NEWS IN BRIEF – REST OF THE WORLD

Sponsored by Lincad

Home

————————————————————————-

20 May 19. Australia – 3 more years and a next-generation Defence wish list. With the Coalition returned and cabinet position announcements imminent – building on the success of the preceding six years in the Defence portfolio and in light of changing regional dynamics – it’s time to discuss a few wish list items to enhance Australia’s future defence capabilities.

Despite a period of leadership instability, the Coalition has been returned to power with a new mandate and plans outlined during the election campaign to enhance Australia’s defence and defence industry capabilities.

The election of the Coalition in 2013 saw a major shake-up in the way defence was approached by government. Following what the Coalition describes as six years of neglect under the tumultuous Rudd/Gillard/Rudd governments, the newly formed government sought to create an environment of stability and consistency for defence with a number of key policy objectives.

Central to this was the commitment to return Australia’s defence expenditure to 2 per cent of GDP following what both Prime Minister Scott Morrison and now former minister for defence Christopher Pyne explained as a 10 per cent reduction in real terms in the last year (FY2012-13) of the previous government – resulting in defence investment falling to its lowest levels since 1938.

While Australia’s defence expenditure looks set to increase to $38.7 billion in 2019-20, it is a case of business as usual for defence and industry, with the Coalition’s budget announcement signalling the government’s continued commitment to supporting the capability and development of Australia’s sovereign defence industry capabilities.

The Coalition remains committed to continuing the delivery of a number of key projects identified as part of the government’s 2016 Defence White Paper, which focused on delivering a series of major capability upgrades and modernisation programs across the Australian Defence Force, including:

The delivery of the first unit as part of the $5.2 billion LAND 400 Phase 2 Boxer Combat Reconnaissance Vehicles
Industry partners presented their bids as part of the $10-15 billion LAND 400 Phase 3 Armoured Fighting Vehicle program
Construction progress for the $35 billion SEA 5000 Hunter Class guided missile frigate program
Construction commencement and milestones at the $535 million SEA 5000 Shipyard facility at Osborne, South Australia
The continued arrival of Australia’s Lockheed Martin F-35A Joint Strike Fighters
Signing the Strategic Partnership Agreement for the $50 billion SEA 1000 Attack Class future submarine program
Committing to the acquisition of 30 self-propelled howitzers and 15 support vehicles to be built and maintained at a specialised facility in Geelong

The government has confirmed over the next decade to 2028-29 that it will invest more than $200 billion in defence capabilities. Building on these commitments and recognising the changing geopolitical, tactical and strategic realities of the Indo-Pacific, Defence Connect has put together a brief wish list and is encouraging conversation about capabilities for the Coalition’s defence ministers to consider establishing in this next term of government.

Acquire an additional three Hobart Class guided-missile destroyers

Serving as the basis of Australia’s maritime-based area-air and missile defence capabilities, the Hobart Class is a critical capability for both Navy and the broader “joint force” ADF capability. Despite procurement and construction problems, Australia’s Hobart Class destroyers will provide a quantum leap in the capability of the Navy’s surface fleet, serving as a task force air defence screen, secondary command and control hub and invaluable surface and subsurface warfare asset.

HMAS Hobart and her two sister ships, HMAS Brisbane and Sydney, are Hobart Class Air Warfare Destroyers based on the Spanish F-100 frigates. The Hobart Class Combat System is built around the Aegis Weapon System, incorporating the state-of-the-art phased array radar, AN/SPY 1D(V), will provide an advanced air defence system capable of engaging enemy aircraft and missiles at ranges in excess of 150 kilometres.

Acquiring an additional three Hobart Class vessels serves to enhance the nation’s naval shipbuilding capabilities – maintaining the critical skills in both Adelaide and/or Henderson shipyards until the major construction Hunter and Attack class programs commence – while providing additional redundancy for the Navy in the face of increasingly advanced anti-ship ballistic and cruise missile systems and enhancing the protective layers around other major Navy assets, namely the Canberra class amphibious warfare ships.

Accordingly, the Coalition needs to lay down a Block 2 variant of the Hobart Class guided-missile destroyers with enhanced area-air and missile defence capabilities and enhanced anti-submarine warfare capabilities – specifically noise reduction characteristics – also need to begin upgrades of the existing fleet.

Begin development of a ‘joint force’ long-range, stand-off missile system with conventional and electronic warfare variants

The retirement of the F-111 long-range strike platform and the limited reliability of the Collins Class submarines present a significant long-range strike capability gap for the ADF. This continuing capability gap has been a focal point for many Australian strategic policy experts, including both Peter Jennings and Malcolm Davis of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

“We need to be placing more effort into developing the long-range strike capability. This includes things like cruise missiles that can be launched by platforms across the ADF. We also need to place greater emphasis on upgrading the capability provided by Collins, not just as a stop-gap, but as an imperative, as these submarines will continue to form the point of our deterrence spear for some time yet,” Jennings told Defence Connect in late 2018.

Accordingly, developing a potent joint force – multipurpose long-range, stand-off missile system capable of fulfilling conventional maritime and land-focused kinetic strike roles with a variant capable of electronic warfare – to support the development of a conventional deterrent triad while minimising the logistics tail and enhancing the interoperability of each of the branches of the ADF, to be fielded in the late-2020s/early 2030s.

Additionally, developing a hypersonic variant to be introduced in the mid-to-late 2030s further enhances the long-range, stand-off strike capabilities of the joint force ADF.

Begin development of a heavy, long-range, low-observable, unmanned strike platform

Australia has recently been gifted with the perfect opportunity to respond to this long-range strike gap in the form of the joint Defence Science and Technology and Boeing development of the “loyal wingman” concept, which when combined with the successful platform and technology demonstrators in the Reaper series and MQ-4C Triton paves the way for developing a fleet of long-range, unmanned, low-observable strike aircraft with a payload capacity similar to, or indeed greater than, the approximately 15-tonne payload of the retired F-111.

Such a capability would also enjoy extensive export opportunities with key allies like the US and UK who could operate the platform as a cost-effective replacement for larger bombers, like the ageing B-52H Stratofortress, B-1 Lancer and B-2 Spirit, and supplement for the in-development B-21 Raider long-range strategic bomber.

Long-range strike serves as the “thrust” component of the broader force structure adjustment. The growing prominence of cruise and ballistic missile-based threats has resulted in the Australian government outlining the need for a layered, integrated air and missile defence (IAMD) system as part of the AIR 6500 program.

This program provides opportunities for the nation to develop a leading-edge battlespace management and IAMD capability while also incorporating lessons learned as a result of China’s successful introduction of anti-access/area denial systems to establish a virtually impregnable wall of steel throughout the sea/air gap, providing Australia with the opportunity to more actively and assertively engage with Indo-Pacific Asia.

Focus on delivering two Attack Class submarines annually

While, the Attack Class is expected to deliver a quantum leap in the capability delivered to the Royal Australian Navy and its submarine service by leveraging technology and capabilities developed for nuclear submarines, implemented on a conventional submarine, the projected delivery time frame and tempo of delivery presents significant concern for Australia’s “silent service”.

It is time to focus on supporting the Australian industry’s capacity to deliver two submarines annually beginning in the 2030s – particularly as a result of the growing submarine fleets in the region and with the importance of the strategic importance of sea-lines-of-communication support over 90 per cent of global trade, a result of the cost-effective and reliable nature of sea transport. Indo-Pacific Asia is at the epicentre of the global maritime trade, with about US$5 trillion worth of trade flowing through the South China Sea and the strategic waterways and choke points of south-east Asia annually.

Meanwhile, the Indian Ocean and its critical global sea-lines-of-communication are responsible for more than 80 per cent of the world’s seaborne trade in critical energy supplies, namely oil and natural gas, which serve as the lifeblood of any advanced economy.

Conduct an updated force posture review – in line with the 2020 Defence White Paper, Integrated Investment Plan and Defence Industry Strategy

The opposition announced a commitment to conduct the first force posture review since 2012 – the changing dynamics of the Indo-Pacific and the steady march towards Australia playing an increasing role in the region requires a dramatic shift in the ADF’s force posture and force structure – to focus on greater expeditionary and power projection capabilities.

Developing these concepts in conjunction with an updated Defence White Paper and expanded Integrated Investment Plan and Defence Industry Strategy to enhance the capabilities of Australia’s defence industry – splitting the focus on domestic demand and export-oriented industrialisation in a similar manner to the policy and doctrines that supported the development of South Korea. (Source: Defence Connect)

19 May 19. What a Coalition win means for the Australian Defence Portfolio. Following a tight race the Coalition has been returned to power. Here’s what the Coalition’s re-election means for the Defence Portfolio.

The Coalition has hung on to office – with promises of continued momentum and investment into developing the Australian Defence Force and supporting the growth and sovereign capabilities of Australia’s defence industry.

The projected federal budget surplus for the 2019-20 financial year will support growth and investment in defence industries, the PM said, particularly through the Liberal Party’s planned naval shipbuilding projects.

The election of the Coalition in 2013 saw a major shake up in the way defence was approached by government – following what the Coalition describes as six years of neglect under the tumultuous Rudd/Gillard/Rudd governments – the newly formed government sought to create an environment of stability and consistency for defence with a number of key policy objectives.

Central to this was the commitment to return Australia’s defence expenditure to 2 per cent of GDP following what both Prime Minister Scott Morrison and now former minister for defence Christopher Pyne explain as a 10 per cent reduction in real terms in the last year (FY2012-13) of the previous government – resulting in defence investment falling to its lowest levels since 1938.

While Australia’s defence expenditure looks set to increase to $38.7bn in 2019-20, it is a case of business as usual for defence and industry, with the Coalition’s budget announcement signalling the government’s continued commitment to supporting the capability and development of Australia’s sovereign defence industry capabilities.

The delivery of the first unit as part of the $5.2bn LAND 400 Phase 2 Boxer Combat Reconnaissance Vehicles;
Industry partners presented their bids as part of the $10-15bn LAND 400 Phase 3 Armoured Fighting Vehicle program;
Construction progress for the $35bn SEA 5000 Hunter Class guided missile frigate program;
Construction commencement and milestones at the $535m SEA 5000 Shipyard facility at Osborne, South Australia;
The continued arrival of Australia’s Lockheed Martin F-35A Joint Strike Fighters; and
The $50bn SEA 1000 Attack Class future submarine program.

The government has confirmed over the next decade to 2028-29 the government will invest more than $200bn in defence capabilities, including:

The continuous naval shipbuilding program, which is investing around $90bn to build world-class vessels, while also building a strong and viable Australian naval shipbuilding industry;
Supporting the acquisition of 30 new self-propelled howitzers for the Australian Army – to be built and maintained at a purpose-built facility in Geelong;
Building three new naval surface ships to be built at the Australian Marine Complex at Henderson, WA.
Continuing to upgrade the EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft and E-7A Wedgetail battlespace management aircraft; and
Building Australia’s policy and intelligence capabilities to ensure Australia has a deeper understanding of the changing geo-political environment.

Ministerial postings

With the retirement of former minister for defence Christopher Pyne – the Coalition has an open cabinet posting to fill – with recently appointed Defence Industry Minister Linda Reynolds expected to fill the position.

Minister Reynolds was elected to the Senate in 2014 following more than 20 years’ experience at the national political level working for Ministers, Members of Parliament and the Liberal Party of Australia.

Minister Reynolds served for 29 years in the Australian Army as a Reserve Officer in a wide range of part- and full-time appointments. She combines a wealth of political, academic and professional corporate experience, including:

Chief of Staff to the Minister for Justice and Customs;
Project Director with Raytheon Australia;
Deputy Federal Director of the Liberal Party of Australia;
Commanding Officer of a Combat Service Support Battalion; and
Adjutant General of Army, the Chief of Army’s key governance adviser.

The Coalition has used this relatively short election campaign to sell its credentials on defence and national security – with the FY2019-20 budget serving as the culmination for what became “business as usual” for the defence industry under the Coalition – despite its own internal leadership challenges.

Minister Reynolds was the first woman in the Australian Army Reserves to be promoted to the rank of Brigadier and was awarded the Conspicuous Service Cross, she has completed a Master of Arts (Strategic Studies). (Source: Defence Connect)

17 May 19. Russia, Kazakhstan discuss defence partnership. The Russian Ministry of Defence has carried out consultations on military cooperation with Kazakhstan, the Russian MoD announced on 15 May. Both parties reviewed and agreed on the implementation of the Strategic Partnership Program of the two countries in the military sphere for 2019-2021 and the Defence Cooperation Plan for 2019. The consultations included the issues of the transit of Russian military cargo through the territory of Kazakhstan, the improvement of the regulatory framework of bilateral cooperation and the functioning of Russian training grounds located in the republic. The following consultations are scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2019. (Source: Shephard)

20 May 19. Saudi Arabia – Mecca Province: Saudi-led coalition air defences allegedly down Houthi-launched ballistic missiles. Local and social media reporting indicates that on 20 May at approximately 0100Z and 0400Z, the Saudi military allegedly employed US-made MIM-104 Patriot conventional surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems to down at least two ballistic surface-to-surface missiles (SSMs) near the cities of Taif and Jeddah in Mecca Province, respectively. Though the Saudi government has not officially commented on the alleged incidents, the SSMs were reportedly launched into the Kingdom from Yemen by Houthi rebels. The Patriot has the capability to engage air targets at altitudes up to FL800 and at ranges out to 100 miles (160 km). Taif and Jeddah are located approximately 350 miles (563km) from the border with Yemen and this would mark the farthest attempted Houthi SSM strikes into the Kingdom since 24 June 2018 when the rebels targeted the capital Riyadh with multiple ‘Burkan-2’ ballistic missiles which were downed by Saudi Patriot engagement. On 14 May, the Saudi Arabian Oil Ministry indicated that two pumping stations west of Riyadh were targeted by Houthi rebel military-grade weaponised drones. EASA, Germany and France have issued notices to operators advising against conducting civil aviation flight activity within the southwest provinces of Saudi Arabia (EASA CZIB 2018-01-R2, NOTAM EDGG B0033/19, France – AIC A 03/19).
Analysis
Our analysis indicates Saudi Arabia has shot down over 100 Houthi-launched SSMs and drones over its territory since the start of 2018, including seven over Riyadh, located deep within the interior of the country. Comparatively, just 16 SSM intercepts occurred over Saudi Arabia during all of 2017, with only three taking place near Riyadh. The Houthis previously attempted to target sites in Mecca Province via SSM strikes on 27 July 2017, 27 October 2016, 10 October 2016 and 1 September 2016. In addition, the city of Yanbu located to the north of Mecca Province was targeted via Houthi SSM launches on 22 July 2017 and 5 June 2018. The majority of Houthi rebel SSM launches into the Kingdom and associated intercepts – along with drone downings – occur over the southwest provinces of Asir, Jizan and Najran. The southwest provinces are located within the Security Control of Air Traffic and Air Navigation Aids (SCATANA) area of Saudi Arabia, which is covered by a notice and a publication issued by the civil aviation authority of the country (NOTAM OEJD W0438/18; AIP SUP AIRAC 05/18 and 07/18). Continued SSM and additional drone launches into the Kingdom by Yemen-based Houthi rebels and associated intercepts via Saudi military conventional SAM engagement are likely to occur weekly over the SCATANA area for the foreseeable future. In addition, quarterly SSM and/or intercepts and/or attacks near Riyadh or over main urban centres located deep within the Saudi interior are probable until a resolution between the factions in the Yemen conflict is reached. We assess territory in Saudi Arabia outside the SCATANA area to be a HIGH risk airspace environment at all altitudes. We assess the SCATANA area of Saudi Arabia to be an EXTREME risk airspace environment at all altitudes.

Risk area recommendation: Comprehensive risk mitigation measures

Flights below FL260 not advised; essential flights over FL260 via measures below
Defer diverting from flight plan with the exception of life threatening situations
Security and operational risk-based identification of pre-planned divert airports
Reliable and redundant communications with an established communications plan
Fully-coordinated and robust emergency response plan supplemented by asset tracking

Advice
Approvals: As a precaution, conduct operational risk-based identification of divert and alternate airports for flight schedules with planned stops at aerodromes in the country or with overflight of the airspace. Operators are advised to ensure flight plans are correctly filed, attain proper special approvals for flight operations to sensitive locations and obtain relevant overflight permits prior to departure. In addition, ensure crews scheduled to operate to or over the country in the near term are fully aware of the latest security situation.
Missile Launches: Unannounced rocket and missile launches that transit airspace used by civilian aircraft pose a latent threat to operations at all altitudes. The country has a history of not issuing adequate notice of activities in its airspace that could affect flight safety. Multiple safety of flight concerns emanate from a situation where a missile malfunctions during the boost, mid-course or terminal phases of flight. Such an event would cause the missile to fly an unplanned trajectory and altitude profile which could expose overflying aircraft to mid-air collision, route diversion and or debris splashdown issues. Leading civil aviation governing bodies have standing notices advising operators of the threat to civil aviation in the airspace due to unannounced military activity, rocket test firings and or missile launches.
Shoot-down Policy: The country has an aggressive air intercept and shoot-down policy which allows air and air defence forces to intercept and disable aerial targets violating airspace regulations. Military air and air defence assets may be employed to down aerial targets under the auspice of the policy. While legal civil aviation flights are unlikely to be directly targeted, there remains a latent but credible risk of misidentification and interception by military air and air defence assets. (Source: Osprey)

17 May 19. Australia’s need for a ‘high-low’ air dominance capability mix. The decreasing cost of highly capable fighter aircraft is challenging the air dominance and air superiority capability of the F-35, reigniting debate about the implementation of the ‘high-low’ fighter mix to secure continued regional air dominance.

Fighter aircraft, like every facet of military technology, are rapidly evolving. The current global and regional transition from fourth to fifth-generation fighter aircraft, like the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter platforms, is reshaping the role of fighter fleets and the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific region.

Designed to establish and maintain air superiority or air dominance, fighter aircraft have evolved from relatively simple wood and canvas air frames during the First World War, to the highly manoeuvrable, long-range aircraft that dominated the skies of Europe and the Pacific during the Second World War; the latest two generations of fighters are the pinnacle of these earlier designs.

Indo-Pacific Asia’s fighter fleets are made up of fighter aircraft ranging from third to fifth-generation aircraft, each with unique capabilities and roles within the regional balance of power. Prior to diving into the concept of the ‘high-low’ fighter mix, it is critical to understand the differences between the generations of aircraft operating in the Indo-Pacific.

Third-generation fighter: Designed and developed between the early 1960s and the 1970s, these aircraft placed renewed focus on manoeuvrability and traditional ground attack capabilities. Third-generation aircraft also saw the increased use of guided missiles in combat, the introduction of analogue avionics systems and improved aerodynamic performance. Examples of third-generation fighter aircraft include the US F-4 Phantom II, the French Mirage F1, the Russian MiG 25 Foxbat and Chinese Shenyang J-8.
Fourth-generation fighter: Developed and in service from about 1980 until the present, fourth-generation fighter aircraft placed renewed emphasis on manoeuvrability and air-to-air combat capability, supported by improved fly-by-wire flight control systems, improved avionics, the introduction of digital computers, aerodynamic air frames and on board radar systems to leverage advances made in long-range air-to-air missiles. Fourth-generation combat aircraft also marked the introduction of multi-role fighter aircraft. Examples of fourth-generation fighter aircraft include the US F-15 Eagle, F-14 Tomcat, F/A-18 Hornet, Russian MiG-29 and Su-27, French Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon and Chinese Shenyang J-10 and J-11.
4.5 generation fighter: Evolved variants of the fourth-generation, incorporating advances in microchip and semiconductor technology to improve avionics, radar, data links and network-centric warfare. Additionally, these aircraft incorporate advances in radar cross section reducing design and materials, advanced GPS guided weapons and in some cases thrust vectoring. Examples of 4.5 generation aircraft include the US F-15E Strike Eagle and F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, the Russian Su-30MKI and MKK variants, Eurofighter Typhoon and Rafale variants.
Fifth-generation fighter: The pinnacle of fighter aircraft, incorporating all-aspect stealth even when armed, low-probability-of-intercept radar, high-performance air frames, advanced avionics and highly integrated computer systems, these aircraft provide unrivalled air dominance, situational awareness, networking, interdiction and strike capabilities for commanders. Examples of fifth-generation aircraft include the US F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Russian Su-57 and Chinese J-20 and FC-31.

Air superiority and air dominance

Increasingly advanced, highly-capable fourth, 4.5 and fifth-generation fighter aircraft that combine low observable coatings and airframes, increased aerodynamic performance, advanced sensor suites and computational power like the air dominance/air superiority specialised F-15 Eagle-series, F-22 Raptor, Russian Su-57 and Chinese J-20 are at the pinnacle of the contemporary air power hierarchy.

Almost taking a leaf out of the years leading up to the confrontation between American and Soviet aircraft over Vietnam, the US and many allies, including Australia, have been repeatedly told that air superiority, namely traditional dog fighting, is a thing of the past as a result of increased sensor capabilities, low observability and advanced air-to-air missile (AAM) systems – resulting in the development of the costly, flying super computer, the F-35.

However, the specialised focus of platforms like the Russian Su-57 and Chinese J-20 series of air superiority fighter aircraft – both of which have larger combat radius, higher-speeds, larger weapons payloads and better aerodynamic performance – raises questions about the air dominance and air superiority capability of the F-35 in the face of seemingly superior, specialised peer-competitor aircraft.

Jack of all trades, a master of none

The F-35 was designed to serve a number of roles, replacing the growing fleet of highly specialised aircraft in the arsenals of the US and allies, like Australia – including the F/A-18 Hornet-series, F-16 Falcon-series, the Harrier-series and venerable A-10 Warthog close support aircraft – resulted in an aircraft designed to fulfill the ‘low’ end of the capability mix.

While controversial, the comparatively poor aerodynamic performance, combined with reduced payload and combat radius when pitted against ‘high’ performance combat aircraft across the Indo-Pacific, raises questions about the ability of the contemporary allied air forces to penetrate the increasingly complex and long-range anti-access/area denial challenges in the region, and the survivability of these platforms.

The increasingly challenging operating environment emerging on Australia’s doorstep, combined with similar concerns developing among allies including the US and Japan, also raises questions about developing and introducing a highly-capable, high-speed, low observable, air-superiority focused platform to complement the ‘low’ end capability of other platforms, future-proofing the capability and enhancing the interoperability of the Royal Australian Air Force and allied air forces.

For Australia, the future operating environment to the nation’s immediate north will necessitate investment in a highly capable, long-range, air dominance fighter aircraft to compliment the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters and replace the ageing F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets by the mid 2030s. (Source: Defence Connect)

17 May 19. Iran – US FAA issues notice, background information for airspace over Persian Gulf & Gulf of Oman. On 16 May, the US FAA issued a NOTAM and background information for the airspace over the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman due to increased political tensions and heightened military activities in the region, stating that “Iran has publicly made threats to US military operations” (KICZ A0015/19). Since 16 April, the US has deployed additional MIM-104 Patriot anti-conventional surface-to-air missiles to military installations in the Middle East, B-52 heavy bombers to an airbase in Qatar, F-35 stealth fighter jets to an aviation installation in the UAE and an aircraft carrier strike group to the Persian Gulf amid increased tensions with Iran. The US National Security Advisor, Ambassador John Bolton, stated the deployments were “in response to a number of troubling and escalatory indications and warnings” related to Iranian military and proxy group activity in the Persian Gulf region. Operators are advised to ensure flight plans are correctly filed, attain proper special approvals for flight operations to sensitive locations and obtain relevant overflight permits prior to departure. In addition, ensure crews scheduled to operate to or over the areas above in the near term are fully aware of the latest security situation.

Analysis

The US FAA has an additional standing notice and background information advising operators to exercise caution when transiting Iranian airspace due to unannounced military activity and missile launches (NOTAM KICZ A0016/18). US officials claim intelligence shows that Iran is likely moving anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) and/or ballistic missile components aboard boats in the Persian Gulf, leading to the aforementioned US military deployments in the area. We assess the reported Iranian ASCM and/or ballistic missile movement activity to be an indicator of preparations for test launches in the Persian Gulf region as well as Strait of Hormuz or Gulf of Oman area. We assess there is an increased likelihood for the test launches to occur within the next 30-60 days. Of note, Iran claimed to have conducted tests of a “Jask-2” submarine-launched cruise missile and a land-based “Ghader” ASCM within the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz areas as part of its ‘Velayat 97’ exercise on 24 February. In addition, the Iranian military conducted a test launch of a short-range anti-ship ballistic missile into the Strait of Hormuz during a large-scale naval exercise in early-August 2018. While Iran has a history of not providing adequate prior notice of activity hazardous to aviation, operators should monitor airspace-specific NOTAMs, bulletins, circulars, advisories, prohibitions and restrictions prior to departure to avoid flight schedule disruption. We continue to assess Iran; to include over-water areas of the Persian Gulf as well as the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman, to be a MODERATE risk aviation and airspace operating environment at all altitudes.

Risk area recommendation: Stringent risk mitigation measures

Overflight possible with the following measures in place
Security and operational risk-based identification of pre-planned divert airports
Access to reliable and redundant communications with an established communications plan
Fully-coordinated and robust emergency response plan

Advice

Missile Launches: Unannounced rocket and missile launches that transit airspace used by civilian aircraft pose a latent threat to operations at all altitudes. The country has a history of not issuing adequate notice of activities in its airspace that could affect flight safety. Multiple safety of flight concerns emanate from a situation where a missile malfunctions during the boost, mid-course or terminal phases of flight. Such an event would cause the missile to fly an unplanned trajectory and altitude profile which could expose overflying aircraft to mid-air collision, route diversion and or debris splashdown issues. Leading civil aviation governing bodies have standing notices advising operators of the threat to civil aviation in the airspace due to unannounced military activity, rocket test firings and or missile launches.

GPS Interference: GPS interference within parts of the airspace and in the environs surrounding certain airports have been reported in recent years. The source of the GPS interference is assessed to be emanating from either military/government activities, legal commercial sources or actors with nefarious intent. Civil aviation flight operations face a nascent credible risk of being to be exposed to GPS navigation interference when landing at international airports or while operating in the airspace. As such, operators should take this information into account during their flight planning process and while identifying divert options.

Shoot-down Policy: The country has an aggressive air intercept and shoot-down policy which allows air and air defence forces to intercept and disable aerial targets violating airspace regulations. Military air and air defence assets may be employed to down aerial targets under the auspice of the policy. While legal civil aviation flights are unlikely to be directly targeted, there remains a latent but credible risk of misidentification and interception by military air and air defence assets. (Source: Osprey)

15 May 19. Strongest militaries in 2019: comparing global armed forces. The latest figures from the Global Fire Power Index identify the strongest militaries in 2019. In which areas are some of the strongest militaries dominating and where do they fall short?

What are the strongest militaries in 2019? Each year since 2006, the Global Fire Power Index has ranked 137 modern military powers using 55 different metrics to give each country a score based on their size, finances, and number of high tech equipment. A perfect score in the index is 0.

We take a look at the top ranking nations, and find out why they are ranked in this order, including the areas where some nations excel in terms of military power and where others fall short.

The United States (Power Index (PI): 0.0615)

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the US is ranked number one in most of the directly comparable metrics, such as total aircraft strength with 13,398 aircraft, including 5,760 helicopters in service, which is the most out of any nation in the world. At $716bn, the US also has the world’s largest defence budget, $492bn more than China – the world’s second largest defence spender.

The US falls short of first place in only a few metrics, such as the number of combat tanks with 6,287 (ranked 3rd); the number of self-propelled artillery equalling 992 (7th), and the number of rocket projectors (15th).

In terms of naval assets, the US is second only to China, with 415 and 714 respectively.

Russia (PI: 0.0639)

Russia holds first place in certain metrics. It is the top nation in terms of number of combat tanks with 21,932 – more than three times the US’s total – and also armoured fighting vehicles (of which it has more than 50,000) and self-propelled artillery. For every other comparative metric, Russia holds either 2nd or 3rdplace.

Moreover, this is all made possible with a relatively small defence budget of $44bn. Russia also has a strong navy, with a total of 352 assets. This includes 82 corvettes, more than the US (15) and China (42) combined.

China (PI: 0.0673)

China performs better in some areas than in others. In terms of total naval assets, it is the top nation on the list with 714 vessels, including 119 patrol vessels, 76 submarines and 52 frigate ships. It is also top of the list in terms of the number of towed artillery in its arsenal with 6,246.

The Global Fire Power Index ranked China 2nd for its number of combat tanks, armoured fighting vehicles, jet fighters and attack aircraft, while China’s score fell in terms of its number of aircraft trainers, where it achieved its lowest ranking of 5th place overall.

At $224bn, it has the second largest defence budget in the world in 2019.

India (PI: 0.1065)

India maintains a strong air force and navy, according to the index, ranking 3rd for the number of transport aircraft, at 248, and in 4th place in terms of total aircraft strength, including jet fighters and attack aircraft, and in 5th for total helicopter strength.

The Indian Navy also maintained a good number of assets at 295 including all primary and auxiliary vessels, which placed the nation in fourth position. India is also top of the list in terms of its number of patrol vessels with 139, 20 more than China.

For armoured fighting vehicles and self-propelled artillery, the Indian Army ranks 25th and 26threspectively, much lower than its overall ranking. India has a defence budget of $55.2bn for 2019, smaller than the US and China, but slightly larger than Russia’s spending.

France (PI: 0.1584)

France’s military budget for 2019 stands at $40.5bn in total. The nation’s strengths lie in its air capabilities. For example, the nation is ranked 8th in terms of total aircraft strength and 7th in terms of total helicopter strength. The French Armed forces operate 1,248 different aircraft and 566 helicopters.

It has a relatively medium sized navy with 118 naval assets in total, including four aircraft carriers – more than Russia, China and India. The French Army is relatively weak in terms of its total equipment, having been ranked 44th for combat tanks with only 406; 55th for towed artillery, and 61st for the number of rocket projectors.

Japan (PI: 0.1707)

Next on the list of strongest militaries in 2019 is Japan, which has a defence budget of $47bn for 2019, according to the Global Fire Power Index.

Similar to France, Japan’s military strength lies in its aircraft and naval assets. Japan is ranked in 6th place for total aircraft strength with 1,572 aircraft, and for total helicopter strength with 636. This includes 119 attack helicopters, for which is only bested by three other nations. It also owns 131 naval assets in total including four aircraft carriers, and 37 destroyer warships – the second highest number of destroyers owned by any nation.

However, in terms of the number of combat tanks, self-propelled and towed artillery, Japan is ranked lower – at 25th place.

South Korea (PI: 0.1761)

The Republic of Korea Armed Forces maintain a good balance across all branches, in terms of military strength in 2019. The force’s total aircraft strength is ranked in 5th while its total helicopter strength is 4th. Furthermore, it is also ranked the 4th best nation for its number of self-propelled and towed artillery, of which it has 2,140 and 3,854 respectively.

South Korea’s lowest ranking on any metric is for armoured fighting vehicles, of which it has 2,870, putting it in 23rd place. South Korea’s national defence budget of $38bn in 2019 places it in 10th on the list of richest militaries.

14 May 19. Indian Army Raises Alarm Over Rising Accidents Due to Faulty Ammunition. The Army has sounded the alarm over the unacceptably high number of accidents taking place in the field due to the poor and defective quality of ammunition being supplied for tanks, artillery, air defence and other guns by the state-owned Ordnance Factory Board+ (OFB).

The Army has told the defence ministry (MoD) that the spike in ammunition-related accidents is causing “fatalities, injuries and damage to equipment” at an alarming rate. This, in turn, is “leading to the Army’s loss of confidence in most types of ammunition” being manufactured by OFB, said sources.

MoD sources said the Army has raised with Secretary (Defence Production), Ajay Kumar, the “serious concerns” about the lack of requisite “quality control and quality assurance” by OFB, which with 41 factories and an annual turnover of about Rs 19,000 crore is the main source of supply of arms and ammunition to the over 12-lakh strong force. “Any drop in the quality of OFB products has major operational ramifications on the country’s war-waging potential,” said a source.

The red alert has led to “an urgent collaborative effort” between the Army and MoD’s department of defence production to improve the functioning of OFB, with Kumar also asking the force to submit “a paper” about different problems with the ammunition.

The 15-page paper presents an extremely grim picture. It says “regular accidents” are occurring with 105mm Indian field guns, 105mm light field guns, 130mm MA1 medium guns, 40mm L-70 air defence guns as well as the main guns of the T-72, T-90 and Arjun main-battle tanks, with some “isolated cases” also being reported from the 155mm Bofors guns, due to defective ammunition. (Source: defense-aerospace.com/Times of India)

14 May 19. Saudi Arabia – Riyadh: Saudi Oil Ministry confirms two pumping stations targeted in Houthi rebel drone attack. On 14 May, the Saudi Arabian Oil Ministry indicated that two pumping stations near the capital Riyadh were targeted by Houthi rebel military-grade weaponised drones. Correspondingly, Yemen-based Houthi rebels claimed to have launched a series of “Qasef” variant military-grade weaponised drone attacks against “vital Saudi facilities” without specifying where the targets were located in the Kingdom. This marks the farthest ever confirmed Houthi rebel military-grade weaponised drone activity within the Saudi interior as Riyadh is located approximately 500 miles (805km) from the Yemeni border. All previous confirmed Houthi rebel military-grade drone activity in the Kingdom has occurred in the southwest provinces of Jizan, Najran and Asir. The most recent previous incident occurred on 8 April when the Saudi-led coalition claimed to have shot down a Houthi rebel military-grade drone over Asir Province. The southwest provinces of Asir, Jizan and Najran are located within the Security Control of Air Traffic and Air Navigation Aids (SCATANA) area of Saudi Arabia, which is covered by a notice and a publication issued by the civil aviation authority of the country (NOTAM OEJD W0438/18; AIP SUP AIRAC 05/18 and 07/18). EASA, Germany and France have issued notices to operators advising against conducting civil aviation flight activity within the southwest provinces of Saudi Arabia (EASA CZIB 2018-01-R2, NOTAM EDGG B0033/19, France – AIC A 03/19).

Analysis

This represents the first confirmed Houthi attack targeting Riyadh since 24 June 2018, when Saudi military forces used US-made MIM-104 Patriot conventional surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems to intercept at least two ‘Burkan-2’ ballistic surface-to-surface missiles (SSMs) over over the capital, launched into the Kingdom from Yemen by Houthi rebels. The Patriot has the capability to engage air targets at altitudes up to FL800 and at ranges out to 100 miles (160 km). The majority of Houthi rebel SSM launches into the Kingdom and associated intercepts – along with drone downings – occur over the southwest provinces in the SCATANA area. Our analysis indicates Saudi Arabia has shot down over 100 Houthi-launched SSMs and drones over its territory since the start of 2018, including seven over Riyadh and one over Yanbu, located deep within the interior of the country. Comparatively, just 16 SSM intercepts occurred over Saudi Arabia during all of 2017, with only three taking place near Riyadh. Continued SSM and additional drone launches into the Kingdom by Yemen-based Houthi rebels and associated intercepts via Saudi military conventional SAM engagement are likely to occur weekly over the SCATANA area for the foreseeable future. In addition, quarterly SSM and/or intercepts and/or attacks near Riyadh or over main urban centres located deep within the Saudi interior are probable until a resolution between the factions in the Yemen conflict is reached. We assess territory in Saudi Arabia outside the SCATANA area to be a HIGH risk airspace environment at all altitudes. We assess the SCATANA area of Saudi Arabia to be an EXTREME risk airspace environment at all altitudes.

Risk area recommendation: Comprehensive risk mitigation measures

Flights below FL260 not advised; essential flights over FL260 via measures below
Defer diverting from flight plan with the exception of life threatening situations
Security and operational risk-based identification of pre-planned divert airports
Reliable and redundant communications with an established communications plan
Fully-coordinated and robust emergency response plan supplemented by asset tracking

Advice

Approvals: As a precaution, conduct operational risk-based identification of divert and alternate airports for flight schedules with planned stops at aerodromes in the country or with overflight of the airspace. Operators are advised to ensure flight plans are correctly filed, attain proper special approvals for flight operations to sensitive locations and obtain relevant overflight permits prior to departure. In addition, ensure crews scheduled to operate to or over the country in the near term are fully aware of the latest security situation.

Drones: Operators are advised to review internal and external mechanisms for suspicious activity, safety and security reporting. Any revisions to processes should account for drone sightings as part of a wider aviation risk management strategy to protect aircraft, passengers and crew. Operators are advised to monitor government advisories as well as trends in terrorist tactics, such as the employment and proliferation of weaponised drones. In addition, we recommend aviation security managers to evaluate instances where drones were recovered in possession of terror suspects along with incidents where disrupted plots were to include drones for pre-attack reconnaissance and/or drone weaponisation. (Source: Osprey)

13 May 19. Vladimir Putin Orders to Develop Russian Aerospace Forces. The Russian president stressed that the US decision to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2019 should be taken into consideration when discussing the future of the country’s armed forces.

President Vladimir Putin has ordered the development of the Russian aerospace forces, setting the creation of defences against hypersonic weapons as one of the branch’s key priorities. The president specifically instructed that such defence systems be developed and adopted prior to any other state arming itself with hypersonic weapons. He added that the significance of aerospace forces would increase in the near future.

“We know for sure that right now, only Russia possesses [hypersonic] weapons. But we also understand that the world’s leading states will obtain such weapons sooner or later. For all of us, it would be better if for them this is ‘later'”, Putin said.

The president further underlined that in the development, the Russian Armed Forces would be taking into account changes in the political sphere, namely Washington’s decision to withdraw from the INF treaty, which was announced in February 2019.

The Russian president also pointed to the latest achievements of the Russian Aerospace Forces, such as the completion of tests for the latest S-350E “Vityaz” air defence system, stressing its increased effectiveness against precision strike weapons and increased missile capacity. Putin also noted that modern systems account for 82% of all armaments in Russia’s strategic forces.

The US announced its withdrawal from the INF Treaty in February 2019 after numerous attempts by Moscow to dissuade the United States from making such a decision. Washington claims that Russia violated some of the accord’s provisions by testing a missile within the banned range. Russia invited the US to a demonstration of the missile in question to show that it’s in full compliance with the INF Treaty, but the event was never attended by US representatives.

The INF Treaty was signed by the Soviet Union and the US in 1987, banning all nuclear-armed ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles that operate at ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometres. (Source: Google/https://sputniknews.com)

12 May 19. Taiwan Breaks Ground to Build Its Own Submarines. Taiwan’s major shipbuilder has broken ground on a factory aimed at producing submarines to blunt threats from China while easing dependence on politically sensitive arms sales from the West.

Shipbuilder CSBC Corp. Taiwan will work with the Taiwanese navy to initially develop a $3.3bn submarine at the factory in the southern port city Kaohsiung, scheduled to be completed next year after last week’s groundbreaking. A prototype of the diesel-electric submarine, a first for Taiwan, is due as early as 2024.

Taiwan’s aging fleet of four submarines, two from the United States and two from the Netherlands, cannot keep up with the military modernization of China, only 100 miles away across a narrow strait.

“The submarines will not only enhance the navy’s asymmetric fighting ability, but to deploy them in waters to our island’s southwest and northeast can make us more effective in deterring enemy ships from surrounding Taiwan,” President Tsai Ing-wen said Thursday at the groundbreaking ceremony.

“To produce our own is the only route to take,” she said.

(Source: defense-aerospace.com/Los Angeles Times)

12 May 19. Chinese Guided Missile Destroyer Suitable for Mass Production: Experts. China is expected to build even more guided missile destroyers, Chinese military analysts said on Sunday as China launched two Type 052D guided missile destroyers on Friday in Dalian, a coastal city in Northeast China’s Liaoning Province. Decked with Chinese national flags, the two Type 052D destroyers were launched in the Dalian Shipyard on Friday with the assistance of tug boats, marking the 19th and 20th of launches of their kind, news website wenweipo.com reported on Friday. China now has 20 Type 052Ds either in active service or being fitted out for service soon, the report said.

Wei Dongxu, a Beijing-based military analyst, told the Global Times on Sunday that 20 would not be the end for the ship’s development, and China might have more than 30 in the future.

“The platform [of the Type 052D] is pretty reliable and it uses very mature technologies. These make it suitable for mass production,” Wei said, noting that the destroyers will play crucial roles in China’s fleet air defense system.

The domestically developed Type 052D destroyer saw significant upgrades on its predecessor, the Type 052C. It is equipped with weapons and equipment including advanced active electronically scanned array radar systems and 64 vertical launch missile cells. The ship is capable of undertaking missions including escort and air defense, experts said.

Dalian Shipyard’s double launch of the Type 052Ds on Friday came after another double launch in July 2018. The vessels launched back then were two Type 055s, China’s more advanced destroyer featuring a displacement of more than 10,000 tons and 112 vertical launch missile cells.

China has planned eight Type 055s for the first batch, Upolitics, a WeChat account run by Beijing Youth Daily, reported. The Type 055 made its parade debut on April 23, when the People’s Liberation Army Navy celebrated its 70th anniversary. Though the Type 055 seems superior to the Type 052D in all ways, Chinese analysts said the former would not replace the latter anytime soon. The Type 055 destroyer can provide stronger air defense umbrellas to, for example, an aircraft carrier combat group, but it is not necessary to dispatch a ship with its caliber for every single mission, because for many the smaller and less expensive Type 052D would suffice, Wei said. The US Navy currently operates more than 60 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and more than 20 Ticonderoga-class cruisers. (Source: defense-aerospace.com/Global Times)

10 May 19. New Canadian Fighter Jets Will Need U.S. Certification: DND. American officials will need to certify the fighter jet Canada buys at the end of a multibillion-dollar procurement that’s started and stopped and started again for more than a decade, ensuring that it’s fit to plug into the U.S.’s highest-security intelligence systems.

But, says the Department of National Defence’s top procurement official, they will not get to decide which plane replaces Canadian military’s aging CF-18s.

“Ultimately when we select, when we are into the detailed design, at some point, yes, the U.S. will have a role to play in ultimate certification,” Patrick Finn, the Defence Department’s assistant deputy minister of materiel, told The Canadian Press.

“But the Americans won’t be sitting with us with the evaluation and doing that type of work. It will be us.”

Some industry sources are nonetheless worried the U.S. could use the certification requirement to block Canada from choosing a non-American plane, particularly given the Trump administration’s approach to trade.

The federal government this week laid out the latest iteration of its plan for the $19bn competition to replace Canada’s CF-18s with 88 new fighters, which is expected to officially launch in July.

While much of the presentation delivered to fighter-jet makers focused on a loosening of industrial-benefit rules (that is, how much the winning bidder will be expected to spend on work and production in Canada), the government also revealed that companies will be asked to show how they plan to meet certain security requirements.

Specifically, companies will have until September to explain how they plan to ensure their aircraft can comply with the standards required for handling top-secret intelligence from two security networks in which Canada takes part, called “Five Eyes” and “Two Eyes.” (Source: defense-aerospace.com/The Canadian Press)

————————————————————————-

About Lincad

Lincad is a leading expert in the design and manufacture of batteries, chargers and associated products for a range of applications across a number of different sectors. With a heritage spanning more than three decades in the defence and security sectors, Lincad has particular expertise in the development of reliable, ruggedised products with high environmental, thermal and electromagnetic performance. With a dedicated team of engineers and production staff, all product is designed and manufactured in-house at Lincad’s facility in Ash Vale, Surrey. Lincad is ISO 9001 and TickITplus accredited and works closely with its customers to satisfy their power management requirements.

Lincad is also a member of the Joint Supply Chain Accreditation Register (JOSCAR), the accreditation system for the aerospace, defence and security sectors, and is certified with Cyber Essentials, the government-backed, industry supported scheme to help organisations protect themselves against common cyber attacks. The majority of Lincad’s products contain high energy density lithium-ion technology, but the most suitable technology for each customer requirement is employed, based on Lincad’s extensive knowledge of available electrochemistries. Lincad offers full life cycle product support services that include repairs and upgrades from point of introduction into service, through to disposal at the end of a product’s life. From product inception, through to delivery and in-service product support, Lincad offers the high quality service that customers expect from a recognised British supplier.

————————————————————————-

NEWS IN BRIEF – REST OF THE WORLD

EXHIBITIONS AND CONFERENCES

VETERANS UPDATE

MANAGEMENT ON THE MOVE