Talking to the Indian press, about the sad state of affairs of Indian defense, the Indian IAF Vice Chief Air Marshal P K Barbora made the following statement
We do not even match up Pakistan as far defence goes: IAF Vice Chief
Amazingly this story was published only by two Bharti newspapers. Other than the Indian Express all major newspapers either suppressed the story, did not see news value in it or deliberately did not publish it. Bharatis are fed a constant dose of “indigenous production” which they begin to believe. These stories shatter the false paradigm with truth, so most Indian news outlets do not run the stories.
NEW DELHI, Nov. 19 (APP) Indian Air Force Vice Chief Air Marshal P K Barbora while complaining against Indian political class for playing politics on military requirements said “as far as defence goes, we don’t even match up with Pakistan.”Playing politics over defence purchases impinged “very badly” on the country’s military requirements,” he told a CII seminar on energising aviation sector in India.
P K Barbora while expressing dissatisfaction also about India’s Defence exports said, “as far as defence goes, we don’t even match up with Pakistan.”“The internal politics over the years is such that whatever defence requirements are cleared by the government, they are opposed by the opposition parties and the same happens when roles change and opposition sits in government, “ he said.
Barbora’s observations on Tuesday about recruitment of women pilots in IAF also generated heated debate in the media.
He had said “they may be recruited as fighter pilots provided they do not become mother till a certain age.” He also suggested that having woman pilots in IAF may be a bad investment for the government.
Today, he said he did not mean that what had been debated in the media over his remarks saying those were his personal views and not the policy of the Ministry of Defence. APP
The Indian Express also the reported the same story. Here Vice Chief Air Marshal P K Barbora sheds light on the fake indigenous production of planes in Bharat (aka India):
Talking about the transfer of technology (ToT) agreements in the defence deals, Barbora said they were not very beneficial as "what actually has come after so many deals (in ToT) with foreign company or whatever it is, I am sorry, it was tools and kits, which came in bags and containers and we assembled the aircraft here."
Citing example of the success of the European aviation consortium Airbus, Barbora said Indian industry should also look at building partnerships on those lines and must join hands with other countries to grow.
Marshall Barbora had some ideas on how to develop the Indian defense industry, but his ideas failed to explain how China and Pakistan had developed thier local defense industry and both have defense exports bigger than Bharat. Marshall Barbora also did not shed light on why a foreign commercial enterprise would give away its secrets (Coke formula) and commit commercial suicide.
We have to take steps…we need to be bold enough to invite Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), more so into defence use," he told a CII seminar on energising aviation sector in India.
At present, foreign companies are allowed to invest only 26 per cent in Indian companies. Some of the global defence giants such as BAE Systems had proposed to start a joint venture with Mahindra Defence Systems with 49 per cent stakes but it did not get government’s approval. Commenting on the politics over military purchases, Barbora said whatever defence requirements are cleared by the government, they are opposed by the opposition parties and the same happens when roles change and opposition sits in government. "That impinges very badly on our defence requirements," he said. He said bringing in private players was very important for the aviation sector as India was not even contributing one per cent to the world market in the aerospace industry. Asking the private companies to learn reverse engineering processes the way China did to develop most of its defence technologies, he said, "Forget about ethics. China has done all the reverse engineering. Has anyone ever had the courage to ask China why are you doing it. No one cares a hoot. If you can’t do it yourself, you should know how to reverse engineering. "We have not been able to move forward for some reason or the other," Barbora added. On the present status of the country’s capabilities in the aerospace sector, the IAF Vice Chief said India was very happy producing small parts of aircraft and exporting them to Airbus in Europe but China has already started building whole aircraft for the same company. News x. http://newsx.com/story/66875
Stressing on the need for giving more freedom to private industry, Barbora said, "Private industry has to be evolved and given a market of their choosing and not our choosing, of course with certain guidelines."
GANDHINAGAR: Air Chief Marshal P V Naik said on Wednesday that India’s "aircraft strength is inadequate and is just one third of China’s air force.” He said it would take at least three years for the situation to change as the IAF was in the process to augment its inventory.
Talking to the media at the South Western Air Command during his two-day visit to Gujarat, the IAF chief said: "IAF is known worldwide as a professional organisation for its capabilities. But India’s aircraft strength is just one third of China’s. Our present aircraft strength is inadequate — it is not enough.”
"China is one of the many challenges, including terrorism, a low spectrum conflict that India is facing in the current geo-political situation. The country was seized of the problems and taking multi-pronged measures ranging from diplomatic to economic to face the challenges besides developing capabilities. We are playing it cool. This is also a part of the strategy,” he said.
On reports of incursions by Chinese troops, he said as far as IAF was concerned, there were no incursions anywhere. He also sought to allay fears by saying that adequate deployment has been made on the border. "The coordination between Indian armed forces and intelligence agencies is much better now than what it was a year ago,” Naik said.
The IAF chief said contracts have been signed between Russia and India for a fifth generation fighter and transport aircraft. "India proposes to buy at least 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMCA) like F-18, F-16, Raphael and C-150 Hercules. One Airborne Warning & Control System (AWACS) has already arrived while two are expected by next year. Besides, we intend to buy heavy transport aircraft (global inquiry floated) and medium lift helicopters,” said Naik. Times of India. IAF strength just one-third of China’s: IAF chief. TNN 24 September 2009, 12:15am IST
The Indians cant seem to win. They spend a lot of money but get treated really badly. The Russians have been pushing Delhi around for a decade. Their strong-along games on the Admiral Gorskov is a classic case study of what not to do in defense procurement. Bharat (aka India) constantly complains to Moscow about the lack of Transfer of Technology (ToT).
Bharat is the only major military power of the world that has been unable to produce its own indigenous aircraft. Its Purchase Order of $10 Billion for foreign planes is an admission of its failure to create local planes. The legendry incompetence of the Indian Department of Defense has led to many fiascos like the LCA which has been in design for the past 25 years. Even if the new GE engines can replace the failed Kevari engines, the plane is 1980s vintage and has no military value. The Tejas can is unable to replace Bharat’s aging fleet of Flying Coffins (the arcane Russian Migs that cannot defy gravity in Bharat).
The US for all its talk about strategic partnership and “natural ally” has not offered Bharat (aka India) the latest arms technology. The F-18s are slated to be discontinued. Most NATO members do not want them. Bharat is ready to spend $10 billion. One would imagine that Lockheed Martin would go head over heels to appease Delhi. The standoffish attitude of Martin has surprise and annoyed many Indian arms purchasers.
If Bharat makes a decision against the Mig-35s there will be a huge cost of pay. Russia has already designed the FGFA, though it will allow Bharat a face saving paint job on the planes (all in the name of “joint production”. If Bharat does not buy the Mig 35s, that deal would be further jeopardy.
Lockheed Martin will not commit commercial suicide by giving up the “Coke Formula” to the Indians. The planes will be sequestered in separate hangers, and complete with intrusive surprise inspections and all. The Indian Navy has already decided that it does not want the F-22s. If the Indian Air Force does decide on the F-22s, it will then have to setup separate system of maintenance for the Russian planes (which make up the bulk of its fleet) and a more secure one for the US manufactured plane.
MUMBAI — Field trials by six aircraft makers — including Boeing Co. and Dassault Aviation SA — for an estimated $10 billion Indian Air Force contract will likely be completed by July, an Indian minister said Wednesday.
"They (the trials) are expected to get over some time in June or July next year because testing has to be done across both the winter and summer seasons," M.M. Pallam Raju, junior defense minister, said on the sidelines of an industry conference.
Boeing is offering the F/A-18 fighter jet for the 126 multi-role combat aircraft deal, while Dassault has put up the Rafale.
Vivek Lall, vice president and India head for Boeing Integrated Defense Systems, said in October that the F/A-18 recently completed the second phase of trials in India’s Leh, Jaisalmer and Bangalore areas.
The third phase will start in the U.S. in February.
Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-16 Falcon, Russian Aircraft Corp.’s MiG-35, Saab AB’s JAS-39 Gripen, as well as the Eurofighter Typhoon — produced by a consortium of European companies–are also competing for the contract.
India plans to buy the 126 jets, as well as advanced helicopters and other defense equipment, to modernize its mainly Soviet-vintage defense forces. The Indian Air Force has 1,700 aircraft, including helicopters and transport planes, according to its Web site.
India, which is among the world’s top arms importers, has earmarked 1.42 trillion rupees ($30.7 billion) as capital expenditure on defense for the current fiscal year through March 2010, up from 1.06 trillion rupees in the previous year.
Mr. Raju said 30%-40% of this year’s defense budget has been spent so far.
Under current rules, foreign companies which receive import orders in excess of 3 billion rupees must draw at least 30% of that order from domestic suppliers or make a similar sized investment within India, in what is known as an offset.
"The offset obligation for this (126-fighter jet) order is 50%," said Mr. Raju. NOVEMBER 18, 2009, India: Fighter Jet Deal Trials Likely to End July. By DEEPALI GUPTA and SANTANU CHOUDHURY
If Bharat does decide on the F-16s, this is the first time that opposing countries will get American Aircrafts. A Pakistani F-16 facing off an Indian F-16 would create for interesting comparisons.
Lockheed Martin X-35 Prototype Demonstrator for F-35 / Two (2) built
Photo – Tom Reynolds / USAF
F35 Joint Strike Fighter Program data is still secret
On April 21, 2009, the Wall Street Journal (USA) reported that computer spies had hacked the US DOD computer system and stolen highly classified data from the world’s most expensive weapons program – the Joint Strike Fighter Program. This Lockheed Martin fighter, the F-35 Lightning II, accesses 7.5 million lines of computer code, more than triple the amount used in the current top Air Force fighter, the F-22 Raptor. The Raptor deploys the most advanced stealth technology of any air force in the world and for that reason is banned from export.
Although forever denying they indulge in cyberwarfare, China was immediately the first suspect for the stolen data event announced in late April, 2009. Vague statements from the United States Department of Defense implied the theft attempt had been traced to China via IP addresses. Details were not forthcoming except that anonymous informants reported that the F-35 Lightning II Program has been repeatedly broken into. Supposedly, this latest attempt downloaded a great deal of data but the most sensitive information from the program was not stolen. Let’s quickly look at the reality of cyber theft of classified and critically important F-35 data from secure research facilities at the United States Department of Defense and USAF.
USAF CyberCommand
Graphic Art – dangerroom / wired
I have no specific knowledge about, or access to, the computer security procedures used by America’s military establishment, but there is a simple procedure that makes stealing any computer data difficult. This procedure is widely known to anyone of high school age and older. The computer holding the sensitive data is never networked or connected to another computer. Frequent backups are done to a removable hard drive which is locked in a safe when not in use. Data can be easily shared among project personnel using copies on removable drives.
The only way for an outside entity to steal data in this environment is to break into the project office and physically steal physical computers and hard drives. Unless 24’s Jack Bauer has defected, this is near impossible in the real world. Official Pentagon statements that F-35 data was not stolen, either from USA contractors or foreign partners, have said that a physical break-in would be required. That brief statement implies this simple security procedure is used. Hacker probes are detected weekly at the Pentagon and military facilities elsewhere. It is not difficult to cloak a computer, hide its IP address and make it invisible in cyberspace. Tens of thousands of advanced, personal and business computer users understand the protocol and use it daily.
It seems that at the end of the day, nothing of value could be stolen by a cyber attack against the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program. The few confirmed cases where a foreign agent successfully stole and then sold US military secrets involved the theft of ‘hard copy’, data in a physical form such as a computer drive and/or hard (i.e. paper) copies of highly classified reports.
United States “Trillion Dollar National Reserve Note”
Graphic Art – methodshop
A One Trillion USD cost estimate for the F-35 Lightning II Program was released on March 12, 2008 by the United States Government General Accounting Office. The GAO is the investigative arm of the United States Congress and is highly respected for its honesty, integrity and professionalism. The oft-quoted $300 billion figure covers the production and acquisition of 2.458 aircraft for three military services in the United States: Air Force, Navy and Marines. An additional $650 billion is needed to operate and maintain this large fleet of F-35s that will be the first rank USA fighter well into the 21st century. Increase in operating costs is driven by the obvious factors: ongoing design changes, depot maintenance, increased fuel consumption and higher fuel costs.
The Obama administration has planned to equal, or exceed, the $17 billion budget planned by the Bush Administration for cyber-security. With this vast sum in play for the F-35 Lightning II Program and cyber security in general, can we find out more about what is at stake? For those critical of the large budget and who wish these funds were sent elsewhere to support domestic needs amidst the serious recession stalking the American landscape, understand that there is no possibility of a simple, lateral budget transfer. Military budgets cannot be sent back to a general fund and then easily re-assigned. Unless the United States forgoes its imperial vision, programs such as the Joint Strike Fighter will always be defined as essential, then funded and implemented.
Cover Art / F-35 Lightning II Program Brief – USAF
Photo – F-35 Lightning II Program / USAF
Can we in the general public, and forever outside the defense establishment, get a realistic overview as to what would be achieved after spending USD One Trillion? I think we can make that determination with enough accuracy to fuel endless debates as to whether the expense is justified. This article will not enter that debate for which there can never be a resolution – only arguments – about policies that mandate such hugely expensive military aircraft. Setting the policy debate aside, let us see what One (1) Trillion USD buys for the United States Air Force and Lockheed’s international customers for the F-35. The F-35 Lightning II may turn out to be a badly flawed, very expensive aircraft.
F–35 on runway at night
Photo – irandefense.net
In April 2008, The United States Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, announced sweeping changes in Air Force leadership and budget priorities. Production of the F-117 will be halted at 187 aircraft. Further development of the supersonic B-2 bomber was canceled. Amidst these and other cutbacks, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program was preserved and their purchase in 2010 was doubled to 30 aircraft.
The F-35 Lightning II was designed with multiple objectives in mind, including a low enough level of stealth capability to make export possible without revealing cutting edge technology that guarantees America’s dominance of the global military air space. Technology that would allow for export of large numbers of the F-35 was designed into the program from its inception. Nations that integrate the F-35 into their long term, strategic military aviation policy are further embedded in the United States web of strategic alliances. Furthermore, a large revenue stream is generated for Lockheed Martin and other contractors who build components for the F-35 Lightning II.
First F-35B STOVL Fighter Unveiled at Lockheed Martin, December 18, 2008.
Photo – airattack
F-35 / Profile and Mission
The F-35 article at Wikipedia is an excellent aircraft profile and review of international strategic partnerships. The F-35 Lighting II is a Fifth Generation Fighter, single seat with stealth capability and multiple mission support. The USAF plans to acquire a total of 1765 aircraft.
There are three models of the F-35. The F-35A, a conventional land takeoff and landing aircraft, is the smallest and lightest of the models and the only one with an internal cannon. The F-35A is intended to outperform the F-16 Fighting Falcon in stealth payload, range, and avionics. It will replace the F-16 starting in 2013 and the A-10 Thunderbolt starting in 2028.
The F-35B is a short takeoff and vertical landing fighter; The US Marine Corps plans to purchase 340 F-35Bs and replace all current F/A-18 Hornet, AV-8B Harrier II and EA-6B Prowler. The F-35B was unveiled at Lockheed’s Fort Worth plant on 18 December 2007 and first test flight was June 11, 2008. The F-35B will be available in 2012.
The F-35C is a carrier based fighter that has a large folding wing and larger control surfaces than the F-35A for better control at low speeds. Large wing area facilitates decreased landing speed, increased range and payload and twice the range possible with internal fuel when compared to the F/A-18C Hornet and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. The United States Navy intends to buy 480 F-35Cs to replace various models of F/A 18 Hornets. Two functional prototype F-35Cs have been manufactured and production models are scheduled for 2015.
Pratt & Whitney F13 Engine
Photo – Gingojo / Wikimedia
Performance parameters for the F-35 that have been released include: a) maximum speed of Mach 1.6+ (1200 mph, 1931 kmh); b) range of 1200 nautical miles (2220 km) for the F-35A and F-35C; c) range of 900 nautical miles (1670 km) for the F-35C; d) service ceiling of 60,000 ft; and f) g limits for each model of 9 g. Rate of climb is classified. There are vertical takeoff and landing versions being developed for each of the two jet engines adopted: the Pratt & Whitney F135 and the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136 .
Lockheed Martin F-35 variants
Graphic Art – Lockheed Martin
Major finance for the JSF Program is provided by the United States and there are several important country partners including the UK, Italy (Alenia) and Turkey. The major contractors are Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems in that order. First flight was 15 December, 2006 and initial deliver/fly-away cost was $83 million. One approach to holding down costs was to have the three variations of the F-35 share 80% of the parts.
F-35 JSF Program – Advanced Electronically Scanned Array Radar (AESA)
Graphic Art – F-35 Lightning II Program / USAF
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics is the prime contractor and performs final aircraft assembly, overall system integration, mission system, and manufactures the forward fuselage, wings and flight controls systems. Northrop Grumman provides Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, center fuselage, weapons bay, and arrestor gear. BAE Systems provides aft fuselage and empennages, horizontal and vertical tails, crew life support and escape systems, electronic warfare systems, fuel system, and Flight Control Software (FCS1). Alenia will perform final assembly for Italy and possibly assembly of all European aircraft with the exception of the F-35s bought by the UK.
F-35 – cockpit instruments
Digital graphic art – irandefense.net
In terms of competitive upgrade, the F-35 is required to: a) have a long range capacity second only to the F-22; b) be 4 times more effect than familiar legacy fighters in air to air combat; c) be 8 times more effective than existing aircraft in air to ground combat; and c) 3 times superior when flying reconnaissance and suppression of air defense missions. Other important advances include integrating avionics and sensor data from on board and off board sensors to maximize the pilot’s situational awareness and improve weapon delivery. The pilot has a full-panel-width panoramic cockpit display.
F-35 Lightning II – weapon bays open
Photo – airattack
The weaponry designed for the F-35 include four barrel cannons, one or two air-to-air missiles and two air-to-ground bomb bays. To the extent that the Air Force is comfortable with compromising stealth capabilities, additional missiles, bomb bays and fuel tanks can be added to the Lightning II. The F-35 can carry more weapons than any of the aircraft it is designed to replace.
These extraordinary demands are to be met in addition to longer range and less required logistical support than any existing legacy aircraft. This ‘order’ is tall indeed, but is it too ‘tall’ for what is possible even when the contractors have an extraordinary record of achievement with the development of cutting edge military aircraft?
F-35 initial flight on Dec. 15, 2006 over Fort Worth, Texas
Photo – David Drais / Lockheed Martin
Test Flight and Pre-Production
An F-35 reached supersonic speeds for the first time on November 13, 2008 when the test flight of AA-1 achieved Mach 1.05 at 30,000’ with four passes through the sound barrier and eight minutes in supersonic flight. The BF-1 is the first weight optimized design and it made a conventional takeoff flight on June 11, 2008. On December 19, 2008, Lockheed Martin rolled out the first weight optimized F-35A (AF-1) which is the first F-35 to be assembled at full production speed. It is structurally identical to those F-35As (land based takeoff and landing) that will be delivered to allies starting in 2010. As of January 5, 2009, six F-35A’s have been completed and 17 are in production of which 13 are pre-production test aircraft. The other four are production fighter aircraft that will be stationed at the Eglin USAF Base in Florida.
F-35 Mission Concept
Graphic Art – irandefense.net
F-35 / 21st Century and USA Strategic Policy
In the United States Air Force, the F-35 with its multiple capabilities will replace several aircraft including the F-16 and A-10, and it is intended to be the world’s premier strike aircraft through 2040. If this ambitious goal can be achieved, United States dominance of military airspace is guaranteed for at least four generations, and the USA will remain the world’s dominant superpower well into the 21st century. (The naval equivalent of a stealth super weapon is the USA nuclear submarine fleet.).
Russia and later in the 21st century China, are the only candidates for serious competition that might someday challenge United States dominance in the air and seas. If the JSF Program is also a diplomatic weapon that will continue ‘peace through intimidation’ vs Russia and China, that is very important. Uncomfortable as some readers may be when considering these aspects of the world situation, their reality and importance cannot be minimized. Personal philosophy and individual political views aside, empire building and world domination in the social, economic and military spheres has dominated much of the historical record since the days of ancient Egypt.
How well designed is the F-35 Joint Strike fighter to play a major role in the implementation of American foreign policy throughout the first half of the 21st century? To the extent that the F-35 is seriously flawed, the military aviation component that is essential to the policies used by the USA to dominate the planet is weakened. This appears to be an ‘all the eggs in one basket’ situation with respect to future USA air power; there is no backup or alternative to the F-35 Lightning II. There is no other aircraft with the entirety that has been designed into the F-35. Perhaps very high costs alone dictated this situation. The deepening recession and weakening of the USA banking system combine to further embed the pre-eminence of the F-35 within American military and foreign policy for many years to come. The One Trillion Dollar Fighter Program Wed, May 13, 2009 Business/Politics
Sweden_JAS 39 Gripen (Griffin)
Photo – aereo.jor.br
For anyone who’s into fighter jets, this article will be a treat as it compares the latest, greatest and costliest in aviation research and development. Presented here are Sweden’s Griffin, the EU’s Typhoon and two extraordinary fighters from Russia. One thing is sure: the Joint Strike Fighter Program (F-35) of the United States and several allied nations has competition. Buckle up for our supersonic tour.
Competition for the F-35
United States defense and public news media present the F-35 as a fighter in a class by itself without serious competition. The self promotion is obvious and inaccurate. There are several aircraft programs in other countries with similar capability and objectives. In some countries, budget limitations have restricted these programs to research and design studies, and the only aircraft flying are prototypes and demonstrators. For other nations, there is limited production with delivery to the home country’s air force and a few early customers in other nations. These programs are similar to the F-35 in terms of calendar for development to final design and production. Military aviation commentators and journalists outside the United States often attribute superiority to the latest Russian fighters over those made by the USA in air combat scenarios.
The United States is far ahead when looking at commitments to purchase F-35s, particularly with Italy’s intent to buy 131 F-35s, and Turkey planning to acquire 116 Joint Strike Fighters. The United States military aviation funding capacity is usually assumed to be limitless and subject only to the political and funding whims of the season. US Secretary of State Robert Gates has recently introduced a reality check into this aspect of next generation fighter development. Still, at the end of the day, American deep pockets for finance seem to be in a tier of their own that no other nation can match.
There are ‘dark horse’ candidates for F-35 competition in Sweden and the European Union that could challenge F-35 market dominance. Is it possible for Russia, and later China, to dramatically ramp up production of their 5th generation aircraft and thereby close the gap with the United States in the race for global military aviation dominance?
Sweden – Saab JAS 39 Gripen (Griffin)
Sweden JAS 39 Gripen – Firing Test Missile
Photo – aereo.jor.br
The Saab JAS 39 Gripen (‘Griffin’) is a 4.5 generation Swedish multi-role fighter that is capable of air-to-air, air-to-surface, and reconnaissance missions. The Gripen NG (Next Generation) now in development increases thrust by 20% and can cruise at Mach 1.1 with air-to-air missiles. Demonstration flights reached Mach 1.2 this January. All models can operate from 800-meter-runways and can use public roadways for takeoff and landing; the Gripen can be re-armed and refueled in ten minutes by five men operating from a truck.
Sweden JAS 39 Gripen – cockpit
Photo – aereo.jor.br
The human machine interface in the Gripen is extraordinary with three full colour, head down displays and digital emergency instrument presentation. These multifunction displays are unique to the Gripen and take up 75% of cockpit space. Export cost is in the range of $40 to $61 million, below that of the F-35 whose per aircraft costing is now over $83 million and rising. Brazil, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, India, Netherlands, Romania, Switzerland and Thailand are each considering purchases of the Gripen, for a total of at least 513 aircraft. Dutch cost estimates include a saving of $7.6 billion over the lifetime of a fleet of 85 Gripen when compared to a similar fleet of F-35s.
Euro EF2000 Typhoon
Euro EF2000 Typhoon
Photo – Simplify (user) at Project Reality Forums
Not wanting to leave the field to the Americans and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program without a ‘fight’, the European Union committed to a multi-role fighter designated the Eurofighter EF 2000 Typhoon in 1986. Eurofighter GmbH is a holding company that manages three separate partner companies that manufacture the EF 2000: Alenia Aeronautica, BAE Systems and EADS. The Typhoon is a twin-engine canard delta powered by twin EJ-200 augmented turbofans. It is designed to outperform the highest agility fighters such as the American F-117 and F-22; and the Russian MIG 29 and Su-27. Typhoon has a reduced radar cross-section but is not a considered a stealth aircraft in the usual sense.
Euro EF2000 Typhoon / Cockpit
Photo – ReaL-FrienD / Wikipedia
Typhoon’s glass cockpit does not have any of the conventional instruments and the pilot-plane interface capability is perhaps the most advanced in the world. There are three full, Multi-function Head Down Displays (MHDDs); XY cursor and voice (DVI) command; a wide angle, Heads Up Display (HUD) with Forward Looking Infra Red (FLIR); Voice & Hands On Throttle And Stick (Voice+HOTAS); Helmet Mounted Symbology System (HMSS); Multifunction Information Distribution System (MIDS); a Manual Data Entry Facility (MDEF) located on the left glare shield; a fully integrated aircraft warning system with a Dedicated Warnings Panel (DWP) and a speech recognition system as well.
The Eurofighter can reach Mach 2+ (2,495 km/h, 1550 mph) at 65,000’; Mach 1.2 at sea level and Mach 1.1 at supercruise (afterburners not used). Its range is 2,900 km (1,840 m) and the combat radius 556 km (345 mph) and rate of climb is >315 m/s (62,000 ft/min).
Combat contests and games show the Typhoon to be exceptional. At the Typhoon Meet held in 2008, the Euro EF2000 won all mock combat battles against F/A-18 Hornets, Mirage F1s, Harriers and F-16s even though it was heavily outnumbered. The typhoon achieves excellent agility at both supersonic and low speeds. “The Eurofighter consortium claims their fighter has a larger sustained subsonic turn rate, sustained supersonic turn rate, and faster acceleration at Mach 0.9 at 20,000 feet (6,100 m) than the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, Mirage 2000, Rafale, the Su-27, and the MiG-29”. (Source #3). It incorporates an advanced Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS), and a sophisticated and highly integrated Defensive Aids Sub-System.
Euro EF2000 (Spain) Typhoon / July 2007
Photo – All Glory To The Hypnotoad / Wikimedia
The Typhoon is more expensive than the American F-35. Cost per aircraft is about £69.3 million or ~$105 million. The cost of the complete program has continued to rise as delivery dates have fallen behind contracted schedules. Since 2003, the UK Minister of Defense has refused to release project cost estimates. The 2003 figure was £20 billion ($30.2 billion), which is far below the overall costing estimated for the Joint Strike Fighter Program whose production goals are an order of magnitude higher than that planned for the Typhoon. The absence of cutting edge air to ground battle capability (now in development) in the EF2000 has led some countries to look elsewhere for their next generation fighter upgrade.
The Typhoon had its first flight March 27, 1994; the first production contract for 620 aircraft was signed January 30, 1998 but commercial production did not begin until 2003. As of May 2008, 146 Typhoons had been delivered to the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain. Austria has purchased a system package for EUR 1.969 billion that includes 9 years finance, logistics, training and simulator for 18 aircraft. Other countries with serious interest in the Typhoon are Greece, Japan and Saudi Arabia. The latter committed to purchasing 72 Typhoons in 2006, with 48 to be built in Saudi Arabia. As of late October 2008, the test program for the Royal Saudi Air Force began with one Typhoon in RSAF livery. The first UK RAF Typhoons were declared battle ready on 1 July 2008.
The Russians are Coming / MIG-35B
When listing aircraft that might be comparable to the F-35, we do not often see a Russian fighter mentioned. But wherever advanced Russian fighters are deployed, countries in the region look very closely at those aircraft when making decisions about upgrading their air forces to the F-35 or next generation fighters.
Sukhoi Su-35BM
Photo – daneshju.ir
The Sukhoi Su-35 (Flanker-E) is a 4.5 generation long-range, multirole, strike fighter. It closely resembles a specialized version of the Su-30. It is derived from the Su-27 program in the early 1980s wherein a Su-27M prototype first flew in 1988. Aircraft designation was changed to Su-35 in 1993 after comprehensive changes had been made. 15 Su-35 (Su-27M) aircraft have been produced, of which five Su-35s (‘Super Flanker’) have been used by the Russian Knights display team. Sukhoi began developing a 4.5 generation upgrade to the Su-35 in the mid 2000s, which is an interim design until the 5th generation PAK FA (T-50) can complete test flights and enter production. The most recent aircraft in the Su-35 family is the Sukhoi Su-35BM, alias Su-27BM or Su-27SM2. The first upgraded Su-35BM came out of the ‘black’ and into the ‘white’ at the MAKS-2007 airshow, and it flew on February 19, 2008. (“BM’ translates as ‘big modernization.’). Production is scheduled to begin in 2009.
Su-35BM has increased service life and further reductions in radar cross section. Canards were eliminated from the design because new composites and electronics further reduced aircraft weight. Fully rotating, vector thrust nozzles power Saturn engines to provide maximum maneuverability.
The Su-35BM is in prototype stage – only two have been built so far and the first flight was on February 19, 2008. Radar cross-section has been reduced and avionics are now entirely Russian. Its maximum speed is Mach 2.25 (2,400 km/h, 1,500 mph) at 18,000 m (59,100 ft), range is 3,600 km (1,940 nmi) and rate of climb is >280 m/s (>55,100 ft/min). The aircraft cost is estimated at $65 million.
MIG-35B Cockpit
Photo – daneshju.ir
A small number of Su-35s are in service with the Russian Air Force with 12 deployed as of 2008. As of July 2008, the Venezuelan government has expressed interest in buying several Su-35s, and the aircraft has been offered to India, Malaysia and Algeria.
Russia – Su-47
Su-47 / test flight
Photo – airvoila
While not intended to be developed into a battle-ready, fully functional military fighter, the Su-47 (also designated S-35 and S-37) incorporates several original and potentially important features that bear close watching. Much of what is learned from the test flights of the Su-47 will be incorporated into Russia’s production of new fifth-generation aircraft. The Su-47 Berkut (Golden Eagle) transitioned to ‘white’ status in January 2000. One aircraft has been built at a cost estimate of Russian rubles 1.67 billion ($70 million).
Innovative features of the Su-47 include: an aluminum / titanium fuselage whose components are 13% state-of-the-art composite materials and sophisticated fly-by-wire control. Forward swept and inverted wings allow for exceptional maneuverability and attack angles up to 45°. The quick turn ability of the Su-47 may have no equal. Lower minimum flight speed allows for use of short runways. Thrust vector engines of +/– 20 to 30 degrees/second further enhance the maneuverability capacity that derives from the high angle inverted wings. Its maximum speed is Mach 2.34 (2,500 km/h, 1,552 mph), range is 3,300 km (2,050 mi), ceiling is 18,000 m (59,050 ft) and rate of climb is 233 m/s (46,200 ft/min).
Su-47 (S-37) / schematic
Photo – airvoila
F-35C in flight over the Grand Canyon
Photo – f22 enthusiast / f-16.net
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program has several important international partners. Despite design problems with stealth capability, the production of battle-ready aircraft has begun. Israel, Turkey, Italy and Australia have made the largest purchase commitment at this time. Find out more, in the final part of Environmental Graffiti’s three-article series taking an in-depth look at everything you needed to know about the Joint Strike Fighter Program.
International Collaboration / F-35 Exports
From its inception, the Joint Strike Fighter Program was designed to live up to its name. Extensive allied participation was actively solicited for many reasons. There would be some cost savings but considering the record setting finance required, the United States would always bear most of the cost burden. By releasing new jet fighter technology that is very advanced, yet not deemed sensitive enough to require shielding with maximum security, the United States can share some of its finest research and development in the design of 5th Generation fighter aircraft. Other countries benefit for obvious reasons while the United States continues to shoulder the majority of costs. The web of alliances that the USA controls continues to build, strengthen and expand.
If you like the U.S. approach to global affairs, the war on terror and use of its air force, than this is an excellent situation. Otherwise, these three articles are discussing a 21st century ‘killing appliance from Hell”.
JSF Program / International Partners Flags”
Photo – F-35 Lightening II Program / USAF
There will always remain a central and thorny question which is both political, military and philosophical. Does the chance of air war using maximum force weaponry rise if more nations possess such weapon systems? Perhaps, but that scenario is only activated if political and military leaders choose to do so.
We see extensive and horrifying civilian casualties in Pakistan and Afghanistan from the collateral damage that arises from flying unmanned drone missions whose targets are believed to shelter enemies and dangerous terrorist assets. Those drone missions could be flown less; or they could stand down until essential intelligence support is dramatically improved; or they could be flown unarmed without public admission of that fact in order to frighten and intimidate but not kill. These are alternatives that have barely been considered if at all.
When the F-35 and similar aircraft from other countries are deployed, how and when they shall be used will be the most important chapters in their biography and the most significant aspect of their existence for the world at large.
Pratt & Whitney F135_Engine Test
Photo – airattack
Eight countries including the UK, Israel, Australia and Turkey have agreed to contribute more than $4.3 billion to the Joint Strike Fighter Project. The UK is the only Level 1 partner. Total project costs are now estimated at $1 trillion. Sales of 2400 F-35s could generate at least $200 million and there is a statement in the press that major partner nations might purchase a total of 3100 F-35s through 2035. Given the tumultuous international economic climate and other unpredictable factors, estimates of F-35 production and sales to partner nations must be taken with several pounds of salt.
The United Kingdom initially planned to acquire 138 F-35Bs for the RAF and Royal Navy per statements in December 2006. The British Royal Air Force and Royal Navy planned to use the F-35B VTOL to replace their Harrier GR7/GR9s. After initial agreement, the USA has since refused to grant access to technology that would allow the UK to maintain and upgrade the F-35 on its own. Although Britain has committed to two new Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers as naval bases for the F-35B, as of March 2009 contracts for the purchase of only three F-35Bs have been signed.
Italy plans to acquire 74 F-35As and 57 F-35Bs, although it will not participate in F-35 testing and evaluation and will not purchase test aircraft.
X-35C / 2001 Test Flight
Photo – USAF
The Netherlands had planned to acquire 85 F-35As but on April 29, 2009, Labor Party MPs ruled against going forward with the purchase of two test F-35s. Labor is critical to the ruling coalition in the Netherlands that is led by the Christian Democrats who do not want to move forward with the F-35 to upgrade the Dutch Air Force. Several other parties are supporting the F-35, others are not. A last minute decision agreed to a non-refundable down payment for the purchase of one JSF operational test aircraft. The final decision to purchase 85 of the F35 Joint Strike Aircraft has been deferred until 2012.
Denmark is one of two international suppliers to Northrup Grumman for center fuselage components and is considering replacing 48 of its aging F-16s with F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.
Norway is a Level 3 partner in the System Development and Demonstration Phase of the F-35 program. On November 20, 2008, Norway committed to replacing its fleet of F-16s with the F-35 instead of the Swedish (Saab) JaS 39 Gripen.
Canada has been involved with the Joint Strike Fighter Program from the beginning and is expected to invest a total of $160 million in order to gain access to information, technology transfer and business for Canadian sub-contractors. Total value of contracts issued to Canadian companies is projected to be at least $4.8 billion.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning
Photo – Lockheed Martin
Turkey joined the JSF Project in 2002 and intends to order 116 F-35s with a value of at least $11 billion. These aircraft will be produced in Turkey by Turkish Aerospace Industries whose supplier contracts for center fuselage components with Northrup Grumman have a value of over $3 billion. After 2013, Turkey will produce 100% of the Turkish Air Force’s F-35s under license from Lockheed Martin as was done with their F-16 fighter program.
Israel signed a Letter of Agreement worth $20 million to join the System Development and Demonstration as a security participant but briefly lost their partnership status after the Chinese arms deal crisis. Israel intends to buy more than 100 F-35As starting with an initial purchase of 25 aircraft at a cost of more than $5 billion to replace their fleet of F-16s. Delivery may begin in 2012 and Israel is likely to be the first nation to receive the F-35.
With the exception of the JSF/HMDS helmet mounted display that is developed with Elbit Systems, there will be no Israeli technology installed on their F-35s. A request to manufacture one third of the F-35s in Israel is outstanding. As of April 21, 2009, negotiations between the Israeli Defense Ministry and Lockheed Martin about the purchase of F-35s were bogged down over unit costs and the technicalities of integrating Israeli-specific avionics and armaments, the latter being the most serious issue. Latest news bytes talk about a delivery date of 2014 for a squadron of 25 F-35s with activation of the squadron to be in 2016. A further 50 F-35s would follow later.
F-35 Lightning II test aircraft AA-1 undergoes a flight check over Fort Worth, Texas
Photo – Lockheed Martin
To further complicate matters with Israel, their defense establishment is now reviewing the entire situation. The Israeli IDF is investigating whether upgrades to existing Israeli F-15 and F-16 fighters or purchase of advanced versions of both aircraft plus the Boeing F-15 Eagle would more than suffice and render the F-35 squadrons unnecessary. Most Israeli military funding comes from U.S. Foreign Military Financing Credits that will total $11.425 billion from 2009 through 2012.
In essence, the United States would buy the F-35 for Israel, a feature of the United States-Israel military relationship that is not well known to the general public. To stir the pot further, there is now an intense debate in the United States and elsewhere about the extent to which Israeli politics in the Middle East influence United States policy in the region. FMF credits add further credence to the view that Israel has very deep access and influence upon United States Middle East policy. Does the tail wag the dog after all in the eastern Mediterranean?
F-35 / Helmet Mounted Display System / Electro-Optical Targeting – Sapphire Windows / Lower Hemisphere – Forward Coverage / Spherical Coverage -Distributed Aperture System
Graphic Art – irandefense.net
Australia is participating in the Joint Strike Fighter Project and already committed to the F-35 in June of 2002, perhaps the first country to do so with the objective to obtain cost savings when purchasing the F-35. Australia is a Level 3 partner in the F-35 Systems Development Phase. The Australian Department of Defense 2009 White Paper states an intent to purchase a minimum of 72 F-35s to replace three of four F/A-18F Super Hornet squadrons starting in 2010. If the global economic recession allows, additional purchases will bring the number of F-35s in the Australian Air Force to 100 and outfit a fourth squadron. Acquisition of the F/A-18F Super Hornet is part of a risk mitigation strategy as difficulties with finalizing design and production of the F-35 continue. A request to the United States to sell Australia F-22 fighters was rejected.
Other countries expressing an interest in and/or have been offered the F-35 by the United States include: Singapore, India (F35A, F35B), Brazil, Finland, Spain (Navy), Greece and the Republic of China (Taiwan) where that interest was quickly rejected by the USA for obvious political reasons.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Cockpit
Graphic Art – irandefense.net
F-35 Problems
The United States Congressional General Accounting Office Report criticizes the major contractors, especially the rush to development before key technological components were ‘mature’, and a too rapid schedule to production before flight tests were completed and the F-35 signed off as ready for production. Auditors criticized both the military and the contractors for:
- a) pressing into the development’s phase before key technologies were mature; b) starting manufacture of test aircraft before designs were stable and; c) moving to production before flight tests showed the aircraft was ready.
1. Weight
Depending on exact configuration, F-35 take-off weight can approach 60,000 lb (27,000 kg), which resembles the F-105 fighter of the Vietnam era. Earlier designs for the F-35 were much heavier, by 8%. In order to meet performance requirements, Lockheed added engine thrust and shed 10,000 lbs by thinning the F-35’s skin. Design changes were also made to other features of the design including the weapons bay and vertical tails. The overall impression of the aircraft’s design is a bit old fashioned and ‘conventional’.
F-35_JSF_Program variants
Photo – F-35 Lightening II Program / USAF
2. Stealth Capability
RAND Corporation simulations have shown that numerous Russian Sukhoi fighters defeat a small number of F-35s. Using public access photos, controversial Australian engineer Carol Kopp claimed that the stealth capabilities of the F-35 are near trivial and that new long-wave-length radars now operational with the Russian armed forces can detect the F-35 at any angle. Kopp claims the F-35 is truly stealthy only in a narrow cone around the nose. Lockheed Martin and the U.S. Pentagon have conducted their own studies which refute inferior combat performance and lack of stealth capacity.
F-35 takeoff from carrier
Photo montage – Lockheed Martin
On April 28, 2009, Dr Carlo Kopp and Air Power Australia issued a 36-page analysis of the F-35’s stealth attributes. The critique is devastating and I quote the conclusion (Source #4):
“The Joint Strike Fighter is demonstrably not a true stealth aircraft in the sense of designs like the F-117A, B-2A and F-22A, as its stealth performance varies much more strongly with aspect and threat radar operating frequency band. The degradation of the initially intended Joint Strike Fighter stealth performance occurred during the SDD program when a series of design changes made to the lower fuselage of the aircraft resulted in fundamental shaping changes in comparison with the X-35 Dev/Val prototype aircraft. The Joint Strike Fighter SDD design departs strongly from key stealth shaping rules employed in the development of the F-117A, B-2A, and F-22A, or the never built YF-23A and A-12A designs. As a result the tactical options available to Joint Strike Fighter users when confronted with penetrating modern Integrated Air Defense Systems (IADS) are mostly those necessary to ensure the survival of non-stealthy legacy aircraft types.”
This negative assessment continues: “The result of these limitations is that the operational economics of a fighter force using the Joint Strike Fighter will be much inferior to a force using a true all aspect stealth aircraft such as the F-22A Raptor. As with claims made for Joint Strike Fighter air combat capability, claims made for the Joint Strike Fighter concerning the penetration of IADS equipped with modern radars and SAMs are not analytically robust, and cannot be taken seriously. Moreover, it is clear that future Joint Strike Fighter users will pay a significant price penalty for a stealth capability unable to deliver much, if any, return on such investment.”
3. Noise Pollution
The F-35 is expected to be twice as noisy on takeoff as the F-15 and 4X as loud when landing. Residents of American cities near the Davis-Monthan and Eglin Air Force Bases are very concerned and have threatened law suits.
F-35 Mission Concept
Graphic art – irandefense.net
Current Status
Some of the partner countries in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Project have wavered in their public commitment as discussed above. It is hard to see at this juncture how this most expensive weapons program can pay for itself, let alone move into accounting black ink. But then, if deemed in the national interest of the United States, final costing is of no concern. Considering genuine design challenges that remain, the embedded global economic recession, aircraft alternatives from other nations (EU Typhoon, Sweden’s JAS 39 Gripen, advanced fighters from Sukhoi in Russia), unavoidable large cost overruns and the irrelevancy of weapon systems like the F-35 Lighting II in the theater of asymmetric warfare that the global war on terrorism has brought to the world, the story of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Project has several chapters yet to be written. The Future of Asymmetric Warfare Wed, May 20, 2009 Business/Politics
The first article (I) in this three part series discusses the history of the F-35 Lightening II Program. Profile, performance standards and current status of test flight demonstrators and production aircraft are described. The second (II) article casts a searchlight on the strongest competitors for the Joint Strike Fighter Program from other nations.
The first article in this series (I) discusses the history of the F-35 Lightening II Program. Profile, performance standards and current status of test flight demonstrators and production aircraft are described. The third and final article (III) in this short series will look at the international partners working with the United States on the Joint Strike Fighter Program, and the problems that have emerged with F-35 design and performance. Russia Responds to the Joint Strike Fighter Program Mon, May 18, 2009 Business/Politics
The second article (II) in this series surveys other nations for aircraft that are potential competitors for the Joint Strike Fighter Program. The third and final article (III) in this short series will look at the international partners working with the United States on the Joint Strike Fighter Program, and the problems that have emerged with F-35 design and performance.
X-47B UCAS_Mission Concept
Artist – Northrup Grumman
Mysterious Unmanned Aerial Aircraft at Kandahar
Reports are coming out of Afghanistan this spring about sightings of a large reconnaissance aircraft unlike any previously known to the military aviation industry. Rumor has it that this aircraft has also been seen by U-2 pilots flying high altitude reconnaissance missions over Iraq. With remote, Taliban controlled areas in Pakistan and Afghanistan inaccessible to ‘boots on the ground’ intelligence, the United States and NATO rely heavily upon aerial reconnaissance using (U)nmanned (A)erial) ((V)ehicles . When aircraft designation includes (C)ombat then it is weaponized, can release bombs and is not restricted to surveillance. UAVs are very different than predator drones, whose sole mission is to take out a target.
B(road) A(rea) M(aritime) S(urveillance) !concept
Artist – Northrup Grumman
Sources at Janes Information Group, publishers of the world renowned “All the World’s Aircraft” and “Defense Weekly”, released a short report on 15 April 2009 about a mysterious UAV that has been seen in Afghanistan early in 2009. Experienced military personnel at Kandahar Air Base in Afghanistan said the aircraft was unlike any known to them. Immediately after landing, it was moved into hangers used for the MQ-1 Predator drone and MQ-9 Reaper which fly frequent missions throughout the country. One source talking to Janes reported that NATO personnel photographed the aircraft, and were then detained by a security team who destroyed their photographs. Janes believes other photos exist but there are no publicly available copies at this time.
X-43B HST flight concept 1 – NASA
Artist – Media Fusion / NASA
Granted stealth is not a priority in Iraq or Afghanistan, because there is no enemy air force, but it is hard to imagine a cutting edge UCAV program setting stealth aside. Any UCAV could be deployed in future situations where the enemy might have retaliatory capacity.
Why such an UCAS would be at Kandahar Air Base is puzzling because this facility is not highly secure and not appropriate as an airfield from which to launch clandestine surveillance missions at night. Perhaps this aircraft had mechanical trouble and was forced to land at Kandahar which was not its destination or home base.
X-43B HST flight concept 2 – NASA
Artist – Media Fusion / NASA
The Players
Programs to develop the next generation Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle have been confirmed by the USAF, USN, and DARMA without their supplying any details. The research to produce such aircraft always incorporates cutting edge technology and possible strategic breakthroughs. Such programs must be ‘Black’, publicly denied and inaccessible to new media. Also needing no confirmation is the strategic value of reducing aircraft radar cross section and incorporating stealth technology to the maximum extent possible.
Let’s role play Sherlock Holmes. Can we shortlist possible candidates for the mysterious UAV seen in Afghanistan from planes known to exist, however sparse the details might be as to their precise configuration and mission?
X-43B flight concept ADP 2 – Lockheed Martin
Artist – Lockheed Martin
Only a handful of companies have the expertise to develop advanced UCAV, and only three are relevant to this detective challenge. But first we must mention DARPA, an agency of the US Department of Defense that was founded in response to the Soviet Union launch of Sputnick. Its mission is to not only prevent any further technological surprises to the United States but to generate a few of its own for enemies of the USA to think about. It specializes in short term, cutting edge projects and its only charter is ‘radical’ innovation. DARPA has a long term commitment to Hypersonic Aircraft powered by scramjet engines. As to its organization, imagine “100 geniuses connected by a travel agent.”
In the UK, BAE Systems is the aviation firm of choice for the British government. BAE has funded its own research into UAV technologies and demonstrators for ten years. Programs include stealth and low observability, systems integration and system control infrastructure. They developed two of the candidates for the mysterious UAV in Afghanistan.
_Lightning_flight1_opt500x298_flikr.jpg)
Lockheed F-5 (P-38) – D-Day invasion stripes
Photo – Lockheed Martin
Lockheed Martin is a multinational aerospace manufacturer with headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland and the world’s largest defense contractor. Lockheed Martin developed the Trident Missile, F-16, F-22 and has the contract for the F-35 and Orion Project. The latter will be the next generation space ship for human flight. Their division of Advanced Development Programs, organized in the early days of WWII, is known as Skunk Works. The first Skunk Works mission was to develop a fighter that could compete with those made by Messerschmitt in Nazi Germany. The result was the P-38, the most successful fighter of WWII.
X-47B flight concept
Artist – DARPA
Northrup Grumman is the fourth largest defense contractor in the world, and the largest builder of naval vessels. It developed and produced the B-2 Spirit strategic bomber and is actively bidding on new strategic aircraft programs.
Identify? The Mysterious UAV in Afghanistan
The list of candidates for the mysterious UAV in Afghanistan is not long, and the aircraft must take into account the few design specifics that have leaked out. Let’s take a look.
Photos disclose a ‘fat’ wing chord, and a large central fuselage faring. (‘Fat wing chord’ refers to short stubby wings versus those that are long, graceful and more tapered. Faring, more commonly spelled ‘fairing’ is a contoured component designed to reduce drag.) Aircraft engine nozzle is shaped like a half moon as is that on the Lockheed P-175 Pole Cat, but is not cranked on the tailing edge as is the PC. The fuselage fairing could support a large squared off intake, or a large satellite communications and sensor equipment mix. Two large blisters on either side of the central fairing are likely to be the intakes for a single turbofan engine. The large doors inboard of the main landing gear may be bomb bay doors, indicating that this aircraft is weaponized.
UK-BAE Systems_Corax UAV
Photo – BAE Systems / Wikipedia
Candidate #1 – BAE Systems Corax (Raven) is a prototype, stealth UAV developed by BAE Systems for the British military. Corax first flew in 2004 and was unveiled to the public in January 2006. It is not known how many Corax have been built. Overall size seems small for the UAV seen in Afghanistan, but Corax is powered by a jet engine, which many UAVs are not. (HERTI, a small, propellor driven, very low speed UAV built by BAE Systems was deployed by the RAF in Afghanistan, summer 2007.)
UK-BAE Systems – Taranis UACV model
Photo – Mike Young / Wikipedia
Candidate #2 BAE Systems Taranis: Development began on a demonstrator in 2006 and when finalized, the Taranis will be one of the largest jet powered UCAVs in the world with a 9.1m wingspan. Assembly of Taranis began in September 2007, and ground testing will take place in 2009. First flight trials at the Woomera test range, Australia are planned for 2010. With this time frame, Taranis would not appear to be a candidate for the mysterious UAV observed at Kandahar, Afghanistan in spring 2009. Then again, the Brits are quite efficient with UAV development programs. Raven, which was the predecessor to Corax, went from concept to first flight in ten months in 2003 and Corax was then completed in 2005. Is Taranis ahead of schedule? Is a wingspan of 30-32’ big enough to account for what was observed at Kandahar?
Lockheed Martin P-175 flight photo – Franborough (UK) Air Show / 2006
Photo – Wikipedia
Candidate #3 Lockheed Martin P(olecat)-175: The Polecat was funded internally at Lockheed Martin’s Advanced Development Group (Skunk Works). The P-175 was developed in 18 months and unveiled at the Franborough Air Show in 2006. Only one aircraft was built and little is known about the design, but Polecat could be weaponized and had a 90’ wingspan. Altitude is believed to have been 65,000’ with a flight duration of 4 hours. The one aircraft manufactured crashed and was destroyed on Dec.16, 2006, a serious setback to the Skunk Works UAV programs. But was more than one aircraft manufactured even though released information says otherwise? If so, does this ‘Polecat” have advanced capabilities? Aviation Week’s report about the Polecat mentioned The Long Range Strike Program for the USAF. The LRSP’s formal design and development will occur in 2010, with operational capacity no later than 2018.
Northrop_Grumman X-47B UCAS landing at NAWS China Lake, Mojave Desert, California
Photo – DARPA
Candidate #4 Northrup Grumman X-47B – Pegasus X-47A is the original designation for this UAV, which was first flown in February 2003. X-47B refers to the version recently deployed to the United States Navy. In 2004, DARPA awarded a contract for three full scale X-47B demonstrators. The program was halted by the US DOD but resumed under a new guise when Northrup Grumman was selected by the Navy to develop a version of the X-47B that could be carrier based. Flight testing commenced in April, 2009. The USN has recently released several photographs of the X-47B landing and taking off from a carrier. If these photos are not composites created for publicity purposes, they indicate that testing carrier landings is well ahead of schedule.
Northrop_Grumman X-47B UCAS on carrier deck
Photo – DARPA
Built from advanced composite materials, the X-47B now with the USN does not carry weapons. Pegasus has a diamond-kite profile and stealth design with extreme backward sweep on the wing leading edge and 35° forward sweep on the trailing edge. There is a high elevon at the mid section of each wing’s trailing edge, and no tail or vertical fin. Wingspan is 62.1 ft (18.92 m) and cruising speed is 0.45 Mach, with high subsonic maximum speed and altitude of 40,000’. As a candidate for the mysterious UAV in Afghanistan, Pegasus has good size and one can imagine test flights from offshore carriers. But as a carrier based aircraft, why land at Kandahar unless mechanical problems forced the decision?
UAVs, Stealth and UFOs
UAVs have an odd profile when judged against what is expected for military jet aircraft. Stealth capacity further alters plane architecture as noted with wing design for the X-47B. “The Lockheed F-117 uses mostly a faceted surface design, panels that are always at odd angles to the next panel, while the Northrup designed B-2 bomber uses smooth blending. In either case, not only are the designs electronically hard to find, they are also hard to spot with the naked eye until it is far too late.” (Source #6) Glimpses of stealth military aircraft occur on a regular basis and it is difficult to keep a long test route for a ‘black project’ demonstrator completely outside public and commercial airline air space. Furthermore, UAVs fly their missions at slower speeds and at lower altitudes than strategic fighter bombers.
Northrop_Grumman X-47B UCAS on carrier deck
Photo – Northrup Grumman
Many UFO reports of the past several decades are believed to be sightings of demonstrators for military aviation Black Projects. Often only one aircraft with flying capability is manufactured. Latest design aircraft have profiles that would impress everyone, except those with an intimate knowledge of the design, as highly unusual and perhaps not resembling anything assumed to be flying with a sovereign state air force. Black Projects cannot be shared with news media and the general public for valid security reasons.
Reports of UFOs that might be test flights of cutting edge UAV prototypes cannot be commented upon by DARPA, USAF or government departments of State and Defense. Such ‘news’ will hover in the air and catalyze the imagination for many years. Denials that ‘such and such aircraft was not in such and such air space’ on the day and time under scrutiny could be straightforward, or a deliberate attempt to deflect attention away from a military sensitive area or important ‘black’ test flight. What would a farmer in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Britain or the USA think if when casually glancing at the sky, he or she caught a glimpse of a latest design stealth UCAV?
X-43C flight concept
Artist – Media Fusion / NASA
Well, there we have it. Each of these candidates has features that do not easily match what little is known about the unknown UAV in Afghanistan, spring 2009. A solid identification of this aircraft that may or may not be weaponized will likely never be made. Perhaps some day, for reasons of its own, the United States DOD and Air Force (or UK Ministry of Defense) will choose to disclose further information about their latest unmanned reconnaissance aircraft now flying secret missions in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Strange Case of the Black Unmanned Aircraft at Kandahar
Tue, Apr 21, 2009
All Indian sopas are bad. Some are worse than others. Bollywood has perfected the art of transmitting visual pain through their soaps. The saga of the Indian rust buckets (air craft carriers) is a funny one. Bharat is using a 50s vintage bucket—which is now being replaced by a very expensive one—if Delhi and Moscow can ever agree to a price tag.The normal life of a ship is 20 years. This aircraft carrier was obsoleted by the British in the 80s. The huge expense has not project Bharati power anywhere. It has been unable to use this colossal white elephant anywhere. Not in one situation has it been able to project any power. It is like taking a Kia to race car to impress people that you have a car.the Viraat rust bucket hosts 18 obsolete Harrier planes. The words “power” and Viraat should not be used in the same sentence. it is anything but powerful.
The Indian Navy’s lone aircraft carrier INS Viraat will complete 50 years in service Wednesday, a defence official said Monday.
‘The navy chief (Admiral Nirmal Verma) will be going to Mumbai tomorrow (Tuesday) and he will also be on board the vessel, on the day she turns 50,’ said a senior navy official, requesting anonymity.
INS Viraat, which has a crew of 1,500 personnel, has just been given a life-extending re-fit at the Cochin Shipyard Ltd, where it was docked for the past year.
The refit has increased the aircraft carrier’s sea life with the Indian Navy till 2015.
The 28,000-tonne INS Viraat, the Centaur class aircraft carrier, was originally commissioned in the British Royal Navy as HMS Hermes Nov 18, 1959.
The Indian Navy acquired it in 1987 after it had served the Royal Navy for nearly 28 years.
‘An extensive refit – with brand new fire control equipment, navigation radars, improved nuclear, biological and chemical protection and deck landing aids – has increased the life of the vessel into the next decade,’ the official said.
The aircraft carrier gives the Indian Navy an edge over the Chinese navy, which does not have one.
The Indian Navy’s second aircraft carrier – Russian-built Admiral Gorshkov – is expected to be inducted by 2012.
INS Viraat is pivotal to the navy’s aim to project India’s naval and air power well beyond its shores. It provides operation ground for Sea Harrier combat jets. It can carry up to 18 combat aircraft and is suited for supporting amphibious operations and conducting anti-submarine warfare. India’s sole aircraft carrier turns 50 Wednesday 2009-11-16 17:50:00. Sify News
The drama of the rust bucket’s repalcement by another rust bucket—this one for $3 Billion continues unabated
Click Image to Enlarge 
New Delhi: A 40-member Russian delegation has arrived in India to discuss the price hike for refurbishment of aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov, even as both the sides have "dug in their heels" on what they are willing to settle as the final price, an Indian Navy official said on Monday.
The price negotiations for Gorshkov, to be commissioned in the Indian Navy as INS Vikramditya, have dragged on for long with both sides refusing to budge from their stands.
"The Russian delegation is in town for the price negotiation of the aircraft carrier. But the current position is that both the sides (Indian and Russia) have dug in their heels as far as final price is concerned. What will matter now is who blinks first," the senior Indian Navy official told.
The Russians are demanding $2.9 billion for the refurbishment work, whereas Indians are asking them to climb down to $2.1 billion.
However, the official said that till the time a final price tag is fixed for the 45,000 tonne Kiev class aircraft carrier, the work on the vessel will progress at the usual pace.
"That is the agreement between the two sides that the work on the aircraft carrier would not be stalled. The delivery date for the aircraft carrier fixed at 2012 will be honoured. India has released about over 650 million dollars so far for the refit work," the official added.
The price negotiations failed to make any headway even during Defence Minister A.K. Antony’s visit to Russia.
India had paid around $600 million initially after an agreement between the two countries in 2004, according to which the old aircraft carrier was gifted as free but India was to pay $974 million to modify and upgrade it in accordance with Indian Navy’s specifications.
In 2007, however, the Russians said they had made a mistake in their calculations to repair and modify Gorshkov, and demanded another $1.2 billion. Recently, they have added still another $700 million saying that modifications, and then sea trials, would be more expensive than estimated by them earlier.
The total demand by the Russians now touches $2.9 billion, instead of $974 million as originally contracted.
The delivery of the aircraft carrier has also been pushed from 2008 to 2012-13, although repair work on it is continuing without break at the Sevmash shipyard in northern Russia’s Arctic coast. Russian team in India to negotiate Gorshkov price. (Source: IANS) Published: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 at 16:45 IST
Tags: New Delhi , INS Vikramditya , Gorshkov
November 2, 2009: Malaysia
admitted that it is getting rid of its MiG-29 fighters because the aircraft are too expensive to maintain. It costs about $5 million a year, per aircraft, to keep them in flying condition. Three years ago, Malaysia bought two more MiG-29s, in addition to the 18 it got in the 1990s. Two of those were lost due to accidents. Malaysia has since ordered 18 Su-30 fighters, and will apparently order more to replace the MiG-29s. Malaysia also bought eight F-18Ds in the 1990s, and is getting rid of those as well. Russia has offered better prices on maintenance contracts for new Su-30s, in addition to bargain (compared to U.S. planes) prices.
Most of the MiG-29s provided satisfactory service. Malaysia was long a users of U.S. aircraft, so they have been able to compare Russian and American warplanes. The Russian aircraft cost less than half as much as their American counterparts. The Malaysians find that an acceptable situation, even though they face better trained pilots flying F-16s in neighboring Singapore.
The MiG-29 entered Russian service in 1983, as the answer to the American F-16. Some 1,600 MiG-29s have been produced so far, with about 900 of them exported. The 22 ton aircraft is roughly comparable to the F-16, but it depends a lot on which version of either aircraft you are talking about. Russia is making a lot of money upgrading MiG-29s. Not just adding new electronics, but also making the airframe more robust. The MiG-29 was originally rated at 2,500 total flight hours. At that time (early 80s), Russia expected MiG-29s to fly about a hundred or so hours a year. India, for example, flew them at nearly twice that rate, as did Malaysia. So now Russia is offering to spiff up the airframe so that the aircraft can fly up to 4,000 hours, with more life extension upgrades promised. This won’t be easy, as the MiG-29 has a history of unreliability and premature breakdowns (both mechanical and electronic).
Recently, Russia grounded all of its MiG-29s in order to check for structural flaws. Compared to Western aircraft, like the F-16, the MiG-29 is available for action about two thirds as much. While extending the life of the MiG-29 into the 2030s is theoretically possible, actually doing so will be real breakthrough in Russian aircraft capabilities. The Indians are going to take up the Russians on their upgrade offer. But the Malaysians are going to go with the more highly regarded Su-30. Malaysia expects to have all its MiG-29s out of service in about a year. If they can’t be sold, they will simply be scrapped. Algeria, and several other nations, have turned down the MiG-29, which has acquired the reputation of being second rate and a loser. http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20091102.aspx
Bharat (aka India) has a 50s vintage obsolete aircraft carrier but doesn’t have the planes to carry tham. Half of them crashed under the inept leadership of the IAF which has the worst crash record of any Air Force on the planet.
On the other hand the mothballed Russian Aircraft Carrier Gorshkov for which Bharat has paid about $3 Billion still doesn’t have a confirmed delivery date or even a confirmed contract to which both parties (Delhi and Moscow) have agreed upon. The Mig 29s that were supposed to have been carried by Gorshkov have arrived and have no home—they were built to take off and land from Aircraft Carriers. MiG-29Ks are the maritime version of the Migs and their maximum effectiveness emanates from the deck of an aircraft carrier. They cannot land on the Viraat.
The Indian Navy had mothballed the obsolete Viraat (along with the Harriers) with a decommissioning date all set—it was recommissioned because the Gorskov got delayed by several years. The Indian Navy did not want to be left without the prestige of an Aricraft Carrier.
The arcane Viraat does not have a landing strip that can accommodate the Migs landing on it. Only the British-origin Sea Harriers which are specifically designed for Aircraft Carriers can land on the Viraat—and that landing is a “Vertical landing” (like a chopper). The vintage Sea Harriers used to be useful for reconnaissance and search and rescue mission—and have minimal fighter jet capability. The Indian Navy would have liked to fill the decks of the Viraat with the Harriers, but the planes are pretty much useless, so the Navy would rather leave the deck of the Viraat empty then to fill the deck with aircraft that serve no useful purpose.
Bharat is replacing the vintage Viraat with an expired Gorshkov. The Russians are fed up of dealing with the Indians on the Gorshkov, and the Bharatis are fed up of paying more Dollars for the Gorshkov—which is now 60% more than the price of a new Aircraft Carrier (that no body would sell to the Indians).
The Indian Navy has now contracted to try to build Aircraft Carriers itself. Building an Aircraft Carrier from scratch is a very difficult enterprise and Bharat with little or no expertise in building ships will have a very tough time constructing indigenous Aircraft Carriers. The Koreans which have one of the best Shipbuilding industries on the planet are not building Aircraft Carriers, and the Chinese have only very recently ventured into this game.
The Times of India report describes the dilemma very eloquently.
NEW DELHI: Sheer lack of long-term strategic planning, coupled with a dose of bad luck, has landed India in a peculiar situation. If it did not expose a gaping hole in the country’s military capabilities, the predicament would have actually been quite ludicrous.
On one hand, it has an ageing but newly-refurbished aircraft carrier, INS Viraat, which is fast running out of fighters which can operate from its deck.
On the other, it’s soon going to induct another type of maritime fighters but no suitable carrier to operate them from. Navy will get Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov only by early-2013 but will begin inducting its MiG-29Ks later this month.
Sources say the first four of the 16 MiG-29Ks contracted along with the 44,570-tonne Gorshkov, in the initial $1.5-billion package deal inked with Russia in January 2004 after a decade of negotiations, will arrive in India in the "last week of November”.
This comes at a time when the 50-year-old INS Viraat is finally back in action after an 18-month-long comprehensive refit to increase its longevity as well as upgrade its weapon and sensor packages.
But, as reported by TOI earlier, the 28,000-tonne old warhorse is left with only 11 of its Sea Harrier jump-jets. Navy inducted 30 of the British-origin Sea Harriers, which take off from the angled ski-jump on INS Viraat but land vertically on its deck, but has lost over half of them in accidents since mid-1980s.
India had shown interest in buying some more Sea Harriers from British Royal Navy, which replaced the fighters in 2006 with Harrier-GR9s, some time ago but the deal did not ultimately materialise.
Unlike the `unconventional’ Sea Harriers, which are V/STOL (vertical and/or short take-off and landing) jets, MiG-29Ks are `conventional’ fighters and hence cannot operate from small carriers like Viraat.
The ongoing refit of the partly-burnt Gorshkov, at Sevmash Shipyard in North Russia, in fact, includes removal of missile launchers on the bow to build a ski-jump at a 14.3 degree angle as well as three arrestor wires on the angled deck for MiG-29Ks.
"MiG-29Ks, which are `tail-hookers’, will land on Gorshkov with help of arrestor wires in STOBAR (short take-off but arrested recovery) configuration. They cannot land vertically like Sea Harriers,” said an official.
Incidentally, India is going to order 29 more MiG-29Ks for around $1.1 billion since the fighters will operate from both Gorshkov, rechristened INS Vikramaditya, as well as the long-delayed 40,000-tonne indigenous aircraft carrier being built at Cochin Shipyard, which should roll out by 2014-2015.
India and Russia, of course, have to still settle their bitter wrangling over the huge jump in Gorshkov’s refit cost. "Its earlier $974 million refit cost will go up to $2.5 billion or so… The negotiations are still in progress. But Gorshkov will come to us by 2012-2013,” said the official.
Consequently, Navy will have to wait till then to undertake carrier deck operations of MiG-29Ks. In the interim, naval pilots will have to fly the MiG-29Ks from only the shore-based airbase INS Hansa in Goa. Times of India. India’s plight: A carrier running out of jets; fighters without their carrier. Rajat Pandit, TNN 12 November 2009, 02:33am IST. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indias-plight-A-carrier-running-out-of-jets-fighters-without-their-carrier/articleshow/5220411.cms
Defense analysts believe that Bharat will be challenged to come up with three or four Aircraft Carriers in the next few years. If the Gorshkov deal ever materializes for Delhi, she may have a USSR vintage rust bucket with new paint on it—if the deal fails (which many analysts suspect it will), then Bharat is left with a 50s carrier with obsolete planes on it (if Delhi decides to replace the half that crashed). The Indian Navy plans to decommission the Viraat once it gets the Gorshkov—that is the reason it is not replacing the Harriers that land on it. Maintaining an Aircraft Carriers is an expensive exercise. Maintaining an obsolete Aircraft Carrier is even more expensive. So why does Bharat maintain a rust bucket when it serves no purpose at all? The entire culture is about big temples that can overwhelm the senses of the lower castes. Lots of Dollars and Paisas are being spent on stoking the ego of the Indian Department of Defense—so that they can claim credible defense in front on an illiterate and penury stricken population.
For the foreseeable future Bharat will not have any affective Aircraft Carrier capability—even though on paper it may show more than one Aircraft Carrier on its books.
It is essential for the Chinese and the Pakistanis, Bhutanese, Bangladeshis, Nepalese, Lankans and Maldivians to understand the mentality that spawns waves of mercenaries that try to capture foreign countries.
Mr. Bharat Verma represents the thinking of the Indian establishment. He personifies the thoughts of not only the Saffron Brigade, he represents the mainstream Indian intellectuals and the public. His ideas of a more aggressive foreign policy have landed Delhi in the soup it is in—a belligerent Pakistan, an antagonized China, a miffed Lanka, an angry Nepal, a passively resistant Bhutan, an alarmed Maldives—even Bangladeshis consider India one of their biggest enemies.
The neighbors of Bharat are Hindu, Buddhist, communist, Muslim and secular. All of them hate the policies of Delhi and love the culture, the food and the music. Either every country in South Asia is wrong, or there is something fundamentally wrong with Indian thinking? The Naxals control 40% of Bharati territory do not agree with the coterie that rules Delhi. Only history can decide whether Delhi was right, and everyone else was wrong– however the fact remains that Bharat cannot achieve regional ascendency through hegemony, and it cannot achieve global status without the help of all her neighbors.
Mr. Verma’s egregious comment about Balochistan represents Bharati designs on Pakistan. Though Mr. Verma constantly continues his drum beat of obfuscation—the fact remains that he is totally ignorant of Pakistani geography. Pakistan is successor state to the British rule. According to the Indian Act of Independence Balouchistan, as a Muslim majority area went to Pakistan. Kalat represent only a small portion of Balochistan. The state of Kalat signed an article of accession with Pakistan. Unlike the article of accession of Kashmir (which Delhi claims is now lost—as if it ever existed), the Baloch article of accession is a living document in the archives of history and seen by the world. All Baloch parties signed the 1956 constitution, the 1963 constitution and the 1973 constitution renewing their 5000 year old relationship with the Sindhis, Baloch, Pakhtuns, Punjabis and Kashmiris to continue to live together.
Mr. Verma’s irredentist writings are an interested read—representing an encircled mentality that is helpless and unable to do anything—this sick mind then lashes out at anyone and everyone in sight.
India, argues Bharat Verma, needs to aggressively counter China’s imperial ambitions.
New Delhi [ Images ] cannot afford to sit around while others plot its destruction.
Surrounded with sullied strategic environment and the spreading fire that engulfs the region, New Delhi can either continue to live in fear as it has in the past, or fight back.
There are two distinct threats that endanger the existence of the Union.
First are China’s imperial ambitions that threaten to ultimately dismember India into 20 to 30 parts. To succeed in its aim, Beijing [ Images ] over a period of time unleashed the first phase of the strategy and intelligently encircled India. This initial phase resulted in shrinking New Delhi’s strategic frontiers in its vicinity.
The Indians unwittingly made the Chinese task a cakewalk as they were preoccupied with internal bickering for short-term personal gains, overlooking the vicious expansionist agenda designed jointly by Beijing and Islamabad [ Images ] to tear apart the country.
Even as it pretended to withdraw its covert support to the rebels in India’s northeast in the late seventies, China took advantage of Islamabad’s hatred for India, and deftly invested in Pakistan to carry out the task on its behalf.
The primary segment of the Chinese strategy moved with clockwork precision by investing in autocratic and Islamic fundamentalist elements in countries on India’s periphery — Myanmar, Bangladesh and the Maoists in Nepal.
In Sri Lanka [ Images ], while Indians dithered, Beijing and its proxy Pakistan quickly moved in to help arm Colombo against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, develop the Hambantota port etc.
While the adversary invested in encircling India on its land and sea frontiers, the Indians merrily continued to indulge in their favorite past time — meaningless and endless debates.
Invited by Islamabad, the Chinese moved into Pakistan occupied Kashmir [ Images ]. With growing irrelevance of Pakistan as a nation State, this area in times to come will become Chinese occupied Kashmir. Similarly, China fabricated its territorial claim on Bhutan and is working to eclipse the prevailing Indian influence there.
Let us look at another version of historical events—if we can imagine for a second another possibility in South Asia. If Bharat had not conspired to illegally take over Muslim Kashmir, if it had not tried to bully Pakistan into subservience, if it had not sent Mukti Bahni mercenaries into East Pakistan (as it is today doing in Balochistan), she would have found an ally in Pakistan—this ally would have been invaluable in exterminating the external threats to South Asia. Bharat’s illegal occupation of Srinagar allowed Pakistan to liberate Aksai Chin—and its gift to China allowed China land access to Tibet. Without Aksai Chin, China would never have been able to move its forces into Tibet or run over India in the 1962 war. If Kashmir was part of a friendly Pakistan, Tibet would have been a friendly country for India and there would have been no Superpower China to contend with. Without Tibet, Xinjiang would have been very vulnerable and Manchuria would have been restless.
It has been century of missteps of the current leadership of Bharat. History would have been very different for Congress leadership had pursued sane policies before the Cabinet Mission Plan.
Bharat can again reverse the negative trends—by resolving Kashmir, Siachin, Sir Creek and abiding by the Indus Water Treaty. These simple steps would great goodwill among the Pakistanis and stop the hostility that Delhi faces. Each Mumbai creates losses of billions of Dollars for Bharat.
Is New Delhi prepared to defend its strategic frontiers in Bhutan unlike our timid response in Tibet [ Images ]?
The second phase of the long-term strategy to unravel India based on smaller geographical regions is now underway. After successfully encircling India, the recent spurts in Chinese incursions on the border, objections to the prime minister’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh, lobbying against India at the Asian Development Bank [ Get Quote ], the drama of apportioning official annual budgets for the development of the so-called Southern Tibet (Arunachal Pradesh), devising opinion polls against India, issuing visas on separate sheets to residents of India from Kashmir are clear pointers in that direction.
The concluding part of the plot of unraveling the Union, if successful, will remove the challenge to China’s unquestioned supremacy in Asia.
China’s initial thrust succeeded not only in effectively rolling back India’s influence in its external periphery, but also helped its proxies to extend their tentacles deep into India, threatening the Union’s internal stability.
Therefore, the second distinct aspect that endangers the existence of the Union is the rapidly increasing internal security threat.
While the external adversary devised strategy to shrink India’s influence in its ‘near abroad’, the individual states’s inability to govern ensured rollback of authority towards their respective capitals.
Mr. Verma lists various reasons for the weak Bharati state. The reasons for the withering of the Indian state is not because of lack of aggressiveness of lack of governance. The reason for the weak Indian Union is because “India” was never a monolithic state. A Subcontinent fractured by hundreds of languages, cultures, religions, millions of regional Gods, hundreds of ethnicities, and Sub religions was represented by more than 570 individual and independent states. The system survived in the alliances and rivalries that stemmed from the political wrangling of the various interests. Both Locke and Hobbs had something to do with the mergers and acquisitions. In a classic case study of Hobsonain civilization theory many people or states of South Asia banded together to save themselves from the aggression of other peoples or states. Simultaneously South Asia was and has always displayed John Locke’s civilizational theories—many people and states got together because they wanted to—in a blaring vocalization of their desire for “nationhood”/statehood.
Colonization lasted only about a century. 1757 to 1857 was really the East India Company rule which was more cunning, craftiness, and persuasion than massive use of force. the century of Company rule and one century of direct British Raj made drastic changes to the the society so that the resources of South Asia could be massively and efficiently harvested. However the two centuries of British and European presence did not fundamentally change the political landscape of South Asia.
When the British came South Asia had approximately 570 states. When the British left South Asia there were 570 states in South Asia plus two dominions India and Pakistan. The unraveling of India (which Mr. Verma calls lack of governance) began when Delhi began thinking of itself as a “nation state’. Nehru forcibly began incorporating all the 560 or so states into the federal structure of the Indian Union. He declared all states that did not conform to the Indian Constitution, would be considered “enemy states” . On the backs of guns and tanks he tried to do what no emperor had ever done. He used Patel to conduct a Police Action against Hyderabad, and forcibly incorporated Junagarh, Kashmir, Bhopal, Manvadar, Assam into the Union. None of them wanted to be part of this grand experiment called “India”. The signed the papers, or were coerced into signing the papers—but the people resisted.
If one looks at the map of Bharat today and colors in the 200 or more insurgent districts, one would actually get the states that were forcibly incorporated into the Indian Union. Most of Hyderabad, Kashmir, and Assam are in open rebellion.
The genesis of the Naxal rebellion was not in the 70s, it was in the 50s. the notion of a monolithic South Asia for several thousand years is a figment of the imagination of Pandits who fed a line to John Princep about the glories of Ashoka—no mention of Ashoka existed in any Greek or Bharati text before John Princep no the advice of Panddit Ratnakar published “the History of India”. that notion of Ram Raj today permeates the temples—and creates the aggressive foreign polciy of Bharat as personified in the writings of Mr. Bharat Verma.
The reduction of the Bharti state internally and externally is a result of the way the ‘country was formed. There never was a nation called India, and there is no country called India today. The future is bleak. Mr. Verma confirms the above in the next paragraph.
The Indian sway unwittingly stands reduced simultaneously, within its borders and in its immediate vicinity. The combined intensity of the external and the internal threat, where each feeds on the other, if not handled with ruthlessness, will unravel India in times to come.
Negligence in governance is primarily responsible and permits the hostile external actors to take advantage of the internal dissent to further their imperial ambitions.
To power itself out of the largely self-inflicted external-internal encirclement New Delhi should work out a comprehensive counter-strategy with an offensive orientation. For an enduring win against the heavy odds, the national goal should be to emerge as the single most dominant power in Asia by 2020.
This aim envisages an economically powerful India backed by extraordinary military capabilities and reach, and formation of potent international alliances that help defend multi-cultural democratic values under adverse conditions in Asia.
Instead of endlessly ceding strategic space as in the past 62 years, we must learn to fight at multiple levels, and secure and extend our influence in Asia through hard and soft power on land and sea.
Pursuit of this singular national goal will automatically force us to gear up the entire infrastructure, resources, policies and strategies towards the fulfillment of this endeavour.
At present, we are an inward looking, bickering, dithering and indecisive nation. New Delhi lacks the key aspiration and therefore the vision, that motivates and impels a nation to excel and achieve worthy living standards for its citizens. Centrality of such national core ambition will remove the prevailing confusion and the attendant aimlessness.
However, to be the pre-eminent Asian power, it is essential that New Delhi first set its own house in order by reclaiming the space lost within to the non-State actors.
Lack of skills and direction, self-serving gimmicks and dwindling integrity in the civil administration ended up in handing over the control of 40 percent area to the Maoists and ten percent on the borders to the insurgents.
It is vital that the State recaptures this space in the shortest possible time frame and establishes its authority up to the borders. Otherwise, India will be the next State after Pakistan to be consumed by civil war.
Bharat Verma is right, Bharati policies have dug the hole that Delhi finds itself in. The more it digs now, the deeper in the hole it gets. Bharat Verma is only partially right ni the solutions—he advocates more aggressiveness on the part of Delhi.
In a Nuclear age with serious cracks in the Indian Union surrounded by enemies, more aggressiveness on the part of Delhi will only exacerbate the siltation for Bharat.
Bharat now has a hostile Tibet, and a nuclear armed Pakistan. It may be facing a nuclear armed Myanmar in the East and a violently angry Bangladesh. With Nepal as part of the Maoist arc, Delhi faces total rebellion in the Northeast stats of Assam. Delhi had plans to incorporate Bhutan into the Union, like it did Sikkim. Those initial gains have now been reversed. The annexation of Sikkim is being disputed, and Bhutan has moved towards China. Beijing has vociferously claimed South Tibet (which Indian occupies and call Arunchal Pradesh)
Since the Maoists and the insurgents are armed and supported by external actors, it is appropriate that they be dealt by exercise of requisite military force, before development and effective policing can take roots. The nation is witness to the fact that the Indian police and civil administration just do not have what it takes to disarm those who wield weapons against the State.
To rapidly develop the sinews of the civil administration including the police to face the war like situation brewing inside, it is crucial to inject military thinking and muscle.
First, the State should infuse military talent by offering attractive terms and conditions to retired military personnel on fixed tenure and contract basis to take the battle effectively into the heartland of Maoists and the insurgents. They are fairly young, have military skills, are motivated, and understand combat in all its hues to take on the Maoists and the insurgents.
Second, from the pool of retired military personnel, create military advisory cells in the home ministries of the states and at the Centre with adequate resources. Inter-link them with each other on a national grid to develop military appreciation of the situation on the ground and offer clear and decisive options.
Third, since it is a long haul, the central and all state police forces should pay the Indian Army [ Images ] and Navy to select and train at least 100 constables each year in their various regimental training centres to augment the armed constabulary.
Fourth, the Indian Army can select and train a few officer cadets every year for the Indian Police Service at its Officer Training Academy in Chennai on the same tough pattern as the military officer cadets. This will rapidly induct precision of military thinking and sinews that the civil administration urgently requires to fulfill the task at hand.
Mr. Bharat Verma’s so called solutions are akin to rearranging the chairs on the deck of the Titanic. These cosmetic measures may look good on paper, but cannot solve centuries of discrimination against the Dalits. Most of Maoists and Naxals are lower caste Hindus, who hate the establishment and the Brahman state. The policemen will not come from Mars, they will be part and parcel of the local topography. Neither the 100 policemen in every district, nor the retired army officer can make the tetrahedron monster go away. The ne policy will only be to better assist the Naxalites. The US Army trained upwards of 500,000 Iraqis for the local Iraqi Army—only to find the same soldiers fight them at night.
Unless and Until the Bharat Verma’s of the world are able to get tot he root cause of the rebellion, penury, poverty, illiteracy and lack of basic services—Bharat will continue to face Naxal rebellion upon Maoist rebellion.
The success of expanding Chinese strategic reach in Asia is due to the singular fact that, unlike other Communist parties, the Communist Party of China from its inception has the advantage of precise military thinking in the party, as the People’s Liberation Army officers are integral to it. The above suggestions are particularly relevant to pacifist India, as military thinking in most of the other cultures is a natural component.
In addition, remove all man made barriers like inner line permits etc to allow inter-mingling of citizenry, and establishment of businesses and industry in the northeast and Kashmir and other states.
While the terrorist, jihadi and the infiltrator forcibly change the demography, citizens are not allowed to settle and buy land in many areas of the Union. Such contradictions besides being illogical defy national integration, consolidation and fusion of the nation into one entity. However, we should avoid forced settlements like the Han Chinese in Tibet or Pakistan in the Shia-majority Northern Areas.
But, of course, the writ of the State cannot be re-established within, unless it can deliver high quality governance and development programmes.
As long as Bharat continues to try to find stability in iron and steel symbols of power—trying to hoodwink the people into thinking that “superpower status is achieved by buying$3 Billion Dollars worth of “Gorshkov” steel—the Indian state will continue to wither away. Pakistan faces issues because of the war next door, Bharat faces issues because of fundamental problems of governance and thinking
If India had developed its military power on requisite scale and demonstrated the gumption to use it when and where necessary in the past 62 years, if the foreign office had injected military spine into its policy making, and if the enemy knew that New Delhi would respond ruthlessly if threatened, with a clear message, ‘Don’t mess with us!’ — I am convinced that multiple wars would not have been imposed on India.
Neither export of terrorism would have occurred on the scale it does nor China would have dared to be so nasty.
Adequate military preparedness and the ability to wield it tellingly act as deterrence, taking away the cost-benefit ratio of war from the adversary.
To emerge as the dominant force in Asia, it is therefore, essential that offensive orientation in thinking be injected across the spectrum from a young age. This entails confronting adverse geopolitical situations differently to achieve dominance.
Beijing has created an excellent infrastructure of roads and railway network in Tibet that allows them to bolster its hostile posture towards New Delhi. To create similar infrastructure on our side of the border is going to be time consuming. Therefore, if push comes to a shove, how can we innovate to neutralise the imminent threat posed by the adversary?
We should induct massive heavy lift capabilities for troops by introducing a fleet of helicopters and transport aircraft on a war footing. Initiation of superior means of mobility for the troops and extraordinary firepower will act as a robust deterrence.
We should create military capabilities to disrupt the enemy’s rail supply line to Tibet.
Indian thinkers are nervous at China’s declaration to further extend the railway line to Nepal and Myanmar. Brought up on pacifism, they forget that railway lines and roads can move traffic in two directions. Therefore, in case hostility breaks out, we must ensure military wherewithal to dominate these railway lines and use it to induct our troops in the reverse direction.
We must always plan to take war to the enemy using his vulnerabilities.
Kashmir legally acceded to the Indian Union, therefore, in my mind there is no dispute. However, Tibet and Sinkiang (East Turkistan) were forcibly annexed by China. These indeed are matters of dispute.
As sovereign nations, India and Tibet did not have any major boundary dispute. Therefore, illegal occupation of Tibet by China does not bestow on it any legitimacy to raise bogus boundary claims on India.
Similarly, Baluchistan was tricked into joining Pakistan. This also can be a subject of dispute. New Delhi should learn to think differently.
Wielding the weapon of psychological warfare, the Chinese recently prodded their friends in Pakistan to project via the Indian media that this is going to be the Chinese century and in Asia, the American influence is going to disappear leaving Beijing as the dominant power.
Therefore, India must decide whether it wants to side with the losing Western alliance led by America or the winning side led by China. These are symptoms of acute anxieties in Beijing and Islamabad. The presence of Americans in Afghanistan-Pakistan and the growing Indo-US strategic partnership unnerves China.
However, despite its technological superiority, the Americans cannot win the war in Afghanistan without India’s help. They just do not have adequate boots on the ground.
Similarly, India on its own cannot prevail in this region and requires the Western alliance’s assistance. There is a synergy of purpose. Equally true is the fact that the Americans are fighting India’s war too. If they withdraw from the Af-Pak area, the entire jihad factory will descend mercilessly upon India to create mayhem.
Hence, it is in India’s national interest to synergise with the West in Af-Pak to benefit from resource rich Central Asia and deny the centuries’s old route of invasion to the adversary.
New Delhi must contest and reclaim the strategic space lost within and in its vicinity. Otherwise, in times to come, the Union will slip into civil war and finally wither away. How India must face the Chinese threat. Rediff News. Bharat Verma is the editor, Indian Defence Review. http://news.rediff.com/column/2009/nov/11/bharat-verma-on-how-india-must-face-the-chinese-threat.htm
Mr. Verma’s fire and brimstone about how Bharat should deal with China and Pakistan and Bangladesh—not to forget their internal Hindu enemies the Nazals and external Hindu enemies in Nepal is “a tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury—signifying nothing”. The Bharati economy has achieved meager success in the past decade which is probably not a repeatable feat. As Paragh Khanna said in his book “The 2nd world”, Bharat has missed the boat on global status, and it is now stuck between the raised expectations of is relatively small Brahman led middle class and the reality of the rest of Slumdog India and the Naxals that control 40% of the territory of the Indian Union. Managing the expectations of 50% of the population of Delhi, Benares, Kolkota, Mumbai, Lucknow, Hyderabad who sleep on the sidewalk (paying rent to the city) is a Herculean task. Bharat thought that by purchainsg symbols of power (air craft carriers, planes and gadgets) it could dissuade the lower castes from revolting. It has been mistaken. The 3rd generation that sleeps on the sidewlaks, was born on it, lives on it and will die on it is up in arms. The Maoists are up in revolt and growing. Even Delhi cannot blame the biggest security threat to India on Pakistan or the Muslims. The biggest security threat to Bharat is from the Maosists—Prime Minister Manmohan Singh blamed Nepal, China, Bangladesh and Lanka for the Bharati Maoist problems. The problem resides in the minds of the Brahman mentality which wants to dominate millions of people inside Bharat and has revanchist claims on territory outside Bharat.
The temple education teaches the Bharatis that the IVC was Hindu—in actual fact no artifact has been unearthed that represents the Hindu Pantheon, Arjun, Agni, Kali Devi, Shiva etc etc (33 million Gods). The IVC distinctly is abent in Hindu symbology. However Bharati texts continue to spread the malicious and irredentist stories that Hindusim ruled Kabaul to Raj Kalhani and that land belongs to the Hindus. Hindusim is as much an import to South Asia as Christianity was. Agni and Mithra were Persian Gods—captured by the Vedas during their travels into the Ganges plains.
Unless and until this basic revanchist thinking is exterminated in Bharati minds, it will never be able to live in peace with her neighbors.
.jpg)
An Israeli flag is burned in front of a mosque in Tehran Friday. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
Iran already has a missile armament capable of wreaking havoc, but its air, sea, and ground forces are out of date and badly in need of maintenance, according to a survey of websites devoted to military topics.
Iran owns one of the largest missile inventories in the Middle East and has developed an infrastructure capable of building missiles indigenously, according to NationMaster, a website specializing in military data and analysis.
Iran recently flight-tested the Shehab-3 missile, capable of reaching Israel, and there are reports about the development of even longer-ranged missiles. But at least two sources are not unduly alarmed.
Iran’s capabilities in missile production have kept in line with its doctrine of protection against regional threats, according to NationMaster.
Jane’s Defense Weekly agrees with this assessment:
Iran’s chemical weapons and ballistic missiles, and possibly its nuclear weapons program and biological warfare capabilities, are meant to deter opponents and gain influence in the Persian Gulf region,according to that publication–the acquisition and creation of these various weapons systems can also be seen as a response to Iran’s own experience as a victim of chemical and missile attacks during the Iran-Iraq War.
GlobalFirepower, another military statistics website, which cites the CIA as one of its sources, ranks Iran 18th in military power worldwide behind Turkey (10), Israel (11), Pakistan (15), and Egypt (17) but ahead of Saudi Arabia (24), Iraq (37), Afghanistan (40), and Lebanon (42).
According to this site, Iran’s defense budget was $6,300,000,000 and it currently has 540,000 active military personnel.
GlobalFirepower offers this catalogue of Iran’s military equipment, as of 2006:
Navy: 3 frigates, 3 submarines, 5 mine warfare craft, 140 coastal patrol craft, and 13 amphibious craft.
Army: 1,613 tanks, 640 personnel carriers, 2,010 towed artillery, 310 self-propelled guns, 876 multiple launch systems, 5,000 mortars, 75 anti-tank guided weapons, and 1.700 anti-aircraft weapons.
Air Force: 84 aircraft and 84 helicopters.
The army comprises about 350,000 men, including 220,000 conscripts, according to the Haaretz daily newspaper of Israel. The Islamic Revolutionary Guards, viewed as the most loyal guardian of the ruling system, has another 125,000 men. The army was organized into four corps in 2004 with 4 armored divisions and six infantry divisions.
Jane’s Defense Weekly estimates that Iran’s Air Force is composed of 290 combat aircraft with a high percentage of older types probably unserviceable. There could be 50 ex-US aircraft in this category plus about 40 helicopters.
A large number of Iran’s tanks are elderly British-made Centurions and US-made M-60s, according to Haaretz, and some of the tanks’ serviceability may be in doubt.
Jane’s Defense Weekly offers this overall assessment of Iran’s military:
"Iran’s armed forces are limited, despite their size, by a very poor maintenance record caused by lack of spare parts and very poor training, There is little doubt that, at the moment, Iran is not capable of presenting any credible external threat and conventional force projection is almost certainly limited to within its own borders."
But Jane’s Defense Weekly is less upbeat about the prospects of a nuclear-armed Iran:
"There remains the fear that Iran is in the process of building a nuclear capability that, if it came to fruition, would pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf region." How credible a threat is Iran’s military? October 11, 7:15 PMStaten Island Independent ExaminerJohn Signoriello
- Several sources were used in this article:
- Jane’s Defense Weekly: www.janes-defence-weekly.com
- Haaretz daily newspaper: www.haaretz.com
- NationMaster: www.nationmaster.com
- GlobalFirepower: www.globalfirepower.com
- John Signoriello can be contacted at siexaminer@yahoo.com
Defense
Crescent daggers
India envious of Pakistan nukes–jittery about Pakistan Plutonium capability
Pakistan's as Nuclear power: 350 bombs
Pakistan’s Plutonium based Tritium H-Bombs deter Indian agression
Nukes: Don’t mess with us–Islamabad’s defiant rebuke to threats
Why the US can never attack North Korea: Peek into Pakistan's Nuclear planning
Pakistan’s robust Nuclear & Missile prowess growing fast–US scientists
Nuclear deterrence & Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) blunts Bharat’s Cold Start Strategy
Military Strategy
PakSat II, PakSat III PakSat IV using Chinese and Turkish technology
Pakistan Space Agency (SUPARCO) to launch 3 satellites in 3 years
Pakistan indigenous Satellite launch Vehicle & PakSat launch in 2011
Pakistan’s Augusta Subs, Orion P3Cs, Mirage fighters, & now Tiger choppers
Pakistani defense based on missile nuclear deterrent. Hatf, Shaheen, Ghauri, Babar and Abdali are far more advanced then previously thought
Pakistan's "214 Subs" made in Karachi
5th Generation Su-35 spinoffs made in China as J-11s
Pakistan rapidly moving beyond basic JF-17 Thunders. The J-10s J-11s and newer versions of JF-17
Jointly Redesigned and upgraded Chinese J-10Bs built in Pakistan as FC-20s to be operationalized before 2015
The Pakistani hawks in the sky: Y-89 AWACS
Nothing succeeds like success: Hataf, Ghauri, Babar, Abdali missiles
JF-17 Thunders: Designed, built and operationalized in a record time of 4 years. Custom built for Pakistani needs
The impact of Pakistan’s first indigenous JF-17 Thunder Squadron deployment
Serial production of JF-17 Thunder expedited:30-50 per year to 100 per annum
Beyond the Pakistani made JF-17 Thunder Fighter Plane, Chinese made J-10s.PAF next acquisition the J-11s?
Hamza: Pakistan's Augusta class Subs made in Karachi
Pakistan’s 500 Al-Khalid tanks have been in production since 2001. Next generation tanks exported via IDEAS
Pakistani made UAVs: Uqaab & Jasoos
3 New shipyards support Pakistani ship building & Frigates
Pakistan's F-22 Frigates made in Karachi
Chinese SAMs S-300s for Pakistan
Strategic Assett: Pakistan Steel Mill to triple itself
Pakistani ASBMs: Vikram killer weapons
Why did Pakistan buy fewer F-16s?
PAF: Nuclear armed deterrent to hegemony
Pakistan already has a Nuclear Deal with China! India tried to raise expectations to portend failure!
IAF vs PAF: Defined by IAF
Tanks: Bharati Arjun vs. Pakistani Al Khalid
Pakistan’s 250 JF-17s, 50 F-16: Indias panicky “concern”
When with Iranian S-300s be operational?
Russian 5th generation Su 35s spinoff of Su 27 Made in China as J-11
China achieves techonological independence in arms production
Russian Arms--Made in China
With $30 Billion China building Jxx 5th Generation Fighter
Indian missile failures
Why doesn't Russia transfer plane technology to India?
When will Delhi ground the New Flying Coffins?
Indo Russian bickering disputes delay FGFA to stretch target in 2017
How Abdul Kalam stole US NASA secrets for India
Indian Airforce crying wolf? or facing shortage of jets?
Indian Airforce crying wolf? or facing shortage of jets?
South Asia Air Forces: PAF counters IAF strategy
The declining Indo-Russian relationship leaves Delhi scrambling for new arms sources—but they come with strings
Are Are the F-35s totoal failures like the scrapped F-111s? The Australians think soAsian Oceans–Chinese Lakes
Indian Defense Reports
Indian Strategic plans about Pakistan
Secretary of State Clinton during the campaign called Pakistanis paranoid about Indian intentions. Ms. Clinton please explain this article (not the only one) published in India's most presitgious Defense journal.
India's real intentions about Pakistan. See Indian Defense Review article
The India Doctrine by Munshi
Indian intelligence: “‘the aim of RAW is to keep internal disturbances flaring up and the ISI preoccupied so that Pakistan can lend no worthwhile resistance to Indian designs in the region.”
Listing of Indian RAWs bomb blasts in PakistanSri Lanka
THE LAST REFUGE OF BUDDHISTS IN SOUTH ASIA
Sri Lanka Page
Pakistan China celebrate LTTE annhilation
LTTE was created by IndiaIndian Military Prowess
Helicopters for India?
How Abdul Kalam Stole US secrets for Delhi's rockets Delhi's Tejas
World Record: 500th Flying coffin crashes
Russian FGFA: Tricolor paint
Junk jets for Japan
More Flying coffins?
$10 billion for which plane?
F-16s or F-35s
Lockheed's bait and switch
Moscow sale to Delhi: Russian Mig 35s are simply Mig 29s with new decals
Delhi's missiles
Brahmos: Faster than the speeding bullet
Abject failure in indigenous arms production forced Delhi to buy weapons without Transfer of Technology
After Moscow's grounding, when will Delhi ground the New Flying Coffins?
Delhi’s deeply frozen Israeli Missiles: Windfall profits for Delhi politicians but no Baraks
India’s ‘98 Nuclear duds complicate 123 deal with USA and CTBT signing
The Delhi Dud Report video
Indian duds in Pokhran: Dr. Santhanam exposes nuclear fizzle
How Abdul Kalam stole US secrets for Delhi’s rockets
Rust bucket Arihant: Delhi’s clunky, noisy Soviet era Charlie class tub assembled from Russian submarine kit
India’s Bullock Cart Space program Made in USA & Russia
More Duds: The fiasco of the IAFs Mig 29s
The Delhi Dud Report on Indian Defense: Arms that don’t work
Rust bucket Arihant: Delhi’s clunky, noisy Soviet era Charlie class tub assembled from Russian submarine kit
Delhi Duds: The fiasco of the IAFs Mig 29s
The Delhi Dud Report on Indian Defense: Arms that don’t work
Indian Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), continues to falter even after 25 years
Tejas 1983: A dismal failure which became obsolete in the design phase
Helicopters for India?
The Admiral Gorshkov ripoff
How Abdul Kalam Stole US secrets for Delhi's rockets Delhi's Tejas
World Record: 500th Flying coffin crashes
Russian FGFA: Tricolor paint
Junk jets for Japan
More Flying coffins?
$10 billion for which plane?
F-16s or F-35s
Lockheed's bait and switch
Moscow sale to Delhi: Russian Mig 35s are simply Mig 29s with new decals
Delhi's missiles
Brahmos: Faster than the speeding bullet
Abject failure in indigenous arms production forced Delhi to buy weapons without Transfer of Technology
After Moscow's grounding, when will Delhi ground the New Flying Coffins?
Delhi’s deeply frozen Israeli Missiles: Windfall profits for Delhi politicians but no Baraks
Unmitigated failure: Indian Tejas scrapped. New Snecma plane?
Aircraft Carrier “Admiral Gorshkov”: Delhi wanted a Lada, & now demands a Mercedes
Junk jets for Japan
More Flying coffins?
$10 billion for which plane?
F-16s or F-35s
Lockheed’s bait and switch
Moscow sale to Delhi: Russian Mig 35s are simply Mig 29s with new decals
Delhi’s missiles
Brahmos: Faster than the speeding bullet
Abject failure in indigenous arms production forced Delhi to buy weapons without Transfer of Technology
After Moscow’s grounding, when will Delhi ground the New Flying Coffins?
The CAG Report on Indian duds video
Who is responsible for the duds in the Bharati Defense establishment. VIDEO
Duds in the Bharati Defense establishment. Part II VIDEO
Rupee News- While Mr. Zardari teeters, Pakistanis win and Pakistan thrives
- Kangaroo court–Indian case explodes: Cook Kasab denies any terror links: Indian Policy obtained confession using torture
- How Chottu Ram was defeated in the Punjab–1940
- Pakistan-US relationship to run into problems if Obama fails to dispel Islamabad’s concerns–Maleeha Lodhi
- Pakistan’s Journey from a Nation to a Nation-State
- Sagacious Virtuosity: Dump the elite–Pakistanis are not going to take it anymore
- Terrorism against Muslims- Rawalpindi Blast
- No Neighbor is Safe from Rogue State India
- India entrapped the US in Afghanistan
- Tipaimukh Dam: India strangulating Bangladesh
Middle East
Kargil Truth
KARGIL, SIACHIN & SIR CREEK DISPUTES Kargil declassified
Secret Kargil tapes
Border disputes: Sir Creek
Sir Creek: The other "Kashmir" dispute
Siachin Truth Paper
Palestine
Palestinians are ready to accept 22% of their original homeland with Pre-67 Israeli borders and Arab part of Jerusalem. "Taba" post Oslo.
Even after 60 years many dream of Nile to the Euphrates-"Ertz Israel"
This is why they hate usSole Superpower
Asian War Games
Delhi's Cold Start Strategy frozen DOA (Dead on Arrival)
Pakistani response to India's Cold Start Strategy
Neutralizing Delhi's Surgical strikes
Hot War: A response to Cold Start
Pakistan is not Hizullah and Bharat is not Israel
India's Cold War Strategy and the Pakistani Nuclear Response
Pakistani defense based upon Missle Nuclear deterrent Shaheed, Ghauri, Babar, & Abdali
Nuclear Armeggedon in South Asia: Analysis
Between the Devil & the Deep Sea–India’s vulnerability in the Malacca Straits & the Ariabian SeaGlobal War on Terror
Analysis: Indian terrorists attack Pakistani School a few miles from the Wagah border
LTTE Lanka Lahore: Terror trail leads to Delhi
Lankan Foreign Minister blames LTTE and Indian RAW for Lahore attack on cricketers
RAWs trail of terror: Indian bomb blasts in Pakistan
Indian intelligence's (RAW) covert war on on Pakistan
Partial list of RAW bombings of civilians in Pakistan
BLA is a threat to International Peace. The BLA a creation of Indian Intelligence agency RAW trying to destabilize Pakistan & Iran
Smoking Gun: India provided Rs 650 for terrorism in Swat
RAW: India intelligence: “the aim of RAW is to keep internal disturbances flaring up and the ISI preoccupied so that Pakistan can lend no worthwhile resistance to Indian designs in the region.”Khyber Pass landmines
Why are Pakistani peace deals in Swat considered capitulation and US peace deals in Faluja & Kabul considered diplomacy?
Afghanistan defeat: British Failures of “the White Man’s burden”
Concerted Police Action, without a failed war, can solve Afghan terror
US AfPak policy review results mimic Chinese demads given to Hillary
Force is all-conquering, but its victories are short-lived. ~Abraham Lincoln In 1821
The Taliban was a construct of the CIA and was armed by the CIA:--Congressman Dana Rohrabacher
Obama's Vietnam & Cambodiazation of the Afghan war
Solutions to "Obama's Vietnam"
Kabul: The Final Spring Offensive? End of NATO?
Afghanistan: The writing is on the wall. Can Obama read it?
UK Brig. Smith: “We’re not going to win this [Afghan] war”
Failure and Defeat in Afghanistan: Inevitable Frustration & misdirected Payback for ally Pakistan
US Charge of the Light Brigade into Pakistan is a US failure and has to stop
Pakistan's do more list for the USA
Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan & Swat run by Taliban Huge Migraine for India
Facing the Khyber poltergeist & Ganges hobgoblin
NATO war: UK 1880 defeats in Afghanistan
The folly of the UKs “Charge of the Light Brigade” in Afghanistan AGAIN reminds us of Britian's previous defeat in Afghainstan. Unfortunately the lessons of the unmitigated disaster of “Auckland’s Folly”, (First Anglo-Afghan War 1838–42) have not been taught to the Oxbridge students.
Bin Laden used Reagan’s USSR strategy to Destroy US Capitalism?
Cambodiazation of the Afghan war
Rescueing the Pashtuns of Afghania from Afghanistan
Unite! Erase the Durand Line
Solution: Fixing "AfPak" expedites the inevitable union between Pakistan & Afghanistan
The emerging "Leave Pakistan to Afghanistan" strategy goes mainstream--Extricating the US from the Lost in the Khyber
Chinese Century
The end of an era: The shrinking superpower-The emerging quad led by China
“Waving Goodbye to Hegemony” By Parag Khanna: Dawn of a multipolar world with China and Europe and maybe Russia
China reads the riot act. Strict conditions for Bailing US out and buying US T-Bills
Between the Devil & the Deep Sea–India’s vulnerability in the Malacca Straits & the Ariabian Sea
The coming war between India and China
String of Pearls strategy makes it an " 'Asian' Ocean"--a Chinese Lake
India vs. China: Who is winning?
"China's Gibralter"-Gwader: "Beijings's Guantanimo"- Hambantoa defies India in the oceans
"China's Israel"=Pakistan
The Impact of Chinese Commercial Jumbo Jets for the world
With $30 Billion China building Jxx 5th Generation Fighter
Beyond Pakistani made JF-17 Thunders & Chinese made J-10s: When will the PAF acquire and manufacture the J-11s (as the JF-18)?
China allows a peek into its secret Naval base: Not so subtle warning to India?
China's underground Hainan Submarine base-a threat to Delhi hegemony designs
Revising finance 101 for the Chinese Century: Political impact of Center of Gravity shift from New York to Beijing
C919: Impact of Chinese Commerical Jumbo jets for the world
Hainan Naval incident: Beijing to USA: Can’t you read the sign? "Sea of China" is Chinese territory
Between the Devil & the Deep Sea–India’s vulnerability in the Malacca Straits & the Arabian SeaResurgent Russia
Indian power
Indian duds in Pokhran: Dr. Santhanam exposes nuclear fizzle
‘Naked’ India needs Nuclear tests to deal with China: Santhanam
Indian Army chief Malik unsure about Nukes doubts Kalam
The entire Indian establishment has been lying about the Pokhran duds for a decade
India’s Pokhran duds blow up 11 years later: Huge political fallout
India’s ‘98 Nuclear duds complicate 123 deal with USA and CTBT signing
The Delhi Dud Report video
How Abdul Kalam stole US secrets for Delhi’s rockets
Indian “Nuclear Sub” not “Nuclear”: Sailing empty hull without reactor
Rust bucket Arihant: Delhi’s clunky, noisy Soviet era Charlie class tub assembled from Russian submarine kit
India’s Bullock Cart Space program Made in USA & Russia
More Duds: The fiasco of the IAFs Mig 29s
The Delhi Dud Report on Indian Defense: Arms that don’t work
Rust bucket Arihant: Delhi’s clunky, noisy Soviet era Charlie class tub assembled from Russian submarine kit
Delhi Duds: The fiasco of the IAFs Mig 29s
The Delhi Dud Report on Indian Defense: Arms that don’t work
Indian Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), continues to falter even after 25 years
Tejas 1983: A dismal failure which became obsolete in the design phase
Helicopters for India?
The Admiral Gorshkov ripoff
How Abdul Kalam Stole US secrets for Delhi's rockets Delhi's Tejas
World Record: 500th Flying coffin crashes
Russian FGFA: Tricolor paint
More Flying coffins?
$10 billion for which plane?
F-16s or F-35s
Lockheed's bait and switch
Moscow sale to Delhi: Russian Mig 35s are simply Mig 29s with new decals
Delhi's missiles
Brahmos: Faster than the speeding bullet
Abject failure in indigenous arms production forced Delhi to buy weapons without Transfer of Technology
After Moscow's grounding, when will Delhi ground the New Flying Coffins?
Delhi’s deeply frozen Israeli Missiles: Windfall profits for Delhi politicians but no Baraks
Unmitigated failure: Indian Tejas scrapped. New Snecma plane?
Aircraft Carrier “Admiral Gorshkov”: Delhi wanted a Lada, & now demands a Mercedes
More Flying coffins?
$10 billion for which plane?
F-16s or F-35s
Lockheed’s bait and switch
Moscow sale to Delhi: Russian Mig 35s are simply Mig 29s with new decals
Delhi’s missiles
Brahmos: Faster than the speeding bullet
Abject failure in indigenous arms production forced Delhi to buy weapons without Transfer of Technology
After Moscow’s grounding, when will Delhi ground the New Flying Coffins?
The CAG Report on Indian duds video
Who is responsible for the duds in the Bharati Defense establishment. VIDEO
Duds in the Bharati Defense establishment. Part II VIDEO
Comedy of errors: IAF bombs Gandhi canal in Jaisalmir-India
If the US can sell Junk jets to Japan why not Bharat?
India’s Nuclear proliferation
India’s inadequate aircraft strength: it is not enough: IAF Chief P V NaikReal News
Central Asia
Stopping the Indian mercenaries
Halting the suicide bombers needs a holistic strategy and an immediate stopping of drones
Has Indian been thrown out of Tajikistan? Why was Russia angry at India?
Dumping the IMF, stopping the US drones, and halting the Indian & Afghan mercenaries coming from across the border
Planes
Indian Military Strategy
RAW Page: Indian Intelligence machinations
RAWs trail of terror: Indian bomb blasts in Pakistan
Indian imperialism: Using RAW to destabilize all neighbors
BLA is a threat to International Peace. The BLA a creation of Indian Intelligence agency RAW trying to destabilize Pakistan & Iran
Indian RAW & Afghan NSD proxy behind FATA Baluch unrest
India a major player in Afghanistan: Bases-Lashkargarh, Qushila Jadid,Khahak,Hassan Killies
India intelligence: “‘the aim of RAW is to keep internal disturbances flaring up and the ISI preoccupied so that Pakistan can lend no worthwhile resistance to Indian designs in the region.”
Pakistan’s National Crisis Management Cell (NCMC) submits proof of Indian RAW involvement in terror bombing in Pakistan. Blunt message to New Delhi to stop!
‘RAW training 600 terrorists In Afghanistan’ Senator Mushahid
Analysis: Indian terrorists attack Pakistani School a few miles from the Wagah border
107 Indian “Consulates” & RAW Intel Units in Afghanistan spreading terror to PakistanWater Wars
INDIA'S AQUA BOMBS: Draught & floods imposed on Pakistan: Indus Water Treaty violations- state terror
Indian Aqua bomb: The coming water wars in Kashmir
The Aqua Wars
Water Wars: The impact of India stopping Pakistani waterAfghan Great Game
Beyond US withdrawal from Afghanistan
Afghanistan defeat: British Failures of “the White Man’s burden”
Imperial blindness: Another Empire stuck in Af-Pak quagmire unable to extricate itself out of Kipling’s hell
The Grand Bargains for Kabul
Russia asserts itself in Central Asia
Moscow's pound of flesh for base & supplies to Kabul
Gwadar to China:- Trade lessons from the 5000 yr old Pakistani Indus Valley Civilization: The Harrappan Trade Corridor within the IVC (Dilmin, Mekan) and beyond is now being resurrected again
Obama's advisor predicts focus on talks and reconciliation
Why was India attacked in Kabul?
India a secret player in Afghanistan: Bases—Lashkargarh, Qushila Jadid,Khahak,Hassan Killies
Peace: Top 10 reasons for ending the war in Afghanistan & recommendations
Proxy war in Afghanistan: Strategic depth vs Strategic cloutBeyond the Oxus
US bluff: Other arduous US Supply Chain routes to Afghanistan not feasible
Pakistan to US: No pay-No play: Tough lessons in geography!
After controlling most of Afghanistan, the insurgents target supplies from Uzbekistan and the Central Asia Republics
Uzbekistan pressured the IMU is scared of Taliban reprisals on supplies to Kabul
Anti-Occupation forces choke US Afghan war
Reality check on War in Afghanistan
The implications of the IMU activity in Pakistan
The Grand Bargain? Pakistan key to Afghan Great Game
Tough lessons in geographyIndia as World Power
Women in Bharat
India as world power! Part 1
World power India: Part 2
Super Power- Part 3
India as space power
A space program "Made in USA" and "Made in Russia"
A gift from the Brahman Gods to Hindus. Bottled Cow Urine. UK Telegraph story
How long to end poverty in "Bharat"? 3 Centuries!
The Caliban of South Asia—an artificial state called Bharat (aka India)
Can Dalits and Muslims overcome tokenism and get real power in India?
