Crooked Bough News Round-up

— Skunk Works Tests Sees AI-Enabled L-29 Jets Fly Mock Air-To-Air Mission On Orders From Aerial Controller

 

at 11/22/24 5:40pm

A human controller flying in an L-39 Albatros jet ordered a pair of L-29 Delfin jets with artificial intelligence (AI) driven flight technology acting as surrogates for advanced drones to engage simulated enemy fighters in a series of recent flight tests. Lockheed Martins famed Skunk Works advanced projects division led the experiment, which reflects growing discussions about how exactly crewed platforms will manage their uncrewed companions in the future. This is becoming a particularly important question for the U.S. Air Force in regard to its Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program. Skunk Works collaborated with Lockheed Martins own Demonstrations and Prototypes organization and the University of Iowas Operator Performance Laboratory (OPL) on the crewed-uncrewed teaming test, according to a company press release. The testing occurred, at least in part, over an unspecified range in Iowa. In a series of flight tests, the Skunk Works and OPL teams simulated an offensive counter air mission where an airborne, human battle manager aboard an L-39 Albatros assigned targets to two AI-controlled L-29 Delfin jets, which then worked together to defeat two mock enemy jets using simulated mission systems and weapons, the release explains. [The] airborne battle manager issued real-time commands to AI-controlled aircraft through a touchscreen pilot vehicle interface (PVI). A stock picture of one of the L-29 jets from the University of Iowas Operator Performance Laboratory (OPL) involved in the recent Skunk Works test. USAF These flight tests build on previous experiments that demonstrated AI-controlled air-to-ground jamming and geolocation, the release adds. This year, the tests shifted to AI in air-to-air combat, where AI sends commands directly to the planes autopilots. This is the third test of this type and the first to include a real-time human battle manager overseeing the AIs actions. As The War Zone has highlighted in the past, there are significant benefits to using piloted or pilot-optional platforms as surrogates for drones in tests within the United States. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) currently imposes significant restrictions on truly uncrewed flight operations inside U.S. airspace. This, in turn, means that pilot-optional aircraft present significant benefits, especially research and development and test and evaluation activities. Having a human pilot onboard can help accelerate certain kinds of testing and also provides an extra margin of safety. The U.S. military and other companies beyond Lockheed Martin, such as Shield AI, have used OPLs L-29s, as well as contractor-operated L-39s and other pilot-optional platforms, to support advanced autonomy and drone development efforts in the past for exactly these reasons. In addition, despite continual advances in what can be done in virtual environments through advanced modeling and simulation, being able to conduct live testing remains very important, in general. Live flight tests are a crucial aspect of advancing our expertise in AI and autonomy, Matthew Gabe Beard, Lockheed Martin Skunk Works autonomy/AI and machine learning engineering manager, said after another test involving OPLs L-29s that demonstrated their ability to conduct AI-enabled air-to-air intercepts back in June. These flights are powerful demonstrations of our ability to quickly and affordably develop and test operationally relevant AI capabilities. OPLs L-29s at Edwards Air Force Base in California earlier this year. USAF Lockheed Martin is among an array of U.S. defense contractors working to develop more and more advanced AI agents and expand the envelope of what AI-driven autonomous flight systems can do. This includes General Atomics and Anduril, which also currently developing drones as part of the first phase of the CCA program, also known as Increment 1. Lockheed Martin was among the companies not selected to proceed in Increment 1, but that are looking toward the next phase, or Increment 2. Increasing trust in those systems to do what they are instructed to do by human operators is also a key aspect of this autonomy work. Additional developments are undoubtedly ongoing in the classified realm, as well. This is hardly the first time Lockheed Martin has demonstrated an operational relevant autonomous flight capability, either. Back in 2015, the company, working together with the CalSpan Corporation, demonstrated the ability of a highly modified pilot-optional F-16 testbed, now designated the X-62A, to fly in formation with a standard two-seat F-16D, break off to fly a preplanned route, and the form back up with the other jet, all while in a semi-autonomous mode. The F-16 testbed took part in a very similar experiment in 2017 that also included the jet carrying out a simulated strike mission. Since then, the X-62A has been involved in even more advanced autonomy testing work, including a first-of-its-kind AI-driven dogfight with another F-16 just earlier this year. You can read more about that particular jet here. The X-62A test jet. USAF The X-62A Variable In-flight Simulator Aircraft (VISTA) flies over Edwards Air Force Base, California. U.S. Air Force photo All of this is being done with a particular eye on meeting emerging U.S. military requirements, especially the autonomy demands that the U.S. Air Forces CCA program is generating. The Air Force is also working on autonomous capabilities and other technologies to support future drone developments in direct cooperation with the U.S. Navy and branches of the U.S. military through the CCA effort. The work were doing with the University of Iowas OPL is foundational for the future of air combat, where a family of crewed and uncrewed systems will work together to execute complex missions, John Clark, head of Skunk Works, said in a statement after the recent test. Were excited to leverage our diverse skillsets to advance all elements of this new way of operating. For the CCA program, there continue to be questions not just about what kinds of missions the highly autonomous drones will expected to perform, but also about how they will be controlled, especially by operators in other aircraft. The touchscreen devices like the one featured in the recent Skunk Works test continue to be a user interface of choice. “There’s a lot of opinions amongst the Air Force about the right way to go [about controlling drones from other aircraft],” Skunk Works head John Clark told The War Zone and others at this year’s Air & Space Forces Association’s (AFA) Air, Space & Cyber Conference back in September. “The universal thought, though, is that this [a tablet or other touch-based interface] may be the fastest way to begin experimentation. It may not be the end state.” The video below from Collins Aerospace presents one notional vision for how advanced drones might operate together with crewed aircraft, including receiving instructions from human operators via touchscreen devices, at least initially. At the same time, there is growing evidence that tablet-like devices, especially, may create additional burdens for pilots. “We started with [the Air Force’s] Air Combat Command with tablets… There was this idea that they wanted to have this discreet control,” Michael Atwood, Vice President of Advanced Programs for General Atomics, said during an appearance on The Merge podcast earlier this year. “I got to fly in one of these jets with a tablet. And it was really hard to fly the airplane, let alone the weapon system of my primary airplane, and spatially and temporally think about this other thing.” “We’re working through a spectrum of options that are the minimum invasive opportunities, as well as something that’s more organically equipped, where there’s not even a tablet,” Skunk Works Clark added at the AFA gathering. An example of an actual tablet-based drone control system General Atomics has experimented with in the past. GA-ASI The Air Forces CCA program is increasingly facing a raft of other questions, including about how and where they will operate from, especially on a day-to-day basis domestically within the United States, what it will take to deploy them to forward locations for non-combat and combat missions, and other new training, maintenance, and logistics demands. Serious concerns are also building about the services ability to pay for its planned CCA fleets and other modernization plans. You can read more about all of these issues here. The Navy and other branches of the U.S. military will have to answer the same kinds of questions when it comes to their future drone plans and how those pilotless platforms will be managed. The latest Skunk Works test involving the battle manager riding in the L-39 jet directing the two L-29 aircraft is another step forward in finding the necessary answers to help turn various uncrewed aviation ambitions into realities. Contact the author: joe@twz.com The post Skunk Works Tests Sees AI-Enabled L-29 Jets Fly Mock Air-To-Air Mission On Orders From Aerial Controller appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Air, Artificial Intelligence, Drones, Loyal Wingman, News & Features, Skunk Works, Unmanned] [Link to media]

— Marines’ New Sniper Rifle Declared Fully Operational A Year Early

 

at 11/22/24 5:08pm

The U.S. Marine Corps has hit full operational capability for the service’s MK22 Mod 0 Advanced Sniper Rifle (ASR), the service announced this week, a feat that took place a full year ahead of schedule due to the rifle already being fielded by U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and the Army. With every Marine reconnaissance and infantry unit, as well as military occupational specialty schools now sporting the bolt-action MK22, the service said it is providing snipers a more versatile and sustainable weapon as Marines prepare for a potential conflict with China. The MK22 replaces the M40A6 (a derivative of the long-serving Remington 700 platform) and MK13 Mod 7 rifles, and its barrels are chambered for 7.62X51 mm, .300 Norma Magnum and .338 Norma Magnum rounds, which the service said will help Marines hit targets from farther away when needed, and with greater precision. U.S. Marine Corps M40A6 sniper rifle. (U.S. Marine Corps) Lance Cpl. Dalton Payne The MK22 also sports a caliber agnostic 7-35 variable power Precision Day Optic (PDO). The M317 Precision Day Optic (PDO) paired with the MK22 is a game changer, Brian Nelson, the MK22 project officer for Marine Corps Systems Command, said in a statement announcing the rifles arrival in the force. While the MK22 is heavier than its predecessors, having one gun that can swap out calibers will benefit the force as it prepares for a West Pacific war with China as part of the Force Design 2030 revamp of the service, the Marines said in 2022, when snipers began testing the new rifle. MK22s arrival means Marines will only have to have different ammunition and extra barrels on hand in order to cover two caliber types currently fired by the M40A6 and MK13 Mod 7. This saves on logistics, with just one platform having to be supported by armorers instead of two. The MK22 also features a 10-round detachable magazine and is viewed as a more sustainable weapon by the Marines, with less maintenance time and repairs that can be done at a lower level, eliminating the need to send the firearm to an intermediate repair location. A so-called “condemned barrel” will no longer take the weapon out of the fight, the Marines said. A U.S. Marine takes aim with the services new MK22 sniper rifle. (U.S. Marine Corps) Sgt. Cristian Bestul Every MK22 kit includes the M317 PDO, its scope mount, a suppressor, tool and cleaning kit and three barrels, with recon and infantry units also getting the .300 Winchester Magnum barrel, scout sniper tripod kit, anti-reflection device and laster filter unit, according to the Corps.  Marines like the ability to conduct caliber conversions at their level and the fact that they only have one rifle instead of the two it replaced, Kevin Marion, a logistics management specialist with Marine Corps Systems Command, said. This shift improves operational efficiency, reduces the logistical burden on units, and lightens the individual Marines load. The Marines’ new rifle is based on the Barrett Multi-Role Adaptive Design, or MRAD, sniper rifle, which was brought into the fold by U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in 2021. You can read more about SOCOM’s adoption of that rifle here. The Army began equipping its Green Berets with the ASR in 2021, and they have been fielded by the conventional force as well. Barrett first unveiled the rifle in 2010 and offers barrel lengths ranging from 20 to 27 inches. The Marine Corps announcement this week did not make clear which barrel lengths the service adopted. Its been a relatively short career for the MK13 sniper rifle, which was adopted by the Marines starting in 2018. The workhorse M40 had been in service since 1966. Contact the author: geoff@twz.com The post Marines New Sniper Rifle Declared Fully Operational A Year Early appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Land, Sea, Small Arms, Sniper Rifles, U.S. Marine Corps] [Link to media]

— Multiple Drone Incursion Just Occurred Over USAF Fighter Base In England

 

at 11/22/24 4:13pm

A number of drones were spotted over and near RAF Lakenheath in England on Nov. 20, the Air Force told The War Zone in response to our query about the incident. “The number of UASs fluctuated and they ranged in size/configuration,” a spokesperson for U.S. Air Forces in Europe Air Forces in Africa (USAFE) told us “The UASs were actively monitored and installation leaders determined that none of the incursions impacted base residents or critical infrastructure.” RAF Lakenheath. (Google Earth) There were unconfirmed reports that F-15E Strike Eagles were sent aloft to chase the drones and that flight operations at the base were affected. The Air Force did not immediately respond to those claims. “To protect operational security, we do not discuss our specific force protection measures but retain the right to protect the installation,” USAFE told us. “We continue to monitor our airspace and are working with host-nation authorities and mission partners to ensure the safety of base personnel, facilities, and assets.” RAF Lakenheath houses an extremely important set of capabilities, most notably the U.S. Air Forces in Europes only fourth and fifth-generation fighter wing and home to F-35A & F-15E tactical jets. USAF 494th Fighter Squadron F-15E Strike Eagles seen returning to RAF Lakenheath on May 8, 2024. The jet in front has a number of red missile silhouettes painted above its name, Hellcat, that look to reflect air-to-air kills during its recently concluded deployment to the Middle East. USAF This is the latest known drone incursion over a U.S. military installation or sensitive area, a topic that The War Zone has covered extensively. Two days before the Lakenheath drones were spotted, drones were seen over the U.S. Army’s Picatinny Arsenal in northern New Jersey. The FBI has taken over the investigation into that incident, which you can read more about in our initial report here. There has been an increase in intrusion events at home and abroad, and especially after the events over Langley AFB last winter, they are being looked at with much more concern. This now includes accelerating the deployment of military capabilities to identify and defeat drone systems near these key areas. However, its worth noting that when it comes to defending homeland installations from drones, none of these countermeasures include directed energy weapons or kinetic systems, such as guns and missiles. You can read more about what is being done in our previous feature. This is a developing story. We will update it with more information as it comes in. Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com The post Multiple Drone Incursion Just Occurred Over USAF Fighter Base In England appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Air, Air Forces, Royal Air Force, U.S. Air Force, Unmanned] [Link to media]

— Multiple Drone Incident Just Occurred Over USAF Fighter Base In England

 

at 11/22/24 4:01pm

A number of drones were spotted over and near RAF Lakenheath in England on Nov. 20, the Air Force told The War Zone in response to our query about the incident. “The number of UASs fluctuated and they ranged in size/configuration,” a spokesperson for U.S. Air Forces in Europe Air Forces in Africa (USAFE) told us “The UASs were actively monitored and installation leaders determined that none of the incursions impacted base residents or critical infrastructure.” RAF Lakenheath. (Google Earth) There were unconfirmed reports that F-15E Strike Eagles were sent aloft to chase the drones and that flight operations at the base were affected. The Air Force did not immediately respond to those claims. “To protect operational security, we do not discuss our specific force protection measures but retain the right to protect the installation,” USAFE told us. “We continue to monitor our airspace and are working with host-nation authorities and mission partners to ensure the safety of base personnel, facilities, and assets.” RAF Lakenheath houses an extremely important set of capabilities, most notably the U.S. Air Forces in Europes only fourth and fifth-generation fighter wing and home to F-35A & F-15E tactical jets. USAF 494th Fighter Squadron F-15E Strike Eagles seen returning to RAF Lakenheath on May 8, 2024. The jet in front has a number of red missile silhouettes painted above its name, Hellcat, that look to reflect air-to-air kills during its recently concluded deployment to the Middle East. USAF This is the latest known drone incursion over a U.S. military installation or sensitive area, a topic that The War Zone has covered extensively. Two days before the Lakenheath drones were spotted, drones were seen over the U.S. Army’s Picatinny Arsenal in northern New Jersey. The FBI has taken over the investigation into that incident, which you can read more about in our initial report here. There has been an increase in intrusion events at home and abroad, and especially after the events over Langley AFB last winter, they are being looked at with much more concern. This now includes accelerating the deployment of military capabilities to identify and defeat drone systems near these key areas. However, its worth noting that when it comes to defending homeland installations from drones, none of these countermeasures include directed energy weapons or kinetic systems, such as guns and missiles. You can read more about what is being done in our previous feature. This is a developing story. We will update it with more information as it comes in. Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com The post Multiple Drone Incident Just Occurred Over USAF Fighter Base In England appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Air, Air Forces, Royal Air Force, U.S. Air Force, Unmanned] [Link to media]

— North Korea Getting New Air Defenses In Return For Supporting Russia In Ukraine: Official

 

at 11/22/24 2:57pm

North Korea has received Russian air defense systems in return for its support of the Kremlin’s war in Ukraine, South Korean officials have declared. The transfer of these weapons is the latest development in the deepening military relationship between Pyongyang and Moscow, which has also seen more than 10,000 North Korean troops sent to Russia in recent weeks to fight against Ukraine. According to Shin Wonsik, the top security adviser for South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, Russia has provided surface-to-air missiles and other unspecified air defense equipment. This will be used to reinforce the air defense of the North Korean capital, Pyongyang, Shin told a South Korean SBS TV program today. Shin Wonsik, the security adviser for South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, while he was still serving as South Korean Defense Minister, in July 2024. Photo by Yoshikazu Tsuno/Gamma-Rapho/Pool/Anadolu via Getty Images Anadolu While the specific type of air defense systems wasnt disclosed, Lee Illwoo, an expert with the Korea Defense Network in South Korea said that the S-400 surface-to-air missile system was most likely. This systems, which combine long-range surface-to-air missiles, launchers, ground-based radar systems, and other components, are among the most advanced available anywhere. As well as being widely used by Russia, including in the war with Ukraine, they have been exported to Algeria, Belarus, China, India, and Turkey. The S-400 has a maximum range of up to 250 miles and can tackle lower-end ballistic missile targets, as well as aircraft and cruise missiles. You can read more about the system and its capabilities here. A diagram showing various typical components used within an S-400 battalion. RIA NOVOSTI Overall, the S-400 would make sense for North Korea, especially in a strategic role for the protection of Pyongyang since the country otherwise lacks modern air defense systems in this class. The protection of the capital primarily relies upon mainly outdated surface-to-air missiles and anti-aircraft artillery. Meanwhile, North Korea is increasingly active in building its own types of air defense systems. While North Korea claimed to have operationally fielded the domestically produced KN-06, also known as the Pongae-5, long-range surface-to-air missile system as long ago as 2017, the current status of this is unclear. Even if it has been more widely deployed, it is likely less capable than the S-400. The KN-06 is understood to be based on the Chinese HQ-9 system, which itself is derived from the Russian S-300 — an air defense system that is a generation behind the S-400. North Korean leader Kim Kong Un watches a test launch of the KN-06 surface-to-air missile. North Korea State News Potentially, other air defense equipment may have been provided by Russia, too. According to Kim Dae Young, a military expert at the Korea Research Institute for National Strategy, counter-drone equipment may also be of particular interest to North Korea, which faces a growing threat from South Korean and U.S. uncrewed aerial vehicles. At the same time, long-range S-300s or even Pantsir series short-range air defense systems would be useful for North Korea. The threat posed by drones to Pyongyang in particular was recently highlighted when North Korea accused South Korea of using drones to scatter propaganda leaflets over its capital. Videos released by the North Korean authorities showed two different types of UAVs. That incident, which you can read about here, came after waves of excrement and trash-filled balloons launched by North Korea into the South, a campaign of disruption that started this summer, accompanying a period of worsening tensions on the peninsula overall. Photos released by the North Korean state news agency KCNA last month appear to show drones, which it says were used to drop propaganda leaflets over Pyongyang. KCNA South Korea refused to confirm whether or not it was behind the alleged drone flights. As TWZ highlighted at the time, “The ability of drones — sophisticated or otherwise — to penetrate the heavily defended airspace over the North Korean capital will surely be a considerable worry to officials there and would appear to highlight deficiencies in the North’s best air defense coverage.” Very likely, any military campaign launched by South Korea against the North would see extensive use of drones, including to confuse and overwhelm air defenses. This is especially relevant in the case of Pyongyang, which would be on the receiving end of decapitation strikes against the leadership. A South Korean F-15K drops two Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) onto an island target in response to a North Korean IRBM launch earlier the same day October 4, 2022. Photo by South Korean Defense Ministry via Getty Images Whatever the types of air defense systems that have apparently now been supplied, they will be a significant boost to the North Korean military — officially, the Korean People’s Army. At the same time, it’s clear that Russia is in dire need of air defense systems, with the war in Ukraine putting significant stress on its existing surface-to-air missile stocks. Currently, there is a huge demand for such systems to protect the homeland as well as to defend airspace over the front lines. Presumably, it’s been determined that giving up some S-400s — or whatever other systems — is worth it for what they are getting in exchange from North Korea. The arrival of new military hardware from Russia was long expected, by way of thanks for North Korea’s increasing support for the Kremlin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine as well as the counteroffensive in Russia’s Kursk region. New: North Korean troops have been spotted in Ukraine’s eastern Kharkiv region, a spokesperson for Ukraine’s military in the region told CNN. “I can confirm to you that, according to radio intercepts, North Korean units have been spotted in the Kharkiv region,” said Yevhen…— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) November 22, 2024 Pyongyang’s support for the war has seen the supply of a diverse range of weapons, including millions of badly needed artillery rounds and various kinds of other ammunition. A recent assessment from the South Korean National Intelligence Service (NIS), based on intelligence provided by the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence Directorate (GUR), listed North Korean weapons collected from the battlefield, including claimed “122mm and 152mm shells, Bulsae-4 anti-tank missiles, short-range ballistic missiles such as the KN-23, and RPG anti-tank rockets.” “Considering the size of containers loaded on cargo ships traveling between North Korea and Russia, it appears that a total of more than eight million 122mm and 152mm shells have been provided to Russia so far,” NIS concluded. While all this equipment is in great demand from the Russian side, the deployment of North Korean troops in support of the offensive in Ukraine is an even more significant symbol of the growing military cooperation between Pyongyang and Moscow. Last month, Lt. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov, the head of the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence Directorate (GUR) told TWZ that there were nearly 12,000 North Korean infantry troops training in eastern Russia to fight Ukraine. Since then, there have been accounts of North Korean soldiers taking part in combat, including unconfirmed videos purporting to show fatalities. Earlier this week, The Wall Street Journal reported that a senior North Korean general had been wounded by a Ukrainian strike in the Kursk region. North Koreans in Kursk region sleeping#Ukraine #Russia #NorthKorea pic.twitter.com/PAI0JMrkKJ— The Global 202 (@theglobal202) November 22, 2024 Ever since North Korea stepped in to assist Russia, there has been a good deal of speculation as to what it might get in return. As well as financial reward, including economic cooperation and energy shipments, it was long suspected that North Korea would likely benefit from Russian advanced weapons and technological expertise. There are reports out of South Korea that Russia may have already been helping North Korea develop a space-based surveillance system, as part of a quid-pro-quo arrangement. Surveillance satellites are one area in which North Korea has had some notable failures, while Russia has much more relevant experience. There have been suggestions that Pyongyang might receive new Russian combat aircraft to overhaul its badly aging air force. The delivery of air defense systems could even be an indicator that fighters might be next for North Korea. Even if such a transfer were to involve older, surplus MiG-29 Fulcrums, these would likely be welcomed by Pyongyang. North Korean Pukguksong-5 SLBMs on parade in early 2021. Korean Central News Agency www.twz.com There have also been concerns that Moscow might provide North Korea with technologies to help accelerate its nuclear and long-range ballistic missile programs. Russia would also be a prime candidate to assist North Korea in pushing forward its submarine program, which also includes a growing family of submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) as well as increasingly advanced submarine technologies. While these remain possibilities, it appears that the first tangible benefits headed to the Korean People’s Army will be high-end air defense systems. With North Korean troops only starting to appear on the battlefield in support of Russia, it’s highly likely that Pyongyang’s assistance will continue, and even be stepped up, which will likely lead to more Russian arms heading to North Korea. Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com The post North Korea Getting New Air Defenses In Return For Supporting Russia In Ukraine: Official appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Land, Air, Around The Globe, Europe, Indo-Pacific, News & Features, North Korea, Russia, S-400, Surface-To-Air Missile Systems, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— Conventionally Armed ICBM Concept Highlighted By Unprecedented Russian Missile Attack On Ukraine

 

at 11/22/24 11:11am

It is now confirmed that the weapon Russia fired in an unprecedented attack on Ukraine yesterday was not an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). However, the missile in question, named Oreshnik, is technically derived from an ICBM. Its use highlights past discussions about the potential value of a conventionally armed ICBM, which some countries may be looking at fielding if they havent already, and that would offer a unique extremely long-range strike capability below the nuclear threshold. Russian President Vladimir Putin disclosed the existence of Oreshnik and announced its use in the attack on the eastern Ukrainian city of Dnpiro in a televised address yesterday. The missile is based on the RS-26 Rubezh, according to the Pentagon, a secretive missile you can read more about in detail here. Readers can also find more about what is known about the attack and Oreshnik in The War Zones prior reporting. Better footage of the alleged impacts of multiple warheads separated from a Russian ICBM in Dnipro earlier today.— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (@archer83able.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T10:10:24.907Z When it comes to ballistic missiles, intercontinental range is defined as anything greater than 3,418 miles (5,500 kilometers). Short, Medium, and Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (SRBM, MRBM, and IRBM) have ranges of 620 miles (1,000 kilometers) or less, between 620 and 1,860 miles (1,000 and 3,000 kilometers), and between 1,864 and 3,418 miles (3,000 to 5,500 kilometers), respectively. Within those categories, the exact configuration of the missile, including how many warheads it carries, conventional or nuclear, can vary significantly. The Oreshnik that Russia fired at Ukraine yesterday carried six individual warheads each with six submunitions, according to authorities in the latter country. Putin has said the weapon included unspecified non-nuclear hypersonic technology. It remains unknown when the missile carried standard re-entry vehicles, maneuvering ones, or true hypersonic boost-glide vehicles. ICBMs and other larger ballistic missiles, and their payloads, typically reach substantial hypersonic speeds, generally defined as Mach 5 or above, in the course of their flight and especially while their payloads careen down to their targets. Its worth noting here that the RS-26 already represents an unusual case when it comes to categorization. Officially, Rubezh is an ICBM, but there has long been evidence that it is actually an IRBM. The RS-26 is itself understood to be a shortened derivative of the RS-24 Yars ICBM, which the U.S. government assesses to just be a variant of the preceding RS-12M Topol-M. There is already some debate also about where the Oreshnik lies on the range spectrum, with Putin calling it a medium-range weapon and American officials putting it in the IRBM category. A Russian road-mobile RS-24 Yars ICBM. Vitaly Kuzmin This all may have contributed in various ways to Ukraines initial assessment that what Russian forces had fired was an ICBM. That being said, the concept at least of a conventionally armed ICBM is a real thing. Just last year, the U.S. military openly stated that it had assessed there to be possible interest in [the] development of a conventional ICBM within Chinas Peoples Liberation Army (PLA). There have also been reports that Israels Jericho 3, described as an ICBM, can be employed with a conventional payload. The earlier Jericho 1 short-range ballistic missile and Jericho 2 IRBM, both of which were reportedly retired in the 1990s, are also understood to have been able to carry conventional warheads, as well as nuclear ones. Israel does not publicly acknowledge the existence of its nuclear or longer-range ballistic missile arsenals. The Israeli Shavit-2 space launch rocket, seen being launched here, is reportedly tied to the countrys Jericho series of ballistic missiles. Israel Ministry of Defense Israel is also reportedly developing the next generation of the Jericho, the Jericho 4, a three-stage missile, whose capabilities will include the possibility of carrying fragmentation warheads, according to a report earlier this year from The Jerusalem Post. The story did not provide any further details about that missile, including a range categorization, but it points to the possibility of another Israeli long-range conventional ballistic missile capability in the works. The U.S. military has also explored similar capabilities in the past, including a possible conventionally-armed version of the Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missile, which has intercontinental range. A Trident II launch. USN The Ohio class nuclear ballistic missile submarine USS Rhode Island fires a Trident II during a routine test in 2019. USN After the Pentagon highlighted Chinese interest in a conventional ICBM in 2023, The War Zone explored the potential benefits of such a capability, writing: A likely goal of developing such a system for the PLA would be to have a weapon that puts strategic targets, such as air bases, ports, major command and control nodes, and seats of government, as well as symbolic ones, anywhere in the United States (or really anywhere in the world) at risk without having to escalate to the use of nuclear weapons. This could offer a powerful deterrent to non-nuclear strikes against the Chinese mainland. In addition, the hope could be that if these conventional ICBMs ever had to be used the U.S. government, or any other potential nuclear-armed adversary, would be significantly less likely to retaliate with nuclear weapons. Chinese DF-41 ICBMs, or mockups thereof, on parade. Global Times In a separate story exploring the possibility of Israel using Jerichos with conventional warheads against Iran, The War Zone further highlighted what a weapon of this kind might offer: Already, the Jericho missiles provide the fastest means of striking targets in Iran, and their ballistic trajectory and speed would likely render them immune to interception, especially given the very limited capabilities of Iran’s air defenses against ballistic missile threats. A subsonic cruise missile would be much easier to intercept and wouldn’t provide the option of hitting certain time-sensitive or hardened targets. And in contrast to long-range direct attacks by Israeli Air Force aircraft, no Israeli personnel would be put in harm’s way.  A Jericho missile with a conventional payload would be a very capable weapon in its own right, for the above reasons and even a high-explosive warhead would be extremely destructive. According to CSIS, the Jericho 2 can carry a 3,300-pound high-explosive warhead, while the Jericho 3 has a payload capacity of between 2,200 and 2,900 pounds, although that is in a configuration that has to fly many thousands of miles, not one that has to hit a fraction of that distance. So a much larger payload could be possible if it was adapted for a regional strike profile. The extreme speed that the missiles’ warheads would be traveling during their terminal attack makes them capable of targeting hardened or buried command centers and other key fortified sites to a degree the IAF isn’t capable of. This is a huge capability to consider. Israel does not have the ability to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities that are deeply buried, like the enrichment site in Fordow, via traditional aerial attack, without resorting to nuclear strikes. The United States is the only nation with a conventional air-to-ground capability that could potentially do this — the U.S. B-2 stealth bomber and its Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). But, knowing this limitation, could Israel have created conventional penetrator warheads for its ballistic missiles that could potentially threaten these sites, at least being capable of disabling them for a period of time? A conventional ICBM carrying multiple warheads, or even with a true multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) configuration, could offer even greater capability. A MIRVed missile with conventionally-armed re-entry vehicles with significant accuracy would allow a single missile to strike multiple impact points. The payload bus from a now-retired U.S. LGM-118 Peacekeeper ICBM with 10 mock re-entry vehicles. Wilson44691 via Wikimedia A payload bus from a decommissioned LGM-118A Peacekeeper ICBM now on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force with 10 mock re-entry vehicles. Wilson44691 via Wikimedia There are also clear strategic messaging benefits that would come along with a conventional ICBM capability. A successful attack with such a weapon would have the knock-on effect of very visibly demonstrating the ability to conduct a nuclear strike. Russia clearly had a desire to send signals to Ukraine, and more so to the United States and other countries supporting it, as well as demonstrate a practical capability, with its use of Oreshnik today. At the same time, while there are clear benefits to fielding a conventionally armed ICBM, they could also present worrying discrimination challenges for a defender, who would struggle to determine whether or not they were under nuclear threat. The speed at which an ICBM travels already limits the time available to assess the threat and respond in any way. All of this raises the possibility of a scenario in which an opponent, mistakenly believes they are under nuclear attack and responds in kind, which in turn could well prompt a rapidly escalating nuclear exchange. This is not an idle concern. The Pentagon has said it received advance warning of the Oreshnik attack directly from the Russians through established nuclear risk reduction channels. The notification occurred even though Russias forces fired the missile across a relatively short distance (roughly 500 miles) at a target inside a non-nuclear state not covered by Americas deterrent umbrella. Pentagon:- Russias experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile launched at Ukraine was based on the RS-26 Rubezh ICBM model;- The US was notified by Russia about the launch briefly before it occurred through nuclear risk reduction channels.— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (@archer83able.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T19:57:18.465Z The same kinds of discrimination fears played a significant role in the U.S. militarys previous decision to scrap work on the Conventional Trident Missile. American officials have also openly criticized Chinas ambiguity around their deployment of longer-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying conventional or nuclear warheads. While it has turned out that the RS-26-based Oreshnik that Russia fired at Ukraine was not a conventionally-armed ICBM, it still highlights the very real interest in, if not more active development and even potential fielding of, a weapon of that kind globally. Contact the author: joe@twz.com The post Conventionally Armed ICBM Concept Highlighted By Unprecedented Russian Missile Attack On Ukraine appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Land, Around The Globe, Early Warning/DSP/SBIRS, Europe, ICBMs, News & Features, Nuclear, Nuclear Ballistic Missiles, Orbital Systems, Russia, Space, Tactical Ballistic Missiles, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— Anti-Personnel Landmines Included In U.S. Aid Package To Ukraine For First Time

 

at 11/22/24 10:52am

The Pentagon on Thursday said that Ukraine will be receiving anti-personnel landmines for the first time as part of the latest tranche of weapons for the embattled nation.  The latest Presidential Drawdown Authority Package (PDA), valued at up to $275 million was announced Wednesday. It made no specific mention of landmines but included an unspecified amount of 155mm artillery shells. The Pentagon confirmed that the mines are part of the latest PDA. That points to Ukraine likely being given artillery-fired Area Denial-Artillery-Munitions (ADAMs), designed to scatter landmines ahead of, on top of, or behind enemy forces. Several other indicators point to ADAMs. Ukraine has already received 70,000 of the anti-armor variants of the mine-dispensing shells, has the howitzers needed to fire them which require no new training and nothing else in the package seems to be a match. It is still possible that there is another type of anti-personnel mine capability is being given to Ukraine that wasnt listed, but that seems unlikely based on the factors listed above and Ukraines urgent battlefield needs. 155mm ADAM shells come in two flavors, the M692 and M731, which both contain 36 individual mines. The rounds also function in the same way, releasing the mines out of the rear end after reaching a set point in their flight. U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command Where the M692 and M731 differ is in the specific types of mines inside. The M692 contains M67s, while the M731 has M72. The wedge-shaped mines themselves are only different in the lifespans of their internal batteries – approximately 48 hours for the M67 and just around 4 hours for the M72. Otherwise, each M67 and M72 has eight trip wires (four on the top and four on the bottom) that deploy after ground impact up to 12 meters from the mine, according to Army Field Manual 20-32. [The] trip wires are similar in appearance to very fine thread; they are olive-drab green in color and weighted at the free end. A tension of 405 grams applied to one trip wire is enough to create a break in the electrical circuit and cause the mine to detonate. Each M67 and M72 contains golf ball-sized grenade-like explosive charge designed to kill enemy soldiers through the combined effects of blast and fragmentation, per the Army manual. Shrapnel is propelled upward and outward from the mine and produces fatal casualties to a distance of 15 meters. Its interesting to note that the casing of each M67 and M72 continues just under 0.01 grams of depleted uranium, which is added to the resin blend to help it cure faster and more reliably. U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command There is a possibility that other U.S. anti-personnel mine types could also be included in the most recent aid package for Ukraine, but not clearly identified. The Gator family of mines, which includes anti-personnel and anti-tank mines that can be dispersed using ground-based launchers and ones installed on helicopters, as well as air-dropped cluster munitions, remains in at least limited U.S. service. Older scatterable mines and methods of emplacing them like the Ground Emplaced Mine Scattering System (GEMSS) could still be held in storage. The U.S. military also reportedly maintains a stockpile of manually-emplaced anti-personnel mines in South Korea to be used if conflict were to resume on the Peninsula. Mines in general, and anti-personnel mines especially, are very controversial, particularly due to the threat they potentially pose to civilians long after a conflict is over. The limited battery life of the M67 and M72 mines, as well as Gator mines, is intended to reduce that threat but does not inert the explosives inside the mines, which can still present a serious hazard. The 1997 Ottowa Treaty bans the stockpiling and use of anti-personnel mines, but neither the United States nor Russia is a signatory. Ukraine is a party to the agreement. However, as of 2022, the official position of the U.S. government has been to “align policy and practice with key provisions of the Ottawa Convention for all activities outside the context of the Korean peninsula. U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command The decision to provide ADAMs to Ukraine was made to counter Russia’s so-called “meat assaults” massive waves of personnel attacking positions. These attacks have been taking place for years, but especially so now in eastern Ukraine and Russia’s Kursk region. Though Russia has been slowly gaining ground this way, it has come at an incredibly high cost in terms of personnel and equipment losses. Ukraine needs weapons that can blunt these advances, said U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. “What weve seen most recently is because the Russians have been so unsuccessful in the way that they have been fighting theyve kind of changed their tactics a bit and they dont lead with their mechanized forces anymore,” Austin told reporters in Laos on Wednesday. “They lead with dismounted forces who are able to close in and do things to kind of pave the way for mechanized forces.” Ukraine “has a need for things that can help slow down that effort on the part of the Russians,” he posited. You can see the results of one of those meat waves in the video below. While the Ukrainians are making their own landmines, Austin pointed out that those provided by the U.S. are what’s called “non-persistent,” meaning that in theory, they make themselves inoperable in a certain amount of time, making them safer than what Ukrainians are making on their own. Austin insisted that Ukraine has promised to be “responsible” with these weapons, which are only to be used on Ukrainian soil. He noted that the U.S. has already provided Remote Anti-Armor Mine System (RAAMs) projectiles, which are the anti-tank variant of these munitions. In addition to more than three million conventional 155mm artillery rounds, the U.S. has shipped more than 70,000 RAAMs to Ukraine, according to the Pentagon’s latest statistics. “Weve talked to them about how they would potentially employ these weapons and make sure that theyre doing things responsibly recording where theyre putting their mines and making sure that they take advantage of the self-detonating qualities of these weapons.” The U.S., however, will have limited oversight in how Ukraine deploys the ADAMs, the Pentagon’s Deputy Press Secretary told reporters, including from The War Zone, Thursday afternoon. “Were not tracking it in terms of where they place them, but certainly they have given us their assurances that they will be employed in a way that protects civilians,” Sabrina Singh explained. “They have committed that theyre going to use these mines in their own territory. And I should have added that theyre not going to use them in populated areas.” Ukrainians have an interest in scattering these landmines as safely as possible, Singh noted. After the war, Ukraine “is going to have to conduct a massive demining effort …to remove any unexploded ordinance, both from the landmines that Russia has put in place, and also to any anything else that has been used on the battlefield.” They are already doing this even under heavy Russian pressure along much of the battlefield, which includes large swaths of land littered with Russian mines. During Ukraines failed 2023 counteroffensive, President Volodymyr Zelensk said 200,000 sq km (77,220 sq miles) of Ukrainian territory had been mined by Russian forces, slowing down advances. “Weve already seen them conduct this type of operation in some of the territory that theyve recaptured,” Singh pointed out. “The U.S. is committed to supporting them and to helping them with what they need in those key mining efforts.” As we recently noted, last month was the deadliest of the war for Russia, according to the U.K. Defense Intelligence Directorate. The average daily number of Russian troops killed and wounded was 1,354, it stated, citing Ukrainian Armed Forces General Staff statistics. For the month, there were 41,900 casualties, eclipsing the previous record of 39,100 from May. November is off to an even bloodier start, with an average of 1,498 killed and wounded as of Nov. 12. All told, Russia has lost upwards of 700,000 killed and wounded, those statistics show. It’s worth noting that casualty numbers vary widely depending on the source and The War Zone cannot independently verify them. Latest Defence Intelligence update on the situation in Ukraine 18 November 2024.Find out more about Defence Intelligences use of language: https://t.co/OhCoylRoai #StandWithUkraine pic.twitter.com/wxoSuand2m— Ministry of Defence (@DefenceHQ) November 18, 2024 These casualty figures offer an indication of Russias tolerance for the loss of troops and its willingness to sacrifice them to meet its battlefield goals. That has placed an enormous burden on outmanned Ukrainian troops. With this in mind, the objective of providing ADAMs to Ukraine is to add to Russia’s mounting casualty count, reduce its forces ability to freely maneuver, and to slow what has been in some areas a grinding advance. All of this would assist in reducing the pressure the Russian military is apply at flashpoints along the front lines. With Donald Trump coming into office in two months, some form of negotiations are very likely approaching. Every inch Ukraine loses now it is unlikely to get back if the a perspective deal includes freezing the lines where they are, as many believe it would. Still, the move to supply anti-personnel mines to the Ukraine is an unprecedented one for the U.S. and underlines the precarious state of the conflict. Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com The post Anti-Personnel Landmines Included In U.S. Aid Package To Ukraine For First Time appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: News & Features, Armies, Around The Globe, Artillery, Europe, Land, Russia, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— The Story Of Russia’s Secretive RS-26 Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile

 

at 11/21/24 5:37pm

The Russian missile at the center of an unprecedented strike on the Ukrainian city of Dnipro earlier today has been identified by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin as an alleged new weapon, named Oreshnik. After the strike, the missile had been widely — although not conclusively — identified as the RS-26 Rubezh. Development work on this mysterious strategic weapon system was supposed halted in 2018, although the Pentagon now states that whatever missile was used today in Dnipro was based on the RS-26, suggesting the design was revived at least to a degree, and has now been used in combat. You can read our initial report on the Dnipro missile strike here, as well as our analysis of Putin’s claims around the Oreshnik — described as a medium-range or intermediate-range “hypersonic” missile — here. Note: The missile shown at the top of this story is the RS-24 Yars intercontinental ballistic missile, a weapon on which the RS-26 is widely assessed to be based. First off, it’s worth recalling that the RS-26 is widely viewed as an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), a class of weapon that has a range of somewhere between approximately 1,860 and 3,410 miles — based on the ranges it achieved in tests. However, Russia has previously described it as an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), a type of weapon that can hit targets at more than around 3,410 miles. Ok, two reasons why I think Russia probably used a variant of the long-gestating RS-26 Rubezh IRBM: (1) Russia hinted that it resumed development of the RS-26 this summer and (2) thats what the Ukrainians predicated a day ago, down to the launch site. https://t.co/eUIPx7eqVt— Dr. Jeffrey Lewis (@ArmsControlWonk) November 21, 2024 The reason for this discrepancy likely lies primarily in Russia having sought to remain within the limits of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which outlawed ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers (310 and 3,410 miles). The INF collapsed in 2019. Some reports mentioned the RS-26 missile. Even if we believe them, RS-26 is not really an intercontinental missile. It was tested at the range of more than 5500 km, but it is in effect an intermediate-range missile, (think of it as SS-20 2.0): russianforces.org/blog/2017/07 2/— Pavel Podvig (@russianforces.org) 2024-11-21T10:11:00.678Z However, it could explain why the Ukrainian military initially reported that the missile that struck Dnipro was an ICBM — a claim that many Western officials subsequently denied, pointing instead to the RS-26 or an RS-26 derivative. Regardless, there is now a growing consensus that the missile used was a conventionally armed IRBM based on the RS-26. The launch site appears to have been Kapustin Yar, roughly 500 miles from the target.  As for the RS-26, this is a solid-fueled, road-mobile missile that has been described in the past as a smaller derivative of the RS-24 Yars ICBM, although the exact relationship is unclear. Development of the RS-26 began around 2008 by the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology. The missile is reportedly around 39 feet long and has a diameter of just under six feet. A road-mobile RS-24 Yars ICBM, from which the Russians reportedly developed the RS-26. Vitaly Kuzmin A first, unsuccessful test launch occurred at Plesetsk in September 2011. In a second test in May 2012, Russia demonstrated that the RS-26 could reach an intercontinental range, although it was widely assumed that this was only achieved with a light payload or no payload at all. Subsequent tests strongly indicated the missile couldnt fly beyond intermediate ranges with an actual warhead, which would have put it in contravention of the INF had it been fielded operationally prior to 2019. Amid this controversy, Russia had officially pulled the plug on the potentially treaty-busting RS-26 in 2018. In March of that year, only weeks after Russian President Vladimir Putin mentioned it in a provocative speech, Russia reportedly decided to shelve the development of the Rubezh, dropping it from the state armament plan for 2018 to 2027. Instead, the country would focus on fielding the nuclear-armed Avangard hypersonic boost-glide vehicle weapon. Previously, Putin had stated that the RS-26 would also serve as the primary launch vehicle for Avangard. A Russian Ministry of Defense video reportedly showing Avangard prototypes and a computer-generated depiction of its operational concept.  “The Avangard was included in the [state armament plan] program’s final version as more essential to ensure the country’s defense capability,” a Russian defense industry source said, according to state-run media outlet TASS. “All the work on the Rubezh and the Barguzin [rail-mobile ICBM] was put on hold until the end of 2027. A decision on the work’s resumption will be made after the current armament program is fulfilled.” Without the RS-26, the Avangard has instead been fielded in a silo-based form loaded onto repurposed rocket boosters from old UR-100N UTTKh ICBMs. The hypersonic boost-glide vehicle may also become a payload option for the silo-launched RS-28 Sarmat ICBM, which has had a troubled development. There is clear evidence that a new RS-28 test launch earlier ended in disaster. A test launch of the RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile. Russian Ministry of Defense screencap www.twz.com It was unclear exactly why Russia abandoned the RS-26, although it may simply have been a financial decision, especially with competition from a range of other advanced strategic capabilities the country is also pursuing. Cost concerns were certainly raised in the TASS reporting in 2018. “It was initially planned to include both the Avangard and the [RS-26] Rubezh in the state armament plan,” the anonymous defense industry source told TASS. “It became clear later that funds would not suffice to finance both systems at a time.” There may have been other issues, as well. After all, prior to being mentioned again in 2018, there had been scant official mention of the RS-26 at all for years. The Kremlin was supposed to demonstrate the system to arms control inspectors from the United States first in 2015 and then in 2016, but both of these inspections were missed. However, in a 2021 report, the Pentagon stated that, despite the reports in the Russian press, work on the RS-26 and testing of associated equipment continued at least into 2018. With the demise of INF and the deepening tensions between Russia and NATO, it could be that Moscow has revisited the RS-26, perhaps in the form of the Oreshnik, although there is no evidence that either missile has so far been operationally deployed. Asked for his reflections on the Dnipro strike, and prior to the Oreshnik disclosure, Pavel Podvig, a Senior Researcher in the WMD Program at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), told TWZ that the missile used could have been an RS-26 — employed on an experimental basis — or perhaps some new type of missile in the same class. If that were the case, the new missile, Oreshnik or otherwise, would likely be very similar to the RS-26, according to Podvig’s assessment. We dont know yet what this is and I leave it to the true OSINT experts to determine the novelty of the missile.But Id be shocked if Russia managed to build an MIRVed MRBM without relying to at least 90% on an existing designs and cannibalizing RS-26 (or other missile) parts… https://t.co/orh4r4h8e1— Fabian Hoffmann (@FRHoffmann1) November 21, 2024 As to the likelihood of Russia having returned to developing IRBMs, more generally, Podvig says it’s “entirely possible” that Russia might have revived the RS-26 program. “I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some effort to create a missile that would be kind of similar to RS-26, or SS-20 and things like that. I would not be surprised if design bureaus started putting together a project of that kind,” he added. There is also the possibility that, if a version of the RS-26 was used, this was simply a case of using up one of the non-operational or even prototype rounds in a combat mission, albeit now rebranded as Oreshnik. The combination of range to target (roughly 500 miles), the ability to evade Ukrainian air defenses, and the powerful signaling may simply have been too tempting for Russia. The RS-26 program was mothballed in 2018 russianforces.org/blog/2018/04 One cannot rule out that RS-26 was taken out of its retirement for a strike. This implies that Russia had a number of these missiles in storage for almost ten years. Not impossible, but rather unlikely. 3/— Pavel Podvig (@russianforces.org) 2024-11-21T10:11:00.679Z At the same time, using an IRBM of any kind for an operational strike will also provide Russia with very valuable information. After all, no ICBM or IRBM has ever been used in combat before. While the precise identity of the missile used remains a mystery for now, it’s also unclear what kind of payload it was carrying. When it was developed, the RS-26 was expected to carry either a single nuclear warhead or a nuclear multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) payload — both options were tested in 2013. The Avangard was, for a while, also seen as an RS-26 payload. Clearly, the missile that targeted Dnipro was either conventionally armed or perhaps, unarmed. Videos of the strike show what appears to be six warheads hurtling toward the ground, consistent with MIRVs. The Ukrainian Air Force confirmed that Russia struck the Ukrainian city of Dnipro with a conventionally armed ICBM this morning, marking the first combat use of an ICBM in history. Footage from Dnipro showed glowing reentry vehicles hitting the ground around 5 AM local time. pic.twitter.com/PWTGajH9bT— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) November 21, 2024 Podvig told us that an unarmed RS-26 (or similar IRBM) is “not entirely impossible,” but also raised the possibility of the missile being fitted with small explosive warheads. There is also the potential that the missile was carrying decoys or a combination of small conventional warheads and decoys. No big visible explosions indicate small warheads6 groups of 6 projectiles means that you likely had 6 missiles with 6 large submunitions eachWhile this can be ie 3 MIRVs in inert configuration and 3 heavy decoys I think the simpler explanation would be 6 heavy submunitions.— krakek (@krakek1) November 21, 2024 A conventionally armed IRBM is an interesting proposition and it’s not clear if this would have been developed specifically for this strike, or for use in Ukraine more generally, or if it might reflect a broader interest in Russia to field conventional versions of its strategic missiles. Russia is not known to have looked at developing conventionally armed IRBMs/ICBMs, although, in the past, TWZ has looked at the potential arguments for doing just that — albeit in the case of Israel. Amid a worsening crisis involving Iran, we examined the possibility of Israel launching an attack using a conventionally armed version of its Jericho IRBM — best known as a launch vehicle for the Israeli nuclear deterrent. The same arguments could apply to Russia, which might want to make an extremely powerful show of force in the hope of signaling to the West that it should not become more deeply involved in the war in Ukraine. This is especially true for deterring the U.S. and its partners from allowing expanded targeting for its donated weapons inside of Russian borders. Its a signal. Whatever RS-26 true range or purpose, its classified by Russia as a strategic system. Its use is meant to cross a threshold. And seems highly likely it is intended to mirror ATACMS use in Russia.— Shashank Joshi (@shashj.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T09:27:05.796Z Tellingly, soon after the United States and other allies last week allowed Ukraine to launch long-range missiles into Russia, officials in Moscow warned that they might use a weapon never previously employed on Ukrainian territory. Using a conventionally armed IRBM may well be a response in kind to that decision by the relevant Western powers. Not only is such a missile immune to Ukrainian air defenses but it also delivers a very robust message and one that will resonate across Europe. After all, this is a missile that can reach targets anywhere in the continent and which, on another day, could be topped with a nuclear warhead. If the missile was indeed filled with decoys and perhaps didn’t even carry highly-destructive conventional warheads, that would very much point to signaling being the desired effect. On the other hand, a high-explosive warhead would be extremely destructive and might well be selected for a particularly important or heavily defended target. Should Russia want to target hardened or buried command centers and other key fortified sites in Ukraine, then it might call upon the same types of missiles again — provided they are available in sufficient numbers. Even demonstrating such a capability is significant, since Ukraine’s air defenses mean that Russia could use such missiles to strike anywhere in the country with impunity. Again, if a conventional warhead can be used in this way, the implications of using a nuclear warhead become obvious. Russian war planners would have to weigh all this up against the possibility that Ukraine and NATO might misconstrue an incoming conventionally armed IRBM as a nuclear one. However, it should be recalled that all of the ballistic and cruise missiles launched against Ukraine so far by Russia also have the capability to carry nuclear payloads. As we suspected, it is now widely understood that Russia warned the U.S. of its intended strike by a conventionally armed strategic weapon prior to launch. Ultimately, we will need to wait for more evidence to determine the relationship between the RS-26 and the Oreshnik. It seems certain, however, that Russia has launched an unprecedented attack — and one that does not have a historical parallel. Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com The post The Story Of Russia’s Secretive RS-26 Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Land, Around The Globe, Europe, ICBMs, MRBMs/IRBMs, News & Features, Nuclear, Nuclear Ballistic Missiles, Russia, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— Pros And Cons Of The Navy’s Controversial Submarine-Launched Nuclear Cruise Missile

 

at 11/21/24 4:05pm

As President-elect Donald Trump nears his return to the White House, the U.S. Navy’s nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM-N) program started during his first term is potentially returning to the spotlight as well. It remains unclear whether Trump’s second term will put wind in the sails for the program, which President Joe Biden proposed canceling in the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review. Questions remain about whether the deterrent juice is worth the financial and resource squeeze to field SLCM-N and its warhead in the next decade, and the potential role it could play in escalating hostilities, not lessening them. Concerns also persist about whether it will irrevocably change the very nature of the American attack submarine force, and if all those dollars could be better spent elsewhere. While the Navy has proceeded with standing up the program as required by Congress, sea service leaders have increasingly expressed concern about whether it’s a wise allocation of finite resources. And despite Biden White House and Navy hesitancy, Congress has continued to fund the program. But supporters argue that SLCM-N would provide a much-needed sea-based nuclear deterrent that is a rung below the strategic level on the nuclear warfare ladder, and that the commander-in-chief is owed a bevy of such options. Like its predecessor, the U.S. Navy’s scuppered nuclear-armed Tomahawk Land Attack Missile-Nuclear (TLAM-N), SLCM-N is envisioned as a lower-yield nuclear weapon launched from subs that would provide a new dimension to the maritime portion of the nuclear triad while allowing the United States to proportionately respond to a limited nuclear strike by an adversary. The guided-missile cruiser USS Monterey (CG 61) fires a Tomahawk land attack missile on April 14, 2018. (U.S. Navy) Seaman Trey Fowler “It’s part of an overall ability to build a flexible reaction, flexible deterrent,” Bradley Martin, a retired Navy surface warfare officer and current senior policy researcher at the RAND think tank, told The War Zone. “Being sea-based, it does allow concealment and less vulnerability than there might be if it’s sitting on an attack aircraft someplace.” Meanwhile, a Navy request for information published on November 15 offers some of the most specific information released to date about how the Navy envisions outfitting SLCM-N in the Virginia class attack submarine fleet.  The RFI is part of Navy “market research” focused “on rapid development, integration, and demonstration” of an SLCM-N “all-up round,” or a missile delivered ready to load onto an attack submarine. It seeks white papers featuring industry perspectives “on either weapon system integration, cruise missile prototype development, or cruise missile subsystems.” The request further notes that all nuclear warhead installation and missile storage, as well as missile onloading and offloading, will take place at existing ballistic missile submarine facilities at Kings Bay, Georgia, and Bangor, Washington.  Any prototype must be able to be launched from a 87-inch Virginia Payload Tube, a Virginia Payload Module, or both.  The Virginia Payload Tubes are mounted forward of the sail and house vertical launch cells for cruise missiles (primarily). The Virginia Payload Module will be installed on new Virginia class submarines and is large four tube vertical launch system structure that is installed amidships. (U.S. Navy) The Navy is also looking for missiles that are “as modular as possible,” including software and hardware, so that changes to the core missile body or common tactical systems don’t require changes to warhead payload interfaces or avionics “associated with the nuclear mission.” “This open system approach is being pursued to allow for future technical insertion or technology upgrades as required through the life of the SLCM-N program,” the Navy’s request states.   The request also seeks the ability to break the missile into nuclear and non-nuclear parts. “Technology proposed for the SLCM-N flight system must be producible and fieldable to meet an FY 2034 initial operational capability,” the RFI states. “However, prototypes will be required within 3 years.” Still, much remains unclear about how this missile system will eventually manifest. The Navy has not released details regarding how many missiles it would plan to buy or the work that will be required to outfit submarines with the system. Even basing them at Trident facilities, which primarily host nuclear ballistic submarines, seems like a major hurdle to deploying them regularly. The Congressional Budget Office estimated in July 2023 that the SLCM-N and its warhead could cost $10 billion from 2023 to 2032, and that such costs don’t include “systems integration, storage or operations.” Count Vice Adm. Johnny Wolfe, director of the Navy Strategic Systems Programs (NSSP), is one of the SLCM-N skeptics. Wolfe’s office overseas the seaborne leg of America’s nuclear triad. Speaking at the Navy Submarine League’s annual conference last week, Wolfe called existing plans to reach initial capability for SLCM-N by 2034 “a very, very aggressive timeline,” Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. of Breaking Defense reported. According to that outlet, Wolfe also warned in his conference remarks that the program would basically require an entire new workforce and industrial base, at a time when the Navy and American defense giants are struggling to deliver new ships and get existing ships out of maintenance on time. “This is truly a capability we have to build from the ground up,” Breaking Defense quoted Wolfe as saying. Wolfe also quashed the idea of the Navy simply recreating a nuclear Tomahawk from the Cold War era.  “We can’t reconstitute that, okay?” Breaking Defense quoted Wolfe as saying. “It’s not that easy.” A Navy spokesperson later confirmed to Breaking Defense that Wolfe was referring to producing an appropriate missile, and not the nuclear warhead, which would be the responsibility of the U.S. Energy Department. “The requirement to deliver SLCM-N would increase the capacity requirement amongst industry to a level that had not previously been accounted for,” the spokesperson said, according to Breaking Defense. Sailors assigned to the submarine tender USS Emory S. Land (AS 39) weapons handling division conduct an offload of a Tomahawk missile from the Los Angeles-class fast-attack submarine USS Asheville (SSN 758) in Guam in 2022. (U.S. Navy) Petty Officer 1st Class Victoria Kinney While some brass has expressed skepticism over the program, the Biden administration also warned in July 2023 of the trade-offs in going forward with SLCM-N. Namely, in a policy statement, the White House said that deploying the system “would reduce capacity for conventional strike munitions, create additional burdens on naval training, maintenance and operations, and could create additional risks to the Navy’s ability to operate in key regions,” according to a report this month on the program by the Congressional Research Service. Indeed, taking SLCM-N to sea would require standing up a bevy of new Navy systems and protocols, as deploying and supporting nuclear weapons is a different reality compared to conventional munitions. New security protocols and personnel would have to be deployed. Highly specific surveillance and maintenance requirements would have to be enacted. This is in addition to specialized and highly secure communications systems needing to be installed and sustained in order to receive nuclear strike orders through proper channels. Such a capability would also require additional vetting and training of sailors assigned to such vessels. “It’s perfectly valid to say there’s considerable costs that would go with putting this on a SSN,” Martin said. “There would be security protocols, command-and-control protocols that would have to be added.” Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro also warned in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee in May that the program would “fundamentally change the mission of many of these submarines themselves.” Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro testifies to the Senate Armed Services Committee in May. (U.S. Navy) Petty Officer 2nd Class Jared Mancuso Del Toro noted that the Navy had stood up an SLCM-N program management office as required by law, but that he remained concerned that the program would “operationally impact” Navy submarines’ ability to do their jobs in the Pacific and elsewhere.  “That actually will prevent us perhaps from doing the things that we need to do tactically and operationally, by providing this SLCM capability to the submarine.” Del Toro also noted how this “multi-billion dollar program” will prevent the naval enterprise from taking on other pricey priorities. The Navy said in 2022 that canceling the effort would save the service nearly $200 million in Fiscal Year 2023 alone, and $2.1 billion in the next five years, according to the CRS. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has also questioned the effort, testifying that year that “the marginal capability that [the SLCM-N] provides is far outweighed by the cost,” the CRS notes. But supporters of the program argue that the main reason for American subs in the first place is deterrence, and giving the president an additional submarine-launched tactical nuclear option has major advantages.   The U.S. Navy has already fielded a lower-yield nuclear strike option in the form of the W76-2 warhead loaded onto an unspecified number of Ohio class nuclear ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), boats that are already set up to fire nuclear weapons. Concerns over an adversary not knowing if a Trident launch is packing a low-yield or much more powerful payload is also an issue. The cruise missile delivery system fired by SSNs solves this issue to some degree, but also introduces others in terms of strategic ambiguity. If these boats can fire nuclear-armed cruise missiles, then will any cruise missile be interpreted as such during a crisis?  Still, proponents think fielding the weapon is worth the effort. It provides “significant flexibility to manage a crisis,” Franklin C. Miller, a former senior defense official and National Security Council staffer, wrote in Real Clear Defense this summer. And while it doesn’t these days, the U.S. Navy’s non-ballistic missile-equipped fleet does have a history of carrying nuclear weapons, Miller writes. “Throughout the Cold War, U.S. carriers deployed with nuclear gravity bombs and ASW weapons; surface combatants carried a range of nuclear-tipped anti-air and ASW weapons; and SSNs carried nuclear-tipped torpedoes and the SUBROC ASW systems,” he writes. “From the 1980s until the end of the Cold War, surface ships and SSNs also carried nuclear Tomahawks (and those nuclear Tomahawks contributed significantly to deterring Soviet nuclear attacks on our aircraft carriers).” The battleship USS Missouri fires a Tomahawk missile. (U.S. Navy) Several military leaders have also echoed the contention that the commander–in-chief should have several tailored tactical nuclear weapons options at their disposal. Miller cites repeated testimony by Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti saying that “SLCM-N is a tailored option the President should have,” while a recent CRS report notes then-Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley expressed support for SLCM-N to  Congress in April 2022, noting that the president “deserves to have multiple options.” Of course, the President does have multiple options outside the Navy’s leg of the nuclear triad. The Air Force has B-61 tactical nuclear bombs that currently equip certain fighters and B-2 bombers, which are highly flexible assets that can deal with broadcasting strategic intent and executing proportional strikes if called upon to do so. That service also has air-launched nuclear cruise missiles in its arsenal. As President-elect Trump’s inauguration nears, and his politically appointed defense and Navy secretaries get to work, whether SLCM-N will return to prominence remains to be seen, but considering the program was born out of his last administration, it’s a definite possibility. At the least, it’s a program that warrants “a really careful look,” Martin said.  “It’s costly and it definitely would create operational challenges and considerations for submarines,” he told The War Zone. “Is there a deterrent effect, and is it useful? Does it cause adversaries to think differently? If so, it potentially is worth the cost.” Contact the author: geoffz@twz.com The post Pros And Cons Of The Navys Controversial Submarine-Launched Nuclear Cruise Missile appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Sea, Land Attack Cruise Missiles, Naval Munitions, Nuclear, Nuclear Attack Submarines (SSNs), Nuclear History, Nuclear Policy, Nuclear Warheads, Submarines] [Link to media]

— Russia’s Experimental Ballistic Missile Used To Strike Ukraine Is Based On The RS-26 Rubezh

 

at 11/21/24 2:00pm

We are now getting details about the weapon used in the unprecedented attack on Ukraine earlier today, with Russian President Vladimir Putin saying his countrys forces fired a previously unknown medium-range hypersonic missile called Oreshnik. The new design is based on the previous RS-26 Rubezh ballistic missile, according to the Pentagon. Readers can get up to speed on what else is already known about the missile strike on the eastern Ukrainian city of Dnipro in The War Zones initial reporting here. Ukrainain authorities had initially claimed that the weapon Russia fired today was an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). Subsequent reports citing anonymous U.S. government officials have said that it was actually a medium or intermediate-range ballistic missile (MRBM/IRBM). The RS-26 is officially categorized as an ICBM, but experts have long assessed that it is more likely an IRBM. MRBMs, IRBMs, and ICBMs are categorized by their maximum ranges – between 620 and 1,860 miles (1,000 and 3,000 kilometers), between 1,864 and 3,418 miles (3,000 to 5,500 kilometers), and greater than 3,418 miles (5,500 kilometers), respectively. In response to the use of American and British weaponry on November 21 this year, Russian armed forces conducted a combined strike on one of Ukraines defense-industrial complex facilities, Putin said in a televised address. This included testing one of Russias latest medium-range missile systems in combat conditions. In this case, a ballistic missile equipped with non-nuclear hypersonic technology, referred to as Oreshnik by our missile forces. Statement by the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir PutinWatch herein in full (dubbed in English) pic.twitter.com/mF5SCJdlq1— MFA Russia (@mfa_russia) November 21, 2024 Targets for engagement during further testing of our newest missile complexes will be determined based on threats to the security of the Russian Federation, he added. When selecting targets for such systems as Oreshnik on Ukrainian territory, we will ensure that civilians, as well as citizens of friendly nations present in those areas, are advised to leave potential danger zones in advance. This will be done openly, publicly, and out of humanitarian considerations, without fear of opposition from the enemy. In his remarks, Putin said that Oreshnik (which means hazel in Russian, keeping with the countrys tradition of naming ballistic missiles after trees) had a peak speed of Mach 10, but provided no other details about the weapon. He also made no mention of any connection to the RS-26, work on which was publicly shelved in 2018. Imagery from todays attack on Ukraine looks to show six warheads descending on the target and multiple resulting impacts. Better footage of the alleged impacts of multiple warheads separated from a Russian ICBM in Dnipro earlier today.— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (@archer83able.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T10:10:24.907Z I can confirm that Russia did launch an experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh said at a routine press conference today. This IRBM was based on Russias RS-26 Rubezh intercontinental ballistic missile model Pentagon:- Russias experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile launched at Ukraine was based on the RS-26 Rubezh ICBM model;- The US was notified by Russia about the launch briefly before it occurred through nuclear risk reduction channels.— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (@archer83able.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T19:57:18.465Z Singh added that the U.S. government had been notified about the launch beforehand through Nuclear Risk Reduction channels. We raised this very real possibility in our initial report. This contradicts separate remarks from Dmitry Peskov, spokesperson for Putin, who said today that Russia has no obligation to make such notification for launches of medium-range weapons. Russia did not send advance notifications to the United States or other countries about the use of the Oreshnik hypersonic missile on a Ukrainian military-industrial facility as there are no such obligations, Dmitry Peskov told TASS:https://t.co/98zuuM1D6e pic.twitter.com/ieldbKB8hM— TASS (@tassagency_en) November 21, 2024 Russia launched an experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile against Ukraine, another U.S. government official also told The War Zone directly. While we take all threats against Ukraine seriously, it is important to keep a few key facts in mind. Russia likely possesses only a handful of these experimental missiles. The RS-26 is itself reportedly a smaller derivative of the RS-24 Yars ICBM. Rubezh is also understood to have a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) configuration and was associated in the past with the development of the Avangard hypersonic boost-glide vehicle. Russia has publicly fielded Avangard in a silo-based configuration using a repurposed ICBM rocketed booster. Hypersonic boost-glide vehicles offer capabilities that are particularly hard to defend against, as you can read more about here. The video below shows an Avangard test in 2018. Whether Oreshnik carries standard re-entry vehicles, maneuvering ones, or true hypersonic boost-glide vehicles remains unknown. Larger ballistic missiles and their payloads, in general, typically reach hypersonic speeds. A picture said to show a piece of the Oreshnik after the attack looks to be a part that is also found in the Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile and that is linked to the production of components for other Russian strategic ballistic missiles. 1/2 Just a small bit of OSINT on Russias new Oreshnik MRBM, allegedly used to strike Dnipro (per Putin): I found the exactly the same part on the Russian govt procurement site. Docs from 2013 show its also used for the S-30 Bulava SLBM. https://t.co/QCS2R8FNAZ pic.twitter.com/Dome4heoWO— Mark Krutov (@kromark) November 21, 2024 Bonus post: Of course, this specific part for both old and "new" Russian strategic missiles (I doubt "Oreshnik" is truly "new") was made on a Swiss high-precision drilling and milling machine, the Fehlmann Picomax 54. https://t.co/uvAdm7pbC3 pic.twitter.com/6EHNHAmdJw— Mark Krutov (@kromark) November 21, 2024 This is what the fragments of the new Russian ballistic missile "Oreshnik" found today in the Dnieper look like. From them, we can already understand something about the new missile. For example, from the serial number of the product in the first photo, we can establish that the… pic.twitter.com/oBqnNqhLYy— Malinda (@TreasChest) November 21, 2024 Regardless of its exact configuration and capabilities, Russias use of Oreshnik is also just the latest example of the country using the conflict in Ukraine as an opportunity to demonstrate new and advanced weapon systems. The war has already seen the first operational use of the Kinzhal air-launched ballistic missile and the sea-launched Zircon air-breathing hypersonic cruise missile In addition, the introduction of a new ostensibly hypersonic weapon comes amid continued efforts to bolter Ukraines air and missile defenses. Western-supplied Patriot surface-to-air missile systems have been notably effective against Kinzhal, as well as ground-launched ballistic missiles. At a peak speed of Mach 10, Oreshnik would be moving faster than a system like Patriot can reliably intercept. Existing modern air defense systems worldwide, including the missile defense systems created by Americans in Europe, cannot intercept such missiles. It’s impossible, Putin explicitly boasted in his announcement about Oreshnik today. Using an experimental and expensive capability like Oreshnik, which also likely has lower accuracy in its conventional mode than existing long-range munitions that Russia has been using on Ukraine, is also clearly intended to send broader messages to Ukraines foreign benefactors. Putin has not explicitly said it was in retaliation for Ukraine getting approval to employ U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) short-range ballistic missiles and British-supplied Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles against targets in Russia. Ukraine has withstood countless attacks from Russia, including from missiles with significantly larger warheads than this weapon. Let me be clear: Russia may be seeking to use this capability to try to intimidate Ukraine and its supporters, or generate attention in the information space, but it will not be a game-changer in this conflict, the aforementioned U.S. government official told The War Zone. We briefed Ukraine and close allies/partners in recent days about Russia’s possible use of this weapon to help them prepare. As the President announced earlier this year, the United States is providing Ukraine with hundreds of additional Patriot and AMRAAM missiles to strengthen its air defenses. Many of these air defense missiles have been delivered already, as a consequence of the Presidents decision to divert air defense exports to Ukraine, and deliveries of additional air defense missiles to Ukraine are ongoing, they continued. And, as the President directed in September, the United States will continue to surge security assistance to Ukraine to strengthen capabilities, including air defense, and put Ukraine in the best possible position on the battlefield. Just yesterday, we announced another security assistance package and those efforts will continue until the end of the President’s term. With Putins threat to continue employing Oreshniks, more information about the missile and its RS-26 predecessor may now start to emerge. Contact the author: joe@twz.com The post Russias Experimental Ballistic Missile Used To Strike Ukraine Is Based On The RS-26 Rubezh appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Land, Around The Globe, Europe, Land-Based Ballistic Missile Defense, Land-Based Conventional Hypersonic Weapons, News & Features, Russia, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— Russia’s Unprecedented Ballistic Missile Attack On Ukraine: What We Know

 

at 11/21/24 10:19am

The Ukrainian Air Force claims that Russia launched a conventionally armed intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) today at the city of Dnipro, in the center of the country. They offered no proof and some U.S. and Western officials are pushing back on the specific ICBM claim, stating that an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) was used. In either case, the act is unprecedented for the war in Ukraine and it would mark the first use of either one of these types of weapons in combat anywhere. Officials in Moscow had previously warned they might use a weapon never previously employed on Ukrainian territory, in response to the United States and other allies last week allowing Ukraine to fire long-range missiles into Russia. Among the conflicting claims about exactly what kind of missile was used, it appears that it was a ballistic missile with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) capability. Videos emerging on social media show what appears to be six warheads hurtling toward the ground and multiple impacts as a result. This analysis could change as more information comes available. Another video of the ruSSian ICBMs multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles https://t.co/maEa5qFcQi pic.twitter.com/88fEGZHy1r— ??? ???? ????????△ (@TheDeadDistrict) November 21, 2024 The Ukrainian Air Force confirmed that Russia struck the Ukrainian city of Dnipro with a conventionally armed ICBM this morning, marking the first combat use of an ICBM in history. Footage from Dnipro showed glowing reentry vehicles hitting the ground around 5 AM local time. pic.twitter.com/PWTGajH9bT— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) November 21, 2024 An explosion and the aftermath of the attack were captured in images photographed by Ukrainian emergency services. Russia hits Dnipro with ICBM followed by aeroballistic and cruise missiles, injuring twoIn its attacks, Russia has never used the ICBMs against Ukraine before.https://t.co/uNciidgt9uEmergency Service, https://t.co/bmDqujYT2S pic.twitter.com/02jcN1WMxp— Euromaidan Press (@EuromaidanPress) November 21, 2024 At least one of the warheads reportedly struck a rehabilitation center for people with disabilities, wounding two people, according to Ukrainian emergency services. The impact site of one of the rods of the Russian ICBM RS-26 launched this morning at the city of Dnipro.State Emergency Service of Ukraine regarding the damage caused by attack:"In the morning, the enemy attacked Dnipro: 2 people were woundedThe building of the… https://t.co/8R8FX19eDf pic.twitter.com/kM6OrurJZ3— Special Kherson Cat (@bayraktar_1love) November 21, 2024 The Ukrainian Air Force claimed Dnipro was attacked by an ICBM — the longest-range, fastest flying ballistic missile class that otherwise carries a strategic nuclear warhead or warheads. “On the morning of November 21, 2024, between 05:00 and 07:00, Russian troops attacked the city of Dnipro (enterprises and critical infrastructure) with missiles of various types,” the Ukrainian Air Force claimed on Telegram. “In particular, an intercontinental ballistic missile was launched from the Astrakhan region of the Russian Federation. The Air Force added that eight ballistic and cruise missiles were also fired in this attack. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky hedged that claim a bit. “Today, it was a new Russian missile. Its speed and altitude suggest intercontinental ballistic capabilities, he said on X. Investigations are ongoing. Today, our insane neighbor has once again revealed its true nature—its disdain for dignity, freedom, and human life itself. And, most of all, its fear.Fear so overwhelming that it unleashes missile after missile, scouring the globe for more weapons—whether from Iran or North… pic.twitter.com/tEsZ0Uu1bt— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) November 21, 2024 A Western official told ABC News that the attack did not appear to be an ICBM. It was instead a ballistic missile, which was aimed at Dnipro, in Ukraines southeast, the Western official told the network. Ukraine’s military says Russia launches ICBM, a claim denied by Western official https://t.co/F5dTg4n9Nv— luis martinez (@LMartinezABC) November 21, 2024 U.S. officials told CBS News that the missile was not an ICBM, but an intermediate-range ballistic missile or IRBM. Two US officials told CBS News that Russia had launched a ballistic missile, but not an ICBM, with one saying it appeared to have been an intermediate range ballistic missile (!).https://t.co/2NQ4dXCsZM pic.twitter.com/SkGFZm6VAN— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (BlueSky too) (@Archer83Able) November 21, 2024 A National Security Council official told @TBowmanNPR that Russia launched an experimental medium-range ballistic missile against Ukraine. NEW: An NSC official tells @TBowmanNPR that Russia launched an "experimental medium-range ballistic missile" against Ukraine.— Geoff Brumfiel (@gbrumfiel) November 21, 2024 Adding to the mystery of the nature of this weapon, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova was interrupted during a press briefing. A hot mic captured Zakharova’s phone conversation with an unidentified caller who instructed her not to comment on the ballistic missile strike,' The Guardian reported. Notably, the caller did not use the word intercontinental. In the brief telephone exchange – footage of which remains available on the foreign ministry’s official account on X – the caller appears to disclose that the strike targeted the Yuzhmash military facility in Dnipro. wow, in the middle of her press briefing just now, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova got a phone call from someone instructing her not to comment on today’s ICBM allegations.— Kevin Rothrock (@kevinrothrock.me) 2024-11-21T10:13:19.151Z Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yuri Ignat pushed back on statements that the missile was not an ICBM. Let them reject it, he told The War Zone. Do not call the rocket — it has arrived! There are claims, as yet unverified, that Russia might have used its RS-26 Rubezh missile. While Russia has previously described this as an ICBM, its range is actually consistent with an IRBM. You can read more about Russia’s halting development of this weapon here. BREAKING:The ICBM fired at Ukraine today was a RS-26 “Rubezh.”It’s a mobile-ground ballistic missile system derived from the RS-24 “Yars.”First tested in 2012, it has a range of more than 6000 km and can carry multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs). pic.twitter.com/V0HLtC7oIH— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) November 21, 2024 This is my best guess on the makeup of the warhead that was carried by the RS-26 "Rubezh" last night. I believe it contained 6 inert simulated warheads with the shape and weight of a nuclear warhead that are intended solely for testing of the system. To save money, the casings… pic.twitter.com/srrOx1bQwv— OSINT (Uri Kikaski) (@UKikaski) November 21, 2024 TWZ spoke to Pavel Podvig, a Senior Researcher in the WMD Program at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), who noted that it would not be a problem to strike Dnipro with an ICBM or an RS-26, even given the relatively short range involved — roughly 500 miles from the reported launch site at Kapustin Yar. Still, its worth noting that doing so would have required a very steep parabolic flight profile similar to what we see North Korea use for many of its test launches. Presumably traces of an ICBM launch, photographed early in the morning in the sky over the Talovsky district of the Voronezh region.According to Ukrainian sources, the missile was launched from the Kapustin Yar test site in the Astrakhan region. Although the Voronezh region… pic.twitter.com/WHJCJXGPnj— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 21, 2024 Back in the day, even in the 1970s, you can see that those missiles [ICBMs] had a minimum range of about 1,000 kilometers. The maximum was about 11,000 kilometers [6,800 miles]. So I think it is entirely possible and shouldn’t be a problem for modern ICBMs, like Topol-M or Yars, they should be able to do 800 kilometers [500 miles]. If we’re talking about RS-26 then it’s even less of a problem, because, of course, it is a shorter-range missile, an intermediate-range missile, and so 800 kilometers would be perfectly within its capabilities. But we don’t know what kind of missile it is at this point. Bearing in mind the fact that Russia has previously described the RS-26 as an ICBM, it could be that this is the descriptor that Ukraine is using, as well. In the meantime, U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey referred to reports that Russia had fired “a new ballistic missile into Ukraine,” which could also apply to the RS-26, or a related missile. The way it worked with RS-26 for example, was that the project was kind of stopped sometime in the mid-2010s, Podvig added. So maybe it could be a new type, similar to the RS-26, or maybe he meant that the RS-26 has never been deployed, has never been operational. So any kind of operational [RS-26] missile would be a missile of a new type. That’s hard to tell, but basically, there is not much you can do in terms of new types. The easiest thing is to take what they did before — using the stages from Yars — and basically make an RS-26 kind of missile. As to whether the RS-26 program might have been revived, Podvig considers that a definite possibility. It is entirely possible that they are just going to revive the program, Podvig said. That is possible, especially after the demise of the INF Treaty, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some effort to create a missile that would be kind of similar to the RS-26, or SS-20 and things like that. That’s my take. I would not be surprised if design bureaus started putting together a project of that kind. Hans Kristensen, Director of the Nuclear Information Project, Federation of American Scientists, added his thoughts on the possible missile used, in a post on X. Claim of Russian use of ICBM against Ukraine was not correct, he tweeted. Something else and speculations it might have been RS-26 canceled years ago. Launch location should tell us more. They might just have seen an opportunity to test a prototype. That didn’t take long. Claim of Russian use of ICBM against Ukraine was not correct. Something else and speculations it might have been RS-26 canceled years ago. Launch location should tell us more. They might just have seen an opportunity to test a prototype. https://t.co/bM3S47uj9d— Hans Kristensen (also on Bluesky) (@nukestrat) November 21, 2024 Meanwhile, video emerged on social media claiming to be fragments of the missile, which could give investigators more information about what type it was. Fragment of one of the missiles that hit Ukraine’s Dnipro last night.Could be part of alleged Russian ICBM. pic.twitter.com/WzxtCGckDv— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 21, 2024 As TWZ Editor-in-Chief Tyler Rogoway pointed out, the use of this weapon would have triggered a series of alarms throughout the U.S. military and have been picked up by a wide array of sensors and exactly what the U.S. had in terms of intelligence prior to launch, or even notification from Russia, remains unclear. Couple things on the Russian MIRVd ballistic missile strike in Ukraine:If the U.S. did not have clear intelligence or warning prior to the launch of the missile of its intent and payload, it would have set off a very concerning chain of events at STRATCOM that rippled…— Tyler Rogoway (@Aviation_Intel) November 21, 2024 If Russia did use an ICBM or IRBM, it would be a very expensive method of attack. However, such weapons can provide a tactical advantage and certainly showcase a strategic message. Intercepting multiple warheads at the speed and angle of these weapons in the terminal phase is beyond what Ukraines donated Patriot batteries can defend against. Defeating these weapons requires a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) or Aegis Ashore air defense system, David Shank, a retired Army colonel and former commandant of the Army Air Defense Artillery School at Ft. Sill, Oklahoma told us. The Ground-based Midcourse Defense missile defense system (GMD) would work best, he added. Ukraine has none of these systems. All the hubbub about nuclear threats means a lot of you are missing the fact that Russia may have just demonstrated a capability to strike strategic targets in Europe like airbases with a high impact cluster munition that evades 99% of NATOs air defense inventory.— Decker Eveleth (@dexeve.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T15:18:44.288Z Deploying these weapons also sends a message that Russia is willing to take another step up the escalation ladder in the wake of having its territory struck by U.S.-donated ground-launched Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) and U.K.-donated air-launched Storm Shadow long-range missiles. The strike itself proves: Russia does not seek peace, Heorhii Tykhyi, a spokesman for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry stated on X. To the contrary, it makes every effort to expand the war. We’re awaiting expert conclusions to determine the exact type of new missile that Russia fired at Ukraine this morning, which had all flight characteristics of an ICBM. The strike itself proves: Russia does not seek peace. To the contrary, it makes every effort to expand the war.— Heorhii Tykhyi (@SpoxUkraineMFA) November 21, 2024 There are reports that Ukraine responded by attacking the Kapusin Yar facility in Russia that reportedly launched the missile. If true, it would mark at least the second strike against that facility. Ukrainian OWA-UAVs struck Russian 105th assembly and testing building at the site located at the Kapustin Yar Nuclear Missile Test site at Kapustin Yar Cosmodrome.This strike was in response to Russian ICBM strike on Dnipro. Kapustin Yar Cosmodrome is Russias premier… https://t.co/CyyuvWfRQr pic.twitter.com/HkVyW7Wr8R— Intelschizo (@Schizointel) November 21, 2024 With Iran and China providing weapons and North Korea providing troops and weapons to aid Russias war on Ukraine, the former head of the Ukrainian military suggested that WWIII has already begun. World War III has already begun, former Commander-in-Chief of Ukrainian Army Valerii Zaluzhnyi says.“I firmly believe that by 2024, we can say World War III has started.Ukraine now faces not just Russia but soldiers from North Korea. Let’s be honest—civilian killings by… pic.twitter.com/NMfgr8UKbt— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 21, 2024 As analysis of this weapon pours in over the coming hours, we will have a better sense of what Russia used. Regardless, this attack has clearly rattled Ukraine and raised concerns in the U.S. and across NATO as both sides continue to escalate. Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com The post Russias Unprecedented Ballistic Missile Attack On Ukraine: What We Know appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: News & Features, Around The Globe, Europe, Russia, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— Watch A Ukrainian Uncrewed Aerial Mothership Launch Kamikaze Drones

 

at 11/20/24 6:04pm

Ukraines domestically developed Dovbush T10 drone has taken on a new role acting as a mothership for first-person view (FPV) kamikaze quadcopters. In this configuration, the T10 also serves as a key signal relay node between the highly maneuverable one-way-attackers and their operators. Serhii Beskrestnov recently posted video, seen below, of an apparent test of a mothership T10 carrying two FPV kamikaze drones, one under each wing, on his Telegram channel. Beskrestnov (sometimes referred to by the pseudonyms Serhii Flash or Flesh; his first name can also be found written as Serhiy) is a Ukrainian servicemember who has been cited as an expert in “radio technologies” and other military electronics. He regularly posts about new uncrewed aerial systems, electronic warfare, and other battlefield developments. Ukrainian "Dovbush" UAV carrying and releasing two FPV drones during tests.The "Dovbush" UAV is reportedly capable of carrying up to six FPV drones at the same time.https://t.co/wSS1kfRo3i pic.twitter.com/9vZNVJBF1J— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (BlueSky too) (@Archer83Able) November 19, 2024 According to Beskrestnov, the T10 mothership can carry up to six FPVs at a time. The footage he shared online shows picture-in-picture views as the kamikaze drones are released while their launch platform continues on separately. A single pickup truck looks to be the test target for both kamikaze drones. Screen captures showing the view from the two T10-launched FPVs as they approach the target truck. captures via X Interestingly, the clips also show that the drones are held in place upside down under the T10s wings via their small bomb-shaped payloads and that they flip over when they are released. I find the way the FPV is attached to the wing amusing. The bomb acts as an adapter between the mothership and the FPV-Kamikaze. And the FPV itself hangs upside down— Special Kherson Cat (@specialkhersoncat.bsky.social) 2024-11-19T22:51:22.863Z In his Telegram post, Beskrestnov did not provide more details about the T10 motherships capabilities, including its range and endurance and how far the FPVs can reach after launch. The T10 first emerged in late 2022 configured as a surveillance and reconnaissance platform with an unspecified sensor package and a reported range of just under 22 miles (35 kilometers). The drone can also be employed as a one-way-attacker with a nearly 26-and-a-half-pound (12-kilogram) warhead. In its baseline configuration, the design reportedly costs around $12,000. The T10s primary mode of launch appears to be via a rack installed on the top of a pickup truck, which gets it up to a suitable speed to fly off on its own. How it might be recovered after a mission is unclear. The design reportedly features a navigation package that can fall back in some way on inertial navigation system (INS) guidance if its GPS signal is jammed, something that is a major threat on the battlefield in Ukraine. At its most basic level, the T10 mothership offers a way to maximize the reach of typically short-range FPV drones by releasing them at the edge of its own combat radius. The FPVs also gain extra loiter time, which they could spend on identifying and/or maneuvering to their targets, or even waving off an initial attack run and coming back from a different, unexpected vector. Putting the signal relay on the mothership orbiting above also puts that node closer to where the FPVs are actually operating, making it easier to maintain connectivity. The graphic below offers a good visual depiction of the overall benefits of this combination. FPV drone mothership/relay concept of operations. Tyler Rogoway/The War Zone The T10 mothership is not the first such combination to emerge on the battlefield in Ukraine, with the Russians also employing larger drones as aerial launch platforms and signal relay nodes for FPVs. Russian forces started using Pchelka drone carrier in Ukraine.The UAV is capable of carrying and dropping FPV drones from the air. Moreover, it also serves as a signal repeater, increasing the range of use of drones. pic.twitter.com/MPs0x6R8fW— Clash Report (@clashreport) March 21, 2024 The Russian army started using drone-carrier-and-reaper-drones!The Drone-type “ mother” was used, which serves as a repeater for the control and video signal for up to 40 km distance and also a carries multiple FPV drones.Ukrainian sources wrote: “The Russians hit our… pic.twitter.com/mAQ6lix0KX— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 16, 2024 The U.S. military and others have also been exploring similar nested uncrewed aerial capabilities outside of the conflict in Ukraine. Was waiting for FPV drone motherships to become a thing, the DT-300 drone from UK based company Roton aerospace has a FPV drone mothership version in testing as well. pic.twitter.com/8vlT9lSFlW— Mad_mechanic911 (@Madmechanic911) November 19, 2024 The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) driven capabilities into the equation, something that is already happening in Ukraine, may offer a new and especially significant step forward for FPV kamikaze drones, in general. AI-enabled targeting capabilities would be a huge boon for FPVs, especially in the terminal phase of flight, where human operators currently have to manually find targets and steer the drone into them. You can read more about the game-changing impacts AI is set to have on drone operations in this War Zone feature. However, blending launch platform and signal relay in a single mothership package already helps address many of the limitations. AI targeting could still help in the event that the relay is disrupted or the mothership is shot down. The Russians claim they have recovered a Ukrainian FPV with AI target acquisition and terminal guidance.Long awaited, these jam-resistant drones will hopefully soon appear frequently. pic.twitter.com/wARWRySdrL— Roy (@GrandpaRoy2) November 11, 2024 While Ukraines T10-based drone mothership may not be the first such design to emerge in the conflict there, it is more evidence of the value this kind of combination offers already. Contact the author: joe@twz.com The post Watch A Ukrainian Uncrewed Aerial Mothership Launch Kamikaze Drones appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Air, Around The Globe, Drones, Europe, News & Features, Russia, Ukraine, Unmanned] [Link to media]

— British Defense Cuts Hit All Three Services Hard

 

at 11/20/24 12:54pm

The United Kingdom has announced sweeping cuts of its Armed Forces as it seeks to save money, despite the precarious security situation in Europe and elsewhere. The Royal Air Force, British Army, and Royal Navy will also lose frontline equipment, and it’s not necessarily clear how capabilities will be maintained once these assets are withdrawn. Moreover, with a new defense review expected next year, there is the possibility of worse to come for the British Armed Forces. Speaking in parliament today, U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey outlined the plan, which will affect all three branches of the British military. The assets to be withdrawn include the following: The Royal Navy’s two Albion class amphibious assault ships, HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark will be taken out of service at the end of the year, around a decade earlier than planned — although their withdrawal has been threatened now for several years. With their retirement, the ability of the U.K. Royal Marines to launch land assaults from the sea will be notably reduced. A new class of amphibious warfare vessels, up to six Multi-Role Support Ships (MRSS), is being planned, with these expected to carry out a wider variety of operations, as you can read about here. However, these are only due to enter service beginning in the early 2030s, leaving a significant capability gap in the meantime. Concept artwork of the new Multi-Role Support Ship (MRSS). BMT The Royal Air Force will lose its fleet of 17 Puma battlefield mobility helicopters, together with 14 of the oldest Chinook heavy-lift helicopters used by the same service. The United Kingdom had already ordered new Chinooks to modernize that force, some of which date back to the very first deliveries of these helicopters in the early 1980s. However, today’s decision leaves a question mark over plans to replace the Puma fleet, under the New Medium Helicopter (NMH) program. There had already been suggestions that the NMH might also face the ax. A U.K. Royal Air Force Chinook helicopter on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales. Crown Copyright The British Army’s controversial fleet of 47 Watchkeeper drones is being culled. Although these have only been in service for six years, they have suffered a spate of crashes and have been widely criticized. You can read more about them here. A British Army Royal Artillery Watchkeeper ready for flight at RAF Akrotiri, Cyprus, in July 2021. Crown Copyright The Royal Navy will bid farewell to the Type 23 frigate HMS Northumberland. The warship was already in need of an expensive overhaul and was due for retirement. Interestingly, this particular warship collided with a Russian Navy submarine in the North Atlantic Ocean in 2020, and both vessels were reportedly damaged in the incident, which you can read more about here. Earlier this year, the Type 23 fleet had been reduced by two, with the decision to withdraw HMS Argyll and Westminster, reportedly in order to free up personnel to staff its new class of frigates. This reduced the service’s fleet of Type 23s to nine. All this comes at a time when the Royal Navy’s major surface combatants are in high demand, including in the Red Sea. HMS Northumberland at sea in 2022. Crown Copyright CPO Phot Owen Cooban Other naval assets getting chopped include the two large Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships, RFA Wave Knight and RFA Wave Ruler. These vessels carry fuel and supplies but are notably not compatible with supporting the Royal Navy’s two Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers. RFA Wave Knight at sea. Crown Copyright LA(Phot) Dave Jenkins Defense Secretary Healey said the cuts would result in savings of up to £500 million — equivalent to around $633 million — over the next five years. Healey also defended the assets being withdrawn on the basis that they are “outdated,” although this is a claim that doesn’t stack up for all the equipment affected, most notably the Watchkeeper drones. Despite their problems, these drones do offer certain critical capabilities, including ground moving-target indicator (GMTI), a radar mode that allows discrimination between moving targets on the ground and static ones, allowing it to track the activity of the moving targets over time. Congratulations to Labour, in particular, for managing to screw up WATCHKEEPER twice. First by ordering it, and then by scrapping it just as it started delivering. Ground Moving Target Indication radar tracking of surface targets clearly considered a decadent capitalist luxury. pic.twitter.com/dZKvLD8rKy— Gabriele Molinelli (@Gabriel64869839) November 20, 2024 “We face increasing global threats,” Healey said in a written statement today. “War in Europe, growing Russian aggression, conflict in the Middle East, and technology changing the nature of warfare. As a result, defense needs increased resilience and readiness for the future.” While that is certainly true, the truth is that, with some exceptions (notably Watchkeeper, again), this equipment is very much part of the U.K. Armed Forces’ resilience and readiness. Ultimately, the cuts are the result of tight budgets — something that the British military is becoming increasingly familiar with. A Watchkeeper drone in flight over the United Kingdom during a test flight. Watchkeepers have reportedly struggled to operate in the British climate. British Army Although working under greater financial pressure, the U.K. Armed Forces are also being called upon to restructure and modernize to better face the resurgent Russian threat, illustrated by the war in Ukraine and by a spike in ‘hybrid warfare’ activities across Europe, widely seen as being Kremlin-inspired. As well as Russia, the U.K. Armed Forces are also increasingly expected to play a more active role in the Indo-Pacific theater, not to mention in the Middle East, and a host of other global missions. These are significant ambitions, and, at the same time, the United Kingdom is committed to some hugely expensive ‘big ticket’ defense programs, including the replacement of the Royal Navy’s Trident submarine-based nuclear deterrent with the new Dreadnought class of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, and the Tempest future combat aircraft. An infographic for the future Dreadnought class SSBN. BAE Systems While cuts have continued to be made, the U.K. government has remained committed to increasing the defense budget to 2.5 percent of GDP, a pledge that the defense secretary repeated today. However, he didn’t announce when this would come into effect. As it stands, the U.K. Armed Forces — like many others around the world — are being asked to do a lot more, with less. Removing older and expensive-to-operate equipment makes sense, so long as it’s being replaced by equivalent capabilities that are cheaper, but which also meet the demands of the latest force posture. A good example of this would be the Army’s Watchkeeper drones, which are not likely to be badly missed by many. On the other hand, there’s no doubt that uncrewed air systems are of growing importance on the battlefield and British efforts in this direction have so far achieved very mixed results. If the money saved by withdrawing Watchkeeper doesn’t help drive the development and fielding of more reliable drones for the Army, then questions will likely be asked. A British Army Archer artillery gun is fired during Exercise Dynamic Front, in Finland. Russian aggression is seeing the U.K. Armed Forces re-posture to fight a potential conflict in Europe, adding yet more demands on its three branches. Crown Copyright Corporal Rebecca Brown, RLC There is also the possibility of more cuts to come. After all, the U.K. government is expected to release its latest defense review next spring, and that might see another raft of cuts to all three services. With funds for defense spending limited, there will be fears that more equipment might be axed, as an easy option for making short-term savings. Overall, however, today’s cuts reflect the very harsh decisions facing the U.K. government as it seeks to meet the goal of a British military that is increasing its “resilience and readiness” to meet a wider range of threats, not just from Russia. Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com The post British Defense Cuts Hit All Three Services Hard appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Air, Air Forces, Around The Globe, Europe, Navies, News & Features, Royal Air Force, Royal Navy, Sea, United Kingdom] [Link to media]

— ICBM Reentry Vehicle Capability Still Unproven By North Korea, U.S. Military Says

 

at 11/20/24 11:12am

The U.S. military has not seen demonstrable evidence of North Korea successfully testing a re-entry vehicle capable of bringing a nuclear warhead back down to Earth through the atmosphere, according to Americas top officer in the Pacific region. The North Koreans are actively working on this technology, which is essential for long-range ballistic missiles with exo-atmospheric flight profiles, especially intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) able to reach the United States. All will have been aware by now that North Korea tested its largest ballistic missile, having reached an apogee of over 7,000 kilometers [approximately 4,349.5 miles], portending a capability that will have the ability to range the entire continental United States, U.S. Navy Adm. Samuel Paparo said in opening remarks at an open event at the Brookings Institution think tank yesterday. Paparo is head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) and was referring to North Koreas first test launch of the Hwasong-19 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), claimed to be its longest-ranged design to date, on Oct. 31. North Korean authorities said the missile reached a peak height of 7,687.5 kilometers (approximately 4776.8 miles). The Hwasong-19 was fired from this massive transporter-erector-launcher (TEL). North Korean State Media Do we know much about the North Koreans ability to bring a re-entry vehicle safely back through the atmosphere and whether they would themselves have any confidence that they could do that? Michael OHanlon, a senior fellow and director of research in the Foreign Policy program at Brookings, subsequently asked Paparo. Because its one thing to range North America. Its something else to be able to bring a warhead [down] and detonate it. Not yet. Weve not yet seen that capability, but we just see continued testing towards that, the INDOPACOM commander said in response. Designing a re-entry vehicle that can survive the physical and thermal stresses of hurtling down to Earth through the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds is a complex proposition. That vehicle also has to be able to keep any payload, such as a nuclear warhead, inside safe and be reliably and accurately able to reach the desired detonation point, which only adds to the challenge. A view of Earth, as purportedly seen from a camera mounted on the Hwasong-19 launched on Oct. 31. North Korean State Media There is no debate that North Korea has been actively pursuing re-entry vehicle technology, which is critical for fielding a real ICBM capability, for years. The regime in Pyongyang has claimed to have successfully developed this capability in the past and to have progressed to work on multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRV). Observers have suggested that the Hwasong-19 has the hallmarks of design intended for a MIRV payload. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un inspects a thermonuclear warhead design in 2017. A graphic showing what looks to be a re-entry vehicle design is seen in the background. North Korean State Media A MIRVed missile could strike multiple targets, potentially hundreds of miles apart, and/or lob several warheads at a single target area to increase the likelihood of achieving total destruction. Multiple incoming re-entry vehicles increase the challenges for defenders, especially if they are mixed in with decoys and other countermeasures. Paparos comments yesterday underscore that there remains no definitive evidence available, at least publicly, to support North Koreas re-entry vehicle claims. At the same time, it is important to stress here that North Korea could still potentially at least attempt an ICBM strike against the United States, or a similarly ranged target area, without having a re-entry vehicle capability that the U.S. military has conclusively assessed to be functional. It could also seek to cause a massive global disruption by detonating nuclear warheads in space, something The War Zone has explored in the past. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has assessed that North Korea’s Hwasong-14/KN20 intercontinental-range ballistic missile (ICBM) test launch on July 28[, 2017] failed to demonstrate successful atmospheric reentry, The Diplomat reported back in 2017, citing anonymous U.S. government sources. The same assessment, however, notes that North Korea’s ICBM reentry vehicles would likely perform adequately if flown on a normal trajectory to continental U.S. targets. The video below includes clips of the Hwasong-14 launch on July 28, 2017. The CIA assessment notes that based on the two observed flight tests of the Hwasong-14 to date, North Korea’s reentry vehicle technology is likely sufficiently advanced to pose no performance problem should the missile be fired at a minimum energy trajectory, that story added. The assessment of the reentry vehicle is supported by analysis of data gathered from ground, sea, and air-based sensors by the U.S. National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC). In his remarks yesterday, Paparo also highlighted growing military cooperation between North Korea and Russia and the worrisome impacts that might have in the future. So North Korea has contributed [ballistic] missiles directly used [by Russia] against Ukraine. They have contributed artillery shells that have been directly used against Ukraine. Now they have directly contributed soldiers [and] theyre being directly used against Ukraine, Paparo noted. I would expect coming back will be submarine technology and propulsion technology. News that North Korea had started construction of a new submarine, which could feature nuclear propulsion, had emerged in October. Last year, the North Koreans also formally unveiled a heavily reworked Cold War-era Romeo class diesel-electric submarine modified to fire ballistic missiles, seen below. North Korean State Media North Koreas new-ish missile submarine. KCNA The War Zone has pointed out in the past that re-entry vehicle technology, something Russia has significant experience with, could well be something else North Korean authorities might seek in return for their support in the ongoing fighting in Ukraine. The Russians also possess other missile technology that could feed into North Korean developments. At this point, it’s very early in our assessment phase, and we don’t see any indication at this point that there was Russian involvement, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said at a press conference alongside Secretary of State Antony Blinken, as well as their respective South Korean counterparts, on Oct. 31. But again, we’ll continue to work with our partners and our allies in the region to analyze this. North Korea also has close ties to China and Iran, who both have very active ballistic missile programs. Over the past decade or so, North Korea has conducted tests of a significant number of new liquid and solid-fuel ballistic missiles, including multiple ICBM designs, as well as hypersonic and long-range cruise missiles. This further includes types that North Korean officials say are capable of carrying nuclear warheads, something the country also looks to be stepping up production of. The Hermit Kingdom has also demonstrated its ability to fire ballistic missiles from a wide array of static and mobile launchers, including ones emplaced at the bottom of lakes and rail-based systems. As underscored by the Hwasong-19 test, North Koreas missile and nuclear weapons programs continue to be very active. Though Paparo said the U.S. military has not seen evidence of a successful demonstration of re-entry vehicle capability, the North Koreans are clearly pushing ahead toward that goal. Contact the author: joe@twz.com The post ICBM Reentry Vehicle Capability Still Unproven By North Korea, U.S. Military Says appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Nuclear, Around The Globe, Europe, Indo-Pacific, News & Features, North Korea, Nuclear Ballistic Missiles, Nuclear Proliferation, Russia] [Link to media]

— Danish Navy Shadows Chinese Cargo Ship After Baltic Sea Cable Damage

 

at 11/20/24 10:08am

Denmark has confirmed it’s monitoring the Chinese cargo vessel at the center of allegations surrounding recent damage to two communication cables in the Baltic Sea. Yesterday, Germany said that the damage was most likely the result of sabotage, while the Chinese ship, the Yi Peng 3, was identified as operating in the vicinity of the cables when the incidents occurred. You can read our previous reporting here. In a statement on X today, the Danish Armed Forces said: “We are present in the area near the Chinese ship Yi Peng 3. The Danish Defense currently has no further comments.” Regarding the Chinese ship Yi Peng 3:The Danish Defence can confirm that we are present in the area near the Chinese ship Yi Peng 3. The Danish Defence currently has no further comments. https://t.co/11s3yeR4PB— Forsvaret (@forsvaretdk) November 20, 2024 On MarineTraffic, an aggregator that provides real-time information on ship movements, the Yi Peng 3 can be seen anchored in the Kattegat as of 1:00 p.m. GMT today, having exited the Baltic via the Danish Straits. In close proximity to the Chinese cargo ship was the Rota (P525), a Royal Danish Navy Diana class patrol boat, also anchored. The Chinese bulk carrier Yi Peng 3 is anchored and monitored by a Danish naval patrol vessel (both vessels are seen in the photo at the top of this story) in the sea of Kattegat, on Nov. 20, 2024. Photo by MIKKEL BERG PEDERSEN/Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images MIKKEL BERG PEDERSEN A screencap from MarineTraffic shows the approximate location of the Yi Peng 3 anchored in the Kattegat as of 1:00 p.m. GMT today. MarineTraffic screencap Another Royal Danish Navy warship, the Thetis class ocean patrol vessel Hvidbjørnen, was also noted heading toward the scene, underway in the northern part of the Kattegat earlier today. Yes, definitely looks like Hvidbjørnen is joining the party.— Bengt Sirbelius (@bengts.bsky.social) 2024-11-20T01:08:59.984Z The Danish Armed Forces have so far not said whether or not a boarding party has been put on the Yi Peng 3. A screencap from MarineTraffic shows the Yi Peng 3 anchored in the Kattegat as of 1:00 p.m. GMT. The red dot to the right of the Chinese cargo ship is the Royal Danish Rota (P525) patrol boat. MarineTraffic screencap According to the Polish website Defence24.com, the Rota first “detained” the Chinese bulk carrier yesterday evening, Nov. 19. At this point, the Yi Peng 3 was in Danish territorial waters, sailing in the Danish Straits at the exit of the Great Belt. “After a few hours, another vessel HDMS Søløven, which is specialized for underwater work, reached both vessels,” the same report added. It appears that the HDMS Soeleloeven is approaching Yi Peng 3 at 16.5kn right now, at a distance of about 23 miles.There is a high chance that this will have appropiate forces for boarding on board (unlike the patrol boat).At this speed, they should be there in approximately… https://t.co/z08VrFtXtz pic.twitter.com/dabGUhOPux— C Schmitz (@chrisschmitz) November 19, 2024 The Chinese vessel had departed the Russian port of Ust-Luga, in the Leningrad region, close to the Estonian border, on Nov. 15 and had been scheduled to sail to Port Said, Egypt, where it was originally due to arrive on Dec. 3. The Yi Peng 3 is 224 meters (735 feet) long, with a beam of 32 meters (105 feet) and it has a gross tonnage of 40,622 tons. As for the damaged cables, you can read more about the background of those incidents in our previous report. In summary, the first of these is the 135-mile-long BSC cable between the Swedish island of Gotland and Lithuania, which was damaged around 8:00 a.m. GMT last Sunday. The second is C-Lion1, a 746-mile-long cable between Helsinki and the German port of Rostock, put out of action around 2:00 a.m. GMT on Monday. Both of these are fiber-optic communication cables, running along the Baltic seabed. The C-Lion1 submarine telecommunications cable being laid to the bottom of the Baltic Sea by a cable-laying ship, off the shore of Helsinki, Finland, in October 2015. Photo by Heikki Saukkomaa / Lehtikuva / AFP) / Finland OUT HEIKKI SAUKKOMAA An infographic shows the approximate locations of the undersea cables that were damaged in the Baltic Sea in the last few days. Photo by Murat Usubali/Anadolu via Getty Images Anadolu Already yesterday there were suggestions that the Yi Peng 3 might somehow be involved in the incidents. Based on publicly available ship-tracking data, the Yi Peng 3 appears to have passed overhead both of the cables around the same time incidents of damage were first reported. According to the German newspaper Kieler Nachrichten, on Monday, when the damage to the C-Lion1 cable was confirmed, the Yi Peng “stopped, drifted, and sailed two circles in the sea area south of Öland for almost 90 minutes.” The Chinese cargo vessel was seen to slow down as it passed the cables, based on data gathered by auonsson, an open-source intelligence analyst. “The speed of cargo ship Yi Peng 3 was affected negatively as she passed the two Baltic Sea cable breaks C-Lion 1 and BSC,” auonsson wrote on the social media platform Bluesky. “Before the incidents, she held normal speeds. After stopping and drifting for 70 minutes she again held normal speeds. By this time the two cables were broken.” Chinese-flagged cargo ship Yi Peng 3 crossed both submarine cables C-Lion 1 and BSC at times matching when they broke.She was shadowed by Danish navy for a while during night and is now in Danish Straits leaving Baltics.No signs of boarding. AIS-caveats apply.— auonsson (@auonsson.bsky.social) 2024-11-19T09:50:25.253Z “Headwinds could play a role in slowing Yi Peng 3 down, but I dont believe this to be the case. The changes in speed are much more significant than the changes in wind speed,” auonsson added. The speed of cargo ship Yi Peng 3 was affected negatively as she passed the 2 Baltic Sea cable breaks C-Lion 1 and BSC.Before the incidents she held normal speeds. After stopping and drifting for 70 minutes she again held normal speeds. By this time the two cables were broken.— auonsson (@auonsson.bsky.social) 2024-11-19T10:56:44.536Z So far, no official evidence has been presented that ties the Yi Peng 3 to these incidents, although, as we shared previously, there is a notable precedent. In October last year, the Balticconnector gas pipeline running between Estonia and Finland was damaged. The Finnish National Bureau of Investigation later identified the culprit as the Chinese container ship Newnew Polar Bear, which had dropped its anchor, dragging it along the seabed. A joint press conference for the investigation into the damage to the Balticconnector gas line on Oct. 8, 2023, between Finland and Estonia at the headquarters of the National Bureau of Investigation in Vantaa, Finland on Oct. 24, 2023. The screen shows the Chinese cargo ship Newnew Polar Bear, which was the focus of their investigation. Photo by HEIKKI SAUKKOMAA/Lehtikuva/AFP via Getty Images HEIKKI SAUKKOMAA The Newnew Polar Bear had earlier been spotted with one of its anchors missing and the same type of paint on the anchor could be matched to that on the damaged pipeline. Chinese authorities later admitted that the Newnew Polar Bear was to blame but stated that it was an accident. However, the rapid departure of the Newnew Polar Bear from the Baltic last October fueled suspicions that the pipeline damage might have been an act of sabotage. With that in mind, it would make sense for the Danish authorities to investigate the Yi Peng 3 before it transits into international waters and continues its journey. Yi Peng 3 in relation to territorial 12 mile limit, ie Danish border.Thanks @bwallacep.bsky.social for noticing!— auonsson (@auonsson.bsky.social) 2024-11-19T18:49:27.114Z For now, we will have to wait and see whether the Yi Peng 3 is being examined for any signs of damage that might be consistent with snagging the two communications cables, but this would certainly seem like a possible line of inquiry for the Danes. If the Yi Peng 3 is found to have been responsible for the damage, questions will very likely be asked about how that could have happened — especially since two cables in separate locations were affected. Moreover, with the precedent of the Newnew Polar Bear incident last year, there will likely be concerns that this could be evidence of some sort of broader, deliberate campaign in the highly strategic Baltic region. We will update this post if more information becomes available.  Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com The post Danish Navy Shadows Chinese Cargo Ship After Baltic Sea Cable Damage appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: News & Features, Around The Globe, Baltic Sea, Europe, Patrol Boats, Sea] [Link to media]

— U.S. Embassy In Kyiv Temporarily Closed Due To Russian Airstrike Threat

 

at 11/20/24 9:39am

In a rare move, the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv shut down operations today after officials “received information about a potential significant air attack on November 20, the embassy announced. Several other Western embassies followed suit. Meanwhile, Ukrainian officials say the country is being subjected to a large-scale Russian propaganda campaign using fake information about a potential attack to spread fear. “Out of an abundance of caution, the Embassy will be closed, and Embassy employees are being instructed to shelter in place,” the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv posted on its website Wednesday. “The U.S. Embassy recommends U.S. citizens be prepared to immediately shelter in the event an air alert is announced.” The announcement did not elaborate on the threat to Kyiv, which is frequently targeted by Russia and had just been hit by another volley of missiles and drones overnight. Ukraine: The U.S. Embassy in Kyiv received specific information of a potential significant air attack on Nov 20. The Embassy will be closed and recommends U.S. citizens be prepared to immediately shelter in the event an air alert is announced. https://t.co/ah0bpDfULK pic.twitter.com/m8cWXCXT2V— Travel State Dept (@TravelGov) November 20, 2024 In response to our questions seeking further details, the embassy told us the closure “is related to air alerts, including increased possible threat of combined attack from drones and missiles, as has happened recently. We continue to monitor the situation working with our Ukrainian partners.” “This is a temporary change in posture, and we anticipate a quick return to regular operations, the embassy told us. We recommend all U.S. citizens follow instructions from local authorities regarding air alerts and immediately seek shelter when instructed. The Embassy will continue to provide updates via official U.S. Embassy social media platforms. ” After the U.S. closed its embassy, Greece, Italy, and Spain followed suit. Embassies of the United States, Spain and Italy are closed in Kyiv today due to a possible massive Russian missile attack. pic.twitter.com/2c89yqhDSE— Anton Gerashchenko (@Gerashchenko_en) November 20, 2024 “The American Embassy has shared information on its website about a possible high-intensity air strike today, November 20,” the Italian embassy posted on its website. “As a precaution, the Embassy in Kyiv will remain closed to the public today. The Embassy remains operational. In the event of an air raid alert, all Italian citizens present in the country are advised to follow the most stringent risk mitigation measures and immediately go to the nearest shelter.” The closures come amid heightened tensions. On Tuesday, Ukraine used U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) missiles for the first time against a target inside Russia. In response to the Biden administration’s approval of such attacks, a top Russian politician said that his nation could launch a weapon in retaliation that has never before been used. Adding to the concerns, a previously planned reduction in the threshold by which Russia said it would use its nuclear arsenal went into effect on Tuesday. The closure is not related to Russia’s announcement that it has lowered the threshold for a nuclear strike, the embassy added. The embassy closure is related to ongoing threats of air attacks.  Ukrainian officials suggested that the warnings are based on Russian propaganda efforts to sow fear. “A terrorist country is conducting a massive information and psychological attack against Ukraine,” the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence Directorate (GUR) stated on Telegram Wednesday. “A message about the threat of a ‘particularly massive’ rocket-bomb attack on Ukrainian cities today is being spread through messengers and social networks, allegedly on behalf of the GUR. This message is a fake, it contains grammatical errors typical for Russian information and psychological operations.” GUR urged people to “trust information only from official resources and from the spokespersons of the Ministry of Education and Culture. The enemy, unable to subjugate Ukrainians by force, resorts to measures of intimidation and psychological pressure on society. Please be vigilant and persistent.” Still, the threat of air strikes remains very real, GUR reminded. “Do not ignore air raid signals it is safer to wait in shelter,” GUR explained. “However, we urge you not to panic.” #гурінформує Країна-терорист проводить масовану інформаційно-психологічну атаку проти України https://t.co/4iZNxfPpnE pic.twitter.com/QdgWUwL7Pp— Defence intelligence of Ukraine (@DI_Ukraine) November 20, 2024 The Russians are using the embassy closings to stoke fear, a top Ukrainian official suggested. “In terms of information, now they are also trying to shake panicky moods against the background of the closing of embassies,” Andriy Kovalenko, head of Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation at the National Security and Defense Council, said on Telegram Wednesday. Ukraine has been well aware that Russia was planning future attacks and stockpiling munitions to hit the nation’s power and heating infrastructure ahead of winter, Kovalenko noted. “The Russians prepared for shelling in the cold season this is their tactic,” he posited. “Rockets were stockpiled, aviation and fleet were being prepared. Bet on cruise missiles and ballistics, as well as drones for the depletion of air defense. These plans are not unexpected, they are known and warned about.” The Russians, he added, “have different types of missiles in their arsenal. And this is also known.” A fragment of a Russian missile is on the ground after being removed by State Emergency Service workers from a five-story apartment building in the Pecherskyi district of Kyiv, on Nov. 17, 2024. (Photo by Ukrinform/NurPhoto via Getty Images) NurPhoto To head off any panic, Kovalenko reminded Ukrainians that they had been through this before. “After three years of large-scale, as well as now knowing about Russias presence of missiles and plans to attack Ukraine and infrastructure, Ukrainians already understand the situation you need to plan your time and prepare safe places for yourself in case of alarm, calculate the route and the time it takes to reach these safe places can be reached,” he offered. “It is also important to follow official communications, in particular, from the Air Force.”   “As for the panic that they are trying to incite, I will clarify once again that Russia was preparing for shelling and this is part of the war,” Kovalenko said. “The plans of the Russians are known to the Defense Forces. There is and will be an antidote.” Ukrainian offices are also closing and urging employees to work from home, another sign of how far the fake messaging has spread, argued Maria Drutska, a former Ukrainian defense official now working in the foreign affairs sector. There’s a flood of fake news and disinformation designed to sow panic and confusion. Trust only official sources. Russian propaganda is working overtime to manipulate and deceive—don’t fall for it.Stay calm. Stay informed. Stay resilient. Every lie they spread only proves… pic.twitter.com/U1PPxuEi9D— Maria Drutska (@maria_drutska) November 20, 2024 After the warnings were issued, residents in Kyiv and elsewhere in Ukraine braced for a new wave of attacks that have become routine. Kyiv is sheltering under air alerts. “Fast-moving objects in the air—likely ballistic missiles or jet drones.”People take these warnings seriously now, expecting Russia to retaliate for ATACMS strikes. Still, our trust is in air defense 1/ pic.twitter.com/uWE9Z6FE7p— Tymofiy Mylovanov (@Mylovanov) November 20, 2024 On its Telegram channel, the Ukrainian Air Force said more Russian missiles, guided bombs and drones were on the way as of 11 a.m. Eastern time. WARNING, the Ukrainian Air Force cautioned. Air defense work is possible! Update: 3:59 PM Eastern The U.S. Embassy in Kyiv has resumed services following a temporary shelter-in-place suspension earlier today. Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com The post U.S. Embassy In Kyiv Temporarily Closed Due To Russian Airstrike Threat appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: News & Features, Around The Globe, Drones, Europe, Russia, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— Conflicts “Eating Into” Critical Munitions Stockpiles Needed For China Fight Top U.S. Officer In Pacific Warns

 

at 11/19/24 5:57pm

The U.S. military risks going into a potential major fight with China with insufficient stocks of Patriot surface-to-air interceptors and other key munitions due to obligations in the Middle East and Ukraine, the top officer in the Pacific has warned. Americas armed forces need to not only replenish that inventory, but grow it further, to be adequately prepared for a high-end scenario in the Pacific, especially a conflict over Taiwan. U.S. Navy Adm. Samuel Paparo, head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), talked bluntly about his concerns at an open event at the Brookings Institution think tank in Washington, D.C., hosted earlier today. Adm. Samuel J. Paparo, commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, speaks at AFCEA’s TechNet Indo-Pacific in Honolulu, Oct. 24, 2024. USN At one point in the discussion, Paparo was asked a direct question about whether ongoing fighting in Ukraine and in and around the Middle East were impacting U.S. military preparedness in his part of the world. Up to this year, where most of the employment of weapons were really artillery pieces and short-range weapons, I had said not at all, he said. But now, with some of the Patriots that have been employed, some of the air-to-air missiles that have been employed, it is now eating into [our] stocks. and to say otherwise would be dishonest. Ukraine has received a number of Patriot surface-to-air missile systems and interceptors to go with them from the U.S. military and other Western partners. Patriots were also among the air and missile defense systems employed in the defense of Israel against Iranian attacks in April. Ukrainian personnel remove camouflage netting from a Patriot launcher. Ukrainian Air Force Ukrainian personnel remove camouflage netting from a Patriot launcher, which is loaded with missile canisters associated with older interceptors like the PAC-2-series. Ukrainian Air Force The U.S. military has supplied a variety of other air and missile defense capabilities to Ukraine since 2022. American forces have also expended significant numbers of surface-to-air and air-to-air munitions in operations to shield friendly warships and commercial shipping in and around the Red Sea from Houthi militants in Yemen, as well as while defending Israel. This includes SM-2, SM-3, and SM-6 ship-launched surface-to-air interceptors and AIM-9X and AIM-120 air-to-air missiles. Ground-based National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS), examples of which have been supplied to Ukraine, can also fire AIM-9Xs and AIM-120s. The US Navy Arleigh Burke class destroyer USS Carney fires an SM-2 missile at Houthi threats in October 2023. USN The U.S. Navys Arleigh Burke class destroyer USS Carney fires a missile at a Houthi threat in October 2023. Also visible in the foreground is a Phalanx CIWS. USN A variety of other surface and air-launched munitions have gone to Ukraine and/or have been expended in the course of operations against the Houthis and elsewhere in the Middle East, as well. One prime example of this is supplies of Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) short-range ballistic missiles to Ukrainian forces, which they have just recently gotten American approval to employ against targets inside Russian territory. In the past, Army officials have explicitly cited incoming stocks of new Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) short-range ballistic missiles as helping free up ATACMS for Ukraine. A US Army M270-series launcher fires an ATACMS missile. US Army “If there are X [munitions in the] inventory of the United States of America, which is fungible across all theaters, that can be applied equally across any contingency, none are reserved for any particular theater, expending them elsewhere inherently, it imposes costs on the readiness of America to respond in the Indo-Pacific region, Paparo explained. The Indo-Pacific region is the most stressing theater for the quantity and quality of munitions, because the PRC [Peoples Republic of China] is the most capable potential adversary in the world, he continued. We should replenish those [munition] stocks and then some. I was already dissatisfied with the magazine depth, Americas top officer in the Pacific, who took up the post in May, added. Im a little more dissatisfied with the magazine depth. You know, its a time for straight talk. Paparo is not the first to raise the alarm about what the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East are doing to U.S. munition stockpiles. Navy officials have been especially open about the worrying number of missiles and other weapons that have been expended against Houthi and Iranian threats. Concerns about the adequacy of U.S. stocks of certain munitions also predate these current crises, as the The War Zone has highlighted in the past. An SM-3 missile at the moment of launch. The first combat employment of this anti-ballistic missile interceptor was in April 2024 against Iranian ballistic missiles headed toward Israel. USN An SM-3 anti-ballistic missile interceptor at the moment of launch. USN There have already been growing calls from inside Americas armed forces, as well as Congress and elsewhere, to replenish those inventories and grow them beyond their previous size. There is also an emerging consensus that expanding and diversifying the U.S. industrial base available to produce key munitions, as well as developing and fielding lower-cost capabilities that are faster to produce, is increasingly critical. The Patriot interceptors and other munitions Paparo alluded to today are not bought off the shelf, are full of high-end and often unique components, and can take months or even years to procure. As indicated by his magazine depth remarks, Paparo is already very outspoken on these issues, especially when it comes to preparing for a potential conflict with China over Taiwan, in the South China Sea, or elsewhere in the Pacific. Paparo has previously discussed efforts to help the Taiwanese defend themselves through the use of hordes of kamikaze drones and other uncrewed platforms in the air, on the waves, and underwater that would turn the battlespace around the island into a hellscape for invaders, as you can read more about here. Speaking today, Paparo stressed his belief that the U.S. military should be working to prepare for a potential fight around Taiwan as soon as possible rather than with an eye toward being ready to do so by 2027. U.S. officials regularly cite past statements by Xi Jinping telling the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) to at least be prepared by that year to successfully execute an armed intervention against the island. The closer we get to it [2027], the less relevant that date is, and the more we must be ready today, tomorrow, next month, next year, and onward, Paparo said at Brookings. With a new presidential administration on the horizon and concerns about at best flat defense budgets in the coming years, there are many new questions facing the U.S. military when it comes to things like replenishing munitions and its general global posture. Regardless, when it comes to Ukraine, specifically, ATACMS may be the last major offensive weapons system left that the U.S. has to take off its shelf and hand to that country, according to a separate report just today from Politico, which only underscores Paparos remarks. The current head of INDOPACOM has certainly made clear that he believes that there is a worrisome shortfall of critical munitions, which would be doubly concerning should a high-end fight with China break out. Geoff Ziezulewicz contributed to this story. Contact the author: joe@twz.com The post Conflicts Eating Into Critical Munitions Stockpiles Needed For China Fight Top U.S. Officer In Pacific Warns appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Air, Air Force Munitions, Air-To-Air, Air-To-Ground, Land, Maritime Surface-To-Air Missiles, Naval Munitions, Sea, Surface-To-Air Missile Systems] [Link to media]

— Army Arsenal Seeking Info On Mysterious Drone Flights Over Installation

 

at 11/19/24 5:39pm

The U.S. Armys Picatinny Arsenal in northern New Jersey is working with local, state, and federal partners to obtain more information about mysterious drone activity over the facility and in the surrounding area, a spokesman told us. His comments were in response to questions we asked about reports of strange drone activity near the facility that emerged on social media overnight. The military installation is home to several important armament development organizations, including the Joint Center of Excellence for Guns and Ammunition, the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) Armaments Center, and one of the Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC)s research and development laboratories. The reported drone activity comes in the wake of a drone incursion over Langley Air Force Base last December that we were the first to report. You can read more about that in our initial story about those incidents here. Langley is just a high-profile example of an increasingly concerning pattern of peculiar drone operations around sensitive facilities. “We received reports of what were believed to be drones flying over Picatinny Arsenal, in addition to other locations in Morris Countyon the evening of November 18, 2024,” facility spokesman Timothy Rider told us in an email Tuesday afternoon. “Picatinny Arsenal organizations were not involved in UAV flight operations on that date. We are working with several of our local, state, and federal partner organizations to obtain more information on the reported activity.” One Twitter account claimed that drones flew over Picatinny Arsenal. Large Sized Drones flying around in unauthorized areas around New Jersey, including over Picatinny Arsenal, which is a Military Base, last night November 18th, being followed by BlackHawk Helicopters. New Jersey residents speak up pic.twitter.com/sonoqZyLY5— BeautyMrk (@BeautyMrked) November 19, 2024 “We remind everyone that it is unlawful to fly UAVs over Picatinny Arsenal and any other federal military installation without prior authorization,” Rider warned. Several social media accounts posted video and images Tuesday of lights seen over northern New Jersey they attribute to drones of an unknown origin. However, they are low-quality and it is impossible to discern exactly what was seen and whether they were even drones. “Unusual activity reported over Morris County, NJ: multiple large drones spotted flying from the Somerset County border northward and back,” the @NJerzyFireAlert Twitter account reported. “Law enforcement has been advised to notify their communications centers of any sightings.” New Jersey State Police “aviation is reported to be in the area tracking the drones, the account, which monitors police and fire activities in the area, added. “An Army Black Hawk helicopter was also tracked on flight radar in the area. Multiple reports of the drones being spotted in Madison, Morris Township, and Mendham.” Unusual activity reported over Morris County,NJ: multiple large drones spotted flying from the Somerset County border northward and back. Law enforcement has been advised to notify their communications centers of any sightings. Photo taken in Morristown ( Josh Wolfson) pic.twitter.com/pSqe6KnwQj— N. Jerzy Fire Alert (@NJerzyFireAlert) November 19, 2024 There were several posts of the above video with differing claims. Upwards of a Dozen Large Drones have been spotted tonight over Morris County in Northern New Jersey, with them being tracked by Law Enforcement and Fire Officials. A AW139 Helicopter with the New Jersey State Police was tracking the Drones to the North of Dover, but has since… pic.twitter.com/A3lJWOosbx— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) November 19, 2024 UNUSUAL: Morris County NJ is tracking at least five, unknown, large drones that have been flying unauthorized for over 2 hours.Army BlackHawk helicopter also on flight radar in the area. Drowns reported in Madison, Morris Township, and Mendham. pic.twitter.com/fSpFYDmzkJ— Oliya Scootercaster (@ScooterCasterNY) November 19, 2024 As this was taking place, a New Jersey State Police helicopter was spotted traveling down to Picatinny Arsenal and flying several orbits over it, according to an online flight tracking website. Rider, the facility spokesman, could not immediately tell us if there was any connection to the drone incidents it is asking partner organizations about. Seems the NJ State police heli beelined it right for the Picatinny Arsenal military research and manufacturing facility same time the drones were spotted.. Circled for awhile, then headed back after a fuel stop. https://t.co/Cw9TnNQHLh pic.twitter.com/ds5Tf0QgP5— CT POLICE LIVE (@CTPOLICELIVE) November 19, 2024 Sgt. Boris Sanchez with the Dover Police Department, told us that as of Tuesday afternoon, his agency has not received any reports about drones flying in the area last night or early this morning. Meanwhile, about 25 miles to the north, drones are being used in efforts to fight a large forest fire along the New Jersey-New York border. It is unclear what, if any connection, there is between those and what was posted on social media, but that seems unlikely considering the distance involved, unless they were being confused with manned aircraft. Several drones were spotted near the Picatinny Arsenal in northern New Jersey. The facility is about 25 miles from a large forest fire on the New Jersey-New York border. (Google Earth image) New York State Police Drones continue to play a vital role in the ongoing battle against the Jennings Creek Wildfire, which has now consumed 5,300 acres along the New York-New Jersey border, the Drone-XL website reported on Monday. The fire, which initially challenged responders with only 10% containment, has now reached 88% containment on the New York side and 90% containment on the New Jersey side, thanks in part to advanced drone surveillance capabilities. New York State Police Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) pilots remain at the forefront of the firefighting operation, using thermal imaging to identify hotspots and guide ground crews, according to Patch. This aerial intelligence has proven especially valuable as the fire zone has expanded and conditions have evolved. Drones operating on the New York side of the fire did not cross into New Jersey, a New York State Police spokesman told us. New York State Police is the only agency authorized to operate Unmanned Aerial Systems on the New York State side of the wildfire, Beau Duffy said. We don’t have any evidence that our UAS have crossed into New Jersey. Nobody has sought information about the New Jersey drone sightings from the New York State Police, Duffy added. The New York State Department of Military and Naval Affairs (DMNA) told us that they were flying UH-60 Black Hawk and CH-47 Chinook helicopters to help fight the fire, but they were not operating drones in that effort. Eli Roberts, who chases storms, captured extensive video of those helicopter flights in operation, which you can see below. We have reached out to several federal, state and local agencies for additional details and will update this story with any pertinent information provided. It remains unclear exactly what people were seeing in the sky last evening over and near Picatinny Arsenal, however, the installation is clearly taking reports of drone activity seriously enough to contact several other partner organizations to find answers. This fits with a major change in how seriously military installations and critical infrastructure facilities are taking these kinds of events. For years they were largely seen as puzzling and action came slow, if at all. Now, with the glaring threat posed by drones of various types and their proliferation in conflicts overseas, as well as the increase in intrusion events at home and abroad, and especially after the events over Langley AFB last winter, they are being looked at with much more concern. This now includes accelerating the deployment of military capabilities to identify and defeat drone systems near these key areas, which you can read about here. We will update you when we find out more details about this incident. Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com The post Army Arsenal Seeking Info On Mysterious Drone Flights Over Installation appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Air, Americas, Armies, Around The Globe, Drones, Land, News & Features, U.S. Army, U.S. Homeland, Unmanned] [Link to media]

— Sabotage Claims Swirl Around Severed Baltic Sea Cable Incidents

 

at 11/19/24 12:40pm

Germany says that damage to two communication cables in the Baltic Sea was most likely the result of sabotage. The mysterious incidents, which began on Sunday, are the latest in a series in the region. They come as concerns grow over nefarious Russian activity in Europe, seemingly part of an apparent wave of ‘hybrid warfare’ as the conflict in Ukraine further stokes East-West tensions. Meanwhile, accounts of a Chinese vessel operating in the vicinity of the cables around the time they were damaged raises the possibility that this might have been involved, whether deliberately or otherwise. The two cables in question are both fiber-optic communication cables, running along the Baltic seabed. One of these runs between the Swedish island of Gotland and Lithuania, and the other between Finland and Germany. An infographic shows the approximate locations of the undersea cables that were damaged in the Baltic Sea in the last few days. Photo by Murat Usubali/Anadolu via Getty Images Anadolu The first of these — some 135 miles long — appears to have been damaged at around 8:00 a.m. GMT on Sunday, according to the telecoms company Telia Lietuva. This led to an outage with internet communications. The second cable is 746 miles long, running between Helsinki and the German port of Rostock. This was put out of action around 2:00 a.m. GMT on Monday, the Finnish cybersecurity and telecoms company Cinia said. A fiber-optic cable is pulled ashore from a German cable-laying ship in the Baltic. The cable seen here, which runs from Scandinavia to the German island of Rügen, also appears at the top of this story. It was not one of those recently damaged but is similarly used for internet communications. Photo by Stefan Sauer/picture alliance via Getty Images picture alliance The incidents led to immediate speculation around potential hostile action, an idea that the German Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius today picked up on. The German Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius during a visit to Airborne Brigade 1 at Graf-Werder-Kaserne in September 2024. Photo by Laszlo Pinter/picture alliance via Getty Images picture alliance “No one believes that the cables were accidentally damaged,” Pistorius said. “I also don’t want to believe that the ships’ anchors caused the damage by accident.” “We have to assume, without certain information, that the damage is caused by sabotage,” he added. Two undersea internet cables in the Baltic Sea have been disrupted by sabotage – German Defense Minister Pistorius."A very clear sign that something is going on there. No one believes that these cables were accidentally damaged. And I dont want to believe in the versions that… https://t.co/kq9ly24ym5 pic.twitter.com/SS3OCJE3X0— Anton Gerashchenko (@Gerashchenko_en) November 19, 2024 Pistorius hasn’t so far provided any specific evidence to back up this claim. Meanwhile, the foreign ministers of Finland and Germany have offered more circumspect statements on the incidents, with a joint statement expressing their “deep concern” and confirmation that a “thorough investigation” is now underway. The Swedish Navy, too, confirmed today that a criminal investigation is underway in that country, with the Navy contributing ships that will pinpoint the locations of the damaged cables. We are deeply concerned about the severed cable in the Baltic Sea, raising suspicions of intentional damage. An investigation is underway. Our shared security relies on protecting critical infrastructure. Full statement by @ElinaValtonen and @ABaerbock: https://t.co/jfgHlFLduP pic.twitter.com/5oM46cFZdb— GermanForeignOffice (@GermanyDiplo) November 18, 2024 However, this is hardly the first time that there has been suspicious activity in the Baltic Sea, including suspected sabotage. Most notoriously, there was a series of explosions along the Nord Stream gas pipelines in 2022. The cause of these is still being investigated by German authorities. One of the 2022 Nord Stream gas leaks photographed from a Danish F-16 fighter. Danish Armed Forces Outside of the Baltic, there have been other incidents of reported sabotage of critical communications cables, including one associated with Evenes Air Station, in northern Norway, which happened in April, but was only disclosed in August, as TWZ reported at the time. Norway has seen other suspicious incidents in the past, notably the cutting of a vital undersea cable connecting Svalbard to mainland Norway in 2022.  While the Baltic Sea has long been of strategic significance for both Russia and NATO and its allies, there has been a spike in incidents in these waters since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Against the backdrop of East-West tensions, suspected sabotage incidents in the Baltic have led to speculation that these may be Russian-inspired, or at least connected to this standoff. “The fact that such an incident immediately raises suspicions of intentional damage speaks volumes about the volatility of our times,” said Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen and her German counterpart Annalena Baerbock in their joint statement. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (right) and Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen (left). Photo by Kay Nietfeld/picture alliance via Getty Images picture alliance “Our European security is not only under threat from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine but also from hybrid warfare by malicious actors. Safeguarding our shared critical infrastructure is vital to our security and the resilience of our societies.” The foreign ministers stepped back from blaming Russia directly for the latest incidents, but, in a separate statement, Baerbock did draw attention to other reported Kremlin-inspired hostile activity in Europe in recent months. Baerbock noted that Germany has been targeted by cyber-attacks, surveillance of critical infrastructure, and fires as the result of an incendiary device plot, which you can read more about here. Other incidents in Germany this year alone have included an alert at Geilenkirchen Air Base after the German Ministry of Defense reported “intelligence information indicating a potential threat,” the arrest of two German-Russian nationals on suspicion of plotting sabotage attacks on U.S. military facilities in the country, as well as reports of unexplained drone activity, including over a major floating liquid natural gas (LNG) terminal. “These can’t all just be coincidences,” the German foreign minister said. E-3A AWACS aircraft at Geilenkirchen in February 2022. In August this year, the facility’s state of alert was raised in response to “intelligence information indicating a potential threat.” Photo by Marius Becker/picture alliance via Getty Images In the meantime, NATO is stepping up its surveillance activities in the Baltic. In particular, the Latvian Navy has said it will increase its patrols in the areas where the cables were damaged. More broadly, NATO’s Allied Maritime Command (MARCOM) says that it is aware of an increased threat to undersea infrastructure. “These attacks show how vulnerable such infrastructure can be. NATO is stepping up patrols near undersea infrastructure,” the command said. In the recent past, MARCOM has also highlighted the specific risk that Russia poses to undersea infrastructure. “We know the Russians have developed a lot of hybrid warfare under the sea to disrupt the European economy through cables, internet cables, pipelines. All of our economy under the sea is under threat,” MARCOM’s deputy commander Vice Adm. Didier Maleterre said earlier this year. Previously, we’ve looked at how the Russian Navy has a variety of means at its disposal to conduct covert operations on the seabed. It’s widely assumed that Russia’s special mission submarines, deep-sea submersibles, and unmanned underwater vehicles can be used for both investigating and disrupting undersea cables. Certainly, cutting communications cables should be well within the capabilities of such craft. There are also various Russian Navy surface vessels that are ideal for these kinds of activities. Prominent among them is the Yantar, described as an “oceanographic research vessel,” but frequently used for military purposes, with specialized equipment that can reportedly tap or cut submarine cables and investigate and retrieve objects from depths of up to 18,000 feet. Recently, the Yantar was escorted out of the Irish Sea after it entered Irish-controlled waters and patrolled an area containing critical energy and internet submarine pipelines and cables. The Russian spy ship Yantar. Almaz Design Bureau On the other hand, sabotage of undersea cables could likely also be achieved covertly even without using methods as high-tech as submarines and other underwater vehicles. In shallower water, divers would be able to operate, although they would still require some kind of support vessel, at least in the general vicinity. The security situation in the Baltic is also having a direct effect on infrastructure plans. Most prominently, Sweden decided earlier this month not to build 13 new offshore wind farms, citing the security risks involved. As for the most recent damage to the Baltic communication cables, there has been some speculation that a commercial vessel may have been responsible, by dragging its anchor along the seabed. There would also appear to be a precedent for this. Last year, a subsea gas pipeline and several telecoms cables off the coasts of Finland and Estonia were badly damaged in an incident that was initially suspected of being sabotage. Ultimately, investigators determined that a Chinese container ship likely dragging its anchor had caused the damage. While it’s unclear whether the damage in 2023 was accidental or intentional, it’s possible that the same thing might have happened again in the last few days. Based on publicly available ship-tracking websites, it appears that another Chinese vessel, the Yi Peng 3, may have been in close proximity to both the communication cables around the time that damage was reported. Using the same data, it seems that the cargo ship also slowed down while passing over the cables. pic.twitter.com/KU0zU0Rtu5— auonsson (@auonsson) November 19, 2024 Strong circumstantial evidence that Chinese-flagged cargo ship Yi Peng was responsible for breaking two underwater telecoms cables in the Baltic Sea (17-18th November).CLion1 connecting Finland and Germany and BSC connecting Sweden and Lithuania severed.Via… pic.twitter.com/3Bknm21RVo— Navy Lookout (@NavyLookout) November 19, 2024 The same Chinese vessel was later noted being shadowed by the Royal Danish Navy, before heading out of the Baltic. So far, previous incidents involving apparent sabotage to Baltic Sea infrastructure have proven very difficult to pin on any one culprit, despite a spike in reports of Russian-inspired activity in this regard. However, the latest developments underscore the fact that undersea infrastructure is a major vulnerability, something that has been known for years, while the Baltic Sea’s strategic importance is magnified by the standoff between NATO and Russia. Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com The post Sabotage Claims Swirl Around Severed Baltic Sea Cable Incidents appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: News & Features, Air, Around The Globe, Baltic Sea, Europe, Germany, Russia] [Link to media]

— TB3 Operates From Turkey’s ‘Drone Carrier’ Amphibious Assault Ship For The First Time

 

at 11/19/24 11:39am

A Bayraktar TB3 uncrewed aircraft has successfully landed on and taken off from the Turkish Navy’s ‘drone carrier’ TCG Anadolu for the first time. TB3s, which can be armed with small precision munitions and conduct surveillance and reconnaissance missions, are set to be a central component of the ships air wing. Selcuk Bayraktar, chief technology officer at the TB3s manufacturer Baykar, posted videos of the TB3s milestone achievements aboard Anadolu on social media earlier today. Bayraktar had previously posted clips showing one of the drones making approaches and flying over the ships flight deck, but not actually touching down. Sevda kuşun kanadında.. TCG-ANADOLU’ya ilk iniş-kalkış..#BayraktarTB3 pic.twitter.com/sfBMQDIyE0— Selçuk Bayraktar (@Selcuk) November 19, 2024 #BayraktarTB3 Anlık/SnapGece yaklaşma testleriNight approach tests TCG ANADOLU Mavi Vatan pic.twitter.com/uXDhwzGEaU— Selçuk Bayraktar (@Selcuk) November 7, 2024 More specific details about the new TB3 testing aboard Anadolu, including what degree of automation and/or autonomy was involved, remain limited. The TB3 flew for the first time last year and conducted its first land-based ski-jump takeoff test earlier this year. The drone is a navalized variant of the combat-proven TB2, which Ukrainian forces extensively employed in the opening phases of Russias all-out invasion. TB2s have also seen combat in Syria and Libya, as well as in fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenia. The Anadolus design is based on that of Spain’s Juan Carlos I amphibious assault ship and it features a large open flight deck with a ski-jump at the bow. The Turkish vessel also has a well-deck at the rear for launching and recovering landing craft, as well as spaces internally for accommodating tanks and other vehicles and ground personnel, to support traditional amphibious operations. The TCG Anadolu. Ozan Guzelce/via Getty Images In 2023, Turkish authorities announced plans to optimize the ships configuration to support drone operations. Modifications to support that shift in focus would include the addition of dedicated control stations and accompanying beyond-line-of-sight satellite communications terminals, a ‘roller system’ on the flight deck toward the bow to help launch uncrewed aircraft, an arresting gear system, and safety nets. Bayraktars videos do not appear to show the use of any launch or recovery systems on Anadolu as part of the latest TB3 testing, indicating those modifications, at least, are still to come. The TB3 landing on and taking off from Anadolu is still a significant achievement that puts Turkey one step closer to fielding an operational uncrewed naval aviation capability currently found in no other country. With an expected 1,000-mile-maximum range and 24-hour endurance, the drones are set to give the Turkish Navy a completely new way to project maritime power. The TB3s can be fitted with up to six underwing hardpoints capable of carrying small precision-guided missiles and bombs, as well as rockets and other munitions, along with a sensor turret containing electro-optical and infrared cameras underneath the central fuselage. A rendering of TB3 armed with various small precision-guided munitions. Baykar Flying from Anadolus deck, TB3s could conduct attacks at certain targets on land and at sea, as well as conduct surveillance and reconnaissance missions. The drones could also act as aerial network relay nodes and, if fitted with a radar of some kind, possibly even serve as airborne early warning platforms. Turkeys naval drone ambitions for Anadolu already look to go beyond the TB3. An example of Baykar’s jet-powered fighter-like Kizilelma drone was also loaded onto the ships flight deck for a ceremony marking its formal entry into service last year, as seen below. Kizilelma reflects a larger trend in increasingly advanced uncrewed aviation developments from the Turkish aviation sector that also includes Turkish Aircraft Industries (TAI) stealthy flying-wing ANKA-3 uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV). Serhat Cagdas/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images For Turkey, drones also offer a valuable domestic pathway to fielding fixed-wing naval aviation capabilities, in general. The Turkish governments ejection from the F-35 program over the countrys purchase of Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile systems in 2019 upended any near-term plans to acquire short-takeoff and vertical landing capable B variants for Anadolu. The S-400 deal and other factors led to a broader cooling of U.S.-Turkish relations that ended any discussion about acquisitions of ex-U.S. Marine Corps Harrier jump jets. There has been some talk in the past year about Turkey rejoining the F-35 program. Helicopters, including armed AH-1W Cobra and T129 types and anti-submarine warfare SH-60B Seahawks, are also expected to operate from Anadolus deck. Turkish officials pose on the flight deck of TCG Anadolu during a ceremony in 2023. A TB3 and Kizilelma drones, as well as AH-1 and SH-60 helicopters, are visible. Murat Kula/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images In addition, the TB3 testing aboard Anadolu is just one example of a still-growing push to field uncrewed naval aviation capabilities globally, as well as adapting big-deck amphibious warfare ships into the drone carrier role. China is making particularly significant strides in this regard, including in the development of flying wing UCAVs that can operate from carriers and other big-deck ships, as well as an entirely new class of super-sized amphibious assault ship. In the United Kingdom, the Royal Navy has shown its ability to launch and recover drones in the same general size class as the TB3, such as General Dynamics Mojave, from its carrier HMS Prince of Wales as part of efforts there to expand uncrewed naval aviation capabilities. Just last week, what General Atomics described as a Gray Eagle STOL drone successfully launched from South Koreas Dokdo amphibious assault ship as part of another demonstration, but recovered at a base on land. Yesterday, Gray Eagle STOL launched from the ROK helicopter ship Dokdo (deck length, 653ft/199m).GE STOL gets up so quick, we might launch it off surfboards next. pic.twitter.com/H8GUuzQPLT— C. Mark Brinkley (@cmarkbrinkley) November 13, 2024 General Atomics is also pitching a derivative of its MQ-9 Reaper that can operate from big-deck ships, as well as a carrier-capable member of its highly modular Gambit family of uncrewed aircraft. A rendering of a notional catapult-equipped HMS Prince of Wales with an air wing that includes carrier-capable Gambit 5s and MQ-9 Reaper variants. General Atomics A number of other countries are also actively looking to field fixed-wing naval drone capabilities or otherwise exploring doing so, and in many cases by leveraging existing or future big-deck amphibious assault ships. In many ways, the U.S. Navy has been lagging behind in such developments, with the MQ-25 Stingray tanker drone set to be its first operational advanced uncrewed carrier-based aircraft. The MQ-25 will have a secondary surveillance and reconnaissance capability, and there have been discussions about adding additional roles and missiles, including stand-off strike, in the future. The Navy is now in the process of installing new dedicated drone control centers on its carriers, which it says will help it realize its own larger uncrewed naval aviation plans. The service has a stated goal for its carrier air wings to eventually become at least 60% pilotless. With the successful demonstration of the TB3s ability to land on and take off from the Anadolu, Turkey still looks in line to be the first to have an operational drone carrier. Contact the author: joe@twz.com The post TB3 Operates From Turkey’s ‘Drone Carrier’ Amphibious Assault Ship For The First Time appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Air, Around The Globe, Big Deck Amphibious Assault Ships, Drones, Middle East, News & Features, Sea, Turkey, Unmanned] [Link to media]

— U.S.-Supplied ATACMS Missile Strike Inside Russia Have Begun

 

at 11/19/24 10:28am

Ukraine has used the U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) for the first time against a target inside Russia, according to U.S. officials, as well as military sources in Russia and Ukraine. The confirmation comes soon after Moscow warned that the use of Western-supplied long-range missiles by Ukraine against Russia could trigger a nuclear response after Russian nuclear war plans were updated. Early this morning, a large explosion tore through Russia’s 67th GRAU Arsenal, a critical ammunition storage facility in Bryansk Oblast, sending a fireball soaring hundreds of feet in the air.Ukrainian attack drones had been spotted in the area. pic.twitter.com/YhNWDIsqJe— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) November 19, 2024 This is allegedly the moment when ATACMS struck the 67th GRAU arsenal near Karachev. You can hear a lot submunition explosions, probably the M74 bomblets of the Block-1 (M39A) missile. pic.twitter.com/8RmKxYSvJ6— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) November 19, 2024 Detonations on the Russian ammunition depot in Karachev, Bryansk region of Russia, after alleged ATACMS strike this night. https://t.co/QncxKA8mu7 pic.twitter.com/SF9OJBT7cB— Special Kherson Cat (@bayraktar_1love) November 19, 2024 The ATACMS strike is said to have targeted a munitions storage facility near the town of Karachev in the Bryansk region of western Russia, early this morning. The target is around 70 miles from the Ukrainian border. The ATACMS short-range ballistic missiles can hit targets up to about 190 miles away, while earlier variants feature a shorter range. Videos showed a large fireball rising over the area, as well as the sounds of multiple smaller explosions, with the specific target said to be the 67th Arsenal of the Russian Main Missile and Artillery Directorate (GRAU). The approximate location of Karachev within the Bryansk region of western Russia. Google Earth “Indeed, this is the first time that ATACMS has been used to strike Russian territory. The strike was carried out on a facility in the Bryansk region, and it was successfully destroyed,” an unnamed Ukrainian military source told Ukrainian news agency RBC-Ukraine. Another Ukrainian official confirmed the use of ATACMS, speaking to the Washington Post on the condition of anonymity. Provided the Karachev depot was the target, this would suggest that indications Washington had limited the use of ATACMS to Russia’s Kursk region exclusively are erroneous — or otherwise that Ukraine decided to ignore that restriction. On the other hand, the Bryansk region does neighbor it and it’s almost certain that weapons stored in Karachev were being used to directly support the Russian counteroffensive in Kursk. Too good to be true. As always, yesterday’s news that Biden allows Ukraine to use US long-range missiles to hit targets deep in Russia turns out to be too good to be true. Axios reports that the US administration allows strikes only in Kursk region. These people… 1/ pic.twitter.com/YtqSVfJCHT— Tymofiy Mylovanov (@Mylovanov) November 18, 2024 There are also reports that the facility was struck by drones, including from the governor of Karachev, who reported that eight Ukrainian drones were shot down. Local authorities also reported a drone attack, according to Astra Press, an independent Russian news outlet on Telegram. A combined operation using ATACMS and one-way attack drones is certainly a possibility. The attack was confirmed by Andriy Kovalenko, head of Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation at the National Security and Defense Council. In a post on Telegram, Kovalenko said that the facility was used to store artillery ammunition, anti-aircraft missiles, air-to-ground guided weapons, and ammunition for multiple-launch rocket systems. He also said that drones were involved in the attack, apparently arriving ahead of ATACMS. Meanwhile, the Russian Ministry of Defense also claimed that it had found debris from ATACMS missiles close to a military facility in the Bryansk region, further claiming that, from a total of six such missiles fired by Ukraine, five were brought down by Russian air defenses, and the other was damaged. The Russian Ministry of Defense said that a small fire had resulted from the attack but there were no casualties or significant damage. A U.S. Army HIMARS launcher fires an ATACMS missile. U.S. Army A US Army HIMARS launcher fires an ATACMS missile. US Army These claims have not been independently verified, but, judging by the scale of the explosion seen in videos from the scene, the damage to the depot may well have been substantial. So far, no videos or photos have emerged showing ATACMS fragments in Bryansk, either on social media or from official Russian channels. This is not the first time that this munitions storage facility has come under attack, with at least three such raids having been reported since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine was launched in February 2022. In the past, there were also Ukrainian reports that the depot was being used to store arms delivered to Russia by North Korea. Undated footage showing ATACMS in action in Ukraine: Launch of a pair of ATACMS missiles somewhere in Ukraine pic.twitter.com/g0D38Z5ecU— Special Kherson Cat (@bayraktar_1love) November 19, 2024 As we reported previously, U.S. President Joe Biden only this weekend approved Ukraine’s use of U.S.-supplied long-range weapons to strike targets within Russia’s borders. Yesterday, President-elect Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor nominee criticized the Biden administration for the policy shift, with Florida congressman Mike Waltz describing it as “another step up the escalation ladder.” You can read more about U.S. and Russian officials’ responses to the ATACMS decision here. Next U.S. NatSec advisor @michaelgwaltz in an interview with FOX reacted to reports about Biden lifting restrictions on ATACMS for Ukraine: "Its another step up the escalation ladder. And nobody knows where this is going. North Korea is unleashing ballistic missiles,… pic.twitter.com/YJ5gmbLcMX— Ostap Yarysh (@OstapYarysh) November 18, 2024 After the policy change was announced, Russia issued a series of threats, although talk of any kind of military response had been expressed in only vague terms. Today, however, Moscow has said that the use of missiles like ATACMS against Russia could lead to a nuclear response, as part of a newly unveiled nuclear doctrine. Speaking at his regular daily press briefing, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Ukraine’s use of Western-supplied conventional missiles against Russia could be met by Russian use of nuclear weapons — although the kinds of targets were not specified. Peskov said that the Kremlin considers the use of nuclear weapons to be an extreme measure, but that updating the doctrine was a necessary response to the current political situation. The latest nuclear doctrine, which was formally approved by Russian President Vladimir Putin before the U.S. election earlier this month, features an expanded list of criteria that could warrant a nuclear response. They now include “aggression by any non-nuclear state, but with the participation or support of a nuclear country,” which would appear to be a very direct reference to Ukraine and its Western backers. Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin in Moscow on Nov. 18, 2024. Photo by Vyacheslav PROKOFYEV / POOL / AFP VYACHESLAV PROKOFYEV “In addition, a nuclear response from Russia is possible in the event of a critical threat to its sovereignty, even with conventional weapons, in the event of an attack on Belarus as a member of the Union State, [or] in the event of a massive launch of military aircraft, cruise missiles, drones, other aircraft and their crossing the Russian border,” the document added. The updated Russian doctrine document is an astounding read. It is so broad and detailed that one has to wonder what it means. Why not just publish a one-pager declaring: “The President can authorize the use of nuclear weapons in any scenario deemed necessary.” — Hans Kristensen (also on Bluesky) (@nukestrat) November 19, 2024 This is not the first time that Russia has issued nuclear threats within the context of the war in Ukraine. It has also undertaken tactical nuclear drills on its own territory and in Belarus. Earlier this year, leaked documents also appeared to indicate that Russia’s threshold for employing tactical nuclear weapons is significantly lower than previously thought. Ammunition storage sites were among the likely ATACMS targets that we identified within Russian borders. This is especially true in the case of the versions of ATACMS with cluster warheads, which deliver hundreds of bomblets over a wide area, although the unitary warhead version would also be ideal for penetrating hardened bunkers in which weapons might be stored. Other likely targets include airfields, logistics nodes, supply lines, equipment storage sites, and large gatherings of troops. Any of these — and more — may well be the next to be hit, while the attack on Karachev suggests that the next Ukrainian ATACMS strikes may well target areas outside of the critical Kursk region. U.S. to allow Ukraine to use long-range weapons inside Russia, NYT reports. This could be a game-changer for Ukraine, which would allow them to challenge Russian logistics supply lines and air dominance.Below is a map of potential targets from ISW https://t.co/7nqhakKpqi pic.twitter.com/wF23YHm87l— Jane Lytvynenko (@JaneLytv) November 17, 2024 For Russia, the arrival of ATACMS strikes within its own borders is another headache. Already, the presence of these weapons in Ukraine has pushed back Russian airpower and at the same time put many more Russian air defense sites at risk. This same pattern will now be extended into Russia itself. With much uncertainty ahead of Trump’s new presidency and the possibility that U.S. arms deliveries to Ukraine will be significantly reduced, or perhaps cut altogether, Kyiv is very likely to try and make the best use of its limited ATACMS stocks in the next two months. Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com The post U.S.-Supplied ATACMS Missile Strike Inside Russia Have Begun appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: Land, Around The Globe, Europe, MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), News & Features, Nuclear, Nuclear Policy, Russia, Tactical Ballistic Missiles, Ukraine] [Link to media]

— Biden ATACMS Decision Spurs Russian Threats, Hope and Derision Elsewhere

 

at 11/18/24 4:57pm

President-elect Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor nominee criticized the Biden administration for easing restrictions on Ukraine’s use of U.S.-donated Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) short-range ballistic missiles. In a major policy shift, the Biden administration on Sunday said Ukraine is now allowed to use ATACMS, although limited to strikes inside Russia’s Kursk region. That move comes two months before Trump takes office. TWZ readers can get up to speed with the news about Bidens long-range weapons policy shift in our recent report here. Mike Waltz, currently a Florida congressman, also told Fox News that he was not briefed before the policy change became public. “Its another step up the escalation ladder,” he said about allowing Ukraine to strike targets in Kursk with ATACMS. “And nobody knows where this is going.” “North Korea is unleashing ballistic missiles, artillery, now tens of thousands of soldiers” into Ukraine, he continued. “The administration responds by lifting this restriction. North Korea sends more soldiers. South Korea is now saying it may get engaged. China is buying oil from Iran for pennies on the dollar. Iran is using that to send missiles and drones into Russia that is then hitting Ukrainian critical infrastructure.” Next U.S. NatSec advisor @michaelgwaltz in an interview with FOX reacted to reports about Biden lifting restrictions on ATACMS for Ukraine: "Its another step up the escalation ladder. And nobody knows where this is going. North Korea is unleashing ballistic missiles,… pic.twitter.com/YJ5gmbLcMX— Ostap Yarysh (@OstapYarysh) November 18, 2024 Up until now, the Biden administration has refused to allow Ukraine to use ATACMS inside Russia, fearing both antagonizing Moscow and running through U.S. stocks of those weapons ahead of a potential conflict in the Pacific. The Biden administration move “is a tactical development,” Waltz posited. “President Trump is talking grand strategy here. How do we get both sides to the table to end this war? Whats the framework for a deal and whos sitting at that table? Those are the things that President Trump, of course, will be working with.” Trump has promised to quickly end the war, though no details have yet been provided. As we have previously reported, it remains to be seen just how the president-elect will deal with the situation. You can read more in our deep dive here. What could Trumps return to the White House mean for Ukraine? Expert forecasts vary from concern about abandonment to cautious optimism. https://t.co/pSrcGNtr2e— Howard Altman (@haltman) November 8, 2024 Russian President Vladimir Putin has yet to respond, but the Kremlins spokesman said the move adds fuel to the fire. “This is a qualitatively new round of tension and a qualitatively new situation in terms of U.S. involvement in this conflict,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists in a Monday briefing. “It’s clear that the outgoing administration in Washington intends to take steps to, they’ve said so, to continue to add fuel to the fire and to further provoke the level of tension.” Putin has previously threatened to supply weapons of the same type to some regions of the world where they can be used to launch strikes on sensitive facilities of the countries that do it to Russia?” Russian State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin issued an ominous warning. “On Bidens decision to allow Ukraine to strike deep into our country with U.S. missiles,” he wrote on Telegram. “If this happens, Russia will be forced to respond. How is a question for the Ministry of Defense. It is possible that new weapons systems will be used, which the Russian Federation has not used on Ukrainian territory. He did not specify what kind of weapon, though Russias nuclear arsenal is obviously the most concerning. Regardless, Volodin said that while the ATACMS will cause damageit will not change the situation on the battlefield. I emphasize this. But it will only worsen the fate of Ukraine and its future. And it will finally destroy Russian-American relations. State Duma speaker Volodin said that Russia could respond to Western long-range missiles with weapons systems that it has not yet “used on Ukrainian territory”“The use of new weapons systems, which the Russian Federation has not used on the territory of Ukraine, cannot be ruled… pic.twitter.com/dGSoX8XFnD— NEXTA (@nexta_tv) November 18, 2024 Russian media offered sentiments ranging from “Biden is moving the world closer to a catastrophe” to “This is not something out of the blue and invincible, according to BBCs Russian editor Steve Rosenberg. Russian media reaction to President Biden allowing Ukraine to strike inside Russia with long-range missiles ranges from “Biden is moving the world closer to a catastrophe” to “This is not something out of the blue and invincible.” #ReadingRussia pic.twitter.com/GsHXFX5BaI— Steve Rosenberg (@BBCSteveR) November 18, 2024 Josep Borrell, the EUs foreign policy chief, welcomed Bidens ATACMS decision. He has repeatedly urged member states, in particular Germany, a leading military donor, to lift these restrictions. However, his attempts to craft an EU-wide position have gone unheaded, leaving each country to act unilaterally. You know my position, Borrell told reporters on Monday. Ukraine should be able to use the arms we provide to them not only to stop the arrows but also to hit the archers. I continue believing this has to be done. EU’s Josep Borrell: “Ukraine should be allowed to strike inside Russia with EU-supplied arms. It’s not just about stopping the arrows but hitting the archers.” He expressed hope that EU members will support this during upcoming discussions.https://t.co/9id5UCDLMU— NOELREPORTS (@NOELreports) November 18, 2024 A since-revised story in the French Le Figaro media outlet on Sunday claimed that both France and Britain signed off on the use of their long-range weapons in Russia. That claim no longer appears. On Monday, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot neither confirmed nor denied whether Ukraine had been granted permission to use SCALP-EG air-launched cruise missiles for strikes deep into Russian territory. Speaking to journalists ahead of a European Union ministers meeting in Brussels on Monday, Barrot referenced France’s previous stance on relaxing restrictions, according to Reuters. We openly said this was an option that we would consider if it was to allow to strike a target from where Russia is currently aggressing Ukrainian territory. So nothing new on the other side, Barrot said. The U.K. has yet to allow Ukraine to use its similar Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles inside Russia, the BBC reported. Meanwhile, a former high-ranking Ukrainian official criticized the Biden administration for limiting the use of ATACMS to Russias Kursk region. I think the weakness of the Biden administration in facing up to Putin is the key reason why we are entering the third year of war, tweeted Tymofiy Mylovanov, Ukraines former Minister of Economics. Ukrainians could have stopped Putin in 2022 had Biden not hesitated to provide weapons and allow strikes he is only now authorizing. Too good to be true. As always, yesterday’s news that Biden allows Ukraine to use US long-range missiles to hit targets deep in Russia turns out to be too good to be true. Axios reports that the US administration allows strikes only in Kursk region. These people… 1/ pic.twitter.com/YtqSVfJCHT— Tymofiy Mylovanov (@Mylovanov) November 18, 2024 Donald Trump Jr. derided the outgoing Biden administration as imbeciles for easing restrictions on ATACMS just two months before his father takes office again. The Military Industrial Complex seems to want to make sure they get World War 3 going before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives, he tweeted. Gotta lock in those $Trillions. Life be damned!!! Imbeciles! The Military Industrial Complex seems to want to make sure they get World War 3 going before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives. Gotta lock in those $Trillions. Life be damned!!! Imbeciles! https://t.co/ZzfwnhBxRh— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) November 17, 2024 Allowing Ukraine to use ATACMS in Kursk is the latest in a series of iterative steps the Biden administration has taken when it comes to the use of long-range weapons on Russian soil. Back in May, Biden allowed Ukraine to use M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, or HIMARS, with a range of about 50 miles, against targets inside Russia bordering Kharkiv Oblast. It was in response to a Russian counteroffensive in that area. Ukraine has also been using U.S.-donated Joint Direct Attack Munition-Extended Range (JDAM-ER) and Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) precision-guided bombs, as well as French-donated AASM-250 Hammer rocket-assisted bombs in Kursk. As we noted yesterday, Bidens ATACMS decision was a response to the presence of North Korean troops in Kursk to help Russia push Ukraine out of its three-month-old salient there. Holding on to Kursk is also critical, especially now, as it is seen as a key bargaining chip. With the new administration taking its own approach to the war, an attempt to negotiate a deal is now rapidly approaching on the horizon. Losing Kursk now would mean Ukraines haggling position would be significantly weaker. One fear is that Putin will lash out regardless. The policy shift runs the risk of triggering a sharp increase in retaliatory sabotage, such as cyber and arson attacks on Britain and its European NATO partners, The Guardian argued. The Latest On the battlefield, Russian troops are continuing to advance near two key cities in eastern Ukraine, but are making little progress in taking back territory in its Kursk region. In particular, Russian troops are pressing toward Kupiansk, a logistics hub along the Oskil River in Kharkiv Oblast as well as Pokrovsk in Donetsk Oblast. However, as the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) argues, Ukraine’s continued defense of Pokrovsk bodes well for the future. “Russian forces have not taken Pokrovsk after eight months of grinding but consistent advances in western Donetsk Oblast. Ukrainian defensive operations, based on the integration of successful Ukrainian drone innovators and operators with ground forces combined with constraints on Russias strategic and operational-level manpower and materiel reserves have forced the Russian military command to abandon its original campaign design of a frontal assault on Pokrovsk,” ISW suggested. “Ukraine’s ability to stave off the seizure of Pokrovsk thus far and force the Russian military to divert its efforts to advances in arguably the least operationally significant sector of the frontline is a positive indicator of Ukraine’s ability to continue fighting this war despite the challenges Ukraine faces and the setbacks it has suffered.” NEW: Ukrainian drone operations continue to play a critical role in constraining Russian mechanized maneuver and preventing Russian forces from fully exploiting Ukraines ongoing manpower constraints.Special Report: The Ukrainian Defense of Pokrovsk Has Compelled Russia to… pic.twitter.com/EDfHfLTVup— Institute for the Study of War (@TheStudyofWar) November 18, 2024 Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky visited Pokrovsk on Monday. He spoke with troops there and awarded medals. Pokrovsk has been under intense pressure by Russian forces who have advanced to within about six miles east of that city. President Zelensky visited the frontline city of Pokrovsk. He met with the 25th Separate Airborne Brigade defending the city. He talked to the defenders and presented them with awards."This is a tense area. Only thanks to the strength of the soldiers, the East is not… pic.twitter.com/9u45qHK1aa— NOELREPORTS (@NOELreports) November 18, 2024 Zelensky also visited Kupiansk, a city in Kharkiv Oblast that has come under increasing pressure from Russian forces. Today on the frontline. Currently in Kupiansk, after visiting Pokrovsk. I spent time with our brigades, congratulating the men and women—our warriors—on Sergeant’s Day.Sergeants are the backbone of our military, essential for the effective work of officers and entire units. I… pic.twitter.com/74rCyPVoHl— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) November 18, 2024 Low-level Russian military commanders in Kursk misrepresented their progress there, resulting in increased losses, Euromaidan Press reported. The commanders “lied about the success of the assaults on Malaya Lokhnya and the frontline changes, which led to catastrophic results for the next stage of their planned operation,” the news outlet claimed. “This false narrative led to a complete lack of situational awareness on the battlefield. In reality, the Russians did not control these settlements.” Instead, “100 Russian soldiers from the broken units were actually encircled with no chance to break out,” Euromaidan Press continued. “In an attempt to secretly salvage the situation and align with the reports submitted to higher command, Russian commanders ordered repeated waves of assaults.” The War Zone cannot independently verify these claims. Russian low-level commanders reported false claims to their military leadership about capturing four strategic villages in Kursk Oblast, which resulted in two Russian units becoming trapped without supplies or reinforcement options. https://t.co/cgzHVEnqGY— Euromaidan Press (@EuromaidanPress) November 18, 2024 Russia continues to suffer heavy losses in its effort to dislodge Ukraine from the Kursk region. The following video showcases a compilation of Russian vehicles destroyed by mines there. The offensive of the russian armed forces in the Kursk region during which 17 units of enemy military equipment were blown up on mines. pic.twitter.com/cm8QwAdL8q— ✙△ Albina Fella △✙ (@albafella1) November 18, 2024 Last month was the deadliest of the war for Russia, according to the U.Ks Defense Intelligence directorate. The average daily number of Russian troops killed and wounded was 1,354, it stated, citing Ukrainian Armed Forces General Staff statistics. For the month, there were 41,900 casualties, eclipsing the previous record of 39,100 from May. November is off to an even bloodier start, with an average of 1,498 killed and wounded as of Nov. 12. Its worth noting that casualty numbers vary widely depending on the source and The War Zone cannot independently verify them. Latest Defence Intelligence update on the situation in Ukraine 18 November 2024.Find out more about Defence Intelligences use of language: https://t.co/OhCoylRoai #StandWithUkraine pic.twitter.com/wxoSuand2m— Ministry of Defence (@DefenceHQ) November 18, 2024 A day after launching a massive strike against Ukraines power infrastructure, Russia attacked Odesa. The missile strike killed at least eight and wounded at least 18 according to local officials. Russia has been saving cruise missiles to carry out its winter campaign of destruction against Ukraines power and heating infrastructure, as well as other targets. The only way to truly stop this terror is to eliminate Russia’s ability to launch attacks. And this is absolutely realistic.Today, Russia struck Odesa with a missile—deliberately targeting a residential area. As a result of this barbaric act, innocent lives were lost, and many… pic.twitter.com/5Isl7F3hxV— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) November 18, 2024 8 people were killed and 18 were injured as a result of the Russian strike on Odesa, one child also injured, — OVA pic.twitter.com/ZHwPnNC42u— The Ukrainian Review (@UkrReview) November 18, 2024 The video below shows one of those missiles being shot down. The moment Ukraines air defense shot down a Russian missile in the Odesa region. Locals captured footage of the falling debris. pic.twitter.com/K8zlNPhoGb— NOELREPORTS (@NOELreports) November 18, 2024 Intense volleys of anti-aircraft fire by Ukrainian air defense units were seen in a video of a Nov. 15 Russian attack on Odesa. #NEW —Moments of Ukrainian anti-aircraft guns in Odessa countering a swarm attack by Russian Geran-2 drones uanow pic.twitter.com/V3rhdCO9S8— UK R REPORT (@UKR_Report) November 15, 2024 Video emerged on social media of Sundays massive attack across Ukraine. The one below shows the moment of impact of a missile on the Kremenchuk Hydroelectric Power Station. Russian missile strike hits Kremenchuk hydroelectric power station in Ukraine. pic.twitter.com/cC41uJoUR2— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 17, 2024 Some of the Kh-101 air-launched cruise missiles used in Sunday’s missile strike were equipped with Soviet R-95-300 engines instead of standard Russian TRDD-50A engines, the Ukrainian Colonel of the General Staff Telegram channel reported. “This is the first recorded case of such a symbiosis of a modern cruise missile of the Russian Federation and an outdated Soviet engine,” Colonel of the General Staff claimed. “Given that the Russian Federation does not manufacture them, there is a possibility that they are taken from old Soviet stocks or the remnants of Kh-55, Kh-55SM cruise missiles are disassembled. The production of subsonic rocket engines in the Russian Federation “can be a kind of bottleneck (weak spot) in the entire chain of rocket production, and be a restraining factor in the continued increase in production volumes,” the Telegram channel postulated. “Previously, the R-95-300 engines, in addition to its native Kh-55(SM) cruise missile, were also seen in almost all discovered Kh-59 guided air missiles.” Some Russian Kh-101 cruise missiles in recent strikes used old Soviet R-95-300 engines instead of standard Russian TRDD-50A engines.These engines are no longer manufactured, and must have been old Soviet stocks or scavenged from disassembled Kh-55/55SM cruise missiles. pic.twitter.com/aKWFfZJwlB— Roy (@GrandpaRoy2) November 18, 2024 The U.K. Defense Intelligence directorate said two Russian Gepard-class frigates, Tatarstan and Dagestan, were damaged in a Ukrainian drone attack on the port of Kaspiysk on Nov. 6. The operation also reportedly damaged smaller Project 21631 vessels, the U.K. intelligence officials claimed. This was Ukraine’s first strike against Russia’s Caspian Flotilla. You can read more about that in our story about the initial attack here. Latest Defence Intelligence update on the situation in Ukraine 15 November 2024.Find out more about Defence Intelligences use of language: https://t.co/m302tHOEsf #StandWithUkraine pic.twitter.com/9ul3NOEkvY— Ministry of Defence (@DefenceHQ) November 15, 2024 Ukraine’s defense minister said the country is ramping up its production of long-range strike weapons. “Today, we are increasing the production of Ukrainian missiles,” Rustem Umerov said on Telegram. “The first 100 rockets of this year have already been produced. Serial production of R-360 ‘Neptune’ cruise missiles with improvements for hitting targets at longer distances has been successfully scaled up.” In addition, “new drone missiles are also being developed, in particular, ‘Palyanytsia,’ which is an example of successful cooperation between the state and the private sector. We also work in this direction with foreign partners.” Umerov noted that April 13, 2022, marked a turning point for Ukraine’s missile industry. That’s when “the Neptune missile complex destroyed the flagship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, the cruiser Moskva. It became a historic moment and demonstrated the strength of our national missile armament.” You can read more about that in our reporting at the time here. Minister @rustem_umerov:We are now scaling up Ukrainian missile production. The first 100 missiles have already been produced this year. Serial production of R-360 Neptune cruise missiles has been successfully expanded, with upgrades enabling strikes at longer distances.:… pic.twitter.com/RGzPXrDugW— Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) November 18, 2024 North Korea provided Russia with 50 170mm M1989 Koksan self-propelled howitzers and 20 240mm multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS) capable of firing standard rockets and guided missiles, the Financial Times reported. That confirms a story we reported last week about the appearance of Koksans in Russia. CONFIRMED: The information in the news we reported 2 days ago has been confirmed. North Korea supplied Russia with 50 170mm M1989 Koksan self-propelled howitzers and 20 240mm MLRS capable of firing standard rockets and guided missiles.Financial Timeshttps://t.co/4CX79xbyYO pic.twitter.com/NZrnjSM9vG— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 16, 2024 Russian engineers are “manufacturing hundreds of decoy drones meant to overwhelm Ukrainian defenses as they try to protect against a horrific new weapon,” an Associated Press investigation has found. The plant at Russia’s Alabuga Special Economic Zone “recently started churning out thermobaric drones alongside the decoys,” the investigation found. Also known as a fuel-air explosive (FAE) weapon, it is in the same class as certain U.S. weapons, like the AGM-114N Hellfire missile, with a special ‘augmented’ warhead, or the BLU-118/B that was used against cave complexes in Afghanistan. Essentially, this type of weapon works in two stages, using a fuel mixture scattered as an aerosol cloud and an ignition detonation to ignite the cloud. It generates a high-temperature explosion that creates a much more powerful blast wave over a longer duration than a conventional condensed explosive. It can kill people in gruesome ways even if they are located inside buildings, caves, and bunkers. “Russia came up with the plan for decoys in late 2022 and codenamed it Operation False Target,” a person familiar with Russia’s drone production told AP.  “The idea was to launch armed drones along with dozens of decoys, sometimes stuffed with rags or foam, and indistinguishable on radar from those carrying real bombs, the wire service stated. Ukrainian forces must make split-second decisions about how to expend scarce resources to save lives and preserve critical infrastructure.” Last week, we noted that Russia is using its Gerbera drones as decoys in Shahed-136 attack waves to fool Ukrainian air defense and force it to expend interceptors. NEW: A secret factory in central Russia is producing hundreds of decoy drones to overwhelm Ukrainian defences. Russian false target plan began in late 2022 and is called Operation False Target.Source: AP pic.twitter.com/Xv3kCVsgoH— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 17, 2024 The Gerbera drones contain at least nearly 30 foreign components, according to the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence Directorate (GUR). Research on Gerbera drones that have been shot down “proved that the Russians make them according to the Chinese prototype using foreign components imported from China,” GUR claimed on its Telegram channel. The drone is made by the Chinese model aircraft manufacturer Skywalker Technology Co., Ltd., which also produces fuselages and organizes the delivery of kits to Russia,” GUR added. “Delivery is carried out through third-party companies.” In addition, the barrage versions of the UAV are guided to targets by an operator similar to the way first-person view drones work, GUR stated. The Gerbera is equipped with “a Chinese camera with a three-axis suspension Topotek KHY10S90 and a Xingkai Tech Mesh Network XK-F358 modem.” It’s powered by “a DLE60 engine manufactured by the Chinese Mile Hao Xiang Technology Co, Ltd,” GUR added. “In the summer of 2024, this company came under US sanctions for supplies to Russia.” According to GUR’s War Sanctions database of Russian weapons containing foreign components, there are 29 in the Gerbera drones. Earlier this month, we reported that GUR claimed it found dozens of Western-made components in the Russian S-70 Okhotnik-B (Hunter-B) flying wing unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV) downed last month in a case of friendly fire.  The presence of foreign components in Russian weapons has been established since the start of the war as commonplace, as we have previously reported. The Defence Intelligence of Ukraine has investigated the components of the Russian Gerbera drone, which can imitate the Shahed-136/Geranj-2 to overload Ukrainian air defense.This is another Russian drone made of cheap materials, such as plywood and foam. In addition, it… pic.twitter.com/KoaS4r3y3v— WarTranslated (Dmitri) (@wartranslated) November 18, 2024 The European Union is considering additional sanctions against China for providing Russia with Garipya attack drones. We have had reports from intelligence sources on the existence of a factory inside China producing drones which are shipped to Russia, a senior EU official told Politico. The official said that the EU has to determine whether Beijing knew about the firms activities and whether the production of drones amounted to direct cooperation on military equipment between China and Russia. One option being examined is adding more Chinese companies to a list of third-country firms facing EU sanctions, a second EU diplomat told Politico. NEW: China has sent weapons to Russia for the first time for use against Ukraine. The EU is preparing sanctions.Source: FAZ pic.twitter.com/Rwvs2t6c0P— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 15, 2024 Another damaged and abandoned U.S.-donated M1 Abrams main battle tank was reportedly recovered by Russian troops. Out of 31 donated, Ukraine has previously seen at least eight destroyed, one damaged, seven damaged and abandoned, and one captured, according to the Oryx open-source tracking group. Those figures could be higher because Oryx only tabulates losses for which it has visual confirmation. The Russians are evacuating another captured M1A1SA-UKR Abrams tank to the rear. This one visibly damaged. pic.twitter.com/on5J0mWTmB— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (BlueSky too) (@Archer83Able) November 15, 2024 In what may prove to be one of the most iconic images captured during Russias all-out war, there are claims that a Russian Lancet loitering munition is seen seconds before striking Ukrainian troops. There are claims, however, that the image is faked, sparking a debate you can read about in the following thread. Pic is fakeThey took the pickups pic and added a fake Lancet, in a very bad wayFrom the video the Lancet have the right size and totally different trajectory! pic.twitter.com/ZNMEcaqbbw— Tin_85 (@Tin__85) November 16, 2024 Ukraine reportedly launched Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (GMLRS) munitions strike fired by the M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, or HIMARS or an M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) provided to Ukraine against Russian positions. They then fired another volley at troops coming to evacuate them. You can see the strikes in the following drone video. Devastating Ukrainian HIMARS strikes on Russian forces in Zaporizhia region.The evacuation crews were are also attacked at the end. pic.twitter.com/oUtFDSxfHK— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 16, 2024 Germanys Quantum Systems, whose Vector eVTOL UAV has been deployed by the hundreds in Ukraine, recently gave a rare look inside its Ukrainian Service, Support, Training, and Logistics Center (SSTLC) and spare parts production. The German drone manufacturer Quantum Systems, whose Vector eVTOL UAV has been deployed by the hundreds in #Ukraine, has given a rare insight into their Ukrainian Service, Support, Training, and Logistics Center (SSTLC) as well as (spare parts) production. For those interested pic.twitter.com/JDuN0yCRh9— German Aid to Ukraine (@deaidua) November 17, 2024 What may be the first duel between net-throwing drones was captured on video. While both sides are using drones that fire nets to capture opposing drones, this may be the first time such weapons were used against each other. The DoD is looking at a similar system for domestic drone defense. Drone wars: Russian net-throwing drone intercepts Ukrainian net-throwing drone.Perhaps the first duel of its kind. pic.twitter.com/mQHCv3e5Z6— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 17, 2024 A Russian Orthodox priest reportedly warned troops about the North Korean soldiers sent to help fight Ukraine. Our Korean comrades arrived from distant lands who dont believe in God, said the priest, according to a machine translation. They brought some kind of illness with them God deniers with atheist sins. On Sunday, Ukrainian Lt. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov, head of GUR, told us that there were 12,000 North Korean troops in Russias Kursk region as part of a massive effort to push Ukrainian troops out of the salient they established there three months ago. Orthodox priest complaining about the "Godless" North Koreans in his sermon to Russian soldiers."God is punishing us for accepting them in our home." pic.twitter.com/8KTlhtgGHm— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 18, 2024 And finally, Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer may have provided Santa with night-vision capabilities, but the governor of Russia’s Magadan region claims pelts from those animals will help Russian soldiers hide from Ukrainian thermal imaging. In addition to providing medical devices, equipment and sweets, Sergey Nosov promised to send “reindeer skins for disguise on the front lines,” the Russian Argumenti news outlet reported. The properties of the skin and wool of the reindeer “allow you to hide from thermal imaging equipment and shelter, and also retain heat in the cold season,” Nosov said, according to the publication. Whether reindeer skin can outright fool thermal imaging systems is unknown and a claim we cannot verify at this time, although a heavy hide should be able to mask some degree of thermal signature. The governor of Magadan region of Russia will send reindeer skins to the front to camouflage Russian soldiers from surveillance drones. (Not a joke) pic.twitter.com/99rYtzUKz8— Special Kherson Cat (@bayraktar_1love) November 18, 2024 Thats it for now. Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com The post Biden ATACMS Decision Spurs Russian Threats, Hope and Derision Elsewhere appeared first on The War Zone.

[Category: News & Features, Around The Globe, Europe, Land, MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), Russia, Tactical Ballistic Missiles, Ukraine] [Link to media]

As of 11/22/24 7:05pm. Last new 11/22/24 5:58pm.