Total Pageviews

Monday, November 26, 2012

The Saga Of Liao Ning 16

Within just two months of being commissioned, the Liao Ning (pennant no 16)—the   PLA Navy’s (PLAN) first aircraft carrier—on November 25 both received and launched its first two Shenyang Aircraft Corp-built J-15 combat aircraft (clones of the Su-33). It was on September 25, 2012 that China had commissioned the Liao Ning, which will primarily be used for testing purposes but it will also help defend “the interests of state sovereignty, security and development,” according to the country’s Ministry of National Defense. China’s then President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao had attended the commissioning ceremony, thereby highlighting the political importance attached to the 990-feet Soviet-era vessel.
The launch of the Liao Ning at the Dalian port made China the last of the five-member UN Security Council to own an aircraft carrier. “The delivery and commission of the Liao Ning is just a small step of China’s aircraft carrier procurement programme and there is a long way to go before we have a powerful navy,” the ship’s Commanding Officer, Rear Admiral Zhang Zheng said. “Today (September 25) will be forever remembered as the day China’s Navy has entered the era of aircraft carriers”. The Liao Ning is now being run by highly educated crew, including female sailors. Half of the commissioned officers on board hold masters or doctoral degrees, according to Mei Wen, political commissar of the aircraft carrier. The delivery of an aircraft carrier is not the end of an aircraft carrier project, especially when the carrier-based aircraft are not delivered. It is just an important result of a stage in an aircraft carrier project because the supporting weapons and carrier-based aircraft systems need to be further tested. It still needs a longer period of time for the aircraft carrier to form a joint combat effectiveness together with the aircraft carrier battle group and submarines. Generally speaking, after the aircraft carrier is delivered, it requires to undergo three preparatory stages in order to attain the status of an operational platform.
First stage: Sea Trials After Delivery: An aircraft carrier will first enter a series of sea trials lasting 18 months (after an aircraft carrier is developed for the first time) or 12 months (for follow-on vessels) after delivery to ensure that both crew and equipment meet the requirements of performing combat deployment tasks, which include loading and unloading of goods and materials and equipment, residential checks, preparation period of going to sea, tests and trial voyages before being sent back and final contract trials.

Second stage: Fine-Tuning. The period of being sent back to the shipyard after delivery, which normally lasts for several months, is a typical maintenance stage in the early phase of the whole life-cycle, aiming to amend the problems in the final tests and troubles found and postponed to be solved during trial voyages, and also to upgrade the various on-board carrier-based systems. The shipyard bearing the task after being sent back is similar to the shipyard of goods and materials and equipment because it is familiar with the aircraft carrier.

Third stage: Combat Deployment Preparation. The training for preparedness during war is the responsibility of the fleet forces command where the aircraft carrier is in, including the tests of air-defence operation system, anti-submarine warfare system, anti-ship combat system, electronic warfare system, and flying of carrier-based aircraft groups, as well as certification of the crew complement and their operational capacities. During the training period, the crew complement must accept comprehensive training to adapt to the aviation facilities of the aircraft carrier, such as the battle station exercises for dragging, rescuing and refueling, and battle station operational exercises on duty. The training and examination of operating personnel on takeoff and landing of the carrier-based aircraft are also essential. Before the new aircraft carrier enters formal service, the specialised technician personnel must conduct a comprehensive flight-deck inspection, including the distributed architecture, rigidity, strength and conditions of taking off and landing.
The Liao Ning had its weapons suite installed by April 2011. The suite includes four FL-3000N anti-missile systems each comprising a 24-missile launcher. The two metre-long FL-3000N missiles have a maximum range of 9km. Also installed for close-in air defence are twin nine-barrel variants of the Type 1130 cannon system, plus twin 18-tube countermeasures dispensers. For ASW defence, twin UDAV-1M 254mm RBU-12000 ten-tube ASW mortar launchers have been installed. Built by Russia’s ‘SPLAV’ Federal State Unitary Enterprise State Research & Production Association, the KT-153M launcher can fire two types of rounds: a decoy round (111S02) and an ASW rocket round (111CZG). The former is designed for the hydro-acoustic decoying, ensuring that an inbound active-homing torpedo is diverted. The latter is used both in a barrage mode to lay on an inbound torpedo’s trajectory a drifting mine barrage comprised of several warheads and in a depth-charge bomb mode.
Also on board is a locally developed Improved Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System (IFLOLS), which is used to give glidepath information to pilots in the terminal phase of landing on an aircraft carrier. IFLOLS, uses a fibre-optic ‘source’ light, projected through lenses to present a sharper, crisper light. This has enabled pilots to begin to fly ‘the ball’ further away from the ship, thereby making the transition from instrument flight to visual flight smoother. Additional improvements include better deck motion compensation due to internalisation of the mechanism. The Liao Ning on August 10, 2011 left its shipyard at Dalian Port in northeast China’s Liaoning Province after an eight-year refitting process. As it set sail, the Liaoning Provincial Maritime Safety Administration publicised a notice restricting navigation in waters off the Dalian coast, saying that vessels are forbidden from travelling through an area of sea 13--25 nautical miles wide and 22 nautical miles long in the northern Yellow Sea and Liaodong Bay from August 10 to 14, 2011.
The 323 metre-long Liao Ning will carry about 18 J-15 ‘flying shark’ heavy multi-role combat aircraft (a cloned version of the Su-33), about six Z-8K airborne early warning helicopters, and two Z-8K search-and-rescue helicopters. The vessel will also carry 2,500 tonnes of aviation fuel, allowing it to generate up to 1,000 aircraft and helicopter sorties without any replenishment. Crew complement will be 3,000. The J-15, developed and produced by the No112 Factory of Shenyang Aircraft Corp (SAC), features enlarged folding wings, strengthened landing gears with twin nose wheels, a pair of small canard foreplanes, a larger wing area to improve its low-speed handling, a shortened tail-cone to avoid tail-strike during high AoA landing, and an arrester hook. The avionics and weapons suites are both of Chinese origin. At least one Su-33 prototype (T-10K-3) was acquired from Ukraine in 2001 for airframe reverse-engineering purposes. The first J-15 prototype was assembled by SAC in 2008 and it made its maiden flight on August 31, 2009, when it was powered by two Russian AL-31F turbofan engines. The first takeoff from a land-based simulated ski-jump occurred on May 6, 2010. For lead-in-fighter training for the PLAN’s aircraft carrier-based naval aviators, the FL-2000/JL-9 flying training aircraft has been modified to incorporate an arrester hook.
The Liao Ning, formerly known as the Varyag, was to be an Admiral Kuznetsov-class multi-role aircraft carrier of the Soviet Union. She was known as Riga when her keel was laid down at Shipyard 444 (now Nikolayev South) in Nikolayev December 6, 1985. Design of the carrier was undertaken by the Nevskoye Planning and Design Bureau. She was launched December 4, 1988, but she was renamed Varyag in late 1990. Construction stopped by 1992, with the ship structurally complete but without electronics. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the vessel’s ownership was transferred to Ukraine, where the ship was laid up, unmaintained, then stripped. In early 1998, she lacked engines, a rudder, and much of her operating systems, and was put up for auction. It was purchased at an auction for US$20 million by Chong Lot Travel Agency, a company widely believed to be a front for the PLAN. In April 1998, the then Ukrainian Trade Minister Roman Shpek announced the winning bid—US$20 million from Chong Lot Travel Agency Ltd, a small company based in China’s Hongkong SAR. The company subsequently proposed to tow the Varyag out of the Black Sea, through the Suez Canal and around southern Asia to Macau SAR, where it would moor the ship and convert it into a floating hotel and gambling parlour. It would be similar to the maritime attractions ‘Kiev’ in Tianjin and ‘Minsk’ at the Minsk World in Shenzhen. Considerable evidence suggested that the future of Varyag was linked to the PLAN and its programme to develop an aircraft carrier. Before the auction was closed, officials in Macau had warned Chong Lot that it would not be permitted to berth Varyag in the harbour. The sale was carried out anyway. Chong Lot is owned by Chin Luck (Holdings) Company of Hongkong SAR. Four of Chin Luck’s six board members lived in Yantai, China, where a major PLAN shipyard is located. Chin Luck’s Chairman then was a former career military officer with the PLA. In mid-2000, the Dutch ITC tugboat Suhaili with a Filipino crew was hired to take the Varyag under tow. Chong Lot could not get permission from Turkey to transit the dangerous Bosphorus Strait, since under the Montreux Treaty of 1936 Turkey has obligations to permit free passage, but has certain sovereignty and refusal rights. The Varyag spent 16 months under commercial tow circling in the Black Sea. High-level PRC government officials conducted negotiations in Ankara on Chong Lot’s behalf, offering to allow Chinese tourists to visit cash-strapped Turkey if the travel agency’s ship were allowed to pass through the Straits. On November 1, 2001, Turkey finally relented from its position that the vessel posed too great of a danger to the bridges of Istanbul, and allowed the transit. The Varyag was then escorted by 27 vessels, including 11 tug-boats and three pilot boats, and took six hours to transit the strait (most large ships take an hour-and-a-half). Sixteen pilots and 250 seamen were involved. At 11:45am on November 2, she completed her passage and made for Gallipoli and Çanakkale at 5.8 Knots (10.7kph). She passed through the Dardanelles without incident. On November 3, Varyag was caught in a Force 9 gale and broke adrift while passing the Greek island of Skyros. Sea-rescue workers tried to re-capture the hulk, which was drifting toward the island of Evia. The seven-member crew (three Russians, three Ukrainians and one Filipino) remained on board as six tugboats tried to reestablish their tow. After many failed attempts to re-attach the lines, a Greek Coast Guard rescue helicopter landed on Varyag and picked up four of the seven-an crew complement. One tug managed to make a line fast to the ship later in the day, but high winds severely hampered efforts by two other tugs to secure the ship. On November 6, Aries Lima (reported as both Dutch and Portuguese), a sailor from the tug Haliva Champion, died after a fall while attempting to re-attach the tow lines. On November 7, the hulk was taken back under tow and progress resumed at some 3 Knots. The Suez Canal does not permit passage of ‘dead’ ships—those without their own on-board power source—so the Varyag was towed through the Straits of Gibraltar, around the Cape of Good Hope, and through the Straits of Malacca. The tugs towing the Varyag maintained an average speed of 6 Knots (11kph) over the 15,200-nautical-mile (28,200km) journey, calling for bunkers and supplies at Piraeus, Greece; Las Palmas, Canary Islands; Maputo, Mozambique; and Singapore en route. The Varyag entered Chinese waters on February 20, 2002, and arrived on March 3 at Dalian Shipyard in northeastern China. China continued to assert that Varyag would be a casino. When Macau awarded new casino licences in February 2002, Chong Lot was not among the successful bidders. The Varyag was subsequently tied up at Dalian. The total cost of acquiring the vessel was over $30 million: $25 million to the Ukrainian government for the hull, nearly $500,000 in transit fees, and some $5 million for the towing services.
A Zinc Chromate primer was applied to the Varyag’s main deck in 2006 at Dalian. This is a primer for a non-skid surface to keep aircraft from skidding off of a carrier’s main deck. In late Arpil, 2009, the Varyag was moved from the pier in Dalian, to a dry dock about two miles distant. In 2009, at the Wuhan Naval Research Institute 711 or China Ship Design Institute, the PLAN embarked on building a full-scale deck and island mock-up of the Varyag. This included the ski-ramp and complete deck markings, the island superstructure and a complete array of sensors were added there. These fittings have been repeated in real-life on the Liao Ning itself as its island was rebuilt. Two full-size mock-up aircraft were also placed on the mock-up deck, one a Z-8 heavylift helicopter, and a strike aircraft that resembled a Su-33. On June 8, 2011 the Chief of General Staff of the PLA confirmed that China’s first aircraft carrier was under construction. On the morning of August 10, 2011 the Liao Ning began her first sea trial.


 

167 comments:

Anonymous said...

How many aircraft (how many jets, how many choppers etc.( does Liaoning carry?

How many does Kuznetsov?

Vikramaditya?

Viraat?

Early Vikrant (R11)

IAC-1 ?

Nimitz ?

Enterprise?

Anonymous said...

How many skyranger PAF & PA has ? Are they really Skyranger or Oerlikon 35mm revolver cannon ? What is the platform of Skyranger ?

Anonymous said...

Prasun da ,

Many thanks for your answers.

How good is the chinese FL-3000N anti-missile system? Is it as good as the US SeaRAM anti-missile system?

Will the IN deploy such misile based CIWS on it's future warships like the Project 17A FFG, Project 15B DDG, Batch 3 Talwar class FFGs and the INS Vikramaditya?

sathead3 said...

Anon@9:05 AM - courtesy Wiki:
Kuznetsov: 14 SU-33, 28 Mig-29K, 4 Su-25, 17 Ka-27 choppers
Vikramaditya: 16 Mig 29K, 10 choppers
Viraat: Up to 3 aircraft including Harriers and choppers
Nimitz: 85-90 fixed wing and helicopters
Enterprise: Holds up to 90 (60+ normally)

sathead3 said...

Sorry, meant to say
Viraat: Up to 30 aircraft not 3!

Sayan said...

Sir , What happened to the rest of the T-72M ? Were they sold to neighbouring countries ?

Why does such a rugged tank like T-90 malfunction in the intense heat of Thar desert ? Why cant they be used during day and at noon in Thar , Cholistan deserts ? Afterall they with T-72 form the backbone of IA armoured inventory .

Wont all T-90 be upgraded to MS standards ?

MRO fcailities for Su-30 are comping up at Hal and 11 BRD. Wonderful news indeed. From now on no Sukhois have to be sent to Irkutsk .

What is the increase in wing area of J-15.Su-33 has a 62.0 sqm wing area.

Rahul said...

Hi Prasun, Are you absolutely sure that PAF has Skyranger ? How many have they ordered ?

What is the alternative to Skyranger available to IA and IAF ? How good and versatile is Panstir S1 ? Is it good as an alternative ?

Already four regiments of Spyder-SR are already operational with IA. 4 regiments mean 288 missiles.How many Python-5 & Derby were bought in total ?

Why do Akash official website give the range of Akash between 25-30 km ? The range is 25 km ? How Akash is better than Kvadrat SAM from which it was reverse engineered ?

Anonymous said...

Considering The cost of
Gripen NG = 57.6 m$
MiG 35 = 30 m$
Dassault Rafale = 90.5 m$
Wouldn't it be wise for IAF to order a rather cheaper a/c , in cond. of such tough economic times
Last day I heard the GDP growth rate of India fell to just 5.5%pa
This will also help IAF to reach its sanctioned strength in less time and in Less Budget
As for price of 126 rafale, it can order 197 gripen or 380 MiG-35.....

Anonymous said...

Skyranger has been in PA and PAF for years. Infact the PAF version is made/assembled in pak. PA also has the AHEAD technology.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,

By the cost estimates mentioned above, It looks like the lioning had cost the PLAN atleast $3 Billion to buy the non functional carrier. All expenses of refit makes this aircraft carrier worth some where $5 Billion?

Lioning is much heavier when compared to INS Vikramaditya. Which one is more potent?

Which aircraft is better? Mig 29K or the Chinese copy of Su 33 the J 15?

In terms of endurance which ship edges out the other?

Which one is better self defense suite?

Its mentioned about INS Vikramaditya that It carries 16 mig 29K + 6 Naval LCA + 8 Helicoptors of various roles. Is this information correct? VMT in advance.

Anonymous said...

http://us.cnn.com/2012/11/25/world/asia/china-aircraft-carrier-landing/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

raw13 said...

so nice to see the PLAN carrier. according to many indian pundits india has 40 years of carrier operational experience and PLAN will take decades to catch up. Ummm indian pundits indeed!!! OH yes the J-15 are copies and hence also crap. Yeah Man rubbish. They don't even have chinese engines! what is the world coming to? why don't these chinese play by the rules?

IN will have to spend seriously just to maintain current status. India is being scr**d from multiple side, just like the USSR.

raw13 said...

3rd fc1 sq about to be operational. It is likely to be based at masroor, this is the one that will be using cm-400 and c802/803.

Anonymous said...

Liaoning has been sold to China on condition that no military use shall ever be made of it. So why the Ukranian authorities are not taking seriously the violation of agreement
Even the US is to meek to point it out ?
Moreover could this AC be used offesively agains India ?
What is the status of P17A FFG

Anonymous said...

i can understand the raw13. initially i was also too overtly patriotic that the logic and wisdom was given second seat. and used to be jingoistic about what we have. But that was 10 years back, and through learning i changed. My advise to Raw13 and the likes is this is only a transition phase where you suffer from this type of jingoism. and sure you will change, sooner or later depending upon the brain you got.
Prasunda, i like the reasoning and logic you put in each of your blogs/answers. and of course the substantiating proof is a scientific method. thanks...

Anonymous said...

@raw13
yo, genius, did you know that it even took US decades to master the naval aviation skills required for carrier operations.

and,it's mostly the western analysts who believe that, it will take china years to master these skills.

the caries here, is for the Chinese to master the skills of operating a aircraft carrier.Many western analysts have also said that it will take decades for china to put a credible platform,many Chinese analysts believe the same.
for starters, read this article

"http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/06/relax-chinas-first-aircraft-carrier-is-a-piece-of-junk/all/?utm_source=Contextly&utm_medium=RelatedLinks&utm_campaign=Previous"

and of J-15, it was Russians who said that the Chinese clones of sukhoi are inferior to their war planes.And it was not Indians,so, next time,sharpen those brain cells before you start hitting that keyboard of yours.

and of fc1, stop bringing that crap here over and over again.Pakistani genius minds can have mental orgasm over there stealthy super cool fc1,don't bring your crap here.

it would be best if i not start talk about the Pakistani pundits.
let alone those super cool analysts, the whole armed forces have no clue about the nation....they are even incapable of protecting there so called 'strategic' airbases and defense installations, and yet claim that they can match India.
the great Pakistani armed forces indeed!!!!!

Anonymous said...

@raw13
stop the boot licking of the Chinese.
we all know how great the Pakistani military is,so,reserve the cheap talk of fc1 to the Pakistani pundits.

Anonymous said...

@raw13
"India is being scr**d from multiple side, just like the USSR."

multiple side? there is only one side i.e east.only the Chinese are a potential threat, the Pakistani navy is just a nuisance in the region.

even labeling the Pakistani navy as 'pain in the a$$' is like giving them the respect they don't deserve.

Anonymous said...

Sir when will the INS Arihant be commissioned ?
Any news of P15A DDG ?
Is navy getting any major warship added to its fleet this Dec or Jan ?
And what about AnC Command , are they having any major asset other than 4 Su30s and a LST ?
They are vital assets and can be used for power projection and choking Chinese oil supplies if any misadventure by Chinese happened even then they are not well protected ?
For India to become an Asian superpower it will have to effectively use its assets for Power projection in its areas of interest

Anonymous said...

Sir, 1.Tejas mk2 has increased length ? Does it have same wingspan ? Is the wing area the same ?

2.Fixed canards or all-moving canards can be fitted to the front section of Tejas mk2 to improve AoA and agility. Now there is space available for fitting canards.

3. When UDAV-1M 254mm RBU-12000 ten-tube ASW mortar launchers are available why is RBU-6000 being fitted on batch 2 of Talwar class , Shivalik class , Kolkata class DDG ?

4. During mid-life refit will RBU-6000 be changed with RBU-12000?

5.The two different ASW rockets you mentioned one decoying and the other for destroying incoming torpedoes in barrage mode are they in use by IN for RBU-6000 ?

6.Why isn't there any RBU-12000 launchers in INS Vikramaditya for ASW defense ?

7.Why is g tolerance of Tejas mk1 limited to 8G? Can this g level be increased to 9g ?

8.Type 730 CIWS has it's own radar and optronic director while there is none for AK630M . AK-630 on Vikramaditya need to NE replaced with a capable system .

9.How many units of Skyranger PAF possess ?

10. ARM can easily neutralize Spyder SR radar leaving way for a PGM strike to destroy Brahmos battery. S-300 and 400 series are agile. They can destroy not only lumbering bombers but also supersonic jets , cruise missiles. Where there is flat terrain devoid of obstacles like mountains , hills or other terrain masking features in NW India a targeted ac won't be able to get outside the engagement zone of it's tracking radar. So it's a kill or abortion of attack . And since all these is happening at 150 km above range no ARM can be released .
Thus it is well protected .

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Only Red Dragon China could have dared to purchase it from Ukraine in this manner and haul it back home through such difficult modes. Based on pure data, it has to be superior to our Vikramaditya. Also theoretically the J-15 has to be superior to our Mig-29. So the solution may lie somewhere else.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.46AM: About 40 Skyshield 35 systems. They were procured along with Spada-2000 E-SHORADS for base air-defence sometime in 2004-2005.

To Anon@12.22PM: FL-3000N is a laser-guided system as opposed to IR-guided SeaRAM. The former does not have a closed-loop target acquisition system, whereas the SeaRAM has. On Project 17A FFG, Project 15B DDG, INS Vikramaditya & on IAC-1 the Barak-2 will double up as both MR-SAM & a CIWS capable of intercepting inbound subsonic/supersonic ASCMs at a distance of 6km away from the targetted warship.

To SAYAN: Most of the T-72Ms are being converted into carriers of Akash SAM, carriers for Rajendra BLR & BSR, plus the BLT-72 AVLB. India can’t sell any Soviet-origin or Russia-origin weaponry to third countries without Russian approval. As for MBTs functioning in the Thar/Cholistan deserts, they can, but human beings inside such MBTs can’t. In addition, there’s hardly any space inside the T-72 or T-90S for installation of air-coolers for both the crew compartment & for the gunner’s/commander’s sights. Since space isn’t a problem for the Arjun MBT family-members, such MBTs are ideally suited for desert warfare 24/7. The T-90S MBTs will be subjected to selective upgrades that have been designed by CVRDE, like installation of new commander’s panoramic sight, APU, BMS, a device for remote-activation of buried IEDs, IFF transponder, & new combat net radio. Wing-area of J-15 is the same as that of the Su-33. Everything is the same, except for the avionics suite, which is the same as that on board the Chengdu J-10.

To RAHUL: About 40 Skyshield 35 systems. They were procured along with Spada-2000 E-SHORADS for base air-defence sometime in 2004-2005. The IA & IAF too want the Skyranger & Skyshield 35. Pantsyr-S1 is not reqd since the IA already has Tunguska-Ms & upgraded Schilkas. Akash can engage multiple targets all at once, whereas a Kvadrat/Kub firing unit could engage only a single target at a time.

To Anon@3.27PM: Rafale’s procurement costs are higher but life-cycle costs are lower, whereas the MiG-35’s procurement costs are lower but the life0-cycle costs are far higher. And it makes no sense to procure Gripens when the Tejas Mk2 will offer more or less the same capabilities as the Gripen.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@5.34PM: Since the PLAN never had an aircraft carrier before, there were several start-up activities of a non-recurring nature that had to be financed. These included the setting up of academic institutions, shore-based training facilities, funds for sending several PLAN personnel to Ukraine & Brazil for specialised vocational training, buying out entire production-engineering facilities from Ukraine for items like deck arrestor systems, boilers & the Su-33, etc. Liao Ning won’t be a non-functional aircraft carrier, but it will spend the next seven years primarily as a training platform. In addition, new homeporting facilities will have to be constructed in Hainan Island & elsewhere. Mind you, the PLAN has yet to evolve into one capable of deploying a carrier battle group, by far the most challenging task. Also to be noted is the absence of a long-range air-search radar on the Liao Ning as well as on the three existing Type 071 LPDs of PLAN, an item that is imperative for vessels as large as aircraft carriers & LPHs, even when on-board AEW & C platform support is available. The INS Vikramaditya & IAC-1 will not only have such radars, but the four Project 15B DDGs too will have them. In contrast, none of the existing DDGs of PLAN have a reasonably appreciable long-range air-search radar. Then there’s the issue of missile-based area air-defence (against both combat aircraft & ASCMs) for which the Liao Ning has only FL-3000Ns, whereas both INS Vikramaditya & IAC-1 will have Barak-2 MR-SAMs on board. Consequently, in terms of overall potency, the Liao Ning is still inferior to INS Vikramaditya & IAC-1. However, in terms of combat aircraft assets, the Liao Ning scores above its Indian counterparts, since the J-15 will be more formidable than the MiG-29K in BVR air combat. But once the MiG-29K is armed with BrahMos-1 mini ASCM, it will be evenly matched against a J-15 armed with CM-400AKG ASCMs (that is, if an ASCM variant of the CM-400AKG does exist). INS Vikramaditya will have only MiG-29Ks on board, not LCA (Navy) Mk2s.

To RAW13: Yes, it was indeed an eye-catching event & I wish the PLABN all the very best. But as I’ve explained above, experience in CBG operations can’t be acquired overnight either. India will be least bothered about the PLAN’s future CBG deployment plans for at least another decade since the PLAN’s threat orientation is focussed within the South China Sea, Yellow Sea & the Western Pacific. In fact, the countries most threatened a PLAN CBG will be Japan, The Philippines & Vietnam, & not India. VMT for the heads-up on the raising of the 3rd PAF JF-17 Thunder sqn. Always welcome such constructive inputs, as opposed to the outbursts of xenophobic nationalism.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@6.58PM: When China becomes the destination for 43% of Ukraine’s total annual exports, then one can hardly expect Kiev to object to what it did with the Varyag. The US can’t do much here, since it was the US that had once showered Ukraine with all kinds of promises about granting it full NATO membership & eventually nothing came out of such empty promises.

To Anon@7.01PM, 7.06PM, 7.14PM & 7.20PM: Kindly don’t get too worked up or get provoked by rants that don’t even deserve to be countered. Be cool.

To Anon@7.23PM: S-2 won’t be commissioned as INS Arihant until late 2014 at the very latest. First Project 15A DDG should be commissioned by the first quarter of 2014. The 2nd Batch-2 Project 1135.6 FFG should arrive either before the year’s end or early next year. Chinese misadventrism, if any, will more likely take place somewhere in the South China Sea & not in the Indian Ocean, do rest assured.

To Anon@11.01PM: 1) Wing area will be increased, as will the air-intake size. 2) Incorporation of canards will only serve to further delay the validate the aircraft’s flight-control logic. 3) RBU-6000 is ideal for DDGs & FFGs. 4) No. 5) Of course. 6) ASW defence for aircraft carriers is provided by its escorting DDGs & FFGs. The PLAN will discover this in future once it goes about the process of creating a CBG. 7) Yes it can. 9) About 40 Skyshield 35s. 10) EL/M-2106 radars of SpyDer-SR are of the LPI-type & will therefore not attract any ARMs.

To Mr.RA 13: Liao Ning won’t be a non-functional aircraft carrier, but it will spend the next seven years primarily as a training platform. In addition, new homeporting facilities will have to be constructed in Hainan Island & elsewhere. Mind you, the PLAN has yet to evolve into one capable of deploying a carrier battle group, by far the most challenging task. Also to be noted is the absence of a long-range air-search radar on the Liao Ning as well as on the three existing Type 071 LPDs of PLAN, an item that is imperative for vessels as large as aircraft carriers & LPHs, even when on-board AEW & C platform support is available. The INS Vikramaditya & IAC-1 will not only have such radars, but the four Project 15B DDGs too will have them. In contrast, none of the existing DDGs of PLAN have a reasonably appreciable long-range air-search radar. Then there’s the issue of missile-based area air-defence (against both combat aircraft & ASCMs) for which the Liao Ning has only FL-3000Ns, whereas both INS Vikramaditya & IAC-1 will have Barak-2 MR-SAMs on board. Consequently, in terms of overall potency, the Liao Ning is still inferior to INS Vikramaditya & IAC-1. However, in terms of combat aircraft assets, the Liao Ning scores above its Indian counterparts, since the J-15 will be more formidable than the MiG-29K in BVR air combat. But once the MiG-29K is armed with BrahMos-1 mini ASCM, it will be evenly matched against a J-15 armed with CM-400AKG ASCMs (that is, if an ASCM variant of the CM-400AKG does exist).

Mr. Ra 13 said...

VMT.

Anonymous said...

/// FL-3000N is a laser-guided system as opposed to IR-guided SeaRAM..///

Wrong. FL-3000N is both passive(RF) and Imaging Infra-Red (IIR)

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/luritie/GeyeI_zps87aee6bf.jpg

///Also to be noted is the absence of a long-range air-search radar on the Liao Ning as well as on the three existing Type 071 LPDs of PLAN, an item that is imperative for vessels as large as aircraft carriers & LPHs, even when on-board AEW & C platform support is available. The INS Vikramaditya & IAC-1 will not only have such radars, but the four Project 15B DDGs too///


liaoning has four long range multifunctional APAR

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

congratulations to you, looks like MoD is listening to you via telepathy

just heard FMBT project will be scrapped in favor of upgrades in Arjun via tranches

also


I beleive with Tejas mk1 no. being capped it will evolve into LIFT

whats your say

Joydeep Ghosh

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

Thanks for the reply.

I want to know how many Su-27SK & Sukhoi Su-30MKK and their clones like the Shenyang J-11/J-11A/J-11B/J-11BS/J-16/J-17s and also J-10 are there with the PLAAF? How many will be there till Shenyang J-20 enters the PLAAF i.e. till 2020?

You told that J-15 will be more formidable than the MiG-29K in BVR air combat. I think the MiG-29K with it's Zhuk-MSE radar & powerful IRST sensors like the OLS-30 coupled with future BVRAAMs like the RVV-AE-SD & the RVV-AE-MD will be more potent than the J-15. What do you say?

Please give a detailed description of future air-to-air missiles that will go on board the FGFA? Will future BVRAAMs like the Meteor and the RVV-AE(future variant which will go on-board the PAK-FA) will have dual band seekers i.e. both active radar homing & electro-optical sensors? Please explain.

Thank you.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

If the FMBT and LIFT really grow in the above manner, it will be really great and as already suggested by you.

Vikram Guha said...

Hi Prasun Da,

I recently read in Business Standard that the Army is "scuttling" the trials of the Arjun so that they can purchase the T 90MS from Russia .

Would love to hear from you on this.

Regards,
Vikram

Anonymous said...

Is ADA working on 2-3 AMCA designs ? Out of which one will be selected ? Its also being said by ADA officials that the model design thAT WE HAVE SEEN DUring AERO India is gonna chANGE because of IAF's strigent demand for stealth ?

Congrats u were right about FMBT to be based on Arjun. What is CVRDE now gonna do to reduce weight ? According to IA addition of 1 more person in Arjun as against t72 and t90 (3 in t72/t90 and 4 in arjun) adds an extra 10 ton weight (this doesn't mean 4th person weigh 10 ton). Is it possible CVRDE is now gonna try to build arjun that will work with 3 people which is possible with more automation ? How are they gonna plan to reduce the weight of arjun ? Also there was a talk about some new 1800 hp engine with two modules one 300 hp and second 1500 hp which could be turn on and off while arjun is in stealth mode thereby reducing IR signature during night and could start both of them during attack mode. Can you tell anything about this or its just one of the many star wars dream that drdo has ? Is there a plan for some different higher calibre barrel also ? Lastly to suport future development of arjun platform, IA will have to purchase more arjun mk2 or they will have to state their commitment for big number for arjun mk3/FMBT. What do you think ? Is there a chance IA will increase the order of 126 mk2 ?

SAme goes for LCA mk2, if what you wrote about the capability of lca mk2 in your previous articles is achieved by ADA in time, would you see IAF purchasing more lca mk2 considering every other project is getting delayed ?

Mr. Ra 13 said...

After your good and long efforts, many good news seem to be emerging. Or is it all a natural outcome in the form of indigenization due to the increasing financial crisis.

Anonymous said...

Sir latest news - Army looking to scrap FMBT, instead, build on Arjun design.

I think a Arjun Mk-3 is also in the offing. Any views regarding this? You were right the future lies in heavy tanks, not 50-tonners.

1. So this can be regarded as a steap in the right direction?

2. What could be the features of such a Mk-3 Arjun if its is developed?

3. In what numbers could IA induct such a tank developed instead of 50-ton FMBT?

383 said...

Prasun

An excellent report on Liaoning and she is not near operational but the flight deck crew seemed to have copied US carriers to the tee for landing take off and marshaling. As some on who served and controlled and worked up a carrier I could not believe J-15 landing and hooking was perfected ..great pilots too and she looks well constructed.

On the order for 126 RAFALEs and since 100 FGFAs are moving and economy is down, 50 Mirages and 48 MiGs being upgraded CAN OUR ECONOMY afford Naval and Army needs too...Then lets get 63 Rafles with options and see how it goes . Also HAL is become to big a PSU to deliver all. Must review it.

Has BAE clinched IJT deal to help HAL and are VIP 101s of Westland in trouble as IAF is told first arrives with trained crew next month.

Anonymous said...

what is the advantage for PLAN for having Zubr class fast vessels?

Thanks for the article on Chinese aircraft carrier. It seems the luck was with Chinese when they tolled Vyrag from Ukraine to China. Anyway, I hope somebody in MoD will be listening to you and Chinese Military build up, and start doing something to clean up their a$$es.

A question from different topic. Syrian civil war is going on for almost 2 years now. Many people have died. Now the recent news indicate that Assad's time is limited, any time he will be deposed by the rebels. The Western countries and Israel think that post-Syrian government may be good for them considering Assad's closer relationship with Iran.

What will happen if new government that rules Syria will be like AKP party (Erdogan's party), considering the anti-Israel mindset and love for conservative form of Islam? Do you think, this kind of support to rebels in Syria is a kind of control over Islamic countries by Turkey.

Thanks

Anonymous said...

Sir, I asked you a question regarding range of Brahmos on 26/11 @ 1:27am,
You replied "a range of 550km is best it can offer"
Sir, I 'm having one more query regarding this. As the missile uses Russian motor, how could India extend range of Brahmos which uses Russian motor, and Russia is a signatory to MTCR, and therefore bound by the condition for not helping other nations to get missiles with ranges greater than 300km ?
Has India developed its own indigeneous motors, or found a way to bypass MTCR ?
Shall I consider that India is having Brahmos of ranges >300km ?

Rahul said...

Hi Prasun , Are there any talks going on between IA officials and Rafale, IAI people regarding Iron Dome system ? Is Army eveluating this system itself ?

When will the new Tamir interceptor capable of intercepting NLOS-BSM emerge ?Tamir is a hit to kill missile.So it will be effective against cruise missiles.

Akash can intercept 0.01 sq metre RCS targets.Then it must be able to intercept cruise missiles? Is it having 25 or 30 km range ?

How many firing units are there per Skyshield system ?
Barak-1,8 was supposed to be ready by 2013 & 2014. Why the delay ?

Pls ans .Already four regiments of Spyder-SR are already operational with IA. 4 regiments mean 288 missiles.How many Python-5 & Derby were bought in total ?

I live in Barrackpore. Today for the very first time I saw helicopter flying at night & on a close look found them to be Mi-17V5. Yellow specks were rotating in the skies and there was a fixed green light. IAF is taking night flying seriuosly. Palta AFB must be a training centre. I hear people say they see those lights most of the days between 7 pm and 10 pm. A very positive sign indeed.

Sayan said...

Sir, Our generals hide their shortfalls behind the heroism of the fighting troops : Ajai Shukla
Still today are our tanks night blind, is crippling shortage of tank ammunition still present ? IA has inducted four Spyder-SR regiments into service. How is the air-defense network still obsolete today ?

IA has one of the largest tank fleets at 4000 tanks. But there are 1300 T-90M and 1900 T-72M. Where are the rest ?

Won't there be improvmnts in armour of T-90S during upgrade? You once reported that IA representatives were in Nizhny Tagil for negotiating the deep upgrade of first 330 T-90S into T-90MS .

Before T-90 ,T-72 goes to battle are composite add-on armour slabs and blocks fitted to the turret , hull sides , lower and upper glacis in the manner of Leopard 2 to give it added protection ?

Are we facing SHORTAGE of 155 mm artillery shells ?

Pinaka 1 uses IMI TCS. But IMI has been blacklisted. From where is this TCS now sourced ?

SpyderSR ATATR had lpi mode . How this sort of radar can be deteded ? Can Tarang mk2 provide warning of such radars ? Are EL 2082 , air survellience 2084 also function in LPI mode which makes them unvulnerable from arm ?

What various problems were sorted out during month grounding of Tejas mk1 apart from helmet problem ? Pls have patience and give replies. You tend to overlook many thing. You are a very busy man. But we are grateful for taking pains and answering our ques.

Sayan said...

Sir, one more thing. You said J-15 has a larger wing area for better low speed handling. If J-15 has 62 m sq wing area then it is same as Su-27,30 .

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Do the black listings practically serve the larger interests of the nation or they go against them or they are irrespective of the both.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.25AM: FL-3000N presently uses a millimetric-wave laser beam-riding guidance system. Its land-based version (known as FLV-1000) uses a passive IR seeker. No one in China has as yet developed dual-mode seekers for any missile to date. As for the Liao Ning, the four distributed arrays of the Type 348 radar are PESA & as such are only volume-search antenna-arrays for target engagements, & not long-range air-search radars. The only air-/surface-search radar on board is the Fregat. Even on the Type 052C DDGs, the long-range air-search radar used is the Type 517M, with the Type 348 PESAs being used for target engagements.

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: VMT. Did you hear about it, or did you read about it at (http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/11/army-proposes-to-scrap-future-main.html)? I also saw how rudely that ‘desi’ self-styled journalist replied to your innocent queries. Now, let’s get down to separating the wheat from chaff.
Firstly, Rosoboronexport State Corp had only proposed as far back as September 2011 that the IA’s first 310 T-90S MBTs be upgraded to T-90MS standard, following which at least another 354 new-build T-90MS units could roll out from HVF Avadi after fully knocked-down kits were delivered by Uralvagonzavod JSC for final assembly by HVF Avadi. However, since IA HQ had already been committed since late 2008 to upgrading the first 310 T-90S MBTs in-country by incorporating IRDE/OFB-developed Cdr’s panoramic sight, APU developed by Indesys Equipments Pvt Ltd, IRDE-developed driver’s thermal imager, DEAL-developed VHF frequency-hopping radio & millimeter-wave IFF transponder, plus the LEDS-150 active protection system, IA HQ have some consideration to the procurement of only 354 new-build T-90MS MBTs & that too for replacing those 354 T-90S MBTs that are due to be re-deployed from the west to the north. Therefore, contrary to what has been alleged by this ‘desi’ journalist, there was never a conflict of views/perceptions/priorities between the IA HQ’s Directorate General of Mechanised Forces (DGMF) & the Directorate of Military Operations (DGMO).
Secondly, both the DGMO & DGMF have till date not displayed any seriousness or a sense of urgency when it comes to procuring the T-90MS simply because the Russian Army itself has not yet procured it. It was for this very reason that the IA refused to conduct mobility & firepower evaluations of the prototype T-90MS MBT that was brought to India for being showcased during DEFEXPO 2012. This was highly unusual, since it is the global norm that whenever any such vehicle is sent to another country at great cost during a military technology expo, the vehicle always stays back for at least a month after the expo & during this time-period the host country’s military forces conduct mobility & firepower trials—especially if such a vehicle evinces serious interest from the concerned end-user. Since this never happened post-DEFEXPO 2012, one can only conclude that no one in India is seriously interested in the T-90MS.
Secondly, at http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/11/army-scuttles-arjun-trials-to-push.html the figures for Arjun MBTs ordered to date are wrong. The actual figure is 240 (124 Mk1s and 116 Mk1As).
Thirdly, it so happens that whenever the only option left on the table is one that’s logical, then that option has to become a reality. This is exactly what I had been stating all along, i.e. forget having wet-dreams about 50-tonne MBTs & instead go with the tide & existing global trends by developing follow-on iterations of the Arjun Mk1.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.59AM: You will get those figures at the website of Japan’s Defense Agency, where the annual report of the JDA publishes such figures. There’s no way a MiG-29K will be able to outsmart the J-15, just as during the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict the Su-27s had prevailed over the MiG-29s. As of now there’s nothing to indicate the development of dual-band seekers for BVRAAMs like FRAAM, Meteor, PL-10, PL-21, RVV-AE-PD, RVV-AE-ZRK or Astra Mk2. Boeing’s Joint Dual-Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM) could well be the first AAM to feature dual-mode guidance.

To Mr.RA 13: It so happens that whenever the only option left on the table is one that’s logical, then that option has to become a reality. This is exactly what I had been stating all along, i.e. forget having wet-dreams about 50-tonne MBTs & instead go with the tide & existing global trends by developing follow-on iterations of the Arjun Mk1. Similarly, regarding LIFT, there is simply no other option from abroad (be it the Russian Yak-130, South Korean T-50 or Italian M-346H) that can fulfil the IAF’s unique reqmts for a supersonic tandem-seat platform with low life-cycle costs. Consequently, the only option left on the table then becomes the Tejas Mk1 trainer variant—perfectly logical & common-sensical (assuming those qualities are also to be found within the country’s apex decision-makers).
For the FMBT/Arjun Mk2 project, the following steps are now reqd to be undertaken:
1) Accelerate the mobility trials of the Cummins India-developed 1,500hp engine mated to SESM automatic transmission.
2) Either expedite the development of a turret-mounted automatic ammo loader, or import such an autoloader from France (the same as that on the Leclerc).
3) Build a vectronics integration test-rig with the help of DARE, & use it for designing & testing out the Arjun Mk2’s vectronics suite (inclusive of APS, BMS & a health-n-usage trend monitoring system) as well as the related MIL-STD-1553B digital data bus.
4) Commence work on designing & fabricating a maintenance simulator for Arjun Mk1A & Mk2.
5) Begin exploring risk-sharing joint development options for a 1,800hp powerpack for Arjun Mk3.
6) Authorise funding for ARDE to develop a 120mm smoothbore 52-cal or 55-cal cannon for the Arjun Mk2.
7) Begin feasibility studies aimed at developing a 140mm 48-cal smoothbore cannon for Arjun Mk3.
8) Select a remotely-operate weapon station with built-in 0.50-cal machine gun common to both the Arjun Mk1A & Arjun Mk2.
9) Do away with the LAHAT missile-firing feature altogether, since the IA’s AAC will henceforth be able to extend air-defence against hostile helicopters through its future fleets of attack helicopters, helicopter-gunships & RSHs.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIKRAM GUHA: Nothing is being scuttled, as I’ve explained above & had done so in the previous thread as well. Nor is it true that the IA has not developed an indigenous armour philosophy in the last 65 years (see: http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/11/general-indifference.html). The reality is that in the absence of firm warfighting directives being issued by the MoD (by drafting a national defence posture & declassifying it so that all citizens of India can read it or even offer suggestions), all three armed services are totally helpless when it comes to agreeing on issues like tri-services integration & joint warfighting postures/protocols. For instance, the AAC should have been given ownership of attack helicopters way back in the late 1980s, based on lessons learnt during EX BRASS TACKS & OP PAWAN. Similarly, all theatre commands of all three armed services, or at least those of the IA & IAF, should have been transformed into joint theatre warfare commands (again based on lessons learnt from EX BRASS TACKS, EX CHECKER BOARD in 1986-1987 & after OP PARAKRAM in 2002). Somehow, someone located somewhere within the legislation-articulating institutions of India has just forgotten to do his/her job. Consequently, instead of such far-reaching institutional reforms being enacted under a top-down approach, things are crawling due to a bottom-up approach being adopted by both the three armed services as well as by the politicians & bureaucrats at the apex levels. The end-result is a dysfunctional state of affairs, under which, for instance, the IAF’s IACCCS & the Army’s ADC & RS, while both dealing with air-defence, were originally designed to be incompatible with one-another, i.e. both being unable to communicate with one another or exchange data.

To Anon@2.45PM: What ADA is now doing is evaluating four scale-model designs via wind-tunnel tests. These models will also be sent abroad in future (probably to Russia or France) for further wind-tunnel tests. Regarding FMBT, the automatic loader will be mandatory. I’ve already listed above what OUGHT to be done for the future. There will have to be only a single 1,800hp powerpack, along with an APU. All this talk of two separate 300hp & 1,500hp powerpacks are good soundbytes only for academics. IR signature reduction is possible even today with specialised camouflage nets like Sweden’s Barracuda & decoy systems of the type being imported from RAFAEL for the Arjun Mk1A. As for Tejas Mk2 & LCA (Navy) Mk2, definitely the future is bright in terms of large numbers of such aircraft to be ordered. That is because ADA is everyday learning more & more by trial-and-error. For instance, when designing an aircraft, one has to make sure that all parameters, including those related to 0-0 ejection seats & HMDS, are resolved before the final design is frozen. In case of Tejas Mk1, the airframe’s design was frozen at a time when it wasn’t even decided whether to procure ejection seats from Martin Baker or Zvesda, or whether to procure HMDS for the pilot. In fact, the delayed selection of wingtip lighting systems had previously even resulted in the entire wing of the Tejas Mk1 being subjected to re-design! Such lessons ought to be absorbed & remembered when it comes fabrication of the Tejas Mk2’s airframe.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA 13: VMT. In the final analysis, it is indeed all about the bottomline: one cannot just keep on creating sinking funds without a well thought-out project amortisation mechanism. In addition, I reckon it has been realised at last in some quarters that in the real world, there’s no ToT as such. One has to develop one’s own muscles in order to stand up on one’s own two feet. While there’s no dearth of indigenous talent, the nurturing environment for channelling such talents toward productive achievements still remains wanting. This, though, can be resolved by A) articulating & investing in a well-defined military-industrial roadmap that assures the investor of returns from his/her investments, & B) undertaking large-scale, instead of symbolic, disinvestments in all existing DPSUs & helping them to restructure & consolidate (for instance, merging all existing MoD-owned shipyards into one single vertically integrated shipbuilding firm, thereby preventing duplication of effort).

To Anon@8.52PM: 1) Of course. Looks like reality & logical reasoning have triumphed at last. 2) I’ve already explained that above. 3) At least 900 Arjun Mk2s & 600 Arjun Mk3s.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To 383: VMT. The flight-deck crew were trained by their Brazilian Navy counterparts, who in turn had been trained by their French & US Navy counterparts. In addition, the PLAN had since 2005 made enormous investments in shore-based deck-landing/takeoff facilities in Wuhan, similar to what had been done in the former USSR & what the IN is now involved with at Dabolim. Obviously, the PLAN was moving ahead with the help of those countries (like Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, the Baltic Republics & Brazil) that were never part of the US & EU embargo imposed on China after May 1989. India’s economy will undoubtedly be sluggish based on the present situation, but if far-reaching reforms were to be enacted in a gutsy manner & by showing some spine in issues like strategic disinvestments in blue-chip DPSUs like HAL, MDL & BEL, followed by industrial consolidation (like merging all shipyards into one corporate entity vested with managerial & financial autonomy so that it can compete on a level playing field with the likes of L & T & Pipavav Defence & Offshore) then a pandora’s box will open with positive results. Like the late Deng Xiaoping, I’m a great believer in taking difficult decisions without difficulty & if decisions like the ones I’ve listed above are taken, then India’s military force-modernisation efforts won’t hit any monetary speedbumps. The HJT-36 IJT is a dead-duck since no one in the IAF wants it. Globally, most respectable air forces operate a basic turboprop trainer, advanced jet trainer & a lead-in fighter-trainer (LIFT). In the IAF’s case, operating an IJT made sense only when it was still operating the piston-engined HPT-32s for ab-initio primary flight training. Now that the PC-7 Mk2 basic turboprop trainers are being procured, the jump from the PC-7 Mk2 to the Hawk Mk132 AJT will be smooth (as opposed to the extremely difficult graduation from a piston-engined aircraft to an AJT). That only leaves open the LIFT slot to be filled, & it is here that the tandem-seat version of the Tejas Mk1 fits in perfectly. AW-101s for VVIP transportation will arrive as scheduled, since there was no wrongdoing involved with contractual obligations. The problems & confusion arose because a bunch of ill-informed Delhi-based ‘desi’ journalists had uncovered an attempt by AgustaWestland to hire civilian (Abhishek Verma) & military ‘consultants’ (a serving Army Maj Gen) for two potential deals: getting the A119 to qualify for the IA’s & IAF’s reqmts for LOH/RSH helicopters (the A119 was unable to even pre-qualify); & influence the Delhi State Govt to procure A109P helicopters for the Delhi Police’s SWAT detachment. Consequently, these ‘desi’ journalists erroneously assumed that since AgustaWestland was involved, then there must also be something fishy about the AW-101 deal. From then on these ‘desi’ journalists launched a vilification campaign to malign AgustaWestland, not realising that a public-listed company like AgustaWestland that is also answerable to the EU Parliament will never violate the integrity clause contained within the AW-101 procurement contract documentation. Shit happens!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.55PM: Hovercraft like the Zubr are ideally suited for rushing in reinforcements like Marine detachments in times of crisis, for instance, if Vietnam were to attack & capture a China-held islet of the Spratlys in the South China Sea. Consequently, the Zubr will always be used as a logistics vessel for high-speed cruise along the high seas, thereby improving the PLAN marines’ expeditionary warfare capabilities in selective areas like the South China Sea.
WRT West Asia, any post-Assad regime in power in Damascus will most likely be as unpredictable as the present one in Cairo, which, although democratically elected, is now arrogating to itself the same type of dictatorial powers that Hosni Mubarak had exercised. Therefore, for countries like Israel, any Sunni-dominated govt in Syria will be the lesser of the two evils, since the Iranian influence in Lebanon & Gaza will greatly diminish. In essence, what’s now going on is the never-ending sectarian strife between Sunnis & Shias, with Iran, Iraq & Syria being pitted against the GCC member-states, Jordan & Egypt. Israel has nothing much to do with such conflicts, while Turkey just wants to cash in by adopting an opportunistic & mercantile approach.

To Anon@11.08PM: Firstly, MTCR is not a binding treaty like those arms-control or disarmament treaties under UN auspices. Being a regime, MTCR is defined by its members in different ways, moften what suits the major powers the most. That’s why the US exports T-LAMs & Trident D-5 SLBMs to the UK. In case of the BrahMos-1 Mk3, Russia too can be ‘flexible’ with India by authorising the BrahMos Aerospace JV to install additional fuel-tanks inside the missile-body so as to attain a 550km-range. Why so? One probable reason could be Russia’s displeasure against China after the latter violated the IPRs of Russia & reverse-engineered Soviet-era weapons & sensors like the MR-90 Orekh target illuminator, MR-760 Fregat M2EM radar, MR-123-02 fire-control radar and SP-521 optronic tracker, 9M317M SAM, Su-33, etc. Therefore, Russia gets pissed off with all this & decided to retaliate via India. Therefore, it is not India that has found a way to bypass the MTCR or hoodwink the Russians (which is impossible, since the entire propulsion system of BrahMos-1 comes fully built from Russia & therefore cannot be tampered with), but Russia agreeing to ONLY authorise the range extension of BrahMos-1 Block-3. Ranges of BrahMos-1’s Block-1s & Block-2s remain the same at 290km.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAHUL: 1) Talks are always going on & are routine affairs. 2) It is still under development. 3) Akash SAM was never designed to intercept low-flying cruise missiles nor was the L-band Rajendra PESA engagement radar designed to track targets that tend to suddenly pop-up from the horizon. 4) No of guns used depends on the air-defence networking. 5) The number of rounds acquired has never been made public. 6) Yellow specks are lights attached to main rotor-tips for night navigation & maintenance of vertical/horizontal separation by visual means. They’re of Israeli origin.

To SAYAN: Anyone claiming that the IA’s MBTs are night-blind is being delusional. All T-72 MBTs are equipped with active searchlights on the turret. No of T-90S MBTs in service is less than 800. There’s no shortage of 155mm rounds. TCS is no longer available for Pinaka Mk1. LPI radar emissions are extremely difficult to detect. RWRs presently in IAF service cannot detect such emissions until it is too late. EL/M-2082 & EL/M-2084 do not need to function in LPI mode. On the J-15, there are canards, whereas on the Su-27SKs & Su-30MK2s the canards are absent.

To Mr.RA 13: Blacklisting for the sake of preventing companies from taking part in competitive bidding is a self-defeating exercise. It’s like subjecting one’s child to sustained malnourishment for a mistake that need not be penalised in such a manner at all. If there is conclusive evidence of contract violation or discovery of attempts to engage in unfair business practices prior to the commencement of bidding processes, then all that needs to be done is give a single hard wrap on the knuckles. In case of the former (contract violation), the MoD ought to demand & obtain liquidated damages in cash (as Taiwan had done last year against THALES) while allowing existing contracts to be serviced. In case of the latter, the issue ought to be reported to the OEM’s host country so that institutions like the EU Parliament can swiftly investigate & penalise such companies (something that the Central Vigilance Commission & CBI seem unable to do quite often), or if an impropriety is committed during the competitive process, then the involved OEM’s Bank Guarantee must be enchased & the OEM must be required to re-submit a new BG if it still intends to stay in the game & compete. Bottomline: public humiliation & hefty financial fines always produce the desired results in a win-win manner, whereas blacklistings lasting years on end (like the ones imposed against Bofors AB & HDW) only hurt the potential/existing customer.

Anonymous said...

@Prasun Da
The Chinese 052C DDG has a 450km ranged S-band multifunction Active Phased Array Radar. Can they not use that for air search?

How do they compare to Project 15A?

Anonymous said...

To Anon@11.25AM: FL-3000N presently uses a millimetric-wave laser beam-riding guidance system. Its land-based version (known as FLV-1000) uses a passive IR seeker. No one in China has as yet developed dual-mode seekers for any missile to date. As for the Liao Ning, the four distributed arrays of the Type 348 radar are PESA & as such are only volume-search antenna-arrays for target engagements, & not long-range air-search radars. The only air-/surface-search radar on board is the Fregat. Even on the Type 052C DDGs, the long-range air-search radar used is the Type 517M, with the Type 348 PESAs being used for target engagements.
===============================
It says FL-3000N is passive Radio Frequency (RF) and Imaging InfraRed (IIR) guidance at Zhuhai Airshow 2012

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/luritie/GeyeI_zps87aee6bf.jpg
http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Naval-Weapon-Systems/FL-3000N-HQ-10-China.html

-

Jane’s stated the 052C AESA as “sea star”, directly translated from official designation of the radar from Chinese.

http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Intelligence-Weekly-2009/China-keeps-developing-its-aircraft-carrier.html
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/3904/militaire052c0060.jpg
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/6267/02092012194057.jpg

The Naval institute guide to world naval weapon: page 222 has explained why the 052C fixed phased arrary likely to be active.

http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=4S3h8j_NEmkC&pg=PA222&lpg=PA222&dq=346++radar+%2B+%22052C%22&source=bl&ots=hIVxPTZ_aU&sig=rGWzqjqEsR3ukzAeoywlVENCaXU&hl=en#v=onepage&q=346%20%20radar%20%2B%20%22052C%22&f=false




Anonymous said...

"The end-result is a dysfunctional state of affairs, under which, for instance, the IAF’s IACCCS & the Army’s ADC & RS, while both dealing with air-defence, were originally designed to be incompatible with one-another, i.e. both being unable to communicate with one another or exchange data."
Are IACCCS and ADC&RS now compatible ? This will improve the overall air defence capability also.

"What ADA is now doing is evaluating four scale-model designs via wind-tunnel tests. These models will also be sent abroad in future (probably to Russia or France) for further wind-tunnel tests."
Whats the progress of wind tunnel facility being built by Boeing in India ? If its ready by the time these models are to be send to Russia or France, can it be used for this purpose ? Also when are these models gonna tested and when the final design be frozen ? Any new design among these models ? When is the work on the first prototype gonna start ? Are we gonna see two different protypes designed for AMCA project just like in PakFa and US stealth fighter jet program and then a final design be selected by IAF ?

Rhienmetall is in India and so are israeli companies, now Japan is also considering India for potential JVs. The problem with Japan and israel is that they build everything in-house and most of the time, just for themselves thereby increasing cost. India casn join hands with these countries and produce an MBT in India for these countries also, result will be a state of the art MBT with reduced cost. One thing to note is, any product which could meet the stringent requirement for indian environments and indian terrains could almost run everywhere in the world. Japan and israel and and we can rope in some south asian and latin american countries also just like in JSF project. Japan can help us reduce weight and give insight in new materials for tank development. Germans can help us in engine, gun and turret, israelis can help us in self protection suite and turet. The only new thing in MBT world is the design of latest Leopard and IR reduction by BAE.

"That is because ADA is everyday learning more & more by trial-and-error."
Thats actually why i am optimistic about AMCA also because HAL and ADA are also gonna learn alot from FGFA and Super Sukhoi projects also. Hell i also think that by the end of this decade we might actually even get AURA because those UAV projects have also gave them alot of insights and alot of labs have been working on UCAV for a couple of years (just not on engine and sturctures but these two fields can get help from projects like FGFA, MMRCA, Super Sukhoi). Alot of complex work is being done in AI and other algorithms critical for UCAV. One more point in favor of AMCA is that IN also wants it and are willing to put money in the project.



Anonymous said...

Prasun ji please read this article -

http://newindianexpress.com/states/odisha/article1356541.ece

It says that DRDO next month will conduct 2 SLBM launches of K-15 missile, one from a submerged pontoon and ONE FROM A SUBMARINE anytime between December 6 and 8.

Is this news true? I can't believe DRDO guys have reached this level so soon.

Anonymous said...

Sir will LCH have onboard EO sensors like those on Eurocopter Tiger?

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun sir,

Below comments were from the ajay shukla blog where the author highlights many issues on Arjun. Whats your comme on this?

Ghorcharrah Gabbar said...

This issue has seen much 'flame and blame' on this blog. I don't know what do we need to declare Arjun dead once for all? It just comes back to haunt these blogs and insult common intelligence. I am plainly disgusted and shamed by the abject capitulation of the powers that be at giving Arjun yet another chance instead of a good burial.

The Arjun is a patchwork effort - disparate major components / assemblies sourced from diverse foreign manufacturers and tossed up as a MBT - a la Frankenstien. While it may be argued that this is an almost universal design and development approach for MBTs to cut costs and exploit leading-edge technologies, CVRDE has 'grafted' various sub-systems together in a fig-leaf approach to cover major design flaws and performance deficiencies. The results of the design audit by an Israeli consultancy team are still under wraps but I figure that the ARJUN Mark 2 is the result of reconstructive surgery to remove fatal design & performance flaws. Ask the two armoured regiments that are reeling under the maintenance / repair load of a huge number of 'dead' tanks.I'd say the DRDO and EME are getting better at the 'cut-nip-tuck' system of field maintenance - replace not repair.

This blog forever bemoans the Indian Army's maniacal preference for foreign MBTs (read T-90) whereas nothing about the ARJUN is Indian except the hull & turret shell, a 120mm rifled pea-shooter and the HSUs. Why even the design is a Leopard 2 inspiration, quite like Bollywood and Bappi Lahiri who continue to draw similar inspiration from overseas; we even needed foreign consultants to validate the design and selectively publicised areas where the consultants found no technical arguments. The sources of the foreign components are primarily German and French - that is multi-national.

So if DRDO has its say, we continue to re-validate the design and performance of Arjun Mark 1 or 2 based on major systems that are entirely foreign and then magically ramp up an indigenisation effort to turn-out Indian versions of a powerpack, tracks, road-wheels, radiators, fire control systems (especially the target acquisition systems), the gun control cubicle etc etc. My, my - are we dumb or are we sold ???

Take for instance the dated 120mm rifled gun - RIFLED !!! Not only is the FSAPDS ammo under-performing (penetration was found wanting during the comparative trials with T-90s), the HESH ammo is a product of DRDO kitchens - no other ammo variant such as fragmentation or multi-mode HE ammo has been developed due to a pronounced inability. SO the DRDO gets LAHAT gun-launched missile as a third ammo variant claiming they had planned for the same. There is no HEAT or multi-mode anti-personnel 120mm ammo. The DRDO has not been able to design a single HEAT warhead for indigenously manufactured ammo till date - forget the ancient 106mm RCL round or the famously-absent Nag ATGM warhead. Infact the DRDO insistence on the superiority of a rifled gun is so bloody contrived to conceal their poor ammo design abilities. Instead of being an additional ammo variant for precision, long-range engagements, LAHAT has become a convenient plug-in to blunt criticism of poor ammo diversity. How many LAHAT rounds will each tank carry as its on-weapon ammo scale ? The LAHAT fire control system, including target designation system, possibly requires a stand-alone installation in its night-capable form. Given LAHAT's 300 m/s velocity, a target at 4000m will require to be tracked and designated by the firing tank (if not externally designated) for atleast 14 secs.

Anonymous said...

o...Contd from my previous comment

While this acquisition-cum-engagement duration maybe acceptable as an odd exception for engaging helicopter targets or other ultra-critical battlefield threats but certainly not for its role as secondary tank ammo - irrespective of its hit/kill probability specs.

Examples abound of DRDO's proven inabilities in ammo development - the 81mm smoke grenades for the in-service MBTs and ICVs are incapable of creating instantaneous smoke-screens despite years of DRDO efforts; the 84mm Carl Gustav ammo is still 100% imported-design, indigenous manufacture; the 'vaunted' SHAKTI grenades to replace the HE-36 have yet to go into mass manufacture; even the 125mm HEAT ammo retains the original Soviet design; the in-service ATGMs (KONKURS, FAGGOT, MILAN) retain original warheads; why even the 125mm FSAPDS AMK 340 is absurdly underperforming when it manages to reach the target. Come to think of it, the DRDO has not been able to develop even training / practice variants of main gun ammo for the 125mm gun. Check the INSAS story - what an expensive lesson for us to learn!

To date the DRDO has not been able to indigenise an ARV; its upgrades for the Vijayanta were actually downgrades from the performance and reliability points of view; the T-55 upgrade fared no better beyond a 105mm gun. What has the DRDO done for the T-72 that has dramatically improved the tank's performance in firepower, mobility or survivability? Why has the DRDO failed in even providing a FCS upgrade for the T-72 series to fire the numerous variants of the APFSDS ammunition. Why is their design prowess unquestionable when it comes to Arjun despite the fact that the entire A-vehicle fleet of the Indian Army epitomises the DRDO's kitchen garden abilities.

I recall reading that adding a fourth crew member add 10 tons to a tank's weight. This is bunkum. At a pinch, remove the rotary conveyor in the T-72 and you can have a standing loader and tandem-seating for the commander and gunner. The T-55 is a legacy four-man crew design, the Paki Al-Zarar is another ad hoc design example where weight has not been a major gain. I have made some well-founded comments elsewhere in this blog about the weight distribution of contemporary MBTs between the turret and the remainder of the MBT chassis (refer to my comments on the posts on the FMBT earlier). In short the turret of the M1A2 (25 tons) and Leclerc (16 tons) point to the turret weighing approx 33% of the entire MBT's weight. Going by a parametric 33% turret weight yard-stick, for a 50-ton MBT the turret would expect to weigh upto 17 tons which is a fair guesstimate. The hull width (turret-basket) in the 4-man T-55 was 2000mm, in the Merkava (Mk 1) it was barely 26 cm more. The western and Russian designs differed in exploiting the sponsons to expand the turret ring over the tracks to gain ergonomic space in the turret, and additional armour plate externally. The ARJUN turret as well as the T-20 Leclerc turret have been experimentally fitted onto a T-72 chassis proving that this hybrid-design option is viable - whether for a four-man crew or a 20 round bustle-magazine.



Contd...

Anonymous said...

...Contd from my previous comment

Given that the hull design of the T-72 has served the tank well and the hull dimensions impinge on the entire mobility envelope of a tank (strategic, operational and battlefield) as well as the transport / bridging ecosystem - I would strongly advise validation trials of a turret upgrade on a T-72 / T-90 hull. After all there's another empirical analysis of hits on 308 knocked-out Iraqi tanks by Manfred Held after Gulf War 1 which recorded 77% hits on turret vis.vis 23% on the hull by KE & HEAT projectiles fired from Coalition tanks and ATGM platforms. Given the advantages accruing from digitisation, optronics, conformal / modular armour arrays, ERA and other survivability facilitators, I'd say if we can perfect a modern four-man turret instead of wasting our energies on an entire MBT, we'd probably be wiser and meaner. The turret could be a DRDO wet-dream minus a rifled gun (please).

Nothing over 50 tons ! Never.

Meanwhile an independent design effort could be initiated comprising a front-engine A-vehicle chassis for a family of vehicles (ICV, H-APC, ARV, AERV, SP gun, SPAGU, light tank, medium tank, tracked logistic carrier).

Vikram Guha said...

Many thanks Prasun Da.

Funny how you explain things so simply while some desi journalist make a mountain out of a molehill.

Regards,
Vikram

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,

VMT for the detailed explanation. My bad for not being very clear, "non-functional aircraft carrier" I mean the state it was when it was bought from ukraine (Varyag).

If the entire program constitutes of setting up all the above mentioned steps (Training Facilities, Manufacturing Facilities, Docking Facilities etc etc..) then the total cost estimates would be much much higher (Leaving alone the spending estimate of $5 billion on converting a non-functional Varyag to a functional Lioning)

This could be well be the same case for India also when it comes to designing and building an new aircraft carrier from scratch, setting up manufacturing facilities (Like manufacturing AB/A grade steel by SAIL), Training facilities (Like one in Dabolin) and also the docking facilities for such big ships.

Adding to that would be designing and building a Naval version of Tejas (Unlike the J-15 way by copying/reverse engineering and importing the manufacturing facilities from ukraine) would end up taking much more time.

If Mig 29K is not a match for Su-33/J-15 (In BVR combat) then the same applies to Naval LCA. What is the thinking behind fielding both class of fighters on IAC1.

Converting LCA trainer to a LIFT platform could end up following the same flight testing course (Now being done to LCA Tejas). How much time would it take to validate the platform and IAF starting to receive the planes.

Anonymous said...

Is this Armata MBT ?

http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/russia/main_battle_tank/armata/Armata_main_battle_tank_Russia_Russian_army_defence_industry_military_technology_640.jpg

If it is then i think we should just build the mki version of this as FMBT or just acquire the turret

Mr. Ra 13 said...

I remember reading somewhere that Russia will be replacing their Su-33's with Mig-29K's. If this is correct then what is in the minds of the Russians.

Anonymous said...

Sir , HAL's Jaguar Darin III Makes Maiden Flight in Livefist .
"This is significant moment for HAL as the upgrade

result in major operational improvement with regard to all weather air to ground, air to sea and air to air capabilities through incorporation of multi
radar", says Dr. R. K. Tyagi, Chairman, HAL.

Is muti mode radar included in DARIN 3 upgrade for all IS and IM jets ? MAWS,internal RF jammer like Virgilus , TRD which were earlier missing in the ac were they installed under Darin 3 upgrade? What are the improvements in EW systems

Any FLIR system for passive long distance target acquistion and engagement is installed ynder nose like PAF Mirages ?
No new weaponry are being procured as art of this upgrade package .

SherKhan said...

Hello Prasun,

I hope you are well. I know you are interested in the subject below(link). It's a book by someone heavily involved with the project. It's available from amazon and I think its worth a read:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Eating-Grass-Making-Pakistani-Bomb/dp/0804776008/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1354109877&sr=8-1

Another suggestion maybe you should start a FQ&A section, it may save you having to answer the same questions multiple times and the section would also be a good reference.

Cheers,
SherKhan

AK said...

Hi PRASUN, A low cost IRST , Selex Galileo Skyward can be installed in Jaguar iS. It is excellent for navigation in white out conditions,detection of air targets and detection , tracking of ground targets from standoff distances. It will be loved by pilots. This coupled with a MMR having SAR,ISAR, DBS ,GMTI and the usual air to ground modes will hugely enhance the combat potential and survivabilty. Pico sar is not adequate as it has a. SAR range of 20 km. Something offering Elta 2035 like performancr is desirable. There's always a difference between radar and non radar equipped ground attack fighters. Internal mounted sensors will free up pylons for weapons carraige.

Anonymous said...

Sir! what will be the life cycle cost for Tejas ?? it will be like Russian jets like low cost high life cycle cost or reverse??

Sayan said...

Sir, As IMI is blacklisted , accuracy of Pinaka mk1 round has detoriated to its prevoius figure . Why doesnt IA request MoD to withdraw blacklisting of IMI, Rheinmetall ?

IAF to upgrade 80 Su-30MKIs to ‘Super Sukhoi’ standard
The prowess of IAF’s front line fighter aircraft Su-30MKI is set to get a boost with plans to equip them with missiles having a strike range of around 300 kilometers. The plan is to upgrade the first 80 Su-30MKIs to the level ‘Super Sukhois’ which will have highly advanced radars and weapon systems, IAF sources told PTI here. Is this again a blunder of desi media ? All IAF Sukhoi will get advanced radars, EW suite, MSWS , new glass cckpit,etc and not the first 80 . Or is it that IAF has downsized the no of Sukhois to be upgraded with such radars ?Pls clarify.

How many 300 km standoff range ALCM are to be procured ? These missiles are meant to be used only by the first 80 Su-30 or the whole fleet ?

Has the 10,900 crore deal for upgradation already signed ? What are the exact clauses of the deal?

French Dassault opens Indian subsidiary for Rafale deal. Is this indicative of the fact that Rafale deal is in final stages of negotiations ?

Before T-90 ,T-72 goes to battle are composite add-on armour slabs and blocks fitted to the turret , hull sides , lower and upper glacis in the manner of Leopard 2 to give it added protection ? Besides 800 T-90, 1900 T-72M,118 Arjun mk1 what other tanks in what nos make up tank inventory ?

India Issues RFP For 56 Cargo Aircraft. Which ac is IAF's choice ?

HAL Carries Out Maiden Flight of Upgraded Jaguar Aircraft “Darin III”. Which radar suite upgraded Jaguars carry ? Why isnt there any Towed array decoy, missile warning system fitted ?

Are any ALCM being procured for Jaguar IS ?

What is the status of 48 Su-35BM deal of PLAN ? Is it signed ?

Anonymous said...

I just Trolled Broadsword blog today and found much to my annoyance, much of negative thinking about DRDO. I know ,I may still not be more educated or experienced than them, but I 've few words for them "DON'T JUST COMMENT, GO AND LOOK HOW TOUGH IS TO DEVELOP EVEN A SIMPLE GSM SIGNAL JAMMER, SITTING IN FRONT OF A LAPTOP AND POSTING A COMMENT IS MUCH EASY TASK, THAN FACING THE HARSH REALITIES"
I 'm just in 3rd yr of my B.Tech.(of course electronics branch) and can clearly see a list of American Scientists (more then 75% of all scientists who work with EC) whose hard-work for about past 100 years , had brought US to this stage, and u people think, if we give DRDO money they will develop all these technologies an 5-10years, ( no need to tell how technologically advanced India was in 1947). Then, I think govt. u r living in world of fairy talis , where a simple rotation of magic wand can do anything.

Anonymous said...

Sorry for my last line it reads
"THEN I THINK GOVT. HAS WASTED ITS PRECIOUS RESOURCES ON YOUR EDUCATION , WHILE YOU ARE STILL LIVING IN THE WORLD OF FAIRY TALES, WHERE A SIMPLE ROTATION OF MAGIC WAND CAN DO ANYTHING"

Anonymous said...

Sir ,

1. What are the firm orders of Tejas mk1?Are we going for two squadrons of Tejas mk1 ?

2.Weapons posters in Zhuhai airshow 2012 states the presence of dual mode seekers in many Chinese weaponry.

3. When will Arjun mk2 be unveiled ? Does it have 79 improvements over Arjun tank ?

4. Has Army shown any interset in mk2 ? Will substantial nos be ordered?

5.What are the various stealth features present in FGFA that are not present in T-50 as you said once ?

6.What is the use of having 48 Tunguskas for 2000 tanks ?

7. Why isn't any LRSAM being procured ? Don't you think they serve as good denial weapons over flat terrain .

6. How many fighter jets are put on alert or on scramble duty in each IAF base ? Are they put on 5 min alert ?

7. Instead of going for M4 carbines , HK 416 can be bought. They elimate all the shortcomings of m4 carbine .

8.What is taking so long to achieve FOC on Tejas mk1. The ac is up and flying and it can be easily used in air-air role . Why isn't there any provision if multi-ejector racks in mk1 .

Anonymous said...

Sir, what's the status of LCH and LUH?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@8.43AM: Jane’s was never the authoritative source for data pertaining to weapon systems of Eastern Bloc & Chinese origin. Instead, data obtained from OEMs from China, Russia & Ukraine us the most reliable & authoritative. Consequently, for the FL-3000N, data sourced from ALIT & CASIC is to be taken as the ultimate word. Regarding naval APARs, here again the only authoritative source is CETC, the OEM for such products. China’s first naval APAR is presently undergoing tests on board the trials vessel No851, while the first ever fitment of such a radar on a PLAN warship is on the first Type 052D DDG, which is now undergoing outfitting in a wet-basin at Shanghai.

To Anon@9.20AM: Boeing is not building any wind-tunnel test facility in India, but has promised to help construct a high-altitude engine test facility. Such a facility has to be located in a high-altitude area high in the mountains, probably somewhere in Ladakh. It will take more than 5 years to build such a facility over inhospitable terrain, since civil engineering works in such areas have traditionally taken a long time to reach fruition. For instance, the air base in Nyoma has yet to come on-line, while of the 20 border-roads approved for construction by BRO in 2001, only 13 could be completed by 2012. In China, on the other hand, such projects are routinely completed within two years.

To Anon@11.13AM: Let’s wait & see which submarine will be used for conducting the submerged launch of K-15 SLBM. Launches from submerged pontoons were carried out in the past & the pontoons were of Russian design.

To Anon@11.13AM: No.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.36AM: Here are my observations:
1) The results of the design audit by an Israeli consultancy team are still under wraps but I figure that the ARJUN Mark 2 is the result of reconstructive surgery to remove fatal design & performance flaws.--------------------------------------Totally wrong. IMI was brought in to upgrade QA levels within the final assembly line at HVF Avadi. IMI never did any design audit of Arjun Mk1.
2) Ask the two armoured regiments that are reeling under the maintenance/repair load of a huge number of 'dead' tanks.I'd say the DRDO and EME are getting better at the 'cut-nip-tuck' system of field maintenance.-------------------------------This is happening not because of any design flaws of the MBT, but due to the fact that the IA’s Master General ordnance (MGO) Branch was never involved from the very outset for catering for through-life product-support for Arjun Mk1. That was the very reason why the Arjun Mk1 was subjected to the AUCERT process, so that MGO Branch could quantify the MBT’s product-support reqmts. If any such problems do persist, then it is purely due to deficiencies within the MGO Branch, & not within EME or HVF or CVRDE.
3) Not only is the FSAPDS ammo under-performing (penetration was found wanting during the comparative trials with T-90S).----------------------------Penetration of which type of armour? This is an utter lie!
4) DRDO has not been able to design a single HEAT warhead for indigenously manufactured ammo till date-------------------------------another total lie!!!
5) To date the DRDO has not been able to indigenise an ARV-------------------------it was never told to do so.
6) DRDO’s upgrades for the Vijayanta were actually downgrades from the performance and reliability points of view----------------------------------Factually incorrect.
7) the T-55 upgrade fared no better beyond a 105mm gun.----------------No one else within IA anything beyond that & it wasn’t DRDO that upgraded the T-55, but BEL in cooperation with Poland’s Bumar Labedy.
8) Why has the DRDO failed in even providing a FCS upgrade for the T-72 series to fire the numerous variants of the APFSDS ammunition.-----------------DRDO was never tasked to develop the FCS upgrade components. Instead, the entire package was outsourced from Poland on the IA’s insistence.
9) Given that the T-72’s hull dimensions impinge on the entire mobility envelope of a tank (strategic, operational and battlefield) as well as the transport / bridging ecosystem……………………. Totally wrong. This has nothing to do with MBT hull/turret design, but with the availability or unavailability of adequate transportation infrastructure (i.e. external & interior lines of communication).
10) After all there's another empirical analysis of hits on 308 knocked-out Iraqi tanks by Manfred Held after Gulf War 1 which recorded 77% hits on turret vis.vis 23% on the hull by KE & HEAT projectiles fired from Coalition tanks and ATGM platforms.-------------------This was because the Iraqi MBTs were hunkered down within their tank pits in static mode, & they never waged manoeuvre warfare.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIKRAM GUHA: VMT.

To Anon@2.05PM: When planning the IN’s future force structures inclusive of INS Vikramaditya & IAC-1, the threat appreciation never took into account the Liao Ning with its complement of J-15s. Even today, neither the PLAN nor the IN can possibly visualise a clash of arms against each other. In fact, just like the PLAN’s SSBNs, the Liao Ning will hardly move beyond the Western pacific or South China Sea.

To Anon@4.24PM: No, it isn’t.

To Anon@6.09PM: EL/M-2032 MMR is part of DARIN-3 upgrade package. No MAWS or ELT-568 internal jammers. FLIR system will be the Litening-2 LDP. AIM-132 ASRAAMs will be ordered in future. Starboard side has a retractable in-flight refueling probe that was first shown at Aero India 2007.

To SHERKHAN: VMT for the heads-up & well-meaning suggestions. Will try to follow them up.

To AK: Skyward IRST would have been an extremely valuable fitment. Problem is, the DARIN-3 package was finalised by 2009 & its design frozen. EL/M-2032 MMR with SAR, GMTI & weather-monitoring mode is included.

To Anon@8.36PM: Life-cycle cost of Tejas Mk1/Mk2 will be significantly lower than those of present-day MRCAs.

To SAYAN: Before T-90 ,T-72 goes to battle are composite add-on armour slabs and blocks fitted to the turret , hull sides , lower and upper glacis in the manner of Leopard 2 to give it added protection?--------------------------------------No.
Besides 800 T-90, 1900 T-72M,118 Arjun mk1 what other tanks in what nos make up tank inventory?------------------------------T-55s & Vijayanta.
India Issues RFP For 56 Cargo Aircraft. Which ac is IAF's choice?---------------------------None, hence the resort to a global tendering exercise.
HAL Carries Out Maiden Flight of Upgraded Jaguar Aircraft “Darin III”. Which radar suite upgraded Jaguars carry?------------------EL/M-2032 MMR.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun da

An IA air defence Regiment contains how many individaul air defence systems??..VMT

Anonymous said...

Prasun sir, You said repeatedly said in past that there wouldn't be any radar as part of Darin 3 upgrade. Is ELM-2032 is installed on every Jaguar IS as part of upgrade ? Jaguar IM already has some them before the upgrade. Jaguar IS is a strike aircraft. Why there isn't any internal jammer , MAWS ? After again some major op some Jaguar will get lost and then IAF would understand dire importance of MSWS, Virgilius .

Anonymous said...

"Let’s wait & see which submarine will be used for conducting the submerged launch of K-15 SLBM. "
Do we have some other option ? I doubt Russia is gonna let us test our missile from their sub.

"Boeing is not building any wind-tunnel test facility in India, but has promised to help construct a high-altitude engine test facility."
Are you talking about the same one where Boeing is investing as India purchased C17 ? What is this facility meant for ? How come the whole media circle termed it as a wind tunnel facility,such a big mistale from the media? Is there a plan by India to set up such a facility, considering we are now gonna build a 5th gen fighter jet, AURA UCAV and hypersonic missiles of future (different wind tunnel facility must be needed for this) ?

Is this Armata MBT ?

http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/russia/main_battle_tank/armata/Armata_main_battle_tank_Russia_Russian_army_defence_industry_military_technology_640.jpg

Anonymous said...

Is Israeli Spike also in the fray for IA's ATGM deal apart from Javelin ?

DAshu said...

Let’s wait & see which submarine will be used for conducting the submerged launch of K-15 SLBM.

excellent reply without saying much :)

DAshu said...

am waiting for your book sir

MR said...

Prasunji, what is your take on this TOI report?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Israel-pips-US-in-anti-tank-guided-missile-supply-to-India/articleshow/17407482.cms

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun sir,

Did tejas trainer had its first flight? We heard of the Airforce version and the Naval versions having flown but not the trainer.

Anonymous said...

Sir ,

1. What are the firm orders of Tejas mk1?Are we going for two squadrons of Tejas mk1 ?

2.Weapons posters in Zhuhai airshow 2012 states the presence of dual mode seekers in many Chinese weaponry.

3. When will Arjun mk2 be unveiled ? Does it have 79 improvements over Arjun tank ?

4. Has Army shown any interset in mk2 ? Will substantial nos be ordered?

5.What are the various stealth features present in FGFA that are not present in T-50 as you said once ?

6.What is the use of having 48 Tunguskas for 2000 tanks ?

7. Why isn't any LRSAM being procured ? Don't you think they serve as good denial weapons over flat terrain .

6. How many fighter jets are put on alert or on scramble duty in each IAF base ? Are they put on 5 min alert ?

7. Instead of going for M4 carbines , HK 416 can be bought. They elimate all the shortcomings of m4 carbine .

8.What is taking so long to achieve FOC on Tejas mk1. The ac is up and flying and it can be easily used in air-air role . Why isn't there any provision if multi-ejector racks in mk1 .

AK said...

Hi Prasun, Are all IAF Jaguar IS of IAF getting EL/M-2032 MMR as part of their DARIN 3 upgrade ? EL/M-2032 also has ISAR modes .This will now enable Jaguars to keep an eye & map their targets from a long distance.

Skyward IRST can still be fitted under the nose . It will be an excellant navigational and targetting tool. When theres an will and desire to do something it will be done and one will always proceed.

If LDP-2 is carried it will further reduce the no of weapons carried as it will take up a hardpoint.

What happened to IDAS suite of Jaguar IS about which wrote a great deal in Ambitious Upgrade Plans For IAF Jaguars ?radar/laser warning receiver, full multi-spectral detection-capable missile approach warning system, EW jammer pod & TRD ? Was this whole suite dropped ?

Do IAF needs to be reminded once again of the great importance of IDAS suite which is just the difference between between getting shot down or succesfully completing the mission and returning to base.

Anonymous said...

1. Prasun ji, is that news regarding K-15 SLBM test from submarine true? I thought such a test (and a publicized event at that) was still years away.

2. What do you mean "lets see what submarine is used in this test"??

Do you mean to say that there are more submarines other than Arihant that can carry and launch K-15? What are they?

3. I've been reading on other net sites with people saying that other nuke subs like Akula-II cannot carry and launch K-15, are they true? What is the reason why they can't?

4. Is it true that Arihant's silos are arranged not in one-behind-the-other formation but has 2 silos on each side of the hull? This means the sub's width is pretty big, no?

5. What could be the maximum submerged displacement of Arihant?

Anonymous said...

Sir, Which among AASM,JSOW,IMI MSOV is airforce's choice for PGM of upgraded Jaguar IS ? Among the four EW cum escort jammer suites you mentioned in Ambitious Upgrade Plans For IAF Jaguars which was ultimately shortlisted for equipping Jaguars ? What were the additions to the DARIN 3 upgrade list and what were dropped from this list as mentioned in a past thread .

sntata said...

Dear Prasun,
It is welcome news [if true] that IA has veered round to the ground reality that Arjun-2 should be the basis for FMBT, as you have been saying all along. After all, it was Army that suggested 90 odd upgrades on Arjun-1, including a mine-plow. When DRDO successfully delivered them in record time, now if Army says it is too heavy at 67 odd tons and asks for latest Russian tank - I think it the height of irresponsibility, if not treason. But the Army's preference for T-90 upgrade appears to me as having a solid base. Army also could not properly evaluate user trials of Arjun-1 and had to call Israeli experts to evaluate. It is only when the Israelis expressed admiration for Arjun-1 and dubbed it as 'Desert Ferrari' that IA accepted Arjun-1.

Sayan said...

Sir, Israel pips US in anti-tank guided missile supply to India. What was the reason behind losing of Javelin to Spike ATGM ? Which version of Spike will be procured - 2.5 km or 4 km ?

Indian, Chinese fighter aircraft come face to face near Arunachal border. Lhasa based radar Chinese radar picked up Sukhoi-30 over Tawang . What range did it have ? Why did IAF Sukhoi went off radar cope along with PLAAF ones ? Were PLAAF ones succesfull in jamming IAF survellience radars ?

Sukhoi Attacks Itanagar’s Night Silence.Sukhoi Su-30 MKI has been conducting routine flight for the last few nights to remain alert and prepared. After China test flew its 2nd stealth fighter (J-31) on October 30 last transforming it into a top regional military power, how could India fail to flex its military muscle?

Are these routine flights due to confrontaion over Tawang or some major exercise of IAF Eastern command ?

Anonymous said...

hi prasun..i am working with GMR Infrastructure..recently the news is that the maldives govt has terminated the contract for airport development with GMR for the Ibrahim Nasser airport..our team in maldives has been given a notice of 7 days to vacate the airport..some are fearing arrest..we are getting inputs that the maldives govt has taken this bold step due to backing from China..GMR has already spent Rs. 1500 crore in this project and arbitration is onging in singapore..the contract has been terminated on flimsy grounds of non transparency at the time of internation competitive bidding..pls advice what ur assesment of the influence of china is behind this decision of the maldivian govt??do you think GMR will be in a position to enforce the arbitration award compensation (assuming it is in our favour)??is the govt of india having sufficient influence over the maldivian govt to make them rescind the decising??kindly share your view as i have very high regards for it..thanks a lot

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.07AM: I was the only bloke that had all along insisted on the incorporation of a miniature MMR + IRST sensor into the Jaguar. The first DARIN-3-equipped Jaguar was a ‘born-again’ single-seater IS (previously a DARIN-2-equipped Jaguar IM). Since all 10 Jaguar IMs had EL/M-2032 MMRs on-board, it was easier to begin installing DARIN-3 on them to start with. 125 Jaguar IS units will have DARIN-3 mission avionics on-board, inclusive of EL/M-2032 MMR of the same type as that on board the Sea Harrier LUSH units. RLG-INS is SAGEM's Sigma-95N, the same that is on board the Su-30MKI, Tejas Mk1 & Sea Harrier LUSH. Cockpit mock-up of DARIN-3 was first displayed by HAL during Aero India 2009, while the retractable in-flight refuelling probe installation from UK-based Cobham was shown during Aero India 2007. All 10 Jaguar IM variants of IAF’s No6 Sqn will revert to IS-standard as interdictor/strike aircraft, i.e. the maritime strike roles will be taken over by MiG-29UPGs armed with 3M25E ASCMs. The 24 AGM-84A Harpoons acquired by the IAF will be transferred to the Navy for its P-8Is since the IAF doesn't want two combat aircraft-types sharing the same role--something that's a logistical nightmare & financially avoidable. That's why not a single Jaguar IM has till date test-fired any Harpoons. The 10 Jaguar IMs that already have the EL/M-2032 on-board will thus be the first DARIN-3-equipped reborn Jaguar IS aircraft. Instead, I would have liked to see the Jaguar IS be fitted with multi-sensor warning systems like laser warning receiver & MILDS-F missile approach warning system, which can nowadays be mounted at the aft-end of underwing pylons. Installation of just RWR isn't enough for the future. EL/L-8222 self-protection jammer is also included, based on the schematic diagram drawn up by HAL. One will know more about this next February during Aero India 2013. Re-engining with Honeywell F125s will be undertaken concurrently with installation of DARIN-3 cockpit/mission avionics at the final assembly line of HAL, since re-engining involves just a drop-in installation without undertaking an airframe modification (meaning the engines have already been flight-certified for Jaguar by Honeywell & will not require any additional work by either HAL or the IAF's ASTE). It is the flight certification of the avionics suite that is far more complex & time-consuming.
AIM-132 ASRAAM for self-defence, perhaps yes. But why the need for Derby??? After all, DARIN-3 isn't meant for transforming the Jaguar IS into a MRCA. EL/M-2032 MMR is on board since it has GMTI & weather monitoring modes--the two primary modes of operation desired by any operator of interdictor/strike aircraft. The absence of HMDS as part of the avionics upgrade therefore clearly indicates that BVR air combat was never envisaged for Jaguar IS. In fact, even ASRAAM should not be required, since Jaguar IS will always be accompanied by air superiority-configured assets like Su-30MKIs or Rafales or Tejas Mk2s or MiG-29UPGs or Mirage 2000UPGs.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.39AM: Read this: http://www.rediff.com/news/report/india-signs-4-billion-deal-with-us-for-10-c-17-aircraft/20110615.htm

To Anon@9.43AM: Yes, very much so.

To DASHU: Am withholding any comment on the expected SLBM launch till the time the present CNS of IN makes any comment during his customary pre-Navy Day press conference early next month. After all, a previous Navy Chief had made some bold claims & predictions in December 2010 regarding the commissioning of Arihant SSBN by 2012.

To MR: The Spike is indeed in the fray, but all this talk about denial of ToT from the US is pure baloney.

To Anon@4.40PM: The IAF’s Tejas Trainer hasn’t flown as yet, if I’m not mistaken.

To Anon@5.52PM: 1) All such data is contained in the thread on Tejas Mk1’s LSP-7. 2) There are no in-service dual-mode seekers for any guided-weapon originating from China. 3) Arjun Mk2 will surface sometime by 2014/2015.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AK: The first DARIN-3-equipped Jaguar was a ‘born-again’ single-seater IS (previously a DARIN-2-equipped Jaguar IM). Since all 10 Jaguar IMs had EL/M-2032 MMRs on-board, it was easier to begin installing DARIN-3 on them to start with. 125 Jaguar IS units will have DARIN-3 mission avionics on-board, inclusive of EL/M-2032 MMR of the same type as that on board the Sea Harrier LUSH units. RLG-INS is SAGEM's Sigma-95N, the same that is on board the Su-30MKI, Tejas Mk1 & Sea Harrier LUSH. Cockpit mock-up of DARIN-3 was first displayed by HAL during Aero India 2009, while the retractable in-flight refuelling probe installation from UK-based Cobham was shown during Aero India 2007. All 10 Jaguar IM variants of IAF’s No6 Sqn will revert to IS-standard as interdictor/strike aircraft, i.e. the maritime strike roles will be taken over by MiG-29UPGs armed with 3M25E ASCMs. The 24 AGM-84A Harpoons acquired by the IAF will be transferred to the Navy for its P-8Is since the IAF doesn't want two combat aircraft-types sharing the same role--something that's a logistical nightmare & financially avoidable. That's why not a single Jaguar IM has till date test-fired any Harpoons. The 10 Jaguar IMs that already have the EL/M-2032 on-board will thus be the first DARIN-3-equipped reborn Jaguar IS aircraft. Instead, I would have liked to see the Jaguar IS be fitted with multi-sensor warning systems like laser warning receiver & MILDS-F missile approach warning system, which can nowadays be mounted at the aft-end of underwing pylons. Installation of just RWR isn't enough for the future. EL/L-8222 self-protection jammer is also included, based on the schematic diagram drawn up by HAL. One will know more about this next February during Aero India 2013. Re-engining with Honeywell F125s will be undertaken concurrently with installation of DARIN-3 cockpit/mission avionics at the final assembly line of HAL, since re-engining involves just a drop-in installation without undertaking an airframe modification (meaning the engines have already been flight-certified for Jaguar by Honeywell & will not require any additional work by either HAL or the IAF's ASTE). It is the flight certification of the avionics suite that is far more complex & time-consuming.

To Anon@7.30PM: Let’s just wait & see, because presently there’s no submarine within India that’s capable of launching SLBMs, nor have the Arihant’s sea-trials been concluded, meaning it can’t possibly be used as a SLBM-launch platform as yet. Akula-2 cannot launch any SLBM, only cruise missiles, since no VLS silos are on board any Akula SSGN. The side-by-side silos are for narrow-bodied missiles like K-15 & BrahMos. An intercontinental-range SLBM will have far greater diameter than K-15.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@7.54PM: Both AASM & tactical CALCMs will be ideal for upgraded Jaguar IS. EL/L-8222 jammer will be for self-protection, while EL/L-8251 will be the escort jammer. IRST has been dropped.

To SNTATA: Kindly rest assured, for the IA has not gone around saying that the Arjun Mk1A is too heavy a MBT. IA’s MGO Branch had received some guidance directly from the IDF-Army during AUCERT trials because the IA never had any previous experience in conducting such trials, since all its previous MBTs were of imported origin & whose AUCERT trials had already been conducted in their respective countries of origin & their results were delivered to MGO Branch as part of the MBT importation process.

To SAYAN: The competition is still underway & it will be premature to strike off the Javelin ATGM. Reqmt is for 2.5km-range ATGM. China’s airspace surveillance radars at Lhasa or Nyinchi can easily spot high-flying Su-30MKIs that are required to fly at high altitudes when equipped with EL/M-2060 SAR pods for conducting ground surveillance. Su-30MKIs have since 2010 been conducting formation-flying exercises from Kalaikunda AFS during day & night. They have nothing to do with Tawang.

To Anon@11.11PM: Under WTO, Maldives is legally bound to honour the arbitration award compensation scheme that is reached. There’s no escape from that. Grounds for contract termination are extremely flimsy if the excuse given is FMR’s non transparency at the time of international competitive bidding, since if that was really the case, then GMR could not have won the contract in the first place. I doubt if China is behind all this mischief, since India has far more economic leverage over Maldives than China. In fact, Maldives wants India to remove visa restrictions (the number of times one is permitted tp enter India every year) imposed by India on those Maldivians that come to Chennai for medical treatments & diagnosis. At least 500 Maldivians presently go to India every month for medical purposes. I very much doubt if China will be able to compensate Maldives or replace India in this area.

Nair said...

Hi Prasun,
ISRO is not doing better under the new director. There are some failures and the projects are shamelessly delayed. I heard sources that, politics is playing more than before. Somebody is pushing parts from his friend's company, which are substandard. So present director is very pessimistic when taking decisions. He does not want to be blamed for the launch failures. Hence huge delays in space projects. Moreover, politically there are some pressure to launch satellites to Moon and Mars (to counter China, saying we are not inferior) when ISRO wants to stick with India centered plans.

If the ISRO be a semi-autonomous body, do the things would be better? ISRO has not succeeded much in GSLV tech, even after a few tests.

Please read this article.
http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Failure_Of_IndiaS_Big_Rocket_Project_Is_Symbolic_Of_Deep_Structural_Problems_999.html

Your comments.
Thanks

Anonymous said...

Prasun sir , You have previously commented to a reply that EL/M-2032 in Jaguar IM were not truly multi mode. They had only air-sea modes. The bulkhead is too small for housing a mmr radar. Now this means two things. Either the nose has been modified to accommodate a newer radar or there is a change in radar variant.

Jaguar IS nose needs to be reshaped and modified. Why don't HAL install a volumnious nose instead of the one on IM so that a larger aperture EL/M-2032 can be fitted,one which will offer a 150 km range SAR range. When after all amodified nose is needed why don't go for a bigger , better nose.

Atleast internal RF jammer should be there. Such a few no of pylons and if LDP are mounted there the weapons carriage will reduce further. IAF may well go for maws, TRD as well as IRST in its upgraded Jaguar . The upgrade has just begun. Many things are still left.

Anonymous said...

Sir, Are you absolutely sure of the fact that all IS will now get MMR radars. Have you seen the contract signing documents for 125 EL/M-2032 radars just to be sure. So, all acs will get a new front section. What will be done to laser ranger in nose. EL/M-2032 is not a miniature MMR. If at all they are to get radar then its absolutely amazing.

ravi said...

what is ur view on UFO's sighitings near India-china border

Gessler said...

Sir the twin-seat Tejas trainer has flown already -

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/839/tejas27.jpg/

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/5/tejas28.jpg/

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/217/tejas29.jpg/

Its tailfin reads " KH-T-2009 "

AK said...

Hi PRASUN, Which variant of EL/M-2032 will be installed ? Will it have the same aperture of 2032 of Tejas mk1?Why wasn't 2035 chosen instead of 2032.IAI brochure says ground targets can be mapped upto a distance of 150 km. Is this true for Jaguar 2032 MMR ?
When the nose needs to be changed fot accomodating radar why not fit a large version of 2032 as opposed to the smaller one of LUSH . Now, IAF Jaguar IS would be able to detect, identify and track ground targets through SAR,ISAR modes from 70 km + distance. An area of interest can be mapped in high res mode from 70 km away , targets identified, target pic fed to a standoff PGM like JSOW,AASM with IIR or mmw seekers . Through inertial nav and correlation of target imagr stored in memory & the one obtained through the terminal seeker , targets can be engaged precisely in all weather conditions, fog,smoke from standoff ranges . What do you think ?

How man Jaguar IS are currently in service ? Some yearsback IAF had placed orders for 17 dual seat IS. IAF also wants 20 new IS acs. What. About these aircrafts.

Now what's needed is a descent MAWS , internal Virgilius jammer. PaF has acquired some 500 BVR AMRAAM besides Chinese BVRAAM like SD-10. For them internal RF jammer is a must. IRST can still be installed.

Anonymous said...

Hi, How many PAF have ordered to date ? 2008 Trishul thread PAF's First Block 52 F-16D Takes To The Skies gives the no as 58. Wiki says 80. How many F-16 PAH will have after all are delivered.

Anonymous said...

The most capable fighter in PAF service from 1983 to 2007 has been the F-16 Fighting Falcon. 40 of the F-16A/B Block 15 models were delivered from 1983 to 1987. Deliveries of another 28 F-16A/B were stopped after the 1990 arms embargo imposed on Pakistan under the Pressler amendment but 14 of these were later delivered during 2005-2008. The F-16A/B fleet is to be upgraded with MLU (Mid-Life Update) modification kits and Falcon Star Structural Service Life Enhancement kits by Turkish Aerospace Industries starting in September 2010 at a rate of 1 per month. Four F-16A/B are already undergoing upgrade in the U.S. for delivery in 2011. The MLU package will include new APG-69v9 radars, Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems and Link-16 data-links, along with other new communications, targeting and electronic warfare systems.[68][69]

In 2006, 12 F-16C and 6 F-16D Block 52+ were ordered with a further 18 aircraft optional. 14 of the optional fighters were ordered in 2010.[70][71] The first batch of 3 F-16C/D fighters landed at PAF Base Shahbaz, Jacacobad, on 26 June 2010

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun , Whats the reason behind today's Jaguar crash ? Will the whole fleet be grounded ? Will this ac be replaced with a new one ?

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=19782 In the case of procurement of 336 Radar Warning Receivers (RWR), the Indian Air Force failed to derive intended benefits out of an investment of Rs.521 crore as the performance of the integrated RWRs was found unsatisfactory, leading to a decision to integrate these as an interim measure till development of an advanced system. What is the problem with these RWRs ? What RWR are they and for which platforms are they meant ?

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=19779. What is the requirement of muti calibre rifle ?

Anonymous said...

Prasun saab,

1) What could be the possible structural changes of Super-MKI?

2) Whats the status of the MIRES AESA? What is its peak power output?

3) There are reports saying that the pod on the aft of the PAKFA's cockpit is not a 2nd IRST but infact an EO jammer. Whats your take on this?

4) Will LCH TD-3 have any mast-mounted EO sensor or something?

5) What will be the visible changes on TD-3 since TD-2 other than tail-wheel fairings?

6) Can a typical HEAT round from Al-Khalid penetrate Arjun Mk1's frontal armor? What about Arjun Mk1's HEAT round's performance on AK's frontal armor?

7) Will there be any angular nose shaping like that of Su-34 on Super-MKI?

Anonymous said...

Hi, The recent MiG-21BISON that belly landed is it being restored and repaired for service or is it a writroff ? Jaguar crash is awriteoff.

Anonymous said...

Hi, Jaguar already has refuelling probe. What's the status of Jaguar production by HAL. Can CBU-105 be used against airfields , radars , parked jets which are not emitting any heat.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Albeit there are too many mountains accompanied with the bad weather, but this Jaguar like crashes near Chinese border are always suspected.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Gangtok/IAF-Jaguar-crashes-in-North-Sikkim-injured-pilot-rescued/Article1-966571.aspx

Anonymous said...

Slava class Ukrayina, which is almost 90% complete, is rotting away in Ukraine, due to lack of funds to complete the ship. They just need 30 million $ to complete the ship.Why doesn't IN buy this ship, install Brahmos MRCM , update it with the latest radars and induct it into service.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slava_class_cruiser

"Today, the three finished ships serve in the Russian Navy and the uncompleted fourth vessel, renamed "Ukrayina", is owned by Ukraine. Efforts have been made to complete and update the unfinished ship; in 2010, Ukrainian president Yanukovich stated that Russia and Ukraine would work together on the project. Russia has also expressed interest in purchasing the vessel, which Ukraine has previously offered for sale. However, as of early 2011 no final agreement has been concluded between the two countries, on this matter.[6] The Russian navy has plans for extensive upgrades of all their Slava-class vessels during the 2010s; completing work on the Ukrayina may serve as a test-bed this."

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To NAIR: There’s no doubt that ISRO ought to be transformed into an autonomous body & the PMO should not be running ISRO as I’m sure the PMO has a lot of better things to do. Nor should ISRO’s future project roadmaps be dictated by what neighbouring is doing. Instead, the time is ripe for the national space agencies of China, India & Japan to close ranks & work together to create another international space station by 2020 or even earlier. As for the GSLV, I’m afraid no one else in this world will offer any kind of ToT related to cryogenic engines. It is therefore only up to ISRO to invest more funds & human resources in order to overcome such technological challenges. In the near-term, ISRO ought to keep its focus on space applications projects involving the operationalisation of IRNSS GPS navigation satellite constellation, deployment of the three telecommunications satellites for the three armed services, plus development of four ballistic missile early warning satellites as part of the country’s projected Missile Monitoring System & follow-on radar-imaging satellites for which Japan’s technological assistance must be sought in addition to what’s already available from Israel.

To Anon@9.04AM: All that’s required to transform the existing EL/M-2032 on a Jaguar IM into a MMR is to replace the programmable signals processor (PSP) module at an avionics intermediate workshop. No other changes to the existing radar is required. The new PSP will then offer air-search & track mode, weather monitoring, Doppler beam-sharpening & GMTI. The nose radome of Jaguar/DARIN-3 is the same as that on the Sea Harrier LUSH. 150km SAR range is never used by any interdictor/strike aircraft during strike sorties since that involves flying at altitudes over 30,000 feet—not a good idea at all if the intention is to sneak inside hostile airspace below radar coverage. Standoff SAR-based ground or battlespace surveillance is therefore carried out best by Su-30MKI equipped with EL/M-2060 pod & the acquired imagery is then transmitted in real-time by secure data-links, following which the ground-based mission planning system of upgraded Jaguars can be used to digitise the related flight navigation data reqd for low-level interdiction. That’s precisely the reason why the Jaguar/DARIN-3 has a digital map-generator. Multi-sensor warning system (MSWS) should have been installed instead of just RWRs. EL/L-8222 self-protection jammer has to be mounted underwing since there’s no spare internal volume reqd for internal EW jammer. IRST too has been dropped since offensive air superiority sweeps will be carried out by escorting MRCAs. Therefore, there’s no need even for AAMs like ASRAAMs or Python-5s. But some crucial elements are still missing (not mentioned in HAL's press-release), like HOTAS & NVG-compatible cockpit avionics, both of which were incorporated into the earlier MiG-27UPG upgrade.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.56AM: Why should the contract for 125 EL/M-2032 MMRs be already signed? What’s the rush? As it is the upgraded Jaguar/DARIN-3 platform will have to undergo more than 800 hours of flight-tests over the next three years before work begins on upgrading the Jaguar IS fleet. So there’s plenty of time left for placing bulk orders for EL/M-2032 MMRs. That’s also the reason why bulk orders have not been placed for even those EL/M-2032 MMRs that are to go on board the Tejas Mk1s.

To RAVI: There’s definitely something developing in that area with regard to deployment of storage of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by either China or India. Such UFO activity is generally witnessed on a persistent basis only when such WMD-related activities take place.

To GESSLER: You’re absolutely right, VMT for the heads-up.

To AK: It will have the same aperture as that on board the Sea Harrier LUSH. Have already commented on the SAR mapping mode above. All 20 new-build Jaguars have already been delivered to the IAF. At least 150 Jaguars now remain in service.

To Anon@5.50PM: Let’s begin with what could not have happened. 1) Since the pilot ejected safely, it was not a case of controlled flight into terrain. 2) Neither was it a case of mid-air collision. 3) It cannot be pilot disorientation since the sortie was conducted in the early afternoon & even if there was bad visibility in the valleys all the pilot then had to do was to gain altitude in order to climb above inclement weather conditions. That leaves us with only two options: either a case of mechanical failure caused by equipment malfunction due to faulty maintenance, or engine stall caused by either a bird-strike or malfunctioning fuel-pumps. It could well be that the first cause could be the most probable reason, since the crashed aircraft was from its permanent home-base Gorakhpur & operating out of Hashimara, which hosts MiG-27Ms & therefore does not have all the requisite support tooling/ground support hardware that is Jaguar-specific & therefore sustained air operations undertaken say over a two-week period without adequate ground-support infrastructure does many a time take its toll. The on-board flight data recorder will of course reveal the nature of equipment malfunction.
The RWRs were the Tarang Mk2 variants meant for the 20 new-build Jaguars & MiG-27UPGs.

To Anon@7.42PM: CBU-105 is meant for use against any man-made hardware that emits heat. This includes armoured vehicles, radars, road-mobile & rail-mobile vehicles (whether mobile or static). CBU-105 is therefore best employed against concentrations of such hardware. Aircraft are normally parked in a dispersed manner & therefore such munitions will be useless against such targets.

To Mr.RA 13: The crash site was actually quite some distance away from the Sikkim-China border. In fact, both the IAF & the PLAAF keep at least 20km away from each other’s perception of what constitutes the border, this being part of the bilateral CBMs under implementation since 1993. Furthermore, since the crash took place while the Jaguar IS was flying in between valleys in typical terrain-masking flight profile, it is highly unlikely to have been even monitored by any Chinese airspace surveillance radars, leave alone air-defence artillery.

Anonymous said...

Sir, Sea Harrier possess an extremely small radar aperture. When Jaguar IS' nose needs to be changed why not take advantagr of this and install a bigger nose with a radar. Is the EL/M-2032 in DARIN 3 upgrade package the smallest variant of 2032 ?
What max high res SAR range will it provide ? The biggest var had range of 150 km. SAR will enable a pilot to map the area of interest of his choice from a range of 60 km.

Sea Harrier LUSH has a different nose than IS.
IRST like Skyward are imp not ony for air weeping but more for navigation under whiteout conditions. If yesterday the pilot had encountered inclement weather conditions he would have climbed to altitude avoiding terrain masking or if he had continued then there might be a CFt. Skyward will enable the pilot to fly in such white out conditions by showing him the terrain in front. That's why its important. It doesn't also occupy a hardpoint and decrease weapons load.

Since Jaguar will penetrate into enemy territory it must have internal RF jammer. There will be space available for EL-568 jammers since they will be distributed all over the airframrle. For a low flying terrain masking ac, Msws or MAWS is of utter importance. IAF HQ after all should understand the imp of a proper IDAS suite of ac .

abs said...

@prasunda
generally speaking, are Chinese air crafts and choppers that come in and around the border area ever detected by Indian ground based radars? Is the coverage throughout the entire Sino front, in case the above is true?

buddha said...

Is there any possibility of modified
Iron Dome with increased range for India's perspective to protect Indian army's offensive launch unit from MBRL rockets or artillery shelling or Nasr .

Anonymous said...

Prasun,
According to specs of MRSAM/LRSAM, it can be used to counter cruise missile, so why is drdo chalking out plans to develop Cruise missile defence (similar to BMD) ? ALso according to drdo's recent reports, the recent test conducted by drdo had a prithvi missile following the trajectory that a 2000km range missile will follow but what about the speed ? Its true they can make Prithvi behave like a 2000km range missile but a 2000 kn range missile also has a faster speed. Is this modified Prithvi also has a faster speed just like the higher altitude ?

Is drdo gonna demonstrate the use of Agni 5 platform as a quick satellite launching platform as suggested by a lot of top drdo scientist ?

IA is looking for new light weight bullet proof jackets and modular helmets integrated with communication & NV gears. Who is the favorite ? Does any indian company stands a chance ? Is IA gonna equip every soldier of infantry with this ? How many palmtops and mini laptops is IA gonna purchase for infantry under soldier modernisation program ?

Just like Shaurya is the land variant of K-15 missile, is there a land variant of K-4 (Agni-3 or Agni 4 are not its land variant)

After Finance Ministry cancelled IA's proposal for Mountain Strike Force and asked them to design for 3 service plan, IAF chief recently submitted the study. Can you throw some light on this new IAF-IA strike Force ? After such a quick reply it appears that for the first time all the three forces are coming together and are pretty serious to bring an ultimate defense against any Chinese aggression.

Can you post the pictures of Nirbhay cruise missile, arjun mk2, all 4 designs of AMCA project.

AK said...

Hi Prasun, Apart from 20 Jaguars , werent another 17 ordered before that ? After the crash how many are left ? There are five Jaguar squadrons. Each squadron has 18 ac. So in total there are 90 acs. Where are the rest ? How many of the total acs will be eventually upgraded ?

Any latest info on what actually caused the crash ?

PA & PAF have inducted new gen very low level survellience radars. Flying at low alttitude will not confer any advantage to IAF Jaguars. Besides they dont have internal RF jammers and will be easily targetted by MRSAM,E-SHORAD , radar directed AAA.

What is the aperture of Sea Harrier EL/M-2032 radar ? What will be percent radar aperture of Jaguar DARIN-3 upgrade MMR with reference to largest or base level antenna aperture of EL/M-2032.

Anonymous said...

Hi , Previous Jaguars in IAF had a two slab faced slant faced optical aperture at the very tip of nose.What is this ?? Nowadays Jags have a very small optical aperture in nose ? Why the larger one was replaced by the smaller one ?Jaguars are also having two black colour projections in the upper surface of the nose in a row one after the other ? What are these ?

Jagaurs are already having in-flight refuelling probes. As a result refuelling probes are not needed. Jagaurs are in service with IAF since 1981.These jets are 30 years old. How can thier life be extended for another 25 years ? Which acs are getting life extension ?

All strike acs conceived during the time of Jaguar had a nav radar, attack radar, terrain following radar like in A-7 Intrider, Corsair 2. How can Jaguar have not a single radar ?

Anonymous said...

Sir whats the status of the NAL Saras project? Has IAF/IN ordered any planes as yet?

Anonymous said...

Sir , What is MFCR radar of BMD phase 1 ?

How can CBU-105 be used against static APC,tanks,vehicles. It attcks those with a heat signature. Static vehicles, parked aircraft whose engines arent on and running will not emit any IR signature. The round will then self destruct itself in air causing no destruction in ground.

Anonymous said...

Sir, IAF is planning to raise a 4th squadron too.This is true or false ?

Anonymous said...

varione 1494sir ,
i understand that the IA has finally settled to develop arjun as a FMBT..
sir , but how many MBTs do we really need..
there are 6000-8000 m1 abrams(& it's variants) in service with us army & usmc..but acc. to wikipedia..there are only 15 heavy BCTs in us army each employing arnd 56 MBTs..i.e a total of 840..my question is where are the rest of the MBTs ??
& also now that AAC has been allowed to have a full fledged force..how many heavy MBTs do we require..?
isn't it a gud idea to have heavy MBTs for western sector & lighter MBTs & tank destroyers for eastern sector ?

Anonymous said...

sir ,
was curious about a thing..
in IA we have arnd 359 infantry battalions..in arnd 29 infantry regiments..but whst the difference b/w these regiments..
1) how is light infantry diff from normal infantry..we have a Sikh light infantry & also a sikh regiment..but whats the difference b/w the two..similarly there is a JAKLI & JAKRIF..??
2)is each of these battalions equally trained & can be deployed for any op anywhere any time ??
3) don't u think that in CAPFs..command of these forces should only be given to direct AC recruits & not ips officers..
$) instead of having different border guarding forces..viz BSF ITBP SSB..we can have only 1..
& only 1 CI force ie CRPF..& one force to guard various installations & so called vips ??
5) also..insted of having diff offcer rtng institutes..all CAPFs could have 1 large officer trng centre somethng akin to IMA..which coulf offer diff courses for AC & SI Recruits..this would also save alot of money & bring synergy among diff CAPFs..
ur take sir..

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Sorry to repeat >> I remember reading somewhere that Russia will be replacing their Su-33's with Mig-29K's. If this is correct then what is in the minds of the Russians.

KSingh said...

Prasun,

Is the IN replacing the 9mm STEN carbines their VBSS teams use?? I have seen the IN have spent money on upgrading the rest of their kit from helmets to BPJs and such but then having these vintage weapons is just absurd.

NEIL said...

Prasun Da what is the progress of the Naval MMRCA?
After Chinese induction of the J-15 we may have to brace ourselves are there any counters to the Chinese Liaoning and its J-15s?

Anonymous said...

Sir, last year on 25 June 2011, a MiG-29KUB crashed during testing in Russia, prior to delivery to India, killing its two pilots.Now the number of aircrafts in service with navy are reduced to 15 (whereas the complement of INS Vikramaditya is 16 fixed wing a/c). Will this a/c not be replaced by Ruskies as the a/c is crashed prior to delivery and that too due to error of Russian Pilots.Moreover Wiki is showing the no. of a/c in IN service to be 15.
Also, its written there "It is theoretically possible to outfit the MiG-29KUB
with powerful radar, and encrypted data links, to permit networking of multiple
MiG-29KUB aircraft for AEW coverage. The MiG-29KUB may also be enhanced in areas such as electronic warfare and long-range interdiction.The MiG-29K,
unlike the early MiG-29, can both conduct aerial refueling and "buddy" refuel other aircraft.".Will KUB be used in this role, or its just a marketing tactic of vendor, also can K perform buddy refuel other a/c. Sir , how many MiG-29K are ordered by IN.Is Navy not planning to go in for more advanced for IAC-1(like Sea Gripen) rather than MiG-29K.

Anonymous said...

Sir, the Deepak Class Tankers are known for timely delivery and excellent interiors, how these interiors compare with that of INS Shivalik.Will P-17A FFG have covered mooring deck and reduced no. of antennas.

Sayan said...

Sir , ‘Enemy’ ballistic missile to be downed in space next month . After all PDV will emerge in January.

The brand new PDV will intercept the incoming target at about 110-150 kilometres altitude, far higher than the 50 kilometre-high interceptions that the exo-atmospheric PAD (Prithvi Air Defence) interceptor has been doing so far. The PDV will carry a new Indian electro-optic seeker, which will work in tandem with the radio frequency seeker that the PAD has traditionally carried. An electro-optic seeker provides greater accuracy and reliability than a radio frequency seeker in homing the interceptor onto the target. IIR seeker is definitely of Indian origin.

The PDV will be a solid-fuel missile that will be powered by a sophisticated new “pulse motor”. This will provide surges of propulsion during the missile’s later stage, increasing its manoeuvrability when it is very close to the target. What is this propulsion ? Will this missile have a greater agility than PAV which can manuver at 2 g only.

“Intercepting the target at longer ranges provides several advantages. Firstly, the target is travelling slower — some 2 kilometres per second at 150 kilometres; compared to 2½ kilometres per second at 50 kilometres altitude. Secondly, the target missile can be engaged before it enters Indian airspace, so that the debris falls into enemy territory. Finally, a longer flight time gives the interceptor more time for navigation, and the seeker can see better. Liquid fuelled missiles travel at 2 km per sec. But solid fuelled missiles defineitely flies at a much higer speeds ?

Why not test PDV against Agni 1 launched from A&N islands ?

Sukhoi 30 MKI aircraft skids off the runway at Lohegaon airport. Are these results of pure maintainence ? What actually happened ? Why was smoke billowimg from another Su during takeoff ? Has the cause been located and rectified across the fleet ?

Whats the cause of Jaguar crash ? Will this ac be replaced ? Looking forward to new post.

F said...

Prasun,

If naval vessels are not fitted with fire directors for their main guns, how are the guns operated? The reason I'm asking is because I've noticed a certain vessel which is armed with a Bofors Mk1 but does not have a fire director fitted.

For the RMNs NGOPV project, do you know which company apart from the German Naval Group and Transfield were shortlisted? I've read that 3 companies were shortlisted, was it Yarrow or Swan Hunter?

Land and sea base ESM systems pick up radar frequencies, TACAN, data links, etc. Do they pick up the 'squawks' from IFF transponders?

Why do some navies fit IFF transponders on their vessels when there are many othey ways of identifying 'friendly' ships?

Did Avibras ever promote ASTROS to the Indian army? In your opnion why has AVIBRAS not come up with a guided 'smart' round for ASTROS, could be lack of funds or simple a lack of expertise/technology?

F said...

P.S.

Why will J-15 will be more formidable than the MiG-29K in BVR? Because of a more capable radar?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@8.52AM: One can’t draw a correct estimation of any aircraft’s nose diameter by just looking at images. The real dimensions are appreciated only when standing next to the aircraft’s nose radome. The smallest antenna diameter of the EL/M-2032 can be found in Kfir C7s, not on the Sea Harrier LUSH. The EL/M-2032s on Jaguar/DARIN-3 don’t require SAR at all since the aircraft will be flying low-level interdiction sorties. Instead, the EL/M-2032 will offer GMTI, Doppler Beam-Sharpening & terrain avoidance (as opposed to terrain-following) modes. Mapping of any area of interest will be done by EL/M-2060 SAR pods long before the interdiction sorties are even launched. Instead of Skyward IRST sensor, the decision was made to use NVGs. Internal RF jammers too aren’t reqd since the aircraft will always be protected by escorting air superiority combat aircraft.

To ABS: The deployment of ground-based airspace surveillance radars & tactical low-level gapfiller radars by both the IA & IAF throughout the LAC in the North East as well as in Sikkim & northeastern Ladakh for detecting terrain-hugging helicopters & UAVs is now picking up. But the IA’s & ITBP’s forward observation posts along the borders are also tasked with conducting visual observations through hand-held optronic devices.

To BUDDHA: That is precisely what IAI/ELTA & RAFAEL are now working on.

To Anon@12.59PM: DRDO’s involvement in cruise missile defence is limited to only developing the network-centric airspace surveillance capabilities, under which radars like EL/M-2084 Arudhra & EL/M-2258 ground-based radars & the aerostat-mounted versions of the EL/M-2084 radar will be networked along with airborne platforms like A-50I AEW & CS & EMB-145I.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AK: 17 tandem-seaters were ordered first, followed by 20 single-seaters, with all deliveries being completed by late 2008. Out of 178 Jaguars acquired to date, about 140 remain in service. Only 68 Jaguars will be retrofitted with DARIN-3 mission avionics, while 125 will be re-engined. Hostile low-level air-defence radars can always be targetted by ARMs like Kh-31P Krypton. For self-defence against SHORADS, EL/L-8222 EW pods will suffice.

To Anon@9.05PM: That was the Ferranti LRMTS. Nowadays the THALES-built laser rangefinder is used. IAF Jaguars never came equipped with in-flight refuelling probes & therefore they have to be retrofitted. Jaguar was never designed as a deep interdictor & therefore it had reqd an airborne radar. It was designed to function as a ground strike aircraft like the MiG-27M.

To Anon@9.25PM: It is a dead-duck & now deserves a decent burial.

To Anon@10.27PM: Read this: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2011/08/home-grown-anti-missile-shield-for-new.html
Any object that is man-made will have an IR signature, including parked vehicles. They will lose their IR signature only if they deep-frozen beyond -10 degrees Celsius.

To Anon@2.11AM: Regiments are not formations, but groupings of formations raised mostly by the Brits during the colonial era. Battalions are formations. JAKLI & JAKRIF are only the regimental names. In terms of training & equipment, all infantry battalions are the same.

To Mr.RA 13: That was just a marketing gimmick employed by the Ruskies during the M-MRCA competition to give the impression that the MiG assembly line will indeed be kept operational by churning out MiG-29Ks or the navalised version of the MiG-35. In reality, the Ruskies are more likely to go for a navalised T-50 PAK-FA after 2020.

To KSINGH: They have already been replaced by Tavors.

To NEIL: The ideal naval M-MRCA for IAC-2 will be the navalised FGFA. Both the Liao Ning & its complement of J-15s will not even bother to transit the Malacca Straits & enter the Indian Ocean for at least a decade from now, since it will have far more important matters to attend to in the South China Sea & East China Sea.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.47PM: That crashed MiG-29KUB was a prototype belonging to RAC-MiG, & was never destined for delivery to India. MiG-29Ks can also carry out buddy-buddy aerial refuelling tasks. Todate, 16 + 29 MiG-28K/KUBs are on order, of which 16 have already been delivered.

To Anon@10.09PM: INS Shivalik being a warship, it doesn’t have interiors as lavish as those on replenishment tankers.

To SAYAN: The PDV is meant to intercept targets at an altitude of 200km, not 150km. Read this: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2011/08/home-grown-anti-missile-shield-for-new.html

To FARIS: In the absence of radar- or optronics-based fire-control systems, fire-direction is done manually like it was during World war-2. For the NGPV project, it was Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems, Transfield & BAE Systems/Yarrow. Swan Hunter had gone bankrupt in the early 1990s itself. Emissions of IFF transponders are also detected by ESM sensors. Shipborne IFF transponders are used for classifying airborne platforms that are picked up by shipborne radars. Every shipborne radar has a built-in IFF transponder. RCS estimation & ESM, & not IFF, is not employed for distinguishing between friendly or hostile warships. AVIBRAS never promoted ASTROS in India. Even till this day it doesn’t take part in any aerospace/defence expo held in India. It is quite surprising that AVIBRAS never committed itself to a continuous product improvement programme for the ASTROS family of MBRLs. As for J-15 versus MiG-29K, in a one-on-one in the absence of AEW coverage for both sides, the J-15 will prevail over the MiG-29K as it will be able to detect & track the MiG-29Ks way before the MiG-29K can do the same, thereby seizing the initiative in beyond-visual-range air combat.

F said...

Prasun,

With a Bofors Mk1, how do operate the gun manually if no provision was made for a crew to operate the gun from inside the turret? There was a photo of KD Lekiu's fire director queing the gun on KD Mahawangsa. I had no idea that this was even technically possible.

What is your opinion on sub launched air to surface missiles? DCNS has come up with a tube launched Mistral and Diehl is offering IDAS. On paper, providing a sub with a ability to hit back at low level ASW helos or MPAs makes a lot of sense but do you think that most sub operators will go for such systems?

In viw of recent developments - offers from BAE Systems, Boeing and Dassault - are you still of the opinion that Gripen will be eventually selected for the RMAF?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To FARIS: Of course there’s provision for manual gun-control on the Bofors 57mm Mk1. Just look at the observation window on the left side of the cannon-barrel. Submarine-launched short-range SAMs are indeed viable. In fact, the Type 877EKM Kilo-class SSK since the very beginning has carried on-board two Igla-1 launchers & four missile rounds way before the IDAS or anything similar was even thought of. For the RMAF, the JAS-39 Gripen NG & Saab 2000 AEW & CS combination will prevail.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

A classic case of yellow journalism that’s routinely practiced by ‘desi journalists’ throughout India can be found here: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/records-confirm-tender-was-altered-allowing-agustawestland-to-qualify/1039462/0

For instance, the report first alleges that critical technical requirements in the contract were tweaked by India, allowing Italian manufacturer AgustaWestland to enter the bidding competition in the first tender floated to acquire 12 helicopters for ferrying VVIPs. Then the report goes on to say that the Mi-17 was disqualified apparently after Ruskies forgot to include the earnest money deposit in their tender submissions, while Sikorsky’s S-92 lost out as it could not perform optimally at the high altitude. So, if both the Mi-17 & S-92 failed to comply with the IAF’s ASQRs EVEN AFTER they were watered down to enable the AW-101 to compete, where’s the corruption involved & what’s wrong if the AW-101 was allowed to participate in the competition? After all, no Indian VVIP is ever likely to be acclimatised enough to fly out to areas located at altitudes of either 6,000 metres (19,685 feet) or even 4, 572 metres (15,000 feet). So why on earth should the IAF’s ASQR ever call for any VVIP transportation helicopter to fly out to 6,000 metres in the first place?????

Yet another case of ‘desi yellow journalism’ appears in: http://business-standard.com/india/news/star-wars-over-india/494161/

Consider the following:
DRDO developed the LRTR in partnership with Israeli company, ELTA, which had already developed the Green Pine Radar for Israel’s Arrow anti-missile system. The MFCR was developed along with French company, Thales. Quickly, the DRDO absorbed the technology and established production units, in case the technology pipe was shut off.
(Reality: in an exclusive interview given to FORCE magazine in March 2010, Dr Saraswat stated on page 10: “When I say that this will be indigenous, it means that design and development will be done here, while computers and certain other essentials like T/R modules will be procured from outside. You know that it is neither possible nor desirable to make everything within the country”.)

This involved work at the frontiers of missile technology--developing a seeker for homing onto a target.
(Reality: Both the RF-based seekers of the PAD & AAD are of Russian origin).

When intruder was just 100 metres away, the interceptor’s Radio Proximity Fuze took charge, detonating an explosive warhead when the Prithvi came within 10 metres.
(Reality: No one presently uses RF-based proximity fuzes for shooting down missiles. Instead, laser-based proximity fuze is employed, even by AAMs).

The DRDO is going ahead with building a comprehensive ABM shield, that intercepts incoming ballistic missiles at altitudes of up 110-120 kilometers (through exo-atmospheric, or “outside-the-atmosphere”, interceptors) and has a second layer of endo-atmospheric (“inside-the-atmosphere”) interceptors like the AAD that destroy incoming missiles when they are still 15 kilometres above the earth.
(Reality: Totally wrong: The DRDO’s target is to develop the PDV capable of intercepting missiles at an altitude of 200km, & the AD-1/2 capable of intercepting missiles at an altitude of 35km).

And the prospect of radicalized jehadis in Pakistan getting their hands on one or more nuclear weapons is a growing possibility that no government in New Delhi can possibly ignore.
(Reality: This is a physical impossibility since the nuclear weapons of Pakistan are never maintained in a ready-to-launch mode, the warheads are in a totally disassembled state, & all their components are guarded by an 18,000-strong trans-national military formation 24/7).

KSingh said...

Prasun,

wrt

"To KSINGH: They have already been replaced by Tavors.
"


That simply isn't true, look at these pics from October 2012:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8191/8147161373_9e2a75ff0b_b.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8473/8147162829_c4c9f3fe77_h.jpg


9mm Stens-NO Tavors! But the rest of their kit is brand new and modern.

KSingh said...

+ Prasun I had read an article recently alleging the recent issues vis a vis corruption allegations with the AW-101 deal may affect the signing of the LUH deal and more importantly may result in the cancellation of the MMRCA as Fincarti is linked to the consortium that produces the Eurofighter and as such they may be discrepencies in what EADS offered whivh calls into question the entire MMRCA competition and means the MMRCA has to be cancelled and re-tendered. Same goes for the LUH deal where the AW wasn't allowed to compete.


Is there any truth to this? It could be HUGE if true, MMRCA being ceanccelled would be a nightmare.

Anonymous said...

"DRDO’s involvement in cruise missile defence is limited to only developing the network-centric airspace surveillance capabilities, under which radars like EL/M-2084 Arudhra & EL/M-2258 ground-based radars & the aerostat-mounted versions of the EL/M-2084 radar will be networked along with airborne platforms like A-50I AEW & CS & EMB-145I."
What about the interceptor ? Can drdo set up this network of radars by the time MRSAM is inducted ?

"That is precisely what IAI/ELTA & RAFAEL are now working on."
Isn't David Sling is build for longer range rockets and cruise missiles ?

What is IAF planning for the purchase of additional longer range AWACS like Phalcon ? Are the RFI/RFP out ?

"The ideal naval M-MRCA for IAC-2 will be the navalised FGFA."
In is not interested. They are ready to support AMCA project and are even willing to put some money on it. The decision is based on the fact that indian aircraft carriers are not large enough to carry heavy aircrafts like PakFa.
In my opinion lets just let drdo and IN have their moment. Neither IAC2 or AMCA is coming anytime soon. Its clear IN will be inducting a 5th gen fighter jet and by 2017, ia m sure we will see the first prototype of AMCA. Alot will be cleared by 2017.

"Both the Liao Ning & its complement of J-15s will not even bother to transit the Malacca Straits & enter the Indian Ocean for at least a decade from now, since it will have far more important matters to attend to in the South China Sea & East China Sea."
Are we gonna arm A&N and Lakshadweep islands with shore based anti-ship missiles ?

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun sir,

With the possible advent of PLAN ambition to become a blue water Navy. It could be well possible for Chinese navy to move out of its littoral waters and enter into international corridors. Considering the range of its carrier and the support from replenishment tankers. It could very well enter into the Indian ocean and beyond. So in an adverse case there is always a possibility for Chinese ships entering into Indian ocean (Even the other case can also be considered taking IN plan to become a true Blue Water Navy) and the IN entering into Chinese littoral waters.

In a hypothetical case of engagement the IN's Mig 29K will only be engaging (With in the air space covered by Vikramaditya's and IAC 1 on board Air search radars functioning as AEW&C platform) with in the supported limits? Or does IN plans to procure a long range AEW&C platforms (Like the A 50I) that can provide battle space coverage beyond the limits of the operating Aircraft carrier (Considering the combat radius of both mig 29k and the Naval LCA, if it 400 km - 450 km radius coverage then both the birds will be under-performing (In the advent of a formidable adversary) with out an AEW&C platform.

Anonymous said...

Which Assault rifle out the six contenders " Beretta, Colt, Sig Sauer, Galil ACE ,Tavor TAR 21 and Ceska Brena is the best to replace the INSAS 5.56 for the future indian army and WHY?

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun sir,

Could multiple V 22 Osprey (fitted with AEW&C complement) could well fit in as medium speed early warning aircraft as these were showcased to Indian authorities with a triangular shaped radar mount on the spine of the V 22...

Hunt said...

Hi Prasunji,

This could be well out of the topic (Out of my curiosity, please bear some time). Why a microprocessor will be crucial (since it's just a programmable device). Also they were widely available in different architectures like X 86, Z 80, Motorola 68000 etc). Also it is the software behind that device which contains the actual logic (computed by the microprocessor) that gives the desired output (Like the Vikram computers developed by ISRO). How can microprocessor be a hurdle for self reliance? I also read the Chinese institutions had developed their own Microprocessors for their home grown defense applications. Why it is crucial to develop a home grown Microprocessor? VMT in advance.

Anonymous said...

Sir , http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/TIyk3a16HOI/AAAAAAAALPs/eULtkWRQz1Q/s1600/IAF-Jaguar1w.jpg

This Jaguar JS170 is fitted with inflight refuelling probe and its tailfin reads JS170.

Nose sections of Sea Harrier LUSH and Jaguar IM are totally different . For incorporting radar , IS will be fitted with a nose. This nose has yet to be unveiled. So, the actual antenna aperture is unknown.

Previously , IAF wanted to upgrade 68 Jaguars with DARIN 3 avionics package but now IAF and HAL is going forward with life-extension , avionics fitment and re-engining of aprox 120 Jaguar IS, IM.

EL/M-2032 to be fitted will have its usual A2A and A2G modes which inclusive SAR,ISAR along with terrain avoidance .

Darin 3 upgraded Jaguars wont be entirely used in low level interdiction strikes. These acs will also fly sorties at medium altitudes.

abs said...

@prasunda
what about the chinese fixed wing aircrafts flying in and around the border areas? Could their movements be also detected by Indian fixed ground based radars??

Anonymous said...

Sir, Why isnt Heckler Koch , FN Herstal participating in carbine competition ? If IA likes a rifle from either of these two companies can it buy such a rifle ?
Why everywhere in all news print and mesia it is given that the new rifle to replace will INSAS will be muti calibre and can fire both 7.62 mm and 5.56 rounds ?
What was the reason of the recent Jaguar crash ? What mechanical equipment in the jet malfunctioned .

Anonymous said...

Sir,Your Home-Grown Anti-Missile Shield For New Delhi By 2014? Sheer Unabashed Jingoistic Kite-Flying By DRDO, Period says that PDV will have an Isreali origin IIR seeker . But Dr VK has said it will use a combination of RF seekers and IIR seekers for better accuracy ? Can it be true ? From where will RF , IIR comb seeker be imported ?

Will PDV have a kill vehicle like American LEAP ?
As PDV will intercept the hostile missile at an altiude of 150-200 km will it be a mid-phase BMD system as oppsoed to PAD , THAAD terminal phase interception ?

Russia already has a operational BMD system , S-300V . Why cant tech found in their interceptors , radars be used in Indian BMD radars , interceptors ? Is it because we use more high tecg radars , interceptors than them ?

Whats the significance of two endo-atmospheric interceptors D-1,2 . AAD can intercept at 50 km altitudes .
Will any of AD-1,2 be as small , potable,compcat as PAC-3 ?

Pls have patience and reply them.

Rahul said...

Hi Prasun,Even if phase 2 of BMD is successful , it will be deployed for protection of NCR & Mumbaii only. Are any more cities to be protected. At present IA formantions , storage areas of tanks , ordance depots nd other vital war sustainence infrastructure ; IAF airbases , radar sites are facing immediate threats from PLA & PA massed fure assaults of TBM , NLOS-BSMs. What is preventing IA & IAF HQ from placing mass orders of PAC-3 , THAAD or similar systems. PAC-3 systems in large nos are required for neutralising TBM, NLOS-BSM. PAC-3 can also double up as a CMD system. Are Army nd airforce waiting for some miracle to happen ?

F said...

Prasun, the problem with the Strelas mounted on the Kilos - just like the Blowpipes mounted on the Israeli subs - was that the sub had to be surfaced. That's why IMO most navies during the 80's and 90' didn't bother to arm their subs with SAMs.


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Here’s yet another example of ill-informed EXCLUSIVE NEWS from a convulated ‘desi’ journalist: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/tata-to-unveil-indias-first-indigenous-155-mm-howitzer/1/235748.html

Even though this ‘desi’ journalist was seen wandering around during DEFEXPO 2012, he obviously never bothered to observe what was being showcase at TATA Power SED’s pavilion: a TML-built 8 x 8 mounting Denel’s T5-52 155mm/52-cal howitzer, with TATA Power SED supplying only the vectronics for the gun-control system.

Anonymous said...

Hi , Why can't Ka band seekers be used instead if IIR seekers in PDV ? Pac-3 hit to kill missile uses ka band seeker . In Tejas mk1 IN & IAF variant is EADS providing technical consultation . What do you think bout the bold statements made by our IN chief ? Its very good by the way. He is worlds apart from our Gandhi badi politicians .

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSINGH: Those photos show VBSS demonstration teams, not the actual operational gear of such teams. Not Fincantieri, but Finmeccanica. And no, the AW-101 contract was not subjected to any corrupt practices. What was corrupted was the RSH evaluation process in which the AW-119 could not even pre-qualify & therefore Abhishek verma & Co were hired to try to reverse this decision & also for lobbying for the supply of A-109Ps for Delhi Police’s SWAT team. Lastly, when Finmeccanica isn’t linked to the Rafale at all, how then can the M-MRCA procurement process be jeapordised? If anything, it may only serve to harm the interests of the Eurofighter consortium, of which Finmeccanica is a member.

To Anon@10.30AM: Yes, the network will be in place by the time bulk deliveries of Barak-2 MR-SAMs begin. The Barak-2 will be a far better option for India when it comes to neutralisation of NLOS-BSMs, since barak-2 will be a generation ahead of David’s Sling. No RFPs will be issued for any off-the-shelf purchases of foreign AEW & CS, since the DRDO has already hijacked this project & now wants to develop a homegrown AEW & CS using the A330-200 airframe. Had the MoD heeded the IAF’s advice, then by now follow-on orders for up to six more A-50I PHALCONs could have been placed, since Russia’s Ulyanovsk-based Aviastar is now able to series-produce IL-76-90 airframes quickly & have them ferried to Beriev Aircraft Co for fitment of antenna radomes. The DRDO’s proposed A330-200 AEW & CS will at best be available only after 2020. How can the proposed 65,000-tonne IAC-2 be classified as being ‘small’??? And FGFA will not be as heavy as PAK-FA.

To Anon@11.18AM: Like I said before, the PLAN’s priority is to establish naval supremacy in the South China & East China Seas, which may be quite difficult in itself given the presence of the US Navy & JMSDF in these areas. Furthermore, Japan will not sit tight & become a fence-sitter & will instead most likely built an aircraft carrier-based battle group of its own in future. Therefore, all in all the PLAN’s VBG would not like to make matters worse by trying to enter the Indian Ocean, just as the IN’s CBGs will not attempt to make their presence felt in the South China Sea.

To Anon@11.43AM: Firstly, the GSQRs for such weapons are still being drafted. Secondly, when in-country competitive firing trials are conducted, they will last for at least 3 years. Which means final selection is still four years away (2016). The TAR-21 has an obvious advantage since it is already in service with all three armed services, plus with the CAPFs.

To Anon@11.47AM: V-22 with triangular antenna radome has not yet been showcased to anyone in India. It still remains a paper design & the IN is unlikely to order it unless the US Navy itself becomes the launch customer. The IN’s foreign weapons procurement philosophy is simple: procure only those weapon systems that are proven & are already in service or are likely to enter service with the supplier-country’s armed forces.

To HUNT: It is an issue of cyber-security, since malware can always be embedded within such imported microprocessors. That’s precisely why China’s OEMs have designed & produced dedicated MIL-SPEC microprocessors for exclusive use by the PLA on board various platforms & weapon systems.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@12.37PM: Those Jaguars were ‘retrofitted’ with IFR probes in the late 1990s, just like the Mirage 2000s. They never had IFR probes since the early 1980s. Nose-sections of Jaguars—be it IM or IS—will be the SAME/IDENTICAL for accommodating the EL/M-2032 MMR. EL/M-2032 MMRs meant for tactical interdictors & close air-support aircraft have never had SAR/ISAR modes & will never need to have such modes. GMTI & DBS are far more important for precision-strike. Sorties will be flown at medium altitudes ONLY AFTER sustainable air-superiority can be achieved, which against the PAF or PLAAF is doubtful. For the first 72 to 96 hours, all interdiction sorties will be low-level.

To ABS: Of course, without a doubt. Since such aircraft tend to fly above the high-altitude Tibetan Plateau, they can be easily detected by even long-range civilian ATC radars. And unlike India’s side of the LAC, there are no valleys close to the border on the Chinese side, making terrain-masking flights totally impossible for the PLAAF.

To Anon@1.08PM: Who says they’re not participating? Just because a ‘desi’ news reporters fails to mention these companies does not mean they’re not interested in the Indian market. The most probable (never exact) cause for the Jaguar IS crash will be identifiable ONLY AFTER the crash wreckage is fully recovered for in-depth forensic analysis.

To Anon@1.31PM: It was not Dr VKS had said, but what the ‘desi’ news reporter interpreted the information to be & used his/her imagination to draft the story. The same had happened when such ill-informed ‘desi’ news reporters from THE HINDU had earlier claimed that the Nirbhay cruise missile will be turboprop-powered!!! There’s no need for an RF-seeker when an IIR seeker with higher target engagement probability is used. The PDV’s warhead section containing the IIR sensor will be the kill-vehicle. PDV will offer THAAD-like interception capabilities. Russia’s operational BMD system uses nuclear warheads, something India does not want to go for. The larger AD-1 is for neutralising MRBMs & IRBMs while the smaller AD-2 is for neutralising TBMs & NLOS-BSMs.

To RAHUL: Personally, I believe that only AD-1 & AD-2 will be operationalised in large numbers & will make use of EL/M-2258 volume-search/target engagement radars fir protecting VAs & VPs against NLOS-BSMs & possibly TBMs. PDV will remain a technology demonstration project aimed at sending a clear signal to one’s adversary that any attempt to formalise a warfighting doctrine that calls for using conventionally-armed IRBMs or MRBMs as terror weapons against highly populated Indian cities will be neutralised. India’s R & D on BMD is not geared towards degrading the adversary’s nuclear deterrence capabilities; rather, it is all about outspending an enemy & convincing an enemy that any attempt to utilise ballistic missiles in large numbers as mass-terror weapons against civilian targets will be a futile exercise. In other words, India wants countries, for instance Iran & Pakistan, to make a formal declaration that ballistic missiles will never be used against civilian targets like cities, i.e. preventing another round of ‘war of the cities’ of the type Iran & Iraq were engulfed in during the 1980s. If such declarations are forthcoming, then the DRDO-led BMD programme’s PDV component will not get operationalised & will remain a technology demonstration project. On the other hand, if such declarations are not forthcoming from Pakistan & if India is forced to bulk-produce & deploy PDV interceptors, then this will only degrade the credibility of China’s & Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence posture, something that both China & Pakistan I’m sure would like to avoid. Therefore, right now, it is a wait-and-see game that’s being played & only the future will tell which side blinks first.

raw13 said...

Want to know why india will never be able to break out of the suncontinent? never mind those guys next door. Look how india goofed up in Male. Fact is india which should be able to use the fact that it has lots of muslims and understands them, doesn't!!! Now it loses to USA. Until india truely represents all its people it will remain hindustan. surrounded and hindu. The minute it becomes proud of all its history especially the last 1000 yrs it will become something else, India.

Anonymous said...

Sir , IAF can achieve sustainable air-superiority over PAF.
Low level flights has its own set of disadvantages. It is more of a tactic actually. By escaping long range survellience radars and flowing close to the ground Jaguar will be targetted by a large variety of SHORADS,V-SHORADS, MANPADS , radar directed artillery.So by forcing the ac to fly at low level you are actually letting the ac to enter into its own death trap. Further Jaguar has no MAWS. So it will not get any warning of incoming MANPADS. And at low alltitudes there is little reaction time and no way of engaing in manuvers to break missile lock. So Jag is dead meat.

Besides IAF has first decided to fit Elta 20600P RTP in Jaguar IS as part of Darrin 3. It offered standoff survellience as well as targetting data in all weathers and had SAR,ISAR modes Then IAF went for nose mounted MMR instead of it. So, MMR of Jaguar will be truely a MMR with all A2G and A2A modes of EL/M-2032 along with terrain avoidance. Jaguar combat radius is second only to Su-30. Jaguar will also be used in deep BAI strikes apart from close-support .

Nose of Sea Harrier LUSH is different from Jaguar IM .

Most Jaguars have IFR now. Around 120 will be fully upgraded.

What is DBS ? All SAR capable radars have this mode.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAW13: Looks like you’re averse to doing your homework. For the fact remains that the powers-that-be in Male are pitted against a JV: that between India’s GMR Infrastructure & Malaysia’s MAHB. Next, do try to do some research on the origins of the term ‘Hindustan’. The landmass called Hindustan ceased to exist since August 14, 1947. And Hindustan means the landmass to the east of Hindu Kush mountain range, i.e. Indo-Gangetic Plain, & does not have any religious connotations whatsoever. And as for the past ‘history’, i.e. from the time Mohd bin Qasim set foot in Sindh, the lesser said the better.

Anonymous said...

Sir, Lots of thanx for patiently replying .

As PDV will intercept at 150-200 km altitudes is it a mid-phase intercept intercept whereas PAD was a terminal phase interceptor.

What are the advantages of RF-IIR seeker combo ? THAAD uses such a seeker . How will IIR seeker acquire and track the target at long ranges which RF seeker can ?

Will PDV be more agile than PAD ? PAD didn't have much agility . How much advances have been made in areas of discrimination of warhead from decoys,chaff and engagement of maneuvering trgets ?

PDV , AD missiles will also be effective against nuclear warhead armed missiles. What do you think ?

As AD-1 2 are some years away won't be it prudent to buy Patriot advanced cap 3 and THAAD as a stopgap ?

S-300V and v-2500 interceptors don't use nuclear warheads. We can use tech from them.

Rahul said...

Hi Prasun, Has DRDO also hizacked BMD programme that IA & IAF are unable to procure PAC-3 & THAAD in quantities . AD-1,2 are still five years away . But the threat is imminent. When they were marketed to us, why didn't IA & IAF procured them ? PAC-3 is ideal for countering massed fire assaults with nlos-bsm & tbm. Barak-8 can also intercept nlos-bsm & tbm. Can PDV be deployed in all major Indian cities.

Why is Rafale developing a longer range & customised version of Tamir for IA ? It already has Stunner missile for that .

Aren't any trials of artillery guns taking place ? Uptil now IA has conducted a lot if trials. It must know for sure which is best and what is its preferred choice . BAE FH77 52 cal ver can be purchased in towed artillery req. o Denel mounted howitzer have MRSI capabilty nd isi it auto loaded ?


If IA really wants tracked howitzer then it must go for PzH 2000, the best SPH so far with auto-loading . It will much better than OFB developed Bofors clone on T-90 hull.

Isn't PA well ahead of IA in SPH with close to 500 Paladin ? If not 500 what's the exact no ?

F said...

Prasun,

Given that China's main area of interest is the South China Sea and the Western Pacific and that it does not need a carrier to makes things nasty for the USN, ROKN and the JMSDF, would you agree that the primary use of its first carrier would be to ensure that its merchant and energy fleet does not get interdicted in the Indian Ocean and the Melaka Straits? The Chinese are very nervous of the fact that their merchant and energy fleet on their way from the Middle East to China is extremely vulnerable to IN and USN interdiction.

There has been so much speculation and concern expressed by various parties as to why China would want a carrier but it is often forgotten that unlike Uncle Sam, China does not need the ability to project power on a global scale - but only in its backyard.

Would you agree that worst thing that can happen for the Philippines, Vietnam snd Malaysia would be if the PRC declared a 'Maritime exclusion Zone' in the Spratleys and gave warning that any ship entering this zone would be attacked? Or is would this move be too risky as it wound bring the USN in? Also, is all the recent Chine assertiveness just sabre rattling or are they really willing to go to war if another claimant ups the ante?

Would be to cost prohibitive to fit a VLS section into the Scorpene for the launching of Brahmos? And will integration to SUBTICs be a major problem?

Anonymous said...

Sir, Is FGFA's airframe diffrent or downsized or slight modified from PAK-FA ? How can FGFA be lighter than PAK-FA ? Is it single-engined ? What is the goodies in FGFA that make it more stealthy ?

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Thanx for the cute reply on Mig-29K.

BTW I have also read at places that Akash missile can use nuclear warhead. How is that! Out/Not out! Please clarify.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@7.49PM: PAD is history & it’s time for the PDV to take its rightful place. RF seeker for PDV is actually the command-line-of-sight in-flight mid-course navigation mechanism, while for the terminal stage the IIR sensor will be used. PDV is not required to have high agility as much as lateral acceleration with higher energetic propellants. At an altitude of 200km no incoming missile can undertake any kind of agile manoeuvre. That’s why the AD-1 & AD-2 will have more agility than the PDV. Whether the inbound missile is conventionally armed or nuclear-armed is immaterial.

To RAHUL: Only Patriot PAC-3 is available from the US, not THAAD. Nor are the threats imminent. The Barak-2/Barak-8 MR-SAM/LR-SAM combination will be good enough for intercepting NLOS-BSMs of the type now being fielded by India’s neighbours. Future variants of Tamir will suffice for 60km/80km-range MBRLs. Beyond that the Stunner will be reqd.

To FARIS: Even though China suffers from the ‘Melaka dilemma’, it will be at least a decade before any PLAN-operated CBG can venture out of the South China Sea. An ocean-going CBG will require at least four destroyers, four fleet replenishment vessels & four SSNs, items that the PLAN does not as yet possess in adequate quantities. If at all any maritime exclusion zone is declared by China, then it will be to apply pressure on either Vietnam or ROC, no one else. It will indeed be cost-prohibitive & utterly futile to install BrahMos VLS on to any existing SSK from a structural & standpoint. However, on board SSGNs, the BrahMos VLS will be a perfect & lethal fit.

To Anon@11.09PM: MTOW of the FGFA as specified by the IAF will be lesser, about 18.5 tonnes, against the 24 tonnes for the PAK-FA. FGFA will have far greater composites content, while for the PAK-FA the Ruskies want to continue using titanium-alloys.

To Mr.RA 13: It would be imprudent for a missile with a range of 25km to have a tactical nuclear warhead. It would have made sense had the missile been able to go out to at least 60km. By the way, do read this as it is quite interesting: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/towards-a-pakafghan-reconciliation-/1039688/0

And I’ll post later tonight by far the most hilarious content to be posted in this blog. It concerns all the stupid questions that were put forward to the CNS yesterday morning by the ‘desi’ journalists, & the befitting retorts given back by the CNS.

F said...

Prasun,

Why would a 'Maritime Exclusion Zone' only be applied against Vietnam and Taiwan? What about the Philippines and Malaysia?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To FARIS: That you will get to read about in the forthcoming thread, which will be uploaded later tonight.

Anonymous said...

Sir, can you please furnish me with details related to Truck Mounted Artillery by TataSED. Which gun they use, is it an indigeneous one ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.14AM: It’s all there at: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/04/deefexpo-2012-highlights.html

TATA Power SED & TATA Motors have teamed up with DENEL Land Systems to offer a motorised 155mm/52-cal howitzer and I'm told this system is most likely to be sold in future to Indonesia. TATA Power SED has developed the gun-control system’s vectronics (minus the RLG-INS, which is imported), while TATA Motors has supplied the 8 x 8 truck. The ENTIRE howitzer is FULLY IMPORTED & it is DENEL’s T-5/52 system that was originally mounted on a TATRA vehicle back in 2002. Presently, only the OFB can locally manufacture most of the structural components of any howitzer. Neither TATA nor the Kalyani Group nor L & T nor Punj Lloyd possess such engineering/industrial/test & validation capabilities.

Anonymous said...

Sreenivas

hi prasun da, what is your opinion about the howitzer (tata-denel). You have been a proponent of the mounted systems. is it good go for India. showcasing in India may mean our forces might be interested. if i am not mistaken the proposal for howitzers are still in rfi level. how early any thing will be acquired since we need it direly.

Anonymous said...

sreenivas

I recently saw that in the wiki article related to BMD of India, it is mentioned that you are a big opponent of such idea. sure some of our readers ill conceived your thoughts, since you have been very clear that BMD in realistic hit-kill mode is good to pursue if it is like PDV/ADseries (ofcourse except balooney). wondering i misconstrued your thoughts or the content writer there.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SREENIVAS: The biggest hurdle for the TATA-DENEL JV remains the blacklisting of DENEL. For as long as DENEL remains blacklisted by the MoD, I fail to see how this born-again T-5/52 motorised howitzer can possibly take part in a future competitive bidding process initiated by the MoD. The same problem is afflicting the FICV offer from TATA, since Rheinmetall—another company blacklisted by the MoD—is the principal strategic industrial partner of TATA for the FICV project. My personal view is that for 155mm/52-cal mounted gun systems/motorised howitzers, it is best to procure those types that can even be airlifted & transported by aircraft like C-130J-30. However, the downside of this option is that presently, only the CAESAR from France’s NEXTER Systems (teamed with L & T) fits the bill. The rest are all too big for the C-130J-30, but can easily be transported by C-17A Globemaster IIIs & IL-76MDs. If not the CAESAR, then the next best options are the ATMOS from the JV between Soltam Systems & Kalyani Group, or the NORA from the JV between Serbia’s Yugoimport SPDR & Punj Lloyd.
Regarding BMD-related R & D, I’m all for it provided the goals are clear-cut, i.e. first countering imminent threats like NLOS-BSMs & long-range MBRLs, followed next by developing interceptors for neutralising TBMs, IRBMs & MRBMs. Consequently, it is the content-writer of WIKI who has been unable to comprehend my thoughts/appreciations regarding this subject (on which I dwelt upon yesterday afternoon@4.41PM in this very thread).

Oracle Training in Chennai said...

Thanks for sharing such useful information on the blog and refer the link Oracle Training in Chennai

Oracle Training in Chennai said...

Awesome Blogs share more information and refer the link Oracle Training in Chennai