Panama Intercepts NorK Ship Carrying Missile Parts (Updated)

     From the Daily Mail:

Panama has detained a North Korean-flagged ship after it was found to be carrying undeclared weapons hidden underneath sugar containers, the country's president said. 

President Ricardo Martinelli said the ship, the Chong Chon Gang, was intercepted as it approached the Panama Canal from Cuba and as it was stopped the 35-man crew rioted and the captain tried to kill himself. 

The 'sophisticated missile equipment', hidden in containers of brown sugar, were detected after Panamanian authorities stopped the ship, suspecting it was carrying drugs. 

Martinelli said the undeclared military cargo appeared to include missiles and non-conventional arms and the ship was violating United Nations resolutions against arms trafficking.

Panamanian authorities have only searched one of the ship's five cargo holds so far, said Luis Eduardo Camacho, a spokesman for the president. 

'This material not being declared and Panama being a neutral country, a country in peace, that doesn't like war, we feel very worried about this war material and we don't know what else will have... passed through the Panama Canal,' Martinelli said. 

The governments of North Korea and Cuba have so far not commented on Martinelli's remarks. 

Hugh Griffiths, an arms trafficking expert at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, said the seized ship is called Chong Chon Gang and has been on the institute's suspect list for some time. 

He said the ship had been caught before for trafficking narcotics and small arms ammunition. It was stopped in 2010 in the Ukraine and was attacked by pirates 400 miles off the coast of Somalia in 2009. 

Griffiths' institute has also been interested in the ship because of a stop it made in 2009 in Tartus - a Syrian port city hosting a Russian naval base. 

The vessel was pulled over near the port of Manzanillo on the Atlantic side of the canal.

We're going to keep unloading the ship and figure out exactly what was inside,' Martinelli told Panamanian television late on Monday, without giving further details.

'The world needs to sit up and take note: You cannot go around shipping undeclared weapons of war through the Panama Canal.'

Griffiths also said the institute earlier this year reported to the U.N. a discovery it made of a flight from Cuba to North Korea that travelled via central Africa. 

'Given the history of North Korea, Cuban military cooperation and now this latest seizure, we find this flight more interesting,' he said. 'After this incident there should be renewed focus on North Korean-Cuban links.' 

Martinelli said the captain had a heart attack and also tried to commit suicide during the operation.
He said authorities had been tipped off some days ago that the ship might be carrying drugs.

He posted a picture of what appeared to be a green tubular object sitting inside a cargo container or the ship's hold.

A spokeswoman for the canal said she did not have any more information and referred questions to the attorney general and the office did not immediately return requests for comment.

Javier Caraballo, Panama's top anti-drugs prosecutor, told local television the ship was en route to North Korea. 

The Communist country is barred from importing large weapons under United Nations sanctions. 

The UN strengthened sanctions against the country in March following it nuclear tests that set tensions rising in the area. 

About 15,000 ships pass through the canal every year. 

     A normal shipping container is about 12.5m with the largest container being about 17m. The cylindrical objects in the container (see photo above) stretch for most of the length of the container. That would put them in excess of 10m, possibly more. If I had to guess those are parts for some North Korean IRBM, which one, I cannot guess. Congrats to the Panamanians for intercepting these parts.

Update: SMS Msgt over at Elements of Power points out that the cylindrical objects are more similar to parts to a Fan Song radar system. The Fan Song is associated with the SA-2 Guideline.

Saudi Arabia Pointing Missiles At Iran And Israel

     From the National Post:

Saudi Arabia is targeting Israel and Iran with powerful ballistic missiles, new satellite photography shown by military experts to The Daily Telegraph suggests.

Images analyzed by experts at IHS Jane’s Intelligence Review have revealed a hitherto undisclosed surface-to-surface missile base deep in the Saudi desert, capable of hitting both countries.

The analysts spotted two launch pads with markings pointing north-west towards Tel Aviv and north-east towards Tehran. They are designed for Saudi Arabia’s arsenal of truck-launched DF3 missiles, which have a range of 1,500 to 2,500 miles and can carry a two-ton payload.

The base, believed to have been built within the past five years, gives an insight into Saudi strategic thinking at a time of heightened tensions in the Gulf. While Saudi Arabia does not have formal diplomatic relations with Israel, it has long maintained back-channel communications as part of attempts to promote stability in the region.

The two countries also have a mutual enemy in Iran, which has long seen Saudi Arabia as a rival power in the Gulf. Experts fear that if Iran obtains a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia would seek to follow suit.

Analysts at IHS Jane’s believe that the kingdom is in the process of upgrading its missiles, although even the DF3, which dates back to the Eighties, is potentially big enough to carry a nuclear device.

The missile base, which is at al-Watah, about 125 miles south-west of the capital, Riyadh, was discovered during a project by IHS Jane’s to update its assessment of Saudi Arabia’s military capabilities.

It serves as both a training and launch facility, with the missiles stored in an underground silo built into a rocky hillside. To the north of the facility are two circular launch pads, both with compass-style markings showing the precise direction that the launchers should fire in.

The Chinese-made missiles are not remotely guided and have to be aimed at their target before firing.

“One appears to be aligned on a bearing of approximately 301 degrees and suggesting a potential Israeli target, and the other is oriented along an azimuth [bearing] of approximately 10 degrees, ostensibly situated to target Iranian locations,” said the IHS Jane’s article, which is published Thursday.

While the trailer-launched missiles could theoretically be fired from any location, the idea of having pre-planned directional markers was to ensure that they could be deployed in accurate fashion as quickly as possible, said Allison Puccioni, an image expert at IHS Jane’s.

“There is a marked out spot for the launch truck to park in, which will facilitate an expedited launch,” she said.

Robert Munks, deputy editor of IHS Jane’s Intelligence Review, said: “Our assessment suggests that this base is either partly or fully operational, with the launch pads pointing in the directions of Israel and Iran respectively.

“We cannot be certain that the missiles are pointed specifically at Tel Aviv and Tehran themselves, but if they were to be launched, you would expect them to be targeting major cities.

“We do not want to make too many inferences about the Saudi strategy, but clearly Saudi Arabia does not enjoy good relations with either Iran or Israel.”

Officials at the Saudi embassy in London did not respond when contacted by The Daily Telegraph.

The Israeli embassy in London said: “We have no comment on this matter”.

David Butter, an associate fellow with the Middle East and North Africa programme at Chatham House, a London-based foreign affairs think tank, said: “It would seem that they are looking towards some sort of deterrent capability, which is an obvious thing for them to be doing, given that Iran too is developing its own ballistic missiles.”

He added, though, that the Saudis would know that the site would come to the attention of foreign intelligence agencies, and that the missile pad pointed in the direction of Israel could partly be just “for show.”

“It would give the Iranians the impression that they were not being exclusively targeted, and would also allow the Saudis to suggest to the rest of the Arab world that they still consider Israel a threat.”

Oil-rich Saudi Arabia considers itself one of the pre-eminent powers in the Gulf region, but its Sunni Islam leadership has long been at loggerheads with the Shia mullahs of Iran.

The conflict in Syria, in which Saudi Arabia has backed the Sunni-dominated rebels and Iran has backed the Shia-dominated regime of President Bashar al-Assad, has heightened fears of a wider sectarian conflict.

A confidential diplomatic cable revealed in the “Wiki-Leaks” disclosures of 2010 said that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly exhorted the United States to launch military strikes against Iran’s nuclear programme and “cut off the head of the snake.”

     Saudi has been thought to have had ballistic missiles for years, but the news here is that this base was heretofore unknown. In a check of Missile Threat, Saudi Arabia is not listed as possessing any ballistic missiles. There have rumors about the possibility, but this is the first confirmation of them.

North Korea Can Put Nuclear Warheads On Missiles

     From Fox News:

Obama administration officials scrambled to downplay the errant disclosure of a classified portion of an intelligence report finding that North Korea has advanced its nuclear knowledge to the point that it could arm a ballistic missile with a nuclear warhead. 

The analysis, disclosed Thursday at a hearing on Capitol Hill, says the Pentagon's intelligence wing has "moderate confidence" that North Korea has nuclear weapons capable of delivery by ballistic missiles but that the weapon was unreliable. 

The revelation was significant, because it has not been previously reported or believed that the country had the ability to miniaturize and deliver a nuclear weapon. 

But top U.S. officials repeatedly stressed that the finding does not mean North Korea has the capabilities to launch a nuclear missile with any reliability at this point. 

"It is inaccurate to suggest that the (North Korea) has the capability articulated in that report -- they have a missile but that is very different than having the militarization, nuclearization, etcetera," Secretary of State John Kerry said Friday, after landing in South Korea as part of a tour of Asian countries. Highlighting is mine.

     Obama has stated over the last couple weeks that the U.S. will tolerate a nuclear armed DPRK, and now we find out that they've had this capability for a significant period of time. This means the Obama administration has been bullshitting the American for an unknown period of time. Not only that, but unless Obama takes out the Nork's nuclear capability (not gonna happen) it will show the world the U.S. is all bark, no bite.  Then we have the piece of bull from John Kerry (second bolded section), the mere fact that they have a missile should be grounds for glassing their ballistic missile and nuclear facilities. This is not good, that whole peninsula is a bomb about to go off.

DF-16 Is Made Public

     From Aviation Week's Ares blog:

In mid-September 2012 the first full image of the China Aerospace Science and Industries Corporation’s (CASIC) Dong Feng-16 (DF-16) was revealed on Chinese web pages. In mid-March 2011 the Director of Taiwan’s National Security Bureau (their CIA) told the Taiwan legislature that the DF-16 had been deployed and that it had an estimated range of 800km to 1,000km, the latter falling within the definition of a medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM).

It is reported to be deployed with one Second Artillery Brigade in the Guangzhou Military Region, contributing to what the Taiwan Ministry of Defense says are now 1,600 missile aimed at Taiwan. The DF-16 is seen as a faster successor to CASIC’s 300-500km range DF-11 short-range ballistic missile (SRBM), better able to counter Taiwan’s U.S.-made Patriot PAC-2/3 and domestic Tien Kung anti-tactical ballistic missile interceptors.

New imagery reveals that the DF-16 is both wider and longer than the DF-11 and that its bi-conic warhead structure leaves room for potential growth to include specialized warheads, like the terminally guided and deep penetrating warheads used by the competing DF-15 SRBM family. It uses a 10x10 wheeled transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) similar to that employed by CASIC’s new DF-21C/D MRBMs but does not use the latter’s “cold launch” missile storage tube. Instead the DF-16 uses a new protective “shell” to cover the missile.

One has to wonder what else will show up, as this comes on the heels on the unveiling of the F-60.

Kuwait Buys 60 Patriot PAC-3 ABM Missiles

     From Defense News:

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon said Wednesday it planned to sell 60 Patriot missiles to Kuwait in a deal worth an estimated $4.2 billion, as the emirate tries to bolster its defenses against the threat from Iran.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), which is in charge of U.S. weapon sales to foreign countries, notified the Congress of the intended sale on July 20, the agency said in a statement on its website.

Congress has 30 days to raise any objections it may have. If nothing is said, the contract is deemed valid after that waiting period.

The deal involves the sale of 60 Patriot advanced capability (PAC-3) missiles, 20 launching stations, four radar systems and control stations, personnel training and training equipment, and spare parts, the DSCA said.

“Kuwait will use the PAC-3 missiles and equipment to improve its missile defense capability, strengthen its homeland defense, and deter regional threats,” the agency said.

     Nothing like the threat of ballistic missiles from Iran to light a fire under a country's leadership. Though, I think THAAD would be a better choice from missile defense.

A Forgotten Relic Of The Cold War

Video Credit: jaglavaksoldier

Of Syrian Scuds And SAMs

     Jeffrey Lewis over at Arms Control Wonk postedthis vdeo apparently showing 3-4 SS-1 Scud TELs moving out of a Syrian military base. The TELs are at 0:01, 0:36, 0:47, and at 2:47. Due to the quality of the vidoe the identity of the TELs are up for debate with some looking like an SS-26 TEL in some ways

    This video below is reportedly from the same Syrian military base, and shows SA-2 Guideline missiles on their launchers and on a transport. At the very least the fact that these rebels can take over an air defense base indicates a greater level of strength than than was previously known.

Video Credit: The140205

DF-41 Back From The Dead?

    China Defense Blog posted this photo showing an unidentified Chinese missile being carried on a WS-9000 commercial truck chassis. Defense Tech suggested that this might be a DF-31, but he pointed out it is much to small to be a DF-31. However, there are couple of other possibilities, 1) It could be a DF-41, 2) It could be a DF-16, or 3) something new.

     Personally, my first thought is that this is a DF-41. The DF-41 program was started in 1986, and was supposedly canceled 2002. However, no one really knows what has happened to the program, and it is entirely possible that it is still going strong. Also, the DF-41 was reported to be silo-based and road mobile, which could make this a DF-41. 

      As to the possibility that this might be a DF-16, this is probably the most debatable as no one actually knows anything about the DF-16 is, if it is in the first place road mobile, and the dimensions. All that is known about the DF-16 is that is an IRBM with a range of 4,000km, and that it is in development. As to the possibility that this is an entirely new missile, it is either an ICBM or an IRBM, obviously road mobile, has length of at least 20m, besides that there is not much else one can tell from this photo.

      It will be interesting to see over the spring and summer to find out whether or not this is a DF-16, -41, or an entirely new system.

Iranians Rips Off More Soviet Equipment

     Uskowi On Iran posted these photos showing some of Iran's "missiles". The first two photos show 2 Khalij Fars (Persian Gulf) which Iran claims is an Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM), but is more likely is a Scud painted black with more fins (and is probably dangerous to be around when they light the fuse).

Next up to bat is a copy of the SA-2 "Guideline" which has been named the Tondar which Iran thinks is a SRBM (Short Range Ballistic Missile), but is simply a surface-to-air missile painted blue.

And last and probably least is Iran's Shabab-2 SRBM, which is a Scud with a new name.

Photo Credit: Uskowi On Iran

Qaddafi Fires A Scud At Rebels

     Defense Tech reports that some of Qaddafi's military forces launched a SS-1 Scud at the rebel held town of Brega, but missed by about 50 miles.

     While it is good that the Scud missed the town, what is interesting about this is that Qaddafi still has Scud missiles in existence. When the Allied coalition set up the no-fly zone, almost every air defense system was destroyed (with the exception of MAN Portable Air defense System), and a good deal of his artillery and armor were destroyed in later airstrikes. How the Allied forces managed to miss a Scud TEL (Transporter, Erector, Launcher), is very unusual as they tend to be on the top of the list when taking out a 3rd world country's military (during the wars in the Persian Gulf Scuds were the coalition's #1 target because they could have reached Israel, and Israel if attacked by Iraq would have attacked Iraq and thereby destroyed the coalition). 

     What is more concerning however, is that Qaddafi may have more Scuds, and other surface-to-surface missiles. Global Security lists Libya as having 80 Scud-Bs as of 2005, and 45 FROG-7 (Free Rocket Over Ground 7) surface-to-surface missiles as of 2010. Some of these missiles would probably have been taken out by Allied airstrikes, but there have been no reports of any Scuds or FROG-7 being destroyed. The advancing rebel forces probably have either captured of destroyed some of these missiles as well, but there have been no reports of this yet. 

     However, Qaddafi might be most of his surface-to-surface missiles nearby Tripoli or somewhere where most of the people are loyal to him, as an ace up his sleeve. This not all that unlikely as Qaddafi, as do probably most dictators, is probably keeping these missiles in reserve for some major attack whereby he can undermine support for the no-fly zone and the rebels. This could be supported by the fact that an Italian frigate operating 12 miles off the coast of Libya, was fired on by someone using an unknown type of missile, which crashed into the water about 1 mile away.

     However Qaddafi intends to use the surface-to-surface missiles, he will use them in the fashion that will garner maximum possible publicity to undermine support for the Allied coalition.

Photo Credit: U.S. Navy

New Information About The DF-21D

     Last week the Taipei Times, ran an article quoting Chinese Gen. Chen Bingde confirming the existence of the DF-21D, this would be the first time a Chinese official confirmed it's existence. 

     Further down in the article Chen Bingde stated that the DF-21D has a range of  of 2,700km, which is is almost twice as much as the estimate of 1,500km given by the Navy. Chen Bingde also stated that the DF-21D is still in the development stage and that such high-tech devices were difficult to bring to bring to maturity. Earlier this year the company which produces the DF-21D claimed that it would field a 4,000km IRBM (Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile), along with that Chen Bingde stated that a 2,700km range is easy for them. 

     However, I am skeptical about a 2,700km range for the DF-21D because the Chinese have had problems with high-tech equipment (aircraft engines for example), and the fact that MARVs are not simple things to produce and are very complicated. On top of this the Chinese will be depending on a series of satellites to to feed information to the DF-21D, and satellites can be damaged by flashing lasers at them. Back during the Cold War the Soviets flashed lasers at the Space Shuttle, which caused some problems on the shuttle and discomfort for the crew.

     Overall, the DF-21D is an interesting question, but there still are many kinks to work out in the DF-21D, but, given time the DF-21D could mature into a threat.

Photo Credit: Wikipedia

The Virginia-class: The New Ohio-class

     Aviation Week reported last Thursday that the Navy was considering canceling the proposed SSBN(X) project to meet budget reduction requirements. Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright stated at the Defense Writers Group breakfast that the Pentagon was considering lengthening Virginia-class submarines to be capable of carrying Trident C-4 SLBMs (Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles).

     The idea of lengthening Virginia-class submarines has been discussed before, the idea being to insert an extra 27.4 meter section into a normal Virginia-class sub, and fill the section with 194  Tomahawk cruise missiles. 

     The proposal to insert SLBMs into a Virginia-class certainly has merit, but with congress in a stalemate over the debt ceiling, the chances of this happening, are slim at best.

     

Photo Credit: U.S. Navy

Iran's Impenetrable Missile Silos & All The Other Doomsday "Weapons"

     During the last few years Iran has unveiled a stream of new weapons and facilites, ranging from copies of Germany's V-1 flying bomb to ship killing flying boats that look like they were made in the 1920s to missile silos that are supposedly impenetrable. So, here are some examples of Iran's newest weapons.

     This year during the Great Prophet 6 exercises Iran showed off it's new missile silos that the say can withstand direct attack (just not the nuclear kind), and can handle Shahab-3 and Sajjil-2 Medium Range Ballistic Missiles (MRBMs).

     Next up is Iran's fleet of flying boats, Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmed Vahidi stated concerning the boats "Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the few countries which managed to design, build and use flying boats in a short time.". The flying boat is designated the Bavar 2 and is supposedly armed with 1 machine gun and a camera. Defense Tech reported that Iran also claimed that the Bavar 2 cannot be seen by any radar because of it's hull's advanced design.

     Moving on we come to Iran's "Ambassador of Death" which is a V-1 flying bomb with a range of 1,000 kilometers, a max speed of 560 MPH, and can be armed with 2 113.4 kilogram bombs or a single 450lbs bomb.

     Stephen Trimble spotted this gem apparently showing a model of a stealth fighter, which looks somewhat like a YF-23.

     While most of this stuff is extremely low tech, if deployed en masse it could drive the price of oil sky high, and shut down the Strait of Hormuz 

Photo Credits (top to bottom): U.S Air Force, Federation of American Scientists, CNN, Fox News, The DEW Line

       

     

     

     

Chinese General Says That “China never intends to challenge the U.S.”

The Blaze reports that General Chen Bingde who is roughly equivalent to the to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was in Washington to help increase cooperation between the U.S. and Communist Chinese militaries. While in Washington he gave a 45 -minute speech at the National Defense University to play down fears of Chinese intentions, during the speech Gen. Bingde stated “China never intends to challenge the U.S.".
     Allow me to show you that what Mr. Bingde said is a bald faced lie. As I have discussed previously China is overhauling the former Soviet carrier Varyag and there is a very good possibility that the Varyag will be ready for sea trials by the end of this year. Now, aircraft carriers are not defensive weapons, they are designed to take the fight to the enemy from 350+ miles away. Now why would a nation that borders mostly nations that have lousy armed forces (with the exception of India and Russia) need an aircraft carrier? Surely China doesn't need an aircraft carrier to bully Vietnam, Myanmar, Japan, or the Philippines? No, most of these countries have nil in the way of a blue water navy, the only country in the Pacific that is a threat to the Chinese is the U.S. The U.S. has the largest Air Force, Navy and best Army in the world and is the only military in the Pacific that can defeat the Chinese military.
     The only reason why the Chinese would build a stealth fighter that possibly has the capability to sink aircraft carriers would be to threaten American aircraft carriers. Honestly, I believe the Chinese are scared of American aircraft carriers, why else would they develop a ballistic missile specifically for sinking aircraft carriers?
      The only thing holding China back from domination the Pacific Ocean is the U.S. military and the Chinese know it. China's massive military buildup in the last 10 years is meant for one purpose, to challenge the U.S. on the high seas and in the air and defeat the U.S. in war. 

Next Generation of U.S. Aircraft Carriers

The above photo is a picture of the USS Nimitz (CVN-68) the lead ship of the Nimitz-class aircraft carriers. The Nimitz-class carriers have formed the core of the U.S. Navy since mid-1975 and will continue to do so for the next 10-20 years. At the same time the early Nimitz-class ships are beginning to age out and will need replacing in the near future. The Navy began on the Nimitz-class replacements several years ago and, the lead ships of the Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers are due to be commissioned in 2014.

     The Gerald R. Ford-class has a number of improvements over previous classes of aircraft carriers, for example the Gerald-R. Ford-class will be equipped with the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System  (here is a video of a test) which is basically electric currents generating a magnetic field to propel the catapult forward to launch the aircraft. Another improvement the Gerald R. Ford-class has is the RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow  surface-to-air missile system which is the successor to the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow which has equipped U.S. Navy ships since the mid-1970s.
       However, there is not much difference in aircraft capacity and capability between the Nimitz-class and the Gerald R. Ford-class as both are and will able to handle the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, F-35C Lightning II and the C-2 Greyhound. Both the Nimitz and Gerald R. Ford-classes both carry around 90 fixed wing aircraft and helicopters most of the time.
    I have written before on the subject of the Gerald R. Ford-class in "All Our Eggs In One Basket"
where I discussed the fact that while the Gerald R. Ford-class ships are being built the Navy is at the same time going to be trying to build it's SSBN-X-class of submarines. When you are trying to build two VERY expensive classes of ships (9 billion for the carriers and 6-7 billion for the subs) at the same time when you need both there are 3 choices. 1. don't build any of the ships, 2. increase the shipbuilding budget, 3. build one of the subs or carriers at a time and modify the older ships to work until the hard times are over. Personally, I prefer option #2 and just increase the shipbuilding budget but, the U.S. will be in so much debt at that point that it will not be possible. Option #1 is not viable because you will always need a nuclear deterrent and aircraft carriers thus, that leaves only one option left. The only real way to get the Navy through the coming shipbuilding crunch is to somehow overhaul  the Ohio-class SSBNs which will need replacing at the time and, the 2 or 3 newest Nimitz-class class carriers and, pray that a Democratic administration does not get elected between 2025 and 2045.  


Photo Credit: U.S. Navy

China vs. Taiwan Update

Since the Nationalist forces pulled out of mainland China in 1949 the Communist and Nationalist China's have been at each others throats. In the last 15 years this not so friendly rivalry has been intensifying, I have covered some of China's recent actions as seen in "Chengdu J-20: Carrier Killer?", "DF-21D: Is It a Threat?" and "Chinese Naval Aviation Update" with all the coverage going to the "People's" (read communist) Republic of China, I have yet to cover any of the Republic of China's (Taiwan) recent moves.
     In the past few months Taiwan's president Ma Ying-Jeou has urged the U.S. to allow Taiwan to purchase more F-16C/D Block 50/52 Falcons and to allow upgrades to Taiwan's existing F-16A/B Block 20 fleet. President Ma says that these purchases would allow Taiwan to negotiate with the PRC on an equal footing. One of the reasons used to explain the delay in this purchase is that the PRC would retaliate economically if we did so (they hold 1+ trillion dollars of our dept courtesy of the politicians in D.C.). At the same time the Taiwanese have built a homegrown fighter that looks like a cross between an F/A-18 and an F-16.
     Moving on to the world of air defense, the Taiwanese held a drill back in January to test the effectiveness of their I-Hawk surface-to-air missile systems but, 5 out of 19 missiles missed (roughly 25%). Because so many missiles were off target there is speculation that the test will score Taiwan some new American-made surface-to-air missiles, like more MIM-104 Patriot batteries, maybe some MEADS units if and/or when the U.S. reenters the program.
     China in the last 10 years has been rapidly expanding it's navy from a coastal defense fleet to a true blue water navy capable of competing with the U.S. and other countries on the high seas. To answer this threat Taiwan recently fielded the Hsiung Feng III or Brave Wind anti-ship missile on it's warships and, possibly on mobile land launchers as well. The Hsiung Feng III is reported to have a range of 300km, enough to reach mainland China and, a warhead which is rumored to be in the 225kg range. On top of this Taiwan has said that it plans to build a "stealth" warship that will be armed with 8 Hsiung Feng III missiles and 8 Hsiung Feng II missiles. On top of this Taiwan in the last 6 months has added at least 2 frigates and 10 new missile boats to it's naval forces.
     Last, but by no means least is the news that Taiwan has developed an Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile capable of reaching Beijing. Taiwan has not said if the IRBM is nuclear capable though it probably is not nuclear capable and more likely is meant as a deterrent to show the PRC that Taiwan can hurt them. 
     With the ROC (Taiwan) and the PRC (mainland China) both rapidly building up their military's it is almost inevitable that in the next 20 years there will be a clash between the two nations. When this war begins it is almost certain the U.S. will pulled into the war and will at some point lose an aircraft carrier and multiple surface ships. In the present situation there is no real solution that will appease both sides, in this situation there is only one path to take if you wish to remain free, deterrence. Taiwan has up to this point denied having any nuclear, biological or chemical weapons while the PRC has all of these weapons in large quantities and the necessary delivery systems for these weapons. Taiwan must either engage in a massive build up of it's conventional forces or begin a clandestine nuclear weapons program similar to the early Israeli nuclear program. Whatever the ROC does it must do quickly because the U.S. is moving farther and farther away from Taiwan and more and more towards the PRC and will soon not support Taiwan as we have in previous decades.   


   
Photo Credit: CIA

It's Been 6 Months Since The Missile Launch Off California

     It's been almost six months since the mysterious missile launch off the southern California coast. I have heard ideas that it was something to do with pissed off teachers unions to, that it was a Chinese submarine missile launch showing the U.S., China can reach us. The government says that it was just a jet contrail and nothing out of the ordinary. What started this whole thing was a grainy video taken by a news helicopter showing something flying up. Here is the raw video:

     At 0:11 in the video there is a glowing red dot on the end of whatever was flying up, I have been to several air shows and jet engines from that distance do NOT glow like that. The only flying machine that flies like that is a rocket and, on November 9, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency posted a warning to shipping in the area, that the area the missile originated from that there would be ”intermittent missile firing operations”.
     Hypothetically speaking, if it were a Chinese Type 094  Jin-class SSBN that launched a JL-2 SLBM this would show a stunning collapse of American SOSUS (Sound Surveillance System) systems, early warning systems and most of all, American anti-ballistic missile systems. If it were true that the Chinese launched a missile off the U.S. coast, quite frankly there will and would be hell to pay in the Pentagon and Capital Hill. However, I have doubts that it was the Chinese that did this because the noise that most of their submarines make underwater is somewhat akin to a Mettalica concert on steroids. The only Chinese submarine that could make it to the U.S. coast without being detected is a Kilo-class diesel-electric submarine but, a Kilo submarine's range is only about 400 miles at 3 knots or 6,000 to 7,500 miles with snorkel at 7 knots. Furthermore, if it was a Kilo it would obviously have to use it's snorkel and that is 10 times more noisy than a Chinese SSBN. Also, Kilo's cannot launch any sort of ballistic missile and, I don't think a SA-N-8 Gremlin would make that sort of exhaust (the land version is called the SA-14 Gremlin).
      Now that China for the most part is ruled out, the only other nations that have SSBNs are the United States, United Kingdom, France and Russia. The United Kingdom and France both keep their SSBNs in the Atlantic ocean and Russia only has Typhoon-class and Delta III and IV-class submarines both of which are easily detectable by sonar nets (SOSUS) and have no reason to provoke us like this. That leaves the US of A, if it were the U.S. that would explain the missile launch warning from the feds and, the Navy is currently working on the replacement for the Ohio-class SSBNs called the SSBN-X. The SSBN-X is supposed to carry the successor to the Trident D-5 carried by all U.S. SSBNs at the moment, this missile is called the Trident E-6 which is expected to go into service in 2030. It is a bit early but, it might not be a ballistic missile because the U.S. military is known for highly classified projects that only come out 10-20+ years later like the F-117, SR-71 and CONSTANT PEG.
       Whatever the object was the government seems very nervous about releasing any info about what it was except the story that it was a jet. Our dear leader (thats sarcasm) Barack Obama once said  "the only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide." 

Photo Credit: CNN

Air Force Looking Into Producing A New ICBM

Finally! The Federal Government has seen the light! The Pentagon has begun looking at the replacement for the aging Minuteman III ICBM!
     With all the celebrating over, let me elaborate on the Minuteman III missile. The Minuteman III was developed in the late 1960s as a variant of the original Minuteman I ICBM which was one of the U.S. responses to the supposed "missile gap", where the Soviet Union had a supposed advantage in nuclear armed ICBMs. The Minuteman III's development began in 1964 and the Minuteman III went operational around 1971, with the 741st Strategic Missile Wing at Minot AFB in North Dakota. The Minuteman III was the first ballistic missile to carry MIRVs, usually carrying three W62 nuclear warheads each with a yield of 170kt (KiloTons) or about 170,000 tons of TNT. With the all of the arms limitation treaties being signed in the last 20 years since the downfall of the Soviet Union (START II, SORT, New START, etc.) the United States has unilaterally removed MIRVs from the Minuteman III, as of 2011 the U.S. has only 1 nuclear warhead on it's land based ICBM force.
     Now, there are a few problems with the development of a new ICBM, 1. The anti-nuclear crowd will scream bloody murder that the U.S. is restarting the Cold War. 2. All the skills necessary to produce a ICBM have deteriorated since we have not produced a ICBM since the the LGM-118 Peacemaker in 1970s and 1980s. 3. We have not developed a new nuclear warhead since the W88 for the Peacekeeper in the late 1980s. 4. As I said before in problem 2 all the skills necessary to produce an ICBM have deteriorated thus, the producer would have to start from scratch to build an ICBM which would be quite expense and, the Pentagon recently has been having a rash of projects overshooting their budget, and are not eager to have another boondoggle like the F-35 5. The President recently signed the New START treaty that limits Russia and the U.S. to a total of 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads a piece.
      With the problems laid out allow me to give you the answers. 1. Ignore the anti-nuclear crowd and hope for the best. 2. Well, there is not really a solution for this problem except to just do the job (and hope Congress doesn't cancel the program if the first missile crashes). 3. The answer is relatively simple to this question, have Lawrence Livermore Laboratory in California  go into overdrive to produce a new ICBM warhead and a new nuclear gravity bomb to replace the aging B61. 4. If the program becomes overly expense, in the contract have a clause that forces the contractor to pay for 10 to 50% of the program depending on the size of the overrun. 5. Pull out NOW, New START is meaningless. New START covers only strategic nuclear warheads and the Russians have said they are not to eager to regulate tactical nukes.
Thats not all, the Russians have said that if they feel threatened by troop movements by the U.S. or NATO or even future plans, they will pull out of New START. Finally, any nuclear limitation treaty is a moot point without China signing it due to the fact that China is third place in total amount of nuclear warheads with around 400 nukes and, climbing.

     Whatever path is taken by the American Government we must choose quickly because our nuclear deterrent is aging rapidly and, at some point in the near future it will collapse because there is nothing more we can do to extend the lifetime of our present nuclear force. Thus, Congress and the President must begin a nuclear modernization program within the next 4 years or in the near future face a crisis never before imagined by any American since the 1950s.....a total lack of a nuclear deterrent.

Photo Credit: USAF/Wikipedia

DF-21D: Is It A Threat?

Recently there has been a lot of talk about China's new DF-21D Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM) and, that it is a threat to US naval forces throughout the Pacific Ocean. However the Chinese have had many problems with high-end technology as evidenced by their lack of a modern AWACS aircraft and the fact that they have had a multitude of problems in developing indigenous weapon systems, without copying another countries systems with no licence 

     The missile system that the DF-21D is based off of is the DF-21, (DF standing for DongFeng). The DF-21 is an Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) capable of ranges between 1700-3000 kilometers depending on the variant. The DF-21's NATO designation is CSS-6 with the DF-21's variants having Mod 1-4. The DF-21 series has been in service since the early 1990s but, only now has turned into a real threat.   

     The method in which the Chinese have turned the DF-21D into a threat is through maneuverable reentry vehicles or MARVs. The difference between conventional multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle or MIRVs and MARVs is that a MARV is capable of inflight maneuvers thus, posing a greater challenge to anti-ballistic missile systems like the Aegis BMD system (Ballistic Missile Defense). One of the reasons ASBMs are not usually used by most countries armed forces is that ASBMs are extremly complicated. Imagine firing a model rocket at a moving bullseye 2-3cm wide and a meter long, 350m away and hitting the bullseye. This is probably not the best analogy but, it shows the challenges involed with this type of weapon system. In fact ASBMs are so complicated that the Soviet Union developed a sub fired ASBM designated the SS-NX-13 but, a couple of years later gave up on the system. 

     This is just an observers opinion but, given time the DF-21D could possibly develop into a threat.