Total Pageviews

Friday, March 9, 2012

China's Latest MR-SAM


53 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
The 4th picture is not click-able and hence, not able to view the writings. Could you pls rectify the problem?

Heberian said...

Hi Prasun- Why does this look better than the Aakash? (tongue-in-cheek question)

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Heberian: If indeed it does, it is because the LY-80E is of 2009 vintage, whereas the Akash is of 2001 vintage. In any case, pray allow me to share some interesting developments that have taken place over the past 72 hours. On the morning of March 7, I got a call from the Editor & Publisher of FORCE magazine who informed me that “he has been instructed by Headquarters (which one he didn’t say & I never asked) not to publish any more of my editorial contributions, and since he was not in a position to go against the wishes of ‘HQ’ for the time-being, that’s how things would be”. My only response was: No problems & thank you very much.
Now, based on subsequent feedback that I got from officials that need to remain unnamed for the time-being, this is what it is all about: FORCE’s February 2012 issue on pages 14-17 had published my analysis of the PLA’s warfighting strategy and it was this very analysis that I had reproduced in my blog at: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/02/how-china-will-fight-future-border-wars.html
Now, it seems that the civilian decision-makers at MoD gave this analysis a very serious reading and used it as one of the main points to question various elements of the so-called ‘transformational plans’ that Army HQ has proposed for countering the PLA’s force modernisation efforts all along the LAC. The MoD was supported by the DRDO, which too agreed with my assessment about the need for the Indian Army to fast-track the acquisition of NLOS-BSMs like the Prahaar and have an accelerated theatre-type BMD network in place, among other things. To cut a long story short, Army HQ reportedly got intensely irritated by such counter-proposals emanating from the civilians at MoD and it was consequently time to unleash vengeance at targets like me. Therefore, in order to prevent me from having the two remaining sequels (about how India’s force modernisation efforts ought to shape up in order to match those of the PLA) published, this ‘Headquarters’ reportedly issued the above-mentioned instructions to FORCE. However, needless to say, this act alone won’t prevent those in the MoD & DRDO interested my two remaining sequential appreciations (operational analysis) from obtaining them directly from me. And an abridged version of these appreciations will of course be uploaded in my blog in due course.
And by the way, for the Project 75I submarine-building programme there was never any clamour from anyone to allow the private-sector shipbuilders to become prime contractors. The private-sector shipbuilders are more interested in two things: First, playing a part in the construction of two of the four LPHs; & supplying the bulk of the 40 commercial vessels that are required every year by Indian shipping companies. Right now, Indian shipbuilding firms can hardly supply eight commercial vessels per annum. For Project 75I, it is best that MDL remain as the prime contractor as it makes no sense to create duplicated submarine fabrication infrastructure anywhere else. Larsen & Toubro, on the other hand, has its hands full with fabrication of the S-3, S-4 & S-5 SSBNs, and is also likely to be involved with the programme for fabricating SSNs with the help of French expertise.

sbm said...

Prasun, you know how we tend to bash the MoD civvies all the time and DRDO even more often ?

At least this time they wanted to read a different viewpoint - so make sure you get your stuff to them.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SBM: Very many thanks. Do rest assured that the stuff is ALREADY in the possession of the relevant agencies of the executive branch of the Govt of India. And that's precisely the reason why, despite incessant urgings in the recent past from several bloggers to get the two concluding parts of my analysis uploaded, I've held on to them, but will upload them at the opportune moment. In this day & age, printed publications with very limited print-runs have far outlived their usefulness and conbsequently, denial of printed publishing opportunities doesn't matter at all, at least to me, since I've never sought or obtained any monetary compensation for my editorial contributions to FORCE. It was strictly charity-work.

sbm said...

Just for the record, I never received any for mine when I was briefly their technology correspondent !

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,

I have been a follower of your blog from long time and really appreciate your deep and knowledgeable analysis. When ever I used to read your blog, I always used to think if some one in our civilian community has so much understanding that how we are lagging behind China than what our govt. is doing and why do not they take any note of these wonderful analysis. Anyways hope something positive comes out from MoD and DRDO due to this.

Thanks.

abs said...

@prasunda
hi prasunda how are you doing??? :) sorry could not keep up with your, as always, excellent articles, hope to make up for them now :)
wrt ur first comment to 'heberian' you have talked about army's transformation plans to counter china, and which is exactly something that we all would like to know :)
besides please dont get bucked down by the Army HQ threats, ur blog is doing an exceptional job of teaching us commoners and also a few other executive people the nitty gritty of the threats and types of threats that surround us. we are the citizens of INDIA and its us who should know about our security so that a comatose MOD and foolish Army dont endanger us :-/

KSK said...

Does IA have any tank gun barrel laser emitter?????

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hNpxvKAisVc/T1luP5y3JuI/AAAAAAAAOOs/zrKBU-604Jk/s1600/1331256763_23415.jpg

How effective are they?

Anonymous said...

where is india?

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/NC09Ag01.html

Why is Pak in so much demand, by even Russia?

Anonymous said...

Could detail the basic differences between turbojets and turbofans.....which is used in what?

Anonymous said...

Recently there have been talks about NATO and India.........for whom is it more beneficial?

KSK said...

Regarding the HAL restructuring ... could we say that something is better than nothing??

I mean will the proposed restructuring yield any positive outcomes than before?

Anurag said...

@Prasun Da,
Hope you are fine.
Now PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't say that you are not gonna publish those two remaining parts on Trishul.By the way,I can't figure it out why IA is getting so much pissed off;after all common sence says that your analysis may help them working out an effective counter against the PLA!!Then what's these all about????

And by the way,do you know if PRC has developed any ultra low frequency sonar or not??

THANX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,

Please provide a comparative analysis of the guidance system in Akash and LY-80E. What is a composite guidance and hat are the advantages and disadvantages of Command - line guidance. No seeker/guidance intelligence will certainly make Akash cheaper, what else are the differences?

Thanks,

NR

Anonymous said...

Anon@March 9, 2012 11:36 PM

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_a_turbofan_and_turbo_jet_engine

Anonymous said...

Anynymous 10pm the answer to your question is this: most Central Asian countries are lying in ruins since the demise of the SSR and when you are lying in the dumps, all alone, a pair of salwars walking past would appear to be a woman - hence so much interest.Naturally a pair of Indian trousers won't arouse so much interest! LoL

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To: SBM, Anon@8.34PM, ABS & Anurag: To add to what I’ve stated above, let me try & explain exactly what had happened and who are the major players. In Delhi, when it comes to deriving appreciations of national security threat assessments, there’s a huge deficiency prevailing within the armed forces for the simple reason that there has never been any directive from the Cabinet Committee on National Security (CCNS) to the Chiefs of Staff Committee or to the HQ Integrated Defence Staff to come up with a single tri-services integrated operations plan (SIOP) aimed at countering various threats, such as a two-front limited conflict. Consequently, the respective national threat assessments conducted by the Directorates of Intelligence at the three armed services HQs differ widely not only from each other, but also from those prepared by the tri-services Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) and civilian agencies like the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) and China Study Group (CSG). All this often proves disastrous because a clear and comprehensive picture never emerges and therefore all force modernisation efforts of the three armed services are geared towards combatting the threats in a piecemeal manner, as opposed to evolving a SIOP. Consequently, the Directorates of Intelligence at the three armed services HQs and the DIA have totally differing and opposing nett threat assessments, and it is this that is most often the source of inter-services turf wars and the nett result of all this is that every armed service is only bothered about its own restructuring and transformational efforts that will be almost worthless against an adversary whose armed forces have SIOPs, are far more integrated, and excel in waging fourth- and fifth-generation limited wars, whereas India’s armed forces, especially the Army, are still preparing for waging third-generation all-out conventional warfare.
For folks like me, however, who are outside and totally independent, there are no such institutional limitations like service loyalty at all costs, and therefore it is extremely easy for me to think out-of-the-box and derive a comprehensive national threat assessment that often clashes directly with those conducted in a piecemeal and uncoordinated manner at the service HQ-levels. And this is exactly what took place some three months ago, when a civilian body under the Govt of India’s executive branch came in possession of a periodic nett national security assessment that I had drafted entirely on my own, taking into account the official statements/revelations emanating from China & Pakistan (anyone routinely monitoring the TV talk shows in these two countries can also come across such inputs) and backing them up with photographic evidence, some—but not all—of which was uploaded by me at: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/02/how-china-will-fight-future-border-wars.html

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Continued from above...
It needs to be stated that I have been engaging in such self-sponsored ‘academic’ exercises for more than 15 years and I’ve never hesitated to share them with any agency—civil or military—whenever I was requested to. Now, it so happens that this particular nett periodic national security assessment of mine was reportedly at odds with that of the Directorate General of Military Intelligence (DGMI) at Army HQ. And for reasons unknown to me, DGMI, when asked by the MoD, was never able to convincingly repudiate or dispute the kind of conclusions & recommendations that I had reached/made in my nett periodic national security assessment. Consequently, as part of an effort to discredit me, Army HQ apparently decided to launch a two-phase counter-campaign by, first, initiating a vilification campaign two weeks ago (this being conducted at a closed-door forum in New Delhi by an ex-Army Brigadier who is a frequent editorial contributor to FORCE magazine) under which I was typecast as being a guy who always likes to paint the PLA as standing ten-feet tall and whose sole agenda is to demoralise the military establishment. Under phase-2, which began four days ago, it was reportedly made known to FORCE magazine that further publication of my PLA-specific editorial contributions would not be tolerated (as they’re reportedly very “damaging”).
In many ways, this reminds me of the needless and damaging fingerpointing that took place after OP Vijay in 1999 when all-out efforts were made by Army HQ at that time to vilify the then CO of 121 Brigade by claiming that the Brigadier was asking for enhanced video surveillance of his sub-sector of the LoC when he knew fully well that the Army at that time had no MALE-UAVs. Well, it so happens that while the Army indeed had no MALE-UAVs at that time, the IAF did possess a fleet of 16 Searcher Mk1s (since 1996) that could have been deployed, but this was not done, again due to inter-services rivalries.
Therefore in conclusion, this is what I have to say in jest to those trying in vain to vilify me:
“A fierce fighting cock is a cock with balls. Although I have never yet seen where the balls are, I assume they must be hidden there somewhere. If not they would not be such fierce fighters. That is why I presume the likes of you & your ilk love Hindi movies. Hindi movies always start with the baddie terrorising the entire village. Then along comes the hero who gets beaten up to the point of death as he stands up for the democratic rights and civil liberties of the entire community. He then recovers from his injuries and singlehandedly defeats the baddie and his army of 65 toughies, plus in the end he gets to marry the most beautiful girl in the village. These are movies made for your mind. The trouble is folks like you measure the size of your balls according to the size of the cock’s balls. And to qualify as a man you must have balls the size of a cock’s balls. You’re not concerned whether you have brains bigger than a cock’s brains. I really don’t know how big the cock’s balls are. But I am more concerned with saving my balls, whatever size they may be. So I use my brains, which are bigger than a cock’s brains, and not my balls to make my decisions. I am not sure what decision I would make if I use my balls to make these decisions. But by using my brains to make decisions I think I am able to make better decisions and in that same process save my balls as well. I suppose this is because I have a better brain than folks like you, who may have gone to university but yet still use their balls rather than their brains to make decisions. And since they use their balls rather than their brains to make decisions they do not always make the cleverest of decisions. This is the problem with you and your fellow-farts who suffer from the cock syndrome. You all think like cocks and use the balls in deciding things. I refuse to think like a cock so I use my brains. And that is why folks like you can never match me. You can’t come even close."

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ABS: VMT. No one’s threatened me. On the contrary, those elements within Army HQ that feel threatened by my periodic ‘academic’ nett national security assessments are only trying to vilify me, and consequently discredit my inferences and conclusions. And of course I will continue to upload my assessments and conclusions in this blog, for there’s on one capable of stopping me from doing so.

To KSK: Of what operational use is a tank gun barrel laser emitter on the battlefield? It is merely a training tool for maintaining the MBT’s crew’s tank gunnery proficiency.

To Anon@10PM: Why is Pakistan so much in demand? If you only had watched the various recent Pakistan TV talk shows, you would have realised what’s exactly happening inside that country. Firstly, Pakistan’s civilian establishment is not viewed by the military establishment as being the real stakeholders in Pakistan’s future. Secondly, the citizens of Pakistan are not counted as being the country’s nett assets by either the civilian decision-makers or the military establishment. For the latter, the only assets worth fighting for at all costs are the China-origin nuclear assets. Secondly, the US knows all about this and therefore, two years ago, decided to legally infiltrate into Pakistan up to 4,000 over-ground intelligence operatives to thoroughly seek out and localise the GPS coordinates reqd for offensive strike air taskings, that’s imperative whenever offensive air campaigns using precision-guided munitions are required to be mounted. Raymond Davis was one such operative. The US had, two years ago, prepared a list of 382 targets—including 53 in and around Islamabad—that needed decapitation via conventional air-strikes just in case Pakistan engaged in ‘strategic defiance’ of the US (like persisting with the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project) of the type witnessed in 1990 under the then Pakistan Army COAS Gen Mirza Aslam Beg. And it was the former Pakistani Ambassador to the US, Hussain Haqqani, who had issued 4,000 visas to these US over-ground intelligence operatives within 24 hours. This is the real story behind Pakistan’s so-called ‘Memogate’ affair. The rest is all ‘tamasha’ and ‘nautanki’ meant for the gullible.

To ANURAG: Of course they will be uploaded in my blog ASAP, rest assured. The reason why some elements at Army HQ are reportedly pissed off with me is because my nett national security assessment’s conclusions and recommendations are comprehensive and are geared toward the evolution of a SIOP, whereas the Army HQ’s plan-of-action calls for dealing with the projected threats in a service-specific and piecemeal manner. Bottomline: According to the Army HQ’s logic, it is not knowledge that’s power, but rather the denial of knowledge that translates into true power.

To NR@12.30AM: The LY-80E & Akash employ strikingly similar technical and operating parameters. But while the LY-80E is vertically-launched and is thus omni-directional in its post-launch trajectory, the Akash isn’t. Secondly, there’s the difference in engagement ranges: the Akash Mk1’s being 25km and the LY-80E’s being 40km.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSK: For starters, one needs to get rid of this minimalist mindset about “something’s better than nothing”. In today’s globalised existence, if one isn’t an integral part of the global supply chain, then that one becomes a nobody. Therefore, prudence demands that bold decision-making is not discarded in favour of half-measures. The restructuring one is hearing about HAL does not involve financial or corporate restructuring; rather it involves creating separate autonomous divisions like aircraft division, helicopter division, avionics & accessories division, etc. However, the need of the hour is financial and corporate autonomy and this won’t happen for as long as HAL or BEL or BEML or MDL or GRSE all remain as DPSUs.

Heberian said...

Dear Prasun-
I did hear about this directive to "Force" from some old, but still interested contacts back home, and sadly yes, it is the usual "we and only we are right" syndrome that has handicapped our services for long.
While I am not very familiar with journalism, wont it be possible for your editorials to be published by some magazine like "Outlook" etc? I know the power of the net, for I have first hand studied how the PRC goes about harnessing that power, and in a past avatar have presented that to the powers that be, back home. But I think that file must be gathering dust somewhere. The reason I ring this up is because , while the power of the internet is great, so is the tech-obsolescence level of some of our powerful babus etc. They still rely on print..

I just cannot understand the ostrich-head-in-the-sand atitude of our military leadership. Dont they see? Or dont they want to see?

Thanks for the clarification on the missiles.. I was just surprised how they look like the SM2..

On another note-- I saw some pics on other blogs of the latest Tejas LSP. Would you know why it now sports bulges where there were intakes earlier? Like the leading edge of the tail..

Thanks in advance! And please keep writing, and do try to publish part 2 and 3 somewhere in the print media if possible.

dashu said...

strange attitude from professionals especially from armed forces ...
One thing for sure they believe in denial of knowledge is the power not the knowledge is the real power...
Like some one asked above - "I just cannot understand the ostrich-head-in-the-sand atitude of our military leadership. Dont they see? Or dont they want to see? " ...

either one is dangerous .

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To HEBERIAN & DASHU: Publications like OUTLOOK or INDIA TODAY won’t have even a page to spare about developments like the LY-80E or HQ-16. In addition, such magazines have shelf-lives lasting only a week. In any case, TEMPUR magazine out of Malaysia always publishes my editorial contributions and the relevant depts of the MoD and armed services HQs in Delhi have been on TEMPUR’s e-mailing list since early 2004. They continue to receive the magazine in PDF format. Therefore, implementation by FORCE magazine of Army HQ’s alleged instructions it won’t be my loss for sure. On the contrary, it comes as a great refief to me since I will henceforth have greater discretionary time left on my hands to focus more on matters requiring greater attention. After all, managing and supervising a Rs.1,000-crore business empire based on aviation MRO activities that my longtime friends and myself have nurtured and mentored for well over a decade does require some focussed attention if one wants the existing businesses to grow and diversify.
Regarding the ostrich-head-in-the-sand atitude prevailing within the senior levels of India’s armed forces, it has more to do with survival in an environment characterised by intense institutional jealousy and rivalry that prevails in the respective corridors of power in Delhi. For instance, if an officer of the rank of Lt Gen at the fag-end of his career is confronted with uncomfortable home-truths and is unable to defend himself or his actions, he then has two options: either own up and take an ethically righteous approach but at the same time brace for the consequences that may follow; or decide to deliberately gloss over his deficiencies by engaging in a cover-up and finding fall-guys. Regretably, in most cases the latter option is the preferred one, since the concerned Lt Gen or even a General is most interested in maintaining his high-end lifestyle after he retires (imagine him a day after his retirement without his chauffeur-driven staff car, no orderlies, no salutes or adulation, no back-patting, no more socialising in the party circuits either in the metropolis or cantonments, etc) & in order to achieve this he needs to stay in the good books of the civilian decision-makers at the MoD, who are the ultimate arbiters in matters like appointing a senior military officer as either a Governor of s state, or an Ambassador or High Commissioner overseas, or making them appointed Direct ors at MoD-owned DPSUs for the next three to six years. Consequently, in light of all such imperatives, any Delhi-based or Gurgaon-based or NOIDA-/Greater NOIDA-based three-star or four-star armed forces officer is today prepared to make any kind of sacrifices or compromises that will ensure his lavish if not pompous post-retirement lifestyle. I have seen it all first-hand over the past 23 years both within India as well as abroad whenever I’ve come across such officials travelling on all-expenses paid junkets. On the other hand, the top-level civilian bureaucrats I’ve interacted with over the years are far more sober and down-to-earth.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To HEBERIAN: Regarding the LY-80E MR-SAM missile, it is in reality a souped-up and re-engineered 40km-range 9M317M missile originally developed by Russia and which forms part of the naval Shtil-1 air-defence system and the land-mobile Buk-M1 MR-SAM.
Regarding the Tejas LSP-7, the following airframe modifications are visually notable:
1) The redesigned nose section, especially the all-composite radome housing the EL/M-2032 multi-mode radar.
2) Absence of the auxiliary air-intakes both in the air-intake section & in the aft section at the base of the vertical stabiliser, this being so because the flight-test monitoring equipment was earlier housed in the aft avionics bay and was not part of the Honeywell-built closed-loop environmental control system (ECS) and therefore reqd cooling from external sources. Now that the relevant mission avionics are on board the LSP-7, they are now all covered by the cryogenic cooling channels of the ECS. Hence one sees the re-engineered aft-end of LSP-7, which now houses the BEL-built internal pulse/continuous-wave self-protection jammer. However, the sensors of the MILDS AR-60V2 missile approach warning system have not yet been installed.
3) Also note that the SAGEM-built Sigma-95N ring laser gyro-based inertial navigation system (RLG-INS) used to be located directly behind the pilot ejection seat’s headrest. This too has now been relocated to an unexposed internal avionics bay aft of the cockpit section that comes under the umbrella of the closed-loop ECS.
4) HF radio comms antennae have yet to be installed. Presently, only VHF & UHF radios are on-board.
5) Twin BDL-built countermeasures dispensers have been installed at the aft wing-root sections.

Heberian said...

Hello Prasun-
Thank you for replying. I understand what you say, but cant help wish things were not so selfishness driven among most of the senior officer corps. Oh well. As for Outlook and such, I see your point.

Thanks for the clarifications about the latest Tejas LSP. I wondered specifically because the bulge at the base of the vertical stabilizer looked like "jugad" rather than aerodynamics driven.

If you dont mind, one silly question... whereabouts in KL is TEMPUR regularly available? I have not noticed it at the MPHs or Borders whenever I am in KL.. so I will be thankful to know where one can get hold of copies.. When in KL, my haunts are Bangsar and the the packed mid-valley malls for meeting folks.

Many thanks again!

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
in case of war on both front will india be able to counter it?

what is your view about USA helping india in case of such a war?

Is Russia tilting more to China than India??

what should be india's counter measure in case Russia selling SU-35 to china, which they will copy and pakistan will also get the same.

Hope you reply.

Thanks.

F said...

Prasun,

On current generation sub designs, when the torpedo tube doors are opened, do they still generate a lot of noise?

In your opinion, did Malaysia make the right choice in choosing the Scorpene, or should it have gone for a much larger sub with more endurance and range to enable it to deploy in the South China Sea and Sulu Sea for much longer without the need to head home for refueling ?

Is it true that the RMN originally wanted the Type 214 but got the Scorpene due to a political decision?

Did you not find it strange that in the documentary I posted, the RMN Scorpene crews are all wearing anti-flash hoods? I've never seen sub crews wearing anti-flash hoods before- only crews on surface ships!

Apart from the price consideration and political factors, why would a foreign customer decide to go for the LY-80E rather than Aster 15 or 30?

Heberian,

The 2 bookstores at Lucky Gardens [near Bangsar], next to the wet market, regularly have Tempur. For some reason, Perjurit is much easier to get than Tempur. In the late 1980's, you could even get Naval Forces, Military Technology and Asian Defence Journal in bookstores!

H said...

hi sir !! according to recent article our Nirbhay missile will use Propfan engine ....is it able to desire result for cruise ....and is it will be Superior to Babur.??

Heberian said...

@ F (Faris?)-
Thank you very much, sir!

I am familiar with Lucky Gardens and the wet market as well, but have never thought to check out the book stores there. That will be remedied in a few days :)

Sadly, my BM is not as good as my putonghua... but am working on it :) else I would have picked up some other interesting looking publications I have seen, especially in the nice used magazines/books place at the Curve and in Amcorp mall.

Once again, thank you!

Anonymous said...

indian made UBGL entered into service of not?if yes how many

Anurag said...

@Prasun Da,
VMT for such a detailed reply.By the way,if the MoD and DRDO guys are having same views of you;then can't they convince (if not force) the army to rethink about its future warfare tactics??

And are you gonna send those two remaining parts to MoD??

And lastly,don't you think that DRDO should make a slightly longer range version (say 250 km) of Prahar NLOS BSM system to engage PLA logistical hubs??

Eagerly hoping to see your reply.
THANX.. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .

Anonymous said...

Hey Prasun,

Can we expect the testing of Akash mk2 and Pinaka mk2 this year ?? How is Akash mk2 in comparison to LY-80E MRSAM (since mk2's range will also be close to its Chinese counterpart) ?

According to MOD, armed forces should priorities their requirements and make purchases accordingly. Whats the priority deals for IAF, IN and especially Indian Army ?? Is the procurement of those equipments for Future Indian Soldier from US OEMs like Raytheon & General Dynamics and new assault rifles, BP jacket and helmet, a priority ????

According to reports the radar on tejas isn't exactly EL/M-2032 MMR but a hybrid of Indian and Israeli work. What are the key differences ? Is that DRDO/Cassidian built EW system on-borad LSP-7 ?

I heard Prahaar missile range can be increased to 250 km, is it true ?

Also there's alot of confusion about turboprop/turbofan engine on Nirbhay. Well it will be resolved during Defexpo. Both Russia and US has worked on similar projects in the past. Now suppose if DRDO is using tuboprop then what will be the cruise speed of this missile ? Also if its a loitering missile, how long it can stay in the air (whats the loitering time)??

You said civilian leadership in MOD is considering your reports about on China like NLOS-BSMs and military establishment does not like it. I just wanna know, are we now expecting huge orders for Prahaar and Pinaka, considering final decision is made by civilian leadership ?

Why Indian Army issued RFP for MRSAM last year ?? Is the IA version of IAI/DRDO MRSAM got delayed ? If not then when all the three versions of Brarak-NG (for IA, IAF, IN) are entering the service ?

Also Whats going on with SHORAD and VSHORAD ? When can we expect these deals to get signed and who is the favorite ? SAAB is offering RBS 70 NG, is IA gonna purchase it considering its also been used by Pakistani forces ?

Thanx in advance...

Anonymous said...

Also you said MDL and HSL will be building 4 P75I SSK and 2 by OEM, will it be 2 each by MDL and HSL ???
Also is HSL setting up a new line for SSK or this P75I is gonna effect SSBN production line ?? How many submarine HSL gonna build at a time ?? Also i hear MDL has built the second production line for SSK to beef up the production by acquiring some nearby yard, is it true ?? So how many SSK MDL can now build at a time ?? When is the work on SSN/SSGN will start ?? Will there be new production line for SSN or India will stop making SSBN when they will make SSN because other countries will not stop ??

I hear this year finally we are going to sign Kaveri K-10 deal with Snecma. I hear we are getting what we want from this deal after 2 years of negotiations and this engine will incorporate 5th generation technologies ?? Will it be fuel efficient ?? Is it power be higher than GE414IN, if not then why would India replace this engine with Kaveri ? Will technology wise Kaveri will be superior to GE414IN or power of Kaveri will be more than GE414 ?? Whats going on with AESA project and IMRH helicopter project ?? They were also similar project like Kaveri, i mean DRDO was looking for a foreign vendor hear too to fill the gap. When are we expecting these deals to be signed and with whom ? Is there even a negotiation going on or not ?? Is this aesa gonna be suitable for a 5th gen fighter jet or not ??? Is AMCA gonna have a chin mounted concealed EOTS or nose mounted IRST like on PakFA

PakFa/FGFA has many flaws and it is far behind F22, F35 and J20. This is according to various forums on the web. What major changes that we are expecting in future PakFa prototypes ?? When is the first FGFA flying ?? Is it a twin seater or single seater ? If its a twin seater then why India is making FGFA when we are going to purchase only 50 twin seater ? How is the increase in RCS going to be countered in twin seater version of PakFa ? India is going to spend around 5 billion $ on FGFA project, where exactly this money is going to be spend ? How much of this 5 billion $ going to stay in India ?Is DRDO/Cassidian built EW system and Samtel/Thales built TopSight HMDS, good enough to go on India's 5th gen fighter jets like FGFA and AMCA ? If not then are there projects to make new generation EWS and HMDS ? IS FGFA going to have similar cockpit as AMCA because in AMCA's cockpit alot of ambitious equipments are going in ?

Anonymous said...

Prasun,
do u know the operational specifications of the Torpedo Advanced Light
Varunastra torpedo
Thakshak torpedo

developed by the nstl

how many of each are with the navy?

F said...

Heberian,

The best place in the whole country to get military books is the Kinokuniya bookstore at KLCC. Borders used to have a good selection but not anymore. The bookstore at Amcorp has mostly general military stuff but the prices are good and occasionally you'll be surprised at what you can get there..

Anonymous said...

http://www.defenceaviation.com/2012/02/shenyang-j-16-silent-flanker-chinese-intermediate-stealth-fighter.html

Are they going the Super Sukhoi way?????
Will Super Sukhoi carry weapons internally??

SOUVIK said...

Hey Sir,in present situation can the Indian military defend this country against a hypothetical attack by PRC given Pakistan hasn't opened up the western front?

And what do you think about the standard issue INSAS assault rifle of IA??Can it be compared with M 16A4 or IMI Tavor TAR21 solely interms of accuracy and maximum effective range (as all the three are chambered for 5.56X45mm NATO ammo and have and have long barrels)?

Suppose you are told to give score to DRDO based on its performance-how much you will give them out of 100?

And lastly,how does the Patkas fare against Chinese ballistic helmets?

Thank you sir.

Anonymous said...

Hi, Prasun u have done a wonderful job and also a grey service to the nation. U have opened the eyes of the MoD towards the IA's operational requirements. U must make them understand that there is an urgent need of fielding a cruise missile defence network. The MoD should order far greater nos of the Barak 2 and the LRSAM, a quick reaction point defence SAM system should be purchased to protect supply depots , armored formations , airfields from concentrated air launched extended range PGMs. Such system should essentially be a combined gun missile system. They should be employed in the western airbases to potent then from PAF H-4/2 glide bombs and they should also be fielded around radar sites to protect them from anti radiation missile attacks? Are any such systems to be purchased? Whats the status of the Maitri Sam? The Brahmos is a very high speed missile. If it is to be used as a LACM as it is being done its seeker should be able to find targets on dense clutter environment, it should be able to fly in close proximity to geographical features. If it has such speed how will it be able to maneuver around obstacles. Such a high speed missile will not have much maneuverability with such small control surfaces? Then hoe can it work as a LACM? Also the Brahmos can be modified into a ABM and replace the Prithvi Ad missile. reply.

a said...

Is BrahMos too expensive for what it does. Spending $3 million to deliver a 200 kg warhead seems excessive when there are so many other cheaper alternatives available.

Though in anti-ship role it is valuable.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Heberian: I believe FARIS has already answered your queries.

To FARIS: Yes they do, loud enough to be detected by the targetted submarine’s sonar suite. For the RMN the Scorpene was an ideal choice compared to the Class 214 from TKMS/HDW, since the RMN did not want to blindly go for AIP-powered SSKs without first mastering the basics of submarine warfare & ASW. Even a larger SSK with greater underwater endurance has to return back to its shore base within 44 days to stock-up on perishables and a crew complement change and the same applies to SSKs like the Scorpene as well. Anti-flash goods are always worn by those members of the SSK crew that are manning the vessel’s combat management system. As for the Aster 15/30, they were designed from the outset to counter primary threats like TBMs and ASCMs, whereas the LY-80E is optimised as an anti-aircraft air-defence MR-SAM for the time-being. It may well be upgraded n future and be co-deployed along with the HQ-16 LR-SAM.

To Anurag: Regretably, the civilian decision-makers at both the MoD & Parliament have unable thus far to have any meaningful debate on nett national security threat assessments and it is for this reason that there is widespread ignorance of developments in such areas, and about what’s happening elsewhere in the world. Consequently, the MoD is often unable to take crucial policy-level decisions, like for instance mandating that all attack helicopters be owned and operated by the Indian Army. Instead, the MoD shies away from such decision-making and passes the buck to the individual armed services and asks them to resolve their turf-wars internally, which of course is something that will never happen. The two remaining parts of my nett national threat assessment have already been received by the MoD. The Prahaar’s R & D path is evolutionary, meaning there will be range increases in the years to come.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.25PM:
“Can we expect the testing of Akash mk2 and Pinaka mk2 this year?”
Not this year, but by next year.
“How is Akash mk2 in comparison to LY-80E MRSAM (since mk2's range will also be close to its Chinese counterpart)?”
The only advantage of the LY-80E is that it is vertically-launched and therefore its reaction time is quicker.
“According to MOD, armed forces should priorities their requirements and make purchases accordingly. Whats the priority deals for IAF, IN and especially Indian Army? Is the procurement of those equipments for Future Indian Soldier from US OEMs like Raytheon & General Dynamics and new assault rifles, BP jacket and helmet, a priority?”
No idea. All this will emerge only by June.
“According to reports the radar on tejas isn't exactly EL/M-2032 MMR but a hybrid of Indian and Israeli work. What are the key differences ? Is that DRDO/Cassidian built EW system on-borad LSP-7?”
There’s no hybrid MMR under development. The CEMILAC posters displayed at Aero India 2011 clearly mention the EL/M-2032 on the Tejas Mk1.
“I heard Prahaar missile range can be increased to 250km, is it true?” YES, WHY NOT?
“Also there's alot of confusion about turboprop/turbofan engine on Nirbhay. Well it will be resolved during Defexpo. Both Russia and US has worked on similar projects in the past. Now suppose if DRDO is using tuboprop then what will be the cruise speed of this missile ? Also if its a loitering missile, how long it can stay in the air (whats the loitering time)?”
Firstly, show me one loitering cruise missile powered by turboprops. Is there any available today? Also, the CEMILAC posters displayed at Aero India 2011 make NO mention of either propfans, or ducted fans, or turboprops or even turbofans being developed by DRDO. The only four engine programmes that involve the CEMILAC & DRDO are the PTAE-7 turbojet, Kaveri, AL-55I & Shakti/Ardiden-1H.
“You said civilian leadership in MOD is considering your reports about on China like NLOS-BSMs and military establishment does not like it. I just wanna know, are we now expecting huge orders for Prahaar and Pinaka, considering final decision is made by civilian leadership?”
What I said was the MoD has pitted my nett national security appreciation with that prepared by the DGMI at Army HQ. Both appreciations have divergent conclusions and my assessment recommends the accelerated development both the Prahaar NLOS-BSM & a limited BMD network using the AAD-1/2 interceptors. The Prahaar ought to be ordered in large numbers (at least 2,000 rounds) by the Army, while the IAF ought to go for at least 400 road-mobile cannisterised Shaurya TBMs. As far as MBRLs go, the Army will have to get something superior to the 90km Smerch-M, since China’s and Pakistan’s 300mm MBRLs can even now go out to 120km.
“Why Indian Army issued RFP for MR-SAM last year? Is the IA version of IAI/DRDO MR-SAM got delayed? If not then when all the three versions of Brarak-NG (for IA, IAF, IN) are entering the service?”
This is happening because the HQ Integrated Defence Staff has FAILED to convince the Army to opt for the Barak-2 MR-SAM, when logic demands that all three armed services ought to procure a common MR-SAM that will be produced in-country.
“Also Whats going on with SHORAD and VSHORAD ? When can we expect these deals to get signed and who is the favorite? SAAB is offering RBS 70 NG, is IA gonna purchase it considering its also been used by Pakistani forces?”
SHORADS will be the SpyDer-SR for both the Army & IAF, while the VSHORADS for all three armed services will most likely be the Mistral from MBDA.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.53PM:
“Also you said MDL and HSL will be building 4 P75I SSK and 2 by OEM, will it be 2 each by MDL and HSL?”
I never said any such thing about the project 75I SSKs.
“Also is HSL setting up a new line for SSK or this P75I is gonna effect SSBN production line? How many submarine HSL gonna build at a time?”
HSL is not setting up any SSK production line. HSL will only take part in the construction of two of the four LPHs.
“Also i hear MDL has built the second production line for SSK to beef up the production by acquiring some nearby yard, is it true? So how many SSK MDL can now build at a time?”
Read this: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2011_10_01_archive.html
“When is the work on SSN/SSGN will start? Will there be new production line for SSN or India will stop making SSBN when they will make SSN because other countries will not stop?”
Fabrication of SSGNs can always proceed at the same facility that is building SSBN sections. Final assembly lines will be different, with the SBC handling the SSBNs and HSL & L & T handling the SSGN’s final assembly.
“I hear this year finally we are going to sign Kaveri K-10 deal with Snecma. I hear we are getting what we want from this deal after 2 years of negotiations and this engine will incorporate 5th generation technologies. Will it be fuel efficient? Is it power be higher than GE414IN, if not then why would India replace this engine with Kaveri? Will technology wise Kaveri will be superior to GE414IN or power of Kaveri will be more than GE414?”
Have you ever come across a turbofan incorporating 5th generation technologies that is a fuel guzzler??? K-10’s thrust rating will be the same as the F414 but it will have growth potential. The K-10 will not be developed for fifth-generation MRCAs, but for the Tejas Mk2. No one has decided as yet what kind of turbofan will go on the AMCA.
“What’s going on with AESA project and IMRH helicopter project? They were also similar project like Kaveri, i mean DRDO was looking for a foreign vendor hear too to fill the gap. When are we expecting these deals to be signed and with whom? Is there even a negotiation going on or not? Is this aesa gonna be suitable for a 5th gen fighter jet or not? Is AMCA gonna have a chin mounted concealed EOTS or nose mounted IRST like on PakFA”
AESA-MMR project will not take off unless the DRDO first succeeds in developing an environment control system (ECS) for all airborne mission avionics suites. And both the IMRH & HJT-36 IJT projectd are DEAD DUCKS.
“PakFa/FGFA has many flaws and it is far behind F22, F35 and J20. This is according to various forums on the web.”
Really? And are any of these commentators connected in any way with the Sukhoi OKB? Have they received any special briefings on the PAK-FA or J-20 from Sukhoi OKB or Chengdu Aircraft Corp?
“What major changes that we are expecting in future PakFa prototypes?”
There won’t be any major changes. Why should there be?
“When is the first FGFA flying? Is it a twin seater or single seater?”
First FGFA will fly by 2016. It will be a single-seater.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.03PM: The Light Weight Torpedo (TAL) has been indigenously developed by the National Science and Technology Laboratory (NSTL), Visakhapatnam. It is an electrically propelled, self-homing torpedo which can be launched both from ships and helicopters. It can hunt submarines with a speed of 33 Knots with endurance of six minutes in shallow and deep waters. The TAL weighs around 220kg. BDL is manufacturing 25 such torpedoes at its Visakhapatnam Unit. The wire-guided and ship-launched Varunastra torpedo is equipped with a high-speed electric propulsion with powerful manoeuvring abilities and a low-drift navigational system. It has acoustic homing with wide-look angle, autonomous guidance, durable recovery aids and lethal warheads. Carrying a high-energy explosive warhead weighing 200kg, the 7.6-metre long Varunastra can hit a hostile target within a range of 30km. It is estimated to have a weight of 1,500kg. The Takshak has two versions, a submarine-launched variant with wire-guidance and an aircraft-launched one with autonomous guidance.
Brochures of all DRDO-developed torpedoes are available at:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56066692/Indian-Indigenous-Underwater-Weapon-Systems-by-DRDO

Anonymous said...

http://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-j-20-mighty-dragon-fighter-jet-2012-3?utm_source=mostread&utm_medium=rightrail&utm_term=&utm_content=2&utm_campaign=recirc#the-j-20-climbed-the-sky-to-demonstrate-its-maneuverability-3


J20 seems impressive

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.08PM: That is needless propaganda and disinformation. No need to worry about it.

To SOUVIK:
“In present situation can the Indian military defend this country against a hypothetical attack by PRC given Pakistan hasn't opened up the western front?”
Of course it can to a certain extent, given the fact that China has repeatedly stated that it does not envisage all-out conventional wars in future, but instead is planning and equipping for only limited high-intensity border wars, or local wars. What this means is that the PLA will not go to war for the sake of capturing chunks of enemy territory, but will instead focus heavily on punitive strikes & assaults aimed at only destroying the enemy’s war-waging capabilities at the theatre-level. For India, the way to counter the PLA’s offensive might is therefore to first conceptualise & articulate a limited warfighting doctrine (even for a two-front scenario, although I very much doubt the Pakistan Army’s ability to go on the offensive against India for at least the next seven years), followed by acquiring force multipliers like SAR-equipped overhead recce satellites, missile early warning satellites, land-mobile cannisterised NLOS-BSMs and TBMs like Prahaar, BrahMos Block 3 & Shaurya. Only then will India have a credible conventional deterrent in place, especially against China.
“And what do you think about the standard issue INSAS assault rifle of IA??Can it be compared with M 16A4 or IMI Tavor TAR21 solely in terms of accuracy and maximum effective range (as all the three are chambered for 5.56 x 45mm NATO ammo and have and have long barrels)?”
Yes, the INSAS does compare very favourably, since now it is being offered with a range of new-generation aiming sights & UBGLs.
“Suppose you are told to give score to DRDO based on its performance-how much you will give them out of 100?”
I would give the DRDO an 80. The problem was never with the DRDO, but with the unavailability of a supporting military-industrial infrastructure (both govt-owned and private-sector) capable of producing innovative & high-quality production-engineering solutions, and most importantly, the unavailability of a an optimum decision-making machinery at the apex levels of the MoD, meaning armed services specialists, DRDO technocrats & civil servants sitting together as a team to first identify the kind of warfighting capabilities required, and then unitedly devising the procurement wishlists and related GSQRs, ASQRs & NSQRs and concurrently drawing up an industrial roadmap aimed at nurturing & mentoring the various industrial skills & expertise reqd for product development. Had this been done since the 1960s (as the South Koreans, Japanese & Chinese did), then things would have been totally different today.
“And lastly,how does the Patkas fare against Chinese ballistic helmets?”
Patkas are primarily meant for protection against small arms fire and shrapnel from grenades, whereas helmets are reqd to ALSO offer protection from shrapnel and blast effects emanating from heavy field artillery rounds, MBRL rockets & mortar rounds. Therefore, Patkas can never be compared with ballistic helmets.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.18PM: The BrahMos was never designed as terrain-hugging weapon and therefore its typical cruise altitude is 13km. It is therefore best employed against static ground targets (like strategic military-industrial installations and rail transportation hubs) as a top-attack PGM. It is not necessary for a cruise missile to always be a terrain-hugging system. Terrain-hugging cruise missiles are reqd only for attacking those targets that are heavily defended, like air bases, naval harbours, field HQs and national command HQs. In India’s case the SpyDer-SR is being deployed for land-based air-defence against cruise missiles like the Babur & Ra’ad, and also against gliding PGMs like H-2/H-4.

Anonymous said...

" Final assembly lines will be different, with the SBC handling the SSBNs and HSL & L & T handling the SSGN’s final assembly. "
What is SBC ????

So MDL is gonna make SSK. Thats sad for Indian Navy. P75I will start only by the end of this decade and by that time apart from a couple of old submarines only Scorpenes will be left. It looks like Indian Navy's underwater strength is on the verge of finishing. What have we gained from the ToT of P75I ? Is GOI setting up facilities which will help us design future submarine within the country or we are just gonna spend taxpayers money in the name of ToT without learning anything ?

SOUVIK said...

Hey Sir,khub khub dhanyabaad.Apni e sera,chalie jan guru.
Good to see 80% for DRDO from someone knoledgable like you
By the way,I was trying to compare the Patkas and ballistic helmets w.r.t their ability to stop small arm bullets.I have heard that U.S PASGT helmets and British Mk5 helmets were unable to stop AK 47 rounds in Afghanistan where as Patkas were reportedly able to stop 7.62X39mm AK rounds from just 10 meter and 7.62X51mm NATO rounds from 40 meter as per the manufacturer!!Is that true?If so,won't it be safe to say Patkas provide superior protection against small arm fire as compared to other ballistic helmets?

By the way,do you have any info about the existance of some ULF sonar development by PRC?Some chinese forumer was bragging about it in a pakistani forum.

Why is IA so much dissatisfied with the INSAS assault rifles as reported by our media multiple times?

And lastly,I heard some where (can't remember the source) that before Kargil conflict,the head quarters of PA Northern light infantry was destructed in detail by IA artillery bombardment-is that true?Can you please clarify it (if it's true)?

DHANYABAD.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.19AM: SBC is the Vizag-based Ship Building Centre, where the Arihant-class SSBNs are being assembled. By 2020 six Scorpenes, four Class 209/Type 1500 SSKs, about two Type 877EKM SSKs plus the three Arihant-class SSBNs (S-2, S-3 & S-4) will be in service. Three more Scorpenes are likely to be ordered in future. Therefore, the undersea warfare capabilities will remain robust. Setting up facilities for designing future submarines is very easy and can be done in two years. The most difficult part, which takes almost a decade to set up, is a team of trained naval architects specialising in submarine design.

To SOUVIK: “Won't it be safe to say Patkas provide superior protection against small arm fire as compared to other ballistic helmets?” ABSOLUTELY.
“By the way, do you have any info about the existance of some ULF sonar development by PRC?” THEY ARE still developing it and they will take at least another five years before all R & D is completed.
“Why is IA so much dissatisfied with the INSAS assault rifles as reported by our media multiple times?” I HAVEN’t come across anyone from any of the three armed services who us dissatisfied with these rifles..
“And lastly, I heard some where (can't remember the source) that before Kargil conflict,the head quarters of PA Northern light infantry was destructed in detail by IA artillery bombardment-is that true? Can you please clarify it (if it's true)?” Definitely not true. NLI HQ was way beyond reach of Indian artillery. Only repeated airstrikes could have destroyed the HQ. But since IAF combat aircraft did not venture beyond the LoC, no such HQ was destroyed or even attacked.

Anonymous said...

you said Spyder being deployed by india,considering pakistan's and china cruise missile arsenal is it enough 18 firing unit of spyder?how much india needed

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon^^^: 18 was just the initial consignment. More have been ordered since 2010.

LT said...

Thank you Prasun! Yes, FARIS did clarify. And it is very helpful. I will soon be reading TEMPUR.

@ FARIS - For some reason, I never did venture into Kinokuniya. But I will make it a point to do so. Many thanks, once again.