g4lly

ENGAGEZ VOUS !!! ... dans l'armée US :) http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/12/26/military_considers_recruiting_foreigners/ Military considers recruiting foreigners Expedited citizenship would be an incentive WASHINGTON -- The armed forces, already struggling to meet recruiting goals, are considering expanding the number of noncitizens in the ranks -- including disputed proposals to open recruiting stations overseas and putting more immigrants on a faster track to US citizenship if they volunteer -- according to Pentagon officials. Foreign citizens serving in the US military is a highly charged issue, which could expose the Pentagon to criticism that it is essentially using mercenaries to defend the country. Other analysts voice concern that a large contingent of noncitizens under arms could jeopardize national security or reflect badly on Americans' willingness to serve in uniform. The idea of signing up foreigners who are seeking US citizenship is gaining traction as a way to address a critical need for the Pentagon, while fully absorbing some of the roughly one million immigrants that enter the United States legally each year. The proposal to induct more noncitizens, which is still largely on the drawing board, has to clear a number of hurdles. So far, the Pentagon has been quiet about specifics -- including who would be eligible to join, where the recruiting stations would be, and what the minimum standards might involve, including English proficiency. In the meantime, the Pentagon and immigration authorities have expanded a program that accelerates citizenship for legal residents who volunteer for the military. And since Sept. 11, 2001, the number of imm igrants in uniform who have become US citizens has increased from 750 in 2001 to almost 4,600 last year, according to military statistics. With severe manpower strains because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and a mandate to expand the overall size of the military -- the Pentagon is under pressure to consider a variety of proposals involving foreign recruits, according to a military affairs analyst. "It works as a military idea and it works in the context of American immigration," said Thomas Donnelly , a military scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington and a leading proponent of recruiting more foreigners to serve in the military. As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan grind on, the Pentagon has warned Congress and the White House that the military is stretched "to the breaking point." Both President Bush and Robert M. Gates, his new defense secretary, have acknowledged that the total size of the military must be expanded to help alleviate the strain on ground troops, many of whom have been deployed repeatedly in combat theaters. Bush said last week that he has ordered Gates to come up with a plan for the first significant increase in ground forces since the end of the Cold War. Democrats who are preparing to take control of Congress, meanwhile, promise to make increasing the size of the military one of their top legislative priorities in 2007. "With today's demands placing such a high strain on our service members, it becomes more crucial than ever that we work to alleviate their burden," said Representative Ike Skelton , a Missouri Democrat who is set to chair the House Armed Services Committee, and who has been calling for a larger Army for more than a decade. But it would take years and billions of dollars to recruit, train, and equip the 30,000 troops and 5,000 Marines the Pentagon says it needs. And military recruiters, fighting the perception that signing up means a ticket to Baghdad, have had to rely on financial incentives and lower standards to meet their quotas. That has led Pentagon officials to consider casting a wider net for noncitizens who are already here, said Lieutenant Colonel Bryan Hilferty , an Army spokesman. Already, the Army and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement division of the Department of Homeland Security have "made it easier for green-card holders who do enlist to get their citizenship," Hilferty said. Other Army officials, who asked not to be identified, said personnel officials are working with Congress and other parts of the government to test the feasibility of going beyond US borders to recruit soldiers and Marines. Currently, Pentagon policy stipulates that only immigrants legally residing in the United States are eligible to enlist. There are currently about 30,000 noncitizens who serve in the US armed forces, making up about 2 percent of the active-duty force, according to statistics from the military and the Council on Foreign Relations. About 100 noncitizens have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. A recent change in US law, however, gave the Pentagon authority to bring immigrants to the United States if it determines it is vital to national security. So far, the Pentagon has not taken advantage of it, but the calls are growing to take use the new authority. Indeed, some top military thinkers believe the United States should go as far as targeting foreigners in their native countries. "It's a little dramatic," said Michael O'Hanlon , a military specialist at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution and another supporter of the proposal. "But if you don't get some new idea how to do this, we will not be able to achieve an increase" in the size of the armed forces. "We have already done the standard things to recruit new soldiers, including using more recruiters and new advertising campaigns," O'Hanlon added. O'Hanlon and others noted that the country has relied before on sizable numbers of noncitizens to serve in the military -- in the Revolutionary War, for example, German and French soldiers served alongside the colonists, and locals were recruited into US ranks to fight insurgents in the Philippines. Other nations have recruited foreign citizens: In France, the famed Foreign Legion relies on about 8,000 noncitizens; Nepalese soldiers called Gurkhas have fought and died with British Army forces for two centuries; and the Swiss Guard, which protects the Vatican, consists of troops who hail from many nations. "It is not without historical precedent," said Donnelly, author of a recent book titled "The Army We Need," which advocates for a larger military. Still, to some military officials and civil rights groups, relying on large number of foreigners to serve in the military is offensive. The Hispanic rights advocacy group National Council of La Raza has said the plan sends the wrong message that Americans themselves are not willing to sacrifice to defend their country. Officials have also raised concerns that immigrants would be disproportionately sent to the front lines as "cannon fodder" in any conflict. Some within the Army privately express concern that a big push to recruit noncitizens would smack of "the decline of the American empire," as one Army official who asked not to be identified put it. Officially, the military remains confident that it can meet recruiting goals -- no matter how large the military is increased -- without having to rely on foreigners. "The Army can grow to whatever size the nation wants us to grow to," Hilferty said. "National defense is a national challenge, not the Army's challenge." He pointed out that just 15 years ago, during the Gulf War, the Army had a total of about 730,000 active-duty soldiers, amounting to about one American in 350 who were serving in the active-duty Army. "Today, with 300 million Americans and about 500,000 active-duty soldiers, only about one American in 600 is an active-duty soldier," he said. "America did then, and we do now, have an all-volunteer force, and I see no reason why America couldn't increase the number of Americans serving." But Max Boot, a national security specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that the number of noncitizens the armed forces have now is relatively small by historical standards. "In the 19th century, when the foreign-born population of the United States was much higher, so was the percentage of foreigners serving in the military," Boot wrote in 2005. "During the Civil War, at least 20 percent of Union soldiers were immigrants, and many of them had just stepped off the boat before donning a blue uniform. There were even entire units, like the 15th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry [the Scandinavian Regiment] and General Louis Blenker's German Division, where English was hardly spoken." "The military would do well today to open its ranks not only to legal immigrants but also to illegal ones and, as important, to untold numbers of young men and women who are not here now but would like to come," Boot added. "No doubt many would be willing to serve for some set period, in return for one of the world's most precious commodities -- US citizenship. Some might deride those who sign up as mercenaries, but these troops would have significantly different motives than the usual soldier of fortune." Bryan Bender can be reached at bender@globe.com.

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/5580/ Excalibur 1b Program Completes 45 Flight Tests of Low-Cost Titanium Base Raytheon Company fired its 45th low-cost titanium base as part of design testing for the Excalibur 1b precision-guided artillery projectile. The Excalibur 1b design is based on Raytheon's combat-proven Excalibur 1a. It uses fewer parts and requires simpler manufacturing, resulting in lower costs and increased reliability. Excalibur's proven six-meter (19.7 feet) accuracy reduces collateral damage, which saves warfighter lives and reduces the chance of civilian casualties. "Raytheon is the industry leader in the production of precision-guided projectiles," said Jim Riley, Raytheon Missile Systems' vice president of Land Combat. "We started testing the new base in July 2008, and we have consistently met all our testing objectives." The projectiles were stable during flight, and the stowed fins deployed after clearing the gun. The tests also demonstrated the fins' structural integrity and ability to synchronously deploy and lock. Component testing of the new base design will continue through May 2009. "During these test flights, we've integrated base bleed into the fin extension. That's an important step on the road to delivering Excalibur 1b to the U.S. Army," said Steve Bennett, Raytheon Missile Systems' Excalibur program director. "We feel confident Excalibur 1b will meet the U.S. Army's cost objectives and exceed the incredible performance expectations established by Excalibur 1a."

Vu les prestations précédentes ...

Pas tapé ... je colle ca la parce que je sais pas trop ou le mettre ailleurs. http://www.lemonde.fr/organisations-internationales/article/2009/02/16/les-derives-des-politiques-antiterroristes-pesent-sur-les-democraties-occidentales_1156171_3220.html Les dérives des politiques antiterroristes pèsent sur les démocraties occidentales La Commission internationale de juristes (CIJ), une ONG basée à Genève qui regroupe de nombreux professionnels reconnus du droit international, a publié, lundi 16 février, un rapport (PDF, en anglais) qui critique les atteintes aux droits de l'homme et aux grands textes internationaux commises par les Etats au nom de la lutte contre le terrorisme. Pendant trois ans, neuf juristes, dont Mary Robinson, ancienne présidente de l'Irlande et ex-commissaire des Nations unies aux droits de l'homme, ont ainsi rencontré des victimes de la lutte antiterroriste et des représentants associatifs et gouvernementaux dans plus de quarante pays. Le constat est inquiétant. Selon le rapport, plusieurs mesures adoptées par les Etats "sont illégales, voire contre-productives" au regard du droit international, et les "atteintes aux droits de l'homme ont été bien plus graves qu'on ne pouvait l'imaginer" depuis les attentats du 11-Septembre. Le comité estime ainsi que l'arsenal juridique qui existait avant cette date suffisait déjà pour lutter contre le terrorisme. Selon lui, plusieurs Etats, y compris en Occident, n'ont pas hésité à renier "les engagements qu'ils ont pris dans le cadre de traités", notamment en remettant en cause "l'interdiction de la torture et des traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants, les disparitions forcées et la garantie d'un procès équitable". Les Etats-Unis sont, à ce titre, largement critiqués pour la prison de Guantanamo et l'usage de la torture. Mais le comité pointe les contradictions de l'ensemble des Etats démocratiques qui "participent aujourd'hui à l'érosion du droit international (...) en se rendant complices de violations perpétrées par d'autres Etats ou en faisant montre de tolérance à leur égard". En s'appuyant sur plusieurs exemples historiques, comme celui de l'Irlande du Nord, le comité veut montrer que l'instauration de procédures juridiques et policières spécifiques, au mépris du droit international, est souvent une mauvaise solution parce qu'elle favorise "les tensions communautaires" et le "recrutement par les groupes armés". LA FRANCE CRITIQUÉE POUR SES EXPULSIONS ADMINISTRATIVES Le rapport critique la France pour ses expulsions administratives d'étrangers "menaçant la sécurité nationale". Sur simple rapport des services de renseignement, le ministère de l'intérieur peut en effet prendre un arrêté d'expulsion. S'il peut faire l'objet d'un appel, cet arrêté n'est pas automatiquement suspensif. Le comité assure ainsi que la France a expulsé "des individus qui risquent la torture dans leur pays d'origine (...) avant même que leur appel ait été examiné et alors que leur expulsion a été annulée par la suite". Ils critiquent également la législation sur l'immigration française qui, depuis 2003, autorise les expulsions administratives pour incitation à la haine raciale. Selon des témoignages recueillis par le comité, le gouvernement a plusieurs fois utilisé cette législation pour expulser abusivement des individus au risque d'atteindre à la liberté d'expression. "L'expulsion de musulmans renforce le sentiment d'exclusion et de stigmatisation au sein de la communauté musulmane en France, au risque d'encourager une éventuelle radicalisation, affirme le rapport. Souvent, les mesures de lutte contre le terrorisme conduisent à la mise au ban des communautés locales alors que leur pleine implication est pourtant essentielle à la réussite de ces mesures." Le CIJ espère obtenir grâce à ce rapport "l'appui actif d'une opinion publique informée et d'une société civile forte" qui puissent faire pression sur les Etats pour "qu'ils développent une stratégie globale de lutte contre le terrorisme, en interdisant le recours à la torture et toute autre forme de violation des droits de l'homme".

Euh ... il suffit de faire page précédente ... une ou deux fois pour retrouver ton message normalement.

C'est vachement rassurant sur l'audition de nos SNLE ... le pump jet glissant tout le long de la coque est passé inapercu :lol: ... il a du bien morfler le sonar de proue ...

Ou ca quatre dans les fantasme de Bourdin ?! 3 ... enfin plutot deux maintenant :lol: va falloir accélérer la mise en service du petit dernier pour sauver les meuble ... La question c'est : - combien va couter le carton ... forcément tres cher. - comment on maintient notre permanence de dissuasion océano avec deux SNLE ...

Euhhhh nan ...

Le ville de bordeaux fait 160 m ... la porte fait 22m sur 14m ... la soute aussi. Résultat on peut ballader mimile dedans ... Mais pour l'opérer depuis c'est une autre affaire, vu que la porte s'ouvre a moins d'un metre de l'eau en charge. Y coller une plateforme de 60m de long ... meme en grattant un peu a moins de 3m au dessus de l'eau et sur laquelle il faille pouvoir remonter mimile puis le faire décollé est assez cavalier :) La seul solution crédible pour opérer mimile en mer c'est les "Mobile Landing Plateform" avec transit sur le pont d'un PA - puis transfert par ses propre moyen - ... ou dans la soute d'un RoRo - puis transfert porte a porte - ...

Erf vla que libé et l'express publient les meme articles :lol: ca m'apprendra a lire.

Yep

Philippe Séguin ... président de la cours des comptes. L'endettement de la France se situe entre 67 et 70% de PIB ... et visiblement a l'image de la période 93/96 l'avenir de la dette francaise court terme l'inquiete vraiment :lol: http://www.easybourse.com/bourse-information/actualite/10152-philippe-seguin-donne-la-gueule-de-bois-a-l-etat Cour des comptes : Séguin donne la gueule de bois à l’Etat C’est un rituel attendu chaque année avec une certaine émotion, que la Cour des comptes n’a pas manqué : la présentation de son rapport annuel devant la presse. Et en cette période marquée par la crise économique et financière, force est de constater que les enquêtes et recommandations de l'institution 'valaient le déplacement' selon les mots de son Premier président, Philippe Séguin. De nombreux sujets furent évoqués, mais il ressort surtout que le coût des mesures d’aide aux banques et du plan de relance risque d’avoir un impact 'massif et durable sur la dette publique'… C’est en termes œnologiques que le Premier président de la Cour des comptes a souhaité entamer la présentation du fameux rapport annuel de la Cour. Et pour 2008, le «millésime» ne manque pas de saveurs ni de corps : de la critique du pilotage des finances publiques dans la crise, à celle du pilotage et du contrôle de la gestion des collectivités territoriales, en passant par la gestion des cessions immobilières de prestige par l’Etat ou la prise en compte des demandes d’asile… de nombreux thèmes sont passés entre les mains des magistrats de la rue Cambon avec, à la clef, un rapport de près de 1000 pages… Les finances publiques dans la crise Comme tout bon vin, le rapport annuel de la Cour a «une très bonne attaque», selon Philippe Séguin, consacrée aux finances publiques dans la crise. Le constat de la Cour est ici sans appel, la France aborderait la récession «dans une situation plus mauvaise qu’au début des récessions précédentes». Force est en effet de constater que la dette publique, qui atteint aujourd’hui 64% du PIB, n’était que de 40% à la fin de 1992, c’est-à-dire au moment du démarrage de la récession de 1993. «En 1993, rappelle en effet la Cour, le déficit a atteint 6,4% du PIB et, malgré une reprise de la croissance dès 1994, il est resté supérieur à 3% jusqu'en 1997. La dette publique est alors passée de 40% du PIB à 59% fin 1997. La crise de 1993 a ainsi marqué un décrochement durable des finances publiques et une même évolution amènerait la dette publique jusqu'à 85% du PIB fin 2012». La situation actuelle, souligne la Cour, est d’autant plus inquiétante que contrairement à nos voisins européens, nos comptes publics n’ont toujours pas été rééquilibrés pendant la précédente période de croissance relativement soutenue, et que nos marges de manœuvres sont faibles en raison d’un taux de prélèvements obligatoires déjà placé parmi les plus élevés des membres de l’OCDE. Au total donc, le déficit public de la France pourrait probablement avoisiner les 3,2% du produit intérieur brut en 2008 et son niveau d'endettement risquerait lui de flirter avec les 85% en 2012. L’institution a ainsi épinglé les mesures de soutien à l'économie annoncées par le gouvernement et censées n’avoir qu'un effet transitoire sur le déficit. En réalité estime la Cour, ces dernières pourraient dégrader massivement et durablement la dette. Quant aux prévisions du gouvernement qui table sur un retour à la croissance en 2010, même dans le cas où cette hypothèse serait vérifiée, la Cour des comptes rappellent que le supplément de dette par rapport à 2007 serait, en 2010, de 250 milliards d’euros (fin 2007, la dette s’élevait à plus de 1 200 milliards d’euros). En conséquence, l’institution de la rue Cambon a émis un certain nombre de recommandations visant à stabiliser et réduire rapidement la dette. A commencer par le fait qu’il faut que les mesures de relance restent «limitées dans le temps»… Besoin de réformes structurelles Conformément aux dires du gouvernement, la Cour a jugé que les mesures de financement des banques, prises en novembre, pourraient avoir peu d’impact sur le déficit, mais «plus sûrement un effet durable, de 1 à 2 point de PIB au minimum, sur la dette des administrations publiques». De même, alors que le gouvernement assure que le plan de relance de 26 milliards d'euros comprend des mesures en principe réversibles et temporaires (représentant un surcroît de 18,5 milliards d'euros pour le déficit public 2009), les sages de la rue Cambon estiment qu’«il n'est cependant pas assuré que ces mesures restent toutes temporaires». Les conditions sont en effet difficiles selon eux : «la dette financière de l'Etat a dépassé pour la première fois les 1 000 milliards d'euros en octobre et la dette des administrations publiques approchait les 1 300 milliards à la fin de 2008, soit 50 000 euros par actif occupé contre 47 000 à la fin de 2007.» Aussi la Cour recommande-t-elle une «gestion soutenable» des finances publiques sur le long terme, avec la poursuite de réformes structurelles pour tenir les dépenses. «La maîtrise des dépenses publiques n’est elle-même pas acquise.» La Cour le soulignait déjà dans son rapport de juin 2008 : «les réformes alors engagées étaient insuffisantes pour limiter la croissance des dépenses à 1% en volume et par an, objectif du gouvernement». Son diagnostic reste, selon son premier président, «d’actualité.» De fait, cet objectif du gouvernement suppose d'économiser 50 milliards d'euros à l'horizon de 2012, or, selon Philippe Séguin, «la Révision générale des politiques publiques a été interrompue alors que les mesures décidées [...] dégageront, selon les estimations du gouvernement, une économie de seulement six milliards à cet horizon».

Comment je t'ai grillé sur le coup :lol: http://www.air-defense.net/Forum_AD/index.php?topic=1969.msg362628#msg362628 Ce qui est sûr maintenant c'est que la Royale a la signature du HMS Vanguard :lol: ... c'est son juste avant le crassshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ! sur l'enregistrement :) Ca se trouve on a embarqué un morceau du pump jet aussi :lol: Moi je leur tire mon chapeau c'est quand meme fort ... sur 361 millions de kilometres carré d'océan ... ils ont réussis a se trouver exactement au meme endroit, à la même profondeur et au meme moment ... et avec des vitesse différente.

http://www.lexpress.fr/actualites/2/le-souvenir-amer-des-veterans-sovietiques-d-afghanistan_740978.html MOSCOU - Vingt ans après leur retraite humiliante d'Afghanistan, les anciens combattants soviétiques n'ont qu'un message à adresser aux Etats-Unis: la guerre est ingagnable dans ce pays. Un cimetière de tanks soviétiques, au nord de Kaboul. Vingt ans après leur retraite humiliante d'Afghanistan, les anciens combattants soviétiques n'ont qu'un message à adresser aux Etats-Unis: la guerre est ingagnable dans ce pays. (Reuters/Ahmad Masood) Un "cimetière" de tanks soviétiques, au nord de Kaboul. Vingt ans après leur retraite humiliante d'Afghanistan, les anciens combattants soviétiques n'ont qu'un message à adresser aux Etats-Unis: la guerre est ingagnable dans ce pays. (Reuters/Ahmad Masood) Les derniers soldats soviétiques ont quitté le sol afghan le 15 février 1989, après dix ans de combats, 15.000 morts dans leurs rangs et la conviction, pour toute une génération, d'avoir combattu pour rien. La décision du nouveau gouvernement américain d'envoyer des renforts dans le pays pour lutter contre l'insurrection islamiste les replonge en plein cauchemar. "C'est comme se battre contre du sable. Aucune force au monde ne peut prendre le dessus sur les Afghans", assure l'ancien officier Oleg Koubanov, un homme trapu âgé de 47 ans, la médaille de l'Ordre de l'Etoile rouge fièrement accrochée à la poitrine à l'occasion d'une commémoration vendredi à Moscou. "C'est leur terre sainte. Peu importe que vous soyez russes ou américains. Nous sommes tous des soldats à leurs yeux", explique-t-il encore. Comme plusieurs milliers d'autres anciens combattants, certains en costume de ville, d'autres en tenue de combat, Koubanov est venu assister à un concert somptueux financé par la mairie de la capitale. "LE NOMBRE NE RÉSOUT RIEN" L'heure est aux retrouvailles. On s'embrasse, on se prend en photo, puis on discute de l'intention du président Barack Obama de porter les effectifs américains de 37.000 à 60.000 hommes dans les prochains mois. Au plus fort de la guerre de 1979-89, les Soviétiques étaient 150.000 en Afghanistan. "Le nombre ne résout rien", affirme Chamil Tioukteïev, 59 ans, qui a commandé un régiment entre 1986 et 1988. "Vous pouvez mettre un soldat devant chaque maison ou installer une base sur chaque montagne. Nous l'avons constaté nous-mêmes. Plus vous envoyez des troupes, plus vous rencontrez de résistance." Les chars soviétiques ont envahi l'Afghanistan en 1979, à la demande du gouvernement communiste alors au pouvoir à Kaboul. Après une décennie à envoyer toujours plus de soldats, Mikhaïl Gorbatchev a sonné la retraite en 1989. "Plus ils enverront de soldats, plus ils en perdront", prédit Andreï Bandarenko, un ancien officier des forces spéciales âgé de 42 ans, à propos des plans américains. "Qu'est-ce qu'Obama sait de la situation sur le terrain? Nous avions aussi notre imbécile, Gorbatchev, qui en savait encore moins." Vingt ans après, Bandarenko ressent toujours de l'amertume au souvenir de sa retraite dans les montagnes au milieu de l'hiver, par moins trente degrés. L'état-major soviétique, dit-il, n'avait pas mesuré la difficulté de se battre contre des moudjahidine maîtres du terrain, dans des montagnes arides où les températures peuvent plonger en quelques heures d'une chaleur caniculaire à un froid glacial. A l'image des Américains, les Soviétiques avaient tenté de transformer l'Afghanistan en un pays unifié, au-delà des rivalités ethniques ou tribales, rappelle encore Bandarenko. "Il n'y a pas de langage commun entre les groupes ethniques, entre les clans. Ils sont impossibles à contrôler." DE GRANDS OBJECTIFS Les Etats-Unis rejettent la comparaison avec l'Union soviétique, en soulignant qu'ils veulent apporter la liberté à un pays que Moscou voulait assujettir. L'affirmation fait sourire l'ancien instructeur de pilotes d'hélicoptères Gourgen Karapetian, 73 ans. "Nous avions de grands objectifs nous aussi", dit-il. On nous disait que le communisme apporterait des écoles, des routes, l'électricité, transformerait une société primitive. "J'étais persuadé que nous pourrions aider ce peuple, améliorer sa vie. Les Américains veulent leur donner la démocratie, mais ils n'en veulent pas. Ils vivent selon leurs propres règles." Iouri Chaidourov, un ancien soldat âgé de 47 ans à la poitrine bardée de médailles, estime que la meilleure leçon à tirer, pour les Américains, de l'expérience soviétique serait de simplement accepter la défaite. "Ils ne gagneront jamais. Il faut qu'ils partent avant qu'il ne soit trop tard."

Attention ca vient du SUN ... http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2240543.ece BRITISH and French nuclear submarines which collided deep under the Atlantic could have sunk or released deadly radioactivity, it emerged last night. The Royal Navy’s HMS Vanguard and the French Navy’s Le Triomphant are both nuclear powered and were carrying nuke missiles. Between them they had around 250 sailors on board. A senior Navy source said: “The potential consequences are unthinkable. It’s very unlikely there would have been a nuclear explosion. “But a radioactive leak was a possibility. Worse, we could have lost the crew and warheads. That would have been a national disaster.” The collision is believed to have taken place on February 3 or 4, in mid-Atlantic. Both subs were submerged and on separate missions. Row As inquiries began, naval sources said it was a millions-to-one unlucky chance both subs were in the same patch of sea. Warships have sonar gear which locates submarines by sound waves. But modern anti-sonar technology is so good it is possible neither boat “saw” the other. A senior military source said: “The lines between London and Paris have been hot.” The MoD insisted last night there had been no nuclear security breach. But this is the biggest embarrassment to the Navy since Iran captured 15 sailors in 2007. The naval source said: “Crashing a nuclear submarine is as serious as it gets.” Vanguard is one of Britain’s four V-Class subs forming our Trident nuclear deterrent. Each is armed with 16 ballistic missiles. She was last night towed into Faslane in Scotland, with dents and scrapes visible on her hull. Triomphant limped to Brest with extensive damage to her sonar dome. Triomphant has a crew of 101. Vanguard weighs 16,000 tons, is 150 metres long and has a crew of 140. The MoD said it did not comment on submarine operations. Pour ceux qui on du mal avec l'anglais ... Le HMS Vanguard et le Le Triomphant seraient rentré en collision dans la nuit du 3 au 4 ... Le triomphant est depuis retourné a Brest pour réparation suis a une collision avec un objet immergé ... Pendant ce temps le HMS Vanguad a été remorqué a Faslane avec des trace d'impact et d'éraflure sur la coque. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1146124/British-French-submarines-packed-nuclear-missiles-crash-underwater.html British and French nuclear submarines loaded with missiles collide underwater British and French submarines armed with ballistic missiles threatened a nuclear disaster after colliding in the Atlantic, it emerged last night. The crash is believed to have occurred after state-of-the-art technology fitted in both vessels, which is designed to detect other submarines, apparently failed completely. Each boat is a key part of their respective countries' nuclear deterrent, ready to unleash hugely destructive weapons at a moment’s notice. While both countries claim that security was not comprised during the collision, wide-scale enquiries are currently underway on both sides of the Channel. HMS Vanguard HMS Vanguard, the lead boat of her class in the Royal Navy, had to be towed back to her base in Scotland after the underwater mishap French Navy sources confirm that Le Triomphant, one of four strategic nuclear submarines of the ‘Force de Frappe’ (Strike Force), was returning from a 70-day tour of duty when it collided with HMS Vanguard. During heavy seas in the middle of the night between February 3 and 4, French sailors heard a loud ‘bang’ that all but destroyed the submarine's sonar dome. This part of the boat should have detected the Vanguard in the first place, but Le Triomphant’s crew of 101 neither saw or heard anything before the collision. Between them the submarines had 250 sailors on board. A senior Navy source told The Sun: 'The potential consequences are unthinkable. It's very unlikely there would have been a nuclear explosion. But a radioactive leak was a possibility. Worse, we could have lost the crew and warheads. That would have been a national disaster.' As inquiries began, naval sources said it was a million to one unlucky chance both subs were in the same patch of sea. A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: 'It is our policy not to comment on submarine operational matters, but we can confirm that the UK’s deterrent capability has remained unaffected at all times and there has been no compromise to nuclear safety.' French sources confirmed Le Triomphant, pictured, was involved in a collision with Vanguard The French last night also tried to play down the collision, with a Navy spokesman saying: ‘The collision did not result in injuries among the crew and did not jeopardise nuclear security at any moment.’ Le Triomphant took at least three days to limp back to her home port, although she did not have to be towed. HMS Vanguard, by contrast, apparently had to be towed back to her home base in Faslane, Scotland. With a complement of 135, she is the lead boat of the Vanguard class of submarines which carry Trident ballistic missiles around the world. Le Triomphant is also the lead ship in her own class of French nuclear submarines. Both vessels boast 16 M45 ballistic missiles, weighing 35 tons each, which carry six warheads with a range of around 5000 miles. France’s Atlantic coast is notorious for being a ‘submarine graveyard’ because of the number of underwater craft, mainly German U-Boats, sunk in the area during the Second World War. The story of one was immortalised in the classic 1981 film Das Boot. This 1994 photo taken by a US Navy employee shows HMS Vanguard arriving in port in Florida Two sailors died from a blast on a British nuclear submarine in March 2007. An oxygen generator blew up as HMS Tireless cruised beneath the Arctic ice. The tiny compartment the men were in quickly filled with smoke, but rescuers could not open doors buckled by the explosion. Operator Mechanic Anthony Huntrod, 20, from Sunderland, and Leading Mechanic Operator Paul McCann, 32, from Halesowen, West Midlands, were dead by the time their shipmates reached them. The deaths led to Armed Forces Minister Bob Ainsworth issuing an 'unreserved' apology in the House of Commons, after it emerged that the oxygen machine which exploded had been contaminated with oil. A Board of Inquiry heavily criticised the Navy and the Ministry of Defence blamed 'systematic failings' for the tragedy. Bon visiblement les sous marins francais son plus sourd que les anglais bruyant :lol: ... par contre pour la solidité la mechnique anglaise a été mise KO dans l'éperonnage :) Bénéfice de l'exploit : - On a la signature du Vanguard :lol: immanquablement le bruit avant le crashhhhhhhhh! sur l'enregistrement :) - On a plus que 2 SNLE en état ... y en a qui vont devoir faire des heures sup :lol: - La réparation risque d'etre longue et couteuse ... taper dans le cul d'un SNLE c'est pas comme taper un conteneur ... Le pump jet anglois a du faire du hachis avec le dome et le sonar :lol: - Finalement c'est pas mal d'avoir une composante nuke aero :)

[dailymotion=425,350]x8da6d[/dailymotion] [dailymotion=425,350]x46whh[/dailymotion] o

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/opinion/15arquilla.html The Coming Swarm WITH three Afghan government ministries in Kabul hit by simultaneous suicide attacks this week, by a total of just eight terrorists, it seems that a new “Mumbai model” of swarming, smaller-scale terrorist violence is emerging. The basic concept is that hitting several targets at once, even with just a few fighters at each site, can cause fits for elite counterterrorist forces that are often manpower-heavy, far away and organized to deal with only one crisis at a time. This approach certainly worked in Mumbai, India, last November, where five two-man teams of Lashkar-e-Taiba operatives held the city hostage for two days, killing 179 people. The Indian security forces, many of which had to be flown in from New Delhi, simply had little ability to strike back at more than one site at a time. While it’s true that the assaults in Kabul seem to be echoes of Mumbai, the fact is that Al Qaeda and its affiliates have been using these sorts of swarm tactics for several years. Jemaah Islamiyah — the group responsible for the Bali nightclub attack that killed 202 people in 2002 — mounted simultaneous attacks on 16 Christian churches in Indonesia on Christmas Eve in 2000, befuddling security forces. Even 9/11 itself had swarm-like characteristics, as four small teams of Qaeda operatives simultaneously seized commercial aircraft and turned them into missiles, flummoxing all our defensive responses. In the years since, Al Qaeda has coordinated swarm attacks in Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Turkey, Yemen and elsewhere. And at the height of the insurgency in Iraq, terrorists repeatedly used swarms on targets as small as truck convoys and as large as whole cities. This pattern suggests that Americans should brace for a coming swarm. Right now, most of our cities would be as hard-pressed as Mumbai was to deal with several simultaneous attacks. Our elite federal and military counterterrorist units would most likely find their responses slowed, to varying degrees, by distance and the need to clarify jurisdiction. While the specifics of the federal counterterrorism strategy are classified, what is in the public record indicates that the plan contemplates having to deal with as many as three sites being simultaneously hit and using “overwhelming force” against the terrorists, which probably means mustering as many as 3,000 ground troops to the site. If that’s an accurate picture, it doesn’t bode well. We would most likely have far too few such elite units for dealing with a large number of small terrorist teams carrying out simultaneous attacks across a region or even a single city. Nightmare possibilities include synchronized assaults on several shopping malls, high-rise office buildings or other places that have lots of people and relatively few exits. Another option would be to set loose half a dozen two-man sniper teams in some metropolitan area — you only have to recall the havoc caused by the Washington sniper in 2002 to imagine how huge a panic a slightly larger version of that form of terrorism would cause. So how are swarms to be countered? The simplest way is to create many more units able to respond to simultaneous, small-scale attacks and spread them around the country. This means jettisoning the idea of overwhelming force in favor of small units that are not “elite” but rather “good enough” to tangle with terrorist teams. In dealing with swarms, economizing on force is essential. We’ve actually had a good test case in Iraq over the past two years. Instead of responding to insurgent attacks by sending out large numbers of troops from distant operating bases, the military strategy is now based on hundreds of smaller outposts in which 40 or 50 American troops are permanently stationed and prepared to act swiftly against attackers. Indeed, their very presence in Iraqi communities is a big deterrent. It’s small surprise that overall violence across Iraq has dropped by about 80 percent in that period. For the defense of American cities against terrorist swarms, the key would be to use local police officers as the first line of defense instead of relying on the military. The first step would be to create lots of small counterterrorism posts throughout urban areas instead of keeping police officers in large, centralized precinct houses. This is consistent with existing notions of community-based policing, and could even include an element of outreach to residents similar to that undertaken in the Sunni areas of Iraq — even if it were to mean taking the paradoxical turn of negotiating with gangs about security. At the federal level, we should stop thinking in terms of moving thousands of troops across the country and instead distribute small response units far more widely. Cities, states and Washington should work out clear rules in advance for using military forces in a counterterrorist role, to avoid any bickering or delay during a crisis. Reserve and National Guard units should train and field many more units able to take on small teams of terrorist gunmen and bombers. Think of them as latter-day Minutemen. Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Turkey and Yemen all responded to Qaeda attacks with similar “packetizing” initiatives involving the police and armed forces; and while that hasn’t eliminated swarm attacks, the terrorists have been far less effective and many lives have been saved. As for Afghanistan, where the swarm has just arrived, there is still time to realize the merits of forming lots of small units and sprinkling them about in a countrywide network of outposts. As President Obama looks to send more troops to that war, let’s make sure the Pentagon does it the right way. Yes, the swarm will be heading our way, too. We need to get smaller, closer and quicker. The sooner the better. John Arquilla teaches in the special operations program at the Naval Postgraduate School and is the author of “Worst Enemy: The Reluctant Transformation of the American Military.” http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2009/02/journal-swarming-attacks.html JOURNAL: Swarming Attacks My friend, the great military theoretician John Arquilla (he's not only one of the most gracious people I've ever met, he's also the author of many seminal works that have greatly influence my thinking) has an excellent new article in the New York Times called "The Coming Swarm." It's essentially a warning that swarming attacks of what he terms "the Mumbai model," will become more frequent and most will be successful. John is definitely correct. It's my belief, and I suspect that John would concur, that the reason we will see more swarming is due to the pervasive influence of decentralized organizational forms, like open source insurgency, on warfare's evolution. Swarming is a characteristic of these loosely connected organizations. Potential development paths for which we have ample evidence (seen in early proving grounds for modern warfare like Iraq) include: * More ambitious attacks that eventually attempt complete and sustained urban takedowns. See "The Coming Urban Terror" for more on how physical attacks and systems disruption can combine to fully disrupt cities. * Rapid innovation for DIY weapons development. See "Tinkering Networks" for more. * The development of strategy without generals or think tanks. See "Emergent Intelligence" for more. NOTE: Since systemic shocks, like the current debt-deflation depression, catalyze the growth of open source insurgency, we can expect to see an accelerating wave of swarming attacks in the future. When things eventually erupt, we will see fewer placards (protest doesn't work anymore) and more bombs. NOTE2: I suspect that one reason for the atrocious behavior of our current crop of elites is that they (being historically naive) don't fear the mob anymore. They should.

Euh c'est pas le tout de mettre mimile dans le hangar au forceps ... faut aussi lui prévoir une aire de décollage nan ? tu comptes le débarqué et l'embarquer comment ? Parce que les 30t a vide dépasse un peu les spec des élévateurs et grue ... Alors on peut bien allonger un BPC de quelques dizaine de metre histoire de pouvoir aménager une plateforme au niveau du hangar aero ... et de faire sortir mimile juste en roulant ... m'enfin ca devient compliqué cette obsession pour mimile sur les BPC apres :lol: les machin vont etre plus gros que le CdG :) 36m de hangar aero en plus pour mimile ... plus une bonne grosse cinquantaine de metre pour la plateforme arriere ca fait pas loin de 100m de plus sur les BPC :lol: Bon en meme temps c'est sympa ca fera un plus grand radier un plus grand hangar vehicule toussa ... on pourra meme peut etre y mettre un dock flottant latéral en plus du radier :)

Les bouboule c'est le propulseur ... visiblement il y a une charge heat a l'avant et une autre charge a l'arriere ... peut etre un missile anti structure avec une charge perforante puis une charge explosant a l'intérieur. A priori c'est un saeghe 2 Range: 1000m TOF: 11.5s Guidance: CLOS Penetration: 750mm Velocity: 85m/s Missile Weight: 7.4kg Launcher weight: 5.3kg Tracker weight: 3.1kg Total weight: 15.8kg Visiblement il y a plusieurs modele ... donc un avec un airspike qui sert de détonateur a la précharge heat, et un autre sans spike qui semble plus orienté antistructure.

Tu payes avec quoi qu'on rigole ?

La liste des soucis est longue ... Airbus's A400M May Face Design Overhaul To Meet Performance Targets Airbus is facing much more than just contractual and schedule challenges in its A400M military airlifter program - the company may need to do a great deal of re-engineering work to achieve the aircraft's performance targets. Numerous issues threaten to make the A400M a less attractive and capable aircraft, industry officials say, on top of the well-publicized delays in the flight-test program linked to the lagging engine Fadec development. One key area of concern is that the A400M is overweight, which would negatively affect its payload and range capabilities. According to Airbus Military data, maximum payload is 37 tons and range is 1,780 naut. mi. with a full payload. But people close to the program say the aircraft is considerably heavier in its current development status. The first six units to be used in the flight-test program are 12 tons heavier than planned, according to those executives. A weight-saving campaign has identified a reduction potential of 7 tons. Early production aircraft will only incorporate reductions of 5 tons at most, leaving payload below the 30-ton mark. Airbus Military appears to have informed procurement agency Occar about the likely weight penalty. Some Occar members, including France, have accepted the changes, but Germany, whose air force needs the aircraft for so-called out-of-area deployments that are both payload- and range-critical, has not. If the A400M falls far short of the previous design targets, missions to places such as Afghanistan would become much more complex and costly. Germany plans to use the A400M to transport the Puma armored fighting vehicle that weighs 31.5 tons in its basic version. If Airbus Military cannot recoup more of the payload capabilities, the aircraft would only be able to carry the Puma with a sizable range restriction. Government officials indicate it is unlikely that Germany would reduce its A400M order in favor of other models, such as the C-130J or the C-17 that are being evaluated by the U.K., but mainly for political reasons. A proposal by EADS CEO Louis Gallois to use Airbus A330-200Fs as an interim solution is receiving a lukewarm response at best. "If we wanted to have a commercial freighter, we could simply charter one from Cargolux or somebody else," one German military official says angrily. But Germany's current C-160 Transall transport fleet flies a lot of short-haul domestic legs in Afghanistan to places that cannot accommodate an A330F. One air force official hints that the Transalls could continue operating for several more years instead, as they are well maintained. But Germany leases some Antonov An-124s for missions beyond the C-160 capabilities. If the A400M's biggest customer (60 of 192 units on order) insists on the previous performance guarantees, it could force a major redesign of the aircraft, such as a larger wing to allow for more fuel. But that seems highly unlikely, given the already huge financial and schedule challenges that made Airbus CEO Thomas Enders describe the terms of the current program as being a "mission impossible." On Jan. 9, EADS and Airbus announced a delay of up to four years in the A400M project and proposed renegotiating the contract with the Occar nations. According to the original terms committed to in 2003, EADS is carrying most of the financial risk of the program and may face big penalty payments if no solution is found. In their statement early in the month, Airbus Military and EADS said they "want to discuss the program schedule along with changes to other areas of the contract, including certain technical characteristics of this first-class military aircraft." No additional details were mentioned and Airbus/EADS officials have declined to comment further. Responsibility for the A400M was recently shifted under the Airbus umbrella to reduce management complexity and improve program oversight. Airbus officials suggest the main performance criteria aren't at any particular risk. The executive vice president of programs, Tom Williams, says the more he has been reviewing the program, the more certain he has become that "this is still going to be a bloody good airplane." The aircraft is beating its short-field performance and load targets, he says. However, the fact that Airbus has halted A400M prototype production until "adequate maturity is reached" is interpreted by industry insiders as an indirect admission that there are probably massive changes to the aircraft in the works, making continued production obsolete at this point. Industry officials say the weight problem could well turn out to be the primary issue with the aircraft, and no longer engine software. One observer believes the A400M payload will end up 3-4 tons below the original target, even after the design changes, which could include the introduction of carbon fiber composites in non-critical areas. The three-year timeframe proposed by EADS between the first flight and first delivery at the end of 2012, at the earliest, suggests that modifications to some parts of the aircraft structure are also possible. Some weight-saving initiatives are affecting aircraft operations, though. A hydraulic system to lower the main landing gear on the ground in order to ensure an even loading ramp has been scrapped. That decision means floor beams may have to be reinforced, since heavy tanks are planned to virtually drop down when their center of gravity has passed the loading edge. Executives close to the Europrop International (EPI) engine consortium say Fadec issues with the TP400 are expected to be resolved by June. Gallois said early this month that once an acceptable standard Fadec was provided, the A400M could fly about a month later. But, in addition to software, there are also hardware problems involving the engines. Because of unexpectedly high loads, cracks were found in some of the original design engine gearbox casings. Those needed to be partially strengthened. The executives say upgraded casings have been delivered to the Seville, Spain, final assembly line and will be installed to replace the original parts. Some special operational performance goals are also in doubt, according to people familiar with the details. For example, the A400M may not be able to fly "Sarajevo profile" steep approaches because of possible flutter issues with the propellers. Moreover, officials familiar with the program say some systems may be rejected by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). The agency appears not to agree with how oxygen bottles and fire protection systems are installed in the fuselage and main gear bay. If no agreement is reached, the A400M will not be given the EASA approval needed for planned civil certification. An EASA official says the agency does not comment on ongoing certification processes. EADS is talking with customers about some requirements relief, but company officials claim these have to do with special needs and are not related to fundamental aircraft performance aspects. Enders says both customers and the company's own engineers contributed to some requirements being added that are "technologically hardly feasible or only feasible at a disproportionate amount of cost." Williams says one example is an extreme tactical navigation requirement. It calls for the aircraft to fly low and remain entirely passive - not even using a terrain-following, terrain-avoidance system - to support special operations. Visiblement il y a des soucis structurel sur la cellule ... soucis qui ne se régleront pas forcément avec un soft FADEC mature ...

Yep

On pourrait acheter un An-225 avec et on baladerait mimile sur la galerie comme Bourane :lol:

Je reproche pas qu'on s'échine a éviter que les gens se tue au volant ... ce qui m'étonne c'est qu'on est pas mis les constructeur au parfum avant pour faire le changement avec eux. C'est pas tres compliquer de comprendre qu'un pays ou on peut plus trop s'arsouiller tranquille, et ou l'essence est cher ... va changer de comportement d'achat automobile. Donc la logique aurait été de donner un préavis au constructeur pour qu'il dispose de modèle fini et viable et d'offre différente de celle qui prévalait avant. Pourquoi les allemand continu a se battre pour la liberté des conducteur de polluer et de se tuer ... juste pour vendre encore des bagnole allemande le temps que leur constructeur adapte leurs offres, et change leur clientèle. En france on a un passif merdique en ce qui concerne la fiscalité des carburant et le role statutaire de la bagnole ... pourtant on a déjà eu la claque de 74 mais rien n'y a fait. En plus de cela on innove peu ... et on vend essentiellement sur le segment ultra concurrenciel des voiture moyenne que les autres savent produire aussi bien que nous. Par exemple ... toyota citroen et pijo sorte une C1 107 aygo, censé concurrencer les smart ... mais raté, pas super sexy, désagréable a rouler et a l'habitabilité mal travaillé... Echec ... mais toy qui s'en sort moins mal avec l'aygo - elle est moins moche que les deux autres - lache pas le morceau ... et quelques année plus tard sort l'IQ sur le meme principe ... mais réussi cette fois ... sexy, utra pratique, ultra maniable, et d'un confort tres acceptable pour un petit voiture - en tout cas bien supérieur a la concurrence - ... pendant ce temps peugeot continu a faire végéter les echec 107 et 1007 ... sort un 4x4 dont tout le monde se fout, laisse trainer dans sa gamme une 607 qui a 10 ans et une 407 a l'architecture dépassé, des 208 et 308 qui ressemble a n'importe quelle prod asiatique ... Chez Renault c'est pire ... Vel Satis invendable - pourtant le concept de monospace luxueux était intelligent ... mais la voiture n'est pas assez satutaire. - des laguna architecture a l'ancienne ... et trop cher pour la clientele Renault ... des mégane moyenne mais qui ne sorte pas du lot ... et la voiture qui sauve renault la Clito3. Modus et meme Twingo 2 sont des échec, les nissan note sont bien plus pratique et moins cher. Citroen s'en sort mieux les C4 et les picasso sont des bonne bagnole un peu originale, mais cher, la C5 revu est pas trop mal, les C1 et C2 et C3 doivent etre quasi invendable, comme le 4x4 mitsu rebadgé. Le plus amusant c'est qu'il y a 10 ans tous trois vendait des vehicules electriques ... qu'ils n'ont plus au catalogue, et que maintenant qu'ils ont peut de vehicuel a faible émission ... on leur colle un malus carbone !!! Pareil on aurait pas pu attendre qu'ils se contruisent une gammes de moteur faible émission - bon ok les constructeurs sont des anes qui pensait que le temps de mazout roi durerait encore mille ans ... m'enfin - ... ou faire rentrer la mesure en jeu progressivement. Enfin apres le passage du petrole cher - qui a changé durablement les habitude ce coup ci :) - celui de la recession ... celui des radar auto et des malus carbone... difficile de se relever surtout pour des constructeur coincé dans leur modele automobile des année 80. Le probleme est le meme pour la production/équipement de vehicule militaire ... visiblement les chose évoluer tres doucement. Le modele le plus innovant n'a meme pas été retenu pour le JLTV.

L'état a qu'a mettre la limitation de vitesse a 160kmh ... ca va accelerer l'achat des bagnole :lol: Faut qu'en meme etre con pour empecher les gens de casser leur bagnole puis apres s'étonner qu'ils n'en achetent pas plus autant qu'avant :) surtout vu les especes de fossile roulant au mazout qu'on essaye de nous vendre ... Je suis pas sur qu'il y ait un seul modele attrayant dans la gamme des trois grand fabriquant francais ... je suis mechant y a bien la C3 Picasso.