Total Pageviews

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

China’s Latest Weapons For Export Shown At Eurosatory 2012


NORINCO of China showcased two of its latest products for the export market at the recently concluded EUROSATORY 2012 expo in France. The MBT-3000 has been touted as hosting a digital vectronics suite, carries 38 rounds of 125mm ammunition (including 22 in an armoured autoloader carousel) with a loading speed of eight rounds per minute. The MBT’s gunner and commander are provided with second-generation cooled thermal imagers, while the driver uses an uncooled thermal imager. The 1,300hp powerpack uses a water-cooled turbocharged electronically-controlled diesel engine. In the years to come, once can safely expect the Al Khalid Mk2 MBT to be an exact replica of the MBT-3000.
The second NORINCO product displayed in scale-model form at EUROSATORY 2012 was the Sky Dragon MR-SAM system, which is an export variant of the LY-80E MR-SAM system.
Now, notice how similar the design of the Sky Dragon’s four-cell MR-SAM erector/launcher (above) is to that of the Babur LACM’s three-cell erector/launcher (below). As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words!!!

21 comments:

Mr. Ra 13 said...

I think Pakistan, N. Korea and Iran may be the only Beneficiaries of all these programs.

KSingh said...

Prasun, can you tell me why the IN still uses the C-630 as its sole CIWS gun on board all of its ships when the system is almost SEVENTY years old and there are better systems on the market like Goal keeper/Phalanx. What is the point on specning BILLIONs on warships and systems like BARAK-1 when the last line of defence is so outdated? At the very least the IN could have gone for the 630M1-2 with dual gatling guns. Has the operational use of the Phanlanx onboard INS Jalashwa changed any mindsets within IN?Are there any plans to put a new CIWS gun on fuutre IN platforms?

Anonymous said...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-to-launch-AWACS-project-to-counter-China-Pak/articleshow/14253161.cms
Prasun Da,
The above link says that the follow on order of two additional Phalcon AWACS "has run into some rough weather due to sharp cost escalation".
Please clarify wheather India has given the order of two additional Phalcon AWACS or not.

bradshaw said...

Hi Prasun, please throw some light on the recently acquired anti armour capabilities of Indian army. There is lot of descrepancy as far as information on the internet is concerned. Wiki says , IA already has 12000 spike missiles with 350 launchers and about 60,000 javelins on Order as well as 443 NAG missiles in production. Is this true and how much is acquired till date.

Now, what is the need to order 4000 generation old Milan and 15,000 Konkurs missiles ???? Or it is just to keep the old BDL lines running ????

How effective is the recently acquired CBU 97 censor fused bombs as a anti - armour weapon.

Any news on 24 Harpoon block 2 ordered sometime back. Are they delivered and what they are used with? AFAIK they are not part of the package with P-8I's and IN wants to integrate them with Jaguars for anti - ship role. May b a replacement for the Sea eagle missile but only 24 ordered :)

amey said...

Thanks for the brilliant job u r doing keep it going sir.
1. Any update on MiG-27 fleet ?
When it will be operational?

2. What guidance is konkur m?
Soclas?

3.Has indegenous prod of su-30mki run into rough weather?
Wht r reasons for it?wht steps r being taken to streamline it?

4.Has initial batch of 50 su-30 started to being upg by irkut to super su std?

5.When will 1st of the other newly built 42 super su-30 will arrive in IND?

6. Are cbu-105 delivered to IAF?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSingh: I agree, the AK-630 or even the Kashtan ought to be replaced by newer hybrid systems like a combination of the Palma & Barak-1. The Vulcan Phalanx is definitely notches above the AK-630, but the Palma too is a fantastic system as it has an optronic target acquisition-cum-fire-control system, which is deemed critical for point-defence.

To Anon@10.23AM: What has run into rough weather is the concerned news reporter’s ability to separate wheat from chaff.

To Bradshaw: Since when did Wiki become the holy grail as far as Indian military hardware procurements go? Neither the Spike nor the Javelin have been ordered as yet. The Milan-2Ts on order are reqd for replacing some of the 16,000 rounds that were ordered from the 1980s onwards. The Konkurs-Ms have been ordered to replace the older Konkurs ATGMs. The Nag should have been ordered in far larger numbers to replace the older Konkurs. The 24 Harpoon Block-2s are for the IAF Jaguar IMs. Sea Eagles were never acquired in large numbers, only 40 were acquired. As for air-delivered sensor-fuzed munitions, their effectiveness depends on how accurately they’re delivered from the airborne platform. If the platform is equipped with RLG-INS-based nav-attack system & backed up by a LDP, then the ordnance delivery will be pretty effective.

Anonymous said...

"Palma too is a fantastic system"

Coming from you that's a rare praise.But all I see is a compact and improved Kashtan with Optronic sensor instead of Radar. What is so special about it ? Did the Russians manage to fix the previous issues plaguing the Kashtan in this one. Its been reported Palam cannot reload its rockets like the Kashtan.

Anonymous said...

Prasun,when the Barak-1 has become outdated and cant even intercept and destroy Exocet,C-602 subsonic ashm let alone supersonic ashm, they will the IN install them onboard the P-15A DDG?

Why cant the IN go for newer C-RAM missiles like RAM block 2 which can effectively counter supersonic threats or a VLS version of the Python-4. The Python-4 will be the best choice.The IN should replace all BARAK-1 CIWS on existing frontline warships with some newer more capable systems.

Does the IN have full operational control over the Jalashwa and can it be used in war?

How does the Palma improve upon the Kashtan simply by using an optronic fire control system instead of radars? A dual combo of radar and optonics should have been the best choice. Radar based systems have far more aquisition and tracking range than their optronics based counterparts.

Anonymous said...

Prasun with the disqualification of the Skyranger/Skyshield manufacturer Reinmetal. You stated the the army has fewer options left in the market. It does have a alternate in the Centurion C-RAM though on the expensive side. It uses both RADAR and FLIR for target aquisiton. It has performed well in the field.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/north_america/united_states/artillery_vehicle/centurion_c-ram/pictures/Centurion_C-RAM_Counter-Rocket_Artillery_Mortar_weapons_system_United_States_American_US_army_002.jpg

Anonymous said...

Sir,
1.Is the army replacing its inventory of old 16000 Milan with just 4000 new gen Milan-2T and the older stocks of Konkurs with 15000 new build Konkurs?
2. Whats the difference between the previous fleet of Konkurs and the present one. THEY STILL EMPLOY SACLOS & HAVE THE SAME RANGE.
3.How many CBU-97 sensor fuzed munitions has the IAF ordered?
4.According to wiki ,the no of MiG-21 in IAF service is:
MiG21Bis - 56
MiG21Bison - 138
MiG21M/MF - 56
Is this true?

amey said...

Sir, please answer my question above
thanks in advance!!!

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
1.What do you make out of the MiG-27 fleet?will it ever fly once again.Is the IAF trying out anything to solve the problem.Why arent the Ruskies being contacted in this matter?
2.In wiki i read,"This was an export variant of the MiG-27M provided in 1986 to India in knock-down kits for license-assembly. It was the same as the MiG-27M, except the undernose fairing for the infra-red search and track (IRST) sensor had a single window instead of several, like the one on the original MiG-27M. A total of 150 were assembled by India. India refers to this model as the MiG-27M Bahadur, while MiG-27L is the Mikoyan export designation."
3.Cant a modified version of the Litening 3 or some other nav and attack pods be squeezed into the nose?
4.Can the IRST on board the MiG-29UPG be used for navigation over complex terrain under bad weather conditions and in zero visibility.
5.Has attrition replacement been sought for the single Su-30,2 Mirages and 2 MiG-29.?
6.Is the IAF paying proper attention to SEAD,DEAD.They are an integral part of any air campaign and is especially necessary against an af with numerical superiority and complex mutli-layered SAM networks. They are most important to prevent aircraft losses.
7.Is the IAF interested in IAI Iron Dome and the Tamir missile or any other CIWS or such systems. They are important tp protect vital military assets and airbases in the NW,NE and along the LAC from massed fire assaults with LACM, TBM, NLOS-BSM & other standoff glide bombs.
8.China nd Pakistan should each award the MoD their highest military honour for the prestiguous service it is doing for them.The Defence Minister should also be awarded. He is busy busting scams,going by the book, blacklisting firms on the advice of CBI.What he and the CBI are not getting are the detoriating conditions of the armed forces.They are simply deplorable. Not a single piece of artillery has been bought. Many existing platforms are affected for shortage of spares.The DRDO cant design a single piece of military hardware of its own.The OFB cant come up with a good assault rifle.Nor can they manufacture critical ammo without ToT from foreign companies.In the midst of these MoD has blacklisted IMI,Rheinmetall AD.They must have come up with abrilliant and ingenious idea of producing all the high tech stuff which are to be otherwise imported in a JV of MoD & CBI and sve the country millons of dollars.

Anurag said...

The Arjun Mk2, which will for all intents & purposes will become the FMBT, will have all the enhancements that we now see on the ‘avatar’ of the Leopard 2; namely an integrated all digital vectronics suite that includes various situational awareness & self-protection aids; plus the 1,500kp power pack.

But you had earlier stated that it will be the Arjun MkIII (with its 140mm high velocity smooth barrel gun,unmanned turret,1800 hp engine) which will become the FMBT-What happened to that project????Has it been shelved????

2.Do you know what type of radar antenna is mounted onboard PLAAF's IL 76 AWACS and its estimated tracking range against fighter sized targets????

3.Can you give any idea wrt possible maximum power output and tracking range of DRDO AWACS????

4.Is that news true that DRDO is building a larger 360 degree AWACS follow on to the mini AWACS????

5.One fellow,claiming to be an employee in NPOL told that HUMSA NG is a VLF sonar and infact better than Nagan ATAS and even better than current systems of Russia and China-do you think this claim holds any truth????And if true,then can't NPOL develop a VLF atas to replace the Nagan atas????

6.And lastly'will it be too wrong if we say that after arrival of MBT Arun,India has surpassed China at least on field of tank development????What do you think????

PLEASE try to reply.

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

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

This firing which has been going on
on the LOC must be stopped with
massive force by India

Why dont we RE START the Artillerry DUELS that happened earlier AND show the Pakis their PLACE

SherKhan said...

Hi Prasun,

Indeed a picture is worth a lot!

However to see what is in front of one's self one needs a reasonable eyesight and a logical (objective) mind and most importantly without prejudice.

Have a look at this GLCM Tomahawk launcher (it's around 20yrs ago):

http://science.howstuffworks.com/cruise-missile1.htm

Wonder if pak have copied this?

This one you don't have to square the circle :-)

accidental loser said...

Ok. That cud be a good reason, but what the tricycle provides is the external shock and damping absorbers which somehow cud tak the pressure of impact on a crash landing. This increases the chances of survival if something goes wrong. Also a wheeled helo could easily be maneuverable on the ground instead a skid type one. So what say prasun!!!!! i was talking about the ALH then and not about LCH. And hey, seems like u missed the second ques. abt AA-12's seeker. Do answer please!!!!!!!!!!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.50AM: There are two versions of the Palma available: one with only twin six-barreled 30mm cannons & one with the cannons plus SAMs. I was referring to the former cannon-only version version. The Kashtan’s fire-control radar had & continues to have problems on board the three Batch-1 Project 1135.6 FFGs. It is a systems integration problem peculiar to these FFGs and has to do with EMI issues, which have never been resolved. That’s the reason one doesn’t see the Kashtan CIWS on the three Batch-2 Project 1135.6 FFGs.

To Anon@10.17AM: The Barak-1s will go on board the three Project 15A DDGs. For countering high subsonic ASCMs like C-802, SM-39, AM-39 or the Harpoon’s variants, what’s required is a combination of cannons capable of churning 10,000 rounds a minute (like the AK-630M-2 or Palma) and whose fire-control is optronics-based, plus IIR-guided missiles like the RAM or the VL-MICA or the VL version of the AIM-132 ASRAAM now being developed by MBDA. RAFAEL has to date not developed any version of the Python-4/5 that can be vertically launched against ASCMs. The INS Jalashwa is sovereign Indian property (unlike INS Chakra, which is Russia-owned) & therefore India has full operational sovereignty over this vessel. Lastly, it is a mistake/fallacy to believe that radar-based CIWS have greater acquisition/tracking range than optronics-based fire-control systems. When it comes to ASCMs, target acquisition/tracking begins when the targetted warship’s passive ESM sensors first detect the inbound ASCM when it is still some 20nm away from the warship. With today’s sensor-fusion technologies, one can easily synchronise the functions of an existing CIWS’ optronic fire-control system with those of the shipborne ESM sensors for achieving accurate target cueing.

To Anon@10.25AM: The Centurion C-RAM is a CIWS-type system aimed at neutralizing inbound PGMs, while the reqmts of both the IA & IAF regarding cannon-based air-defence artillery systems are totally different. The IA & IAF don’t want a CIWS-type AAA system, instead they want a system capable of targetting & destroying manned combat aircraft. In my view, therefore, the best option is to acquire additional ZU-23-2 cannons that can be truck-mounted and then upgrade them locally with new-generation optronic fire-control systems. That should take care of the reqmts of both the IA & IAF.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.37AM: Even when India ordered the Milan-2 way back in 1982, they were always ordered in successive tranches of 4,000. Both Milan-2T & Konkurs-M have tandem warheads, whereas Milan-2 & Konkurs didn’t. Got it? Data on CBU-97 SFMs is available at the US DSCA’s website on Congressional notifications of arms sales. How can there be 138 MiG-21 Bisons when only 125 were procured & of those some have already crashed?

To ANURAG: I don’t remember describing the Arjun Mk3 in that manner. AS for the FMBT, considering the low-level R & D base of India when it comes to developing such armoured vehicles, I personally believe that developing a 50-tonne FMBT is a pipedream & will only waste the Indian taxpayer’s money. Instead, the Arjun Mk2 now under development ought to become the FMBT over the next six years. The PLAAF’s KJ-2000 AEW & C platform uses a mechanically rotating antenna whose range is comparable to that of the PHALCON. The DRDO’s AEW & CS laboratory testbed has yet to enter the flight-test phase & until that happens, no performance figures/parameters will be available. What the DRDO now wants is to acquire a larger widebodied airframe, preferably from Bombardier Aerospace, this being for accommodating additional manpower/operating consoles reqd for AEW & C functions as well as for BMD-related airspace surveillance. The S-band AESA-based radar will be the same as that on the EMB-145 AEW & CS. Regarding point 5, you will have to ask this so-called NPOL employee to reveal the performance parameters of new-generation HMS/ATAS solutions from China & Russia, if indeed he claims to have access to such data. The panoramic HUMSA-NG is a VLF active/passive sonar which is hull-mounted, & the Nagan too is a VLF sonar which is an active/passive towed-array system. Hull-mounted sonars (HMS) have never competed against towed-array sonars (ATAS) & therefore comparing the performance of HMS with ATAS cannot be compared in a competitive manner. In fact, HMS & ATAS complement one another & are used together in a synchronised manner—this being the bistatic mode. In fact, the LFATS ATAS from L-3 Ocean Systems/BEL which the IN will procure is not even VLF, but ULF!!! New-generation HMS, ATAS & dunking sonars coming out of the US, France & Germany are ALL ULF-based, since VLF is already old stuff. Therefore, for all intents & purposes, this “NPOL employee” must have blogged when he had either exceeded his daily intake of toddy, or was smoking something which balanced individuals don’t!!!
Lastly, China began developing MBTs way back in the early 1960s and has since then developed seven successive generations of MBTs (Type 59, Type 69, Type 80, Type 85, Type 90, Type 99 & the MBT-3000), while India has only begun with the Arjun Mk1/Mk1A. The Chinese lead in MBT developments is therefore obvious.

To Anon@6.29PM: The cross-LoC firing is limited to only one sub-sector & therefore doesn’t warrant horizontal or vertical escalation.

To SherKhan: No, nothing from the ground-launched T-LAM was copied by either China or Pakistan. Instead, what ought to be compared is the configuration, i.e. instead of the four-cell T-LAM launcher, focus should be on the three-cell launch configuration of both the Babur & CJ-10, and the common vehicle chassis employed by both the Babur & CJ-10. Also to be noted is the vertical-launch configuration of Ukraine’s Korshun LACM, which has since been replicated by the Novator Klub in a four-cell configuration.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Accidental Loser: If wheeled helo could easily be manoeuvrable on the ground instead of a skid-type one, then why are the Dhruv Mk3 & Rudra (Dhruv Mk4) both having skids? Why are the AS.550C3 Fennec & Bell 407 LOH/LUH equipped with skids? AS for the R-77, I’m not aware of the existence of any kind of dual-mode terminal seeker.

Anonymous said...

KJ 2000 does not have any mechanically rotating antenna...it probably carries an ASEA radar in triangular configuration...can you confirm...this configuration suggested by chinese since then found its way to israeli PHALCON AWACS... not the other way round!

Sujoy Majumdar said...

Prasun Da,

The IAF had laid out 600 technical parameters for the various fighters in the MMRCA selection program . For the benefit of your readers will you plz state what are these 600 technical parameters.