Author: Matthew G. Saroff

I Just Had the 2nd Worst Start of the Day Ever*

No Comments

When I left for work today, and as I unlocked the door, I looked down, and saw a dead feral kitten by the curb.

I think that it might have been hit by a car.

It was gray, and perhaps 12 weeks old.  I had seen it around the neighborhood.

I put on some gloves, and put the cat in a bag, and then in the trash.

It was putrefying, and it was leaking fluid, and it was the worst smell of my life.

In life, it had been a kitten, with all that this entails.

Still kind of freaking, though I managed to put it behind me enough to function at work.

*If you don’t know #1, you do not need to know.

Someone in the Bowels of Bureaucracy has a Sick Sense of Humor

No Comments

The new headquarters of the Department of Homeland Security used to be an insane asylum:

Washington D.C. is often used as a backdrop for tales of idiosyncratic power (Veep, House of Cards, Homeland, 24, Newsroom, The West Wing, just to name a few) and why not? The architecture’s symbolism and ideology can be matched only by the cynicism and suspicion these structures inspire. So therefore it seems somehow fitting that DC’s next major addition, the Headquarters for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), will be perched on a hilltop just across the Anacostia River, physically and gesturally overseeing all before it.

 Yet beyond maintaining constant visuals on the terrain, this headquarters represents a change in the city’s views on temporality, functionality and even irony. Because this is a space with a past, one it both embraces and fears.

 The Ghost Across the River
In 2007, the announcement came that a long abandoned former mental institution was to be renovated in order to create a headquarters for the DHS (the agency which oversees immigration, customs, border control and the secret service, along with several other federal functions). Aside from sounding like the plot to a bad action/horror movie, the site was a bit of an odd-duck: an enormous campus, fifteen minutes drive from the White House and full of old buildings barely anyone had ever heard of. For its own part, St. Elizabeths Hospital was founded in the 1850s as “The Government Hospital for the Insane”, hosting generations of doctors, nurses and patients. Some of which having been infamously linked to the powerful of DC, including: Ezra Pound, brought there on charges of treason in 1945; John Hinckley Jr., for shooting President Reagan in bizarre attempt to impress actress Jodie Foster in 1981; Richard Lawrence, who attempted to shoot President Andrew Jackson in 1835, failed, and was then beaten mercilessly by the President himself and Charles Guiteau, after killing President Garfield in 1881.

I am amused, but not particularly surprised.

Joe Biden Speaks the Truth

No Comments

So of course, he had to apologize for it:

A diplomatic rift between Turkey and the United States was patched over late Saturday after the American vice president, Joseph R. Biden Jr., officially apologized to Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, for remarks suggesting that Turkey helped facilitate the rise of the Islamic State terrorist group.

In remarks at Harvard University on Thursday, Mr. Biden said Mr. Erdogan had admitted erring in allowing foreign fighters to cross Turkey’s border into Syria, eventually leading to the formation of the group, also known as ISIS and ISIL.

Mr. Biden’s spokeswoman, Kendra Barkoff, said in an emailed statement that the two leaders spoke by phone on Saturday. “The vice president apologized for any implication that Turkey or other allies and partners in the region had intentionally supplied or facilitated the growth of ISIL or other violent extremists in Syria,” Ms. Barkoff said. “The United States greatly values the commitments and sacrifices made by our allies and partners from around the world to combat the scourge of ISIL, including Turkey.”

………

Mr. Erdogan, despite widespread evidence to the contrary, denied that Turkey’s long, porous border had enabled thousands of militants to cross onto the Syrian and Iraqi battlefields since the Syrian civil war began in 2011. “Foreign fighters never crossed into Syria from our country,” Mr. Erdogan said. “They would cross into Syria from Turkey on tourist passports, but nobody can claim that they have crossed with arms.”

Seriously? How f%$#ing stupid do we think we are?

BTW, this is what Biden said:

Speaking at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Mr. Biden said allies including Turkey, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates had extended unconditional financial and logistical support to Sunni fighters trying to oust the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad.

“President Erdogan told me,” he said, according to the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet, “ ‘You were right. We let too many people through. Now we are trying to seal the border.’

“Our allies poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens of thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against al-Assad,” he said, including jihadists planning to join the Nusra Front and Al Qaeda.

I think that the appropriate response to Erdogan’s hissy fit is to tell him to go pound sand, which is why I would make a lousy diplomat.

He, and rest of the Sunni hegemonists were hip deep in supporting Al Qaedal linked militants, and Saudi Arabia directly supported what would become ISIS in their bid to overthrow the Assad regime.

The fact that this is not a part of the dialog about the US intervention in Iraq and Syria is a sign of just how completely the House of Saud owns our foreign policy apparatus.

We are Halfway to Boots on the Ground in Iraq

No Comments

We are now deploying attack helicopters to Iraq:

The United States sent attack helicopters into combat against Islamic State targets west of Baghdad on Sunday, the first time low-flying Army aircraft have been committed to fighting in an engagement that the Obama administration has promised would not include “boots on the ground.”

The U.S. Central Command, in a statement about U.S. activities against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, provided few specifics about the helicopters. But they were likely AH-64 Apache attack helicopters, which were deployed to Baghdad International Airport in June to provide protection for U.S. military and diplomatic facilities.

Until Sunday, U.S. airstrikes in Iraq have been limited to fast-moving Air Force and Navy fighter aircraft and drones. But the use of the relatively slow-flying helicopters represents an escalation of American military involvement and is a sign that the security situation in Iraq’s Anbar province is deteriorating. Last week, the Islamic State militants overran numerous Iraqi bases and towns and were becoming a widespread presence in Abu Ghraib, the last major town outside of Baghdad’s western suburbs.

Jeffrey White, a former senior Defense Intelligence Agency analyst who closely follows developments in Iraq, said the use of helicopter gunships by the United States means that U.S. troops effectively are now directly involved in ground battles.

(emphasis mine)

Note that, notwithstanding their design for damage resistance, Apaches have been taken down by small arms fire.

Add a few ZSUs (self propelled anti-aircraft artillery) to the mix, and we are going be have helicopters shot down, and either a very risky rescue mission or US troops held prisoner.

We are going to be back in ground combat sooner rather than later.

Barack Obama now owns the “stupid war” that he opposed in 2003.

It’s the First Monday of October………

No Comments

Which means that the Supreme Court has begun its new session.

Rather unsurprisingly, the court punted on gay marriage, declining to hear any of the appeals of the recent ruling striking down gay marriage bans.

This has the effect of massively expanding gay marriage, or the recognition of gay marriage:

With not a single dependable hint of its own constitutional view of same-sex marriage, the Supreme Court in one fell swoop on Monday cleared the way for gays and lesbians to wed in a batch of new states — starting first in five more states, and probably adding six more in the coming weeks. If that happens in all eleven, it will mean that same-sex marriages would then be legal in thirty states and Washington, D.C.

 In seven one-line orders, released without explanation and with no report on how any Justice voted, the Court surprisingly refused to review any same-sex marriage case now before it and, in the process, prepared to lift a series of orders that had delayed such marriages while the issue remained in the Court. Almost no one had expected that to happen.

 It may take a few weeks for the Court’s action to take effect in real-world terms, in the geographic areas where federal appeals courts have struck down bans in five states — the decisions that the Justices have now left intact. Because those appeals court rulings are binding on all federal courts in their regions, those decisions almost certainly dictate the outcome in six more states.

As Maddow noted, it only takes 4 judges to put a case up for review, and the 4 right wing judges voted to support DOMA in US v. Windsor, it means that at least one judge (My money is on Roberts) who voted against gay rights voted against reviewing the cases.

It is either an acknowledgement by one of the conservative justices that society has changed, or it it a tactical decision, hoping that the next justice will be appointed by a Republican to replace Ginsbert.

In addition, we have a very interesting 4th amendment case,  where the question of whether a search is legal if the stop is is based on a misunderstanding of the law.

We also have a patent case, Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., where the court is going to review whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Patent Court) can review the facts presented in the district court on appeal, or only address matters of law or “clear error.”  (Interestingly enough, the Patent Court ruled against the patent, and the district judge ruled for the patent.)

The fact that the Supreme Court is taking it implies to me that at least 4 justices are looking to slap down the Patent Court yet again, which has for a while engaged in a de novo review of patents when it heard appeals.

I’m also interested in Tibble v. Edison International, where workers sued their employer, because their retirement plans were high fee plans, because Edison was getting kickbacks from the plan manager.

It’s actually a statute of limitations case, since the investment choices were initially made more than 6 years before the suit was filed, but the plan was maintained for long enough that the last day was within the statute of limitations.

More on other cases here.

Sanity in Minnesota

No Comments

He has a sense of outrage that Stewart Lacks

Minnesota has changed the law to require a conviction or guilty plea before allowing civil forfeiture:

In a big win for property rights and due process, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton signed a bill yesterday to curb an abusive—and little known—police practice called civil forfeiture. Unlike criminal forfeiture, under civil forfeiture someone does not have to be convicted of a crime, or even charged with one, to permanently lose his or her cash, car or home.

The newly signed legislation, SF 874, corrects that injustice. Now the government can only take property if it obtains a criminal conviction or its equivalent, like if a property owner pleads guilty to a crime or becomes an informant. The bill also shifts the burden of proof onto the government, where it rightfully belongs. Previously, if owners wanted to get their property back, they had to prove their property was not the instrument or proceeds of the charged drug crime. In other words, owners had to prove a negative in civil court. Being acquitted of the drug charge in criminal court did not matter to the forfeiture case in civil court.

As Lee McGrath, the executive director of the Institute for Justice’s Minnesota chapter, put it, “No one acquitted in criminal court should lose his property in civil court. This change makes Minnesota’s law consistent with the great American presumption that a person and his property are innocent until proven guilty.”

The bill faced stiff opposition from law enforcement and a bottleneck in the legislature. In March, the Star Tribune called it an “outrage” that lawmakers were “dragging their feet on one of the big, common-sense changes” to the state’s forfeiture laws. Ultimately, SF 874 found wide, bipartisan support, passing the state senate 55 to 5 and the state house unanimously. The reforms will go into effect starting August 1, 2014.

The story is from May, but I just found about it, and I also found this presentation from John Oliver on this issue, and I it was just too good not to discuss.

Civil forfeiture statute has clearly morphed into a deeply corrupt enterprise, and it needs to be completely restructured.

The Minnesota law is a good start, but I would also change the disposition of funds.

 When law enforcement is paid for sh%$ like this, it rapidly begins to resemble a protection racket.

My suggestion would be a scholarship funds.

Ear Worm!

No Comments

I’ve had the theme from The Prisoner going through my head for 3 days.

It’s not so bad, I like the theme, but it adds a surreal aspect to my day.

This is the extended opening from the first episode, “Arrival,” and I noticed a couple of things that I Had not before: McGoohan’s character drives under the gate before it opens, and he enters through what is clearly labeled an exit.

I am definitely going to have to go through the whole series looking for Easter eggs.

Kind of Like Your Mother in Law Driving off a Cliff in Your Brand New Car

No Comments

The huge cyberattack on JPMorgan Chase that touched more than 83 million households and businesses was one of the most serious computer intrusions into an American corporation. But it could have been much worse.

Questions over who the hackers are and the approach of their attack concern government and industry officials. Also troubling is that about nine other financial institutions — a number that has not been previously reported — were also infiltrated by the same group of overseas hackers, according to people briefed on the matter. The hackers are thought to be operating from Russia and appear to have at least loose connections with officials of the Russian government, the people briefed on the matter said.

I have a real hard time choosing sides between Russian Hackers and Wall Street.

Shorter Court Filing: Socialize Our Losses, and Privatize Our Gains

No Comments

Various players in companies rescued by the US Treasury have taken to filing lawsuits in an attempt to get a share of the profits after the bailouts:

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (FMCC) plunged in New York trading after investors including Bruce Berkowitz’s Fairholme Capital Management LLC lost a legal bid yesterday to force the bailed-out companies to share profits with private shareholders.

Fannie Mae fell 29 percent to $1.92 at 11:10 a.m. Freddie Mac dropped 26 percent. Their preferred shares, which drew investments from private-equity and hedge funds, also tumbled, with one series plummeting 54 percent. The mortgage giants had surged for more than two years on speculation that shareholder rights to the earnings could be restored.

The investors sued for breach of contract over allegedly promised dividends and liquidation preferences, and what they called an illegal “taking” under the U.S. Constitution. U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth rejected their claims, finding that the government is allowed under a 2012 amendment to the companies’ bailout agreements to sweep “nearly all” profits from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the U.S. Treasury.

Here is the crux of what they were looking for:

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac each surged more than 1,000 percent in 2013 on speculation that courts or lawmakers would allow private investors to share in the companies’ profits, which have rebounded along with the housing recovery. The mortgage-finance firms extended their rally through July, then lost their gains for the year in September, when they each fell more than 30 percent.

There you have it.

The vultures figured that they could buy worthless shares, and convince the Congress of the courts to give them free money at the taxpayer’s expense.

Lamberth just told them to go pound sand.

BTW, it ain’t just these parasites trying to do this.

Like a bad penny, Maurice “Hank” Greenberg is back:

The government today entered its third day of trial defending its $182 billion rescue of American International Group Inc. in another Washington federal court. Maurice “Hank” Greenberg’s Starr International Co., the insurer’s biggest shareholder when the financial crisis struck, claims the assumption of 80 percent of AIG stock by the U.S. in September 2008 in exchange for an $85 billion loan amounted to an unconstitutional taking of private property.

The timeline here is pretty clear:

  • Hank Greenberg runs AIG.
  • Hank Greenberg is kicked out of AIG for dodgy accounting.
  • AIG implodes, in large part as a result of the sh%$ Greenberg did.
  • AIG is bailed out. (More accurately, the counter-parties are bailed out, but that’s another story)
  • Greenberg files a lawsuit to get money for the company that he had a hand in destroying.

Seriously.  This sort of sh%$ is why Eric “Place” Holder will be remembered by history for his refusal to prosecute the banksters.

This will happen, because the people who wrecked the world still don’t feel that they have done anything wrong.

Your Daily Schadenfreude

No Comments

The draconian voting restrictions in Arkansas have resulted in the Republican Attorney General being dropped from the voter roles:

UC Irvine law professor Rick Hasen says this development, which he describes as coming from the “Irony Dept”, is just “too delicious”.

Leslie Rutledge, the Republican candidate for Attorney General in Arkansas, has been discovered to have been registered to vote in multiple states in addition to Arkansas, and even voted by absentee ballot in Arkansas’ general election in November of 2008 — after she had registered to vote in Washington D.C. [PDF] in July of the same year.

According to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Rutledge has now been removed from Arkansas’ voting rolls by the Pulaski County Clerk, after he confirmed that she was registered to vote in D.C., and possibly Virginia. The removal from the rolls may also lead to her ineligibility to be elected to office.

“For the AG candidate of the party who likes to scream about voter fraud to be registered in two (or three) places at once is ironic and amusing on its own,” writes Matt Campbell of Arkansas’ “Blue Hog Report”, which was on this story from the jump.

“However, the bigger implication is Article 19, section 3, of the Arkansas Constitution,” he adds, which states: “No persons shall be elected to, or appointed to fill a vacancy in, any office who does not possess the qualifications of an elector.” If Rutledge is not registered in Arkansas, she no longer “possess[es] the qualifications of an elector.”

I don’t expect her to be prevented from voting, nor do I expect her to be dropped from the ballot, because, after all, “Silly rabbit, voter suppression is for Democratic voters.”

I am sure that the courts will rule that way.

Still, I will enjoy a few minutes of pleasure at Ms. Rutledge’s discomfiture.

Judge Rules for Gitmo Detainees on Force-Feedings

No Comments
The Obama administration has used every possible effort to avoid a public hearing on the Guantanamo hunger strikers, but Judge Gladys Kessler is having none of it:

Videos showing force-feedings of a hunger-striking Guantanamo detainee must be publicly aired, a federal judge ordered this afternoon.

Lawyers for Syrian Abu Wa’el Dhiab, who has been held at Guantanamo since 2002 and has been refusing food for the last 18 months, have characterized the footage as “extremely disturbing.” Dhiab is asking the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. to stop the military’s practice of forcibly removing him from his cell and restraining him for feedings.

The government argues that the 28 tapes at issue are classified, and will likely appeal today’s ruling. Releasing the videos, the Justice Department has said, might give a glimpse of the the prison infrastructure, or let Guantanamo inmates or others learn how to resist “forced cell extractions” or locate equipment that could be used as a weapon. The government also warned that the videos might “inflame Muslim sensitivities overseas.”

But the judge, Gladys Kessler, found that those justifications were “unacceptably vague, speculative,” or “just plain implausible.” So much information about the force-feedings was already public, Kessler wrote, and certainly detainees “are already familiar with the tactics used to extract them from their cells and enterally feed them.” The videos may be altered to protect the identities of prison guards, she said.

“This may well be the most significant court decision on Guantanamo Bay in years,” Alka Pradhan, one of Dhiab’s attorneys, said in a statement. “No longer does the American public have to rely on propaganda and misinformation, but can finally watch the videotapes and judge for themselves.”

The government tried to have an upcoming hearing in Dhiab’s case — set for Monday — largely closed to the public, but Kessler decided yesterday that it would stay open. It’s not clear whether an appeal or the redaction of the videotapes will delay next week’s proceedings. In a statement, the Justice Department said it was considering its options.

 They will appeal, of course. 

The Obama administration has bought into the whole “State Secrets” mentality that would give Dick Cheney a stiffie.

Still if these tapes do come out, it will be a good thing, because is is long overdue for Americans to know what is being done in their name.

Canada Defers F-35 Decision

No Comments

They have decided to rebuild and extend the life of their F-18 Hornets, and defer their decision on the F-35: (paid subscription required)

Canada’s conservative government, which has spent four years pushing for a noncompetitive purchase of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, announced at the end of September it would delay retirement of the Royal Canadian Air Force’s Boeing CF-18A/B Hornets for up to five years, until 2025. Canada will, however, continue to support JSF.

 With an election due next year, Prime Minister Stephen Harper appears to have passed the Next-Generation Fighter Capability (NGFC) decision to the next administration, after reports in June that the announcement of a JSF buy was imminent. “Harper was poised to pull the trigger,” one industry source suggests, “but he backed away” following negative public and media reaction. An F-35 buy could have been portrayed as an attempt to foreclose options before the election, and a decision to conduct a competition would be seen as a capitulation, the source suggests. The latest announcement indicates intent to maintain RCAF strength without rushing the NGFC choice.

 The move is not a complete surprise. Lockheed Martin says it is “not news” and that planned Canadian JSF deliveries extend through 2025. (The schedule spanned 2017-22, based on late-2011 plans.) However, there are no programs under contract that support Hornet operations beyond 2020: L-3’s Military Aircraft Systems unit, which supports the Hornet airframe and systems for Canada, had no comment, and Canada’s Department of National Defense (DND) also declined to respond.

 The future of the NGFC depends on the pending election: A decisive Conservative win would favor the F-35, while opposition parties could move toward a competition or delay the entire program. A September report stating Canada had short-listed the F-35 and Super Hornet has been dismissed as inaccurate. “It will either be the F-35 or an open competition,” says a source associated with a potential NGFC competitor.

 The contentious next-gen fighter debate started when DND—then led by Peter MacKay—sought to bypass Canadian law that forbids sole-source procurements except under strictly defined circumstances. In 2008, the DND defined key NGFC requirements and concluded that two aircraft other than the JSF could meet them. But in 2010, to justify a sole-source JSF buy, DND issued a revised set of requirements that it claimed only JSF could meet.

 After a scathing report in 2012 by the auditor-general, the government stripped the DND of authority over the next-gen fighter, shifting authority to the Public Works Department for the acquisition. In February, an independent review panel validated the air force’s new process for evaluating four contenders: the F-35, the Boeing Super Hornet, the Dassault Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon.

I would argue that of those 4, the F-35 is the least well suited to their requirements, which is for domestic defense, operating at long ranges, over uninhibited land, where it was always better to lose AN engine than it is to lose THE engine.

The F-35 will cost more to purchase, and more to operate, than any other of the alternatives.

It’s low observability characteristics have no advantage in the interceptor role.

It is a closed system which makes it effectively impossible for Canada’s domestic defense establishment from qualifying new weapons on it.

The only advantage is that it generates “Poodle Points” with the US.

Poodle points can, of course, be cashed in for ……… Nothing at all.

Wall Street: It F%$#s the Airlines Even Worse than the Airlines F%$# the Airlines

No Comments

Aviation Week, in reporting a leadership change at JetBlue, notes that much of the impetus for removing the current CEO was because he was too passenger centric: (paid subscription required)

When the JetBlue Airways Board of Directors decided not to renew CEO Dave Barger’s contract but instead elevate airline President Robin Hayes to the top spot, it implicitly endorsed a view held by many on Wall Street that the carrier, while profitable, lags too far behind its rivals.

Barger, an original JetBlue executive, took over in 2007 after the board determined the carrier’s visionary founder, David Neeleman, struggled at running day-to-day operations. Barger quickly fixed the operation, helping it recover from a devastating “valentine” that was delivered on Feb. 14, 2007, when the airline failed to properly prepare for and react to an ice storm that hit the New York area. But like Neeleman, who insisted JetBlue be more refined than its competitors, Barger kept the focus on the customer, preferring not to add baggage fees or seats to aircraft even when most other U.S. carriers adopted both practices.

His resistance to some revenue-generating ideas may have been Barger’s downfall. Despite signaling in recent months he might remain at JetBlue, Barger will be replaced on Feb. 16 by Hayes, a former British Airways executive vice president for the Americas. Hayes is not talking revenue—he has not been saying much at all—but Wall Street analysts say they are hopeful JetBlue will start acting more like competitors. In arguing this summer for a CEO change, Cowen & Co. analyst Helane Becker wrote: “JetBlue is an overly brand-conscious and customer-focused airline, which has resulted in lagging fundamentals.”

………

“What I see Dave Barger doing is leading the company through difficult times and not going into bankruptcy,” says George Hamlin of Hamlin Transportation Consulting. “If there’s something wrong with that, I am living in a strange world.”

(emphasis mine)

If you are wondering why flying sucks wet farts from dead pigeons, just look at this.

“Activist investors” have decided that JetBlue gives an excessively positive experience to its customers, and this must not be allowed to stand.

Bravo, Occupy the SEC

No Comments

Occupy the SEC now has a simple rating of your Congress critter.

It’s a pretty simple system:

Methodology

Our methodology was rather straightforward. We created a simple formula that allowed us to produce a score between 0 and 100 for each member of the House . A score of 100 means that a member voted in a manner that was consistent with our positions on every bill. Conversely, a score of 0 means that the member took the opposite view of OSEC on all considered bills.

Additionally, we gave some weight to the sponsorship and cosponsorship of bills. If a bill was “good” then we viewed sponsoring (or introducing) the bill as good and therefore rewarded that individual with what amounts to additional good votes. If the individual introduced a “bad” bill then we subtracted from the member’s score by counting the sponsorship as if it constituted additional bad votes. Co-sponsorship of bills was treated in a similar fashion but the weight we applied was smaller. Lastly, we added a multiplier to each bill that reflected the importance of the bill and its potential impact. For instance, if the bill was just a minor “technical fix” then it received a small multiplier, but if the bill was aimed at, say rehauling an entire agency (as HR 3193 aims to do by changing the makeup of the CFPB), then we viewed votes on that bill as being more significant, and consequently applied a larger multiplier to it.

Rather unsurprisingly, the Dems score better than the Republicans, but I would note that any Dem under 50 should be considered for a primary challenge.

H/t naked capitalism.

Well, This is an Interesting Turn of Events

No Comments

The Japanese Self Defense Forces (JSDF) is looking to update their Soryu-class submarines, and the next batch will switch from an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system to using lithium ion batteries to replace the current lead acid technology:

Japan has decided to power its new batch of Soryu-class submarines with Lithium-ion batteries instead of air-independent propulsion (AIP) technology — a move that could raise eyebrows after similar types batteries were faulted for fires aboard the Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

 However, experts brush aside those concerns and instead say this type of technological leap increases power and performance, while reducing maintenance. It also could make Japanese subs more marketable overseas.

 Yasushi Kojima, a spokesman for the Maritime Self-Defense Force (MSDF), said the change would affect the next four remaining Soryu-class submarines in Japan’s 10-boat class.

………

 The existing Soryu-class diesel-electric submarines (16SS) use AIP technology based on Kockums Stirling engines license-built by Kawasaki Heavy Industries, allowing them to stay submerged for long periods. The engines power Sweden’s smaller Gotland-class submarines for up to two weeks at 5 knots.

 The current Soryu-class submarines are propelled by a large electric motor that has three power sources: diesel engines, the AIP engines and main storage batteries. Diesel engines, which require oxygen for combustion, power the boats on the surface or while snorkeling. The boats can snorkel for extended periods to limit their detectability while transiting submerged (only the snorkel mast is above the water) or for short periods to quickly recharge their batteries after operating underwater. The AIP engines — which burn small quantities of diesel fuel and liquid oxygen — are used for long-range underwater cruising at low speed, and to keep the batteries topped off. The batteries are used for ultra-quiet operation as well as high-speed underwater operations, which quickly depletes them.

 By shifting to Lithium-ion batteries, the new Soryus would retain their main propulsion diesels, but be equipped with more powerful and far lower maintenance batteries than lead-acid types widely in use.

LiIon batteries have at least 4x the energy density of lead-acid batteries, and I would assume that the spaces for the LOX tanks and Sterling engines would be changed to battery storage.

If you assume twice the volume of batteries, and 4x the energy density, it means that you could have about a 2 week undersea patrol before it would have to surface or use the snorkel.

I think that this might give an underwater patrol performance approaching that of the AIP system, with a much longer underwater dash range, and logistical issues would be simpler, as a tanking up the submarine with liquid oxygen is not something that can be done at sea or at a foreign port.

My (barely educated) guess is that this change is being considered because they expect their submarines to range further from their home ports in the future, and the ability to refuel at sea from Japanese or allied tenders would be an important part of this, and that they feel that losing some underwater endurance is worth this.

If this is indeed the case, it reflects a major change in the Japanese military posture.

Since the end of WWII, this sort of power projection has been an anathema to both the JSDF and the Japanese government.

Korea Hedges its Bets on the F-35

No Comments

There are still budget issues to be decided by the parliament, but the defense ministry has approved going forward on the KF-X fighter program:

South Korea’s proposed KF-X indigenous fighter program is now closer to being launched than at any time since it was proposed in the late 1990s, following conditional approval for full-scale development from the defense ministry.

The aircraft, which has been pushed by the ministry’s Agency for Defense Development (ADD) and would probably be built by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI), must still overcome opposition from the finance ministry and some members of parliament.

If the KF-X survives while production of older European and U.S. aircraft winds down, then next decade it may be the only alternative to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning as a fighter engineered for compatibility with Western weapons and communications. The South Korean program also offers the most immediate sales prospects for Western manufacturers of fighter engines and equipment.

The ministry’s Defense Program Execution Committee, chaired by Defense Minister Han Minkoo, on Sept. 24 approved the basic plan for full-scale development of the KF-X starting in 2015. The committee required that the ministry’s Defense Acquisition Program Agency (DAPA) and the finance ministry agree on the total program cost. DAPA may not issue a request for proposals until it and the finance ministry have that agreement. The agency “cannot be optimistic about the result,” says the Yonhap news agency. The finance ministry habitually opposes costly defense programs or at least seeks delays.

Even if DAPA and the finance ministry agree, full-scale development cannot begin next year without funding authorized by parliament in the government budget due to be settled in December. Members of parliament often take a skeptical view of the defense ministry’s largest ambitions.

DAPA is trying to persuade the finance ministry that the KF-X can be developed for the 8.5 trillion won ($8.1 billion) estimated by an influential think tank, the Korea Institute of Defense Analysis. But the Naeil newspaper reports 8.5 trillion won would pay for an aircraft with only air-to-air capability. Air-to-ground capability would take a further 600 billion won and 4.5 years.

There is also the problem that 20% of the development cost is supposed to be borne by industry, including Lockheed Martin. The U.S. company agreed to support the KF-X technically in return for South Korea last year choosing the F-35A in the F-X Phase 3 fighter competition, but there is no sign that it will invest cash in it—nor should there be, since Lockheed Martin hardly wants to back a future competitor. Indonesia paid 20% of the KF-X pre-development costs and is expected to take the same share of full-scale development.

I think that one of the things that is driving this is that Korea has real doubts as to the affordability and effectiveness of the F-35, and wants to hedge their bets.

I’m also thinking that they are expecting to see a market for a less expensive aircraft built to western standards.