ClearedHot

Don't forget the bacon Infused bourbon...two of my most favorite things in one!

Drones Converge on California, Ready to Take Off Five years ago, the Pentagon was on cusp of an air-combat revolution. For a few brief, heady months in late 2005, it looked like the U.S. military might soon launch full-scale development of a new class of fast, lethal Unmanned Aerial Vehicles eventually capable of replacing all kinds of fighter jets, from the older F-15s, F-16s and F-18s to the latest F-22s. But the revolution fizzled when the Air Force abandoned its share of the so-called Joint Unmanned Combat Air System effort. Manned jets continued to dominate, culminating in today’s mammoth, $300-billion F-35 program. The embers of upheaval kept burning, almost invisibly. The technology from the 2005 effort survived in various forms, slowly maturing amid a growing demand for combat UAVs. Today, no fewer than three separate killer drone designs — two of them direct descendants of the original J-UCAS demonstrators — have converged on two airfields in California for flight tests. The revolution flared up again without many people noticing. While the F-35 still gobbles up the bulk of the Pentagon’s fighter funding, jet-powered killer drones are back — and revolution is once again a real prospect. High-endurance armed drones such as the General Atomics Predator have been a fixture of U.S. military operations since the mid-1990s air war over the Balkans. Besides being cheaper to buy and operate, robot aircraft carry fuel in place of a pilot and so can stay in the air longer. Plus, if they crash or get shot down, nobody gets hurt. That means the military can assign drones to what a robot-industry insider from Boeing called the “worst down-and-dirty missions that even the nuttiest pilot wouldn’t want to do.” But today’s drones are “fair-weather” killers, too slow to survive the sophisticated air defenses of, say, China or Iran. To bring the advantages of robot aircraft to high-intensity warfare, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency along with the Air Force and Navy sponsored J-UCAS starting in 2003. Boeing’s X-45 (pictured) competed with the Northrop Grumman-built X-47 to “demonstrate the technical feasibility, military utility and operational value for a networked system of high performance, weaponized unmanned air vehicles,” according to Darpa. By 2005, the J-UCAS program had sent its prototypes on mock bombing runs and proved the drones could develop their own tactics on the fly. The “Common Operating System” meant to control the speedy, lethal bots was particularly promising, and with it J-UCAS even threatened to upstage the $300-billion F-35 manned-fighter program. The new drones were “on the cusp of making history in the aviation world,” said the insider. Then in 2006, the axe fell. The Air Force withdrew from the program. Officially, the Air Force wanted to shift its focus and cash to the new, manned (and ultimately short-lived) “2018 bomber.” There were concerns that algorithms might not be trustworthy to make combat decisions, quite yet. Unofficially, the move away from J-UCAS might have reflected concerns among the Air Force’s top brass that the new killer drone could hasten the demise of the traditional fighter pilot. In any event, without the Air Force J-UCAS collapsed. The Navy continued funding the X-47 for a modest series of tests. The original X-45 ended up an exhibit in the Smithsonian’s Air and Space Museum, never to fly again. Or so observers believed. In fact, Boeing had secretly continued work on a new version of the X-45, apparently believing the Air Force would come back around to the idea of fighter-style killer drones. Meanwhile, a high-profile think piece co-written by future Navy undersecretary Bob Work (.pdf) helped persuade the Navy to raise its expectations for the X-47. Sensing a new momentum for armed UAVs, General Atomics spent its own money to develop a bigger, jet-powered cousin of the Predator called the Avenger. In the summer of 2009, the Air Force published a “road map” showing how robots might replace nearly every kind of manned aircraft in today’s arsenal. Just a few months later, the air branch lifted the (patchy) veil of secrecy surrounding its fighter-like MQ-170 spy drone, built by Lockheed Martin. The stage has been set for an unofficial revival of J-UCAS. There are no official requirements for a new fighter drone — yet. But the Pentagon is obviously very, very interested. As is often the case, the drama is taking place in California. Northrop’s X-47 is at the Navy’s China Lake base in the Mojave Desert, running ground tests prior to a planned first flight “before the end of the year.” Not to be outdone by its former J-UCAS rival, Boeing two weeks ago bolted the new-and-improved X-45 to the back of a 747 for a ride from St. Louis to the Golden State’s Edwards Air Force Base, where the bot will have its first flight early next year. General Atomics beat both of the bigger companies into the air: The Avenger has racked up scores of test flights at Edwards since 2009. Years ago, one analyst called J-UCAS “the worst-funded good idea in decades.” There’s still not a lot of government money behind the current revival: The Navy has allocated around a billion dollars for X-47 tests. The X-45 and the Avenger are both company-funded efforts. But the idea is as good as ever. And with the impending first flights of the X-45 and X-47, killer drones are about to get a second shot at transforming aerial warfare. Danger Room will be there, every step of the way.

I have the DVD to watch this weekend and have been reading the book "War" written by Sebastian Junger who is the journalist that shot the video for the movie. There is also an associated picture book called "Infidel" written by Tim Wetherington that documents all the key players. This is a must read if you want to understand what it is like on the front lines of hell in Afghanistan.

You understand the local situation better than us but given some of the other videos of this same guy that are out there, there should be some leadership changes. Such a tremendous waste and a lot of people had to know what was going on.

Houston Store Owner Kills 3 Would-Be Robbers HOUSTON -- Police say a Houston jewelry store owner has shot and killed three men who tried to rob his business. Houston police spokesman Kese Smith says two men were in the store Thursday afternoon pretending to be customers when a third man burst into the store and stated, "This is a robbery." All three men then pulled out pistols, tied up the store owner's wife and took her to a back room. They were trying to tie up the owner, when he took a handgun from his waistband and fatally shot one of the suspects. Smith said he then grabbed a shotgun and shot and killed the other two suspects. The store owner was shot in the stomach and taken to a Houston hospital. Smith says his wife was not hurt.

Harumpfff

Mexican aerial drone crashes in backyard of El Paso home EL PASO (AP) — An unmanned drone belonging to the Mexican government crash landed Tuesday in El Paso's Lower Valley, officials confirmed today. "I was told that it crashed in somebody's back yard, and that no one was injured. I was paged at 6:28 p.m. on Tuesday, so it happened shortly before that. We were told it was not a police matter," said Detective Mike Baranyay, a spokesman for the El Paso Police Department. The crash occurred at Yarbrough and Loop 375. Police said the U.S. Border Patrol seized the aircraft, which was to be transported back to one of the international bridges so that Mexican officials could recover the drone.

Jerusalem (CNN) -- The Israeli Air Force shot down an unidentified flying object over the Dimona nuclear plant in the Negev Desert Thursday, the Israel Defense Forces said. The object appeared in a designated no-fly zone, the air force was scrambled and the object was shot down, the IDF said. The object could have been a party balloon, the IDF said, but forces have not yet found the debris to determine what it was. There have been unconfirmed media reports that it was a motor-driven object. The air force reacted according to procedure when the object was spotted, the IDF said. The Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz reported that last October "IDF warplanes intercepted an Israeli ultralight aircraft that accidentally flew into the area and forced it to land at an airstrip in southern Israel." It also reported that "an Israeli surface-to-air missile downed a crippled Israeli fighter-bomber that strayed into the restricted zone" during the Six Day War in 1967. The craft's pilot was killed.

With the promotion I break even.

Yeah...what I said.

Mission first, People always.

Well...sort of...he is in an odd situation and I think he could argue rate protection to the amount he is currently making. I don't see them taking money because you are promoted. He certainly will NOT get the 2010 rate for the next rank, but his BAH should not go down.

"Two"...No HUD...gasp, how did us old farts ever learn to fly or land the T-38? I never found T-38 TOLD to be that difficult, I guess because in the old days we did it with an abacus.

Brother...utter fail. He made a liar, fool, embarrassment of himself.

AP: Pilot duped AMA with fake M.D. claim He seemed like Superman, able to guide jumbo jets through perilous skies and tiny tubes through blocked arteries. As a cardiologist and United Airlines captain, William Hamman taught doctors and pilots ways to keep hearts and planes from crashing. He shared millions in grants, had university and hospital posts, and bragged of work for prestigious medical groups. An Associated Press story featured him leading a teamwork training session at an American College of Cardiology convention last spring. But it turns out Hamman isn't a cardiologist or even a doctor. The AP found he had no medical residency, fellowship, doctoral degree or the 15 years of clinical experience he claimed. He attended medical school for a few years but withdrew and didn't graduate. His pilot qualifications do not appear to be in question — he holds the highest type of license a pilot can have, a Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman said. However, United grounded him in August after his medical and doctoral degrees evaporated like contrails of the jets he flew. He resigned in June as an educator and researcher at William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, Mich., after a credentials check revealed discrepancies, a hospital spokeswoman said. Doctors who worked with the 58-year-old pilot are stunned, not just at the ruse and how long it lasted, but also because many of them valued his work and were sad to see it end. "I was shocked to hear the news," said Dr. W. Douglas Weaver, who was president of the cardiology group when it gave Hamman a training contract for up to $250,000 plus travel a few years ago. "He was totally dedicated to what he was doing, and there is a real need for team-based education in medicine," said Weaver, a pilot himself from Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit. Even after learning of Hamman's deception, the American Medical Association was going to let him lead a seminar that had been in the works, altering his biography and switching his title from "Dr." to "Captain" on course materials. It was canceled after top officials found out. Now, groups that Hamman worked for are red-faced that they hadn't checked out the tall, sandy-haired man who impressed many with his commanding manner and simple insights like not taking your eyes off a patient while talking with other team members about what to do. "This is Your Captain Speaking: What can we learn about patient safety from the airlines?" is how his training sessions typically were billed. Journals that printed articles listing Hamman with M.D. and Ph.D. degrees are being contacted in case they want to correct the work. Beaumont removed him from a U.S. Department of Defense medical simulation contract that a physician at the hospital had obtained. Doctors who attended Hamman's sessions don't have to worry — the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education will not revoke any education credits they earned. "That just makes the learners more of a victim," said the council's executive director, Dr. Murray Kopelow, adding that this is a first in his 15 years on the job. "Sounds like there's lots of victims in this case — the learners, the accredited providers, the whole CME system." Hamman did not return several phone calls and e-mails seeking comment. David Nacht, an employment lawyer in Ann Arbor, Mich., acknowledged that his client did not have the medical and doctoral degrees he had claimed from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the 1980s. "It's Mr. Hamman's desire that he clear up any misconceptions about his background that he has caused. He wants to be completely straightforward about it," Nacht said. There is no indication Hamman ever treated a patient, though his teamwork training had him videotaping in emergency rooms and other settings where patients were being treated. Hamman does have an associate's degree in general aviation flight technology and a bachelor of science degree from Purdue University. He also has "type ratings" to fly half a dozen very large commercial planes, according to the FAA. United would not discuss his job history, citing employee confidentiality. But the company confirmed that he is not currently authorized to fly. Hamman lives in Michigan and is based in Chicago. As long ago as 1992, an FAA workshop listed Hamman as an M.D. from United's flight center in Denver. In an interview last year with Cath Lab Digest, a publication for heart specialists, Hamman says that being a doctor may have "opened up some doors at United, and I ended up as manager of quality and risk assessment." In 2004, he joined Western Michigan University, a Kalamazoo school with a big aviation program in nearby Battle Creek, as co-director of its Center of Excellence for Simulation Research. In 2005, the center got a $2.8 million grant from the Michigan Economic Development Corporation to expand simulation training into medical settings. Matching funds from other groups brought the total to $4.2 million. Soon Hamman was videotaping heart attack treatment drills and deconstructing what doctors did right and wrong. He spoke at Northwestern University and for the AMA and the American College of Emergency Physicians. In 2009, he joined Beaumont Hospital. Dr. Sameer Mehta, a Miami cardiologist who runs an annual conference for heart specialists, had Hamman lead sessions in 2009 and earlier this year. He seemed to understand the jobs of the EMS, emergency room and cardiac catheterization lab staffs and how they needed to work together, Mehta said. "He was able to simulate exactly what we were doing," and to offer suggestions from aviation to help, Mehta said. It's easy for groups to assume someone else has vetted a popular speaker, said Dr. William O'Neill, a legendary cardiologist who spent 17 years at Beaumont before becoming an executive dean at the University of Miami in 2006. "Somehow you've gotten the name or seen them in the literature," said O'Neill, who has helped with many conferences. When he heard that Mehta and others had been duped by Hamman's phony degrees, "I thought, `There but for the grace of God go I.'" Hamman's ambition may have done him in. In checking a grant proposal he wanted to submit in late spring, the Beaumont staff discovered the lack of an M.D. degree, said spokeswoman Colette Stimmell. Hamman resigned June 15. In hindsight, the careful wording in some of Hamman's comments is apparent. "I couldn't handle a full-time cardiology practice" with the demands of being a pilot, he told at least two reporters. Less clear is what, beyond basic principles of teamwork, his training really offered. "In a sense, he didn't talk about anything medical," said Dr. Stephen Mester, a Florida cardiologist who took one of Hamman's sessions at the cardiology conference in Atlanta last spring. "I did not find it worthwhile, but I believe it could be worthwhile for programs just getting started." After fessing up, Hamman asked the AMA and the cardiology group to let him continue, saying, "the work is the work." They decided that a lie is a lie. "He really didn't need to be a physician to do what he was doing. He could have been successful without titling himself," said Weaver of the cardiology college. "He made a very serious mistake."

Dudes/Dudettes, Topic back open for discussion that is within the proper bounds of the released AIB. Discussing/comparing/mentioning items in the SIB will NOT be tolerated on this forum. We all want to learn to prevent future loss of life, but do so within legal limits and with some common sense in mind.

Done. WTF people...really....

Yup...

Egyptian Official: Israel Could Be Behind Deadly Shark Attack An Egyptian official believes that Israel's intelligence agency might be behind the fatal shark attack of a German tourist in Sinai over the weekend, the Jerusalem Post reports. "What is being said about the Mossad throwing the deadly shark (in the sea) to hit tourism in Egypt is not out of the question, but it needs time to confirm," South Sinai Gov. Muhammad Abdel Fadil Shousha told egynews.net. Israeli officials told the Jerusalem Post that the claims were ludicrous and would not comment. Egyptian authorities have reopened some Red Sea beaches that had been closed to swimmers after an unusual series of shark attacks over the past week. Swimmers were being allowed back into the water of several bays at Sharm el-Sheikh, a resort at the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula that is a renowned reef diving spot. Diving remained restricted to professionals. Shark attacks at Egypt's Red Sea resorts are rare, and three shark experts from the U.S. are trying to determine what is behind them. Besides the death, four other swimmers and snorkelers were badly injured. On Tuesday, Ziad al-Basel of Egypt's Chamber of Diving and Watersports, said a limited number of bays were reopened for swimmers.

5 generals mishandled $87M, comptroller says By Bruce Rolfsen brolfsen@militarytimes.com Five generals have been disciplined for mishandling $87 million and failing to meet Air Force standards. Gen. Roger Brady, Gen. Stephen Lorenz, Lt. Gen. Glenn Spears, Maj. Gen. Anthony Przybyslawski and Brig. Gen. Sandra Gregory received letters of admonishment for acting inappropriately in 2005 by allowing the Air Force to over draw its fund for permanent change-of-station moves, according to Lt. Col. Todd Vician, a service spokesman. All had budget- or personnel related jobs. The Defense Department uncovered the shortage in 2006 during a routine audit. Brady and Lorenz are set to retire by the end of the year. Gre gory retired in 2006. Today, Spears is commander of 12th Air Force and Przybyslawski is a special assistant to the commander of Space Command. Air Force Secretary Michael Donley and Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz issued the letters after being briefed in August on the results of an investigation Donley had asked DoD’s comptroller to conduct. In a statement, Donley said the officers did not intend to act inappropriately but did fail to meet Air Force standards. “Everyone is accountable for their actions, and we expect the highest standards of conduct from everyone in the Air Force — regardless of rank — and senior leaders have a special responsibility to those who follow them,” Donley said. Also singled out were Gregory W. Den Herder, then the executive director of the Air Force Personnel Center, and three individuals whose names the Air Force declined to release citing Privacy Act limits. Den Herder retired in 2006. The comptroller held Lorenz, Herder and two of the unnamed people responsible for violating federal regulations. Donley determined Brady, Spears, Przybyslawski, Gregory and one unidentified person should be held accountable because their “actions or inactions” contributed to the overdraft. In an e-mail, Lorenz told Air Force Times he was unaware he had committed a violation until after he left the budget office in October 2005. “When I learned [about the violation], I was very surprised and terribly disappointed,” Lorenz wrote. “I accept full responsibility for everything. ... Our team would have prevented this unfortunate situation, had we known of it at the time. I am glad to know that our system is being improved to prevent any recurrence. ” Brady, too, accepted responsibility. “In the context of supporting two wars overseas, yet drawing down the Air Force by 40,000 people and other force shaping efforts, it is regrettable we didn't recognize the accounting systems, in place for many years, were inadequate,” he said in an e-mailed statement. Spears and Przybyslawski declined to comment. Lt. Col. Steve Kelly, Spears’ attorney , said the comptroller report had “exonerated” Spears. Brady Retiring Lorenz Retiring Spears still in command Przybyslawski a Special Assistant Gregory retired

The single best warrior, officer, person I have ever worked for.

How much, it is sold out on the website and they don't show the price. The others look a lot more expensive.

Wall Street Journal December 6, 2010 Pg. 1 China Clones, Sells Russian Fighter Jets By Jeremy Page ZHUHAI, China—A year after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a cash-strapped Kremlin began selling China a chunk of its vast military arsenal, including the pride of the Russian air force, the Sukhoi-27 fighter jet. For the next 15 years, Russia was China's biggest arms supplier, providing $20 billion to $30 billion of fighters, destroyers, submarines, tanks and missiles. It even sold Beijing a license to make the Su-27 fighter jet—with imported Russian parts. Today, Russia's military bonanza is over, and China's is just beginning. After decades of importing and reverse-engineering Russian arms, China has reached a tipping point: It now can produce many of its own advanced weapons—including high-tech fighter jets like the Su-27—and is on the verge of building an aircraft carrier. Not only have Chinese engineers cloned the prized Su-27's avionics and radar but they are fitting it with the last piece in the technological puzzle, a Chinese jet engine. In the past two years, Beijing hasn't placed a major order from Moscow. Now, China is starting to export much of this weaponry, undercutting Russia in the developing world, and potentially altering the military balance in several of the world's flash points. This epochal turnaround was palpable in the Russian pavilion at November's Airshow China in the southern city of Zhuhai. Russia used to be the star of this show, wowing visitors with its "Russian Knights" aerobatic team, showing off fighters, helicopters and cargo planes, and sealing multibillion dollar deals on the sidelines. This year, it didn't bring a single real aircraft—only a handful of plastic miniatures, tended by a few dozen bored sales staff. China, by contrast, laid on its biggest commercial display of military technology—almost all based on Russian know-how. The star guests were the "Sherdils," a Pakistani aerobatic team flying fighter jets that are Russian in origin but are now being produced by Pakistan and China. "We used to be the senior partner in this relationship—now we're the junior one," said Ruslan Pukhov, of the Russian Defense Ministry's Public Advisory Council, a civilian advisory body to the military. Russia's predicament mirrors that of many foreign companies as China starts to compete in global markets with advanced trains, power-generating equipment and other civilian products based on technology obtained from the West. In this case, there is an additional security dimension, however: China is developing weapons systems, including aircraft carriers and carrier-based fighters, that could threaten Taiwan and test U.S. control of the Western Pacific. Chinese exports of fighters and other advanced weapons also threaten to alter the military balance in South Asia, Sudan and Iran. China's military muscle still lags far behind that of the U.S., by far the world's largest weapons manufacturer and exporter. China accounted for 2% of global arms transfers between 2005-2009, putting it in ninth place among exporters, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). But no other Asian country has sought to project military power—and had the indigenous capability to do so—since Japan's defeat in 1945. China's rapid mastery of Russian technology raises questions about U.S. cooperation with the civilian faces of Chinese arms makers. The Aviation Industry Corp. (AVIC), China's state aerospace company, builds fighters, for instance. But it is also making a new passenger jet with help from General Electric Co. and other U.S. aerospace companies. A GE official says the company has partnered with foreign engine manufacturers for decades "with elaborate protections built in place" that have preserved the company's intellectual property. There are also implications for U.S. weapons programs. Last year the Pentagon decided to cut funding for the F-22—currently the most advanced fighter deployed in the world—partly on the grounds that China wouldn't have many similar aircraft for at least 15 years. But then Gen. He Weirong, deputy head of China's Air Force, announced that Chinese versions of such jets were about to undergo test flights, and would be deployed in "eight or 10 years." The Defense Intelligence Agency now says it will take China "about 10 years" to deploy stealth fighters in "meaningful numbers." For Moscow and Beijing, meanwhile, a dispute over the intellectual-property rights to such weaponry is testing their efforts to overcome a long historical rivalry and build a new era of friendly ties. "We didn't pay enough attention to our intellectual property in the past," said a Russian defense official. "Now China is even competing with us on the international market." Few things illustrate this more clearly than the J-11B, a Chinese fighter that Russian officials allege is a direct copy of the Su-27, a one-seat fighter that was developed by the Soviets through the 1970s and 1980s as a match for the U.S. F-15 and F-16. Before the early 1990s, Moscow hadn't provided major arms to Beijing since an ideological split in 1956, which led to a brief border clash in 1969. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Kremlin was desperate for hard currency. In 1992, China became the first country outside the former Soviet Union to buy the Su-27, paying $1 billion for 24. The deal was a coup for China, which had shifted its military focus away from a potential Soviet land invasion, and now wanted to defend territorial claims over Taiwan and parts of the South China Sea and East China Sea. Efforts to upgrade its air and naval forces had been hampered by U.S. and European Union arms embargoes imposed after the 1989 crackdown on protesters around Tiananmen Square. China's military modernization program grew more urgent after its leaders were stunned by the display of U.S. firepower during the first Gulf War, Western military officials say. Beijing's breakthrough came in 1996, when it paid Russia $2.5 billion for a license to assemble another 200 Su-27s at the Shenyang Aircraft Company. The agreement stipulated that the aircraft—to be called the J-11—would include imported Russian avionics, radars and engines and couldn't be exported. But after building 105, China abruptly canceled the contract in 2004, claiming the aircraft no longer met its requirements, according to Russian officials and defense experts. Three years later, Russia's fears were confirmed when China unveiled its own version of the fighter jet—the J-11B—on state television. "When the license was sold, everyone knew they would do this. It was just a risk that was taken," said Vassily Kashin, a Russian expert on the Chinese military. "At that time it was a question of survival." The J-11B looked almost identical to the Su-27, but China said it was 90% indigenous and included more advanced Chinese avionics and radars. Only the engine was still Russian, China said. Now it is being fitted with a Chinese engine as well, according to Zhang Xinguo, deputy president of AVIC, which includes Shenyang Aircraft. "You cannot say it's just a copy," he said. "Mobile phones all look similar. But technology is developing very quickly. Even if it looks the same, everything inside cannot be the same." The J-11B presented Russia with a stark choice—to continue selling China weapons, and risk having them cloned, too, or to stop, and miss out on its still lucrative market. Russia's initial response was to suspend talks on selling China the Su-33, a fighter with folding wings that can be used on aircraft carriers. Since then, however, it has re-opened negotiations on the Su-33, although it rejected China's offer to buy just two, and insisted on a larger order. Sukhoi Aviation Holding Co.'s official position now is that it remains confident about its business in China. Indeed, many aviation experts believe AVIC is having problems developing an indigenous engine for the J-11B with the same thrust and durability as the original Russian ones. Sukhoi is betting that China will have to buy the Su-33 on Russian terms as Beijing will struggle to develop its own carrier-based fighter in time for the planned launch of its first carriers in 2011 or 2012. The company also hopes to sell China the Su-35—a more advanced version of the Su-27—if the J-11B doesn't perform well enough. "We're just hoping our aircraft will be better," said Sergey Sergeev, deputy director general of Sukhoi. "It's one thing to make a good quality copy of a spoon, but quite another to make one of an aircraft." The Russian and Chinese governments both declined to comment. In private, however, Russian officials say they worry that China is about to start mass producing and exporting advanced fighters—without Russian help. China bought $16 billion worth of Russian arms between 2001 and 2008—40% of Russia's sales. Photographs published recently on Chinese military websites appear to show engines fitted on the J-11B and a modified version—called the J-15—for use on aircraft carriers. That has compounded Russian fears that China has reverse engineered an Su-33 prototype it acquired in 2001 from Ukraine, according to Russian defense experts. At last year's Dubai Air Show, China demonstrated its L-15 trainer jet for the first time. In June, China made its debut at the Eurosatory arms fair in France. In July, China demonstrated the JF-17—the fighter developed with Pakistan—for the first time overseas at the Farnborough Airshow in Britain. China also had one of the biggest pavilions at an arms fair in Capetown in September. "They're showing up at arms fairs they've never been to before," said Siemon T. Wezeman, an arms trade expert at SIPRI. "Whereas 15 years ago they had nothing really, now they're offering reasonable technology at a reasonable price." China is generating particular interest among developing countries, especially with the relatively cheap JF-17 fighter with a Russian engine. The Kremlin has approved the re-export of the engine to Pakistan, as it has no arms business there. But it was enraged last year when Azerbaijan, an ex-Soviet republic, began talks on buying JF-17s, according to people familiar with the situation. Also last year, China's JF-17s and Russia's MiG-29s competed in a tender from Myanmar, which eventually chose the Russians, but paid less than they wanted. This year, both entered a tender from Egypt, with China offering the JF-17 for $10 million less than Russia's $30 million MiG-29. That prompted Mikhail Pogosyan, who heads Sukhoi and the company that makes MiGs, to suggest that the Kremlin stop selling China the Russian engines for the JF-17. The Kremlin hasn't done that yet, but Russian officials have suggested privately taking legal action if China exports more advanced jets like the J-11B. Last month, Russia's government proposed new legislation attaching an intellectual property rights clause to foreign military sales agreements. The issue was raised during a visit by President Dmitry Medvedev to China in October, according to people familiar with the situation. "Of course we're concerned, but we also recognize there's very little we can do," said Mr. Pukhov, of the Russian Defense Ministry's Public Advisory Council. Asked what advice he would give Western aerospace firms, Sukhoi's Mr. Sergeev said: "They should keep in mind what products they're selling—whether they're civilian or dual use. And most important is to prepare very carefully your contract documents." While Russia worries about intellectual property, other countries are concerned about security. The arms programs China initiated two or three decades ago are starting to bear fruit, with serious implications for the regional—and global—military balance. The J-11B is expected to be used by the Chinese navy as its frontline fighter, capable of sustained combat over the entire East China Sea and South China Sea. Aircraft carriers and J-15 fighters would further enhance its ability to stop the U.S. intervening in a conflict over Taiwan, and test its control of the Western Pacific. China's arms exports could have repercussions on regions in conflict around the world. Pakistan inducted its first squadron of Chinese-made fighter jets in February, potentially altering the military balance with India. Other potential buyers of China's JF-17 fighter jet include Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Venezuela, Nigeria, Morocco and Turkey. In the past, China has also sold fighters to Sudan. The potential customer of greatest concern to the U.S. is Iran, which purchased about $260 million of weapons from China between 2002-2009, according to Russia's Centre for Analysis of the Global Arms Trade. In June, China backed U.N. sanctions on Iran, including an expanded arms embargo, but Tehran continues to seek Chinese fighters and other weaponry.

Yup...at least that is told me what is was going to say. The bottle does not look like the one in this picture, but the prince's photo is the same.

Thought I posted this previously, but maybe I had too much bourbon at that point... My fault for not specifying, I am looking for a local source, or reasonably local, or for the point of origin. I will be making a trip to the Maker's Distillery in the near future to pick up a few bottles from my barrel. There seems to be a bit of a mystery as to who makes the Private Keep. Most of the Bourbon forums think it is being produced under a "penn name". If you really want a prize, find the Cognac named in the picture below. I am not a Cognac fan...or was not until I tried this with over lunch with one of the Deputies of the FSB in Moscow last year... a story for another time...but it was excellent. As I recall it was named for an old Armenian prince?