More good news has
trickled in before the year’s end. The two additional A-50I PHALCON platforms
(each housing ELTA Systems’ ELW-2090 mission sensor/management suite) have been
cleared for procurement at a cost of Rs.3,306 crore. The airframes will be
supplied by Russia’s Ulyanovsk-based AVIASTAR JSC, while BERIEV Aircraft
Company will customise the airframes for housing the mission sensor/management
suites. Also cleared for procurement are six aerostat-mounted radars worth Rs.3,310 crore. Thus
far, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, ThalesRaytheon,
Israel Aerospace Industries/ELTA and Rosoboronexport State Corp have responded
to the IAF’s global RFP for supplying both the aerostats and their on-board
airspace surveillance radars. The IAF requires about 60 such radars, which can be deployed
up to an altitude of 15,000 feet above sea level, have a surveillance envelope
ranging from 10km to 35km, and are able to pick up airborne targets ranging
from ground level to 30,000 feet.
RAFAEL Advanced Defence Systems, on the
other hand, will get a Rs.950 crore contract for supplying additional RecceLite
pods (meant for Su-30MKIs) and their related ground-based imagery exploitation
stations. While the former will be supplied directly by RAFAEL, the latter will
be supplied via the MoD-owned Bharat Electronics Ltd.
Below is my favourite ATGM/PGM choice
for arming the Army Aviation Corps’ Rudra helicopter-gunships, and possibly the
LAH version of the IAF’s Light Combat Helicopter as well as Mi-17V-5s. The
Hermes-A is a 2-in-1 solution aimed at neutralising both armoured vehicles and
hardened bunkers/shelters on the battlefield. Developed by Russia’s Tula-based
KBP Instrument Design Bureau, the laser-guided Hermes-A can also be guided by
LDPs like LITENING, and as such can also be launched by fixed-wing combat
aircraft during battlespace interdiction missions.
INS Kolkata, the first of three Project 15A guided-missile destroyers (above) for the Indian Navy, is expected to be commissioned into service by the Indian Navy by next March.
Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteThe 2nd cockpit picture from above is that of the Mig-29UPG while the last cockpit picture from above is the CSIO-developed HUDWAC. Am i right? Please correct me if i am wrong.
Why don't the IAF go for a next-gen cockpit like the Rafale one or the Cockpit NG to be used on the Super Sukhois? Even they can wait for the FGFA cockpit to arrive which will be more advanced and user friendly than the CSIO-developed HUDWAC.
What is the difference between DARE-developed TUSKER EW pod and the DARE-developed SIVA DF-pod?
If the DARE-developed R-118 RWR can intercept and identify airborne and ground-based radars in the 1-18 GHz then i think there is no need for the DARE-developed TUSKER EW pod which contain a 6-18 GHz self-protection jammer suite. Please explain.
Thank you.
To Anon@1.40AM: That is a Russian HUDWAC, not the CSIO-developed one. The posters of Tusker & SIVA are all self-explanatory. RWR can only provide warning & it cannot jam anything.
ReplyDeletesir can u give us the latest updates on dev. in electronic warfare for all 3 forces. there was an article in drdo news letter (in last two months) that drdo awacs has its dummy electronics with real ones any update on that will also be useful.
ReplyDeleteIs the DISHA Advanced ESM system gonna be installed on some dedicated ELINT platform. I mean is there a ELINT project just like AWACS because they can build it ?
ReplyDeleteHas anyone from defence ministry or home ministry or states have shown any interest in kalyani group RONI ?
How good are Tusker, SIVA & MSWS as compared to other similar systems around the globe ? Are Tusker and SIVA just tech demonstrator or IAF is purchasing them ?
Are their some EW systems, targetting pod, IRST or other optronics sensors and avionics being build specifically for AMCA, FGFA or AURA ? Also what are we gonna do about weapons for these platform considering they all of internal weapon bays and we cannot put any weapon that we like or we have to chose the weapon before designing the internal bays or it should be built for universal use but because of smaller size of AMCA and AURA it might not be so easy.
Any news about about the scramjet engine projects of drdo and isro ? Are they working together ? If not then why not ?
Also everybody in drdo and isro are very optimistic about the AVATAR project. Can you tell us if any progress is made in the project beczuse they think they can test it in 2015-16. It will be the size of Mig25. ALSO they don't talk much about the project.
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThe last picture of the artillery gun which you posted,Is that the gun which OFB manufactured with TOT of Bofors?
This gun looks awesome...
Also, What about project Sanjay, I've read about it alot of times in previous comments but there is no post on that as of now? Can you give an idea what that project is actually related to??
Thanx
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWhy GoI has decided to purchase around 5,00,000 no. of AK -47 from a foreign country. Can't India (DRDO) produce a good quality of assault riffle itself like M-16 or superior one?We can develop ICBM; but import AK - 47. It doesn't make any sense. Has DRDO reverse engeneered the ASTRA air - air missile from the R -77 AA missile? Please tell me.
Thank you.
Sir, Pls post pictures of UV based maws and laser emission warner of MSWS . Want to read more about the maws from DRDO literature. Why did DRDO go for a uv based maws instead of IR one ? Isn't the Maws apertures distributed throughout the airframe for spherical coverage ?
ReplyDeletehi prasun...
ReplyDeleteJust came across news of tejas lsp8 engine ground runs....is lsp8 different from lsp7? If so what are the upgrades but if not so then does hal took 9 months to manufacture 1 tejas....isn't that a very long time?
Hi Prasun saheb, are there any other firearms coming from kalyani group other than Roni?
ReplyDeleteis roni of 9mm caliber or .45in ?
Sorry sir, You have already uploaded all pics of MSWS. Will MSWS on Su-30 be installed in such a brute box as on Avro or like the way in Su-30MKM and Rafale.
ReplyDeleteTo Ken: Latest updates will be available during & after Aero India 2013 expo. But all previous threads have dealt extensively with the issue you’ve flagged.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@8.04AM: The DISHA sensor was a spinoff from the DRDO’s ‘Divya Drishti’ project which called for developing a passive airspace surveillance system with radar fingerprinting capabilities, this being a response to an urgent request from India’s Strategic Forces Command. A naval version of DISHA has already been tested & trialled on board a P-25 corvette of Indian Navy & this system is called VARUNA. The AVATAR project has yet to overcome several significant R & D challenges.
To MrSINGH1987: It is one of two FH-77B 155mm/39-cal towed howitzers that were taken from the Indian Army’s existing stocks & were subjected to the deep upgrade. They were thus not built from scratch, as I had explained in the previous thread. Will upload the Project Sanjay thread next month.
To SOUBHAGYA: It is not the DRDO’s fault, for the DRDO is not a production agency. It is the MoD-owned ordnance factories that are to blame for poor QA/QC standards. Astra is primarily a re-engineered R-77 & that’s why all DRDO audio-visual presentations on such weapons always talk about various DRDO labs mastering various technologies related to PGMs, meaning the fundamental R & D was carried out by some foreign R & D authority/ies, and the DRDO labs are now figure out the know-why & know-how, instead of engaging in painstaking & prohibitively expensive fundamental R & D for which there is an acute lack of both indigenous R & D infrastructure & skilled scientific/engineering human resources.
To Anon@10.17AM: LSPs 7 & 8 are strikingly similar in terms of being the definitive Tejas Mk1 variants. HAL did not take 9 months to fabricate the LSP-8. The delays were caused due to exhaustive diagnostic checks that needed to be carried out due to fuel-leaks discovered in some earlier PV models. In a wat, therefore, it is good that such preventive maintenance practices are carried out & it is perhaps for this reason that till to date, not a single TD, PV or LSP version of Tejas Mk1 has suffered from a fatal air-crash, especially when one compares it to the R & D cycles of similar MRCAs like the Gripen.
To GESSLER: No, that’s the only one. Logic demands that if this weapon is meant to be a pistol-cum-carbine, then it ought to be of 9mm calibre. It is definitely an innovative design that could have great potential for SWAT teams.
To Anon@10.53AM: The MSWS installation on HS-748 was meant for airworthiness certification purposes related to similar installations on board the EMB-145I AEW & CS, & were therefore not related to either Rafale or Su-30MKI.
"The AVATAR project has yet to overcome several significant R & D challenges. "
ReplyDeleteAnd what are those considering even the scramjet engine has been tested 2 times in the lab for 20s.
Design work and the material side research has also significantly progressed.
control and guidance system along with their packaging, checkout system, HILS (hardware in loop simulation) are required now, all of which can be achieved while the mechanical and electrical integration is done. I wouldn't be surprised if the first flight is carried out in 2013 as they are saying. Although this will be a scale down model but if they are able to test all the things they wanna do then we will be able to see a full scale model test by 2015-2016 very easily.
The next couple years are very important.
We should not forget that work on this project started in 1998 and ISRO's involvement has also changed the project and be ready to get surprised as we are also getting help from alot of places without much trouble (Israel, UK, Russia etc). We shouldn't be worried about MTCR because its broken by all the P5 members every year so the question is how active we are and do we have some leverage.
Skepticism is natural considering its possibly the most creative, futuristic and game changing project that india has ever taken. Also not much has been done in this field but work has been done in US, UK, Europe, Russia, Japan and Australia. India is in a unique position to ask for help from all these countries in separate areas were we are weak.
Russia is possibly the most important of them all and we need to bring this project under joint development.
Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteThe DARE-developed SIVA DF-pod weighs just 100kg even though it is larger than the TUSKER EW pod which weighs 250kg despite being smaller in dimensions.Why? Moreover the frequency coverage band in the SIVA DF-pod is D to J band, while the TUSKER EW pod contains a 6-18 GHz self protection jammer suite.So it means the SIVA DF-pod is a more powerful jammer than the TUSKER EW pod? Am i right?
How does the SIVA DF-pod compare to the EL/L-8222 self protection jamming pod? I think it can be compared to the EL/L-8212 self protection jamming pod. What do you say?
Will the Russians be able to field next-gen avionics like the AN/AAQ-37 electro-optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS)and the AN/ASQ-239 EW system now found on the F-35 JSF for the PAK-FA?
Why don't the IAF go for a next-gen cockpit like Cockpit NG with a single large PAMLCD about 19 in x 11 in to be used on the Super Sukhois?
Thank you.
Sir, Why did DARE use UV based MAWS instead of IR ones ?
ReplyDeleteWill MAWS apertures in Su-30 be embedded in the aircraft skin and distributed throughout the ac in the form of apertures ? Will MAWS installation be similar to the one in Su-30MKM ?
prasun da,
ReplyDelete1. You have mentioned that P15A Destroyer INS Kolkata probably will be commisioned by march but is BARAK-8 meant for its
air defence be ready by then??
2.Is INS ARIHANT going to be only a tech demonstrator and subsequent subs will be carrying K-4 SLBM's ??
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDelete1. What is the present state of development of K-4? Has it been tested from submerged platform?
2. Here is a news item that DRDO is testing multi-caliber guns. Promising, isn't it? :http://defenceforumindia.com/multi-calibre-guns-undergoing-trials-drdo-chief-saraswat-1317
Sir thanks for your previous answers.
ReplyDelete1) How many PInaka-type (all variants combined) MBRLs will IA procure?
2) When will the BM-21 Grad 122mm MBRLs start to be phased out?
3) Are India's BM-21s mounted on Tata or Ashok Leyland trucks?
From what I know Ashok Leyland is proposing to use its Super Stallion for the BM-21.
4) Will future Pinakas (namely Block-2) be mounted on Tata/AShok L trucks or the same Tatras?
5) By when will India test its first ASAT weapon?
6) Is LCH's glass cockpit from India or is it the Israeli one?
7) When is the LCH TD-3 going to fly? I heard sources saying by end-2012 but it seems HAL has messed up with the deadlines again, as always!
8) January 2013 will be an interesting month for Indian defence development IMO!
> first test of Nirbhay LACM
> first flight of LCH TD-3
> first flight of Tejas LSP-8
> first test of Astra BVRAAM from Su-30MKI
Do you have any comments on this?
9) Is IA inducting any optronic sights developed by DRDO? I heard about something called IMFS optronic sight, is it ready?
10) What radar (if any at all) does the Saryu-class OPV carry?
Sir, When will delivery of the recently ordered Su-30 start and uptill when will they last ? Will these jets be delivered in CKD or semi CKD kits to HAL ?
ReplyDeleteWhat are the integration problems being faced by R&D team ? Almost all components of the upgrade are Russian. The major Western equipment is Virgilus jammer and MAWS.
Will the new Su-30 jets receive the same RCS reduction measures as present in Su-35 ?
Why isn't there any maws or msws in MiG-29UPG or are there plans to retrofit them in country ?
Why aren't there any weapons packages included in recent contract ? When will there weapons come ?
Are there any plans of procuring 52 cal Bofors towed howitzer ?
The barrel front part of OFB 155/45X howitzer is considerably different from FH-77B or FH-77BO52 . Why is it so ?
Interesting read on directed-energy weapons: http://www.boeing.com/Features/2012/10/bds_champ_10_22_12.html
ReplyDeletePrasun Da,
ReplyDeleteWishing you and your family a very happy and prosperous 2013 .
Regards,
Vikram
Sir, I hve a few ques.
ReplyDelete1. RDY-2,3 and EL/M-2032 are contemporary radars and belongs to the same niche ? Which is more advanced and better of the two ?
2. Elta 8222 and PAJ-FA from Thales both are self-protection jammers. Which of the two provides more band coverage, more sensitivity in dense environments , ability to defeat multiple threats simultaneously, exoctic jamming modes like gate range stealing.
3. Isn't PAJ-FA being bought for each Mirage 2000UPG a part of upgrade.
4.PAJ-FA and Tusker provides same band coverage but Tusker is much more heavier. So why go for Tusker pod ? Does it hve any specality ?
5.MiG-29 UPG has a better cockpit than Mitage 2000UPG. Mirage should have had a better cockpit .
6.Is it final and confirmed that Kolkata class DDG will not have any Barak-1 but 4 AK-630 as part of its CIWS?
7. Will guided Smerch rocket rounds be procured ?
8.Will upgraded Darin 3 Jag have holographic HUD ? What was the cause of the last crash ?
HAL is trying to save its HTT-40 basic trainer project. IAF will never fall for it but its MOD who has to take the decision. Now suppose MOD caves in and let HAL continue what will be the implication ? How much money the taxpayers are gonna lose ? Can HAL bring down the cost ?
ReplyDeleteIs it possbile that HAL's LUH project is also cancelled if the 197 LUH deal is signed ? Is the same fate gonna met with IJT project also ?
Now i really think there's no point in wasting money on these projects.
HAL lost the train and they need to learn that it won't come back just for them.
sir ,
ReplyDeletehttp://www.defencetalk.com/forums/military-photos-videos/indian-military-pictures-1982-12/
in the above link u'll see indian soldiers from 10 garhwal rifles on a UN mission..here they are equiped with an APC..my ques is are these APCs provided to every infantry battalion or only mech. inf. ..
are regular indian infantry men trained in using these vehicles & fight with them ??
or were these APCs provided only for this mission ??
i remember seeing a MAHAR regiment battalion on a UN mission with an APC as well..
plzz give a reply sir . thank you.
Hi Prasun Da,
ReplyDeleteI wish you & all your loved ones a very happy new year .
-Sujoy
Sir, MoD clears mega deals for radars, missiles, Navy vessels, AWACS
ReplyDeleteWhen will the PHALCON contract be signed with IAI ? Will it be the same PHALCON variant that are already in service ?
ELTA is in for a major deal for new generation air and missile defence radars — the armed forces have proposed to buy six of these for Rs 3,310 crore — that can detect and track incoming missiles and aircraft as well as direct defence systems. What are these new radars ? Is it correct that only 6 such radars are to be procured ?
What recce and imaging systems for SU-30 are being bought for 950 crore ? Does this also includes escort jamming and self defence pods .
It seems MoD has finally woken up from a deep slumber.
Wishing you and your loved ones a Happy New Year.
To Anon@4.01PM: SIVS is a DF pod & not a jammer pod. SIVA is used for only obtaining target vector cues for Kh-31P Krypton ARMs.
ReplyDeleteTo UNKNOWN: Barak-2 70km-range LR-SAM version for the Indian Navy is ready & is now being ferried in to India for installation. For as long as the S-3 SSBN doesn’t arrive, the Arihant will function as a technology demonstrator platform. Once the S-5 & S-6 SSBNs each with 12 K-4 SLBMs arrive the following decade, S-2, S-3 & S-4 will all be converted to SSGNs armed with Nirbhay SLCMs.
To SNTATA: 1) Not yet. 2) Promising, yes. What will be the endgame? No one knows for sure.
To Anon@9.14PM: 1) About 72. 2) Not before 2020. 3) Neither. 4) TATA. 5) No one knows for sure. 6) Israeli….from ELBIT Systems. 7) February 2013. 8) I wish the DRDO all the very best in all its future endeavours. 9) Yes, for MPVs on internal security missions. 10) Only a marine navigation radar.
To Anon@5.50AM: It is impossible for HAL to reduce the costs of HTT-40 because: 1) HAL has to procure new land for building a Greenfield facility for producing the HTT-40 since there’s no available spare production capacity. 2) HAL will have to equip the new production facility with new jigs, moulds & tools. 3) HAL will have to bear the cost of the HTT-40’s airworthiness certification.
In contrast, Pilatus Aircraft does not have to shoulder any such financial burden, since all its costs (of the type I’ve listed above) have already been recovered ever since the first PC-7 was exported in the 1980s. Therefore, be it Pilatus, Embraer, Raytheon or KAI, financial quotations from any existing manufacturer of basic turboprop trainers will ALWAYS be 60% cheaper than what HAL even dream of quoting. Bottomline: both the HTT-40 BTT & HJT-36 IJT projects are a TOTAL waste of the Indian taxpayer’s money & ought to be terminated with immediate effect.
To Anon@8.56AM: Those APCs don’t belong to the Indian UN contingent.
Wishing everyone & all their loved ones a joyous, prosperous & productive 2013. For those interested in learning about what the stars foretell for 2013, kindly go to: http://shine.yahoo.com/horoscope/yearly-horoscope/
ReplyDeleteSir, when will you answer the rest of the ques . Pls ans them.
ReplyDeletehello prasun sir, some questions ..request u to answer please...
ReplyDelete1. India was going to purchase 4 lhd's ....what's the status of that....??
2. What is current status and future of arjun mk2..??
3.i heard about refales jet that it's hit by roadblocks .....current status and future doings.....?
4. Is LRSAM and MRSAM ready for induction....??
5. M777 ordered or not...??
6. What will probably be india's future battle rifle....after insas....???
Expecting answer 's
Thankyou !!!
happy new year prasun sir....may god give u all the happiness and prosperity which u wish for...
ReplyDeleteis k 15 a mutiple warhead capable slbm or nuclear tip slbm
ReplyDeleteDear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWish you and family a happy and prosperous New Year. Looking eagerly forward to many in-depth and analytical posts in the coming year.
dear prasun,
ReplyDeletewish you a very happy new year.
wish you very
ReplyDeleteHappy New Year,
Sir
check out this http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Russian-nod-for-Indias-bid-to-link-south-with-central-Asia/articleshow/17822137.cms
ReplyDeletethere is no convergence of interest btw india, china.
both are trying to dominate asian politics, we should not play second fiddle and try to squeeze this chinese as much as possible.
To MAYANK RAJ: 1) Contract for the four LPHs will be inked probably by late 2014 or early 2015. 2) It is still in R & D mode & one will be able to get a glimpse of it sometime in 2014. 3) Nothing of that sort. Contract will be inked by March 2013. 4) Yes. 5) Will be ordered this fiscal year. 6) That will become known only after the conclusion of competitive evaluations in 2014. 7) K-15 SLBM is the same as land-launched Shaurya TBM, i.e. with a unitary warhead. DRDO is still years away from developing MIRVs.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@10.11PM: On the contrary, there’s plenty of convergence between China, India & Russia & that’s the reason why there’s an annual trilateral summit of the foreign ministers of the three countries held since the last few years, just like the annual BRICS summits. Any corridor running through Iran is fraught with uncertainties unless & until Iran resolves all its outstanding issues with the IAEA. What Central Asia requires most is an outlet to the warm waters of the Arabian Sea and this can be offered only by Iran, Pakistan & India, and certainly not China. This therefore makes it all the more imperative for India & Pakistan to resolve the issue of J & K on a permanent basis based on a win-win formula (which was already agreed to & almost clinched by 2007) so that the Central Asian can make use of the Wakhan Corridor in order to reach India.
1) Sir the land-based Barak-8 and ship-based Barak-2 are products of the same JV programe, no?
ReplyDelete2) P-15A DDG will be a potent ship with 16 ASCMs and atleast 64 SAMs IMO. What is the main gun used on P-15A-class DDG? Is it 100mm or 127mm?? Can you tell me its name?
3) Whats the maximum range the MFSTAR radar can see?
4) P-15A coming in March 2013, thats good. When is the first P-28 Kamorta corvette coming?
5) How many Dhruv ALH helicopters (all versions included) have been ordered thus far by Indian Armed Forces? And how many would ultimately be ordered?
Thanks in advance.
To Anon@11.31PM: 1) Yes. 2) 48 SAMs, not 62. Main gun is the same Arsenal 100mm as that on the three project 15 DDGs. 3) More than 300km. 4) Maybe by early 2014. 5) More than 180.
ReplyDeletesir though I comment rarely ,I m regular reader of ur blog ...love it.btw very very happy, prosperous and fruitful new year sir.
ReplyDeleteWish you a very happy new year.
ReplyDeleteThank you Prasun for your patience, intelligence and the sincerity with which you respond.
ReplyDeleteExpecting an intellectually stimulus writings from your blog next year.
Wish you and all the fellow bloggers a very happy new year.
NR
To Everyone Above: Wishing you all too all the very best for 2013. Have also just updated the narrative above, along with some new images. Have fun!
ReplyDeleteHere's more nonsense from another 'desi' journalist (see: http://www.flickr.com/photos/78966197@N08/8329064973/sizes/k/in/photostream/), who claims the IN procured INS Chakra due to the delays in INS Arihant's commissioning!!!
ReplyDeleteThe two events seem to be independent and their mutual relationship may be incoherent.
ReplyDeletesir which lph would india take ....? Is india really thinking of super aircraft carrier like that of usa..? Will iac 2 will be nuclear powered and with catapult deck..?
ReplyDelete"each housing ELTA Systems’ ELW-2090 mission sensor/management suite"
ReplyDeleteIs this the same suite as the previous Phalcons ?
Also let me get this straight, India is paying 300 million$ per AWACS ? Isn't this gonna be the costliest AWACS ? I really hope its worth the money.
"The airframes will be supplied by Russia’s Ulyanovsk-based AVIASTAR JSC, while BERIEV Aircraft Company will customise the airframes for housing the mission sensor/management suites. "
Is the airframe gonna be the same Il76 ?
"Also cleared for procurement are six aerostat-mounted radars worth Rs.3,310 crore."
So are you saying IAF's RFP is for 6 aerostat whose number can go upto 60 or IAF will go for drdo's solution ?
Are we gonna install new LRSAMs pon any of the warships which are already in service especially 3 Shivalik and 6 Talwar class FFGs ?
hi prasun
ReplyDeleteam i right in saying that you have inadvertently put the picture of the pantsyr missile as an anti tank missile named hermes.
happy new year
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWishing you a happy,productive & prosperous 2013.
Which aerostat mounted radar models are the various companies offering ? What are the top contenders and whih is IAF's choice ?When will technical evaluations,trials begin ?
What is the max standoff range from which RecceLite will be able to provide high and medium resolution IR & Visual spectrum images ?
Whats the logic behind acquiring RecceLite type pods ? LOROP could have been procured instead as it provides very long range high res imagery ?
Why did MoD go for 2 instead of 3 PHALCONS ? Why isnt a advanced derivative of Phalcon being bought instead of ELW-2090 ?
Hermes A is none other than 9M311 of SA-21Panstir. From what range does the fire control system of Hermes begins laser designation of target ? Is it within 15-20 km t match the missile's standoff range ?
If Mi-17V5 is equipped with Hermes-A where will the optronic pod be fitted ? Why is Hermes -A labelled as radio command guided missile ? If a tank is acquired by a MMR of a fighter ac , can it give guide Hermes -A to target via commnad link guidance ?
Sir, Pls ANS sir .When will delivery of the recently ordered Su-30 start and uptill when will they last ? Will these jets be delivered in CKD or semi CKD kits to HAL ?
ReplyDeleteWhat are the integration problems being faced by R&D team ? Almost all components of the upgrade are Russian. The major Western equipment is Virgilus jammer and MAWS.
Will the new Su-30 jets receive the same RCS reduction measures as present in Su-35 ?
Why isn't there any maws or msws in MiG-29UPG or are there plans to retrofit them in country ?
Why aren't there any weapons packages included in recent contract ? When will there weapons come ?
Are there any plans of procuring 52 cal Bofors towed howitzer ?
The barrel front part of OFB 155/45X howitzer is considerably different from FH-77B or FH-77BO52 . Why is it so ?
WHY ARENT IAF GOING FOR MORE 2060P SAR pods .They are more capable than RecceLite.PLS PLS ANS.
Sir, Last month I asked you when will MR-SAM with range of 70 km and LR-SAM with range of 120 km get inducted ? You said 2014 and 2016 respectively. Now you are saying that MRSAM is ready for fitment on 1st Kolkata class. Which to believe ?
ReplyDeleteWhat is advertisedrange of RBE2PESA ? How does it air to air range compare with RDY-2 in Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 ?
A rough ratio a defending army requires in case of mountain warfare 1:3 or 2:3 ?
ReplyDeleteprasun da,
ReplyDeletewish u very happy 2013!
CVS401-PERSEUS cruise missile under development by MBDA for french and british naval forces is expected to weigh 800kg carrying a 200 kg warhead with speed upto MACH 3 and it has both top attack and ski skimming options whereas BHRAMOS is a 3000 kg missile carrying a 200 kg warhead & speeds also upto mach 3 so dont u think that brahmos is too bulky and outdated for submarine/ship launches in future? sir ur take on this
Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteWhen will be the uprated AL-31FP, presently rated at 126kN with after-burning, with 20% more power and a total technical service life of 6,000 hours, instead of the present 2,000 hours, be available? Has it been tested?
Also will the uprated engine will have new-generation full-authority digital engine controls (FADEC) as well as all-axis thrust-vectoring nozzles?
You have earlier written that only Boeing and Elbit manufactures PAMLCDs. Russia at present doesn't have the technological expertise. So from where will the PAMLCDs for the new glass cockpit of Super Su-30MKI come?
Thank you.
Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteA very, very Happy New Year. Wish you continue to write in your blog and clear our doubts.
When will be the vendor selection by the Bengaluru-based Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in consultation with the Indian Air Force (IAF) for supplying various critical sub-systems of imported origin for the Tejas Mk2 multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) be concluded? You have told that it is expected to be concluded by this March.
What do you think which AESA-based MMR wil be selected? Will it be the Vixen850E AESA integrated with the 55kg Skyward nose-mounted IRST?
Has the IAF zeroed in on the CockpitNG option?
Thank you.
Prasun sir,
ReplyDeleteAmid the degraded value rupee against dollar, we can expect a slight escalation in the price. But still does the new phalcon deal includes latest version of IL-476 air frame (with new PS-90 engines) and more advanced airborne AESA radar mount? VMT prasun sir.
To MR.RA 13: They’re indeed independent & their mutual relationships are totally incoherent—a point totally missed by the ‘desi’ journalist.
ReplyDeleteTo MAYANK RAK: What will be chosen will be known only after the global RFPs are floated & the responses received. At the moment, the offers from DCNS, Fincantieri, TKMS & Hyundai seem to be the best. As for IAC-2, the IN is in favour of a 65,000-tonne nuclear-powered vessel with catapult deck.
To Anon@8.10AM: It is far more advanced than the EL/W-2070 PHALCON. Cost of US$300 million is inclusive of the related ground-support, hangars & other land-based product-support reqmts like repair workshops. Airframe will be IL-76-90. What is DRDO’s solution for aerostat-mounted radars???? There isn’t any. The Akashdeep aerostat is capable of hosting only optronic turrets & nor the far more bulkier radars. LR-SAM cannot be installed on any existing P-17 FFG or Project 1135.6 FFG.
To RAD: How can that be??? The brochure clearly states the weapon system as being Hermes-A. Furthermore, the Pantsyr-S1’s 57E6-E SAM has a range of only 20km, top speed of 1,300 metres/second, weight of 94kg, & a 20kg warhead. Compare this with the figures posted above of the Hermes-A.
To AK: Aerostat-mounted radars are the same as those that are land-based, like ELTA’s AD-STAR or THALESRaytheon’s Ground Master 400, which are the frontrunners. Technical evaluations are already concluded. RecceLite’s optronic performance parameters are the same as those of LITENING LDP. LOROP cannot transmit imagery in real-time to any ground receiving station. RecceLite can. ELW-2090 is the latest that IAI/ELTA has to offer. The reqmt was originally for seven A-50I PHALCONs, but the MoD decided to acquire the first three & option for only another two. That opotion is now being converted into a firm order. Hermes-A is NOT the Pantsyr-S1’s 57E6-E SAM, which has a range of only 20km, top speed of 1,300 metres/second, weight of 94kg, & a 20kg warhead. Compare this with the figures posted above of the Hermes-A. Optronic pod for Mi-17V -5 can always be fitted on any of the stub-wings. The missile is guided via radio-commands transmitted via two-way data-link, i.e. man-in-the-loop guidance, while a laser spot-tracker autotracks the moving ground target, whose image is shown inside the helicopter’s cockpit on an AMLCD, with the pilot maintaining the cross-hairs on the designated target. Consequently, combat aircraft’s MMR cannot engage in similar targeting, since the laser-based autotracker & data-link is not on board the combat aircraft, unless the combat aircraft itself is modified to have an on-board optronic fire-control system.
To Anon@1.41PM: In case of Su-30MKIs built by IRKUT Corp, the aircraft are delivered within 18 months in SKD condition & HAL undertakes final assembly. The heart of the navigation & attack system of the Super Su-30MKI will be a new mission computer with which all other avionics LRUs will have to be interfaced & new applications software will have to be developed. That is now in progress. There will be no cross-over RCS measures from Su-35 to Super Su-30MKI. Presently, no MAWS on MiG-29UPGs. Weapons packages are always ordered as supplementary contracts, not as part of the main contract for procuring combat aircraft.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@8.05PM: Both have to be believed. Fitment of weapons on-board a warship does not mean service-induction of the weapon system. Only after weapons installation on board can the warship proceed for its commissioning process. Declaring the warship as an operational platform takes at least another 16 months after various types of shakedown trials & evaluations, especially for a first-of-type warship armed with weapons of brand-new design. Same goes for INS Teg & INS Tarkash, both of which never fired any BrahMos ASCMs before their commissioning. Therefore, commission ing of a warship does not automatically mean that all its weapon systems & sensors on-board have been inducted as operational systems. There are no advertised ranges of RBE PESA or RDY-2. The latter is a generation behind the RBE.
To Anon@8.05PM: 1:3 is the bare minimum reqd.
To UNKNOWN: CVS401-PERSEUS cruise missile is a futuristic weapon that will enter service only the following decade, whereas the BrahMos-1 is in service today & by the time the CVS401-PERSEUS enters service, the BrahMos-2 will be available. When it comes to submarine launches, the BrahMos-1 will be ideal for SSGNs like INS Chakra or the Arihant, but totally irrelevant for SSKs & SSNs. The best ASCM that can be launched from SSKs & SSNs still remains the torpedo tube-launched versions of the supersonic 220km-range Novator 3M-54E Club-S.
To Anon@9.09PM: That version of the AL-31FP is still undergoing tests & is expected to be ready for delivery by 2015. Naturally, its FADEC will also be of a superior type. All-axis TVC will also be available by then. Super Su-30MKIs won’t have PAMLCDs, only two much larger AMLCDs of the type on board the Su-35BM.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@9.25PM: It should be completed by this March. Same goes for the AESA-MMR. Vixen 850 AESA-MMR has already been integrated with Skyward IRST sensor & has been available since March 2012. The IAF had specified the Cockpit NG for Tejas Mk2 way back in May 2012.
To Anon@10.30PM: Rupee-Dollar values don’t count when it comes to dealing with Russia because Russia since 2007 has been billing all its export customers in Euros. The only version of the IL-76 now being produced in Russia is that under Project 476, under which the IL-76MD’s airframe has been strengthened & upgraded to include glass cockpit & FBW flight-control system & Perm PS-90A turbofans.
Prasun sir,
ReplyDeleteBrahmos's ramjet propulsion requires it to be accelerated to an extent where missile achieves required ramming speed for its engine to function (unlike the turbofan engines in subsonic cruise missiles), so it requires powerful enough rocket booster to achieve this speed.
Now if we take the case of Brahmos hyper-sonic version (scram-jet engine/missile in development) into consideration, it is obvious that it requires a mammoth rocket booster (As showcased in X-43A and also in the showcase models displayed by DRDO in various Expos) which aids the actual missile to achieve the required hyper-sonic speed (the minimal functional speed of the scram-jet) for the scram-jet to be triggered and then maintain sustained speed during its entire course of flight. Will this missile be able to fit into future destroyer's hulls? Even then to achieve hyper-sonic speeds it could well trade of its range (maintaining current Brahmos's 300 km range can be difficult) and this missile cannot be easily carried by airborne platforms (Unless its like the B-52 or Tu-160 Blackjet bombers) due to its sheer size and weight. What could well be the dimensions and weight of this missile prasun sir? How many of these can be fit into future capital ships of IN? VMT in advance..
Happy new year All!!!
ReplyDeleteI do hope india-pak can do some sort of win-win over Kashmir. Because i can tell you all the hatred and the never die attitude towards india is based purely on Kashmir with average pak.
If Kashmir had not become an issue in 1947/8, i think today there would only exist soft borders at the most.
Your choice of Hermes-A as attack helicopter fired missile is excellent. Can this missile also be used on the UCAV's in future.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@12.07AM: The models showed by DRDO in various past expos are those of the Avatar hypersonic proof-of-concept vehicle. In terms of looks/appearance, the BrahMos-2 will be more closer to the CVS401-PERSEUS cruise missile. A range of 220km will be more realistic to expect, instead of 290km of BrahMos-1. Fitment of up to 8 such missiles on-board DDG-/FFG-type warships & SSGNs will not be a problem at all. But yes, air-launched variants will require heavier launch-platforms….even the Super Su-30MKIs won’t do.
ReplyDeleteTo SHERKHAN: VMT & the same to you & all your loved ones. Actually, the India-Pakistan borders were quite porous till September 1965 & that’s why cross-migration had continued quite freely till then under the Nehru-Liaqat Pact. A win-win deal over J & K is indeed reachable within 2014 & I regard it as a distinct possibility & that’s also the reason why Islamabad too is moving forward towards declaring the Northern Areas (Gilgit & Baltistan) as Pakistan’s fifth province, something which it did not previously want to do for fear of contravening the various UN resolutions on J & K. Consequently, with the UN resolutions now becoming irrelevant, the coast is therefore clear for both India & Pakistan to jointly explore innovative solutions & enact them with visionary statesmanship. I personally believe that part of the solution must be an India-Pakistan consensus on the future of Afghanistan, i.e. both countries must be on the same page in terms of determining the future status of Afghanistan without prejudice to each other’s core national interests. In other words, it should be India & Pakistan that ought to be the key players in ensuring the future socio-economic & political stability of Afghanistan & thereby by extension, also jointly ensure the same for Central Asia. Unless & until this is done, outside powers thousands of miles away will still engage in playing double-games throughout Central Asia—this being the single-most important lesson that one can draw from history. Therefore, rather than focus on divergences, it is time for both India & Pakistan to talk with one voice about strategic convergences with regard to Afghanistan & Central Asia—logic demands this. From the Pakistani side, Islamabad has already moved forward in this direction by enunciating a new foreign policy that’s based on regional stability that calls for Pakistan to achieve geo-economic strategic depth within all its immediate neighbours. India too ought to now reach out in a similar manner under the umbrella of SAARC & strengthen Pakistan’s evolving democratic process so that once & for all the so-called two-nation theory can be buried by the reality of SAARC & Central Asia co-existing as one integrated socio-economic union, & India & Pakistan co-existing just like the US & Canada, where territorial boundaries exist only for administrative purposes, and are irrelevant for everything else, i.e. soft borders. But for all this to happen, as I had stated before, visionary statesmanship is of the essence, which can only come about if the mindset undergoes a transformation for the better, i.e. changes in NIIYAT will automatically produce a corresponding change in ZEHENIIYAT.
To Mr.RA 13: UCAVs will be excellent carriers of PGMs like the Hermes-A. For instance, a turbofan-powered version of the Rustom-2 could carry up to six Hermes-A PGMs.
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteTake a look at this-
http://idrw.org/?p=17175#more-17175
Are they really looking for trucks from abroad? I thought indigenous solutions from TATA, Ashok Leyland are sufficient! Or the reporter messed up with the requirement of TELs for newer generation canisterised missiles(The mention of the name Volat does make sense)for which alternative indigenous solution does not exist till now.
Also about the RONI, I refuse to believe thats the only product coming from the company! Also I wonder why they are not trying to come up some solutions like Cornershot when such weapons are in great demand for internal securities? If they indeed has developed RONI indigenously, I believe they can come up with a solution in no time given a firm order from GoI.
Thanks & Happy new Year
To SHAURYA: VMT & the same to you & all your loved ones. The PTI reporter indeed messed up by mentioning prospective OEMs from Russia & Belarus as potential replacements for the TATRA family of vehicles. TATA, Ashok Leyland & even VOLVO are more than capable of catering to the reqmt for heavy-duty vehicles for all three armed services. Then there are the Indian JVs with URAL & KAMAZ. Therefore, plenty of locally-built options are available. But the particular mention of the Belarus-based OEM is with particular reference to 16 x 16 vehicles as TELs for ballistic missiles like Agni-4/Agni-5, since China too had approached the same company for ToT regarding such vehicles & had obtained it a decade ago.
ReplyDeleteThe RONI is not a Kalyani Group-developed product, rather, it was designed by an Israeli SME (there are several such garage-based SMEs specialising in such innovations-for-sale all over Israel, Austria & Switzerland) & Kalyani Group just bought off its IPR & manufacturing rights. Nothing wrong with that. It is too late now to locally develop innovations like CORNERSHOT. The time to do it would have been the late 2008-2009 period after 26/11 & entities like OFB should have taken the lead. Presently, imported CORNERSHOTs have flooded the Indian markets & enjoy a total monopoly.
hello prasun sir,....
ReplyDelete1. What happend to Tata's made artillary .? What calibre is it of...?
2. Is the new subs which india would procure(next gen subs) will have advance ballastic missile , aip systems ?
3.does india has any specialised bomber plane.....like tu 22m or b 52 ...any...?or they have any plans to develope or procure...?
4. Is the new 2 awacs to be procured will have same il 76 platform or new il 476...?
5. Is their a new radar to be fitted on it...? Would it be aesa or pesa..?
Hi Prasun da:
ReplyDelete"Defence modernization funds cut by Rs 10,000 crore; Army operations may be hit" news in Economic times...Is it true??
This Govt. is messing up everything..one after another..Indian defence budget is very low for capital aquisition..and now this...Shame on Congress..
VMT
Hello Prasun ji,have a happy and properous 2013 ahead!
ReplyDelete1) Can you tell me what is the ship on the far left of this picture of Goa Shipyard ? The one in front is a Saryu-class OPV, the ones in background are Coast Guard vessels -
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/811/highlevelnigeriandelega.jpg/
2) Any plan for follow-on Aditya-class fleet tankers? If so, how many?
3) Latest news says there's gonna be a 10k crores cut in defence budget, how will this effect the force modernisation plans of the armed forces?
4) What is the maximum speed BrahMos-2 can achieve?
5) I have heard in some circles that BrahMos-2 will be aka PJ-20. Is that true?
6) I have read you saying to an Anon that 7.5 Mach is the cruise speed of Shaurya. Then what's the maximum terminal speed?
7) Is the Nirbhay ALCM test confirmed to be this month or any chance it would be postponed again?
8) Can Su-30MKK or J-11A/B carry and launch the CJ-10 ALCM?
9) What will be India's annual production rate of BrahMos-1 missiles once the 2nd production line in Kerala begins to function to its full capacity?
10) How many Shaurya missiles would the IA induct ultimately?
Noticed that the Tarkash does not have the Kashtan like the first batch of Talwar Class ... are the Second batch frigates using AK-630 plus Barak 1 combination??
ReplyDeletethx
1.Aksai chin is geographically part of tibeten plateau wheareas south tibet part of indian subcontinent.Why doesn't india settles for a win-win solution with china, just back off from our flawed claims on aksai chin and also remove irritant cia supported tibeten exile govt. from india. 2.India has joined anti-china alliance if the trust level b/w india and us has reached such a level why didn't iaf went for cheaper super hornet for mmrca competition. 3.Since indian navy has started getting western how you compare our upcoming kolkata class low observable destroyer with plaan advanced destroyers. 4.India being geographically in naval terms isolated why doesn't indian navy increases the number of submarines for its underwater combet fleet and make way for controlling various straits which joins indian ocean with adjoining smaller seas.
ReplyDeleteHI Prasun
ReplyDeleteWould you agree that the Hermes anti tank missile has more than a passing resemblance to the pantsyr missile?. If so why , then the only reason is that of commonality of parts and guidance.If i understand it is laser homming in terminal stages , it is difficult to make out the laser seeker in the nose of the missile. When all major players have gone to lock on after launch, why the old system of radio guidance ?.
Sir, Why did DARE use UV based MAWS instead of IR ones ?
ReplyDeleteWill MAWS apertures in Su-30 be embedded in the aircraft skin and distributed throughout the ac in the form of apertures ? There will be 6 UV apertures for all-round coverage .Will MAWS installation be similar to the one in Su-30MKM ?
Sir,
ReplyDeleteI went through your Dassault Aviation’s Rafale Wins India's M-MRCA Competition. There you said RBE 2 aesa has 1001 T/R elements . You are not a man of assumptions since assumptions are mother of all ... From where you got this figure ? In 2009 in a press news of Thales it claims to test the aesa version of RBE2 with 1000 gallium arsenide elements.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/Sbzce5H5wTI/AAAAAAAAGQQ/vfJ3O45uAek/s1600/aesa1-779263.jpg RBE2 AESA pic in Thales RBE2 brochure. Pls compare this with RBE2 in the 2nd pic of Dassault Aviation’s Rafale Wins India's M-MRCA Competition. In brochure RBE2 front is a right angular cylinder and antenna is of same dia as the portion immediately behind the antenna.In your thread the RBE2 is slightly cone shaped with a reduced antenna and aperture. Whats the difference between these two RBEAA ?
I have come across many pics of Rafale. Some Rafales dont have OSF in their nose. Their nose dia and internal volume seems to be a bit larger.
http://rafale.co.in/index.php/en/photos.html Pls have a look at the 6th pic of the left side column and the pic to the right of it. Dont these have larger radomes than the rest ?
How does RBE2 pesa compare with RDY-2 in terms of pure raw range performance ? Rafale is the succesor of Mirage-2000. Rafale has also been designed as a air-superiority fighter. As a result RBE2 pesa ought to have atleast 10 percent more range than RDY-2. Whats your say on this ?
Many bloggers claim that RBE-2 pesa has a 100 km detection range against a 3 sqm target.This is same as RDY-2 . While Captor has a 121 km range for this same target . Are all these to some extent correct?
ECR-90 and Zhuk-ME both employ slotted planar array. They both have same antenna dia. How ist it possible that ECR-90 has a 185 km range against a 5 sq m target whereas Zhuk-ME has 120 km ?
Is it true that Thales is working on a 1400 module count version of RBE2 radar for Rafale that will replace the 1000 TR elements of RBE2 ?
SIR, PLS GO THROUGH & TRY TO ANS. I would like to read your viws on them.PLS ANS SIR.
More good news regarding HAL-built LUH -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.hal-india.com/HAL-CONNECT/HAL-%20CONNECT%20-ISSUE%20-46.pdf
^^Ground test vehicle of LCH engine deck structure assembly completed.
http://www.hal-india.com/HAL-CONNECT/HAL-%20CONNECT%20-ISSUE%20-44.pdf
^^first LUH cockpit structure ready for ground test vehicle.
Work is going real fast, Prasun saheb! Especially when compared to previous endeavours like Dhruv ALH that dragged on for decades.
Any news as per what engine will be selected to power LUH? Please tell me its gonna be the Shakti.
Will the foreign acquisition for 197 LUHs be scrapped anytime soon?
http://indrus.in/articles/2012/12/27/india_to_assemble_russian_mil_and_kamov_helicopters_21303.html
ReplyDeleteSir as per above article, India's ELCOM SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. has signed a contract with Russian helicopters holding firm to license-assemble their helicopters in India.
And that the first helo to be made in india in regard to this would be the Ka-226T "Sergei". Do you have any comments on this? I have never heard of a company caled Elcom was involved in defence manufacturing and that they have the infrastructure needed to build advanced multirole helicopters like these.
1) Is there any significant difference between Older Phalcon-2070 AEW&C and the latest order of two Phalcon-2090 in terms of performance.
ReplyDelete2) Will there be any increase in detection range from previous 300 NM.
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned Super Su-30MKI will have a new mission computer.Which DRDO lab will develop it and the new software required?What % of components in Super Su-30MKI will be of indian origin?
Regards,
Anand
Hi Prasun, Isnt the previuos PHALCONs of IAF equipped with ELW-2090 sensor suites.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the range of ELW-2090 ?
What happened to induction of induct new-generation S-band long-range surveillance radars (LRSR) by IAF ? ELTA Systems-built EL/M-2288 AD-STAR, THALES-built Ground Master 400, and SELEX Sistemi Integrati’s RAT-31SL are competing in this requirement . Are evaluations of radar still going on ? When are orders likely to be placed ?
What is Elta 2083 Airstar radars two of which are already in service ?
Is there enough no of elta 2060P SAR pods in service for Su-30mki ? Are new procurements of self defense and escort jamming pods being made to bring jammer pod strengths to required levels ?
To MAYANK RAJ: 1) See this: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/12/which-one-should-it-be.html
ReplyDelete2) AIP, yes, & no ballistic missiles. 3) No. 4) IL-476. 5) L-band AESA.
To Anon@10.47AM: The news item is correct. Also read the latest INDIA TODAY about how bloated the MoD & three armed services are. There’s plenty of room available for cost-cutting & belt-tightening. In essence, the MoD’s expenditure practices are hopelessly outdated (of the 1040s era). One cannot blame only the UPA/Congress….all political parties are complicit in this area.
To GESSLER: 1) it is the 2nd NOPV undergoing fitting-out. 2) None at the moment. 3) It should not, since especially the Army is bloated & the MoD relies on 1940s-era financial & accounting practices. Imagine a DDG that is supposed to cost only Rs8,000 crore gets delivered to the In at a cost of Rs.15,000 crore!!! There’s enormous wastage taking place since the 1990s. Read the latest INDIA TODAY for more details. 4) Estimated top speed is Mach 6.5. 5) Dunno. 6) That depends on whether the Shaurya is adopting a pure ballistic flight-path or a depressed ballistic trajectory. 7) That depends on weather conditions in the Bay of Bengal. Inclement weather may well prevail there, due to the fact that this is the El Nino year. 8) No. Only the H-6K can. 9) About 24. 10) No one knows for sure.
Fabrication of any prototype is extremely easy. It is the flight-testing & airworthiness certification that’s the most difficult part, as evidenced by the Dhruv ALH’s R & D cycle. An uprated version of the Ardiden-1H is the most logical choice for the LUH. Whether the procurement of foreign-design RSHs will be scrapped remains to be seen.
To Anon@12.20PM: No more Barak-1s on any future naval warship of the IN. The same goes for the three Batch-2 Project 1135.6 FFGs.
To JAI: 1) A final settlement of international boundaries of China & India has already been worked out & under this scheme of things, India will be reqd to surrender its claim to Aksai Chin in return for maintaining its hold over Arunachal Pradesh. 2) I don’t think India is part of any anti-China alliance nor does she aspire to be one. In fact, given the deteriorating situation in the East China Sea vis-a-vis Japan, Beijing knows that it too cannot afford to have a two-front war scenario & therefore wants to quickly settle all outstanding issues with India ASAP under its new ‘Look West’ policy. 3) The P-15A Kolkata-class DDG will be more advanced than the PLA Navy’s latest Type 052D DDG in terms of both firepower & sensor fusion technologies. 4) Things are moving pretty fast on the P-75I project & RFPs are expected to be issued very soon. NAVANTIA of Spain’s S-80 Super Scorpene SSK fitted with Stirling Engine AIP is expected to be the frontrunner for this contract.
ReplyDeleteTo RAD: Of course there’s a resemblance between the Hermes-A & the Pantsyr-S1’s 57E6-E SAM. Lock-on after-launch is the preferred mode for those laser-guided missiles that can be guided by a variety of laser illuminators, be it from a LDP or a handheld designator. Radio-command guidance on the other hand is the preferred method when a man-in-the-loop terminal guidance system is reqd from the launch platform, meaning there’s no need to rely on handheld laser target designators & the launch platform alone (like a helicopter or combat aircraft) is reqd to acquire & designate the target inside hostile territory where friendly SOF or infantry forces are impossible to deploy.
To ARUNM: The figure of 1,001 was THALES’ estimate of a ‘never-exceed figure’. It was an estimate from the OEM, & not the final figure, which remains classified. There are no differences in the two photos of RBE-2. They look different in 2-D since the photos are from different angles. Rafales without OSF were from the first production batch in the mid-1990s & at that time the RBE-1 PESA-MMR was mounted. Range-wise, both RBE-2 & RDY-2 are the same when it comes to detecting & tracking MRCA-sized airborne targets. A max range of up to 130km is more than enough for BVR combat. Anything beyond that is tactically useless since long-range airspace surveillance data will always be available from ground-based radars for GCI, as well as from AEW & CS platforms. 185km-range of ECR-90 is totally false. There’s no need to increase the no of T/R modules on any nose-mounted AESA-MMR when a distributed array can produce far better results, as the Russians have proven & will apply on both the Super Su-30MKI & FGFA.
To Anon@10.11PM: It is better to read directly from the source. Therefore, do read these two statements:
http://www.oboronprom.ru/sites/default/files/nr_rh_elcom_india_eng.doc
http://www.oboronprom.ru/sites/default/files/nr_rh_mi-17v-5_india_eng.doc
ELCOM SYSTEMS PVT LTD is a heavy engineering company specialising in the production of gearboxes & they represent RENK in India & are supplying the gearboxes for IAC-1/INS Vikrant after Kirloskar failed to develop indigenous alternatives. For starters, ELCOM will be the beneficiary of direct industrial offsets attached to the contract for procuring Mi-17V-5s & therefore ELCOM will locally overhaul & service all gearboxes of Mi-17V-5s as well as those for Ka-28PLs & Ka-31s. The Ka-226T licenced-production clause will be activated ONLY IF the Ka-226T is selected as the new-generation RSH for both the IA & IAF.
To Anon@10.11PM: The ELW-2090 will also be capable of tracking ballistic missiles. The ELW-2070 isn’t capable of doing so. Detection range of both is the same at 300nm.
ReplyDeleteTo ANAND: Check out the last poster above that I’ve just uploaded to find out more about DARE-developed mission computers. Difficult to say what will be the local content of Super Su-30MKI at this stage.
To AK: No, the first three A-50I PHALCONs had ELW-2070 sensor/mission management suites. Range is the same at 300nm. The first six S-band LRSRs will be aerostat-mounted. EL/M-2083 AirStar L-band has been superceded by the AD-STAR. It is never ‘enough’ to describe the no of such pods in service with the IAF or IN. They’re always procured in successive tranches for different combat aircraft fleets. But overall, the no of such pods in service is quite low & needs to be increased three-fold.
prasunda,
ReplyDelete1) if long range cruise missiles cannot be tested in India (as you mentioned earlier) how smaller nations (like Turkey, South Korea, germany) are doing them.
2) cant we test cruise missiles in A&N island chain with out extensive test facilities like Balasore.
3) you told earlier that Air Launched missiles need not be stealthy since their flight profiles using terrain mask will make up for it. But at the same time you told super sonic cruise missiles cannot be terrain hugging. So how is Air launched brahmos going to make up the lack of stealth. it can be as good as the GLCM
Sreenivas
To Sreenivas: 1) The missiles of Germany, ROK & Turkey like Taurus KEPD-350, SLAM-ER & SOM are all not fully autonomous LACMs, but all possess man-in-the-loop guidance systems that relay digital imagery of the terrain traversed & the target back to the launch aircraft’s pilot. Therefore, such loitering LACMs are not reqd to navigate autonomously along various waypoints & therefore need to traverse a much shorter lateral distance during test-flights. If at all the maximum navigational distance is reqd to be tested along a lateral route, both Germany & ROK can easily access the vast desert firing-ranges in the US, while Turkey can do so in China’s Inner Mongolia region. 2) Neither the A & N chain of islands nor the facilities off Balasore over the kind of continuous lateral over-land terrain that’s reqd for flight-testing autonomous long-range LACMs. All existing missile test-firing ranges of India are geared for testing only ballistic missiles & NLOS-BSMs all of which have an over-water flight trajectory in the bay of Bengal & southeastern Indian Ocean. 3) Air-launched & ground-launched BrahMos has supersonic cruise capability & salvo-launch to make up for the lack of stealth.
ReplyDeletesir, hal e mag. http://hal-india.com/HAL-CONNECT/HAL%20-CONNECT-%20ISSUE-%2043.pdf page 10 talks about GTSU-110, GTSU-127 and PTAE-7 engines we all know about PTAE engine but what about other two. also what is your openion on FPGA based control system developed by AERDC team
ReplyDelete"Difficult to say what will be the local content of Super Su-30MKI at this stage."
ReplyDeleteConsidering deal is gonna be signed in 2014 there is possiblity of a few last minute changes with recent development is avionics. IAF of today is very aware of what is going on currently and whats gonna come in the near future. One such change might be cockpit NG of LCA mk2 for Super 30 upgrade instead of Su35 cockpit.
Is there anything new in Nirbhay cruise missile which can justify development of such a missile almost 2-3 decade after similar missiles were built in the west ?
@Prasun da
ReplyDeleteI would like to talk about about a few things
that you said you were surprised about me asking for S1,
Here is what i thought :- the structure in Kalpakkam was just the nuke reactor chamber and INS Sindhukirti was ripped apart in HSL to know the nitty grities of making a big submarine as India had never made such big ones.
Prasun da you always talk about ALH still awaiting air worthiness certificate, whereas i keep reading news and images of ALH, Rudra flying in icy heights, deserts or sea. should that suffice for certificate
I dont know much about aero dynamics but I think if the exhaust of the 2 engine ALH and its variants are routed through tail (a hollowed out one) there would be no need for a tail rotor and it will make the helicopter more stable. whats your say, can these be adopted in ALH
oh btw i has asked something about setting up a air assault setup alongside AAC armed with BMD-4M and its Tank destroyer variant. whats your take on that.
thanks
Joydeep Ghosh
To KEN: They are jet-fuel starter-engines for the Tejas Mk1 & Tejas Mk2 (see the poster I’ve just uploaded above as the bottommost pix). A similar system is now being developed for the FGFA, plus an on-board oxygen generation system, these being the only two items that have so far being confirmed as being of indigenous origin on the FGFA. More items may follow in the years ahead.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@9.22AM: Cockpit NG will definitely not be on Super Su-30MKI as the cockpit configuration was finalised two years ago, a time when the Cockpit NG wasn’t even existing. R & D work on Nirbhay cruise missile is a consequence of India’s ouvert & declared status as a nuclear weapons-state, which came about in only May 1998. Prior to that, there wasn’t any operational reqmt for a guided-missile of this type.
To JOYDEEP GHOSH: All airworthiness certifications of the Dhruv that have been awarded so far have come from CEMILAC & DGCA, none of which are internationally recognised, especially for the civil aviation sector & therefore not ONE civilian customer of repute exists for the Dhruv till this day? Why? Simple, for without securing international CofA from either the FAA or EASA, no insurance company will be willing to come forward to provide insurance coverage for such a helicopter, & without such insurance coverage, there will be no civilian buyer. Military aircraft/helicopters are different since they don’t require any insurance coverage. Tail-rotor would still be reqd even after the mods that you’be suggested. Do study the design of the MD-900 Explorer NOTAR helicopter from Boeing to find out how a no-tail rotor helicopter functions. Air-Assault formation already exists in the form of 50 Independent Bde (Para).
Lastly, one doesn’t learn about designing & building submarines by ripping apart existing SSKs. For building submarines, one requires detailed engineering design blueprints of the SSK, plus design blueprints for the various production-engineering hardware & processes, like the ones India had procured from HDW in the 1980s for the Class 209/Type 1500 SSK at great cost.
By the way, Shin Maywa-built SH-3 amphibians are most likely to be ordered this fiscal year & will be paid for with the funds of National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA), since the MoD has alashed the IN's capital account budget for FY2012-2013.
ReplyDeleteprasun,
ReplyDeletejust as a suggestion, i request you to provide hyperlinks to important contents or words in the articles, in that way, the articles or the opinions will be more informative and interesting, and will certainly add more weight-age. on the other part, if possible, change the background from black to white and use black color for words, the black background and green words seem a little grotesque, and doesn't suit a blog dedicated for defense analysis
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteI like your line of thinking. I hope is it contageous!!! The need of the hour indeed is for the leadership in the subcontinent to wakeup and see beyond their noses.
Hi Prasun da
ReplyDeleteWhy is India going for Shinmaya US2 when the Russian Be 200 is available ..Be 200 is much bigger and better...
Why did MOD slashed the Capital Budget in 1 Jan 2013 when only 2-3 months left in this fiscal...So it means there were still 10000 Cr left unspent??...What are the areas where MOD could have cut instead of the Capital budget..VMT
Prasun doesn't India need Long-range High power radars similar to the Russian Voronezh DM or American PAVE PAWS. I feel India require at-least three. One to cover the Eastern Sector facing China, One in Western Sector in Gujarat or Rajasthan, One to cover IOR region placed in South.
ReplyDeleteHilly terrain may be a hurdle but could be overcome easily.
Can the US TPY-2 Radar or Israeli Super Green Pine radar be used as interim solution till such long range radars come-up.
Hi Prasun da
ReplyDeleteNow that its official that the Kaveri engine will power the Indian UCAV..Cant this engine be used in HALE UAV s like Northrop Grumman Global hawk...Which engine will powerthe RUSTOM 2 UAV..Does India possess the capacity to build Global Hawk like UAV s in 4 years timeline..
Do u think its good idea for DRDO to develop phalcon like AWACS or is it better to go for more Israeli radars??If so Why..VMT
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIf possible, could you please mention what happened aboard the INS Delhi at LIMA 97 after its encounter with the RAAF P-3. You mentioned you might do so a few months ago.
In your opinion why is Indonesia taking the trouble to get the Chinese to develop a land attack version of the C-802 when it can easily buy Brahmos off the shelf?
Are you still writing for Tempur? Apart from one or two places, it's becoming increasingly difficult to get an issue.
Prasun is it possible to modify the Barak-2 70-km SAM into something similar to the submarine-launched MICA SAM that can be fired from underwater at air targets like ASW aircraft?
ReplyDeleteHello Prasun saheb, Im back. Thanks for the answers for previous set of questions...
ReplyDelete1) How many SAMs and how many ASCMs could the P-17A FFG carry?
2) Is Arihant undergoing sea trials right now?
3) Will P-17A and P-15B be built by modular shipbuilding methods at MDL? How many years would it take this way to build the ship from scratch until handing over to IN for sea trials?
Will GRSE also be equipped with these construction methods in future?
4) When could the first flight of AEW&CS radar-equipped EMB-145I be conducted?
5) Is Sudarshan LGB qualified on Jaguar IS ground-attack aircraft?
6) Can you provide be more details regarding the development of future variants of Sudarshan LGB? I heard you talking about a powered-flight version of the kit?
7) Will the air-launched 600-km supersonic LRCM have Indian RAMJET engine? That would be cool.
Whats the progress on this missile and when could it make its first appearence?
8) Whats the progress on chinese aro engine developments? Will WS-10 ever power a production-standard J-10 aircraft to the frontline in combat?
What about the future of chinese engines?
9) Any new progress on Tejas Mk-2's frameless canopy? Im so interested about it!
10) What will replace the AK-630M as IN's primary close-in weapon system for warships in the future?
Will we purchase Phalanx/Goalkeeper or can OFB/private sector come up with an indigenous solution?
11) What company manufactures the 120mm rifled gun of Arjun Mk-1? And who makes the smoothbore version of Mk-2?
12) IA made a good decision scrapping FMBT, so, is there any new progress on Arjun Mk-3's front? Has IA started specifying the requirements etc. for such a tank?
Thanks in advance.
Sir, A lot of thanx for the thorough reply.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the differences between RBE-1 and RBE-2 ? Will it be possible to fit the bigger radome of the very first production batch Rafales into the current Rafales for a bigger internal volume. It may allow for a bigger radar with a definite 1000 TR elements.Then it would solve for the small nose .
From where do you know that RBE-2 and RDY-2 has the same detection and tracking range against a MRCA sized target.Not a single percent of range improvement.
What is the approx tracking range of ECR-90 if not 185 km against a 5 sqm target. Is it the same as Zhuk-ME ?
If OSF is removed from the nose will it cater for a larger dia radar antenna?
Are there any definitive plans of Thales to increase TR elements to 1400 of RBE-2?
The RBE-2 that was flight tested on a Mirage 2000 testbed does it ahve the same aperture as the production variant AESA in F3 tranche Rafales ?
Tracking range of 180 km, Is it against a 5 sqm target ?
Hello Prasun , Wish You a Happy New Year . Hope this year brings in Peace and Prosperity in your life.
ReplyDeleteBest Wishes
Austin
Hi
ReplyDeleteIn your previous blog trident.blogspot
you have said :" The most silent at the moment is the Japanese MSDF’s Soryu-class submarine."
Is Soryu offered to India as Australia is looking for them??
Soryu is 4200 Tons have Sterling AIP and higher endurance and very silent .. would not be better to aquire than S80???
To SHERKHAN: VMT. I totally concur with your assessment of the prevailing ground realities.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@2.56PM: The Be-200 is bigger, yes, better, no. Beggars can’t be choosers, for the SH-3s will be supplied to NMDA as an ODA package by Japan, but will be operated by the IN for coastal surveillance & SAR. There are several areas where wasteful expenditure can be done away with. Just read the latest INDIA TODAY magazine for some more details on this issue.
To Anon@3.04PM: Voronezh DM or PAVE PAWS or X-band BMEWS are all items that will never be exported & will therefore have to be developed & built locally, but this will not happen since India lacks both the financial muscle & the human resource R & D base reqd for deploying such sensors. Therefore, a far better option is to have a constellation of four BMEW satellites in geo-stationary orbit, a task that India can jointly accomplish with Japan. Radars like Green Pine LRTR only provide theatre-based early warning, & not continental early warning.
To Anon@3.05PM: Not Kaveri, but a derated & re-engineered version of the Kaveri will power the USAV. A re-engineered version of Kaveri minus the afterburner can indeed power HALE-UAVs but such a platform cannot be developed in India within 4 years given the prevailing circumstances & mindsets. Such an effort requires committed & sustained financial support for R & D, plus a consortium-type military-industrial approach of the type that the MoD abhors (hence the MoD unilaterally decided in 2008 to make BEL the prime contractor for Rustom-1 & Rustom-2 UAV production without calling for bids from India’s private-sector). Rustom-2 will be powered by twin Rotax-type engines. If the DRDO/CABS really wants to develop a homegrown AEW & CS far larger than the EMB-145I, then in my view it ought to start by first developing an aerostat-mounted AEW & CS under which an aerostat will carry a triangular S-band AESA antenna-array for airspace surveillance & ground-based aerial battle management over VAs & VPs throughout India’s hinterland. CABS’ efforts to develop an airborne AEW & CS platform will at best bear fruit only after a decade from now & therefore, the MoD ought to authorise the import of at least nine more A-50I PHALCONs to add to the three now in service, thus bringing the total of A-50Is to 12 by 2017.
To FARIS: Will surely go deeper into the issue (concerning INS Delhi) at a later date, bit it had nothing to do with the RAAF P-3C incident, rest assured. BrahMos is quite expensive compared to the C-802 or C-705 & any ASCM that uses an active radar for terminal homing can easily attack any land-based target with large RCS, like refineries or oil storage-farms, which is what the Indian Navy’s Styx ASCMs did on December 4, 1971 at Karachi. TEMPUR’s printing order has been drastically reduced over the past 1 year, largely due to management problems & financial constraints.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@7.16PM: Not Barak-2, but Python-5.
To GESSLER: 1) Not more than 24 Barak-2s & eight BrahMos-1s. 2) Not yet. 3) Yes. About four years for the lead warship. Yes. 4) By next month. 5) Not yet. 6) Wait till the conclusion of Aero India 2013 for further details. 7) LRCM diagrams have always shown it powered by ramjets. First appearance expected by next year. 8) There’s plenty of data available on-line on this subject. 9) It has already been designed & is awaiting production. 10) There’s no need to replace AK-630Ms. OFB already produces them along with Mahindra Defenc e. 11) OFB does it. Smoothbore version is still in the design stage. 12) GSQR for Arjun Mk3 is now being drafted.
To ARUNM: RBE-1 was PESA-MMR whereas RBE-2 is AESA-MMR. From THALES. Tracking range is about 90km. OSF installation has nothing to do with AESA-MMR’s antenna diameter as the OSF is mounted aft of the AESA-MMR. Yes, same aperture. Tracking range is 90km against 5 sqm airborne target.
To AUSTIN: VMT & the very same to you & all your loved ones.
To VISAKH: Soryu-class SSK is not on offer to anyone, be it Australia or India, since Japan has not yet changed its post WW-2 constitutional provisions that ban the export of weapon systems. The whole idea behind IN’s P-75I project is to procure more SSKs as quick as possible. Consequently, procuring a totally new design when compared to the Scorpene SSK will only complicate matters & will result in deliveries only by 2020. Therefore, the only sane & logical option is to locally produce an SSK design that features a high degree of commonality of sub-systems with the Scorpene, but which is also modular so as to allow the installation of AIP plug-ins like Stirling Engine. And the only available option is the S-80 Super Scorpene, which can have the same SUBTICS combat management system as Scorpene for example, but at the same time can also incorporate the Stirling Engine AIP plug-in.
Hi Prasun, IAI brochure of ELW-2090 shows it mounted on an Il-76. Besides many sites claim that IAF Phalcon suite is ELW-2090. Why isn't IAF interested in Northrup Grumman, LM & bae systms LRSR systems ? Does Ground. master 400 come witj various restrictions associated with US defense equipments as Raytheon is involved. How many El-2084 radars are in IAF service 18 or 24 ?There was an IAF commander's conference on inadequate no of crucial EW systems. After that why wasn't any ordered ?There are two different EL-8251 jamming pods in service. What are the difference between the two ? Isn't this in servive with Jaguar IS and Su-30 ? After Mirage 2000 upgrade aren't they going to gt a new Thales podded jammer one per ac.
ReplyDeleteIf P-15A carries just 48 Barak-2 & no Barak-1 don't you think this is inadequate. Delhi class carries 44 983M1 MRSAM and 48 Barak-1.
Sir, What will be the various consequences of the budget cut in new aquisitions nd force modernisation ? For sure, mmrca deal won't be signed before March, orders for additional awacs, aerostat mounted radars won't be placed. What will be the other effects ?
ReplyDeleteDoes the 50 Independent para has its own airborne armour,artillery and assets ?
What will be the likely result of MoD's descsion to make HAL the lead integrator in Rafale deal ?
To AK: BAE Systems, LM & Northrop Grumman are all invited to respond to the RFP. Less than six EL/M-2084 Arudhra radars are now in service since deliveries are on-going. There’s only one ELL-8251 escort jammer pod that’s available. A few were acquired about five years ago. P-15 delhi-class FFG carries only 48 983M1 MR-SAMs and 16 Barak-1s. 48 Barak-2s on a P-15A DDG is more than adequate.
ReplyDeleteTo SAYAN: Whenever any procurement contract is signed, only 20% of the contract value is reqd to be paid, with the rest going in successive tranches every consequent year. Therefore, orders for items like M-MRCA & follow-on A-50Is can always be placed in this fiscal year, if reqd. Consequences of the budget cuts will be felt more in areas like construction of housing accommodation, infrastructure development like roadways by BRO, reduced orders for spares packages, etc. 50 Ind Para Bde does not have its own integral armour & artillery assets. HAL was never ever nominated as the lead integrator for the Rafale MMRCA deal, but the lead Indian military-industrial contractor. There’s nothing to integrate in India by anyone as the entire aircraft comes fully integrated from the OEM.
"Consequences of the budget cuts will be felt more in areas like construction of housing accommodation, infrastructure development like roadways by BRO, reduced orders for spares packages, etc. "
ReplyDeleteIsn't the road construction supposed to be under some other ministry ? Why MOD paying for this ? BRO can construct the road but some other ministry should pay for it as once build everyone will be using it and not just the military.
Also we have seen BRO's work, why don't we include private sector, its just the road, now we are letting private firms to build and modernize air bases.
"HAL was never ever nominated as the lead integrator for the Rafale MMRCA deal, but the lead Indian military-industrial contractor. There’s nothing to integrate in India by anyone as the entire aircraft comes fully integrated from the OEM."
Why ? HAL is the lead integrator for Su30 why not rafale ? Its possible IAF wants some Indian and israeli components in Indian rafale and they are choosing HAL to integrate. People say French are not allowing Indians to tweek with their Rafale unlike Russians but the truth is all this is mere speculation. Nobody knows anything about MMRCA contract because MOD doesn't want anybody to know anything until deal is signed. Its way too big deal to mess up with.
"the MoD ought to authorise the import of at least nine more A-50I PHALCONs to add to the three now in service, thus bringing the total of A-50Is to 12 by 2017."
ReplyDeleteWith a cost of 300 million $ per aircraft, its way too expensive for a country like India. Its better India should take Russia out of the equation and bring in Canada (Bombardier) or Brazil(Embraer) or even Gulfstream(IAF should get over with the size issue) is better. Il76 based Phalcon's life cycle cost is also way too high and it appears the platform itself is also expensive.
"DefenceMin goes global in search for Kaveri partner"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.business-standard.com/india/news/defencemin-goes-global-in-search-for-kaveri-partner/497740/
You said we are partnering with Snecma and its gonna be part of MMRCA. Whats going on ?
And how comes even after deciding to go for a international partner, we are still searching for one and still writing
"Otherwise the next cycle of engine development could take another 15-20 years,” admits Ramnarayan, frankly."
WTF
" A DRDO committee is identifying specifications for the engine. Based on these, a Request for Proposals (RfP) will be issued to engine makers."
Even after so many years they are still don't know what they are building ? And shouldn't they involve IAF so that RFP is not changed at the last moment.
Same thing happened to HAL's IMRH project. Indian armed forces need around 300+ medium utility helicopter. In 2009 a partner was almost chosen in the final fight between Eurocopter and Mil but IAF changed the whole specification and the project had to be scrapped. Now HAL doesn't even think about this project and IAF don't care. After the deals for medium category will be signed, HAL's eyes will ber opened and then they will decide to build IMRH. HAL should think about which project is important and which could generate alot of revenue for them and which one is feasible for them.
Projects like LUH, BTT, IJT, LIFT, IMRH could have generated alot of money for them just like Dhruv and LCH but it appears like HAL doesn't wanna work. They know IAF will have to upgrade their aircraft and purchase new once, nothing to worry, MOD will come to us and we will get licence production or upgrade offer. Why should we work on new projects ?
Prasun Da,
ReplyDeleteIs DRDO working on any Direct Energy Weapon project either by itself or in collaboration with a foreign nation ?
Thanks,
Vikram
prasun ji you have been pointing to various shortcomings and irregularities on the defence matters but why dont you team up with arvind kejriwal at least temperorily or give him the information to his party about these matters then you can definitly increase the awareness among the people of this country.And besides that you can act as their advisor on these matters as no other political party dosent have this wing in them.They even have contact with gen vk singh this will be a great combo
ReplyDeletewhat do u say my brothers?
"P-15 delhi-class FFG carries only 48 983M1 MR-SAMs and 16 Barak-1s"
ReplyDeleteSir, the Delhi DDG carries 32 Barak-1 SAMs, not 16.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/402/mysorebarak1.jpg/
^^Look at the 4 x 8-cell VLS modules. Picture is of INS Mysore.
Sir, Thanks very much .
ReplyDeleteDassault Fox literature states PESA radar of Rafale as RBE2 and AESA variant as RBE2AA.
When you said that RBE2 and RDY-2 has same detection range against a MRCA sized target which RBE you meant AESA or PESA one ? AESA one cannot have a max detection range of only 90 km ?
Is the radome in early production batches of Rafale really bigger to the ones now in service with French airforce and having PESA radars? Is the aperture of such radar really bigger ?
Will it be possible to have such a nose portion , radome in IAF Rafales and house a slightly bigger aperture RBE2 AESA radar ?
Is the tracking and detection range of ECR-90 against a 5 sqm target 90 km ? If so, it is even less than Zhuk-ME radar with a 120 km detection range against a 5 sqm target ?
What is the standoff max SAR ground mapping range of RBE2 AA ? Will it be like 150 km of EL/M-2032 ?
Sir, You are wrong regarding P-15 SAM armament. It carries 44 Shtil SAM , 32 Barak-1.Pls check your figures and info before typing.
ReplyDeletePrasun Sir,
ReplyDeleteCVS401-PERSEUS looks like its aerodynamic profile of the nose section and the body is stream lined for supersonic flight paths (But its specifications are really contradicting to the current supersonic missile's specs in terms of weight, speed and range). Would Brahmos-2 Hyper-sonic version's aerodynamic profile would be much more stream lined to a sleeker design to cater to its hyper-sonic Mach 6-7 speed glide paths (It may not be as sleeker as the X-43A which is designed to fly at speeds of Mach 12 and above).
Still if we consider your estimation of Brahmos-2's range of 220km then it would definitely decrease the lethal operating range (Anti Ship attack range) of the modern capital ships having this missile compared to current envisaged ships boarded with Brahmos-1 supersonic missile's 290km variant. So could it be the case that the most possible scenario for future battle ships conceptualized for carrying Brahmos-2 variant would also carry similar number of Brahmos-1 variant together to maintain the same effective range? Your views sir, VMT again.
To anon at 1:15 pm. Delhi class DDG have 48 not 44 983M1 . 24 are stored in a forward magazine in front of bridge and another 24 in a mag aft of helicopter deck. You ought to check your figures.
ReplyDeletesir, thank you for your prev. replies. what is your take in http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2013/01/defence-ministry-goes-global-in-search.html it specifically mentions the director of GTRE. WHO will be willing to share such core technologies? how much will it delay the project? any news on boeing helping us with high altitude test facility? what will we gain from assembling GE F-414 engine? is there any offset for this contract? if so how do they plan to fulfill the clause?
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@8.21AM: It depends on what kind of roads one is talking about. If one is talking about national arteries then the Ministry of Roadways & Surface Transport is in charge. If it is about roads within states, then the respective PWDs at the state-level are in-charge. If one is talking about roads starting from base camps & ending right at the border then the BRO is in charge & in many cases where the state-level PWDs are incapable of executing such projects, then the BRO takes over, especially in the North East.
ReplyDeleteHAL was never the lead-integrator for Su-30MKI or even Super Su-30MKI. It is only the lead Indian military-industrial contractor. All systems integration work on the Su-30MKI & Super Su-30MKI was & is being done in Russia. There will be no Israeli or Indian component on the Rafales, since items like ODL & IFF transponder on the Rafale will all be software-defined.
To Anon@8.37AM: Basic law of economics is the more you buy the lesser they cost….i.e. economies of scale. Placing orders in tranches of three or two does not help anyone.
To Anon@9.13AM: Good luck to the DRDO & GTRE. One thing, however, is for certain: no one in the world will come forward to share their hard-won core technological competencies. If it was that easy then by now China could have well bought off an existing engine designer/manufacturer. Talking about IMHR project, it would have taken at least a decade to develop the IMRH, a time-period no end-user would like to wait for, given the urgency of reqmts. Just imagine the three Project 17 FFGs that are, right now, devoid of shipborne 10-tonne MRHs, thereby preventing the P-17 FFGs from engaging in ASW operations with dunking sonar & preventing them from undertaking over-the-horizon target acquisition/tracking!!!
To VIKRAM GUHA: There is some exploratory R & D work being undertaken jointly with Israel.
To Anon@12.25PM: Whatever information I have to receive is all uploaded on to various threads in this blog. Anyone interested is more than welcome to browse through them & attain enlightenment from any of the suggestions contained within this blog. It’s a free country, as you may be aware, & therefore one doesn’t need to join any party of NGO or lobbying firm to advice anyone on such matters.
ReplyDeleteTo GESSLER: VMT & you’re absolutely right!
To ARUNM: RBE-2 is AESA-MMR. RBE or RBE-1 is the PESA-MMR as per the THALES backgrounders available with me. I never said maximum detection range is 90km. I said the maximum tracking range is 90km. Operationally, I don’t see any pressing reqmt for a larger nose for Rafale. Distributed AESA apertures are a far better option. Detection & tracking ranges are two totally different performance parameters. Don’t confuse the two to be the same.
To Anon@1.42PM: BrahMos-2 can be expected to bear a close visual resemblance to the CVS401-PERSEUS, since the latter too is expected to emerge as a hypersonic weapon in its final avatar. Missiles like BrahMos-2 will be employed more against carrier battle groups & not against solitary warships, for which BrahMos-1 will suffice.
To KEN: All I can say is ‘Good Luck’ to the DRDO & GTRE. One thing, however, is for certain: no one in the world will come forward to share their hard-won core technological competencies. If it was that easy then by now China would have well bought off an existing engine designer/manufacturer by now. So, don’t be surprised at all if in the end after all the global competitive bidding exercise, it is still SNECMA Moteurs that gets selected on cost grounds (as it will definitely be the case, if one applies logic to this whole issue). For the F414 turbofans, GE Aero Engines will supply all the necessary product-support infrastructure as part of direct industrial offsets, like MRO workshops & test cells. However, no licenced-manufacturing will take place.
Sir, Thanx again for your thorough replies.
ReplyDeleteUsually tracking range of a radar is 0.80-0.86 of its detection range.
RDY-2 has the same tracking range as RBE or RBE-2 ? RBE-2 is sure to have more than 90 km tracking range against a fighter sized target.
Thales had promised a 50% improvement in tracking and detection range over RBE in RBE2.
What is the detection ranges of ECR-90 and RBE for a 5sqm fighter sized target ?
Are there any differences in size of radomes , their dias of early production batch Rafales having RBE and new ones having RBE2 ?
err, If Brahmos-2 is primarily tasked to engage principle surface ships like Aircraft Carriers then it is not providing the user the required/adequate standoff distance range in order to use it (It is known that the Aircraft carrier will have an effective tactical area coverage with a radius of more than 450 km, i.e., depending on the type of aircraft). So in this scenario the user needs to penetrate into the Aircraft Carriers battle space (protecting itself from any threats posed by Aircraft Carriers air and ship based threats) and then launch this weapon towards the intended target (Or is it like they intentionally mention the announced range of the missile half the actual range?). VMT
ReplyDelete1) Prasun can MR/LR SAM able to take-out inbound Supersonic missiles similar to Brahmos ?
ReplyDelete2) What about Hyper sonic missiles. Are there any missiles currently under development which can counter inbound Hyper-sonic anti-ship missiles.
hello sir..,
ReplyDeleteShould india take the bmp 3 from russia... Is bmp 3 good or bad...? And in what aspects..? What ur take on this...?
Thankyou
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteApologies for asking such an ignorant question but how do navies that do not have access to satellites communicate with their subs? Do ASEAN navies have to rely on 2 way shore based ELF transceivers?
If a decision was made to armed Western IR AAMs on Russian built aircraft or vice versa, apart from changing the pylons are any other modifications required? I seem to recall that IAF Fishbeads were armed with R.550 Magics and a Magic was used to destroy the PAF Atlantique?
In your opinion, which ASEAN country traditionally has the greatest political pull/influence? Is it Indonesia due to it being the largest country and one of the founding members of ASEAN?
Out of curiousity, how did you find out that RMN ship crews where in Cherbourg when Mossad arrived to snatch back the impounded FACs in 1973? It would have been extremely embarrassing wouldn't it if the RMN's 6 Combattante had also ended up in Israel :]?
http://bibliotheca.limkitsiang.com/1976/08/21/the-166-million-%E2%80%9Cspica-m%E2%80%9D-rmn-fast-strike-craft-scandal/
Is it true that the only SSKs that were built to USN SUBSAFE standards are the Collins class and that due to adhering to SUBSAFE standards the Colllins have the best damage control/damage ressistent capability?
Is the primary reason that relatively few Stingers have been ordered is due to the fact that it's expensive compared to other MANPADS or due to stringent U.S export restrictions to non-NATO and non-U.S. allies?
Any idea as to why Raytheon needs 4 years to manufacture just 6 ATFLIR pods?
http://www.strategicdefenceintelligence.com/article/qIRKzQUq6KQ/2012/12/20/raytheon_to_provide_atflir_pods_to_malaysia_under_fms/
In the mid-1990's, IDR had some articles written by an ''Edmond Dantes''. Was this nom de plume used by Major Sachi or you :] ??
Do you by any chance know which publication David Saw is with now? For a while he was writing for ADD and I enjoyed reading his stuff.
Thank you.
To ARUNM: Tracking range of RDY-2 is about the same as that of RBE-2, i.e.90km. THALES had promised a 50% improvement in performance (no of aircraft being tracked), not of range enhancement. ECR-90’s detection range won’t exceed 130km. Radome size remains the same.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@5.49PM: Even with 290km-range BrahMos-1, it is possible to get close to the carrier battle groups by employing SSGNs armed with BrahMNos-1, & not warships or combat aircraft armed with BrahMos-1.
To MAYANK RAJ: In my view, the BMPV-64 ICV from Ukraine & BMP-3 ICV both ought to be subjected to competitive in-country mobility & firepower trials before taking a final decision.
To FARIS: 1) Not ELF, but VLF. No ASEAN navy presently has ELF or VLF communications capability. 2) Pylon interface unit & its processor-based LRU will be reqd. No IAF MiG-21 has ever been armed with Matra’s R550 Magic-2. Only Jaguars & Mirage 2000s are. The MiG-21bis that shot down the PN’s ATL-2 used R60T IR-guided AAMs, not Magics. 3) Undoubtedly Indonesia. 4) I personally know three of the RMN officers who were part of the RMN’s commissioning crew stationed at Cherbourg at that time. Two of them are ex-RMN Chiefs. Why would anyone expect the IDF-Navy or Mossad to ‘steal’ what was never their’s? They went to only take possession of what was legally theirs as Israel had fully paid for its vessels to CMN. 5) Not true. Because the local construction programme of such SSKs in Australia was of sub-standard quality. 6) Due to stringent US export restrictions. 7) ATFLIR pods were no longer in series-production when they were ordered for the RMAF. Deliveries would have been quicker if pre-owned ex-USN stocks were ordered. 8) IDR’s articles written by ‘Edmond Dantes’ were in fact written by its then Bangkok-based Bureau Chief Robert Karniol (a Canadian). It was his nom de plume. 9) No idea.
To Anon@7.49PM: The Barak-2 will be able to intercept inbound supersonic ASCMs. There’s no counter as yet to hypersonic ASCMs.
ReplyDeleteSorry Prasun, if no ASEAN country has VLF or ELF, how do they communicate with their subs?
ReplyDeletePrasun,
ReplyDeleteJust came across this video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TveNjPw5H5Q
It's very moving.
Hi Prasun da
ReplyDeleteDid u see the Bussiness standard article today"M&M JV with Rafael rejected due to CBI case"..Is it true?? or some desi media Bogus stuff...
To FARIS: They communicate via either radio or SATCOM.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@1.26AM: Yes, it is very much true. But look at the blatant double standards being practiced by the MoD: on one hand it has no objections to MoD-owned DPSUs like BEL striking joint industrial partnerships with RAFAEL, & yet it objects to a JV with a private-sector company!!! If at all there was any definitive clinching evidence against RAFAEL, then by now it would already have been blacklisted & all its bank guarantees would have been encashed, as was the case with IMI. This has not happened (since Derby & Python-5 are being procured for Tejas Mk1 & LCA Navy Mk1 & the DRDO is co-developing the LRCM with RAFAEL & now wants to co-develop an enhanced version of Iron Dome), meaning that RAFAEL is free to do business in India, but on the MoD’s terms, i.e. deal only with a DPSU (in this case, BEL) & not with any private-sector company, although Mahindra Defence had teamed up with RAFAEL as far back as 2004 to offer jointly-developed products like Mahindra Marksman 4 x 4 fitted with border surveillance sensors.
@prasun da
ReplyDelete1. looks like my views on kaveri 2 have come true, also it looks to be good for the fate of AMCA
2. you said India will give up control on Akshai Chin for Arunachal Pradesh, but what about the Saksgam valley and the balwaristan area.
3. sometime back heard China picked up the entire production line of Tu22M3 from Russia, dont you think its time India goes for the 2/3 squadrons of Tu160, or is it that India have already gone for them but the deal has been or will be masked under some other deals.
4. I say so because the talk of air launched Brahmos and Nirbhaya, Frankly if Brahmos and Nirbhaya are fired from so called Super Su30s it will virtually mean these jets will have to be jury rigged to carry just 1 or max. 2 of such weapons and wont carry any other system.
5. Where as in case of Tu 160 it can carry a lot of them, also defence deals with Ukraine suggest Tu 160s of Ukraine may well be on offer alongside Russian ones.
6. dont you think too much time, money is spent on importing or license making large systems, where as small speacility clothing, boots, or 2/3/4/5/8/10 ton trucks or vehicles like BMD 4 like FICV should be gven more importance. Also its a fact that apart from C130Js India severely lacks special ops troop transport that are light, fast once they are put on ground
hope i havent taken too much of your time
thanks
Joydeep Ghosh
Prasun sir, I had some queries with regard to the Kolkata class destroyers:-
ReplyDelete1) Its been reported that the Chinese had bought the S-300FM (SA-N-20) A.K.A "Rif-M" and installed it on their Type 051C air-defence guided missile destroyers. In light of this why are we still opting for only medium range SAM systems for such an important project?
2) The Chinese also seem to have gained quite an expertise in modulating these systems to enhance their benefits- up to the point of producing clones with even higher capabilities than the baseline systems they were reverse-engineered from (Hongqi HQ-18, HQ-10, HQ-15). Shouldn't the Indian defence establishments be looking towards doing the same SPECIALLY FOR NAVAL APPLICATIONS? It seems to be an area as technologically critical as strategic/ballistic missile technology.
3) With the recent upgrade of a major Indian shipyard, an upgrade enabling it to "utilize" modular construction, can we finally hope to see the build times on these ships being cut down or at least not be prone to delays?
One last miscellaneous question:
Q- What is the significance of the new law being drafted in the PRC with regard to the exploration of the Indian Ocean? (article provided in the link- http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-01-02/china/36110511_1_first-aircraft-carrier-chinese-presence-china)
My apologies for the rather lengthy questions. I earnestly look forward to reading your reply. Thank you.
Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteFirst Best wishes for year 2013.
Now could you please explain your comment.."meaning that RAFAEL is free to do business in India, but on the MoD’s terms, i.e. deal only with a DPSU (in this case, BEL) & not with any private-sector company"
Why MOD behaves with this kind of DOUBLE STANDARD ??
What advantages it brings if Rafael is restricted to do tie up with only Defence PSU..we have seen tie up with Def PSU only paves the way for commission khori and marely licensed production over decades ..read TATRA-BEML case.
BEML has not done 1% product up-gradation or developed any key technology for All Terrain Vehicles in India .
Where as we have seen Mahindra is very very good at learning and developing own technologies and more significantly develop own products out of JVs .
Regards,
Sir,
ReplyDelete1. Is the Raytheon Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System (JLENS) aerostat mounted radar in the competition for S-band LRSR radars ?
2.In Ambitious Upgrade Plans For IAF Jaguars, you mentioned Raytheon’s ALQ-184(V)9 and ALE-50,BAE ALQ-184V9 and ALE-55,IAI/ELTA’s EL/L-8251,Rafale Skyshield are on offer as integrated EW escort jammers-cum-decoy systems. Which was eventually selected ?
3.When selecting sich EW systems does the IAF subject them to a thorough technical cum performance evaluation to select the best ?
4. Does any of IAF fighters have end game expendable RF decoys like ALE-50 and reusable RF decoys like ALE-55 ?
5.Are there plans of fitting such jammers on any IAF fighters. They are very useful once a missile is launched.
6.You once mentioned around 20 EL-8251 jammers were procured by IAF. Why is it that only one is in service now ?
7.Which is better PAJ-FA or EL/L-8222 ?
8.Why doesnt IAF spend money in equipping its fighter fleet with state of art latest IDAS , defensive EW systems as all Western nations and some Middle east countries do. They are vital for preventing war attritions. IAF has always not emphasised much on survivability of its assets.
Hi Prasun da
ReplyDeleteDid u see the Indian Express article today "MMRCA negotiations run into fresh hurdle"...It cited the old news that MOD rejected Dassults plea whether HAL will lead the project or not.It went on to say that it is unlikely to seal the MMRCA deal before 2013 end..Now if thats true..then GOD save this country..Ur views??
By the way went today at the DRDO Expo at India science Fair in Kolkata..Few observations as told by the DRDO guys:
1)Sudarshan LGB passed trials but IAF not so interested.
2)Rustom 2 will take 6 years min..to reach production
3)ASTRA surface to air not yet planned and is unlikely
3)saw DRDO Future 155 mm artillery Graphics...production when??DRDO does nt know
4)hand held Thermal Imagers and laser designator to start into production now for IA.
One thing was evident while talking to DRDO guys..DRDO and armed forces relations are not good.Some even blamed media for negative news on DRDO...Ur views pls??VMT
Hi, To anon at January 5, 2013 7:54 PM. Where is this Science Fair taking place in Kolkata ? Will you kindly give the location. Where is the DRDO stall ?
ReplyDeleteDRDO stall salt lake stadium..Kolkata
ReplyDeleteSir, thanx Uptill which day will it be held ?
ReplyDeleteIf MMRCA deal is not signed within the current budget year, do you think it will be a blow to the national defense.
ReplyDeleteSir, Thanx for the thorough ans.
ReplyDeleteI have visited Raytheon website and viewed RACR radar of F-16 block 60.
http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/racr/
I have spent a considerable amount of time comparing the aesa apertures of RBE2 and RACR from the available photos. RACR aperture is 1.2 to 1.4 times larger than RBE2.RACR is sure to have more TR modules and greater range. RACR maximum width is similar to RBE2 dia but it is longer . It has more aprture area . What do you say ?
I have also viewed ES-05 Raven AESA of Gripen NG . It also has a larger aperture than RBE2AA. http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/8975-mrca-news-dicussions-part-iii-21.html
The first aesa pic is that of demo aesa in Gripen NG demo. It is an exact RBE2. The 2nd aesa is a definitive aesa developed by Selex Galileo. It has greater area although slightly. Compare the two pics and you will see it.
Of all MMRCA contenders it is Rafale which has the smallest aperture AESA . What do you say ? And still it is 2nd costliest.
To JOYDEEP GHOSH: 1) Hopefully the definitive turbofan for AMCA will be ready for flight tests after 2025. But it will be totally irrational for any foreign OEM to become a strategic R & D partner of GTRE. 2) It is not Saksgam Valley, but the Trans-Korakoram Tract. It is erroneously labeled as Saksgam Valley but several vested interests within India who are nowadays making a living (after retirement) by spreading falsities & absurdities, for instance this: http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-india-beware-of-china-s-himalayan-moves/20130104.htm
ReplyDeleteAs I had explained earlier, even if India approaches the ICJ in The Hague, it will lose the case since Pakistan & China inked their mutual boundary agreement in accordance with the internationally recognised watershed principle. On top of that, since India is in favour of achieving a win-win solution to the J & K dispute, she will have to recognize Pakistan’s sovereignty over Gilgit & Baltistan (Northern Areas, in return for Pakistan recognising India’s sovereignty over Jammu & Kashmir. Balwaristan collectively constitutes the state of J & K, Azad Kashmir (PoK) & the Northern Areas, but in light of a win-win settlement being reached with Pakistan, Balwaristan will cease to exist. 3) Neither has China had any access to even a single nut-and-bolt of the Tu-22M2, nor is it possible for India to gain access to any Tu-160 due to the existence of ratified international arms-control agreements inked by the US, Russia & Ukraine. 4) Even a Super Su-30MKI carrying two Nirbhays will have a lethal punch in the Indian context. 5) As I said earlier, export of such weapons is banned under international treaties. 6) One of the best tactical twin-engined transports for SOF-based air-assault operations remains the An-32B. UJust equip it with NVG-compatible cockpit lighting & an enhanced night-vision landing system & you will have something that will prove to be a delight for India’s special operations forces.
To BHASWAR: 1) The IN does have a choice of procuring both 70km-range Barak-2 & its 110km-range Barak-8/Barak-NG. 2) Chinese OEMs are neither producing cloned SAMs now are reverse-engineering any SAM of Soviet origin. What they have done so far is re-engineer Soviet-era MR-SAMs & LR-SAMs by obtaining the original technical design data packages from countries like Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, the Baltic Republics & some Central Asian republics since the mid-1990s. 3) No, that won’t be possible to achieve, since the principle reason for the delayed delivery of warships is nor the shipyard, but the IN’s Naval Design Bureau (NDB), which never seems to be able to freeze a new warship family’s design. For instance, even now the NDB is tinkering with the detailed design of IAC-1/INS Vikramaditya at a time when the vessel’s hull has already been floated!!! 4) The new law will officially mandate the PLA Navy & the Maritime Surveillance Agencies to provide escort protection to China’s offshore minerals exploration infrastructure that will have to be located in the southwestern Indian Ocean.
To INDIAN: Didn’t you know? I had already explained this way before. For as long as the MoD’s Secretary for Defence Production & Supplies also remains a Board-member of all the MoD-owned DPSUs, his/her loyalty will always be with the DPSUs. The only way to change the present scheme of things is to redesignate the post as Secretary for National Military-Industrial Infrastructure. For only then will such a Secretary be able to ensure a level playing field.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@7.39PM: 1) Yes. 2) The selection process is not yet over. 3) No. Only a paper evaluation & some factory visits are conducted for performance data verification. 4) No. 5) There are always such plans on paper. 6) Who said only one is in service? 7) EL/L-8222. 8) That is due to the mindset acquired as a result of procuring Soviet-era hardware in large numbers since the late 1960s. This mindset also therefore believes that lives are expendable. Hence till this day there are no dedicated CSAR helicopters in service with the IAF. Very sad state of affairs, indeed.
To Anon@7.54AM: That story is another piece of classic yellow journalism, rest assured. I was there at the ISC fair. Sudarshan LGB passed only technology demonstration trials last year & now efforts are on to optimise the gimbaled laser seeker’s performance (i.e. accuracy) from a current 5 metres CEP to 3 metres CEP. Only after this is done will user-trials commence. Data on Rustom-2 MALE-UAV & Astra BVRAAM’s SR-SAM variant is correct. But time will prove that the decision about not developing the Astra’s SR-SAM variant is wrong & very costly. DRDO’s ATAGS project is a total waste of time, money & effort for obvious reasons. Since the OFB has already developed a 155mm/45-cal towed howitzer version of the FH-77B, it should only be logical for the OFB to team up with the Mahindra & Mahindra/BAE Systems joint venture company for developing a 52-cal version of the 155X45. India’s armed forces do not like the DRDO’s penchant for initiating technology demonstration R & D programmes that have no finite timeframes for reaching maturity, while the DRDO is getting increasingly irritated with the MoD’s insistence that only DPSUs be accorded the status of prime industrial contractor.
To Mr.RA 13: No, that will not be the case. Even if the MMRCA contract is inked in FY2013, it will be all right.
To ARUNM: Photos in 2-D are deceptive. One has to compare the models visually in 3-D. Only then will the truth emerge.
Sir, But those pics were actual scale models.
ReplyDeleteYou have been to a no of aerospace expos and you have seen with your own eyes, photographed and collected brochures of RACR of F-16, ES-05 Raven. Can you tell the differnce in aperture sizes of RACR for block 60 and RBE2 . To me in 2D oval shaped RACR seemed bigger. F-16 nose is also a lot volumnious and offers more frontal area than Rafale . This can be ascertained seeing the frontal pics of both the acs. I have compared them many a times. Only you can provide the ans regarding aperture size.
What about aperture size of ES-05 Raven & RBE2 ?
Why did Dassault designed such a small nose ? They could have kept the nose dia the same as Mirage 2000.
Is it true that UAE airforce found out that RBE2AA had an inferior range to their blk 60's APG-80 ?
I had gone through a lot of pics of blk 60 and Rafale nose but still couldnt figure out how both thier nose areas and their apertures are equal .
Sir, Russia pushing India to buy BMP-3 vehicles and shelving homemade FICV project. is it true that IA is not satisfied with BMP-3 which is a 3 decade old design . Why not go for CV-90 ?
ReplyDeleteWhy did IAF choose A330 over IL-78 air-refuellers ?
Will IA get its OFB developed FH-77 45 cal howitzers within 3 months ?
Why is OFB expanding production capacity of Pinaka rockets from 2000 to 5000 rounds? Only a few Pinaks are in service with IA . What are the two new Pinaka rounds now in developement ?
Did you found out something new about Nirbhay cruise missile from your visit to ISC ?
How many Barak-2 will P-15A have ? Isnt LR-SAM's range 120 km ?
Has R&D for a customised improved Iron Dome to suit IA's need already commenced ?
How will MAWS be fitted to Super Su-30 ?Will apertures be embedded in airframe ?
Sir, http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/268/rafale52.jpg/
ReplyDeleteIf newer Rafales featured such a big radome and even the IAF ones then it will be possible to house a bigger AESA.
Prasun Sir,
ReplyDeleteIsn't the Indian Navy variant of the Barak listed as having a range of 70km? Isn't the naval variant called the MR-SAM with 70km range and the Indian Air Force variant called the LR-SAM with 120km range? If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative then please shed light on how the IN can opt for a 110km variant of the Barak on the Kolkata Class Destroyers or any other project like the IAC-1?
Sir what will be the caliber of India's future 120-km MBRL design? The current 40-km Pinaka is 214mm.
ReplyDeleteTo BHASWAR: The In refers to the Barak-2 as LR-SAM while the IAF refers to this same missile as MR-SAM. The Barak-8/Barak-NG variant will be known as the LR-SAM by the IAF, meaning the IAF is procuring both Barak-2 & Barak-8/Barak-NG. The IN too has the option of going for the Barak-8/Barak-NG in future.
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@4.38PM: 300mm, same as that of Semrch-M.
Prasun Sir,
ReplyDeleteAre the current Kolkata Class Destroyers capable of carrying the Barak-NG?
The articles on http://defense-update.com/ regarding the MF-STAR and the Barak state that the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR Multi-mission radar and the Barak-NG package is equivalent in performance to the similar ranged components of the Aegis systems (that is to say the SM-2 and the current operational variant of the AN/SPY-1 radar). Is there any merit in such statements?
Has construction on the project P-17A Frigates commenced or is it even close to commencing? There was an article in The Indian Express, dated: 20th June 2009, which stated that the deal for the 7 vessels had already been signed (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Navy-seals-45-000-cr-deal--seven-warships/479132).