The Beijing-Kunming Expressway in China’s Sichuan province (bordering northeastern India) linking Yaan to Xicang was commissioned into service on April 28, 2012.
Pakistan, meanwhile, will order four additional 3,000-tonne F-22P guided-missile frigates (FFG) that will all be licence-built in Pakistan at a cost of US$200 million. Thus far, the Pakistan Navy (PN) has inducted into service three F-22P FFGs (all built at Shanghai’s Hudong Zhonghua Shipyard), while the fourth one is being licence-built by Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works (KSEW). The first F-22P FFG, PNS Zulfiquar, was commissioned on September 19, 2009, and the second, PNS Shamsheer, on December 19, 2009. The third FFG, PNS Saif, was commissioned on September 15, 2010, while the fourth FFG, PNS Aslat, will be commissioned next year.
The PAF’s JF-17 Thunder MRCA, meanwhile, has commenced flight validation trials for the WMD-7 laser designation pod at Chengdu. The photo below shows the JF-17 equipped with an optronic calibration pod in lieu of the actual WMD-7 pod being fitted.
Lastly, the DF-16 cannisterised ballistic missile, weighing close to 8.2 tonnes, is estimated to have a range of 1,200km. It will eventually replace the solid-fuelled single-stage Hatf-4/Shaheen-1/CSS-6/M-9/DF-15 TBMs that were inducted into service on March 8, 2003 (with a claimed CEP of 50 metres when carrying a 1-tonne nuclear warhead).
The 3,200km-range DF-25 cannisterised MRBM is a two-stage solid-fuel missile that can deliver a single nuclear warhead weighing 2,000kg. The two-stage DF-21A MRBM, on the other hand, has a range of 2,700km. The DF-25s will replace the solid-fuelled two-stage Hatf-6/Shaheen-2/M-18 IRBMs of Chinese origin, which have a claimed CEP of 300 metres when carrying a 1-tonne nuclear warhead.
Congratulations China!
ReplyDeleteAny such attempt to build roads/highways in the North-East will launch successful careers of environmental activists.
NR
To NR: Read about this shameful state of affairs:
ReplyDeleteThe 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/
The remarkable thing is what takes 5-10 years with the Indian government,just takes 1-3 years by China.With that ratio in mind PAF, PN and PA will overtake IAF and IA and IN all the critical areas because Chinese turn over is so quick and they will just hand over stuff when needed.Whilst the hypocritical moral police are covering up cheer girls at IPL, the whole country's nakedness is flaunted unashamedly by selfish bureaucrats and power hungry leaders.One question though- how is China able to hand over missiles to Pak ignoring any MCTR?Are they not a signatory?
ReplyDeletePrasun,
ReplyDeleteWhat is the IN's plan as a replacement of Veer class? Anything similar to chainease Hobei class n the cards?!
Sir, to your comment that FAC-M can never come within 100 km of DDG, i would like to sy it would be more of 250-300 km for DDG,180-250 km for FFG,100-150 km for corvettes currently in service with the IN.
ReplyDeleteAlso , how does the F-22 frigate figure aginst the Talwar and Shivalik class.
The Kolkata class DDGs now being built, will they complement the fleet of DDGm or re4place the aging Rajputs? Also as for the follow on P-15B, will they complement or replave the Rajputs?
As for the 7 P-17A frigates will they relace the Godavari class FFG?
Previously in one of your threads and also in some of your comments u said that the IN was interested in procuring 9 SSN of Barracuda design. U also said that serious talks regarding them have started after we finalised the Rafale M,RCA. Can u pls provide an upgrade of the project.
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteDon't you think that Wasting billions and billions of dollars in building such word class roads in mountains makes sense or have any rationale ?? Even if we will take out a bridge or even 3-4 pillars with our JSSCM, than the whole highway is useless !!!! Same is with the rail links, even if you will take out a stretegic bridge , everything is lost :)
Instead we should look for more and more long range precision strike capabilities so that we can take out this infrastructure and logistics worth billions in just one pre-emptive strike !!
Prasun you pics showing the Beijing-Kunming Expressway are impressive and breathtaking. At the same time I can't help but noticing that entire stretches are elevated therefore highly vulnerable to NLOS Missiles and IAF LGB's. Couple of missiles at right spots will render them useless for weeks. PLF won't be able to defend entire stretch with SAMs.
ReplyDeleteIndia should not make the same mistake, they should go for all weather tunnels. They will be expensive to build but certainly worth it.
Whats your view.
Its not just the Pakistani's, the kashmiri's (I am one) have no desire to be with india PERIOD
ReplyDeleteWe consider Pakistani's our brethren, same blood, same history and they feel exactly the same way. Indian soldiers on our streets armed to the teeth, checking our ID's, humilating us on daily basis are a stark reminder of being occupied. Freedom will come...
this Anonymous above is day dreaming ... wake up kido.. go to POK and tell
ReplyDeleteAlso prasun , regarding integrating the shaurya with our ships for anti ship roles , you pointed out that it is not possible to integrate the ballistic missiles for anti ship roles. You also pointed that news about the DF 21 is just a myth.
ReplyDeleteHowever wiki says, : "DF-21D (CSS-5 Mod-4) Anti-ship ballistic missile
Range of various Chinese missiles; DF-21 A/B range in red.
A Dongfeng 21D anti-ship ballistic missile.China has reportedly developed and tested the world's first anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) called DF-21D, with a maximum range of around 2,700 kilometres (1,700 mi)[9], in 2005, according to the US Department of Defense. It is estimated to have reached initial operating capability in 2007 or 2008. The guidance system is thought to be still in an evolutionary process as more UAV and satellites are added.[10] The DF-21 anti-ship ballistic missile itself is assumed to have entered active service by 2009.[11][12]
The US Department of Defense has stated that China has developed and reached initial operating capability [13] of a conventionally-armed[14] high hypersonic[15] land-based anti-ship ballistic missile based on the DF-21. This would be the world's first ASBM and the world's first weapons system capable of targeting a moving aircraft carrier strike group from long-range, land-based mobile launchers."
So it is quite evident that even US has acknowledged that DF 21D has got the IOC and its the first ever ASBM in the world. What's your take on this ?
How far off is this bridge from the nearest line of Indian control.
ReplyDelete@Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteHave you noticed that every old and new warships including those F 22P frigates of PN has rudimentary air defense systems.Don't you think they would become easy targets for IAF strike fighters and it would be better to use IAF against PN fleet??
2.Both the IMI and Rheinmetall are black listed-don't you think Arjun MkII may have to suffer greatly for this??
3.Is bullet proof body armor a standard fit for PA and PLA or only selected groups are issued with them??And what about Indian Army??Is BPJ stadard fit for IA??
4.And lastly,what's the status of 8 km range Helina ATGM??Do you think IA is waiting for that version to come and that's why is reluctant to induct the 4 km range Nag??
PLEASE try to reply.
THANX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
http://defenceexpress.blogspot.in/2012/05/user-trials-of-indigenous-artillery-gun.html
ReplyDeletewhich gun is this???????????????
http://business-standard.com/india/news/delayschallenges-for-indo-russian-fighter/474329/
ReplyDeleteIAF prefers 2 seat version but will this not effect the stealth characteristics ... and russia may take advantage and ask to pay more money which it always does ...
so where do u see the partnership in FGFA goin?
To Pierre Zorin: Very aptly summed up, indeed. However, even 5-10 years is too short a timeframe, for capitals like Gangtok & Itanagar have yet to receive even their first civilian airports! Regarding MTCR, as it is a regime & not an internationally binding treaty, China is not legally bound to adhere to MTCR provisions. Regarding NPT, China, although a signatory, has historically sought an exemption for its WMD-related nuclear commerce dealings with Pakistan, this according to Bill Clinton’s memoirs.
ReplyDeleteTo Shaurya: As I had explained last December, the replacement for the Veer-class corvettes will have to be stealthy multi-role platforms capable of both littoral ASW & maritime strike, for which the Visby-class & Gowind-class vessels are being proposed at this stage.
To Anon@9.44AM: Pakistan’s obsession with J & K is linked directly with its need to secure its sources of riverine water supplies. It has nothing to do with any kind of religious ideology. Of course India will respect all prevailing international conventions & not starve Pakistan of this precious resource. That India is not denying Pakistan its due of water supplies is a proven fact, while Pakistan being the lower riparian state has repeatedly failed to adopt the optimum watershed management techniques, resulting in several rivers flowing through west Punjab eventually drying up. Consequently, Pakistan invited China for help in diverting the flow of several glaciers located in the Northern Areas (Gilgit-Baltistan) in order to increase the waterflow from north to south & at the same time build artificial reservoirs that will also serve as sources of hydel power and it is for this reason that for the past four years members of the PLA’s Construction Corps can now be seen throughout the Northern Areas.
To Anon@11.37AM: The F-22P is a littoral patrol FFG, and comes nowhere near the Project 1135.6 FFG or Project 17 FFG in terms of endurance, integral firepower & sea-control operations. The Project 15B DDGs will replace the Kashin 2-class DDGs. There’s nothing new to add as of now regarding on-going negotiations on procuring Barracuda-class SSNs.
To Bradshaw: On the contrary, creation of such transportation infrastructure is imperative for regional economic development. We must not look at all such structures only from a military vulnerability viewpoint. That was the main reason I uploaded the photos, so that all may get to see how seriously China views the issue of infrastructure development along its border provinces, versus the total lack of such developments along India’s northern & northeastern borders. It is high time India began thinking big & recovering a degree of self-esteem, instead of being perpetually coy about the ‘China bogey’. Regarding the DF-21D, it reportedly will be a shore-to-ship missile, but to date, it has not yet been tested against moving maritime targets. All its test-firings have been in surface-to-surface mode. Had it been feasible to develop ASBMs, then the former USSR would have developed them a long time ago. Instead, this did not happen and the Soviets relied on ‘swarm’ tactics involving salvo firing of long-range supersonic anti-ship missiles from bombers, submarines & warships. I therefore wouldn’t expect the Chinese to develop a ‘world’s first’ when other developed nations have discarded this approach.
ReplyDeleteTo SK: There are quite a few tunnels, & I’ve uploaded their photos as well. An optimum mix of elevated highways & tunnels is the best way forward over mountainous terrain.
To Anon@2.04PM: You’re just another troll who in all probability has never even set foot on J & K soil. For if you had, you wouldn’t claimed that Indian soldiers are checking the IDs of civilians anywhere in J & K. FYI Indian soldiers have never been given such tasks, be it in J & K or in any part of India, because they have much more important things to do, like establishing an enforcing counter-infiltration & counter-insurgency grids. So do give it a rest, & go somewhere else to express your abject ignorance.
To Mr.RA 13: About 760km.
To ANURAG: The F-22P FFGs being littoral patrol vessels only have FM-90N SHORADS & the Type 730 CIWS for self-defence against aerial threats. As such, they would be vulnerable to anti-ship strikes from even IN corvettes armed with Kh-35E ASCMs & SSKs firing 3M54E Klub-S ASCMs & helicopters firing salvoes of ASCMs. Regarding the Arjun Mk2 & Arjun Mk1A, IMI had already completed its consultancy commitments to CVRDE two years ago. In terms of hardware supplies, only the RCWS & APS fitments will be affected, but alternate sources for these are available from ELBIT Systems. The only critical problem is in the area of APFSDS ammo for the T-72M1 & T-72CIA MBTs, since the IMI-produced APFSDS round had a better armour penetration capability than the 3BM42 rounds now being imported from Russia (the 3BM44 rounds are not approved for export as of now). Rheinmetall had nothing to do with the Arjun MBT. Only the ‘desi’ journalists from INDIAN EXPRESS had thought otherwise. Bullet-proof body-armour (BPJ) is not standard for either the PA nor the PLA. The same goes for even the US Army & British Army. All they wear are flak jackets to ensure protection from shrapnel. Only those units involved in counter-insurgency operations and threatened with sniper fire wear BPJs. 8km-range HELINA is still under development and won’t be available before 2016. It sure beats me why the 4km-range Nag is not being inducted into service with the BMP-2 Sarath ICVs, and why are Konkurs-M ATGMs being imported instead.
To Anon@9.59PM: It is a FH-77B fitted with a 155mm/45-cal barrel developed indigenously by OFB, which was first showcased during DEFEXPO 2008. The barrel was originally developed for upgunning the M-46, this being called the Metamorphosis, which was first showcased during DEFEXPO 2006.
To KSK: There are several inaccuracies in this concoction, which was expected. Firstly, no one from Indian officialdom had ever said that the FGFA would enter service by 2017. What was said that the first FGFA prototype would be rolled out in 2016, followed by flight certification by 2019, and series-production commencing after that. Secondly, stealth does not translate into ‘near-invisibility to radar’, instead the term used is ‘low-observability by radar’. Thirdly, the statement (a key IAF requirement is a ‘360-degree’ airborne electronically scanned active radar, rather than the AESA radar that Russia developed) is not only false, but is downright mischievous & malicious. I was at the Aero India expo press conference of February 2011 being given by the then IAF Chief ACM P V Naik, in which he clearly explained how the 360-degree ‘situational awareness’ for the FGFA’s aircrew will work with the help of not only two IRST sensors (one forward looking in front of the cockpit canopy’s base & the other rear-looking mounted just aft of the cockpit), but also a distributed AESA architecture comprising the MIRES X-band nose-mounted AESA-MMR, plus wing-root/tailfin-mounted L/S-band AESA T/R modules—something that will also go on board the Super Su-30MKI. Obviously the writer of the above-quoted FGFA concoction was either too plain dumb to understand what was being explained, or was absent when the press conference was underway. Fourthly, a tandem-seat FGFA will NOT become inevitably more bulky nor will it reduce the FGFA’s stealth and performance unacceptably. Instead, all that will happen is that the FGFA will have a lesser number of internal fuel tanks in order to accommodate the tandem-seat cockpit. And since the FGFA will not be a pure air superiority platform like the F/A-22 Raptor, but will instead be a multi-role platform, a two-man crew is both essential & critical—something even the Rafale M-MRCA’s procurement will reflect. Fifthly, HAL will never be involved with R & D activity regarding either the AESA-MMR or its distributed architecture, as it has no human resource base in this area. Sixthly, no one in India, least of all NAL, has ever had any experience in developing composites raw materials, which continue to be imported till this day. NAL only has a few autoclaves for the co-curing processes reqd for moulding composites-built airframe sub-structures & bulkheads but even then, for the Tejas Mk1 & Tejas Mk2, all such composites-built modules will be supplied by TATA Advanced Materials Ltd, & not NAL. Therefore, the composite raw materials for the FGFA too will have to imported from Russia, with co-curing taking place in India. Lastly, the entire powerplant for the FGFA will be imported just like the AL-31FP was, & some screwdriver technologies will be passed on to HAL as industrial offsets.
ReplyDeletePrasun,
ReplyDeleteVMT for your rply! But correct me if I am wrong isn't visby class more optimised for ASW role rather than anti ship strike missions? Also looking at the ongoing problems and delays in induction of visby's shouldn't we look for something smaller and similar to the Hamina class or Skjold class boats (given that they are available for export)?
your reply to KSK above is beautifully explained one . but I have one complain against you , why you are so soft towards China , though you are correct and honest regarding china. 1st time I came to know the reality behind this composite material claim of HAL/DRDO
ReplyDeleteIt's really sad and disgusting to borrow a mobile from Chinese solders to make call. Regarding infrastructure development we need to do much more. We are no match to Chinese .
ReplyDeleteare the composites used in Agni V & 4 also imported one?
ReplyDeleteHi Prasun,very very thanx for replying to my queries regarding the relifing of R-27 missiles and IR countermeasures. I have a few more queries.
ReplyDelete1. U said, "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.". But isnt it the mechanism behind the normal IR seeker.According to wiki,"Very modern heat-seeking missiles utilise imaging infrared (IIR), where the IR/UV sensor is a focal plane array which is able to "see" in infra-red, much like the CCD in a digital camera."
2.Also according to u ,"the IIR seeker can always be overwhelmed by flares dispensed in clusters. Even IRCCM fails in front of such flares dropped in clusters." How can u be so sure about this? Has this technique been tested against IIR equipped missiles and has it proved succesfull? Can u pls give me a weblink regarding this?
3.according to u ,"Several countermeasures are available for neutralising FPAs, especially for armoured vehicles & combat aircraft. IAF already has such flare cartridges procured from IMI. " What are the countermeasures available for jets other than flares? Are the flare cartidges bought from IMI good enough for neutralising all current IR guided AAM & MANPADs? Has the flares been tested against those seekers?
4.Most modern IR guided AAM and MANPADs have IR seekers employing dual filters-UV and IR. Even iff flares can succesfully jam, saturate the IR filter, then the missile will still be able to home in on the target using the UV filter? How does flares tackel this? can the crtidges bought from IMI provide protection against this type of missiles.
5.It is a pleasure to see that the IAF has paid proper attention to IR countermeasures. The IAF realised its importance after losing a Mi-17 to MANPADs in Kargil war.It would be a great plesure if it paid equal attention to IDAS for every aircraft.
6.If flares were so effective in jamming and saturating Infrared homing missiles, then why did the Soviet airforce suffered huge losses of its Su-25, Mi-25 in the hands of Stingers even after they were fitted with flare dispensers during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Pls reply.
Hi, when comparing the Turkish army to the Indian army, u said that only in the area of field artillery, u see the Turkish army having a quantitive advantage over the Indian army. But they posses some 3600+ tanks. we on the other hand posses around 1800 T-72 and 650 T-90. They are having so many APC and IFV. We on the other hand possess no APC but have BMP-2 as both APC and IFV. Is the BMP-1 still in service?
ReplyDeleteCan u pls tell whether our ARmy is the 3rd largest in the world according to equipment.? US, Russian Army and PLA are ahead of us in equipment quantity. Can u pls mention any other country which is above indian army in terms of equipment.
Hi Prasun da, what is the staus of our BMD? According to Dr VK Sarawat, the first phase is ready. Do u really believe so. Why isnt te DRDO testring the PAD and Ashwin missile aginst solid fuelled TBM,IRBM.? With Pakistan ready to replace its old arsenal of liquid fuelled TBM, IRBM with more advanced solid fuelled counterparts , the DRDO must test its BMD sometime now.
ReplyDeleteIn which flight phase does the PAD intercept its target?Does it intercept the missile when the missile is traversing from its launch point towards its target or in the terminal phase when the missile dives towards its target?
Is the current BMD employing PAD . AAD an area defense or a point defense weapon?
Will there BMD for the whole country or only select points and areas. The NCR will ofcourse be protected. Will the capitals of the 29 stats be protected? Will the BMD network protect military targets such as supply depots, HQ, storage areas of tanks, artillery, airbases? Also will the military industrial base of the country be protected such as the various Ordance factories, DRDO facilties?
The F-22P are 3200 tonnage and the upgraded ones are likely to be closer to 4000 tonnage. Many of the features of the type 54 will be inco-operated into them...it may even be called F-23P. PN are slowly building up their capabilities. They just need to finalise the deal for the 6 Qing Class Subs....these will be designed inco-operating vertical launch tubes and number of other PN specific reqs
ReplyDelete@Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteVary Many THANX for your replies.I've got few more questions (damn!they never stop coming!:-) )
1.You stated above that IN needs Visby type corvettes-is there any plan on the part of IN to import them??And what role the P 28 and P 28A corvettes would be playing then??
2.As you know,PLA has inducted huge nos of S 300PMU SAMs-then don't you think that IA should also induct long range SAMs like MBDA Aster 30 instead of MRSAM??
3.Can't the AAD be modified or upgraded to an anti aircraft missile??After all,it has got comparable speed,range and altitude to Soviet S 300PMU2!!I just want to know if it's viable or not and if not,why??
4.Multiple news agencies have reported that IA is short of Body armors and ballistic helmets-I wonder what's stopping them getting level 3A BPJs from Tata advanced material limited and those patkas as standard helmets instead of issuing tenders for foreign vendors??!!Any idea??
5.A retired IA Major once told me that OFB still can't manufacture 'match' callibre 7.62X51mm rounds used by snipers and IA has to import them-is that correct??!!
6.You had stated that IAF can not destroy PN ground based C 602 AShCM batteries-can't we use our Cartosat and RISAT series of sattelites or SAR equipped Heron/Searcher 2 UAVs to detect them??
7.Isn't it better to deploy AWACs and aerostat mounted AESA radars instead of ground based radars for ABM and ACM (Anti cruise missile) roles??
8.Is there currently any programme by DRDO to develop GPS or laser guidance systems for 155mm artillery shells??
9.I heard some where that Kalyani group was bidding for a MoD tender to select a production partner for DRDO developed 155mm L52 gun-do you have any info about this??Which kind of gun it will be-toed,wheeled or tracked??
10.And lastly,I found IA's field artillery upgradation to be quite confusing to me.I mean who is going to upgrade which system into what??
Like,
a)who is upgrading the existing 400 Bofors FH 77B L39 howitzers into what callibre??
b)who will upgrade how many M 46 guns into what callibre??
c)which L52 gun will be imported-towed,tracked or wheeled and in what numbers??
d)which callibre 155mm gun OFB developed that is currently undergoing firing trials??
PLEASE clear my confusions once and for all,will be greatful to you.
By the way,how is your helicopter charter service going??Hope everything is fine.GOD bless you.
THANX in advance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
what u think of berthing all our navel asset on western side to karwar base?concentrating navel asset in one base will put it vulnerable to attack or not,specialy nuclear attack
ReplyDeleteSir,you had stated that there is no such thing exists as Sword Fish radar.
ReplyDeleteBut official LRDE site does mention about an 'AESA LRTR'-I wonder what is that radar?Can you clarify?
Thanks..
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWats ur take on this artistic replicas of Nirbhay cruise misslie .... i doubt if with that heavy mounted turbofan engine , it can have efficient loitering capabilities :(
http://livefist.blogspot.in/2012/05/could-this-be-indias-nirbhay-cruise.html
Prasun, big flap in India Today about Su-30 production.
ReplyDeleteHowever, HAL delivered 23 last year.
12-14 should be the rate right now.
I am sure there are problems but isn't there a tendency in the media to exaggerate things ?
Prasun, Don't you think that Indian army has lost its artillery firepower edge over the Pakistan. We hardly have 400 odd 155 mm Bofors FH77 Howitzers and a handful of upgraded M-46's. On the other hand PA has over 1000 pieces of 155 mm M109 and M198 howitzers plus a number of chinese designs????
ReplyDeleteIt has been said though that this gap in Indian artillery has been filled by the induction of 62 SMERCH systems and 80 odd the Sagem 30 equipped Pinaka MBRL's..... Is is possible to neglect the artillery power and replace it with MBRL's ??
And i think most of our artillery regiments are targeting the western frontier , what if one day china attacks us.... the LAC is thousands of Kms long mountaneous border and we require thousands of artillery pieces firing day and night to repulse such a mighty attack. What plans/war tactics and resources Indian Army has today to repulse or absorb such an attack across the whole LAC? I am sure they must not be relying on 105 mm IFG :-D
Sir,I need to ask you a few questions.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that 8km range Helina will have same size to present Nag?
Why did IA deceided to import Konkurs M instead of inducting Nag?Both have same range but Nag has greater warhead mass and fire and forget top attack capability!And when they had made their mind to import an ATGM,then why not the Kornet E?Importing Konkurs M just doesn't make any sence!
Can't we use Astra BVRAAM as a quick reaction SAM on our DDGs,FFGs and corvettes to protect them against inbound AShMS?
Is there any report if our P 8Is will be fitted with any kind of air aorne radar or not?
I have read that the army is scouting the international market to buy rifles with interchangeable barrels of different calibres, like 7.62, 5.56 and 6.68mm. Talks are underway with US' Colt, Baretta from Italy and Israeli Military Industry (IMI).
ReplyDeleteWill this be a costly toy gun or a real functional worthwhile gun, I mean more flexibility may destroy the ruggedness.
sir ,
ReplyDeletea lot of people have confusion about the Field Artillery Rationalization Plan (FARP)..Can u please specify the following..
1) what kind of guns is the MoD looking at.. towed,mounted,self propelled,wheeled,tracked..& in what no.s
2)which guns is the MoD looking at ?
3)according to u , what is the optimum no. of guns that should be bought of what kind..
& please tell us abt your views regarding which guns are best suited for FARP & in what role.
thanks & regards
Thanks for ur reply abt FGFA .. sad to read but we cant clean the rust of years within hours.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.defenseworld.net/go/defensenews.jsp?id=6935&h=NHI%20Industries%20Reiterates%20Concerns%20over%20Sikorsky%20S-70B%20in%20Indian%20Multi%20Role%20Helicopter%20Tender
NHI is complaining before the selection .. do they think S70B may be ahead n cas S70b will definitely be the lowest bidder, they claim s70b did not meet NSQRs or r their concerns real .. ??
NH90 is more advanced in FCS as it has FBW controls and modern design ? which one will be chosen and in wat nos?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lLzEA5ptu-0/T7HfhD7usPI/AAAAAAAAOyc/ZNJtL9j9c50/s1600/1337004308_81275.jpg
ReplyDeletePrasun what is this.
To Shaurya: The IN’s reqmt for new-generation multi-purpose corvettes will have to be met only by the end of this decade, so there’s plenty of time for options like the VISBY to mature in terms of performance & reliability. Then there’s the Gowind family of corvettes that’s on offer as well. The availability of modular designs will likely result in one hull design being selected, and being produced in two distinct versions: one for littoral ASW & the other for littoral ASV.
ReplyDeleteTo Dashu: Can you kindly elaborate by way of some examples in what way am I so soft towards China? Regarding composites, the raw materials are ALL imported, mostly from Russia, with the final co-curing & bonding processes taking place within India.
To Anon@3.49PM: There are no weblinks of the type that you seek. The only way to seek authoritative data on these topoics is to get in touch with both the OEMs and the operators, for it is only they that have possession of the technical manuals listing out the operational parameters. The bulk of Soviet air losses in Afghanistan were accounted for by those platforms that were not equipped with flares dispensers. Very few Mi-25s & Su-25s were downed and that too not due to MANPADS, but by RPG rounds that were fired against them whenever they were flying between valleys.
To Anon@4PM: The Indian Army has 4,000+ tanks. As for APCs, the BTRs are still active, as are the BMP-1s.
To Anon@4.15PM: The BMD project of DRDO is still in R & D mode & will remain so until tested against solid-fuelled ballistic missiles. No MBD system anywhere in the world can be a deployed for countrywide coverage. In India’s case, only the NCR & Mumbai will probably be given BMD coverage. Ballistic missiles are never used against supply depots, HQ, storage areas of tanks, artillery, airbases, etc. For such targets only cruise missiles are employed.
To Anon@7.05PM: The Qing-class SSKs will not have any vertical launch tubes for launching Babur cruise missiles. Instead, customised horizontal launch tubes located alongside torpedo tubes will be used.
To Anon@12.53AM: Not possible, & will never be done.
ReplyDeleteTo Assasin’s Creed: LRTR & Sword Fish are two different things. Sword Fish isn’t the name of any radar, but the name of the DRDO project to acquire & customise the two EL/M-2080 Green Pine LRTRs from ELTA Systems in 1998.
To Bradshaw: That artist’s impression is a 100% copy of Japan’s ASDF-operated TACOM air-launched multi-purpose target drone. Here, read this: www.icas-proceedings.net/ICAS2004/PAPERS/075.PDF
In terms of field artillery assets Pakistan is definitely ahead of India, even in areas of MBRLs. The Smerch-M has 90km-range, while the Pakistani AR-2 MBRL has 120km-range. MBRLs can never replace howitzers. Along the LAC, deployment of around 400 motorised 155mm/52-cal howitzers in Sikkim, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, eastern Ladakh & Arunachal Pradesh should suffice. Given the choice between the 39-cal LW-155 & a motorised howitzer that could be transported by a C-130J-30, I would choose the latter any day. And for the same reason, left to me, I would discard the OFB 45-cal FH-77B & opt for the Kalyani Group’s version of GHN-45.
To SBM: The follow-on 40 Su-30MKI units ordered about three years ago are now arriving from IRKUT Corp in SKD condition in successive tranches of eight each, with HAL only doing final assembly. That’s how the annual production rate has ramped up & will remain so till 2015, following which the 42 newly-ordered ones will also be assembled by HAL at a similar rate (eight per year). But where in that INDIA TODAY report is there any exaggeration(?), although exaggeration takes place a lot elsewhere, likes BROADSWORD’s latest discredited swipe at the FGFA.
To Souvik: No, the HELINA’s length will be more that of the Nag. My personal view is that the Nag should have been ordered for all those BMP-2 ICVs that are already equipped with TISAS target acquisition/fire-control hardware. The Astra BVRAAM should indeed have been re-engineered & developed as a fire-and-forget vertically launched QR-SAM/SR-SAM immediately after the DRDO terminated the Trishul SHORADS technology demonstration programme. Like the Mica EM/IR, the Astra QR-SAM too should have been developed with two optional seekers for terminal guidance: active radar & imaging infra-red seeker, with the latter option being for combating sea-skimming anti-ship cruise missiles. All P-Is will have two types of airborne radars from Raytheon & Telephonics.
ReplyDeleteTo Mr RA 13: It will be functionally worthwhile, since several other established land forces too are exercising such options.
To Anon@10.03PM: The Indian Army wants new-build 155mm/52-cal solutions in wheeled, towed & tracked versions, while for the towed M-46 upgunning programme, only 155mm/45-cal solutions are being sought as they’re the only ones available from Kalyani Group/ELBIT Systems & Punj Lloyd/Yugoimport SDPR. But the OFB & DRDO along with BEL have forced the MoD to instead explore the possibility of acquiring 155mm/45-cal versions of the FH-77B. To me that’s a retrograde step, as is the Army HQ’s move to acquire four types of 155mm howitzers. Therefore, it remains to be seen what type of towed, wheeled & tracked 155mm howitzer will ultimately be selected: 155mm/45-cal or 155mm/52-cal. If the latter is selected, then the best choice will be the Caesar 155mm/52-cal motorised howitzer from L & T/Nexter Systems, since it is air-transportable. If 2,000 such howitzers are acquired along with up to 600 upgunned 155mm/45-cal M-46s & 290 LW-155s, then all existing deficiencies can be overcome. There’s no need for towed & tracked 155mm/45-cal or 52-cal howitzers.
To KSK: For naval shipborne helicopters, digital FBW-FCS is not a critical reqmt, and it only serves to increase the procurement & maintenance costs. HUMS installation on the S-70Bs can easily be done in-country. Therefore, from an L-1 standpoint, Sikorsky’s S-70B Seahawk equipped with L-3 Ocean Systems’ HELRAS ultra low-frequency dunking sonar will be the best bet, along with Kongsberg’s Penguin ASCMs or even the stealthy NSM. I was one of the first to explain to IN HQ in writing as far back as 2005 that the S-70B will be much better than the MH-60R, since the S-70B comes with HELRAS, while the MH-60R & NH-90 both come with the FLASH low-frequency dunking sonar from THALES. Now it appears that the IN has seen the light of day & has zeroed in on the HELRAS, as well as the LFATS ultra low-frequency towed-array sonar (also from L-3 Ocean Systems), with BEL being nominated as the exclusive marketing/product support agent in India for both the HELRAS & LFTAS.
To Anon@11.17PM: Maybe some kind of accessory used by SWAT teams.
To ANURAG: For the next-generation ASW & ASV corvettes ab imported design customised for the IN will be selected. The P-28 ASW corvettes are far too big and more units of this type won’t be built as the design is not contemporary. Smaller vessels are reqd for coastal ASW roles. Regarding LR-SAM the Barak-8 is already on order for the IAF. The AAD is not a viable LR-SAM & the reasons why it isn’t was explained a long time ago by Dr V K Saraswat. In terms of manoeuvrability it can pull only 7G, whereas the Barak-2 MR-SAM & Barak-8 LR-SAM can withstand 80Gs. In India’s case, LR-SAMs are NOT reqd in large quantities since the aerial threats against India don’t include high-flying bombers like B-52s. The reqmt for rounds used for sniper rifles is quite small and therefore the OFB hasn’t found it economical to produce them locally. C-602 ASCM TELs being land-mobile, one would require persistent surveillance by RISAT-type satellites, something possible only if six to eight such satellites are in orbit at the same time. Aerostat-mounted AESA-type radars will come in handy for cruise missile defence, not for BMD. For BMD, at least four missile monitoring satellites parked in geostationary orbit are reqd. No guided 155mm artillery rounds are under development anywhere in India. Regarding the Kalyani Group, everything about its activities is available in my DEFEXPO 2012 Show Report Part-1 thread. Right now, only TATA/Denel Land Systems, L & T/Nexter Systems & Mahindra/BAE Systems are all offering 155mm/52-cal solutions. The Kalyani Group & OFB are both offering only 155mm/45-cal towed howitzer solutions. There’s only some 290 FH-77Bs left out of the original 410 39-cal howitzers delivered. Consequently, the Indian Army wants the OFB to build 114 FH-77Bs as attrition replacements, & also offer an upgraded FH-77B featuring a 45-cal barrel in cooperation with BEL, a prototype of which is now undergoing firing-trials. The Kalyani Group, on the other hand, is focussed on two projects: upgrading some 700 M-46 130mm guns into 155mm/45-cal standard (this being done by buying out all the proprietary design and manufacturing data from Austria’s NORICUM/Voest Alpine (all this was first developed by the legendary Canadian Dr Gerry Bull in 1983/1984 at the request of China’s NORINCO and it became a great success, since almost 1,000 such guns & their base-bleed rounds also designed by Dr Bull were produced by NORINCO); & secondly bidding in competition with OFB for producing in India an upgraded GHN-45 155mm/45-cal towed howitzer, this too with full ToT from NORICUM/Voest Alpine, including a total buyout of all manufacturing facilities in Austria.
ReplyDeleteContinued from above: Incidentally, way back in 1987 in Bangkok I had an interesting meeting with a senior marketing official of ARMSCOR who explained to me in detail all about the GHN-45’s evolution. It all began with Dr Gerry Bull being approached by ARMSCOR to design & develop such a howitzer in two versions, towed & wheeled self-propelled. Consequently, Dr Bull sought the help of Spain’s Santa Barbara (since ARMSCOR didn’t know how to design or fabricate such howitzers) to build the prototypes of the now-famous G-5 (towed) & G-6 (wheeled) models. After this was done, as part of a secret operation, a replica of Santa Barbara’s artillery manufacturing facilities in Spain was created in South Africa, which is now known as Denel Land Systems. It was here that the G-5s & G-6s were built not only for South Africa, but also for Iraq & Oman. At the same time, a variant of the G-5 was designed by Dr Bull for export worldwide, since ARMSCOR during the Apartheid days was severely restricted in terms of its export options. This variant for global export became the GHN-45 & NORICUM/Voest Alpine was the buyer if all IPRs for this gun from Dr Bull. And it was this very GHN-45 that emerged No1 in India’s field artillery competition (between 1982 & 1986) both in terms of performance & cost. Not only did it offer increased range (out to 39.5km), but was also air-transportable, & was the cheapest. This is a matter of record, with all the paperwork now rotting with the MoD’s & Army HQ’s archives. The FH-77B & GIAT Industries’ TR-155 were far more expensive & were never air-transportable. Based on these elementary facts alone, the FH-77B should have been rejected outright, but as we all now know, corruption came out tops and the rest is all history. It is rather ironic today that the GHN-45, which was rejected 26 years ago in favour of the FH-77B, is today making a re-entry back into India as the Kalyani Group’s offer in competition with the OFB’s upgraded FH-77B 155mm/45-cal towed howitzer.
ReplyDeletesir,
ReplyDeletewill russia deliver only 8 sukhois in skd/ckd condition annually ?
in this way it wud take a long time (9yrs) to get the 72 aircraft i.e till 2021..i thougth the sukhoi project was to complete by 2018..
all 272 aircraft..
2) u said the indian army has 4000+ tanks..as far as i know the IA has 60 armoured regiments..each having 60 tanks in 4 squadrons each..where are the balance 400+ ?
3) acc to u 2000 SP howitzers with 600 upgunned m-46s & 290 lw 155 wud suffice for india..but this is only enuf for arnd 150 arty regiments ?
what will the rest 50 or so arty regiments use ? upgunned bofors ?
4) what abt the rocket arty..what is plan for pinaka induction..
are 80 pinakas 62 smerchs enuf..?
5)i heard there r only 38 smerchs & not 62 as widely believed..12 each for the 3 strike corps & 2 for parades..where r the rest ?
6) can u plzz tell why on earth the indian army doesn't hv para qualified armoured regiments..not even 1?
& why does the whole para brigade has only 1 engineer & signal company each? is it enuf..does it mean out of 60 engineer regiments only 1 company is para qualified ?
Thansk a lot Prasun for your reply. By the way, the T-90's acquired by IA are without the active protection suites SHTORA as deployed by the Russians. Long ago , an RFI was issued for these for global vendors and subsequently A $150 million contract was signed with SAAB for its LEDS-150 system which uses mongoose missile for active kills. But since than i have not seen a single T 90 equipped with the Swedish system. Have we incorporated this on T-90's or we are still looking for alternative systems like Trophy or Iron Fist ??
ReplyDeleteAlso if you can throw some light on the active protection suite on Arjun Mk 2 .... i suppose that must of Israeli origin or similar to Iron Fist. And do you think buying T-90's or going for Costly Arjun models, we can have purchased or licensed the production of Merkava 4 tanks from Israel ??
HI Prasun
ReplyDeletewhy cant we buy 100 2nd hand F-16 from the US and put israeli systems like the 2052 AESA rad and new missiles like the barak SAM converted to a AAM . It would be 4th + gen fighter . The LCA MK@ will come only in 2020 and till then all our mig series will be obselete. Please comment
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThanx for the rply. But I was talking not only about design maturity point of view, size and speed should be other important factors too. For surprise attack or strike purposes shouldnt ee opt for smaller, faster, agile true FAC-M than bigger multi-purpose corvettes. What do you think? Also stealth being an important factor for those attacks, no matter how much stealthy the design is a 1200-1500ton corvette will have bigger signature compare to 400-500ton boat & costly toou. Isn't it?
Another topic, I fully support your view that IN should have opted for Vl-MICA or RAM for their new generation surface combatants. Has IN changed their stand recently on this topic or they are still happy with Barak-1?
@Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteWMT for you reply.By the way,I knew that overhead missile launch detection sattelites are best sensors for deploying a BMD network.I was comparing between aerostat mounted radars and ground based radars for ABM role-so which one is better between these two for BMD role??
2.By the way,don't you think that DRDO should seriously consider to fit the upcoming Rustom H MALE UAV with a miniaturised version of Kaveri turbofan engine and arm them with 2-4 Helina ATGMs (when ready)??
3.I heard (most probably on Livefist) that DRDO had started development work on a miniaturised turbofan (they named that 'Laghu shakti' or something like that) to power Nirbhay LRCMs and AURA UCAV-what's the present status of that project??
4.Is there any plan to develop an armed version of Daksh ROV??(I had heard that DRDO was thinking on arming it with Mag 58 GPMG).
5.Has the development work of the Indo-Israelli supersonic Air Delivered Munition (ADM) been started yet??
6.Do you know if our IAF has shown any interest in air launched Brahmos??
.
Hey sir,thanks for replying to my previous question.
ReplyDeleteBy the way,do you know how many ordnance factory are currently producing 155mm artillery shells and in what approximate numbers per year?And do you know whether the Modular Bag Charges developed by HEMRL has gone into production or not?
And is there any new 120mm and 125mm FSAPDS rounds currently under development by ARDE?
To Bradshaw: The LEDS-150 installation has been held up due to delays in fixing the schedule of upgradation of the first 310 T-90S MBTs, work on which should have begun in 2010 at the end of the half-lives of these MBTs. The APS for the Arjun Mk1A was meant to be the Iron Fist but now there will have to be a re-bid due to IMI’s disqualification/blacklisting by the MoD. In any case, the LEDS -150 can go on board as well with ease.
ReplyDeleteTo RAD: Very simple, because Uncle Sam wouldn’t allow it.
To Shaurya: If you look at the photo of the TKMS-designed version of the Visby corvette I uploaded in Part-1 of the DEFEXPO 2012 show report, you’ll see that this version is much smaller and lighter than the original Visby design. The version being proposed for India will displace not more than 550 tonnes. Regarding new-generation CIWS, IIR-guided vertically-launched missiles are being looked at & evaluated for the IAC-1 as well as Project 15B DDGs, Project 17A FFGs & Project 28A ASW corvettes.
To ANURAG: As I had already explained earlier, aerostat-mounted radars don’t offer any greater advantages for BMD over LRTRs like the Green Pine, especially when such LRTRs can easily be sited on hillocks or higher-altitude grounds. Theoretically, everything is possible, but the question to be asked is: is it practicable. For instance, just because China wants to protect itself with LR-SAMs against bombers like the B-52 & B-1B doesn’t mean that India too should follow suit. Similarly, what’s the use of equipping any kind of UAV with LGBs & ATGMs when there’s on policy as yet within India of using such UCAVs for either covert strike (like the CIA does) or for close air support (for which the reqd kind of airspace management protocols have not yet been evolved by the IAF)? As I had explained quite some time back, there is a huge reqmt for HALE-UAVs ONLY for missions like maritime surveillance/recce, for which the Rustom-2 UAV powered by a single Kaveri turbofan should be just fine. Regarding the GTRE’s Laghu Shakti turbofan, it is under development with help from Russia’s NPO Saturn, but it is meant for unmanned air vehicles (as per MoD’s statement) & not for any kind of cruise missile. For powering subsonic cruise missiles with 650km-range, the existing HAL-developed PTAE-7 turbojet is good enough. Armed versions of the Daksh were on display at DEFEXPO 2012. Work on co-developing the ADM began in early 2009. Of course the IAF remains interested in air-launched BrahMos.
To Souvik: The OFB is indeed producing 155mm rounds, but only of a limited variety. Will elaborate on that soonest in a new thread. BMCS for 105mm howitzer, 130mm M-46 & 155mm FH-77B is already being mass-produced by two private-sector Indian companiues—one in Pune & one in Delhi.
you have mentioned in the above comments that india imports raw material from russia for making carbon fibers. Poly acrylonitrile(PAN) is the raw material for making carbon fibers and NAL has developed the polymer and transferred the technology to kemrock industries for commercialisation.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nal.res.in/pdf/kemrock.pdf