Clancy Indirectly Predicted Green-On-Blue Attacks

     About a 2 years ago I bought a copy of Tom Clancy's The Cardinal of the Kremlin, which revolves around the story of an American mole high up the Soviet chain of command (I won't spoil it for those who have not read it). But that is beside the point, a good chunk of the book was devoted to the Soviet war in Afghanistan. 

    In Chapter 17, the main Afghan character, The Archer (so named because of his use of Stinger SAMs) leads an attack on a Soviet battalion at it's base. At about the time the unit was eating lunch, the CO was the first to get killed. In Chapter 3 a Afghan sergeant attempeted to kill a Soviet captain and an Afghan LT loyal to the Soviets, just prior to an attack by the Muj.

     Clancy is generally a good read, and is generally solid on the technical end of things, but here he not only told what was happening to the Soviet in A-Stan, he also told us what would happen when if we ever went in to A-Stan. A warning we would have been wise to heed.

Flashback Friday: Ulyanovsk-class

     This week the topic of discussion is the USSR's planned class of supercarriers, the Ulyanovsk-class. The Ulyanovsk-class was supposed to be a Soviet analog to the American Nimitz-class supercarriers. The main mission of the Ulyanovsk-class would have been power projection and sea control, versus ASW as with all previous Soviet carrier designs.

     The Ulyanovsk-class would have had a displacement of just under 80,000 tons fully loaded, a length of 325 meters, a beam of 40m, and a draft of 11m. The Ulyanovsk-class would have had a top speed of at least 30 knots, and crew of roughly 3,800 men. 

     As with all Soviet carrier designs the Ulyanovsk-class carried their own offensive firepower in the form of 12 SS-N-19 Shipwreck ASCMs in 12 VLS launchers between the forward catapults. The Ulyanovsk-class also carried 24 SA-N-9 Gauntlet SAMs in VLS cells scattered around the deck. However, the Ulyanovsk-class departed from previous Soviet carrier designs in that they were not equipped with ASW weapons, sonar, and large guns. 

     The lead ship of the Ulyanovsk-class, the Ulyanovsk, was under construction when the USSR collapsed in 1991, and was scrapped in 1994 and her metal sold on the world metal market, as was the metal being readied for the second ship. However, there are rumblings that the Ulyanovsk-class design may be used for China's future aircraft carriers (unfortunately the Aviation Week article that I was going to link to is no longer available, so here is a blog post I wrote a year ago with some links on the subject).

     The Ulyanovsk-class was a rather interesting aircraft carrier design, but ultimately was a colossal boondoggle for the USSR, sapping precious resources from more valuable projects. The USSR attempted to build ships that were equal to U.S. Navy ships, rather than concentrating on submarines and cruise missiles which would have been cheap and and hard to kill solutions. In other words, we out spent them, and in trying to catch up they bankrupted themselves.

Photo Credit: Harpoon HQ, K.E. Cepreeb

The Largest Nuke Ever Detonated

     The video is self-explanatory.

Video Credit: Discovery Channel

A Forgotten Relic Of The Cold War

Video Credit: jaglavaksoldier

A Ukrainian Boneyard For Soviet Tanks

      Defense Tech recently posted some interesting pictures showing hundreds of T-62s, T-72s, T-80, and their engines rotting away in an armor repair facility near Kharkov. You can see a lot of reactive armor still remains on the sides of the tanks, along with some infrared floodlights. Though, all the the machine guns used as the secondary armament have been removed. I wonder how hard it is to make one of these street legal.... Click here to see more photos from the photographer's website.

Reminds me of bygone Victory Parades through Red Square. Thank God they never came through the Fulda Gap.

Photo Credit: Pasha Itkin

It's The Weekend! 9/17/11

Video Credit: Discovery Channel

The Last Soviet Bomber: The Tu-160 "Blackjack"

     During the late 1960s the Soviet Union developed the Tu-160 (NATO reporting name "Blackjack") as a response to the American B-70 Valkyrie. However, as it turned out that a Mach 3+ strategic bomber would be too expensive, the Tu-160 evolved into a Mach 2 long range bomber similar to the Tu-22M (NATO reporting name "Backfire").

     The Tu-160 began life in late 1967 in a contest between Sukhoi and Myasishchev, but later was built by Tupolev. Production of the Tu-160 began in 1984 with a planned production of 100 aircraft, but due to the collapse of the Soviet Union production was capped at 36 aircraft, of which 19 were left in the Ukraine when the Soviet Union collapsed. In 1999 the Ukraine gave Russia 6 Tu-160s and 3 Tu-95s along with 600 air launched missiles in payment for gas debts. 

     The Tu-160 has a top speed of 2200 kilometers per hour (1,367 MPH), and a max altitude of 16,000 meters (10 miles), and a range of between 10,500 and 14,000 kilometers (6,524.4 to 8,700 miles) depending on the payload. The Tu-160 is armed with either 12 Kh-55s for attacking fixed targets, or 24 Kh-15 for either attacking enamy radar installations or for the anti-shipping role. The Tu-160 is also the fist Soviet/Russian bomber not to have tail guns since the end of WWII, as all previous Soviet/Russian bombs had at a minimum twin 23mm guns in the tail.

     In recent years the Russian long range aviation units have become more active, due to the fact that in 2007 former Russian president (and ex-KGB agent) Vladimir Putin announced that long range flights that were banned by former Russian president Boris Yeltsin, would resume. Since then Tu-160s have been intercepted by NATO fighters several times, most recently in March of 2010. 

     Due to the fact that the Tu-160 is a somewhat old design, there is talk that the bomber version of the T-50, the PAK DA will replace the T-160 and the Tu-95. However, the Russian government has stated that upgrades will keep the Tu-160 in service through 2020.

       

      

      

Photo Credit: Sergey Krivchikov

Ron Paul On Iran

     Rep. Paul, the reason we negoiated with the Soviets was because they were not a bunch of muslim terrorists hell-bent on wiping Israel and the U.S. off the map. And, sanctions are not a precursor to war, take North Korea for example, we have many sanctions against them and we are not going to attack them. Also, the articles below might change your mind that Iran is working on nuclear weapons.

IISS Sees Modest Iranian Nuke Production Capacity

Sanctions Don't Harm Iran's Nuke Program 

     In my humble opinion, I think that if Ron Paul becomes president we will be the world's doormat, that's why Rick Perry is a better choice.

The Future Of The Chinese Aircraft Carrier Program

     

Defense News reports that Chinese Gen. Luo Yuan of the Academy of Military Sciences stated "If we consider our neighbors - India will have three aircraft carriers by 2014 and Japan will have three carriers by 2014", the General went on to say  "So I think the number [for China] should not be less than three so we can defend our rights and our maritime interests effectively.".     

     This idea is not unheard of, due to the fact that in 2008 a Japanese newspaper ran an article quoting Chinese sources saying that China would build 3 aircraft carriers (not including the Varyag) starting in 2009. Further evidence to support this claim comes in the form of a photo Alert 5 found, and was later posted here, showing the Varyag's starboard side, and a large keel in the next dry dock.

     The keel in the photo appears to be as long as the Varyag itself, and is not yet finished. The keel also appears to be for a ship larger than a destroyer, which are the biggest warships in the Chinese navy (with the exception of the Varyag), and also appears to be extremely large compared to the man in the bottom left center. If this is an aircraft carrier it is probably is of a size similar to the Varyag, and possibly of a different design.

     On top of this, Aviation Week reported that China is also planning to build 2 nuclear powered Project 1143.7 Ulyanovsk-class carriers during the 2020s. The Ulyanovsk-class was supposed to be a Soviet equivalent of the Nimitz-class carriers of the 1980s, and was designed to carry 70 aircraft, and have a displacement of 80,000 tons. However, with collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Ulyanovsk which was then under construction, was canceled and scrapped.

      If the Chinese were to build a nuclear powered aircraft carrier similar to the Ulyanovsk-class, it would mean the Chinese would have to learn a who new range of skills. 1. The Chinese have no experience dealing with nuclear reactor on a surface ship, but do have some experience with reactors on submarines. 2. Nuclear powered carriers need special refueling areas for their mid-life refueling, and special procedures for refueling a reactor of that size. 3.The replenishment need for a Ulyanovsk-class carrier is 33% larger than for the Varyag, and the Chinese do not have a large supply fleet or the skills needed for that task.

     One other aspect of the Chinese aircraft carrier program is whether or not they will put anti-ship missiles (ASMs) on their carriers like the Soviets/Russians. When the Varyag was designed, it was supposed to carry 12 SS-N-19 (P-700) Shipwreck ASMs. The Ulyanovsk-class was also designed to carry 12 SS-N-19s, and/or 12 SS-N-12 (P-500) Sandbox ASMs. What is interesting about this is that in the photos showing the Varyag, there has been no sign of VLS (Vertical Launch System) cells that would hold ASMs. However, if there are VLS cells in the photos then there is a possibility that they might be loaded with surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) rather than ASMs.

     As the Chinese continue to overhaul the Varyag, it will be extremely interesting to find out more about the Varyag's weapons system, and equipment as more information comes out. On top of this it will be facinating to see how China designs their future aircraft carriers, and associated systems.

Photo Credit: China Defense Blog, Alert 5



Libyan Rebels Use APC Turret On Pickup Truck

     That's right folks, the Libyan Rebels have done it again by welding a BMP-1 turret to the back of a pickup truck, as the video below shows.

     I have not really covered the war in Libya very much as the only reason to do so is because our president overstepped his powers, but thats politics. However, what is I do like to cover is they way the Libyans on both sides can improvise as I have written about before, but it is the Rebels that can really improvise as the photo below shows.

     To get back to the video above the photo the Rebells welded a BMP-1 turret to a pickup truck, the turret in question is armed with a 73mm 2A28 Grom soomthbore semiautomatic gun. The Grom fires a RPG-like projectile that can penetrate up to 11in of armor or with newer versions up to 16in, and has a battlefield range of 500 meters. However, as the men operating the turret in video show, they are not trained professionals and probably won't hit much except air. 

     Moving on to the photo, the rocket pod in question is a UB-16 rocket pod that fires S-5 series unguided rockets. S-5 rockets weigh about 5kg depending on warhead and fuse and have a range of 3 to 4 kilometers and are about 1.4 meters long. 

     With the war in Libya dragging on it will be interesting to see how both sides continue to make improvise weapon systems that defey standard logic.

Photo Credit: Department Of Defense, and 2 unidentified photographers

The Next Generation Of Russian Submarines

     When the Cold War ended in 1991 all of the Russian Ministry of Defense's projects were either outright cancelled or delayed for several years because of a lack of funding. Now, 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has begun to replace some of it's Cold War-era military equipment, especially in the area of submarines. As of 2011 Russia has 3 new classes of submarines in the works or somewhat operational, these classes are the Yasen-class attack submarines (SSN), the Borei-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) and the Lada-class diesel-electric submarine (SSK).
     The Yasen-class submarines are nuclear powered with a max speed of 35+ knots submerged and max speed of 20 knots on the surface. The Yasen-class has length of 120 meters and a beam of 15 meters along with a draft of 8.4 to 10 meters and, a displacement of 5,800 to 9,500 tons on the surface and a displacement of 11,800 tons submerged. Yasen-class submarines are believed to be armed with 8 torpedo tubes used for torpedoes and mines along with 8 vertical launch tubes for SS-N-26 SLCMs (Submarine Launched Cruise Missile) and SS-N-27 SLCMs.

    The Borei-class SSBNs are the latest Russian SSBN and will carry 16 RSM-56 Bulava SLBMs on early ships and 20 Bulava SLBMs on the unofficial Borei II-class. The Borei-class has a length of 160 meters and a beam 13.5 meters along with a draft of 10 meters. The Borei-class has a displacement of 14,700 tons on the surface and a displacement of 24,000 tons submerged. The Borei-class is believed to have operational diving depth of 380 meters and a maximum diving depth of 450 meters. Borei-class submarines are reputed to have a submerged speed of around 29 knots and a surfaced speed of 15 knots. An interesting side note about the Borei-class submarines is that they are the first class of submarines in the Russian Navy to use pump-jet propulsion which has the advantage of reducing the sub's sonar signature.

     Last but, by no mean least is the latest in the long line of Russian diesel-electric submarines, the Lada-class SSKs. The Lada-class is improved version of the Improved Kilo-class submarines with improvements such as newer combat systems, lower displacement and possibly air independent propulsion . The Lada-class submarines have a length of 72 meters, a beam of 7 meters and a draft of 6.5 meters. The Lada-class has a displacement 2,700 long tons submerged and displacement of 1,765 tons on the surface (versus 3,500 and 2,300 tons for the Kilo-class). The operational diving depth of the Lada-class is around 250 meters and a max diving depth of 300 meters. The Lada-class is armed with 6 533mm torpedo tubes that can fire both standard torpedoes and P-700 SLCMs (see SS-N-26 above).
     With the ending of the Cold War approaching it's 20th anniversary much of the U.S.'s and Russia's equipment is beginning to age out and needs to be replaced (read Minuteman III ICBMs, Black Hawk and Huey helicopters, etc...). And as older equipment it will interesting to find out more and more details about how these new systems work. Also the top picture is not a photo of a new class of subs, it is a photo of an Akula-class sub.
  
    



Photo Credit: Department Of Defense, Military-Today.com

What Happend To the 600-Ship Navy?

     During the 1980s at the height of the Cold War, Ronald Reagan pushed a massive military modernization and expansion plan that for the Navy would have resulted in a 600-Ship Navy. My question is what happened to that idea?
     When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, governments around the world began to make massive budget cuts to their military's, one example is the so called Royal Navy and British Army, both of which are skeletons of their former selves. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union most governments have begun rearming (Britain hasn't) and putting their military's back together. Since 1991 the U.S. has expanded it's military but, the 600-Ship Navy idea is nowhere to be seen. The 600-Ship Navy has become a victim of several groups, socialists/communists who want to redistribute wealth and want a larger government, cost cutters who think now the the USSR is gone we can put the money into other programs, peace groups who think there should be no military at all and the list goes on.
      Few poeple outside the military realize how dire the situation really is, since 1987 the Navy has gone from the 1980s high of 594 ships to about 290 ships in service in 2011. Since 1987 our Navy has been more than halved and almost nobody in the media, the government or the people realizes it. Our Navy has been second to none since the end of WWII when we had over 6,000 ships and still are larger that the next seven navies combined but, China is rabidly increasing the size of their Navy and as of 2011 are second in size to only to the U.S. and climbing.
     The Navy is starting to begin building ships a higher rate in the last couple of years but, as I said a couple of articles ago the Navy is crumbling before our very eyes. And if we do not correct this situation, the cosequences could be extremly bad to say the least.



Photo credit: New Wars

All Our Eggs In One Basket

    As reported in my previous article "It's That Time Of Year"  I reported that the Navy was requesting (and got) 1.1 billion dollars for research on the SSBN-X-class of submarines.  The SSBN-X is a class of ballistic missile submarine slated to replece the Ohio-class SSBNs now in service with the U.S. Navy, the Navy is currently looking to replace the Ohio-class sometime during the 2020s. 

    However, during the last years of the Cold War with the Soviet Union. the Navy went through an enormous shipbuilding program intended to culminate in a 600 ship Navy in order to compete with the Soviets on the high seas. The high point of the 600-ship Navy plan was 594 ships in 1987, rising to 594 ships from the post-Vietnam low of of 521 ships.

     Because of this massive shipbuilding effort during the 1980s, a large amount of the Navy will age out during the 2020s and there is little anyone can do to stop it from happening. Furthermore, with a large part of the Navy being decommissioned it will be extremely hard for the Navy to replace the Nimitz-class aircraft carriers and the Ohio-class SSBNs at the same time. Since the SSBN-X has an estimated cost of 6-7 billion dollars apiece the SSBN-X alone would eat up a sizable portion of the Navy's shipbuilding budget, not counting the Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers slated to begin replacing the Nimitz-class beginning in the 2015 and ending sometime after 2040.

     Most people might ask what is the solution to this problem? Well, for starters we could have all the Socialists/Communists sent off to Nowhere, USA and have them start a big commune and leave the rest of us alone (that's sarcasm). In reality the solution to ALL of America's budget woes is really quite simple, cut the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, Agriculture, cut about 90% of the Department of the Interior and cut the Department of Homeland Security. If all of this is done the benefits are enormous because we could pay off the debt, have money for defense and best of all have less government. However, the pies de resistance is that all of those things would become the state's responsibility as stated in the 10th amendment to the Constitution which states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." lav

     Which ever way the government chooses to go, they must choose quickly, because the U.S. Navy is crumbling before our very eyes.