Gulf of Aden anti piracy convoy schedules June and JJuly 2015

Government of Japan convoy schedule for June and July 2015. To apply for JMSDF escort, visit http://www.mlit.go.jp/en/maritime/maritime_fr2_000000.html, please contact directly the Anti-Piracy Contact and Coordination Office, Maritime Bureau, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MILT), Japan: Tel: +81-3-5253-8932 Fax: +81-3-5253-1643 Email: INFO-PIRACY@mlit.go.jp.

Korean Navy convoy schedule for June and July 2015. All merchant vessels wishing to join the convoy group must submit their application forms directly to the ROK naval warship carrying out the mission. The ROK MTG can be reached directly at INMARSAT: 00-870-773-110-374, Email: cheonghaeetg@navy.mil.kr.

Chinese Navy convoy schedule for June and July 2015. For further information, please email planavy@navy.mil.cn, or call Tel: 86 10 652 92218/96, Fax: 86 10 652 92245.

Indian Navy convoy escort schedule for June and July 2015. To register, email dgcommcentre-dgs@nic.in or visit www.dgshipping.com. Telephone numbers for contact are: 91-22-22614646 or fax at 91-22-22613636.

Russian Navy convoy escort schedule for June and July 2015. For further information email smb@msecurity.ru, isps@msecurity.ru or fax +7 (499) 642-83-29.

Photos of Royal Navy destroyer HMS Daring port visit to Shanghai, China (10 December 2013)

Chinese navy officers stand as the British Royal Navy destroyer HMS Daring arrives to the north side of the bund at Huangpu River in Shanghai, December 10, 2013. The HMS Daring has returned from the Philippines after delivering aid after Typhoon Haiyan hit the region. [Photo/Agencies]

HMS Daring, a UK destroyer, sails up the Huangpu River in Shanghai on Dec 10, 2013. [Photo by Yang Yi/Asianewsphoto]

Angus Essenhigh, right, the commanding officer of HMS Daring, shakes hands with a Chinese navy officer in Shanghai, on Dec 10, 2013. [Photo by Yang Yi/Asianewsphoto]

Crew members of the British Royal Navy destroyer HMS Daring stand on the deck as they arrive at a port area of Huangpu River in Shanghai, December 10, 2013. The HMS Daring has returned from the Philippines after delivering aid after Typhoon Haiyan hit the region. [Photo/Agencies]

Crew members of the British Royal Navy destroyer HMS Daring stand on the deck as they arrive at a port area of Huangpu River in Shanghai, December 10, 2013. [Photo by Yang Yi/Asianewsphoto]

British Royal Navy destroyer HMS Daring is docked at the port area of Huangpu River after its arrival to Shanghai December 10, 2013. [Photo/Agencies]

Members of the welcoming ceremony band play as British Royal Navy destroyer HMS Daring arrives at a port area of Huangpu River in Shanghai December 10, 2013. [Photo by Yang Yi/Asianewsphoto]

A sailor from British Royal Navy destroyer HMS Daring tries to catch a mooring line to dock in the north side of the bund at Huangpu River in Shanghai December 10, 2013. [Photo/Agencies]

China PLAN anti-piracy convoy schedule for Gulf of Aden, November 2013

China PLAN anti-piracy convoy schedule for November, 2013:

GULF OF ADEN: Chinese Navy convoy schedule for October and November 2013. For further information, please e-mail cnmrcc@msa.gov.cn, cnmrcc@mot.gov.cn, or call Tel: 86-10-652-92221 Fax: 86-10-652-92245 (MSCHOA).

Source: US Navy, Office of Naval Intelligence

The sneaky-beaky Cold War adventures of Australia’s Oberon-class submarines

Love, love, love those Oberon-class boats. First submarine I ever set foot on was HMS Opossum as a small awestruck lad. Loved them ever since. This troy about the RAN’s O boats is an absolute corker.

Cold War exploits of Australia’s secret submarines

The Oberon-class submarine HMAS Onslow at the Singapore Naval Base 1974. Picture: The Australian National Maritime Museum Source: Supplied

ON February 20, 1986, six senior naval officers came to the cabinet room in Canberra to brief prime minister Bob Hawke on Australia’s secret Cold War submarine operations in Asia.

Defence minister Kim Beazley had invited them to explain to Hawke what the navy’s ageing Oberon-class submarines were capable of, and what they’d achieved on dangerous, clandestine missions to Vietnam and China. Beazley wanted to lock in Hawke’s support for the costly and contentious plan to build six Collins-class subs in Australia.

The large and genial defence minister understood the strategic value of submarines as offensive and defensive weapons. When Hawke arrived, he looked like thunder and his crabbed body language signalled he wanted to be anywhere but hearing a presentation from the navy.

That was soon to change. Commander Kim Pitt began explaining he had been on patrol in HMAS Orion in the South China Sea from September 17 until November 9 the previous year; the focus of that patrol was Cam Ranh Bay on the east coast of Vietnam, then the largest Soviet naval base outside the USSR.

Pitt began a video that grabbed Hawke’s attention and immediately transformed his mood. The PM appeared transfixed as he watched dramatic and brilliantly clear footage taken by HMAS Orion as it slipped in behind and beneath a surfaced Soviet Charlie-class nuclear submarine heading into the Vietnamese port.

The video began with distant pictures of the Soviet submarine motoring towards the harbour, well outside the 12-nautical mile (22.2km) Vietnamese territorial limit. The video was shot through a camera in Orion’s periscope as the submarine loitered, barely submerged in the choppy sea.

Then Pitt took the Orion deep, ran in close behind the Soviet boat, and came up to periscope depth again. Now the video showed the Soviet submarine’s wake boiling and bubbling on the surface. Hawke watched, startled, as a clear image of the turning propeller appeared on the screen just above and ahead of Orion.

Pitt ran beneath the Soviet submarine, filming sonar and other fittings mounted along its hull. The remarkably clear pictures exposed the underwater secrets of Charlie-class technology. The only other way to get them would be for a western spy to penetrate dry-docks in the Soviet Union.

Pitt positioned Orion ahead of and beneath the Soviet submarine, slowed almost to a stop, and then allowed the Soviet boat to pass him while he filmed the other side of its hull.

Hawke grasped intuitively that this video intelligence would add immensely to Australia’s prestige in the US. It could be used to Australia’s advantage in negotiations with Washington and gave Australia a seat at the top table in the global Cold War intelligence collection game. For 45 minutes, Hawke asked questions about how the patrols were organised; their duration, their frequency, their success. He was told how the submarines recorded radio transmissions to deliver vital intelligence to the Western effort to track and identify the Soviet fleet.

The officers put up a photograph of a Soviet Kirov-class nuclear-powered cruiser, much admired by Western navies. US spy satellites had picked up the cruiser leaving its base in Murmansk and tracked it around the Cape of Good Hope and into the Indian Ocean.

The RAN sent the guided missile frigate HMAS Canberra to intercept the cruiser off Sri Lanka and follow it through the Strait of Malacca and up towards Cam Ranh Bay. The frigate took vital photographs and monitored the cruiser’s communications until it approached Vietnam.

Pitt, in HMAS Orion, was waiting, submerged outside Cam Ranh Bay with the submarine’s communications masts deployed to record the cruiser’s arrival. He recorded its procedures and protocols, which deepened Western understanding of Soviet naval communications and command and control systems, meaning the West might be able to jam them in the event of hostilities.

The cautious admiral Mike Hudson, chief of the naval staff, dismayed the submariners by telling Hawke that while the operation was professional and produced good intelligence, it was very hazardous. A submarine might be detected and possibly captured, with serious international consequences. “As we do more and more patrols, the likelihood of this happening will increase,” Hudson said.

Hawke rounded on him. “No, you are wrong,” he replied. “I’ve got a degree in statistics and I can tell you that the probability of detection does not increase as the number of patrols increase. They are discrete, one-off events and the probability of detection is constant.”

Beazley was delighted with the meeting. Hawke’s support for new submarines was locked in. The submarine officers were also triumphant. They had put together a show that had convinced Hawke, converting him from curmudgeon to champion.

They did not tell Hawke that Pitt had also video-taped a submerged conventional Soviet submarine going into Cam Ranh Bay. It was brilliant submarine seamanship, but some of his colleagues regarded it as dangerous and unnecessary and Pitt as “a bit of a pirate”. He later became director of submarine warfare.

The mystery boat operations were shrouded in secrecy as the submarines collected intelligence on the Soviet nuclear submarine and surface fleets and reinforced the US-Australia alliance. They also won Australian submariners their spurs in the Cold War’s global espionage game, as they showed uncommon bravery, dash and initiative on about 20 patrols between 1977 and 1992.

Their success ensured the Collins-class submarines were built and secured the future of Australia’s submarine service.

But the last patrol in the series proved a dangerous failure, with HMAS Orion at grave risk of detection and capture.

On October 22, 1992, she left Sydney Harbour and headed for Shanghai to gather intelligence on the Chinese navy, especially its new submarines. Orion’s CO was commander Rick Shalders, who later commanded Australia’s Collins-class submarine fleet.

The Americans wanted better intelligence on the Chinese navy, but US nuclear submarines were too big to be sent into the shallow waters of the East China Sea. Australia’s smaller O-boats were ideal for the task.

Shanghai was China’s biggest mainland harbour at the wide mouth of the Yangtse river; the water was shallow and murky, and busy with non-military shipping, including the local fishing fleet and ferries. The shoreline was heavily urbanised.

It would not be easy to stay unseen and undetected while barely submerged and trying to collect intelligence, and the consequences of detection could be grave for the submarine’s crew and for Australia-China relations.

Shalders’s trip to the area of operations was uneventful and the submariners were looking forward to getting their work done and getting back to the relatively safety of the open sea. Orion was equipped with the best photographic and electronic intelligence collection equipment; civilian language specialists were on board to translate Chinese navy transmissions.

But the patrol proved a nightmare, with the harbour crowded with fishing boats, many trailing long fishing lines and nets.

Shalders had to raise his periscope periodically to check the intelligence-collection aerials.

The fishermen constantly watched for signs of fish and could not miss minor disturbances made by Orion’s equipment and by the presence of the submarine not far below the surface.

They followed Orion around the harbour. Shalders could not surface and could not risk moving quickly away from the danger.

Things started to get desperate when Orion fouled the fishing lines and nets. One fishing boat started to sink by its bow as its net became entangled with the submarine. The fisherman saved himself by cutting away the net from the boat with an axe.

By now Shalders knew he was facing possible disaster. It was only a matter of time before the Peoples’ Liberation Navy became aware something was seriously amiss and investigated what was going on in the shallow water. Shalders and his crew faced the real prospect of detection, surrender, capture, imprisonment, trial and possible execution as spies. Relations between Australia and China would be in tatters. Shalders decided he had no choice but to abandon the operation.

Summoning all his skills, he took the submarine out of the harbour and into the relative safety of the East China Sea. The Australians returned home with nothing to show for their hair-raising experience.

The then chief of the naval staff, admiral Ian McDougall, a former submarine commander, told defence minister Robert Ray the O-boats were reaching the limits of their service lives and the patrols should be stopped because of the growing danger.

The submarine service was incandescent. It saw the patrols as invaluable for its reputation at home and abroad, and for continuing access to funding. The submariners wanted to preserve the skills they had developed.

The Defence Intelligence Organisation argued that despite the Soviet collapse there was an acute need to collect intelligence on the military activities of other countries, especially China, India and Indonesia, and that submarines were the most effective means. But Ray accepted McDougall’s advice and ordered an end to the patrols.

A senior submariner, commander John Dikkenberg, met Hawke’s successor as PM, Paul Keating, to argue for reinstatement of the patrols. Keating listened carefully, but would not over-rule his defence minister.

Four years later, when Ian McLachlan was appointed John Howard’s first defence minister, he asked to be briefed on the cancelled patrols. The navy urged their resumption and was given the OK for a carefully controlled and limited mission off Indonesia to re-establish intelligence-collecting skills.

Bronwyn Bishop, then minister for defence science and technology, also accepted that skills were being lost and gave her blessing to resumed patrols. Six more patrols were undertaken, mainly monitoring Indonesian military communications around Indonesia and East Timor. The Howard government wanted more information on Indonesian military activities in Timor, where Fretilin guerillas were still fighting for independence.

The new Abbott government is considering whether to acquire a fleet of 12 new submarines, which would represent Australia’s largest defence project. If it does, the proud Cold War history of the O-boats will have helped persuade decision-makers that submarines, despite their daunting cost, can be very good value indeed for taxpayers’ dollars.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/cold-war-exploits-of-australias-secret-submarines/story-e6frg6z6-1226742599268

“Canada could benefit from expanding its military presence in the Asia-Pacific”

A look at Canada’s capabilities. In essence, the same as every navy smaller than the USN… augmenting the American force with the key focus on interoperability.

The Royal Canadian Navy in the Pacific – a look at capabilities

By David McDonough

HMCS Algonquin (DDG 283)

Canada could benefit from expanding its military presence in the Asia-Pacific. As I described in a previous Strategist post, the government faces certain budgetary constraints likely to limit the size of its future naval presence and capacity for maritime diplomacy. Yet such a challenge isn’t insurmountable. To ensure sufficient fleet funding, Canada has the option of placing greater priority on the capital portion of the defence budget—even if it comes at the expense of personnel and operations/maintenance spending.

Such a move would offer Ottawa some leverage to join the ASEAN Defence Ministers Meeting Plus. More importantly, Canada would have a means to help augment America’s naval power in the region, which is expected to be under increasing strain as a result of defence cutbacks—at a time when China is expanding its own naval fleet and showing greater assertiveness in its maritime disputes with its neighbours.

Other like-minded countries have already begun to focus on their own maritime forces. For example, Japan has strengthened its naval fleet with advanced (e.g. air-independent propulsion) submarines, helicopter destroyers, and plans for helicopter carriers, with a keen eye for possible amphibious operations to protect its vulnerable south-western approaches. Australia has also been eager to deploy a more formidable naval presence with its planned acquisition of Aegis destroyers and replacements for its Collins-class submarines. Both platforms are expected to have the high-end command, control, communications, and weapon systems necessary to ensure operational interoperability with the US Pacific Fleet.

Like the Australian navy, the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) also has a strong tradition of interoperability with its American counterparts, to the point where Canadian warships can also be seamlessly integrated into US naval task forces (PDF). It would serve the RCN well to ensure that its future naval platforms can continue to be integrated with the US and other regional navies. Much depends on the capabilities offered by these naval platforms, which should be designed to complement America’s efforts at maintaining operational access to the Western Pacific.

The RCN needs to maintain some of its high end maritime war fighting capabilities. Of particular relevance is area air defence (AAD), a capability that should be retained and upgraded on its destroyer replacements—much as Australia has done with upgrades to its Anzac frigates and the Aegis equipped destroyers. Indeed, the United States, Japan, and other allies have become increasingly wary of China’s advanced anti-access and area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities, from shore-based aircraft and missiles to an undersea and surface fleet heavily armed with anti-ship cruise missiles—a concern reportedly also shared by the RCN, at least according to drafts of its unreleased Horizon 2050 naval strategy.

For the RCN to maintain interoperability with its key regional partners, Canada should also ensure that some of its next-generation Canadian Surface Combatants incorporate the Aegis combat system—joining other regional powers including Japan, Australia, South Korea, and the US Navy. Importantly, Aegis can also be upgraded to provide a mid-course and terminal ballistic missile defence (BMD) capability. Both the United States and Japan have proven eager to expand their BMD fleet, due to China’s development of a much feared anti-ship ballistic missile. Other countries may soon follow suit.

An anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capability would also be highly valued in a region where many countries are expanding their submarine inventories. Much of the concern is on China’s undersea fleet, as a possible ‘assassin’s mace‘ capable of challenging American and allied sea control in this maritime theatre. For this reason, the US Navy has already been increasing its ASW assets in the region, with the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) operating a formidable fleet that specializes in undersea and surface ASW.

The RCN already has a long history of ASW operations. Indeed, with its fleet of Victoria-class submarines, the RCN would be better placed for these missions than in the past, when it largely relied on surface ASW and escort duties. It also provides the natural locus for cooperation with regional navies, like the JMSDF. Of course, ASW isn’t necessarily cheap. Canada would eventually need to replace its fleet of Aurora maritime patrol aircraft and Victoria submarines. But, given the growing demand for ASW, we shouldn’t underplay the benefits that could be accrued by returning to this specialisation.

With such capabilities, the RCN would be well placed to support American and allied efforts to ensure sea control in the Western Pacific. If required, Canada would also be able to join in defensive missions envisioned in the US Air-Sea Battle concept, while avoiding its more offensive plans to disrupt and destroy A2/AD systems at their source.

Yet it would all be for naught if Canada lacks the logistics for sustained operations in the Pacific, therefore raising the issue of operational sustainment. Sadly, little attention has been paid to the future of the RCN’s auxiliary oiler replenishment fleet. Indeed, it’ll now have to settle for the acquisition of only two Joint Supply Ships, thereby increasing the chances that Canadian warships will be unable to be deployed for sustained operations abroad—unless an ally provides at-sea replenishment, which can no longer be guaranteed given the growing demand for such logistics ships.

In such a situation, the RCN might find its emphasis on Pacific operations curtailed, even if it otherwise enjoys high-end capabilities well-suited to that region. But, more importantly, it could also find its historic role as a blue-water fleet possibly endangered. Such an outcome would be doubly unfortunate, and is an important reminder not to ignore the logistical tail.

David S. McDonough is a SSHRC post-doctoral fellow in the Department of Political Science, University of British Colombia and a research fellow in the Centre for Foreign Policy Studies at Dalhousie University. Image courtesy of Flickr user U.S. Pacific Command.

http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-royal-canadian-navy-in-the-pacific-a-look-at-capabilities/

Chinese naval squadron passes through Strait of Magellan for first time

A Chinese Peoples Liberation Army Navy squadron has passed through the Strait of Magellan from the Pacific into the Atlantic. The force comprises the Type 052C destroyer ‘Lanzhou’, the Type 54A frigate ‘Liuzhou’ and the Fuqing-class replenishment oiler ‘Poyanghu’. The fleet political commissar”(队政委… now there’s a job description!) commented that this was {quote} “a very meaningful military practice” {unquote}. Which hits the nail on the head. China is no longer content to be a regional naval power and is increasing its global projection. The West ignores that at its peril.

高清:中国海军舰艇编队首次通过麦哲伦海峡

麦哲伦海峡东部出口海域宽阔,海峡两岸是一座雪山。图为兰州舰航行在麦哲伦海峡。严冬摄

14日下午3时(北京时间15日凌晨2时),由导弹驱逐舰兰州舰、导弹护卫舰柳州舰和综合补给舰鄱阳湖舰组成的舰艇编队顺利通过麦哲伦海峡,抵达海峡东部出口引水点。这是中国海军舰艇编队首次航经麦哲伦海峡。

记者在兰州舰看到,海峡东部出口海域宽阔,天气晴朗,平均浪高2米,风力3-4级,海面过往船只、油井平台较多。我舰艇编队组成单纵队劈波斩浪,一路向北航行。

编队13日从智利内水道转入麦哲伦海峡西部入口水域,顶着海面9-10级大风,在浪高达4-6米,摇摆达10度以上。陶宏祥摄

编队是昨日从智利内水道转入麦哲伦海峡西部入口水域,当地时间下午2时进入海峡。当时,海面风力9-10级,浪高4-6米,舰艇摇摆10度以上。进入海峡后,风浪减少了许多,但海面风力仍达到5-6级,平均浪高3米。

为了确保编队航行安全,全体官兵在指挥员、南海舰队副参谋长李晓岩少将的率领下,认真研究、精心准备、精确操作,严格落实狭水道航行、雾中航行、大风浪航行等部署,航渡过程没有出现任何差错,顺利通过海峡。

在麦哲伦海峡入口处,狂风卷起巨浪打过兰州舰。何得志摄

兰州舰舰长唐银川有着多年的航海经验,也曾多次在各种复杂海域航行过,提起此次航渡麦哲伦海峡的感受,他向记者介绍:“海峡航行里程、狭窄地段长,水道曲折,大角度转向多,西风和涌浪较大,流向多变,在这里航行,确实是一种挑战,但是我们经受住了考验,得到了锻炼,复杂陌生海域的舰艇操纵能力得到进一步加强。”

记者了解到,通过海峡后,编队领导亲自部署,要求各舰、各相关部门细心收集和整理相关资料,认真总结航渡经验。编队政委冯瑞声说:“此次我们海军舰艇编队首次通过麦哲伦海峡,显示了中国海军在走向深蓝的征程中更加从容和自信。这也是一次非常有意义的军事实践活动。”(记者陶宏祥 特约记者曾行践)

我舰艇编队组成单纵队劈波斩浪,一路向北航行。海峡两岸是一座座雪山。陶宏祥摄

新闻链接:

麦哲伦海峡位于南美洲大陆南端和火地岛、克拉伦斯岛、圣伊内斯岛之间,长约563km,宽3.3~32km,由地壳断裂下陷而成。1520年,葡萄牙航海家麦哲伦首先通过,因此取名麦哲伦海峡。海峡处于南纬50多度的西风带,两侧岩岸陡峭、高耸入云。海峡内寒冷多雾,并多大风暴,是世界上风浪最猛烈的水域之一,不利于航运发展,但在巴拿马运河开通前,是南大西洋和南太平洋间的重要航道。麦哲伦海峡,实行“过境通行”和强制引航制度。

Comparing China’s new J-15 with the F/A-18E/F as the ideal carrier aircraft

Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo of the Peoples Liberation Army Navy (a.k.a. “the Chinese Navy”) recently commented that the Shenyang J-15 is better than the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet in terms of air-to-air combat, but slightly inferior with regard to engaging surface targets.

In terms of its performance compared to other carrier-based aircraft in service around the world, Yin Zhuo said that the J-15 capabilities are high. For instance, it reaches a similar level to the U.S. F/A-18C/D “Super Hornet”. While overall it is slightly inferior to the F/A-18E/F, it has better performance in air combat. Its ability to attack land and sea-based targets is lower than the F/A-18E/F, but it is at least equal to, and perhaps slightly better than, India’s Mig-29K.

Aviation analyst Andrei Pinkov gave a comparative analysis of the J-15 and the F/A-18:

“The orientation of F/A-18E/F is a fighter attacker, so that its maneuvering is not so good as the J-15, which derives from an air control fighter. This means that the J-15 is more likely to shoot down F/A-18E/F in close combat,” says Pinkov. “However, the ‘Super Hornet’ is able to take off with the assistance of catapult, so that its real payload is likely to exceed that of J-15, which takes off by means of ski-jump. Thus the U.S. fighter has advantages in terms of attack and combat radius.”

During 2013, the J-15 has made a series of test flights from China’s new aircraft carrier the ‘Liaoning’ as both the aircraft and carrier work-up to operational status. RAdm Yin Zhuo refused to confirm that the J-15 was already in mass production, but commented that online speculation is logical based on the facts that J-15 is already in service, and its technology is mature enough for mass production.

Yin Zhuo said that the full service life of the J-15 would be about 25 to 30 years. The fact that the J-15 and its variants are now regularly seen in flight, and taking off and landing on aircraft carriers, indicates that it will not be subject to any further major modifications. Once mass production is under way the aircraft design will be fixed other than in terms of possible changes to radar and electronic communication systems, or modernization of the engine after 10 to 15 years of service. However, the profile, basic finish, and performance standards of the aircraft have been established.

J-15 tied down on flight deck.

When

Russia to stop using carrier-based pilot training site in Ukraine

Well, either the Russians are giving up on naval aviation entirely, and the blueprints for those Nimitz-style nuclear-powered carriers will be consigned to dustbin of history (unlikely), or the new facility at Yeysk is really going to be opened in 2014 and training will continue at a shiny new stretch of concrete near the Black Sea (probable).  Either way, they’re not going to pay to do it in Ukraine any more. Hmm… do you think the Chinese will take up the lease?

МИД Украины подтвердил отказ России от использования полигона НИТКА

Ранее сообщалось, что Россия официально проинформировала украинскую сторону о том, что, начиная с 2014 года, больше не планирует использовать полигон НИТКА для подготовки летчиков в интересах авиации Военно-морского флота (ВМФ) РФ.

© Фото: Украинский споттерский сайт Аэровокзал

КИЕВ, 10 сен — РИА Новости, Максим Беденок. Министерство иностранных дел Украины подтверждает отказ России от использования полигона по подготовке палубной авиации “НИТКА” с 2014 года, сообщил во вторник директор департамента информационной политики МИД Украины Евгений Перебийнис.

“В ходе шестого заседания подкомитета по вопросам безопасности украинско-российской межгосударственной комиссии, которая состоялась 4 сентября в Москве, российская сторона сообщила о том, что начиная с 2014 года она не планирует использовать полигон”, — сказал Перебийнис журналистам.

Он также сообщил, что такое решение российской стороны было ожидаемым для Украины, поскольку РФ вводит в эксплуатацию неподалеку от Ейска аналогичный объект.

Перебийнис добавил, что с учетом сложившейся ситуации украинская сторона принимает меры по определению направлений дальнейшего использования данного полигона, поскольку украинская армия не нуждается в нем.

Ранее об отказе России использовать полигон “НИТКА” РИА Новости сообщил высокопоставленный источник в Минобороны РФ. Читайте подробнее >>

Авиационный комплекс “НИТКА” (наземный испытательный тренировочный комплекс авиационный) используется для подготовки летчиков палубной авиации. Единственный созданный в СССР тренировочный авиакомплекс находится на аэродроме Новофедоровка (близ города Саки в Крыму). После распада СССР он перешел к Украине. Соглашение между правительствами Украины и России об использовании полигона было подписано в феврале 1997 года.

Каковы функции полигона НИТКА

Авиационный комплекс НИТКА (наземный испытательный тренировочный комплекс авиационный) используется для подготовки летчиков палубной авиации. Единственный созданный в СССР тренировочный авиакомплекс находится на аэродроме Новофедоровка (близ города Саки в Крыму). После распада СССР он перешел к Украине. Соглашение между правительствами Украины и России об использовании полигона было подписано в феврале 1997 года.

Кто может арендовать полигон в Крыму

Ранее украинское оборонное ведомство заявляло, что прорабатывает возможность предоставления полигона для летчиков палубной авиации НИТКА в Крыму по согласованию с РФ для учений вооруженных сил других государств. При этом отмечалось, что использование украинского полигона третьими странами возможно в том случае, если Россия откажется от его использования.

Сообщалось, что в аренде комплекса заинтересованы Индия и Китай. Однако конкретных договоренностей по этому вопросу еще не достигнуто.

http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20130910/962242483.html