Why has YouTube censored viewers in India from accessing songs related to the farmers’ protests? #IndianFarmers
Wednesday, February 10, 2021
The farmers’ protests are the biggest political threat Modi has seen
K S DAKSHINA MURTHY
The protests are arguably the biggest challenge to the authority of the ruling BJP government to date, and they are going nowhere.
The borders between Delhi and that of two adjoining states, by all accounts, resemble a conflict zone with fencing, barricades, coils of barbed wire, iron spikes cemented to the ground and scores of security personnel manning them. All of it was erected by the government to keep away protesting farmers from the Indian capital.
For the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government under prime minister Narendra Modi, the protests are the latest, and arguably the biggest, challenge to its authority.
After initially appearing to be conciliatory and holding several rounds of talks with the agitating farmers, the government has stepped back and let the protests be – possibly hoping that the steam will run out and that the farmers will return to their homes.
But contrary to the government’s hopes, the protests have intensified. More farmers, in their thousands, have joined in and there is no way of knowing which way the agitation will turn.
Negotiations reach a stalemate
The protests have turned out to be extraordinary in several ways. Farmers – across all classes – are out on the streets in full force, along with their families including scores of women and children.
According to eyewitnesses, the anger is palpable and they are determined to fight to the finish. Hundreds of thousands of farming families take turns to be at the protest site and it is working with rare efficiency despite the biting cold.
Their demand is for the repeal of three farm laws passed by the Modi government in August last year. The laws open up India’s vast agricultural economy to the private sector enabling corporates to directly buy farm produce and allows private companies to stock essential commodities like wheat and rice without any limit. The third law allows private players to directly sign deals with farmers away from the gaze of government regulators.
The government terms these laws necessary as part of agricultural reforms which will enrich farmers and release the enormous potential of this sector.
But the protesters are not buying into the government’s view.
According to them, undermining government regulators and supervisors will expose farmers to the volatility of the market. The Minimum Support Price (MSP), which the government announces every season to ensure that farmers don’t run into losses, will effectively become redundant and they fear that private corporations will drive down prices.
To begin with, the farmers demanded that the MSP be turned into a law as a guarantee that corporations wouldn’t indulge in price undercutting. The government refused and the farmers hardened their stance asking for the cancellation of all three new laws.
Despite holding eleven rounds of talks with the farmers’ unions, the government has been unable to convince them to give up their protests. The discussions have boiled down to one basic demand: repeal the laws.
The Supreme Court of India, in response to a petition, intervened and named a committee of four individuals linked to the agricultural domain to try resolve the stalemate. But the farmers rejected the committee as, according to them, all four were individuals who had on earlier occasions supported the new farm laws.
The government offered to suspend the implementation of the three laws for 18 months to give time for a resolution. But the farmers rejected the offer on the grounds that there is no legal option to keep the laws in abeyance, and that they wouldn’t take the government on its word.
Protesters are in for the long haul
The protests are being spearheaded by two umbrella bodies of farmers that in turn make up nearly 300 farmers’ groups across the country. And these unions are ideologically diverse, ranging from ones led by left parties to centrist-liberal groups that have worked among peasants for decades.
Having carefully organised and planned the protests, the farmers committed one serious blunder on January 26, India’s Republic Day, when a planned tractor rally into Delhi went awry. A section of renegade farmers broke away from the pre-decided route and stormed Red Fort, a high-profile structure that over the years has come to symbolise India’s nationhood.
It is here that the prime minister traditionally hoists the national flag and addresses the nation on India’s independence day.
The farmers forced their way into the Red Fort and hoisted the flag of the Sikh community near the one where the national tricolour was fluttering. The government and many across the political spectrum frowned on the farmers’ actions. The Modi government attempted to use the farmers’ misstep and public condemnation by sending in security forces to evict the protesters from the border.
However, the farmers’ unions themselves criticised those who had stormed the Red Fort and claimed that it was an attempt by sections close to the ruling BJP that tried to sabotage the protests. Once the farmers realised their agitation was in danger they flocked back to the Delhi borders in their thousands, pre-empting the security forces from evicting them.
According to the latest reports, more farmers have now turned out at the protest sites compared to before January 26. And farm leaders have categorically stated they are in it for the long haul. Reports quoting Rakesh Tikait, one of the leaders, said they “will not go back home until the laws are taken back.”
For the Modi government, the situation is tricky as one wrong move can hurt its chances of returning to power in 2024. There is no immediate threat as the ruling BJP has a comfortable majority in the Lower House of Parliament. Of the 543 seats, it holds 303 – well above the halfway mark of 272.
But the challenge to the BJP is in the long-term, as public perception about the government will matter. Elections in at least four state assemblies are scheduled in a couple of months. They may prove an indicator on which way popular opinion is moving over the farmers’ issue.
Besides the farm laws themselves, questions have been raised over the urgency in the manner in which the farm laws were passed in parliament.
Despite the long-term implications of the three farm laws, which seek to overhaul India’s agriculture economy, the government rushed the laws through without adequate discussion.
Agriculture under the Indian Constitution is a state subject and, some experts say, the federal government may have exceeded its mandate by passing the three laws.
Though farmers in their thousands from the states of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan have been in attendance for the protests, others from farming communities in Maharashtra, Karnataka and Kerala too have come out periodically in their own states in support.
The government would like its supporters to believe that the protests are restricted to one state – Punjab. But its pan-Indian character is there for anyone to see.
The situation, undoubtedly, is tense. Despite the veneer of a peaceful protest, the government knows it has to promptly handle the protests lest it blows up on its political fortunes.
Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints and editorial policies of TRT World.
Opinion: How India became a vaccine-making powerhouse
If 2020 will be remembered for a virus that paralysed our planet, 2021 should be defined by a vaccine that healed it. The coronavirus vaccine has had special meaning for India, a country that has emerged as the pharmacy of the world. While India has earned its reputation as a major pharmaceutical hub after decades of steadfast effort, its world-class vaccine ecosystem had not received much attention till the current pandemic was upon us
Quick, smart decisions by a resolute leadership; effective and consistent application of prevention protocols; and a cooperative, vigilant citizenry, have allowed India to push down the infection rate. While the total numbers of infections seem high, the daily infection rates have declined sharply and the number of active cases at about 130 per million is one of the lowest in the world. With strong manufacturing, research and innovation capacities and a large vulnerable population, India rapidly became both a laboratory and hub of vaccine manufacture.
Manufacturing is only one part of the game. The pandemic has highlighted India’s role as a reliable partner in global pharmaceutical supply chains. These capacities have been built diligently over a number of years with active state prodding. India is a major supplier of pharmaceutical products and pre-cursors to global markets, including developed markets in the EU, U.S. and Canada. While India’s production of cost-effective and affordable pharmaceutical products is critical for developing countries in Asia and Africa, the country has also contributed to making health care affordable in many developed countries including Canada. During the pandemic, despite a surge in domestic needs, India continued to supply pharmaceutical pre-cursors and finished products, including essential medicines like paracetamol and hydroxychloroquine, to more than 60 countries in the world, Canada among them.
India began research into a possible vaccine as soon as data on the pandemic became available. Six Indian vaccines soon entered the global race, three indigenous and three joint ventures with global players. On January 03, 2021, India announced the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of two India-manufactured Covid-19 vaccines, namely, Covishield produced by the Serum Institute of India and Covaxin, produced by Bharat Biotech, in collaboration with the Indian Council of Medical Research. The approval of Covaxin was conditional and in clinical trial mode with all recipients being tracked and monitored as in a regular trial.
India kicked off its domestic Covid-19 vaccination programme on January 16 this year, the largest such drive in the world with an initial target of 300 million people. Four million health workers received the first jabs within 18 days of the launch, the fastest rollout the world has seen. Driving the success of the project was a robust distribution network with upgraded cold chain equipment, continued training of health workers and a massive outreach and information campaign in support of the vaccination drive.
Last year, addressing the United Nations, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi had made a pledge that India’s vaccine production ecosystem and its innovative capacities would be made available to the entire world in combating the pandemic. This year, India is making good on that promise. The UN Secretary General said in January that India’s vaccine production capacity is ‘one of the best assets that the world has today’.
Even as India managed its own domestic Covid-19 vaccination programme, it started shipping the Covishield vaccine overseas. Reflecting a commitment to “neighbourhood first” and vaccine internationalism, India is providing over twenty million vaccine doses to more than a dozen neighbours and partner countries, helping them kick-start their own vaccine programmes. India’s Prime Minister told the World Economic Forum that more Indian vaccines would soon be available to the world. The made-in-India vaccines are more affordable, and easier to safely store and transport. This allows most less-developed countries to painlessly run their domestic vaccination programmes. Like Canada, India is also committed to the success of the GAVI Alliance; at the global vaccine summit in June 2020, India pledged a contribution of USD 15 million to GAVI. India has now opened commercial export of Covishield with first shipments already delivered to foreign shores.
If the virus was a global public bad that originated in China to quickly choke our world, the vaccine is a global public good that must be equitably available to bring relief to our suffering planet. India is playing a part in providing that healing hand.
Ajay Bisaria is the High Commissioner of India to Canada.
If 2020 will be remembered for a virus that paralysed our planet, 2021 should be defined by a vaccine that healed it. The coronavirus vaccine has had special meaning for India, a country that has emerged as the pharmacy of the world. While India has earned its reputation as a major pharmaceutical hub after decades of steadfast effort, its world-class vaccine ecosystem had not received much attention till the current pandemic was upon us
.
© Provided by National Post A medical worker prepares to inoculate a police personnel with a Covid-19 coronavirus vaccine at the Police headquarters in Srinagar on January 4, 2021.
India’s inoculation programmes have by far been the largest in the world, with 27-million infants being immunized for 12 diseases annually. Audacious campaigns, such as the Pulse Polio drive, went beyond immunization, to eradication of a crippling disease. This immunization experience was backed by substantial R&D strengths, linking the public and private sectors, integrating academia and industry. India’s evolving vaccine eco-system propelled the country to innovate on vaccine discovery and bet on industrial-scale production. Today, 60 per cent of the global vaccine production capacity is located in India, enabling it to demonstrate the fastest rollout of Covid vaccines anywhere in the world.
Like Canada, India has pursued a science-driven policy in addressing the coronavirus challenge. India’s response to this pandemic has been tailored to the evolving situation in the unique context of huge demographic and geographic complexities. India crafted an effective domestic response with active surveillance, strong sub-regional monitoring, capacity building of frontline healthcare workers, risk communication and deep community engagement, while addressing the psycho-social needs of vulnerable populations.
All this enabled high recovery rates of over 97 per cent. India added capacity even as the country reeled under the pandemic’s early blows: PPEs were locally fabricated, 1.5 million were tested daily, and over a million critical care hospital beds were added. Effective medical interventions allowed India to limit the Covid fatality rate at 112 per million population, much below the global average, despite the challenges of a high population density and the need of many to get back to work.
India’s inoculation programmes have by far been the largest in the world, with 27-million infants being immunized for 12 diseases annually. Audacious campaigns, such as the Pulse Polio drive, went beyond immunization, to eradication of a crippling disease. This immunization experience was backed by substantial R&D strengths, linking the public and private sectors, integrating academia and industry. India’s evolving vaccine eco-system propelled the country to innovate on vaccine discovery and bet on industrial-scale production. Today, 60 per cent of the global vaccine production capacity is located in India, enabling it to demonstrate the fastest rollout of Covid vaccines anywhere in the world.
Like Canada, India has pursued a science-driven policy in addressing the coronavirus challenge. India’s response to this pandemic has been tailored to the evolving situation in the unique context of huge demographic and geographic complexities. India crafted an effective domestic response with active surveillance, strong sub-regional monitoring, capacity building of frontline healthcare workers, risk communication and deep community engagement, while addressing the psycho-social needs of vulnerable populations.
All this enabled high recovery rates of over 97 per cent. India added capacity even as the country reeled under the pandemic’s early blows: PPEs were locally fabricated, 1.5 million were tested daily, and over a million critical care hospital beds were added. Effective medical interventions allowed India to limit the Covid fatality rate at 112 per million population, much below the global average, despite the challenges of a high population density and the need of many to get back to work.
Quick, smart decisions by a resolute leadership; effective and consistent application of prevention protocols; and a cooperative, vigilant citizenry, have allowed India to push down the infection rate. While the total numbers of infections seem high, the daily infection rates have declined sharply and the number of active cases at about 130 per million is one of the lowest in the world. With strong manufacturing, research and innovation capacities and a large vulnerable population, India rapidly became both a laboratory and hub of vaccine manufacture.
Manufacturing is only one part of the game. The pandemic has highlighted India’s role as a reliable partner in global pharmaceutical supply chains. These capacities have been built diligently over a number of years with active state prodding. India is a major supplier of pharmaceutical products and pre-cursors to global markets, including developed markets in the EU, U.S. and Canada. While India’s production of cost-effective and affordable pharmaceutical products is critical for developing countries in Asia and Africa, the country has also contributed to making health care affordable in many developed countries including Canada. During the pandemic, despite a surge in domestic needs, India continued to supply pharmaceutical pre-cursors and finished products, including essential medicines like paracetamol and hydroxychloroquine, to more than 60 countries in the world, Canada among them.
India began research into a possible vaccine as soon as data on the pandemic became available. Six Indian vaccines soon entered the global race, three indigenous and three joint ventures with global players. On January 03, 2021, India announced the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of two India-manufactured Covid-19 vaccines, namely, Covishield produced by the Serum Institute of India and Covaxin, produced by Bharat Biotech, in collaboration with the Indian Council of Medical Research. The approval of Covaxin was conditional and in clinical trial mode with all recipients being tracked and monitored as in a regular trial.
India kicked off its domestic Covid-19 vaccination programme on January 16 this year, the largest such drive in the world with an initial target of 300 million people. Four million health workers received the first jabs within 18 days of the launch, the fastest rollout the world has seen. Driving the success of the project was a robust distribution network with upgraded cold chain equipment, continued training of health workers and a massive outreach and information campaign in support of the vaccination drive.
Last year, addressing the United Nations, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi had made a pledge that India’s vaccine production ecosystem and its innovative capacities would be made available to the entire world in combating the pandemic. This year, India is making good on that promise. The UN Secretary General said in January that India’s vaccine production capacity is ‘one of the best assets that the world has today’.
Even as India managed its own domestic Covid-19 vaccination programme, it started shipping the Covishield vaccine overseas. Reflecting a commitment to “neighbourhood first” and vaccine internationalism, India is providing over twenty million vaccine doses to more than a dozen neighbours and partner countries, helping them kick-start their own vaccine programmes. India’s Prime Minister told the World Economic Forum that more Indian vaccines would soon be available to the world. The made-in-India vaccines are more affordable, and easier to safely store and transport. This allows most less-developed countries to painlessly run their domestic vaccination programmes. Like Canada, India is also committed to the success of the GAVI Alliance; at the global vaccine summit in June 2020, India pledged a contribution of USD 15 million to GAVI. India has now opened commercial export of Covishield with first shipments already delivered to foreign shores.
If the virus was a global public bad that originated in China to quickly choke our world, the vaccine is a global public good that must be equitably available to bring relief to our suffering planet. India is playing a part in providing that healing hand.
Ajay Bisaria is the High Commissioner of India to Canada.
Why does India want to privatise public sector banks?
The Modi government takes the politically fraught step of selling its stake in banks, which have been losing money.
Months after the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September, 2008, the then Indian finance minister triumphantly said his country was able to weather the global financial crisis on the back of its strong banks.
“In the world’s leading countries, the finance sectors have crashed but we are still surviving because we nationalised our banking sector,” Pranab Mukherjee said.
Western financial institutions that had dabbled in fancy derivatives and securitised loans ran into trouble. Indian banks - many of them controlled by the state - stuck to the business of raising deposits and lending money to businesses.
But now New Delhi is desperately trying to sell some parts of the public sector banks (PSB) in an attempt to overhaul the banking system, which has been marred by a surge in bad loans.
Earlier this month, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government announced a plan to privatise two public-sector banks.
The names of the banks marked for a sell-off haven’t been officially released. But reports suggest that Punjab and Sind Bank and the Bank of Maharashtra, two relatively smaller lenders, are on the list.
The Indian government has already merged the PSBs, bringing their number down from 27 in 2017 to 12.
State-controlled commercial banks in which the government owns majority stake dominate India’s financial landscape, accounting for two-thirds of the outstanding loans.
Successive governments have struggled to stop the PSBs from bleeding money. In the past 12 years, more than 3.8 trillion rupees ($52 billion) of taxpayers money have gone into keeping them afloat, writes Tamal Bandyopadhyay in Pandemonium: The Great Indian Banking Tragedy.
Privatisation has been on the cards for some time. But it has been politically challenging as employee unions oppose the move and the PSBs are widely seen as filling a vacuum left by private lenders.
India's state-run banks have played an important role in financing small and medium enterprises. (AP)Glory days no more
Unlike private banks, which are driven by profits, New Delhi has used public-sector creditors to pursue developmental goals such as ensuring that people in rural areas have banking services and small businesses can get loans.
Public sector banks grew rapidly after the late Prime Minister Indra Gandhi, of the opposition Congress party, nationalised the banking sector in 1969.
Since then, banking services including loans for small businesses rapidly increased as the state-run banks opened thousands of branches and mobilised deposits from households.
“After nationalization, the breadth and scope of the Indian banking sector expanded at a rate perhaps unmatched by any other country. Indian banking has been remarkably successful at achieving mass participation,” Abhijit Banerjee, a MIT economist and a Nobel Laureate, wrote in a paper.
But nationalisation made the banks prone to political interference especially as politicians used them for poverty alleviation schemes that can help them win votes.
PSBs have also been hurt by the more tech-savvy private banks that are now capturing a bigger share of the deposits.
What went wrong
Contrary to general perception, the financial woes of the public sector banks are not solely a result of corruption and nepotism.
Over the years, the Reserve Bank of India, the central bank, has tightened regulations that require banks to set aside more of their capital to offset potential losses from loans, which might not be paid.
This basically taints the financial statements of the PSBs.
Indian public sector banks, which have lent heavily to corporate entities, also took a hit from the 2008 financial crisis which took a toll on domestic markets.
In the mid-2000s, India’s GDP was growing in double digits with businessmen hoping that the economic expansion will persist for decades to come as seen in China’s case.
Buoyed by the outlook, companies invested in plant and machinery and aggressively hired talent. They took on a lot of debt both from India’s public sector banks and from abroad.
A large part of the loans went into financing infrastructure projects such as power plants and steel mills. But a fall in global commodity prices amid an economic downturn hit company revenues and made it difficult for them to repay the loans.
High inflation led to a rise in interest rates, and consequently jacked up the cost of loans. The depreciation of the rupee piled a further burden on companies which had borrowed in foreign currency.
All of these factors have contributed to the problems that PSBs are facing now.
Source: TRT World
Out of this world:
Shepard put golf on moon 50 years ago
© Provided by The Canadian Press
Fifty years later, it remains the most impressive bunker shot in the history of golf, mainly because of the location.
The moon.
Apollo 14 commander Alan Shepard and his crew brought back about 90 pounds of moon rocks on Feb. 6, 1971. Left behind were two golf balls that Shepard, who later described the moon's surface as “one big sand trap,” hit with a makeshift 6-iron to become a footnote in history.
Francis Ouimet put golf on the front page of American newspapers by winning the 1913 U.S. Open. Gene Sarazen put the Masters on the map by holing a 235-yard shot for an albatross in the final round of his 1935 victory.
Shepard outdid them all. He put golf in outer space.
“He might have put golf on the moon map,” Jack Nicklaus said this week. “I thought it was unique for the game of golf that Shepard thought so much about the game that he would take a golf club to the moon and hit a shot.”
Shepard became the first American in space in 1961 as one of NASA's seven original Mercury astronauts. After being sidelined for years by an inner ear problem he became the fifth astronaut to walk on the moon as Apollo 14 commander.
But he did more than just walk the moon.
Shepard waited until the end of the mission before he surprised American viewers and all but a few at NASA who did not know what Shepard had up his sleeve — or in this case, up his socks. That's how he got the golf gear in space.
“Houston, you might recognize what I have in my hand as the contingency sample return; it just so happens to have a genuine 6-iron on the bottom of it,” Shepard said. "In my left hand, I have a little white pellet that’s familiar to millions of Americans.”
He hit more moon than ball on his first two attempts. The third he later referred to as a shank. And he caught the last one flush, or as flush as an astronaut can hit a golf ball while swinging with one hand in a pressurized spacesuit that weighs 180 pounds (on Earth).
“We used to say it was the longest shot in the history of the world because it hasn't come down yet,” famed golf instructor Butch Harmon said with a laugh.
Harmon is loosely connected with the shot through his relationship with Jack Harden Sr., the former head pro at River Oaks Country Club in Houston whom Shepard asked to build him a 6-iron he could take to the moon. Harden managed to attach the head of a Wilson Staff Dyna-Power 6-iron to a collapsible tool used to collect lunar samples.
The shots did come down on the moon. Still up for debate is how far they went.
“Miles and miles and miles,” Shepard said in a light moment that was broadcast in colour to a captive television audience watching from nearly 240,000 miles away.
Not quite. The shot for years has been estimated at 200 yards, remarkable considering how much the bulk of his spacesuit restricted Shepard's movement. He had even practiced in his spacesuit in a bunker in Houston when no one was around.
On occasion of the 50-year anniversary, British-based imaging specialist Andy Saunders provided a more accurate account. Saunders, who is working on a book called, “Apollo Remastered,” worked out through digital enhancing and stacking techniques of video footage that the first shot went 24 yards. The second ball went 40 yards.
Former PGA champion Jimmy Walker hits a 6-iron about 200 yards on Earth. Walker, a space enthusiast with a skill and passion for astrophotography, worked with the USGA and Saunders as the Apollo 14 anniversary neared to see how far he could hit a 6-iron in one-sixth gravity of the moon.
“He was known for saying miles and miles,” Walker said. “They took my launch conditions and said my ball would fly 4,600 yards and it would have just over a minute of hang time.”
That would be a little over 2 1/2 miles.
That also would be a conventional 6-iron while wearing golf shoes and a sweater vest.
What stands out all these years later is Shepard even thinking about taking a golf club to the moon and back. The inspiration came from Bob Hope, who carried a golf club just about everywhere he went. That included a trip to Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston a year before the Apollo 14 mission.
According to USGA historian Michael Trostel, that's what made Shepard realize a golf shot would be the ideal illustration of the moon's gravitational pull. To build a club, he found the right person in Harden at River Oaks.
“He was incessant tinkerer with equipment,” said Brandel Chamblee, a Golf Channel analyst and longtime friend of Harden's son. "I would tease Jack and his father, any club they got had been ‘Hardenized.’ No club off the rack was ever good enough for them. They always changed the lie, the loft, the bounce. They used lead tape. It was apropos he made Shepard's 6-iron.”
Convincing his superiors took some doing. In a 1998 interview with NASA, Shepard said he ran his idea by the director of the Manned Spaceflight Center who told him, “Absolutely no way.” Shepard told him club and two golf balls wouldn't cost the taxpayers anything. And he would only do it if the entire mission was a complete success.
Shepard said he told director Bob Gilruth, “I will not be so frivolous. I want to wait until the very end of the mission, stand in front of the television camera, whack these golf balls with this makeshift club, fold it up, stick it in my pocket, climb up the ladder, and close the door, and we’ve gone.”
The actual club is one of the prize exhibits at the USGA Museum in New Jersey, which came with one awkward moment.
“He donates it at a ceremony at the 1974 U.S. Open,” Trostel said. "NASA called him later and said it was looking at the club for the Smithsonian. He said he already had donated it to the USGA Museum. They said, ‘Mr. Shepard, that’s government property.' We had a replica commissioned and gave it to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.”
For years, no one knew what golf balls he used and Shepard was determined to avoid any commercialism. Chamblee and Harmon unlocked the mystery this week, and it came with a twist.
They were range balls from River Oaks.
“Within the Hardens, the legacy is he gave him golf balls from the range that had ‘Property of Jack Harden’ on them,” Chamblee said. “Technically — if the balls aren't melted — Jack is the only person who owns property on the moon.”
All because of a one-handed swing by Shepard, still the only person to hit a golf ball on the moon.
“It was designed to be a fun thing,” Shepard said in the 1998 interview, five months before his death at age 74. “Fortunately, it is still a fun thing.”
Doug Ferguson, The Associated Press
Fifty years later, it remains the most impressive bunker shot in the history of golf, mainly because of the location.
The moon.
Apollo 14 commander Alan Shepard and his crew brought back about 90 pounds of moon rocks on Feb. 6, 1971. Left behind were two golf balls that Shepard, who later described the moon's surface as “one big sand trap,” hit with a makeshift 6-iron to become a footnote in history.
Francis Ouimet put golf on the front page of American newspapers by winning the 1913 U.S. Open. Gene Sarazen put the Masters on the map by holing a 235-yard shot for an albatross in the final round of his 1935 victory.
Shepard outdid them all. He put golf in outer space.
“He might have put golf on the moon map,” Jack Nicklaus said this week. “I thought it was unique for the game of golf that Shepard thought so much about the game that he would take a golf club to the moon and hit a shot.”
Shepard became the first American in space in 1961 as one of NASA's seven original Mercury astronauts. After being sidelined for years by an inner ear problem he became the fifth astronaut to walk on the moon as Apollo 14 commander.
But he did more than just walk the moon.
Shepard waited until the end of the mission before he surprised American viewers and all but a few at NASA who did not know what Shepard had up his sleeve — or in this case, up his socks. That's how he got the golf gear in space.
“Houston, you might recognize what I have in my hand as the contingency sample return; it just so happens to have a genuine 6-iron on the bottom of it,” Shepard said. "In my left hand, I have a little white pellet that’s familiar to millions of Americans.”
He hit more moon than ball on his first two attempts. The third he later referred to as a shank. And he caught the last one flush, or as flush as an astronaut can hit a golf ball while swinging with one hand in a pressurized spacesuit that weighs 180 pounds (on Earth).
“We used to say it was the longest shot in the history of the world because it hasn't come down yet,” famed golf instructor Butch Harmon said with a laugh.
Harmon is loosely connected with the shot through his relationship with Jack Harden Sr., the former head pro at River Oaks Country Club in Houston whom Shepard asked to build him a 6-iron he could take to the moon. Harden managed to attach the head of a Wilson Staff Dyna-Power 6-iron to a collapsible tool used to collect lunar samples.
The shots did come down on the moon. Still up for debate is how far they went.
“Miles and miles and miles,” Shepard said in a light moment that was broadcast in colour to a captive television audience watching from nearly 240,000 miles away.
Not quite. The shot for years has been estimated at 200 yards, remarkable considering how much the bulk of his spacesuit restricted Shepard's movement. He had even practiced in his spacesuit in a bunker in Houston when no one was around.
On occasion of the 50-year anniversary, British-based imaging specialist Andy Saunders provided a more accurate account. Saunders, who is working on a book called, “Apollo Remastered,” worked out through digital enhancing and stacking techniques of video footage that the first shot went 24 yards. The second ball went 40 yards.
Former PGA champion Jimmy Walker hits a 6-iron about 200 yards on Earth. Walker, a space enthusiast with a skill and passion for astrophotography, worked with the USGA and Saunders as the Apollo 14 anniversary neared to see how far he could hit a 6-iron in one-sixth gravity of the moon.
“He was known for saying miles and miles,” Walker said. “They took my launch conditions and said my ball would fly 4,600 yards and it would have just over a minute of hang time.”
That would be a little over 2 1/2 miles.
That also would be a conventional 6-iron while wearing golf shoes and a sweater vest.
What stands out all these years later is Shepard even thinking about taking a golf club to the moon and back. The inspiration came from Bob Hope, who carried a golf club just about everywhere he went. That included a trip to Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston a year before the Apollo 14 mission.
According to USGA historian Michael Trostel, that's what made Shepard realize a golf shot would be the ideal illustration of the moon's gravitational pull. To build a club, he found the right person in Harden at River Oaks.
“He was incessant tinkerer with equipment,” said Brandel Chamblee, a Golf Channel analyst and longtime friend of Harden's son. "I would tease Jack and his father, any club they got had been ‘Hardenized.’ No club off the rack was ever good enough for them. They always changed the lie, the loft, the bounce. They used lead tape. It was apropos he made Shepard's 6-iron.”
Convincing his superiors took some doing. In a 1998 interview with NASA, Shepard said he ran his idea by the director of the Manned Spaceflight Center who told him, “Absolutely no way.” Shepard told him club and two golf balls wouldn't cost the taxpayers anything. And he would only do it if the entire mission was a complete success.
Shepard said he told director Bob Gilruth, “I will not be so frivolous. I want to wait until the very end of the mission, stand in front of the television camera, whack these golf balls with this makeshift club, fold it up, stick it in my pocket, climb up the ladder, and close the door, and we’ve gone.”
The actual club is one of the prize exhibits at the USGA Museum in New Jersey, which came with one awkward moment.
“He donates it at a ceremony at the 1974 U.S. Open,” Trostel said. "NASA called him later and said it was looking at the club for the Smithsonian. He said he already had donated it to the USGA Museum. They said, ‘Mr. Shepard, that’s government property.' We had a replica commissioned and gave it to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.”
For years, no one knew what golf balls he used and Shepard was determined to avoid any commercialism. Chamblee and Harmon unlocked the mystery this week, and it came with a twist.
They were range balls from River Oaks.
“Within the Hardens, the legacy is he gave him golf balls from the range that had ‘Property of Jack Harden’ on them,” Chamblee said. “Technically — if the balls aren't melted — Jack is the only person who owns property on the moon.”
All because of a one-handed swing by Shepard, still the only person to hit a golf ball on the moon.
“It was designed to be a fun thing,” Shepard said in the 1998 interview, five months before his death at age 74. “Fortunately, it is still a fun thing.”
Doug Ferguson, The Associated Press
Pope seeks 'Copernican revolution' for post-COVID economy
COPERNICUS WAS LABELED A HERETIC BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OF HIS DAY, DR JOHN DEE A MONIST DEFENDED COPERNICUS THEORY THOUGH HE TOO DISPUTED IT AS AN ASTROLOGER
ROME — Pope Francis urged governments on Monday to use the coronavirus crisis as a revolutionary opportunity to create a world that is more economically and environmentally just — and where basic health care is guaranteed for all.
Francis made the appeal in his annual foreign policy address to ambassadors accredited to the Holy See, an appointment that was postponed for two weeks after he suffered a bout of sciatica nerve pain that made standing and walking difficult.
Francis urged the governments represented in the Apostolic Palace to contribute to global initiatives to provide vaccines to the poor and to use the pandemic to reset what he said was a sick economic model that exploits the poor and the Earth.
“There is need for a kind of new Copernican revolution that can put the economy at the service of men and women, not vice versa,” he said, referring to the 16th-century paradigm shift that stated the sun was at the centre of the universe, not the Earth.
He said such a revolutionary new economy is “one that brings life not death, one that is inclusive and not exclusive, humane and not dehumanizing, one that cares for the environment and does not despoil it.”
Francis has frequently called for the world to use the pandemic as a chance to re-imagine a global economy that values people and the planet over profits, and one where fraternity and solidarity guide human relationships rather than conflict and division.
The 84-year-old Francis hit those themes in his lengthy address, which was delivered in a larger reception hall than usual to provide greater social distancing for the 88 ambassadors who attended. At the end, Francis invited each one up but said he wouldn't shake their hands and urged them to keep their distance. Francis has been vaccinated against the virus.
In his speech, he called for basic health care to be provided to all. He noted that those on the margins of society and who work in the informal economy have been among the hardest hit by the pandemic, with the fewest social nets to survive it.
“Driven by desperation, many have sought other forms of income and risk being exploited through illegal or forced labour, prostitution and various criminal activities, including human trafficking,” Francis warned.
He said children have suffered from an “educational catastrophe" with closed schools, women have been victims of domestic abuse, the faithful have been deprived of communal worship and that all of humanity has been restricted from close human contact.
“Along with vaccines, fraternity and hope are, as it were, the medicine we need in today’s world," he said.
In addition to the pandemic, Francis listed other areas of particular concern, starting with the coup in Myanmar, which Francis visited in 2017. He called for political leaders to be “promptly released as a sign of encouragement for a sincere dialogue aimed at the good of the country.”
He called for the war in Syria to finally end, noting that 2021 marks its 10th anniversary, and urging the international community to “address the causes of the conflict with honesty and courage and to seek solutions." He praised the U.N. treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons and the extension of the START treaty between the U.S. and Russia.
He also called for disarmament efforts to extend to conventional and chemical weapons.
Nicole Winfield, The Associated Press
COPERNICUS WAS LABELED A HERETIC BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OF HIS DAY, DR JOHN DEE A MONIST DEFENDED COPERNICUS THEORY THOUGH HE TOO DISPUTED IT AS AN ASTROLOGER
ROME — Pope Francis urged governments on Monday to use the coronavirus crisis as a revolutionary opportunity to create a world that is more economically and environmentally just — and where basic health care is guaranteed for all.
Francis made the appeal in his annual foreign policy address to ambassadors accredited to the Holy See, an appointment that was postponed for two weeks after he suffered a bout of sciatica nerve pain that made standing and walking difficult.
Francis urged the governments represented in the Apostolic Palace to contribute to global initiatives to provide vaccines to the poor and to use the pandemic to reset what he said was a sick economic model that exploits the poor and the Earth.
“There is need for a kind of new Copernican revolution that can put the economy at the service of men and women, not vice versa,” he said, referring to the 16th-century paradigm shift that stated the sun was at the centre of the universe, not the Earth.
He said such a revolutionary new economy is “one that brings life not death, one that is inclusive and not exclusive, humane and not dehumanizing, one that cares for the environment and does not despoil it.”
Francis has frequently called for the world to use the pandemic as a chance to re-imagine a global economy that values people and the planet over profits, and one where fraternity and solidarity guide human relationships rather than conflict and division.
The 84-year-old Francis hit those themes in his lengthy address, which was delivered in a larger reception hall than usual to provide greater social distancing for the 88 ambassadors who attended. At the end, Francis invited each one up but said he wouldn't shake their hands and urged them to keep their distance. Francis has been vaccinated against the virus.
In his speech, he called for basic health care to be provided to all. He noted that those on the margins of society and who work in the informal economy have been among the hardest hit by the pandemic, with the fewest social nets to survive it.
“Driven by desperation, many have sought other forms of income and risk being exploited through illegal or forced labour, prostitution and various criminal activities, including human trafficking,” Francis warned.
He said children have suffered from an “educational catastrophe" with closed schools, women have been victims of domestic abuse, the faithful have been deprived of communal worship and that all of humanity has been restricted from close human contact.
“Along with vaccines, fraternity and hope are, as it were, the medicine we need in today’s world," he said.
In addition to the pandemic, Francis listed other areas of particular concern, starting with the coup in Myanmar, which Francis visited in 2017. He called for political leaders to be “promptly released as a sign of encouragement for a sincere dialogue aimed at the good of the country.”
He called for the war in Syria to finally end, noting that 2021 marks its 10th anniversary, and urging the international community to “address the causes of the conflict with honesty and courage and to seek solutions." He praised the U.N. treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons and the extension of the START treaty between the U.S. and Russia.
He also called for disarmament efforts to extend to conventional and chemical weapons.
Nicole Winfield, The Associated Press
Alberta expected to recognize essential COVID workers; NDP says get them top-up funds
EDMONTON — Premier Jason Kenney is expected to discuss a plan today to recognize Alberta's hundreds of thousands of critical workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.© Provided by The Canadian Press
The Opposition NDP says Kenney needs to recognize it’s time to use hundreds of millions of dollars in available federal funding to top up wages.
NDP Leader Rachel Notley says the United Conservative government has used $30 million out of the $347-million maximum in eligible federal funding for essential workers under a deal brokered last year between Ottawa and the provinces.
The federal government promised to provide up to $3 billion if the provinces contributed $1 billion.
Notley says not only is the pay being denied to workers in high-risk jobs, but Alberta is also missing out on the effect the extra spending would have in stimulating the economy.
Kenney has said the government doesn't plan to leave $317 million on the table.
Last week, the premier said he has been consulting with the federal government and with workers in essential services to determine the best way to go ahead.
“We’re not leaving that money on the table,” said Kenney.
“We’ve made an application to the federal government to proceed with the additional $317 million.
“We’ve consulted broadly with the concerned sectors to determine the best way of framing this. We’ve looked closely at what other provinces are doing.”
It’s up to the provinces to decide which occupations are eligible for funding.
Notley said Kenny’s laggard approach has proven costly.
“This was a three-to-one sure bet on money in Albertans’ pockets and the premier chose to play politics rather than support them,” she said Tuesday.
“Even if Jason Kenney were to finally get to work and allow Alberta workers access to this funding tomorrow, Albertans have lost out on hundreds of millions in economic growth and over a thousand jobs at a time when they needed it most.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 10, 2021.
Dean Bennett, The Canadian Press
Veteran Submariners Explain What Might Have Caused Japanese Submarine Collision
Despite all the technology at their disposal, for a submarine crew, the simple act of surfacing can sometimes be fraught with danger.
BY THOMAS NEWDICK AND TYLER ROGOWAY FEBRUARY 9, 2021
For the purpose of this article, our first source prefers to keep their identity anonymous. While we don’t know exactly what happened yet, the scenarios they present provide a fascinating insight into the tricky world of underwater operations from someone whose day-to-day job involved “sub driving.”
JAPAN COAST GUARD
Soryu after the accident.
First, a recap of what we know happened. Yesterday, at 10:58 AM local time, around 25 miles southeast of Cape Ashizuri, off the island of Shikoku, which lies southwest of Japan’s main island of Honshu, the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force’s (JMSDF) diesel-electric submarine Soryu collided with the bulk carrier Ocean Artemis. The cargo vessel had departed the Chinese city of Qingdao last Friday and was bound for Okayama Prefecture in western Japan. With 51,000 gross tons and a length of 750 feet, the Ocean Artemis is registered in Hong Kong and was transporting iron ore. For comparison, the submarine has a surfaced displacement of approximately 2,900 tons and a length of just over 275 feet.
Reports state that the collision resulted in injuries to at least three submariners. Initially, the Japanese Ministry of Defense described the damage to the Soryu as limited to masts housing a periscope and a communication antenna. However, photos that have since emerged reveal more considerable damage, including to its dive planes, the starboard one of which is almost broken in two. There also appears to be rather more severe damage to the top of the sail itself, with a number of anechoic tiles missing.
Our submariner source pointed out that automatic identification system (AIS) data — a tracking system that provides logs of vessels’ movements — shows that the Ocean Artemis was heading in a northerly direction and was making between 7.7 and 11.1 knots when it collided with the Soryu. All this information can be gleaned from open sources, including the Marine Traffic website.
Looking at the available evidence, the same source thinks it plausible that the Soryu was submerged, but at a shallow depth. However, the submarine was far enough below the surface to make it impossible to use the periscope. Had the submarine been at periscope depth, it would have been hard to miss a bulk carrier like the Ocean Artemis visually, unless the periscope operator was completely negligent, since it was broad daylight and the weather was fairly good.
JAPAN COAST GUARD
The submariner notes that it looks like the periscope on Soryu is fully raised, suggesting that it did not directly impact the hull of the container ship. This leads to the assumption that the periscope could have been lowered at the time (or otherwise missed the hull). “Otherwise, it would be bent out of shape or sheered off completely (which may be true, because submarines tend to come with two periscopes for redundancy). Again, it is hard to say for sure, but if they were at periscope depth in broad daylight, they ought to have seen the container ship,” they explained.
In the opinion of our source, Ocean Artemis possibly came up from behind in the baffles — traditionally the sonar “blind spot” behind a submarine made famous during the “Crazy Ivan” set-piece sequence in The Hunt For Red October. Two different factors could have combined to ensure the submarine was not able to see the cargo ship. Firstly, the towed sonar array that could be used to detect the vessel above and behind would have been retracted, which is required in order for the submarine to surface. Second, the submarine has no aft-looking hull-mounted sonar, thus requiring frequent baffle clears — turns to “hear” behind the submarine using forward and side sonar arrays. With the submarine most likely heading in a northerly direction, the forward-looking and flank array sonars would have been biased toward the areas with the highest amount of surface traffic. This means the safety-of-ship sensors prioritize the areas with the most hazards, not out to the open ocean, which would not have helped with the Ocean Artemis probably bearing down on the submarine from the rear.
JAPAN COAST GUARD
Coupled with that, having a big cargo ship like the Ocean Artemis approaching from the rear is also the worst case for hydrodynamic forces — Soryu might simply have been sucked up into the ship’s hull due to the Venturi effect. This is not an unknown phenomenon, by any means, and the same thing happened to the Los Angeles class nuclear-powered attack submarine USS Newport News in the south of the Strait of Hormuz in 2007. On that occasion, the submarine was pulled up and into the hull of the Japanese tanker Mogamigawa. The Newport News sustained damage to its bow and the commanding officer was relieved of their command.
The former U.S. Navy submariner also identified certain human factors that could have played a contributing role. The crew of the Soryu may have been fatigued or stressed, or there may have been overconfidence in their abilities, leading to complacency. In the demanding operational environment aboard a submarine, one highly stressful event may have led to a reduction in situational awareness. “These three behavioral characteristics are common in crews post-exercise,” the source notes.
JAPAN COAST GUARD
There is also the possibility that the crew reading the sonar returns aboard the Soryu was unfamiliar with shallow-water acoustic propagation paths. Based on where the mishap occurred, the submarine was likely on the continental shelf, where propagation paths are very different compared to in deep water. As our source explains, “raw data between shallow and deep water can look identical, but mean very different things. i.e., they might have been accustomed to bottom-bounce acoustic signals but were in fact receiving direct path, if they had any signal at all. A direct path contact can be mistaken for a bottom bounce contact at 20 miles away… even to an experienced driver.” In this scenario, it’s suggested that a sonar return from the cargo ship was simply mistaken for a return from the seabed. The ex-U.S. Navy submariner does note, however, that the crews of diesel-electric submarines like the Soryu are typically more adept at shallow water operations than their nuclear-powered counterparts.
Lastly, the incident could have involved a simple collision on the surface of the water, despite it being in broad daylight. After all, “dumber things have happened.”
JAPAN COAST GUARD
Aaron Amick had a bit of a different theory on what may have occurred, telling The War Zone:
Japan’s Soryu SSK collision with the Ocean Artemis reminds us how dangerous submarines are to operate at sea. Judging by the photo taken by helicopter after the February 8th collision, it’s clear the strike occurred on the starboard side of the submarine, damaging the sail, dive surfaces, masts, and antennas. The lack of damage topside forward and aft of the sail suggest a broadside impact. If this is the case, the cargo ship was not in the submarine’s baffles and should have been visible on the sonar displays before the crash.
The damage appears to be limited to the top part of the sail and the fairwater plane, indicating the submarine was in a submerged condition at the time of impact. It is clear the Soryu was making preparations for periscope depth and was sucked up into the passing hull of the Ocean Artemis or was at periscope depth and was pushed aside by the mammoth ship.
Amick, who also runs Subbrief, made the following video explaining the rationale behind his thinking:
Two very insightful possible explanations from two experienced submariners.
Whatever turns out to be the cause of the incident, in this case, we can be thankful that no one was more badly hurt. The former U.S. Navy officer we spoke to also provided a note of caution: as behemoth cargo ships continue to proliferate in the world oceans, unfortunately, the likelihood of these sorts of collisions is only going to increase.
Contact the author: thomas@thedrive.com and tyler@thedrive.com
Why French Leclerc Tanks Have Been Seen Fighting in Yemen
UAE tankers have conveyed to their French counterparts their satisfaction with the Leclerc. The armies of the coalition are reportedly “strongly impressed” by its performance.
In January 2016, the Saudi government approached the Leclerc’s manufacturer, Nexter, to express interest in purchasing a few hundred of the French tanks.
In January 2016, the Saudi government approached the Leclerc’s manufacturer, Nexter, to express interest in purchasing a few hundred of the French tanks.
The Emirati Leclercs are split in two armored battalions, one of which remains stationed around Aden, while the other patrols Yemen’s mountainous central region.
Here's What You Need to Remember: UAE tankers have conveyed to their French counterparts their satisfaction with the Leclerc. The armies of the coalition are reportedly “strongly impressed” by its performance.
“So what do you think of France’s new super tank, the Leclerc?” a retired colonel in the French army’s logistical brigade jokingly asked me in 2002. “You know, the one we paid a fortune for and that we’ll never use in battle.”
So far his prediction has proved true. The French military has deployed light armored vehicles and air power in its combat missions in Afghanistan, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Central African Republic and Mali.
But the French army’s main battle tanks haven’t fired in anger since the Gulf War.
But in the summer of 2015, the United Arab Emirates threw two battalions of Leclercs into the civil war in Yemen — and from the few sketchy reports, it seems the tank has fared better than the American-made M-1 Abrams has done in the same conflict
France, along with England, has been a pioneer of armored warfare since World War I. At the beginning of World War II, it actually fielded more tanks — and better-armed and -armored ones — than the Germans did, but the French army’s poor doctrine and organization doomed the vehicles.
During the Cold War, France produced two major tank designs — the AMX-13 and AMX-30. The AMX-13 was a light tank. Debuting in 1953, it weighed a mere 13 tons and boasted a long-barrel 75-millimeter gun.
Israel and India both deployed the AMX-13 in heavy fighting against Arab and Pakistani opponents, respectively — and the consensus was that the AMX-13’s mobility was useful, but it was too lightly armored for pitched battles against other tanks.
The French army, however, was convinced that anti-armor weapons were becoming so effective that adding thicker armor was pointless. It preferred to emphasize speed and firepower. Thus, when the AMX-30 tank arrived in 1966, it had only 80 millimeters of armor, compared to the 243 millimeters of armor that protected the United States’ contemporary M-47 Patton tank.
But the AMX-30 still had a decent 105-millimeter gun and, despite its light armor, managed to attract significant foreign orders. It also proved readily adaptable into various support vehicles.
By the early 1980s, a new generation of Western tanks emerged, typified by the American M-1 Abrams. These sported composite armor that was highly resistant to the shaped charges on modern anti-tank missiles. During the 1991 Gulf War, the M-1’s armor proved almost completely immune not only to anti-tank missiles but also to the 125-millimeter armor-piercing shells fired by Russian-made T-72 tanks.
Qatar and France deployed AMX-30s in the same conflict. The Qatari tanks saw action at the Battle at Khafji, where they destroyed three 1950s-vintage T-55 tanks. The Iraqis destroyed two AMX-30s.
Fretting over the AMX-30’s thin armor, coalition commanders all but sidelined the French 6th Light Armor Division, deploying it as a rearguard along the flank of the U.S. Army’s XVIII Airborne Corps.
In the mission, the French armor performed well, ultimately destroying 10 Iraqi tanks. But the French tankers probably wished they’d been able to go to war in the new tank that, at the time, was just a year away from entering service. The Leclerc.
By the 1970s, the French army knew its AMX-30s could not reliably defeat the latest Soviet tanks such as the T-72. The independent-minded French didn’t want to simply buy new tanks from the United States or Germany — they wanted a tank as hard-hitting as the Abrams was, but also lighter and better protected than the American vehicle.
The resulting AMX-56 Leclerc — pronounced “le-claire” — took its name from the French general whose armored division liberated Paris in 1944. It was, at the time, the most expensive tank in the world, costing $9.3 million per vehicle in 2011 dollars. By comparison, a new M-1A2 cost $7.56 million and the Russian T-90 carried a price tag of just $4 million.
The French army fields 406 Leclercs, 240 of which are in its four active tank regiments. There are also 20 recovery-vehicle variants in service.
The three principal Western main battle tanks — the Abrams, the German Leopard 2 and the British Challenger 2 — share many design elements such as 120-millimeter guns, four-person crews and composite armor. While similar in its major performance parameters, the Leclerc exhibits a lot of French quirks.
In place of a human loader, it features an auto-loader system with a rate of fire of 12 shells per minute. The auto-loader reduces the crew to just three — a commander, gunner and driver. The Leclerc has a .50-caliber machine gun in the coaxial position next to the main gun, rather than next to the commander’s hatch.
Its 120-millimeter smoothbore main gun is slightly longer than the Abrams’ is, meaning it can, in theory, penetrate more armor. It’s also capable of firing programmable air-burst high-explosive shells. But the Leclerc’s principal advantages lie in its defensive properties and mobility.
The comparative effectiveness of modern tank armor is difficult to calculate, but the Leclerc and the M-1 appear to have similar frontal armor, though some critics argue the Leclerc’s frontal plate has more weak points around its sensors. In place of the M-1’s Chobham composite armor, the Leclerc boasts an unusual mix of composite, traditional and reactive armor that is slightly more effective against kinetic penetrators fired by other tanks.
The Leclerc’s side armor, however, is clearly superior to the M-1’s. Newer models also feature titanium armor inserts and explosive-reactive armor bricks on the side — belts of explosives that prematurely detonate incoming missiles and shells.
Finally, a Galix grenade launcher in the turret can discharge a variety of munitions including flashbang grenades, high explosives, multi-spectral screening smoke and infrared decoys that can confuse missiles.
The Leclerc also has a smaller turret profile than the Abrams does— making it harder to hit. However, critics argue the smaller turret affords less space for internal upgrades.
At 60 tons, the Leclerc is 10 tons lighter than most Western main battle tanks are. There are many benefits — a good power-to-weight ratio, lower ground pressure, superb acceleration and a comparatively high maximum speed of 45 miles per hour. The Leclerc is a lot more fuel efficient than many other tanks. It can travel 340 miles before refueling, compared to 260 for the Abrams. This reduces the tank’s logistical burden.
Critics claim the Leclercs are difficult to maintain. Defenders of the French vehicle insist this reflects the teething problems of early production models.
Though they haven’t seen combat, French Leclercs have deployed…on peacekeeping missions in Kosovo and Lebanon, where they performed well. In one dramatic incident in Lebanon in 2006, a platoon of four Leclercs confronted between two and five Israeli Merkava tanks attempting to enter the Lebanese village of Marwahin. After a 20-minute standoff, the two sides disengaged.
The French unveiled a new upgrade, the Leclerc XLR, in June 2016, with the goal of keeping Leclercs relevant until 2040. In addition to new sensors and electronics, the XLR would have modular armor kits, including one kit protecting against IEDs by jamming cellular signals and another optimized for defeating rocket-propelled grenades.
The United Arab Emirates was the only other army to purchase Leclercs. The UAE acquired 390 “tropicalized” versions with V12 engines plus 46 armored recovery vehicles. The UAE Leclercs also deployed on the Kosovo peacekeeping mission, where a contrast was stark. The Emirati Leclercs boasted superior sensors and systems compared to the French tanks.
The Emirati army bought 13 Azure armor kits with slatted bar armor designed to detonate the warheads of rocket-propelled grenades before they impact the hull. The U.S. Army fielded a similar urban-combat upgrade in Iraq. Azure also includes a remotely-operated machine gun.
While the French Leclercs remain unblooded, the Emirati tanks have actually seen combat — in Yemen, where the UAE has deployed between 70 and 80 Leclercs.
When Yemen’s president Ali Abdullah Saleh was deposed in 2011, Houthi tribes felt squeezed out of the new government and launched a full-scale rebellion in 2015.
Complicating matters was that Yemen’s military was already engaged in intense counterinsurgency campaign against Al-Qaeda militants who had carved out footholds in the countryside.
By the end of March 2015, the Houthis were close to triumphing, having captured the capital of Sana’a and seized territory in the port city of Aden. Perceiving the Houthis to be Iranian proxies, Saudi Arabia intervened at the head of a coalition of Arab states.
The Saudi-led coalition, benefiting from U.S. logistical and technical support, succeeded in recapturing Aden, but has sustained heavy casualties from the Houthi fighters. The coalition stands accused of indiscriminately bombing civilians.
By July 2015, Saudi ground forces were bogged down attempting to capture the Al Anad air base near Aden. An Emirati armor brigade conducted an amphibious landing — most likely via tank landing craft — at an oil refinery terminal, a major logistical feat for the small country. The armored brigade rolled down the N-1 highway and captured the air base on Aug. 3, allowing coalition forces to break out of Aden.
The Emirati Leclercs are split in two armored battalions, one of which remains stationed around Aden, while the other patrols Yemen’s mountainous central region. The armored brigade also includes a mechanized battalion of Russian BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles equipped with 100-millimeter guns, plus a battery of G6 155-millimeter self-propelled howitzers.
In videos, Leclercs can be seen racing down roads and firing their main guns in urban skirmishes. But how effective are they? It’s unclear whether the Emirati tanks have directly clashed with the Houthis’ own small number of captured tanks. But there is some information to work with.
So far there aren’t videos of Leclercs being destroyed — which can’t be said for the other vehicles of the coalition. Houthi rebels have filmed their destruction, by way of long-range anti-tank missiles, of at least nine Saudi M-1A2S tanks. At least five M-60 Pattons and two AMX-30s have also been destroyed. Additionally, the Houthis devastated a column of Emirati M-ATV mine-resistant vehicles in an ambush.
Sources in the UAE state that Leclercs have been damaged four times by anti-tank weapons. It appears two incidents involved IEDs, a third involved a rocket-propelled grenade that deflected off the target tank’s Azure slat armor and the fourth involved an anti-tank missile.
In all cases, the Leclercs survived, although a missile did kill a tank commander when it struck the commander’s hatch.
One Leclerc may have been knocked out while not in use. On Sept. 4, 2015, an SS-21 Tochka ballistic missile fired by a Yemen army unit allied with the Houthis slammed into an arms depot at Marib Airfield. The ensuing detonation killed 45 people and reportedly damaged a parked Leclerc.
To be clear, other factors may explain the lack of combat losses. To begin with, there are far more Saudi tanks of all varieties in Yemen than there are Emirati Leclercs. Furthermore, the Saudis may be operating in sectors where the Houthi have concentrated more of their anti-tank weapons.
Finally, some of the videos suggest the Saudi tank losses reflect poor tactics and a lack of combined-arms coordination. It’s possible the UAE tanks have deployed more carefully and in coordination with supporting arms.
Nonetheless, there are a few other signs that suggest the Leclerc is performing well.
This first appeared in WarIsBoring here.
by Sebastien Roblin
February 9, 2021
February 9, 2021
Here's What You Need to Remember: UAE tankers have conveyed to their French counterparts their satisfaction with the Leclerc. The armies of the coalition are reportedly “strongly impressed” by its performance.
“So what do you think of France’s new super tank, the Leclerc?” a retired colonel in the French army’s logistical brigade jokingly asked me in 2002. “You know, the one we paid a fortune for and that we’ll never use in battle.”
So far his prediction has proved true. The French military has deployed light armored vehicles and air power in its combat missions in Afghanistan, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Central African Republic and Mali.
But the French army’s main battle tanks haven’t fired in anger since the Gulf War.
But in the summer of 2015, the United Arab Emirates threw two battalions of Leclercs into the civil war in Yemen — and from the few sketchy reports, it seems the tank has fared better than the American-made M-1 Abrams has done in the same conflict
France, along with England, has been a pioneer of armored warfare since World War I. At the beginning of World War II, it actually fielded more tanks — and better-armed and -armored ones — than the Germans did, but the French army’s poor doctrine and organization doomed the vehicles.
During the Cold War, France produced two major tank designs — the AMX-13 and AMX-30. The AMX-13 was a light tank. Debuting in 1953, it weighed a mere 13 tons and boasted a long-barrel 75-millimeter gun.
Israel and India both deployed the AMX-13 in heavy fighting against Arab and Pakistani opponents, respectively — and the consensus was that the AMX-13’s mobility was useful, but it was too lightly armored for pitched battles against other tanks.
The French army, however, was convinced that anti-armor weapons were becoming so effective that adding thicker armor was pointless. It preferred to emphasize speed and firepower. Thus, when the AMX-30 tank arrived in 1966, it had only 80 millimeters of armor, compared to the 243 millimeters of armor that protected the United States’ contemporary M-47 Patton tank.
But the AMX-30 still had a decent 105-millimeter gun and, despite its light armor, managed to attract significant foreign orders. It also proved readily adaptable into various support vehicles.
By the early 1980s, a new generation of Western tanks emerged, typified by the American M-1 Abrams. These sported composite armor that was highly resistant to the shaped charges on modern anti-tank missiles. During the 1991 Gulf War, the M-1’s armor proved almost completely immune not only to anti-tank missiles but also to the 125-millimeter armor-piercing shells fired by Russian-made T-72 tanks.
Qatar and France deployed AMX-30s in the same conflict. The Qatari tanks saw action at the Battle at Khafji, where they destroyed three 1950s-vintage T-55 tanks. The Iraqis destroyed two AMX-30s.
Fretting over the AMX-30’s thin armor, coalition commanders all but sidelined the French 6th Light Armor Division, deploying it as a rearguard along the flank of the U.S. Army’s XVIII Airborne Corps.
In the mission, the French armor performed well, ultimately destroying 10 Iraqi tanks. But the French tankers probably wished they’d been able to go to war in the new tank that, at the time, was just a year away from entering service. The Leclerc.
By the 1970s, the French army knew its AMX-30s could not reliably defeat the latest Soviet tanks such as the T-72. The independent-minded French didn’t want to simply buy new tanks from the United States or Germany — they wanted a tank as hard-hitting as the Abrams was, but also lighter and better protected than the American vehicle.
The resulting AMX-56 Leclerc — pronounced “le-claire” — took its name from the French general whose armored division liberated Paris in 1944. It was, at the time, the most expensive tank in the world, costing $9.3 million per vehicle in 2011 dollars. By comparison, a new M-1A2 cost $7.56 million and the Russian T-90 carried a price tag of just $4 million.
The French army fields 406 Leclercs, 240 of which are in its four active tank regiments. There are also 20 recovery-vehicle variants in service.
The three principal Western main battle tanks — the Abrams, the German Leopard 2 and the British Challenger 2 — share many design elements such as 120-millimeter guns, four-person crews and composite armor. While similar in its major performance parameters, the Leclerc exhibits a lot of French quirks.
In place of a human loader, it features an auto-loader system with a rate of fire of 12 shells per minute. The auto-loader reduces the crew to just three — a commander, gunner and driver. The Leclerc has a .50-caliber machine gun in the coaxial position next to the main gun, rather than next to the commander’s hatch.
Its 120-millimeter smoothbore main gun is slightly longer than the Abrams’ is, meaning it can, in theory, penetrate more armor. It’s also capable of firing programmable air-burst high-explosive shells. But the Leclerc’s principal advantages lie in its defensive properties and mobility.
The comparative effectiveness of modern tank armor is difficult to calculate, but the Leclerc and the M-1 appear to have similar frontal armor, though some critics argue the Leclerc’s frontal plate has more weak points around its sensors. In place of the M-1’s Chobham composite armor, the Leclerc boasts an unusual mix of composite, traditional and reactive armor that is slightly more effective against kinetic penetrators fired by other tanks.
The Leclerc’s side armor, however, is clearly superior to the M-1’s. Newer models also feature titanium armor inserts and explosive-reactive armor bricks on the side — belts of explosives that prematurely detonate incoming missiles and shells.
Finally, a Galix grenade launcher in the turret can discharge a variety of munitions including flashbang grenades, high explosives, multi-spectral screening smoke and infrared decoys that can confuse missiles.
The Leclerc also has a smaller turret profile than the Abrams does— making it harder to hit. However, critics argue the smaller turret affords less space for internal upgrades.
At 60 tons, the Leclerc is 10 tons lighter than most Western main battle tanks are. There are many benefits — a good power-to-weight ratio, lower ground pressure, superb acceleration and a comparatively high maximum speed of 45 miles per hour. The Leclerc is a lot more fuel efficient than many other tanks. It can travel 340 miles before refueling, compared to 260 for the Abrams. This reduces the tank’s logistical burden.
Critics claim the Leclercs are difficult to maintain. Defenders of the French vehicle insist this reflects the teething problems of early production models.
Though they haven’t seen combat, French Leclercs have deployed…on peacekeeping missions in Kosovo and Lebanon, where they performed well. In one dramatic incident in Lebanon in 2006, a platoon of four Leclercs confronted between two and five Israeli Merkava tanks attempting to enter the Lebanese village of Marwahin. After a 20-minute standoff, the two sides disengaged.
The French unveiled a new upgrade, the Leclerc XLR, in June 2016, with the goal of keeping Leclercs relevant until 2040. In addition to new sensors and electronics, the XLR would have modular armor kits, including one kit protecting against IEDs by jamming cellular signals and another optimized for defeating rocket-propelled grenades.
The United Arab Emirates was the only other army to purchase Leclercs. The UAE acquired 390 “tropicalized” versions with V12 engines plus 46 armored recovery vehicles. The UAE Leclercs also deployed on the Kosovo peacekeeping mission, where a contrast was stark. The Emirati Leclercs boasted superior sensors and systems compared to the French tanks.
The Emirati army bought 13 Azure armor kits with slatted bar armor designed to detonate the warheads of rocket-propelled grenades before they impact the hull. The U.S. Army fielded a similar urban-combat upgrade in Iraq. Azure also includes a remotely-operated machine gun.
While the French Leclercs remain unblooded, the Emirati tanks have actually seen combat — in Yemen, where the UAE has deployed between 70 and 80 Leclercs.
When Yemen’s president Ali Abdullah Saleh was deposed in 2011, Houthi tribes felt squeezed out of the new government and launched a full-scale rebellion in 2015.
Complicating matters was that Yemen’s military was already engaged in intense counterinsurgency campaign against Al-Qaeda militants who had carved out footholds in the countryside.
By the end of March 2015, the Houthis were close to triumphing, having captured the capital of Sana’a and seized territory in the port city of Aden. Perceiving the Houthis to be Iranian proxies, Saudi Arabia intervened at the head of a coalition of Arab states.
The Saudi-led coalition, benefiting from U.S. logistical and technical support, succeeded in recapturing Aden, but has sustained heavy casualties from the Houthi fighters. The coalition stands accused of indiscriminately bombing civilians.
By July 2015, Saudi ground forces were bogged down attempting to capture the Al Anad air base near Aden. An Emirati armor brigade conducted an amphibious landing — most likely via tank landing craft — at an oil refinery terminal, a major logistical feat for the small country. The armored brigade rolled down the N-1 highway and captured the air base on Aug. 3, allowing coalition forces to break out of Aden.
The Emirati Leclercs are split in two armored battalions, one of which remains stationed around Aden, while the other patrols Yemen’s mountainous central region. The armored brigade also includes a mechanized battalion of Russian BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles equipped with 100-millimeter guns, plus a battery of G6 155-millimeter self-propelled howitzers.
In videos, Leclercs can be seen racing down roads and firing their main guns in urban skirmishes. But how effective are they? It’s unclear whether the Emirati tanks have directly clashed with the Houthis’ own small number of captured tanks. But there is some information to work with.
So far there aren’t videos of Leclercs being destroyed — which can’t be said for the other vehicles of the coalition. Houthi rebels have filmed their destruction, by way of long-range anti-tank missiles, of at least nine Saudi M-1A2S tanks. At least five M-60 Pattons and two AMX-30s have also been destroyed. Additionally, the Houthis devastated a column of Emirati M-ATV mine-resistant vehicles in an ambush.
Sources in the UAE state that Leclercs have been damaged four times by anti-tank weapons. It appears two incidents involved IEDs, a third involved a rocket-propelled grenade that deflected off the target tank’s Azure slat armor and the fourth involved an anti-tank missile.
In all cases, the Leclercs survived, although a missile did kill a tank commander when it struck the commander’s hatch.
One Leclerc may have been knocked out while not in use. On Sept. 4, 2015, an SS-21 Tochka ballistic missile fired by a Yemen army unit allied with the Houthis slammed into an arms depot at Marib Airfield. The ensuing detonation killed 45 people and reportedly damaged a parked Leclerc.
To be clear, other factors may explain the lack of combat losses. To begin with, there are far more Saudi tanks of all varieties in Yemen than there are Emirati Leclercs. Furthermore, the Saudis may be operating in sectors where the Houthi have concentrated more of their anti-tank weapons.
Finally, some of the videos suggest the Saudi tank losses reflect poor tactics and a lack of combined-arms coordination. It’s possible the UAE tanks have deployed more carefully and in coordination with supporting arms.
Nonetheless, there are a few other signs that suggest the Leclerc is performing well.
This first appeared in WarIsBoring here.
J.F.C. "Boney" Fuller - Wacko Genius of Armored Warfare
Major General John Frederick Charles Fuller was, during World War I and through the early 1930s, the British army’s tank warfare go-to guy. He was the man who taught the Wehrmacht how to blitzkrieg, George Patton how to rumble and the Israelis how to kill Syrians.
Myanmar coup: US, UN condemn violence against protesters
The US and UN's concern followed a raid by the military on the Yangon headquarters of outsted leader Aung San Suu Kyi's party late on Tuesday.
The United Nations expressed "strong concern" over the violence
The US on Tuesday condemned violence against protesters in ongoing protests against a military coup in Myanmar. US State department spokesman, Ned Price said that everyone had a right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
"We repeat our calls for the military to relinquish power, restore democratically elected government, release those detained and lift all telecommunication restrictions and to refrain from violence," said Price.
The United Nations also expressed "strong concern" over the violence.
"The use of disproportionate force against demonstrators is unacceptable," said Ola Almgren, the UN resident co-ordinator in Myanmar.
Meanwhile, the EU's foreign policy chief said the bloc could impose sanctions on Myanmar's military and was "reviewing" all options.
On February 1, army commander Min Aung Hlaing seized power in Myanmar. Coup leaders cited alleged irregularities in a November election that saw the NLD win in a vote the electoral commission said was fair.
Suu Kyi was detained the same day and has not been seen since.
am/rt (AFP, Reuters)
The US and UN's concern followed a raid by the military on the Yangon headquarters of outsted leader Aung San Suu Kyi's party late on Tuesday.
The United Nations expressed "strong concern" over the violence
The US on Tuesday condemned violence against protesters in ongoing protests against a military coup in Myanmar. US State department spokesman, Ned Price said that everyone had a right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
"We repeat our calls for the military to relinquish power, restore democratically elected government, release those detained and lift all telecommunication restrictions and to refrain from violence," said Price.
The United Nations also expressed "strong concern" over the violence.
"The use of disproportionate force against demonstrators is unacceptable," said Ola Almgren, the UN resident co-ordinator in Myanmar.
Meanwhile, the EU's foreign policy chief said the bloc could impose sanctions on Myanmar's military and was "reviewing" all options.
Watch video 02:22 Myanmar anti-coup protesters remain defiant
Raid on Suu Kyi's offices
The US and UN's concern followed a raid by the military on the Yangon headquarters of outsted leader Aung San Suu Kyi's party late on Tuesday.
"The military dictator raided and destroyed NLD headquarters at around 9.30 p.m.," said the National League for Democracy, Suu Kyi's party.
The US and UN's concern followed a raid by the military on the Yangon headquarters of outsted leader Aung San Suu Kyi's party late on Tuesday.
"The military dictator raided and destroyed NLD headquarters at around 9.30 p.m.," said the National League for Democracy, Suu Kyi's party.
Watch video 02:15 Myanmar army chief says vote-rigging justifies coup
Another day of protest
Earlier in the day, security forces in Myanmar used rubber bullets and tear gas against anti-coup protesters who rallied to defy a ban on gatherings.
Demonstrators want power restored to the deposed civilian government and freedom for the nation's elected leader, Suu Kyi, and her allies.
IN PICTURES: PROTESTS SPREAD IN MYANMAR OVER COUPDoctors and nurses on the frontline
On February 1, army commander Min Aung Hlaing seized power in Myanmar. Coup leaders cited alleged irregularities in a November election that saw the NLD win in a vote the electoral commission said was fair.
Suu Kyi was detained the same day and has not been seen since.
am/rt (AFP, Reuters)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)