Total Pageviews

Saturday, August 4, 2012

Snapshots Of Combined PLA Army/Air Force Exercises Now Underway In TAR


Anurag said...

@Prasun da,
According to some sources,''Pakistan Army still occupies peak 5353 which lies inside of Indian side of LOC in Kargil sector.The artillery observers based there have a clear view of NH 1D which joins Kargil with rest of Kashmir and multiple attemts by Indian Army to dislodge them with concentrated artillery bombardment were unsuccessfull.''

1.I want to ask how serious advantage this peak gives to Pakistan Army against us??

2.During any future conflict,how sesiously may Indian Army suffer due to the occupation of peak 5353 by PA??

3.And what do you think Indian Army's possible options and strategy should be to capture that peak if situation demands so??

4.Do you have any idea about possible induction time of Tactical Communication System??

5.I have heard that heavy long range SAMs like S 300V/S 300PMU2 etc are less effective against modern multi role fighters sea skimming anti ship missiles-is there any truth in this??And if ture then why??

6.Do you think that Arjun MkII may get a 120mm smooth barrel gun??

7.Don't you think that Russian approach of fitting their FMBT with 140mm or 152mm gun is better than the western approach??And won't it be better if ARDE can fit the Arjun MkII and III with a 140mm gun??

8.As per some Pakistani keyboard generals,the KLJ 7 radar's range has been increased to 130+ km by PAC with 'a little bit of tweaking'-how the the hell that could be done without increasing the signal power output??

Hope you can reply.
THANX in advance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Anonymous said...

sir you said that the turret cannot be redesigned cuz that wud be cost prohibitive but can be "modified"....

what sort of modification are you suggesting ??

why cant the amap be straightway procured and modified for use on arjun...

wud shifting the arjuns gunner sight alittle be prove to be alot cost prohibitive..??

in this very thread you posted a pic that shows that mk2 will have a IR JAMMER....which is certainly it for real or just some company ad stuff...

why just an ir jammer why not a laser jammer as well ??

how wud the tarang mk2 rwr fare against likes modern aesa radars like the ones on f 35 , f 18 , f22 ??

any updates on the tejas mk2 ??

i have heard that (not from media) that ada has still not decided whether to use the current but enlarged intakes or totally redesigned intakes that allow future airflow requirements of an even more powerful engine as this true..??

Anonymous said...

sir what good is an era panel that exists only one side !!!???

era protection only for half the front glacis !!!

this is simply ridiculous......cvrde has simply made us the laughing stock !!

lets just hope that they drive this lunacy to just prototype level...and somebody drills some sense into them so that they deal with this mess...

what are major differences between arjun mk2 and arjun mk-1-a ??

Pierre Zorin said...

Ajay Shukla says the US is holding on tech transfer (about Javelin) but isn't it he who is economical with the truth for two reasons? 1) India doesn't have the industrial or technological base to absorb advanced tech YET 2) No country who has intellectual rights will share 100% secret even for a sum because that is how it would maintain supremacy and an edge?

Anonymous said...

@ Anurag 10 :47 AM

I guess the PAKIS have got under your skin as these days they are CELEBRATING their "VICTORY in Kargil"
on their forums by telling the whole world that they have got Pt 5353

The fact is that this peak even if it is occupied by India will be very easily reoccupied by the enemy because it has a very favourable geography and terrain
in that area around Pt 5353

The POK base in the rear Headquarters area of Gultari is just on the other side of the 5353 from which the enemy can easily CLIMB back on 5353

You must SEE the LOC before getting perturbed by these PAKI claims of success

The LOC and the peaks and valleys are such HUGE and imposing features that that it is NOT possible to OCCUPY each and every peak EVEN though we have a HUGE force on the LOC

What matters is that IF they try
to stop Indian convoys how much retaliatory DAMAGE we can do

I will post MORE info soon

Anonymous said...

@ Anurag

Please read this article

AN EXCERPT from this article

When Operation Parakram began a little over three years ago, both the Indian and Pakistani armies began trading ferocious artillery fire up and down the LoC. In the high mountains, sudden winds and unpredictable atmospheric conditions ensure that shells rarely land where the gunners intend them to. But, with their direct line of observation, Pakistani forces on Point 5353 should have been able to pass on corrections which could have enabled their artillery to obliterate Sando Top.

If, that is, the Pakistani troops on Point 5353 had been given the chance. Indian soldiers on three posts, Point 5165, Point 5240 and Point 5100, guided their superior 155-millimetre Bofors howitzers with devastating accuracy. Pakistani troops on Point 5353 were first hit with smoke-filled mortar shells, to flush them out of their bunkers, and then with air-burst artillery, which showered down shards of metal at supersonic speed. Well over 40 Pakistanis are believed to have died on Point 5353, troops who could not be reinforced since the Indian soldiers on Point 5165 and Point 5240 could hit their supply lines. India lost little other than an ammunition dump at Dras. Although each shell costs up to Rs.100,000, cash is, contrary to public impression, considered as less valuable than human life. Pakistan believed that India intended to take Point 5353. Indian planners probably considered the option, but decided against it. "What is the point?" says one top officer who served in the area at the time. "Mountain warfare sucks in never ending numbers of men for the occupation of the next height. Where does it end? At Point 5353? The Marpo-La pass? Olthingthang? Gilgit? Skardu?"

Anonymous said...

@ Anurag

The EXCERPT which I have posted
shows that from the ADJOINING peaks around Pt 5353 India can INFLICT a
LOT of pain and Damage to the Pakis

And Secondly as the Army Officer who was in this area has remarked that

Pt 5353 is Nature's gift to the Pakis Let them have it and GLOAT

In the NEXT war we will WIPE OUT
even SKARDU in POK with Brahmos fired from SU 30 Mki AND SMERCH MBRLs

Anonymous said...

Can you pls post an article about the progessess made in the field of cruise, bsm , tbm defense, the various procurements ,IA & IAF are making to implement it , R&D regarding AD-1,2 sams.

Each Army AD regiment has 3 batteries each with 6 launchers. That means 72 Spyder sams per regiment for a total of 288 missiles in total for IA. Can you pls shed some light on the IAF Spyder compsition.?

For an effective cruise missile defense, one also needs to deploy SHORADS-E-SHORADS capable of intercepting PGMs. The Russians claim that their SA-22 ,Thor systems were specifically designed for this. Rheinmetall claims so with its Skyranger mobile gun system. For cost-effective and massed deployment of NLOS-BSM,TBM , Ballistics missile defense for protecting vital military facilities, military-industrial facility, PAC-3 is the best solution .. Raytheon claims that it can even intercept sub-1000 km missiles though they are likely to be used in the Indian context. The cost to shoot down an incoming NLOS-BSM,TBM will be the least for PAC-3 as it is purpose built for the job.It has smaller dimension and can be installed in far greater nos per TEL. S-300/400 systems are equally effective. 48N6E missile round is most effective for area-denial of upto 200 km over flat terrain devoid of hill. There are also other 300 missile rounds which has 100-125 km range and can be used for BMD, CMD and 12 can be mounted per TEL.The STUNNER SAM now being developed by IAI is specifically meant for CMD, NLOS-BSM defense. It should be procured by IAF.

Also is the IAF intending to procure Iron Dome , David,s Sling missile systems. They will be very effective for countering CM ,NLOS-BSM ,PGM. Our homegrown Barak-8 will only come by 2016. Also PAC-3 SAM systems should be procured and they can be used to supplement AD-1,2.

Thanx in advance. Pls reply .

Purbayan Roy said...

Hi Prasun , just now watched a Nat Geo documentary titled 'Hitler's Stealth Fighter' . Northrup Grumman produced a 1:1 copy using exactly the same materials to measure its RCS. Now, cant DRDO get hold of some blueprints and build a stealth jet just like it. With modern materials and a revised design, it would be a superb aircraft. Whats the future of DRDO IUCAV? Cant they make a larger manned version of it ? It can be used foe deep penetration , air superiority. Ho-229 had excellent handling characteristics. Also why cant DRDO scale up the model to produce something like B-2? They can take the help of Ruskies. Maybe DRDO is doing so , but its classified and nobody knows about it. A black project just like Northrop Grumman 's most stealth concepts dont see the light of the day and nobody knows anything about it.

Anonymous said...

Hi , is it possible to have underground production facilities for vital war supplies and other hardware such as tanks , aircrafts which could produce a limited no of aircrafts , tanks , ammo even after being bombed heavily . Which countries posses such production facilities ? Similarly are there any underground airbases, hangars where the fighter jets are kept deep below ground and thus remain safe from enemy strafing runs , bomb attacks. The associated aircraft maintainence faculties , armory , fuel supplies are located underground. China has many such bases. Does Pakistan & India have any such bases.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

By the way, everyone seems to have missed the point about the LY-80E MR-SAM’s test-firings in southeastern TAR. The question no one has asked thus far is: why should the PLA field the LY-80E when it has already fielded the KS-1A MR-SAM throughout the Chengdu & Lanzhou Military Regions, & in the Tibet Military District? Is the PLA therefore considering using the LY-80E as the optimum air-defence system against NLOS-BSMs like the BrahMos-1 Block-3? As they say, the devil always lurks within the details. Overlook the detail, & the devil will haul one’s arse back to hell (LoL!).

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANURAG: It really amazes me how some folks still think that another Kargil-type limited war is even possible in future. Consider the following:
A) It was the PRC, Pakistan’s one & only all-weather friend, which supplied R & AW with the intercepted telephone conversation which Musharraf had with Lt Gen Mohd Aziz in early June 1999. This means that Beijing did not, does not & will not tolerate such unwarranted limited war scenarios to be repeated in future.
B) Both India & Pakistan know very well that an attack will always be followed by a counter-attack in kind, or even lead to vertical escalation, meaning if Pakistan were to stage a repeat of OP Badr, then India would most likely do the same in the Neelam Valley of Northern Areas. His is where the PRC has stepped in to ensure that all this does not happen again& that the ceasefire across the LoC holds out permanently, & has therefore forced Pakistan to undertake a massive infrastructure development programme throughout the Northern Areas, including the Neelam Valley Hydroelectric Project. Now, would anyone in Pakistan would be stupid enough to provoke the flaring up of long-range artillery duels across the LoC, which will only expose such infrastructure to Indian artillery fire-assaults? I think most definitely not.
Therefore, in light of all of the above, it is sheer lunacy to even think about a future flare-up anywhere along the LoC, & therefore domination of commanding heights by either party no longer offers any military advantage to either party, & all that both parties can do n bow is engage in surveillance & monitoring of each other’s daily movements/activities.
The TCS won’t enter the induction stage before 2016. The terminal stage of LR-SAMs are not as agile as SR-SAMs (which are typically ground-launched variants of within-visual-range AAMs) & therefore have very limited G-load sustenance. SR-SAMs like the SpyDer-SR, by comparison, can sustain combined G-loads of 76 G. That’s why missiles are AIM-9L, AIM-132, Mica-EM/IR & Python-5 are used for SHORADS & anti-ASCM defence. Arjun Mk2 WILL have a 120mm smoothore cannon of extended calibre. During the 1990s, the Russians did experiment with a 135mm smoothbore cannon, which is now believed to have been obtained by China through industrial espionage. The Russians’ thinking on future armoured warfare are now in sync with that of the French, & therefore Russia now has two likely choices: either stick to 125mm unitary APFSDS rounds (by designing a new turret-mounted autoloader like that on the Black Eagle Object 640 MBT technology demonstrator; or go for 140mm smoothbore cannon capable of firing APFSDS unitary rounds. Going for 152mm smoothbore cannon is not a serious option as of now. The 140mm smoothbore cannon option is most promising for the French, Russians & Germans. Rheinmetall already developed such a cannon sometime back & tested it on a Leopard 2A4. In India’s case, R & D on a 140mm smoothbore cannon needs to be undertaken in such a way (exactly what Rheinmetall has done) that the projected Arjun Mk2 MBT’s 120mm smoothbore cannon can be easily replaced in future with the 140mm cannon.
The CETC-built KLJ-7’s detection range can indeed be increased to 130+km by maximising peak transmitted power output, but the downside is that this will immediately alert the opposing party’s RWR. Secondly, It makes no sense to increase radar detection range unless there’s an accompanying increase in the BVRAAM’s engagement envelope to at least 100km. This, as we know, isn’t the case with either the SD-10A or PL-12 BVRAAMs. This therefore leaves only one conclusion: the KLJ-7’s extended-range target detection mode will be used only for over-water surface-search—this being for maritime strike with the CPMIEC-built C-802A air-launched ASCM, which is now undergoing flight-qualification trials for the JF-17 Thunder.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.10AM: The suggested modifications have already been explained in the previous thread. For the Tejas Mk2 & LCA (Navy) Mk2, the current air-intakes will have to be enlarged, which means a total redesigning effort.

To Anon@11.11AM: Arjun Mk2 will have a 1,500hp powerpack with automatic transmission, an ammo autoloader on the turret, 120mm smoothbore cannon of extended calibre, & an all-electrical turret traverse/stabilisation system.

To PIERRE ZORIN: This is precisely the problem with such ‘desi’ news reporters. They ask all kinds of weird questions about ToT without first defining what exactly constitutes ToT & how many levels of ToT exist, and thereby end up making themselves a laughing stock in the eyes of the world. Consequently, such blunders & muddling through only ends up confusing the general public even further. Not a single established weapons manufacturer in the world will engage in charity by teaching others the tricks of the trade, which, if allowed, will only lead to the creation of another competitor. At the same time, Indian MoD & allied DPSU officials are also to blame for spreading disinformation many a time. For instance, HAL has never grown tired of stating that Russia has shared its single-crystal turbine blade technologies (related to the AL-31FP turbofan) with India, without explaining the difference between producing single-crystal alloys as raw materials & producing machined single-crystal turbine blades from alloys supplied off-the-shelf by Russia. Furthermore, of what use is ToT of either of these or even both of these if the AL-31FP’s engine core is still imported off-the-shelf from Russia? It’s like Dr V K Saraswat claiming on one hand that the DRDO has developed in-house an extended-range L-band LRTR & on the other hand stating that this radar’s T/R modules will have to be imported off-the-shelf. The devil always lurks within the details & it is such details that are always overlooked or oversimplified by jingoistic chauvinists.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@7.04PM: Russia said as far back as 2006 that it will no longer market its MR-SAMs & LR-SAMs in India since the latter is determined to achieve a high degree of indigenous technological competence in this area. Everything now depends on whether the DRDO will be or will not be able to fully develop the AD-1/AD-2 endo-atmospheric interceptors for intercepting NLOS-BSMs, & the PDV exo-atmospheric interceptor for TMD purposes. If the DRDO is successful, then there won’t be a reqmt for imported Patriot PAC-3s or THAAD. For air-defence against MBRLs like CPMIEC’s A-100E or NORINCO’s PHL-03, the Iron Dome is available right now.

To PURBAYAN ROY: Building an airframe is not the same as building an airworthy aircraft. Nut at least you may now have an idea about how to measure an aircraft’s RCS. Have you ever come across any such effort by the DRDO to measure the RCS of either the Tejas Mk1 or even the Su-30MKI? I sure haven’t. DRDO’s ICUV & AMCA are all projects which I would still classify as being utopian. However, if India’s private-sector is invited to develop ICUV technology demonstrators, then I believe the effort will be much more worthwhile, productive & cost-effective. Even for ‘Black’ projects, there’s always a paper trail/money trail. The existence of all such projects has always been well-known as has been the existence of the end-products. What remains a secret are the capabilities of such end-products & their intended areas of application. Anyone who’s thinking about India’s ability to have similar ‘Black’ projects for developing B-2-like solutions is living in a fools’ paradise. The annual spending by the US on such ‘Black’ projects is to the tune of US$300 billion. Do you think either India or Russia or even a China or a Japan has such deep pockets?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.20PM: Such military-industrial production facilities existed in the early 1940s in the former USSR & Nazi Germany. Later on, Albania, North Korea & Vietnam, followed. Underground aircraft/weapons storage areas at air bases have long existed in the US, Russia, North Korea, the former Yugoslavia, Iraq & China. China has less than 10 such air bases, while India & Pakistan have one each.

Vikram Guha said...

Dear Prasun da,

Regarding the IAF tender for standoff missile. Did the IAF come out with a tender for this ? I don't recollect seeing any RFI for this.

Thanks & Regards,

Nikhil said...

Hello Prasun ,

I am willing to forgive China for everything including 1962 ( when I was very young) knowing fully well that our moron politicians were equally responsible . However, what I cannot forgive China is for selling nuclear weapons to the Pakis . Isn't it true that India cannot carry out surgical strikes against the Pakis coz they have nukes a point also made by disgraced Paki scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan ?


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIKRAM GUHA: The RFIs for ALCMs were issued some two years ago.

To NIKHIL: Yes, China has indeed supplied (not sold) nuclear weapons AND their ballistic/cruise missile-based delivery systems to Pakistan, but what must ALSO be noted is that this is a far better prospect than that involving the unregulated cooperative WMD proliferation efforts of Pakistan & North Korea. China, by retaining executive command-and-control over Pakistan’s deliverable n-arsenals (through an elaborate mechanism of permissive action links or PAL), can & does influence Pakistan to exercise a large degree of strategic restraint. A far worse scenario would have developed had China not stopped North Korea from cooperating with Pakistan in the arena of WMD-related R & D. Had this happened, then the ‘Islamic Bomb’ would have become a reality a long time ago. Instead, today it is just a Pakistan-centric n-weapons capability that’s been established. Just look at how far North Korea—for reasons of economic survival—has gone to sell its uranium enrichment & plutonium reprocessing expertise to countries like Iran (via Pakistan), Libya (again via Pakistan) & Syria (via Iran). China, on the other hand, very cleverly BOUGHT OVER all the hardware & blueprints that Dr A Q ‘Bhopali’ Khan had smuggled/stolen out of The Netherlands-based URENCO in the mid-1970s, & ensured that any Pakistan-based plutonium reprocessing facilities are kept under strict Chinese supervision. What all this means is that while Pakistan does possess nuclear weapons, it does not have the sovereign right to exercise its nuclear weapons options, since China has firmly applied handcuffs on to Pakistan’s hands.
As for conventional & sub-conventional surgical military strikes by India being carried out against Pakistan under a nuclear overhang, they were carried out in 1984 in Siachen, and in Chorbat La in the mid-1990s. Possession of WMDs does not & will never constitute a deterrent against such surgical operations.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

This is for some Anonymous that had earlier quoted AUSAIRPOWER as stating that China has 450 Sukhois. The latest numbers coming from the latest annual report of Japan’s Defense Agency states that China has 244 Su-27s/J-11s, 97 Su-30s & 224 J-10s.

Anonymous said...

HI Prasun da

Reg. Our homegrown 5th gen AMCA fighter development.Do u think it is viable for DRDO to take such a complex project. Do u think DRDO will ever be able to deliver this aircraft??Given the fact that making a light combat aircraft took decades that too with many foreign hardawre.Even if techical expertise from the Russian PAKFA is combined with French help (after rafale selection as MMRCA),Do u think the AMCA will be delivered or it will be waste of money?OR Do u think it will be better for us to join the F 35 fleet?Given the fact that US is willing to sell it to India.

Kindly express your views..

Thanks in advance ..

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Please inform that in the above photograph, which Chinese Tanks and Armoured vehicles are shown standing covered and uncovered on the ground.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA 13: PTL-02 105mm 6 x 6 assault guns, PCL-09 122mm motorised howitzers, & 6 x 6 artillery fire-direction vehicles, along with PLZ-07 tracked 122mm SPHs, Type 86G ICVs and PGZ-45 self-propelled anti-aircraft guns.

Anonymous said...

Sir, has IA & IAF placed orders or has procured Iron Dome systems coz u said that For air-defence against MBRLs like CPMIEC’s A-100E or NORINCO’s PHL-03, the Iron Dome is available right now.

PLAAF & PLA will never be able io intercept Brahmos block-3 with LY-80E. Such types of intercepts requires a more demanding sam with huge agility and active radar seeker performance. Barak-8 ER-SAM will have thrust vectoring and will have good agility.

Thanx for giving the nos of Sukhois in PLAAF.

Anonymous said...

What do you think of this? You have been blaming the lack of simulators for all these crashes. Now it turns out there is a design flaw in the FBW system. Even if we had simulators, these crashes would have happened.

Anonymous said...

Hi , I am anon at 11:20 pm. Underground weapons production facilties are really a engineering marvel.They are completely bomb proof. Some are even able to take a direct hit from nuclear weapons. Hope India has something like this. Is the IAF undergound base you mentioned the one in Uttarlai, Barmer AFB. In wiki it was mentioned that IAF Uttarlai AFB is a major airbase with extensive underground facilties. "The Indian Air Force operates underground hangars. Sukhoi Su-30 MKI have been stationed at Trishul Air-base situated in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India. It houses one of the largest underground hangars in Asia. Adampur, situated in Punjab, houses an air-base with underground hangars. It is the home base for MiG-29 and MiG-21 interceptors. " Are all these true ? I have also heard a similar thing about Kalaikunda. Of course there may be more such bases. All classified stuff. no will know. the more there are such underground bases , the better. Has the ARMy also got any such facilities

Anonymous said...

From what i have read on your blog. Neither you nor the GOI or the armed forces seems to have considered the threat of ballistic missiles (except NLOS-BSM which you talk about all the time) or cruise missiles.

I want to know, is there really no need to get such air defence assets which useful against ballistic missiles and cruise missiles or we are downplaying it because whatever anybody says DRDO is working on Phase 1 of BMD program right now and then they go for phase 2 which according to them will be completed by 2016 (which means atleast 2018) and then they will work on cruise missile defence.

In short India will not have any defence against Ballistic and cruise missile before 2020. Should we be sitting idle hoping nobody uses such weapon against us(keeping in mind Pakistan almost used nuke against during Kargil war) or we should request for Patriot or S-400,500 or Arrow 2,3 (Earlier the request was denied by US for Arrow but considering the relationship now we can ask for Arrow and also some help with our own indigenous efforts) ?

Vikram Guha said...

Prasun da , VMT.


SK said...

" China has less than 10 such air bases, while India & Pakistan have one each."

Prasun could you tell which based these are in India and Pakistan ?

Anonymous said...

Sir ,
Can you pls post an article about the progessess made in the field of cruise, bsm , tbm defense, the various procurements ,IA & IAF are making to implement it , R&D regarding AD-1,2 sams.

Each Army AD regiment has 3 batteries each with 6 launchers. That means 72 Spyder sams per regiment for a total of 288 missiles in total for IA. Can you pls shed some light on the IAF Spyder compsition.?

Not all LR-SAM have less agility. The Russian S-300/400 Sam system has many 200 km range missiles with thrust vectoring like R-73. 48N6,48N6E2,48n6E3 with 81 , 102 ,130 mn range and 9M96 all have TVC. If IA, IAF wants them , Russia will offcourse supply them.Again Barak-2,Barak-8 has tvc.

Whats most astonishing is that PLA after knowing from its IB and various Indian media reports that IA will field Brahmos block3 in Nort East has rapidly deployed LY-80 sam to protect its vital facilties whereas we on the other hand after knowing that China intends to resort to masses fire assaults using NLOS-BSM,TBM during hostilties to strike major IA bases in N, NW ,NE and Army logistics, staging areas and that Pakistan will use Babur , Raad aginst us have been slow to deploy effective counters to them in form of SAMs.

Is IAF and IA interested in iron Dome , David Sling and have any orders has been placed. IAF already has some of its elements in the form of elta 2084 radar. What is left is Tamir and Stunner missiles.

And any news on Akash mk2 ?
Pls reply .

Rahul said...

Hi PRASUN , Spyder SR system has EL-2106 ATAR radar as it's survellience & targeting radar has a max range of 30+ km. Cruise missiles have a very low RCS. This radar will detect cruise missiles once it comes close to the radar, thereby decreasing reaction time greatly . So a long range radar is required. Pakistan army and PAF has a huge stockpile of RBS-70 . It is a beam rider and has laser guidance. Presently , none of the IAF fighter jets has laser emissions warner . So they are very vulnerable. The most vulnerable are the transport helicopters, attack choppers. Laser emissions warner can only warn the aircraft. Who will jam the these missiles or decoy them . Has any laser jammer been invented. ?Will the IAF AH-64 Apaches have any such countermeasures to RBS-70 and other similar laser guided surface to air missile systems ? Else they will be very vulnerable. Has IAF taken any measures to alleviate this problem .

Anonymous said...

Is the Indian Airforce procuring 18 batteries (108 launchers with 750 Python-5 and 750 Derby missiles) according to wiki ?

Shiva said...

Hi Prasun,

Why have we consistently failed to attack Pakistan inspite of the fact that Pakistan has been sponsoring cross border terrorism for more than 2 decades ?


Anonymous said...

Prasun, you mentioned that Pak's nukes are in Chinese control, however safeguarded by PAL, isn't the latter an American technology? I am veering towards a venn diagram,

some in Chinese control
some in American control
some in Overlapping control
some tactical nukes in Pak's own control ready in response to Indian cold start and demonstrate what they think to be a warning shot (this is where they are multiplying the tactical nukes like rabbits)
and some untested dirty nukes again in Pak's own control which is where the Jihadi blackmail comes from? from where Albright's phrase of International migraine comes from

so, unless Americans or Chinese give the go ahead, Indian cities are safe. Its the armed forces that need to be prepared with regards to battlefield tactical nukes and by which time Indian leaders will capitulate

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@12.57PM: If that’s your conclusion, then I can only infer that you’ve not understood anything what I’ve been saying in all the previous threads, especially the one on IACCCS.

To SK: The one in India is at Barmer Uttarlai Air Force Station, while for Pakistan it is at Samungl, Balochistan.

To Anon@7.25PM: Possessing thrust-vectoring capabilities does not automatically mean that the LR-SAM has high G-tolerance capabilities. Had LR-SAMs been as manoeuvrable as you seem to believe or assume, then there would have been no need whatsoever for MR-SAMs & E-SHORADS. The S-300V, S-300PMU2, V-2500 & S-400 are all optimised for usage against NLOS-BSMs & TBMs & are best suited to Russia’s own theatre missile defence (TMD) network, which is totally different from India’s evolving combined TMD/CMD architecture now being developed by the DRDO, & the IAF’s IACCCS, which has drawn inspiration from the Israeli experiences. Consequently, what the Russians had offered is totally incompatible with the IACCCS.

To RAHUL: Under the IACCCS network, all new-generation radars (like the EL/M-2084 Arudhra MMR) will be networked to present a composite mosaic of the evolving air situation, meaning a SpyDer-SR Battery or Regiment will not be depending on the EL/M-2106 ATAR standalone radars for early warning. There will be at least 15 minutes of warning time available for activation of a particular SpyDer-SR firing unit. Shooting down low-RCS cruise missiles is not a problem at all since way back in early 1991 the Iraqis successfully shot down a few T-LAMs with Euromissile Roland SHORADS. There’s no need for low-flying helicopters to be equipped with laser jammers, since the best defence against laser-guided SAMs is always to duck below the line-of-sight of the ground-based laser illuminator, which will break the laser lock-on.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SHIVA: There are two reasons for this: Firstly, the problems in both Punjab and J & K were India’s own making & therefore one cannot blame Pakistan for taking advantage of the situation. After all, India too took advantage of the situation in 1970-1971 & helped create Bangladesh out of East Pakistan. Therefore, India’s decision-makers should have been aware by setting such a precedent of forceful/deliberate humanitarian intervention, others would soon follow India’s footsteps. This is exactly what Pakistan has done since the mid-1980s. Secondly, none of the ruling Indian decision-makers since the mid-1980s have had the stomach for initiating audacious & iconic operations like OP Thunderbolt, OP Opera & OP Orchard, simply because they lacked faith in themselves & in their armed forces, & they never had the strength of conviction that’s required whenever one has to stand up in defence of one’s principles. And why does such a defensive mentality prevail? The answer lies in the total subversion of democratic ideals & principles by none other than Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi in 1938, when he forced Subhas Chandra Bose, an elected President of the Indian National Congress, to vacate his office and then treated him with scorn. That is how woolly-headed India’s founding fathers were, and their successors in post-independence India have been even more woolly-headed, & consequently we now have the outrageous spectacle of folks like members of Team Anna resorting to the same bag of tricks once employed by M K Gandhi (against S C Bose) to subvert the very parliamentary system that was ushered into independent India by none other than the Indian National Congress! The proverbial chicken has thus at last come home to roost (LoLz!!!). As they say, what goes around, comes around as well.
Talking of iconic surgical strikes, do read this:

To Anon@12.09AM: PAL-related technologies were shared by the US with the PRC during the mid-1970s. There’s no such military doctrine as Cold Start, nor will the tools necessary for enacting such doctrines be in place before 2022 & therefore, there’s no rationale for Pakistan for increasing the volume of tactical nuclear weapons on a war-footing. Dirty nukes too are non-existent since all the fissile materials reprocessing facilities within Pakistan are within strictest Chinese control.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@2.15AM: Under the existing scheme of things, with ADA handling all aspects of new-generation combat aircraft R & D on one hand, & HAL being relegated to only the status of an aircraft manufacturer, the AMCA in my view can never become a reality. HAL will be too busy in the years to come with the development & production of FGFA and Super Su-30MKI, plus the Rafale licenced-production activities, & will therefore have little or no inclination to extend any kind of production-engineering support to ADA for the AMCA project. In my view, therefore, the AMCA will be a wholly DRDO-led & administered technology demonstration effort. Things could be different if ADA this time ropes in private-sector players from the very outset as systems developers for the AMCA, but given the prevailing mindset within the MoD, this too is most unlikely to happen.

To Anon@7.51AM: The Iron Dome system from RAFAEL & IAI is still being examined & evaluated at this stage, but it looks inevitable that it will eventually be procured. As regards the LY-80E, its lack of agility does not mean that it cannot intercept the BrahMos—a supersonic cruise missile that hardly has any agility--& by cruising at an altitude of 13km, can be easily detected & tracked by any ground-based or shipborne volume-search radar. Therefore the Chinese are definitely on the right track in employing the LY-80E for intercepting such supersonic land-attack cruise missiles, while the ACSM version of BrahMos can indeed be intercepted by the LY-80E’s shipborne vertically-launched variant, which is on board all Type 054A FFGs of the PLA Navy.

To Anon@10.41AM: Never have I stated that the lack of simulators is the reason why the IAF’s combat aircraft—especially the Su-30MKI--have been crashing over the years. What I have stated is that the lack of simulators have prevented the IAF aircrew from becoming proficient in airborne emergency management procedures, which have resulted in the loss of life (aircrew). In fact, I was the first one in the world to reveal way back in May 2009 (when the IAF & all the ‘desi’ & ‘videshi’ journalists were all sound asleep & totally clueless) that the first Su-30MKI’s crash was due to the catastrophic failure of the Su-30MKI’s FBW-FCS, which in turn was caused by loss of electrical power (see: Any aviator worth his/her salt will immediately realise (after reading what the CAS of IAF has said) that the problem is NOT with the Su-30MKI’s flight-control logic (for, if that was the case, then the aircraft would never have been declared airworthy by either Sukhoi OKB or the IAF), but with a particular production-engineering aspect that induces or provokes the FBW-FCS to malfunction during certain flight regimes. The most likely/probable cause, therefore, is some kind of wire-chaffing that takes place when the aircraft is in the midst of a supermanoeuvrable flight regime, and this is what causes a malfunction in the electrical power supply channels connected to the Su-30MKI’s digital flight-control computers.

Anonymous said...

"If that’s your conclusion, then I can only infer that you’ve not understood anything what I’ve been saying in all the previous threads, especially the one on IACCCS."
I know what IACCCS is. I really don't know what all you have written about it but lets just see.

IAF plans to connect all the radars (including awacs), SAMs and in future satellites (don't know when but not anytime soon). I still have questions.

1. Can we detect cruise missiles ?

2. What about ICBMs, and SLBMs and your favorite NLOS-BSM ?

3. Pakistan plans to arm its subs with cruise missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads. There airforce already uses Babur and army has its own nukes. It seems to me Pakistan has in a way achieved nuclear triad. What good is IACCCS ?

4. Suppose we could detect these incoming threats on our newly acquired Israeli and French radars, question is how are we gonna intercept them ? What good knowing a missile is coming in the next few minutes is gonna help us ?

Correct me if i am wrong but i still standby my previous comments as it doesn't look to me anything much is happening in air defence considering the pace with which our neighbors are increasing their offensive capabilities.

DRDO is working on BMD and neither armed forces nor government seems to care. There were a few talks about cruise missile defence from armed forces but DRDO works on their own timeline. They will go for CMD project only in 2018 or later while threat continues to increase. And i don't know where PMO and MOD stands on this issue.

In short what am i missing ?

Anonymous said...

Hi prasun da(from anon @2.15 am)

I too agree with u that unless the MOD involves private players and a foriegn collaborator,the AMCA will remain a paper plane.Kindly tell the way out?

Shall India join the F35 programme or buy more FGFA?AMCA is meant to to replace MIG29 and jaguars

Kindly tell your views...Thanks in advance

Anonymous said...

Is the Indian Airforce procuring 18 batteries (108 launchers with 750 Python-5 and 750 Derby missiles) according to wikipedia. Pls reply .

Rahul said...

Hi PRASUN , whats the total no of Spyder -SR Batteries are on order for IAF & IA assuming that each battery has 6 launchers. Why arent IA , IAF inclined to buy MR version?What will happen when the choppers are flying in deserts area devoid of houses , undulating terrain or any infrastucture. What if there are no obstacles for terrain hugging. It will take the missile only 8-10 secs to hit its target and it is very difficult to duck behind some cover.And the aircraft will always need to have a dedicated laser warner to warn the pilot that he is being targetted so that evasive manuvers can be taken. Are laser jammers available ? Why cant this be fitted to the MiL Mi-17 & Apaches ? None of IAF jets, transport aircrafts and gunships have laser warner & jammer.

Anonymous said...

Sir , as u said that The Iron Dome system from RAFAEL & IAI is still being examined & evaluated at this stage, but it looks inevitable that it will eventually be procured. This maens that for sure Iron Dome will be procured.

If the Chinese can deploy SAM to counter Brahmos block-3 then why the heck are we so slow to implement CMD,TMD ? When will the 2nd phase of IAF'S IACCCS network consisting of LR-SAM be implemented? day by day , the PLA stock of NLOS-BSM, TBM is increasing. On the other side Pakistan is also stockpiling its Babur , Raad in huge nos. The Brahmos regiment in North East is yet to be fielded. But the Chinese has already placed SAM to counter this threat whereas for us the threats are already there and increasing in magnitude day by day. Some thing has to be done quickly. We can directly go for pac-3. It will much less expensive to shoot down NLOS-BSM, TBM with pac-3 than AD-1,2. infact PAC-3's unit cost is much less than that of NLOS-BSM.A sort of economic attrition. And when will Akash mk2 be fielded ?

dashu said...

another R&AW man got dismissed like Rabinder Singh, this time it's China .

bradshaw said...

Hi Prasun da,

What is the radar on Jaguar IM's. Is it Agave or has been replaced by the ELTA 2031. As per my knowledge and sources i came to know that HAL has upgraded 10 jags with elta 2032.

"In 1996, a contract was signed with Elta to upgrade the maritime attack variant with the EL/M-2032 multimode fire control radar. Ten EL/M-2032 radars are to be supplied. The IM aircraft will also be installed with integrated electronic warfare pods."

Another thing is the Agave radar was acting as a target illuminator for the Exocet or Sea eagle missile. How will we incorporate the Jags with Harpoon since the source codes of missile and radar are from different vendors ?

bradshaw said...

again the administrator of says in one of his posts "The ELTA radar that is operational on Jaguars isn't the exact 2032 from Israel. Now I don't know how far I can go with this, but the radar on Jaguar is a special 2032 modified by India.
The IS variant in Sqn 6 have the Agave radar. Here's a pic of the Sqn 6 from BR."

Now what does that special elta 2032 means? May be reducint the number of T/R modules so to fit inside the smaller nose of the jags ?

Anonymous said...

To Bradshaw, TR modules are present only on AESA and not on slotted planar array type radar. No IS variant has any sort of radar installed. If indeed one would have been present with SAR,ISAR & GMTI modes then it would have been very beneficial.

Purbayan Roy said...

Hi Prasun , the problems that sukhoi fleet is facing regarding FBW, is it a problem with FBW design or is due to poor manufacturing standards and poor production quality that caused chaffing ? How long will it take to find a solution to this problem and apply it across the entire fleet .

Will there be attrition replacements for the last Su-30, 2 Mirage 2000, Mig-29 ?Now can MiG-29 fly during night over undulating terrain without crashing?

If Brahmos can such easily be shot down , why is it being produced in large nos? Whats the speciality in Brahmos? Doesnot Brahmos ashm perform a zig - zag manuvere in its terminal flight to escape interception by targets defenses.

bradshaw said...


You are correct it doesnt have T/R modules. But might be the antenna size have been adjusted to fit in the small nose. The jaguars were in acute need of a SAR radar and Elta 2032 has SAR modes and a good detection range.

Anonymous said...

Why is the SF going for the M-4 Carbines ? What do the M4s do that the TAVOR can't. M4 is on the verge of getting replaced with newer weapons like the XM-8, FN-SCAR etc

Shiva said...

Hi Prasun,

Many thanks for explaining . However, your explanation have posed some more questions :)

I agree that the damage done by Gandhi & Nehru is probably irreparable . (I have read a couple of times that Shastri tried to correct it & therefore got killed) That said if how exactly is India responsible for Kashmir & Punjab ? Hindus were getting killed in Punjab even before Op Bluestar. If Pakistan can carry out subversive activities against India , no reason why India cannot do the same unless of course it is part of the Govt's minority appeasement policy. Last but not the least Team Anna may have vested interest but the present UPA Govt. is by far the most corrupt Govt in our history . If Team Anna can overthroe this corrupt Govt & this poodle PM , shouldn't this be encouraged ?

Best Regards,

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@8.49AM: Had you read the comments section of the IACCCS thread, you would have by now known which of the IAF’s radars can detect cruise missiles. IVNMS & SLBms will be detectable once the four Missile Monitoring System satellites are put into orbit. NLOS-BSM is not only my favourite. Instead, it is India’s favourite as she began her IGMDP with the Prithvi-1/2 BLOS-BSMs, then acquired the BrahMos production rights. China & Pakistan followed suit by procuring a range of NLOS-BSMs & cruise missiles. Why should one even think of intercepting n-armed ballistic or cruise missiles? Are New York, St Petersburg, Shanghai, Paris & London all defended by BMD? If BMD is reqd by India for defence against n-armed missiles, then what good is India’s n-deterrent if it cannot deter hostile n-strikes? So why are you putting IACCCS & Pakistan’s nuclear triad into the same basket? The answers are the points you are missing.

To Anon@9.18AM: I already suggested the way out yesterday. And I also stated that given the on-going regressive mindsets of decision-makers within the Govt of India, the most logical suggestions will be the first ones to be rejected! I still hold on to the view that until someone explains what is it that the F-35 & AMCA can/will do which the FGFA won’t be able to, I remain unconvinced about the need for both the F-35 & AMCA.

To Anon@11.51AM: Please ask WIKI for confirmation & revelation of its source of information.

To RAHUL: The IAF’s total reqmt for SL-QRMs (SHORADS) has not yet been worked out, & won’t be till 2016. The Army’s QR-SAM (SHORADS) reqmt too is undefined & it was only stated on June 21, 2012 that the Army wants 3 Regiments to be inducted in the 12th Five Year Plan (2012-2017), while another 5 Regiments be inducted in the 13th Five Year Plan (2018-2022). Why should the IA or IAF procure imported medium-range SAMs when the 35km-range Akash Mk2 will be available in future, along with the 70km-range Barak-2 MR-SAM? Even when flying over flat terrain helicopters can fly nap-of-the-earth profiles to stay clear of laser-guided SAMs. This is what happened in August 1999 when Pakistan Army RBS-70s were used against IAF Mi-171s when the latter was trying to collect the wreckage of the downed PN ATL-2 MR/ASW aircraft in the Rann of Kuych. Even without laser warners then, the Mi-171s survived such laser-guided SAMs.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.56PM: Nothing can be done quickly in India, especially now, given the man-made economic downturn. Already, questions are being raised by the Union MoF about the ever-increasing cost of building high-tech warships in MoD-owned shipyards. Akash Mk2 has not even left the DRDO’s Laboratory, and is unlikely to be field-tested before early 2014.

To DASHU: It seems India has the unique distinction of being the only country where even administrative matters concerning the country’s intelligence agencies have to be publicly reported! I wish for just once the Govt of India invoked the Official Secrets Act & levelled charges of treason against the newspaper & its reporter for publishing such news items which, needless to say, are extremely harmful. While it is all right to name officials/persons who are deceased or retired, it is treasonous to reveal the names of serving officials. In any case, what else can one expect from such ‘jaahil & badmaash’ ‘desi’ journalists who are more than willing any time to compromise the country’s national interests?

To BRADSHAW: The EL/M-2032 is on board 12 Jaguar IMs. The agaves were replaced a decade ago. The AGM-84L Harpoons can be easily interfaced with the EL/M-2032 since both are built to NATO-standard MILSPEC. Only the weapons management computer has to be reprogrammed with the help of source-codes supplied by IAI/ELTA Systems. EL/M-2032 is not an AESA-based MMR. And it comes with different antenna options, just like the GRIFO family of radars from Selex Galileo (formerly FIAR). GMTI & SAR modes of operation are not required for radars optimized for maritime strike. When flying over water there’s no need for ground-mapping or terrain profiling & therefore SAR mode is never reqd for maritime strike. SAR mode is reqd for terrain-mapping only when flying over ground or over islands or along coastal areas, which is why only those radars fitted on maritime patrol/ASW aircraft have the SAR mode. It is such aircraft that will relay the target’s coordinates to the Jaguar IM. In other words, the Jaguar IM never indulges in broad-area target search. It only undertakes target detection within a pre-determined localized area & then locks-on for illuminating the target only for providing over-the-horizon mid-course correction cues to the ASCM.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To PURBAYAN ROY: The problem is related to production-engineering, & has nothing to do with poor manufacturing quality or production deficiencies. The probable list of design deficiencies have already been identified & all that now remains to be done is to re-engineer the on-board power supply system & then obtain a supplemental type certification of airworthiness for the modifications—all of which will be done by Sukhoi OKB & United Aircraft Corp’s IRKUT Corp subsidiary. Once this has been completed, then all related technical/engineering data will be supplied to HAL & the IAF so that the modifications can be carried out in-country over a period of three years. Any combat aircraft can fly low over undulating terrain by using night-vision goggles. And how exactly can a supersonic land-attack cruise missile flying in the top-attack mode undertake any type or amount of zig-zagging? And why should anyone expect China to just sit back and do just nothing to defend itself against a missile like BrahMos? Obviously the PRC has sensed the threat emanating from BrahMos & has therefore worked out probable countermeasures.

To Anon@1.01AM: The M-4 carbines are a little lighter than the Tavors, if I’m not mistaken.

To SHIVA: “How exactly is India responsible for Kashmir & Punjab?”
Who rigged the state-level elections on a massive scale for J & K in 1987? Was it Pakistan, the Kashmiris, or was it Delhi? Who created monsters like Jarnail Singh Bhindrawale? Was it Pakistan, or was it the likes to Giani Zail Singh & the Congress (I)? Who created ULFA & BLA in Assam? Was it Pakistan, Bangladesh, or the late Hiteshwar Saika, the former CM of Assam? Who gave fillip to the Naxalbari & Maoist movements within India? Was it China, Pakistan, or was it the combination of CPI & CPM? Before pointing fingers at others/outsiders, it is always a much safer bet to set one’s own house in order & eradicate all possible loopholes/shortcomings. Find the answers to the questions I’ve posed above & you’ll realise that there’s no dearth of traitors within the majority communities of India. Outsiders can only interfere by taking advantage of a worsening situation, & it is up to India’s political leadership to ensure that the seeds of discord or separatism are always nipped in the bud, something India’s successive political leaderships have never learnt. Instead, they have stuck to the colonial-era policy of divide-and-rule & it is adherence to this policy that has repeatedly polarised communities along religious, cast & tribal lines. Team Anna does not have the wherewithal to uproot any corrupt government, simply because they don’t have the means & intellectual appeal to mobilise the masses. If they had, then by now they would have undertaken their fasts in India’s drought-hit areas in states like Maharashtra or Karnataka, instead of indulging in five-star reality TV chirades at Jantar Mantar.

Anonymous said...

"Are New York, St Petersburg, Shanghai, Paris & London all defended by BMD?"
Unofficially NY, DC, LA, St Petersburg, Elektrostal, Russian Far East (N.Korean border), Dubrovki (north of Moscow), Kaliningrad, Nakhodka and major parts of Israel. These all places have BMD cover.

US has a multi layer defence sstem unlike India's two-tier defence.

"IVNMS & SLBms will be detectable once the four Missile Monitoring System satellites are put into orbit."
I really haven't heard about these 4 satellites anywhere but if you say so.
Just to make the record straight, till this day only one military satellite has been launched that too with israeli help. The ones in the pipelines are :
1. 3 communication satellites for the 3 services.
2. 7 IRNSS satellites.

I would say let them finish these satellites first then they can work on these 4 alleged satellites. IRNSS can be used for BMD purpose but right now its solely built keeping in mind Missile targeting for precision long range strikes. Also even after these 4 satellites, as i have written before, we have nothing to intercept them.

Please tell me which part i am still missing.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@8.21AM: Whoch type of BMD systems are used for defending the cities you’ve mentioned above? Are they capable of intercepting MIRVs? You can read all about the DRDO’s Missile Monitoring Systems in the March 2010 issue of FORCE magazine that published Dr V K Saraswat’s interview. It was he who revealed this in his own words. Till today, no military satellite has been launched by India & none of India’s armed forces have operational control over any such satellite.

Anonymous said...

sir how does the rd33 mk and series 3 engines compare to the rd93 ?? in terms of tbo and ttsl

what are the hot section lives of rd 93 , series 3 and mk engines ??

sir does tejas mk2 employ sensor fusion of any sorts ??

sir since you said the mk2 will most probably have vixen 850e radar....then what bvr and wvr missiles will come with tejas mk2 ??
will it be aim9 and aim120 or meteor and asraam ??

sir you had wrote that airforce is in favour of vixen 850e but what are our real chances that we get this radar on tejas mk2.....with corruption , lobbying and all ??

will the arjun mk2 have the same ridiculous one sided era panel as on the arjun mk1a ??

how many counter munition launchers are there on the arjun mk2's iron fist ??

where will the detection radars of the iron fist aps will be put on the arjun mk2 ??

are the conformal radar antennas of the iron fist aps protected from small arms fire on the arjun mk2 ??

will the iron fist on arjun mk2 will have the optional ir sensors as well ??

who are contenders on the ficv program and what are the solutions they are offering ??

Anonymous said...

Dear Prasun, One of the photo's shows a regiment of 6x6 Light Tanks of the PLA. The Indian Army was to procure Light tanks but this procurement seems to be out of sight and out of mind. Can you PLEASE throw some light on the issue of Indian Army's Light Tank requirements for the mountainous regions and what would be a projected requirement, Wheeled or Tracked?

Rahul said...

Hi PRASUN , the SHORADS requirement of IAF hasnt yet been worked out. But back in 2009, there were reports in various newspapers that IAF were procuring 18 Spyder systems. What about this? Is this some vogus info by the desii journalists. Only in June 21 did the Army mention that it will induct 3 SHORAD regiments in 12th 5 yr plan and another 5 in 13th 5 yr plan. But in some of your comments some time back possibly in 2011, you had said that IA had already started inducing Spyder-SR systems and a no of batteries are already in service. Then you also said that these batteries are from the batch of 3 SPYDER regiments that were ordered in 2009. There were reports of this purchase in some dailies also . So, are these 3 SPYDER regiments different from the ones that are to be procured in 12 , 13 th 5 yr plan thus taking the total no of regiments to 3 + 3 + 5 = 11 OR these are the same three regiments .

Even when flying over flat terrain helicopters can fly nap-of-the-earth profiles to stay clear of laser-guided SAMs. Can you pls tell how can this happen. If the operator has LOS to the helicopter or aircraft, the missile can be launched and it will reach its target. Due to presence of heavy clutter , does the laser beam gets degraded and so by flying very low, getting shot at can be avoided even without taking cover behind some objects .Are any sort of laser countermeasures available for airborne platforms such as helos, fighter acs , transport aircrafts.

VMT for replying.

Purbayan Roy said...

Hi Prasun , I am not talking about the Brahmos LACM but the Brahmos anti-ship cruise missile. Doesnt the Brahmos ASHM have good manuvering capablties in its terminal stage. Doesnt it zig-zg during the terminal stage of its fight when it is close to the hostile ship . If it indeed flies straight then why is Navy investing so much on Brahmos ? it can go for Moskit which is both supersonic & has good agility. The latest version also have increased range. We can also go for 3M-54E which has a range of 220 km % has a kill vehicle with extreme agility. Will attrion replacements be sought by Iaf for the fighters lost in crashes . When will DRDO come up with indoor outdoor RCS measuring facility. It is of paramount importance for stealth IUCAV. Northrup Grumman has a gaint facilty where they make models of various stealth concepts and test it for RCS. In this way they are able to remain ahead of the enemies .Seen this facilty in Nat geo channel.

Anonymous said...

prasun da, while i am a big fan of your defence update i am bit taken aback by the way your military way of seeing demographic things. Particularly pertaining to Gandhiji, Nehru and Indira Gandhi.I would say it is very easy 50 years down the lane to critisize on policies which went bad. I guess it is more chauvinistic to say the decision by Gandhiji to overtake the Satyagraha model to uproot the colonial empire. Do you really think it would have been possible for Netaji to take up the mighty British empire (and we no now that Japan was defeated militarily so there was absolutely no chance he would have acheived the goal). For a rather civilized enemy a civilized fight is essential. It was not the INC which invented the civil protest against British but the Irish (who indeed seeded the idea here) and the British themselves. It would have almost certainly failed against Hitler or the Japanese.
Similarly it is possible to blame Nehru for his failed Kashmir and China policy but again the nacent India was much more trouble with the amalgamation of the unwilling princely states that hardly anyone considered a politically united India would be a reality. But the Industrial growth, and democratic upgradation, inciting scientific acheivement (in a a land of snake charmers and black magic) was obviously Nehrus contribution.
You cannot overlook our acheivement in the political reality that is Inida, with all its weakness. You just cite an example of a country like India, under the colonial empire, which has a certain democratic credential now, i buy your argument.
I am not amused by the way our country is now, but i am not disappointed either. we could have and should have done better but unfortunately destiny is not assured to be on your side always and no soothsayer is worth his salt.

Anonymous said...

Does the IN have full operational control & sovereignty over INS Jalashva? Or IN can only use it for humanitarian purposes and during times of disaster to evacuate Indian civilians from danger zones? Can IN use it during war and for amphibious purposes ?

Anonymous said...

i want to ask that what is the Status of rfi issued for indian navy carrier based fighter that rfi hasbeen cancelled & i want to ask that after upgrade mig29 can become a gud fighter?...

Anonymous said...

To Anon @8.14 pm

To some extent you are right.But the problem with Gandhi and Nehru was that they made too many compromises which later came down heavily on India.By nature most of us Indian s are submissive,We tend to forget and forego.But even the Dalai Lama said after Osama Bin Laden was killed that forgiveness doesnt mean always to forget and forego whatever it may be.Even today look at the Gandhi family, they are still ruining the country, from economy to defence everything in mess...So please google all misdoings of gandhi and Nehru family, then u will undrstand the damage they have caused....(Sorry for going offtopic)

Anonymous said...

@anon 10.25

agree that we do not need to forgive and forget forever (and even Gandhiji himself asked the Afridi raiders of J&K to be thrown out militarily!), but where a pin will do there a rifle certainly wont fit. And in when you say a mess you should have an alternate. Do you have a widely acceptable alternate to the government. You are absolutely right, most of us Indians are a fearful lot who care about their selfish interest rather than a collective interest. So if some one is to be blamed it is we ourselves. And btw Gandhijis true family has no big business in our political India (save for Mr. Gopal Gandhi who has an illustrious career).
apologies for off the topic discussion, but many times politcs and the guys calling shot become more important than the guy who actually shoots!

Anonymous said...

3 doubts,

why the IAF is still into the business of maritime interdiction that too with just 12 Jaguars

Even the US navy considers the sizzlers and sprinters to be a big threat (and claims to be rather defenceless against them), then why are you discounting Brahmos.

The BMD may not be foolproof method but obviously it dents the enemies confidence of safely delivering a warhead with surety, which means more weapons to be allocated for a single ones job creating a lot of administrative and command troubles. BMD may be cost prohibitive but if some thing can reduce the chances by say a 50% that is a big advantage for the secondstrike option, espeically as you say the 'war of cities'. it may not work with a better adversary like China, but may work with a confused adversary like Pakistan. The more you stand to lose the the less you intiate such stupidity (as the proverbial saying the 'ones with glass castles should not throw stones at another's')

Anonymous said...

To Anon@10.39 pm

YES. there is always a alternative to Govt. It depends on you, whether u want to take a closer look or not.The mess that the country is in now is present Govt. created and no one else.The country has not been in a worse position then now in last 30 years.I hope u agree with me..(Sorry again...and no more political topics) said...

Prasun babu ,

With respect to the test firing of the LY 80 ( HQ 16A) by China isn't it a fact that it's single shot kill probability is less than 50% against cruise missiles ? In that case do you recon that China will also field the HQ 7 to increase the chances of intercepting an incoming cruise missile ? Given the fact that China has signed a deal with Russia for the supply of S 400 in 2018 there is a belief that China is not making enough progress in the field of developing SAM . Also, it is important to mention here that Russia in all likelihood will not include the 40N6 variant missile ( which has an active radar homing head and is capable of destroying airborne targets at ranges of up to 400 kilometers) in the S 400 system that it will sell to China.If it does I recon the survivability of India's Su 30 MKI over Chinese airspace will be seriously threatened in case of any eventuality . Would sincerely appreciate your views.

Thanks & Regards,
Debajit Sarkar

Anonymous said...

prasun sir what is status of dairin3 upgrade on jaguar....and pls update on mrca &fmbt..& will india buy more phalcon radars from israel....sir request u to give update on this topics....

bradshaw said...

If some Jaguars are fitted with ELTA 2032 than they must be carrying Derby's too apart from IR guided R550 misisles on the over wing pylons ??

And don't you think that IAF and IN is going for standardization since sea harries , jaguars and even the LCA has tha same radar. Doesnt it indicates that it will be ELTA 2052 on LCA mk 2 since all weapons/sensors/avionis will be tested with 2032 and 2052 will follow the bus architecture and easy integration with existing models ?? i mean it will be a natural choice for an AESA .... An d LRDE cant develop a PESA , so expecting something from them will again too much , they are good at producing mini models of AESA good to display as a show piece :DD

Anonymous said...

PSG whats your opinion on the new Offset rules.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.15PM: The TBO & TTSL figures of the RD-33MK/RD-33-3 are about six times higher than those of the RD-93. The RD-93’s TBO is 700 hours & TTSL is 1,400 hours. The RD-93 featured technologies of the early 1980s, whereas the RD-33MK/RD33-3 features technologies less than a decade old. The same goes for the hot-section components. Sensor fusion will be there for the integrated EW suite of the Tejas Mk2 & if the IRST goes on board as well, then there will be sensor fusion of inpits from the IRST sensor & the AESA-MMR. Any kind/type of NATO MILSPEC-standard AAMs can be interfaced with any NATO MILSPEC-standard AESA-MMR, its weapons management computer & HMDS, as the open-architecture nature of the avionics suite permits various plug-n-play options. It is still too early to comment much on the Arjun Mk2’s final vectronics & self-protection suite configuration. FICV’s details were all uploaded last April on the DEFEXPO 2012 thread.

To Anon@2.47PM: Wheeled tank destroyers are more suited over the locational desert-type terrain of eastern Ladakh. Tracked light tanks are more suited for terrain that is devoid of hard soil & is always vulnerable to landslides/mudslides, like those prevailing in northeastern India. However, light tanks are also capable of operating quite well in areas like eastern Ladakh & Uttarakhand. It appears that the idea of acquiring light tanks for the eastern Ladakh theatre has been given up in favour of deploying medium tanks like the T-72M1 Ajeya or even the TANK EX, since the PLA Army too has deployed medium tanks like the ZTZ-96G in that area. Northeastern India does not host the type of terrain that favours large-scale armoured/mechanised warfare & therefore, helicopter-gunships equipped with ATGMs will be in much demand in such areas.

To RAHUL: The IAF & IA both need well in excess of 40 Regiments of SHORADS each. So far, the IA has already received hardware for three Spyder-SR Regiments & in future 8 more Regiments of an as-yet-unselected SHORADS will be procured for the IA. Regarding laser-guided SAMs, the earth’s curvature plays a big role in defining the SAM’s line-of-sight. Secondly, such SAMs being VSHORSADS (for point-defence only), they’re most unlikely to be sited in front of an advancing armoured force or helicopter-gunship formation that is advancing in flat terrain, because it is almost impossible to pre-determine the axis of advance of a fast-moving manoeuvring formation. That’s why laser-guided SAMs are typically sited alongside static targets that need point-defence.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To PURBAYAN ROY: Be it a LACM or ASCM variant of BrahMos, the laws of physics stay the same. The terminal guidance active radar of any such missile has a very small antenna & therefore a very limited field-of-view & therefore once target lock-on is achieved, there’s no way any kind of zig-zag manoeuvring can be achieved. This is especially so for ASCMs of all types. For LACMs, it is not zig-zagging that’s done, but rather navigation by way of flying over different waypoints which allows the missile to acquire & attack the target from the rear, or from the flanks, instead of a head-on approach in a straight line as the crow flies.

To Anon@8.14PM: There’s nothing civil or military about analysing any event. It is all about taking difficult decisions with difficulty—that being the hallmark of a true leader. If nacent India found it extremely troublesome to ensure the time-bound amalgamation of the unwilling princely states, then it was up to the PM as the team-leader to first address such problems head-on, instead of gallivanting around the world trying to create a better mankind for everyone else except for the Indian citizens. Nor can one claim that problems related to the amalgamation of the unwilling princely states prevented the then PM to take 8 long years to admit in Parliament that China had indeed built a highway across Aksai Chin! History after all is what one is taught, & not what really transpired. Therefore, to cling to the belief that it was the Satyagraha model that uprooted the colonial empire is easily discredited. The fact remains that popular resentment against the colonial rulers increased manifold after the hanging of Bhagat Singh, Rajguru & Sukhdev & while some like Subhas Chandra Bose were quick to see this & took full advantage of it, others like M K Gandhi & J L Nehru were the stragglers & only in 1942 did they come face-to-face with reality & consequently gave the ‘do or die’ slogan. And what’s your definition of a ‘rather civilised enemy’? One that deliberately & consciously employed mercenaries like the Gurkhas to open indiscriminate & unrestricted fire against innocent civilians gathering to commemorate a religious festival at Jalianwallahbagh? Destiny is what you make of it, & not about taking anyone’s side.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.11PM: Of course the IN has full & unrestricted operational sovereign control over all its assets.

To Anon@10.24PM: Will answer that next week. The same question has been posed in LIVEFIST as well. Let’s first wait to see what the answer would be, or if at all there will be an answer in that blog.

To Anon@10.49PM: Not just with the 12 Jaguar IMs, but also with a squadron of MiG-29UPGs, which are qualified to launch the 3M25E ASCM. My personal view on this is that this is a waste of money, just as is the case with the UIAF’s insistence on maintaining a fleet of heavy attack helicopters. Who says I’m discounting BrahMos? All I did was state that the PLA has begun the process of deploying MR-SAMs designed to neutralise the threat posed by BrahMos. I have yet to come across any official US Navy statement admitting that it is defenceless against sizzlers and sprinters, especially the SSGN-launched types. Pakistan a ‘confused adversary’? Do not underestimate the adversary is all I can say for now.

To DEBAJIT SARKAR: Where did you obtain that figure of “single shot kill probability is less than 50% against cruise missiles”? According to ALIT, the LY-80E’s OEM, the SSKP is no less than 0.85 against aircraft targets and no less than 0.60 against missile targets. Land-based FM-90 (not the older HQ-7) & shipborne FM-90N of the types operational in China, Bangladesh & Pakistan are optimised for intercepting SUBSONIC cruise missiles. LR-SAMs like the S-400 are meant for usage against high-flying bombers & reconnaissance aircraft/drones, & not against combat aircraft that can easily duck below the engagement altitude envelopes of the S-400’s target engagement radar.

To BRADSHAW: No, the Jaguar IMs still carry the R550 Magic-2s & in future could well be armed with AIM-132 ASRAAM. Any present-day AESA-MMR of Western origin can be interfaced with any kind of BVRAAM & the same goes for HMDS/WVRAAM combinations of Western origin.

To Anon@1.33AM: The same as before: one is putting the cart before the horse with cosmetic measures, instead of attempting bold & far-reaching structural economic reforms.

Unknown said...


wrt the Naval-LUH RFP sent out recently. Who exactly is in the fray (which exact helos and manufacturers) and when can we expect induction?

And wrt LHD/LPD which exact plastforms are in the hunt and when will we see a descion made on which one has one and when will we see the first one enter IN service?

Also what is the status of the Marine brigade of the IN that is supposedly being raised?

RAJ47 said...

I am a little late to comment on this post, but I thought it was important.
1.The radar statiion is nnot in Shigatse but atop Gangbala mountain about 135 km away from Shigatse.
2.The J-11s are seen at Gongga, Lhasa and not Shigatse.
3.The HQ-16 pic is of Beijing MR. Till date HQ-16 is deployed only at two places in China, only one place confirmed.
4.SAMs are deployed only at Gongga in TAR, Shigatse has empty SAM site prepared for S-300P. The other places you mention ( are in Lanzhou MR, but not yet confirmed.
5.Please contact me if you need more information on any issue concerning PRC.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAJ47: Regarding your observations above, they’re all way off the mark, since you’re obviously not exposed to what’s been reported by CCTV since August 2010 not only about combat aircraft deployments within TAR, but also about SAM test-firings involving the KS-1A & LY-80E within TAR. Had you been even remotely aware of the terms & conditions of the sale by Russia of S-300s to China since the late 1980s, you wouldn’t have dreamt up the S-300P deployment part at Shigatse.

Anonymous said...

Prasyn sir,

Is India in possession of
S-300PMU and S-400 as well?