Total Pageviews

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

PNS Azmat FAC-M’s Sea Trials To Get Underway

It may be recalled that the Pakistan Navy’s (PN) Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Muhammad Asif Sandila, was on April 23, 2012 the chief guest at the commissioning ceremony of PNS Azmat, Pakistan’s first fast attack craft (missile) at the Xinggang Shipyard in Tianjin, China. Admiral Sandila said that the contract for acquiring FAC-Ms included the construction of a second FAC-M in Pakistan by the end of 2012 by Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works (KSEW). It may be recalled that the PN’s then Chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Noman Bashir was the Chief Guest on September 20, 2011 at the launching ceremony of PNS Azmat at Xingang Shipyard. Each FAC-M, displacing 260 tonnes and armed with eight C-802 anti-ship cruise missiles, is manned by a crew complement of 20. It was in late February 2010 that the PN had issued a restricted tender to the state-owned China Shipbuilding & Offshore International Company Ltd (CSOC) for the procurement of two FAC-Ms that would each have a length of 60 metres, radius of action equal to or greater than 500 nautical miles, maximum speed of 30 Knots, and be equipped with a surface/air search radar, optronic fire-control director, twin 25mm machine guns, a 30mm machine gun, and countermeasures dispensers.


In December 2010, Xinggang Shipyard was selected to fabricate the two FAC-Ms. Keel-laying of PNS Azmat, costing some US$50 million, took place on March 1, 2011. Its harbour trials commenced in October last year. The second FAC-M is now being fabricated under licence at KSEW.


51 comments:

ARAK said...

@Anurag,

Dansum - Saltoro - Siachen detail from another blog.

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
You told that IA should have
captured the Dansum instead of
Saltoro ridge-can you PLEASE tell
me what advantage Dansum can
provide over Saltoro ridge??And
who controls the Dansum at
present??
And what should Indian Army now
do to secure the Siachen against
a possible scenario you
mentioned above??
2.Why did Mr Saraswat tell that
Indian BMD can protect 'two'
cities??Does that mean DRDO has
got only the two Green Pine
radars and the Sword Fish is not
ready yet??!!
3.What's the status of the 1600
km range Sword Fish Mk2??Is it
still under development??
4.Any update on the PDV??
5.Has the Shaurya been entered
mass production yet??Looking
at the PLA's vast arsenal of solid
fueled MRBMs,don't you think IA
should order atleast 1000
conventionally armed Shaurya
and Agni 1 missiles instead of
procuring more and more
Brahmos missiles??
6.Is there any chance that
Shaurya may get a combination
of GLONASS and the DRDO
developed minaturised SAR
seeker in addition to the RLG-
INS??
7.Has the IA ordered the Prahar
NLOS-BSM yet??
8.There are multiple reports that
IA is short of ballistic helmets
and body armors-then why can't
they procure more Patkas and
the level IIIA ballistic vests
produced by Tata??What's
stopping them as per you??
9.Has the Varunastra wire guided
torpedo and Takshak thermal
torpedo entered service yet or
still under trial??
10.And lastly,what happened to
the proposed 3rd part on PLA's
war preparedness in which you
was to provide IA's possible
options and strategies to
counter PLA's efforts??
PLEASE try to reply.
THANX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

dashu said...

I went through the 1st report and come to conclusion that IA in a desperate situation and understood your point . Our only hope is IAF . But what is the way out of this ? I assume IA is correct in full fledged war preparation, which u r complaining . By doing a full fledged war IA may rectify its mistake and capture the Dansum . I sincerely want to know your suggestion what is the way out of this mess .of course war is one of those options but I want a solution without a war

dashu said...

am just curious are we gonna loose J&K ????

bradshaw said...

Hi Prasun,

PN is heavily investing in cheaper platforms like fast attack crafts which are small and very inexpensive to operate but at the same time can take out heavier and very costly IN frigates and destroyers..... what plans In have to deal with these new mini suicidal boats of PN ??

Also PN is using the chinese C-802 missiles and offcourse has the harpoon's but bot are having the range of under 200Kms. On the other hand the In has standard brahmos on most of its frontline warships with a 300 Kms range. Dont you think that in any case the IN will have the first hit and PN acquiring the Harpoons, C-802 or even the exocets is sheer stupidity unless they go for something beyond 300 Kms like the c-803's ??

Anonymous said...

Prasun with reference to your previous reply. Doesn't IA have any reinforced bunkers in Siachen. If not can IA construct few using some modular construction.I understand constructing such structures on ice won't be easy.

I don't know the merits of stationing IA in Siachen, If the IA stationed troops can be that easily taken over by MBRL/NLOS rockets followed by Heli borne troops,can't the IA have countermeasures for scenario you mentioned. Can't we station MBRL or NLOS from our side ? If not on Siachen atleast some place close by within coverage area. Even if they did take over the point IAF can bomb them out the same way they did.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun, regarding the purchase of R-27TE1 Alamo from Artem Jsc, i want to know the following : 
1. U said nowadays with the advent of aesa based RF jammers distributed throughout the airframe and aesa MMR the survivability in Bvr combat has increased a lot. Can the RBE2 & MIRES aesa be used for directional jamming of hostile survellience, engagement and tracking radars and also the active and semiactive seekers and datalinks . 
2. Why are such aesa based systems not being fitted on the Mig-27 & Jaguar Is,Im acs when the rest of the fleet are nt being fitted with it.
3. Why is nt enough attention being paid to protecting the ac from IR based threats. Flares are unable to jam and saturate the seeker of 2nd & 3rd gen IR missiles like Stinger having both Ir and uv filters. Also all modern Ir missiles have IIR seekers which are very difficult to jam , saturate with flares and can only be effectively countered by destroying the seeker with the laser of DIRCM. Also all such missiles have high ICCM. How can flares counter them. And if flares r so effective then why there was such losses during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Why isnt the DIRCM being fitted on fighter jets for guranteed protectn ? 
4. Most modern active active AA missiles like the AIM-120 & R-77 have lock on jam mode. When it senses it is being jammed, it lockson to the jamming source and home in on it. How will SPECTRA and Virgilius counter that? 
5. And how many R-27 Alamos are we purchasing for replacing a previous batch. Has the previous batch of missiles been relifed.
Pls try to ans.

Anonymous said...

Hi,India is raising an offensive Corps and taking other steps to gear up its preparedness along China border to meet the challenges, Defence Minister AK Antony said as he pitched for a substantial hike in defence budget.
Will this Offensive corps be China centric and based in the NE. Will it have armour and artillery component besides infantry? When will this corps be raised? Also AK Antony said, "Now we have given a new directive to our armed forces to meet the new challenges in context of the new threat perception faced by the country".. What is this new directive all about? Has the MoD at last got the real threat perception emanating from China and Pakistan? Does the IAF& Navy fit in this expansion plan? Can we expect the IAF to order more fighter jets and increase the no of fighter squadrons as well as enhance it's offensive capabilities ? Wil the Navy place orders for more destroyers and place emphasis on having a fleet of SSNs?

KSingh said...

Prasun, I was wondering if you could provide the exact status and likely time of signing for a few pending defence deals regarding India:
-Follow-on order of 6 C-130J-30s
-Follow-on order of P-8I
-Follow-on order of 2/3 Phalcon AWACS
-IAF AAR platform(A330 MRTT)
-IAF heavy attack helo (Apache)
-IAF heavy lift helo (Chinook)
-M-777 ULH
-MMRCA for IAF
-C-27J for IAF
-22 BAE HAWKs for IAF's SURYA KIRAN
-IAF/IA LOH/LUH (Fennec)
-IN FCS (for MARCOs initially)
-LPD/LHD for IN
-N-MMRCA for IN
-MRPA for IN
-Amphibious SAR/transport place for IN
-Shore-based AWACS for IN
-FireScout for IN
-RQ-4C Global Hawk for IN
-C-27J for BSF
-C-130J for ICG
-C-130J for Met dept


Again when can we expect these deals to be signed- especially the ULH,LOH/LUH, APACHE and Chinook?


Thanks a bunch freind.

KSingh said...

+ Prasun there are reports the IN are looking for thier own AAR platform. Is there any truth to this? And is so will they just go for a few extra of whatever the IAF selects (ie A330 MRTT)? Or will they get a complelty different platform like the KC-130J? And how many are they likely to go for?

Souvik said...

Hey Prasun sir,do you think that the new Barak NG would be able to counter super sonic/high subsonic sea skimming anti ship missiles?

Why after so many years DRDO couldn't develop an ultra low frequency sonar?I mean how difficult it is to build an ULF sonar than a low frequency sonar-they just need to change the frequency of the transmitters,right?Or am I missing something?

Any update on the GPS guided submunitions for Pinaka?
Hope you can reply to my queries.Thank you.

Kunal said...

At first I would like to tell you sir that I'm a big fan of your blog but what I like most is the COMENT section of your blog which is a thousand light years apart from other blogs.

m.economictimes.com/news/politics/nation/antony-to-seek-hike-in-defence-outlay-to-counter-twin-threats-from-pakistan-china/articleshow/13061033.cms

What do you think about this sir?Do you think that Mr Pranab idiot Mukherjee will pass this budget hike?

By the way,can you give a rough idea about the numbers of Pinaka MBRLs currently in service with Indian Army?And is there any news if IA would induct more Pinaka MBRLs in future or not?
Hope to see your reply Sir.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anurag: As ARAK above had stated, the answers to your query on Siachen can be found at:
http://forcenewsmagazine.blogspot.in/2012/05/can-siachen-spring-next-surprise.html
http://forcenewsmagazine.blogspot.in/2012/05/siachen-does-not-have-any-strategic.html
http://forcenewsmagazine.blogspot.in/2012/05/hoon-talk-how-siachen-warwas-ill.html
These 3 articles, which had first appeared in the December 2004 issue of FORCE magazine, have since been updated. It is a sheer waste of money to secure this area militarily. The only pragmatic solution lies in jointly demilitarising the area along with Pakistan and & along with China declaring these glaciated regions as a permanent environmental preserve guaranteed by international law, i.e. like the Arctic Circle & Antarctica. It is time both India & Pakistan undertook such an exercise in a joint, objective & mutually beneficial manner. The fact that China too is probably willing to pitch in is indicated by China’s desire to host similar weather observation stations in Aksai Chin. This could therefore well develop into a historic opportunity in terms of both conflict resolution & permanent border demarcation by all three countries. All other arguments that one is witnessing from the likes of some former Indian foreign service officials & retired military officials is absolute TRASH, probably because they’ve yet to overcome the hangovers of partition. Obviously they’re on the wrong side of history & their only agenda—according to me—is to continue spreading disinformation & lies to the citizens of India for their own nefarious reasons (for one, if peace reigns, then they won’t be invited to the TV talk shows & seminars, and thus lose their consultant fees, perks & allowances & free junkets!). Regarding BMD, how can it protect even a SINGLE city, leave alone two, when none of the interceptor missiles have not even been tested against incoming solid-fuelled ballistic missiles? Until Dr Saraswat can answer that, all his statements on this topic is regarded by me as unjustified & unproven bravado. PDV conrinues to be elusive as work has not been yet completed on developing the dual-mode active radar/IIR terminal seeker. No one has placed any orders as yet for the Shaurya, because it has yet to be decided as to which armed service should be its custodian/operator. All the avionics that one now sees on the Agni-4 & Agni-5 were first developed for the Shaurya and only then they found application elsewhere. At least eight more test-flights of the Prahaar are reqd before series-production gets underway. Glaring shortcomings of equipment within the services are only due to the excruciatingly slow decision-making processes now prevailing within the MoD. What is reqd at the helm of MoD is a radical reform under which all procurement decisions should be made jointly by civil servants & armed forces officials who are sitting side by side under the same roof, so that responsibility is shared. Only then will the civil servants become less fearful of taking decisions. Varunastra & its twin-torpedo tube launchers will enter service only with the P-15A DDGs & P-28 ASW corvettes. Takshak is still under development.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Dashu: The IA is in a desperate situation because of only 1 reason: it will expose the unprofessional way in which OP Meghdoot was conceived, and this in turn will open a can of worms that will expose the hollowness of all claims & false bravado about continuance of the occupation of the Saltoro Ridge. Long gone are the days when Dansum could be captured. It should have been done in April 1984. Now the time has come for demilitarisation of that entire area on both sides of the divide. And if better sense prevails, then this momentum should be carried forward to its logical conclusion by embarking upon a time-bound schedule for permanently demarcating India’s borders with Pakistan & China. The atmospherics can’t get any better than they’re now. And NO, no one, especially India, is going to lose J & K.

To Bradshaw: The PN’s aim is pure & simple: in the event of future hostilities (God forbid) Pakistan’s EEZ & territorial waters should not be violated. This was the strategy way back in 1986 (during EX Brass Tacks, when the IN had formulated its contingency war-plans & was just halfway through its briefing to then PM Rajiv Gandhi in the IN’s War Room when the then CNS Admiral Tahiliani abruptly ended the briefing then being given by Vice Admiral Lakhar, for fear of the Indian PM coming to know about the IUN’s vulnerabilities---more on this will be revealed in a book I’m now drafting for publication about the IN’s operational art from 1971 till 2002) and this remains so till now. The PN has reinforced this warfighting doctrine with the procurement of some 200 C-602s & their coastal land-mobile launchers. Therefore, in the event of any hostilities with India in future, the IN will, in my estimation, be unable to stage any kind of maritime strike operation with its warships within striking distance of the 290km-range C-602s. The only way to neutralise this threat is through airpower, i.e. finding & destroying such C-602 launchers & the PN’s P-3C Orion MR/ASW aircraft with either ship-launched NLOS-BSMs or carrier-based MiG-29Ks—something not possible until 2018 at least. In my view therefore, the PN’s surface combatants will not venture beyond 200nm from Pakistan’s shores because if they do, they will be easy targets for the IN’s Ka-31 AEW/ASV helicopters & Kh-35E, Klub-S/N & BrahMos ASCMs. For protecting Gujarat’s coastline against stealthy attacks by FAC-Ms, at least three aerostat-mounted radars will be reqd to be deployed.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.32PM: Heavy in-depth deployments by either India or Pakistan on either side of the LoC in the vicinity of the glaciers is not at all necessary from an operational perspective. If one is cribbing about India losing the high ground, then such fears are unfounded as further north India does occupy the high ground in and around DBO. In addition, had it not been for the ceasefire since November 2003, MBRLs would have already been brought into play, and a disastrous war of attrition would have ensued. That sanity has prevailed since then is proof enough of the demilitarisation & military disengagement process to be carried forward. Mind you, China too is now in a mood to facilitate this & has therefore proposed that an international weather observatory be established in Aksai Chin. I can therefore only hope that statesmanship prevails & emanates from Delhi, Islamabad & Beijing. Maybe this is what the AP Governor Gen (Ret’d) J J Singh was referring to a few days ago when he called for a process of give-and-take for dealing constructively with China & perhaps even Pakistan. For mind you, India’s preoccupation with the Siachen issue stems not from any military threat posed by Pakistan, but has more to do with the China bogey, with I personally believe has been overstated by many in India.

To Anon@4.15AM: The MiG-29UPG, Rafale, upgraded Mirage 2000 & FGFA will ALL have distributed AESA-based directional jammers on board, therefore minimising the need for AESA-MMRs to be used for directional jamming. The Jaguar IS too could well receive such directional jammers during their upgrade programme. DIRCM is still too costly an item for combat aircraft. Therefore, it is far cheaper to develop new-generation flares capable of neutralising dual-spectrum IR scanners of AAMs. Lock-on jamming works only when it is continuously applied. When jamming the active radars of BVRAAMs, there’s no need to conduct jamming continuously against BVRAAMs, since the targetted aircraft will be changing its flight profiles, thus taking evasive actions.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@4.17PM: What is proposed for raising is a Mountain Strike Corps (MSC), of which one Division will be earmarked as an air-assault formation. AS for the new directive, it is not that new, & was issued way back in early 2009 & again in 2010. But such directives don’t make any sense, since the directive doesn’t specify the following:
1) If one is talking about preparing for waging a two-front war, then what kind of wars will be fought? A full-scale war with Pakistan & limited high-intensity border war with China? Or full-scale wars with both Pakistan & China?
2) Will such wars be fought sequentially, or concurrently?
3) Has the MoD issued any directive to HQ Integrated Defence Staff (IDS) to evolve war plans with the three services under which a single integrated operational plan (SIOP) will be put to effect, or will each individual armed service be left to its own to formulate its own war plan?
4) Has the MoD insisted on ‘combined’ or ‘joint’ transformational changes in the warfighting doctrines of the three armed services, or has it merely passed on the buck to the services HQs asking them to rationalise their force-structures in their own sweet time?
5) Has the MoD directed the HQ IDS to come up with a seamless & unified joint services theatre-based command structure for neutralising any kind of military threat posed by the PRC along the LAC?
Only after such questions are answered will it possible to evolve the optimum force structure reqd for combatting any kind of military threat to India. Unless & until this happens, it will be futile to even discuss force modernization issues. For before acquiring the tools for waging war, one must first decide on how to wage the war. For instance, one has to decide if instead of having only one dedicated air-assault division, it is far more worthwhile to give integral rapid-reaction air-assault capabilities to most of the 10 existing mountain divisions. And if this is to be achieved, then wouldnlt it be far more pragmatic then to equip such formation with combat aviation brigades equipped with their own multi-role utility helicopters, LOHs, LUHs and attack helicopters? Thus far, all evidence on the ground leads me to believe that A K Antony & co are shying away from addressing such core issues/questions.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSIngh: It would be highly speculative to accord exact procurement timelines for all such items, because as I’ve explained above, it will only amount to money not been well-spent. One has to sort out the foundation first before embarking upon any build-up of assets. Therefore there’s a crying need for the MoD to issue a National Defence Posture as a White Paper once every five years, at the very least. Any AAR platform to be acquired by the IN will have to be carrier-based, like heavylift MRHs equipped with ro-ro fuel tanks.

To Souvik: ULF sonars aren’t that easy to design & develop. For starters, the lower the frequencies, the larger the T/R antenna aperture. This involves a lot of testing in both shallow and deep water. It was only recently that both the IN & DRDO issued RFPs for acquiring a deep-water test-range for sonar development.

To Kunal: Very many thanks (VMT). Money isn’t the principal issue when it comes to force modernisation. As I’ve explained above, what matters most is getting the fundamentals right. One must first decide how will future wars be fought before buying the tools reqd for waging such wars. Once that’s decided, then the decision-making process in the MoD should be reformed by according equal responsibility for procurement-related decisions taken to both civilians and military officials. Budgetary processes/activities must be undertaken not just by the MoD, but by more the armed services HQs under the guidance of HQ IDS. The MoD should focus more on policy-making on issues like strategic disinvestments in DPSUs, industrial offsets guidelines, & private-sector participation in R & D on an equal footing and emerging as systems developers, which is exactly what Dr V K Saraswat stated in no uncertain terms in his interview to NDTV in last month’s ‘Walk the Talk’ show. If all these things happen, India’s capital markets will have more than enough money to dump on military-industrial projects and there will be no need for any RM to go with a begging bowl to the MoF for more defence expenditure funds. AS for the Pinaka MBRL, three regiments have already been raised, & three more are to follow.

Anurag said...

Very many THANX Prasun Da for replying to my queries.It's been a really GREAT time for me to read your blog especially the comment section.You are really a million men apart from two of those other blog runners when it comes to systematic analysis and replying to queries of your followers.Keep it up man.

By the way,you forgot to reply to three of my queries,so asking again (with a few new ones).Hope you won't mind.

1.What's the status of the 1600
km range Sword Fish Mk2??Is it still under development??

2.There are multiple reports
that
IA is short of ballistic helmets
and body armors-then why can't
they procure more Patkas and
the level IIIA ballistic vests
produced by Tata??What's
stopping them as per you??

3.And lastly,what happened to
the proposed 3rd part on PLA's
war preparedness in which you
was to provide IA's possible
options and strategies to
counter PLA's efforts??

4.So as per you the armed forces can't decide who will use Shaurya?!Does that mean here too a turf war is going on similar to the one over use of Helicopter gunships??

5.Can't we use our Su 30MKIs armed with Brahmos or 3M54E Klub missiles with guidance from Phalcon AWACS to devastate those FACs of PN??

6.And lastly,isn't it possible for IN to convert the INS Virat into a LHD after induction of Vikramaditya??

THANX in advance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

bradshaw said...

Prasun da:

A question came to my mind that why we are not using the shourya cruise missiles which is a version on K-15 on our frontline naval ships instead of brahmos?? Its more faster , can carry a higher warhead and range is almost 700-1000Kms. The lengtth is 10m against 9m for brahmos with a similar diameter and can be vertically launched from ships. Why we cannot use it for anti ship roles instead of short range brahmos which again comes under the MTCR guidelines ??

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun, very very thanx for your  replies regarding use of Aesa based jammers .THANX A LOT FOR THEM. But u have forgetten to answer some of the questions. Also i have a few more doubts. 

1. U didnt answer pt 5. as to how many R-27TE1 are we purchasing and whether the previous lot have been relifed.
 2. U said that DIRCM is a costly item for a fighter. But it is already fitted to the whole transport fleet of USAF. A fighter costs much much more than a combined IDAS & dircm. So it is entirely justifiable to install one. It will be a huge game changer in air-air combat especially in WVR combat. Everytime an IIR missile locks on and homes in on a target, the target with a dircm will have a good chance of surviving. It will prevent attrition which is inevitable in modern wvr combat when almost everyone is equipped with HMD. TheDRDO can team up with Northrop or Elbit and develope such systems for fighter jets. 
3. U said developing new generation flares that will be able to fool and jam dual band IR seekers should be developed. Can such flares jam, saturate IIR seekers. Is the Drdo developing or develope flares like that? 
4. The Rafale is a state of the art modern fighter jets and employ world class subsystems. So does the Rafale hv such new gen flares because it doesnt have a Dircm. 4. Can the distributed Virgilius and SPECTRA be used as a trackerbreaker jam. Also can such systems prevent lock on and break lock on , once it has been achieved. 5.The present principle defensive EW jammer of the IAF is the Elta 8222. Is it sophisticated enough to jam the active seekers of BVRAAM and prevent lock on and break track. Is it capable of pulse , CW jamming? Can the IAF depend on it?
6. R-77 & aim-120 can lock on to the target if jammed continuously. But if one resort to intermittent jamming, will not thd seeker start aquiring and tracking the target once jamming is stopped. Also Prasun, somewhere i read that that emissions of AESA transmitters cant be detected by present RWR. So if that be the case, how will the aim-120 and r-77 lock on to the jammer? 

Pls ans. Thanx in advance.......

dashu said...

Your every reply comes with some new hints .

In your reply to Bradshaw you said "- something not possible until 2018 at least." why so ??? I guess Anurag's 5 question might be related to this and why cannot we take out those 200 C-602s & their coastal land-mobile launchers with IAF help . but still why not possible until 2018 at least by the IN.

Kunal said...

PLEASE take a look at this
http://idrw.org/?p=11033
why the DRDO is using the term Mk2 and not MkIA or MkI+?

And when China can fit anti ship cruise missiles on their FACs then why can't we do the same?

And do you think that Barak 2 MRSAM can neutralise inbound enemy supersonic/high subsonic anti ship cruise missiles or not?Will it be tested against Harpoon and Brahmos AShMs?

buddha said...

WHAT IS THE RANGE OF Exocet MISSILE THAT INDIA WILL INSTALL IN Scorpène class submarines

Anonymous said...

Any chance of Brahmos been fitted on to Scorpene Sub ?

I want to know which deals we will expect GOI to clear this year for al the services of armed forces ??

After the Gen. letter, a new committee is formed that will look into the expansion plans of Army aviation. Do you have any information on this and any chance of this committee making a change in Army aviation wing ??

Any news on Nirbhay cruise missile ?? And whats the progress of ALCM supersonic cruise missile that India was developing with Israel ?
Do you have any information drdo's anti-radiation missile ? And has any progress been made to fill the gaps in air defence network especially in the NE ??

Did you heard about Antony's reply in RS ? He told he is submitting a draft to Finance ministry for a new offensive corps. Is this a new addition for the NE sector or its the same strike force and mountain battalion that was cleared by CCS later last year?

I also need to know what are ADE and HAL's plans regarding AMCA and AURA's weapon ? I mean for PakFa, we will get all set of weapons but for AMCA and AURA which will have internal weapon bay we will either have to design the bay keeping in mind the weapons that these two aircraft will (design based on weapons to be used) or have a whole new program that will specifically design weapons for these two platform or we will end up in the Brahmos fiasco again (First the decided to make Brahmos for Su30 and now they have plans for Mig29, in two years we will see Brahmos for LCA too. Its ineeficient, they should have made the air launched version to be based on Mig29, so that it could be used by almost every aircraft that IAF have).

KSingh said...

Prasun,

Regarding the signing of the PC-7 Mk.II deal-
-are any of thse for the IN?

-And what paint scheme will these a/c sport?

-As the Deepaks had silver paint but seems IAF is going now for grey low-vis paint jobs even on trainers (ie HAWK AJT and HJT-36)? And is this 75 the only number india will procure from Pilatus or will there be follow-on orders?

- And how many flight sims will India get?

Thanks

KSingh said...

Prasun, what are your thoughts on this fight that broke out between officers and jawans of the IA in Ladakh?

What do you think IA is going to do in the way of punative action?


It seems like a VERY serious incident that requires harsh punihsment.

Anonymous said...

At last M777 howitzers cleared by DAC

Anonymous said...

sir ! when will M777 start arriving and are we getting TOT from this deal ???

Anonymous said...

The deal still have to be cleared by the FM and CSS.

soumyadip said...

prasun sir told.........

"NO, no one, especially India, is going to lose J & K".

unfortunately we have already lost almost 30% of it and even more unfortunate thing is that no one in this nation wants to recover it and instead wants to compromise which only shows that we Indians have no self respect left in us at all.......whenever i see the map of my country i feel pathetic and helpless,i don't know about others but thats the way i feel......

Anonymous said...

is M777 so perfect there was lot of news about the leaked reports
its accuracy isnt good enough and it failed some parameters
sir can u clarify on that

Unknown said...

Prasun, what will be the truck that is used by the IA to tow the M-777? The Bofors has a Swedish truck what will M-777 have, a US truck?


And will the IA purchase any precsion Excaliber rounds?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANURAG: There’s no radar called ‘Sword Fish’. The BMD network uses the Green Pine LRTR. Only two were bought over a decade ago (and that’s why Dr Saraswat is saying that only two cities/locations can be defended by the BMD network) and its longer-range version has not yet been ordered from IAI/ELTA Systems. The DRDO is not developing any LRTR, but only its operating software. @nd question was already answered above. As for the third question, I’m updating the script as new developments have taken place since it was drafted. Yes, a turf-war is on regarding the Shaurya. For attacking the PN’s FAC-Ms, Kh-31As launched from Su-30MKIs or even MiG-29UPGs or MiG-29Ks will be more than enough, since the FAC-Ms are equipped with only shoulder-launched MANPADS for air-defence. The Viraat should be used as a helicopter carrier in future, since it makes no sense to use it as it is being done now for the sake of only five Sea Harriers.

To Bradshaw: The Shaurya TBM was developed with only nuclear warheads in mind. When equipped with conventional warheads, such a missile will be next to useless for pinpoint strikes. It will only come in handy as a terror weapon when equipped with HE warhead. To date, no one in the world has used any type of ballistic missile for anti-ship strike. All that’s being said about the DF-21D is just hype & devoid of any truth.

To Anon@4.28PM: About 1,000 R-27ET1s will be ordered. Not all USAF transports are fitted with DIRCM. Combat aircraft don’t need DIRCM since they have something which transport aircraft/civilian aircraft/utility helicopters don’t: manoeuvrability. That’s why no one is developing DIRCMs for combat aircraft. There are various modes of launching flares, including those for saturating the seekers of IIR-guided AAMs. Why should the DRDO develop such flare cartridges? Only those companies that are associated with the development of multi-spectral IIR seekers can develop such flare cartridges. EL/L-8222 jammer is not used for neutralising BVRAAMs, but the fire-control radars of MR-SAMs and E-SHORADS. How can a BVRAAM’s seeker re-acquire its target when the target has already changed location and moved out of the seeker’s field-of-view when the jamming was underway?

To Dashu: It will be impossible for the IAF to knock-out the ground-based C-602 ASCM TELs without the availability of JSTARS-type RISTA airborne platforms. Persistent surveillance capability is something both the IAF and IN lack and unless SAR-equipped JSTARS-type platforms are acquired and backed up by aerial refuelling, it will be next to impossible to neutralise the shore-based C-602s. What the IAF can ‘try’ to achieve is temporarily render the air bases housing the P-3Cs & Saab 2000 AEW & C platforms useless for day or two. These two platforms will be the eyes and ears for all of the PN’s ASCMs, be it ship-launched or land-launched. If the IN wants to knock-out such platforms on its own, then it will require at least 40 MiG-29Ks and about 14 Ka-31 AEW helicopters from two aircraft carriers to engage in sustained counter-base/counter-force air campaigns, something not possible before 2018.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Kunal: The IN doesn’t have any FAC-Ms, instead it has guided-missile corvettes. The Barak-2 will have such capabilities, but whether against Harpoons & BrahMos? It remains to be seen.

To Buddha: About 50km for the MBDA-built SM-39 Exocet.

To Anon@8.56AM: BrahMos can’t go on board any Scorpene SSK since no one had designed the Scorpene to accommodate such vertically-launched missiles. And to redesign the Scorpene would cost a bomb.

To KSingh: The 75 PC-7Mk2s are all for the IAF. The Navy wants about 16 units but that will come under a follow-on contract. Paint scheme will not be of the low-visibility-type, since these aircraft will come unarmed. Two flight simulators will be acquired: one cockpit procedures trainer & a full-flight simulator. Regarding the fistfights between Army personnel, I reckon that entire artillery regiment ought to be disbanded permanently.

Soumyadip: What’s gone is gone, no use shedding tears about it. One cannot always have the whole cake & eat it as well. Let’s be happy with the fact that Junagadh, Goa, Daman, Diu, Hyderabad, & Sikkim all became part of India. One thing more: the map that every Indian citizen sees from childhood is actually Imperial Britain’s perception of India, and is not supported by the reality that should have come into force after 1947. There were plenty of cartographic errors committed by the former colonial masters, be it in western and northern J & K, or Aksai Chin. In fact, historically, Aksai Chin was never a part of either Imperial India or the State of Kashmir. Again, it was a British cartographer/surveyor that screwed up matters. Also, don’t forget how Nehru gladly gave away a valley adjoining Nagaland to Myanmar in 1950. But far, far more worrisome to me is the unchecked proliferation of stray animals in the streets of cities like Kolkata.

To Unknown: I think this time there will be a fair trial between the offerings from Mahindra, TATA, Ashok Leyland, URAL India & BEML. I reckon a right-hand-drive vehicle will be chosen. Excalibur rounds are part of the package.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To All: By the way, it appears highly likely that the DF-16 & DF-25 missiles (both in cannisterised version) will be deployed against India by China out of TAR & Sichuan. The possibility of these missiles being supplied to Pakistan as replacements for the Shaheen-1 & Ghauri-1 remains very high indeed.

Anurag said...

@Prasun da,VMT for your replies.

By the way,don't you think we should deploy aerostat mounted AESA radars instead of ground based ones for our BMD network??

You told that Shaurya can't be used with pinpoint accuracy-but as per DRDO,Shaurya has cep of 10-15 meters with RLG-INS.Then don't you think a combination of GLONASS/IRNSS and a miniaturised terminal SAR seeker with the RLG-INS may give it an accuracy of less than 10 meter.Don't you think this is accurate enough against a company of enemy infantry or a command center or an air field??A Shaurya with an one ton fuel air thermobaric explosive or cargo munitions can wreck havoc on enemy especially when it can change its flight path like a cruise missile!!Don't you think so??

And lastly,I've heard that OFB still can't manufacture 'Match' callibre 7.62X51mm rounds used by Snipers-is that true??

KSK said...

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-us-navy-next-generation-jammer-proceeds-but-f-35-integration-deferred-indefinitely-371742/

There is a paragraph here-
"The current focus for the NGJ programme is to develop a mid-band jammer, Green says. Mid-band is the most urgent need for the USN because most of the threats are found in that range. There is a relatively new and very capable low-band pod that is currently in production, Green says, which means that it does not need to be replaced immediately"

Could you elaborate on the threats that could be handled by MidBand jammers.and the GaN chips

Anonymous said...

Indian air force will receive 75 PC-7 MK IIs , followed by an additional 106 produced locally by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd.

1. Are 181 BTs enough for basic training or more will be built?

2. When will the first HAL built PC-7 will be produced?

3. Is there any TOT involved and how much of it will be indigenized ?

Anonymous said...

And what will happen to the HTT-40 that was displayed in Air show 2012?

Two deals were announced within days of each other,so what others can we expect in time to come?

can anything can be developed in-house for replacing 40mm L-70 and 23mm Tunguska AA systems if not wat r the modern alternatives?

Anonymous said...

Prasun will there be any follow-on orders for the M-777 Ultra Light Howitzers.

1) 145 is a small no. I reckon that the IA needs atleast 3 times more.

2) Are there any 155 mm guns deployed in Siachen at the moment.

3) Iam not a technical person, You have mentioned in the previous threads that 52 Caliber Guns have better accuracy then 45 Caliber. Is it only accuracy or can range also be increasing the Caliber. If 52 Caliber has so many advantages then lesser caliber
whats stopping the gun makers to make even longer barrels say 57 or 62 Caliber guns

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,I an anon on May 10,4:28 pm.Once again very very thanx for your replies . I have a few more queries to make.
1. Has the previous batch of R-27 missiles been sent to Vympel for relifing or relifing them is not possible?
2.How is it possible to jam,saturate an IIR seeker. it can practically see in the IR spectrum. it will be able to distinguish between a jet and a cluster of flares , however it may be deployed. Also i have visted many AA missille manufactures website. On the MBDA web, it clearly states that the Magic has built in IRCCM feartures and is not vulnerable to fooling by flares. also i have read many a times that IIR seekers employing FPA cant be jammed, staturated by flares. it can only be neutralised be a laser beam destroying the delicate electronics of the seeker.
3. At present , does the IAF have such multi spectral flares on order or in possesion.With the wide proliferation of HMD and thrust vectoring AAM, it widely decreases the survivability of fighter jets in WVR combat.
4.U sa EL/L-8222 jammer is not used for neutralising BVRAAMs, but the fire-control radars of MR-SAMs and E-SHORADS.But how can such a small jammer match the emitted power of such ground based radars. The emissions of such radar will burn through the active jamming. also cant this pod be used for jamming the MMR radars onboard a fighter jet for preventing and breaking lock on.Suppose a hostile ARH BVRAAM is on its way to the jet. So, cant this pod help in any way in this situation.In this situ will the missile take out the aircraft? IAF needs to have a new pod based EW jammer.
4.The IAF at present posses only 3 AWACS whereas PAF fields 8 of t5hem. Has the IAF have any intention of ordering AWACS from a foreign vendor? Will it not order another 2 il-76 based Phalcon awacs or it has already orderd them.
Pls ans.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun

I've few questions.Hope you answer like you do for every question.Pardon if you have replied before.

1)How does Azmat compare with Veer Class missile corvettes?Are they trying to emulate what we did in 1971 (Karachi incident)?
2)Is it possible for a small machine like this to sneak in near a destroyer (or frigate) to launch a surprise attack?
3)Why are we not ordering more missile corvettes?Are they a thing of the past?What I mean is that 4 missile corvettes or 1 frigate?Which is better??
Regards,
Noob

Anonymous said...

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/dc50/russia-ready-set-mig-plant-india-340#comment-120433


Is this news for real,they missed by 35 years.

bradshaw said...

Hi Prasun da, Thanks a lot for your replies.

I was reaing an interesting article and it says : "By the end of 2008, the PLAAF operates a total of 160 S-300 launchers grouped into 10 SAM battalions (40 batteries). These launchers include 32 S-300PMUs, 64 S-300PMU1s, and 64 S-300PMU2s. Each launcher is equipped with four ready-to-launch missiles and 4~8 spare missiles. If taking additional spare and practice missiles purchased from Russia into account, the total number of missiles received by the PLAAF has amounted well above 1,000. China has deployed S-300 SAM batteries in Tibet, to defend against India’s growing air power."

China has created bubbles of air defences with its S-300 copies having a range of almost 200 Kms. In a case of conflict the Indian army will obviously have a defensive posture than an aggresive one. On the other hand we are wasting almost $ 5 billion in acquiring obsolete systems like Akash with a range of only 30 kms.

Don't you think that we should go for longer range SAM systems like Patriot PAC 3 , MBDA Aster 30 or even the S-400's ???? Or do we intend to develop Barak-8 into a long range air defense system for air force and army as well.

SK said...

Prasun for Anti-Tank Missiles be it Nag or the others can a tethered hovering UAV
(such as http://bacajela.blogspot.in/2012/05/israeli-company-leads-development-of.html)
be used as target acquisition sensor instead of mast mounted sensors. These can go higher and have a better coverage to direct longer (+7KM) range anti-tank missiles. With this there is no need to mount the missiles like the NORINCO GT-6. Instead heavier longer range anti-tank missiles can be fielded and launched vertically from the launcher vehicle.

Anonymous said...

"By the way, it appears highly likely that the DF-16 & DF-25 missiles (both in cannisterised version) will be deployed against India by China out of TAR & Sichuan. The possibility of these missiles being supplied to Pakistan as replacements for the Shaheen-1 & Ghauri-1 remains very high indeed."

Why in the world does China wants to arm Pakistan with such highly mobile cannisterised missiles. Pakistan today is a powder keg which might explode or most probably implode at any time. Such weapons will only make situation worse.This act certainly defy's logic.

Can US pressurize China to stop them from arming Pakistan if not why can't we return the favor and arm Vietnam with Saurya. If the P5 sit quite over China violations of international treaties that doesn't mean we have to.

Hell India can drop hints that should China arm Pak then we will do the same with Taiwan. There are times when the bull has to be taken by Horns and this is one such case.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun, everywhere i have read( wikipedia , india today) that the IA is the 3rd largest army in the world. Now although this classification is based on troop strength,i assumed that this ranking also takes into account the equipment. Now i see that i am absolutely wrong. The Turkish army has a greater inventory of tanks,apc,artillery according to wiki.

Turkish army:
Tanks:
1.Leopard 2A4 339
2.Leopard 1 398
3.M60T 170
4.M60A3 TTS 619
5.M60A3 752
6.M60A1 RISE 104
7.M48A5T1 619
8.M48A5T2 758

APC:
1.ACV-AIFV 650
2.ACV-AAPC 1,381
3.M113 3,162
4.Otokar Cobra Armored personnel carrier 789
5.Otokar Akrep Armored personnel carrier 370
6.ACV-ATV Tank destroyer 48
7.BMC Kirpi MRAP 150 A Total of 468 ordered
8.M113A1 TOW Tank destroyer 173


Artillery and missile systems:

1.HY-12Di Mortar 575
2.UT1 Mortar 325
3.M1/M29 Mortar 3,175 81mm.
4.M30 Mortar 1,265 107mm.
5.M-19 Mortar 3,500+ 60mm
6.Panter Howitzer 225 155mm gun. A Total of 400 To be built.
7.M101A1 Howitzer 830 105mm gun.
8.M114 Howitzer 535 155mm gun.
9.115 Howitzer 155 203mm gun.
10.M116 Howitzer 180 75mm gun.

Self-propelled artillery:

1.M125A1 Self-propelled mortar 225
2.ACV-AMV Self-propelled mortar 170
3.T-155 Fırtına Self-propelled howitzer 240 155mm gun. A total 350 are to be built.
4.M110A2 Self-propelled howitzer 219 United States 203mm gun.
5.M107 Self-propelled howitzer 36 175mm gun.
6.M44T Self-propelled howitzer 222 155mm gun.
7.M52T Self-propelled howitzer 363 155mm gun.
8.M108T Self-propelled howitzer 25 105mm gun.

Rocket and missile system:
1.T-300 Kasırga WS-1 Multiple rocket launcher 80

100 km range with improved range versions under development.

2.M270 MLRS Multiple rocket launcher 12
3.MAKSAM RA 7040 Multiple rocket launcher 24
4.T-122 Sakarya Multiple rocket launcher 130+
5.T-107 MBRL Multiple rocket launcher 100+
6.TOROS 230A Multiple rocket launcher Turkey Truck mounted 230mm, long-range rocket system. 6 tubes per launcher. 65 km range. Used for research T-300
7.TOROS 260A Multiple rocket launcher
8.J-600T Yıldırım I Short-range ballistic missile

9.J-600T Yıldırım II Short-range ballistic missile China/ Turkey J-600T with improved, 300 km range.
10.TACMS MGM 140 Block I Surface-to-surface missile 72

Are this the true nos or gross estimates? If the nos are true then
compare them with the IA inventory. We are lagging behind in numbers by a huge margin.

SherKhan said...

in fact pak already have the technology similar to DF-16, they don't need the DF-16....just look at the latest video of shaheen-1 test...notice the speed of its climb...furthermore pak have been playing with multiple warheads for the past 4-5 years....all designed to defeat ABM. Pak know the slow route india is taking...thus it is able to mitigate in advance...india starts all over again....it is called an arms race...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANURAG: Aerostat-mounted radars are reqd for cruise missile defence, and not for BMD. There’s no tactical ballistic missile in existence anywhere that has a CEP of 10/15 metres. The DRDO has never given firm CEP figures for the Shourya as yet, but only for the Prithvi-2 which was never inducted into service. Pinpoint accuracy is only achieved if there’s a terminal seeker & in Shourya’s case, such seekers are non-existent. Presently, only the BrahMos has such a seeker and another one is being developed for the Prahaar. Developing such seekers for hypersonic MIRVs is a highly challenging task for which India does not as yet have the type of skilled human resources reqd for R & D in such areas. Regarding OFB, there are many things which it still can’t manufacture, like decent 125mm APFSDS rounds, on which R & D work had begun in the late 1980s. But firget all that & read about this shameful state of affairs:
The telecom revolution may have networked the length and breadth of India but it hasn’t quite touched Indian Army jawans along the LAC at Nathu La who are forced to borrow cellphones from their Chinese counterparts on the other side of the fence to stay in touch with their families. This was the startling discovery made by members of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Technology during a study visit to Nathu La Pass in July last year. The Committee’s tour notes record this: “The Army personnel during the deliberations brought the attention of the Committee to poor telecom connectivity at Nathu La. The Committee expressed unhappiness to learn from the jawans that they have to borrow the handsets from the jawans posted in the borders on the other side to remain in touch with their family members”. Several private players have a presence in Sikkim but these are focused on Gangtok and adjoining areas with state-owned BSNL being the only major service provider near the Nathu La outpost. However, procurement of mobile towers and telephone exchanges by BSNL for deployment near the Indian Army camp has been delayed. “For the last four years, purchase orders have not been placed,” said a BSNL official. The House panel asked BSNL to fast-track the purchase but nothing has moved so far. Nathu La in Sikkim’s East district is one of the three open trading border posts between China and India. Agreements limit trade across Nathu La to 29 types of goods from India and 15 from the Chinese side after it was reopened in 2006.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/no-network-in-nathula-so-jawans-borrow-phones-from-chinese-soldiers/945976/

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSK: Mid-band jammers are operating in the G-J bandwidths. Regarding GaN chips, do read this: http://www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=22808.php

To Anon@9.28AM: 181 PC-7 Mk2 BTTs are more than enough for the IAF. HAL will not build any PC-7 Mk2, only licence-assemble them and undertake their depot-level maintenance. That itself translates into ToT.

To Anon@9.39PM: No HTT-40 was displayed in any mock-up form. Only an artist’s impression & scale-model was shown. It will be better for HAL to scrap the HTT-40 project & instead focus on developing a LIFT tandem-seat variant of the Tejas. L-70 & Tunguska will remain in service for another 20 years at least.

To Anon@11.39PM: For mountain warfare, a total of 290 LW-155s will suffice, for they’re meant for use only along the LAC in AP & Sikkim states. Only 130mm M-46s were deployed for the Siachen operations. 155mm/52-cal howitzers have both superior range envelopes & accuracy levels. Increasing barrel length brings along a whole new set of problems, especially those related to mobility. For the future, 53-cal is more than enough to fulfil all projected reqmts, since rocket-propelled artillery rounds are also available.

To Anon@8.38PM: All previous stocks of R-27s have been re-lifed. Re-lifing is done once every 10 years and it can be done only once. No IIR seeker with FPA can ‘see’ its target. It can only sense the target’s presence by computing the heat signature of the target relative to the surrounding environment. However, the IIR seeker can always be overwhelmed by flares dispensed in clusters. Even IRCCM fails in front of such flares dropped in clusters. Several countermeasures are available for neutralising FPAs, especially for armoured vehicles & combat aircraft. IAF already has such flare cartridges procured from IMI. EL/L-8222 jammer is not used for neutralising the target illuminators/engagement radars of MR-SAMs and E-SHORADS, but for the data-links that are both in the engagement radar & in the missile round. If the target illuminating radar is too strong to be jammed, then the aircraft can always duck underneath the radar’s envelope. L-band & X-band directional jammers are reqd. Jamming pods can’t jam X-band radars and are only used for mid-band jamming. The MoD already ordered two more A-50I PHALCONs last year.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon/Noob@11.07AM: The Azmat is a FAC-M while the Veer-class vessels are corvettes, meaning the latter is not only faster, but has greater endurance. But, if aided by MR/ASW aircraft like P-3C r even the Saab 2000 AEW & C, then the FAC-M can become a lethal killer capable of doing what the IN did in 1971 under OP Trident. FAC-Ms can never even come to within 100km of a DDG or FFG. New ASW & ASV corvettes will be reqd for the IN only after 2018.

To Anon@12.39PM: It sure looks like that.

To Bradshaw: No S-300 batteries have been deployed anywhere in Tibet thus far. Onbly KS-1As have been deployed, and will in future be followed by the HQ-16 LR-SAM & LY-80E E-SHORADS. The Barak-8 will be a 120km-range LR-SAM for the IAF. It is the MoD in its ‘all-knowing wisdom’ that creates confusion by referring to the Barak-2 70km-range MR-SAM as a LR-SAM in its annual reports. Nothging surprising there, since it also refers to a ‘four-dimensional’ (only A K Antiny & his Defence Secretary will know what 4-D is all about!!!) ground-based S-band airspace surveillance radar being developed by the DRDO.

To SK: Mini-UAVs can always be used for target detection for ATGMs and the data acquired can easily be sent via a BMS-specific data-link to TELs equipped with vertically-launched NLOS-ATGMs with ranges exceeding 10km.

To Anon@5.08PM: The Shaheen-1s, Ghaznavis and Shaheen-2s will require replacements over the next 5 years, while the Ghauri-1s will be retired from service as these liquid-fuelled ballistic missiles are a liability. Therefore, like India, Pakistan too is focussing on acquiring cannisterised ballistic missiles with shoot-and-scoot capabilities.

To Anon@10.54PM: Only in the area of field artillery I see the Turkish Army having a quantitative advantage over India.