# The latest most advanced Weapon systems in the world



## The SC

The latest most advanced Weapon systems in the world .

This thread is to discuss the latest in military equipments for Space, Air, Sea and land defences that are available on the world market.

Space weapons: the new debate
by Taylor Dinerman
Monday, June 20, 2005

On May 18th an article in the New York Times set off a thunderstorm of controversy over space weaponization. The Air Force is seeking some changes and clarifications to the soon-to-be-released updated version of the 1996 national space policy. This, in fact, left open the door for US space weapons but didnt do much else. The space weapons fight may have more to do with the politics of liberal think tanks and their fundraising skills than with anything the Pentagon is actually planning to do, at least in the near term.

In early 2001, the Rumsfeld Commission, established before he was named Secretary of Defense, warned that* America was vulnerable to a space Pearl Harbor. Since then, little has been done to protect the US governments space assets while our forces have, more and more, come to rely on satellites for navigation, communications, and intelligence. Our potential foes have come to see these systems not just as vulnerable but, essentially, defenseless.
*
*Currently, the US has between sixty and seventy major military satellites in orbit. Thirty of these make up the GPS navigation constellation that is vital for missiles, bombs, lost drivers, yachtsmen who never learned to use a sextant and, more recently, robots in factories and warehouses. The Pentagon has a wide variety of special communications satellites but these have never been able to fill the huge bandwidth demands of modern warfare. The DoD is the worlds number one purchaser of commercial communications satellite capability. There are also about a dozen remote sensing spacecraftfor missile launch warning, weather forecasting, and intelligence gathering.
Our potential foes have come to see these space systems not just as vulnerable but, essentially, defenseless.
*
*Together, these systems constitute Americas military spacepower. They provide the leverage that allows pilots in Nevada to control armed Predator drones in the skies of Afghanistan and Iraq. They allow a battalion commander in Baghdad to keep track of every vehicle in his unit at a glance from a screen inside his command tank. The Secretary of Defense and the President use it to keep track of any major military operations, worldwide. Comprehensive military spacepower defines what it means to be a superpower in the 21st century.
*
*For the moment, the US has extremely limited options when it comes to defending its satellites. If a space object is detected and confirmed as hostile, the US operators could order the US spacecraft to move out of the way. Even if successful, this is a limited and ineffective way to defend a satellite, since it uses up precious onboard maneuvering fuel. Even a primitive enemy antisatellite (ASAT) weapon could cut years off the lifespan of a multi-billion dollar asset.
*
*The US has a few near-term antisatellite options. There is an existing satellite jamming weapon called the Counter Communications System. This Earth-based device stops a satellites operation but does no permanent damage. Very little information has been released on its effectiveness. Since it operates from the ground and its effects are supposedly reversible, it has not generated the controversy associated with space weapons.
*
*There has been talk that the Airborne Laser (ABL) could be used as an ASAT weapon. The ABL is a 747 equipped with a chemically-powered laser, designed to shoot down Scud-type missiles as they are taking off. This is called the boost phase, and it is the time when ballistic missiles are most vulnerable. It has been suggested that the ABL may be able to blind or seriously damage a satellite in low orbit. This weapon could also conceivably be used to help deorbit pieces of space debris.*

Other possible antisatellite weapons are the Ground-based Missile Defense (GMD) interceptors, now being deployed in Alaska and California. These are the first stage of a very rudimentary, national missile defense. The recent test failures have been well publicized, but while the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) claims that the problems that caused the failures have been identified, they are reluctant to announce when they plan to resume testing. The GMD interceptors could be modified to attack low orbiting enemy satellites.
Since the early 1990s, there has been almost no work done on space-based missile defense systems and, according to recent reports, the MDA does not plan to ask for any money before 2008.

Traditionally, it has been the prospect of America putting antiballistic missile weapons into orbit that has most excited the left, both internationally and at home. In March 1983, when Ronald Reagan called on the scientific community to make nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete, everyone leaped to the conclusion that he was talking about space weapons, and Ted Kennedy immediately called the whole idea Star Wars. In fact, Reagan was thinking primarily about space systems, but was mostly interested in beginning the process of technology development. He was not wedded to any one concept or system. His Strategic Defense Initiative began as an effort to answer the question: could America be defended from a Soviet missile attack and what would it take to do so?

In 1991, under then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, the DoD announced that it was planning to deploy something called Global Protection Against Limited Strikes (GPALS). This was to have consisted of at least 2000 orbiting Brilliant Pebblessmall satellites with a heat seeking guidance system, designed to hit enemy missiles in the boost phase. It was based on the military principle that its easier to be up and shoot down, a phenomenon well understood by nine-year-old boys equipped with water balloons. The whole project, however, was canceled by Bill Clintons Secretary of Defense, Les Aspin, with the words, Im taking the stars out of Star Wars.

Since then, there has been almost no work done on space-based missile defense systems and, according to recent reports, the MDA does not plan to ask for any money before 2008. Under current plans, the Pentagon will not even think about deploying any sort of son of Brilliant Pebbles until around 2015. Instead, they are working on a ground-based system, called the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI): a missile that would only be launched after an enemy missile has left its silo or launch pad, and would then chase until hopefully hitting and destroying it; that is, being down and shooting up. Not only that, but the KEIs would have to be based in nations near the sites from which enemy missiles might be launched. This gives those nations where these interceptors would be based an effective veto over whether the US could or could not defend itself.

The latest addition to the array of possible space weapons are the so called space strike weapons. The most advanced of these space strike weapons is the Common Aero Vehicle (CAV). Work on the CAV began during the Clinton administration. This effort was mostly confined to a few blue sky studies, including the 2002 Rand publication, Space WeaponsEarth Wars. Among other things, this study concluded that these weapons would not be effective against runways, deeply buried bunkers, bridges and long low buildings. According to this study, a notional weapon weighing 100 kilograms would only be able to penetrate 1.5 meters of steel, or 3 meters of clay and stonehardly enough to reach the deep bunkers we believe the Iranians have built to hide their nuclear weapon development facilities. In spite of their capability to hit targets at velocities of anywhere from 2 to 10 kilometers a second, it would take a very large weapon indeed, or several smaller ones, to hit the type of deeply-buried targets expected to exist in Iran and North Korea.
After all, why not fight wars in space? Theres lots of room there and not a lot of civilians to get in the way.

This has excited foes like Center for Defense Information and the New York Times. The CDIs space expert, Theresa Hitchens, has been a leading lobbyist against all sorts of space weapons for the last few years. Since the DoD is moving with glacial bureaucratic slowness towards a possible decision to begin work on space-based missile defense weapons, let alone on Rods from God, the CDIs recent effort may have more to do with fundraising than with the actual politics of military strategy or procurement. The trigger for this burst of activity was the request by the DoD that the new space policy consider the need to actively defend US satellites.

*This issue, rather than Rods from God, is the real subject of the current debate inside the administration. There is an urgent need to equip the next generation of major American military satellites with effective self-defense systems. These could include low-power solid-state lasers that could blind, or even fry, enemy ASAT weapons or, even small, kinetic, last-ditch defense systems analogous to the Navys Phalanx rapid-fire guns. There is even a possibility that high-powered microwave weapons might be deployed to defend large US spacecraft, but this would present a difficult problem since it would create a electromagnetic shock that might damage the spacecraft which the system was trying to protect.
*
If built and deployed, these weapons would indeed constitute unilateral space weaponization. The opposition believes that, like virginity, space would somehow lose its purity once orbital weapons of any sort were deployed. Officials in China, Russia, and France speak as if their national security depends on the continued defenselessness of Americas military space infrastructure.

The nature of space technology, and of space itself, as the ultimate high ground, means that there will be weapons, and future battles, outside Earths atmosphere. No matter what actually happens, it is almost certain that some will find a way to blame America. Therefore, any decision regarding the building of any space warfare system should be made strictly on the basis of military utility. Since no argument or foreign threat will likely change the minds of those who are against space weaponization, any change in US space policy, no matter how mild or hedged with caveats, will be portrayed as opening the doors of hell. Rather, under current circumstances, President Bush should authorize the pursuit of more and better space assets, including weapons, and Donald Rumsfeld should be pushing the Air Force to radically improve the way it designs and builds all its space systems.



The Space Review: Space weapons: the new debate

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## The SC

Top 10: Space Weapons 







Large nations are now racing for space age weapons. These are some of the most advanced and sophisticated weapons built to take the arms race to the next level.

No. 10: anti-satellite Missile:
The ability to destroy man-made satellites in orbit around Earth has already been demonstrated by China, who used an anti-satellite (ASAT) device against one of their own weather satellites. The US likewise shot down a crippled spy satellite in 2008 with a sea-based missile. India has said they wish to develop similar capabilities. The problem: Huge swarms of space debris generated by blowing up objects remain in orbit, and threaten manned spacecraft.







No. 9: Warm Jets:
Does a device that uses electromagnets to shoot a stream of molten metal at incredible speed toward enemy targets sound far-fetched? The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is already working on one, with the appropriately aggressive-sounding name of "MAHEM" (Magneto Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition). Pictured is Earthlight, an Arthur C. Clarke novel that presaged exactly this device.






No. 8: A Deadly Ray:
Directed-energy weapons utilize lasers, high-powered microwaves, and particle beams. Projects in development by the US have names like Airborne Laser, the Active Denial System, and the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL). However, before these weapons can "stun" or "kill" like a Star Trek phaser, engineers need to do much work to weaponize the various forms of energy under consideration.






No. 7: Star Stronghold:
Weapons in space need not be so exotic. Take the former Soviet Union's Almaz Space Station of the 1960s and '70s. The military space station reportedly carried a cannon to destroy satellites or incoming spacecraft. It was even reportedly tested (while no one was aboard the spacecraft) to demonstrate its feasibility. Other space-based conventional weapons could include more exotic packages of destruction, such as radio-frequency or high-power-microwave munitions.






No. 6: Space Parasite:
Home-grown microsatellite and nanosatellite technologies are being proliferated by a number of nations, hinting at some military uses. In one U.S, Department of Defense report, military officials took at face value a Hong Kong newspaper account in January 2001 that claimed China had developed and tested an ASAT system using a "parasitic microsatellite." Apparently this device could have been a small satellite designed to attach itself to other satellites to destroy or damage them. This neat but unsubstantiated assertion quietly vanished from further DoD reports.






No. 5: The Overload:
High-altitude weapons using electromagnetic energy may destroy and disrupt electronic and electrical devices, causing a burst of electromagnetic radiation (electromagnetic pulse, or EMP) to produce current and voltage surges. These bursts are commonly associated with nuclear explosions, but scientists have produced non-nuclear EMP's. The construction of small "e-bombs" poses a significant terrorist threat against airplanes.






No. 4: Moonraker:
Deploying nuclear bombs in outer space seems like a natural goal of the military. Indeed, in the 1950's the US Air Force planned to detonate a nuclear bomb on the moon. This effort, dubbed Project A 119, included a young Carl Sagan on its team. At the time, an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) carrying a nuclear warhead possessed the capability to reach the moon. Fortunately, the man in the moon was spared.


----------



## The SC

No. 3: Rods from Gods:
Scheduled for a test flight on April 20, 2010, the reusable robotic X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV) is a small space shuttle-like craft developed by the US Air Force. If such a reusable space plane becomes feasible, it will offer unheard-of capabilities for launch on-demand, surprise, and flexibility. If those benefits aren't enough, the space plane may be outfitted with a weapon to drop tungsten rods on Earth targets from outer space, the so-called "Rods from Gods."





No. 2: You Can't Hide:
In the USAF's Manned Orbital Laboratory (MOL) program of 1965, two astronauts would launch atop a Titan 3 rocket in a spacecraft similar to NASA's Gemini capsules, then conduct reconnaissance missions from orbit using ultra high-resolution telescopes. The project was scuttled in 1969, and unmanned spy satellites proved a better option later.






No. 1: Space Catapult:
Could an orbiting asteroid be manipulated to smash down on an enemy target on Earth? It's possible, but doesn't seem like an efficient way of doing battle, according to a RAND think-tank report. More effort would be required to achieve such a result than was employed to develop the first A-bomb during the Manhattan Project in WWII, they say.






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Space Weapon Testing: Giant Lines in Chinese Desert for Targeting?






A former China-desk Army intelligence analyst and co-author of a new book about Chinese-American relations, told HUMAN EVENTS November 15 that the strange giant white lines drawn in western China&#8217;s Gobi Desert were most likely practice targets for Chinese space weapons.

Space Weapon Testing: Giant Lines in Chinese Desert for Targeting? | Pakalert Press

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Electromagnetic pulse warfare:




EMP Commission Warns Catastrophic Consequences

First, the definition&#8230; An electromagnetic pulse (sometimes abbreviated EMP) is a burst of electromagnetic radiation. The abrupt pulse of electromagnetic radiation usually results from certain types of high energy explosions, especially a nuclear explosion, or from a suddenly fluctuating magnetic field (e.g. EMP-bomb). The resulting rapidly changing electric fields and magnetic fields may couple with electrical/electronic systems to produce damaging current and voltage surges.

Public statements by physicists and engineers working in the EMP field of the United States EMP Commission determined that EMP protections are almost completely absent in the civilian infrastructure of the United States, and that even large sectors of the United States military services were no longer protected against EMP to the level that they were during the Cold War.

The following are excerpts from a report titled&#8230;

&#8216;Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack (Critical National Infrastructures)&#8217;

&#8230;which is well worth a few minutes of your time to read. While no one can fully imagine the consequences of such an event, the fact is that the technology exists and weapons exist which could bring it to pass. Please consider the ramifications of your life if it were to be&#8230;

The physical and social fabric of the United States is sustained by a system of systems; a complex and dynamic network of interlocking and interdependent infrastructures (&#8220;critical national infrastructures&#8221 whose harmonious functioning enables the myriad actions, transactions, and information flow that undergird the orderly conduct of civil society in this country. The vulnerability of these infrastructures to threats &#8212; deliberate, accidental, and acts of nature &#8212; is the focus of greatly heightened concern in the current era.

*The electromagnetic pulse generated by a high altitude nuclear explosion is one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences*. The increasingly pervasive use of electronics of all forms represents the greatest source of vulnerability to attack by EMP. Electronics are used to control, communicate, compute, store, manage, and implement nearly every aspect of United States (U.S.) civilian systems. When a nuclear explosion occurs at high altitude, the EMP signal it produces will cover the wide geographic region within the line of sight of the detonation. This broad band, high amplitude EMP, when coupled into sensitive electronics, has the capability to produce widespread and long lasting disruption and damage to the critical infrastructures that underpin the fabric of U.S. society.

Some critical electrical power infrastructure components are no longer manufactured in the United States, and their acquisition ordinarily requires up to a year of lead time in routine circumstances. Damage to or loss of these components could leave significant parts of the electrical infrastructure out of service for periods measured in months to a year or more. There is a point in time at which the shortage or exhaustion of sustaining backup systems, including emergency power supplies, batteries, standby fuel supplies, communications, and manpower resources that can be mobilized, coordinated, and dispatched, together lead to a continuing degradation of critical infrastructures for a prolonged period of time.

Electrical power is necessary to support other critical infrastructures, including supply and distribution of water, food, fuel, communications, transport, financial transactions, emergency services, government services, and all other infrastructures supporting the national economy and welfare. Should significant parts of the electrical power infrastructure be lost for any substantial period of time, the Commission believes that the consequences are likely to be catastrophic, and many people may ultimately die for lack of the basic elements necessary to sustain life in dense urban and suburban communities. In fact, the Commission is deeply concerned that such impacts are likely in the event of an EMP attack unless practical steps are taken to provide protection for critical elements of the electric system and for rapid restoration of electric power, particularly to essential services. The recovery plans for the individual infrastructures currently in place essentially assume, at worst, limited upsets to the other infrastructures that are important to their operation. Such plans may be of little or no value in the wake of an EMP attack because of its long-duration effects on all infrastructures that rely on electricity or electronics.

The ability to recover from this situation is an area of great concern. The use of automated control systems has allowed many companies and agencies to operate effectively with small work forces. Thus, while manual control of some systems may be possible, the number of people knowledgeable enough to support manual operations is limited. Repair of physical damage is also constrained by a small work force. Many maintenance crews are sized to perform routine and preventive maintenance of high-reliability equipment. When repair or replacement is required that exceeds routine levels, arrangements are typically in place to augment crews from outside the affected area. However, due to the simultaneous, far-reaching effects from EMP, the anticipated augmenters likely will be occupied in their own areas. Thus, repairs normally requiring weeks of effort may require a much longer time than planned.

Cold War-style deterrence through mutual assured destruction is not likely to be an effective threat against potential protagonists that are either failing states or trans-national groups. Therefore, making preparations to manage the effects of an EMP attack, including understanding what has happened, maintaining situational awareness, having plans in place to recover, challenging and exercising those plans, and reducing vulnerabilities, is critical to reducing the consequences, and thus probability, of attack. The appropriate national-level approach should balance prevention, protection, and recovery.

EMP Commission Warns Catastrophic Consequences | Pakalert Press

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SamranAli

shocking....there is no limit to deadly weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The SC

MEADS (Medium Extended Air Defence System)

The medium extended air defence system (MEADS) is scheduled to replace Hawk and Patriot systems worldwide. MEADS will protect manoeuvring forces and fixed installations against attacks from current and next-generation tactical ballistic missiles, low and high-altitude cruise missiles, remotely piloted vehicles, manoeuvring fixed-wing aircraft and rotary wing aircraft. The total system is designed for rapid deployment and tactical mobility.
MEADS missile defence project

In 2003, MEADS International submitted a solicited proposal for the design and development (D&D) phase. The US and Italy approved the project for the D&D phase in July 2004. In April 2005, the Germany approved participation in the D&D phase.

In June 2005, MEADS International received the formal contract from the Nato medium extended air defence management agency (NAMEADSMA) for the D&D phase. The contract extends the MEADS programme for nine years.

A risk reduction effort (RRE) programme was awarded in July 2001. A successful system demonstration in May 2004 concluded a three-year risk reduction effort programme. The demonstration included a prototype of the fire control radar, command centre, launcher and emulated PAC-3 missile.
MEADS missile and aircraft engagement demonstration

MEADS successfully demonstrated its ability to acquire, track and destroy live targets using simulated PAC-3 hit-to-kill missiles. MEADS also managed to identify and engage simulated ballistic missile and hostile aircraft targets, as well as live dedicated and opportunity aircraft.

The demonstration verified BMC4I (battle management command, control, communications, computers and intelligence) capability to control and display surveillance radar, multifunction fire control radar (MFCR) and launcher functions. The launcher's roll-on / roll-off capability for the C-130 transport aircraft was also demonstrated successfully.

In February 2009, Germany requested that MEADS International integrate the IRIS-T SL air defence missile into MEADS, to fulfil a German Air Force requirement for a lower tier element. IRIS-T SL, supplied by Diehl BGT, is a surface-launched medium-range version of the air-launched IRIS-T. It has a range of 30km.

In 1999, NAMEADSMA selected MEADS International, headquartered in Orlando, Florida, to develop the new air and missile defence system.

A multinational partnership, MEADS International's participating companies are MBDA (formerly Alenia Marconi Systems) in Italy, EADS in Germany and Lockheed Martin in the US.

Finances for the design and development programme were provided by the US (58%), Germany (25%) and Italy (17%). Development work is allocated in accordance with national funding.

Mobile surface-to-air missile system

MEADS is a mobile surface-to-air missile system. The multicanister launcher is mounted on a 5t wheeled vehicle. Advanced radars provide 360° coverage and operate in highly stressing jamming environments.

The system is strategically transportable and tactically mobile. It is required to be transportable by C-130 and A400M aircraft and will be quickly deployed to the theatre of operations and airlifted with multiple missiles loaded on the mobile launcher. Once in the forward zone, it is able to move quickly to keep pace with fast-moving manoeuvre forces.

MEADS has greater firepower and requires less manpower than its predecessors. The components of MEADS are linked by a communications network with netted and distributed architecture enabling the MEADS units to be organised according to the specific task requirements and configured according to predicted threats.

The multiple paths of communications result in the system being very robust against jamming and also allow the units to be dispersed over a wide area. The units have access to sensors from other systems. Interoperability also allows multiple allied air defences to work together.
'Plug and fight' flexibility allowing air defence system integration capabilities

Flexibility is a key characteristic of MEADS. The 'plug and fight' flexibility of its open architecture provides for 21st century air defence system-of-system integration capabilities which allow operational mission-tailoring for homeland defence or defence of manoeuvre forces. MEADS will also provide greater firepower with less manpower than current systems, producing dramatic operation and support cost savings.

The system is able to command a fleet of distributed missile launchers while simultaneously detecting and tracking hostile forces and targets. The missile launchers can be located well away from the ground radar and the battle management units. It is also possible to hand over command and control of the launchers and missiles to a neighbouring battle management unit while management systems are moved.

MEADS is intended for use in standalone and tailorable operational configurations through compatibility with other air defence systems. A minimum engagement capability that relies on a single multifunction fire control radar (MFCR), tactical operations centre and launcher (12 PAC-3 MSE missiles) can be strategically deployed using a single C-5 or tactically deployed in just five C-130 sorties.

Command and control of the MEADS ballistic missile defence system and radar

MEADS ballistic missile defence system BMC4I is a netted, distributed, automated communications network which uses an open systems architecture. All equipment is ruggedised commercial-off-the-shelf / military-off-the-shelf.

The tactical operations centre (TOC) is housed in a single shelter containing three workstations and two operators. One standard TOC is provided to the nations, but each nation mounts it on a chassis or trailer of its selection. Northrop Grumman Italia was selected to provide the MEADS navigation and localisation system in February 2008.

Lockheed Martin Mission Systems & Sensors is responsible for the new truck-mounted surveillance radar for MEADS and, with Selex Sistemi Integrati (formerly Alenia Marconi Systems) and MBDA Italia, will provide the new X-band multifunction fire control radar. Cassidian (formerly EADS Defence Electronics) is responsible for the radar's transmit / receive modules.

Both systems will use a common design for the digital receiver and signal / data processor, allowing for validation using a single prototype. Radars will provide full 360° capability.

MEADS (Medium Extended Air Defence System) - Army Technology





















-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The S-400 Triumf long- to medium-range surface-to-air missile system can effectively engage any aerial target, including aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and cruise and ballistic missiles at up to 400 kilometers and an altitude of up to 30 kilometers.












S-300P/S-400/S-500 Air Defence System Vehicles

S-300P/S-400/S-500 Air Defence System Vehicles

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

China's New Fighter Jet Could Pose 'Terrifying' Challenge to U.S. Fleet

Decorated Navy fighter pilot Matthew &#8220;Whiz&#8221; Buckley, a Top Gun graduate of the Navy Fighter Weapons School who flew 44 combat missions over Iraq, says, &#8220;It&#8217;s probably leaps and bounds above where we are, and that&#8217;s terrifying.&#8221;

&#8220;As a former Navy fighter pilot, going up against something that&#8217;s stealthy, highly maneuverable and with electronic systems more capable than mine -- that&#8217;ll keep me up at night,&#8221; said Buckley, now chief strategy officer at Fox3 Options LLC.

Buckley said photos posted online of the radar-evading Chengdu J-20 jet fighter lead him to believe the aircraft has great stealth capabilities, based on what appears to be a bumpy exterior possibly housing stealth technology, and the lack of external components, such as a gas tank and missiles.

&#8220;It was built to reduce radar signatures. You can tell it has some serious stealth technology,&#8221; he said. &#8220;My F-18 looks like an 18-wheeler on radar. That thing might not even show up.&#8221;

&#8220;We used be No. 1 at having the leading technology. ... Now, we&#8217;re kind of in catch-up mode, where we&#8217;ve never really been before.&#8221;

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/01/07/chinas-new-fighter-jet-pose-terrifying-challenge-fleet/


----------



## manofwar

Found this project...........Seems interesting

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

The Russian Philosophy versus the American one
of
Beyond Visual Range Air Combat *BVR*

The Russian paradigm of BVR combat has its origins in the Cold War period, when Soviet operational analysis indicated that the low kill probability of missile seekers and airframes, especially if degraded by countermeasures, would be a major impediment to success. By the 1970s the standard Soviet technique in a BVR missile launch was to salvo two rounds, a semi-active radar homing weapon and a heatseeking weapon. To this effect some Soviet fighters even included a weapons select mode which automatically sequenced the launch of two rounds for optimal separation.

The mathematics of multiple round missile engagements are unambiguous - the size of a missile salvo launched is a stronger driver of success than the actual kill probability of the individual missiles. If the missiles are wholly identical by type, then the following curves may be optimistic, insofar as a factor degrading the kill probability of one missile is apt to have a similar effect on its siblings in a salvo. However, where the missiles differ by seeker type and guidance control laws, then the assumption of statistically independent missile shots is very much stronger.

A critical question which must be asked when assessing the effectiveness of Russian BVR tactics is that of Western tactics and the effectiveness of the *AIM-120 AMRAAM*, the principal Western BVR fighter weapon. The AIM-120A AMRAAM was introduced at the end of the Cold War to provide a "fire and forget" active radar guided weapon with a midcourse inertial guidance system and datalink support provided by the radar on the launch aircraft, allowing multiple concurrent shots. The AIM-120A was followed by the incrementally improved B-model, and then by the "short span" AIM-120C-3 sized to fit the F-22A weapon bay. The AIM-120C-4 has better kinematic performance introducing a larger rocket motor and shorter control section, and a better warhead, while the AIM-120C-6 introduced a better fuse. The latest AIM-120D introduces a redesigned seeker built for better durability in high vibration carriage environments, a two way datalink, GPS to supplement inertial guidance, incrementally improved kinematics, and better seeker performance against high off-boresight targets.

The Russian Philosophy of Beyond Visual Range Air Combat

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

BVR







Raytheon's AIM-120 AMRAAM missile for beyond visual range engagements.


----------



## The SC

*500 MegaWatt Ranets E pulsed microwave beam weapon*






Directed energy weapons are another capability which is seen by the Russians and Chinese as critical to defeating massed attacks by US smart munitions and cruise missiles. The Russians have been marketing the 500 MegaWatt Ranets E pulsed microwave beam weapon, using a mobile beam director dish on a 8 x 8 MZKT-7930 truck. This system will be electrically lethal to aircraft avionics and guided munition electronics at a range of 7 nautical miles or greater.

The status of High Energy Laser weapons is less clear at this time. Almaz-Antey developed the Soviet 100 kiloWatt plus class carbon dioxide chemical lasers, and built a system comparable to the US THEL/MTHEL, but highly mobile on an 8 x 8 MAZ-7910 chassis.


*The Impact of Russian High Technology Weapons: Transforming the Strategic Balance in Asia
*
*Abstract*

Advanced Russian technology exports present a major strategic risk for the US, whether operated by China, or smaller players like Iran or Venezuela. These systems will deny access to most US ISR and combat aircraft, with only the B-2A, the &#8220;2018 bomber&#8221; and the F-22A designed to penetrate such defences. Until the &#8220;2018 bomber&#8221; is operational, the US will have only 200 aircraft with any capability to deal with this emerging environment. With its compromised X-band optimised stealth, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will simply not be survivable in this environment. The fallback position of standoff bombardment with cruise missiles is not viable. Only a fraction will reach their targets through such defences, and the economics of trading $500k cruise missiles for $100k interceptors, or hundreds of dollars of laser propellant, favour the defender. The US will require a penetrating capability for ISR collection and for lethal suppression of highly mobile SAM, laser and radio-frequency Directed Energy Weapon batteries. This is over and above the need to deliver saturation attacks with the Small Diameter Bomb against actual targets of strategic or tactical interest. Current planning for 180 F-22As and the legacy fleet of 20 B-2As is simply not credible given the diversity of roles and missions, and sheer sortie count required to deal with anything above a trivial opponent. If the US is to maintain its pre-eminent global strategic position, its force structure planning for the Air Force requires a fundamental rethink. A starting point should be the cancellation of the 'Fulda Gap optimised' F-35 JSF, investment of the freed funding into more F-22s, and further enhancement of the already formidable penetrating ISR and strike capabilites of the F-22. Further technological innovation will also be required across the full spectrum of US air capabilities. If the US chooses to optimise its Air Force for the Global War On Terror, it will only accelerate the relative decline of US global power.


The Impact of Russian High Technology Weapons: Transforming the Strategic Balance in Asia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

Micro-Drones

Dust sized micro drones that can disable equipment without being detected.

Mosquito robot

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## GamingLevels

so cool aaaaaa


----------



## The SC

&#8220;Kamikaze drone&#8221; Switchblade Drone











An innovative new weapon may mark the end of days when insurgents can run away, hide from or even go toe-to-toe with ground troops.

The switchblade, developed by military contractor AeroVironment, was born out efforts to take drone technology beyond reconnaissance missions and the massive Reaper or Predator assault aircraft being used in Pakistan and elsewhere. What the researchers came up with was a drone that easily fits into a backpack and could also explode on impact.

The way it works is somewhat similar to mortar artillery in that it&#8217;s launched from a tube. However, it can hover in the air before homing in on an enemy target. And, should a soldier change his mind, it can be called off at the last minute.

It&#8217;s been described as &#8220;a smart, remote-control grenade with wings&#8221; and a &#8220;Kamikaze drone.&#8221; I&#8217;d say it&#8217;s, more than anything else, a miniature guided missile. Whatever you want to call it, the military plans to make sure soldiers are armed with it soon, according to a report by the AFP.

What makes the weapon so deadly is a combination of cutting-edge technologies packed into a missile-shaped capsule that weighs no more than 2 pounds. Inside is a highly-precise guidance and command system and a mechanism that enables explosive material to detonate on impact. A small motor powers the device, enabling it to send real-time video of targets on the ground so soldiers can lock in on the enemy.

"Upon confirming the target using the live video feed, the operator then sends a command to the air vehicle to arm it and lock its trajectory onto the target,&#8221; the company told AFP.

One of the Switchblade&#8217;s obvious advantages is that with such unprecedented maneuverability and versatility, soldiers can more effectively take out targets and do so without having to put themselves in positions where they are more vulnerable. And with this kind of precision, it also reduces the likelihood of collateral damage, which has been an ongoing criticism of the unmanned drone missions in which bombs are dropped on sites where civilians may reside.

According to a report in Wired: the Army awarded AeroVironment a $4.9 million contract on July 29 for &#8220;rapid fielding&#8221; of an unspecified number of Switchblades to &#8220;deployed combat forces.&#8221;

So before too long, they might start seeing some action in Afghanistan.

Tiny missile hunts down, destroys enemies [video] | Smartplanet

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breakthrough may lead to super-destructive missiles 

High-Density Reactive Material






High-Density Reactive Material (HDRM) 

If the military has it&#8217;s way, missiles, grenades and other military weaponry may soon deliver an even more lethal blow.

That&#8217;s because a new material dubbed *High-Density Reactive Material*, developed by the Office of Naval Research, can be combined with other explosive ingredients to increase a standard weapon&#8217;s explosive force by a factor of five. The material, a mixture of several metals, is designed to replace conventional steel casings with little or no compromise in strength or stability.

Manufacturers typically used steel because it provided superior structural rigidity, holding an explosive together until the weapon reached the intended target &#8212; though it did little else to improve the destructive effectiveness of the warhead. While that isn&#8217;t necessarily a problem, the Navy&#8217;s latest advancement represents an entirely novel approach in which the shell can also be detonated to release chemical energy after impact, an added function that increases the likelihood of a catastrophic kill.

Here&#8217;s a brief explanation from io9 of how the new technology works:

Instead of solid steel, these new missiles will have shells made out of a combination of metals. Also mixed in is an oxidizing agent. Oxidizing agents help aid combustion, usually by giving oxygen over to the combusting material. When an ordinary missile hits the target, the energy in the steel shell doesn&#8217;t go into the explosion. Instead, it&#8217;s scattered as shrapnel around the area of the explosion. When this combination of oxidizers and metals hits a target, the materials are combined by the force of the explosion, and they explode themselves. This makes for a bigger localized explosion, but doesn&#8217;t send pieces of steel flying over the area. The navy believes that this change will lead to a smaller amount of bystander deaths.

Naval researchers tested the material during a firing exercise at the Army&#8217;s Blossom Point Field Test Facility in Maryland at the end of June and around mid-August. Next up is a large-scale demonstration against multiple stationary targets is tentatively planned for September.

Breakthrough may lead to super-destructive missiles | Smartplanet


RM bomb





One of the novel features of the new class of &#8216;explosive metals&#8217; known as Reactive Materials is that they can be engineered to perform in completely different ways, depending on the initiation. This makes it possible to have a &#8216;variable lethality&#8217; munition whose effects can be tailored to the situation or the target.

One possible application put forward by arms-maker ATK is in landmines. In a presentation on Reactive Materials In Mines And Demolition Systems (warning, large Powerpoint file), Mark Cvetnic, ATK&#8217;s Technical Director of Advanced Programs, describes a versatile RM-based munition:

"Dial-a-yield" effects &#8211; Tiered response &#8211; reactive materials in a blast weapon can tailor the blast effect to range from non-lethal (disorientation/discomfort/incapacitation) to lethal force.

This means that an untended mine could be set on a variety of non-lethal settings (see picture) depending on requirements, or a human operator could set it to the higher levels. Think:

- Non-lethal disorientation &#8211; explosives and reactive materials to create high-intensity light

- Non-lethal discomfort &#8211; high temperature impulse, with low pressure blast, create discomfort zone

- Non-lethal blast &#8211; using the explosives and reactive fragments to create incapacitating blast wave

The last of these sounds like a high-powered version of the traditional &#8216;flash bang&#8217; stun grenade. Moving up, the lethal range has two settings:

- Lethal blast combining the blast from the explosives and reactive fragments

- Lethal fragments patterns using reactive fragments

Its effectiveness compared to traditional fragmenting mines is outlined:

- RM fragmentation lethal effects

Equivalent Kinetic Energy as steel fragments &#8211; current generation
ATK Thiokol reactive materials have the same density as steel, thus giving RM fragmentation weapons the same fragment kinetic energy

Additional Chemical Energy From RM event &#8211; reactive fragments can produce a large amount of chemical energy in the form of temperature, light and/or pressure.

Having a large amount of energy released inside a body by a RM
fragment in the form of heat or pressure would certainly make it significantly more lethal than an inert metal fragment. This means the
RM mine has settings which, like the phasers in Star Trek, really do run from &#8216;stun&#8217; to &#8216;disintegrate&#8217;.

Of course, this technology is not limited to landmines: any explosive munition could have the same &#8216;dial-a-yield&#8217; capability. This would apply to everything from grenades to 2,000 lbs, so that depending on requirements the target could be warned, driven away &#8212; or destroyed far more effectively than by existing weapons.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/05/reactive-revo-5/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Piloted aircraft transforms into a spy drone 






If recent events are any indication, robotic aircraft will play an increasingly significant role in U.S. military operations.

Drones such as the Predator and Reaper have already proved their mettle as difference makers against insurgents in Libya and Pakistan. And earlier this year, the armed forces gave a sneak peak of what the next generation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) will be capable of when the Phantom Ray X-45C and X-47B stealth bomber both completed test flights, respectively. Now a more versatile robotic aircraft hopes to turn the heads of battlefield commanders who are continually seeking ways to upgrade their arsenal.

The Firebird optionally piloted aircraft (OPA), developed by Northman Grupman, is a 34 foot-long, 5,000-pound spy vehicle that can not only operate as an autonomous drone, but as a piloted airplane as well. It can reach heights of 40,000 feet and has a cruising altitude of about 230 mph, with enough fuel capacity to stay airborne for 24 to 40 hours.

It comes equipped with high-resolution cameras, synthetic aperture radar (SAR), communications relays and eavesdropping technology. Also, the ability to convert into a piloted aircraft gives it an advantage over drones in that unmanned planes aren&#8217;t allowed to venture into American airspace unattended.

The company is confident that these features will leave an favorable impression on government officials when the Firebird is demonstrated during the Pentagon&#8217;s Empire Challenge, a showcase for military contract hopefuls that&#8217;s held later this month.

Video: Piloted aircraft transforms into a spy drone | Smartplanet

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BAE Systems&#8217; Taranis: $214 million unmanned stealth jet can strike targets across oceans 






The United Kingdom&#8217;s Ministry of Defence on Monday unveiled a prototype unmanned combat aircraft that&#8217;s intended to strike targets on different continents.

The drone, made by BAE Systems and called Taranis (after the Celtic god of thunder &#8212; really), is one step on the way to developing the world&#8217;s first autonomous, stealth Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) with long-range capability &#8212; far enough to strike targets on another continent.

The aircraft is controlled by military crews on the ground, and comes with a £142.5 million, or approx. $214 million USD, price tag, according to the UK&#8217;s Daily Mail.

A few quick stats about Taranis:

It&#8217;s nearly invisible to ground radar.
It&#8217;s designed to travel at &#8220;jet speeds.&#8221;
With onboard sensors, it&#8217;s intended for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance in enemy territory.
It can also carry weapons, including bombs and missiles.
It can be controlled from anywhere in the world using satellite communication.
The plane began development in December 2006.
It&#8217;s the U.K.&#8217;s answer to U.S. supremacy in the stealth aircraft sector.

&#8220;Taranis has been three and a half years in the making and is the product of more than a million man-hours,&#8221; said Nigel Whitehead, managing director of BAE Systems&#8217; Programmes & Support business, in a statement.

&#8220;It represents a significant step forward in this country&#8217;s fast-jet capability. This technology is key to sustaining a strong industrial base and to maintain the UK&#8217;s leading position as a center for engineering excellence and innovation.&#8221;

Initial ground-based testing began this year. The first flight is expected to take place in 2011.

The aircraft is the product of an informal partnership of the UK Ministry of Defence and BAE Systems, Rolls Royce (propulsion), QinetiQ (autonomy systems) and GE Aviation (vehicle systems).






A tell-tale glimpse of China&#8217;s stealth technology | Smartplanet

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pak47

Lasers on Planes..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

Rheinmetall demonstrates laser weapons











German company Rheinmetall Defense says it has successfully combined a powerful laser weapon with an advanced air defense system.

The demonstrator systems were recently tested at a proving ground in Switzerland, the company said, and downed an unmanned aerial vehicle used as a target and engaged and defeated other threats as well.

"Having recently used a high-energy laser weapon to down an unmanned aircraft at a proving ground in Switzerland, Rheinmetall has demonstrated the operational potential of combining a powerful laser weapon with an advanced air defense system," Rheinmetall said in a news release.

"This event provides compelling proof of the (Rheinmetall) group's 360-degree competence in relevant technologies -- ranging from military lasers and target recognition and identification, to target tracking and fire control units -- and its unrivalled ability to weld them into a single, forward-looking, fully functional full-scale demonstrator."

The live-fire laser demonstration was conducted at Rheinmetall's Ochsenboden proving ground.

One weapon system -- two 5-kilowatt laser weapon modules -- was integrated into an air defense system using an Oerlikon Skyguard 3 fire control unit and a Skyshield gun turret. The second, a 1-kW laser weapon module, was mounted on a TM 170-type vehicle.

Both laser weapon demonstrators were used in different scenarios: protecting against asymmetric, terrorist-type threats; countering incoming rockets, artillery and mortar rounds; and defending against an aircraft target.

Rheinmetall said the 1-kW laser weapon demonstrator successfully sank a moving rubber raft (substituting as a speedboat) and was also effective in destroying improvised explosive devices and in neutralizing unexploded ordnance.

In the artillery, mortar and rocket scenario, the 10-kW laser demonstrator showed that the doubling the laser output from the 5-kW of the 2010 design improved performance and reduced the time to engage a target by half.

The 10-kW weapon in the anti-aircraft scenario successfully detected, tracked, engaged and destroyed a UAV in flight.

The live-fire demonstration at the Ochsenboden proving ground, the company said, shows the company has the skill and expertise to develop complex laser weapon systems.

Rheinmetall said it expects to have a 100-kW a laser weapon system available for customers in three to five years but, even today, the modular, scalable design of the lasers demonstrated are able to meet a variety of military weapon requirements.

Rheinmetall demonstrates laser weapons

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Peaceful Civilian

Powerful laser weapon?? More threat for the Peaceful environment and skin protecting layers on the sky.
Where is world going??


----------



## The SC

Active Defence System (ADS)







The system is based on the hard-kill principle, in which incoming projectiles are detected and instantly - i.e. within microseconds - destroyed by directed energy immediately before reaching their target. It is the only high-performance close-in defence system which minimizes collateral damage in the vicinity of the vehicle.

Comprehensive protection technology from Rheinmetall

Achieving a level of force protection commensurate to the current threat means having to equip platforms with a combination of active and passive protection solutions coupled with soft-kill systems.

Rheinmetall's comprehensive protection concept is based on a multi-level approach. Effectively constituting a vehicle's outermost layer of defence, the "Active Defence System" is an extremely innovative, highly effective solution that neutralizes ballistic threats before they reach their intended target.

Passive solutions such as add-on armour made of composite or ceramic materials form an indispensable second line of defence. Rheinmetall is pressing ahead with new developments here, too, offering military customers comprehensive protection solutions from a single source, e.g. bullet-resistant driver's cabs for logistics vehicles and trucks.

The Group's protection concept also encompasses high-performance soft-kill solutions for ground vehicles as well as fixed wing aircraft, helicopters and ships. For example, Rheinmetall's "Rosy" smoke/obscurant protection system renders ground vehicles invisible in the event of an attack, while its MASS naval countermeasures now sets the standard worldwide. MASS works by launching decoys which reliably divert incoming enemy missiles from their intended target.

Rheinmetall Defence - 01/02/2011: Rheinmetall takes up a majority share in ADS GmbH


----------



## The SC

Rafale Multirole Combat Fighter, France





























The Dassault Rafale is a French twin-engine delta-wing fighter aircraft designed and built by Dassault Aviation. Dassault described the Rafale as being an omnirole fighter with semi-stealth capabilities. 

Rafale is a twin-jet combat aircraft capable of carrying out a wide range of short and long-range missions, including ground and sea attacks, reconnaissance, high-accuracy strikes and nuclear strike deterrence.

The aircraft were developed for the French Air Force and Navy. France's Air Force and Navy ordered 180 (132 for the air force and 48 for the navy), 100 aircraft had been delivered by the end of 2010.

The Rafale entered into service with the French Navy in 2004 and with the French Air Force in 2006. Ten aircraft are operational on the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier.
Rafale fighter aircraft development

Rafale B and C entered service with the French Air Force in June 2006, when the first squadron was established. The second air force squadron was set up in 2008. A 3.1bn ($3.89bn) contract to develop the fully capable F3 standard aircraft was awarded to Dassault Aviation (1.5bn), Snecma (600m), Thales (500m) and other French contractors by the French Ministry of Defence in February 2004.
"The Rafale entered into service with the French Navy in 2004 and with the French Air Force in 2006. Ten aircraft are operational on the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier."

An order for 59 F3 aircraft, 47 for the air force (11 two-seat and 36 single-seat) and 12 (single-seat) for the navy, was placed in December 2004. The Rafale F3 was certified in July 2008. The contract also includes upgrades of the Rafale F2 aircraft.

The first Rafale F3 was delivered to the French Air Force in 2008. In March 2007, three French Air Force and three navy Rafale fighters were deployed in Tajikistan in support of the Nato International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan.

The French Government ordered 60 additional Rafale aircraft in November 2009. Brazil's Government awarded a $4bn contract to Dassault Aviation in January 2010 to supply 36 Rafale multirole aircraft.

The UAE was expected to acquire the Rafale under a $10bn contract to replace its 60 ageing Mirage fighters. In November 2011, however, the deal came to a standstill when the UAE termed Dassault's price and terms as "uncompetitive". The country is also considering Eurofighter's Typhoon to replace its ageing Mirage fighters.

In February 2012, the Indian Ministry of Defence selected Rafale for the Indian Air Force's MMRCA (medium multirole combat aircraft) programme. The contract is worth approximately $20bn.

Rafale emerged as the preferred aircraft from among various contenders for what is being called the biggest military aviation contract in the world. Its closest contender was Eurofighter's Typhoon.

Under the contract, Dassault will supply 126 Rafale fighters. The first 18 fighters will be supplied by 2015 and the rest will be manufactured in India under a technology transfer to Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL). This contract will be the first international supply for Rafale.
Cockpit of Dassault's Rafale

The cockpit has hands-on throttle and stick control (HOTAS). The cockpit is equipped with a heads-up, wide-angle holographic display from Thales Avionique, which provides aircraft control data, mission data and firing cues.

A collimated, multi-image head-level display presents tactical situation and sensor data, while two touch-screen lateral displays show the aircraft system parameters and mission data.

The pilot also has a helmet-mounted sight and display. A CCD camera and on-board recorder records the image of the head-up display throughout the mission.
Rafale fighter weapons

Rafale can carry payloads of more than 9t on 14 hardpoints for the air force version, with 13 for the naval version. The range of weapons includes: Mica, Magic, Sidewinder, ASRAAM and AMRAAM air-to-air missiles; Apache, AS30L, ALARM, HARM, Maverick and PGM100 air-to-ground missiles and Exocet / AM39, Penguin 3 and Harpoon anti-ship missiles.

For a strategic mission the Rafale can deliver the MBDA (formerly Aerospatiale) ASMP stand-off nuclear missile. In December 2004, the MBDA Storm Shadow / Scalp EG stand-off cruise missile was qualified on the Rafale.

In September 2005, the first flight of the MBDA Meteor BVRAAM beyond visual range air-to-air missile was conducted on a Rafale fighter. In December 2005, successful flight trials were carried out from the Charles de Gaulle of the range of Rafale's weapon systems - Exocet, Scalp-EG, Mica, ASMP-A (to replace the ASMP) and Meteor missiles.

In April 2007, the Rafale carried out the first firing of the Sagem AASM precision-guided bomb, which has both GPS / inertial guidance and, optionally, imaging infrared terminal guidance. Rafale have been equipped with the AASM from 2008. Rafale can carry six AASM misssiles, with each aiming to hit the target with 10m accuracy.

The Rafale has a twin gun pod and a Nexter (formerly Giat) 30mm DEFA 791B cannon, which can fire 2,500 rounds a minute. The Rafale is equipped with laser designation pods for laser guidance of air-to-ground missiles.
Countermeasure and sensor technology on the twin-jet combat aircraft

Rafale's electronic warfare system is the Spectra from Thales. Spectra incorporates solid state transmitter technology, a DAL laser warning receiver, missile warning, detection systems and jammers.

The Rafale is equipped with an RBE2 passive electronically scanned radar developed by Thales which has look down and shoot down capabilities. The radar can track up to eight targets simultaneously and provides threat identification and prioritisation.

Thales developed an active electronically scanned version of the RBE2 which equipped the Rafale in February 2011. Flight tests of the radar onboard the Rafale took place in 2008.

RUAG Aviation has been awarded a $5m contract by Thales in May 2009 to produce sub assemblies for the RBE2 radar to be equipped on the Rafale fighter jet.

Optronic systems include the Thales / SAGEM OSF infrared search and track system, installed in the nose of the aircraft. The optronic suite carries out search, target identification, telemetry and automatic target discrimination and tracking.

In January 2012, the French Ministry of Defence awarded a ten-year contract to Thales to maintain the electronic systems and warfare of the aircraft.
Navigation and communications of Dassault Aviation's Rafale

The communications suite on the Rafale uses the Saturn on-board V/UHF radio, which is a second-generation, anti-jam tactical UHF radio for Nato. Saturn provides voice encryption in fast-frequency hopping mode.
"In February 2012, the Indian Ministry of Defence selected Rafale for the Indian Air Force's MMRCA (medium multirole combat aircraft) programme."

The aircraft is also equipped with fixed-frequency VHF / UHF radio for communications with civil air traffic control. A multifunction information distribution system (MIDS) terminal provides secure, high-data-rate tactical data exchange with Nato C2 stations, AWACS aircraft or naval ships.

The Rafale is powered by two M88-2 engines, each providing a thrust of 75kN.

Rafale is equipped with a Thales TLS 2000 navigation receiver, which is used for the approach phase of flight. TLS 2000 integrates the instrument landing system (ILS), microwave landing system (MLS) and VHF omni-directional radio-ranger (VOR) and marker functions.

The radar altimeter is the AHV 17 altimeter from Thales, which is suitable for very low flight. The Rafale has a TACAN tactical air navigation receiver for en-route navigation and as a landing aid.

The Rafale has an SB25A combined interrogator-transponder developed by Thales. The SB25A is the first IFF using electronic scanning technology.
Rafale engines

The Rafale is powered by two M88-2 engines from SNECMA, each providing a thrust of 75kN. The aircraft is equipped for buddy-buddy refuelling with a flight refuelling hose reel and drogue pack. The first M88 engine was delivered in 1996. It is a twin-shaft bypass turbofan engine principally suitable for low-altitude penetration and high-altitude interception missions.

The M88 incorporates the latest technologies such as single-piece bladed compressor disks (blisks), an on-polluting combustion chamber, single-crystal high-pressure turbine blades, powder metallurgy disks, ceramic coatings and composite materials.

The M88 engine comprises a three-stage LP compressor with inlet guide vane, an annular combustion chamber, single-stage cooled HP turbine, single-stage cooled LP turbine, radial A/B chamber, variable-section convergent flap-type nozzle and full authority digital engine control (FADEC).

Messier-Dowty provides 'jumper' landing gear, designed to spring out when the aircraft is catapulted by the nose gear strut.

Rafale Multirole Combat Fighter - Airforce Technology


----------



## The SC

PAK FA






Russia's next-generation fighter project cancelled

MOSCOW, April 12 (RIA Novosti) - Russian air force commander-in-chief Aleksandr Zelin has announced the cancellation of the $20-billion PAK-FA program after 20 years of escalating costs, technological glitches and redesigns failed to produce a single prototype aircraft.

The PAK-FA, once billed as Russia's next-generation fighter, had consumed $13.9-billion. The estimated cost of each aircraft had soared to $87.2-million from an original target of $30-million.

"It's had a long and troubled history," said Alexei Arbatov, a senior Duma official who heads the lower house committee for defense.

The PAK-FA, a new generation fighter aircraft concept, was designed to be comparable to both the American F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II and has been overtaken by the need to strengthen Russia's strategic nuclear forces.

Acknowledging that the PAK-FA no longer fit into the requirements of Russia, the Air Force said it would rather spend the money on an overhaul of its aviation system. If approved by the Federal Assembly, the funds would be directed instead to buy over 400 additional SU-34, SU-35 and other aircraft and to upgrade and modernize 1,400 aircraft already in service. Surface-to-air missiles also would be a priority.

"It's about having an effective deterrent force," said Air Force Colonel General Alexander Zelin. "It's a big decision. We know it's a big decision, but it's the right decision."

The end of the PAK-FA also reflects an acknowledgement by the Ministry of Defence that it simply cannot afford all the programs it wants. The move underscores the fact that the Ministry of Defence must begin economizing as the cost of new weapon systems increase and demands on military spending grow, industry analysts said.

The Air Force would have spent $20-billion on the PAK-FA program through 2012 without getting aircraft significantly more capable than the upgraded SU-35 it already plans to buy, Air Force officials said.

Some officials of the State Duma reacted angrily to the cancellation.

"I am outraged by the decision to terminate the PAK-FA program given that the Air Force has long argued that it is a critical weapons system that plays a pivotal role in our defence," said State Duma deputy Vladimir Medinsky. "What has changed? And how does the military plan to make up for the lost capabilities?"

Alexei Arbatov, Deputy Chairman of the Defence Committee of the State Duma, said the decision "reflects the difficulty that the services are facing with the cost of modernization requirements now coming to the fore."

The cancellation was a blow to the PAK-FA's prime contractors, Sukhoi and NPO Saturn.

A senior Duma official said the Ministry of Defense expects to have to pay a $450-million to $680-million termination fee to Sukhoi and NPO Saturn.

The program's elimination, however, could benefit the two companies. The Air Force now plans to pour more money into the SU-34 and SU-35, and ramp up the upgrade of aircraft already in service which would keep both companies busy for the foreseeable future.



F-22 RAPTOR











F-22 Raptor oxygen problems may be worse than previously disclosed

"The oxygen-deprivation incident rates are much higher than we were initially told," says Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who is looking into the F-22 Raptor fighter jet problems.

Oxygen problems that have plagued the Air Force's fleet of F-22 Raptor fighter jets may be worse than previously disclosed, according to new information released by two members of Congress.

F-22 pilots have reported dozens of incidents in which the jet's systems weren't feeding them enough oxygen, causing hypoxia-like symptoms in the air. Hypoxia is a condition resulting from a deficiency of oxygen reaching tissues of the body that can cause nausea, headaches, fatigue or even blackouts.

On Thursday, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) and Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) released information handed over by the Air Force that said pilots had experienced about 26 incidents of apparent oxygen deprivation per 100,000 flight hours  a rate at least 10 times higher than for any other Air Force aircraft.

"This information confirms that the F-22 program is not running at 100% and that the oxygen-deprivation incident rates are much higher than we were initially told," said Kinzinger, a former Air National Guard pilot.

The announcement is the latest for the controversial F-22, the world's most expensive fighter jet, which was made byLockheed Martin Corp.and has never been used in combat since entering service in 2005.

The lawmakers held a teleconference Thursday with reporters in which they disclosed the information. Other findings included an early 2011 aircrew survey that found that "a majority of F-22 pilots surveyed did not feel confident" with the plane's oxygen system.

The Air Force tried to fix the problem by adding a high-efficiency particulate air filter consisting of activated carbon and charcoal.

But, Kinzinger and Warner said, tests performed by Boeing Co. found that the new filter negatively affected the breathing system for F-22 pilots. Boeing formally recommended discontinuing use of the filters April 2  a recommendation that was adopted by the Air Force about a month later, they said.

The oxygen malfunctions are suspected of playing a role in at least one fatal accident and led to the grounding of the entire F-22 fleet last year for nearly five months. But even after the grounding was lifted, the Air Force said that investigators could not find a "smoking gun" for the problems and that hypoxia incidents continued to occur.

Last month, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panettarestricted flights of the aircraft because of the ongoing problems.


F-22 Raptor oxygen problems may be worse than previously disclosed - Los Angeles Times


----------



## The SC

Joint Strike Fighter F-35






































The JCA (Briton's Joint Combat Aircraft) will place the RAF at the forefront of fighter technology and will give it a true multi-role air system that will surpass the majority of other weapons systems in production today.
Specifications

Engines: Pratt & Whitney F-135 turbofan
Thrust: 37000lbs
Max speed: 1.6Mach
Length: 15.7m
Max altitude: 50,000ft
Span: 13.11m
Aircrew: 1
Armament: Paveway IV, AMRAAM, ASRAAM

Potential Future Armament: Storm Shadow, SPEAR, Missionized Gun, METEOR


The Joint Strike Fighter, which is being built by Lockheed Martin as the F35, will be known in UK service as the Joint Combat Aircraft (JCA). Although Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor, the UK is a Level 1 partner with the US and a number of British companies, including BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce, will have extensive involvement in building and developing the aircraft. The UK version will be a stealthy, multi-role, all-weather, day & night, fighter/attack air system aircraft that can operate from land bases and both current and the next generation of aircraft carriers. This will give the UK a world-beating land-based and sea-based joint expeditionary air power capability well into the middle of the century. When the JCA enters service, it will be able to conduct deep strike missions, into contemporary Integrated Air Defence Systems, against a myriad of target sets. Moreover, by conducting robust Integrated Air Operations, JSF will support friendly ground forces with close air support, long-range interdiction, anti-surface warfare and tactical reconnaissance. The aircraft will offer many advantages over legacy platforms: very low oberservability, supersonic flight, improved survivability, internal and external weapons carriage, increased range and easier supply and maintenance.

The JCA design applies stealth technology techniques and, to minimise its radar signature, the airframe has identical sweep angles for the leading and trailing edges of the wing and tail, and incorporates sloping sides for the fuselage and the canopy. As a further signature-reduction measure, the seam of the canopy and the weapon-bay doors are saw-toothed and the vertical tails are canted at an angle. To achieve the smallest signature possible the aircraft has the ability to carry a range of weapons internally, rather than external carriage as displayed in current fighters. However, when operating in a permissive environment, an array of weapons can be carried on external pylons.

The main radar system is a newly developed, electronically scanned array multi-function radar with synthetic aperture and moving target indicator capabilities. Targeting information can also be supplied by an electro-optical system, which provides long-range detection and precision targeting by employing thermal imaging, laser tracking and marking, and a 360 degree infrared system. The aircraft&#8217;s systems will also provide navigation, missile warning and infrared search and track capabilities. All this affords the UK, for the first time, a truly tactical ISTAR (Intelligence, Surveillence, Target Aquisition and Reconnaisance) asset.

Early production aircraft will be powered by a Pratt and Whitney F-135 turbofan engine.

The JCA will place the RAF at the forefront of fighter technology and will give it a true multi-role air system that will surpass the majority of other weapons systems in production today, or envisaged in the foreseeable future. Coupled with the Typhoon aircraft, JCA will keep the RAF at the cutting edge of military aviation.

UK military personnel will work alongside their US counterparts in an initial operational test and evaluation programme for the aircraft.


----------



## The SC

Joint Strike Fighter F-35





















The F-35 is designed as an &#8216;affordable stealth&#8217; counterpart to the F-22 Raptor air dominance fighter, one that can share &#8220;first day of the war&#8221; duties against defended targets but can&#8217;t perform air-air or air-ground missions to the same standard. Its air-air combat flight benchmarks are only on par with the F-16, it has a larger single engine instead of twin thrust-vectoring F119s, removing both supercruise (sustained flight above Mach 1) and super-maneuverability options. The F-22A is a much stealthier aircraft on both radar and infrared, but the F-35 is a big improvement over existing &#8216;teen series&#8217; fighters and even beats Generation 4+ options like the Eurofighter, Rafale, and JAS-39 Gripen.

Its advanced APG-81 AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar is smaller and less powerful than the F-22A&#8217;s APG-77v1; but still offers the strong AESA advantages of simultaneous air-air and air-ground capabilities, major maintenance & availability improvements, and secure, high-bandwidth communications benefits. The F-35 also shares a design advance with the F-22A in having &#8220;sensor fusion&#8221; based on sensors of various types embedded all around the airframe, which will allow the plane to perform as a top-level reconnaissance plane, and possibly as an electronic warfare aircraft. These sensors are connected to a lot of computing power, in order to create single-picture view that lets the pilot see everything on one big 20&#8221; LCD screen and just fly the plane, rather than pushing buttons to switch from one view to another and trying to figure it all out. As part of that sensor fusion, the F-35 will be the first plane is several decades to fly without a heads-up display; instead, pilots will wear Elbit/Rockwell&#8217;s JHMDS helmet and have all of that information projected wherever they look. 
*
The testing phase has been delayed, and will now continue into 2014*; meanwhile, funding for the first two production-model aircraft is approved, parts fabrication is under way as of June 2007, and component assembly will begin later in 2007. The pair of F-35A aircraft are scheduled for delivery to the U.S. Air Force beginning in 2010 &#8211; a sore point with the US Congress&#8217; Government Accountability Office, which believes this dual-track approach increases project risks. Production will continue to ramp up year-to-year, and BAE Systems releases indicate that by 2015, when the F-35 is expected to reach Full-Rate Production, the program intends to build 240 F-35s per year.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: JSF Events & Contracts 2007-08

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is one of the most interesting reads about Air Defence

http://www.ndu.edu/press/lib/images/jfq-57/kopp.pdf


----------



## The SC

Pantsir S1 Air Defense System
























Pantsir S1 was developed by KBP, as an upgrade of the Tungushka, offering extended engagement capability such as the use of both gun and missile on the move (Tungushka can use only gun), on the tracked system. The system also offers faster reaction time of 4 &#8211; 6 seconds (compared to 8 seconds for the Tungushka and 5 &#8211; 7 for Pantsir S1O). Like its predecessor, Pantsir S1 can also engage two separate targets simultaneously.

The Pantsir is offered in a tracked, wheeled versions, installed on APCs such as BTR-80and trucks, such as the 8x8 Ural 5323 truck. The truck mounted version is loaded with 700 cartridges per barrel and twelve 57E6-E missiles (also known as 9M335 or the 9M311).

The missile offers high kill probability (0.7 &#8211; 0.95) in an expanded envelope with extended range of 1.2 km to 20km, (1.5 &#8211; 18 km in Pantsir S1O version) and altitude of 5 m' to 10 km. The guns are designed for operation at a range of 200 m' to 4 km and altitude of 0 to 3,000m'. These missiles use a longer tandem boost motor to reach an altitude of 12,000 m'. The range of the radar was also extended to 30km, with simultaneously tracking of up to 20 targets, and engaging two separated targets at the same time. The launch customer of the Pantsir S1 was the UAE.

The Pantsir S1 uses a multi-band radar with effective ECCM and high immunity to jamming. passive, low band IR target acquisition system, utilize signal processing and automatic target tracking. Pantsir S10 uses only one sensor &#8211; probably the passive IR system. The SA-19 missile uses SACLOS guidance, effective to a range of min 2,500 &#8211; 8,000 m,. 1RL-144M fire control system uses an E-Band search radar with a detection range of 18km and J band tracking radar. India has procured the system.

Armament

The Pantsyr-S1 is armed with two 2A38M 30mm automatic anti-aircraft guns developed from the two-barreled 30mm GSh-30 gun, coupled with twelve 57E6 surface-to-air missiles on launchers.
Design and protection
Pantsir-S1 carries up to twelve 57E6 or 57E6-E two-stage solid fuel radio-command-guided surface-to-air missiles in sealed ready-to-launch containers. Missiles are arranged into two six-tube groups on the turret. The missile has a bicalibre body in tandem configuration. The first stage is a booster, providing rapid acceleration within the first 2 second of flight, after it is separated from the sustainer-stage. The sustainer is the highly agile part of the missile and contains the high explosive multiple continuous rod and fragmentation warhead, contact and proximity fuses as also radio transponder and laser responder to be localised for guidance. The missile is not fitted with seeker to keep target engagement costs low. Instead high-precision target and missile tracking is provided via the systems multiband sensor system and guidance data is submitted via radio link for up to four missiles in flight. Missiles can be fired in at up to four targets but also salvos of two missiles at one target. Missile is believed to have a hit probability of 70-95% and have a 15 year storage lifetime in its sealed containers. Pantsir-S1 combat vehicles can fire missiles on the move.
Propulsion
Pantsyr-S1 is mounted on a 10t Ural-5323 truck chassis with a turret that houses the armament, laying drives, sensors, control equipment and crew. The Ural-5323 truck is four-axle, 8×8 all-wheel drive with single tyre wheels. The first and second axle wheels are steerable. The engine is an air-cooled diesel Ural-745.10 providing 290hp. The dual-plate mechanical clutch has a pneumatic booster and three-range five-speed gearbox.
Combat use
The Pantsyr-S1 is able to defeat almost the entire spectrum of air threats, all types of precision guided weapons in particular, flying at a speed of up to 1,000 m/s and approaching from different bearings at an angle of 0- 10 ° to 60 - 70°, aircraft flying at a speed of up to 500 m/s, helicopters, remotely piloted vehicles, as well as light armoured ground targets and enemy manpower. The combination of missile and gun armament enabling the operator to create a continuous target engagement zone and fire at targets uninterruptedly beginning from their maximum range of 18 to 20 km up to a range of 200 m. Target flying at an altitude of 5 to 15 km can be shot down. The Pantsyr-S1 is equipped with multiple-mode adaptive radar/optical weapons control system operating in the UHF, EHF and IR regions of the spectrum. The system features high immunity to jamming, survivability in the presence of electronic countermeasures and under enemy fire.
The Pantsir-S1 fire control system includes a target acquisition radar and dual waveband tracking radar (designation 1RS2-1E for export models), which operates in the UHF and EHF waveband. Detection range is 32&#8211;36 km and tracking range is 24&#8211;28 km for a target with 2 m2 RCS.[4] This radar tracks both targets and the surface-to-air missile while in flight. As well as radar, the fire control system also has an electro-optic channel with long-wave thermal imager and infrared direction finder, including digital signal processing and automatic target tracking. A simplified, lower-cost version of Pantsir-S1 is also being developed for export, with only the electro-optic fire control system fitted. The two independent guidance channels - radar and electro-optic - allow two targets to be engaged simultaneously. Maximum engagement rate is up to 10 targets per minute.


----------



## The SC

Tor M1 9M330 Air Defense System


























The TOR-M1 surface-to-air missile system is a mobile, integrated air defense system, designed for operation at medium-, low- and very low &#8211;altitudes, against fixed/rotary wing aircraft, UAVs, guided missiles and precision weapon. The system is capable of operating in an intensive aerial jamming environment. The system is comprised of a number of missile Transporter Launcher Vehicle (TLV). A Russian air defense Tor battalion consists of 3 - 5 companies, each equipped with four TLVs. Each TLV is equipped with 8 ready to launch missiles, associating radars, fire control systems and a battery command post. The combat vehicle can operate autonomously, firing from stationary positions or on the move. Set-up time is rated at 3 minutes and typical reaction time, from target detection to missile launch is 5-8 seconds. Reaction time could range from 3.4 seconds for stationary positions to 10 seconds while on the move. Each fire unit can engage and launch missiles against two separate targets.
Tor M-1 (SA-15) shown in travelling position, The aft-mounted tracking / guidance radar is shown. The surveillance radar is folded in travelling position.

Tor M1 SA-15 Gauntlet missile system - note folded radars.
Tor M1 can detect and track up to 48 targets (minimum radar cross section of 0.1 square meter) at a maximum range of 25 km, and engage two of them simultaneously, at a speed of up to 700 m/sec, and at a distance of 1 to 12 km. The system's high lethality (aircraft kill probability of 0.92-0.95) is maintained at altitude of 10 &#8211; 6,000 m'. The vertically launched, single-stage solid rocket propelled missile is capable of maneuvering at loads up to 30gs. It is equipped with a 15kg high-explosive fragmentation warhead activated by a proximity fuse. The system is offered as fully integrated tracked combat vehicle, or as a modular combat unit (TOR-M1T) comprising a truck mounted mobile control module and launcher/antenna units, carried on a trailer. Other configuration include separated towed systems, as well as shelter-based systems, for the protection of fixed sites.

Tor M1 missile launched from the vertical container/launcher. The missile uses cold launch to exit and clear the launcher, and the rocket motor and thrusters are ignited at an altitude of 20 meters.The missile is also effective against precision guided weapons and cruise missiles. In tests the missile demonstrated kill probability of such targets ranging from 0.6 to 0.9.

The first operator of the Tor system was the Russian Army Air-Defense, which operates 100 units of the SA-15 Gauntlet variant. The Russian navy also uses the naval version known as SA-N-9. China bought 50 systems and possibly 25 more, between 1997 and 2002. The Greek army fielded 21 Tor M-1 systems. Most recently (December 2005) Iran was reported to sign a deal worth US$ 1.0 billion covering the procurement of up to 29 TOR M-1 missile systems, modernization of air-force systems and the supply of patrol boats. The system was also proposed to several other countries. The TOR component of the deal was reported to be US$700 million. Deliveries of the TOR systems began in November 2006 and by the year's end, over half of the order has been fulfilled. On January 16, 2007 Russia announced that deliveries were completed. Russian defense minister Sergei Ivanov confirmed the delivery and added that Moscow will continue to develop military and technical cooperation with Tehran. This could hint on further sales of S-300 air defense missiles, which were requested by Iran for several years, but so-far denied by Russia. The delivery was completed about 12 months ahead of time. According to the original schedule, completion of deliveries were expected to continue through 2008. (more from freerepublic). The Russian Press indicated on January 30, 2007 that Venezuela is also interesting in aquiring Tor M1 systems at an estimated cost of US$290 million. Venezuela plans to have the new systems interoperable with new radars and fighter jets recently bought from China and Russia.

Thor M-1 shown in deployed position, with radar elevated. (Greece army photo)


----------



## Nishan_101

Rafael looks cool even the EF-2000 too:


----------



## The SC

BUK-M1-2 AIR DEFENSE MISSILE SYSTEM HAS NO EQUALS IN TERMS OF COMBAT EMPLOYMENT







































It is intended for air defense of troops and facilities from current and developmental high-speed tactical and strategic aircraft, attack helicopters, including hovering rotary-wing aircraft, tactical, ballistic, cruise and aircraft missiles in a massive raid with the use of intensive radio and fire countermeasures as well as for engagement of waterborne and ground targets. 

The high firepower of the system, which is ensured by six firing channels, guarantees the engagement of the same number of targets simultaneously flying from different directions at various altitudes. 

The aforementioned characteristics have been attained through the use of the highly effective 9M317 SAM (leading developer and manufacturer is the Dolgoprudny Research and Production Enterprise) and the new fire control system which incorporated specially developed design features into the CP, SPMs and LLs. 

The full-scale tests of the Buk-M1-2 air defense missile system, during which a sea mine sweeper, parked strategic aircraft, launchers and tactical, ballistic and cruise missiles were engaged, have confirmed its high effectiveness as a multifunctional defensive asset. 

Engineering technologies 2012 defence exhibition¡ª¡ª2012¶íÂÞË¹¡°»úÐµÖÆÔì¼¼Êõ¡±·ÀÎñÕ¹ 77RUS & olegkuleshovµÄ¶í¾ü×°±¸ÊÀ½ç ·ÉÑï¾üÊÂ - powered by phpwind.net


----------



## The SC

BUK-M1-2


----------



## The SC

*The S-300VM "Antey-2500" *





















The S-300VM "Antey-2500" (NATO reporting name SA-23 Gladiator\Giant) is a new Russian anti-ballistic missile system.

It is designed to defeat short- and medium-range ballistic missiles with a launch range of up to 2,500 km, aeroballistic and cruise missiles, strategic and tactical aircraft, as well as loitering ECM platforms and highprecision weapon systems in multiple air threat conditions, a complex air situation and severe ECM environment. In 2011, the Russian army will receive an improved version called S-300V4, reportedly based on S-300VM system.
Missile
The 9M82M missile is intended to defeat tactical, theater and medium range ballistic missiles, as well as aerodynamic targets at a range of up to 200 km. The Antey-2500 system is mounted on tracked cross-country vehicles provided with self-contained power supply and navigation systems, surveying and positioning equipment. The missile is controlled throughout the entire flight trajectory.

System CharacteristicsThe Antey-2500 air defense missile system features:

high degree of battle performance automation owing to high-speed digital computers;
phased array radars;
advanced radar data processing methods;
high ECM immunity;
high ability of autonomous operation;
high mobility;
high fire power potential, irrespective of air attack tactics or sequence;
vertical launch from a special transport launch canister;
maintenance-free operation of missiles for at least ten years;
capability to defeat ballistic missile individual warheads flying at speeds of up to 4,500 m/s;
inertial guidance with radio command update and semiactive homing at the terminal phase;
focused detonation of the missile warhead.

The Antey-2500 system comprises:
command post;
circular scan radar;
sector scan radar;
multichannel missile guidance station (MMGS) (4);
9A83M launcher (24);
9A84M loader-launcher (24);
9M82M air defense missiles;
9M83M air defense missiles;
maintenance vehicles;
maintenance and repair vehicles;
group SPTA set;
electronic trainer for MMGS operators;
transporter vehicles;
set of missiles handling equipment

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe that the S-400 and S-500 are trial improvements on this one, it was also called the S-330 and is still the most advanced Medium to High altitude air defence system.


----------



## The SC

9 August 2012 

Pentagon helps build Meshworm reconnaissance robot















Engineers have created a robot that mimics a worm's movements - crawling along surfaces by contracting segments of its body.

The technique allows the machine to be made of soft materials so it can squeeze through tight spaces and mould its shape to rough terrain.

It can also absorb heavy blows without sustaining damage.

The Pentagon's Darpa research unit supported the Meshworm project, suggesting a potential military use.

Work on the machine was carried out by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University in the US, and Seoul National University in South Korea.

Details are published in the journal IEEE/ASE Transactions on Mechatronics.

"[The] soft body, which is essentially compliant, exhibits large strains and enables the robot to traverse small openings and reconstitute shape, and survives from large impact force on falling," the engineers wrote.

They added that using a worm-like motion helped reduce the noise such machines produce, making them suitable "for reconnaissance purposes".
Squeezed segments

Previous attempts to create such a robot have used gears and air-powered or pneumatic pumps. But these added to the bulk of the machines making them less practical for real-world uses.

The Darpa-supported team instead moved their machine by using an "artificial muscle" made out of nickel and titanium wire designed to stretch and contract with heat.
Meshworm The Meshworm is made out of a tube created from polymer mesh around which a metal wire is wrapped to create an "artificial muscle"

By wrapping this wire around a mesh-like tube the engineers replicated the circular muscle fibres of an earthworm, creating different segments in the process.

When a current was applied to part of the wire it contracted, squeezing the tube.

The team created algorithm to send a contraction wave across each of the machine's five segments in turn, squeezing the tube and propelling it forward. This mimics the movement of its biological counterpart.

They were able to make the robot move at a rate of about 5mm per second (0.2 inches/sec).

Two additional "muscles" were added to the sides of the machine to pull it left and right, allowing its direction to be controlled.
Attack resistant
Meshworm hit by hammer The engineers said that the Meshworm remained functional even after being hit with a hammer

The researchers said that the soft nature of the robot's body allowed it to be subjected to hammer blows and be trod on without sustaining any damage because its shape changed to help absorb the blows.

"You can throw it, and it won't collapse," said Sangbae Kim, assistant professor in mechanical engineering at MIT.

"Parts in Meshworms are all fibrous and flexible. The muscles are soft and the body is soft... [and] we're starting to show some body-morphing capability."

The Meshworm is just one of several animal-inspired projects being funded by Darpa.

Other examples include a robotic "cheetah" that can run at speeds of 18mph (29km/h), a micro-aircraft equipped with a camera that looks like a hummingbird, and AlphaDog - a four-legged robot designed to carry soldiers' gear.


----------



## LeGenD

The SC said:


> F-22 RAPTOR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F-22 Raptor oxygen problems may be worse than previously disclosed
> 
> "The oxygen-deprivation incident rates are much higher than we were initially told," says Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who is looking into the F-22 Raptor fighter jet problems.
> 
> Oxygen problems that have plagued the Air Force's fleet of F-22 Raptor fighter jets may be worse than previously disclosed, according to new information released by two members of Congress.
> 
> F-22 pilots have reported dozens of incidents in which the jet's systems weren't feeding them enough oxygen, causing hypoxia-like symptoms in the air. Hypoxia is a condition resulting from a deficiency of oxygen reaching tissues of the body that can cause nausea, headaches, fatigue or even blackouts.
> 
> On Thursday, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) and Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) released information handed over by the Air Force that said pilots had experienced about 26 incidents of apparent oxygen deprivation per 100,000 flight hours &#8212; a rate at least 10 times higher than for any other Air Force aircraft.
> 
> "This information confirms that the F-22 program is not running at 100% and that the oxygen-deprivation incident rates are much higher than we were initially told," said Kinzinger, a former Air National Guard pilot.
> 
> The announcement is the latest for the controversial F-22, the world's most expensive fighter jet, which was made byLockheed Martin Corp.and has never been used in combat since entering service in 2005.
> 
> The lawmakers held a teleconference Thursday with reporters in which they disclosed the information. Other findings included an early 2011 aircrew survey that found that "a majority of F-22 pilots surveyed did not feel confident" with the plane's oxygen system.
> 
> The Air Force tried to fix the problem by adding a high-efficiency particulate air filter consisting of activated carbon and charcoal.
> 
> But, Kinzinger and Warner said, tests performed by Boeing Co. found that the new filter negatively affected the breathing system for F-22 pilots. Boeing formally recommended discontinuing use of the filters April 2 &#8212; a recommendation that was adopted by the Air Force about a month later, they said.
> 
> The oxygen malfunctions are suspected of playing a role in at least one fatal accident and led to the grounding of the entire F-22 fleet last year for nearly five months. But even after the grounding was lifted, the Air Force said that investigators could not find a "smoking gun" for the problems and that hypoxia incidents continued to occur.
> 
> Last month, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panettarestricted flights of the aircraft because of the ongoing problems.
> 
> 
> F-22 Raptor oxygen problems may be worse than previously disclosed - Los Angeles Times


Here is update:

Air Force tells House committee it's fixing F-22 oxygen problem | Breaking News | News f...


----------



## The SC

UPDATE:







Problems have plagued the F-22 Raptor since its inception.

Flaking, toxic stealth coating with equally toxic glue. International dateline software glitches. Pilots nearly passing out from lack of oxygen and the feared "Raptor Cough."

So the jet went through a battery of extensive tests, over many years, only for one general to suggest something completely unrelated to the configuration of the plane's innards: Maybe human beings just weren't physiologically equipped to max out the attributes of this total sky carnivore.

Read more: F-22 Too Much For Human Physiology - Business Insider


----------



## airomerix

DODO's star wars programme. Interesting..


----------



## The SC

The Qaher-313

Iran&#8217;s new domestically-designed and developed fighter jet, Qaher-313 (Conqueror-313), is &#8216;super advanced&#8217; and capable of &#8216;evading radars.&#8217; 
The aircraft has a &#8220;very low radar cross section&#8221; and is capable of conducting operations at low altitudes. 
Highly-advanced materials and electro-ionic systems had been used in the structure of Qaher-313, and the aircraft is capable of carrying advanced armaments.
Qaher-313 can take off and land on short runways and it has easy maintenance.
The new single-seat bomber has been manufactured based on state-of-the-art technologies and modern defense technologies. 

It features a downward Wing-tip device which Flightglobal.com noted vaguely resembles the Boeing Bird of Prey prototype, but with a more faceted design similar to the 1970s-era Lockheed Have Blue that was developed into the now retired F-117 Nighthawk. Flight Global also said, "given the apparent small size of the aircraft and its single engine design, the Qaher 313 could be powered by reverse engineered variants of the General Electric J85 turbojet that Iran is known to have in its possession." Iran has General Electric J85s as well as a dozen other jet engines as a result of old Northrop F-5s and other American aircraft in its inventory from pre-1979 as well as newer engines from Russia and China. Iran also builds various turbo fan engines like the Toloue-4 and Toloue-5 for its UAVs. Iranians have designed the aircraft using CATIA three-dimensional interactive design software and tested it using simulation software including Gambit numerical grid generation software, fluent flow analysis and simulation software, CFD models and they have additionally tested the aerodynamics using small sized jet and propeller flying models.
The aircraft is designed with extra stability and so does not need a fly-by-wire (FBW) system.

A prototype version of the Qaher-313 was portrayed to have test-flown at some point before the presentation. According to the head of the design team, two sub-sized models have been created and tested. One of the models uses a propeller engine while the other uses a small micro jet engine. The models were shown in a video clip (along with descriptions by the head of the design team) the same day. 
The engine used by the design had been successfully tested. He also confirmed that the aircraft had not yet been flown, but that taxi and flight tests will occur in the near future.






































[url=http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/02/02/286875/irans-fighter-jet-can-evade-radars/]PressTV - Iran?s super advanced Qaher-313 can evade radars: Defense minister[/URL]
Qaher-313 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

Chip Scale Atomic Clock





The growing demand for more precise navigation and positioning systems and also for secure telecommunication urges the development of precise but low power consuming clocks. Chip scale atomic clocks (CSAC) promise to be the key technology to master the increasing requirements in precision and size.

http://www.armymantech.com/pdfs/CSAClock.pdf

The continuously increasing requirements for microsecond accuracy of time synchronization of multifunctional IEDs, IEC 61850 merging units (MU) and phasor measurement units (PMU) and their application for protection and control resulted in the use of different solutions based on GPS technology. However, the dependency on GPS is a concern, due to the possibilities of denial-of-service attacks, or loss of GPS due to solar storms. That is why our industry is looking for alternative solutions that can ensure the correct and precise synchronization of the devices in each substation when the GPS signal is not available for whatever reason.
After eight years of successful participation in the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) chip scale atomic clock (CSAC) initiative, Symmetricom announced in January 2011 the general availability of what it says is the world&#8217;s smallest, lowest power atomic oscillator. The world&#8217;s first chip scale atomic clock, the SA.45s CSAC measures less than 16cm3 in volume, is only 1.25 sm high, weighs just 35 grams and consumes a mere 120mW of power. Such breakthrough performance opens up an entirely new class of portable applications.
The SA.45s CSAC accuracy and stability is the result of the use of cesium-based atomic clock technology in a form factor that will support a range of portable applications requiring precise synchronization and time keeping in GPS-denied environments, making it possible to integrate even in an individual IED or PMU.
The SA.45s reportedly provides 10 megahertz and 1 pulse per second (PPS) outputs at standard CMOS levels, with short-term stability (Allan Deviation) of 2E-10 @ 1 sec, long-term aging of 3E-10/month, and frequency change over temperature of 5E-10 over an operating range of -10° C to +70° C.
One of the key technology breakthroughs in Symmetricom&#8217;s SA.45s CSAC is the housing of the cesium atoms in a resonance cell based on a microelectro-mechanical system (MEMS) design. The cesium atoms are &#8220;excited,&#8221; or heated to a vapor state by a beam generated from a vertical-cavity surface emitting a laser (VCSEL) that passes between upper and lower polymide heater/suspension strips. The VCSEL was designed by Sandia Labs, one of Symmetricom&#8217;s partners on the CSAC team. The entire physics package is less than one cubic centimeter in volume and uses only 10 milliwatts of power. 
The clock's circuitry (designed by Symmetricom Inc.) measures time by counting the frequency of the microwaves &#8211; exactly 4,596,315,885 of them constitute one second.
A technician measuring the wavelength of the CSAC's vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser...
One thing the CSAC doesn't do, however, is keep track of the time of day. Instead, it's intended mainly for use with other atomic clocks, allowing two or more geographically-separated groups of people to stay exactly coordinated over time.
While there are various small, inexpensive devices already being sold as "atomic clocks," these simply display a signal received from a remote atomic clock

These groups could include miners in underground tunnels, divers in the deep ocean, or other people who are physically blocked from receiving time signals by GPS. Security personnel disarming improvised explosive devices could also use the technology, as the electromagnetic interference that they utilize to keep telephone signals from detonating the explosives also disables GPS devices. Additionally, CSACs could find use in cross-country phone and data lines, allowing the various data packets to stay coordinated in the event of a GPS outage.
PAC World magazine :*Atomic Clock











Good Timing For Nanoscale Atomic Clocks

The radio spectrum is a dwindling natural resource. By some estimates in less than a decade there will be no more frequencies left for the next-generation of palmtop computers and handheld communicators. But according to mechanical engineering professor Albert P. Pisano, director of Berkeley's Electronic Research Laboratory, outfitting every wireless device &#8212; from a next-generation palmtop computer to a basic FM radio &#8212; with a nano-mechanical clock that's accurate down to ten quandrillionths of a second per day could reopen the radio spectrum for tomorrow's new business.

"Nanotechnology is going to revolutionize how you divide the frequency spectrum and what you use it for," says Pisano, who several months ago with Berkeley professors Liwei Lin and Luke P. Lee, Cornell University professor Amit Lal, and industrial partner Frequency Electronics, Inc. launched the Integrated Nano Mechanical Regulated Atomic Clock project.

"Now, FM stations are .2 megahertz apart," Pisano adds. "But what if they could be .02 megahertz apart?"

Prof. Pisano

Professor Al Pisano is also a director of the Berkeley Sensor and Actuator Center. (Click for larger image.)
Peg Skorpinski photo
Of course, atomic clocks &#8212; which calculate the passage of time (not the time of day) based on the resonant frequency of specific kinds of atoms &#8212; are nothing new. In most homes, atomic clocks have eliminated the frustration of VCRs that annoyingly blink "12:00" by setting themselves via an onboard radio receiver that "sets" itself based on a radio signal from a centrally-located atomic clock maintained by NIST (US National Institute for Standards and Technology) in Fort Collins, Colorado. Traditional atomic clocks like the ones that tell your VCR the time and are used in myriad scientific applications are table-top rigs of power-hungry lasers, mirrors, and high-frequency electronic circuitry that cost upwards of $1,000. Less accurate atomic clocks that regulate data flow for the Internet are shoe-box sized devices that consume 150 watts of power and cost $2000. Pisano and his team hope to shrink the package down to one-centimeter cubed, reduce the power consumed down to 50 milliwatts, and cut the cost to possibly $100.

With atomic clocks the size of sugar cubes, Pisano says, next-generation wireless devices can share radio frequencies based on time.

"Currently, signals are divided into different wavelengths," he says. "But there's a limit to how close you can pack those wavelengths together. To this "wavelength division" multiplexing you can now add economical time-division multiplexing. You can pack far more data into a spectrum if you not only spread it across frequencies but also across time."

Microfabrication Lab

Components of the Nano Mechanical Atomic Clock will constructed at UC Berkeley's state-of-the-art Microfabrication Laboratory. (Click for larger image.)
Bart Nagel photo
The approach, Pisano explains, is not so different than two people communicating on walkie-talkies. Each user takes a turn talking, or transmitting over the specified frequency. But with onboard atomic clocks, devices could take turns that might last only 250 nanoseconds to so. That's where the Integrated Nano Mechanical Regulated Atomic Clock comes in. To prevent transmissions from stepping on each other's toes, the devices need to track the passage of time with far more accuracy than provided by classic crystal oscillator-based clocks like those on your wall or wrist. Chip-scale atomic clocks are of great interest to the military as well, potentially enabling "jam resistance and strong-encryption in data communication...and missile and munitions guidance," according to a project overview from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency that sponsors Pisano and his team's research.

Pisano's approach exploits much the same physics as full-size atomic clocks but, he says, "we've taken everything that makes an atomic clock large and require a lot of power and thrown it out."

Your Turn

Has the time come for nanoscale atomic clocks?

We want to hear from you...
So far, the group has developed a preliminary design and begun work on several of the individual components necessary for a fully-fledged, centimeter-cubed atomic clock. A "modestly-functioning" prototype is still three years away, Pisano says.

The Integrated Nano Mechanical Regulated Atomic Clock will work by using photons to pump the atoms in rubidium vapor to a higher energy state. Once the atoms are pumped to a higher physical layer inside the device, they're disturbed by radio frequency microwaves generated by an oscillator so that they drop down again to a lower layer. A tiny laser determines the opacity of that layer caused by the quantity of atoms there and adjusts the frequency of the oscillator to depopulate the higher layer as efficiently as possible.

"Basically, I have a bottle full of molecules that soak up light if I shake the molecules at the right frequency," Pisano says. "Once I know that the frequency is correct, I can compute how long it takes for exactly one second to pass."

There are several technical and scientific challenges that the research team will face, but one of the researchers' biggest hurdles will be reducing the power consumption of the device so it's not dwarfed by its batteries. The most practical way to ease power consumption, Pisano explains, is by using the atomic clock as a periodic reference for a standard crystal oscillator. Once a day or so, the atomic clock could be "woken up" to recalibrate the crystal oscillator.

"We're essentially making a fat atomic wristwatch," Pisano says.






Lab Notes: Research from the Berkeley College of Engineering


Chip-scale atomic clock survives 500g shock on any axis





Symmetricom&#8217;s new SA.45s chip-scale atomic oscillator outputs a 10-MHz, 3.3V square wave and a 400-nsec, 1-pulse/sec signal. You can use an RS-232 interface to the device&#8217;s internal DSP to provide status and modify the pulse output. The SA.45s has a center-frequency accuracy of ±5×10&#8722;11 and can survive 500g shock on any axis. It occupies 16 cc of volume, weighs 35g, and requires 115 mW of power. Allan-deviation stability is 2×10&#8722;10 over a tau of 1 sec. The device features SSB (single-sideband) RF-output phase noise at 1 Hz of less than &#8722;53 dBc (decibels referred to carrier)/Hz. With a 110-second warm-up, the oscillator has MTBF (mean time between failures) of greater than 100,000 hours.

This oscillator finds use in applications such as dismounted IED (improvised-explosive-device) jammers, UAV s (unmanned aerial vehicles), next-generation man-pack radios, military handheld GPS (global-positioning-system) units, and geophysical sensors. It comes in a 1.6×1.39×0.45-in., hermetically sealed package. Option 001 operates from &#8722;10 to +70°C, and Option 002 operates from &#8722;40 to +85°C.

Chip-scale atomic clock survives 500g shock on any axis | EDN


----------



## Umair Nawaz

manofwar said:


> Found this project...........Seems interesting



another teja on the horizon.


----------



## The SC

[video]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/hpmbomb.gif[/video]

[video]http://www.survivalfoodgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/survival-EMP-bomb-diagram.jpg[/video]





TK Anti EMPS Systems

TechnoKontrol Anti EMPS Systems - Anti Electromagnetic Pulse
Technologies
Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse (NEMP) / Non Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse
(NNEMP) / Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) / Protection and Safety Panels-
Wall-Textile Technologies for Military and Strategic Infrastructures
Technokontrol has designed via its R&D programme our unique Anti-EMPS
technologies which can work in many different sectors for the protection and safety of
the military, national security, strategic infrastructures and law enforcement sectors
including strategic databases, cyber warfare and information technology bases
including satellites, telecommunications, radars,financial services, government
databanks and military installations.

Our exclusive, simple to install, transport, and anti-electromagnetic(Anti-EMPS)
technology panels/protecting technology products will allow all types of military,
strategic, national security departments, private corporations and even civilians to be
protected in the event of any type of EMPS attack, from a ground attack by enemy
Special Forces, common criminals trying to rob a financial institutions databanks,
terrorists to close down a power station or open a dams gates to flood an area or even
to bring down aircraft.
Technokontrol Anti-EMPS technology products are effective against EMPS pulses
emitted from EMPS bombs/devices which can be delivered in different sizes and
means thus not needing to have an extreme technological advanced or unique
delivery/launch systems or technologies as a &#8220;stealth bomber&#8221; or &#8220;long range missile
launcher&#8221; but can be carried in a brief case or even delivered by courier without even
knowing of its devastating effects.
Once the EMPS Bomb has been activated which could also include in any mode of
transport for example and especially fuel transports systems whom rely on
GPS,GMS,satellite technologies as rail, shipping, aircraft and even trucking causing
accidents, explosions and full technical failures. Other damages include power
shutdowns,environmental damage, loss of life at all levels and even hostage taking at
grand level as destroying cruise ships, oil rigs and gas-oil tankers technological
control operations centres thus rendering the ships un-controlled and un-directed to
their physical sinking/destruction or even causing explosions as engines can be shut
down without special cooling off periods or engine burn outs thus causing
over-heating of the engines and close down of emergency safety and security systems
causing disastrous consequences.

EMP Device
Thus Technokontrol developing different types of specialist alloy &#8220;Anti-EMPS
Technologies&#8221; to be easily installed in low cost effective materials and textiles to
allow the quick and wide installation of these "Anti-EMPS Protective
Technologies" for and especially for the military and law enforcement but also for
the industrial, civilian and industrial-commercial strategic sectors which aren´t as
prepared as the military. (Most military modern nations are more prepared than the
civilian sector but we still feel that there is much to be done at present and in the
near future as assets via EMPS bombings can be easily attacked and destroyed and
with the simplest incorrect maintenance or installation errors being also factors to
increase the effectiveness of any EMPS attack regardless of &#8220;hardening/protecting&#8221; of
the electronics installed into military operational equipment even at original
fabrication level).
As this is and will be a new type of &#8220;EMPS Modern Warfare&#8221; as with &#8220;no energy",
there isn´t anything, life, water, food, transport, fuels,telecommunications, medical,
police services, government,etc. Thus causing the downfall of the nations society,
commerce, industry,government and all types of institutions as we understand it in
today´s world.
EMPS warfare technology will make a nation return to the &#8220;Middle Ages&#8221; in a matter
of seconds
This EMPS warfare technology will make a nation return to the &#8220;Middle Ages&#8221; in a
matter of seconds and only will be allowed to be &#8220;rebuilt&#8221; with the assistance and
agreement of the outside world which would normally be its probable &#8220;initial enemyprosecutor&#8221;
who already caused this destruction for some reason. In a simple
conclusion the &#8220;damage-explosion&#8221; of an EMPS attack will be more of an &#8220;social
systematic-implosion&#8221; against the government or rulers of the effected nation due to
the lack of basic human needs as mentioned before and no clear knowledge of an
&#8220;emergency&#8211;recovery&#8221; plan which could be viable prepared or in financial wealthlymodern-
emerging nations but nil in poor nations or regions or countries controlled by
terrorists/criminlas or un-elected/un-stable governments.
EMPS Bombing is by far the most effective way to attack an exact location, region,
country but also can be used to &#8220;bring down to their knees&#8221; any rogue nation,
terrorist groups or illegal /occupation/invasion/ wars between regions, states or
nations without causing human deaths but allowing as many people to live as possible
without any human basic-essential living needs thus destroying the enemies
possibility to continue due to not having any electronically operational hardware but
also due to the immediate social unrest and auto-implosion-destruction of their own
nation due to internal fighting once this occurred due to the lack of supplies, foods,
fuels, medicines, etc. Thus allowing wars to be finished in weeks rather than months
or years with the total fall of the &#8220;enemy&#8221;.
The XXI century is also leading the world to move into a new "Technological Military
Era", where human deaths and/or injuries are each time are less and less in each
battle-anti terrorism scenario due to the more advanced and high-technology military
accurate hardware used in each military or anti-terrorism scenarios are more
efective. These new types of technological warfare won´t stop terrorism or sabotage
attacks against important national infrastructures as pipelines, refineries, factories,
jumbo tanks, rail freight transports, police stations, military bases,etc. This will only
increase the spectrum of terror or piracy armament portfolio against normal stable
nations, governments or corporations for whatever reason, from economical
blackmail to political power control, simple eco-politcial-terrorism or to pure
international criminal activities.
These types of terrorist or piracy attacks which could also include EMPS Bombings if
obtained or fabricated by the &#8220;other-side&#8221; also will have additional national costs
which are the financial, industrial, commercial instability at all levels and the worst of
all the social and psychological costs of the civilian population which is most cases
are nations which are also the voters of these governments of whom are elected to
protect these same people/voters. Thus being paramount that as many as possible
basic infrastructures operations centres must be protected at all costs in the event of
the worst possible scenarios, especially power grids, water resources,
telecommunications centres, civil protection, armed forces, government
institutions,strategic fuel deposits, fuel delivery services and most importantly food
and medical services to the general population.
EMPS Attack technology and its psychological deterrent effect
The psychological effect of a (possible) EMPS attack by any nation/s and its
consecuences can be related to other types of social psychological effects(PTSS) for
all wars but can be compared in today´s modern day warfare with the example of
continuos high-tech military technologies which for an example can be part of any
"aerial drone attack programme" may cause over a period of time legal, criminal,
punitive liabilities and damages against a government or foreign military
manufacturer or supplier due to their direct & indirect psychological, physical and
mental damages of normal civilians or habitants of a region, state, country which
aren´t at war but effected indirectly due to their physical location.
However, these mental stresses as the most common being PTSS also effects the
&#8220;enforcers or military&#8221; thus all parties understanding the value of the psychological
warfare effects especially with the use of all types of armaments as IED´s(Improvised
Explosive Devices) with the increase of mental issues or illnesses of both sides of the
attacked/occupied or territorial controlled civilian/military population as PTSS (Post
Traumatic Stress Syndrome) due to the continuous in many cases aggressive military/terrorist attacks on both sides which in many cases may be justified due to harbouring such wanted terrorists-criminals but also in many occasions to impose
mental stress to reduce any possible assistance of the local habitants to these terror
groups. The contra-effect is then the use of IED´s to continue a never ending battle of
will but the pyscological drama of all parties doesn´t stop once back home but only
begins with the traumatic psychological battlefield stresses of all parties and for the
rest of their lives, especially worse for the modern nations where living standards and
human lives are more valuable socially.
This continuous mental stress pressure (PTSS) of the civilian population by means of
the above mentioned high-tech strategic warfare methods which includes anyone
unrelated or directly,indirectly related due to their political,religious, terrorist causes
which in many occasions creates un-necessary deaths, injuries, hardships,
psychological mental long term damage/illnesses and even worst a grave
regional/national populous "media-backlash", mistrust, hate and longing for revenge
which again continues the planting, seeding and growth of a next generation of
possible normal civilians to fight against these types of foreign physical,
military,social and psychological aggressions/attacks by means of going into terrorist
groups or common criminal activities against an established stable government due to
past warfare effects or even historical or personal reasons of being invaded or
attacked at younger ages and wishing to &#8220;pay back&#8221; by some way or manner these
personal or family damages.
Thus confirming the possible use of this &#8220;EMPS Attack Technology&#8221; as a final
deterrent would resolve many issues immediately or at least swiftly because the
consecuences are extremely well understood and all parties will understand that no
electronic hardware would work thus sweeping clean an area clean with any
telecommunications, economy, transport,electronics, missile launchers, radios, GPS,
etc, and stopping the use of &#8220;drone bombings-military occupation/controls&#8221; and
allowing the civilians to continue their lives as normal and as best as possible and to
regain their trust. Also by implementing a realistic &#8220;re-building civilian programme&#8221;
with already established selected civilians of that region to benefit from real effective
financial, economic,educational, medical assistance to create the right base to grow a
new society with normal values but always with a secure and realistic future by
means of employment and security.
Not only would the EMPS Attack deterrent would be effective but it will be required
as mandatory by all selected nations to create a balance of powers and not allowing
this technology to fall into the wrong hands thus having technologies or safety
products as manufactured by Technokontrol to protect and to hinder any type of
attack from anywhere or anyone for whatever reason.
The great savings from financial, logistical,military,social,geo-political using these
technologies are extremely important and must be considered as another great
positive point towards the production of these EMPS technologies and also the safetysecurity
technologies to protect one owns nation, society, family,etc.
We should consider this technology as such as an important military deterrent as the
nuclear aramament which has now been effective for more than seven decades and
this could be the new long term safer but more strategic deterrent but will be harder
to control as too much data and operational units have been shown as effective from
private manufacturers without taking into account all the military technological and
financial investment also during the last decades into this technology and even more
extreme armament as lazers, etc.
Historical technological creation of EMPS-Cyber Warfare technologies
Due to our belief that modern day warfare is moving into a new direction we believe
that new modern military technologies based on pre-WWII technological electromagnetic studies and research technologies mainly invented by the Russians
and by the best military German research engineering teams created and effectively
tested during 1940-45 having created the first &#8220;High Intensity Electromagnetic
Electromagnetic Lazer Mobile Artillery Gun in 1944 as a new German Wonder
Weapon&#8221;, which was the real technological birth place of &#8220;electromagnetic armament
technology&#8221; has been the bases of these new upgraded and developed &#8220;Modern Era&#8221;
type of electronic military battlefield ground-aerial-sea armament of the XXI century.
Cyber-war is and has become a real life &#8220;virtual battlefield&#8221; where governments,
private global corporations, financial institutions are presently spending billions of
Euros in protecting, preparing, training, anticipating and creating all types of
defensive, anti-cyber-attack technology but also contra-offensive or even attack-viral
software to hinder, control and to protect these national strategic interests. Who
would of thought of modern warefare as todays cyber wars during the 1970´s
Vietnam war? This is what will and is occurring with the EMPS technology which may
sound un-realistic or even too far into the future in today´s world but will be also a
new technological military-defence race but this time we have new comers and not
just the &#8220;cold war members&#8221; but financial criminal economies like the global crime
industry which ¡s todays largest global employeer with billions of dollars in disposable
assets whom may see this also as a new business venture and without going into
global terrorist groups of all backgrounds and political or religuos principles.
This present day cyber war can be understood by how the Iranians have suffered
months or even years of continuous delays in their nuclear power program having
introduced accidentally by purchasing corrupt technology or deliberately
downloading internally viral software by anti-Iranian operatives into their operational
technological operations industrial software programs which will never be recognized
by any foreign military or nation but it´s obvious that cyber warfare is active and
increasing daily from internet fraud, to internet hackers to all types of terrorists.
However, this type of war can be done from a basement in New York to a specialist
underground military bunker in Asia.

Nuclear test EMP measured 4700 km away 200 kt airburst
This cyber war has also put &#8220;against the wall&#8221; the strongest governments of the world
and to which they have even admitted that extreme sensitive data has been stolen and
continues to be stolen from top military USA top secret military and national security
databases which are extremely well protected by means of anti-cyber-attack
protected technologies and specialist cyber teams. Thus creating a more balanced
&#8220;battlefield ground&#8221; between the top global governments and even small budget, low
resourceful terror groups, criminals thus needing in the future to take these terror,
criminal groups out at physical ground level or with EMPS bomb technology if
required.
Top secret and highly classified sensitive military documents as the technical plans of
the new generation USA nuclear submarines are just one example how cyber warfare
has been effective by the enemy as these plans were stolen from the USA government
by means of cyber attacks. However, we all must be cautious due to many times
military officials from all sides stating this loss of information freely in the media can
also mean that there is a large part of &#8220;dis-information&#8221; and sometimes governments
wish their enemies to confirm what they already &#8220;know&#8221; what they have is known to
them or to &#8220;inform the other party something which may not even exist to make them
think in another direction&#8221; as pure &#8220;dis-information&#8221; and this formula is what helped
the allies to win WWII more than any direct military attack or battle scenario during
the whole campaign as &#8220;information&#8221; is the difference between losing a war or
winning thus the allies being extremely efficient in having their intelligence resources
at the right time and at the right place.
EMPS-Electromagnetic Pulse Systems & EMPS types
We must state that even though the norm for these types of EMPS can also be created
by the solar heat, solar flares, solar radiation, etc. We must then also take into
consideration that even though we have prepared our Technokontrol Anti-EMPS
Technology for a direct military, criminal or terrorist attack, we also must consider
also natural disasters which may also occur at any time without any real firm
precision even though scientific studies state that during 2014-2015 the sun solar
activity will be at its highest in many years and we have already suffered in some
parts of the world these effects as in Ottawa, Canada and in Australia where the solar
radiation brought down many electronic base services.
Even in most related data to solar radiation may be very precise no one can really
predict anything 100% when we can´t even forecast the weather in the next three to
five days, how can us humans predict a solar flare or radiation sometime in the near
future or ever. We must also understand that only several degrees of temperature
increase or decrease at global level can be disastrous for the human population,
natural and all living species and we mustn&#8217;t forget our recent &#8220;five century long
XIV-XIX centuries&#8221; of the so called "little ice age" which left the world in a precarious
natural and human situation so if this to where to occur the other way round and a
&#8220;little hot age" things could be possibly even worse due to our present modern needs
of technology and electronics for anything in our daily lives.
Technical data regarding types of EMP: EMP1, EMP2 and EMP3
EMP- TYPE E1-Nuclear EMPS
The EMP1 pulse is the very fast component of nuclear EMP. The EMP1 component is
a very brief but intense electromagnetic field that can quickly induce very high
voltages in electrical conductors. The EMP1 component causes most of its damage by
causing electrical breakdown voltages to be exceeded. EMP1 is the component that
can destroy computers and communications equipment and it changes too quickly for
ordinary lightning protectors to provide effective protection against it.
The Earth's magnetic field quickly deflects the electrons at right angles to the
geomagnetic field, and the extent of the deflection depends upon the strength of the
magnetic field. At geomagnetic field strengths typical of the central United States,
central Europe or Australia, these initial electrons spiral around the magnetic field
lines in a circle with a typical radius of about 85 metres (about 280 feet). These initial
electrons are stopped by collisions with other air molecules at an average distance of
about 170 metres (a little less than 580 feet). This means that most of the electrons
are stopped by collisions with air molecules before they can complete one full circle of
its spiral around the Earth's magnetic field lines.
This interaction of the very rapidly-moving negatively-charged electrons with the
magnetic field radiates a pulse of electromagnetic energy. The pulse typically rises to
its peak value in about 5 nanoseconds. The magnitude of this pulse typically decays to
half of its peak value within 200 nanoseconds. (By the IEC definition, this EMP1 pulse
is ended at one microsecond (1000 nanoseconds) after it begins.) This process occurs
simultaneously with about 1025 other electrons.
There are a number of secondary collisions which cause the subsequent electrons to
lose energy before they reach ground level. The electrons generated by these
subsequent collisions have such reduced energy that they do not contribute
significantly to the EMP1 pulse.
These 2 MeV gamma rays will normally produce an EMP1 pulse near ground level at
moderately high latitudes that peaks at about 50,000 volts per metre. This is a peak
power density of 6.6 megawatts per square metre.
The process of the gamma rays knocking electrons out of the atoms in the
mid-stratosphere causes this region of the atmosphere to become an electrical
conductor due to ionization, a process which blocks the production of further
electromagnetic signals and causes the field strength to saturate at about 50,000
volts per metre. The strength of the EMP1 pulse depends upon the number and
intensity of the gamma rays produced by the weapon and upon the rapidity of the
gamma ray burst from the weapon. The strength of the EMP1 pulse is also somewhat
dependent upon the altitude of the detonation.
There are reports of "super-EMP" nuclear weapons that are able to overcome the
50,000 volt per metre limit by the very nearly instantaneous release of a burst of
gamma radiation of much higher energy levels than are known to be produced by
second generation nuclear weapons. The reality and possible construction details of
these weapons are classified, and therefore cannot be confirmed by scientists in the
open scientific literature.
EMP-TYPE EMP2- NNEMP-Non Nuclear EMP
The EMP2 component is generated by scattered gamma rays and inelastic gammas
produced by weapon neutrons. This EMP2 component is an "intermediate time" pulse
that, by the IEC definition, lasts from about 1 microsecond to 1 second after the
beginning of the electromagnetic pulse. The EMP2 component of the pulse has many
similarities to the electromagnetic pulses produced by lightning, although the
electromagnetic pulse induced by a nearby lightning strike may be considerably
larger than the EMP2 component of a nuclear EMP. Because of the similarities to
lightning-caused pulses and the widespread use of lightning protection technology,
the EMP2 pulse is generally considered to be the easiest to protect against.
According to the United States EMP Commission, the main potential problem with the
EMP2 component is the fact that it immediately follows the EMP1 component, which
may have damaged the devices that would normally protect against EMP2.
According to the EMP Commission Executive Report of 2004, "In general, it would not
be an issue for critical infrastructure systems since they have existing protective measures for defence against occasional lightning strikes. The most significant risk is
synergistic, because the EMP2 component follows a small fraction of a second after
the first component's insult, which has the ability to impair or destroy many
protective and control features. The energy associated with the second component
thus may be allowed to pass into and damage systems.
EMP-TYPE EMP3-Solar EMP
The EMP3 component is very different from the other two major components of
nuclear EMP. The EMP3 component of the pulse is a very slow pulse, lasting tens to
hundreds of seconds, that is caused by the nuclear detonation heaving the Earth's
magnetic field out of the way, followed by the restoration of the magnetic field to its
natural place. The EMP3 component has similarities to a geomagnetic storm caused
by a very severe solar flare.[Like a geomagnetic storm, EMP3 can produce
geo-magnetically induced currents in long electrical conductors, which can then
damage components such as power line transformers.
Because of the similarity between solar-induced geomagnetic storms and nuclear
EMP3, it has become common to refer to solar-induced geomagnetic storms as "solar
EMP."[At ground level, however, "solar EMP" is not known to produce an EMP1 or
EMP2 component.
Types and sizes of present and future EMP Bombs
There are at present proof of small EMPS attack weapons which emit short,
high-energy pulses reaching 10 gigawatts, which could destroy complex electronics
systems. This EMPS bomb attacks systems can now already presently take out
electronic systems of nuclear or electric power plants, banks, trains, or even a simple
telephone switchboard. These systems can be carried in boxes, suitcases, briefcases,
computer bags, etc.
Any type of EMPS attack from a thermonuclear warhead to a solar flare would cause
ionospheric radiation and electronic effects to any national or international region,
territory or nations. Once these issues and greater understanding of these new types
of armaments were confirmed and the consequences understood most military
computers and electronic systems were "prepared/protected" to minimize such
damage, but civil systems remain extremely vulnerable.
There are mainly two types of non-nuclear EMP (NNEMP) and one main nuclear High
Altitude HEMP devices which have been developed since the Vietnam War mainly.
One uses conventional explosives to induce the EMP; another uses a single-use,
high-power microwave generation device.
These smaller versions of EMPS Bomb/Explosive Systems can be used by Special
Forces teams who infiltrate the enemy's and detonate a device near their electronic
devices. It destroys the electronics of all computer and communication systems in a
quite large area. The EMP bomb can be smaller than a HERF gun to cause a similar
amount of damage and is typically used to damage not a single target (not aiming in
one direction) but to damage all equipment near the bomb.
The efficient execution of an Information Warfare campaign against a modern
industrial or post-industrial opponent will require the use of specialized tools
designed to destroy information systems. High Power Electro-magnetic Pulse
generation techniques and High Power Microwave technology have matured to the
point where practical electro-magnetic bombs are becoming technically feasible, with
new applications in both Strategic and Tactical IW (Information Warfare).

Targets of the EMPS-bombs:
The telecommunication systems
The national power grid
Finance and banking systems
The national transporting systems
The mass media

EMP Targets
A Radio Frequency Weapon is one that uses intense pulses of RF energy to destroy or
degrade the electronics in a target. These weapons can be employed in a narrow
beam over a long distance to a point target. They are categorized as High Power
Microwave Weapons (HPM) and Ultra Wide Band Weapon (UWB). The phrase
non-nuclear electro-magnetic pulse is sometimes used.
Advantages of the HPM:
All weather
Low cost per engagement
Possible to engage multiple targets
Non-lethal to humans
Not able to detect attacks
What can Electro-magnetic EMPS do to a nation or attacked location?
The high temperatures and energetic radiation produced by nuclear explosions also
produce large amounts of ionized (electrically charged) matter which is present
immediately after the explosion. Under the right conditions, intense currents and
electro-magnetic fields can be produced, generically called EMP (Electro-magnetic
Pulse), that are felt at long distances. Living organisms are impervious to these
effects, but electrical and electronic equipment can be temporarily or permanently
disabled by them. Ionized gases can also block short wavelength radio and radar
signals (fireball blackout) for extended periods.
The occurrence of EMP is strongly dependent on the altitude of burst. It can be
significant for surface or low altitude bursts (below 4,000 m); it is very significant for
high altitude bursts (above 30,000 m); but it is not significant for altitudes between
these extremes. This is because EMP is generated by the asymmetric absorption of
instantaneous gamma rays produced by the explosion. At intermediate altitudes the
air absorbs these rays fairly uniformly and does not generate long range electromagnetic
disturbances.
The formation EMP begins with the very intense, but very short burst of gamma rays
caused by the nuclear reactions in the bomb. About 0.3% of the bomb's energy is in
this pulse, but it last for only 10 nanoseconds or so. These gamma rays collide with
electrons in air molecules, and eject the electrons at high energies through a process
called Compton scattering. These energetic electrons in turn knock other electrons
loose, and create a cascade effect that produces some 30,000 electrons for every
original gamma ray.
In low altitude explosions the electrons, being very light, move much more quickly
than the ionized atoms they are removed from and diffuse away from the region
where they are formed. This creates a very strong electric field which peaks in
intensity to 10 nanoseconds. The gamma rays emitted downward however are
absorbed by the ground which prevents charge separation from occurring.
This creates a very strong vertical electric current which generates intense electromagnetic
emissions over a wide frequency range (up to 100 MHZ) that emanate
mostly horizontally. At the same time, the earth acts as a conductor allowing the
electrons to flow back toward the burst point where the positive ions are
concentrated. This produces a strong magnetic field along the ground. Although only
about 3x10^-10 of the total explosion energy is radiated as EMP in a ground burst
(10^6 joules for 1 Mt bomb), it is concentrated in a very short pulse. The charge
separation persists for only a few tens of microseconds, making the emission power
some 100 gigawatts. The field strengths for ground bursts are high only in the
immediate vicinity of the explosion. For smaller bombs they aren't very important
because they are strong only where the destruction is intense anyway. With
increasing yields, they reach farther from the zone of intense destruction. With a 1 Mt
bomb, they remain significant out to the 2 psi overpressure zone (5 miles).
High altitude explosions produce EMPs that dramatically more destructive. About
3x10^-5 of the bomb's total energy goes into EMP in this case, 10^11 joules for a 1
Mt bomb. EMP is formed in high altitude explosions when the downwardly directed
gamma rays encounter denser layers of air below. A pancake shaped ionization region
is formed below the bomb. The zone can extend all the way to the horizon, to 2500 km
for an explosion at an altitude of 500 km. The ionization zone is up to 80 km thick at
the center. The Earth's magnetic field causes the electrons in this layer to spiral as
they travel, creating a powerful downward directed electro-magnetic pulse lasting a
few microseconds. A strong vertical electrical field (20-50 KV/m) is also generated
between the Earth's surface and the ionized layer, this field lasts for several minutes
until the electrons are recaptured by the air. Although the peak EMP field strengths
from high altitude bursts are only 1-10% as intense as the peak ground burst fields,
they are nearly constant over the entire Earth's surface under the ionized region.

The effects of these fields on electronics is difficult to predict, but can be profound.
Enormous induced electric currents are generated in wires, antennas, and metal
objects (like missiles, airplanes, and building frames). Commercial electrical grids are
immense EMP antennas and would be subjected to voltage surges far exceeding those
created by lightning, and over vastly greater areas. Modern VLSI chips are extremely
sensitive to voltage surges, and would be burned out by even small leakage currents.
Military equipment is generally designed to be resistant to EMP, but realistic tests are
very difficult to perform and EMP protection rests on attention to detail. Minor
changes in design, incorrect maintenance procedures, poorly fitting parts, loose
debris, moisture, and ordinary dirt can all cause elaborate EMP protections to be
totally circumvented. It can be expected that a single high yield, high altitude
explosion over an industrialized area would cause massive disruption for an
indeterminable period, and would cause huge economic damages (all those damaged
chips add up).
What is a Fireball Blackout? How can it block Radar Systems?
A separate effect is the ability of the ionized fireball to block radio and radar signals.
Like EMP, this effect becomes important with high altitude bursts. Fireball blackout
can cause radar to be blocked for tens of seconds to minutes over an area tens of
kilometers across. High frequency radio can be disrupted over hundreds to thousands
of kilometers for minutes to hours depending on exact conditions.

The technology base for EMPS-bombs
Explosively Pumped Flux Compression Generators (FCG)
The central idea behind the construction of FCGs is that of using a fast explosive to
rapidly compress a magnetic field, transferring much energy from the explosive into
the magnetic field. The initial magnetic field in the FCG prior to explosive initiation is
produced by a start current. The start current is supplied by an external source, such
a high voltage capacitor bank (Marx bank), a smaller FCG or the MHD device. A
number of geometrical configurations for FCGs have been published. The most
commonly used arrangement is that of the coaxial FCG.
The coaxial arrangement is of particular interest in this context, as its essentially
cylindrical form factor lends itself to packaging into munitions. In principle, any
device capable of producing a pulse of electrical current of the order of tens of kilo
Amperes to Mega Amperes will be suitable.
Explosive and Propellant driven MHD Generators
The fundamental principle behind the design of MHD devices is that a conductor
moving through a magnetic field will produce an electrical current transverse to the
direction of the field and the conductor motion. In an explosive or propellant driven
MHD device, the conductor is a plasma of ionized explosive or propellant gas, which
travels through the magnetic field. Current is collected by electrodes which are in
contact with the plasma jet. The electrical properties of the plasma are optimized by
seeding the explosive or propellant with suitable additives, which ionize during the
burn.
High Power Microwave Sources (Vircator)
The fundamental idea behind the Vircator is that of accelerating a high current
electron beam against a mesh (or foil) anode. Many electrons will pass through the
anode, forming a bubble of space charge behind the anode. Under the proper
conditions, this space charge region will oscillate at microwave frequencies. If the
space charge region is placed into a resonant cavity which is appropriately tuned,
very high peak powers may be achieved.
Coupling modes
The major problem area in determining lethality is that of coupling efficiency, which is
a measure of how much power is transferred from the field produced by the weapon
into the target.
Front door coupling occurs typically when power from an electro-magnetic weapon is
coupled into an antenna associated with radar or communications equipment. The
antenna subsystem is designed to couple power in and out of the equipment.
Back Door Coupling occurs when the electro-magnetic field from a weapon produces
large transient currents or electrical standing waves (when produced by a HPM
weapon) on fixed electrical wiring and cables interconnecting equipment, or
providing connections to mains power or the telephone network.

A low frequency bomb built around an FCG will require a large antenna to provide
good coupling of power from the weapon into the surrounding environment. Whilst
weapons built this way are inherently wide band, as most of the power produced lies
in the frequency band below 1 MHz compact antennas are not an option.
Microwave bombs have a broader range of coupling modes and given the small
wavelength in comparison with bomb dimensions, can be readily focussed against
targets with a compact antenna assembly.
The importance of glide-bombs as delivery means for HPM warheads is threefold.
Firstly, the glide-bomb can be released from outside effective radius of target air
defences, therefore minimizing the risk to the launch aircraft. Secondly, the large
standoff range means that the aircraft can remain well clear of the bomb's effects.
Finally the bomb's autopilot may be programmed to shape the terminal trajectory of
the weapon, such that a target may be engaged from the most suitable altitude and
aspect.
Targeting Electro-Magnetic Bombs
The task of identifying targets for attack with electro-magnetic bombs can be
complex. Certain categories of target will be very easy to identify and engage.
Buildings housing government offices and thus computer equipment, production
facilities, military bases and known radar sites and communications nodes are all
targets which can be readily identified through conventional photographic, satellite,
imaging radar, electronic reconnaissance and humint operations. These targets are
typically geographically fixed and thus may be attacked providing that the aircraft
can penetrate to weapon release range. With the accuracy inherent in GPS/inertially
guided weapons, the electro-magnetic bomb can be programmed to detonate at the
optimal position to inflict a maximum of electrical damage.
Mobile and camouflaged targets which radiate overtly can also be readily engaged.
Mobile and relocatable air defence equipment, mobile communications nodes and
naval vessels are all good examples of this category of target. While radiating, their
positions can be precisely tracked with suitable Electronic Support Measures (ESM)
and Emitter Locating Systems (ELS) carried either by the launch platform or a remote
surveillance platform. In the latter instance target coordinates can be continuously
data-linked to the launch platform. As most such targets move relatively slowly, they
are unlikely to escape the footprint of the electro-magnetic bomb during the weapon's
flight time.
Mobile or hidden targets which do not overtly radiate may present a problem,
particularly should conventional means of targeting be employed. A technical solution
to this problem does however exist, for many types of target. This solution is the
detection and tracking of Unintentional Emission (UE). UE has attracted most
attention in the context of TEMPEST surveillance, where transient emanations
leaking out from equipment due poor shielding can be detected and in many instances
demodulated to recover useful intelligence. Termed Van Eck radiation, such emissions
can only be suppressed by rigorous shielding and emission control techniques, such
as are employed in TEMPEST rated equipment.

Whilst the demodulation of UE can be a technically difficult task to perform well, in
the context of targeting electro-magnetic bombs this problem does not arise. To
target such an emitter for attack requires only the ability to identify the type of
emission and thus target type, and to isolate its position with sufficient accuracy to
deliver the bomb. Because the emissions from computer monitors, peripherals,
processor equipment, switch-mode power supplies, electrical motors, internal
combustion engine ignition systems, variable duty cycle electrical power controllers
(thyristor or triac based), super-heterodyne receiver local oscillators and computer
networking cables are all distinct in their frequencies and modulations, a suitable
Emitter Locating System can be designed to detect, identify and track such sources of
emission.
A good precedent for this targeting paradigm exists. During the SEA (Vietnam)
conflict the United States Air Force (USAF) operated a number of night inter-diction
gun-ships which used direction finding receivers to track the emissions from vehicle
ignition systems. Once a truck was identified and tracked, the gun-ship would engage
it.
Because UE occurs at relatively low power levels, the use of this detection method
prior to the outbreak of hostilities can be difficult, as it may be necessary to over-fly
hostile territory to find signals of usable intensity. The use of stealthy reconnaissance
aircraft or long range, stealthy Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) may be required. The
latter also raises the possibility of autonomous electro-magnetic warhead armed
expendable UAVs, fitted with appropriate homing receivers. These would be
programmed to loiter in a target area until a suitable emitter is detected, upon which
the UAV would home in and expend itself against the target.
Technokontrol Anti-EMPS Defence against EMPS-bombs and EMPS personal
carried device attacks.

The most effective defence against electro-magnetic bombs is to prevent their
delivery by destroying the launch platform or delivery vehicle, as is the case with
nuclear weapons. This however may not always be possible, and therefore systems
which can be expected to suffer exposure to the electro-magnetic weapons effects
must be electro-magnetically hardened.
The most effective method is to wholly contain the equipment in an electrically
conductive enclosure; Technokontrol has developed the Anti-EMPS Protection
Panels for such protection systems termed a Faraday cages or TK-EMPS Panel
Protected Bunker-Buildings, which prevents the electro-magnetic field from
gaining access to the protected equipment. However, most such equipment must
communicate with and be fed with power from the outside world, and this can provide
entry points via which electrical transients may enter the enclosure and effect
damage. While optical fibers address this requirement for transferring data in and
out, electrical power feeds remain an on-going vulnerability. The use of these
protective systems with our own electromagnetic power supply as the TK-Omega
RF5000 and TK-Orion RF5000 will also not to need to require external energy
supply thus closing down all and any leaks thus allowing the base or bunker totally
EMPS protected and anti EMPS attack proof.
Where an electrically conductive channel must enter the enclosure, electro-magnetic
arresting devices must be fitted. A range of devices exist, however care must be taken
in determining their parameters to ensure that they can deal with the rise time and
strength of electrical transients produced by electro-magnetic devices. Reports from
the US indicate that hardening measures attuned to the behaviour of nuclear EMP
bombs do not perform well when dealing with some conventional microwave electromagnetic
device designs. Thus needing to use Technokontrols Anti-EMPS Protection
Technology which as being simple and effective will not need to be applied to the
internal electronics of any of the devices required for protection as the whole area,
zone, section will be protected for all outside EMPS and thus needing to install an
antenna to continue to operate with the outside world once the danger has been
overcome or passed allowing normal operations to continue if desired.
Technokontrol Anti-EMPS Protection Panels will save any military, government or
corporation to do significant &#8220;hardening/protecting&#8221; of their systems, as electromagnetic
damage to any single element of a complex system could inhibit the function
of the whole system. Hardening new build equipment and systems will add a
substantial cost burden. Older equipment and systems may be impossible to harden
properly and may require complete replacement. In simple terms, hardening by
design is significantly easier than attempting to harden existing equipment. Thus
using Technokontrol Anti-EMPS technology will avoid mass change-over investments
and allowing all electronics to continue their normal operations reducing cost, time,
burden and protecting classified data, locations or confidential interests to outside
operators.
Intermittent faults may not be possible to repair economically, thereby causing
equipment in this state to be removed from service permanently, with considerable
loss in maintenance hours during damage diagnosis. This factor must also be
considered when assessing the hardness of equipment against electro-magnetic
attack, as partial or incomplete hardening may in this fashion cause more difficulties
than it would solve. Indeed, shielding which is incomplete may resonate when excited
by radiation and thus contribute to damage inflicted upon the equipment contained
within it.
Electromagnetic damage to any single element of a complex system could inhibit the
function of the whole system.
Other than hardening against attack, facilities which are concealed should not radiate
readily detectable emissions. Where radio frequency communications must be used,
low probability of intercept (i.e... spread spectrum) techniques should be employed
exclusively to preclude the use of site emissions for electro-magnetic targeting
purposes. Appropriate suppression of UE is also mandatory.
EMPS Weapons
Complex and expensive experimental efforts are more timely and cost-effective if they
are tested by theoretical and computational modelling. Such computations are made
tractable by viewing the device as a system consisting of a pulsed power source,
microwave source, and an antenna.
Electro-magnetic bombs are Weapons of Electronical Mass Destruction with
applications across a broad spectrum of targets, spanning both the strategic and
tactical. As such their use offers a very high payoff in attacking the fundamental
information processing and communication facilities of a target system. The massed
application of these weapons will produce substantial paralysis in any target system,
thus providing a decisive advantage in the conduct of Electronic Combat, Offensive
Counter Air and Strategic Air Attack.

Because EMPS-bombs can cause hard electrical kills over larger areas than
conventional explosive weapons of similar mass, they offer substantial economies in
force size for a given level of inflicted damage, and are thus a potent force multiplier
for appropriate target sets.
What will happen if we don´t anticipate this new modern day technological
threat? Why must TechnoKontrol Anti-Electromagnetic EMPS technology
should be used?
Electro-magnetic bombs are Weapons of Electronical Mass Destruction with
applications across a broad spectrum of targets, spanning both the strategic and
tactical. As such their use offers a very high payoff in attacking the fundamental
information processing and communication facilities of a target system. The massed
application of these weapons will produce substantial paralysis in any target system,
thus providing a decisive advantage in the conduct of Electronic Combat, Offensive
Counter Air and Strategic Air Attack.
EMPS-bombs can cause hard electrical kills over larger areas than conventional
explosive weapons of similar mass, they offer substantial economies in force size for a
given level of inflicted damage, and are thus a potent force multiplier for appropriate
target sets.
The non-lethal nature of electro-magnetic weapons makes their use far less politically
damaging than that of conventional munitions, and therefore broadens the range of
military options available.
EMPS-bombs can be an affordable force multiplier for military forces which are under
financial and economic pressures to reduce force sizes, increasing both their combat
potential and political utility in resolving disputes. Given the potentially high payoff
deriving from the use of these devices, it is incumbent upon such military forces to
appreciate both the offensive and defensive implications of this technology. It is also
incumbent upon governments and private industry to consider the implications of the
proliferation of this technology, and take measures to safeguard their vital assets from
possible future attack.
All governments, armed forces, corporations, business people, civilians and society in
general should be aware of this mass destructive technology and which at present has
no indication to be stopped due to not needing extremely difficult minerals or
chemicals or top global engineers or research teams to be created once it basics can
be copied and developed. No one can also predict what the &#8220;Sun-EMP3&#8221; will do
tomorrow as a simple point of view and that isn´t even taking into account the use of this EMPS technology in the hands of the wrong people with the wrong reasons.
What are our governments going to do to resolve this issue or at least to protect the
population and nation in general if the worst came to the worst scenario? What are
the emergency plans? Which bases will be protected?Whom will be selected to be
protected and why? Who will protect our families in the case of civil un-rest, lack of
food, electricity, transport, etc?
These are questions which must be answered today for tomorrow.

[video]http://technokontrol.com/en/products/electromagnetic-pulse.php[/video]


----------



## The SC

Liquid body armor
Shear-thickening Fluid

The term "liquid body armor" can be a little misleading. For some people, it brings to mind the idea of moving fluid sandwiched between two layers of solid material. However, both types of liquid armor in development work without a visible liquid layer. Instead, they use Kevlar that has been soaked in one of two fluids.

The first is a shear-thickening fluid (STF), which behaves like a solid when it encounters mechanical stress or shear. In other words, it moves like a liquid until an object strikes or agitates it forcefully. Then, it hardens in a few milliseconds. This is the opposite of a shear-thinning fluid, like paint, which becomes thinner when it is agitated or shaken.

You can see what shear-thickening fluid looks like by examining a solution of nearly equal parts of cornstarch and water. If you stir it slowly, the substance moves like a liquid. But if you hit it, its surface abruptly solidifies. You can also shape it into a ball, but when you stop applying pressure, the ball falls apart.

Here's how the process works. The fluid is a colloid, made of tiny particles suspended in a liquid. The particles repel each other slightly, so they float easily throughout the liquid without clumping together or settling to the bottom. But the energy of a sudden impact overwhelms the repulsive forces between the particles -- they stick together, forming masses called hydroclusters. When the energy from the impact dissipates, the particles begin to repel one another again. The hydroclusters fall apart, and the apparently solid substance reverts to a liquid.

Before impact, the particles in shear-thickening fluid are in a state of equilibrium. After impact, they clump together, forming solid structures.

The fluid used in body armor is made of silica particles suspended in polyethylene glycol. Silica is a component of sand and quartz, and polyethylene glycol is a polymer commonly used in laxatives and lubricants. The silica particles are only a few nanometers in diameter, so many reports describe this fluid as a form of nanotechnology.

To make liquid body armor using shear-thickening fluid, researchers first dilute the fluid in ethanol. They saturate the Kevlar with the diluted fluid and place it in an oven to evaporate the ethanol. The STF then permeates the Kevlar, and the Kevlar strands hold the particle-filled fluid in place. When an object strikes or stabs the Kevlar, the fluid immediately hardens, making the Kevlar stronger. The hardening process happens in mere milliseconds, and the armor becomes flexible again afterward.

In laboratory tests, STF-treated Kevlar is as flexible as plain, or neat, Kevlar. The difference is that it's stronger, so armor using STF requires fewer layers of material. Four layers of STF-treated Kevlar can dissipate the same amount of energy as 14 layers of neat Kevlar. In addition, STF-treated fibers don't stretch as far on impact as ordinary fibers, meaning that bullets don't penetrate as deeply into the armor or a person's tissue underneath. The researchers theorize that this is because it takes more energy for the bullet to stretch the STF-treated fibers.

Research on STF-based liquid body armor is ongoing at the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the University of Delaware. Researchers at MIT, on the other hand, are examining a different fluid for use in body armor. We'll look at their research next.






















Body armor nicknamed "bullet-proof custard"
A revolutionary new form of body armor nicknamed &#8220;bullet-proof custard&#8221; has been invented to help save British troops&#8217; lives. It took a team of scientists with the global defense and security company BAE Systems in Bristol, U.K., to formulate the top-secret substance, which will absorb the force of a shot or shrapnel by thickening and hardening instantly on impact and dispersing the impact over a wider area than the heavier Kevlar® vests. BAE Systems will develop the liquid armor so it can take the force of more powerful guns, including the AK-47 assault rifle. The company believes soldiers could be using the new protective vests in two years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

The SC said:


> The Qaher-313
> 
> Iran&#8217;s new domestically-designed and developed fighter jet, Qaher-313 (Conqueror-313), is &#8216;super advanced&#8217; and capable of &#8216;evading radars.&#8217;
> The aircraft has a &#8220;very low radar cross section&#8221; and is capable of conducting operations at low altitudes.
> Highly-advanced materials and electro-ionic systems had been used in the structure of Qaher-313, and the aircraft is capable of carrying advanced armaments.
> Qaher-313 can take off and land on short runways and it has easy maintenance.
> The new single-seat bomber has been manufactured based on state-of-the-art technologies and modern defense technologies.
> 
> It features a downward Wing-tip device which Flightglobal.com noted vaguely resembles the Boeing Bird of Prey prototype, but with a more faceted design similar to the 1970s-era Lockheed Have Blue that was developed into the now retired F-117 Nighthawk. Flight Global also said, "given the apparent small size of the aircraft and its single engine design, the Qaher 313 could be powered by reverse engineered variants of the General Electric J85 turbojet that Iran is known to have in its possession." Iran has General Electric J85s as well as a dozen other jet engines as a result of old Northrop F-5s and other American aircraft in its inventory from pre-1979 as well as newer engines from Russia and China. Iran also builds various turbo fan engines like the Toloue-4 and Toloue-5 for its UAVs. Iranians have designed the aircraft using CATIA three-dimensional interactive design software and tested it using simulation software including Gambit numerical grid generation software, fluent flow analysis and simulation software, CFD models and they have additionally tested the aerodynamics using small sized jet and propeller flying models.
> The aircraft is designed with extra stability and so does not need a fly-by-wire (FBW) system.
> 
> A prototype version of the Qaher-313 was portrayed to have test-flown at some point before the presentation. According to the head of the design team, two sub-sized models have been created and tested. One of the models uses a propeller engine while the other uses a small micro jet engine. The models were shown in a video clip (along with descriptions by the head of the design team) the same day.
> The engine used by the design had been successfully tested. He also confirmed that the aircraft had not yet been flown, but that taxi and flight tests will occur in the near future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [url=http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/02/02/286875/irans-fighter-jet-can-evade-radars/]PressTV - Iran?s super advanced Qaher-313 can evade radars: Defense minister[/URL]
> Qaher-313 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



This is a fake plane,all aircraft analysts have said its nothing more than a sleek plastic model.
Further, the canopy appears to be constructed of "basic plastic," the air intakes are unusually small, and "The whole impression is of some plastic parts pasted to an old flying platform." One expert says the cockpit and ejection seat seem real, but the Qaher-313 displayed seemed too small to be a capable fighter. A photo of the cockpit shows a simple glass cockpit design using civilian avionics from Dynon Avionics and Garmin which are normally found on much less sophisticated general aviation aircraft. The markings on the backup airspeed indicator in this photo seem unrealistic, suggesting a stall speed in landing configuration of merely 70 knots and a never exceed speed of about 260 knots; values more likely to be found on a small turboprop aircraft.[23] Video footage showing the plane airborne could have been a radio-controlled model aircraft. Poor-quality footage posted on the internet provided no sense of scale for the platform being flown, and also failed to show its take-off or landing. Its stealth factors are also claimed to be into question, having no visible weapons carrying capability, either internally or externally.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv mk3

Umair Nawaz said:


> another teja on the horizon.



direct energy weapons..right??
KALI (laser) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Top 7 &#8216;breakthrough&#8217; military weapons | SmartPlanet

Go to the link,some really interesting new weapons incoming.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Panzerhaubitze2000,probably best SPH atm.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Leopard a7 ,best MBT right now.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Virginia class SSN,quietest and most lethal mass produced SSN around.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

European Meteor BVR,soon to be best BVR in the world.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
M829A3.Best tank round in service.On m1a2 abrams.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
IMI israeli APAM round,specially for anti infantry and urban warfare.[India getting it for arjun mk2]





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
The new american 'super' Bunker buster.Reportedly developed to 'deal' with the 'iranian situation'.See comparison of penetration with GBU-28 current best normal bunker buster in the world that smashed saddam's hardened underground bunkers.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
CBU-97/CBU-105.Deadliest Anti armour smart cluster bomb.3 CBU destroy 90 iraqi tanks in desert storm.India got it.Thanks uncle sam.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
APG-77 AESA radar of f-22.With 1500 modules the best radar atm.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Russian PANTSIR S1E.Best point defence low level system.Designed to intercept cruise missile and PGM as well as aircraft.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Russian TOPOL-M ICBM.Deadliest ICBM in existence.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Russian ISKANDER-M.Unstoppable short range tactical ballistic missile.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
American New generation FORD class supercarrier,with f-35s.Mobile soveriegn US territory.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
New american next gen zumwalt class destroyer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The SC

On Feb. 4, a couple of days after the entire world highlighted the oddities of the first prototype of its Qaher 313 stealth fighter jet and the reasons why the F-313 will never get off the ground, the Iranian MEHR News Agency published an article to explain the aircraft&#8217;s top features.

The F-313&#8242;s top 10 features piece addresses some of the doubts surrounding the Qaher and its ability to fly and are aimed to persuade skeptics that Tehran&#8217;s new aircraft is not only airworthy, but it is also &#8220;one of the most sophisticated fighter jet in the world,&#8221; as Ahmadinejad said.

Here below you&#8217;ll find a long excerpt of the MEHR article:

The top 10 technical characteristics of the F-313 fighter jet and some of the related data on its features and appearance:

1- Using Two inlets and inlet ducts make up the air induction system to deliver air to the engine. Due to an indirect angle of the engine to the air inlets, the radar reflectivity is reduced, and it makes angled design of inlet ducts to the surface to get radar energy wave, just like in F35.

2- The hot exhaust gas mixes with cold air through the inlet ducts, and gets cooler before it gets out of the exhaust system, to reduce heat effects on the surface of the aircraft.

3- Use of radar-absorbent materials in the body, to absorb wave energy and reduce radar reflection, for greater stealth effect of Qaher F-313 fighter.

4- Considering the estimated length and height of the aircraft is less than 16 and 4 meter, the two compartments with payload capacity of carrying two 2000 pound bombs, or greater number of smaller smart guided missiles, or at least 6 air-to-air missiles in the category of R-17 or PL-12.

5- Relatively large vertical tail surface has created favorable directional stability and with canted vertical tails create aerodynamic benefits as well specific appropriate lateral maneuvering capabilities.

6- The very large canopy gives a 360 degree visibility, which is essential for low altitude fly-by flights, especially helps ground mission attacks, and it is also very useful in close dog-fights.

7- The angled wings is perfect example of indigenous design for aircrafts, which gives a side profile like M, and similar to a W profile, is the best form to use in aircrafts.

8- Single-cycle landing gear is another proof that F-313 is a light weight aircraft, with minimum flying weight of 12 to 14 ton, and maximum flying weight of 20 ton.

9- There are 8 analog displays in the cockpit, which shows Multi-Function Display (MFD) technology has more room to improve in F-313, Qaher fighter jet.

10- Considering F-313 normal steering lever, the control systems, with the wing movable surfaces, rudder, and vertical stabilizer are hydraulics, and not fly-by-wire (FBW) system, since many today&#8217;s aircraft use &#8220;side-steering lever&#8221; control.

The advance computer designing software (CATIA) were used for designing F-313, and aerodynamic analysis methods such as computational fluid dynamics (CFD) also were used, with the help of numerical grid generation software (GAMBIT), flow analysis software (FLUENT) and other design computation software, which shows a complete scientific work in various areas of indigenous scientific and technology was used for F-313.


The prototypes are already flying, and tests made. Maybe the one shown in the inauguration is not the final product, but it shows the concept that has been approved to be tested, developed and manufactured.
No nation on earth will act as a clown by officially showcasing falsely something as important as a fighter airplane. And by the way, everytime Iran showcased something, it was working and highly efficient, be it missiles, submarines, ammunition, anti-tank weapons, air defence systems, tanks, ships, or air-planes civilian and military.
The critics have just to accept that it is an original concept different than the mainstream concepts in avionics, and that it is a new comer built by Iran for Iranian's needs, i.e; to defend themselves and deter any wannabe attackers.
The main critics are Zionist Jews and their media paid servants, they are the same ones behind the sanctions, the threats of nuclear attacks and the media frenzy to sell more of their fake stories, and to create conflicts to perpetuate their false status. 
But Iran takes it seriously, because those people who suffer from an inferiority complex projected to the naive and mostly uneducated world as a complex of superiority are dangerous as all the mentally ill and unstable people.


----------



## The SC

EDA high-resolution passive radar locks development milestone

Spanish contractor Indra has completed development and demonstration of the Array Passive ISAR (APIS) adaptive processing equipment, which it claims is the world's first passive radar to make use of Inverse Synthetic-Aperture Radar (ISAR) technology.
Alongside Indra (which has acted as lead contractor), development of the European Defence Agency- (EDA-) sponsored APIS architecture has involved Italy's Consorzio Nazionale Interuniversitario per le Telecomunicazioni (CNIT) and Vitrociset SpA, Hungary's Academy of Sciences' Computer and Automation Research Institute (Hungarian acronym MTA SZTAKI), Spain's Universidad de Alcalá and the University of Cyprus.
As described by the EDA, the 24-month-long APIS programme has been designed to "study and realise" a multi-channel, multi-static single receiver for an Array Passive Radar (APR) that makes use of digital signals-of-opportunity (in this case, digital terrestrial TV transmissions).
In more detail, the envisaged APR would exploit multiple-frequency channels from an illuminator-of-opportunity (IO), multiple IOs located in different positions but operating in the same band - an example here being Digital Video Broadcast - Terrestrial (DVB-T) repeaters - and/or other possible combinations that would include terrestrial, airborne and space-based emitters.
APIS was also intended to "define and implement" an adaptive Space Adaptive Processing (SAP) - ISAR processing technique in which SAP was to be used to filter out direct signals, multipath interference, jamming signals and 'hot' (generated by direct and multipath signals from sources other than the reference one) and spatially correlated clutter, with the whole being intended to create a high-level signal-to-disturbance ratio.
Implementation of adaptive SAP-ISAR processing was noted as requiring new ISAR algorithms for application to SAP filtered signals. Indra notes APIS as making use of a MUltipe Signal Classifiction (MUSIC) algorithm - which is a technique that estimates the frequency content of a signal or an autocorrelation matrix using eigenspace methodology - approach to non-deterministic digital beam forming.

EDA high-resolution passive radar locks development milestone - IHS Jane's 360


Indra develops the first high resolution passive radar system

Indra has completed development work on a passive high resolution primary radar system, under a project sponsored by the European Defence Agency. This is the first such system in the world that can show images using inverse synthetic aperture radar (ISAR)	
Passive radar does not emit any form of radiation and instead uses signals already existing in the environment. Indra&#8217;s radar system takes advantage of digital terrestrial television (DTT) signals as the sources of illumination. The advantages of this type of radar are that it&#8217;s undetectable&#8212;given that it doesn&#8217;t emit any signal&#8212;its low cost and the ability to use it just about anywhere, even in mobile situations, given the wide coverage of DTT signals.
This Spanish company has taken a step forward in the development of these systems by giving it an advanced inverse synthetic aperture radar (ISAR) processing capacity. This represents the first time that this technique, which uses the target&#8217;s movement to obtain its radar image, has been applied to radar.
Indra has employed the most innovative signal processing algorithms in this solution, such as STAP (Space-Time Adaptive Processing) and non-deterministic (algorithms based on MUSIC) digital beam forming techniques (Digital Beamforming).
The system&#8217;s smart capabilities make it the most advanced currently available and the only one that can offer high resolution images.
The APIS project (Array Passive ISAR Adaptive Processing) lasted 24 months and included the participation of Spain&#8217;s National Telecommunications Engineering Consortium (CNIT) and the University of Alcalá, among others.

España, technology for life


----------



## The SC

The Russian 3D air defense radar 1L121-E

The Russian company NNIIRT has introduced an export version of its 1L121-E mobile 3-D air-defence radar at the Aero-India 2013 airshow in India. The 1L121-E solid-state active phased array radar that operates in the UHF band is designed to detect small air targets such as low-flying mini unmanned aerial vehicles (mini UAVs) and precision-guided munitions (PGMs). The radar is mounted on vehicular platforms and is operated by a crew of three.
The 1L121-E provides full hemispheric coverage and is designed to operate on the move or on the halt. Moving from stationary to mobile operation requires about two minutes. The array comprises 36 transmit/receive modules arranged in a phased array controlled matrix covering 60 degrees in elevation, reaching up to 90 km range with minimum distance of five kilometers. At this operating mode the radar can simultaneously track 64 targets. For full-hemispheric coverage 90 degree elevation is employed, reducing detection range to 20 km. The minimum range is set at only two kilometers, simultaneously tracking only 32 targets. When covering full-hemispheric scan the radar mechanically rotates at rates of 50 to 800 m/s.
The radar detects and classifies up to four different target types, positioning each target with an accuracy of 100 meters, with 1 degree accuracy in elevation and azimuth. It will differentiate between two targets spaced 300m apart. In addition to the detection of targets the radar also performs electronic profiling of the target, assessing signals emitted by aircraft, drones or PGMs. This input can assist in threat assessment, jammer location and identification of non-cooperating targets (IFF).
This radar was first shown during the Moscow Air Show (MAKS) exhibition in 2011. It was Developed by Nizhegorodskiy Naucsno-Issledovatelskiy Institut Radiotekhniki (NNIIRT), the organization responsible for numerous Russian ground-based radar developments. At MAKS 2011 it was displayed on a tracked MT-LBu vehicle. Now at Aero-India it is shown on a BTR-80 wheeled platform. Similar installations were also done on GAZ-3937 Vodnik 4×4 wheeled chassis.

Mobile Radar Optimized to Detect UAVs, Precision Guided Weapons - Defense Update - Military Technology & Defense News





Radar technology looks to the future

Radar technology looks to the future - Military & Aerospace Electronics


----------



## thesolar65

All these above sounds good and feels good. But the greatest and most advanced weapon on earth and will always remain is "MONEY". Those who have lots of it will only succeed in developing these...


----------



## Super Falcon

pakistan is no way near to these technologies


----------



## The SC

thesolar65 said:


> All these above sounds good and feels good. But the greatest and most advanced weapon on earth and will always remain is "MONEY". Those who have lots of it will only succeed in developing these...



You say India has a lot of money now, so where are those Indian most advanced weapons on earth.
Brahmos is Russian
Rafale is French

Tejas?


----------



## thesolar65

The SC said:


> You say India has a lot of money now, so where are those Indian most advanced weapons on earth.
> Brahmos is Russian
> Rafale is French
> 
> Tejas?



No No you got it wrong. I was pointing to China. We do do research but also look at our pockets. Our currency reserve is very modest compared to china. Now in the whole world they only can indulge in this kind of development and if you are one of them my advice would be to " Keep it up, spend more, you will soon become the sole super power". My blessings are with you.




Did I say anything wrong?


----------

