Total Pageviews

Monday, October 24, 2011

CCNS Approves & Fast-Tracks ‘Modified’ Project 17A FFG Programme

In what can only be described as joyous ‘Deepavali-eve’ tidings for the Indian Navy (IN), the Govt of India’s Cabinet Committee on National Security (CCNS) earlier last week finally approved the Ministry of Defence’s proposal for kick-starting the Project 17A guided-missile frigate’s (FFG) design-cum-construction programme, which is already running four years behind schedule. Consequently, the MoD-owned and Mumbai-based Mazagon Docks Ltd (MDL), teamed with Fincantieri, has at long-last, received both the green light and the much-required funds required for commencing work on the Project 17A FFG programme, which now calls for the Project 17A FFG to be an advanced derivative of the existing 5,600-tonne Project 17 Shivalik-class FFG, and NOT a brand-new warship design outsourced from abroad. While MDL will be the lead yard for both detailed design and construction of the first four Project 17A FFGs, Kolkata-based Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers will build the remaining three FFGs. It is estimated that the first Project 17A FFG will be launched five years (within 60 months, or by 2017) after its keel-laying ceremony (to be held in the latter half of next year), followed by the remaining six FFGs being delivered every successive year through to 2022.
The CCNS decision, which is likely to cause dismay to foreign shipbuilders like Fincantieri of Italy, France’s Direction des Constructions Navales (DCNS), Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Russia’s Severnoye Design Bureau/Admiralty Shipyards, Spain’s Navantia, the UK’s BAE Systems, and South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries, is likely to result in the Project 17 FFG’s design being modified to accommodate new-generation weapon systems like the Barak-2 MR-SAM/EL/M-2248 MF-STAR combination (see: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2011/04/mf-star-deliveries-for-project-15a-ddgs_07.html) instead of the Cashmere area air defence system comprising the 24 rounds of 40km-range 9M317M Shtil-1 MR-SAMs, 3S-90 missile launcher, four MR-90 Orekh target illuminators, and the Salyut FSUE-built E-band MR-760 Fregat M2EM 3-D radar; plus BrahMos vertically-launched supersonic multi-role cruise missiles instead of the the eight Novator-built 3M54E Klub-N supersonic 220km-range anti-ship cruise missiles. The crew complement will likely be reduced from the existing 257 (including 35 officers) to about 110 by introducing high levels of automation, which will translate into a savings of around 20% in operational costs and higher operational availability of the warships. The Project 17A FFG’s superstructure will also make extensive use of composites similar to what’s now being done on board the latter two of the four Project 28 Kamorta-class ASW corvettes now under fabrication by GRSE.
The decision to fast-track the project 17A FFG construction programme comes close on the heels of a major upgrade undertaken by MDL of its integrated shipbuilding processes for FFGs, which will become idle once the third and last Project 17 FFG—INS Sahyadri—is commissioned into service early next year. Therefore, in order to make optimum utilisation of its warship-building capacities and capabilities, the MoD, in an unusual show of pragmatism, had last month decided to fast-track the indigenous warship construction roadmap.

Thus far, MDL’s infrastructure modernisation plans have moved ahead in four areas: installation of a 300-tonne Goliath crane, construction of a new modular workshop for FFGs, and fabrication of a wet-basin for the outfitting of FFGs and DDGs. All three of these will be ready for usage by early next year and will make MDL the first MoD-owned DPSU to undertake integrated shipbuilding concurrently for two lines of warships and two lines of submarines: the seven Project 17A FFGs, the four 6,800-tonne Project 15B guided-missile destroyers (DDG), and the six Scorpene SSKs and the yet-to-be-ordered Project 75I SSKs. In addition to all this, MDL has also built two more modular workshops—one for warship-building (the four Project 15B DDGs) and the other for submarine construction—at the Alcock Yard, which is adjacent to MDL’s main yard. Consequently, by late next year, MDL will have two dedicated submarine construction facilities—one at its East Yard and the other at the Alcock Yard, both of which will be used for the accelerated delivery of the six Scorpene SSKs on order. As things now stand, the first Scorpene will be launched by August 2015, with the sixth being launched by September 2018.
MDL has also become India’s first shipbuilder to commission a virtual reality lab, enabling its naval architects and engineers to virtually walk through the compartments being digitally designed for a warship. This will from now on obviate the need for constructing mock-ups that are time-consuming, and will also contribute greatly towards faster warship deliveries. MDL has also requested the MoD to approve its strategic industrial partnership with Gujarat-based Pipavav Defence & Offshore Engineering Co Ltd, so that it can enlist the latter’s services as a sub-contractor for fabricating sub-sections of a warship’s superstructure, thereby further reducing the time taken for hull fabrication. MDL will thus play the mentor’s role for the emerging private-sector shipyards and teach the latter the intricacies of detailed designing, fabrication, outfitting, systems and weapons integration, tests and trials, and finally, warship delivery.
As for GRSE, its principal strategic industrial partner is likely to be DCNS (which till mentor GRSE in areas such as virtual digital designing and integrated shipbuilding), while the principal fabrication sub-contractor is likely to be either the MoD-owned and Vizag-based DPSU Hindustan Shiptard Ltd (HSL), or Larsen & Toubro’s brand-new shipyard at Kattupalli in Tamil Nadu, which has been set up jointly with Tamil Nadu Industrial Development Corp and is expected to be fully commissioned early next year.
 
So what is the future of the IN’s Project 75I submarine procurement programme? After all, by late 2012, MDL would have completed hull fabrication for the sixth Scorpene, after which its outfitting will start, leaving MDL’s two SSK hull fabrication workshops bereft of any further activity. Even if the RFPs are issued by the MoD before the year’s end (which appears highly unlikely), it will take at least another three years to arrive at the contract signature stage. Then there’s the issue of according priority to the procurement of four LPHs, for which two MoD-owned DPSUs—MDL and HSL—each teamed up with a private-sector shipbuilders, are likely to be selected for building them. In light of all this, it won’t be surprising at all if circumstances conspire together to force the MoD to exercise the only financially viable and least risky option left for arresting the decline of the IN’s SSK fleet strength by the latter half of this decade—ordering a follow-on batch of four Scorpene SSKs from DCNS via MDL—Prasun K. Sengupta

357 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 357 of 357
SherKhan said...

Gents,

Have a good read of this:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/MK04Df03.html

India seems to have assumed it's natural role in Central/South Asia.

SherKhan said...

Hi Prasun,

Hope you are well. It is a well known that chinese generation does not follow the western. E.g. that f-16blk52 are 4th gen for the west. For china these f-16blk52 are 3gen. It is for this reason that j-20 is 4gen.

One point Ajay is correct on: in 2020 the fighter jet that will be more advanced is likely be j-20 ratherthan the T-50. Chinese have the drive and as you are aware they have just started to walk. If their level of advancement continues...we are in for some interesting times ahead.

Anonymous said...

1. Has'nt India ordered the Spike ATGM? Because it is mentionerd in Wikipedia that India has ordered some 8000 such missiles. Pls tell.
2.IAF is purchasing 18 Spyder systems from Israel.Are they Spyder-SR or Spyder-MR? what is the composition of Spyder system?
3.Indian Army recently floated out RFPs for purchasing QR-SAMs. What is the stsus of this project? Which sam system is being bought and how many are being bought?
4.In of your earlier posts, it was mentioned that the Shtil-1 SAM for the P1156.6 has 50 km range but now u are saying the range is only 40 km. it is very confusing. pls clarify.

Anonymous said...

A small comment on a phrase that irritates me;why say for example
india will place orders for 145 nos Howitzers or Russia has ordered only 67 Nos of Mi-28N?It is a remnant from Indian legal documents.There is no need to add Numbers if one said plainly the figures.I also hate when they say seven (7) for instance...anyway a small issue :)

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Any update on the Astra MkII??Has the development work been started??Will the Astra MkII get a RAMjet propulsion system like the MBDA Meteor??And lastly,do you think that the projected 3 ton of weapons-grade Pu 239 is enough for our needs or it should've been 4-5 ton at the very least??
Please try to reply.
Thanks..

Ravi said...

hey where are the barak 1 silos in the cad pic...i cant locate them with my mk1 eye ball...

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Recently there is the news every where that IA has planned to deploy 100 thousand fresh troops along LAC in NE.I want to ask if these are over and above those 40000 troops earlier deployed as 2 divisions or including those 40000??Hope you can clear the doubt.
Thanks in advance.

Ravi said...

1.Hey why does akash missile system has only 3 missile/launcher....Considering the fact that each target will be engaged with 2 missiles... doesn't it make sense to have 4 missiles/Launcher so that each launcher can engage 2 targets without hindrance....

2.Can you plz direct me to a link where i can have a complete picture of orbat of Indian army...or can you enlighten me about all new raising's after 2008....these recent media reports have confused me a lot... don't they have raised 8 or 4 or 2 mountain div....A complete orbat of north and eastern command would be helpful....

3. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/
_o_no4M2xEPY/TD8xni7qK6I/
AAAAAAAAK6c/dtwFCcvcN-Q/s400/lrsam2-786897.jpg

Check this link out it clearly shows that P15 Alpha have
32 SAM
16 Bhramos
4* Ak-630
6 inch OTO gun
2* twin 533mm torpedo launcher

And nothing more than this...no barak 1 or anything...do you have any link to back your presumptions....

Anonymous said...

Hey Prasun sir,are you sure that PLAAF KJ 2000 AWACS uses mechanically scanned sloted planer array radar and not an AESA??Please don't think that I am questioning your credibility and authenticity,I am just curious as many sources including Janes claim that KJ 2000 to be an AESA.Actually I am confused sir.

Shree said...

Read this PDF
http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2011/India_11-44.pdf

DSCA clearly mentions that
"The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region."

What the hell do they mean by that......

*Do they not want to sell equipment that would change military balance in the region???

*And what would have happened if F-18 won MMRCA and offering F-35 would they still say "The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region."??????????

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Sher Khan: Regarding Afghanistan, it seems that China, India and Russia are all thinking along the same lines and are closely coordinating matters behind-the-scenes, especially with regard to strengthening the SCO. And it also increasingly appears that both China and Russia have prevailed upon Pakistan to take a less paranoic view of India’s role in Afghanistan and the rest of Central Asia. All this bodes well, especially after India voted in favour of Pakistan’s entry into the UNSC as a non-permanent member. It now looks like the foreign policy objectives of Pakistan’s national security establishment are undergoing a sea-change, as it now realises who exactly are Islamabad’s true well-wishers.
Regarding the J-20, I very much doubt if the J-20 will be able to even catch up to the FGFA or PAK-FA by 2020. Presently, there’s no hard evidence anywhere to indicate that China’s military-industrial complex will be able to overcome critical technological shortcomings in areas like turbofans and integrated avionics suites of the type now being developed for the FGFA.
By the way, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJdFqioR-YA

To Anon@6.01PM: No Spikes have been ordered by anyone from India. The Sprders ordered for the Indian Army and IAF are SpyDer-SRs. No decision as yet on QR-SAMs. Shtil-1 has 40km range.

To Anurag: Both the Astra Mk1 and Mk2 variants are still undergoing development. The Astra Mk2 will not have ramjet propulsion. 3 metric tonnes of weapons-grade fissile materials is more than enough. 100,000 troops is inclusive of the 40,000 already inducted.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Ravi: Barak-1 twin VL-silos are on either side (portside and starboard) of the mast housing the LW-08 radar. The installation of four AK-630Ms was a much earlier rendering and has since been replaced with two AK-630Ms and twin EL/M-2221 STGR fire-control radars (similar to what’s been done to the P-15 Delhi-class DDGs. All mountings were clearly visible on the first P-15A DDG (INS Kolkata) which was photographed by a few ‘desi’ journos when visiting MDL’s facilities on August 19, 2011. The weblink you’ve given for the P-15A’s combat suite is evidently outdated as it doesn’t show the BrahMos installation, undersea warfare management suite, countermeasures suite, and the EW suite installations. I have no link to back any presumptions as I’m not presuming anything. I have the photos to back up what I’ve stated. What you need to ask is: if the P-15 Delhi-class and upgraded Kashin 2-class DDGs can do away with a pair AK-630Ms while accepting the Barak-1/ELM-2221 STGR installations, why should the P-15A DDG have four AK-630Ms and no Barak-1?
Your query on the new Indian Army raisings was answered by me earlier on October 17 (in response to a similar query) and it was this: The figure of 89,000 soldiers and officers is indeed for the four new light mechanised mountain warfare divisions, plus a new artillery division, that will be created along with the new Corps HQ to be located at Panagarh, West Bengal. The four new light mechanised mountain warfare divisions will be bolstered by an independent armoured brigade using assets of tracked light tanks and wheeled tank destroyers, plus the 155mm/39-cal LW-155 ultralightweight howitzers. The only missing element will be the LCH, which could have been a critical asset for these divisions, but which is being denied to the Army Aviation Corps by the MoD. The new artillery division will also have Smerch-M MBLs, in addition to the BrahMos Block-3. Therefore, in total, five new divisions will be raised—four infantry and one artillery, of which two have already been raised under the 11th Defence Plan, and the rest will follow in the 12th Defence Plan. That’s the plan, but the reality can be something totally different. This is because the news that the Indian PM has cleared the 12th five-year (2013-2017) plan doesn’t mean much on the ground, since the 11th Defence Plan (2007-2012) itself has not yet received formal govt approval, despite the fact that the MoD had finalised its 11th Defence Plan and sent it to the Union Finance Ministry in July 2006. It was expected that once the two ministries mutually agreed to the plan’s size, it would be brought before the Cabinet Committee on National Security (CCNS). If this is how the Govt of India functions in reality, then long-term force modernization plans will never be translated into reality.

KSK said...

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20111031/168297656.html

How does A50U AWACS compare to our Il-76 with Phalcon Radar???????

Shree said...

Tomorrow(Nov 4) is a big day....

In libya Rafale did most of the Strike missions and Typhoon only provided Recce for Tornadoes..

Do you think performance in Libya matters in decision of MMRCA ??????

And the Brimestone missile seems to have impressed everyone....

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Shree: When selling equipment like the C-130J-30 Super Hercules to other countries, the US uses this phase that you’ve quoted. When selling hardware like Super Hornets, the statement usually used is: "The proposed sale of this equipment and support will be consistent with the national security objectives of the United States”. That’s the way potential export sales are proposed by the US Defense Dept to the US Congress, as mandated by law. Every country has its own peculiar ways and methods, so don’t bother cracking your head on the specifics. Stay cool.

To KSK: If the 'upgraded' A-50U can track up to 10 fighter aircraft for either air-to-air intercept or air-to-ground attack missions, then the A-50I PHALCON is still 10 times better in terms of performance parameters.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Shree: Performance in Libya? You mean a couple of air-to-ground sorties against disorganised bands of tribal militia in flat and aird dersrt terrain? How difficult can that be? Two squadrons of MiG-21 Bisons could backed up by AEW & C platforms have done all that with considerable ease within 30 days! The future air warfare scenario in the subcontinent will be much much more demanding than was the case in Libya.
The on-going marketing efforts by MBDA regarding both the Brimstone and Taurus KEPD-350 are not for the M-MRCA as of now, but for arming the to-be-upgraded Jaguars and Mirage 2000s. The first procurement contracts for such PGMs will be meant for the Jaguars and Mirage 2000s after they've been upgraded, according to MBDA.

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Thanks for your reply.What are the designations of those 2 newly raised mountain divisions??How many IA divisions are deployed in NE??
And lastly,has the IAF and IA inducted sufficient numbers of Prithvi 2 and 3 TBMs accros the LAC??These are needed to pound the PLA during hostility.
Thanks in advance.

Ayatanvan Bhavati said...

@ Prasun.."Regarding Afghanistan, it seems that China, India and Russia are all thinking along the same lines and are closely coordinating matters behind-the-scenes, especially with regard to strengthening the SCO"..You are dead right on this one... Pakistan scored a thumping victory at Istanbul conference. China, Russia, Iran and even India (by keeping low profile and by favoring SCO over any new mechanism) supported Pakistan pitted against US, Turkey and Afghanistan. Surprise was Turkey openly toeing US agenda. Historically, Turkey backs Uzbeks the same way India supports Tajiks, Panjshiries.US failed miserably to sell that Silk Road bullshit. They just want bases and a foot hold and Iran, Russia and China will do whatever they can do to shatter this US dream. India is at the crossroads to choose SCO or back US agenda. Not to mention that Pakistan is in a bigger and more dangerous dilemma. Struck between US -China tussle of power and hegemony..Ek taraf kooan aur ek taraf khai..Is this thestart of another Great Game (Like British Russian great game of Eighteenth century to control central Asia)..

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anurag: The Indian Army has already raised two new Divisions--41 Mountain Div (based in Binaguri, West Bengal) and 56 Mountain Division (in Zakhama, Nagaland, during the 11th Defence Plan (2007-2012)). Due to this, an extra 55,000 personnel have been recruited and their support costs will be a nett addition to the MoD's sanctioned establishment costs. By 2011, III Corps (now being restructured as the offensive Corps) will comprise 56 Mtn Div, 41 Mtn Div and the Rangla-based 2 Mtn Div (presently under IV Corps). From then on, the XXXIII Corps in Sukhna for the Sikkim sector, III Corps in Dimapur and IV Corps in Tezpur will be 100% China-centric, with all three possessing adequate capabilities for launching offensive operations beyond the LAC into the Tibetan Plateau (therefore, as you can see, there's no need for Army HQ to create a dedicated Mountain Strike Corps, and all reportage about this so-called new Mountain Strike Corps is pure baloney. Instead, another two new infantry-centric mountain warfare divisions and one artillery division will be raised by 2018). To cater to the airmobility and aerial logistics replenishment reqmts of these three Corps, an additional 50 Mi-17V-5s will shortly be ordered for the IAF over and above the 80 already ordered. Also, 12 Heron 2 UAVs are being procured by the Army for these three Corps-sized formations. The remaining two holding Corps under HQ Eastern Command will each have one rapid-reaction airmobile infantry Brigade for localised contingencies along the Bangladesh and Myanmar fronts. No new independent brigades are being raised and what is happening in eastern Ladakh, Uttarakhand and Sikkim is that the existing battalions/regiments are being reinforced through redeployments of additional formations to bring them up to rapid-reaction air-assault brigade strength and supported by mechanised assets like tank destroyers and ICVs. And why would one require liquid-fuelled and lumbering Prithvi-2/3s when much more lethal PGMs like the BrahMos Block-2/3 is at the Army's disposal?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Ayatanvan Bhavati: VMT. The Turks have always (and why not, in pursuance of their national interests) preferred to use their Turkmen linkages for securing the westward flow of oil, gas and other mineral resources with the help of the US (which in turn wants to secure politico-economic bridgeheads in Central Asia and the Caucasus). But the latest developments/moves on the regional shessboard may well turn out to be a transformative game-changer. It is also indicative of a strong regional security consensus emerging between China, India & Russia based on shared goals and perceptions. If that's the case, then we can trust Beijing to keep Islamabad's anti-India paranoia under check via a tight leash for some time to come, even if for purely tactical reasons.

Anonymous said...

I read your comment about Mr. Shukla and i don't care about your personnel opinion or dislike or whatever it is.
And whatever China calls it jet who cares but the fact is still the same, Chinese have a jet which is currently in a better condition than PakFa except engine and aesa but they can get anything either by purchase or by stealing and believe me they can induct this jet in huge numbers like US is inducting F35. Another reason why F35 purchase make sense is that many countries are purchasing it especially many Asian countries.

Now i am not saying we should just leave these 2 jets and purchase F35, i think IAF should atleast do some trials of F35 and make sure that the difference between the operational capabilities of the 3 jets is not too much after-all we will be spending more than 10 billion $ on MMRCA.

I would not be saying this if EF and Rafale won't be costing that much and if ToT might actually be helping indian companies but both things are wrong. Rafale and EF are overpriced fighter jets and HAL is getting ToT projects after projects and they cannot even upgrade a fighter jet on their own.

If their is a difference in f35 and MMRCA finalist, i think we should consider buying F35 and also now US will be more cooperative than before, we should not announce the winner now and we can use this renewed US offer in our favor. We might have to compromise like reduce offset to 30% in reponce of more tech transfer or complete source code.

SherKhan said...

China today has less leverage on Pak then USA does. The minute China tries to use that leverage, it will be gone. wrt to USA and China, Pak holds an even bigger leverage over China. And China knows that very well. Pak will not allow India into any position in Afghanistan or CARs if it can harm its interests and it will expect favours in return. Kashmir always will loom large, irrespective of what mainly indian analysts claim.

The biggest USA's mistake was to prop up india in Afhganistan. That made the choice very easy for Pak. Pak played the long game and they didn't loose sight of their objective. The game is not yet over by any means, its just that Pak have done the opposite to what USA expected, raised their game.

The three main playes are and will be Pak, China and Russia in CA. India is on the sidelines hoping for a piece of the pie.

Anonymous said...

Hey Prasun, what about aesa on LCA mk2 ? You told we will be issuing tender but now somewhat different news are coming. Will there be aesa and IRST on LCA mk2 or not ?

Has the work started on lca mk2 ?

WHEN WE WILL BE SIGNING DEAL WITH BOEING ON APACHE ?

ARE WE GOING TO PLACE THE FOLLOW ON ORDER FOR C130J THIS YEAR ITSELF ?

CAN WE EXPECT THE RESULT OF LUH AND HEAVY LIFT CHOPPER COMPETITION AND ALSO M777 DEAL THIS YEAR ?

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE IA'S THIS YEAR BUDGET ? I DON'T REMEMBER IA PLACING ANY ORDER THIS YEAR AND I DON'T WHAT THEY PURCHASED LAST YEAR ALSO. WHERE IS THE BUDGET GOING ?

Anonymous said...

Hey Prasun,
Can you now post the picture of arjun mk2 ? Also how did it perform in the recent tests ?

Anonymous said...

Hey Prasun Indian has signed a 1 billion $ deal with Israel for Spike ATGM. This is part of the BMP-2 modernization program that is going on. Spike ATGM will be mounted on them.

http://www.defencenow.com/news/143/indian-army-goes-for-israeli-spike-atgm-and-homemade-nag-atgm-contemplates-javelin-from-us.html

You said this strike force will have tracked light tanks and wheeled tank destroyers, plus the 155mm/39-cal LW-155 ultralightweight howitzers. Whats the progress on their procurement ?
I just heard about IA looking for 300 light tanks but never heard they also want tank destroyer. How many M777/Pegasus IA will be inducting ?

I heard IA cancelled wheeled artillery procurement program. What are they planning ? Is someone building them in India ?

If you will check out the tenders, IA issued tender for QRSAM, MRSAM,VSHORAD and 500 million $ medium range loitering munitions contract this year. Any progress on these and why MRSAM ? What about LRSAM, any plans for these?

And i think IA will be inducting LCH, don't worry about that. Also IA is also inducting armed Dhruv.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Whatever game Pak666 plays for Afghanistan that will fail, because the time of Pak666 has gone forever.

It will be so that not only Afghan and CA will fool them but also USA and even China will ditch them completely. With common sense all will arrive to the conclusion that the existence of Pak666 is unnecessary and the worst hindrance for the growth and progress of Asia, Europe and the entire world.

If we see the world map, we can realize that Pak-Taliban axis is the only blockade along the eight lane road from Shanghai and Hastinapur to Paris.

Ravi said...

Hey why does akash missile system has only 3 missile/launcher....Considering the fact that each target will be engaged with 2 missiles... doesn't it make sense to have 4 missiles/Launcher so that each launcher can engage 2 targets without hindrance....

Pak666 said...

Look at the history of CA for the past millenia and notice which people had the most influence over it. It wasn't the Russians, it wasn't the chinese and the indians didn't even exist then. Those same forces are awakening and coalesing. Just like in those times the indian will only feel the consequences.

Anonymous said...

Has IAF shown interest in LM's AC-130 Spectre, Predator and V22 Osprey and is US ready to give us these 2 platform ?

I heard indian forces are also looking at BAE Mantis, is it true ? Can we expect Mantis to enter in service in Indian armed forces ?

Can you now post the pictures of arjun mk2 ? Also how did it perform in the recent tests ?

Anonymous said...

Has the Indian army placed any orders for SPYDER system? What is the composition of a Spyder system. How many systems has IAF ordered? How many Tungunska SPAAG does the Indian army has?

According to Wikipedia, TALWAR class ffg has SA-N-17 -1 missile on board having a range of 45 km. But you are sying it is only 40 km.In one of your previous posts you have referred to the range of Shtil-1 sam on board P17 and Talwar as 45 km. now this very confusing. pls clarify. Also according to wikipedia there will be 64 Barak-2 sam on KOLLATA class but you say there will be only 48. pls clarify.Aso pls tell are the air-search radars on P17 Elta 2238 or Elta 2282.


WHAT are the components to be included and upgraded in the DEEP MODERNISATION UPGARDE PACKAGE for Jaguar im and MiG-27? will it include fitting radrs into the nose of MiG-27 and Jaguar. Both the Jaguar and the MiG-27 are obsolete aircrafts by today radars they don't have radars and so the pilot while attacking a grond target have to come in close proximity of the target to visually aquire the target and then go in foe dive bombing or ccp method of bombing. This will expose the aircraft to both point defence as well as area defence sams and will sevrely nullify the survivility of the aircraft. Also bad weather will prevent the attack. If the aircraft has a radar built into its nose it will be able to aquire as well as engage both air and ground targets in all weather conditions and from beyond the envelope of hostile SAMs. So aren't the airforce fitting them with the Elta 2032 or some other advanced radars. Also will the Mig-27 and jaguar be fitted with an IRST sensor ?

Anonymous said...

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/12/the-ally-from-hell/8730/

looks like Pak have over 9000 nuclear scientists....Prasun, why do they need so many? Since all their nukes made in china anyhow?

Anonymous said...

wrt pakistan:

Nuclear-weapons components are sometimes moved by helicopter and sometimes moved over roads. And instead of moving nuclear material in armored, well-defended convoys, the SPD prefers to move material by subterfuge, in civilian-style vehicles without noticeable defenses, in the regular flow of traffic. According to both Pakistani and American sources, vans with a modest security profile are sometimes the preferred conveyance. And according to a senior U.S. intelligence official, the Pakistanis have begun using this low-security method to transfer not merely the “de-mated” component nuclear parts but “mated” nuclear weapons. Western nuclear experts have feared that Pakistan is building small, “tactical” nuclear weapons for quick deployment on the battlefield. In fact, not only is Pakistan building these devices, it is also now moving them over roads.

Are they really making these tactical wareheads? I thought they only had 12...made by china? Prasun What are these american talkign about?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@3.36AM: How can a J-20 minus its definitive engine and AESA-based MMR be any better than the T-50 PAK-FA? The J-20 as it exists now is just a ‘khokla’. And no, India will be spending HALF the amount you’ve mentioned on the imported M-MRCAs, since the other half will be ploughed back into the Indian economy as offsets. This is the time to worry less about ‘overpriced’ imported combat aircraft and worry more about the steadily depreciating Rupee.

To SherKhan: PRC having less leverage on Islamic Republic of Pakistan??? Is that why the PRC’s PLA is today spread throughout the Northern Areas (and in the process securing the ‘on loan’ strategic nuclear deterrent of Pakistan, which has NEVER EVER been deployed outside the Northern Areas) while the US is left second-=guessing about the probable locations of Pakistan’s ‘de-mated’ nuclear arsenal? And the US never propped up India in Afghanistan, but the Afghans themselves who sought greater engagement with India. Kindly try to remember what Mr.RA 13 best explained a couple of days before: in Afghan culture, a friend is always much more valued than a brother.

To Anon@7.48AM: What other different ‘news’ has come out about the Tejas Mk2 LCA and from whom/where? Regarding processing of competitive tenders for sub-contract packages, these have all been issued and responses received. That’s why the DRDO has been told to keep clear of the programme concerning the ‘indigenous’ AESA-MMR, which will take at least another decade to materialise, and should therefore cause no delay in developing the Tejas Mk2. The AH-64D Apache LongBow deal will be inked before the year’s end, in all probability, followed by the deal for the follow-on six C-130J-30 Super Hercules. LUH and heavylift helicopter deals will fructify only next year. Regarding the LW-155 deal, a much bigger and better deal is now being worked out around the lines of what I had proposed two weeks ago.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.51AM: No, I can’t.

To Anon@11.28AM: Now, why on earth would the Indian Army select a 2.5km-range ATGM to replace the earlier 4km-range Konkurs ATGM? Does that make any sense to you? Obviously that news item is grossly erroneous. In fact, the Konkurs is being replaced by the Konkurs-M. The BMP-2K modernization programme hasn’t taken off as yet since only RFIs have been issued, and not RFPs. Regarding the progress on ultralightweight field howitzers, do read my previous comment. I was informed via Army HQ two weeks ago that a proposal similar to what I had proposed two weeks ago in my blog is now being drafted for the Defence Acquisitions Council. Let’s hope things proceed quickly this time. The wheeled field artillery howitzer programme was a no-brainer from the start. In fact, the reqmt for motorised 155mm howitzers was ‘wickedly’ broken up by vested interests in mid-1990 into the two: for wheeled howitzers and for mounted gun systems. Now, common sense has at last dawned and the motorised field howitzer concept based on the lines of what I had earlier proposed is now being actively pursued. Lastly, all those tenders you’ve mentioned aren’t tenders or RFPs, but mere RFIs.

To Ravi: A good question, but one that you should address to Dr V K Saraswat or Dr A P J Abdul Kalam bu filing an RTI request.

To Pak666. We all know who had influence over the CARs and why they eventually decided to make Delhi, instead of Samarkand or Lahore, their dynastic capital. Needless to say, all the CARs haven’t forgotten this fact of history.

To Anon@5.30PM: Of course, there’s no one stopping anyone from expressing any form of interest in any product. And I can’t post any such picture. Regarding the tests, had it not gone well, the Indian Army would not have even bothered to hold a second round of tests. The fact that the Army will be conducting another round of tests means that it is dead serious about giving the MBT’s design/performance enhancements a serious chance of success.

To Anon@6.08PM: Your question on the SpyDer has already been answered THRICE in this very thread! The SAM round has a range of 40km. The Jaguar upgrade was already detailed in: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2011/04/ambitious-upgrade-plans-for-iaf-jaguars.html
Why should one require on-board radars for the Jaguars when the Litening-2/3 LDPs are available for passive target acquisition-cum-designation? No IRSTs are specified for the Jaguars or MiG-27Ms.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@7.08PM: The figure of 9,000 is not all about nuclear scientists, but about the total technical workforce (inclusive of engineers and technicians) that’s engaged in operating and maintaining all existing nuclear reactors, fuel reprocessing plants and R & D institutes.

To Anon@7.54PM: These Americans are just groping in the dark. Years ago, when asked about the US’ global WMD-related intel/monitoring capabilities, someone in authority had remarked: “We often don’t know about everything that’s going on, but we like to give the impression that we know everything there’s to know. As Don Rumsfeld had later remarked, “there are known knowns, there are known unknowns and there are unknown unknowns”.

KSK said...

Everyone watch this video by BBC on Our Indian Army during WW2 very well made.....JAI HIND

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TU1dQK-j-4&feature=related

Mr. Ra 13 said...

What an array of replies, especially the following:

"I was informed via Army HQ two weeks ago that a proposal similar to what I had proposed two weeks ago in my blog is now being drafted for the Defence Acquisitions Council. Let’s hope things proceed quickly this time."

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Watch this two-part BBC Documentary called: Secret Pakistan: Double Cross at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJdFqioR-YA
&
Secret Pakistan: Backlash at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ_mzOaf8Js

SherKhan said...

I just finished reading the Atlantic Journal. It seems to contradict what you say Prasun about the 12 warheads in NA. We can agree to disagree.

WRT afghan culture and very much in pak, a friend is someone you share lot of things with. However when a friend comes between brothers (or family) friend is normally butchered. Remember he is always an outsider. I come from this culture and my knowledge isn't from reading books!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SherKhan: Read this: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article2598711.ece?homepage=true

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Unfortunately I have got removed the sound card from my PC. An action which I regret now.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Peace objectives are entirely different for everybody involved. So it is practically not possible for USA to establish the peace under the given circumstances.

As such slowly but surely the Pak-Afgan region is converting in to another Sudan-Somalian front with all types of open and weird possibilities.

The crux of the matter is that Pak666 was born as a piercing voodoo puppet of USA and by now it has silently changed in to the voodoo puppet of China. So under the conventional circumstances the Pak is not going to allow any situation, wherein the USA gets a credit of any type of peace.

If my statement is wrong, then it would have been already proven wrong by this time.

Anonymous said...

##
You said : Regarding the LW-155 deal, a much bigger and better deal is now being worked out around the lines of what I had proposed two weeks ago.

You said : for wheeled howitzers and for mounted gun systems. Now, common sense has at last dawned and the motorised field howitzer concept based on the lines of what I had earlier proposed is now being actively pursued.
##

Hey Prasun thanx for the reply and can you be more specific about these two statements or just point out where you have written them because honestly i don't have any idea what u are talking about ?
Thanx in advance...

Also we are talking about Spike-ER which has a range of 8km as this is the one for ICVs. Secondly when this deal was signed it came in many newspapers.

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

With hell lot of varied discussions going on this blog, I finally joined in, I have few querries and doubts, can you clear them.

Q1. Indias participation in the PAKFA/FGFA program is mostly regarding contribution to software and composites, is it true.

Q2. I heard that PAKFA still lacks expertise in the segment of digital data bus, considered the nervous system of a fighter jet. The plan by PAKFA makers is to get something similar to the 1553B bus. This is where India comes in which is expected to do all modifications regarding that.

Also some reports say, the reason why Rafale is leading the MMRCA deal is that the French have agreed to full TOT regarding databus on Rafale which is similar to the 1553B bus. And then India will work on tweaking it for PAKFA/FGFA. Who's right?

Q3. I think the real reason for Broadsword/Ajai Shukla opposing MMRCA and favoring the JSF-35 has nothing to do with MMRCA, as at this sage it cant be cancelled.

Q4. I remember Ajai Shukla saying in his blog that JSF-35 was a ideal for ground attack roles, which basically rules out its capabilities against the J20. I believe his favor for JSF-35 got more to do with scuttling the AMCA development by ADA. Your take on this?

Q5. If i am not wrong ADA was intent on developing LCA Mk3 as a 5 gen aircraft, do you think its viable to have three 5 gen aircrafts
1. FGFA (30 ton plus)
2. AMCA (20 ton plus)
3. LCA Mk3 (10 ton plus)

Q6. Since this was originally a topic on ships i want to ask you what has happened to INS Sindhukirti, will it ever come out of docks?

Hoping for reply

Thanks

Joydeep Ghosh

Anonymous said...

Can you throw any light on the present status of the AL-41F ? It was said that the AL-41F still has to undergo considerable amount of development to enable Super-Cruise for the PAK-FA. Once complete what kind of speeds will it be capable with internal weapon payload ? On internet its was said it will have higher Super-cruise speed than F-22, is this attainable with weapon payload ?
For the Proposed Super Flanker upgrade, is IAF going for AL-41F or just a improved AL-31F ? HAL already started making the 31F's under license why not upgrade to 41F since it shares the same core for the remaining Su-30 to be constructed.Also is a center-line conformal weapon carriage on proposal ?
Thanks in advance

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Thanks for your answer.
So if I'm not mistaken,with the ongoing troop increase,IA should have atleast 260 thousand troops readily available on the NE.But do India really posses the capability to send and sustain a sizeable Nos of troops beyound LAC??Won't it be better to fight the PLA from our homeland and contain them at LAC??Don't you think that 145 ultralight howitzers is too few against an enemy like the PLA??And are the troops being deployed in NE new ones or being transfered from other commands??And lastly,any idea how many 155mm howitzers and 300mm MBRLs PLA currently has in its inventory??
Please try to reply.
Thanks in advance..

Pawan said...

Dear Prasun Ji

Some days back you mentioned " What the OFB should now do is to team up with the industrial alliance of BAE Systems and Mahindra Defence and begin modifying these designs (especially those dealing with the barrel, breech mechanism, gun cradle) to suit the 52-cal FH-77BO5L52, since this howitzer and the FH-77B have almost 70% commonality. Following this, the OFB should equip the FH-77BO5L52 with the SIGMA-30 ring laser gyro-based inertial navigation system (the same as that on the Pinaka MBRLs). Finally, the OFB and the industrial alliance of BAE Systems and Mahindra Defence should conclude a production-sharing arrangement under which OFB becomes the prime contractor and handles the howitzer’s final assembly, while Mahindra Defence becomes the principal sub-contractor. This entire programme should include both production of brand-new FH-77BO5L52s, as well as the conversion of existing FH-77Bs into the FH-77BO5L52 configuration. At the same time, the OFB should seize the opportunity by co-developing with the BAE Systems/Mahindra Defence combine, a motorised (truck-mounted) version of the 39-cal LW-155 ultralightweight howitzer for use in mountainous areas. BAE Systems has already developed a turret-mounted version of the LW-155, which can easily be mounted on the hull of a T-72CIA MBT with the DRDO’s help. So ultimately, what you get is a 155mm/52-cal towed howitzer directly from the OFB, while development of the motorised and tracked versions of the 39-cal LW-155 howitzer can come under the direct industrial offsets package, and the DRDO too gets to play a practical role, instead of just developing another technology demonstrator. If this formula is implemented, all field artillery-related woes of the Indian Army can finally come to an end within the next five years, provided swift decisions are taken. Looking to the future, the DRDO, OFB and the BAE Systems/Mahindra Defence combine could also co-develop a navalised turret-mounted variant of the FH-77BO5L52 for the Indian Navy. This is the best way of and leveraging smart industrial partnerships"

Now it this what are were mentioning in above replies if yes then is there going to be any difference in actual plan?

Pawan said...

Dear Prasun Ji
Do not you think we need more than one Mountain SC against china in fact at leastIndia need 4 to 5 MSC to effectively discouraged china from launching any aggressive push inside india.
Yours views please !

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@6.07AM: Regarding the field howitzer competition, kindly read my comments at http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2011/10/highlights-from-uv-asia-2011.html
Regarding the ATGM for upgraded BMP-2K ICVs, the Spike-ER with 8km range cannot be a contender since the target acquisition system on the BMP-2 cannot look beyond 4km. The Spike-ER is being proposed only for the Dhruv Mk4/Rudra helicopter gunship and LCH.

To Joydeep Ghosh: HAL designers will take part in the entire design of the two-seat variant of the FGFA. Regarding digital databus for the FGFA or PAK-FA, I don’t know from where you’ve heard all this, since even on the MiG-29K and Su-30MKI the Russians have been perfectly capable of designing and developing such mil-std digital databuses. In India, ADA and DARE, helped by Lockheed Martin, has developed the mil-std digital databus for the Tejas LCA. Regarding imported combat aircraft, be it Russian or US or European, no one will give access to the on-board mil-std digital databus, simply because such access is not reqd. Under ToT access is only reqd for the aircraft’s mission computer, weapons management computer, EW threat library, and airborne multi-mode radar. The Tejas Mk3 LCA will emerge in the latter half of the next decade to take advantage of developments in the areas of flight and mission avionics.

To Anon@1.01PM: The AL-41F will be a far cry from the existing AL-31FP in terms of generated thrust levels, reliability and serviceability. It will have total technical service life of more than 6,000 hours, as opposed to only 2,000 hours for the AL-31FP, meaning the AL-41F will have an entirely new-design core. Will the Russians be able to develop it by 2016. Absolutely, because since 2005, Russian military R & D funding has come 100% from the Russian state budget, and not from the revenues generated through export sales. Today, the T-50 PAK-FA’s R & D effort is financed entirely through internal resources, and does not require any external financial inputs. For the Super Flanker, an upgrade of the AL-31FP generating 20% more thrust has been developed by NPO Saturn. It too will feature a new-design engine core, plus newer-generation compressor blades.

To Anurag: Raising of new mountain corps, be it two or even 10, will not make India any more secure along the LAC for as long as the transportation infrastructure reqd for mobilizing and deploying such troops along the LAC is in place. Presently, the PLA has neither the human resources nor the firepower reqd to stage an offensive of the kind it launched in 1962. At the most, it can mobilize and deploy six to eight motorised/mechanised highland warfare divisions, that’s it.

To Pawan: Yes, that’s how things are now being worked out in a feasibility study now being worked at by Army HQ for the Defence Acquisitions Council.

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Thanks for your reply.By the way,then why is so much hoopla that PLA can deploy 34 divisions or .5 million troops near LAC in just 3 weeks??!!
And is there any chance of some of the Elta EL/M 2084 radars being deployed in NE??
How many Barak NG ERSAM squadrons are planned for IAF??
Will the IA also get the Barak NG??
Is there any chance that Prahar NLOS-BSMs and conventionally armed Shaurya missiles being deployed in NE??
And lastly, again,do you think 145 ultra light howitzers will be sufficient for NE??
Hope to see your views.
Thanks..

Shree said...

What agreements did we sign in recent visit to Japan by Antony??

I know Japan will not sell arms to anyone but,,,,,,
Any chance of joint development of 5th Gen Fighter(AMCA) with Japan???

I heard Nag is a good ATGM why import??????
What is the status of Helina ??

Anonymous said...

Hi I am Anon@1.01PM:
From what you said Al-41F is a generation ahead than the current AL-31F.
How does the newly developed AL-31FP compare in terms of reliability to the older 31F ? Does it have a better MTBO ? If and when the 41F becomes available why not fit it in Su-30....will it be a overkill ?
After all Russian always develop every platform progressively, since IAF will have a large inventory of Su-30 about 270 so won't it make the 41F equipped Su-30 a a potent support aircraft to the PAK-Fa in the next decade.
Will it be possible to equip the future Tejas Mk3 with Al-41F ? Will the engine fit into the airframe without major redesigning ?

Once again thanks in advance

Anonymous said...

Mr Sengupta,I remember that few years ago IIT,Roorkee had stated that they had validated a nano crystal coating for aircraft canopies.What's the status of that project??Has it been accepted by IAF??
Thnx.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anurag: All this disinformation is being spread around by headless chickens hailing from both the broadcast-media channels as well as retired armed forces officials—especially from the Indian Army—who now have to earn a living by acting as consultants and taking part in numerous seminars organised by agencies that are multiplying inside India by the day! So what better way than to multiply the threat by more than 10 times. In reality, the fact remains that most of the air bases that are alleged to be surrounding Ladakh and the North-East are in fact civilian airports, and no more than one air base each in Xinjiang and Chengdu has so far received the J-10s and Su-27s. The illustration in last week’s INDIA TODAY which produced a graphic comparing the Indian and PLA infantry soldier wrongly showed a so-called PLA ‘digital’ soldier with Robocop-type body-armour and NVDs. In fact, the illustration was that of a SWAT team-member from the People’s Armed Police, and had nothing to do with the PLA Army. The only area where the PLA ground forces are superior to their Indian counterparts is the area of transforming the existing infantry footsoldier-type formations into highland motorized/light mechanised formations, but here too no more than six such Divisions have thus far been upgraded and it is only these formations that are acclimatised for high-altitude mountain warfare. The great majority of the forces now deployed in Tibet & Xinjiang are in fact only the Border Defence Regiments and the paramilitary People’s Armed Police personnel, who don’t have any heavy armour or artillery support. And how can 34 PLA Divisions suddenly arrive at a war theatre using only a single railway line into Tibet? They will take at least a year to acclimatise. Even during the Sichuan earthquake in early 2008, only 120,000 PLA personnel (minus their battle-gear) were mobilized only for the sake of manually clearing the earthquake debris, and even then their movements were severely restricted due to the unavailability of utility helicopters.
The EL/M-2084 Arudhra radars will be deployed only in those areas where threats from land-attack cruise missiles are anticipated. Right now in the North-East the Akash is more than enough to counter existing threats but in future such radars could well be deployed there. The IAF has initially ordered nine squadrons of Barak-2 LR-SAMs. The Indian Army has a plan for using Barak-2 MR-SAMs for air-defence against cruise missiles, ALCMs and NLOS-BSMs like the Nasr. The IAF’s version of the Shaurya could be deployed in the North-East, but priority will be given to deploying the BrahMos Block-3 first. As per present plans, the 145 LW-155 ultralightweight howitzers is just an initial batch. A follow-on batch of another 145 may well be ordered.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Shree: The military cooperation with Japan is focussed mainly in the area of naval operations like anti-piracy exercises and extending facilities for logistics by/for the navies of the two countries. I don’t think Japan will like to tie-up with India for co-developing a 5thgeneration combat aircraft. After all, Japan and South Korea both want a high-tech solutions of the type that can only be offered by the likes of Boeing, Lockheed Martin and the Eurofighter consortium. It is not the Nag ATGM that isn’t performing, but the Helina version of the ATGM whose development has fallen behind schedule. Hence the need for imported solutions. IT all boils down to lack of a long-term R & D financing roadmap. In India, all financial planning by any govt is done on only a five-year basis. This is at the root of all problems, be it for defence or even other areas of development.

To Anon@12.56AM: If it had been accepted by the IAF then by now we would all have seen a gold-coloured glint in the cockpit canopies of the Su-30MKIs and Tejas Mk1 LCA. Since that glint is still elusive, your guess is as good as mine.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ALL: Italy's Fincantieri SPA recently inked an agreement with Mazagon Docks Ltd (MDL) under which it will become the 'Know-How Provider' for both the Indian Navy's Naval Design Bureau and MDL. Under this agreement, Fincantieri will help MDL upgrade the design of the existing Project 17 FFG into the Project 17A version. Fincantieri will also play a crucial role in teaching MDL the techniques reqd for fabricating composites-based sub-structures and modules, just as Kockums AB of Sweden had helped GRSE to achieve similar capabilities for the latter two Project 28 ASW corvettes.

Anonymous said...

Hewy prasun it will be really appreciated if you can post the design or model of the upgraded P17a frigates and P28a corvettes.

Also you said IA will be purchasing MRSAM version Barak NG. Whats the progress of this project ?

And Why IA issued a RFI/RFP (not sure) early this year for a MRSAM ?

Is IA purchasing Skyranger Anti-Aircraft Guns ? If yes then in what numbers ?

Thanx.

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Thanks.So these 'desi journos' are headles indeed.But atleast these kind of news are keeping the babus in MoD on their toes.
By the way,is there any plan
to build any P 15C DDGs after the completion of P 15B??

Anonymous said...

@Anurag
I know u asked Prasun but i would like to answer this for you.

There are no such plans but there will always be DDG after P15a and we will have to wait to see whats they are named but right now IN has not mentioned anything after 4 P15a DDG in their future plans. We will have 2 FFG after P17a under P17b.

spanky's Blog said...

Hi Prasun,
Wasn't the Indian Naval air arm was part of Air force in the beginning ??If yes then how did IAF agreed to hand over the air arm to IN.

I am asking this question because of IAF's reluctance to hand over AAC the combat assets...Can you kindly tell me few facts on this??

Thanks

Sleeper said...

Prasun,

Ajai Shukla says that Rafale will cost Brazil $6.2 billion for 36 fighters. And even this is a discounted price. That comes to a $172 million unit cost for the rafale. Mind you , he quotes trustworthy Brazilian sources.

UAE wants to buy 60 Rafale fighters. And the figure being quoted in the media is $10 billion.
That comes to a $166 million unit cost.

So I think we can safely say the Rafale costs above $150 million.

On the other hand, an F-35 will definitely cost less than $150 million per unit.

The unit costs for the Typhoon seem to be less than that of the Rafale based on figures concerning the Saudi Arabia deal ($110 million). So why does everyone think that Typhoons are more expensive than Rafales ?

It seems pretty clear to me that the Rafales are more expensive than both Typhoons and F-35's.

Please give some clarity Prasun.

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Can you throw some info regarding the current number of Elta EL/M 2083 aerostat radars in IAF service and what is the number of requirement??
Any plan to order more??
Both the DRDO AWACS and Saab Erieye has same kind of radar.So how does the Saab system offer 360 degree coverage(as per PAF) while the DRDO system provides 280 degree??Besides,the operational service ceiling of Embraer ERJ 145 is about 8-10000 feet higher than the Saab 2000 turboprop,so does that mean the DRDO AWACS will have greater range and performance than Saab Erieye??
Hope to see your reply.
Thanks in advance.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@6.38AM: The project 17A FFG’s design work has already commenced and its finalised CAD will be available by next February, not before that. That of the P-28A corvette will not be available anytime soon. The Indian Army issued an RFI for the MR-SAM in order to find out which of the prospective contenders offers the best deal from a technical standpoint. But when it comes to the RFP stage, the Barak-2 MR-SAM will be the most viable option from a techno-economic matrix standpoint. Not ‘if’, but ‘when’ the Skyranger is procured, the reqmt will be for at least 1,400 units.

To Anurag: They’re not keeping anyone on their toes. Just look at the time being taken by the Ministry of Forests & Environment in expediting clearances for vital road construction projects. In many cases, such projects are almost a decade behind schedule! Regarding future DDG or FFGs, no project numbers or acquisition quantities have been allocated as yet, but yes there will be future reqmts for both. Only two EL/M-2083 aerostat-mounted radars have been procured thus far, but there are plans for acquiring at least another 24 by both the IAF and Indian Navy. But these radars will not be the EL/M-2083, but rather the aerostat-mounted EL/M-2084 Arudhra, which is far more effective in detecting and tracking UAVs and cruise missiles. The Saab 2000’s Ericsson-built Erieye radar DOES NOT give 360-degree coverage. If Saab claims that it does, then it is just a marketing gimmick and is physically impossible. The DRDO-developed AEW & CS will have a far greater surveillance envelope over-the-horizon than what can be achieved by the turboprop-powered Saab 2000 AEW & C or ZDK-03 AEW & C.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Spanky’s Blog: The IAF decided to hand over its LRMR/ASW aircraft assets to the Indian Navy for a very simple reason: IAF pilots by nature are trained to fly over land and are therefore used to flying in an environment teeming with ground-based navigational landmarks, like roads, hills/mountain ranges, deserts, forests, etc. But when flying over water, or in a maritime environment, where there are no such landmarks available, IAF pilots got easily get disoriented or lost. The Navy, on the other hand, suffers from no such handicaps since the Navy’s long-range navigational courses prepare its personnel for operating in just such an environment. That’s why the IAF, on getting its first opportunity, gave up its ownership of LRMR/ASW and MRMR/ASW aircraft assets to the Navy. Had the Navy got them much earlier, then the Navy’s operations during the 1971 war would have been much more versatile and effective. But, strangely, the IAF is still clinging on to the maritime strike role with its fleet of Jaguar IMs attached to the Jamnagar-based No6 Sqn. I find it most strange because if the IAF no longer has the ‘eyes & ears’ (like LRMR/ASW or MRMR/ASW aircraft) to look out for and seek out the enemy, then how on earth can it strike against an enemy which would remain undetectable? Clearly the maritime strike domain too ought to be surrendered by the IAF to the Navy, and those Jaguar IMs should be modified to function as tactical strike aircraft like the other IAF Jaguars, while the MiG-29Ks take over the role of anti-ship strike. It is just meaningless to buy brand-new AGM-84A Harpoon ASCMs for arming such Jaguars. Instead, those Jaguars should be better utilised for ground attack/tactical interdiction.

To Der Hacker, Der Nie War: The reason for the dissimilar procurement costs (and not flyaway costs) for the Rafale for Brazil & UAE is obvious. The UAE has almost no need to build additional ground-based support infrastructure for its to-be-acquired Rafales as it already possesses first-class infrastructure, thanks to the earlier procurements of F-16E/Fs and Mirage 2000-9s. Brazil, on the other hand, needs to undertake a quantum upgrade of its ground-based support infrastructure—from those that are there for its existing F-5s and Mirage IIIs to those reqd for the Rafale. For the Royal Saudi Air Force, which already has a first-class ground-based support infrastructure, any additional cost to add to the EF-2000 Typhoon’s flyaway cost is minimal, hence the Typhoon’s procurement costs—even if calculated on a per-unit basis—is very low. In India’s case, irregardless of which mode gets selected as the M-MRCA, the cost of building new ground-based support infrastructure (like those for new-build hangars, workshops, type training centres and BRDs) will all have to be factored in to add to the per-unit flyaway cost. And even after factoring in all such costs, I’ve been reliably informed that the Rafale’s per-unit procurement cost is US$5 million cheaper than that of the EF-2000 Typhoon, based on what had transpired at the MoD on November 4.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

So if all other factors remain constant, the Rafale has an advantage of US$5 million per unit.

I am afraid if EFT was present there only to hike the prices.Lol...

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Thanks for your reply.
If IAF and IN has such a huge requirement of aerostats,then woudn't it be better better for LRDE to develop a specialised version of the S band AWACS or the L band LRTR and mount them onboard the Akashdeep or Nakshatrya aerostats??By the way,any news on the Akashdeep aerostat??
And what's the status of the 40mm under barrel grenade launcher??BROADSWORD had reported that it was cleared for production but couldn't find a picture of a soldier with the UBGL equiped INSAS.
Thanks.

Anurag said...

Hey Prasun sir,if I correctly remember the US had offered India to link its upcoming BMD system with the former's space based missile launch early warning system-what's the progress on that?Has it been final?
And is there any project to develop a homegrown DIRCM and FLIR system by DARE?
Thank you.

Anurag said...

Hey Prasun,can you throw some info about the maximum test depth and and hull crushing depth of Arihant Technology Demonstrator??And any info about the Pachendrya sonar??
thnx.

Shashi said...

Hi Prasun,

Can you please give your thought? who ever wins MMRCA deal:
1. is it true the offset clause is 50% ?
2. What would/should be India's wishlist related to ToT?
3. What would each vendor willing to offer?

Many Thanks,
Shashi

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA 13: It appears to be so.

To Anurag: The DRDO is not yet into developing aerostats capable of housing such radars. The aerostats are only capable of hosting lightweight optronic surveillance payloads or SIGINT payloads. The LRDE’s S-band AESA radar too has a long way to go before being declared fit for operational usage. As for the LRTR, it will be far too heavy for any aerostat. The EL/M-2084 is far lighter. The 40mm UBGR is in mass-production. Max depth for the Arihant is 300 metres (984.2 feet). Panchendriya is the sonar suite (including the flank array panels), while the Ushus is the bow-mounted cylindrical sonar.

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Thanks,any info about the final ultra low frequency sonar to be selected for ATV??Will it be foreign supplied or a homegrown one??
Will the Arjun MkII use the Renk transmission or an inhouse one??
wouldn't it been logical to use the same 85 mW PWR of ATV onboard the IAC 1 instead of the gas turbines??
Thanks..

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Shashi: If the MoD goes strictly by pricing levels, then the Rafale is already the winner as of November 4, 2011. The direct/indirect offsets commitment could well go up to beyond 50% if one considers what I will be explaining below. In addition, since the guided-missiles and PGMs for both the Rafale & upgraded Mirage 2000H/THs will be more or less the same, this will translate into fewer holdings of such munitions, and commonality of storage/maintenance/servicing reqmts, thereby resulting in a lesser financial burden when it comes to creation of new-build ground-based product support infrastructure. On top of that, if SNECMA Moteurs really throws in a generous lifeline for the 98kN Kaveri turbofan’s R & D effort (as it had done in helping GTRE develop a weight-budgeted version of the Kaveri K-9), and if THALES Avionics chips in by offering to co-develop with India’s financial help a lightweight version of the RBE-2 AESA-MMR (like Raytheon’s RACR and Northrop Grumman’s SABR) tailor-made for the Tejas Mk2 LCA and LCA (Navy) Mk2, then I reckon the French are destined for a historic win. Add to that SNECMA Moteurs’ proposal for supplying turboshaft engines at mouth-watering process for the HAL-designed 3-tonne LUH, Dassault Aviation’s desire to help the DRDO develop the AURA UCAV, and France’s offer (like that to Brazil, which is already under implementation) to help India design and build nuclear-powered attack submarines (companies like DCNS are already working with Kirloskar & Walchandnagar Industries for the Scorpene SSKs), and lo and behold (!), the French cake that’s being baked suddenly gets bigger and much more appetizing! Bon appétit, mon ami!

To Anurag: Any ultra low-frequency sonar will have to come from abroad, as the NPOL has so far only developed low-frequency sonars. Arjun Mk2 uses RENK/SESM transmission. The PWR of Arihant has only a 10-year lifespan and is too costly for fitment on to any IAC, according to the present Navy Chief. PWRs are economical only when the vessels using them spend at least six months non-stop on patrols at sea, something which the IAC will never do.

Anonymous said...

Hey Prasun,

There was an interview of Mr.Nikhil Gandhi of Pipavav last year in which he said Russian shipyards came to India and has inspected all shipyards and they have selected Pipavav to do their job in India. He said Russian govt may give them order worth Rs 30,000-32,000 Crores including building of 4 modified Krivak. Is this deal still on ? because if it is then it will be good for Pipavav experience wise.

Can you tell us more about Tarmour heavy armored vehicle ? How many of them are in service and how many on order ? Secondly in what role because according to OFB it can be used in APSc, Ambulance and Combat Engineer's AFVs role ?

What is IA doing for RECONNAISSANCE VEHICLES both wheeled and tracked ? What are the products ? How many in service and how many ordered ? Any plans to develop a new solution or purchase from abroad ?

How many NAMICA will be purchased ?

I heard Russian forces have rejected the T90AM as their future MBT. Now i think they will start the t95 and black eagle project again. Is India still going with t90AM or they have also rejected t90AM ? If rejected will they be still going with Russian MBT or they are going to increase the number of arjun mk2 ?
http://rt.com/politics/press/trud/new-missile-defense-ministry/en/

I once heard IA might increase the number of arjun mk2 to 600 to replace t55 and the number of M777 will go upto 400. Is it true ?

Are we still partner with Polish company on their future light mbt ?

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
How difficult is to develop an ultra low frequency sonar that even after decades of experience of developing multiple low frequency sonars,the NPOL has failed so far to develop an ultra low??What may be the cause in your openion??
And has China been able to develop and deploy any ultra low frequency sonars??
Thanks in advance.

Anonymous said...

What's happening with DRDO/OFB Artillery projects?? Please give a detailed study of current/future prospects of Indian tracked/towed/wheeled artillery..

Recently MOD canceled another deal. Even Iran produces its own guns. So why is Indian artillery program staggering? We can make tanks, aircrafts, ships and rockets but can't make guns!!

Anonymous said...

How many Pinakas are on order and how many have been delivered??

Anonymous said...

Yeah Prasun da,
As per the plans IA will be inducting more Pinaka in the 12th plans and also Brahmos blk-3. How many of these will join the service considering a regiment of Brahmos blk-3 for NE was sanctioned a couple weeks back ?

How many Brahmos blk 3 are planned for NE ? Are we going to deploy Brahmos in Lakshadweep and Andaman islands ?

What is the situation of air defence system and SAMs in Andaman ? Are there future plans for deploying SAM in Andaman ?

What is happening with Zittara ? Is ofb producing it ?

I also heard some one is producing ak101 in India. are inducting them also ?

Are we going to have ASAT weapons or its off the table ?

Anonymous said...

Hi, what I meant is "1 china policy" has nothing to do with Tibet but rather with Taiwan. "1 China" means no 2 entities as presently available, i.e. PRC and ROC. Tibet and it's questions of independence / greater autonomy are a different chapter. But you seemed to be equating "1 China Policy" with Tibet.

Secondly, I never made fun but was trying to engage in constructive discussion, but wonder why you are so unpleasent about it. You must have had a bad day, but that's cool with me, since I know it's not easy being in your shoes.

Cheers!

jjs said...

Hi, what I meant is "1 china policy" has nothing to do with Tibet but rather with Taiwan. "1 China" means no 2 entities as presently available, i.e. PRC and ROC. Tibet and it's questions of independence / greater autonomy are a different chapter. But you seemed to be equating "1 China Policy" with Tibet.

Secondly, I never made fun but was trying to engage in constructive discussion, but wonder why you are so unpleasent about it. You must have had a bad day, but that's cool with me, since I know it's not easy being in your shoes.

Cheers!

SOUVIK said...

To PKS,
Can you throw some light about the total no. of Rohini and Revati 3d radars to be inducted?
Is there any plan to develop AESA variant of Rohini 3d CAR for Akash MkII?
Has the Sword Fish MkI LRTR been entered service?What's the status of the MkII with supposed range of 1600 km against fighters?Has it entered production and will it have any electronic attack capability like the Super Green Pine?
Hope to see your reply.
Thanx.

SOUVIK said...

To PKS,how many Rohini and Revati radars are planned for IAF and IN?
Is there any plan to develop an AESA variant of the Rohini radar for Akash MkII?
Has the Sword Fish MkI entered into service?And lastly what's the status of Sword Fish MkII which suppose to have a range of 1600 km against fighters-is it under development?
Hope to see your reply.
thanks..

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

i have just few querries

1. What has happened to INS Sindhukirti, will it ever come out of docks?

2. Even if the IN get the Jagaur IMs where is the airfield to fly them, can be configured to fly from Viraat after Harriers are retired in 2013/14

3. The DRDO bought the aerostat used in the CWG games and wanted to use in NE sector. Any news on that.

Thanks

Joydeep Ghosh

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun I am Anon 1:01PM :- My second query didn't get posted.
From the info you have given about the AL-41F its clearly a gen ahead then the current AL-31FP. When its ready in 2016 will it be a overkill to fit those on the IAF Su-30's ?

About the newer variant of AL-31FP proposed for the Super Flanker upgrade, comparing it with the current Al-31F where does it stand w.r.t to MTBO intervals.

Can't we go for the Al-41F for the Tejas MK3. As its much better engine then the F414 being used for the Tejas MK2. Will it require any extensive changes to the airframe ?

spanky's Blog said...

Thanks Prasun for the info!!!
Having Jaguars for MSR is indeed a no brainer.If they cant fly properly over seas how the hell will find the targets over sea w/o active AWACS guidence???That means they have to n/w with IN?Wldn't be less cuber some and less infrastructure intensive to let IN do tht?

BTW I thought MIG-29Ks will perform the MSW for IN or are they only for point defense of aircraft carriers????

KSK said...

Hi Prasun,
Recently a Gorkha Rifles regiment has won a gold medal in England beating 100 other teams...
In what type of activity did it occur????

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@6.36AM: The interview with Nikhil Gandhi was not about any Krivak FFGs, but for the construction of five 2,500 AOPVs for the Indian Navy. Russia’s Severnoye Design Bureau is the designer provider. The contract is now under implementation. The Tarmour seems to be an export product, mainly for Afghanistan. The IA’s recce vehicles are BM-2 ICVs fitted with a BEL-built BFSR integrated with an ELBIT Systems-built integrated thermal observation sight. The eventual number of NAMICAs to be procured may reach 80. The Russians haven’t rejected the T-90AM, but want a family of future combat system vehicles all sporting a common hull and customised turrets. The resultant MBT will not be the T-95, but will be an outgrowth of the T-90AM with additional armoured protection and an uprated engine, perhaps going up to 1,500hp. In other words, the Russians too have accepted that in their appreciation of future battlefields, tanks like the T-90 & T-80 will be categorized as medium battle tanks, while the heavier tanks will be the real main battle tanks, a concept the Indian Army embraced more than a decade ago. From a doctrinal standpoint, therefore, the Russians are more than a decade behind India, where the Arjun MBT is classified as the MBT whereas the T-90 and T-72 are medium battle tanks. For the Polish Anders light tank, BEML has teamed up with Bumar, while Mahindra Defence teamed up with BAE Systems is offering the CV90-120.

To Anurag: It all boils down to the amount of money invested in R & D by the MoD. Without adequate funding, it will not be possible to attract the right kind of human resources reqd for producing technological breakthroughs. That’s why only three countries—the US, Germany and France—have produced such ultra low-frequency sonars to date. Neither the Russians nor the Chinese have developed such solutions.

To Anon@12.06PM: Will post a detailed update on the field artillery situation over the next 24 hours, rest assured.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@12.21PM: By 1995, Army HQ reformulated its Field Artillery Rationalisation Plan (FARP), under which it planned to acquire an initial two Regiments of the DRDO-developed 214mm Pinaka MBRLs (comprising 36 launchers) worth Rs11 billion to be acquired by the end of the 10th Plan in 2007 out of the total plan for six Pinaka MBRL Regiments. In October 2003 the GoI’s CCNS cleared the acquisition of two Regiments of the Pinaka MBRL (36 launchers) worth Rs11 billion plus 5,000 rockets worth Rs5 billion. AS for the BrahMos Block-3 Regiment, it will comprise three Batteries each with four Mobile Autonomous Launchers (each with three vertically-launched missiles), three Mobile Command Posts, one Fixed Command Centre, nine missile replenishment vehicles, and three maintenance support vehicles. The Regiment will be able to fire 36 BrahMos missiles against different targets within seconds over a frontage of 600km. There are no plans for deploying land-launched BrahMos in India’s offshore island chains. As for SAMs, right now only Igla-S is deployed in the Andaman & Nicobar chain. In future, the Akash will be deployed. No idea about the Zittara entering production. The AK-101 entered service a few years ago with the Army and Navy’s SOF elements, and is now slowly making its way to the CRPF.

To JJS: When it comes to India, China always insists that the TAR be inclusive of India’s declaration of adherence to the One China policy. That is why every time there is a Summit-level meeting between China and India, the former insists that the joint communiqué released after such meetings always make a mention of India’s declaration about TAR being an integral part of China. The only reason why China insists on such mentions only from India and from no one else is because it is only India that is hosting the Tibetan Govt-in-exile and the Tibetan Parliament-in-exile. That’s why the term ‘One-China’ has a different meaning/interpretation for all other countries (meaning others only are reqd to say that Taiwan is a part of China), while for India it is inclusive of both the Tibetan and Taiwanese issues.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SOUVIK: Revathy is only for the four Project 28 ASW corvettes. For data on the Rohini, kindly refer to: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2011/05/plugging-air-defence-gaps-with-ground.html
Akash Mk2 will use the same Rajendra and Rohini radars. The existing two LRTRs are still the DRDO’s property since the BMD system is still in the technology demonstration stage and has not yet been cleared for operational deployment. Regarding the LRTR Mk2, kindly go to: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2011/08/home-grown-anti-missile-shield-for-new.html

To Joydeep Ghosh: The Sindhukirti for all intents and purposes is a writeoff. It will serve a much better purpose if it is converted into a shore-based museum. There’s no need to transfer the Jaguar IMs to the Navy. Rather, those Jaguar IMs should remain with the IAF and be used for ground attack. The aerostat bought for the CWG was not MIL-SPEC was so cannot be deployed for any military mission.

To Anon@7.37PM: The AL-41F is being purpose-built for the FGFA, and therefore it won’t be a substitute for the AL-31FP. The AL-31FP’s uprating by another 20% will more than suffice for the Super Flanker. AS for the MTBO of such engines, it will go up from 1,000 hours to about 2,500 hours. For the Tejas Mk3, the F414’s future EPE versions will be available and therefore it will be much more economical to stick to the F414 engine family. Retrofitting an existing airframe with a totally new engine requires extensive flight-testing and is therefore not an economical option.

To Spanky’s Blog: The IN’s MiG-29Ks are indeed configured for anti-ship strike roles with Kh-35 and Kh-59 missiles. Therefore, the IAF’s decision to maintain the Jaguar IMs armed with Harpoons as maritime strike aircraft is utterly ludicrous and a sheer waste of precious financial resources.

KSK said...

chinese blogs showed JF-17 with two C-802 missiles as an anti-ship variant ....
*How effective will they be???

C-802 has range of 120kms

*Also how can Project 15 DDG with Barak 2 with a range of 70kms stop jf-15 if it attacks it with c802 from 120kms away???????

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSK: For the 120km-range C-802 ASCM to be guided to its target it would require mid-course navigational cues, which cannot be provided by the JF-17's on-board radar as it does not have 120km target detection range. Furthermore, the C-802's terminal active radar has only a 20km-range Therefore, in all probability, target search/acquisition over the sea will be done by either a P-3C Orion MRMR/ASW aircraft, or a Saab 2000 AEW & C aircraft (which can also do maritime surveillance). It is only after this that the JF-17 will be guided by the P-3C or Saab 2000 to an area about 70km away from the target, from where the C-802 will be launched. The JF-17 will always have to remain within the coverage envelope of the target vessel's air-search radars, because this will give the JF-17's radar warning receiver the exact location of the target and this location will then be relayed via data-link from the JF-17 to the C-802 prior to the C-802's on-board active radar being turned on. For doing all this, the JF-17 will have to maintain altitude out to 10,000 feet so that it can maintain over-the-horizon contact with the C-802. Meanwhile, as the JF-17 communicates via data-link to the C-802, this comms traffic will be picked up by the targetted warship's ESM sensors and automatically, the warship's anti-missile defenses (like Barak-1 and Ellora EW jammers) will be activated. In such a scenario, the topmost priority is always to destroy the anti-ship cruise missile, and not the ASCM-launching aircraft.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSK: And you must also remember that the Indian Navy's DDGs and FFGs will in future always be accompanied by Ka-31 AEW helicopters flying at least 100km ahead of the warships. This will enable the Ka-31s to detect a JF-17 or any other maritime strike aircraft while they are at least 250km away from the Indian warships.

Anonymous said...

Prasun,

Its a question related to your November 8, 2011 1:52 AM post. Can't the P-3C or Saab 2000 do the job rather than JF-17 i.e. it will launch the missile getting a queue from the MRMR which will guide it to the target instead of the JF-17. The scenario that you described is very informative ans interesting. Looking forward to such posts.
Thank you.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon Above: The P-3C Orions armed with AGM-84A Harpoons can engage in maritime strike, but the Saab 2000 AEW & C platforms (which can also engage in maritime surveillance) can't as they're not armed. Therefore, in most cases the P-3Cs & Saab 2000s along with the JF-17s will be working together as a hunter-killer team. But mind you, this tactic is possible only against naval task forces that are devoid of AEW cover (like the Royal Navy was in 1982 during the Falklands War). This tactic WILL NOT be possible to be employed against the Indian Navy since any Indian naval battle group trying to approach the Pakistani coastline (for limited duration operations not lasting more than six hours in a day) will most certainly be accompanied by both the Ka-31 AEW helicopters as well as carrier-borne MiG-29Ks, whose job it will be to sanitise the airspace ahead and around the battle group.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Prasun,

I'm Anon@November 8, 2011 2:44 AM.
Can an Awacs (say Indian Phalcon system) guide a cruise missile to a target. Say a missile is lauched from a Sukhoi, can the Awacs then takes over and pass gudance information to the missile not the Sukhoi. Is it possible.
I think in case of war with Pakistan, Indian battlegroup's biggest challenge will be underwater.
Best regards

Anonymous said...

Nikhil Gandhi interview was related to what i said and not OPV. Read this article :

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-12-09/news/27627928_1_stealth-frigates-russian-yard-russian-govt

Is this arrangement given green light from GOI ?

Regarding t90 version that russian army will accept, i just wanna know whether IA will also induct what russia will induct or we will stick with t90AM ?

Also is it possible the number of arjun might increase and IA will switch from t90 to arjun mk2 ? Also if russia is also going for heavy mbt then whats the point in purchasing heavy mbt from russia when we can get better one from germans, french or all time british challenger ?

Regarding BEML and polish company + BAE and mahindra JV, are these two CV90-120 and anders offered to IA for 300 light mbt requirement or something else ? Is this number will stick to just 300 or it will increase because they might be helpful in amphibious operations also.

are we going to induct remaining 4 regiment of pinaka in 12 th plans and how many pinaka 2 are going to induct ?

Pakeagle said...

Yaa right, Ka-31 is a joke. It has such a poor range of only 600km and is known to be a fuel guzzler with outdated digital terrain maps, ground-proximity warning & obstacle approach warning...

financeblogger said...

In the following article, there has been mention of major teething problems with the Phalcons.

AWACS

Request you to throw light on the same. Also keeping in mind future requirements, how many Phalcons would India need including the ones to be kept in reserve.

Anonymous said...

Recently read an article about Armed forces being adamant against employing women in combat roles, supposedly due to 'operational, practical and cultural' problems. What exactly are these problems? When almost all major militaries, including many theocracies, employ women in combat roles, then why not India?? Doesn't all these problems exist in other countries too or they have different species of women? They might not be commissioned in SFs but what is the harm in having women as regular infantry/ JCOs/ submariners/ fighter pilots? I guess even Pakistanis have women fighter pilots..Don't they?

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Thanx, More and More people are coming to the senses now that F-35 has arrived only to blockade the AMCA.

SOUVIK said...

To PKS,
Thanx for that link.By the way,any idea about how many t/r modules will be in the AESA antena array unit of DRDO AWACS?And what will be maximum detection range of this system against fighters?
Hope you can help.
thnx.

Pawan said...

Dear Prasun ji

I s there some weapon package also coming with MMRCA. I mean did tender say anything about weapons to be delivered along with MMRCA winner.

Anonymous said...

seems as if Russia is indeed playing both sides, or they are shit scared of Paks:

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/current-affairs/pak-39most-important39-partnersouth-asia-putin_612852.html

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@5.48AM: No, not cruise missiles, but BVRAAMs like Meteor will have on-board data-links to communicate with AEW & C platforms when receiving mid-course guidance updates. Land-launched and submarine-launched cruise missiles (both subsonic and supersonic) are generally autonomous in nature and do not require mid-course updates since their flight profiles are generally pre-programmed prior to launch, as the targets are mostly fixed/static installations and not moving ground targets. But when it comes to air-launched cruise missiles that can also loiter to a certain extent, then the launch aircraft (and not any AEW & C platform) can communicate via data-link with the cruise missile’s on-board navigation computer for re-programming the targeting package.

To Anon@12.51PM: There was never any reqmt for four stealthy FFGs. There was a reqmt for only seven P-17A FFGs after the three P-17 FFGs. So, only Nikhil Gandhi knows what he’s talking about. The Russian future MBT is still three years away at least from being unveilled. Therefore, since the Indian Army’s reqmts are more urgent, India will stick to the T-90AM. Regarding the main battle tank (MBT reqmts, the Indian Army has already decided to stick to the Arjun family. Both the Anders & CV90-120 are being offered only for the light tank reqmt. For amphibious operations, the reqmt will emanate from the Indian Navy (which is raising its own naval infantry force), not the Army. The Indian Army is presently only capable of undertaking amphibious landings, and not amphibious warfare, which is a three-dimensional affair. The remaining four Pinaka MBRL regiments will be inducted before 2017. Pinaka 2 is not a new MBRL, but just an improved rocket offering a 40km-range. The present Pinaka-1 rockets have 37.5km-range.

To Pakeagle: Were you smoking hashish when you made that comment? Why should a shipborne Ka-31 that is meant to fly only over water require tools like terrain maps, ground-proximity warning & obstacle approach warning?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To financeblogger: The problems are typical of the type associated with the induction of new systems and things take some time (about eight months) to settle down. Once the in-country product-support system is in place then things take a turn for the better. Also to be noted si that the PHALCONS have a very high utilisation rate, typically 12 hours per day. Hence, the product-support reqmts are far greater. Once the usage routine is established, then the product-support system adjusts itself to the operational reqmts and everything works out fine.

To Anon@5.19PM: I don’t know what the controversy is all about. As far as I’m concerned, I fully support the right to have commissioned female combatants in the armed forces (and especially ion the special operations forces), instead of adopting a patronising feudal mindset. If the BSF, CRPF and RAF can have operational female cadres deployed for counter-insurgency and border patrolling tasks, why not the armed forces? Does it mean that Rani Laxmibai’s decision to lead her forces from the front in 1857 along with her backslung toddler was impractical and culturally ill-advised?

To Mr.RA 13: I’m gladdened to see that reality is dawning at last on this issue.

To SOUVIK: See this: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2011/05/full-spectrum-hawk-eyes.html

To Pawan: The weapons packages will be standard. For the Rafale it will include MBDA’s MICA air combat missiles & Meteor BVRAAM, SAGEM’s AASM PGMs and MBDA’s Taurus KEPD-350 ALCM and BGL/Paveway-2/4 laser-guided bombs. For the EF-2000 Typhoon it will include IRIS-T or ASRAAM, AIM-120C AMRAAM or Meteor, Taurus KEPD-350 ALCM, plus LGBs like Paveway-2/4.

SK said...

Prsaun can you throw any light on the NSTL developed Maareech ATDS. Is it for surface vessels only or can it be also fitted to Submarines as well. How effective is it when compared with western equivalent.

Does Indian Navy has Shkval Torpedoes in its inventory. It was reported that China has bought few. Is this true. Won't such high speed torpedoes put surface warships at risk. Will the decoys or even RBU-6000 will be able to stop them.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SK: The BDL-built Maareech decoy is ship-launched, but a submarine-launched variant is also under development and was shown at the Aero India 2011 expo last February by BDL. For submarines the decoys from WAAS of Italy are in usage. The Shkval torpedoes were bought in limited numbers by both China and Iran from Kyrgyzstan in the mid-1990s and may have been possibly re-engineered by now. The RBU-6000 will have a tough time intercepting them.

Anonymous said...

Prasun, anything to say about this... asian-defence.blogspot.com/2011/08/russian-military-rejects-mig-29k-for.html

Mr. Ra 13 said...

I think the RBU-6000 may be least useful against the high speed of Shkval Torpedoes.

Anonymous said...

Sir , u said the IN is raising its own naval infantry units..y can't the existing IA amphibious units be trained & utilised for this purpose..?
it won't be hard for the army to spare 2-3 brigades ( approx 10k soldiers) for this purpose..
the navy already has MARCOS, then it raised the sagar prahari bal..now this new unit..i mean what is the need of an entirely new unit when the existing IA brigade in trivandrum can be trained for the marine role ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.51PM: The Russian navy’s preference for a Su-30-type solution for carrier-based aviation is well-known. The MiG-29K was never in the reckoning for the Kuznetsov from the outset. But the apprehensions regarding the MiG-29K’s quality or performance are purely speculative and uncalled for.

To Mr.RA 13: read this: http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NorthIndia/China-creeping-up-in-Ladakh/Article1-766140.aspx

& try to relate this with what I had earlier written about China’s arsenal of NLOS-BSMs like the M-20 etc etc, and also about Pakistan’s nuclear ballistic missile launch bases being located in the Northern Areas and their peacetime locations being closely guarded by the PLA.

KSK said...

Very well explained reply about employment of C802 , Sir.
Thanks

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@12.34AM: It is not about the Army being able to spare a Brigade or two for amphibious operations, but about the Army’s in-house rotational system according to which the Brigade’s Battalions are rotated once every three years for a different training regimen. In other words, there’s no so thing as a permanent Battalion or Brigade that forever specialises in amphibious operations. Consequently, what one Battalion or Brigade trains for is lost after three years and a new training regimen is put in place. This is a wasteful exercise as all the expertise gained by a Battalion lasts for only three years and is then lost forever. So, what is happening is once every three years the wheel is being re-invented. And this has been going on for decades! It is therefore high time that a permanent formation is created for the sole task of waging amphibious warfare. If you look at the photos uploaded by LIVEFIST, you will clearly notice that what the Army is practicing is only a landing operation staged from naval LST-Ls and LCUs (and those personnel dubbed as MARCOS by LIVEFIST are not MARCOS but ordinary naval seamen training to become naval infantrymen. The MARCOS is not in the business of staging amphibious assaults, nor is it interested in staging photo-shoots for the mass-media. If it was, then it would never have been a special operations force (SOF). SOF means stealth and secrecy, something which is not akin to daylight ‘nautankis’ and ‘tamashas’ in full view of TV cameras. And no one from MARCOS will commit the folly of staging half-submerged assaults during daytime, rest assured). For full-scale amphibious landings under war-like conditions, one has to stage such landings in the presence of shore-bombardment coming from both naval warships (firing their main guns as well as MBRLs) as well as close air support aircraft. Thus far, in the history of India’s armed forces, no such tri-services exercise has ever been carried out. What has been done so far is only AMPHEX—or amphibious landing exercises whereby the soldiers and armoured vehicles exit the LCUs & LSTs and then form up for a head-count (as shown by LIVEFIST’s photos). Therefore, the Chiefs of Staff Committee decided last year that enough of this tamasha, and the time had now come for raising a permanent naval infantry force commanded and manned by naval personnel, which is exactly what is now happening in Kakinada. And that’s precisely why it is the Indian Navy (and not the Army) that has issued RFIs for air-cushion vehicles, LPHs and heavilift shipborne helicopters. The Navy’s doctrine for “effecting maritime manoeuvres from the sea” is already in place.

To KSK: VMT.

Anonymous said...

Sir , y can't the IA make an exception to its rotational system for the marine brigades..like the batallions assigned to an amphibious brigade will reamin with it forever..
then for say if there are 3 marine brigades with permanent batallions 1 cud in field(gaining operationsl experience),,one cud on 24 hr alert & the 3rd training & resting..
& also the batallions previously assigned to the marine brigades cud be recalled & re-oriented for marine ops atleast this is better than training an unit from scratch..
& also sir livefist claims to having word with men of MARCOS..
& posting pics only after due approval from MARCOS..
what is the numerical strength of MARCOS & the sagar prahari bal & what will be the size of this naval infantry unit..?

Anonymous said...

Sir ,
y is that the indian armed forces r always after big purchases when the indian infantrymen still lack basic gear..i have never seen an indian soldier fully equipped like the western forces r in afghanistan & iraq..
y cant they be given helmet attached NVGs..say an army unit is amushed at night do our generals expect the soldiers to take out their portable NVDs from their rucksacks in between nasty fighting ?
i mean there BPJs sometimes seem to not have kevlar panels..no knee pads no communications set..
their patkas offer no ear or neck protection..their rifles don't hv optical sights..
i mean y r v so lacking , y r v so tolerable as a nation..our soldiers r not rats..
y dont junior officers take these issues up with seniors..or is it that these simply fall on deaf ears ?
what do u have to say about the training of the indian army..is it lacking compared to western standards..or on a par..or better than them ?

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Since some time back the Red Dragon China has perhaps understood that it is inching towards the position of the lone rising superpower of the world and also knows that the other erstwhile superpowers are retreating due to one reason or another.

So China has started consolidating its military strengths wherever it feels needed and desirable. Pak occupied Northern Kashmir is unfortunately one of such areas which is hotly contested against India by Chinese bosom friend Pakistan. This is irrespective of the attitudes and actions of India in this respect.

As the Northern Kashmir is the most dubious place in the world and it is an important point of global control, so in collaboration with Pak, China is tempted to deploy its tactical and strategic weapons there.

China must have stationed its M-20 Iskanders against India, since no one can expect that any Chinese assault can commence from any place in POK and if India retaliates against those Chinese positions in POK then Pak automatically gets involved in this fix-up on behalf of China, which creates an international situation.

As suggested by you earlier, China must have kept hidden its nukes also in this PO Northern Kashmir for the same reasons as above but for the strategic purposes. I suspect them to be purely Chinese nukes but they have shared mutual commonality with Pakistan. So these nukes can be used against India at the behest of any one of them either China or Pak. Retaliation against them again creates an international crisis.

This region being remote, earlier few Chinese and Paki technicians and soldier must be guarding and looking after them. But since the terrorism has openly increased within Pakistan and there is a risk of terrorists capturing such nukes in Pak, now China has been forced to increase its military presence in thousands around these nuke installations.

The most laughable alibi provided by them is that they are constructing the roads for business transportation.

I think your earlier apprehensions in this matter were correct and may need to be taken seriously.

SK said...

Prasun first of all don't you sleep ??? Hats-off to your dedication.
Regarding Skhval can India develop them ? Iran claim's of developing one. Although shorter range won't the y be a lethal addition to the IN arsenal.

India Times reported that IAF has signed for two more Phalcons for Israel. You have reported that Il-76 platforms are no longer available in market so the Il-476 platform was promised in its place by 2012. So on what air-frame will the two follow-on AWACS will be based on ? Is IAF considering the under development C-295 based AWACS for any upcoming procurement.

Anonymous said...

Prasun and fellow bloggers,
There are news that US, if needed will take control of the nuclear assets of Pakistan in case there is an immenent possibility of rogue forces take their control. If Pakistan's nuclear assets are closely controled by China, don't you think any American attempt will bring China and America at loggerheads. Or do you think if American does conduct any such operation, China will deny any involvement?

Thanks!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.50AM: The exceptions cannot be made because in this era of specialization. Today the infantry formations are either mechanised or motorised. Such formations may well be garrisoned in an island for homeland defence or for conducting riverine operations, but waging amphibious warfare requires the kind of synergy that exists between the US Navy & US Marine Corps. In India’s case, such synergies can only come about when the Navy has its own Brigade-strength naval infantry force. Sagar Prahari Bal is only about 800-strong now. It will eventually merge with the naval infantry forces now being created. MARCOS now is not more than a Battalion. As for basic gear of Indian infantrymen, there will be a quantum leap forward once the F-INSAS network is commissioned. But one can already see several improvements in areas like NVGs, comms systems etc with those units deployed in J & K. Training-wise the Indian Army is second to none and one must always remember that the Indian Army has been a battle-tested and battle-experienced institution since the early 1990s, especially in low-intensity conflict scenarios—something which the Western armies greatly envy. The Chinese have not had any such experience, and the Pakistanis have only now begun to experience them, although their version of counter-insurgency operations is like what the Russians and Israelis like to engage in—that is show scant regard for loss civilian lives.

To Mr.RA 13, Be it the M-20s or the Nasrs or the Shaheen-2s, they’re all under a PLA Mechanised Infantry Brigade’s lock-n-key all 365 days of the year since 2002. Pakistan in late 2004 paid a heavy price by basing them in the seismically active Northern Areas and the Chinese will not allow such mistakes to be repeated. The only ballistic missiles under Pakistan’s jurisdiction are those Shaheen-1s and Ghauris that have conventional HE warheads.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SL: I work at nighttime since there’s far less noise and disturbance, and easier to concentrate and stay focussed. And as I don’t have a 9-to-5 work schedule, my working hours are flexible and so I tend to grab a few hours of sleep during daytime. The Skhval was originally developed in R & D labs located at Kyrgyzstan and the DRDO by now may have come across something interesting about such torpedoes from its new-found Kyrgyz counterparts. But such torpedoes are most suited for littoral/coastal warfare. Iran laid its hands on less than 20 such torpedoes and that’s why it has been shown only once being test-fired during exercises. For ensuring guaranteed hits, it is far better to rely on wire-guided heavy torpedoes like the Black Shark.
Regarding the IL-76TD/MF airframes, they’re available from Uzbekistan’s TAPO, that’s not the problem. The problem is between Moscow and Tashkent. Attitude or chemistry problems between Putin & islam Karimov, I guess. The problem is India cannot order the IL-76 directly from TAPO and then forward the airframe to Beriev/Beta Air for airframe customization, even if India wants to do it. This is because Rosoboronexport State Corp insists on handling all negotiations with TAPO directly on its own. This problem would not have arisen had the Russians succeeded in activating the 2nd IL-76 assembly line at Aviastar’s Ulyanovsk facility, but the Russians too are behind schedule in coming up with the IL-476, which will be a wonderful airframe as it will have a glass cockpit and fly-by-wire flight controls. The C-295 AEW & C option remains open for the IAF, especially with regard to its application and usage in North-East India.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@3.31AM: Nuclear assets, yes. Like the fissile materials coming out of the China-supplied N-reactors or held in storage prior to being shipped to China for fuel-reprocessing. Thanks to Dr A Q Khan's recently disclosed 'confessions' we already know that the KRL facility is all 'khokla' and all uranium, enrichment actually takes place in Hanzhong inside China. That leaves only those fissile materials coming out from the Chashma and Khushab n-reactors, which can be used for making dirty radiological devices, and NOT nuclear warheads. The nuclear warheads, their permissive action links and their delivery rockets are all controlled by China, simply because they're also all of Chinese orogin and China would therefore never want all these to fall into the hands of the US. So what better than warehousing all these WMDs in tunnels in and around the Karakoram Range, so that they're safe in Chinese custody in peacetime, and are quickly deployed to launch sites inside the Northern Areas (like the Deosai Plain) whenever the shit hits the fan.

Anonymous said...

Can anybody tell what its all about. Its in Russian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQnEazxrvUo&feature=player_embedded#!

Thanks

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Now I logically understand your theory that all the so-called nuclear warheads, their permissive action links and their delivery rockets are controlled by China in Karakoram/North Kashmir regions.

This makes it difficult for USA to capture these nukes if it needed to and this leads to a practically complex situation if and when Pak is declared hostile. However it makes easier the job of internal dissolution of Pak666.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

I think only an EQ of 8.99 can successfully resolve this case.Lol...

SOURAV said...

To PKS,
Any idea how does the Arjun MkI fare against T 84 OplotM?I mean,which one will get the upperhand if both ever come face to face.
Please try to reply.
thnx.

Anonymous said...

"Be it the M-20s or the Nasrs or the Shaheen-2s, they’re all under a PLA Mechanised Infantry Brigade’s lock-n-key all 365 days of the year since 2002. Pakistan in late 2004 paid a heavy price by basing them in the seismically active Northern Areas and the Chinese will not allow such mistakes to be repeated. The only ballistic missiles under Pakistan’s jurisdiction are those Shaheen-1s and Ghauris that have conventional HE warheads."


aaah his day dreaming never ends

MPatel said...

@anon 3.12

The americans and the world is just scaring themselves into thinking that Pak have nukes. Its a self perpetuating industry. What does CIA and 15 other US intel bodies know? What do all the various bodies around the world (whose expertise is nukes) know? What does Obama Know? Don't they know that they are all wrong and have no clue as to the true nature of Pak (non-existent) nukes. Their solution is simple call: just call Prasun.

They could then just call China and say please sir remove your nukes from Pakistan or we will give taiwan nukes too --> problem solved!

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Pak666 does not have any of its own nukes. This can be further substantiated by the fact that not a single test of Pakistan has ever failed so far. Hmmm… their production line must be with a seven sigma standard.

SK said...

Prasun with all the discussion on Pak nukes I got a few doubts. You have reported how Pak has based its nukes in the northern parts under Chinese control/supervision.
But recently western papers have reported that Pak is moving nukes around in unmarked vans. So what are those ? Dirty radiological devices ? US intel isn't always correct Classic example is Iraq & its WMD. At same time they are very capable example successfully locating Osama in Pak.
Can you do a article on the Pak nukes.

Anonymous said...

If the nukes in Pak are deliberately located there by China to complicate matters w.r.t India. Can't we return the favor by basing or giving few nukes to Vietnam. Or even Taiwan to infuriate China more. Except for Pak all the Chinese neighbors have problems with China.

We cannot compete with Chinese armed forces at all levels but we can certainly destabilize their aspirations. You did mention how a small country like Vietnam held up against Superpowers in the past. If we are determined enough we can too....Indira Gandhi stood her ground during the Bangladesh war against US. Western countries are as it is worried about China so they may not throw a fit if we do give the nukes. NPT or otherwise, we are not actual signatories anyways.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

China has stalked others for centuries. Now it should be made to taste its own medicine, even if they are the nukes.

Anonymous said...

sir,thankyou so much for your replies ,seriously hat off to u for bearing with us & answering all or questions..
is a batallion of MARCOS enuf for a country of india's size..?..internet generally is full of info that MARCOS is arnd 2000 in strength..
what do u have to say about their operations in the gulf of aden ..r they MARCOS or normal VBSS teams of the navy ?

Shree said...

How much of the below artcles is true ?????
And what are the + and - implications for India????
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/columnists/swaminathan-s-a-aiyar/us-may-quit-gulf-indias-loss-chinas-gain/articleshow/10627523.cms

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/columnists/swaminathan-s-a-aiyar/gulf-oil-declining-us-oil-imports-could-push-up-indian-expenditure-on-navy/articleshow/10661858.cms

Mr. Ra 13 said...

If above news is authentic, then soon Arabia will be open for another oil sale and most likely India and China will be vying with each other to get an earlier foothold.

Anonymous said...

Mr RA 13 the reason paks nukes always work is because they got the original weapon designs from china...these were found in Libya. Get it! Not only that, they also got test data, that helped them improve the designs...you know the story about..teach a man to fish...well guess what happened...in return china got the uranium tech from Dr Khan. Its all in his letter but on this website....but you know the saying you can take a donkey to water but can't make it drink...

Anonymous said...

"In 2005, in response to allegations of corruption in defence procurements around the world, the Defence Ministry formulated the Defence Procurement Policy (DPP) 2005. According to the DPP, at least 30% of any order over INR300 crore (US$66.9 million) is to be sourced from Indian companies. This would enable Indian companies to gain expertise in defence-related technologies, as well as cycle back a large amount of any order back into the country."

Can you explain what exactly does this mean? What sort of expertise would Indian Industries gain and how might it help our defense sector?

Anonymous said...

Its sort of strange that almost since its inception PRC has successfully cloned almost every big and small weapon/tank/aircraft that they have laid hands upon, some even from wreckage...But why has India never tried/done the same, given that we had got more official tech. transfers and license productions from greater diverse sources than perhaps any other country..I guess its not a question of money because China has been cloning, mass-producing and selling weapons in international market even prior to its economic revival while even after all these years India is still staggering to produce a single quality weapon to fulfill our own bread & butter needs, let alone exporting them..So what is the reason? Do we lack brains or the will? And will expensive tech.transfers like Sukhoi-30, MMRCA or FGFA make much differences to our defence industry?

SherKhan said...

china's success is based on not have an enemy like Pak. That is where indian money has gone (Kashmir/Punjab/Bihar), whereas chinese have put the same money into R&D and off course had time. Pak will continue to hold indian nose to the ground. This means india will not be able to compete with china for the forseeable future. This is what US has been trying to do, get pak to focus west rather than the east. US and india are so desperate now, that they are now attacking Paks education. Think it will work...think again. Paks focus is east simply because of kashmir no other reason.

Anonymous said...

anon - November 9, 2011 7:48 PM

Because NaMo is not our PM yet and the Womanmohan Singh is a puppet in the hands of Antonia Maino (a known agent of AISE).

Vote BJP

Anonymous said...

1.When will the Barak-2 Sam enter operational service?What is the maximum range of Akash sam? What are the features of the Akash -2 sam?When will enter operational service?
2.If the MiG-27 or The Jaguar IM goes to bomb a target by lasar designating it and then dropping LGBs, then it has to come within 10 Km of the target whaere it will be exposed to various point defence sams such sa Roland, Panstir S1, etc. Also Laser designation cannot be performed in foul weather. So why not fit a radar so that the target can be tracked and mapped using synthetic aperture mode and then engaged using standoff weapons such as Rafale AGM-130.AGM-154 JSOW,etc. Also a radar will also enable the aircraft to fly close to the ground and avoid geographical features so that the MiG-29 type accident will not occur? Why are they not fitting an IRST?
3.IS THE drdo developing any modern infrared jammer and DIRCM for protection of both fixed and rotatary aircrafts from ir homing missiles?
4.When will the Skyranger system will be ordered? Is it capable of engaging PGMs?

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
Any idea how many facilities under the OFB is producing 155mm artillery ammo??
Is there any 155 mm cargo/claster ammo currently in production in ofb??
And lastly,is there any rocket assisted 155mm artillery shells in production or under development by OFB??
Please try to reply.
Thanks in advance.

Anonymous said...

Hi prasun can u please make ur blog mobile friendly??? Its difficult to read ur blog from mobile.
And secondly is any new article coming tonite or can u pls start a new thread for comments I mean 340+ comments , its difficult to navigate to newest comments
Thanks alot .

Anonymous said...

http://idrw.org/?p=5103

On one hand China is unabashedly and incessantly providing Pak with latest weaponry, nukes, subs, building ports and even maintaining constant presence in Northern areas to bully us and then it expects India to stay in its limits wrt Vietnam and South China Sea!! What do you think should India do??

Anonymous said...

Is India (Hal,Nal and Pvt companies) capable of building its own MRTA and mass producing it by 2020, given the recent hurdles in the Indo-russian program? I had heard of a proposal by IAF to procure MRTA from indian PVT industries few months back. What happened to it?

Anonymous said...

Hey..............Long time NO new post !! Miss them..............

Also......cut-paste job of old posts in latest Force... ;-)

Guess.......all them numerous replies bog you down....

lol

Assfukkayani said...

To Sherkhan and any Pakistanis:Why is Kashmir, an integral part of India, such an issue with Pakistan?Is it because of the tourist dollars?I mean if I was the Pm of India I would be asking questions about Sindh, Balochistan and Punjab and would like a unified Punjab and return of Sindh which is in the Indian national anthem and seek an Independent balochistan Pakistan wants kashmir so badly.In fact, Pakistanis are Indians because there would be no Pakistan if it weren't for India which extended from Afghanistan to Burma once.Secondly, Baloch people are Muslims too and India has the highest number of muslims outside Indonesia so how is it Pakistan wants kashmir due to people being Muslims and yet tortures the baloch people?Why is pakistan on the one hand "we are tough guys, aggressor India keep out"and on the other if Indians keep out deliberately cause harrassment to a sovereign nation under the pretext of Islam and Kashmir?You mean to say you wanna sleep with my wife and expect me to stand outside till you are done oz you are a tough guy?Mate I will shove it up yours before you can say lift off to your dick!

Pawan said...

Dear Prasun Ji

News going around that IAF have issued RFI for ISTAR kind of aircraft based systems. If it is true then what happened to IAI SEMA which was selected by MoD for same kinda system. Yours view please

SherKhan said...

@AssfcukedbyKAYANI,

look at this link wrt un resolutions on Kashmir:

http://www.kashmiri-cc.ca/un/

as regards to your wife, though lovely she maybe, i am not into second hand goods...your daughter maybe? Let me know your address.

Also i suggest you read up on your (indian) history (non-existent as it maybe) for the last 1000 years or so.

Anonymous said...

guys...please stop that nonsensical personal attacks. at least this blog was comparatively clean. without mudslinging and name calling also you can convey your point. attack brains with brain, not with something else.
most people visiting here are interested to know technology, put your thoughts, points or knowledge...but not the kind of profanity.
I guess Prasunda went on a vacation..

Anonymous said...

@ MPatel

To Whom does Indians call when they back down from their war threats towards Pakistan?

Americans are saying that they spend over $ 100 million indirectly to help Pakistan improve to security of nuclear installations.

may be all of they including US department of defence are ignorant of the fact that Pakistan don't have any nuclear weapons.

Keep daydreaming

Pakistanis dont mind

Mr. Ra 13 said...

"Americans are saying that they spend over $ 100 million indirectly to help Pakistan improve to security of nuclear installations.

may be all of they including US department of defence are ignorant of the fact that Pakistan don't have any nuclear weapons."

Some competent agency should be able to check it. It appears to be a big financial scam.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anurag: regarding 155mm ammo range being produced by India, you will find the info at: http://ofb.gov.in/index.php?wh=A-E-P-C&lang=en

To Anon@9.29AM: The only MRTA being co-developed and to be built by HAL is the IL-214 MRTA. The other kind of tactical transports being sought for the IAF are twin-turboprops to replace the existing HS-748 Avros.

To: Assfukkayani: There are several reasons that are often given for Pakistan’s enduring yearning for the Kashmir Valley, as are opinions, which are like arseholes, everyone’s got one. But after narrowing down the possibilities, there can be only two viable reasons: Firstly, the issue of water, as Pakistan wants to secure the source of its water supplies from the River Indus (or Jhelum). The second one relates to the existence of the Rozabal Shrine south of Srinagar and about who lies buried in an underground chamber (see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9w-xJfSOyc&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL6556F8DB3874BC2F)

To Pawan: There are two parallel reqmts for ISTAR-type airborne platforms. One is for RAW’s ARC for peacetime border surveillance, The other is for the IAF for wartime applications. I wrote about them way back last April.

Anonymous said...

Hey Prasun,

Rozabal Shrine, what interest Pak has in it, I dont see any of Pakki interest in it, even if its so called shrine of Jesus.

Shree said...

http://chhindits.blogspot.com/2011/11/raytheon-to-do-entire-weapons-suite-for.html

Is this true ???
I thought such weapons exist with the Europeans too...

What do you estimate the benchmark price for MMRCA??????

Considering only AESA radar which manufacturer(Rafale 0r Typhoon) do you think will be able to develop the best one ?????????????????

How much technical expertise can India gain only through AESA development ???

Shree said...

Hi Prasun,
Its been a long time since you have written an article ):
Heres an idea from me...

You say future air warfare will be network centric but IAF has placed agility and aerodynamic performance of highly in MMRCA
so you can explain

Aerodynamic Effectiveness & MANEUVERABILITY OF AIRCRAFT VERSES AIR-AIR MISSILES IN LONG,MEDIUM,SHORT RANGES GUIDED BY SEMI-ACTIVE,ACTIVE RADARS,IR , DUAL MODES AND RAMJET POWERED LIKE METEOR.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IF AWACS COMES INTO PLAY.

Let me know what you think of my suggestion....

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Shree: How can Raytheon do all that when only the AIM-120C-5 is being offered by Eurofighter GmbH? The problem is that the writer of that report has wrongly assumed that India will be acquiring the Typhoon variant of the EF-2000. The marketing and sales negotiations for EF-2000 in India has been done by Germany-based Eurofighter GmbH, and not BAE Systems, which had done the marketing and sales-and-purchase activities for Saudi Arabia. I wouldn'y speculate on any kind of benchmark prices at this stage, since the final pricing will have to be inclusive of the offsets packages as well; only this will bring out the per unit nett price. Regarding AESA-based MMRs, the RBE-2 from THALES of France is already in production, while the Captor-E from Germany's Cassidian is still under development and will enter service in only 2016. Between THALES & Cassidian, it all now depends on who will be more willing to join forces with the DRDO to develop a tailor-made AESA-MMR for the Tejas Mk2 and LCA (Navy) Mk2. While THALES has a long history of successfully marketing its radars to India since the 1960s, Cassidian is quite new in this arena and has so far only teamed up with DARE to develop airborne radar/missile approach warning systems.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Shree: Network-centricity will also be a key domain as far as the M-MRCA goes, just as super-manoeuvrability and supersonic cruise will be a key feature of the FGFA.

jasminOlivia said...

Hi there, awesome site. I thought the topics you posted on were very interesting. I tried to add your RSS to my feed reader and it a few. take a look at it, hopefully

I can add you and follow.





Walkie Talkie in Kolkatta

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 357 of 357   Newer› Newest»