Tuesday, February 4, 2014

As continental U.S. freezes, Alaska gets record high temperatures

While much of the continental United States endured several cold snaps in January 2014, record-breaking warmth gripped Alaska. Spring-like conditions set rivers rising and avalanches tumbling. NASA Eartobservatory illustrates the above words with the two images below.


Above map depicts land surface temperature anomalies in Alaska for January 23–30, 2014. Based on data from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Terra satellite, the map shows how 2014 temperatures compared to the 2001–2010 average for the same week. Areas with warmer than average temperatures are shown in red; near-normal temperatures are white; and areas that were cooler than the base period are blue. Gray indicates oceans or areas where clouds blocked the satellite from collecting usable data.

A persistent ridge of high pressure off the Pacific Coast fueled the warm spell, shunting warm air and rainstorms to Alaska instead of California, where they normally end up. The last half of January was one of the warmest winter periods in Alaska’s history, with temperatures as much as 40°F (22°C) above normal on some days in the central and western portions of the state, according to Weather Underground’s Christopher Bart. The all-time warmest January temperature ever observed in Alaska was tied on January 27 when the temperature peaked at 62°F (16.7°C) at Port Alsworth. Numerous other locations—including Nome, Denali Park Headquarters, Palmer, Homer, Alyseka, Seward, Talkeetna, and Kotzebue—all set January records.

The combination of heat and rain has caused Alaska’s rivers to swell and brighten with sediment, creating satellite views reminiscent of spring and summer runoff. On January 25, 2014, the Aqua satellite collected this image of sediment flowing into the Gulf of Alaska from numerous rivers along the state’s southeastern coast.

All of the heat, moisture, and melting snow has elevated the risk of avalanches. A series of extremely large avalanches in late January sent snow and debris crashing onto the Richardson Highway, blocking the road and cutting the port town of Valdez off from highway access. The avalanches dumped a mound of snow 100 feet (30 meters) tall and up to 1,500 feet (460 meters) long on the highway.


Below are two videos with forecasts for the period from February 4, 2014, to February 11, 2014. The top video shows temperature forecasts and the bottom video shows temperature anomaly forecasts.





Warmer temperatures over the Arctic have resulted in a slowdown of sea ice are growth, as illustrated by the image below (yellow line top left shows 2014 values).



Related posts

- Forecast: America to be hit by temperatures as low as minus 40 degrees
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2014/01/forecast-america-to-be-hit-by-temperatures-as-low-as-minus-40-degrees.html

- The Biggest Story of 2013
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-biggest-story-of-2013.html

- Polar jet stream appears hugely deformed
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2012/12/polar-jet-stream-appears-hugely-deformed.html





Monday, February 3, 2014

Italian Navy’s Scire submarine test fires Black Shark Advanced torpedo



The Italian Navy's second of the Todaro-class (U212) submarines, Scire (S527), has successfully test fired Whitehead Sistemi Subacquei (WASS)-built new Black Shark Advanced (BSA), for the first time, in the La Spezia gulf.Commissioned in February 2007, the hybrid submarine can accommodate a crew of 27 and is armed with six torpedo tubes.

During the testing, the torpedo was equipped in the new Lithium-Polymer Battery and has been launched in Push Out mode, a water ram expulsion system which uses high water pressure to eject the torpedo.The launch, dubbed 'Short-Fire,' is intended to demonstrate the WASS progresses in support of the New Heavyweight Torpedo project, being developed in cooperation with the Italian Navy.WASS chief executive officer Alessandro Franzoni said that the Black Shark weapon is the result of cutting-edge technology and Italian research.It is "an example of national excellence in the field of underwater defence equipment through the use of innovative technical solutions for the propulsion systems, power generation and electro-acoustics," Franzoni said.

The Black Shark is a new generation powerful, long-range, wire guided and self- homing heavyweight torpedo.Designed to be launched from submarines or surface vessels, the stealth dual purpose wire-guided heavyweight torpedo can counter the threat posed by any type of surface or underwater target for the next 20 years.The Black Shark Advanced will replace the old A-184 heavyweight torpedo, currently in service aboard the Italian Navy's submarines, over the next few years while significantly enhancing the navy's ability to defend the waters.

Armed with six torpedo tubes for DM2A4 heavyweight torpedoes, the two Fincantieri-built U212 submarines are equipped with a highly-integrated command and weapons control system which interfaces with sensors, weapons and navigation systems.

Iranian Navy's 'Fateh' and 'Besat' class submarines



Transport of IRIN Fateh class submarine from ISOICO new vessel shipbuilding facility

Launched IRIN Fateh class submarine

Construction ceremony for IRIN Fateh class submarine at ISOICO Shipyard

Crew station console for IRIN Fateh class submarine

 IRIN Fateh class submarine emerging from ISOICO new vessel shipbuilding facility 

Construction of IRIN Fateh class submarine within ISOICO new vessel shipbuilding facility

IRIN Besat class submarine, under construction

Astrium imagery from 27 October 2013 depicting Fateh Class at ISOICO shipyard  [IHS Jane's]

Video documentary from Iran TV 


On Sunday, the website Military.ir published the first images of the new Iranian submarine, Fateh (‘Conqueror’). The images, like the two posted here, are video stills from the official Channel 1 TV presentation, with interesting caption: Rahi Keh Amedim (‘The Path We Have Taken.’)

The Fateh, a new class of submarine, is a major milestone for the Iranian navy. It is far more capable that the previously produced Ghadir class. The Fateh is reportedly a 600-ton diesel sub, with operational diving depth of 200 meters, and range of 5,000 km. The sub’s top speed is 14 knots. It armaments include up to 12 torpedoes and marine mines.

BRAZIL UPGRADES ITS SAO PAULO CARRIER – ANALYSIS





An obscure fact of Latin American military affairs is that the Brazilian Navy possesses its own aircraft carrier. The vessel, now five decades old, is currently undergoing repairs so that it can serve for at least a decade more. Nevertheless, given the fast pace of South American geopolitics and geosecurity affairs, serious questions should be raised whether or not Brazil actually needs a carrier in its fleet.

The Carrier

Brazil acquired its carrier from France in November 2000: the vessel is a non-nuclear, 36,000 ton, Clemenceau-type carrier, which was constructed in the early 1960s.The carrier, originally known as the Foch while it flew the French flag, “entered the dry-dock stage in Saint-Nazaire in 1957 and was launched three years later. It was towed to the Brest arsenal for completion. It entered active service in 1963 and ceased to be armed by the French Navy in 2000, when the Charles de Gaulle CVN came into service.”

When it was sold to Brazil, the Foch was renamed as Sao Paulo. It is worth noting that the Sao Paulo replaced Brazil’s other carrier, the Minas Gerais, which was launched by England during World War II (then known as the HMS Vengeance). The Minas Gerais served for 41 years in the Brazilian Navy starting in 1960 until it was decommissioned in 2001.

The website MilitaryFactory.com provides some additional details about the Sao Paulo, explaining that it “showcases a typical Western aircraft profile with a flat, unobstructed flight deck and starboard, … her deck allows for the launching of two fixed-wing aircraft simultaneously.”  The massive vessel has an overall length of 869 feet and is able to make headway at a top speed of 32 knots. According to details that have been released, the carrier has a crew of over 1,900 sailors. As for the aircraft that it transports, a December 2013 press release by the French shipbuilder DCNS, which is currently upgrading the Sao Paulo, says that the Brazilian warship has 18 Douglas A-4 Sky Hawk warplanes.  Meanwhile, a December 2012 note in Brazilian news agency R7 explains that the carrier also has Super Puma transport helicopters and Esquilo light helicopters. Tragically, the Sao Paulo has not served in the Brazilian Navy without incidents, as on-board fires in 2005 and 2012 killed and injured a number of sailors.

The Sao Paulo is the only carrier currently in use by a Latin American Navy. Nevertheless, COHA has been unable to unearth information on the types of operations this carrier has been involved in during the decade that it has been flying the Brazilian flag. An analysis in the website WarisBoring.com explains that the Sao Paulo has participated in naval exercises, such as sailing with a U.S. carrier, the USS Ronald Reagan.Additionally Argentine warplanes have occasionally landed on the Brazilian carrier, which serves as a confidence-building initiative between the naval forces of the two neighboring states.

Upgrade

It would appear that the Brazilian Navy has plans for the aging Sao Paulo. In early January 2014, the Spanish news agency Infodefensa.com reported that the French shipbuilding company DCNS had been asked by the Brazilian Navy to inspect the Sao Paulo’s forward catapult. The repairs to the Sao Paulo began in November 2013 at a naval base in Rio de Janeiro.



Regarding the rehabilitation of the Brazilian warship, a December 2013 press release by DCNS explains that “the steam catapult, which already performed over 5000 launches, is a key element for the aircraft carrier capability.” The French company has praised itself for its work on modernizing the Sao Paulo as it also reported that “after the team’s intervention, the catapult was dry-fired twice, demonstrating the expected performance. The Brazilian authorities expressed satisfaction.”

Brazil’s Evolving Military and Geopolitics

Thanks to its strong economy over the past decade, the Brazilian armed forces are carrying out important arms purchases which will help the Portuguese-speaking giant consolidate itself as Latin America’s foremost military power.

Throughout the past decades, COHA has written several comprehensive reports on Brazil’s military and its arms acquisitions – we will enumerate just a few of the more prominent examples here. Apart from the Sao Paulo’s upgrades, the Brazilian Navy is constructing a nuclear-powered submarine, with French aid. The submarine has been a dream of the Navy since the country’s 1964-1985 military regime. [13] Paris is also helping Brazil to build four diesel-electric submarines, variants of the French Scorpene design.

Meanwhile, the Brazilian Air Force is getting a revamp as Brasilia has already selected, after several years of negotiations, the Gripen (produced by the Swedish company Saab) as its new warplane. For years, analysts such as those posted at COHA believed that the Brazilian government would choose the Rafale warplane produced by the Swedish Dassault. But in December 2013 Brasilia ultimately chose the Swedish model.  Brazil will purchase 36 Gripen warplanes in a deal reported to be worth around $4.5 billion USD. As for the Brazilian Army, it has purchased Shorad missiles to upgrade its arsenal. The missiles will be used to protect the skies of the cities that will host the upcoming 2014 FIFA World Cup.

It is worth noting that defense-related foreign dignitaries regularly travel to Brazil to lobby the Dilma Rousseff government in an effort to persuade it to buy more weaponry. For example, the Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu travelled to Brasilia in October 2013 to discuss the sales of the Pantsir-S1 and Igla missile system, a deal which if agreed upon in the coming months, could be worth up to $1 billion. [17] Meanwhile, French President Francois Hollande visited Brazil this past December 2013 to convince the Brazilian government to purchase the Dassault warplanes – an unsuccessful visit as Brasilia chose the Swedish Gripen.

This is not to say that other nations in the Western Hemisphere have not also acquired new military equipment over the past decade. For example, the Venezuelan military has also spent billions of dollars to upgrade its own military, mostly by turning to Russia as a major weapons supplier. Nevertheless, as the Russian media even admits, Russia-Venezuela military relations in the post-Hugo Chávez have not been particularly ideal for business. An October 2013 commentary in the Russian news agency Pravda explains, “All major contracts were tied to late president Hugo Chávez . After his death, against the backdrop of complications of the socio-economic situation in the country, defense cooperation with Russia actually came to a standstill … new Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro is not ready to agree on new [contracts].”

Threats?

The aforementioned article by MilitaryFactory.com concludes, “the Sao Paulo remains a critical cog to Brazilian Navy operations in the region, both for stability and in power across Atlantic-facing South American and Latin American waters. For any modern naval power, the aircraft carrier is the heart and soul of the fleet.”
But does Brazil actually need a carrier? Certainly such a vessel is an example of a naval power as it helps Brazil’s Navy increase its power projection or powers. Rising global powers such as China acquire carriers in order to assert themselves as global naval powers.  On the other hand, other nations that already possess these gigantic warships are suffering from an economic crunch and are re-organizing their armed forces. An example of this is the British military, which plans to eliminate some 20 thousand military personnel across the three branches over the next years, including 6,000 sailors.  The British Navy is developing two new carriers, the HMS Queen Elizabeth and the HMS Prince of Wales, but they have stirred controversy because of high costs and the reduction of naval personnel.

As for Brazil, the country is largely devoid of any major security threats that would make a compelling case for its Navy to have a carrier (or plan for a new one within the coming decade). Relations between Brazil and Venezuela during the Hugo Chávez presidency were rarely troubling and commerce was a strong confidence building mechanism to prevent tensions from escalating. Furthermore, in late 2013, there was a major air force exercise in northern Brazil in which several Western Hemisphere air forces participated, including the U.S. and Venezuela.

Moreover, it would be bizarre to believe that a carrier is needed for protection against some of Brazil’s smaller neighbors like Guyana, Suriname or Uruguay. Likewise, relations with Peru and Colombia are generally cordial, with this being reflected in the inter-agency cooperation against transnational criminal activity like drug trafficking.  Furthermore, while Argentina was once a serious contender to Brazil’s military role in Latin America, today the Argentine armed forces is a fragment of what it once was. (We do not count Bolivia and Paraguay in this analysis since, even though both nations border Brazil, neither possesses sea access).

One argument for a naval build up could be that the carrier and nuclear-powered submarine will help safeguard Brazil’s coast, specially its off-shore oil platforms. The government has sold oil blocs to international oil companies, a move that Brazilian oil workers protested against in 2013. [26] It should be noted that also in 2013 the Brazilian Navy has also acquired three Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPV) for protecting its ports and oil platforms from the British manufacturing giant BAE Systems.Certainly, an argument can be made that the Brazilian Navy needs even more vessels to protect its coastal and off-shore installations; but which country or criminal network will want to attack them is far from clear.

As a final point, it is true that a carrier helps a nation’s naval stature, but the vessel also needs to take part in some kind of naval maneuver in order to showcase that it is operational and helpful. Military exercises with other navies are a good example of this. But one could wonder if the Sao Paulo, once it is operational again and before it is retired, could end up being used as a support vessel for some multinational security operation, either as part of the United Nations or some international coalition combating piracy off the coast of Somalia.

Conclusions

Reporting on the Gripen warplane deal this past December 19, 2013 the defense news website Defense Industry Daily explained that the Brazilian Navy “intends to buy 24 fighters of its own, to operate from the carrier that replaces Nae Sao Paulo beginning in 2025.”  Both an April 29, 2013 article in Defense Industry Daily as well as an April 2013 article a Brazilian website called Defesa Aerea & Naval also mention rumors that a new aircraft carrier currently being developed by the aforementioned DCNS (the project is called PA 2) may be sold to Brazil as France is no longer interested in acquiring it.

It is likely that the Sao Paulo will retire within the next decade. This is logical since the vessel is already over 50 years old and it may prove to be more costly to constantly upgrade and repair it instead of buying a new one. Whether Brazil actually needs a carrier, be it the Sao Paulo or a new one ten years from now, remains a highly debatable issue. A case can be made that the carrier can help protect Brazil’s extensive maritime interests, but it is doubtful that the country will face any conceivable major security threats, i.e. a war with another nation, in the near future. Brazil’s carrier may be one of the least well known and used strategic assets in Latin American military history and in the future.

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Is Boeing's New Submarine-Destroying Warplane a $35 Billion Bust?

While US testers seem to be doing their job, no word from Indian Navy yet on the performance of the Aircraft. 

Indian navy, under able supervision of their incompetent government and Defence Ministry, seem to have not tested the aircraft for deficiencies.Instead their focus is currently on grounding front line battle ready ships and blowing up their own submarines in peacetime.



Boeing designed its P-8A Poseidon warplane to accomplish two missions: scout out wide areas of water, and track down and destroy dangerous enemy submarines gliding beneath it. But a new report out of the Pentagon suggests that Poseidon is failing at both jobs.

According to the Pentagon's chief weapons tester, director of operational testing and evaluation Michael Gilmore, the performance of six Boeing P-8As deployed to Japan from September 2012 to March 2013 has revealed "major deficiencies" in the warplane. Gilmore noted that Poseidon's Raytheon  -built radar shows "limitations for some targets." Additionally, the plane's Northrop Grumman -built electronics provide only "limited threat detection" against enemy anti-aircraft radars.

Overall, Gilmore concluded that the Poseidon was "not effective for the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance mission and is not effective for wide area anti-submarine search." For a program that is expected to cost U.S. taxpayers upwards of $35 billion to purchase 117 Poseidons -- and that Boeing hopes will bring in billions more from dozens of international sales at price tags of $299 million a pop -- this is discouraging news.

Opinions may differ
But not everyone agrees with the report. U.S. Navy 7th Fleet commander Vice Admiral Robert Thomas, for one. He's on record saying the P-8A "represents a significant improvement" over the Navy's older Lockheed Martin P-3 Orion subhunters, and is able to "detect, track, and report on more targets" than the Orion can.

ndersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics Frank Kendall agrees, calling the P-8A Poseidon a "good product." Sure, it would be better to have a "great" product. But the Poseidon wasn't expected to be great right out of the box. Kendall explains that "the plan was to develop a certain set and field a certain set of initial capabilities for local anti-submarine warfare capabilities and then add capabilities to that in increments." Going forward, Boeing's plan is to gradually introduce upgrades that will improve the plane's anti-submarine warfare capability "over several years."

Sky-high hopes, baby steps
Meanwhile, even if the Pentagon's report sounds critical of the Poseidon, it does admit that the plane is effective in providing small-area searches similar to the P-3C Orion it's replacing. The report confirms that the P-8A can, in fact, conduct "unarmed anti-surface warfare missions" and, indeed, does effective "all-weather surface target search." Plus, it offers "significant improvements in hardware reliability, maintainability, and availability" over the P-3, as well as "increased range, payload, and speed" in comparison with the P-3C Orion.

Where work still needs to be done, therefore, is in the area of underwater sub-hunting. But while improvements still need to be made, it sounds like the P-8A Poseidon is at least "good enough" for the Navy and enjoys the service's support. And at the risk of damning with faint praise, at the very least the Poseidon is incrementally better at finding subs than the Orions it is replacing -- and getting better with each round of upgrades.

For Boeing investors, that's the really the important part: As Poseidon is better than the alternative, and extending its lead over time, this $35 billion weapons program should be safe. 

Saturday, February 1, 2014

This is Russia's new nuclear attack submarine - Severodvinsk—the pride of the Russian Navy








Abrupt Climate Change - by Paul Beckwith

by Paul Beckwith

Humans have benefited greatly from a stable climate for the last 11,000 years - roughly 400 generations. Not anymore. We now face an angry climate. One that we have poked in the eye with our fossil fuel stick and awakened. Now we must deal with the consequences. We must set aside our differences and prepare for what we can no longer avoid. And that is massive disruption to our civilizations.

In a nutshell, the logical chain of events occurring is as follows:
  1. Greenhouse gases that humans are putting into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels are trapping extra heat in the earth system (distributed between the oceans (93%), the cryosphere (glaciers, ice sheets, sea ice for 3%), the earth surface (rocks, vegetation, etc. for 3%) and the atmosphere (only an amazingly low 1%). The oceans clearly get the lions share of the energy, and if that 1% heating the atmosphere varies there can be decades of higher or lower warming, as we have seen recently. This water vapor rises and cools condensing into clouds and releasing its stored latent heat which is increasing storm intensity.
  2. (i)Rapidly declining Arctic sea ice (losing about 12% of volume per decade) and (ii)snow cover (losing about 22% of coverage in June per decade) and (iii)darkening of Greenland all cause more solar absorption on the surface and thus amplified Arctic warming (global temperatures have increased (on average) about 0.17oC per decade, the Arctic has increased > 1oC per decade, or about 6x faster)
  3. Equator-to-Arctic temperature difference is thus decreasing rapidly
  4. Less heat transfer occurs from equator to pole (via atmosphere, and thus jet streams become streakier and wavier and slower in west-to-east direction, and via ocean currents (like Gulf Stream, which slows and overruns continental shelf on Eastern seaboard of U.S.)
  5. Storms (guided by jet streams) are slower and sticking and with more water content are dumping huge torrential rain quantities on cities and widespread regions at higher latitudes than is “normal”.
  6. A relatively rare meteorological event called an “atmospheric river” is now much more common, and injects huge quantities of water over several days to specific regions, such as Banff (with water running downhill to Calgary) and Toronto and Colorado events.
The above is extracted from one of Paul's earlier posts.

Paul discusses more details in the videos below. Our abruptly changing climate system: where we are and where we are going.

Abrupt Climate Change - part 1


And the next part, Abrupt Climate Change - part 2


Extreme weather is like a sledgehammer repeatedly pounding away at the inaction, lethargy, and climate change denial that is prevalent in rich Western countries around the world.

Inevitably, the hammer pounding will increase in frequency, severity, duration, and spatial extent over the next few years until the denial crumbles, in spite of the annual one billion dollars in fossil fuel money that is paid to support fraud by hiding the truth on the threat that we all face. 

A tipping point in collective societal behaviour will occur, and humanity will finally initiate action, albeit frantically, to begin to deal with the largest problem ever faced in our history.




Paul Beckwith is a part-time professor with the laboratory for paleoclimatology and climatology, department of geography, University of Ottawa. He teaches second year climatology/meteorology. His PhD research topic is “Abrupt climate change in the past and present.” He holds an M.Sc. in laser physics and a B.Eng. in engineering physics and reached the rank of chess master in a previous life.