Asian Military Review - June 2008

VOLUME 16/ISSUE 6

ASIA PACIFIC’S

JUNE 2008 US$10

LARGEST

CIRCULATED

DEFENCE

MAGAZINE

SOLDIER SYSTEM HEADSETS VTOL UAVs CONVOY PROTECTION ASIAN SSM THREAT CHINA’S DEFENCE BUDGET www.asianmilitaryreview.com

Contents JUNE 2008 VOLUME 16 / ISSUE 6

21

Military Headset Technology Adam Baddeley The most capable radio in the world means nothing if the transmission is garbled or can’t be heard. Voice communication doesn’t stop at the radio. The transmission path starts with the spoken word and ends when it reaches the ear canal; voice communications are head set to head set.

Front Cover Photo: This month’s cover is that of a Saab Skeldar seen over a supposedly benign urban terrain. It was opined that this image was more in keeping with a secutiry magazine than a military journal, and this perhaps emphasises some of the dilemmas currently faced by armies engaged on operations. VTOL UAVs are set to become part of the normal fabric of operations, and to ignore their capabilities in relation to their fixed wing equivalents is to ignore vital information. (PHOTO:SAAB)

Convoy Security

VTOL UAVs

04

14

Ian Kemp “Before and after the Civil War, the Army fought a guerrilla war against Indians on the prairies and deserts of the western and southwestern United States. From the moment the wagon train left the fort’s security, it faced the constant threat of ambush by hostile war parties. From then on, “Indian country” has referred to a contested area without any secure rear area.”

David Oliver Although there are more than 50 rotary-wing unmanned aerial vehicles under development worldwide, there are less than a handful of leading contenders for major defence contracts in the near future, and most of these are aimed at the maritime sector of the market. David Oliver looks at the options.

China’s Defense Budget

27

34

Richard A. Bitzinger Every March, as part of its release of its annual budget for central government expenditures for the coming year, Beijing make public a single overall figure for national defense spending. In 2008, for example, that amount was 418 billion yuan, or US$58.8 billion – an increase of nearly 18 percent over last year.

Missile Arsenals of The East: China and North Korea

Andy Oppenheimer The military balance of the Far East is chiefly driven by a wouldbe superpower in possession of nuclear weapons and longrange delivery systems, interacting with a would-be nascent nuclear state, North Korea, which provides nuisance value to the region.

JUNE 2008

01

International Conference on Maritime Security and Defence 24–25 Sept. 2008, Hamburg The first high-level conference dealing with the whole spectrum of present and potential threats to our vulnerable Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC) and harbours. The MS&D International Conference will coincide with the SMM Shipbuilding Machinery & Marine Technology International Trade Fair, scheduled from 23 to 26 September.

For further information: +49 (40) 35 69-21 45 msd@hamburg-messe.de www.msd2008.com

REGISTER FOR THE CONFERENCE NOW

Synchronised with

Organised by

Media partner and special advisor

Supporting Associations

Editorial

Index of Advertisers AM GENERAL APDS DEFENCE & SECURITY 2009 EADS FN HERSTAL HEAVY INDUSTRIES TAXILA HONEYWELL IDEAS IDEX IQPC OPV MS&D HAMBURG PLASAN SASA RAFAEL SCHIEBEL TEXTRON

11 41 39 12-13 23 th 4 Cover nd 2 Cover 3rd Cover 29 37 02 09 07 17 05

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

I

n recent writing, much has been made of the current limits of military power. Apparently big armed forces do not count for much in the modern world. Thus it would appear that a phenomenal amount is being wasted on defence budgets.

Of course, both the accuracy and validity of these beliefs need to be challenged, but as if in response, and in keeping with the current military trend of wanting to appear as being “outside the box”, the concept of military influence is being suggested.

Military influence differs from the concept in terms of its view that military power is no longer just “kinetic” but holistic. “Just like Sun-Tzu” would seem to be appropriate repost. Indeed and in the time of Sun Tzu, hostage taking, kidnapping, and assassination were all part of a General’s repertoire. So how do we do this today?

The problem for this new and intriguing idea is not one of efficiency or even resources, but more of morals and ethics. It’s not about if things can be done, but should they be done. If they can be done is an obvious area of interest, but should it be possible to paralyse a country by using cyber attacks to destroy all its computer controlled infrastructure, is that not the targeting of a civilian population albeit not by the use of fire?

The concept of military influence puts armed forces way beyond the complexity of trying to deal with normal operational problems and into the highest levels of government decision making, so gone are the days of the Government telling the armed forces to achieve the military solution. This means that there is no longer a purely military solution in terms of harming your opponent. What breaks this will to resist is now not just the loss of the physical infrastructure and things he cares about, but perhaps their irrelevance to what he is seeking to do. You may have a very good army that is suddenly not getting paid! Worse still you may not actually be able to communicate with them in any meaningful way or with the bandwidth you think you require. This is not some fanciful future. Even if the potential to do these things is never fully realised the idea itself is powerful.

Suppose the soldiers think they aren’t being paid? Suppose you conduct some forms of disruptive attack pre-emptively and what is more, who is to say who attacked whom? Military influence has the potential to be a bigger Pandora’s box than nuclear weapons. Some may say that terrorists have always understood this and we are just catching up. Others may point out that a lap top is very little use in a gunfight!

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

JUNE 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

LAND WARFARE

Convoy Security Protecting the wagon train

“Before and after the Civil War, the Army fought a guerrilla war against Indians on the prairies and deserts of the western and southwestern United States. From the moment the wagon train left the fort’s security, it faced the constant threat of ambush by hostile war parties. From then on, “Indian country” has referred to a contested area without any secure rear area.”

Thus wrote Richard E. Killblane in Circle the Wagons: The History of US Army Convoy Security.

by Ian Kemp

04

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

A Cougar Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rapid Response Vehicle (JERRV), belonging to a US Navy Seabee Convoy Security Team. (PHOTO: DoD)

Driving in Iraq has remained dangerous and deadly for our troops. The proven, safer alternative is Textron Marine & Land’s M1117 ASV (Armored Security Vehicle).

Our ASV fills the gap between heavier armored vehicles and small trucks, with a long list of protective advances.

Optimized survivability. All terrain performance. Battle-proven firepower. Full 360° angled ballistic armor protection. 63 mph top speed. Run flat tires.

And the ability to withstand anti-tank land mines under each wheel.

With all this, our ASV has compiled an exceptional availability record in Iraq.

No accident then, that the U.S. Army has hundreds being built and many hundreds more on order.

Look into our safer tougher ASV at textronmarineandland.com.

And see why anything less is just not safe enough.

™

© 2008.Textron Marine & Land Systems is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Textron Inc.

LAND WARFARE

ot only the US Army, but the armies of Britain, France, Spain, in fact almost every country whose forces have operated in hostile territory, have learned, and relearned, over the centuries that conducting supply convoys through enemy territory is one of the most hazardous operations of war. US Military Academy Professor Denis Hart Mahan explained in an 1847 textbook that this risk is “owing to the ease with which a very inferior force may take the escort at disadvantage in defiles, or other positions favourable to an ambuscade, or surprise, and to the difficulty to securing a long column, like that presented by a convoy, from a sudden attack”. During the ‘broad front’ world wars of the 20th Century many military planners believed that the only threat to supply columns operating in rear areas would come from air attacks. However, French forces fighting communist guerrillas in Vietnam in the 1950s, US forces facing the same opponent a decade later and British security forces operating against terrorists in Northern Ireland learned there was no safe rear area in unconventional operations as patrols and convoys travelling on main supply routes became the target of ‘asymmetric’ attacks. British forces in Northern Ireland eschewed roads, where possible, in favour of moving by helicopter. US forces developed tactics,

N

06

The first prototype of the Rheinmetall Defence Gefas Advanced Protective Vehicle System.

(PHOTO: Rheinmetall)

techniques and procedures (TTPs) and technical solutions, such as armed and armoured gun trucks, during the Vietnam War but these were quickly forgotten as aberrations unique to that conflict.

American forces quickly crushed the Iraqi Army during Operation Iraqi Freedom in March-April 2003 but in the months that followed, culminating in concerted attacks on 9-11 April 2004, insurgents concentrated their attacks on convoys. “Many transportation units in Iraq soon realized the enemy selectively honed in on specific targets,” noted Killblane. “While foreign terrorists had arrived in country fully prepared to die for their cause, the home-grown Iraqi insurgents pre-ferred to live to fight another day. Hence, they selected targets that would en-able them to escape.”

Insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq use a variety of means to attack patrols

British security forces operating against terrorists in Northern Ireland learned there was no safe rear area in unconventional operations ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

and convoys such as small arms (including sniper rifles), rocket propelled grenades (RPGs), land mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) which can be used as stand alone weapons or to initiate ambushes. “IEDs have become the weapon of choice of terrorists. They are the number one killer of US and coalition forces in Iraq and are the greatest emerging threat in Afghanistan,” stated the US Department of Defense in its Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08) Global War on Terror Request for supplemental funding presented in February 2007.

A wide variety of means has been used to reduce the threat from IEDs. “A key element of the Department’s force protection strategy is the procurement of additional Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles that, in combination with counter IED jammers and improved tactics, have led to a decrease in the lethal effects of IEDs”, the DoD stated in its FY08 Global War on Terror Amendment presented in October 2007. The DoD set the procurement of MRAP vehicles, whose V-shaped hulls deflect the blast of mines and IEDs, as one of its highest procurement priorities in 2007-08 and the more than 3,500 vehicles shipped to in Iraq by the end of 2007 were credited

LAND W A R F A R E

with a decline in the number of IED fatalities. According the DoD’s FY09 budget request the approximately $20 billion MRAP project will conclude with the acquisition of 15,374 MRAPs bought with FY07 and FY08 funding.

Other force protection measures use simple technology. The DoD requested $300 million in October 2007 to pave roads and build bridges in Afghanistan: “The Paving of roads in Afghanistan greatly reduces the IED threat to U.S. and Coalition forces. A Combined Joint Task Force 76 and Task Force Paladin study that evaluated IED incidents on roads that had been paved have showed this.

Their study revealed that paving IED hot spots reduces the ability of the insurgents

“IEDs have become the weapon of choice of terrorists. They are the number one killer of US and coalition forces in Iraq…”

to plant IEDs in the roadway (the normal method of placement in Afghanistan), which enhances U.S. and Coalition forces’ ability to visually detect them. Their experience has shown that paving is one of the most effective means of stopping IEDs in Afghanistan.” IED hotspots are typically paved for an average length of 10 km.

A US Army sergeant prepares to launch a Raven. The Raven and other UAV are used to provide aerial surveillance in support of convoys and patrols. (PHOTO: DoD)

Convoy security starts with training As enemy attacks on convoys increased in 2003-04 the US Army, the US Marine Corps and their coalition allies relearned the old adage that ‘every marine/soldier is a rifleman’ who should be able to protect himself and his buddies. The term

‘combat logistic patrol’ became a more meaningful substitute for ‘supply run’ or ‘administrative move’. The Product Manager for Ground Combat Tactical Trainers within the US Army’s Program Executive Office for Simulations, Training and Instrumentation launched an ‘Unusual and Compelling Urgency Procurement’ in February 2004 for a Virtual Combat Convoy Trainer (VCCT)

LAND WARFARE

‘every marine/soldier is a rifleman’ who should be able to protect himself and his buddies. and subsequently awarded contracts to Raydon Corporation and Lockheed Martin Simulation and Training Systems.

The VCCT is a virtual training system to train commanders, drivers, gunners and passengers of military vehicles, such as the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV), how to identify and avoid a potential ambush, identify IEDs, and react appropriately to various situations such as ambushes, IEDs and vehicle breakdowns. Both designs are mounted in standard 53 foot trailers, which enable the VCCTs to be moved to different locations to support training, with four Humvees replicated inside. In the original Raydon design the driver is provided with flat panel displays while each of the four vehicle occupants is equipped with head-mounted displays providing a 360 degree view while. Lockheed Martin’s original design incorporated a wrap round screen providing a 220 degree field of view. The VCCT utilises databases of both generic terrain, such as desert, and specific locations such as Baghdad. Commanders are able to conduct mission previews and rehearsals and the performance of all participants during the mission is monitored and recorded for an after action review (AAR). Since the original VCCTs were

A US Marine Corp gunner in a HMMWV mockup scans the 'road' ahead in the Virtual Combat Convoy Trainer. (PHOTO: USMC)

delivered in 2004 both prime contractors have introduced numerous improvements in response to operational requirements, user feedback and developments in technology. Such improvements include the provision of a 360 degree field of view for the vehicle crews in the Lockheed Martin system and the introduction of more peripheral vision in Raydon’s HMDs and the integration of the Counter Radio-Controlled IED Electronic Warfare (CREW-2) system in both VCCTs. Mobile VCCTs have been bought by the USMC and the USAF was the first customer for a fixed-site VCCT. In a separate army-funded project Lockheed Martin has developed the Close Combat Tactical Trainer Reconfigurable Vehicle Simulator that can be configured to represent three HMMWV and two

A US Army Boeing AH-64 Apache attack helicopter passes over a Textron M1117 Armored Security Vehicle. (PHOTO: US Army)

08

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck variants. To provide a low-cost VCCT alternative for the US Army National Guard Raydon developed the Virtual Convoy Operations Trainer which is mounted in a single 53 foot trailer. It uses three types of crew stations: an actual Humvee, supplied by the user unit, is connected outside of the trailer; one reconfigurable crew station similar to those used in the VCCT is inside the trailer; and, three Multipurpose Wheeled Crew Stations with positions for the vehicle commander, driver and gunner.

Units will progress to force-on-force training using blank ammunition and force-on-target training with live ammunition. The US and many other forces use the Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (MILES) 2000 system supplied by Cubic Defense Applications. The transportable combat training system which Cubic developed for the Australian Army’s LAND-134 requirement incorporates anti-vehicle mine/IED and anti-personnel mine simulators. Saab Training Systems has developed a Convoy Training System which uses its well proven laser technology which is at the heart of its its Deployable Instrumented Training System and Deployable Tactical Engagement Simulation system. IEDs are replicated by a commercial off-the-shelf non-pyrotechnic training device for aural and visual effect together with a Saab radio module to transmit the effect to instrumented troops and vehicles. RUAG, Combat Training Solutions and AMTI are among other companies which produce IED simulators.

“Personnel deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan need increased Counter

C our

t esy

of

OS

O HK

S

Cour

te sy of Inter natio

nal ®

Mi

lit

ar

y

an

Co urtes

O HK OS y of

SH

r p.

Co

ck

Tr u

LLC ent rn m ve Go d

r p.

Co ck Tr u

H

LAND WARFARE

Vehicles from the US 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment prepare to deliver rations and supplies to forward operating bases. (PHOTO: DoD)

Improvised Explosive Devices (CIED) training that will provide a better understanding of the use and tactics for best utilizing IED defeat jammers and related equipment,” the DoD stated in its FY08 Global War on Terror Amendment. “The training will also give deploying personnel a realistic opportunity to use counter IED equipment, and to practice operational tactics to mitigate the effects of IEDs.” The DoD is planning to spend $270 million to develop CIED home station training facilities at 30 locations in the USA, Germany, South Korea and Japan in FY08.

Convoy escort duty A typical coalition convoy in Iraq will include three elements: a security element which could include specialist IED clearance vehicles; cargo vehicles; and, recovery assets. ‘Topcover’ is often provided by AH-64 Apache attack helicopters, OH-58D Kiowa scout helicopters and unmanned air vehicles such as the MQ-1 Predator, scanning the route ahead to identify potential threats. Smaller UAVs can be ‘flown’ by operators riding with the convoy.

The wheeled tactical vehicle (WTV) most commonly used by US forces to provide security on combat logistic patrols is the AM General 4 x 4 HMMWV. All HMMWVs in Iraq and Afghanistan have been fitted with armour and many also feature gunner shields. The Picatinny Objective Gunner Protection Kit (O-GPK) developed by the US Army’s Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center at Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey represents the army’s chosen standard and 20,000 kits are scheduled to be produced by 2008. "The O-GPK provides significant force protection and situational awareness for the Humvee gunner," said Thomas Kiel, lead designer of the O-GPK. "The system includes a combination of steel and transparent armor that are con-

10

figured to protect our Soldiers against enemy rifle fire and IED blasts."

The Textron Marine & Land M1117 Guardian Armored Security Vehicle (ASV) was developed in the mid-1990s to provide US Army military police units with a better protected vehicle that the M1114 Uparmored HMMWW and the army has designated the ASV as its primary convoy protection platform. More than 1,000 ASVs have been deployed on combat missions and the army plans to buy almost 2,600 by 2013. The vehicle’s modular ceramic composite appliqué armour provides all-round protection against 7.62mm ball ammunition while the four-man crew compartment; weapon station and ammunition storage areas are protected against 12.7mm armour piercing attack. The ASV can withstand a blast of up to 5kg of TNT in the wheel wells.

The ASV’s Textron one-person turret is armed with an Mk 19 40mm automatic grenade launcher and an M2 12.7mm heavy machine gun.

US forces have been using Force Protection Buffalo and Cougar vehicles in Afghanistan since 2003 and in Iraq since 2004 for route clearance and explosive ordnance disposal (EOD). In common with other MRAP designs these vehicles feature V-shaped, blast-deflecting hulls and a raised chassis.

The DoD classifies MRAP vehicles into three categories: ●

Category I vehicles are 4 x 4 Mine Resistant Utility Vehicles are weighing

More than 1,000 ASVs have been deployed on combat missions and the army plans to buy almost 2,600 by 2013 ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

between 7 and 15 tonnes, which able to accommodate a crew of two and at least four passengers and are intended primarily for use in urban operations. ● Category II MRAPs, weighing between 15 and 25 tonnes, carry a twoperson crew and up to 8 passengers.

Missions include explosive ordnance disposal (EOD), convoy escort and ambulance. The majority are generally 6 x 6 designs. ● The specialist 6 x 6 Buffalo used for route clearance and EOD is the only Category III MRAP vehicle.

As no single manufacturer could meet the DoD’s demanding timeline for MRAP deliveries production contracts have been awarded to BAE Systems, Ground Systems Division; General Dynamics Land Systems – Canada; Force Protection Industries; International Military and Government; Oshkosh Truck Corporation; and, Protected Vehicles. Effort is now focussing on fielding more effective armour to defeat explosively formed projectiles (EFP).

Following the initially fielding of the Recon Optical Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS) 1 on several hundred HMMWVs the Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace CROWS 2 is scheduled to be fitted on HMMWVs, MRAPs and other WTVs. Such remote weapon stations, covered in the May issue of Asian Military Review, provide a far more effective, albeit expensive, self-defence capabilits than pintle-mounted weapons.

The DoD’s Long-Term Armor Strategy requires that every new TWV be ‘fitted for but not with’ B-Kit armour which can be easily fitted in the field to supplement the integrated armour protection (A-Kit) fitted during the manufacture process in areas that would be difficult to reach in the field. All US vehicles operating in Iraq and Afghanistan are now fitted with additional armour.

America’s allies are following suit. For example the Canadian Department of National Defence awarded the C$87 million Armoured Heavy Support Vehicle System contract to DaimlerChrysler in May 2007 to provide 82 logistics vehicles in four major variants for deployment to Afghanistan. All of the vehicles have been fitted with an 2,000 kg armoured cab developed by South Africa’s Land Mobility Technologies for DaimlerChrysler which protects against

LAND W A R F A R E

SAF, blast and splinters while the flat bottom is ‘a sandwich of armour and shock-absorbing material’.

In June 2007 Ceradyne Vehicle Armor Systems and Ideal Innovations announced that they had teamed to develop the Bull vehicle protection package which can be fitted to various truck chassis. The team claim that the system, developed in cooperation with the US Army Research Lab for the Ballistic Protection Experiment, will defeat EFPs. Concept images released

by Ceradyne include a troop carrier, an ambulance, a flatbed cargo truck and a long haul tractor.

While many manufacturers of logistics vehicles have developed armoured protection for soft-skin logistics vehicles Thales Australia has used its Bushmaster 4 x 4 armoured vehicles as the basis for its Armoured Combat Support Vehicle (ACSV) for the Australian Army and has developed two variants at company expense. The 4 x 4 ACSV combines the Bushmaster’s front cab section with a flatbed rear cargo area and is capable of carrying up to 5 tonnes

of cargo and towing an 8 tonne trailer.

Jamming equipment Although US and other military customers are understandably reluctant to disclose many details vehiclemounted electronic jamming systems US EOD technicians wait for clearance to investigate two IEDs attacks are widely deployed on coalition forces in Iraq. (PHOTO: USAF) to counter IEDs. The US DoD has awarded Counter- Radio tion to award an additional contract with Controlled Improvised Explosive Device options for up to 15,000 CVRJ units.

In December 2007 the DoD awarded a (RCIED) Electronic Warfare (CREW) contracts to several companies. EDO $9.8 million contract to ITT Advanced Corporation has recently completed a Engineering & Sciences for the design, delivery order for 1,136 additional CREW development and delivery of seven 2.1 units, known as the CREW Vehicle development models for Spiral 3.1 Receiver/Jammer (CVRJ), worth $86.5 Dismounted and seven development million. More than 8,736 of a the original models for Spiral 3.2 Mounted CREW 10,000 units on contract option have been systems. In December EDO became a ordered since April 2007 and last wholly owned subsidiary of ITT A MR September the DoD announced its inten- Corporation. ■

Protection, made by

U A V B R I E F I N G

The Rising of the Remote

VTOL UAVs

Although there are more than 50 rotary-wing unmanned aerial vehicles under development worldwide, there are less than a handful of leading contenders for major defence contracts in the near future, and most of these are aimed at the maritime sector of the market. David Oliver looks at the options.

by David Oliver

Northrop Grumman’s MQ-8B is in Low Rate Production for the US Navy. (PHOTO: Northrop Grumman)

14

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

U A V B R I E F I N G

lthough several helicopter manufacturers have offered unmanned variants of the their manned helicopter range, including Boeing with it’s A/MH-6X Little Bird, Kaman’s K-Max Burro+, and the Russian Mi34UAV, most of the successful VUAVs have been designed from the outset as unmanned vehicles. They range from the Honeywell’s Micro Air Vehicle (MAV), a 15 lb ring-wing VUAV being developed for the US Army’s Future Combat System (FCS) programme, to the 3,000 lb twin-engine Bell Eagle Eye tiltrotor, originally selected by the US Coast Guard. However, the companies currently at the forefront of VUAV technology are EADS, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Saab and Schiebel.

A

Northrop Grumman The most successful VUAV in terms of development and production is Northrop Grumman's heavyweight Fire Scout VTOL tactical UAV system with a 1,200 kg maximum take-off weight. The four-

bladed unmanned helicopter was developed from the Schweitzer 333 light helicopter and is powered by 420 shp RollsRoyce 250-C20W turboshaft engine using standard NATO heavy fuel.

The MQ-8B Fire Scout is intended to be deployed on the US Navy’s new generation Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) and has the ability to autonomously take-off and land on any aviation-capable warship and at prepared and unprepared landing zones in proximity to the soldier in contact. Its role is to provide organic Intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and targeting (ISR/T) capabilities, overthe-horizon (OTH) targeting, real-time battle damage assessment, a communications relay capability and be fully interoperable between land and sea-based Tactical Control Systems The US Navy requirements for the system include eight hours continuous system on station coverage with five hours on station time at 110nm and a ceiling of 20,000 ft and an airspeed of 125 + kts. It is

The most successful VUAV in terms of development and production is Northrop Grumman's heavyweight Fire Scout designed to have Modular Mission Payloads (MMP), Electro Optical/Infrared (EO/IR) laser range finder designator, voice/data communication relay and a 275 kg lift capacity.

Its avionics include COMINT/SIGINT, Tactical Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR/MTI), Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS), Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) and SATCOM. It will be capable of sonobuoy delivery, expendables including Hellfire missiles, threat countermeasures and mine detection.

Low rate production of nine VUAVs with the latest software updates has begun and autonomous take-offs and

The Saab Skeldar is about to begin deck-landing trials with the Swedish Navy. (PHOTO: Saab)

JUNE 2008

15

U A V B R I E F I N G

landings are being trialed at Webster Field, which is part of Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland, on a virtual LCS helipad.

Northrop Grumman estimates there is a future market for more than 500 Fire Scouts, which is considerably higher than that the 120 envisaged two years ago. The RQ-8B Fire Scout has already been selected for Class IV UAS for the US Army’s FCS programme and the reason for this potential requirement increase is the FCS team’s decision to cancel the Class II and III UASs, and the US Coast Guard’s termination of the Bell Eagle Eye programe.

The US Navy also has an increased Requirement for 137 systems to be used on a number of platforms while the Coastguard Requirement is for 24 systems. Germany, Spain and the UAE are also showing keen interest in the system.

The Honeywell Micro Air Vehicle (MAV), the UAV backpack. (PHOTO: US Navy)

Boeing

The US Navy also has an increased Requirement for 137 systems to be used on a number of platforms while the Coastguard Requirement is for 24 systems.

Boeing is developing an endurance helicopter airframe using rigid rotor technology for the US Defense Advanced Research Products Agency (DARPA).

Frontier Systems, a company that was acquired by Boeing in 2004, originally designed the three-bladed piston engine A160 that first flew in 2002. The A160T powered by a heavy-fuel Pratt & Whitney

16

PW207D turboshaft engine first flew in June 2007. Eleven Hummingbirds are being built at Boeing’s Phantom Works for DARPA and US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) under a $49 million contract awarded in 2005.

The 35 ft long A160T has a carbon fibre composite four-bladed 36ft diameter main rotor and was poised to set a number of records for VUAVs before one of the prototypes was lost in December 2007.

The Hummingbird is designed to hover at 15,000 ft and fly for up to 20 hours carrying a 300 lb payload. Payloads include eight AGM-114 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles, DARPA Forester foliage-penetrating radar, the Argus-IS wide-area video sensor and the Adaptive Conformal ESA Radar (Acer). It will also carry an

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

aerodynamically-shaped pod large enough to evacuate a wounded soldier or extract Special Forces.

According to Boeing, the development programme is now back on schedule and the record breaking flights will be attempted later this year. SOCOM plans to evaluate the A160T for a range of missions in 2010.

Saab Saab’s V-150 Skeldar is a fully autonomous, mobile system with VTOL capacity, which enables it to perform take-offs and landings without any field preparations or additional equipment.

Its modular design makes it possible to choose between different payloads. The UAV control station is modular and can easily be customized and adapted for integration into other systems and configurations.

The air vehicle developed from the CybAero Aphid 5 airframe is constructed of carbon fibre, titanium and aluminum composite. A two-cylinder water-cooled two-stroke fuel injected engine powered the original prototype. The power train consists of a robust drive shaft with a centrifugal clutch that relays the power to the

multi-role Our fully autonomous CAMCOPTER® S-100, a vertical take-off and landing UAV system, is a highly versatile platform for a wide variety of military and civilian applications. Built around a compact helicopter aerial vehicle it provides a unique balance between advanced capabilities and operation in tactical environments.

A multitude of individual adaptations and custom-tailored equipment prepare our unique CAMCOPTER® S-100 for an almost boundless range of possible applications: Simply one for all.

A MASTERPIECE OF ENGINEERING

®

CAMCOPTER S-100 www.schiebel.net

UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE SYSTEM

At Eurosatory 2008, please visit us in the Austrian Pavilion, Booth # C200a

U A V B R I E F I N G

rotor system via a drive belt and a main gearbox while the main rotor uses a wellproven Bell-Hiller configuration system comprising stabilizer bar and paddles.

Avionics include redundant computers, GPS receivers, Inertial Measuring Units (IMU), air-data system and magnetic heading indicator allowing fully autonomous operation while maintaining total radio silence.

The Ground Control Station (GCS) is a highly-modularised solution that can be integrated into a number of hardware platforms such as vehicles, trailers or containers. Incorporating vehicle and sensor operator workstation, the GCS is easy to operate and capable of controlling more than one UAV simultaneously. With fully autonomous functionality for air vehicle management, payload and mission management, the GCS can be supplemented by a remote video terminal.

The communication between the vehicle and the GCS is achieved via highly secure direct links containing sensor and com-

The Skeldar’s ability to takes-off and land vertically warrants precise manoeuvrability 18

Fire Scout seen firing 2.75 inch rockets (PHOTO: Northrop Grumman)

mand and control data. Sensor data and command and control are transmitted via separate communication links. The vehicle is designed to carry a range of COTS payloads such as EO/IR, SAR and EW sensors.

The system is also ready for integration of future sensors and upgrading.

No launch or recovery equipment is needed and the operation requires only a few staff. The Skeldar’s ability to take-off and land vertically warrants precise manoeuvrability. It can hover in a fixed position for hours and easily hide behind structures and operate close to other objects.

Parallel to the development of a new demonstration version of Skeldar aimed at the maritime market, Saab is participating in new international initiatives that will make it possible for unmanned vehicles to fly in civil airspace.

The base platform that Skeldar is built on was first test flown in 2007. Following successful flight trials of this basic version, Saab has carried out a complete review and redesign of the unmanned helicopter. This new version, which flew earlier this year, has had most of the components replaced. “After a long and intensive period with ground tests and

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

continuous adjustments we have now come to flying. Work is now continuing with the function lift required for us to implement fully autonomous flights.

Then we should be able to demonstrate Skeldar for potential customers and other interested parties”, says Anders Carp, responsible for UAV operations at Saab.

The maritime version is about to commence deck landing trials. The Skeldar M has a diesel engine and a four-blade main rotor. The 250 kg-class VUAV is designed to carry a 40 kg payload, have an endurance of five hours and a 200 km radius of action with line of sight datalink. Skeldar’s compact layout, it has a 3.30 m rotor diameter, is easy to dismantle for transportation and can be stowed on board the Swedish Navy’s Visby-class stealth corvettes. The automatic deck landing system will be designed to be located on the ship or the air vehicle, for a recovery capability in up to Sea State 5.

Schiebel The Austrian company focuses on the development, testing and production of the Camcopter VUAV system. With headquarters in Vienna, Austria, Schiebel now maintains production facilities in

U A V B R I E F I N G

Wiener Neustadt, Austria, and Abu Dhabi, UAE. The latter plant has delivered 25 Camcopter S-100s of 60 ordered by the UAE armed forces. Five other customers have ordered 13 additional S100 VUAVs. Thales UK has teamed with Schiebel to offer the S-100 Camcopter unmanned helicopter to compete for the expected Royal Navy requirement for a VTOL tactical UAV. The two companies signed a teaming agreement during 2007 Paris air show, with Thales to head marketing efforts and to be responsible for system integration elements of any proposed bid.

Diehl BGT Defence GmbH and Schiebel have continued their co-operation agreeSchiebel’s Camcopter S-100 has bee sold to five customers and has undergone sea trials in the Indian and Pakistan Navies. (PHOTO: Scheibel)

ment on marketing the Camcopter S-100 for the German armed forces. The VUAV is being offered as a shipboard reconnaissance system for the German Navy’s K 130 corvettes to meet the requirements for an Imaging Surveillance System for the Depth of the Employment Area (SAATEG). The Schiebel S-100 – supplementing the high altitude portion of SAATEG with a Medium Altitude Long Endurance system such as Predator B – would provide direct reconnaissance of naval units’ operating area thus enabling precise location.

The Camcopter S-100 UAV System has been developed to carry various sensors for both military and civilian applications. The VUAV is launched automatically eliminating the need for a pre-prepared area or additional launch and recovery equipment. It navigates via preprogrammed GPS waypoints, or can be operated manually through a simple, yet highly stable, flight control system. The S-100 is capable of landing on helicopter deck-equipped ships without the use of additional landing equipment. The air vehicle’s fuselage is a carbon-fibre monocoque providing maximum capacity for a wide range of payload/endurance combi-

nations. In a standard configuration, it is capable of carrying a 50 kg payload for up to six hours.

Another step has been taken in the growth of Schiebel's S-100 into new roles.

At the beginning of October 2007 the unmanned helicopter demonstrated its shipboard capability, completing flights from an Indian Navy offshore patrol vessel’s helipad in the Arabian Sea, for the Indian Navy based in Cochin, South India.

Take-offs from the deck were done both manually and autonomously. Landings were generally flown autonomously to a waypoint relative to the ship at a distance of about 50 ft above and 100 ft behind the helipad and from this waypoint the final approach and landing were executed.

The weather conditions allowed takeoffs and landings at ship speeds of between 8 kts and 16 kts with wind from northwest at up to 20 kts at light to mod-

erate sea states. The longest flight was two hours, demonstrating the S-100's capability to conduct reconnaissance at 12,000 ft altitude at up to 25 nm from the moving ship. The payloads installed onboard the S-100 were an EO/IR sensor and the fixed camera in the nose which sent simultaneously video streaming to the payload workstation. Other sensor payloads that are typically required for operational scenarios are available too, including SAR systems.

The GCS of the S-100 VUAV was installed inside the ship's hangar with the link antennas set up on the structures on top of the hangar. An IMU for sensing the ship movements for automatic landing and the GPS reference antenna were positioned next to the helipad.

These trials were followed up in March 2008, when the S-100 successfully completed flights from a Type 21 Frigate of the

JUNE 2008

Pakistan Navy, also in the Arabian Sea. Launch was made from the helideck of the Frigate at the designated trial site off the coast of Karachi. Equipped with its day/night-capable EO/IR sensor, the S100's takeoffs were done both manually and autonomously from the deck. The weather conditions allowed takeoffs and landings at a maximum ship speed of 13 kts and the frigate’s speed at no time less than 10 kts, with wind from West-Southwest at up to 15 kts at a moderate Sea State.

After a first system check day flight, a 4hour mission was carried out during which the S-100 took off from the ship's helideck by day and landed at night. The tests were concluded by another night flight with a total flight time that day of about 6 hours at a maximum altitude of 6,000 ft.

EADS. EADS has designed and flown several

VUAVs including the Orca 1200 based on the Chabri two-seat helicopter which has been offered to the French Army and Navy for their proposed joint tactical UAV programme, and the lightweight Scorpio. The Scorpio 30 was developed in co-operation with the French company Survey-Copter and targeted at land-based military and civilian applications.

With the successful first flight of its new VUAV, the Scouting and Hunting Autonomous Rotor Craft (Sharc) in July 2007, EADS Defence & Security (DS) launched the flight test campaign for its unmanned helicopter. During the first flight, the unmanned coaxial dual-rotor 200 kg-class helicopter, which is being tested by the Military Air Systems unit of EADS, demonstrated stability and impressive flight characteristics. The VUAV demonstrator, which is 250 cm long, 70 cm wide and 120 cm high, has a maximum take-off weight of 190 kg, and can accommodate 60 kg of mission equipment in its payload compartments.

The Sharc is equipped with a redundant flight control unit, a laser altimeter and also control and data links. It has been designed as a VUAV without hydraulic components, the rotors being controlled by means of electrical actuators. The modular design of the avionics facilitates the integration of a whole range of different mis-

19

U A V B R I E F I N G

The weather conditions allowed take-offs and landings at ship speeds of between 8 kts and 16 kts with wind from northwest at up to 20 kts at light to moderate sea states. sion equipment. Tests on EO/IR sensors are part of the overall flight campaign. In addition, Sharc can also accommodate a compact SAR system.

With its ability to land autonomously

lent, stable flight characteristics, the Sharc meets maritime military requirements for unmanned reconnaissance and surveillance as well as aerial target designation and damage control missions.

The unmanned helicopter will be capable of autonomous take-off and landing despite heavy seas from a ship's helideck. EADS claims that it’s unique design makes the Sharc especially suitable for ship-based missions. The coaxial rotor configuration provides thirty percent more lift at equal weight when compared to conventional helicopter with tail boom designs. This allows for a heavier sensor payload with comparable

The EADS co-axial Sharc VUAV showing its modular composite construction. (EADS)

on deck, large payload capacity and excel-

20

flight performance. The co-axial design

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

provides greater altitude stability which makes it easier to compensate for the rolling movement of the ship, a prerequisite for autonomous deck landings.

The mutually torque-compensating counter-rotating rotors make a compensating tail rotor superfluous. This, in turn, has enabled the designers to keep on the overall dimensions of the Sharc to a minimum. The innovative overall design of the vehicle also allows a number of technical possibilities for the fist time, such as the integration of antennas in the outer skin.

With a choice of rigid or co-axial rotors, ring-wing of tiltrotor, VUAV design is pushing the boundaries of AMR rotary-wing technology. â–

SOLDIER T E C H N O L O G Y

The Sound of Battle

Military Headset Technology

The most capable radio in the world means nothing if the transmission is garbled or can’t be heard. Voice communication doesn’t stop at the radio. The transmission path starts with the spoken word and ends when it reaches the ear canal; voice communication are head set to head set. In a digitizing world, at the individual soldier level voice still takes precedence over data.

Situational Awareness may show a blue dot on a screen, intended to prevent fratricide, but this won’t always be seen by a soldier in the heat of battle and can’t always be related to immediate surroundings.

by Adam Baddeley JUNE 2008

21

SOLDIER T E C H N O L O G Y

lear and unambiguous chat between comrades clears up confusion and its absence can generate tragedy.

Furthermore, noise associated with combat and the everyday acoustic signature of operations and exercise have a toll on hearing. Hearing impaired troops are less effective while in service and once leave, damaged hearing can incur considerable civil cost making hearing protection at all levels an investment to reduce the ‘though-life support cost’ of personnel. As operations become more complex, so too must ancillaries, with headsets increasingly seen not just as hearing protection but a system in itself and operational enhancement.

C

Ear Protection basics Headsets rely on two underlying and complementary technologies to attenuate noise, Passive Noise Reduction (PNR) – dense materials creating a barrier in and around the ear shell against acoustic noise and Active Noise Reduction (ANR) technologies electronically cancelling out unwanted noise.

Noise itself is measured in decibels (dB).

Protection levels are measured in increments of 3dBs, for that each increment upwards decreases by half the time a user can be exposed to that level of sound without damaging hearing. Using European Union rules, an unprotected user can be exposed to noise of 83dB for eight hours but levels of 112dB for just 3.5 minutes. That exact period of time is established by national and regional health and safety regulation with the duty of care incumbent in the legislation increasingly being extended to the armed forces. The US Department of Defense for example has established 85dB to be an acceptable level of noise for an eight-hour period. A key measurement of headsets effectiveness is the level of attenuation they provide with common systems dropping the effective noise heard by users by 20-40dB which would take the effective noise heard in a typical tracked vehicle down from a ‘natural’ 103 dB well below safe levels for an extended period of time.

ANR samples the noise within the headsets or ear canal and then use electronic processing to invert the noise, taking it ‘180 degrees’ out of phase from the unwanted noise and then feeding it back into the ear. The unwanted noise

22

and the ANR-created ‘anti-noise’ then mix and cancel each other out, improving the signal to noise ratio and thus boosting intelligibility. There is however a point in the noise frequency spectrum, where PNR has superior performance to active technologies. ANR excels at attenuating low frequency noise, those noises associated with the sustained ‘din’ of vehicles or aircraft ; up to roughly 500Hz. To achieve the same level of noise attenuation using passive means would require significant amounts of material and consequently, significant

the unwanted noise, creating even more voice distortion. Consequently, a comprehensive headset must use a combination of both passive protection and active electronics. In the case of the dismounted soldier for example, once they are away from the types of low frequency noise associated with vehicles, they are faced with impulse noise from gunshots and blasts all of which are very short in duration and have a very high frequency profile, putting them out of the reach of ANR.

The US Department of Defense for example has established 85dB to be an acceptable level of noise for an eight-hour period.

For headsets used for mounted applications on platforms, the acoustic challenge comes in two types; ‘broadband noise’ – noise which has many different frequency components and several energy level and tonal noise from fixed wing turboprops such as transport aircraft or rotary wing aviation. The ability to tackle energy levels in tones as well as broadband is the key thing moving forward to improve the performance of the headsets by adapting noise attenuation to noise profiles across the whole of the mission.

ANR isn’t a universal palliative below 500Hz and has its own drawbacks. Depending on the frequencies covered by the ANR, it can begin to affect those frequencies used by normal speech. Speech becomes ‘flattened’ and

weight and volume, both of which are undesirable in a soldier based system.

For noises above 500Hz users must still rely on passive technologies, which are much better at cancelling the higher frequencies than ANR and don’t require power. The physics behind this are all to do with wavelengths and how quickly ANR can process sound and cancel noise. Above 500Hz, that can’t be achieved sufficiently quickly, and additional noise is actually added on top of

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

Applications

The UK’s current issue PRR headset.

SOLDIER T E C H N O L O G Y

sound inside the headsets. Compression technology is used so that when Talk Through is enabled, very loud impulse noise isn’t translated into the ear and amplified, causing unintended damage.

Some conflate talk through with ANR and some manufacturers refer to active headsets, inferring but not actually delivering ANR.

Market dynamics Racal Acoustics ANR board.

(PHOTO: Adam Baddeley)

pilots in particular have complained that intelligibility suffers. More capable headsets have introduced complex ANR compensation, reversing the affects of ANR in speech and this is fast becoming a differentiator in the market place.

There is also considerable misunderstanding about what ANR does and doesn’t do. ANR has to some extent become confused with ‘Talk Through’ technology – the ability to pick up external sounds in the local environment outside the headsets, and transmit that

Gil Limonchik, CEO of Silynx, outlined the challenge for headset technology, “Soldiers need a system that can take them from the minute they set up in a quiet area of a base, approach the objective in very noisy platforms like a HMMWV or helicopter and retain communications with their own radios.

Onboard a noisy platform, you want to use the same headset to connect to the

There is also considerable misunderstanding about what ANR does and doesn’t do.

Light and Medium Machine Guns

platform’s intercom systems. You don’t want to swap headsets when you dismount. Milliseconds count when dismounting. Then you need sound localisation and in a firefight you also need impulse noise protection and be able to communicate while you have your hand on your weapon at all times and sometimes doing so while wearing an NBC mask.” He explained it doesn’t matter how good your radio is if you can’t hear properly and others can’t understand what you are saying.

An in-ear microphone approach is being increasingly used as an alternative to more traditional over ear solutions.

This approach eliminates the boom mike and a device within the ear undertakes everything. It works by picking up the same vocalisations that can be heard while speaking while putting your fingers in your ear. These dull and odd sounds are then are processed using sophisticated signal processing so it is both recognisable and intelligible for the user. Such systems also enable aural situational awareness by retaining naturalistic hearing effects such as the

www.fnherstal.com

SOLDIER T E C H N O L O G Y

direction of sound as well as enhancements such as sound amplification – a combat hearing aid - and whisper or quiet modes to avoid detection. Developed with SOF in mind this inherently is gaining traction in the ‘Big’ Army.

Neal Muggleton, Head of Marketing & Product Management at Racal Acoustics commented, “We’ve seen a change in the market place for smaller devices which fit in the ear. That has definitely come in from the end users.

From our perspective however, the market hasn’t flipped over completely.

There is growing acceptance of those devices, but there are many people who can’t or won’t wear them. There has to be a choice between headsets depending on modes of operation and scenarios.”

The Soldiers head and helmet have become real estate for sensors (PHOTO: Adam Baddeley)

24

NACRE’s QuietPro in ear headset has been fielded with a number of European and North American Special Forces and has as been fielded by the Norwegian armed forces as well as a number of Soldier Modernisation Programmes including NORMANS and the RDE-led IdZ ES programme. Total contracts exceed $70 million across fifteen countries, the most important being a $27 million, September 2007 contract from the Marine Corps System Command for QuietPro for use with the Motorola IISR hand held radio.

Eivind Bergsmyr, Nacre’s CEO said, “QuietPro is an instantaneous in ear protector – it shuts out the surrounding sound, when there is an impulse like a shot or explosion. It also opens equally fast so you don’t loose information between shots. Because it’s a digital system we can do that – if you have an analogue systems there are always reaction times to get things to happen.”

The QuietPro typically provides 30-40db of hearing protection, sometimes exceeding this, depending on the individual. The system is designed to aid voice intelligibility and does so by enhancing certain frequencies however, above noise levels of 9095db it becomes necessary to communicate through the radio. Noise levels in most tracked and wheeled combat vehicles are over 100db. By comparison Gun shot impulse noise is typically 160db, a shoulder launched rocket more than 185db and an IED blast 195db. IED blasts in particular have left survivors dazed and deafened from the impact of sound alone which has impacted their

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

The reality of modern operations will see soldiers moving from platform to platform within the same mission ability to fight back.

In testing against these IED noise level using artificial ears, the QuietPro survived and provided protection well beyond 40db for IEDs. Bergsmyr said, “We have examples of soldiers in Iraq claiming QuietPro saved their lives in IED explosion because they were able to survive and were able to avoid the deafness which would have been without the systems and were able to regain SA and reorganise.”

Physical ease of use is also being built in. With Silynx’ QuietOps a programmable PTT controls both the mode of the radio and headset using programmable hotkeys. A series of voice prompts makes the user aware of various modes of the headsets such as Whisper, low battery as well as integrating with the radio itself with spoken prompts for channel selection –eliminating the need for, ‘counting clicks’. This has allowed users to relocate radios from the chest to the soldier’s back, aiding physical integration and signal propagation by enabling the antenna to be parallel to the head. The QuietOps also allows users to monitor two communications devices simultaneously – two radios or radio and an intercom and using the user determining which has precedence or using programmability to have each feed going to a different ears.

QuietOps is in service with the DoD, the Canadian, Australian UK MoD, Israeli SOF and has been tested as part of Future Force Warrior and assessed for inclusion in future iterations of Land Warrior.

Swedish firm Peltor’s ComTac II Tactical Headset uses ear-cup microphones which use liquid/gel ear seals and using talk through, enables ambient sound to be picked up across 360 degrees and is compatible with MICH (Modular Integrated Communications Helmet), Personal Armor System for Ground Troops (PASGT) and Advanced Combat Headset (ACH) helmets and uses a liquid gel seal to maintain the ear cup.

Powered by a single AA battery in each ear cup, this gives 270 hours of battery life and if this gives out, the headset can

SOLDIER T E C H N O L O G Y

still maintain two way radio communications. The ComTac II also uses a noise canceling flexible gooseneck microphone. Another Swedish firm, MSA Sordin produces the Supreme Pro-X for military use and offers waterproofed talk through for 600 hours battery life with 2 AAA batteries and weighs 310g. A version of the Supreme Pro is MICH compatible and is offered with a bone-mike option and weighs 380g.

Selex Communications and Sennheiser Government Systems have teamed on the WACH (Warrior Advanced Capability Headset) 900 which combines ANR and stereo talk through (STT). A notable feature of the WACH-900 is its power management facility which automatically detects available power from vehicle intercom and uses this to charge its lithium-ion cell. If a non-rechargeable AA battery is being used, it reads the battery and doesn’t damage it by trying to recha-rge it. The battery provides 18 hours ANR and 300 hours of stereo talk through when not connected to vehicle intercom.

A number of advanced acoustics feature are used on the WACH900.

Sensors in the system are alert to slight opening in the seal in the ear cup and manage noise accordingly avoiding over compensation by the ANR, producing excess white noise in the ear.

If a high impulse noise occurs on one side of the user, the WACH 900’s STT maintains hearing rather than cutting out the affected side. This ensures that the user maintains situational awareness by hearing the true direction of the noise rather than be confused by the sound entering his hearing by the ‘switched on’ headset ear piece.

Reflecting current operational headsets usage the WACH 900 has been proNACRE’s QuietPro headset system is waterproofed to eight meters (PHOTO: QuietPro)

JUNE 2008

25

SOLDIER T E C H N O L O G Y

tected to ensure that the system’s ANR be switched off when RC-IED jammers are operating. Most headset’s ANR can’t be switched off causing constant feedback in the headset when the jammer is switched on. Sennheiser’s SLC 110 Ultra Lightweight Military Headset has been adopted for the Infanterist der Zukunft Basic System, deployed with troops to Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia.

Selex’s Light Patrol Headset comes as standard with the ubiquitous Personal Role Radio and is submersible to 1m.

Others in the range such as the 126g TASC 1 featuring soft rubber earcups to block out external noise and is submersible to 8m while its TASC 2 was originally designed for US Navy SEALS.

Analogue systems were optimised for the requirement of a specific vehicle.

Bose’s main offering in the military field is the Product Improved Combat Vehicle Crewman Headset and was developed for use in tracked vehicles providing 30dB of overall protection with a MTBF of 14,000 hours. Its Triport Tactical Headset (TTH) which launched in 2004 is optimised for wheeled platforms with lower dB levels in the mid 90s. The TriPort Talk Through capability is powered by a single AA battery for 240 hours of use and weighs 450g on the head.

Lowe Electronics’ LPT700 is a lightweight modular family system which can be used with respirators and a wireless PTT with a number of key dismounted combat features including tone signaling –morse code type one click for yes two for no - and features active ear defenders. Users choose within the LPT700 from multiple configurations that the users can determine for both dismounted platform crew roles.

Elno’s Hedset VH591 is a single ear headset design weighing just 200g without PTT and is compatible with respirators and offers a throat microphone feature. Gentex’s GenComm III headsets reduce nose by 21dB and its PTT can control two radios or radio and intercom and feature low profile ear cups for use

with the US ACH. Israeli firm Source of Sound has supplied solutions to a number of special forces. Its Tiger Headset throat mike is connected to the neck with a light metallic band and is powered from the radio.

Racal Acoustics new all digital solution is the Future Tactical Communications System (FTCS) and is based round three categories of earpieces including in-ear. Its digital core can be used as a drop in replacement of the company’s existing analogue range.

The Digital Communication Platform element to the FTCS is currently entering its production phase and going through final engineering activities to mitigate some of the technical risk, particularly electron magnetic compatibility and immunity. The digital core is essentially a small computer that will host Active Noise Reduction (ANR) and also Built in Test to confirm its level of protection.

Another digital feature is a proprietary ANR Compensation capability, which compensates for the affect of ANR and boosts those frequencies so that the received communications are as good as

The WACH 900 seen attached to the UK Issue PRR.

26

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

‘normal’. Additional software drops will subsequently be added to upgrade capabilities and add existing ones.

Analogue systems were optimised for the requirement of a specific vehicle.

Fine for crew, but not for passengers in a’ battle taxi’. A digital environment allows a more flexible solution to overcome this. Muggleton believes that the reality of modern operations will see soldiers moving from platform to platform within the same mission. Digital platforms will allow infantry headsets to host several profiles for optimum noise cancellation in each nations platforms such as a Chinook or a Warrior, and automatically recognise the change when the user transitions between A MR them. ■

C H I N A B

U

D

G

E

T

China’s Defense Budget: If Not More Transparent, At Least More Credible?

The Guided Missile Destroyer Shenzhen (DDG-167)

Every March, as part of its release of its annual budget for central government expenditures for the coming year, Beijing make public a single overall figure for national defense spending.

In 2008, for example, that amount was 418 billion yuan, or US$58.8 billion – an increase of nearly 18 percent over last year. At the same time, there is a flurry of reporting in the world press as to the incredulity of China’s official defense budget, and fanning speculation that, in reality, Chinese military expenditures are much higher than is declared, and, furthermore, that the lack of transparency on the part of the Chinese when it comes to defense spending is only another sign of Beijing’s aggressive intents and perhaps even a warning of a covert military buildup.

by Richard A. Bitzinger

JUNE 2008

27

C H I N A B

U

D

G

E

T

ut before we once again go off on another bout of conjecture as to what the Chinese are really spending on their military and what it all means, it might be advisable to stop a moment and ask ourselves, what if the official defense budget increasingly does reflect actual spending? If not more transparent, is the declared budget at least more credible, and, if so, what does that mean for Chinese intentions and capabilities?

B

What Do We Hope to Learn from Looking at Defense Budgets?

To being with, what insights do we hope to get from analyzing defense budgets and military expenditures? Ideally, such analysis should inform us better as to: ● Intentions and resolve: As an indicator of the country’s determination to modernize its armed forces over the long haul, what are China’s longterm commitments to defense spending? Is Beijing willing to increase defense spending both in real terms and over a sustained period? How does this compare with neighboring states and potential rivals? ● The burden on the national economy: Is China spending an “inordinate” amount of money on defense, compared to other nations? What does this say about commitments and resolve? How sustainable are current levels of spending? ● Modernization priorities: Which defense technologies, military research and development (R&D), and arms procurement programs are receiving priority funding? What and how many of a particular type of weapon system are being produced and acquired? What does this say about current or emerging Chinese military doctrine or strategy? How much is being spent on personnel vs. operations and maintenance (O&M) vs. equipment, all of which indicates different priorities for force improvement and has different timelines for payoffs? Is one area of expenditure starving out of the others? ● Future military capabilities: How much funding is going to which branch or branches of the military? Is more money being spent on the mod-

28

The PLA has no shortage of manpower (PHOTO: Gordon Arthur)

ernizing the navy and air force, and hence on increasing power projection capabilities, or on ground forces and territorial defense, i.e., People’s War? Is the PLA putting more funding into technologies relating to the so-called revolution in military affairs (RMA), particularly information warfare and precision-strike, which could result in increased capabilities to fight an unconventional or asymmetric war?

Basically, therefore, we analyze defense budgets to see if (and where) a country is putting its money where its mouth is.

As such, the strength of defense budget analysis lies in its use of “hard,” empirical information – i.e., fiscal authorizations, appropriations, and outlays – that can be quantified and charted. This information, in addition, can be compared, tracked, and trend-lined over time, and subjected to a variety of statistical analyses, and therefore used to reveal insights into a country’s plans, priorities, and likely capabilities.

Before we can use defense budgets and military expenditures to address such quantifiable issues, however, we must first have the budgetary figures to work with. More than almost any other field of inquiry, defense budget analysis is a highly data-dependent field of study

As such, the strength of defense budget analysis lies in its use of “hard,” empirical information ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

– in other words, it involves a lot of number-crunching. Consequently, it demands having a lot of numbers to crunch, and the more numbers we have, the more detailed (and useful) will be our analysis. It is ironic, therefore, that few areas of Chinese military studies actually have access to less reliable data than defense budget analysis. The issue of data – or rather, the lack thereof – is therefore the greatest obstacle to constructing useful methodologies and approaches for studying and interpreting Chinese defense spending in-depth

China’s Exploding Defense Budget So what do we know about Chinese military expenditures? First of all, we possess a few firm facts: 1. China’s defense budget has grown significantly for more than a decade.

That the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been the beneficiary of a long-term expansion in defense spending is not in question. Between 1997 and 2005, Beijing increased defense spending by double-digit doses every year – 13.7 percent per annum, in real, i.e., after inflation, terms, according to the Chinese’s own statistics. China’s official 2006 defense budget of 284 billion yuan (US$36.65 billion), for example, constituted a 14.7 percent rise over the previous year – while the 2005 budget was itself a 12.5 percent increase over 2004.

A 2008 budget of US$58.8 billion

C H I N A B

U

D

G

E

T

would mean that Chinese military expenditures have more than quintupled in real terms since 1997, thus permitting Beijing to put considerable additional resources into the hardware and software of military modernization.

China now outspends Japan, France, and the United Kingdom on national defense, and likely Russia as well.

2. China appears to be putting particular emphasis on equipment purchases.

All areas of the Chinese defense budget have benefited from these increases, such as personnel, training, and operations.

Nowhere, however, has Beijing’s munificence been more strongly felt than in the PLA’s equipment budget – that is, expenditures for procurement and (supposedly) research and development (R&D).

PLA annual spending on equipment has increased from US$3.1 billion in 1997 to an estimated US$15 billion in 2007 – again, a fivefold increase in real spending; if this trend holds

30

It is ironic, therefore, that few areas of Chinese military studies actually have access to less reliable data than defense budget analysis. true, the equipment budget will likely reach US$20 billion in 2008. This means that China likely has the second-highest level of procurement spending in the world (after the United States, which, admittedly, still outspends China by a factor of ten to one). If anything has supported China’s recent expansion in military power, it is this explosion in defense spending, which has permitted the PLA to acquire, over the past decade,

new surface combatant and submarines, modern fighter jets, air-to-air refueling aircraft, satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles, and a host of ballistic, cruise, and tactical missile systems.

This upward trend is likely to continue for some time. In May 2006, Beijing approved a new 15-year national development plan for defense science and technology that would boost military R&D spending and focus on developing high-technology weapons and “IT solutions” for the PLA, support advanced manufacturing technologies, and cultivate more collaborative international defense R&D efforts, with the goal of “transforming the PLA into a modernized, mechanized, IT-based force.”

3. Chinese defense expenditures are a manageable burden on the national economy. In 1996, China’s official defense budget absorbed around 9

The Chinese now have considerable indigenous vehicle production capability (PHOTO: Gordon Arthur)

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

C H I N A B

percent of central government expenditures (CGE) and perhaps 1.5 percent of GDP. Over the past decade, defense expenditures as a percentage of CGE has fallen to a little over 7 percent, while it has remained at around 1.5 percent of GDP. This indicates that, even as defense budgets have been increasing, military spending has actually been a modest and stable burden on the Chinese economy.

At the same time, it has been widely accepted in the West that the official budget released by the Chinese every year accounts for only a fraction of actual defense spending. ●

Research and development costs: It is generally believed that military research and development (R&D) is

●

●

Still Off the Books?

Extrabudgetary Defense Expenditures At the same time, it has been widely accepted in the West that the official budget released by the Chinese every year accounts for only a fraction of actual defense spending. In particular, whole categories of military expenditure are believed to be missing from official figures, including:

U

D

G

E

T

annual Chinese defense R&D spending could be as high as US$2 billionUS$3 billion.

Arms imports: Many Western analysts believe that most arms imports are also extrabudgetary purchases, often covered under special or supplemental appropriations. Between 1998 and 2005 Beijing signed new arms import agreements worth some US$16.7 billion, according to the U.S. Congressional Research Service; in 2005 alone, it purchased US$2.8 billion worth of foreign weapon systems.

Expenses for the People’s Armed Police and militia/reserve forces: Expenditures for the paramilitary People’s Armed Police (PAP) are paid for out of a separate central government budget, while costs for PLA reserves and militia forces are partly borne out of provincial budget.

funded from other parts of China’s state budget, such as the country’s general R&D fund and from a special fund for “new product promotion.” A reasonable assumption of A PLAF J8 “Finback” seen over the South China Sea (Photo: US DOD) ●

●

The PLA are allegedly expanding their Special Forces (PHOTO: US DOD)

JUNE 2008

State support for China’s militaryindustrial complex: Much of China’s military-industrial complex has long operated at a loss. Official defense budgets likely do not include the costs of direct subsidies to Chinese defense industries or (in more recent years) forced loans by state-owned banks to arms factories, many of which end up having to be written off as nonperforming.

Earnings from PLA-run businesses: Until their forced divestiture in late 1998, the PLA operated thousands of commercial enterprises, including farms, factories, hotels, discotheques, arms exports, and other services. The profits or budgetary offsets from these activities could be counted as additional sources of revenues for the military. It is still unclear how many PLA-owned business were actually

31

C H I N A B

U

D

G

E

T

So What Does It All Mean?

Currently, Soviet derived designs form the backbone of the PLAAF (PHOTO: US DOD)

sold off (most PLA-run farms were exempted, for example), how many are still secretly owned by the Army (e.g., through dummy partnerships), and how many divestiture orders were simply ignored.

How much all this extrabudgetary spending actually is has been the subject of considerable debate and opinion in the West, and, as a result, a veritable cottage industry has sprung up dedicated to estimating likely Chinese defense expenditures. These unofficial estimates of “real” Chinese defense expenditures employ many different approaches and methodologies, and not surprisingly, have varied widely in their results – from anywhere between 1.5 to ten times greater than the official budget. The U.S. Defense Department, for example, has stated that China’s actual defense budget is two to three times its official figure, which would make it the world’s second-largest military spender.

But is it fair to continue to make such arguments about “hidden” Chinese defense spending? In the first place, the evidence to support statements that certain elements of military spending – in particular, spending on R&D and arms imports – were not in the official budget has always been spotty and usually uncorroborated. In addition, such arguments were too often based more on inference than fact, such as in “how could an armed force of 2.3 million men have a procurement budget of only a few billion dollars?” After all, India maintains a force roughly half the size of and of around the same quality as

32

China, on a budget of approximately US$20 billion. Why, therefore, is a US$45 billion or even a US$58 billion PLA budget so incredible?

In addition, many estimates of “actual” Chinese defense spending use some kind of purchasing power parity (PPP) multiplier that attempts to take into account the “true value” of these expenditures in terms of spending power relative to Western industrialized countries – for instance, savings from relying on cheap conscripts, lower wages paid at defense factories, etc. Unfortunately, there exist no reliable PPPs for China, and the ones we have vary so widely as to be nearly useless.

In fact, it is just possible that China’s declared defense budget is actually becoming a more accurate indicator of what the Chinese actually spend on their defense. Especially as military expenditures have grown, it is increasingly probable that more and more of what it costs to truly run the PLA is being reflected in the official budget.

There is some precedent to believe that this might be so. In the late 1990s, when the PLA was told to get rid of its outside business operations, such as factories, hotels, and real estate companies, at least part of the plus-up in the official budget was to compensate the Army for these divestitures. Therefore, is it increasingly likely that the official budget now does include spending that may have once before been covered in extrabudgetary supplementals.

But is it fair to continue to make such arguments about “hidden” Chinese defense spending?

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

If the official Chinese budget does, more or less, account for all actual military expenditures, what does it mean? In the first place, in just looking at the decadelong rise in official defense spending, we may deduce that Beijing is seriously committed to putting sufficient resources into modernizing the PLA and to overcoming current personnel, equipment, and operations-related impediments to fielding an advanced military force. Salaries and allowances for military personnel have been increased, training has improved, and education has become more professional.

In particular, it is also evident that ten-plus years of double-digit increases in defense spending have begun to pay dividends in terms of improving the quality of Chinese military equipment.

The PLA today is much more modern and more capable than it was only a few years ago, with new fourth-generation fighter jets (such as the recently unveiled J-10 fighter), surface combatants equivalent to the U.S. Aegis-class destroyer, and up-to-date submarine designs. It has especially made dramatic improvements to its command, control, communications, computing, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) architecture, an increasingly critical component in modern armies. China has also been able to make large-scale purchases of Russian weaponry, including fighter aircraft, missiles, and naval combatants – items that make up some of the sharpest edges of the pointy end of the PLA spear.

We may thus infer that the Chinese are using these budget increases to signal their intentions to potential adversaries – especially Taiwan and the United States – that it is serious about using military force, if necessary, in order to gain certain political-military objectives, such as the “return” of Taiwan.

At the same time, it is important to watch future increases in Chinese defense spending relative to the country’s inflation rate. The PLA has reaped enormous gains from very low inflation rates over the past decade, but this may be set to change. China's inflation rate surged to an 11-year high of 7.1 percent in January 2008 and will likely climb further this

C H I N A B

U

D

G

E

T

year, undermining any defense rises.

It may be that the Chinese still significantly under-report their military spending. Even so, in the end, it may hardly matter, as even the official budget for PLA is sufficiently large and expanding to give one pause. Overall, one does not need to count all the beans to know that China is an emerging military – as well as economic and political – power in the AMR Asia-Pacific to be reckoned with. ■

Source: “Chapter IX: Defense Expenditure,” China's National Defense in 2006 (Beijing: Information Office of the State Council of the People's Republic of China, December 2006); “China’s Defense Budget to Rise 17.8% in 2007,” ChinaToday.com, March 15, 2007.

The PLN is expanding from a coastal to blue water navy (PHOTO: Gordon Arthur).

JUNE 2008

33

MILITARY T E C H N O L O G Y

MISSILE ARSENALS OF THE EAST: CHINA AND NORTH KOREA

The military balance of the Far East is chiefly driven by a would-be superpower in possession of nuclear weapons and long-range delivery systems, interacting with a would-be nascent nuclear state, North Korea, which provides nuisance value to the region.

by Andy Oppenheimer

34

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

A DF-21A (Photo: Gordon Arthur)

MILITARY T E C H N O L O G Y

Both China and North Korea also have a long record of missile proliferation, and of spreading nuclear expertise to countries regarded by the West as ‘states of concern’, most notably Pakistan and Iran. China helped Pakistan to build nuclear warheads and successive solid fuel short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs), medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs), and the expertise proliferated in turn to Iran and Libya. The US regularly sanctions Chinese companies and ‘entities’ for trading WMD and missile related technologies to Iran and North Korea. The North Koreans have in turn been estimated as a leading missile proliferator, having also supplied Iran with missile components and know-how although its missile force capabilities have been called into question. This article focuses on the missile capabilities of these two countries and on the possible effect their strategic forces will have on the region and beyond.

N

CHINA – A SUPERPOWER IN THE MAKING The rapid economic rise of China, which is estimated to spend as much as $105 billion a year on defence, has run concurrently with its attempts to gain ground strategically as a global superpower. The increase in tensions across the Taiwan Strait has focused China on enhancing its nuclear capability to provide a truly effective deterrent against possible U.S. military interference on Taiwan’s behalf (the US is already Taiwan’s main military benefactor). The US ballistic missile defence (BMD) programme, undertaken with Japanese and Taiwanese co-operation, is also regarded by China as a threat to its aspirations to becoming a world military superpower.

Running concurrently with its new economic strength, China has been undergoing rapid modernisation of its strategic forces since 1995. While SRBMs have been the mainstay of the missile force, the Chinese Army, the PLA, is now deploying three types of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and second-generation submarine/sea launched ballistic missiles (SLBM).

Added to which it is building up its intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) and SRBM inventory, as well as new mobile long range land attack cruise missiles (LACMs).

Although China’s longrange ambitions are

not yet fulfilled it currently does not have a sufficient quantity of ICBMs with a range above 10,000 km - development of a generation of DF31 mobile, long-range ballistic missiles is of increasing concern when coupled with the possibility that Chinese strategists may change Beijing’s ‘no first use’ doctrine that nuclear weapons would only be used in response to a nuclear attack. The Chinese army, navy and air force can also conduct non-nuclear strategic strikes with highly accurate SRBMs and, in due course, landbased cruise missiles (LBCMs). Of substantial importance is the improvement of warhead and missile accuracy, miniaturisation, and survivability increasing China’s ability to possess a second-strike capability. They have tested advanced technologies for warhead decoys, false decoys, stealth coatings, balloons and warhead manoeuvring techniques.

ICBM and SLBM build-up China has speeded up the development of carrier vehicles for its long-range strategic missiles, the DF-31 and JL-2. With more DF31A ICBMs and JL-2 SLBMs entering service, China is acquiring preliminary capability to perform three-dimensional nuclear strikes.

The US DoD estimated the truck-mobile DF31 ICBM in July 2005 to have a range of at least 7,250 km and to be armed with a new, miniaturised warhead. The Pentagon report of May 2006 indicated that China’s DF-31A will have a range of 11,270 km and is due to enter service later in 2008. China is likely to begin deploying more DF-31A highwaymobile ICBMs to replace the older DF-4s.

China has prolonged the service life of its existing DF-3 IRBMs and DF-4 longrange strategic missiles. (DF-4s and DF31As are long-range strategic missiles, while the D-5 is an ICBM.) The modernisation of the ICBM force includes replacing older versions of the DF-5 with a longerrange DF-5, the Mod 2, which is estimated to have a multiple-warhead capacity – as many as eight per missile. China intends to

Range key: SRMB (short range ballistic missile): < 1,000 km.

MRBM (medium range ballistic missile): 1,000-3,000 km.

IRBM (intermediate range ballistic missile): 3,000-5,500 km.

ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile): > 5,500 km.

JUNE 2008

35

MILITARY T E C H N O L O G Y

is, fitted with either a nuclear or conventional warhead (in which case the range will be 1,500km), and will be used in conjunction with emerging satellite surveillance and guidance systems.

Missile defence on the rise

A poor quality North Korean TV image of Taepo Dong

deploy this new ICBM to counter the US National Missile Defence (NMD) system – affording China the potential to carry out limited nuclear strikes on the US. China has also increased research into multiple independently targetable re-entry (MIRV) vehicles, with the result that the DF31 and JL-2 will be armed with new warheads, and some DF-5As and DF-5s may also become the platforms for these newly developed warheads. The new-generation DF31As are armed with MIRVs, each warhead possessing a 100-kiloton explosive yield (Hiroshima was 15,000 kilotons).

Some 24 JL-2 SLBMs are deployed on two Type 04 SSRNs (ballistic missile submarines), amounting to more than 72 nuclear warheads. Adding the warheads fitted on the 12 JL-1A IRBMs on Type 092M SSBNs, China is now estimated to have a total of 84 sea-based nuclear warheads. This makes the overall number of China's sea-based and land-based nuclear warheads at between 237 and 246. By 2013 China should have 192 sea-based nuclear warheads. Images of a Chinese SSBN carrying 24 SLBMs have been seen on Chinese TV,

On the missile defence front, the PLA is testing and building ground-launched direct ascent anti-satellite (ASAT) interceptors which are based on the DF-21 - and marked recently and spectacularly by the successful destruction of a polar orbit weather satellite at which it was launched during a test in January 2007. This ASAT interceptor will form the basis for a future anti-ballistic missile interceptor. China is also reputed by the US DoD to be developing a new 400 km range surface-to-air

The Chinese army, navy and air force can also conduct non-nuclear strategic strikes with highly accurate SRBMs (SAM) missile for deployment on air defence destroyers and which may have enhanced anti-missile capabilities.

Threatening Taiwan By 2005 it was reported that China had increased its force of short-range ballistic missiles on its coast opposite Taiwan from 500 to 730. Successive US Department of Defense (DoD) reports on PLA modernisation claim that China is evolving the capabil-

MRBMs and LACMs The IRBM, MRBM and SRBM force is also undergoing change. The service lives of 20 to 24 DF-3s and DF-4s are being extended. The DF-21 mobile MRBM is replacing the DF-3, and a new MRBM is reported to have a range of 3,200 km, which may employ multiple warheads. This new missile is estimated from internet imagery to be entering Chinese operational units.

Building on its 200-300-km range of LACMs, China is working on a more sophisticated, second-generation LACM that began deployment in 2006. This is intended as a ground-launched cruise missile system that may later be deployed as a cruise missile that can be launched from ships or submarines as well as from the air. Its range is to exceed 2,000 km and – in keeping with a growing strategic trend – it will be dual-capable, that

36

A DF-21A transporter erector launcher.

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

ity to launch air strikes and mount a blockade against the island. The 2006 annual DoD report on China stated there were 275 to 315 DF-15s and 435 to 475 DF-11s, making the potential total 790. In answer to Taiwan's missile defences China targets the island with up to 1,000 SRBMs and LACMs and, according to the DoD, "have the potential to pose credible threats to modern militaries operating in the region."

Washington is Taiwan's main supplier of defence systems and could be involved in any conflict between the David of Taiwan and the Goliath of China. Chinese military planners are focusing to a greater degree than in the past on targeting ships and submarines at long ranges using anti-ship cruise missiles, partly in reaction to Taiwan Strait crises in 1995 and 1996 when the US military intervened with carrier battle groups. China is investing in target ships, submarines, aircraft and airbases as far away as the Mariana Islands and Guam.

NORTH KOREA: A ROGUE STATE WITH MISSILES Despite presiding over an isolationist ‘pariah state’ and failing economy, the Pyongyang dictatorship has pursued its WMD programme with relentless purpose for several decades, culminating in an underground test of a plutonium device in October 2007. In emitting a sub-kiloton yield only, this proved to be something of a damp squib. Previous missile tests have also fallen short of claimed and predicted range, accuracy, and functional effectiveness. Nevertheless, North Korea has produced a large number of missiles and missile types – the largest in the developing

MILITARY T E C H N O L O G Y

The range of known PLA ballistic Missiles

world - and continues, despite a partial abandonment of its plutonium-processing programme, to threaten its neighbours as the region’s prime ‘nuisance’ state.

Furthermore, North Korea’s sale of ballistic missiles and technologies has become a basic means to generate badly needed foreign currency – for continued financing of its own military programmes. But the dire state of the country’s economy has resulted in poor standards of manufacturing and maintenance of even a relatively small inventory of weapons systems. The closed nature of

North Korean society also prevents vital exchange of technological information, with the country’s military dependent mainly on old Soviet (and new Russian) and Chinese technologies.

Testing and manufacturing facilities are forced underground, literally. Secrecy also makes it eternally difficult to correctly assess North Korea’s true WMD capabilities, with satellite imagery a prime source of information.

Analysts believe that any one of, or a combination of, several systems could have failed: guidance, structure or engines.

Nevertheless, the failed test would have enabled the North Koreans to learn lessons for future Taepo Dong development.

According to the DoD the Taepo Dong 2 was developed to achieve a range of 4,0008,000 km but is still not deployed, and had the 2006 test been successful, it could have achieved a 3,800 to 5,900 km range. This estimate placed North Korea as a threat beyond its region – this range could reach not only Alaska, but also Japan and US military bases at Guam, Okinawa. The test served to intensify the US NMD programme, with addition-

The Taepo Dong – moving to long range

On the missile defence front, the PLA is testing and building groundlaunched direct ascent anti-satellite (ASAT) interceptors which are based on the DF-21

In July 2006 North Korea unsuccessfully tested a new long-range missile, Taepo Dong 2 from the Musudan-ri Launch Facility in North Hamgyong Province, ostensibly to launch a satellite into orbit. It failed on its own during the first stage and, according to USNORTHCOM (US Northern Command), fell into the Sea of Japan.

MILITARY T E C H N O L O G Y

al Japanese collaboration.

The Taepo Dong 2 is a two-stage missile, its first stage resembling the Chinese CSS-2 and CSS-3 first stage, and its second stage, on the No Dong 1. The two-stage variant is believed to have a potential range of as much as 3,750 km with a 700-1,000 kg payload.

With a third stage it is estimated that this missile’s range could be extended to 4,000-4,300 km with a full payload. Some analysts further believe that the Taepo Dong 2 could deliver a 700 to 1,000 kg payload as far as 6,700 km – possibly on a road-mobile system.

Initial production of the Taepo Dong 2 may have started in 2005, with an estimated 20 missiles built in 2006.

Technical challenges remain. For increased ranges it is necessary for payloads to be decreased, which requires miniaturisation technologies that Pyongyang is not guaranteed to possess. Some experts figure that a 200 kg warhead could be delivered to the heart of America and one half the mass to Washington D.C., albeit with poor accuracy.

The R-27 MRBM North Korea is also developing and deploying at least two new MRBM to IRBM systems based on the decommissioned Soviet R-27 SLBM. The R-27 is considered within North Korea’s technological and industrial capabilities, and its proven liquid-fuelled technology means development and deployment can take place without the need for extensive ground and flight tests. Versions of its engines are already used in the Scud-variant missiles and No Dongs.

The DoD believes North Korea is actively pursuing a SLBM capability, which has aroused concern as it could have potential security implications, not just for the region, but for the US. This is based around the fact that North Korea possesses decommissioned Soviet Golf-II class submarines. Although these submarines did not have their missile or electronic firing systems when they were sold to the North Koreans – as scrap metal from a Japanese company - they are capable of carrying three SS-N-5 SLBMs, as the subs allegedly retained significant missile launch sub-systems, including launch tubes and stabilisation systems. A sea-launched missile capability could complicate intelligence collection efforts and present challenges for US BMD systems and their junior partners in development by the South Koreans and Japanese. However, others are sceptical that North Korea can reach the continental United States with the new sea-based version.

38

By 2013 China should have 192 sea-based nuclear warheads Some analysts believe that this technology, in conjunction with the R-27’s welltrod design, gives North Korea the capability to develop either a submarine or ship-mounted ballistic missile. North Korea’s sea-based version of the R-27 – a submarine or ship-mounted system - has an estimated range of at least 2,500 km and fears have centred on the possibility that North Korea may be working towards possessing re-entry vehicles for their version. But many experts believe that North Korea does not have the capability to develop a new SLBM on its own and that none of its other ballistic missiles are easily convertible to SLBMs. The proliferation implications are also potentially dangerous as it is feared North Korea could attempt to incorporate the Golf subs’ launch technology into a merchant ship – and that it could sell this new system to other countries, most notably Iran, as it is alleged to have previously researched a seabased ballistic missile capability.

Nodongs more proven Whatever North Korea is rumoured to be developing, the July 2006 14-hour testing of seven missiles other than the Taepo Dong 2 was proof of success. The successfully tested missiles included five Scuds, the long-established 300-1,000-km-range series; two of the Taepo Dong’s predecessor, the No Dong; and

an unnamed Scud type. The No Dong series was intended to reach a 1,000-2,500 km range – sufficient to reach Japan - and carry a 1,0001,500-kg warhead, including a basic fission nuclear warhead. It is believed that the DPRK will phase out this missile and replace it with a new and more cheaply-built Scud variant.

The No Dong 2 is a medium-range, road-mobile, liquid-propellant, singlewarhead, ballistic missile believed to be an improved version of the Scud C. It can probably deploy a medium-yield nuclear warhead, but this is regarded as highly theoretical at present. It is estimated to have a range of 1,500 km, which could reach Japan and Okinawa. It would be launched from a converted Russian Transporter-Erecter-Launcher (TEL) and North Korean converted tanks and trucks.

It is not certain how far this weapon can be deployed. The earlier, No Dong IRBM has an estimated range of 1,300 km. The landbased version No Dong ‘B’ is a MRBM to IRBM with an estimated range of 2,5003,200 km. Although smaller than the No Dong and Taepo Dong 1, its greater range could in theory enable it to reach most of East Asia, including Guam and Okinawa.

Amid the uncertainties of North Korea’s missile force, what is certain is that the North Koreans can demonstrate in its missile programme the nation-state version of terrorist expertise in improvised explosive devices. Its missile system may be called an improvised missile force, potentially no less deadly and unpredictable than more advanced, and more highly controlled, sysAMR tems of other countries. ■

The Scud still forms the basis of the majority of SSMs.

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

REGIONAL NEWS A N D

D E V E L O P M E N T S

AUSTRALIA

Artillery Ammunition he Australian Defence Forces are in the process of procuring the US developed Modular Artillery Charge Systems (MACS) and XM982 Block Ia-1 Excalibur Projectiles for its land forces. According to a notification from the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency the total value of the contract, if all options are exercised, is expected to be around $58 million.

Canberra has requested the potential sale of 2,400 MACS, 250 XM982 Block Ia-1 Excalibur Unitary Projectiles with base bleed units, 43 Portable Excalibur Fire Control Systems (PEFCS), 43 AN/PRC119 Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS), training ammunition, containers, support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical data, maintenance, personnel training and training equipment.

The Excalibur projectile is a highly accurate round utilizing GPS for its guidance.

The round is used in a number of roles including precise counter-fire at enemy artillery and mortars located via projectiletracking radars.

The ammunition being ordered by Australia is likely to augment the 155mm, a mobile artillery systems being procured through the Land 17 project.

T

40

Excalibur payload types. See Australia.

New submarine maintenance facility In April, Greg Combet, the Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement, inaugurated the new Australian Submarine Company (ASC) West Facility in Western Australia. According to the Department of Defence, the new facility represents an amalgamation of three service facilities into one consolidated state-of-the-art submarine support facility at the Australian Marine Complex at Henderson.

The new facility has been designed to allow submarine maintenance and capability enhancements to be conducted in an undercover and modern environment.

Combet said that, ‘ASC West represents a major step forward in delivering greater capability and availability, while enabling more efficient sustainment and better value for money for the Commonwealth.’

The move is significant for the submarine arm of the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). Until the launch of the facility the RAN’s Collins Class submarines had to be maintained in difficult conditions, open to dust, sand and weather. ASC West will become fully-operational in 2009 removing the problem., It is hoped that with the new facility in place ASC will be better equipped to respond quickly to RAN requirements and offer a quicker turnaround time on maintenance of the submarine fleet.

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

INDONESIA

Jakarta to receive three Sukhoi fighters

by October ccording to local press reports Indonesia expects to take delivery of three of the Sukhoi aircraft it purchased in 2007 by October. In a $350 million contract Jakarta has purchased a mixed fleet of six multi-role Su-27 and Su-30 fighter aircraft from Russia.

The chief of the air force Air Marshal Subandrio told reporters that the three aircraft would become part of a fighter squadron based in Makassar, South Sulawesi. The squadron currently is made up of two Su-27SK and two Su-30MK fighters. Indonesia purchased these aircraft along with two Mi-35 helicopters in 2003.

Last year Russia and Indonesia also signed an agreement that gives Jakarta a $1 billion credit line from Moscow for further arms purchases. More Su30s are believed to be on the shopping list, but are vying for space with other big ticket items such as further helicopters and diesel submarines.

A

T h e F i r s t Tr i - S e r v i c e E x h i b i t i o n a d d r e s s i n g t h e n e e d s of both the defence and homeland security industries

11-13 November 2008 ADELAIDE CONVENTION CENTRE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

• 150+ International Exhibitors expected • 30+ Tri-Service and Homeland security delegations visiting • Many opportunities for business in Australiasia and the Asia Pacific Region • 5000+ Visitors from defence & security procurement, development, import, export and supply • Recruitment Opportunities • Distribution Opportunities

BOOK YOUR EXHIBITION SPACE NOW !

CALL SALES: Southern Hemisphere +61 8 8221 6308 Northern Hemisphere +44 1628 660 566

www.apds2008.com

REGIONAL NEWS A N D

D E V E L O P M E N T S

INDIA

Additional Phalcon purchase

P-8 deal

ndian officials have released invitations to tender to companies wanting to bid for a multi-billion dollar contract for 312 light helicopters to equip the army and air force.

The tender is for 197 aircraft for the Army Aviation Corps and another 115 for the Indian Air Force (IAF). The tenders were released after they were cleared by a Defence Acquisition Council meeting on 10 April.

An independent army contract for 197 aircraft was cancelled late last year after complaints about the bidding process and allegations of illegal use of middlemen.

New Delhi plans to buy the helicopters to give its forces the capability of rapid

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is contemplating increasing its purchase of the Phalcon Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C) system to include a further three platforms. IAF officials are believed to preparing the documents to send to the Indian defence ministry for a decision on funding.

Currently, the IAF is on course to receive three Phalcon systems integrated aboard three Ilyushin Il-76TD aircraft from integrator Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). The contract, which was signed in 2004, was for $1.1 billion for the three Phalcon systems.

The IAF is set to get the first of its three systems in September this year after some delays with the programme. The follow on

As Asian Military Review went to press reports suggested that the Indian government was on the verge of selecting Boeing’s P-8I Poseidon to meet Indian Navy requirements for a maritime patrol aircraft. The deal was being touted as the biggest yet between the US and India with the contract for eight aircraft expected to be worth some $2.2 billion.

Last year the IN completed an evaluation of Boeing’s offering and a system based on an Airbus A319 utilizing EADS CASA’s FITS mission system. The P8I, which is based on the Boeing 737, has been specifically developed for the IN’s requirements.

The aircraft, which is still in the conception stage, is expected to fly by 2012.

IN chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta is believed to have confirmed India’s intent to go ahead with the deal during a visit to Washington in April.

India will procure the aircraft under the USA’s Foreign Military Sales regime. Full details of the deal are expected to be published later in the year.

Helicopter tender

I

Arjun faces criticism

P-8 as proposed to India (PHOTO: BOEING)

deployment and for logistics support on the icy heights of Siachen glacier in the eastern Karakoram Range of the Himalaya Mountains along the disputed IndiaPakistan border.

Among the companies expected to bid for the contract are US firm Bell, Eurocopter, Russian manufacturer Kamov and Italy's Augusta Westland. The four helicopter manufacturers were also the bidders in the Indian army request for proposals, which led to Eurocopter's AS 550 C3 Fennec being selected.

Officials say that the combined army and IAF tenders were expected to be issued in the first week of April, but were delayed because the IAF was late in firming up its requirements.

42

aircraft are scheduled for delivery in April 2009 and August 2010.

Indian reports suggest that the follow on order could be worth an estimated $2 billion for the AEW&C system and the additional three aircraft. The IAF is looking for deliveries of the additional aircraft by 2012.

Jointly developed by IAI and Elta Electronics the Phalcon system utilises an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA), active phased array radar. As well as supplying the system to India, IAI also has contracts in place with the Israel Defence Force, the Chilean Air Force and the Republic of Singapore Air Force. The latter has opted to integrate the radar with four Gulfstream G550 jets.

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

According to a report issued by the Indian parliament’s Standing Committee on Defence in April the indigenous Arjun main battle tank (MBT) failed to perform well in winter trials late last year. The report has led to concerns that the Arjun project, which has been underway for several decades, will fail to produce a vehicle with which the Indian Army will be satisfied.

The committee quoted an unnamed senior army officer who said in his testimony that, ‘we have just carried out the trial in winter. The tank performed very poorly. There have been four engine failures so far.’ However, those working on the programme have criticised the trials arguing that they were set in such away as to make the MBT fail.

According to some local analysts the report by the committee could be the final nail in the coffin of the Arjun project.

Remedying the problems thrown up in the winter trial will take further time and money that the defence ministry appears unwilling to give.

So far 14 Arjun MBTs have been handed to the Indian Army for user trials.

According to local reports these trials have thrown up a number of deficiencies including the fire control system, the inaccuracy of the gun, low speeds in tactical areas, and the inability to operate in temperatures over 50 degrees Celsius.

REGIONAL NEWS A N D

D E V E L O P M E N T S

TAIWAN

JAPAN

MALAYSIA

here are suggestions that the US may allow Taiwan to purchase more advanced F-16 fighter aircraft after the country’s new president takes office.

AFP reported in April that Republic of China Air Force (ROCAF) Chief of Staff Major General Liu Chen-wu told legislators that the US could ink a deal as early as this month.

‘Signs show that the US may sell the F-16 C/Ds after May. We're very optimistic,’ said Maj Genl Liu. The ROCAF has been pursuing the option of buying 66 F-16 C/Ds to upgrade its capability. The service currently already has a fleet of 116 F-16 A/B Block 20 aircraft.

The new president-elect Ma Ying-jeou takes office in late May. Ma, a leader of the Kuomintang, ran in recent elections on a platform of less antagonistic relations with mainland China, something that US officials had also pressed for.

The fact that Ma is expected to be less provocative towards Beijing than his outgoing predecessor Chen Shui-bian, leader of the Democratic Progressive Party. That may pave the way for the US to sign off several defence deals that would otherwise be provocative to mainland China.

The deal for the F-16s, if it goes through, could be worth as much as $3.3 billion and would be the largest between the two countries since 2001. Ma has said that he wants to renew flagging relations with the US.

ockheed Martin announced in February that it had received a $250 million contract from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) to manufacture components for a further eight F-2 production aircraft. Officials said it was the twelfth and final annual F-2 production contract and brings to a close the company’s involvement in manufacturing element of the longrunning fighter programme.

Japan’s F-2 was developed by Japanese industry in collaboration with Lockheed Martin and is a slightly larger version of the latter’s F-16 airframe that is Japan's operational support fighter. In total the Japan Air Self Defence Force (JASDF) is expected to receive 94 of the aircraft.

Lockheed Martin components are shipped to MHI's Komaki-South facility in Nagoya, Japan, where they are assembled with other indigenous components by MHI to form the aircraft. MHI delivered the first production aircraft to the Ministry of Defence in September 2000, and plans to complete delivery of the first 76 aircraft early this year.

Lockheed Martin is now in discussion with MHI about how to effectively maintain and enhance the aircraft in order to meet the long-term operational requirements of the JASDF.

he Malaysian government used the Defence Services Asia exhibition in Kuala Lumpur in April to confirm a number of defence purchase agreements. According to reports the deals signed during the show amounted to some $360 million.

The Ministry of Defence signed an LOI with TDA Armaments, a subsidiary of French defence manufacturer Thales, to procure eight 2R2M 120 mm mortar systems. It was not the only good news for the French firm, which, through its ThalesRaytheon Systems (TRS) joint venture (JV), also signed a contract to upgrade the Malaysian Air Defence Ground Environment system.

TRS officials said that the deal was a major success for the JV and showed the combined talents of the two companies. Malaysia has opted to procure a system that will combine European radar technology with US systems know-how. This is the first publicly acknowledged sale for TRS outside its home markets, although a similar system is believed to have been procured for a country in the Gulf.

Other activities included the purchase of 60 Uro Vamtac high mobility tactical vehicles and 48 Adnan armoured combat vehicles for the army.

New US fighter purchase

T

Final F-2 contract placed with Lockheed Martin

L

Raytheon to upgrade Taiwanese Patriots

NEW ZEALAND

Raytheon announced in late April that it had received a $79 million Foreign Military Sales award from the US Army to provide Taiwan with Patriot Configuration3 radar upgrade kits and related engineering and technical services.

The award for the Taiwan Patriot upgrade kits followed another company announcement of contracts totaling $279 million to provide South Korea command and control, communications, and maintenance support and training equipment for its Patriot air and missile defense system.

There is a growing demand, both domestically and internationally, for the Patriot system according to company officials. The Taiwanese award is an additional indication of the continued expansion of Patriot as the cornerstone of US integrated air and missile defence systems in South East Asia.

n April New Zealand deployed a Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN) frigate to the Gulf region, in support of coalition operations in the region.

Defence minister Phil Goff said that, 'the five-month deployment is part of New Zealand's contribution to the international campaign against terrorism.'

HMNZS Te Mana, one of the RNZN's ANZAC-class frigates, sailed from Devonport on 7 April and from early May was working with international coalition maritime forces stationed in the Persian Gulf as part of the New Zealand government's commitment to help maintain security in the region.

The 3,600 tonne vessel has a range of 6,000 nautical miles at 18 knots and

Wellington dispatches frigate to Gulf

I

JUNE 2008

Government signs defence deals

T

is capable of speeds above 27 knots.

HMNZS Te Mana is deploying with a 175-strong ships company, an SH-2G Sea Sprite helicopter and a shore-based support group. The ship is armed with a 5 inch 54 caliber fully automatic lightweight gun, eight cell Vertical Launch System which houses the NATO Seasparrow Mk 41 air defence missile, PHALANX Close In Weapon System and two MK 32 Mod 5 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes.

The frigate will patrol the waters of the Persian Gulf, monitoring shipping activity to promote the free-flow of commerce, protect infrastructure and counter terrorism, piracy and drugs, arms and people smuggling. However, Goff was keen to stress that the deployment, 'does not involve operations associated with the conflict in Iraq.'

43

REGIONAL NEWS A N D

D E V E L O P M E N T S

SINGAPORE

PHILLIPINES

he four countries with the biggest stake in keeping the Malacca Strait secure held their first Malacca Strait Patrol (MSP) information sharing exercise at Singapore's Tuas Naval Base in late April. The Singapore armed forces, Indonesian armed forces, Malaysian armed forces and the Royal Thai armed forces all took part in the exercise.

The information exercise is part of an initiative which began in 2004 and is aimed at enhancing the security of the Strait. According to officials, the initiative comprises the sea patrols, air patrols, as well as the Intelligence Exchange Group.

The latest enhancements to the information sharing elements of the initiative were tested during the recent exercise.

Singapore’s Defence Science and Technology Agency has developed a number of add-ons to the MPS Information System (MPS-IS) it developed in 2006 and which collates information from each of the countries own systems.

The latest enhancement to the system are an Open and Analysed Shipping Information System, which provides a near real-time recognised maritime picture and a database of vessels, and the Sense-Making Analysis and Research Tool, which can detect any anomalous behaviour of ships.

The new systems are expected to further enhance the capabilities of the MSP, which has already had a significant effect in reducing the level of piracy in the Malacca Strait.

S defence electronics firm Harris has been selected by Manila to supply the Philippines armed forces with its Falcon II high frequency (HF) and very-high frequency (VHF) tactical radios in a contract worth $80 million.

Under the terms of the contract, Harris will provide the Philippines with Falcon II RF-5800H HF manpack and Falcon II RF5800V VHF handheld radios, along with support equipment, spare and repair parts, as well as training and logistics support. Deliveries are scheduled to begin this year and carry through in to 2009.

The radio contract is part of the Philippines attempts to upgrade its capabilities and improve the communications infrastructure of the armed forces. In recent years the lack of a secure HF and VHF radio network has been highlighted as one of the major issues for the armed forces of the small country as they continue to battle insurgents.

The RF-5800H is an advanced HF manpack radio that provides reliable tactical communications through enhanced secure voice and data performance, networking, and extended battery life. The RF-5800V is a lightweight multiband handheld that extends the performance of the Falcon II tactical radio family to the squad level.

The RF-5800 series radios have integrated GPS and IP networking capabilities, guaranteeing seamless communication with other users of the Falcon II family. The Philippines selected the system partly on the strength of it increasing interoperability with allies, such as the US, and for important international roles in peacekeeping and other areas.

Inaugural Malacca Strait Patrols Exercise

T

SOUTH KOREA

Seoul opts for extra F-15s n late April the South Korean government approved the purchase of 21 additional Boeing F-15K Strike Eagles to fulfil part of its future fighter programme, dubbed F-X. In addition, Seoul also stated that it would be procuring the AGM-158 Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM).

According to the country’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) the F-15K fighters are being purchased for $2.3 billion. The Republic of Korea Air Force (RoKAF) wants the fighters to augment its air strike capabil-

I

44

Harris supplies Falcon II radios

U

ity and the aircraft will be delivered between 2010 and 2012. The additional aircraft will augment the existing 40 F15Ks entering in to service with the RoKAF by the end of this year.

The DAPA said that the aircraft will, like those already being procured, be powered by the Pratt & Whitney F100 engine and the deal includes the purchase of an additional 44 engines for the fleet.

Seoul said that in addition to the fighter purchase it had also decided to go ahead with the purchase of the AGM-158 JASSM to augment its strike capabilities.

The JASSM has an operational range over 370 km and the RoKAF will take delivery of the missiles in the 2010 timeframe.

ASIAN MILITARY REVIEW

PAKISTAN

AEW&C capability n a ceremony in Sweden in April the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF’s) Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed, saw his organisation achieve a major landmark in its Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) project with roll out the first Saab 2000 aircraft.

With the first aircraft out of the factory, Saab can now begin installation of the AEW&C equipment centered around the Erieye Active Electronically Scanned Array radar system developed by Saab Microwave Systems.

The original deal $1.15 billion deal was announced in June 2006 with the PAF believed to have ordered seven aircraft.

That number was reduced in May 2007 to six airframes.

Once the first aircraft is integrated with the Erieye it will undergo a full flight trial programme. The aircraft is expected to be delivered to the PAF next year.

I

Swiss re-authorise defence exports to Islamabad In April, the Swiss government removed restrictions on defence exports to Pakistan that it put in place last year after Pakistan’s president Pervez Musharraf instigated a state of emergency. The removal of the restrictions will allow a number of important defence transfers to now go through.

In removing the restrictions the Federal Council effectively gave the green light to Oerlikon Contraves to deliver a total of 24 air defence batteries and ammunition worth $153 million.

According to local reports, six of the batteries had already been delivered when the government decided to suspend exports to Pakistan last November. The systems in question are believed to be based on Oerlikon Contraves’ 55 mm twin gun and missile launcher Skyguard unit.

Spada 2000 According to international press reports, a $656 million sale of MBDA’s Spada air defence system to Islamabad has been confirmed by officials from the company.

Reports suggest that MBDA will deliver 10 batteries of the system to the Pakistan Air Force over the next five years.

The Spada 2000 is currently in operation with Italian and Spanish air defence forces.

The system includes a 60 km-range air defence radar and two missile units, each containing two missile launchers capable of firing six Aspide 2000 missiles. The missiles A MR have an intercept range over 20 km. ■

mission ready

Honeywell â&#x20AC;Ś defining world class logistics Frequent missions and remote operating environments tax aging equipment and over-extended supply chains.

Honeywell supports defense customers by effectively addressing equipment repair challenges in-theater and depot.

Ever-changing conditions demand end-to-end visibility of war-fighting assets, Lean Six Sigma repairs, modifications, upgrades and materiel management worldwide.

Honeywell helps meet the challenge with agile, responsive and comprehensive logistics solutions.

For more information visit our website at www.honeywell.com/logistics or call: 1-800-601-3099 Š 2008 Honeywell International Inc. All rights reserved