VOLUME 16/ISSUE 4
ASIA PACIFIC’S
APRIL 2008 US$10
LARGEST
THE TURKISH AFV INDUSTRY IED JAMMERS
CIRCULATED
DEFENCE
MAGAZINE
ASIAN NAVAL CRUISE MISSILES THE SOLDIERS LOAD
SF AND LIGHT ROLE MOBILITY
www.asianmilitaryreview.com
Leading in short-range air defence Around the globe, the armed forces of more than 40 nations have come to rely on the multifaceted, automated and highly effective air defence solutions produced by Rheinmetall. We supply complete mobile and stationary short-range air defence systems, both gun- and missile-based, including the necessary radar and network technology and state-of-the-art Ahead ammunition. More information at: www.rheinmetall-defence.com Come and visit Rheinmetall Defence at DSA 2008, Kuala Lumpur, Putra World Trade Centre, Hall 1, Stand No. 1062 B. Rheinmetall AG · Corporate Sector Defence · Rheinmetall Platz 1 · 40476 Düsseldorf · Germany
Contents APRIL 2008 VOLUME 16 / ISSUE 4
34 Blocking the Trigger Adam Baddeley While cautiously optimistic about recent reductions in casualties from Improvised Electronic Devices (IED), developing long term counters to what is anticipated to be an enduring feature of ongoing and future conflict is a priority for military forces, for use at home and abroad. IEDs are far and away the largest single source of coalition deaths and injuries in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Front Cover Photo: A US Special Forces Team deploy a 60mm light mortar from an up armoured HMMVW. This demonstrates the true utility of light vehicles and their ability to incrementally increase the capability of light infantry and Special Forces. Obviously there is a requirement to have some degree of armour protection and this has to be measured against the commensurate reduction in mobility that occurs with higher axle weights. (PHOTO: BAe Systems)
04
SPECIAL OPERATIONS AND LIGHT ROLE MOBILITY
Ian Kemp Special operations forces engaged in the Global War on Terrorism rely upon purpose-built wheeled vehicles to provide tactical mobility in harsh terrain. “Special operations forces (SOF) ground tactical vehicles are used for counter-proliferation, foreign internal defence, special reconnaissance, direct action, and unconventional warfare missions, and serve as a weapons platform throughout all areas of the battlefield and/or mission area, ” according to the 2009 us budget request.
12
Lee Willett In Operation DESERT STORM in January 1991, the first weapon launched by coalition forces was a Block II Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise Missile (TLAM), fired from the United States (US) nuclearpowered attack submarine (SSN) USS Louisville in the Red Sea. In later days of the war, once the Iraqi air defence threat had been degraded sufficiently to allow coalition forces to undertake daylight air sorties, journalists gathered in Baghdad’s Al Rashid hotel were stunned to see Tomahawks regularly approaching, pivoting around and racing away from the hotel towards targets downtown.
The Soldiers Load
19
CRUISE MISSILES FOR ASIAN NAVIES
The Turkish AFV Industry
28
William F. Owen Discussion about how much the dismounted infantryman can carry has plagued the doctrine, theory and practical conduct of warfare pretty much since records began. Now, with “Soldier Modernisation” and other so called transformational thinking, the carried weight has increased and is not set to reduce. Asian armies stand are well positioned not to make the same mistakes as NATO and other armies, by considering the problem in different ways.
Ian Kemp The Turkish Defence Industries Undersecretariat (SSM) presented its 2007-11 Strategy Paper last year calling for Turkish defence industry to increase its annual exports from less than $300 million in 2006 to about $1 billion by 2011. Armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) manufacturers such as Otokar AS and are already achieving significant export success and will continue to play a key role in the SSM’s export drive as well as meeting the needs of the Turkish Land Forces Command (TLFC) The Turkish AFV industry represents a significant opportunity for Asian armies, when it comes to procuring a NATO level of capability
APRIL 2008
01
ÀÕ iÀÊ > Ì VÃ
,i >L iÊ ,i >L iÊ`iÌiVÌ ÀÃ `iÌiVÌ ÀÃ
°°° v ÀÊÌ iÊÜ>ÀÊ>}> ÃÌÊÌiÀÀ À Ó\ L iÊ >ÃÃÊ-«iVÌÀ iÌiÀ , 8*\
iÌiVÌ Ê vÊ ÕV i>ÀÊ> ` V i V> Ê>}i ÌÃ L iÊÕÃiÊ> `ÊÛi V iÊ Ìi}À>Ì
ÀÕ iÀÊ > Ì VÃÊ ÃÊÌ iÊÜ À `Ê i>`iÀÊv ÀÊV i V> ]ÊL } V> ]ÊÀ>` } V> Ê > `Ê ÕV i>ÀÊ`iÌiVÌ ÀÃ°Ê ÀÊ ÛiÀÊÓxÊÞi>ÀÃÊ ÕÀÊV «> ÞÊ >ÃÊLii ÊÌ iÊiÝ«iÀÌÊ v ÀÊ`iÛi « i Ì]Êi } iiÀ }Ê> `Ê > Õv>VÌÕÀ }Ê vÊi>ÃÞÊÌ ÊÕÃiÊ> `Ê Ì>ÀÞÊ >À`i i`ÊÀi >L iÊ`iÌiVÌ ÊiµÕ « i Ì°Ê -iiÊÕÃÊ>ÌÊ - ÊÓäänÊ Ê Õ> >Ê Õ «ÕÀ]Ê > >Þà >]ÊÓ£ÃÌÊ ÊÓ{Ì Ê «À ÊÓään
Ì>VÌÊÕÃÊv ÀÊ ÀiÊ`iÌ> Ã > `Ê>ÊÃÞÃÌi Ê`i ÃÌÀ>Ì tÊÜÜÜ°VLÀ L`> °V
i]^c` [dglVgY
87GC
Index of Advertisers AM GENERAL BRUKER DCI EUROSATORY EURONAVAL INDO DEFENCE IDEAS MAN DIESEL MBDA NECE NEXTER OTOKAR PLASAN SASA RHEINMETALL ROSOBORONEXPORT SOLDIER TECHNOLOGY THALES
9 2 25 3rd Cover 33 39 41 11 15 37 21 29 7 2nd Cover 26, 27 31 4th Cover
Advertising Offices Australia Charlton D'Silva, Mass Media Publicitas Tel: (61 2) 9252 3476 E-Mail: cdsilva@publicitas.com France/Spain Stephane de Remusat, REM International Tel: (33) 5 3427 0130 E-Mail: sremusat@aol.com Germany/Austria/Switzerland/Italy/UK Sam Baird, Whitehill Media Tel: (44-1883) 715 697 Mobile: (44-7770) 237 646 E-Mail: sam@whitehillmedia.com India Xavier Collaco, Media Transasia India Limited Tel: (91) 11 2686 8775 E-Mail: xavier@mediatransasiaindia.com Israel/Turkey Liat Heiblum, Oreet - International Media Tel: (97 2) 3 570 6527 E-Mail: liat@oreet-marcom.com Japan Mikio Tsuchiya, MHAS Media Tel: (81) 3 5456 8230 E-Mail: wms-mikio.tsuchiya@peace.ocn.ne.jp Malaysia Shallie Cheng, Publicitas Malaysia Tel: (60) 3 7729 6923 E-Mail: scheng@publicitas.com Philippines Clang Garcia, AdReflex International Tel: (63 2) 638 8374 E-Mail: chang-garcia@adreflexintl.com Russia Alla Butova, NOVO-Media Ltd, Tel/Fax : (7 3832) 180 885 Mobile : (7 960) 783 6653 Email :alla@mediatransasia.com, allbbo@online.sinor.ru Scandinavia/Benelux/South Africa Karen Norris, T K Associates Tel: (44) 1435 884 027 E-Mail: tony.kingham@worldsecurity-index.com Singapore Adeline Lam, Publicitas Singapore Tel: (65) 6836 2272 E-Mail: alam@publicitas.com South Korea Young Seoh Chinn, Jes Media Inc. Tel: (82-2) 481 3411/13 E-Mail: jesmedia@unitel.co.kr
Editorial ith the issuing of the Chinese defence budget in March, the season for geo-political “Panda bashing” got into full swing. Some “China Watchers” see the 418 billion yuan, or US$58.8 billion – an increase of nearly 18 percent over last year - as some dark foretelling of Chinese military ambition that will surely precipitate a third world war. If this is the case, then all of Asia must be ready and defence budgets must soar in order to meet the threat. The regional arms races need to kick into overdrive. The idea that there may be agendas at play here, is all too easy to recognise, and hysterical and ill measured analysis is easy to dismiss. Those of us who denigrate the hysteria of the “Panda bashers” never say that China is not a threat. We just doubt that the threat exists in the way that those who wish to promote the threat of conventional Chinese military power wish to portray it.
W
Of course it is an understanding of “conventional” military power that gives the Sino-phobes much of their ammunition. What if China is cunningly developing “un-conventional” capability? Can one hundred super silent diesel electric submarines dislocate the US Navies carrier groups? Can terminally guided ballistic missiles sink super-carriers? Of course, should the PLA be developing any of this capability, it will do so in secret, and thus add to the speculation. Is China trying to modernise its armed forces? Certainly. Will it seek to not make the same mistakes as it sees happening in the west? Of course it will, but the idea that it will succeed is very far from certain. Chinese military development is not an overall success story. China’s indigenous fighter programmes have taken a disproportionately long time to bear any kind of fruit, and there is some doubt that the aircraft in question will have weapons and sensors that can match a western capability. China’s vast defence budget is almost certainly aimed at bringing its armed forces from the 1950’s to the 1980’s. It is very unlikely that they can develop a comparative western 2008 capability, even in the next 20 years. There is simply too much bureaucratic and organisational inertia militating against it. The other aspect not often realised, is that the PLA offers considerable employment and trained manpower for things other than purely military functions. The PLA is vast and requires funding, especially in order to provide a standard of living that is being enjoyed by Chinas booming middle class. Of course no one was ever proved right by saying that no threat exists.
USA (East/South East)/Canada Margie Brown, Margie Brown & Associates. Tel : (+1 540) 341 7581 Email :margiespub@rcn.com
William F. Owen, Editor
Editor: William F. Owen E-mail: William@mediatransasia.com Publishing Office: Chairman: J.S. Uberoi Media Transasia Ltd, Room No. 1205-1206, Hollywood Centre 233, Hollywood Road, Central, Hong Kong. Tel: (852) 2815 9111, Fax: (852) 2815 1933 Operations Office: President: Egasith Chotpakditrakul Operations Director: Rohit K. Goel International Marketing Manager: Vishal Mehta Advertising Coordinator: Sukanya Prasert Production Manager: Kanda Thanakornwongskul Assistant Art Director: Subrata Jana Group Circulation Supervisor: Porames Chinwongs Media Transasia Thailand Ltd. 75/8, 14th Floor, Ocean Tower II, Soi Sukhumvit 19, Sukhumvit Road, Klongtoeynue, Wattana, Bangkok 10110, Thailand. Tel: 66 (0)-2204 2370, Fax: 66 (0)-2204 2390 -1
APRIL 2008
Audit Bureau of Circulations
Subscription Information ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW can be obtained by subscription. Subscription rate for one year (12 issues) is U.S.$ 100.00 Readers should contact the following address: Subscription Department, Media Transasia Ltd. Room No. 1205-1206, Hollywood Centre 233, Holywood Road, Central, Hong Kong. Tel: (852) 2815 9111, Fax: (852) 2851 1933
03
SPECIAL O P E R A T I O N S
Special Operations and Light Role Mobility
More than an SUV?
Special operations forces engaged in the Global War on Terrorism rely upon purpose-built wheeled vehicles to provide tactical mobility in harsh terrain. “Special operations forces (SOF) ground tactical vehicles are used for counterproliferation, foreign internal defence, special reconnaissance, direct action, and unconventional warfare missions, and serve as a weapons platform throughout all areas of the battlefield and/or mission area, � according to the 2009 us budget request. While not a revolutionary finding, this has profound implications for Asian special operations and infantry mobility. by Ian Kemp VPS seen mounting a 5.56mm Minimi and .50 M2 HMG.
04
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
SPECIAL O P E R A T I O N S
he primary tactical vehicle employed by US special operations forces (SOF) is the ubiquitous AM General High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) which the US Special Operations Command (USCOCOM) modifies into four Ground Mobility Vehicle (GMV) variants to meet the unique needs of different SOF units. The GMV-R (Ranger) and GMV-S (SOF) are used by the army’s 75th Ranger Regiment and Special Forces groups; the GMV-N (Navy) equips the Sea, Air, Land teams of the Naval Special Warfare Command; and, the GMV-M (Marine Corps) has been developed for the recently formed Marine Corps Special Operations Command. According to the USSOCOM modifications to these vehicles include “auxiliary fuel bladders, ammo storage racks, rear floor reinforcement, roll bars, rear bench seats, smoke and grenades system, recovery strap kits, jacking and skid plates, spare tire carriers, side rails, and various types of weapon mounts. Add-on armour provides 360 degree protection for the vehicle plus gunner protection (turret).” For most missions GMVs are armed with a turret-mounted M2HB .50 caliber heavy machine gun or a 40 mm automatic grenade launcher as well as 7.62 mm machine guns mounted on arms that swing out from the doors. Storage racks are provided for support weapons
T
such as the Javelin anti-tank guided weapons, mortars and .50 caliber rifles. Both the US Marine Corps and USSOCOM plan to field the Light Strike Vehicle, a variant of the Internally Transportable Vehicle (ITV) developed by American Growler tow vehicle the USMC’s Expeditionary Fire Support System (EFSS), a towed 120 mm mortar. The complete EFSS is designed to be carried inside the narrow cabin of the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft. The vehicle is based on American Growler’s commercial UV 100 DB off-road vehicle and features a 132 bhp turbo diesel engine coupled to a 4 speed automatic transmission, four wheel drive and four wheel steering. The LSV will be fitted with a Mk 175 pintle mount to accommodate weapons such as the 12.7 mm M2 heavy machine gun or a Mk 19 Mod 4 automatic grenade launcher. It will also accommodate a 10-day mission kit for the marines or a 3
Although SOF units can generally be regarded as ‘light’ forces there are, nevertheless, operational situations when they require a higher level of protection day mission kit for USSOCOM. The USSOCOM has modified a number of Stewart & Stevenson (now owned by BAE Systems) 2.5 ton Light Medium Tactical Vehicles to provide logistics support for SOF long-range patrols thus significantly extending the endurance of such patrols. Lockheed Martin is developing a 4 x 4 ‘Armored Proof of Concept Vehicle’ which is expected to be of interest to USSOCOM both as a long range patrol vehicle and a support vehicle. The demonstrator has a gross vehicle weight of 15,400 lb, including a payload of 4,400 lb, and can tow a trailer of at least 10,000 lb. Options include various levels of armour protection, weapons mounts, air conditioning, central tire inflation system, run-flat tires, automatic fire suppression and a C4I suite. At the other end of the weight spectrum USSOCOM fields hundreds of small 4- and 6-wheeled all terrain vehicles (ATVs) that “allow SOF operators the ability to navigate terrain that is normally inaccessible to standard vehicles”. Under the terms of a $10.3 Serval is based on an extended DaimlerChrysler G-Class chassis.
APRIL 2008
05
SPECIAL O P E R A T I O N S
million 5-year contract awarded in April 2004 Polaris Industries will have supplied 333 vehicles by September 2008 with options for a further 370. The majority are the Sportsman MV (Military Version) based on the company’s commercial Sportsman 700 Twin 4 x 4 ATV. Modifications include a reinforced steel exoskeleton and enhanced suspension; enlarged front and rear stowage racks which allow the MV to carry twice the load of the civilian Sportsman; an auxiliary fuel tank; infrared lights; and, electronically activated front and rear winches each capable of towing 1,134 kg. Goodyear Extended Mobility Technology Mud Runner run-flat tires enable the vehicle to continue for 85 km after a puncture. Three Sportsman MVs can be carried inside a CH-47 Chinook helicopter. The contract also includes the Sportsman 6 x 6 ATV which is can lift 363.6 kg of cargo in a rear dump box. The All Terrain Vehicle Corporation designed the Prowler Rugged Terrain Vehicle to provide USSOCOM with a vehicle that can be carried internally by helicopters for deployment on reconnaissance, direct action and logistics missions. Weapons such as a 7.62 mm machine gun can be mounted on the roof, which incorporates an integral roll bar to protect the driver and front seat passenger. The Prowler has a payload of more than 454 kg, can tow up to 1,066 kg and an optional third seat, which faces to the
06
Tokeh’s extremely small size makes it internally transportable in NH-90 and CV-22
rear, is available. As an alternative to the present gasoline engine ATV Corp is developing an engine for the Prowler, and subsequent vehicles, that uses JP8 aviation fuel. USSOCOM announced in early 2006 that it plans to field a new generation of advanced Lightweight Tactical All Terrain Vehicle (LTATV) in 4 x 4 and 6 x 6 configurations. The command detailed seven areas of “specific” interest: advanced ergonomics to enhance safety and operational capabilities in tactical and administrative environments; optimised power plant capability including multi-fuel/hybrid electric; transportability via all current and envisioned SOF fixed and rotary wing cargo aircraft; night vision device compatibility; improved safety features such as roll-over protection;
Based on the Supacat HMT 400 series 4 X 4 vehicle the MWMIK provides longer range, greater payload and greater mobility than the 4 x 4 WMIK Land Rovers now in use. ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
capable of worldwide deployment in all terrains and climates; and, single and multiplepassenger variants as part of the proposed family of vehicles. Selection of a winning design is imminent as USSOCOM has received funding to acquire an initial 90 vehicles by the end of September 2008. Although SOF units can generally be regarded as ‘light’ forces there are, nevertheless, operational situations when they require a higher level of protection than offered by patrol vehicles derived from light utility vehicles such as the HMMWV or Land Rover. In 2005 the US Army loaned 16 General Dynamics Land Systems – Canada 8 x 8 Stryker armoured vehicles - 14 infantry carrier vehicles, a command variant and a medical evacuation vehicle - to the 75th Ranger Regiment for operations in Afghanistan. Since then the USSOCOM has bought the RG-31 Mk 5 from General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada that subcontracts production to BAE Land Systems OMC of South Africa. The all-welded armoured shell of the RG-31 defeats small arms fire up to 5.56 x 45 mm with an optional protection level of up to 7.62 x 51 mm armour piercing while the V-shaped hull can withstand a double TM57 level mine explosion (14 kg of TNT) under any wheel and a single detonation (7kg) under the cen-
C our
t esy
of
OS
O HK
S
Cour
te sy of Inter natio
nal ®
Mi
lit
ar
y
an
Co urtes
H OS y of
KO
SH
r p.
Co
ck
Tr u
LLC ent rn m ve Go d
r p. Co ck Tr u
H
SPECIAL O P E R A T I O N S
tre of the vehicle. Under the joint service Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) programme the DoD has authorised the purchase of 333 MRAP vehicles, a mix of RG-31s and BAE Systems RG-33s, for USSOCOM.
Australia The Australian Army special forces task group that has been operating in Afghanistan since September 2005 is equipped with a small number of Thales Australia Bushmaster Infantry Mobility Vehicles for security patrols while Land Rover 6 x 6 long-range patrol vehicles and Land Rover 110 4 x 4 Surveillance Reconnaissance Vehicles (SRVs) are used for ‘classic’ patrol missions. Land Rover of the UK developed the 6 x 6 vehicle for the Australian Defence Force's Project Perentie in the late 1980s and 1,000 vehicles were assembled in Australia under licence along with almost 3,000 Land Rover 110 4 x 4 models. The 6 x 6 variants included a long-range patrol vehicle for the Special Air Service Regiment and these were later supplemented through the Bushranger Phase 1 programme by the SRV. The Australian Army plans to replace its Special Forces vehicles through Project Redfin. At DSEi 2007 Land Rover displayed its
08
Panhard has developed the Vehicule d’Action dans la Profondeur (VAP), a deep penetration variant of its successful 4 x 4 Vèhicule Blindè Legèr (VBL) reconnaissance vehicle which is used by at least 15 countries. new 6 x 6 prototype that combines the all terrain capability of its 4 x 4 light utility vehicles (LUVs) with greater payload and volume capacity. In its basic form the 6 x 6 vehicle has a chassis cab and is designed for modular rear bodies to meet customer requirements. With an overall length of 6001 mm the vehicle is 1,400 mm longer than the Defender 110 and 190 mm wider at 1,980 mm. It has a gross vehicle weight of 7,000 kg including up to 4,000 kg in payload. Two vehicles can be driven without preparation The Panhard VAP is based on the famous VBL
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
onto a C-130 Hercules. The vehicle, which is in permanent 6 x 6 drive, is powered by a Defender 2.4 litre common rail diesel engine.
UK Developments The UK Ministry of Defence announced in late June 2007 the purchase of 130 Medium Weapons Mounted Installation Kit (MWMIK) patrol vehicles from Babcock Marine under an Urgent Operational Requirement to bolster fire support for units in Afghanistan and Iraq. Based on the Supacat HMT 400 series 4 X 4 vehicle the MWMIK provides longer range, greater payload and greater mobility than the 4 x 4 WMIK Land Rovers now in use. Land Rover and Ricardo Specialist Vehicles, also of the UK, developed the WMIK for the army’s Land Rover Defender XD 110 to accommodate machine guns, grenade launchers or anti-tank guided weapons. The two companies used their experience of this project to develop the Land Rover Rapid Deployment Vehicle, the latest in a series of attack vehicles based on the Land Rover design. The open top MWMIK carries a crew of up to four and can be fitted with a range of weapons including the M2HB .50 calibre heavy machine gun, the Heckler and Koch 40mm Grenade Machine Gun and 7.62 mm
SPECIAL O P E R A T I O N S
UK Land Rover Based WMIKs seen passing US SOCOM armoured HMWVVs.
general-purpose machine guns. The vehicle has a top road speed of 130 km/h. Deliveries are scheduled to be completed by May 2008 and an additional order for 72 vehicles is anticipated. The MoD refused to confirm speculation the MWMIK is fielded with the Special Air Service. UK company Roush Technologies has recently produced two ATV for the UK’s rapid reaction forces. The LAS-100RE lightweight all-terrain platform was designed under a £3.5 million MoD contract. A lightweight aluminium honeycomb construction keeps the 6 x 6 vehicle’s weight to about 800 kg while still allowing it to carry a 1,000 kg payload. The rear platform is designed to accommodate a wide variety of demountable bodies and equipment. Roush is developing the LAS-200RE and -300RE derivatives for other opera-tional requirements.
Roush and Arctic Cat have developed the Arctic Cat Diesel Reconnaissance Vehicle (also known by the Roush designation LAS50RE). This ATV, in production since 2006, can carry 45 kg on the front rack, more than 90 kg on the rear rack and a tow a 500 kg trailer or other equipment up to 500kg. The New Zealand Special Air Service deployed its newly delivered Pinzgauer 6 x 6 special operations vehicles for the first time in June 2005 to conduct long-range reconnaissance and direct action missions in Afghanistan. The UK company (which is now owned by BAE Systems) built 13 special operations variants as part of the New Zealand Army’s Light Operational Vehicle project to acquire 321 Pinzgauers. The company is offering the latest model, dubbed the X-treme Mobility series, for Australia’s Project Redfin. Germany’s special forces have recently been equipped with the Rheinmetall Landsysteme Serval Light Infantry Vehicle (Special Operations) and a ‘small number’ of Servals were delivered to an unspecified European customer in 2007. The company
developed the Serval using an extended wheelbase DaimlerChrysler G-Class chassis. In German service the vehicle carries a four-person crew. The Serval mounts an RLS 609 K weapon station that can be armed with weapons such as the Heckler and Koch 40mm GMG or the .50 calibre HMG and general-purpose machine guns can be fitted at the front passenger's seat and the rear of the vehicle. The weapon station can be folded to lower the vehicle's profile for air transport inside the army's CH53 heavy-lift helicopters.
European Developments At Eurosatory 2006 Rheinmetall unveiled the Tokeh 4 x 4 light tactical vehicle feasibility demonstrator that is designed to meet a German Army requirement for a vehicle that can be carried inside the NH Industries NH90 tactical transport helicopter. A second demonstrator was completed in 2007 incorporating design changes as a result of early trials. The 1,800 kg Tokeh is able to carry up to 600 kg in cargo including a two-person crew.
SPECIAL O P E R A T I O N S
The USSOCOM has modified a number of Stewart & Stevenson 2.5 ton Light Medium Tactical Vehicles to provide logistics support for SOF long-range patrols thus significantly extending the endurance of such patrols An Iveco 2.3 litre-diesel engine gives a maximum speed of 120 km/h and Tokeh features a height-adjustable suspension system. The vehicle commander can mount a 5.56 mm or 7.62 mm machine gun. Rheinmetall is evaluating the Tokeh’s suitability for internal deployment by the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft that is entering service with the USSOCOM and USMC. The French Army’s Brigade des Forces Speciales Terre (BFST) has recently been equipped with 41 4 x 4 Vehicule Patrouilke SAS (VPS) designed by Panhard General Defense. The VPS is based on a short wheel base DaimlerChrysler G 270 CDI G-Class LUV that Panhard modified to meet the army’s requirement for a vehicle that can be carried internally by a variety of rotary wing and fixed wing aircraft without special preparation. The VPS has a combat weight of 4,000 kg and measures 4.74 m in length, 2.21 m in width and a 1.92 m to the top of the roll cage enabling one vehicle to be air-
lifted inside a medium helicopter, two inside a Transall C-160 and three in C130J-30 stretched Hercules. Seating is provided for a four-strong crew. A manually operated ring mount is fitted on the roll cage over the rear compartment and is able to accommodate a .50 cal HMG or 40 mm AGL while a 7.62 mm machine gun can be installed at the commander’s position in the right forward seat. An armoured floor under the hull provides protection against anti-personnel mines. The vehicle has a maximum speed of 120 kph on roads and a maximum road range of 800 km with its 96 litre fuel tank. Standard equipment includes a self-recovery winch on the front bumper and storage for 30 litres of water and rations, two 20 litre fuel cans and two spare wheels. Panhard has developed the Vehicule d’Action dans la Profondeur (VAP), a deep penetration variant of its successful 4 x 4 Vèhicule Blindè Legèr (VBL) reconnaissance vehicle which is used by at least 15 countries. The company estimates the export potential for the VAP at about 200 vehicles. By eliminating the VBL’s armoured hull the empty weight of the VAP has been cut to 2,500 kg and it can carry a payload of 1,500 kg including four crew. The VAP has an armoured floor that according to Panhard provides ‘good’ mine protection. Powered by a 2.1 litre Steyr turbo diesel engine the VAP has a maximum range of 700 km and can reach a top speed of 120 kph. Panhard is proposing that the VAP be equipped with a range o f
Adapted truck chassis have some use in carrying re-supply payloads to support other vehicles
10
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
weapons, observation devices and communications equipment enabling it to undertake direct action, reconnaissance, target designation and similar missions. The Al-Thalab (Fox) long range patrol vehicle was unveiled at the September 2005 DSEi exhibition by Jankel Armouring of the UK and Jordan’s King Abdullah II Design and Development Bureau. The team used a tropical specification Toyota 1979 4 x 4 chassis as the basis for the vehicles thus enabling users to obtain spare parts from Toyota’s network of civil dealers around the globe. The Al-Thalab carries a maximum payload of 1,700kg including a driver, commander and two crewmembers in the rear. A 7.62mm machine gun can be mounted for the commander’s use and a heavy machine gun or AGL can be fitted on the rear mounted ring platform. Jordan’s special forces have received at least 20 vehicles and another 15 were built for an undisclosed African customer for use on border patrol duties. South Africa’s airborne and special forces operate the Gecko 8 x 8 Rapid Deployment Logistical Vehicles (RDLV). South Africa’s LMT Products modified the Argo Centaur 8 x 8 ATV, manufactured by Ontario Drive and Gear, to meet demanding local requirements. Modifications included fitting a militarised top structure, weapon mounts, storage space, 12V/24V electrical system, communication harnesses and a strengthened lower structure to allow air delivery and helicopter lifts. The vehicle can carry a 900 kg payload, tow a 600 kg trailer and achieve a top speed of 47 kph. The Gecko is fully amphibious with a 230 kg payload and this can be improved by fitting AMR flotation bags. ■
MDO low maintenance
MGO robust construction HFO
low fuel consumption fuel exibility
wide product range
The Foreseeable Future The robustness, high availability and excellent operating economy of medium speed engines from MAN Diesel keep navies at Find out more at www.mandiesel.com
MAN Diesel – Powering the World
sea and at readiness.
NAVAL TECHNOLOGY
Cruise Missiles for Asian Navies Contexts and Capabilities In Operation DESERT STORM in January 1991, the first weapon launched by coalition forces was a Block II Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise Missile (TLAM), fired from the United States (US) nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) USS Louisville in the Red Sea. In later days of the war, once the Iraqi air defence threat had been degraded sufficiently to allow coalition forces to undertake daylight air sorties, journalists gathered in Baghdad’s Al Rashid hotel were stunned to see Tomahawks regularly approaching, pivoting around and racing away from the hotel towards targets downtown. by Lee Willett
Harpoon launching
12
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
NAVAL TECHNOLOGY
ESERT STORM provided the US with a rare (at that time) opportunity to showcase its emerging generation of postCold War conventional weapons. The end of the Cold war nuclear stand-off with the Soviet Union allowed many new conventional programmes to come to the strategic fore. After its performance in DESERT STORM – in which its stand-off, long-range, precision-targeting capabilities gave coalition forces an unprecedented ability to exercise the sanitized, air power dominated warfare which became symbolic of US military operations in the 1990s - Tomahawk became known as a ‘war-winning wonder weapon’. Yet, as advanced as the Block II’s targeting technologies appeared at the time, the hindsight of almost 20 years of further developments in cruise missiles such as Tomahawk shows just how limited in use the Block II variant was when compared to today’s cruise missiles, such as the Block IV Tactical Tomahawk (TacTom). The only reason the Al Rashid hotel was such a regular feature of Tomahawk operations was because the hotel was one of the few distinct landmarks on a very limited number of Tomahawk ingress routes into Baghdad. The nature of the Block II’s Terrain Contour-Matching (TERCOM) guidance meant that it required physical landmarks to verify its position and, in the deserts of Iraq, these were few and far between. Thus US target planners were forced to send the Tomahawks into Baghdad along a route including, amongst other landmarks, the hotel. Coupled with one fundamental weakness of modern cruise missiles – their sub-sonic speed this made them somewhat easy to counter, as was shown when US stream
D
attacks saw several shot down. Even though this tactic was aborted pretty quickly, many political opponents of the weapon in the US used this perceived weakness as an opportunity to target the weapon’s profile and future. Yet the weapon endured because its long-range, standoff, conventional precision gave the US political leaders greater political and military choice in crises and operations, and at a time of reduced political desire to deploy ground troops as nations began to cash in their post-Cold War peace dividends. Following four further operational employments in Iraq, two in Afghanistan, one in Kosovo, and one in Sudan, by the time the Block IV arrived in service in the US Navy and the Royal Navy in 2007, well over a thousand Tomahawks had been fired in combat. With the Block III variant, first fired in Iraq in 1993, the US revolutionized the weapon with GPS guidance to allow it to attack targets from a 360-degree radius, with digital image matching improving targeting in particular cases where heighte n e d accuracy w a s
Where it all began! Styx.
required. With the Block IV, extended range and improved two-way communication have given the missile loiter, re-targeting, and battle-damage assessment capability. Thus, planners have the ability to retarget, in flight, what is now – at least in operational terms – a tactical missile. However, perhaps what were the original precision-guided munitions also had the ability to be re-targeted in flight. A cruise missile is, in effect, little more than a flying bomb. Some analysts have argued that kamikaze tactics employed by
On 21st October 1967, an Egyptian Soviet-supplied Komar-class sank the Israeli destroyer Eilat with a Soviet-supplied Styx. Japanese fighter pilots, seen first in the Battle of Leyte Gulf in 1944, provided the original manifestation of precision-guided munitions, with their aircraft turned into flying bombs. Others have argued that the German V-1 flying bombs, or Doodlebugs, which cruised into the skies over London in 1944, were the first real cruise missile. Indeed, V-1s downed over London, and blueprints found on a German U-Boat, provided much of the data for early US cruise missile programmes. It seems, however, that both concepts contributed to the development of the unmanned, guided rocket that is the modern day cruise missile. Early US programmes did not prove to be particularly successful with, for example, the regularity with which Snark cruise missiles went off course from test ranges on the US Eastern seaboard leading Brahamos being vertically launched from a shore based TEL.
APRIL 2008
13
NAVAL TECHNOLOGY
Chinese C-704s are a smaller (half the weight) and cheaper C-802.
Florida waters to famously be dubbed as ‘snark infested’. It was only when the Tomahawk programme, developed originally as a nuclear-armed submarine launched system, began to flourish as a conventional weapon – free from the strictures of US-Soviet strategic arms control that the political weight behind the programme grew to turn it into the weapon it is today. Arguably, it was the Soviet Union that led the way in early Sea Launched Cruise Missile (SLCM) developments. The Soviets themselves had drawn much from German programmes, including moving
an entire missile factory back east. Notable Soviet nuclear tactical anti-ship cruise missile programmes included the SS-N-2 Styx. While the Soviets did not fire such missiles in anger – although there were reports that Styx SLCMs were deployed on Komarclass patrol boats operating out of Cuban ports during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis – cruise missiles such as Styx were responsible for several noteworthy attacks during the Cold War. On 21st October 1967, an Egyptian Soviet-supplied Komar-class sank the Israeli destroyer Eilat with a Soviet-supplied Styx. On 5th December 1971, the Indian Navy sank the Pakistan destroyer Khaibar and minesweeper Muhafiz with Styx missiles. In the IranIraq war, reports suggest that as many as six ships were sunk by tactical anti-ship cruise missiles. Yet it was the Tomahawk
programme – in political terms, because of its appearances on CNN, and in military terms, because of its significant range and conventional precision – which, finally, placed cruise missiles more firmly onto the military map in January 1991.
Asian Navies and Cruise Missile Capabilities Cruise missiles provide an appealing mix of new technology (particularly stand-off precision), relatively quick availability and low cost. This appeal certainly was clear in the development of Tomahawk. Deploying cruise missiles at sea gives navies much greater political and strategic reach. Many navies throughout the world either have or actively are seeking a cruise missile capability. Such a capability, especially when deployed on a submarine, can enable navies to take a significant – and more affordable - leap forward in their Brahamos being fired from a surface ship
14
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
S
ITY A I R
SU
P E
U
PE
OR RI
T
TY
MAR
RI
ITI
IO
M
E
R
SE
AI
EN
BA
GA
GE
ND
MEN
GROU D
LD RD E I F EFE NCE B AT T L E
Countering the unpredictable Lock on to MBDA solutions
MARITIME SUPERIORITY by MBDA MARTE - ASTER - EXOCET - VL MICA - MISTRAL
www.mbda-systems.com
NAVAL TECHNOLOGY
political and military capabilities and influence, giving them influence which may be disproportionate to their political, military and financial size. Research suggests that as many as nine other navies – Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, South Korea and Spain - have considered whether a longrange stand-off conventional cruise missile capability like Tomahawk would fit their strategic requirement – assuming the US State Department made it available to them as a foreign military sale. The US Navy itself is beginning to think about what comes after the Block IV, with the requirement for greater speed meaning that Tomahawk may have reached the end of its design life – despite Block IV itself still being in service for another 30 years. The US has, for example, also been looking at more affordable – but admittedly less capable – systems. According to Professor Rob de Wijk, the European Union defence and security posture capability parameters mandate a requirement for a total of 1300 SLCMs. The Royal Navy’s Tomahawk inventory, plus France’s Scalp Naval programme – an adaptation of its Scalp EG air-launched cruise missile programme started after the US State Department did in fact reject a French application to buy 50 Tomahawks– no doubt would form the initial backbone of such an inventory. Little is known yet about Scalp Naval’s costs and capabilities and, in the latter case, some have remained sceptical as to how its capabilities will compare to a weapon like the Block IV Tomahawk. The Netherlands was set to be the next in line, having agreed a Tomahawk purchase with the US: a change of Government in The Hague, however, saw the purchase cancelled. Yet a cruise missile of the advanced technological capability of Tomahawk or Scalp Naval may not necessarily be what many navies, such as those in the AsiaPacific region, have a strategic requirement for – nor necessarily can they afford to invest in it.
Russia The Russian Navy has a significant seabased cruise missile capability, with a variety of systems, some of which have significant high-end military capability. Russia’s cruise missile developments date of course back to the era of the Soviet Union. In the
16
…as many as nine other navies – Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, South Korea and Spain have considered whether a long-range stand-off conventional cruise missile capability… Soviet days, despite developing cruise missiles with both nuclear and conventional capabilities, Moscow generally only deployed nuclear systems. Many of these, too, were anti-ship weapons. Soviet developments were driven by an inherently defensive naval posture, but also by the particular need to offset the threat from US Navy Carrier Battle Groups (CVBGs) – particularly when, in the later years of the Cold War, under the Maritime Strategy CVBGs were deployed in a tight offensive noose around the Soviet Union. Soviet submarines carrying nuclear cruise missiles did deploy to waters off the US Eastern seaboard in particular, but this strategy was a response to US naval deployments around Soviet waters. Indeed, responding to US strategic and technological developments was a key part of Soviet behaviour in the Cold War. The Soviets did not perceive a militarystrategic need to develop long-range cruise missiles, but did so because the US was developing them. The only long-range conventional SLCM which reached deployment is the SS-N-21 Sampson – dubbed ‘Tomahawkski’ not only because of its striking similarities to Tomahawk (with sources suggesting that the Soviets acquired early Tomahawk blueprints) but also because the Soviets developed it as a direct response to the US programme. The SS-N-21 is reported to still be in service on Russian submarines. Today, other SLCMs such as the Klub are central to the Russian inventory. Fitted to Kiloclass SSKs, their export potential for nations investing in Kilos also is clear.
China Like the Soviet Union, China appears to be developing its SLCM programme with the
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
aim of being able to offset US Naval conventional and nuclear threats – particularly, no doubt, with any potential conflict with the US over Taiwan in mind. As Jane’s Robert Hewson (writing in Jane’s Navy International in January/February 2007) has argued, ‘China has spent a great deal of time analysing how best to neutralise US naval forces in the Pacific – in particular the carrier strike groups’. This explains, once again, the dominance of anti-ship – and particularly supersonic cruise missile programmes in the inventory. Bolstered by an extensive programme for building and buying surface ships and submarines, the Chinese inventory of highly-capable (many with GPS, supersonic and terminal guidance capabilities) and predominantly anti-ship SLCMs clearly is intended to provide a sea denial capability, one which fills a capability gap of critical strategic significance. According to Hewson, China has
replaced its original, Soviet-based 1960s anti-ship cruise missile programmes with a highly-capable new generation developed both indigenously and through international partnerships. The People’s Liberation Army(Navy), or PLA(N), has several indigenous programmes. One of the most significant is the submarinelaunched C-801 (or YJ-8), fitted to the Type 039 Song-class conventional submarine (SSK). The missile has been dubbed ‘the Chinese Exocet’ because, according to Hewson, it bears striking resemblance to the French MM38/MM39 Exocet. Of course, the Song-class itself is well known, in particular because one surfaced within 8,000 yards of the US carrier USS Kitty Hawk in October 2006. The C-802 variant of this system (known also as the YJ82) has an extended range of 180 kilometres (km) and a semi-anti armour piercing, and the C-602 variant, deployed on Lanzhou-class destroyers, has a range of 280 km (due to its turbo-
NAVAL TECHNOLOGY
fan engine). The PLA(N) also is understood to be developing a supersonic variant, the C-803 (or YJ-83). However, the PLA(N) has no long-range cruise missile capability – at least, not long-range in the way that navies like the US, British or French may understand. Many of these programmes also are offering for China significant export
BrahMos initially will be fitted to the IN’s 877 Kilo-class SSKs opportunities. As Hewson argues, China is emerging as ‘a major player in the international missile market, almost without anyone noticing’. One of its key markets is Iran, to whom China not only is exporting key technologies but with whom China also is co-operating on key technologies. In terms of international partnerships, the level of Sino-Russian co-operation is very intriguing here: as Hewson argues, despite China’s burgeoning indigenous capability ‘Russia remains its most impor-
tant supplier and, in turn, China has cherry-picked the best weapons and military technology that Russia has to offer’. Systems purchased from Russia include the supersonic SS-N-27B, and the SS-N-22 Moskit, or Sunburn.
India One of the most intriguing SLCM developments in the Asia-Pacific region is, of course, the Indian Navy (IN)’s BrahMos PJ10 supersonic missile. Developed in a joint venture with Russia – and named after rivers running through the two countries - the liquid ramjet-powered BrahMos currently has an estimated speed of Mach 2.8, with a range of 290 km. Further developments may include, according to Jane’s, a doubling of this speed. BrahMos initially will be fitted to the IN’s 877 Kilo-class SSKs - allowing India to join a select group of countries with an undersea-based supersonic capability - but can be fitted to other platforms and, in due course, will be fitted as standard on all IN ships.
Other Developments Several other nations in the region also are investing in SLCM capabilities. Indonesia’s surface flotilla carries MM40 Block II Exocet missiles, and its recent purchase of six Amur 1650-class SSKs may
APRIL 2008
open up opportunities for an underwater cruise missile capability. Malaysia’s two French-built Scorpene-class submarines will be fitted with TTL SM39 sub-Exocet anti-ship missiles. South Korea can fit antiship cruise missiles, such as the homegrown Ch’o’llyong (which has a range of 500 km), in Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells on its new Aegis-class King Sejong destroyer. Taiwan recently has unveiled its HF-III supersonic anti-ship cruise missile, now deployed for testing on its Perry-class Cheng Kung frigates, and also is buying Harpoon Block II anti-ship missiles from the US. The development of the HF-III is viewed by some as a reminder to China that Taiwan has significant self-defence capabilities. More interestingly, a October 2007 report in Jane’s Defence Weekly speculated that a land attack version of the HFIII, the HF-IIE, was under development: while its existence has been denied, the strategic implications of Taiwan developing a land attack capability are clear. Why, not What: the Context for Asian Naval Cruise Missile Developments This last point underlines the issue which should be at the crux of any capability decision – why a capability is required, not what systems are desired just because they exist. C-704 has a range of 37km
17
NAVAL TECHNOLOGY
Fleet-on-Fleet Versus Power Projection? Clearly, many Asian navies are investing primarily in anti-ship cruise missiles because of concerns about security of sea lines of communication and about the possibility of fleet-on-fleet engagements, however large or small in scale, because of enduring political differences between the region’s actors. Arguably, many of them may not necessarily see the need for power projection with longer-range capabilities. This marks a stark contrast with the postCold War thinking of many Western navies, which has focused on power projection ashore, either to generate political coercive effect or to deliver military effect ashore in littoral engagements. Rather than with the political and military subtleties of coercion, the navies of the Asia-Pacific region seem more concerned with the realities of fleet-on-fleet war-fighting and the need to defeat high-end defensive capabilities like Aegis – for which supersonic speed may be the only way. It is interesting to note that, in the post-Cold War naval world, one area which major Western navies have not been investing in, with their focus on littoral rather than bluewater warfare, is fleet-on-fleet capabilities.
Long-Range = Long-Term? Thus, it may be very much the case that a long-range cruise missile like Tomahawk – with the Block IV being, to many, the state-of-the-art cruise missile – is not something many nations in the Asia-Pacific The USS Stark, after being hit by a AM-39
18
The Russian Navy has a significant sea-based cruise missile capability, with a variety of systems, some of which have significant high-end military capability region have much interest in developing. There is here, though, the crucial issue that the US has been developing its Tomahawk programme for over 40 years now. This shows that that there is no substitute for years of technology investment and development, and a programme like Tomahawk requires a level of investment unaffordable to most nations. The interest of, for example, the Australian, Canadian, Japanese and South Korean navies does indeed indicate that nations are interested in such a capability (not least, in those cases, because of their close ties to the US), although clearly cannot afford to do it themselves. Moreover, reports that Tomahawks which have gone astray in US operations have ended up in the hands of adversaries but with those adversaries not yet managing to develop comparable capabilities show that mastering the technology and financing its development is a significant, long-term challenge. Off-the-shelf purchases enable the more rapid acquisition of high-end capability at relatively low cost, set against the huge military, political and financial commitment required to develop an indigenous programme. Moreover, shorter-range missile systems are not as restricted by, for example, the Missile Technology Control Regime. Furthermore,
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
some nations may opt for greater numbers of less capable missiles. As the US knows from its own interest in developing more affordable cruise missiles, and given that the US can fire 800 or more in one operation (as it did in Operation Iraqi Freedom), affordable quantity clearly has a quality all of its own for many navies in the area. National military and wider economic strength clearly is a crucial stimulus and enabler for large-scale indigenous programmes. With this in mind, it is interesting to imagine where Chinese and Indian cruise missile programmes, amongst others, might be in 40 years.
Tomahawk and BrahMos: Apples and Pears? As stated above, some analysts view the Block IV Tomahawk as the state-of-the-art cruise missile. Others argue that the weapon speeds achieved in, for example, the BrahMos programme demonstrate that Tomahawk’s relative lack of speed means that its airframe has reached the end of its design life. In an interview conducted for the Russian defence publication Nezavisimoe Voennoe Obozrenie in March 2007 Dr Sivathanu Pillai, the head of the Russian-Indian BrahMos missile joint venture, stated – in response to a question regarding the differences between BrahMos and Tomahawk – that ‘[t]he Tomahawk is a subsonic missile and its speed is 0.8 Mach. The speed of our missile is 2.8 Mach. This is the fundamental different. Our product is far superior to the Tomahawk.’ Yet comparisons of long-range land attack and tactical anti-ship cruise missiles may be comparing apples and pears. Today’s generation of anti-ship missiles may be aiming to defeat Aegis, but with the Block IV the US Navy and Royal Navy can, from international waters, cover every inch of the earth’s surface. The real question is which AMR task is a nation’s perceived priority. ■
SOLDIER S Y S T E M S
The Soldiers Load The Effect Beyond the Carried Weight Discussion about how much the dismounted infantryman can carry has plagued the doctrine, theory and practical conduct of warfare pretty much since records began. Now, with “Soldier Modernisation� and other so called transformational thinking, the carried weight has increased and is not set to reduce. Asian armies stand are well positioned not to make the same mistakes as NATO and other armies, by considering the problem in different ways. by William F. Owen
Australian Soldiers prepare for patrol in Afghanistan (PHOTO: ADF)
APRIL 2008
19
SOLDIER S Y S T E M S
The Need One General in history stated that a soldier should “carry an axe, in case he needs to break down a door.” We can safely assume that the provider of axes to the army in question was in full agreement with that advice, but did probably did not consider the additional weight of the axe in his tender submission! While much is made of the weight that soldiers carry, very little discussion is had about what he should carry. What does a soldier need to carry? This question is actually like asking “how much are clothes for an orphan.”
“A soldier should carry an axe, in case he needs to break down a door.” 20
3 Commando Brigade’s Patrol Troop returning from operations in Afghanistan (PHOTO: Crown Copyright)
Context is critical. To provide this context, most armies come up with a set of taxonomies that are normally predicated on an activity. Thus you have descriptions such as “Assault order” or “Patrol order.” Alternatively there are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd line load definitions that roughly equate to “carried on person,” “carried in PLCE,” and “carried in back-pack.” More simply put, the argument would seem to circle around what is to be done and for how long. The importance of this question cannot be underestimated, because unless context and restraints are specifically articulated, then weight will proliferate. Failure to do so has lead to the high carried loads seen on UK troops
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
in Afghanistan and Iraq. Conversely the failure to carry adequate scales of load reportedly left some US troops involved in fighting in Mogadishu in 1993, without adequate water, night vision, or even body armour. Striking a balance of the most efficient load yet still maintaining the capability to deal with contingencies is not easy. The weapon is the item, without which an infantryman cannot fulfil his mission. The weight on the weapon and the attendant levels of ammunition has a more specific impact on the carried load than is commonly realised. An M4 carbine, with iron sights weighs 2.7kg
SOLDIER S Y S T E M S
Adding Load
Lightweight hand held thermal imagers give soldiers a very useful capability for little overall weight (PHOTO: Elbit)
unloaded. 6 x loaded 30 round magazines weighs 3.4-3.54kg dependants on model. If one was to assume a soldier fighting merely with a weapon and magazines carried in the pockets of his clothing then the carried load would be about 6.24kg. Adding 1.8kg of simple web gear, and a full canteen, gives you an infantryman with a very limited capability.
There is a vast body of empirical evidence that says you can increase his capability by giving him an optic sight (0.28kg), night vision (0.38kg) and a personal role radio (1.5kg, complete with ancillaries). An additional 2.6kg (close to the weight of an M4 Carbine) has produced a significant increase in capability. In actual realistic terms the soldier should be able to operate with less than 10kg of equipment. Almost all the improvements in capability then build on these weights.
Weight now creeps on commensurate with the need to increase capability. You can add an M-203 40mm grenade launcher to the M4 carbine. This increases the weight by 1.36kg, and 6 x 40mm M433 HEDP rounds add another 1.38kg for a total increase of 2.74kg (again, close the weight of the carbine). Other weapons types will increase load as they are added. For example, if the squad or section is carrying a weapon such as a General Purpose Machine Gun, the soldier may have to carry 100 rounds of 7.62mm link will weigh 2.7kg! More cable sighting systems or sensors can be added or substituted. The addition of a low light infra-red/laser pointer and thermal image weapons sight will add 0.25kg and 2.00kg respectively. If the soldier concerned is an officer or NCO he will probably require a more capable radio weighing about 1-1.2kg. None of the discussion so far has accounted for body armour and other protective equipment. Body armour has proliferated massively in the last 20
www.nexter-group.fr
HELICOPTER SYSTEMS: NO COMPROMISE
Photo: Eurocopter
Better Stronger Nexter
SOLDIER S Y S T E M S
years, and is now standard equipment in most armies. However, even the best and most efficient models, that contain plates capable of stopping rifle calibre rounds, tip the scales 7.4 kg, with the vest weighing 3.8 kg and two plates inserted weighing 1.8 kg each. At least 1.8kg can be saved if â&#x20AC;&#x153;plate carriersâ&#x20AC;? instead of the full vest is used. Helmets with good levels of protection can weigh about 1.1kg while a weight of < 1kg is desirable. Lighter weapons will save weight, but may not be as effective (PHOTO: Heckler and Koch)
22
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
SOLDIER S Y S T E M S
Essentially a modern soldier can have a very useable level of capability for about 16kg, though 20-25kg is more likely.
Is Weight Capability? Is something more capable because it is heavier? Clearly this not the case and is especially not true with regards technological improvement in radios, and sensors. The PRC-148, weighing approximately 1kg, is massively more capable than many of the heavier radios it replaced. The night vision devices of today are smaller and lighter than those of the 1970’s and early 1980’s. The lightening of certain pieces of equipment has lead to the perception that there is something to be gained by
explicitly stated, is that there is a very finite limit to human load carrying. Once a human being is loaded beyond a certain point, his ability to function become rapidly degraded. Therefore it is fairly safe to assume that infantry load carrying should be based around the criteria of gaining the most capability from a finite weight.
Finite Weight There are essentially two approaches to ascertaining the optimum weight a solider should carry in combat. The first is physical/empirical and the second is historical. Both have benefits and draw backs, and in both cases the drawbacks are easy to overcome. The physical approach/empirical approach comes from testing. This is comparatively simple, yet time consuming, to achieve. Soldiers are given a load to carry and then asked to accomplish various tasks as a function of time. Once fully recovered (and this can sometimes take days) they then repeat the tasks with a lighter or heavier load and the time difference
The PRC-148, weighing approximately 1kg, is massively more capable than many of the heavier radios it replaced.
carrying more. For example, when soldiers were equipped with 7.62mm rifles, they averagely carried 100 rounds. Now equipped with the lighter 5.56mm round they might carry 180 rounds. However it is comparatively rare for soldiers to make the weight comparison of a 5.56mm weapon, equipped with an optic sight, and laser or IR pointer, plus 100 rounds, with a 7.62mm rifle, with just 100 rounds. In terms of practical employment the 5.56mm system is both lighter and more capable. What is intuitively known, but rarely
measured. This methodology has generally produced indication of maximum weights of somewhere between 20-25kgs, for actual combat and shown the degradation occurs with temperature, humidity and altitude. This can be as much as 50%. Historical studies show about the same weight, with even medieval suits of armour rarely exceeding 25-27kg. There is a common perception based around figures concerning the percentage of a soldier’s body weight. The commonly quoted figure is 30%, and there is some scientific support for this figure. Indeed US load carrying data from Afghanistan indicated that the average fighting load across most battle groups was 30.8% of body weight. However this is potentially misleading. A solider weighing 71kg will still have to be capable of carrying the same load as a soldier weighing 81kg. While it is relatively easy
APRIL 2008
to bench mark the average body weight of solider serving in dismounted combat units, the weights arrived at for a US unit are going to vary a great deal from a Thai or Chinese units yet the weights of the primary pieces of equipment will remain roughly the same. If the load carried by the US in Afghanistan may be 30% of body weight, the same would not be true if the Royal Thai Army carried the same load.
Sustaining Combat Current examinations would seem to indicate that there is not a problem is equipping a soldier with an effective suite of equipment for combat. Given a relatively limited mission, a soldier need not exceed a combat load of 25kg. The longer you want him to perform this mission, or the greater the number of missions you wish him to perform, the greater the carried weight will be. If he has to be un-supported for more than 1224 hours he will require rations and additional water. If he needs to sleep he may require shelter and sleeping gear dependant on the climate. Additionally, the climate may require the carriage of extra food and water to enable either staying warm and well hydrated. Essentially the environment conspires against staying a man remaining well enough to conduct operations. Staying fit a comfortable at night is always going to have to be traded against security and weight. Warm weather resistant sleeping gear made to civilian outdoor commercial standards are usually just too heavy and impractical for military use. Soldiers on operations away from fixed bases, will almost always have to sleep fully clothed and sometimes even wearing body armour. You are not going to have to time to struggle into your armour with 120mm mortar rounds dropping about you! All this suggests that approaches to sleeping equipment that do not involve traditional sleeping bags, may have some merit. The issue of sustaining soldiers in combat should rightly shift emphasis from load carrying to re-supply. A platoon on foot patrol in Afghanistan may well encounter enough enemy opposition to require ammunition re-supply, but there is no point in carrying 2 days rations and water, if you only have 30 minutes of ammunition.
23
SOLDIER S Y S T E M S
Obviously there are certain missions, such as covert observation, and ambushes that may require several days of food and water to be man-packed into a location. One recent development that now regularly causes problems is that of batteries. Radios being maintained in a powered up state so as to be part of a coherent network means that the platoon of 2008 is consuming about 10X the power of the platoon of 1988. The number of battery driven devices has greatly increased. A PRC-148 type battery may weigh about 0.4kg, while a 24-hour ration pack may weigh 0.8kg. 2 batteries may be required for 24 hours of operation, so the weight of batteries needed for 24 hours of platoon operation is coming close to 50% or more of the weight of rations required. With rational and sensible choices as to the type and capability of radios, rations, and sensors, all becoming lighter, the chief addition of weight appears to be that of body armour, and batteries. Batteries can be re-charged in the field. Methanol powered fuel cells or battery chargers do have some considerable potential. Methanol is both light and comparatively easy to handle.
Ways of Reducing Load By far the most effective way an army can reduce its carried load is to exercise leadership. Commanders should have both the ability and authority to make choices about the degree of risk that is acceptable. Maybe there are times when Body armour can be reduced or left behind all together. How much ammunition is really necessary? All of this requires a deep
Historical studies show about the same weight, with even medieval suits of armour rarely exceeding 25-27kg. understanding of risk and a rational approach to set backs as and when they are encountered. Yes, one of your soldiers may die when hit by rifle fire that body armour
The now infamous image of the overloaded paratrooper from the 173rd Airborne, in 2003.
24
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
SLA Marshalls, post war classic work on load carrying.
SOLDIER S Y S T E M S
plates would have protected him against, but if that occurs once in 50 operations conducted without heavy armour plates, is it required that everyone now add 8.7kg to their carried weight? Lighter equipment will also mean lighter carried load, but especially when it comes to weapons, the lightest or lighter weapons will not deliver the same effects as the heavier ones. A 7.62mm GPMG is fare more capable than a 5.56mm belt fed LMG. An M-72 LAW is far lighter than an AT-4 yet cannot penetrate the same levels of armour. In order to makes sensible choices about equipment procurement that supports a lighter carried load, force developers and commanders must have some sort of proven doctrine to provide guidance in making these choices. Do infantry still required un-guided close range antiarmour weapons capable of defeating a current generation MBT? Despite the wealth and depth of research that infantry load carrying is supposed to attract, we still see unfeasible heavy or awkward equipment being
Reducing the carried greatly increases agility. (PHOTO: US Army)
procured for no added benefit, other than to address issues that do no translate into operational effectiveness.
Staying fit a comfortable at night is always going to have to be traded against security and weight.
These issues are often commercial and organisational. No problem seen today with the carried load is un-solvable. All most all obstacles to creating and sustaining light and effective loads are those created by individual and organisational viewpoints on infantry doctrine. Arguably better ways of thinking will lead to AMR lighter loads. â&#x2013;
Russian KORNET-E a modern precision-guided
T
he configuration and characteristics of modern weapons Main performance characteristics of the Kornet-E ATGM system for the land forces are driven by the fact that the quantity with the 9P163M-1 portable launcher of weapons decreases but their performance and combat effectiveness have to increase. Firing range, m: This is a challenging requirement due to both the broadest day 100-5,500 spectrum of potential targets encountered on the battlefield and night (using a thermal sight) 100-3,500 difficulty of their destruction. In this context precision-guided Guidance system: beam-riding SACLOS weapons come into the foreground. Mass, kg: In the land forces of developed nations, according to military launcher 26 experts, anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) systems will make up 1PN79M-1 thermal sight 8.5 the bulk of close precision assault weapons. This is due to their missile in container 29 high effectiveness which has been repeatedly proven during Missile caliber, mm 152 recent local conflicts where ATGM systems were credited with Warheads tandem HEAT, destroying seven of each ten tanks knocked out and up to 40% thermobaric HE of infantry covers. Armor penetration of HEAT warhead, mm 1,000-1,200 Thus the ATGM systems, which are usable in portable, vehicTNT equivalent of HE warhead, kg 10 ular/portable and self-propelled versions, were and remain Operating temperature range, OC from -20 to +60 among the primary weapons offering high effectiveness in both Firing in mountains up to 4,500 m high above sea level provided offensive and defensive situations. Launcher laying range, deg Large-scale tank battles are becoming a thing of the past and in azimuth 360 are superseded by a war of “high-precision” technologies. A in elevation -5….+20 demand arises for a multipurpose versatile mobile precisionAirdrop using standard parachute systems provided guided weapon that could destroy not only tanks, but also other Cyclic rate of fire (in firing to maximum range), round/min 1-2 priority targets on the battlefield. Launcher reloading time, s 30 That ATGM systems, initially designed solely to counter ATGM system crew 2-3 armored vehicles, have turned into a multipurpose versatile defensive/assault weapon able to handle most of artillery missions is now a generally accepted and accomplished fact. They The rational selection of its control system has provided not only have become an effective fire reserve available to a combined-arms the visibility of various targets under all operating conditions, but commander due to their high accuracy of fire, capability for rapid move- also high immunity of the ATGM system against enemy active optiment to threatened sectors, and enhanced warhead performance. cal countermeasures attained through using teleorientation of a misThe Russian Kornet-E anti-tank missile system is a powerful and sile within a laser beam, with the missile photodetector facing the effective multipurpose defensive/assault tactical weapon. It can engage firer. A high energy potential of the laser beam control channel is current and future tanks fitted with explosive reactive armor (ERA), soft- achieved through use of high-power semiconductor lasers and proskinned and light armored targets, fortifications, permanent strong vides proper performance in poor weather (rain, smoke, dust, etc), points, earth-and-timber strong points, low-speed aerial, surface and given the target is visible through the optical or thermal sights. These other targets in poor weather, day or night, and under enemy electron- sights implement the “see-and-fire” principle with respect to a wide ic and optical countermeasures with one or two guided missiles in a range of targets in various operational situations. salvo; that is to say, the whole spectrum of targets on the modern combined-arms battlefield. The jamming immunity in Kornet-E firing is attained by: New missile configuration and launcher design solutions used in ● spatial signal discrimination due to the fact that the radiation detecKornet-E development have enabled its full comtor is located on the missile and faces friendly positions; pliance with the requirements for this kind ● spectral discrimination of the desired signal through use of laser of weapon in the near term and later. radiation features and a narrow-band interference filter in the detector eliminating the effects of optical countermeasures; ● frequency discrimination of steering signals through selection of the missile’s radiation detector bandwidth eliminating the effects of radio jamming. In combat employment, the operator’s functions are reduced to target detection through the guidance device/sight or thermal imager, target tracking, firing, and keeping the sight crosshairs on the center of the target until its engagement. The performance characteristics of the Kornet-E ATGM system are given in the table.
Anti-tank Missile System multipurpose assault weapon A distinctive feature of the 9M133-1 Kornet-E anti-tank missile configuration is that its sustainer is located between the precursor and main HEAT charges. On the one hand, this protects the main charge against fragments of the precursor charge, extends the stand-off distance thereby increasing armor penetration and on the other makes it possible to use a powerful precursor charge able to clear away addon and integral ERA. To expand the range of targets destroyed, the 9M133F-1 missile of the Kornet-E system is equipped with a thermobaric HE warhead having a large radius of damage by shock waves and high temperatures of the explosion products. It is primarily intended to destroy elongated thin-skinned and light armored targets, and personnel in open terrain, behind shelters and inside buildings. It is effective against all fortifications, army missile systems and SAM systems, aircraft on airfields, small vessels on the water. The blast effect of the missile warhead is comparable to that of a 155 mm HE shell. The Russian Kornet-E is distinguished favorably from other countries’ ATGM systems. First of all, it uses the see-and-fire principle and laser beam-riding guidance resulting in the maximum firing range of 5,500 m. By contrast, the Western long-range ATGM systems implement the fireand-forget concept and their missiles carry passive infrared CCD (charge-coupled devices) seekers. The problem of target lock-on by the seeker at launch still remains difficult for many countries developing ATGM systems. It is impossible to fire IR missiles on targets having no considerable heat contrast in the far infrared band (bunkers, permanent strong points, machine-gun emplacements and other engineer installations), especially in a passive optical countermeasures environment. There are target image scaling problems in the seeker when the missile approaches the target. The Kornet-E ATGM system is characterized by: ● simplicity of use requiring no skilled operating personnel; ● flexibility of employment and engagement of all targets at stand-off ranges (beyond the ranges of enemy return fire); ● capability for firing from prone, kneeling, and standing in foxhole positions, both from prepared and unprepared positions; ● possibility for laser beam encoding that allows two adjacent launchers deliver fire at two different targets or at one target simultaneously; ● full protection against optical jammers; ● modular design of the launcher, its small mass and dimensions; ● versatility of mounting attachments allowing its installation on various platforms (wheeled, tracked, shipborne). The ATGM system is reliable, simple and convenient in service, maintains its parameters during
the whole life, and requires minimum maintenance. The missile requires no maintenance during 10 years. Training aids for the Kornet-E system allow crew training within short time using a classroom computer simulator or field training equipment (mass-dimensional mockups of the launcher, thermal imager and missile). The available inspection and maintenance facilities enable the accurate testing of missiles, launchers and thermal sights in stationary and field conditions and first line repairs in combat conditions using spare parts and tools. The Russian Kornet-E ATGM system is superior to all existing anti-tank systems in its class on the strength of all performance indicators – jamming immunity, armor penetration, firing range, small dimensions, and cost-effectiveness ratio.
LAND W A R F A R E
The Turkish AFV Industry
Armour for Asia? The Turkish Defence Industries Undersecretariat (SSM) presented its 2007-11 Strategy Paper last year calling for Turkish defence industry to increase its annual exports from less than $300 million in 2006 to about $1 billion by 2011. Armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) manufacturers such as Otokar AS and are already achieving significant export success and will continue to play a key role in the SSMâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s export drive as well as meeting the needs of the Turkish Land Forces Command (TLFC) The Turkish AFV industry represents a significant opportunity for Asian armies, when it comes to procuring a NATO level of capability by Ian Kemp
Yavuz 8 x 8 with a Rafael Remote Controlled Weapon Station.
28
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
LAND W A R F A R E
FNSS Savunma Sistemleri AS has produced almost 2,750 tracked AFVs since the joint venture between the Turkish Nurol Group and America’s FMC (now part of BAE Systems) was established in 1989. Following the The air defence variant of the 8 x 8 PARS vehicle TLFC’s selection of September 2006 article in the the FMC Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle, Marine Corps Gazette stated: an advanced derivative of the M113 "The Interceptor system, as it armoured personnel carrier, to meet its was designed and fielded requirement for a new infantry fighting starting in the late 1990s, has vehicle family FNSS produced 2,249 vehicles been an astonishing success story that has, in between 1992 and 2005 in for basic variants: conjunction with world-class medical care the Advanced Armored Personnel Carrier, on the battlefield, resulted in historically low the Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle casualty rates throughout the ongoing which carries a one-man turret armed with a Global War in Terrorism." A popular UK 25mm cannon and a 7.62mm coaxial machine newspaper reported in March 2007 that a gun, the Armoured Mortar Vehicle equipped Royal Marine commando survived a battle with a turntable-mounted 81mm mortar and with Taliban fighters in Afghanistan because the Armoured TOW Vehicle fitted with a onehis combat body armour (CBA) withstood man ALT turret armed with two Tubelaunched, Optically-tracked, Wire-guided hit three times by small arms fire.
A
missiles in the ready to launch position. Under the designation Armoured Combat Vehicle (ACV) FNSS has developed a number of variants for the export market including 120mm mortar vehicles and a Hellfire missile carrier to demonstrate its ability to meet customers’ specific requirements. FNSS sold 136 ACVs, configured as engineering, repair/recovery and artillery support vehicles, to the UAE and 211 to Malaysia in 10 variants including IFVs carrying an FNSS one-person Sharpshooter turret armed with the ATK M242 25mm Chain Gun. From 2002 FNSS delivered 146 ACV 300s (denoting the vehicle’s 300 hp Detroit Diesel engine) to Malaysia, where it is known as the Adnan, and the remainder were produced locally by DEFTECH. Malaysia is expected to place considering a follow-on order before 2008. FNSS has developed the ACV– Stretched which is similar to the Mobile Tactical Vehicle Light, a stretched M113 variant. Prototypes have been fitted with the BAE Systems M2 Bradley turret modified to carry a 30mm cannon, the Lockheed Martin Manned Hellfire Turret System armed with
LAND W A R F A R E
four Hellfire missiles, a Russian BMP-3 turret and the Thales Stabilised Weapon And Reconnaissance Mount armed with a 12.7mm machine gun. A Tactical Logistics Carrier prototype has also been developed which is able to carry a 6 tonne payload. FNSS has recently delivered 10 ACV-S vehicles configured as command posts to the Royal Saudi Land Forces. The company in producing an undisclosed number of ACV-S vehicles for Malaysia to serve as the carrier for a yet to be selected 120mm mortar. FNSS is seeking to repeat its success with tracked vehicles in the expanding wheeled segment of the market. The Turkish manufacturer and GPV Inc (since May 2007 a subsidiary of the American CMI-Schneible Group) of New Haven, Michigan developed the Pars (Leopard) family of wheeled armoured vehicles to meet expected requirements in Turkey, the USA and the export market. The family comprises 4 x 4, 6 x 6, 8 x 8, extended 8 x 8 and 10 x 10 versions. FNSS displayed the first 8 x 8 prototype at IDEX 2005 and after being exhibited at DSA in 2006 the vehicle completed extensive trials in Malaysia. Depending on the variant two to four personnel, including the driver and vehicle commander, are seated in a front cockpit while up to 12 personnel are seated in the rear troop compartment. The vehicle’s deep Vshaped hull is designed to deflect mine blasts and individual suspension components are mounted to break free in a blast while the all welded steel hull will defeat 7.62mm armoured piercing (AP) ammunition. Higher levels of protection can be provided. Gross vehicle weight ranges from 16 tonnes for the 4 x 4 to 27 tonnes for the 8 x 8 model depending upon the level of protection. The Pars 8 x 8 configuration is powered by 530hp Deutz engine, can reach a top road speed of 101km/h and has a range of over 1,449km. The vehicles are also amphibious with a maximum speed of 5.6km/h. The Pars family can be configured to accommodate one- and two-
Malaysia is expected to place considering a follow-on order before 2008 person turrets and remote weapon stations. In January 2007 FNSS received a 69-month contract to develop and manufacture 52 Mobile Amphibious Assault Bridge systems for the TFLC which will use the main automotive components of the 8 x 8 Pars. In December 2007 the SSM issued a tender for 468 4 x 4 mine protected vehicles; proposals are due at the end of April 2008. A tender for reconnaissance vehicles in either 4 x 4 or 6 x 6 configurations is expected to be released by the end of March. The service is expected to place an initial order for 180 vehicles although local industry sources suggest the total figure will be about 300 vehicles in various configurations. “FNSS signed a teaming agreement with KMW for promotion and possible local production of the 4 x 4 Fennek Reconnaissance vehicle in case of any requirement and in September 2005 it signed an agreement with Oerlikon Contraves to fit the later’s Skyranger Gun System on either the PARS or ACV-S chassis,” according to an FNSS official. “The company has also an agreement with Land Systems OMC of South Africa on RG-31 and RG-32 vehicles for the Turkish market.”
Otokar Otokar began business, producing buses for the local market in 1963 and received its first military contract from the Turkish Armed Forces in 1987 for Land Rover Defenders produced under license from Land Rover, UK. Otokar unveiled its own 4 x 4 Armoured Patrol Vehicle, based on the Defender 90/110 chassis, in 1991. The vehicle carries a driver and commander in the front compartment and six passengers in the rear compartment. The vehicle’s monocoque
all-welded steel armour defeats small arms fire up to 7.62mm ball ammunition and shell splinters. The APV is in service with Turkish security forces and has been sold to two unidentified export customers. Otokar also produces the 4 x 4 Akrep (Scorpion) light reconnaissance vehicle using the same mechanical components; more than 250 have been built for the TLFC and Turkish security forces. The monocoque all-welded steel armour hull of the Akrep provides the same level of protection for its crew of three as the ARP. The vehicle is normally fitted with a Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Overhead Weapon Station armed with a 7.62mm machine gun. Otokar developed the 4 x 4 Cobra in the 1990s as a private venture to meet an anticipated TLFC requirement for a light armoured vehicle in the 6 tonne class. The design combines a locally developed one-piece all welded monocoque steel hull with the suspension, engine and other automotive components of the 4 x 4 Enhanced Capability Variant of the AM General High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle. The hull is designed to withstand the blast of the 7kg anti-tank mine under each wheel and a 2.5kg mine under the belly. A General motors water-cooled turbocharged diesel engine develops 190 hp giving a top speed of 115 km/h. The Cobra’s 120 litre fuel tank provides a range of 500 km. The Cobra can be configured for various missions including personnel carrier with a capacity for up to 13 personnel including the driver; reconnaissance; nuclear, biological and chemical reconnaissance; command and control; explosive ordnance disposal; communications; ambulance; and, platform for weapons such as a .50 calibre heavy machine gun, 40mm automatic grenade launcher or antitank guide weapons. Recently the company has integrated a remote control weapon station on the Cobra. An amphibious version of the Cobra is available equipped with two propellers which give a maximum speed of 8 km/h in the water. The Maldives was the first export customer for the Cobra with an order for three amphibious variants in 1997. Otokar has produced more than 600 Cobras for the Turkish Armed Forces and export customers. Otokar has received orders for 1,200 AFVs over the past two years earning the company the distinction of being Turkey’s largest defence exporters in 2006 and 2007. To meet an urgent TLFC requirement Otokar collaborated with Aselsan to develop Otokar’s Cobra uses the same basic automotive components are the AM HMMWV (PHOTO: Otokar)
30
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
LAND W A R F A R E
Turkey and South Korea are co-operating on the MBT development
the Cobra Modular Armoured Reconnaissance/Surveillance Vehicle (MARS-V) equipped with an Aselsan mastmounted sensor package. AT least 50 are in Turkish service and potential customers in
the Middle East have evaluated the MARSV. Otokar has also developed a Cobra Special Operations Vehicle for the export market, which has a cut down hull, fitted with a roll over cage. Fold down racks are fitted over each of the rear wheel stations that can be lowered to carry an additional 350kg of supplies. The Cobra SOV will typically carry a crew of four and a variety of weapons can be pintleor ringmounted. A M General exhibited the Cobra for the first time at the Association of the US Army Exhibition in Washington DC in October and actively markets the vehicle. Otokar and AM General are developing a next-generation Cobra based on AM General's XM1211 ECV II 15 ECV II powered by an uprated 186kW GEP SCCS 400 engine. Other improvements include a variableheight semi-active suspension system and
“The company has also an agreement with Land Systems OMC of South Africa on RG-31 and RG-32 vehicles for the Turkish market.” increased ground clearance. A removable parabolic-shaped blast-deflection plate can be fitted under the crew compartment to improve protection against improvised explosive devices. Otokar unveiled a prototype of its Internal Security Vehicle in late 2005 and is developing prototypes of specialist variants including command and control, explosive ordnance disposal and reconnaissance/surveillance vehicles. In the standard configuration the ISV carries a crew of two and 11 passengers. An appliqué armour package is added to the baseline armour to defeat 7.62mm armour piercing ammunition. Otokar is offering the 8 x 8 Yavuz, a joint-
» Quote ASM10 to receive 10% discount JUNE 3RD 2008 Night Vision Summit/Power Management And Load Carriage Focus Day
“A unique opportunity to experience actual soldier technology, you can touch
JUNE 4TH – 5TH 2008 Main Conference
hardware you normally only
JUNE 6TH 2008 Battlefield Situational Awareness Focus Day LONDON OLYMPIA CONFERENCE CENTRE
Colonel Thomas Starlinger, Head of Precision Engagement, EDA
see on slides…”
Soldier Modernisation
ASSOCIATE SPONSORS:
Optimise Soldier System Integration Through Advanced
Load Carriage, Situational Awareness, Power Management & Ballistic Protection BENEFITS OF ATTENDING: 1 52+ Expert Modernisation Speakers! 2 705 SMP Experts In One Room! 3 65+ Live Tech Demos In The Exclusive Solutions Zone! 4 Meet Winners Of The 2008 Soldier Technology Industry Awards!
»
OUTSTANDING KEYNOTE SPEAKERS INCLUDE: Alan Stocks, Deputy Program Manager, MERS Andrew MacDonald, Programme Manager, FIST MoD UK Lt Colonel Mike Bodner, Chairman, NATO Land Capability Group 1 Dismounted Soldier
Per G Arvidsson, Chairman, NATO LCG 1 Subgroup, FMV Laurent Catty, Programme Manager, FELIN, MoD France Dave Schimmel, Power & Energy Team Leader, SOLDIER WARRIOR, PEO SOLDIER
REGISTER TODAY! T: +44 (0) 20 7368 9465 E: soldiertechnology@wbr.co.uk W: www.soldiertechnology.com
ORGANISED BY:
LAND W A R F A R E
ly developed variant of the Singapore Technologies Kinetics Terrex AV81, to the TLFC. The Yavuz carries a commander, driver and a 10-strong infantry section protected by an all welded steel hull to which additional passive armour can be added. A range of weapon stations and turrets can be installed on the Yavuz; at IDEF in May 2007 Otokar displayed a Yavuz equipped with the Rafael Remote Controlled Weapon Station for 30 mm Cannon. Otokar and STK have proposed the development of a family including a 105mm assault gun, command vehicle, 120mm mortar carrier, air defence vehicle and anti-tank missile carrier as well as 155mm/52 calibre self-propelled gun. With a maximum combat weigh of 24 tonnes the Yavuz is designed to be carried by a C130 Hercules tactical transport aircraft. In March 2007 Turkey’s Defence Industry Executive Committee (DIEC) selected Otokar in preference to a teaming of FNSS and BMC (which produced wheeled tactical wheels for the TAF) to be the prime contractor for the Turkish National Main Battle Tank (TNMBT) project. The army wants the first TNMBT prototype to be ready in 2010 and the serial production of 250 tanks to begin in 2013. Further orders are expected. ”By using the technology and know-how developed over 20 years in the area of defence, Otokar will mobilise its engineering power and R&D facilities and mobilise other local subcontractors to design a tank that will fully meet the requirements of the Turkish Armed Forces,” said Gorguc. ”This project will also enable Otokar and Turkish industry to extend its armoured technology and know-how which will contribute its any other future tactical armoured vehicles designs.”
South Korea In June 2007 the DIEC selected South Korea’s Agency for Defence Development and Rotem to be the Technical Support and Assistance Provider for the project. Rotem’s experience developing the XK2 Black Panther MBT for the Republic of Korea Army will provide valuable input for the TNMBT project. The XK2 prototype was unveiled in March 2007 with series production scheduled to begin in 2009 leading to an entry into service two years later. The 55 tonne XK-2 is armed with a 120 mm/55 calibre smoothbore gun fed by an automatic loader and is protected by a combination of composite armour, explosive reactive armour, non-explosive reactive armour and an active protection system. The TNMBT will be a new design to meet
32
the TLFC’s requirements. The service has rejected the installation of an automatic loader so the TNMBT will have a standard four-man crew. Subcontractors for the TNMBT project include: MKEK which will produce the ordnance; Aselsan responsible for the fire control system (FCS); STM and Aslesan will jointly produce the C2 system; and, Roketsan is expected to develop the armour. The TLFC has a fleet of more than 4,200 tanks however about two-thirds of these are elderly M48 series vehicles supplemented by almost 400 Leopard 1s, 274 M60A1s, 658 M60A3s and 298 ex-German Army Leopard 2A4 MBTs delivered since 2006. Turkish industry has gained considerable experience through two ongoing MBT modernisation projects. In March 2002 Turkey awarded a $668 million contract to Israel Military Industries to upgrade 170 M60A3 tanks to the M60T configuration based on IMI’s Sabra Mk III. The prototype was completed in Israel in mid-2005 and was followed by three pre-production vehicles modernised at the
The hull is designed to withstand the blast of the 7kg anti-tank mine under each wheel and a 2.5kg mine under the belly. TFLC’s 2nd Main Maintenance Centre Command facility in Kayseri. Modernisation of the remaining 166 tanks covered by the project is underway with completion scheduled for May 2009. MKEK (Makina ve Kimya Endüstrisi Kurumu) is manufacturing the MG253 120mm smoothbore gun (a license built version of the Rheinmetall L44 gun which IMI produces for the Israeli Merkava Mk 4) and ammunition while Aselsan is manufacturing the Knight II FCS and the Electric Gun and Turret Drive System under license from Elbit. A new powerpack, the German MTU 881 diesel developing 1,000 hp, is also being installed as well as a hybrid armour package. Aselsan has recently completed Cobra seen mounting Nexter’s M621 20mm cannon. (PHOTO: Otokar)
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
a contract to install its own Volkan FCS in 162 Leopard 1 tanks. The system provides a high probability of a first round hit from a moving tank against both static and moving targets in adverse weather conditions. At IDEF 2007 Hema Endustri displayed a Patria 8 x 8 Armoured Modular Vehicle (AMV) fitted with a 12.7mm remotely operated turret. In 2004 Hema signed a technical cooperation agreement covering local production of the Finnish company’s 6 x 6 and 8 x 8 AMV family which Hema has named Anafarta for the Turkish market. Selection of ROTEM as the Technical Support and Assistance Provider for the TNMBT project continues a successful defence relationship which has been forged between South Korea and Turkey. Samsung assisted Turkish industry to develop the TU SpH Firtina (Storm) using subsystems of the 155mm/52 calibre K9 tracked self-propelled howitzer which Samsung is building as a replacement for the Republic of Korea Army’s M109A2s. The TLFC’s 1st Base Maintenance Command is manufacturing 24 Firtinas annually to meet a requirement for 300 weapons. The TFLC’s Technical and Project Management Department has gained considerable experience over the past 15 years through the upgrade of 365 US-built 105mm M52 SPHs to the M52T configuration armed with a 155mm/39 calibre ordnance license-produced by MKEK. The Firtina has combat weigh of about 47 tonnes with a full load of 48 rounds and is powered by a 1,000 hp MTU MT 881 Ka-500 diesel engine which gives a max road speed of 65 km/h. The all-welded steel armour of the hull and turret protect the five-strong crew from 14.5mm small arms fire and 155mm shell splinters. The Firtina can fire a three round burst in 15 second and up to 24 rounds in three minutes; the ordnance is produced by MKEK, which is the prime contractor for the 155mm/52 calibre Panter towed howitzer which has been in TLFC service for several years, while Aslesan developed the FCS which enables each weapon to operate as a fully AMR autonomous system. ■
COUNTER I N S U R G E N C Y
Blocking the Trigger IED ECM technology update
While cautiously optimistic about recent reductions in casualties from Improvised Electronic Devices (IED), developing long term counters to what is anticipated to be an enduring feature of ongoing and future conflict is a priority for military forces, for use at home and abroad. IEDs are far and away the largest single source of coalition deaths and injuries in Afghanistan and Iraq. While the device is tactical, the centre of gravity it is intend to effect is the alliance/coalitionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strategic cohesion which adversely affected by deaths reported in the western and local press. by Adam Baddeley
The Thales Storm H family is designed to be the same form fit as the ubiquitous AN/PRC-148 and enables users to move outside the protective bubble provided by their vehicle. (PHOTO: Adam Baddeley)
34
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
COUNTER I N S U R G E N C Y
ethal and effective, abundant and cheap, available and expendable manpower, IEDs have become weapon of choice for terrorists and insurgents. A Remote Control IED (RC-IED) found in Iraq and placed by the ride of a major road was a standard 155mm shell, cast in a concrete box with one side exposed and this covered with Styrofoam and painted the colour of cement so as to appear as part of the kerb and lightly covered with brushes with the remote initiator placed at the rear of the road’s guardrail. The ‘return’ on terrorist investment in IED is significant, even though some have estimated it takes six IED events on average to kill a coalition soldier. As concerns Canada, total casualties as of December 2006 showed 94 deaths due to IEDs with only 31 due to ‘direction action’ on the part of the Taliban. IED attacks represent roughly 70 percent of total Canadian casualties and in term of materiel 2006 saw 29 Canadian vehicles, including a Leopard 1 MBT, either destroyed or mobility killed. Commercial radio-control equipment used to open garage doors or to enable cordless telephony can easily be adapted as IED triggers, creating Radio Controlled – IEDs (RC-IED), permitting command detonation remotely and wirelessly. The benefits for Counter measures are a basic form of electronic warfare, jamming the frequencies used so no signal can be sent or received – plus military wavelengths too - precluding the device’s detonation until the ‘bubble of jamming interference and with it the target passes out of range. While the use of RC-IEDs is certainly not new, the sophistication and scale of the threat is. Initial equipment used to defeat this threat owed its genesis to the conflict in Northern Ireland but technology and tactics have had to move on to match increasing sophistication of the bombers. This has enabled more power efficient, light-weight solutions to be deployed, but some issues remain stubbornly difficult to resolve. A major weakness of ECM, particularly on vehicles is that they are very visible, with basic physics ensuring multiple antennas often rising several feet into the air from the vehicle, often in a cluster. Furthermore nations reluctant to declare operating details of their Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) making spectrum management and ECM de-confliction impossible. The cost in resources associated with Counter-RCIED has to be balanced against the alternatives, notably, the sheer bulk of vehicles necessary to defeat an actual attack. The Oshkosh Ceradyne Bull, designed
L
specifically to defeat survive Explosive Formed Projectile attacks in close urban terrain exemplifies the design implications for relying simply on armour that significantly exceed those for MRAP (mine resistant ambush protected) class of vehicles designed for more ‘broad brush’ defence against IEDs. Currently based on the Oshkosh sourced MTVR in use with the USMC, Bull weighs in excess of 18,000Kg on the road. Any weight cost incurred by added C-IED technology pales into insignificance, relative to this dedicated class of vehicle.
Organisational change Counter-IED including RC-IED began life as an extension of Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) in the hands of Engineers. As a consequence of the widespread adoption of IED by insurgents and terrorists its counter measures become an all arms fight with EOD being one component of an all arms struggle. This has necessitated equipment to be distributed to every patrol, convoy base and outpost. To ensure proper use, particularly of the often complex jamming equipment, the new organisations and structures have been established to support that have had to be developed. Some organisations have moved more quickly the others. The US Army set up its IED Task Force in October 2003 with a Field Team deploying to Iraq in December followed by an Afghan Field Team in 2004. Quickly moving to a joint organisation, the DoD approved the permanent establishment of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) in January 2006. JIEDDO field teams are now based at seven sites in Afghanistan and at four sites in Iraq: Baghdad, Tikrit, Mosul and Ramadi where they are embedded with deployed units providing unit advice, support in the
The ‘return’ on terrorist investment in IED is significant, even though some have estimated it takes six IED events on average to kill a coalition soldier. APRIL 2008
The Selex Guardian IED EW system. (Photo: Selex)
development of TTP and CREW training (Counter RCIED Electronic Warfare Systems). Counter-IED funding from JIEDDO is going up, total US funding in FY04 was just $100m of which $60m was allocated to the ‘defeat the device’ role that includes jammers, vehicle and personal protection and EOD robots. In FY07, overall funding had risen to $4.35bil of which $1.35bil is for ‘defeat the device’. Recent funding profiles have seen a drop in the proportion of overall C-IED funding allocated for jamming and the like, instead, switching to ISR focus, often dubbed ‘attack the network”, which has risen from just 13 percent of funding to 31 percent of the C-IED budget. The US has set up C-IED training for Coalition partners at the Germany based Joint Multinational Readiness Centre with a permanent JIEDDO cell attached to ISAF staff to support information and personnel exchange. JIEDDO also sponsors the Knowledge and Information Fusion Exchange (KnIFE) update and information medium exchange about IEDS with websites, call centre and various tools for dissemination. In contrast, other organisations have been slower to act. NATO ISAF first formally expressed C-IED concerns in early 2004 although it took until late 2005 for the first CIED requirement to be endorsed by the Alliance and a further wait was needed until February last year when ISAF’s C-IED
35
COUNTER I N S U R G E N C Y
Branch was first formed. NATO has currently funded at least seven requirements valued at roughly €40m covering ECM as well as explosive detection and other technologies. A C-IED Integrated project team has also been established within NATO’s Conference for National Armament Directors to support this field and particularly to establish common ECM standards in the C-IED field. Poland’s, whose forces have been deployed on a large scale to Iraq and Afghanistan, C-IED doctrine only plan to issue a CIED doctrine in 2008. Poland does not have standardised document or publications, regulations or procedures and only limited TTPs at tactical level for deployed troops abroad and do not have dedicated CIED EOD teams, although seven traditional EOD teams were deployed world wide in 2007. The first three EOD teams trained for IED disposal will only be trained in 2009 when Poland plans to declare C-IED readiness.
Solutions Urgent, off-the-shelf buys, buttressed by the employment of legacy and adapted equipment characterized the initial responses in Afghanistan and Iraq. These are now giving way to more tightly structured, integrated solutions, with funding to match. The biggest show in town, at least in Washington DC is the CREW being run by Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA). Several manufactures had been bidding for these contracts covering the development of mounted and dismounted solutions.
36
Four firms Northrop Grumman Space & Mission Systems’, Network Communications Division, ITT Advanced Engineering & Sciences, were recently awarded contract to provide a mix of dismounted CREW 3.1 and mounted CREW 3.2 configurations. The Sierra Nevada Corporation and Syracuse Research organization all won awards contract to developed seven models for dismounted and or mounted solutions. CREW 3 is at this stage a development program through fiscal years 2008 and 2009, with no follow-on commitment to further work or production, potentially allowing others to compete for the production of the fielded system. The next generation system to CEW3.1/.2, considered far more powerful than existing systems are to be developed under the separate programme, CREW 3.3 indicating an evolutionary path for Counter IED in the US. At the same time NAVSEA announced CREW, it was awarded EDO, now owned by ITT a $86.5m contract for a further 1,136 vehicle-mounted CREW 2.1 jammers following another worth $95.2 million contract for 1,250 CREW 2.1 earlier in the years, taking total number for that programme to roughly 10,000 units. The Syracuse Research Corporation VLQ-12, dubbed ‘Duke’, which has been delivered to the US military since 2005. Other solutions are being offered in the US. IbisTek’s Model IT 4106 Disruptor provides continuous jamming in four bands
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
800-885, 925-965, 1800-1950 and 21002220MHZ with output power of up to 20W. This gives jamming ranges of 65m for the first three bands and up to 100m in 2102200MHZ. The system’s range can drop down to around 20m for close in internal jamming coverage too. The 4106 is designed to very quickly equip vehicles, strapping to the rear of the seat with the four antenna quickly bolting onto the top of the vehicle’s cab it can be power direct from a HMMWV;s power adaptors cable connection QinetiQ North America, the former Foster Miller developed the SIREN for the Counter-RCIED role. Reflecting the growth in the market, US companies have sought partnership with the established expertise in the UK. L-3, for example acquired the formerly independent TRL Technology, obtaining access to its Broad Shield suite of systems based round the CES 0512 and CES 0512EF man pack solutions covering the entire range from 25512MHZ and then selected bands from 8801990MHz with up to 10W of software determined and programmable power. The system weighs 3.8Kg without batteries and can operate from -40 degrees c to 55 degrees centigrade. This is complemented by the company’s WBS 2500 vehicle mounted solution that produces 100W of power from CES 0512 and then 40W from 400-2500MHZ and uses dual power amplifiers over a flexible chanEveryday communication enabling the bomb maker.
technology
is
COUNTER I N S U R G E N C Y
Jammers don’t eliminate the threat, or defuse the bomb. They prevent it from being remotely detonated while the jammers is in operation in that area. nelised architecture. In a static mode a 100W PA can be added to the CES 0512, which weighs 11Kg. Lockheed Martin has formed a relationship with Anglo-Canadian firm Allen Vanguard, the former offers the Symphony ECM solution. These have been sourced to US as well as overseas users. In September, the US defence Security Co-opertion Agency announced a $51m order for 523 Symphony jammers and the eventual recipient expects to include the Iraqi Army. In October a C$25m order was received to supply 573 additional ECM system for US Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles with delivery by the Summer of this year. Much more significant is new announced in January 2008 that the US has
established plans to acquire up to 2500 Symphony Systems each year for the next three years. Allen Vanguard equipment was part of two bids put forward by partner companies in the CREW 3 programme but which were not selected. Selex’s Guardian ECM kit has had significant success in the US winning a September 2006 award in partnership with BAE Systems Information & Electronic Systems to provide 3,874 dismounted in a $79.5 million contract. The solution was based on Selex’s Guardian W man pack solution. Thales has recently formally demonstrated its hand held STORM-H(2G) to the US military which is identical in form factor to the ubiquitous AN/PRC-148 MBITR and offers jamming across 850-950MHZ with power output variable and the frequency range able to be manipulated to address mission specific threats. The system can operate for 6 hours without the need for recharge. The first generation STORM –H offered coverage across 20-470MHZ. Thales argument is that with the advent on ‘personal inhibitors’, users are now free to leave the protective bubble of vehicle mounted jammers to investigate and engage enemies.
Yugoimport's CJ family of vehicle-mounted jammers can reach out to 50-200m (PHOTO: Adam Baddeley)
COUNTER I N S U R G E N C Y
A number of systems have evolved outside the traditional core of counter RC-IED manufactures. Czech firm, URC Systems for example has developed the PJ Star ‘Light’ which offers 25W power output over five bands from 25-500MHz, 870-2500MHZ using four antennae. Based in a single ‘Pelicase’ it has an all in weight and operates in temperature of up to 45 degrees and up to 80 percent relative humidity and uses a forced air-cooling systems. Larger systems are also on offer its STAR V has total output power of 775W and in the 20-100MHz range output is a powerful 200W and is fitted to a 6U 19” rack mount. In Australia, Radixon’s Hadrian RJ-P9700 Cellular Phone Jammer, does exactly what it claims with RF output of up to 10W and jamming range of 100m in buildings across four bands 860-885MHZ CDMA, 925-965 GSM, 1800-1950MHZ and 2100-2200 3G. The systems design allows the systems to offer continuously variable RF output power to suit local and tactical requirements. When switched on, mobile phones in range of Hadiran will show a ‘no-provider’ message with current calls immediately stopped. Hadrian operates at up to 50 degrees centigrade and weighs just 1.7KGg. The IED jammer offered by India’s Bharat's operates across 10 to 500 MHz frequency band, and is vehicle mounted. Israel’s expertise in As a consequence of this area is well recognised. In October 2007, the widespread adopElbit Systems tion of IED by insurannounced its new IEDJ, a development of gents and terrorists the EJAB (Electronic its counter measures Jammer Against Bombs) selected by a become an all arms number of users fight with EOD being including Poland for deployment in Iraq. one component of an The IEDJ is a reduced all arms struggle. size variant with 60 percent reduction in volume and a cut in weight by half. The systems frequency range has been increases and each band within its range can output up to 100W of power. Updates and control are undertaken via a laptop which the operator can use from the vehicle can with the systems installed in the rear. With orders of magnitude increases The PJS3plus is a portable jammer to counter the use of GSM mobile phones with coverage of four cell phone bands enabled with an RF output of 2W (PHOTO: Adam Baddeley)
38
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
COUNTER I N S U R G E N C Y
in funding for government research and the perception of an enduring market leading to greater industry investment greater complexity is being added to systems. Key technology features include communication inhibition, this will replace today’s techniques of keeping slots free for communications within convoys and periodic downtime which are difficult to achieve, offer a opening in the force protection that can be exploited and are prone to interference for other nations forces unless closely co-ordinated. One option could be to use the same waveform used by the jammer to carry voice and data to ensure communications, which lends itself to a future SDR implementation. This and other technologies are not available yet and will require further investment and development. Thales intend to address this problems with the new Communications through Inhibition an appliqué systems which can be fitted to any jammer and CNRs from HF through VHF and UHF communications, including frequency hopping communications which allow communications to be maintained within no notch filtered holes. This technology will received its internation-
al patent in February with a productions systems due to be ready by the end of 2008. The system was funded internally by Thales as part of a Emerging Business Initiative beginning in 2007 with participation from engineers in Australia, France and the UK. In November last year this systems, integrated onto a Bushmaster protected patrol vehicle was demonstrated to UK and Australian MoD. Thales believes that the size weight and power requirement mean that taking this capability integrating it on a map platform would be very difficult to achieve.
Conclusion
The L-3 Communications TRL Technology Broadshield family of counter-RCIED solutions offers scalable systems from man pack up to vehicle mounted solutions (PHOTO: Adam Baddeley)
With RC- IEDs a terrorist only has to be occasionally successful using cheap, often put together with mass produced consumer electronics and remnants of battlefield ordnance. Jammer don’t eliminate the threat, or defuse the bomb. They prevent it from being remotely detonated while the jammer is in operation in that area. They do not stop command wire attacks. That said, their effect has been profound providing both actual protection and a physiological boost to mounted patrols and those on foot that their susceptiAMR bility to attack is much reduced. ■
REGIONAL NEWS A N D
D E V E L O P M E N T S
AUSTRALIA
Australia cancel Seasprite
n early March, the new Australian Labour government announced that it was cancelling the beleaguered project to procure 11 Super Seasprite helicopters form Kaman for the Royal Australian Navy. In opposition Labour had heavily criticised the Howard government’s handling of the $1.2 billion Super Seasprite deal, which had suffered severe project overruns because of integration issues. Following its election promise to reinvestigate the project the new defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon ordered a review late last year. In the first week of March Fitzgibbon announced that, ‘after careful consideration of all the issues involved, the Government has decided that it intends to cancel the project. Discussions will be commenced immediately with the contractor in relation to the legal and financial arrangements to facilitate this.’ There will be many issues to iron out
on the project, not least cancellation fees, as Australia has already accepted nine of the 11 aircraft. However, Fitzgibbon said that the announcement, ‘demonstrates our determination to make tough decisions whenever required for the security of the nation and the safety and capability of our defence force.’ Last year, Kaman mounted a robust defence of the programme to Asian Military Review during the Airshow Downunder in Melbourne. Officials said that much of the overrun on the project had been down to changes made in the specification by the Howard government and by problems with the chosen system integrator. In a statement following the cancellation announcement Kaman’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Neal Keating said that the company would try to negotiate a mutually agreeable conclusion to the contract.
Australia cancel Seasprite
I
40
PAKISTAN
Senior general assassinated
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
n a direct attack on the Pakistan Army suspected Al Qaeda terrorists managed in late February to assassinate a high-ranking general. The attack ahs been condemned by the government, which has stepped up security measures for officials. Lieutenant General Mushtaq Ahmed Baig, the army’s Surgeon General, was killed on 25 February when driving home from his headquarters in Rawalpindi. A suicide bomber, reportedly posing as a beggar, was able to close with the general’s car before detonating his explosives. The general was killed during the attack along with his driver and security detail were also killed as well as five civilians. Baig was the most senior Pakistani officer to have been successfully targeted by militants. Al Qaeda has stepped up attacks on the government in the wake of its assistance to the US in the war on terror.
I
REGIONAL NEWS A N D
D E V E L O P M E N T S
INDIA
Fighter tender deferred ccording to several reports, India is believed to be deferring bidding on its potential $12 billion multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) project. It is a move that some analysts believe was inevitable given the difficulties within the countries procurement system. The MRCA project will equip the Indian Air Force (IAF) with up to 126 nextgeneration fighters and has drawn interest from a number of international defence companies in Russia, Europe and the US. A return of bids had been originally set for 3 March. However, there will now be a two month extension at the behest of one or more of the bidders who felt unable to respond adequately to the request for proposals that was issued by the Indian gov-
A
between BAE Systems and EADS over who should lead the bid.
Hawk Inducted In late February, India's defence minister, Raksha Mantri Shri AK Antony, formally inducted the Hawk 132 Advanced Jet Trainer (AJT) into Indian Air Force (IAF) service. Officials said that the event marked an important milestone in the history of the IAF and will certainly be welcomed by pilots. The induction of the aircraft in to the air force means that for the first time the IAF will have an advanced jet trainer that it can use to transition its pilots to front line squadrons flying both modern and not so modern jet fighters. With the induction of these Hawks, the IAF becomes the 19th air force to use the
150km from Hyderabad.
New submarine launched missile The Indian Ministry of Defence confirmed in late February that it had successfully tested a submarine launched cruise missile attracting instant condemnation from Pakistan. Currently, the Indian Navy (IN) does not have a submarine launched missile and the new capability would tilt the military balance between the two countries further in India’s favour. According to officials, the indigenously developed Sagarika missile was tested from an underwater launcher off the coast of Visakahpatnam. The launcher, which was placed at a depth of 50 metres, was designed ot simulate a test firing from a submarine because the capability does not currently exist in the IN’s submarine fleet. Reports suggest that the missile, which was developed by the Aeronautical Development Agency, is a turbo-jet powered system capable of carrying a 500kg warhead over 700km. New Delhi has been helped considerably on the project by Russia. With the test firing of the missile underwater the major challenge for the developers now will be the guidance system, which is one of the most difficult subsystems to get right. Eventually, India hopes to have a missile that includes a terrain contour matching system and guidance assisted by satellites or unmanned air vehicles.
Bumar makes $1.2 billion
ernment in August last year. In the US both Boeing and Lockheed Martin are chasing the project on the back of growing ties between Washington and New Delhi. US officials want to open the lucrative Indian defence market to US companies and is also hoping to build India as a counterweight to China in the region. Russia is also interested in MRCA and wants to retain its status as India leading defence supplier. The IAF already operates a variety of Soviet designed fighter aircraft. The European Eurofighter consortium is also looking to New Delhi as a potential customer for the Typhoon. However, the consortiums dealings with India have been plagued with difficulties due to tensions
42
Hawk jet as their trainer of front line, fast jet pilots and reinforces the Hawk's position as the world's most successful jet trainer. The deal for the Hawks was signed in 2004 and the first aircraft arrived in country late last year. The aircraft is a variant of the BAE Systems Hawk. It incorporates an open architecture mission computer, glass cockpit and a state of the art avionics suite including a new generation Inertial Navigation System with GPS (INGPS). It is also equipped with several indigenous systems including the communication system, identification Friend or Foe (IFF) system and the radio altimeter. The main operating base for the Hawk will be Bidar, located in the north west of Karnataka province, approx
ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
At the beginning of March Polish papers reported that the country’s largest defence manufacturer Bumar was about to clinch a number of Indian defence deals worth an estimated $1.2 billion. If so it will be one of the largest deals that New Delhi has signed with an East European nation. Although Bumar officials refused to comment on the nature of the deals, analysts believe the amount includes at least six different contracts covering a range of equipment. One of the major items is 1,000 engines for India’s fleet of T-72 main battle tanks and upgrades for part of the fleet. The company is also expected to supply 200 WZT-3 tank recovery vehicles and 80 mine clearing vehicles. As part of India’s upgrade of its artillery systems New Delhi is also reported to have been investigating the purchase of 100 Loara self-propelled twin 35mm anti-aircraft guns and 100 155mm self-propelled artillery systems.
REGIONAL NEWS A N D
INDONESIA Further arms deals
n a further sign that Jakarta is continuing to attempt to buildup its military despite concerns over government spending the defence minister Juwono Sudarsono has confirmed that when US Defense Secretary Robert Gates visited in February the two discussed the potential sale of weapon systems. Indonesia is believed to be interested in the purchase of at least six Lockheed martin F-16 fighters as well as other equipment. The closer relations with Washington come at a time when Jakarta is also being courted by Moscow. The latter has made $1 billion of loans available to Indonesia to procure Russian defence equipment, which is likely to include both advanced fighters and submarines. These potential deals, however, come at a time when Indonesiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s government is struggling to keep up with spending commitments. In February, the government said that higher oil prices were forcing a 15% cut in all spending including defence. Officials had announced a $3.9 billion defence budget in January, a 10% rise on the previous year, but this will now be curtailed dropping the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s defence spend to as little as 0.7% of gross domestic product.
I
D E V E L O P M E N T S
SRI LANKA
MALAYSIA
s the renewed fighting between the Sri Lankan government and the separatists Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE) continues unabated Colombo released figures for casualties in February that show that the LTTE is not pulling any punches. Officials said that 104 personnel were killed and a further 822 wounded fighting the LTTE in February. Reports suggest that this is a major escalation in the level of fighting based on the casualty figures. The figures were given by the health minister Nimal Siripala de Silva in a statement to the legislature and are much higher than those that have so far been supplied by the defence ministry. The health minister did not give an estimate of rebel casualties concentrating instead on government and civilian casualties. However, the defence ministry said that some 871 LTTE fighters were killed in the same month. There is currently no independent verification of the government figures as fighting in the north and a government ban precludes aid agencies and journalist working in the region under dispute.
peaking to local journalists, a spokesman for Sukhoi early in February said that Russia will deliver the remaining 12 Su-30MKM fighters to Malaysia before the end of the year. Kuala Lumpur signed an agreement for a total of 18 aircraft in 2003 and contract price believed to be in the region of $900 million. The first six aircraft were delivered in 2007 in time for the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) to show its new capability to the world at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace exhibition in December last year. The Su-30MKM is a Malaysian version of the base standard Su-30 Flanker featuring a customised avionics package built to Malaysian specifications. The RMAF is believed to be evaluating the aircraft further as a replacement for some of its more dated aircraft. Currently it operates a mixed fighter fleet including Russian MiG-29N Fulcrum and US manufactured F/A18D Hornets and F-5 Tigers as well as the Su30MKM.
Death toll revealed
A
SINGAPORE New frigates
he Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN) has commissioned three new Formidable class stealth frigates at a ceremony officiated by Minister for Defence Teo Chee Hean at Changi Naval Base. The three newest editions to the RSN's fleet are RSS Intrepid, RSS Steadfast and RSS Tenacious. The induction of the frigates in to fleet operations marks a significant milestone in the transformation of the RSN towards a 3rd Generation fighting force according to officials. The ships are equipped with state-of-the-art combat capabilities that enable them to perform a wide spectrum of missions from economic exclusion zone protection to anti-surface and anti-submarine warfare. Each frigate is designed to carry a Sikorsky S-70B naval helicopter capa-
T
APRIL 2008
Remaining Flankers this year?
S
ble of complementing the ship in ASW and ASuW operations. By leveraging a high level of automation and enhanced work processes the RSN has also been able to drive down personnel levels for the Formidable class with each ship being operated by a lean crew of 71 and an air detachment of 15 personnel. The three vessels follow into service the lead ship of the class, RSS Formidable, which was commissioned in May last year. The two remaining frigates, RSS Stalwart and RSS Supreme, are expected to become operational next year. Under a technology transfer agreement with French shipbuilder Direction Des Constructions Navales (DCN), the first ship was designed and constructed in France, while the rest were built locally by Singapore Technologies Marine.
43
REGIONAL NEWS A N D
D E V E L O P M E N T S
JAPAN
SOUTH KOREA
CHINA
oeing finally delivered the first KC-767 tanker to the Itochu Corporation in late February heralding the next stage of the Japan Air Self-Defence Force (JASDF) tanker programme. It is the first aerial refuelling aircraft the JASDF has procured and will increase the strategic reach of the pacifist nation. The 12 hour non-stop flight to Gifu, Japan, near Nagoya, originated in Wichita, Kansa, near Boeing's tanker modification centre, following a final review by Japan Ministry of Defense (MoD) Air Staff. Itochu will deliver the KC-767 Tanker to the MoD following in-country acceptance processes. Boeing followed the initial delivery in early March with the second KC-767 Tanker only two weeks after delivering the first refuelling aircraft to the Japanese military. The second aircraft was delivered immediately following acceptance of the first aircraft in country. Japan has ordered four of the tankers, which can also be configured as cargo or passenger aircraft to provide flexibility of operations. It features Boeing's advanced aerial refuelling boom and Remote Aerial Refueling Operator (RARO II) system. Boeing is also building four tankers for Italy with delivery of the first two aircraft planned in 2008. Difficulties with that programme are believed to have had a knock on effect on the Japanese project.
aytheon announced in early March that it had received an initial contract to provide engineering services related to a US Foreign Military Sale of the Patriot surface to air missile system (SAM) system to South Korea under the latter’s project SAM-X. The company said that it expects significant follow-on awards to complete the system integration and to provide command and control, communications and maintenance support equipment, as well as to train Korean operators and maintainers and technical assistance to the deployed systems. ‘There is a strong continuing demand, both domestically and internationally, for the combat-proven Patriot system,’ said Joseph Garrett, deputy of Patriot Programs for Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems. Late last year, Seoul allocated 1 trillion won to purchase 48 second-hand Patriot missiles from Germany. ‘Our Patriot systems will provide South Korea the capability to defend itself from the full spectrum of air and missile threats. Raytheon is committed to ensuring Patriot continues to provide our US warfighters and international allies with a superior, affordable and reliable air and missile defence capability to meet current and future threats,’ Garrett concluded.
n February, Beijing signed a reported $500 deal with Poland's statecontrolled PZL Swidnik to purchase 150 helicopters over at least the next 10 years. The deal between PZL Swidnik is being orchestrated through Jiujiang aeronautics plant, which will manufacture many of the aircraft. According to PZL Swidnik the company is delivering three types of aircraft to China the W-3 Sokol, Kania and SW4. The PZL Sokol helicopters will be assembled in China and were the first helicopter designed and manufactured in Poland beginning in the 1970s. The helicopter comes in a military version, the W-3PL, which has a radar, head up display, anti-missile system and is armed with a 20mm cannon. This version also comes with winglets for carrying rockets and missiles such as the wire guided HOT-3 anti-armour system. However, it is unclear what version of the aircraft Beijing is buying. The Kania is a light, multipurpose helicopter powered by two Rolls-Royce Allison 250-C20B turboshaft engines. The aircraft can carry eight passengers and two crew and has a maximum take off weight of 3550kg. The SW-4 is a single turbine, light, multipurpose helicopterand the smallest of the designs being procured by China. It is designed to carry up to four passengers and a pilot and has is powered by single Rolls-Royce Allison 250 C20-R/2(SP) engine.
New tanker arrives
B
THAILAND
Gripen deal signed t a ceremony in Stockholm in February the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration's (FMV's) Director General Gunnar Holmgren and Air Chief Marshal Chalit Pukbhasuk, Commander in Chief of the Royal Thai Air Force (RTAF), signed the 19 billion Baht agreement that will see the RTAF take delivery of six Gripen multirole fighter aircraft and a Saab 340 Erieye Airborne Early Warning and Control System. Under the deal, the RTAF will be able to replace its ageing F-5 aircraft at the beginning of 2011. In their place the air force will fly six Gripen C/D aircraft, four two-seat Gripen D and two single-seat Gripen C fighters, together with the Saab Erieye system to improve aerial surveillance and fighter control. According to Thai officials, the deal
A
44
South Korea Patriot delivery
R
gives the RTAF the capability they have asked for regarding air surveillance and protection of the country's territory.
US resumes military aid Early in February, the US announced a resumption of military aid to Thailand, which had been suspended in the wake of the 2006 coup by the military. The US said it was resuming aid after the unveiling of a democratically elected government following successful elections in the country. Christopher Hill, the US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, also visited Bangkok to help to rebuild diplomatic bridges which were damaged in the wake of the coup. The resumption of military aid came after Thailand's newly elected Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej was sworn in by King Bhumibol Adulyadej during a brief ceremoASIAN MILITARY REVIEW
Polish helicopter deal
I
ny at the king’s place in Bangkok. The move has been warmly welcomed by Thailand, which is facing an insurgency in the south and the new foreign minister, Noppadon Pattama, told reporters that the move was a positive development for the country. The US suspension cut-off aid in a number of areas including foreign military financing, international military education and training, and peacekeeping operations. The sanctions had to be imposed automatically under US law that forbids assistance to a government when an elected leader has been deposed in a coup. However, the US government was able to maintain aid for counter-terrorism, combating weapons of mass destruction and fighting communicable diseases despite the law. The Department of Defense also continued its annual Cobra AMR Gold live-fire exercises in the region. ■
DON’T BE SURPRISED
DEPLOY • PLUG-IN • COMMUNICATE Want military capability and multimedia IP services? With Thales DI@NE you can have both. Fully deployable, interoperable and air transportable, DI@NE enables complete internet services adapted for the military world. Highly mobile, DI@NE is also extremely flexible in that it can be easily adapted to integrate your existing, legacy systems into a global network. Only one vehicle is required to build a complete air transportable communication node, giving commanders the possibility to run collaborative, transverse and simultaneous actions and take full advantage of integrated C4ISR systems.
With the secure and flexible DI@NE solution from Thales, surprise is on your side.
The world is safer with Thales
www.thalesgroup.com/land-joint