Poland and Greece have bought 118 American AGM-154C JSOW (Joint Stand
Off Weapon). Poland is getting 78, Greece the rest. JSOW is basically a
smart bomb with wings. That enables it to glide up to 130 kilometers
from the aircraft dropping it, to a target on the ground. Range is about
50 kilometers if dropped from low altitude. JSOW also contains more
elaborate fins and software that enables it to follow a specific route.
Like the wingless JDAM smart bomb, JSOW uses GPS and inertial guidance
(as a backup) to find its target. Like JDAM, JSOW will hit within 30
feet of its aiming point.





There are three versions of JSOW. AGM-154A carries 145 bomblets that
attack personnel and vehicles. AGM-154B contains six SADARM bomblets
that seek out and destroy armored vehicles in an area 300 by 600 meters.
This one costs $490,000 each. The AGM-154C carries a 794 pound warhead
that can penetrate concrete or earth before detonating the high
explosives it carries. This model contains a video link that allows for
hitting very small targets (like going through a window) and costs
$720,000 each.





Each JSOW weighs 1,100-1,500 pounds, depending on type. Not a lot of
JSOWs have been bought because there is not a lot of demand for them.
The purpose of a stand off weapon is to keep the aircraft away from
enemy anti-aircraft defenses (mainly missiles.) Some JSOW have been used
in Iraq (between 1999 and 2003) and Afghanistan (2001.) But in most
cases, the much cheaper JDAM (about $26,000 each) does the job just as
well. But against a better equipped foe, like China, Syria, Iran or
North Korea, JSOW would be more useful.





Poland just received its first F-16s. Greece is buying JSOW because its
ancient enemy (and NATO ally) Turkey has also bought it. Poland probably
bought JSOW just to annoy the Russians.

Last year, Canada sent 17 of its Leopard 1 tanks to Afghanistan, to give
Canadian troops there some extra firepower against the Taliban. But as
the warm weather approaches, the lack of air conditioning in these
elderly tanks is seen as a major problem for the crews. The age of the
tanks is a factor as well, so Canada has made arrangements with Germany,
the manufacturer of the Leopard, to lease twenty of the most modern
version of the tank, the Leopard 2A6M. Canada is the last nation using
the Leopard 1. The A6M has considerably better protection against mines,
roadside bombs and RPG rockets. The 62 ton Leopard 2 has a 120mm main
gun and two 7.62mm machine-guns. The 43 ton Leopard 1 has a 105mm gun,
and is actually a little slower (65 kilometers an hour) than the Leopard
2. Both tanks have a four man crew. Germany is selling off some of its
Leopard 2s, and is offering Canada 80 of them at a bargain price (to be
negotiated, but brand new, they cost $6 million each). . Apparently
Canada wants to try out the Leopard 2 via the lease, before making the
lease decision. If Canada is to maintain a tank force, it needs new
vehicles. The Leopard 1s are showing their age, especially with the
workout they are getting in Afghanistan.


------------------------------------------------------------
On a second note the U.S Military figure out what was shooting their
Mobile Helicopters out of the sky...

American troops in Iraq figured out how Iraqi terrorists had managed to
ambush American helicopters with heavy machine-guns and get away with
it. The Iraqis had used trucks with the machine-gun mounted in the back,
and a tarp over metal supports (a common feature of military trucks) to
conceal the weapon. The tarp was rigged so it could be quickly pulled
aside, as well as the metal supports for the tarp. This enabled the
heavy machine-gun to immediately open fire. There were four of these
trucks, and they roamed around areas that American helicopters were
operating above. One of these trucks was spotted, with its machine-gun
revealed, by a UAV, after informants indicated that this was probably
the weapon responsible. U.S. intelligence then analyzed video and other
data they had, and put more UAVs over areas believed frequented by the
trucks. On the ground, intelligence operatives began beating the bushes
for information on these mobile flak traps. Soon the four trucks were
identified and, one by one, destroyed with smart bombs.



Vehicles like this are particularly popular in Africa, where they are
called "technicals" (and the heavy machine-guns are used mainly against
ground targets.) The Iraqi innovation was the hide the machine-gun,
until it had to be used against a passing helicopter. The Iraqis came up
with this concept because, in the past, when heavy machine-guns were
used against aircraft, U.S. aircraft and ground troops were usually all
over the area before the 14.5mm heavy machine-gun could be moved or
hidden. These machine-guns weigh several hundred pounds, and even when
disassembled, the lightest component weighs 176 pounds. It took four
years for an Iraqi to realize that heavy machine-gun would only work
against the American helicopters if the weapons were mobile, and not
easily identified. But that will be difficult now, as the Americans know
what to look for, and the word is out in Sunni Arab areas (where the
Iraqi "technicals" operated, so reduce the chances of an informer
turning them in), that there is a reward for anyone providing
information on additional systems like this.



Eight helicopters have crashed in Iraq since January, most from heavy
(14.5mm) machine-gun fire. In some of those cases, the hostile fire
appeared to be carefully planned. That is, multiple machine-guns,
including at least one heavy machine-gun were placed along a route used
by helicopters, and fired in a coordinated matter. This tactic is called
"flak trap," and dates back to World War II (or earlier). This tactic
works if you can use surprise, and the concealed, truck mounted, heavy
machine-guns did that.



The enemy has also been using portable surface-to-air missiles since
2003, including more modern models, like the SA-16 (which is similar to
the American Stinger.) American helicopters are equipped with missile
detection and defense (flare dispensers) equipment. Thus the most
dangerous anti-aircraft weapon is the machine-gun. However, despite the
recent losses, aircraft losses to ground fire have been declining every
year, since 2003, mainly because of good defensive tactics. Moreover,
the most vulnerable aircraft, helicopters, have been spending more time
in the air. In 2005, U.S. Army aircraft (mainly helicopters) flew
240,000 hours over Iraq. That increased to 334,000 hours last year, and
is expected to go to 400,000 hours in 2007. The more time helicopters
are in the air, the more opportunities someone has to shoot at them.



Since 2003, the United States has lost 60 helicopters in Iraq. Most of
them belonged to the U.S. Army, the rest were marine or civilian (mainly
security contractors.) In the last year, helicopters were fired on about
a hundred times a month, and about 17 percent of the time, the
helicopters were hit. In Vietnam (1966-71), 2,076 helicopters were lost
to enemy fire (and 2,566 to non-combat losses). In Vietnam, helicopters
flew 36 million sorties (over 20 million flight hours). In Vietnam,
helicopters were about twice as likely to get brought down by enemy
fire. As in Iraq, the main weapons doing this were machine-guns. Today's
helicopters are more robust, partly because of Vietnam experience, and
are more likely to stay in the air when hit, and land, rather than
crash.