 |
| 1zoom.me |
В Турции сообщили об изучении характеристик российского Су-35:
Translated by google
Information that Ankara is exploring the possibility of acquiring the latest Su-35 fighters of the 4 ++ generation from Russia was found confirmation. Recall that such an opportunity was announced against the background of the well-known visit of Recep Erdogan to the Russian Federation, when he was shown the latest Russian combat aircraft, including the Su-35 and Su-57.
Currently, Turkey is studying the characteristics of the Russian Su-35 fighter. This statement was made by the head of the defense industry under the presidential administration of Turkey, Ismail Demir. Demir:
"Turkey is carefully studying the Russian proposal for the possible conclusion of a contract for the acquisition of Su-35 fighters."
At the same time, Demir said that de jure continued participation of Turkey in the F-35 program.
From a statement by a Turkish official:
"It is too early to make any estimates. Turkey purchases weapons that meet our security requirements. This is an unconditional rule."
The day before, French President Emmanuel Macron, at a meeting with Donald Trump during the NATO summit, announced that Turkey was behaving "inappropriately." According to Macron, Erdogan speaks of NATO’s collective security commitment "and at the same time buys Russian S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems." Ankara recalled that the purchase of such complexes is not a violation of the charter clause on collective security of the North Atlantic Alliance.
 |
| US Navy |
U.S. Navy Plans To Stop Buying P-8 Poseidon Sub Hunters Despite Growing Undersea Threat:
Russia and China are improving their submarine forces, requiring a robust U.S. response.
The U.S. Navy’s 2021 budget proposal apparently will request no new money to purchase the service’s only long-range anti-submarine aircraft, despite a growing undersea threat and a shortfall in aircraft designed to cope with that threat.
The P-8 Poseidon multi-mission aircraft, a militarized version of the Boeing 737 jetliner, conducts anti-submarine, anti-surface and shipping interdiction missions from land bases, flying much further with greater payload than any carrier-based plane could.
Poseidon rotates frequently to the bases of overseas allies as it conducts maritime surveillance of the Northern Atlantic, Western Pacific and other areas. The plane uses acoustic sensors and radar to detect hostile warships, and carries munitions such as torpedoes that would be used in wartime to destroy such threats.
However, the Navy says it has a validated warfighting requirement of 138 Poseidons to cope with Russian and Chinese naval forces, and it looks likely to stop purchases at 117—far short of that requirement. Congressional appropriators are asking the Navy how it would replace the aging sub hunters in two Navy Reserve squadrons—which must retire in the near future—if production of the P-8 is prematurely terminated.
During the Cold War, the Navy operated three dozen squadrons of land-based sub hunters as it sought to counter the threat posed by hundreds of Soviet submarines and the powerful surface fleet of the Red Navy. Today it has only a dozen active-duty squadrons, plus those two reserve squadrons—even though the Russians continue to invest in new undersea technology and the Chinese Navy is building out its own submarine force.
The Russian undersea fleet is smaller today than it was during the Cold War, but its boats are becoming more capable—more survivable, more lethal—and Moscow is signaling that submarines will remain a priority in its military preparations. As David Axe, defense editor of The National Interest, observes, “Where the Russian navy is all but abandoning the production of new aircraft carriers, cruisers and other ’blue water’ surface warships, it has recommitted to sustaining a large fleet of big, long-range submarines.”
The newer submarines in the Russian fleet are harder to track than legacy vessels, and some are equipped with anti-ship missiles that can hit adversary vessels hundreds of miles away. Last month, the Russians conducted their biggest undersea military exercise since the Cold War, sending ten subs into the North Atlantic to test the defenses of NATO navies.
China’s undersea fleet is not as capable as Russia’s, but it is improving rapidly. In fact, a recent study by the respected RAND Corporation notes a tenfold gain in Chinese undersea capabilities since U.S. aircraft carriers operating near Taiwan managed to escape detection in 1996. RAND attributes the gain in Chinese capability to quieter subs and the introduction of cruise missiles into the submarine force.
Like Russia, China operates a mixed fleet of both nuclear-powered and diesel-electric subs. The nuclear-powered subs, some of which carry long-range ballistic missiles, have much greater range and endurance than conventionally-powered subs. However, the diesel-electric are thought to be quieter, and thus are well-suited to control chokepoints between China’s marginal seas and the broader Pacific. U.S. naval intelligence fears these subs will increasingly be cued as to the movement of U.S. warships by overhead (i.e., orbital) systems.
The geographical circumstances in which the Russian and Chinese navies operate provide ample opportunity for the deployment of P-8 sub hunters within range of their undersea quarry. But 117 Poseidons will not be sufficient to continuously monitor all areas of interest as hostile submarine forces grow more stealthy and more numerous.
Prime contractor Boeing (a contributor to my think tank) has done a good job of keeping the P-8 on schedule and under budget, leveraging the economies of scale made possible by a global installed base of thousands of 737 commercial transports. The Government Accountability Office has noted the success of the Poseidon’s acquisition strategy, which stressed adapting proven hardware to emerging threats.
India, Australia and the United Kingdom have signed on to the program, and other countries such as Norway and South Korea are signaling interest. Dozens of Cold War maritime patrol aircraft around the world will need to be replaced in the next decade. Whether they are replaced by the P-8, though, will depend on whether the U.S. Navy keeps buying the plane to fill out its warfighting requirement.
Because Poseidon is based on a version of the Boeing 737 that is no longer manufactured for commercial carriers, if production ceases it will likely never resume. Suppliers will stop making unique parts, and money will be too scarce to shift the mission for a handful of additional sub hunters to the next-generation 737 MAX. So the Navy either meets its warfighting requirement now, or it never does. One benefit of doing so is to maximize the interoperability of the U.S. Navy’s land-based surveillance aircraft with the allied fleets which will share anti-submarine and anti-surface missions in the future.
There’s no mystery about why the Navy hasn’t funded additional Poseidon purchases in future years. It is short of money. Despite a sizable increase in funding from the Trump Administration, the service has little hope of ever getting near the fleet size of 355 warships it says it needs to cover the world. Tradeoffs are being made in the purchase of submarines, sealift and other assets vital to countering military moves by Russia and China.
But filling out the Poseidon fleet to the number actually needed by warfighters is not a heavy lift in budgetary terms. The planes cost less than $200 million each, and are much cheaper to keep flying than most military aircraft, thanks to their commonality with commercial 737s. It is very unlikely the Navy will ever get a better deal than it would today by purchasing more P-8s off an assembly line at the peak of its performance.
If the Russian and Chinese undersea fleets keep improving at the pace recently seen, the U.S. Navy is going to need all the Poseidons specified in its warfighting requirement. Stopping now at less than the number the Navy itself says are needed would be a false economy that could lead to operational catastrophe in a future conflict.
 |
| US Air Force |
'Article 5, Not F-35': French Minister Lashes Out at US for Forcing NATO Members to Buy Its Weapon - Sputnik International:
Earlier, French President Emmanuel Macron criticised the current state of the alliance, calling it "brain dead" and sparking heated discussions over his comments. Not all of France's NATO allies agreed with its president's account of the state of the military bloc.
French Minister of the Armies Florence Parly has levelled criticism at the US practice of trying to pressure its NATO allies to buy American weapons and equipment above anything else. She argued that the alliance's charter has Article 5, stipulating the collective responsibility to defend each other, rather than "Article F-35", stipulating the collective obligation to buy US military products, in an apparent reference to the fifth-generation stealth jet that Washington has been promoting among its allies.
She further stated that countries should not choose between NATO and Europe, but the two must rather complement each other. Parly also noted that NATO can't give European states their sovereignty, but that they must achieve this themselves.
"Today, Europe does not yet have the military tools to live up to what it is as an economic and political power. NATO will never be the tool of our sovereignty. It is up to the Europeans to build their own sovereignty. It will not happen in a snap of fingers", she said in an interview with Le Journal du Dimanche.
Parly has previously criticised the US push for NATO members to "buy American", reminding Washington in March 2019 that the key article in the alliance's charter is called "Article 5, not Article F-35".
Upcoming NATO Summit Amid "Brain Dead" Controversy
The minister commented on the recent statements by French President Emmanuel Macron, who called NATO a "brain dead" organisation, by opining that it was his call for a useful and healthy debate on the alliance's fundamentals. She added that such a dialogue can take place as early as this week at the NATO summit, which will be held on 3 and 4 December in London.
Macron made his comment, where he said that the North-Atlantic Treaty has been suffering from "brain death" due to a lack of coordination and US unpredictability under President Donald Trump, in an interview with The Economist on 7 November. He namely expressed his doubt about how the value of NATO's Article 5 could change in the near future and whether it will mean much.
The "brain death" comment sparked discussions among NATO members, with Germany, Turkey, Poland, and the US harshly criticising Macron for his take on the alliance's current state.
Germany
 |
| GETTY |
Asia Times | Xingkong-2: China’s new missile threat? | Article:
Gen. John Hyten: ‘We don’t have any defense that could deny the employment of such a weapon against us’
The DF-17, China’s greatly feared hypersonic missile that was first revealed at the National Day military parade on October 1, might not be the only hypersonic aircraft program China possesses, a report by the state broadcaster suggested.
Analysts stressed that China will not fall behind in related technologies compared with the US and Russia, Global Times reported.
“From the test subjects that were made available to the public, the Xingkong-2 (Starry Sky-2) might use a different flight pattern to the DF-17,” said military expert Ma Jun on Military Time, a China Central Television (CCTV) program on military affairs, on Saturday, without further elaboration.
According to Ma, the Xingkong-2 is still in the trial phase and more tests are expected.
The Xingkong-2 Ma referred to is the first Chinese waverider hypersonic vehicle unveiled by the country, dating a year earlier than the DF-17.
Designed by the China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics under the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation, the Xingkong-2 was successfully tested at a target
range in Northwest China in August 2018, the academy announced then.
When the DF-17 missile made its debut at the National Day parade this year, some thought it might be the final product of the Xingkong-2 project.
One distinctive difference between the Xingkong-2 and the DF-17 is that the former has a fairing and the latter does not, making the two very different in appearance alone, analysts pointed out.
They noted that the time does not match either, as the Xingkong-2 was only tested in 2018 and is not likely to enter Chinese military service as early as 2019.
The CCTV program introduced two genres of hypersonic aircraft: one is a glide-boost, meaning the aircraft is propelled into the sky via a rocket and glides in the air using shock waves generated by its own hypersonic flight, while the other is air-breathing, meaning the aircraft uses a scramjet engine to provide thrust.
The DF-17 is said to be a glide-boost vehicle, but it is not known what type the Xingkong-2 might be, other than it could be different from the DF-17, although it was also propelled by a rocket, according to Ma.
According to The National Interest, the 16 DF-17s that featured in the parade all were atop what appeared to be DF-16 medium-range ballistic missiles. In actual use, the DF-16 would boost the DF-17 to Mach five or faster, at which point the DF-17 would separate from the booster and angle toward its target, maneuvering to correct its course or evade enemy defenses.
It’s unclear whether the DF-17 carries a warhead. “It is likely that the DF-17 is configured as a conventional munition with its destructive effect derived from the kinetic energy of the HGV,” commented Andrew Tate, an expert with Jane’s.
With a range of potentially a thousand miles or more, the DF-17 could threaten US forces and their allies across the Western Pacific.
Nozomu Yoshitomi, a retired Japanese army general who now is a professor at Nihon University, said the DF-17 could render obsolete existing defenses. “There is a possibility that if we do not acquire a more sophisticated ballistic missile defense system, it will become impossible for both the United States and Japan to respond,” Yoshitomi said.
“We don’t have any defense that could deny the employment of such a weapon against us,” Gen. John Hyten, then the commander of US Strategic Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March 2018.
Hypersonic weapons are proliferating. In late December 2018, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that the Russian military had tested its Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle in order to “successfully verify all of its technical parameters,” state-owned TASS news agency reported.
“On my instructions, the industrial enterprises and the defense ministry have prepared for and carried out the final test of this system,” Putin said, according to TASS. “The test was completely successful: all technical parameters were verified.”
Meanwhile, the US is just beginning to acquire its first battery of HGVs. The Pentagon in late 2018 awarded Dynetics and Lockheed Martin contracts worth a combined US$700 million to build 20 “common” hypersonic vehicles, fit eight with guidance systems and install them on four launchers.
The US Army could form its first HGV-launching unit as early as 2023.
Dongfeng-17 conventional missile: Details
 |
| raf.mod.uk |
Italian air chief: Time to think about next-gen fighters:
Italy is looking at the UK-based Tempest for its next-generation jet, but options remain open, says Lt. Gen. Alberto Rosso.
Since its origin, military aviation has been faced with two challenges: how to counter the adversary’s air capabilities, and how to generate and integrate effects in the surface battlefield. While the first challenge is shared by the other services, it’s undeniable that only the Air Force serves a purpose other than for itself: enabling other components to maneuver and operate.
These two challenges still exist today, and although not altered in their essence, they are exacerbated by the steep rate of technological innovation.
With regard to the ability to counter potential adversaries, we must consider that the new frontiers of hypersonic flight and suborbital operations will be tomorrow’s potential battlefield. Ill-intentioned actors are already employing swarms of drones to attack critical infrastructure, and we have to focus our resources on staying ahead of any possible threats posed by the new technologies. In our effort to innovate and adopt new systems, we must constantly aim at the integration of old weapon systems with those of the next generation.
Our legacy fleet, mostly fourth-generation aircraft, is being pushed well-beyond what was thought possible just a couple of years ago, and simultaneously we embraced with the F-35 the evolution to the fifth generation, a technological and cultural revolution with many implications.
More specifically, data-fusion technology offers the opportunity, more than ever before, to receive and merge real-time information from various sensors, generating clear situational awareness and information superiority. And that is not all. Alongside data fusion, we have an incredible capacity to distribute information, which enhances the operational envelope of legacy weapon systems. The Italian Air Force is pioneering this integration of legacy systems in a fifth-generation warfare scenario; and as we progress, we are finding out that we can have the whole spectrum of fifth-generation actions and effects delivered by a balanced mix of legacy and fifth-generation systems. We call this “fifth-generation transformation.”
However, the ability to be effective in the scenarios that lie ahead of us requires a lot more than just technology, and that leads us to the second challenge: creating, delivering and integrating effects not only in the land and sea battle, but in (and through) the cyber, electronic warfare, suborbital and space domains. It demands a whole new mindset: a fifth-generation transformation of the whole Air Force. The ability to gain and maintain information superiority will be necessary, but not sufficient, to ensure that we always stay one or more steps ahead of potential adversaries. The quality, timeliness and reactiveness of our decision cycles must also improve — from information superiority to decision superiority.
Being able to sift through huge amounts of readily available information and orient the application of air power with speed and precision will be our “next level” challenge.
Even today, while our fifth-generation systems are progressing along their own path of excellency, integrated with legacy systems, it is time to start thinking about the replacement of the Eurofighter, whose operational life will end around 2040.
We have to act promptly in order to keep a cutting-edge national defense and industrial capability. Our peer nations are already making their moves, and we cannot afford to lag behind. At the moment, two international projects are on the table: the Future Combat Air System program and the Tempest.
I’m personally very satisfied by Italy’s choice to embrace the British Tempest project and to start working together on the development of a sixth-generation aircraft. The institutional, industrial and technological cooperation between Italy and the U.K. dates back to the Tornado program, which gave life to a relationship that built up into the Eurofighter program and got even tighter with the experience within the F-35 program.
The sixth generation has not been clearly defined yet, but we must think now about what we will need in 20 years. It could be artificial intelligence, direct-energy armament, or the possibility to integrate and direct swarms of drones from an asset acting as a sensor itself through its capability to adapt its own “skin.”
The biggest challenge will be for industry. The program will be a pulling factor for national industry for the development of future technologies that do not exist yet.
The long-standing cooperation between Italy and the U.K., since the third generation of aircraft, produced a fundamental expertise that we trust, and it will allow us to obtain the best asset for tomorrow’s scenarios.
As the F-35 integrates with the Eurofighter today, it will integrate tomorrow with the Tempest in a multidomain operations environment.
Lt. Gen. Alberto Rosso is the chief of staff of the Italian Air Force.
 |
| military.com |
Navy Awards $22B Contract to Electric Boat, Newport News Shipbuilding for 9 Block V Virginia Subs - USNI News:
THE PENTAGON – The Navy signed its largest shipbuilding contract ever, awarding a $22.2-billion contract to General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries’ Newport News Shipbuilding for nine Virginia-class Block V attack submarines.
The contract award comes amid a flurry of activity in nuclear shipbuilding, with common suppliers trying to balance the start of the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine program, a two-ship buy in the Ford-class aircraft carrier program and the transition of the Virginia program from the Block IV design to Block V, which adds in acoustic superiority enhancements and 28 Tomahawk missile tubes. The Navy has long said the Columbia SSBN program is its top priority in the coming years, but the fleet desperately needs more attack submarines as well.
“Our whole philosophy going into this is, get Virginia as a stable foundation which then we can build Columbia on top of,” James Geurts, the assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition, told reporters today.
“We really wanted to make sure we had, from both sides, a balanced, stable foundation; showed our commitment to the industrial base; showed our commitment to our suppliers; showed our commitment to the workforce – from that, then we can add Columbia on top.”
Though the Navy, industry and lawmakers had previously expressed interest in expanding this Block V contract beyond the previously planned 10 submarines – with talk of options for as many as 13 boats at one point – the contract covers nine boats with an option for a 10th. All would include the acoustic superiority upgrades, and all but the first boat – SSN-802, which is already under construction – would include the Virginia Payload Module that adds the 28 missile tubes. If the option for the 10th sub were exercised, the total contract value would come to more than $24 billion.
Geurts told reporters the negotiations were so lengthy – wrapping up last month, after an expected April contract award – “so we both could get into a place where we’re comfortable. So getting into a two-per-year cadence in a way that we could also execute that during Columbia. I think it was a lot of hard work on both sides to get to a place where we had shared risk, shared reward, and that’s kind of ultimately why we’ve put one of the boats as an option price, so that we could, if performance warrants as we see it, we can add a 10th boat in there; if not, we can back off a little to make sure Columbia is successful.”
Geurts said the upcoming Fiscal Year 2021 budget request would show more of the planned submarine acquisition and delivery schedule within Block V, but he said the option was written so that it could be executed in any year the Navy chooses, if the service can secure funding for the boat.
Though the fate of the 10th sub is unclear at the moment, the suppliers in the Virginia-class program will still be paid to deliver 10 ship sets of goods under the contract, to keep their workloads stable as they move towards a massive increase in work as the Columbia program comes online. The Columbia SSBN relies on many of the same suppliers – prime contractors Electric Boat and Newport News Shipbuilding, major suppliers like Lockheed Martin and L3, and thousands of small businesses scattered across the country – as the Virginia-class SSNs, and ensuring a smooth ramp-up of workload for those suppliers is key.
Rear Adm. David Goggins, the program executive officer for submarines, told reporters during the media roundtable today that the contract includes $455 million for material for the possible 10th boat.
“From a vendor base perspective, they’re seeing 10 ships,” which allows them to stay on their planned workload ramp-up without disruption.
“Our whole idea on the supply base was, order 10 ship sets so we didn’t have to renegotiate supplier agreements. That’s what they were planning to build to with Columbia, so from the supply base, we’ve tried to really minimize the impact to them,” Geurts added.
“They’re such a vital part of our ability to deliver these submarines. It’s all about a stable foundation – so in our best interest, that was providing a stable foundation, and we’ll always have a use for that equipment on a follow-on Block VI” submarine, if the Navy doesn’t end up awarding the option for a 10th Block V boat and using the material then.
Though the contract for nine or 10 submarines takes care of industrial base concerns and balancing risk between the Virginia and Columbia submarine programs, it doesn’t directly address fleet concerns: chiefly, that the combatant commanders need more attack submarines than they have access to. The Navy is facing a decrease in submarine inventory in coming years before the numbers eventually rise again and reach the requirement – 66 attack subs – in 2048, according to inventory predictions in the FY 2020 shipbuilding plan.
Goggins said he’s pleased with the balance struck between operator needs and builders’ bandwidth.
“To me, it was the overall balance between Virginia, Columbia and the Ford programs. The considerations were the technical risk, the industrial base capability and capacity, and the fleet requirements. So this is really the right balanced approach from a fleet perspective,” the rear admiral said.
Though the contract won’t cover as many new boats as previously hoped, the Navy is making a concerted effort to get its new submarines into the hands of operators faster. Goggins said the time from start of construction to the boat being turned over to the fleet – including construction, subsequent testing and then the post-shakedown availability – has decreased by three and a half years over the life of the Virginia program. He added the ships are being built to a much higher quality and receiving much better scores during sea trials – the last boat, the future Delaware (SSN-791), scored a “pretty phenomenal” .96 in its late October trials – which means less work to be done after commissioning, and therefore a faster turnaround time before the crew can get onboard and start taking on missions.
“The crews are ready” upon ship delivery, Goggins, said, and “we’ve had a couple submarines, shortly after delivery they’ve gone on tasking as directed by the fleet commander.”
Guerts said that, in addition to the faster turnaround time, “now we’re adding lethality” through the acoustic superiority upgrades and the Virginia Payload Module, “to ensure not only are they getting the ship they need, they’re getting it with more fire power, with a more competitive comparative advantage.”
 |
| Виталий Тимкив |
Russia Deploys New Missile System Along Norwegian Border:
The Northern Fleet says the Tor-M2DT missile system will secure air space control and defense.
Russia has deployed a new mobile missile defense system, the Tor-M2DT, and handed it over to units in the Pechenga area near the Norwegian border this week, the Russian Armed Forces said Saturday.
The new local cruise missile division has been under development since August and servicemen can now operate the air defense system, the Northern Fleet said in a statement.
The Tor-M2DT is a variant of the Tor system (SA-15 "Gauntlet") that was first introduced in the late 1980s. It is carried by DT-30PM all-terrain vehicles and is reportedly capable of detecting over 40 air targets, track and engage up to four of them simultaneously at a range of up to 12 kilometers and at altitudes up to 10 kilometers, even with the system’s 16 missiles on the move.
The first units of the Tor-M2DT arrived in the borderlands in July this year following testing in Novaya Zemlya.
The Pechenga valley is located in the Kola Peninsula along the borders to neighboring Norway and Finland. The distance from the local military base to Norway is about 10 kilometers.
Located less than 100 kilometers away is Vardø, the Norwegian town known for housing the Globus intelligence radar system.
According to the Northern Fleet, the purpose of the Tor-M2DT's deployment is to secure air space control and defense.
It is not the only new missile system that has recently been deployed on the border with Norway. In July it became clear that the Bal (NATO name SSC-6 or Sennight) coastal missile system had been moved from its permanent deployment location to the Sredny Peninsula on the coast of the Barents Sea.
It is believed that shooting with the Bal system will be instituted this fall as part of a planned exercise by the Northern Fleet.
The system is made for targeting surface ships, but can also be applied against land targets.
Russian MoD speeds up acquisition of Tor SAM systems
New Arctic anti-aircraft missiles tested at Novaya Zemlya
Northern Fleet to get first Arctic version Tor-M2DT anti-aircraft missile systems in November
