NAVY NEWS WEEK 9-3

27 February 2018

No Chinese warship movement detected near crisis-hit Maldives: According to sources, the Chinese naval movement, which was routine in nature, and through Sunda strait and to the north-west of Australia was approximately 2500 nautical miles away from Maldives. By: Express Web Desk | Updated: February 20, 2018 6:55 pm

The latest development comes amid reports of Chinese naval movement in the Indian Ocean. (Source: AP)

No Chinese warship movement has been detected near the crisis-ridden Maldives, Indian Navy sources have said amid reports of Chinese naval movement in the Indian Ocean. “We have a very robust surveillance system in Indian Ocean region, which is supported by mission-based deployment in place since July 2017,” a Navy spokesperson stated. According to sources, the Chinese naval movement was routine in nature and was through Sunda strait to the north-west of Australia. Sources said the Chinese naval movement took place approximately 2500 nautical miles away from the Maldives. Indian Navy has two detachments of Advanced Light Helicopters (SAR variant) while the Indian Coast Guard has a Dornier aircraft positioned in the Maldives. This means that more than three dozen Indian Navy personnel are present in the country at any given time, sources added. According to sources, the Chinese naval movement was routine in nature and was through Sunda strait to the north-west of Australia. Sources said the Chinese naval movement took place approximately 2500 nautical miles away from the Maldives Meanwhile, the Navy is also conducting the month-long Exercise Pashchim Lehar in the Arabian Sea which is witnessing participation of more than 40 ships. Response from the Navy came after reports emerged that eleven Chinese warships have sailed into the East Indian Ocean this month amid a constitutional crisis in the Maldives, which was under a state of emergency. According to Chinese news portal sina.com.cn, a fleet of and at least one frigate, a 30,000-tone amphibious transport dock and three support tankers entered the Indian Ocean. However, the report did not link the deployment to the crisis in the Maldives or giving a reason. “If you look at warships and other equipment, the gap between the Indian and Chinese navy is not large,” the news portal further said. The rivalry between and China for influence in the Maldives intensified after President Abdulla Yameen agreed to Beijing’s Belt and Road initiative to build trade and transport links across Asia and beyond. India, which has had longstanding political and security ties to the island, has sought to push back against China’s expanding presence in the overwhelmingly Muslim country of 400,000 people. In the wake of the Maldives crisis, China had advised its citizens to avoid visiting the Maldives, famous its luxury hotels, scuba-diving resorts and limpid tropical seas, until political tensions subside. Source: http://indianexpress.com

Duterte aide Bong Go faces Senate probe on Navy ship deal President Rodrigo Duterte's long-time aide, Christopher "Bong" Go, appeared before a Senate investigation on Monday on the military's purchase of Navy ships from South Korea. Go, who serves as Special Assistant to the President, allegedly intervened in the selection of combat management systems that act as the brains of the 2 frigates. He has denied the charge. "Ang dadalhin po ni SAP Bong Go doon ay katotohanan lang. Isisiwalat niya ang lahat, wala kaming itinatago," Presidential Spokesman Harry Roque told DZMM. (The only thing that SAP Bong Go will bring there is the truth. He will divulge everything. We have nothing to hide.) Roque said Go had nothing to do with the frigate acquisition project, which started during the time of former President Benigno Aquino III. The purchase of the 2 missile-capable ships had continued under the Duterte administration, which signed the notice of award to winning bidder, South Korean firm Hyundai Heavy Industries, in August 2016. Rappler and Philippine Daily Inquirer had reported that Go supposedly gave Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana in January 2017 a white paper endorsing another South Korean company, Hanwha, to provide the CMS. The white paper supposedly criticized the Navy’s choice of CMS provider, Dutch firm Thales Tacticos, as it praised the capabilities of the Korean firm. Lorenzana reportedly gave the white paper to then Navy Chief, Ronald Joseph Mercado, with a note saying the document came from Go and that a rebuttal or report must be submitted to the President addressing the concerns raised. The Rappler report said that a week after Go gave Lorenzana the letter, the presidential aide's office sent a letter to then Frigate Project Technical Working Group chairman Commodore Robert Empedrad, inviting him to Malacañang to discuss the CMS selection. Go, however, said he did not know about the invitation supposedly signed by his Undersecretary Christopher Lao. Empedrad submitted a report to Malacañang on January 2017 vouching for the efficiency of the Thales Tacticos CMS, Rappler reported. The discussion over the selection of the CMS supposedly dragged and delayed the frigate project, culminating in the firing of then Navy chief Mercado, who preferred the Dutch system. source: ABS-CBN News

Nevsky Shipyard prepares the Akademik Pashin to test underway replenishment capabilities Nevsky Shipbuilding and Shiprepair Yard (Nevsky Shipyard) is preparing the tanker Akademik Pashin which is undergoing dock-side trials for commissioning of a unique system of underway ship-to-ship transfer of cargo, the shipbuilding company said. The tanker is built under the state contract for the Russian Ministry of Defense. The vessel was designed by naval architecture and marine engineering firm SpetsSudoProekt. General characteristics: length overall: 130 m, beam overall: about 21 m, draft overall: about 7.0 m, 7.0 m draft DWT - about 9000 tonnes, maximum speed - 16 knots, endurance - 60 days, crew - 24. The vessel was de intended for receiving, storing, transport and transfer of liquid bulk cargo, including diesel fuel, fuel oil, aviation kerosene, motor oil, potable water; and of dry cargo, including food, skipper and technical equipment. Cruising range is unlimited in accordance with the class of RS (Russian Maritime Register of Shipping). Shlisselburg, St. Petersburg based Nevsky Shipbuilding and Shiprepair Yard on the left bank of the Neva River. The shipyard is an oldest waterborne transport enterprises in the North-West of Russia engaged in shipbuilding since 1952. The enterprise specializes in the construction of different types of sea-going and inland vessels and ship repair and conversion. NSS Shipyards’s is capable of launching and drydocking of 150-meter-long ships with dock weight of up to 3800 tonnes. source : portnews

Spanish frigate to lead Mediterranean operation Sea Guardian Spanish Navy frigate ESPS Navarra will be leading a three-ship NATO group during the Mediterranean Sea operation Sea Guardian, the Spanish defense ministry announced.

Photo : Michael Cassar ©

In addition to the Spanish Santa Maria-class frigate, the group will include Belgian frigate BNS Louise Marie and an Italian Navy ship. The three ships are set to meet up in the Port of Cartagena during a port visit which will take place between February 9 and 13. After they get underway, the ships will spend some three weeks conducting focused security patrols in the Mediterranean Sea. Operation Sea Guardian in general focuses on maritime situational awareness, counter-terrorism and regional capacity building. ESPS Navarra (F-85) is the fifth unit of the six Santa María-class frigates built in Ferrol and delivered to the Spanish Navy in 1993. She has a complement of 200 people and is equipped with the necessary sensors and weapons to operate as a blue water escort. Source: Maasmond Maritime

HII wins $1.43bn contract to build US Navy’s 13th San Antonio-class ship Huntington Ingalls Industries’ (HII) Ingalls Shipbuilding division has secured a $1.43bn contract to build the San Antonio-class ship LPD 29 for the US Navy. The company will be responsible for carrying out the detail design and construction of the 13th amphibious transport dock of the San Antonio (LPD 17) class under the fixed-price incentive contract. "This contract is further recognition of the confidence the navy / Marine Corps team has in the great work our shipbuilders are doing in the LPD programme." Ingalls Shipbuilding president Brian Cuccias said: “This contract is further recognition of the confidence the navy / Marine Corps team has in the great work our shipbuilders are doing in the LPD programme. “This efficient work is proven through our hot production line keeping the work going in the shipyard, and through our nationwide network of suppliers. “We are excited to build this additional ship and in providing our sailors and marines with the best amphibious ships in the world.”The San Antonio-class serves as the US Navy’s 21st century amphibious assault force. It comprises 684ft-long, 105ft-wide vessels that are able to carry marines, their equipment and supplies ashore using air cushion or conventional landing craft and amphibious assault vehicles. The vessels primarily support the Marine Air Ground Task Force, which helps perform amphibious and expeditionary missions relating to sea control and power projection, in addition to humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations. Ingalls Shipbuilding has already begun preliminary work on LPD 29, while fabrication is slated to commence later this year. The company has constructed and delivered 11 San Antonio-class vessels to the US Navy to date. Ingalls Shipbuilding previously secured a $218m, cost-plus-fixed-fee advance procurement contract from the US Navy in June last year, which covered he delivery of long-lead-time material and advance construction activities for LPD 29. source: naval-technology.

The End of the Battleship: Why Britain needs Aircraft Carriers The Washington Naval Conference of 1922 can be regarded as the high point in the history of the great steel battleships that used to make up the pride of the world’s navies. It was here that the post war order was laid out plainly, namely, that the British Empire and the United States were to operate the greatest fleets, followed by , Italy and , at a tonnage ratio of roughly 5:5:3:1:1. Most importantly, it confirmed that the battleship was the ultimate weapon and status symbol of the time. The increasing value of the battleship had been borne out of two major technological developments. First, the ironclad, and ultimately, the dreadnought. Both produced spells of remarkable naval build-up, as the competing world powers sought to out produce or at least intimidate the others, particularly in the lead up to the First World War. Taken in a historical context however, the impact of the battleship is a very mixed picture, and has been a topic of fierce debate amongst naval experts. I believe this debate has a contemporary use for today’s navy, as understanding the progression and eventual eclipse of the battleship will provide key evidence as to why our modern navy must contain aircraft carriers, whilst giving us clues as to what may be in store for the future of the successor to the battleship. Part of the problem with the legacy of the battleship is the limited number of fleet on fleet battles that were actually fought, even in the hay day of the lumbering ships. Pre-Dreadnought examples focus around the Russo-Japanese war and the devastating loss of the Russian Baltic fleet at Tsushima in 1905. The only real decisive engagement between steel battleships, the Russians lost six of the eight that sailed across the world to meet the Japanese, signalling the rise of Japan as a naval power and the speedy end of the war. During World War One and World War Two however, despite the commonplace belief in the power of the battleship, there was only one case of fleet on fleet action. The Battle of Jutland in 1916 was this last great hurrah of the steel battleship. Never again would these mighty boats meet face to face as the major vessels in fleet actions. But crucially, despite heavy British losses, not a single battleship was lost, and the ability of these fleets to decisively change the outcome of a conflict was heavily discredited. Instead, new naval technologies, namely the submarine, came to epitomize the war at sea. Why then did the Washington Naval Conference seemingly sanctify these weapons? Simply put, because the battleship took up a new and crucial role, as a tool of global influence. The battleship, in its size and power, was the ultimate weapon for gun boat diplomacy, and could be sped around the world to police any incident. The United States didn’t even construct its tonnage worth of boats until long after the treaty was disavowed, it was merely enough for it to have the potential of such great influence. Nevertheless, at the beginning of the Second World War, the battleship still had its advocates. These were quickly proved wrong, as crucial naval engagements demonstrated the weakness of the steel battleship. Initially, pocket battleships such as the German Graf Spee ran rings around British ships, its speed and fire power enabling it to strike and evade the Royal Navy. Submarines began crippling British convoys that had too few light naval escorts. But the true death knell for the battleship was the outcome of the Battle of Taranto. The first major air action from an against naval targets, the Royal Navy took out half of the Italian Navy’s battleships with only 21 outdated Swordfish torpedo bombers. As the British Andrew Cunningham noted, the power of the Navy’s air arm was now plain to see. The age of the aircraft carrier had begun. Across the Pacific, battleships were limited to shore bombardment in the invasions of Iwo Jima and Peleliu, and even the mighty super battleship Yamato, during a last- ditch attack, was swatted aside by American aircraft. Major naval operations such as Pearl Harbour and Midway, the turning points in the war, were dominated by aircraft carriers. The slow and lumbering steel battleships, once the mightiest vessels in the world’s navies, were proven totally outclassed by their successor. Aircraft carriers have since replaced the battleship as the capital ships of the modern navy. Heavily armoured boats have been mostly decommissioned, replaced by frigates and fast-moving warships that make up the bulk of the Royal Navy surface combat fleet. But with the advent of anti-ship missiles and ever more advanced submarines, what is the future of the aircraft carrier? Will it go the same way as the battleship? Already calls on the American navy to produce smaller, cheaper aircraft carriers like the Queen Elizabeth class are emerging. The argument being put forward by some, is that they are required to make up for the lack of expensive major carriers, though crucially, not to replace them. This runs counter to the old rule that battleships previously followed, the bigger the better. Now, with costs skyrocketing, (the new U.S. Gerald R Ford aircraft carriers come in at $10 billion each) and with the disaster that losing merely one could pose, smaller, more flexible carriers, just like the pocket battleship, are beginning to look more tempting. Just as with the battleship, the aircraft carrier is merely changing roles. Modern technology may indeed pose a threat to the aircraft carriers dominance, but as the ultimate symbol of power and global influence, the aircraft carrier is the modern-day gunboat. Britain desperately requires her new aircraft carriers if it is to retain its role on the world stage and remain a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. The pair will provide the Royal Navy with a platform to operate air missions across any region or hotspot, and will prevent flagrant Russian taunting when they next choose to sail their carrier, the Kuznetsov, past British shores. Remember the history of the battleship when discussing aircraft carriers. The aircraft carrier is now the new naval super-weapon, providing Britain with global striking capability in a more unstable world of irregular warfare. Source: UK Defence Journal The above article was contributed to UK Defence Journal by Sam Flint. The demise of the battleship was, to a certain extent, foretold by Adm Jacky Fisher, at first a strong supporter of the battleships. He is alsoseen as the “father” of HMS Dreadnought. However, while the RN were still building these ships, Fisher became a strong proponent of the battlecruiser. These ships would have more or less the same gun ability, but would be lighter on the armour. He coined the famous phrase If you can’t outgun them, you can outrun them. The sinking of HMS Hood proved him wrong.

Navy Wants Longer Tours for Sailors in Japan, Guam, Spain The Navy wants to stretch tour lengths for much of its forward-deployed forces, a proposal that would provide more unit stability, cohesion, continuity and reduce the costs of moving personnel in sea-duty units. The Chief of Naval Personnel, Vice Adm. Robert Burke, submitted the request to the office of the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness in November, following initial discussions by senior naval leaders in September, a CNP spokesman told USNI News. The request for an exception to the military’s personnel assignment policy is “awaiting a response,” Lt. Rick Moore, a chief of naval personnel spokesman, said Friday. It’s unclear when a final decision, or perhaps tweaks to the request as OSD reviews the proposal, would be made. The proposal “would give the Navy the authority to assign sailors on sea duty in FDNF forces – that’s Japan, Guam and Spain – that would match their prescribed sea tour up to a maximum of 48 months,” Moore said. “The main goal is for air, sub and surface (communities) to provide greater continuity by reducing personnel turnover through longer tours,” he said, adding “it only applies to sea-duty units.” FDNF officer tours normally range between 18 and 36 months and it can vary based on the classification of the tours, whether they’re on a Division Officer tour or are a Department Head, XO, CO, Moore said. First-term sailors, whether they’re coming in from recruit training and “A” schools, normally do a 36-month tour, and follow-on tours are normally 24 months for unaccompanied and 36-months for accompanied, he said. “As of now, we do expect the officers will serve their tour lengths that are required for their career milestones – that is, for Division Officer, Department Head, CO/XO,” he said. “The proposal wouldn’t just be specifically for Japan,” Moore said, adding “the same policy would affect all forward naval forces, as a general rule.” The proposal, as submitted, would impact FDNF sea-duty personnel in Guam and Rota, along with Japan. Burke mentioned the proposal during a January visit to Japan, where he spoke during the Career Development Symposium in Yokosuka. Shorter tours require more personnel rotations, which “puts the commands in a state of continuously having to train up their people and not having a seasoned, experienced crew that can train up the new junior folks,” he said during a town hall meeting, according to Stars and Stripes. “We want to get impact and feedback from the fleet,” Moore told USNI News. Among issues raised during symposiums and town hall meetings is accompanied and unaccompanied tours, especially of first-term personnel who get unaccompanied orders. “It is something that we are actively looking into,” he said, noting that CNP is looking at it separately from the longer-tours proposal. The proposal came on the heels of findings in the Navy’s investigations into collisions and at-sea incidents involving surface ships in the 7th Fleet region, including the separate deadly collisions involving USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62) and USS John S. McCain (DDG-56). Among issues cited in the Navy’s investigation report, released Nov. 1, were deficient and ineffective training, unprepared crews, poor communication, and ineffective command and control. Reducing personnel turnover with longer tours is seen as one way of building continuity and cohesion among units, particularly sea-going FDNF crews with higher operational tempo than units rotating overseas from their stateside homeports. Cost savings is another potential benefit. The average PCS cost for accompanied and unaccompanied sailors to Japan is $11,157, for a sailor on PCS orders to Japan, Moore said, citing Navy data. “The Navy does not anticipate any increased PCS costs for longer tours, and the potential PCS costs savings are still being assessed,” he added. A 2016 survey and report completed by RAND, Corp., for OSD (P&R) in response to a congressional inquiry looked at overseas tours and permanent-change-of-station moves and found the military services would save money by reducing the number of annual PCS moves, with one option being extended tours. The report found that while 59 percent of service members surveyed – including Navy personnel – wouldn’t want to extend their tour voluntarily, 41 percent would do so. It also found that some of the 59 percent might willingly extend with some financial incentive. The Navy uses several incentives to get personnel to voluntarily extend their time overseas. One program is the Overseas Tour Extension Incentive Program, or OTEIP, which as of January 2016 had 2,537 personnel “who requested and were approved for voluntary extensions,” Moore said. Financial incentives include Assignment Incentive Pay, which the Navy enables service members to bid for hard-to-fill billets. That 2016 report found: “the Navy’s experience with the AIP program has been successful along a number of dimensions, and there are reasons to believe that the benefits that accrued to the Navy would also apply if auctions were used to assign tour length extensions across all services.” Source: USNI News

Navy's new resupply vessel won't be able to deploy into war zones Published: February 20, 2018 Updated: February 20, 2018 2:35 PM PST

MV Asterisk, the Royal Canadian Navy's new supply ship, is seen in the harbour in Halifax on Friday, Jan. 19, 2018. While the Royal Canadian Navy is chomping at the bit to start using the newest addition to Canada's maritime fleet, a senior officer says the MV Asterix has some key limitations ??? notably that it can't be deployed into war zones. Andrew Vaughan / THE CANADIAN PRESS

OTTAWA — While the Royal Canadian Navy is chomping at the bit to start using the newest addition to its fleet, a senior officer says the MV Asterix has some limitations — notably that it can’t sail into harm’s way. The Asterix’s conversion from a civilian container ship to an interim naval resupply vessel is almost finished as weapons and other sensitive equipment are now being installed, said Commodore Craig Skjerpen, commander of Canada’s Atlantic Fleet. That work is expected to be finished in Halifax in March, at which point the vessel will undergo some final tests before heading to the Pacific to participate in a major, U.S.-led training exercise and then onward to the Asia-Pacific region. The Asterix addresses a critical gap that emerged after the navy lost its previous resupply vessels in 2014, Skjerpen told The Canadian Press, and navy commanders plan to make heavy use of new ship in the coming years. “If I wanted to draw an analogy of driving a car, we were always worried about where the next gas station was,” he said of the impact of losing HMCS Protecteur and Preserver. “So what this does is that where we’re able to program Asterix, we can be less concerned about that. So we can go where we need to go.” But the Asterix isn’t a true military vessel, Skjerpen said, which is why it won’t be allowed to operate in dangerous environments. That may not be an issue now, as the navy is not operating in any areas that be classified as overtly dangerous, but Skjerpen said: “All of our capabilities and everything we design and everything we need is about operating in that threat environment.” Two true military resupply vessels are scheduled to be built in Vancouver and will include more powerful self- defence systems than the Asterix as well as better communications equipment and overall survivability against attack. “That’s a pretty important part when you start talking about a military vessel and something you’re going to operate in a threat environment,” Skjerpen said in explaining why those Vancouver-built vessels, known as the Protecteur class, are still needed. “We want to provide the best capability possible to protect our people throughout. And that’s some of the bigger things that we’re going to get with the Protecteur class that you’re not going to get out of Asterix or vessels like that.” The two new Protecteur-class vessels will also be crewed entirely by navy personnel, unlike the Asterix. It will have about 45 navy sailors responsible for resupply operations, while the captain and 30 crew members charged with actually sailing the vessel are all civilians. “The civilian master is responsible for the safety of the vessel at all times,” Skjerpen said. “At any time, like if the visibility is too low or the seas are too high … the civilian master always has the right to not do something.” But the two new resupply ships won’t be ready for several years, meaning the Asterix, which was converted by Quebec- based Davie Shipbuilding, will be the navy’s only resupply ship for the foreseeable future. “It’s a pretty big step forward from not having something to having that capability,” Skjerpen said. The previous Conservative government awarded Davie a $700-million contract for the Asterix conversion and a five-year lease in summer 2015, with a five-year option afterward, after the navy’s ancient resupply ships were forced into retirement. The project gained notoriety in January 2017 after Vice- Admiral Mark Norman was suspended and court documents showed the RCMP suspected him of leaking secret documents to Davie over fears the Liberal government would cancel the project. Norman remains suspended, but he has not been charged with any crime and has denied any wrongdoing. Source: http://theprovince.com

Naval chief raises red flag over Chinese PLA's frequent transgression across LAC, heightened activity in Indian Ocean “Recent developments (with regard to China) have underscored the vulnerability of the Siliguri Corridor,” Admiral Lanba said. News Nation Bureau Updated On : 2018-02-21 14:53:03

Navy Chief Admiral Sunil Lanba - File Photo

New Delhi: Navy Chief Admiral Sunil Lanba on Wednesday raised a red flag over China's heightened activity in the Indian Ocean region, saying the East Asian neighbor is enhancing its economic and militarily capabilities rapidly. The Chief of Naval Staff said there have been frequent instances of transgression by the People's Liberation Army (PLA) across the Line of Actual Control (LAC). This, as well as last year's Doklam crisis, is “an indication of increasing assertiveness of China”. Admiral Sunil Lanba's comment follows a fast paced development in the Eastern Indian Ocean, where Indian Navy deployed at least eight warships to keep an eye on Chinese naval forces that conducted a military drill in the open sea. “Recent developments (with regard to China) have underscored the vulnerability of the Siliguri Corridor,” Admiral Lanba said. The Siliguri Corridor, also known as the Chicken's Neck, is a narrow stretch of land that links the northeastern states with the rest of India. In the backdrop of Chinese military drill in Eastern Indian Ocean, news agency PTI quoted some government sources as saying that no Chinese warship was deployed close to the waters of the Maldives since political turmoil broke out in the island-nation. India continues to have a significant presence in critical sea lanes in the Indian Ocean region, government sources said. However, a Chinese and a frigate had crossed into the Eastern Indian Ocean through the Sunda Strait and exited the Indian Ocean through the Lombok Strait while heading towards the South China Sea a few days ago, they said. Source: http://www.newsnation.in

US Navy’s New Stealth Destroyer to Be Fitted With Ship-Killing Missiles New budget documents reveal that the mission set of the new high-tech warship will now include anti-surface warfare. By Franz-Stefan Gady February 21, 2018 Zumwalt-class warships, the U.S. Navy’s largest and technologically most advanced class of guided-missile destroyers, will be fitted with new long-range anti-ship missiles, according to the service’s 2019 budget request released on February 12.

Image Credit: U.S. Navy

The U.S. Navy’s $89.7 million request to integrate Raytheon’s SM-6 long-range supersonic missile and the subsonic long- range Maritime Strike , an anti- ship missile variant of the Tomahawk land-attack cruise missile, was first reported on February 12. The decision to change the mission requirements of the Zumwalt-class from a land-attack platform to surface warfare took place in November 2017, although the option to expand the stealth destroyers’ mission set by arming it with new long-range anti-ship missiles has been periodically discussed since the inception of the Zumwalt program in the 1990s. The Diplomat first reported on the Zumwalt-class’ new primary anti-ship mission in December 2017. “After a comprehensive review of Zumwalt class requirements, Navy decided in November 2017 to refocus the primary mission of the Zumwalt Class Destroyers from Land Attack to Offensive Surface Strike,” the 2019 U.S. Navy budget request reads. “The funding requested (…) will facilitate this change in mission and add lethal, offensive fires against targets afloat and ashore.” “Realigning the Zumwalt destroyers to conduct surface strike is consistent with initiatives like the U.S. Navy’s Distributed Lethality concept, which seeks to mitigate its shipbuilding challenges by improving the offensive punch of individual ships that did not previously have potent sea combat capabilities,” Steve Stashwick noted back in December 2017. Zumwalt-class warships, featuring wave-piercing tumblehome hulls and a futuristic stealth design, are fitted with eighty MK57 vertical launch cells, compared to 96 cells on an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer and 122 cells on a Ticonderoga- class , from which SM-6 and Maritime Strike Tomahawks can be launched. Consequently, they will have less combat power for anti-surface warfare operations than older Navy warships. The supersonic SM-6 missile, originally designed to intercept incoming aircraft and cruise missiles, has only recently been deployed as an anti-ship missile. The Maritime Strike Tomahawk is not expected to enter service until the early 2020s. (In 2017, the service awarded a contract to fit an unknown number of its long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles with upgraded sensors.) It is noteworthy that the Zumwalt-class still lacks a projectile for its two main guns to be able to execute land-attack operations, up until November 2017 its primary mission requirement, as I explained previously: With a cost of $800,000 to $1 million per Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP) round, the precision ammunition has become too expensive for the service. LRLAP is the only ammunition specifically designed to be fired by the USS Zumwalt’s two 155 millimeter/62-caliber Advanced Gun Systems (AGS), the main armament of the ship with an estimated range of up to 63 nautical miles (72 miles, 115 kilometers). No replacement for the LRLAP has been selected as of now. The 16,000-ton lead ship of the class, the USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000), was commissioned in October 2016. The future USS Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001), the second ship of the Zumwalt-class, successfully completed acceptance trials on February 1. A third ship of the class, the future USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002), is currently under construction at the Bath Iron Works (BIW) in Maine. Source: https://thediplomat.com

Russia sends 20 WARSHIPS to Baltic Sea to ‘destroy targets' as 'NATO prepare for INVASION' RUSSIA has deployed more than 20 warships to the Baltic Sea for war drills as NATO members in the region prepare citizens for an invasion. By Joshua Nevett / Published 21st February 2018 An armada of Russian ships from the Baltic Fleet have been dispatched from Baltiysk naval base, in Kaliningrad Oblast, for large scale military exercises. Russian Navy missile ships and minesweeper boats are among the vessels taking part in the drills, which kicked off on Wednesday. Military aircraft and helicopters will also be involved to ensure the success of “combat training missions”, a spokesman for the fleet said. Crew from the Baltic Fleet will carry out training exercises at Baltiysk naval base before taking to the waves for “a number of assigned missions”, the spokesman added. Anti-ship and air defence operations will then be conducted by the fleet, whose base in sandwiched between NATO nations Poland and Lithuania. "At the sea training ranges, the crews of warships from the Fleet’s several large units will conduct artillery fire against air and naval targets of various complexity and practice minelaying operations and depth bombing," Roman Martov, a spokesman for the fleet, said. “Overall, the manoeuvres will involve more than 20 warships and auxiliary vessels of the fleet.” Meanwhile, Sweden is reportedly preparing to distribute a leaflet outlining what its nine million citizens should do in the event of war. Sweden, whose eastern coast borders the Baltic Sea, is issuing the advise for the first time since 1961 – the height of the Cold War. Although not a signed up member of NATO, Sweden has entered into a growing number of military agreements with nations that are part of the alliance.

ON THE MOVE: Russia has sent more than 20 warships for war drills in the Baltic Sea

Other NATO members, including Lithuania and Latvia, have issued similar publications to all of their citizens. Since the annexation of Crimea – a move deemed illegal by the international community – Baltic states have been anxious about Russian militarism. Kaliningrad, situated along the Baltic Coast, has been called the "most dangerous place in Europe" amid reports Russia has been bulking up its firepower in a small province. Tensions have come to the fore again recently after NATO accused a Russian jet of risking a collision with a civilian plane by attempting to avoid detection near European airspace. Antoni Macierewicz, Poland's defence minister, said Russia could “change the balance of power” by sending warships with long-range cruise missiles to the Kaliningrad Oblast region. Speaking to reporters at NATO meeting last year, he said: “This is an obvious cause for concern. "Moving such ships on the Baltic changes the balance of power." Elsewhere, a Russian spy ship heading back to its home port is set to sail through the English Channel this week. Source: https://www.dailystar.co.uk

France to sign basing deal with India, drawing Europe into drive to war in Asia By Athiyan Silva 19 February 2018 As French President Emmanuel Macron called for a return to the draft and air strikes against Syria last week, he was also pushing to expand Europe’s role in the war drive in Asia. Under Trump, Washington has intensified its efforts to build up India as a counterweight to China in the Indian Ocean—Beijing’s lifeline for Persian Gulf oil and the pivotal channel for trade in manufactured products between Europe and Asia. France is also escalating its military relations with India and plotting to expand its role in the Indian Ocean. With Paris working with Berlin to transform the European Union into a military machine, France’s strategic thrust into South Asia and the Indian Ocean region must be taken as a warning regarding the size of the European imperialist powers’ appetites and the scope of the wars they are preparing behind the backs of the population. Macron is to visit India next month. While there, he is expected to sign off on a reciprocal agreement granting French naval vessels access to Indian ports for repair and resupply and Indian vessels the right to make routine use of France’s Indian Ocean military bases. Although France’s colonial empire collapsed decades ago, it retains an extensive network of strategically-located Indian Ocean military bases. Indeed, France has recently expanded this network to the Persian Gulf, cashing in on the backing Paris has provided Washington in various US-led Middle East wars. France has bases at Djibouti on the Horn of Africa, at Réunion island near Madagascar, in the , and in Mayotte off . France and India are also preparing to build a military base in the Seychelles. The latter will be part of a network of Indian Ocean bases India is developing as it integrates itself evermore completely into US plans to seize Indian Ocean and South China Sea chokepoints so as to impose an economic blockade on China. Indian ships now routinely patrol the Straits of Malacca and India’s military exchanges intelligence with the Pentagon on Chinese ship and submarine movements in the Indian Ocean. Under the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) between New Delhi and Washington that was signed in 2016 and activated last summer, Indian and American warships and warplanes gained the right to routinely access each other’s military bases. Indian ships, for example, can now anchor at the Pentagon’s pivotal Indian Ocean base in Diego Garcia. India has also set up military observation centers in the Maldives, Madagascar and Mauritius and earlier this month, when Prime Minister visited , obtained rights to use that country’s key Arabian Sea port, Duqm, for supplying Indian Navy vessels. India is also expanding its naval presence into the Pacific Ocean, including the South China Sea. Toward that end, New Delhi has dramatically enhanced its military-security cooperation with , including gaining the right to service its naval vessels there. The Indian Ocean more and more resembles a powder keg that could explode into war at any time, with competing nuclear-armed powers setting up rival networks of bases to surveille and threaten each other. India presents the expansion of its Indian Ocean presence as defensive, given its dependence on Mideast oil and the importance of the waterway for its foreign trade. But such claims are clearly bogus. Since the beginning of the current century, India has dramatically expanded its military might, embarking on a crash- program to build a blue water navy and developing a nuclear triad, that is the capacity to launch nuclear weapons from land, air, and underwater. The Indian bourgeoisie see its growing military capacities as a key means of compensating, in the great power struggle for markets, resources, and profits, for its chronic economic weakness and for securing the support of American imperialism. India’s burgeoning navy and naval base network allows New Delhi in tandem with Washington to threaten to cut off Chinese oil imports from the Middle East, bring the Chinese economy to a halt, and force Beijing to its knees. China, the world’s biggest oil importer, receives 60 percent of its oil from the Middle East and transports 80 percent of that through the Indian Ocean, as well as other raw materials from the Middle East and Africa. Beijing has responded to the moves to strategically encircle it, by advancing its One Belt-One Road (OBOR) project for trade routes on land and sea across Eurasia, financed by Beijing's Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). With Pakistan, its ally and longstanding rival of India, China launched in 2015 the $50 billion China Pakistan Economic Corridor project (CPEC). It links western China to Gwadar, a strategically-located Pakistani port on the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean. When fully operational, the CPEC will enable China to transport Middle East oil and gas to China via a land route through Pakistan, thereby diminishing the threat of a US-Indian naval blockade in the Indian Ocean and cutting 16,000 km from the distance Chinese goods must travel to the Middle East and Africa. China has also secured a rival military basing deal in Djibouti, and it is developing deep-water ports across the Indian Ocean, including with a 99-year lease on Hambantota port in southern and the development of the Chittagong port in . It has also made major investments in the Maldives, including a development project that India claimed was in “listening distance” of its military bases. The great-power tensions surging beneath the surface exploded into view this month, when it emerged that India might invade the Maldives to oust Chinese- backed President Abdulla Yameen. Beijing responded to reports that India’s military is ready for any eventuality in the Maldives, by urging all powers to respect state sovereignty. China's state-owned Global Times went considerably further, declaring in an editorial, “China will not interfere in the internal affairs of the Maldives, but that does not mean Beijing will sit idly by if India breaks the principle. If India one-sidedly sends troops to the Maldives, China will take action to stop New Delhi.” Such conflicts underscore the explosive implications of Macron's decision to allow Indian forces onto French bases and Paris’ assertions that France is an Indian Ocean power. Any of a number of strategic rivalries or unresolved border conflicts in the Indian Ocean region could escalate into a global war between nuclear-armed powers including India, Pakistan, China, the United States and now France. This also underscores the significance of the call by the German section of the International Committee of the Fourth International, the Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei, for the publication of agreements underlying the proposed conservative/social-democratic coalition government in Berlin that would work with Macron. Amid the relentless drive to war by the major powers, workers have a right to know what war plans are being formulated to advance the strategic and commercial interests of European imperialism. Last November, France’s Ambassador to India, Alexandre Ziegler, boasted, “We have a growing cooperation in the Indian Ocean, where both India and France have focal positions, and we are in the process of forming a defence and security partnership in the Indo- Pacific.” In this context, New Delhi has in recent years built up its air force and navy with the assistance of France. France has sold India six Scorpene submarines and 36 Rafale fighter jets, which are capable of carrying and firing nuclear weapons, for a cost of about 8 billion euros. France also conducts military exercises with India such as the Varuna (Navy), Garuda (Air Force), and Shakti (Army) exercises. The two countries have formed a High Committee on Defence Cooperation, and top-ranking defence officials from both countries meet annually. France, India’s 9th-largest investor, is putting billions of dollars in Indian armament, space, nuclear energy, railways, renewable energy and urban development projects. About 750 French companies, and 39 of the top 40 corporations in the French stock exchange, the so-called the CAC-40—including Areva, Eurocopter, Dassault, Thales, Alstom, Safrane, Renault and SolaireDirect—exploit the cheap labor available in India. Source: https://www.wsws.org

Sir William Alexander , Coast Guard Bouy Laying Vessel ,heads out of Halifax for Stephenville. Photo: René Serrao, Portuguese Cove, NS (c)

Australia, U.S., India and Japan in Talks to Establish Alternative to China’s Belt and Road - Report February 19, 2018 by Reuters

Photo: By MAGNIFIER / Shutterstock

SYDNEY, Feb 19 (Reuters) – Australia, the United States, India and Japan are talking about establishing a joint regional infrastructure scheme as an alternative to China’s multibillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative in an attempt to counter Beijing’s spreading influence, the Australian Financial Review reported on Monday, citing a senior U.S. official. The unnamed official was quoted as saying the plan involving the four regional partners was still “nascent” and “won’t be ripe enough to be announced’ during Australian Prime Minister Turnbull’s visit to the United States later this week. The official said, however, that the project was on the agenda for Turnbull’s talks with U.S. President Donald Trump during that trip and was being seriously discussed. The source added that the preferred terminology was to call the plan an “alternative” to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, rather than a “rival.” “No one is saying China should not build infrastructure,” the official was quoted as saying. “China might build a port which, on its own is not economically viable. We could make it economically viable by building a road or rail line linking that port.” Representatives for Turnbull, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and Trade Minister Steven Ciobo did not immediately respond to requests for comment. First mentioned during a speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping’s to university students in Kazakhstan in 2013, China’s Belt and Road plan is a vehicle for the Asian country to take a greater role on the international stage by funding and building global transport and trade links in more than 60 countries. Xi has heavily promoted the initiative, inviting world leaders to Beijing last May for an inaugural summit at which he pledged $124 billion in funding for the plan, and enshrining it into the ruling Communist Party’s constitution in October. Local Chinese governments as well as state and private firms have rushed to offer support by investing overseas and making loans. In January, Beijing outlined its ambitions to extend the initiative to the Arctic by developing shipping lanes opened up by global warming, forming a “Polar Silk Road.” The United States, Japan, India and Australia have recently revived four-way talks to deepen security cooperation and coordinate alternatives for regional infrastructure financing to that offered by China. The so-called Quad to discuss and cooperate on security first met as an initiative a decade ago – much to the annoyance of China, which saw it as an attempt by regional democracies to contain its advances. The quartet held talks in Manila on the sidelines of the November ASEAN and East Asia Summits. Source: http://gcaptain.com

Workhorses of the sea

The Seven Waves loading pipe at Technip FMC in Vitoria – Brazil Photo : Capt Jan Plug Master Seven Rio (c)