June 3, 2015 by Adam Szczepanik – Strategy Page

Libya’s air force has effectively ceased to exist soon after NATO aircraft began supporting local rebels in 1991. What aircraft didn’t get destroyed by NATO airstrikes were hidden and abandoned without maintenance. However as the rebellion evolved into a civil war some of the larger factions realized that a small number of combat aircraft would be a major battlefield asset.

However building an air force was not easy mainly because an international arms embargo was still in effect. The most obvious source for aircraft, munitions and other necessary equipment was what remained of old Libyan air force. The deposed dictator (Moamar Kaddafy) has spent decades building a large, if poorly run and largely ineffective air force. It turned out that there were many intact warplanes, some in reinforced bunkers or hidden in the desert that survived. However, the aircraft in question were in poor shape even before the war, and few years of absolute neglect didn’t make their situation any better.

There is one internationally recognized government, elected in 2014 and based in the eastern port city of Tobruk. This faction managed to gain the allegiance of many personnel from the old Libyan Air Force. Neighboring Egypt supported the Tobruk government and unofficially supplied a few of its obsolete jets and helicopters. The bulk of Libya’s rebuilt air force is made of Kaddafi era Mig-21bis fighters and Mig-21MF provided by Egypt after the war.

Then there were the twelve Su-22’s ground attack aircraft. These were decommissioned years before the war and NATO deemed them not worth attacking. The Tobruk government’s Free Libyan Air Force soon had two operational MiG-21st. While old and obsolete, they are still a very useful mainly because they aren’t fighters, but fighter-bombers by design, with specialized bombing sights, and good payload capacity, which makes them far more useful than the fighters.

The Free Libyan Air Force also has a handful of Mirage F.1 fighters. Most of these are not flyable but two operational ones were returned from Malta. During the war these aircraft were flown there by pilots who defected from Kaddafi’s forces. At least one more was made operational by cannibalizing other grounded aircraft. One fighter bomber variant, Mirage F.1AD was also made operational by the Free Libyan Air Force even though the model was decommissioned for 2 decades. France has promised assistance in overhauling and modernizing ten Mirage F.1s for the Free Libyan Air Force in the future.

Another of very few operational fighter-bombers is a Mig-23UB, which avoided NATO bombings thanks to getting captured by the rebels early in the conflict. The Tobruk government also has two operational Mig-23MLs (fighter variant of the same aircraft). While not as well equipped for ground attack as the UB variant, they still can use unguided bombs, though with even lesser precision.

The largest rival to the Tobruk government is based in Tripoli. The largest militia belonging to the Tripoli faction, Libya Dawn managed to scrounge up three operational Mig-23’s, one Mig-23UB and two Mig-23MLs. However one of these MiG-23s was shot down bombing a Free Libyan Air Force airbase and one crashed during combat operations for unknown reasons.

Libya Dawn’s only operational Mig-25 has met a similar fate. It was not such a big loss though, as this was a two seat trainer, without radar or proper bombsights, capable of only carrying two unguided bombs and dropping them with very poor accuracy, allowing it to only bomb large area targets like oil refineries, airfields and cities, and even that would achieve more of a morale effect than meaningful damage, as it would be hard to intercept due to the high service ceiling and speed Mig-25 s are famous for.

Libya Dawn, as well as the Tobruk government each also have a few J-21 Jastreb light attack planes, L-39 Albatross and G-2 Galeb light attack\trainer planes. While useful both for ground attack and pilot training, they don’t have the supersonic speed, electronic defenses and advanced bombsights of aircraft like the Su-22 or Mig-23UB, making them less effective in performing their missions, while at the same time they are at higher risk from the most anti- aircraft weapons many factions have (shoulder fired heat-seeking surface-to-air missiles and truck mounted or towed 23mm autocannons.)

The Free Libyan Air Force also operates a handful of helicopters, including few Mi-8 utility helicopters, including some armed variants delivered by Egypt, few Mi-24 Hind attack helicopters and it’s updated Mi-35 variant, and a single CH-47 Chinook transport helicopter. The Tobruk government has also captured few transport aircraft in the course of war, most of them are not airworthy though.  The operational ones are notably a BAe 146 regional airliner and C-130 Hercules medium transport, both of which are used to move medical and military supplies to remote locations. A purchase of additional C-130s and spare parts is being discussed with the U.S.  government.

Without assistance from foreign aviation industry, no faction will be able to get more than a handful of operational aircraft operational. That small that number will dwindle as the few flyable aircraft are destroyed because of enemy fire or poor maintenance and piloting. Some will be grounded when there are no more spare parts, or require advanced maintenance services like engine overhauls

June 3, 2015: Strategy Page

A Chinese manufacturer recently announced a 40mm grenade launcher with a computerized sight and computer controlled 40mm rounds that the weapon could program to explode over a specific target being aimed at. At one weapons sales expo this LG5 system was touted as an anti-sniper system for police. Closer examination of the system indicated that the LG5 was actually designed for long range (over 500 meters) targets, especially structures or vehicles that had to be hit on the first shot. There have been no reports of the reports of the LG5, which looks like a large (40mm) rifle with a round magazine allowing for multiple shots and an impressive looking computerized sight, complete with laser range finder. The LG5 may have been just some misdirected hype, but it shows you how far Chinese weapons development has come since the 1990s.

Chinese weapons manufacturers have been developing more and more 20mm-40mm grenade launchers for infantry and mechanized units since 2000. Many of these systems are offered for export, to military and police units as well as, unofficially, anyone with the money to pay for the weapons and extra for “special delivery.” There are multiple manufacturers of these weapons and for most weapons in China and the competition is pretty intense.

This began by producing cheaper versions of existing grenade launchers. One example of this was the QLB06. Introduced in 2006, by 2012 the Chinese QLB06 35mm semi-automatic grenade launcher had apparently become a standard weapon for many Chinese infantry units. It weighs 9.1 kg (20 pounds) empty and is 1046mm (41 inches) long. A drum magazine can hold 4-6 rounds, giving the weapon a maximum weight of 9.6 kg (27 pounds). It's semi-automatic and effective up to 1,000 meters.

The QLB06 is but the latest of a growing number of similar weapons. All these portable grenade launchers have an interesting past. While the U.S. developed (in the 1960s) a 40mm grenade, launched from a single shot (resembling a shotgun) hand held weapon and later a heavier vehicle mounted machine-gun type weapon, China developed something unique in its line of 35mm grenade launcher weapons. The earlier QLB87 has a magazine system that can hold 6, 9, or 12 35mm rounds. It weighs 12 kg (26.5 pounds). It looks, and is used like a light machine-gun. This weapon has not been used in combat yet and Western armies have stayed away from this design because it's easier to mount automatic 40mm machine-guns (weighing over a 50 kg/110 pounds) on armored vehicles or light trucks. The Chinese, however, have more light (few vehicles) infantry. So for them the W87 makes a lot of sense. But apparently Chinese troops, and weapons developers, thought better of the QLB87 and came up with the lighter QLB06.

Automatic grenade launchers, firing low speed 30-40mm shells, became popular in the 1960s when the usefulness of the American single shot M79 40mm grenade launcher was noted. Many troops today want the M79 back. But back then Russia and the United States proceeded to develop automatic grenade launchers. This was actually the second generation, as the Russians originally developed such weapons in the 1930s. By 1939 the Russian Navy was testing a 40.8mm weapon and the army followed a year later. The 21 ounce shells were based on the Djakonow rifle grenade and were fired at 129 meters (400 feet) per second (about 40 percent the speed of a pistol bullet) for a maximum range of 1,200 meters. The weapon weighed 24 kg (53 pounds) and was used in the 1940 Winter War with Finland. For political reasons (the weapons designer fell out of favor) the weapon was withdrawn from service before the Germans invaded in 1941 and was forgotten. This sort of thing happens a lot in military history.

In 1965, the U.S. developed and put into service the M18 40mm automatic grenade launcher. This weapon used the same 40mm round as the M79. The 8.6 kg (19 pound) M18 used a hand crank to load rounds (from a belt). Work on this weapon actually began in 1962, but it took the popularity of the M79 in Vietnam to spur production. Some 1,200 M18s were built through 1968, and it was a popular weapon on U.S. Navy river patrol boats, where ambushes were frequently encountered. Starting in 1966, the M18 was replaced by the heavier M19 that was truly automatic but weighed 34 kg (75 pounds). This was also developed by the U.S. Navy. Russia followed in 1974 with the AGS17, a 30mm grenade launcher weighing the same as the M19 but firing a 285 gram (ten ounce) shell instead of the 458 gm (16 ounce) 40mm shell used in American weapons.

The U.S. and other nations have since come out with lightweight grenade launchers that fit under the assault rifle barrel. But the appeal of a dedicated grenade launcher for a "grenadier" has always been popular. One skilled grenadier with a weapon like the QLB06 or LG5 can be very effective and the Chinese are determined to come up with more effective and cheaper weapons of this type.  

source military-today.com

May 28, 2015: Strategy Page

Chinese airborne and light infantry units are being equipped with a Chinese made amphibious ATV (All Terrain Vehicle). This is an 8x8 vehicle apparently based on the Canadian Argo design, which has been around since the 1960s and has been regularly upgraded, refined, improved and extensively used all over the world. The Chinese ATV can carry six people (including the driver), weighs 1.7 tons and has a max payload of about a ton. If used amphibiously the ATV can only carry about a third of a ton. Max road speed is 60 kilometers an hour. The ATV is 3.9 meters (12.7 feet) long and 1.8 meters (5.9 feet) wide. The Chinese military has several thousand of these vehicles, many (if not most) of them with non-combat units.

03 June 2015 defenceWeb (Reuters)

A multinational force being set up to combat Nigeria's Boko Haram Islamist insurgency in the Lake Chad region will be operational in the coming weeks, Niger's President Mahamadou Issoufou said on Tuesday.

Approved in March by the African Union, the 8,700-strong force drawn from the Lake Chad countries of Niger, Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon as well as Benin, will be financed partly by the international community.

"We have discussed the situation on our southern side with Boko Haram rampaging in the Lake Chad zone," Issoufou told reporters outside the Elysee Palace in Paris after a meeting with French President Francois Hollande.

"We think that in the coming weeks, with the new administration settling into place in Nigeria, we are going to be able to launch the mixed multinational force, to which all of the countries of the Lake Chad basin contribute," he added.

As he spoke, sources in Nigeria's northeastern city of Maiduguri reported that a bomb blast hit a busy market there on Tuesday, killing as many as 50 people.

An Elysee statement said Hollande told Issoufou that France would "continue its logistical support and intelligence to the countries neighbouring Lake Chad" to combat the group thought to have killed thousands of people in its quest to create a caliphate in Nigeria's remote north-east.

The new president of Nigeria, Muhammadu Buhari, the first to take power in a democratic handover in the history of the country, promised to eradicate Boko Haram in an inaugural address last week

03/06/2015 Marie BROYER - Armée de l'air

La mise en service opérationnelle du centre militaire de coordination et de contrôle 80/920 de Paris (CMCC) a été annoncée le 28 mai 2015. Localisé à Athis-Mons, ce CMCC résulte de la signature d’un d’accord avec le centre en route de la navigation aérienne (CRNA) Nord, et fait suite à plusieurs mois d’expérimentation.

Pour une meilleure coordination entre civil et militaire

L’accord signé au CNRA Nord conclut la troisième et dernière phase d’expérimentation de ce projet, et donne le feu vert au lancement du dernier des cinq CMCC existant sur le territoire national.

Le CMCC de Paris permet aujourd’hui un quadrillage complet de l’espace aérien de la métropole. Cette démarche s’inscrit dans le cadre du ciel unique européen, et vise à mettre en place entre les États membres un dialogue concernant l’identification des dangers et la résolution des risques.

La coordination entre civil et militaire est établie par un règlement de la Commission européenne de 2005, dans lequel il est stipulé que le ciel doit être considéré comme un espace à la fois civil et militaire. De fait, les deux services travaillent ensemble, comme en témoigne le lieutenant-colonel Didier Stauffer, commandant du CMCC de Paris,  : « Nous sommes dans la même salle, nous nous connaissons. La valeur professionnelle des militaires est reconnue par nos homologues civils. ».

Les CMCC : des services de contrôle, pas de surveillance

Les centres militaires de coordination et de contrôle n’ont pas pour objectif la surveillance des vols au-dessus du territoire, comme le rappelle le lieutenant-colonel Stauffer : « Il n’y a pas, dans le domaine du contrôle, une interaction dans la lutte contre le terrorisme ».  Au contraire, la mission première des CMCC est de fluidifier le trafic, grâce à une meilleure visibilité des aéronefs « en route » (c’est-à-dire sur tous les aéronefs qui ne sont pas en phase de décollage ou d’atterrissage), une tâche jusque-là réservée aux centres de détection et de contrôle.

Avec la mise en service du CMCC de Paris, c’est la cohérence entre la gestion de l’espace aérien, la gestion des courants de trafics et le service de la circulation aérienne, qui est facilitée.

03/06/2015 Michel Cabirol – LaTribune.fr

Le bilan de la lutte anti-drone reste pour l'heure très modeste. Sur 203 survols illégaux signalés, seulement treize affaires judiciaires mettant en cause essentiellement des touristes, ont été résolues.
 

C'est ce qu'on appelle un joli flop. L'Etat peine à identifier les téléopérateurs coupables de survols illégaux au-dessus des centrales nucléaires, notamment. Des vols qui ont pourtant mobilisé tout l'appareil répressif français, du ministère de l'Intérieur à l'armée de l'air en passant par la plupart des services de renseignement. En dépit de cette mobilisation, l'Etat a échoué. C'est ce qu'a révélé vendredi dernier, lors du colloque organisé par le Secrétariat général de la défense et la sécurité nationale (SGDSN), le magistrat du Bureau contre la criminalité organisée, le terrorisme et le blanchiment, Aurélien Létocart.

Le magistrat a dévoilé le bilan de l'action de l'Etat : 203 survols illégaux signalés, 63 procédures judiciaires, dont 55 clôturées, 13 affaires judiciaires résolues. "Nul ne sait qui est vraiment derrière ces survols", a d'ailleurs récemment reconnu à l'Assemblée nationale le général Jean-François Hogard, directeur de la protection et de la sécurité de la défense (DPSD). Sur ces 13 affaires qui ont abouti, les magistrats ont finalement ordonné comme peine principale la confiscation des drones. Ils ont dû se contenter également de faire un rappel à la loi et ont éventuellement infligé des amendes inférieures à 1.000 euros.

Pas de répression

"Il n'y a pas eu de répression", a reconnu Aurélien Létocart. Pourquoi? Tout simplement, a-t-il précisé, parce que la justice a démontré que les téléopérateurs démasqués avaient "une absence de volonté de nuire" et "une méconnaissance de la législation en vigueur" en matière de vol de drone. Notamment des touristes arrêtés qui ont fait voler un drone dans le ciel de Paris, a-t-il reconnu. Des journalistes étrangers sont aussi à l'origine de survols de Paris par des drones ainsi qu'un agent de la... CNIL. Bref, du menu fretin, bien loin du terrorisme international. Ce qui fait grincer les dents au ministère de l'Intérieur, qui trouve que le bilan n'est pas très satisfaisant.

La question des drones est délicate. "Les citoyens ont l'impression qu'on peut impunément surveiller des sites sensibles", a regretté le général Jean-François Hogard. Pour autant, a fait observer le secrétaire général du ministère l'Ecologie, du Développement durable et de l'Energie Francis Rol-Tanguy, les centrales nucléaires et les sites durcis ne sont pas les installations qui présentent le plus de risques en termes d'impact. Contrairement aux infrastructures aéroportuaires à la merci de pertes d'exploitation, et à certaines installations d'importance vitale. Plus généralement, les drones peuvent filmer les centrales nucléaires. "Ce qui n'est pas tolérable", a convenu le patron de la DPSD.

Des drones difficilement détectables

Dans ce contexte, l'État travaille pour trouver des solutions pour empêcher les survols illégaux de drones mais n'a pas encore trouvé la solution technique face à cette menace asymétrique. "La détection des drones est relativement difficile compte tenu de leur petite taille", a reconnu le directeur de la protection des installations, moyens et activités de la défense (DPID), le contre-amiral Frédéric Renaudeau. "Il s'agit en effet de véhicules de petite taille mettant en œuvre des matériaux non métalliques, se déplaçant à faible vitesse et à basse altitude. Ces trois caractéristiques alliées à un haut niveau d'autonomie rendent ces véhicules très difficiles à détecter", a confirmé le directeur technique général de l'ONERA, Thierry Michal.

Selon le patron de la DPID, la meilleure détection passe par des radars capables d'identifier un drone et de le distinguer d'un autre aéronef ou d'un oiseau. "Nous sommes en particulier capables de mesurer en laboratoire la signature optique et/ou radar des aéronefs envisagés", a pour sa part indiqué Thierry Michal.

La mise en œuvre d'une lutte anti-drones nécessite de remplir l'ensemble des fonctions : détection, identification, décision, neutralisation. "L'efficacité du système impose d'assurer une veille permanente nécessitant une automatisation poussée et une réflexion attentive à la place de l'homme dans la boucle. Enfin, il faudra s'assurer de la cohérence de la complexité et du coût du système vis-à-vis de la menace réellement représentée par ces engins", a précisé le directeur technique général de l'ONERA.

Des solutions adaptées aux enjeux financiers

Le patron de la sécurité d'EDF, Patrick Espagnol, attend d'ailleurs "une réponse globale adaptée aux enjeux sécuritaires et financiers". Très clairement, EDF ne veut "pas d'une solution onéreuse", qui "s'appuie sur l'existant mais enrichi par la recherche et développement (R&D)". Car pour l'heure, a-t-il confirmé, la prise de contrôle d'un drone ou sa destruction restent "encore très aléatoires".

Ainsi, l'Agence nationale de la recherche (ANR) a lancé un appel à projets doté d'un million d'euros pour trouver des solutions à plus long terme. Sur les 24 projets soumis, deux ont été retenus, début avril : "Boréades" de l'entreprise CS et "Angelas" de l'ONERA. Deux études qui vont durer 18 mois. En outre, le ministère de la Défense s'est donné six à douze mois pour dégager des solutions capacitaires intérimaires.

28 mai 2015 Quelle: Redaktion der Bundesdwehr 05/2015  15E15401

03.06.2015 par Aerobuzz.fr


Hier soir, Airbus Defence and Space a envoyé une AIT (Accident Information Transmission) mettant à jour le contenu de l’AOT (Alert Operator Transmission) diffusée le 19 mai dernier à l’ensemble des opérateurs de l’A400M. L’AIT informe que les données du DFDR (l’enregistreur des paramètres de vol) et du CVR (l’enregistreur des conversations de bord) ont été correctement exploitées et que les premières analyses ont été conduites par la CITAAM (Comisión para la Investigación Técnica de Accidentes de Aeronaves Militares), avec les conseils techniques des équipes d’Airbus Defence and Space envoyées en soutien.

La CITAAM confirme que les moteurs 1, 2 et 3 de l’A400M qui s’est écrasé le 9 mai 2015 près de Séville, ont subi un gel de la puissance après le décollage et n’ont pas répondu aux tentatives entreprises par l’équipage pour contrôler normalement la puissance, tandis que le quatrième moteur a répondu normalement aux demandes de l’équipage. Quand les pilotes ont placé la manette des gaz sur « flight idle » (ralenti) pour réduire la puissance, celle-ci a effectivement été réduite mais elle est ensuite restée en ralenti sur les trois moteurs affectés durant le reste du vol, en dépit des tentatives de l’équipage pour récupérer de la puissance. Cette perte de puissance est cohérente avec le fait que les trois moteurs en question étaient concernés par les problèmes identifiés par l’AOT du 19 mai.

Les premières analyses ont montré que les autres systèmes de l’avion ont fonctionné normalement et qu’il n’y a pas eu d’autre anomalie identifiée durant le vol. En conséquence, Airbus Defence and Space n’ajoute pas d’autres recommandations à celles figurant dans l’AOT du 19 mai.

29/05/2015 Liesbeth Bardyn – MIL.be

Dans l’est de l’Allemagne se trouve le grand camp d’entraînement de 230 km² de Grafenwöhr. C’est là que de mi-mai à fin mai trois bataillons de la Brigade Medium ont dressés leurs tentes pour améliorer leurs techniques de tir et leurs compétences tactiques.

Le village d’entraînement dans le sud du camp d’exercice paraît désert, mais les apparences sont trompeuses. Dans les maisons se sont cachés des ennemis que nos militaires doivent maîtriser. Une compagnie du Bataillon de Chasseurs Ardennais encercle le village et nettoie un à un chaque bâtiment. Le feu est ouvert, les explosifs sont découverts et les bombes fumigènes volent un peu partout.

« Il est nécessaire d’organiser régulièrement de tels exercices », explique le commandant de bataillon lieutenant-colonel Jean-Pol Baugnée. « Lors d’opérations il nous arrive souvent de devoir nettoyer des maisons. En Belgique on ne dispose pas d’une infrastructure assez grande pour permettre à autant de militaires de s’entraîner en même temps. » Tout le monde est d’accord sur ce dernier point. Le camp allemand offre à nos militaires plus de possibilités d’entraînement que n’importe quel domaine militaire dans notre pays. « Ici nous disposons de stands de tirs qui s’étendent sur des kilomètres », confirme le commandant de brigade colonel Eric Harvent. « Grâce à cela nous pouvons tester des systèmes d’armes ayant une grande portée, ce qui n’est pas souvent possible en Belgique. De plus nos hommes se retrouvent dans un environnement inconnu. Cela rend l’exercice plus réaliste. »

Une cible s’élève d’un coup dans l’herbe. Un militaire met un ‘ennemi’ hors service avec son arme. Une centaine de mètres plus loin une autre cible apparaît soudainement. C’est le canon DF30 qui s’en charge et qui ouvre le feu. Un peloton du Bataillon Bevrijding - 5 Ligne a pris position sur le grand stand de tir de Grafenwöhr. Avec deux autres pelotons et avec l’aide des véhicules blindés ils essayent de prendre possession d’une zone qui s’étend sur plusieurs kilomètres. « Grâce aux grands stands de tir nous pouvons déployer le soutien d’artillerie des canons DF30 et DF90 », raconte le commandant de bataillon lieutenant-colonel Gert Van Goethem. « Ainsi nos soldats de combats ont l’occasion de se rendre compte du soutien que peuvent leur apporter ces grands systèmes d’armement lors d’une mission. Ainsi ils ont plus de confiance en eux quand ils se retrouvent dans une situation dangereuse. »

Une dernière unité de combat, le Bataillon Carabiniers Prins Boudewijn-Grenadiers se cache dans la lisière du bois devant un bâtiment suspect. Au signal du commandant de peloton, le caporal Diether Nauwelaerts et son équipe prennent d’assaut la maison. « S’entraîner avec des munitions n’est hélas pas souvent possible », explique le caporal Nauwelaerts. « Ceci est donc un moment d’enseignement idéal. Mais c’est aussi l’occasion de renforcer l’esprit d’équipe. » Son commandant de peloton le sous-lieutenant Jelle Camps hoche la tête en affirmation. « Nos militaires n’ont pas le droit à beaucoup de sommeil ni de confort lors de l’exercice. Mais en opération ce n’est pas différent. Il vaut donc mieux qu’ils soient préparés. »

2 June 2015 — MOD News Team

Yesterday, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon appeared on BBC Radio 4’s World at One Programme to discuss defence spending.

As the Secretary of State pointed out, Britain has always punched above its weight and the US has long seen us as an indispensable partner in operations right around the world. With nearly 4,000 personnel engaged in global operations, ranging from tackling Ebola in Sierra Leone, helping to deter Russian aggression in Ukraine, to fighting ISIL in the Middle East.

We have made it very clear that when the target was published last year that we met it then, and we have made it very clear that we’re going to go on meeting it in this financial year.

The 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review will be driven by a hard-headed appraisal of our foreign policy and security objectives and the role we wish our country to play, as well as the risks we face in a rapidly changing world. By undertaking such a full and comprehensive look at future threats, alongside the Comprehensive Spending Review, we are able to look at the future and be sure that Armed Forces have what they need.

It is now a balanced Defence budget… It tells you that we can run a defence budget properly, and so well that you can invest for the future. We’re building two aircraft carriers, seven Hunter-Killer submarines, there are new armoured vehicles on order for the army, we’re buying the Joint Strike Fighter to go on the carriers. It is because we have sorted out the defence budget that we’re able to invest in equipment.

The US have always wanted European members of NATO to take a greater share of the burden, the UK is one of only four countries that does spend 2%.

 When the Defence Secretary was asked whether we should scrap Trident to make savings, he committed to renewing our continuous at sea nuclear deterrent with four submarines.

Every successive government has renewed the nuclear deterrent and that decision faces this Parliament next year when we have to replace the boats. We have to be sure that we can keep this country safe for the period right up to 2060.

You can listen to the full interview here (13:15).

29 mai 2015 par MINUSMA

May 28, 2015: Strategy Page

A recent cell phone photo from inside a Russian Su-24 fighter cockpit was meant to show the fighter refueling with a Russian Il-76 aerial tanker. But it also showed an American commercial (Garmin) handheld GPS device sitting in handmade cradle placed in front of the pilot. Such improvised GPS receivers were common in Western warplanes in the late 1990s, before they all got GPS built into their navigation systems. Russia has not been able to upgrade the navigation systems on all their older aircraft and improvisations like this are allowed, but not officially publicized.

The Russian Air Force is adapting as best it can to two decades of sharply reduced budgets. That means the elderly Su-24 (first introduced in the mid-1970s) has had to wait longer than expected for a replacement. So far Russia has only been able to buy 60 of the new Su-34 light bombers to replace the Su-24. The Su-34 had its first flight in 1990 and finally entered service in early 2014. While most nations using Su-24s have retired them by now mainly because it was so expensive to operate and maintain them. With all the budget shortages the Russians improvised, because even the refurbished Su-24s usually lacked built in satellite navigation devices. That’s because Russia wanted its air force to have its forces use a Russian built satellite navigation system. This is called GLONASS and without much publicity was Russia was quick to copy the American GPS system even before the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.

GLONASS was at full strength (24 satellites) in 1995. But the end of the Cold War meant the end of the regular financing for GLONASS. Maintaining the system required launching replacement satellites every 5-7 years. With no money that was not possible and by the end of 2002 only seven GLONASS birds were still operational. However, the Russian economy recovered at about the same time. This made possible rebuilding the GLONASS network. By the end of 2007 there were 18 GLONASS satellites active. Russia had 24 GLONASS satellites in orbit by 2011, and the system was fully operational in 2012. It is widely used in Russia and most smart phones adapted for the Russian market have GLONASS.

The money for GLONASS is coming from a Russian government that does not want to be dependent on the American controlled GPS system. But the money is only there because of high oil prices. Most GLONASS receivers in use are actually combined GPS/GLONASS receivers. Russia has put billions of dollars into GLONASS since 2012 to keep the system fully operational. The problem now is money, because of the lower oil prices and growing economic sanctions there may not be enough money to maintain the satellite network. GLONASS will be probably be declared an essential system and the money found. But something will have to be sacrificed and new aircraft for the Russian Air Force is more vulnerable to cuts than GLONASS.

29 mai 2015 by Defence HQ