http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2009/August%202009/FightingUnderMissileAttack.aspx

Fighting Under Missile Attack
By John Stillion

The Air Force hasn’t thought about air base defense for a while. Now, things are changing.
For the first time in decades, Air Force aircraft deployed in an international crisis now face substantial risk of damage or destruction on the ground. By some estimates, missile and air attacks could disable up to 70 percent of the aircraft at some overseas bases in the opening minutes of a fight.

SNIP____________________SNIP_________________

These difficulties are compounded in areas such as the Western Pacific, where the missile and air threat is large, bases are few, and political access to existing facilities often is limited or greatly constrained.

The full magnitude of this challenge can be glimpsed by examining a single, highly realistic scenario—emergency movement of US military forces to the Far East in response to a brewing China-Taiwan confrontation in the year 2015.

In this scenario, one of the main difficulties facing the Air Force would be the shortage of suitable bases in the Western Pacific. Only four of the eight US bases there have hardened aircraft shelters.

Already, three of those four (Osan Air Base and Kunsan Air Base in South Korea and Kadena Air Base in Japan) are well within reach of hundreds of Chinese People’s Liberation Army missiles. Currently, China has fielded about 400 conventional ballistic missiles and 250 cruise missiles that could reach bases in Japan and South Korea. Beijing also boasts a large fleet of advanced fighter-bombers.

The fourth hardened base (Misawa AB, Japan) lies just outside this threat ring. However, that puts Misawa about 1,850 miles from the Taiwan Strait, roughly the same distance from the strait as Andersen AFB, Guam, far to the south.

The US currently operates from only two bases—both on Okinawa—that lie within 500 miles of the strait. Requirements of tanking, sortie rates, and infrastructure availability make Kadena the best theater base for a large fighter contingent.

A typical US crisis response would likely see Kadena receiving a mix of aircraft similar to what was sent to Aviano AB, Italy, for Operation Allied Force in 1999, or to Shaikh Isa AB, Bahrain, for Operation Desert Storm in 1991.

SNIP____________________________________________________.

•Of the total, nonsheltered parking space, 90 percent is covered by a massive missile attack. No parked aircraft has time to take off. Of this unprotected aircraft force, 75 percent is destroyed. All others are severely damaged.

•Taxiing aircraft escape without damage. Also undamaged, of course, are aircraft that are already airborne.

•Aircraft ensconced in hardened shelters ride out the attack undamaged. However, these bunkered aircraft are stuck on the ground due to massive debris on operating surfaces and more than 2,500 unexploded submunitions. They are targeted in follow-on attacks by cruise missiles.

_________________________

I would advise people to read the article seems to be talking a lot of sense, I have not posted the complete article here for good reason.

A US Patriot missile is fired from a mobile launcher. (US Army photo)

IIRC during most of the Cold War US and Nato air forces faced missile attack directed at airbases (incl. chemical warheads). So what’s new, really.

As with the joint LPD of the Rotterdam/Galicia classes, Spain and the Netherlands have developed a common design AOR: the Patino/Amsterdam classes.

The 170m-long 17,045t auxiliary oiler and multi-product replenishment ship (AOR) was designed under a joint initiative between Navantia (formerly Bazan, then Izar) in Spain and the Dutch Netherlands United Shipbuilding Bureau Ltd (NEVESBU) based in the Hague.

The Spanish AOR, which carries the pennant number A14, was built at Navantia’s Ferrol shipyard and was launched in the summer of 1994. The Netherland’s Amsterdam class fast combat support ship, of a very similar design, was built by Merwede and Royal Shelde and commissioned in 1995.

Both have a fuel cargo capacity of 6,820t of diesel fuel, 1,660t of aviation fuel and 500t of food and ordnance stores. They have a 490m² flight deck that in Spanish service supports three Sea King SH-3D helicopters. In Dutch service is operates 4 Westland Lynx-helikopters of 3 NH90-helikopters

Both the port and starboard side of the ship have a liquid cargo and solids replenishment station. A vertical replenishment (vertrep) supply station allows fast transfer of ordnance and other stores from ship to ship or to shore. There is a stern refuelling station that is preferred for refuelling operations in high sea states.

Navantia of Spain is building a second replenishment ship, the Cantabria, for the Spanish Navy. Cantabria is a larger version of the Patino (19,500t). It is scheduled to commission in 2009.

Crew is 148 plus 19 aircrew. There is additional accommodation for 20 additional crew for example training, fleet personnel or special operations crew. The crew services include a fully equipped medical centre.

Meanwhile, the Dutch are working on a new design, to replace their oldest AOR Zuiderkruis and to augment their amphibious transport capability: the Joint Support Ship

Dutch Plan for Their Largest Naval Ship Ever
Posted by Joris Janssen Lok at 1/15/2008 6:16 AM

The backbone of a modern, 21st-century navy isn’t its surface combatants or submarines. It is the large amphibious and/or logistic support ships it can deploy to trouble spots around the world, carrying helicopters, hospital facilities, an embarked landing force, supplies, fuel and a suite of C4I facilities. The Netherlands is planning to build its largest ship ever to be able to do just that.

The new ship is designated the Joint Support Ship (JSS) and will have a displacement of 26,000 tons — making it a tight fit to squeeze into Den Helder Naval Base.

The JSS is to be ready by 2014 and design of the ship (by the Defense Materiel Organization DMO in close conjunction with TNO Defence & Security, Schelde Naval Shipbuilding, Imtech, Thales, and other industry partners) is starting for real now that the program to build four new Patrol Ships has moved into the production phase.

The plan to build a JSS was first published in the 2005 Naval Study. The ship is to replace the fleet replenishment oiler HrMs Zuiderkruis. The JSS will have a large flight deck capable of supporting Boeing CH-47F Chinook helicopters.

It will also be able to replenish other naval ships at sea, provide strategic sealift of strategic military equipment, and act as a seabase during crisis response operations worldwide.

The JSS will join two Landing Platform Dock (LPD)-type ships that entered service with the Royal Netherlands Navy (RNLN) in 1998 and 2007, respectively (see the Jan/Feb issue of Defense Technology International (DTI) for more detail about these).

Like these LPDs, the JSS will be based on Schelde’s Enforcer family of large support ship designs (this was also used as the design for Britain’s four new Bay-class amphibious support ships).

Although senior sources in the RNLN so far have not been willing to confirm this, a logical step would be to try and get approval for a second JSS to replace the other fleet replenishment oiler in the Dutch fleet, HrMs Amsterdam, toward the end of the coming decade.

After all, one JSS equals no JSS if the ship happens to be in dock for a major refit at the time a sudden crisis erupts.

With a ship like the JSS, the Netherlands will be able to sea-base a significant aviation, logistic, C4I, disaster relief and humanitarian aid capability right offshore a crisis area struck by a natural or man-made disaster, a civil war or other major disruption.

http://www.dutchfleet.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11481

That was just a speculation to be P-15A. Its just DDG with Brahmos from Brahmos corporation, just like FFG with Brahmos, Submarine with Brahmos etc. But if it is the earlier model of the P-15A than also the design have been changed a lot as shown in the CG.

Perhaps so. But is was the first thing out there, way way before that CG and Brahmos corporation would have some idea of IN requirements, wouldn’t you think?

Behind the Barak-8. 2 X 8.

There is nothing there, that I can see. Pls take the CG and put some arrows in it.

This is Barak-2 and P-15A going to have Barak-8…

Balony. Barak 2 = Barak NG = Barak 8
http://defense-update.com/features/du-2-06/ILmissiledefense-4.htm
http://defense-update.com/products/b/barak8.htm
http://defense-update.com/products/m/mf_star.htm
http://defense-update.com/newscast/0707/news/150707_mrsam.htm

Lastly all the VLS are not shown perfectly in the CG but the weapons I have posted are correct.

And there we have it folks: there are some VLUs not in the CG. Kindly share the source on the weaponry. If there is 2×24 Barak-8, then I expect these to be distributed with 24 by the hangar and 24 directly forward of the RBU and behind the Brahmos. This is the pattern adopted in Rajput and P15 Delhi class (not to mention the Russian Sovremenny and Chinese Type 052B 😉 on which P15A is in part based

There is no other ‘original model’ other than the one shown as CG, its originally from Indian Navy. Just behind the main gun there are VLS of the Barak-8 not Brahmos. After that Brahmos and near the heli deck ther are Barak-1 as I said. This is followed in other IN ships as well.

1) Than who’s model is posted on Bharat-Rakshak (it was displayed at AeroIndia 2005)? (nb: B.Harry and ACIG.org are trusted sources)
And what about the lines drawings there by M. Muzumdar? Isn’t that drawn profile remarkably similar to the profile of the actual ship (see last pic)?
What are these based on?

2) If in the CG the VLUs behind the main gun are for Barak-8, then where are the VLUs for Brahmos?

3) In which other IN ships in particular is the pattern you mention followed?

Barak-8 (note VLU beneath)

http://www.deagel.com/library/Barak-8-surface-to-air-missile_m02009062200048.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/library/Barak-8-and-Barak-8-ER-missiles_m02009062200047.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/library/Barak-8-missile-launcher_m02009062200051.aspx
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/lebourget2009/pages/missiles_sa_barak8_jpg.htm
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/lebourget2009/pages/missiles_sa_barak_8_er_jpg.htm

Just behind the main gun, there are 2 x 24 Barak-8 LR-SAM, after that 2 x 8 Brahmos VLS and near the helicopter deck there are 4 x 8 Barak-1.

INS Kochi launch video,

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videoshow/5026410.cms

The ship looks very advanced and clean shaped. 😀

That is not evident from the CG or any photomaterials.

In the original model, you had (from front to back)
100mm main gun (old model)
8 Brahmos (VL 1×8 )
24 Shtil 9M317ME (VL 2×12)
2x RBU
32 Barak (VL 2x2x8)
2×2 TR
2×2 AK630
24 Shtil 9M317ME (VL 2×12)
2x Hangar/Helicopter

In the CG we see:
100mm main gun (new model)
16 Brahmos (VL 2×8 )
[space]
16 Barak (VL 2×8)
2x RBU
2×2 AK630
2×2 TR
[space]
16 Barak (VL 2×8)
2x Hangar/Helicopter

48 Barak-8 would seem a logical fit, considering the number of missiles on P15 (as well as on Talwar/mond-Talwar/P17). The most logical/likely places (considering Rajpur and P15 layouts) would be 24 forward for the bridge and 24 behind the aft funnel. Question remains what VL launcher is employed:
– variant 1: the 12 cell modules of the VL Shtil (i.e. 2×12+2×12, each pair of modules fitted side by side lengthwise)
– variant 2: the 8 cell modules of the Mk41 (3×8+3×8, each triplet of modules fitted either sidebyside across or one behind another)
I doubt VL launchers of the same type as for Brahmos would be used.

Depending on how rapidly the Barak-8 becomes available (it is still under development after all), it could well be that the first and possibly even the second P15A will initially be ‘fitted for but not with’, with VLUs to be fitted later on. I don’t think this is likely, but it would at least explain the lack of VLUs on the CG.

No this is not the P-15A but the one I have posted as well as ante_climax. The pic from BR was an old speculation but proved wrong. That is just Brahmos onboard a destroyer.

Well, if so, what’s that design’s weapons load out?