Total Pageviews

Sunday, January 13, 2013

HAL's Light Utility Helicopter


109 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good, now dump the MoD's foreign chopper tender.

Didn't know the avionics were indigenous.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Not all avionics LRUs & LRMs will be indigenous. All AMLCDs will be imported for sure. For the tender for imported RSHs to be cancelled, there will have to be an interim solution available for near-term reqmts (since the LUH will at best take five years to become available). The only near-term option therefore is to upgrade all existing SA.315B Lama/Cheetah LOHs into the Cheetal LOH configuration.

Gessler said...

I think LUH will be an excellent helicopter that would fulfill all requirements the IA/IAF can ever think of for a 3-ton RSH.

Nice machine. So if the foreign procurement for 197 RSHs (competition between AS.550C-3 and Ka-226T) is cancelled, will the Indian Armed Forces go in for 384 LUHs, all from HAL?

I think LUH would also garner a lot of export potential for many third-world countries in need of a lightweight high-altitude helicopter at a cheap price.

Unknown said...

Prasun,


What is the status of the LUH/RSH competition? There was talk of cancellation, then talk of Fennec winning, now deafening silence- will the Fennec LUH be ordered or not?



And sir wrt your comments in your past thread- where you said the P-8I will not come with boom refualling capability this is not what Shiv Aroor- who visited the Boeing factory that is assembling the P-8I and was briefed by Boeing officials- claims.Shiv says that Boeing have included the UARRSI system on the P-8I free of cost in the hopes Boeing may bag a AAR order later down the road.


3)Also I had read that HAL were to deliver 3 different variants of the ALH this year to the IA-MK.3, MK4 (WSI) and one of these variants was a "special operations" variant. Is there such a thing or is this mis-reporting?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: I wish I could share your enthusiasm, but there still is a long way to go as far as product maturity is concerned. The HAL brochure I’ve uploaded above says as much too. For instance, there’s no illustration about the various mission-sensor fitments due to be on-board, like RWRs, LWRs, MAWS & FLIR turret. Furthermore, no word about the kind of weapon systems planned for integration. Also, such helicopters don’t require a search radar as that increases weight. Instead, a StormScope installation is more useful. I also have serious doubts about HAL’s ability to comply with all CEMILAC-specified airworthiness certification requirements within the timeframe specified by the MoD. And finally, unless & until HAL gets the LUH certified by either the US FAA or European EASA airworthiness certification authorities, export prospects for the LUH will be almost nil, just like that of the Dhruv ALH. Worldwide, everyone recognises only FAA & EASA CofAs, & not those issued by CEMILAC or DGCA. In terms of competition for export orders from the Third World, the Z-11 & AC-211 models from China are the favourites to capture the markets since they’re available at far cheaper prices & are available now for immediate delivery.

To UNKNOWN: Logic has its own way of prevailing in the end. Consequently, just as no self-respecting air force & navy will go for service-induction for two near-identical products for doing the same job (i.e. one has to choose between the PC-7 Mk2 or HTT-40, instead of procuring both types of BTTs), the same logic applies to the RSH requirement as well. Therefore, procuring 197 imported helicopters & 187 indigenous helicopters to do the same job doesn’t make any sense. Elementary business sense therefore dictates that all 384 RSHs have to be of the same type/model. I do hope that the MoD & its RM ‘Saint’ Antony will therefore see the light of day & accept this elementary result of logical reasoning & decide to upgrade the existing SA.315 Lama/Cheetahs into Cheetal LOHs as an interim solution pending the arrival of the LUH.
About the P-8I, what Boeing has done is it has retained the Universal Aerial Refuelling Receptacle Slipway Installations (UARRSI) only, meaning only the spaces available in the various bulkheads have been left empty, while the piping, hydraulics & wiring harnesses required for the UARRSI have NOT been installed on the P-8I, since the IN never specified an aerial refuelling capability. Globally, there’s not a single new-generation LRMR/ASW platform that needs to be refuelled in mid-air. The P-3Cs & Tu-142Ms too don’t require such capabilities because the internal fuel capacity is more than enough for a 12-hour flight mission. To sustain a 16-hour flight-mission will require four sets of mission management crew on-board, which is next to impossible.
The Dhruv Mk4 is already SOF-qualified & operational with the IA in J & K.

Impatient said...

I see all these illustrations and not a single functional product. Indian defense journalism is definitely for the patient. Are we talking about 2020 IOC?

Anonymous said...

I like your previous idea of armed forces going for Cheetal right now and then later they can procure HAL LUH.
I favor HAL LUH because its development cost is less and it can also further lower the cost of LCH and Dhruv if the armed forces give the firm order from before as there has to be some components that will be same in all 3 of them or atleast 2 of them, like engine.
There were talks of using the same engine on both LCH and LUH, that will significantly lower the cost. There should also be a naval version planned.

Also HAL is capable of building such a helicopter after Dhruv. Also in the spirit of self reliance and promoting defence sector we should do this.

I really hope MOD doesn't purchase 2 separate design for this program. Either they chose HAL or a foreign vendor.

Bhaswar said...

Prasun Sir,

My question is off topic but I felt compelled to ask.

I was checking the dimensions, weight and range parameters of the AAD Missile which is a part of our Anti-ballistic missile defense shield and which has been tested recently and as far as we are aware tested successfully against a "modified" Prithvi missile. Weighing in at 1200kg, with a length of 7.5 m, a diameter of 0.5 m, a flight ceiling of 30km and a stated SAM range of 150-200Km, why are we not considering its usage as a extremely long ranged SAM? Something akin to the S-300 family of systems. Whether or not it is perfectly suited for its role as a ballistic missile interceptor, the fact that it did indeed successfully intercept a high speed inbound missile and that it is equipped with active radar homing for the terminal phase and mid-course update features, should it not be the perfect indigenous candidate? A candidate for a system that will operate even above the range of the in-development Indo-Israeli LR-SAM slated for the IAF? Is there any possibility of it being used to form such an article or spin offs from the BMD project being used to create such a system?

vishakh said...

Hi

http://www.exelisinc.com/news/pressreleases/Pages/ITT-Exelis-and-Tata-Advanced-Systems-Limited-partner-to-manufacture-Generation-3-night-vision-devices-in-India.aspx

Tata advanced system has formed a alliance with German company for Night Vision Devices .... Is there any purchase from Army for the same ???

This solution would be good as Israel and French Solutions ??

bradshaw said...

Prasun,

Is IAF ready to re-engine the Mig 27M's with AL 55 engines and go in for DARIN-3 upgrades similar to the jaguars ?

In all how many Jaguars will be upgraded to DARIN 3 standars and what is the time line ?


Seems the BEL is unable to supply the NVD with FoM 1700+ and Tata SED is the only oprion available with MoD unless it dilutes its specifications ?

mayan raj said...

hello sir...
Happy makar sankranti...
1.what's the status of multi role medium helicopter ...?
2. Sir what's ur take one tejas mk1 ..?will it enter productn in betwn 2013-2015...?
3.then what will happen to mk 2...?
4. Acc to above doc. It can carry weapons...but what weapon will it carry...?
5. Acc to report amca will fly in 2017...what are presenty going on with r & d of amca..? And how will t 50 differ from pak- fa...?
6. In previous slide i saw a canister launch atgm.. Has drdo really made it..? is it in service..? Then what's the use for ordering spike or javelin...?
7. What r the different r&d going related to atgm...?
8. Which atgm has govt gone for spike or javelin...?and which variant...?

mayan raj said...

will india ever change the helicopter design...? All looks same like dhruv...? Will medium helicopterof which hal is in r&d state will look same like dhruv....?

Anonymous said...

Sir thanks for telling me about TBOs of AL-31FP and F414...can you tell m whats the TBO of M88-2 and AL-31FN and WS-10?

ken said...

sir,
1. the engine doesnt seem to be Shakti turboshafts, and have they started production of Shakti turboshafts in india. what is its future. also is it only going to be a assebly line or complete manufacture also what about Intellectual property

2.is it true that Progress D-18T intellectual properties are to be sold to chinese if such a deal happens what will be its implications to both china and india.

3. is there any plans for developing large bypasss turbofan design in india.

Gessler said...

Hi Prasun,

1) Does the BSF operate any Dhruvs with tricycle-type landing gear?

2) Will BSF also be buying the Rudra helicopter-gunship?

3) Whats the status of the Trichy assault rifle? Has it found acceptance with any armed force?

4) If IA does decide to buy Iron Dome, I suppose India will get the license to build them here, right?

5) How many Iron Dome missiles would IA be looking to procure?

6) Any update on Akash Mk-2? What will be its max range and max altitude?

7) I think Arjun Mk-1 stores upto 44 rounds of ammo, will the ammo-storage capacity of Mk-2 be the same?

Anonymous said...

among all the services, which do you think is the most well prepared and the worst prepared in case of India,china and Pakistan?

which of the services should be given top priority in modernization and why? and where are the Pakistanis investing there money on, and what have they prioritized in developing?

Why the navy is looking for new 120 km missile?

In what scenario does the armed forces of India intend to operate their bombers Tu-22m3 and tu-142 bear? are they for Pakistan specific or for china?

Is there any plan to induct more bombers?

Rahul said...

Hi Prasun , Yesterday an article appeared in Times of India that were fresh proposals by IA of raising a mountain strike corps headquatered in Panagarh. What units will this corps have ? It was also stated that it would have quick reaction elements.

There are plans of raising two infantry brigades . Where will they be deployed ?

What happened to plans of raising three independent armoured brigades consisting of 348 T-90MS ? When will the tanks be ordered ?

Desi media is making a lot of fuss about IAF chief's recent statements. ToI reported that IAF can wage a coventional air war for months now. Did IAF develope new tactics of avoiding MANPADS ?

Does Dhruv ALH have adequate bullet proofing of all its essential components ?

When are you going to post narratives of Snapshots Of DRDO Exhibits At ISC's 'Pride Of India' Expo In Kolkata ?

Unknown said...

Prasun,

What is the the status of the SBTF in Goa/INS HANSA? Is construction complete? Also has the NP-2 (naval fighter variant) flown yet or even conducted ground tests?

Unknown said...

+ is the HSMDs on the LCA the DASH HMDS or TOPSIGHT HMDS? And will the IN use the same HMDS as the IAF varient considering the IN MIG-29Ks already use TOPSIGHTS?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To IMPATIENT: What IOC??? Let the certification of airworthiness (C of A) surface first & then start speculating about IOC & FOC!

BHASWAR: We’ve all been through this debate before. The fact remains that that’s no manned or unmanned airborne platform that will attempt to violate India’s airspace at an altitude of 30-35km. Furthermore, the kinematic performances of TBMs or NLOS-BSMs are totally different from those of manned airborne platforms & therefore the AAD can’t be used in the same way as perhaps the Barak-NG LR-SAM.

To VISHAKH: The JV with Germany-based HARDER DIGITAL (http://harderdigital.com/) is aimed at designing & producing Gen 3+ NVDs for not just the three armed services, but also for the CAPFs. If this happens, then there will be no need for importing NVDs from Israel, France or the US. BEL is opposed to this JV since this will remove the monopoly status that BEL presently enjoys & that too for supplying inferior-quality NVDs. I don’t think the MoD will be able to dilute the performance parameters for the sake of favouring BEL, & even if it does so, each of the three armed services chiefs have now been vested with more financial powers & each of them can per annum procure imported hardware worth US$30 million of their own choice without referring the matter to the Secretary of Defence or the Secretary for Defence Production & Supplies.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BRADSHAW: Re-engining MiG-27Ms with AL-55Is? No way. AL-55I was never meant for the MiG-27M anyway. The option was for using the AL-31F as replacement for existing R-29Bs, but that option has since been turned down by the IAF. DARIN-3 avionics upgrade is for 68 Jaguars by December 2017. The JV with Germany-based HARDER DIGITAL (http://harderdigital.com/) is aimed at designing & producing Gen 3+ NVDs for not just the three armed services, but also for the CAPFs. If this happens, then there will be no need for importing NVDs from Israel, France or the US. BEL is opposed to this JV since this will remove the monopoly status that BEL presently enjoys & that too for supplying inferior-quality NVDs. I don’t think the MoD will be able to dilute the performance parameters for the sake of favouring BEL, & even if it does so, each of the three armed services chiefs have now been vested with more financial powers & each of them can per annum procure imported hardware worth US$30 million of their own choice without referring the matter to the Secretary of Defence or the Secretary for Defence Production & Supplies. Therefore, tough times ahead for BEL & good times ahead for the three armed services.

To MAYAN RAJ: 1) The Mi-17V-5 is the MRMH. HAL will not develop another MRMH. 2) It is already under limited series-production. 3) It is under development. 4) 70mm laser-guided or unguided rockets, 20mm gunpod. 5) Who said that???? 6) That is the CLGM & it is far heavier than the Spike or Javelin. 7) Only the ones I’ve highlighted in the previous thread. MRMH project is a dead-duck now that the IAF is procuring additional Mi-17V-5s.

To Anon@3.08PM: TBO figures for all Western turbofans are similar. TBO for AL-31FN & WS-10B is 1,000 hours.

To KEN: 1) No one is producing the Ardiden-1H/Shakti engines in India. They are only be licence-assembled & contain less than 10% of Made-in-India components. IPR for this engine is owned by SNECMA Moteurs/Turbomeca. 2) Totally untrue. 3) Are you kidding?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: 1) Not to the best of my knowledge. 2) What for? For firing ATGMs against Maoist guerrillas? 3) Not yet. The objective was always to offer it first to the CAPFs. 4) Only licence-assemble the rockets. 5) About 3,000 rounds. 6) Max range will be 37km. Altitude will be same as that of Akash Mk1. 7) Yes.

To Anon@6.01PM: All three are well-prepared for meeting all contingencies from any corner. Force modernisation is a continuous process for all three armed services, but in terms of threat perceptions, the IA & IAF are getting the lion’s share of the annual defence budgets. Pakistan’s Army is investing more on waging counter-insurgency operations & on acquiring the capabilities for waging high-intensity limited war. Who has ever claimed that India has Tu-22M3 or Tu-142 ‘vombers’???

To RAHUL: Firstly, any proposal for raising a Mountain Strike Corps cannot emanate from just the IA, since the IA will be heavily relying on the IAF for tactical & strategic airlift, & for vertical envelopment operations. Looking at the terrain of operations in & around Arunachal Pradesh & Sikkim, there are absolutely no areas of any strategic significance that need to be ‘captured’ in the event of hostilities, since the tyranny of the terrain is such that the defender will always have the upper hand in one’s respective territory. The same goes for areas in & around Uttarakhand & Himachal Pradesh. The only area that has historically been used for launching expeditionary warfare has been the Ladakh/Aksai Chin areas. Quick-Reaction Elements of the IA in the North East will only be Battalion-sized heliborne formations at most. Plans for raising three Independent Armoured Brigades are already in the process of being implemented. There’s adequate number of MBTs that are now available for redeployment with these three Brigades & there’s no need to import brand-new MBTs. IAF’s CAS never said anything about waging conventional warfare with airpower. This is pure ill-informed speculation by the ‘desi’ mass- media. The CAS was making a statement in his capacity as Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee & not as the CAS. MANPADS can be neutralised by warning systems like MAWS, LWS & countermeasures like IR flares. Neither Dhruv nor any other helicopter in the world ever has adequate bullet-proofing.

To UNKNOWN: The SBTF is still under construction. NP-2 is undergoing ground tests. HMDS on all Tejas/LCA (Navy) MRCAs will be the Dash Mk5 (TARGO).

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Those who are interested in listening to the usually crappy questions asked by the 'desi' mass-media to the IA's COAS during his customary pre-Army Day press-briefing may log on to: http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/if-provoked-we-will-retaliate-says-army-chief-gen-bikram-singh/261753?hp&video-featured

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Here's another conspiracy theory doing the rounds: A New Foreign Military Intelligence (GRU) report circulating in the Kremlin today is saying that United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was injured, and a top US Navy Seal Commander killed, when their C-12 Huron military passenger and transport aircraft crashed landed nearly 3 weeks ago in the Iranian city of Ahvaz near the Iraqi border. Iranian intelligence agents quoted in this GRU report confirm that the C-12 Huron aircraft is still in their possession in Ahvaz, but will only admit that the plane was “forced to land because of technical problems”. The US Navy Seal member reported killed in this bizarre incident, this report says, was indentified as Commander Job W. Price who as a leader of this highly specialized American Special Forces unit protects high-ranking diplomats traveling in Middle Eastern and Asian combat zones. Curiously, US media reports on Commander Price’s death say it being investigated as a possible suicide as he died from what the American Defense Department describes as “a non-combat related injury”. Equally as curious, US media reports state that Secretary Clinton will return to work next week after her having suffered what they describe as a “nasty bout with stomach flu” and a “concussion” which have kept her missing from public view the past three weeks. This GRU report, however, states that US military flight logs recorded by Russian air and space forces confirm that Commander Price, and other members of US Navy SealTeam 4, left their base in Urozgan Province, Afghanistan on a flight to US Naval Support Activity Bahrain where they met up with Secretary Clinton and all of them transferred to the C-12 Huron that began a flight path to Baghdad, Iraq. Within minutes of leaving Bahrain airspace, this report says, the C-12 Huron carrying Secretary Clinton and her US Navy Seal protectors, “without notice,” deviated from their assigned flight path heading, instead, directly towards Iran’s Ahwaz International Airport where, coincidentally, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had previously landed on an “unscheduled” visit. Important to note, GRU analysts say in this report, was that when the C-12 Huron entered into Iranian airspace neither American nor Iran air force units responded, clearly indicating that this secret mission was sanctioned. Upon the C-12 Huron landing at Ahwaz, however, this report says it encountered “extreme turbulence” causing it to leave the runway where its main landing gear then collapsed causing it to crash. Within seconds of the C-12 Huron crashing, this report continues, Iranian emergency and security personal responded, freeing the victims, including Secretary Clinton who was reportedly unconscious and “bleeding profusely.” After emergency aid was given, GRU agents stationed in Iran state that another US military flight was dispatched from Bahrain to Ahwaz which evacuated all of those wounded and killed in the crash, including Secretary Clinton. Critical to note, Russian medical experts further state in this report, is that the timeline from when Secretary Clinton was first severely injured, to when the news of her true condition was first released, suggest a “planned effort” on the part of the Obama regime to manage the true facts surrounding her health, and here eventual death, or recovery. If Secretary Clinton is able to fully recover, the GRU says, it is “within the realm of possibility” as modern medical advances treating TBI’s has advanced significantly, and no better care for such head injuries exists in the world outside of the US military medical establishment who have treated hundreds of thousands of similar cases in over decade of war. What remains unknown, and which this report does not speculate upon, is to why the American people are still not allowed to know why Secretary Clinton was sent to Iran to begin with, and why the true state of her health is still being kept secret?

Gessler said...

Sir you have still not given the narrative for the ISC 2013 thread...there's lots of stuff that needs to be explained.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Like what? Most of the posters are all self-explanatory.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Interesting Reads:
http://week.manoramaonline.com/cgi-bin/MMONLine.dll/portal/ep/theWeekContent.do?contentId=13226895&programId=1073755753&tabId=13&BV_ID=@@@&categoryId=-193681

http://week.manoramaonline.com/cgi-bin/MMONLine.dll/portal/ep/theWeekContent.do?contentId=13226896&programId=1073755753&tabId=13&BV_ID=@@@&categoryId=-193681

Bhaswar said...

Prasun Sir,

I defer to your superior knowledge on the matter. But, I would still like to say- If we can create an article like the AAD, that is to say that it has a range of 150-200kms and the fact that it does have mid-course update and active seeker technology then can we not use this to develop another SAM specifically suited against aircrafts? The AAD itself is not meant for the role but it still provides the essential technologies required to create such a SAM, no? Not to mention that coupled with a SAM version of the recently successful Astra (successful so far) or the Akash SAM and the rnage appropriate radar systems which we already have in hand, would it not lead to the genesis of an all round SAM system close to the S-300? A system which would work in tandem with the IAF's LR-SAM? Or am I missing something? Lastly even if such a plan is unlikely to ever develop purely from a speculative view point would our success with the AAD and the availability of the required radar systems enable us to create a SAM system comparable to the S-300 within a decade or so IF WE CHOSE TO?

Anonymous said...

"Firstly, any proposal for raising a Mountain Strike Corps cannot emanate from just the IA, since the IA will be heavily relying on the IAF for tactical & strategic airlift, & for vertical envelopment operations."
Oh its not. The proposal from IA was rejected by everyone last year. The recommendations were try to reduce the cost as its way too expensive and it should be a joint tri-service proposal (i don't know where IN comes in here ?). The proposal was given the highest priority by the three service chiefs and then a few days back Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, ACM Browne submitted a revised report. Yes, it was fast but everone is understanding the importance of this corps.
The new proposal include both IA and IAF and may be IN too because they are stressing on the fact that this is a tri-service proposal but i don't understand IN's role here.

Anonymous said...

"There’s adequate number of MBTs that are now available for redeployment with these three Brigades & there’s no need to import brand-new MBTs."
Are u talking about NE ? If yes then which MBT's r there(t90,t72) ? How many are there ?

When is IA gonna purchase tank destroyer/light MBTs ? How many will be purchased ? Who is the favorite ? Is RFP/RFI out ? If yes hen are the trials ?

Anonymous said...

"Who has ever claimed that India has Tu-22M3 or Tu-142 ‘vombers’???"


source Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-142

//The Indian Naval Air Arm had eight Tu-142MKEs in service as of December 2010, based at INS Rajali, Arakkonam.//

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-22M

//Indian Navy leased four aircraft beginning in 2001//

this is what the Wikipedia says about the Tu-142 and Tu-22M3.

Anyway, will the Indian navy be able to achieve a true blue water naval capabilities by 2021? what all it still needs to do for that?

there are a certain class of ships called 'cruiser', which are heavier than destroyer and smaller compared to battle ship.while the most powerful navies (US and Russia) operate these class of ships, is there any scope in the Indian navy for designing and building these class of ships. Our most potent ships are just the destroyers, while big powers have gone for cruiser and battleships-though none battle ships are in service to day- the Indian navy has not taken a big role,do the Chinese have any plans in building the cruisers?

raw13 said...

Child A hits child B making him bleed. Child B grits his teeth keeps quite and at a time of his choosing smacks child A on the nose, making him bleed, bringing tears to his eyes. Child A stays quite for a a while feeling shocked not knowing what happened. Child A's natural tendencies rise to the surface and he starts crying and swearing loudly, hoping that the adults will intervene and seeing his plight will side with him as he is crying uncontrollably and shaking with fear. The adults look disinterested, they say and do nothing, making child A cry even louder!!! What the child A has not realised is that the adults were watching all along and he no longer has any credability with them. They know he is a bully but they are confident child B knows how to take care of himself and has much higher pain tolerance.

Any parent who has childrens recognises the above. :-) :-) :-)

NB. Remember child B can and has the will to make child A bleed forever. He takes a certain pleasure in bringing child A to his knees.

Abhijit said...

Looks like Pak is in deep mess. arrest orders of Rental raja given by pak SC, Governor`s rule in Baluchistan, killings of shia. bdw why so much of publicity over recent killings since both countries are not clean when it comes to beheading this has been going on since 1990`s.And what cheap and vulgar comments by Sushma Swaraj. Everyone knows what BJP did when Sepoy of Maratha LI was beheaded and what happened in 2002.

Gessler said...

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/multipletarget-missiles-to-redefine-warfare/article4305951.ece

Some concept like CVS401-Perseus, I presume?

Any comments? In what types of missiles can India possibly apply this tech?

sntata said...

Dear Prasun,
Which engine is going to power HAL's LUH? Is it the Snecma-HAL Shakti engine or is there going to be an open tender for the engine?

mayan raj said...

1.whats going on with finsas..?any further develpements..?
2. Read this http://hal-india.com/futureproducts/products.asp.. The imrh... That's what i am asking about ?

Anonymous said...

@raw13 said...
//"Child A hits child B making him bleed. Child B grits his teeth keeps quite and at a time of his choosing smacks child A on the nose, making him bleed, bringing tears to his eyes. Child A stays quite for a a while feeling shocked not knowing what happened. Child A's natural tendencies rise to the surface and he starts crying and swearing loudly, hoping that the adults will intervene and seeing his plight will side with him as he is crying uncontrollably and shaking with fear. The adults look disinterested, they say and do nothing, making child A cry even louder!!! What the child A has not realised is that the adults were watching all along and he no longer has any credability with them. They know he is a bully but they are confident child B knows how to take care of himself and has much higher pain tolerance.
NB. Remember child B can and has the will to make child A bleed forever. He takes a certain pleasure in bringing child A to his knees"//


it would be better if you kids stay away from the computer and watch some cartoons;actually, it would be better if your entire action does this, rather than talking out of their ass.As to talk of 'credibility', count how many allies you have and how many around the world trust the pure words of the denizens of the land of 'pure'.

bleed forever???..all along history, this kind of words were used by brainless kids and ball-less chickens , it doesn't surprise me to see you doing this kind of talk here. sharpen those brain cells, else you will become a laughing stock in the world,and not surprisingly ,your entire nation is already a laughing stock in the world.

your entire nation is falling apart, and you talk here of 'bleeding forever', this shows that the stupidity of Pakistanis has no limits, anyway,you are a Pakistani-and by that, born losers and fools, it reminds me of how the Pakistani news papers were reporting that they were winning the war against India in 1971,all the while the Pakistani troops were running trying to save their ass from getting bombed, Pakistanis on one side believed that they were winning while on the other side, Pakistanis were surrendering, this is the great Pakistan for you.so continue to ride the high horse and live in denial till few more thousand and thousands are massacred.

do your self and your nation a favor--grow up and see the reality, you have been ranked as a 'failed state' since 3 to 4 years, first, get rid of that tag and than we can talk of power play.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Firstly, the RF seekers for both the AAD & PAD are imported from Russia & were not developed indigenously. Secondly, & most importantly, what would be the specific airborne targets that such LR-SAMs are to engage from an Indian standpoint? Where is the threat to India coming from that requires solutions like S-300?

To Anon@8.07AM: The only ones that are speculating about the importance of the MSC is the ‘desi’ mass-media & all they’ve managed to do is further confuse the gullible. The so-called revised report in fact states exactly what I had stated above yesterday.

To Anon@8.11AM: There’s already an armoured regment of T-72M1s in the north-east & another one is due there along with a mechanised infantry battalion & together this will constitute the new independent armoured brigade. There are no concrete plans at present for procuring either tank destroyers or light tanks.

To Anon@8.31AM: Since when has Wikipedia become a trusted source of information??? The Tu-142M is a LRMR/ASW aircraft, not a bomber. The IN is already a blue-water navy. If it wasn’t, then it wouldn’t be able to have been an active participant in anti-piracy patrols around the Horn of Africa since 2008.

To RAW13: Regarding a query you had posted in a previous thread about Pakistan’s WMD inventory, what the ill-informed Western analysts fail to realise is that just like India’s case, Pakistan’s WMD arsenals are all in a disassembled state in peacetime & are spread throughout the country & therefore the chances of any unauthorised person or party having access to a fully-assembled n-weapon are nil.

To ABHIJIT: Yes, Pakistan is indeed in a deep mess of its own creation & the last thing India ought to do is stoke the flames & become provocative. As the COAS of the IA himself said yesterday, the Govt of India through the MoD has already approved the rules of engagement (in terms of retaliation) & suffice to say that the IA is more than capable of taking care of its own. The last thing anyone wants is the kind of rants emanating from the BJP/NDA, because it was this very party/alliance that made a fool out of itself during OP Parakram & far worse, let go of a golden, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity in mid-1999 by preventing the IA & IAF from crossing the LoC, thereby losing the only opportunity to do a ‘reverse Kargil’.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: Not exactly. This news-report is in fact confirmation of my earlier statement about the ADE, DARE & GTRE joining forces to develop a ‘mother vehicle’ i.e. a MALE-UAV powered by Laghu Shakthi turbofans that can carry up to four PGMs equipped with either MMW seekers or IIR seekers i.e. an extended-range HELINA like the Brimstone PGM. That’s why use will be made of a modified Lakshaya RPV for technology demonstration purposes. This was confirmed to me by DRDO officials during the DRDO expo in Kolkata two weeks ago. Cost-wise, it is far far cheaper to use a re-usable aerial delivery vehicle like a MALE-UAV to deliver such PGMs, instead of developing a rather expensive turbofan-powered mother vehicle/missile that will not be reusable.

To SNTATA: From both the brochures & HAL’s e-newsletter, it is obvious that the LUH’s design has been frozen, airframe fabrication has commenced & the gearbox’s design has been frozen & its fabrication has commenced, all this meaning that a version of the Ardiden-1H/Shakti engine has already been selected & it is now too late to select a new engine.

To MAYAN RAJ: 1) Nothing new. 2) That webpage was created in early 2011 & since then a lot of developments have taken place, like the IN preferring MRHs of foreign design & the IAF going for large-scale procurements of the Mi-17V-5. Consequently, there’s no domestic market left for the IMRH, meaning it is futile to develop the IMRH.

mayan raj said...

@Anonymous...
Why to give these fucking shitlers so much attention,....? Raw13 are those peoples who dont know that they have always been a citizen of a country.... Where the goal of every citizen is to become a terrorist or an isi agent..... Who don't even spare there mother land...From terrorising.... I think he dont knows that they have been defeated 4 time in wars.... And every time when his country has intented to terrorise its neighbours...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To MAYAN RAJ: Chill out man....shit happens in this world. Things won't get any better with your rising BP. Take it easy.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

What about this man - Dr. Tahirul Qadri. Whose agent is he? Iran, Pervez Musharraf, Army, Canada or Zionist.

Anonymous said...

// "The IN is already a blue-water navy. If it wasn’t, then it wouldn’t be able to have been an active participant in anti-piracy patrols around the Horn of Africa since 2008. "//

let me put it this way, i was talking on technological terms, we have built ships that are good at fighting in high seas, but what about ships that do the work of intelligence gathering like the French ship Dupuy de Lôme (A759) [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dupuy_de_L%C3%B4me_(A759) ] and the ships that we have built are hardly indigenous.We just have the money and some decent skills to build ships, but the true blue water navies like the Russian,American, french etc are masters in demonstrating new technologies at sea,we just follow their footsteps, until India does something like these nations have done, we are not a true blue water navy. And our submarines are shabby compared to what they(the big powers) operate.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA 13: He’s just a Barelvi rabble-rouser of dual citizenship (of Canada & Pakistan) who wants to implement the Bangladesh model of ‘interim government’, supposedly to transform the political landscape by getting rid of the 500-odd ruling-class families made up of feudals, jagirdarsm makhdooms & vaderas & ushering in his own brand of political Islam (the so-called revolution) based on a classless society whose foundation is Article 62 (of Pakistan’s Constitution), which was a gift to Pakistan by the ‘farishton ka farishta’—the late Gen Zia-ul-Haq, who was known as a person who could never lie—until it was discovered after his assassination that he had never even filed his annual income tax returns from 1960 till 1988! What Article 62 states is that Pakistan will be governed according to the tenets of Islam. This then raises a moot point: who is a good-enough Muslim to rule & who is a bad Muslim & who should adjudicate on this matter & how much righteous & truthful he ought to be? This question could not even be answered by the Justice Munir Commission 30 years ago in Pakistan & it remains unresolved till this day. Furthermore, will Article 62 also be applied in equal measure on the country’s Judiciary, bureaucracy & the armed forces & not just on politicians? Consequently, what you have today is uncontrolled sectarian violence & religious intolerance in each of Pakistan’s four existing provinces, & the principal political parties all possessing their own provincial death-squads to settle scores, which is what’s causing bloodbaths in urbanised areas like Karachi, Quetta & Peshawar. But to answer your question about who his financial sponsors may be, efforts are still on to trace the money-trail & so far all that has emerged is that he’s receiving funds channeled through Dubai.

To Anon@11.47PM: ELINT/SIGINT collection today is done by a variety of naval platforms (airborne, surface-based & underwater). The term ‘blue water’ is used to describe a navy’s operational capabilities, & not a country’s military-industrial capabilities.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Oh! So it is basically a Barelvi revolution against the Deobandi establishment. Thanx for the enlightening answer. Obviously the funding sources too have to be good.

mahawat singh said...

hello sir,
Which are the best lhd for IN...? Is the combat uniform of army being changed...?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA 13: As for funding sources....am presently monitoring the various Pakistani TV current-affairs discussions & one of them is now claiming to try to connect the dots between this fella & increasing incidents of cross-firings along that portion of the LoC in Jammu since last December! Next will come the claim that this fella is sponsored by R & AW!!!

To MAHAWAT SINGH: All the offers of LPH designs from France, Germany, Italy & South Korea are equally good. Am not aware of any changes in IA's combat uniforms.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Yes! His bitterest enemies will try to associate him with R&AW.

Anonymous said...

@ Mr Ra13: It would do the world a great good to have the deobandi nation to become a naasbandhi nation!No more fools bred to carry on stupidity ;)

Gessler said...

Hi sorry my above comment has spelling mistakes etc. so I removed it.

-->

Prasun, please read this -

Tata 12x12 Prahaar Missile System:
Tata Motors Ltd has developed an indigenous high mobility, all-terrain and all-wheel
drive, Tata LPTA 5252-12 X12 vehicle, specifically for missile launcher cum carrier
applications like integration of Prahar, BrahMos and Nirbhay Missiles, in close
coordination with R&DE – DRDO.

^^The first para of the Prahaar missile carrier section on Page 1 of this PDF file from Tata Motors -

http://tatamotors.com/pdf/defence-expo-2012-background-note.pdf

Is that credible? I haven't heard of BrahMos missiles on Tata trucks and I think you've said there won't be any GLCM variant of Nirbhay??

Anonymous said...

"let me put it this way, i was talking on technological terms, we have built ships that are good at fighting in high seas, but what about ships that do the work of intelligence gathering like the French ship Dupuy de Lôme (A759) [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dupuy_de_L%C3%B4me_(A759) ] and the ships that we have built are hardly indigenous"
I don't think India has such a vessel and i doubt IN needs it in todays world. Todays modern multi -mission frigates and destroyers have sensors and radars can do alot of their jobs.
India can easily build such ship considering the type of partnership we have with Israel, France and Russia.

"The IN is already a blue-water navy. If it wasn’t, then it wouldn’t be able to have been an active participant in anti-piracy patrols around the Horn of Africa since 2008. "
First of all i don't don't think IN is a blue water navy, it aspires to be one. Second just because IN is doing anti-piracy operations in Horn of africa doesn't mean IN is blue-waTER NAVY. This only means IN has good relationship with South African Navy and they replenishment tankers, so does more than dozen other nations and that doesn't mean they are also blue water navy.

"This news-report is in fact confirmation of my earlier statement about the ADE, DARE & GTRE joining forces to develop a ‘mother vehicle’ i.e. a MALE-UAV"
Common, the guy is clearly saying its a missile. If you wanna compare it to something, you can say they are trying to build MIRV for smaller missiles. ALthough nice and if they will be able to bring back the mother missile it would drastically reduce the operational cost and this is the theory suggested by our great President Dr. Kalam a few years ago.

You are right that drdo is building Laghu Shakti but they are also building naval version of tejas and a version that will power trains. DRDO is just trying to justify the expenditure from labs like GTRE.

Also we all want you to be correct. We all want drdo to build a turbofan powered UCAV may be based on Rustam platform. But the fact is you and all of us know, nothing like this is sanctioned so far or requested by armed forces. By 2015 we might be able to get Global Hawk like UAVs which are HALE UAVs, i don't think drdo is anywhere close to beating that beast.

" This was confirmed to me by DRDO officials during the DRDO expo in Kolkata two weeks ago."
Oh thats great news. But the article is talking about missile and its a missile. May be they are also building a UAV just like you said and they can incorporate things from this missile project into that UAV.

mahawat singh said...

1.whats the status of indian navy 56 mrh tender...? Scraped again or what...??
2. In the luh willall the avionics made indigeneously...??
3. I had reqd some where that india and israel are codeveloping a radar for tejas mk 2 ,some sams , and some weapons for mk2....what are there status..??

Anonymous said...

"Firstly, the RF seekers for both the AAD & PAD are imported from Russia & were not developed indigenously."
Here's good news, actually its not new news but still. DRDO have started building seeker. We have build a MMW and a RF seeker. We have partnership with israel for this and because of our active missile program, our government has now found out the importance of seeker technology and how critical it is(I am not saying AAD/PAD seeker are indian made).

I saw the video link of IA chief interview provided by you on NDTV.
The two things that i noticed is :

1) You are right, the questions asked by journalists were same and useless. I don't think any one them understood the meaning of tactical lelvel operation otherwise why would they keep on asking the same question.

2) I think the Nyoma incident has really made everyone worried and thats why IA chief is talking alot about morale and retaliation and that too left to the commanders near the LOC. or he is the chief who really understands the soldiers problems and wants to do something about it.

Prasun you read about articles related to Air chiefs statement that Kargil war is why he made such a statement ?
I mean what a piece of shit. I read a novel written by a soldier nearly 8 years ago and what he wrote showed that Kargil was a very big failure from tactical or operational stand point. The inter-service coordination was a mess. It was like we are seeing the Normandy operation just instead of see we are fighting in Himalayas. Kargil was way difficult than Normandy.
Only thing that Kargil showed is that we can rely on our soldiers even if our Generals are a bunch of fools and behave like they never fought a war in their life.

Anonymous said...


@Prasun K. Sengupta

//"To RAW13: Regarding a query you had posted in a previous thread about Pakistan’s WMD inventory, what the ill-informed Western analysts fail to realise is that just like India’s case, Pakistan’s WMD arsenals are all in a disassembled state in peacetime & are spread throughout the country & therefore the chances of any unauthorised person or party having access to a fully-assembled n-weapon are nil."//

right,but the concern raised by the west has another dimension to it,everyone knows that no mullah can walk into the nuclear complex and walk away with a nuclear missile,the other dimension is that the rogue elements within the army or the forces guarding nuclear materials may end up do the bad job which the mullahs want to do.

The radicalism has not just caught up with the people.many indicators have already pointed that radicalism has also crept in the state defense institutions, recent attacks on so called strategic bases were carried out by an 'insider' help, these 'insiders' are nothing but radicals holding the state offices.Clearly, no one knows to what extent the radicalism has crept in, but everyone knows that it exists in the armed forces.

The point here is,what if the nuclear warhead is smuggled out?...no one is expecting the nuclear missile to be launched from Pakistan, even the Mullahs know that this cannot be done, but, what can be done is, smuggle only the warhead to other unstable or radicals middle eastern countries which hold Russian or other ballistic missiles, we are already hearing about the Russian missiles in Syria falling into hands of the opposition forces,and the opposition forces are know to include AL-Qaeda and other terrorists fighters in to it.

once the warhead is in the hands of the Mullahs, the only thing they will do is, try to smuggle it out of Pakistan as fast as possible.They cannot hide it in Pakistan and they cannot keep it under there control forever in Pakistan, Pakistan army is strong enough and they will easily get back the warhead,but once smuggled out, the Pakistanis will be powerless, and other middle eastern nations are unstable and untrustworthy, their govts have hardly any control over their nations, and this is why we saw the Arab spring, what the mullahs need is an highly unstable environment ripe with civil war, high on Islamic delusional glory theories, hatred for west etc, and many middle eastern countries match the above criteria, the mullahs will take this warhead and hide it there, they will even wait for years for the right opportunity to strike, on the other hand, the infrastructure is already there for them to strike if they wish to strike as soon as they want, add to this, Pakistani missiles are not indigenous, they are based on north Korean and other missiles like soviet scud, which have been proliferated through out the world, and this is well known fact,and these missile technologies have been proliferated to many rogue nations, or can be easily proliferated, the warhead can be easily assembled to missile which hold resemblance to Pakistani missiles, and there many missiles which hold this resemblance, the mullahs don't necessarily have to look to Pakistani missiles for carrying the warhead, the missile technology has already reached the door step of many rogue states. And this particular scenario -among many-is threat even to India and to west.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
According to Delloite, GOI is going to increase the FDI level from 26 to 49% this year. Is there any news regarding this ?

Anonymous said...

Dear Prasun

hi..as you have mentioned in your blog various times that Pakistans Nuclear Arsenal is scattered across the country and that its delivery is in the executive control and command of China (pls excuse for any inadvertent commission or omission)..the indian policy planners must surely be knowing of this..then how come we are bogged down by the frequent rattling from Pakistan that in case of a war they would use their nuclear arsenal against us..why does india fear their arsenal and hence does not stage any proactive military measures against terrorist targets in PoK and other parts of Pakistan?? Pls inform..thanks a lot

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous 8:05 AM
//"I don't think India has such a vessel and i doubt IN needs it in todays world. Todays modern multi -mission frigates and destroyers have sensors and radars can do alot of their jobs.
India can easily build such ship considering the type of partnership we have with Israel, France and Russia."//

India does not possess such a vessel;who would not want to have a ship that can pickup communication signals beyond enemy lines, there is not much info on this ship, much of it will be classified,i don't think our frigates or destroyers have the ability to do the same job which this ship does, for a simple reason that the french navy, even while having more potent ships than our frigates and destroyers, have yet opted to design and build this ship. And in no way it is an obsolete technology, it was commissioned in 2006,just 7 years back.

India can build this kind of ship, but it will not be able to do it alone, and whether India will build it or not will depend on the wishes of our partners, that is, whether they agree to share the crucial technologies.IF they refuse to share technology,India cannot build such kind of ships.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

To: Anon@January 16, 2013 at 5:09 AM

Good and realistic comparison.

Gessler said...

Sir the first IAF C-17A Globemaster-III has flown.

Has any exact date been fixed for delivery to India? I hard they'll be based at Hindon AFB, same place where C-130J-30s re presently based.

How far has the option for follow-on orders come? I think we would go for upto 26 such aircraft in the overall.

Until when will IL-76MDs remin in IAF service?

Anonymous said...

Prasun sir,

1. Does the Skyward IRST have QWIP technology?

2. Will Tejas Mk-2 ultimately have indigenous AESA radar?

3. Are any Israeli IRST being considered for Tejas Mk-2?

4. Will the PDV interceptor be comparable to THAAD capability-wise?

5. How many times has Prahaar NLOS-BSM been tested so far?

6. How many S-5 type SSBNs will IN buy? 3 or 4?

7. Ive heard you saying Tejas Mk-2 will have frameless canopy, can we use the technology and know-how generated in R&D of this project to make similar canopies for FGFA, Super-MKI and Rafale?

8. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-China-agree-to-hold-joint-military-operations/articleshow/18025957.cms

any comments^^ ?

Sujoy Majumdar said...

Prasun Da ,

Does the IA still train US special forces in Mizoram ? Does that include the SEAL forces as well ? I once read in a North eastern daily that the jungle warfare school in Mizoram was designed with inputs from Vietnam but once the Vietnamese found out that US special forces are being trained they stopped co-operating .

Regards,
Sujoy

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: Why are you so surprised? After all, all that the press-release states is that the LPTA-5252 is capable of acting as TEL for the guided-missile systems you’ve mentioned. Why are you assuming that “is capable of” means the same as “has been ordered”? In fact, to date no firm orders have been placed for even the Prahaar NLOS-BSM’s TEL, while replacement new-build MALs for BrahMos-1 Blocks2/3 will be sought through a global tendering process as per guidelines laid down by the MoD’s Defence Procurement Procedures (DPP) guidelines. The TEL being proposed for Nirbhay is for ground-launched experimental test-firings of the projected warship-launched/conventionally armed version. The C-17As should begin arriving in India by this March. IL-76MDs can remain in service until 2020.

To Anon@8.05AM: Why are you assuming that the vessel Dupuy de Lôme (A759) is only for intelligence-gathering? It is in fact a vessel for missile telemetry tracking & both the IN & PLA Navy already have such vessels. IN has been a blue water navy since 1971, a fact that has been officially recognised in writing by the official naval literature of all major navies of the world. And the guy who is saying that the unmanned air vehicle is a missile was the very same guy who had claimed that the Nirbhay cruise missile would be turboprop-powered! Still wanna believe all that crap that he has been writing to date??? If it was really technologically possible to make re-usuable guided missiles, then by now they would have proliferated worldwide, especially of US- & European origins. And Dr Kalam nebver used the ‘term’ missile to describe such weapons, but he actually used the term ‘reusable air vehicles’. Do check out his original presentations for proof.

To MAHAWAT SINGH: 1) ALL PENDING PROCUREMENT DECISIONS for this fiscal year have been DEEFERRED till the next fiscal due to the urgent need for controlling the already highly bloated budget deficit. 2) Are you kidding? More than 50% of on-board avionics suite will be imported. 3) That’s not true. Only active IIR seekers are being co-developed for AD-1 & AD-2 endo-atmospheric interceptors. RF seekers for Barak-2 are wholly imported.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.20AM: 1) Both MMW & RF seekers are still laboratory-level experimental models & are still years away from entering production, since neither Israel nor Russia are helping India in this matter in any manner. 2) On the other hand, the X-band SAR seekers are nearer to entering production for both the Prahaar NLOS-BSM & Nirbhay cruise missile family.

To Anon@10.06AM: Your proposition ASSUMES that a nuclear warhead is in a fully assembled state. In fact, just like in India, Pakistan’s nuclear warheads too are kept in a disassembled state, with each component having its own permissive action link (PAL) for safety purposes. Therefore, the technology & expertise reqd to assemble a fully functional n-warhead is beyond the reach of any unauthorised personnel.

To Anon@10.44AM: For which sector?

To Anon@10.55AM: It is not about being rattled or needled by any form of nuclear sabre-rattling. In fact, it is about controlling the escalation from limited high-intensity conflict to an all-out no-holds-barred war. The civilian & military decision-makers of India fully understand this today, but back in 1999 & 2002 the civilian decision-makers were clueless & were unwilling to accept the sound military advice given by the three armed services chiefs of India at that time. The point to remember is that no amount of nuclear sabre-rattling deterred the IA & IAF in mid-1999 from escalating the conflict through Op Vijay & OP Safed Sagar within a limited high-intensity war paradigm & it was for India’s political decision-makers to understand this fact & authorise the IA & IAF to undertake a ‘reverse-Kargil’ campaign as an act of self-defence in order to redraw the LoC to India’s strategic advantage & afford greater tactical depth to certain defensive IA positions along the LoC’s sections above & below the Pir Panjal range. In fact, many Pakistan Army analysts have themselves wondered aloud what kept the IA & IAF severely constraint when India had all the moral & operational excuses reqd for launching such a limited offensive campaign for at least another month. Some of these analysts have even stated that this was an excellent moment to launch even an expeditionary campaign aimed at deploying an IA Para Brigade in or around Skardu.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.65PM: 1) Yes. 2) By 2025, perhaps. 3) There are no IRSTs of Israeli origin. 4) Yes. 5) Only once. 6) Only 2 have been budgeted for thus far: S-5 & S-6. 7) For FGFA only. 8) This was the 2nd ground-breaking meeting to be held in 3 months between the two sides, the earlier one being NSA Shiv Shankar Menon’s meeting in Beijing late last year immediately after the new Chinese leadership took over. At that time, the NSA was the FIRST foreign official to have been invited to Beijing to be briefed extensively about China’s new ‘Look West’ foreign policy. The Defence Secretary’s meeting this time, it must be noted, was held at the Office of the Central Military Commission (CMC), which also was a first, since all such meetings previously had been held at China’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) & with only MND officials. In terms of command-and-control hierarchy, the CMC is above & more powerful than the MND. This clearly indicates that China-India bilateral dialogues & negotiations have just undergone a decisive notch above & something positive is clearly brewing between the two countries.

To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: The US Army Rangers that have been to CIJWS in Mizoram are not exactly special forces. Nor was the CIJWS originally designed with any Vietnamese inputs. What was done in the previous decade was that certain courses were formulated with Vietnam’s inputs on guerrilla/irregular warfare conducted over mountainous terrain. When the US Army’s Special Operations Groups first wanted to gain expertise in jungle-based guerrilla warfare in the late 1950s, they first approached the British & consequently sent their personnel to what was then Malaya to receive hands-on training from the special operations units of the Brits (& their Gurkha Rifles detachments), Aussies & Kiwis.

F said...

Charlie Beckworth - the creator of Delta - mentions undergoing a traning stint in Malaya [in the 1960's], in his book. Years later, a detachment of Green Berets also went to Kota Tinggi for jungle training.

Prasun,

If a particular country buys Mil-17s from either Ulan Ude or Kazan via Rosoboronexport, when it comes to ordering spares later, can they order directly from either one of the OEMs or do they have to go through Rosoboronexport?

When a global tender is issued, how exactly is it sent to the various companies that are interested in tendering thier products/services? In hard copy to local agents or directly to the company [wherever they are located] via courier or by fax/E-mail?

Which comes first, a RFI or a RFP?

Something you'll be interested in - training for ANA Mil-17 crews in presently being conducted in the Czech Republic and they have a full mission simulator.

BTW, Dassault has taken full pages ads for the Rafale in the STAR. And local sources report that the Malaysian government has decided to sign for AEWs before the MRCA deal.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To FARIS: 1) One deals with Rosoboronexport State Corp only for military products, i.e. military versions of Mi-17 family bought by a foreign military customer. In that case, all spares too will have to be obtained from either Rosoboronexport or a JV company that is set up in the customer’s country between Rosoboronexport & its local business partners. 2) In case the Mi-17 version acquired is by a civilian private customer, then all spares can be procured directly from the OEM (either Kazan or Ulan-Ude). 3) Whenever global tenders are issued, then a hard-copy of the original tender documents has to be bought by those parties (either OEMs or their authorised agents) that are interested in bidding. Documents are always collected in person, & are never relayed or received or released by any other means. 4) RFI comes first, followed by RFPs. There are presently several low-cost full-motion simulators for Mi-17s available. 5) Procuring platforms like Saab 2000 AEW & CS first makes sense since this platform is concurrently capable of both AEW & C as well as maritime surveillance. 6) Both Rafale & EF-2000 will be far too expensive for the RMAF. The best bet is still the Saab Gripen NG from a political standpoint. From a logical standpoint, however, priority ought to be given to procuring six additional Su-30MKMs in order to have two full-strength squadrons equipped with this aircraft--something the RMAF has long desired.

F said...

Thank you for your input Prasun.

From a logistical and practical viewpoint surely the Super Hornet makes more sense than the MKM. The Super Hornet shares commonality with the 'D', it uses the same ground support equipment and the same ordnance. Also, product support via FMS is far superior to anything the Russians can offer. Another point to consider is that Malaysia's closest defence partner - Australia - is a Super Hornet operator.

It is no secret that if the RMAF had its way it would go for the Super Hornet and not anything else. My opinion is even though the Gripen is the only contender that Malaysia can afford - unless funds are allocated from a special budget - that Thailand's selection of the Gripen will be a negative point for SAAB, with regards to Malaysia. Why is the Gripen NG the best bet from a political viewpoint? As Malaysia has improved its relations with Uncle Sam and welcomes the U.S shift to the Pacific Region, wouldn't the Super Hornet also be politically ideal?

that the government

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To FARIS: The reqmt for an additional six Su-30MKMs is meant for having 12 aircraft per squadron, & has nothing to do with the projected MRCA reqmt. What is not being noted by most bloggers within & outside Malaysia is that the RMAF wants a light-MRCA & not a medium-MRCA. This has been made amply clear to all by the present Panglima of TUDM. But marketers being what they are, they will fall head-over-heals to make their offers as enticing as possible on paper & there will be opportunists who will try to cash in on greed & successfully elicit consultancy contracts with all-expenses-paid golfing junkets, corporate sponsorships for TUDM’s events like golf tournaments, open-houses, etc & of course the great biennial milking of the cow during LIMA. However, the writing on the wall has always then there for all to read: first consolidate what one has already acquired; & second, be realistic in terms of new procurements since the days of high economic growth rates for most Southeast Asian countries are over & this will remain so for the next five years at least. Consequently, this is what emerges:
1) F/A-18E/F, EF-2000 & Rafale are all M-MRCAs & therefore do not fit the RMAF’s reqmts. The chance to acquire the Super Hornet was PERMANENTLY lost when the decision was made to procure the Su-30MKMs.
2) The only two viable light-MRCAs available are the JAS-39 Gripen-NG & JF-17 Thunder, and between these two only a fool will opt for the JF-17.
3) In terms of through-life product-support for Su-30MKMs, things are far more better than they were three years ago since the depot-level MRO facilities for Su-30MKI are already coming on-line at HAL’s Nashik facility (which now also has a bonded warehouse for stockpiling all rotables & consumables to be delivered within 24 hours to any customer) & this is also the reason why the TNI-AU too has discarded China’s CATIC option & is eager to work with HAL.
4) RTAF’s procurement of JAS-39C/D & Saab 340 AEW & CS will not have any negative influence over Malaysia’s decision to procure Saab 2000 AEW & CS & Gripen-NG. To even dream about any perceived negative influence is naïve at best & mischievous at worst.
5) The issue of Malaysia improving its relations with Uncle Sam was, is & will always be a non-issue since bilateral relations between the Malaysia & the US had never worsened in the first place. Malaysia can never afford to get on the wrong side of Uncle Sam, period.
6) Procuring JAS-39 Gripen-NGs powered by F414 turbofans produced by US-based GE Aero Engines will hardly offend Uncle Sam. Uncle Sam will only be offended if Malaysia withdraws from the annual CARAT series of bilateral exercises, or prevents the US Navy SEALS from coming to Malaysia every year for bilateral exercises with PASKAL, or stops having regular bilateral air exercises with the USAF’s PACAF Command.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To FARIS: Also to be noted is that the PDRM has a long list of airlift assets whose procurement has been delayed for close to a decade. These include:
1) Four tactical transport aircraft for transporting UTK & VAT-69 personnel within Peninsular Malaysia as well as from Peninsular Malaysia to East Malaysia. The PDRM’s King Air 350s are not up to the task, as was well-known in 2008 when the previous PM quietly gave the go-ahead to buy them without a competitive tendering process.
2) At least six medium-lift helicopters like the EC-721 Cougar Mk2, again for the UTK & VAT-69 to respond to tactical emergencies within Peninsular Malaysia & East Malaysia.
Therefore, in terms of priorities, if at all a special budget is required for urgent procurements, then the above two qualify as the top-most priorities, keeping in view the n ear-term threat perceptions.

Gessler said...

Prasun saheb,

1) Is India looking for a turboprop-powered AAR aircraft like KC-130J to refuel helicopters?

2) Will there be an AAR/MRTT version of the HAL-UAC MTA?

3) Do you think the DRDO AEW&CS radar system will have any export prospects?

4) You have told us previously that a Transmit-Receive Multi-Module (TRMM) pack on AEW&CS has 8 T/R modules each. How many such
TRMMs are there in all?

5) Who is developing the retractable refuelling pod for Tejas Mk-2?

6) Any indigenous IRST planned for development?

7) PAK-FA has multiple EODAS-like sensors distributed throughout the airframe. Will similar sensors also be mounted on Super Sukhoi?

8) What is the full name of the MIRES AESA radar? Is it N012 or N045 as per few sources I have?

9) When could the 750km conventionally-equipped Nirbhay ALCM make its appearence?

10) Can you explain what this ATV-D01 rocket is supposed to be? Some sort of testbed/TD for engine technology?

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/713/atvbrochure21.jpg/

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/339/d01611.jpg/

11) Is there going to be anything like a ship-based PDV version to intercept DF-21D type BMs?

Bhaswar said...

Prasun Sir,

Please tell me that we at least manufacture the HAL/Turbomeca Shaki engine ourselves and don't just assemble it or do the "screw-driver walaa" job only? And what does it mean that we co-designed it with France? Did we ACTUALLY absorb any crucial technologies through the process, do we have a well oiled and functioning production line for these engines in the country? Could we now design and produce a similar engine with the same performance and parameters from scratch on our own steam without any help or "consultancies" IF we wanted to (I know we don't need to but still I'm just asking hypothetically)?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: 1) Definitely not. 2) Definitely not. 3) No. 4) Roughly the same as that on the Ericsson Erieye. 5) UK-based Cobham. 6) No. 7) Only two IRST sensors, same as that on FGFA. 8) No idea. 9) About 3 years. 10) The schematic clearly says that it is used for testing scramjet technologies. 11) DF-21D is not an anti-ship ballistic missile, it never was & will never be. It is physically impossible to develop ASBMs. Therefore, there’s no need for an ASBM interceptor.

To BHASWAR: Are you kidding? HAL will go broke for good if it were to establish its own manufacturing line for any new-generation turboshaft or turbofan engine. Ardiden-1H/Shakti engine was never co-developed by HAL. HAL only supplied the Dhruv ALH’s engine compartment & gearbox blueprints so that the engine could be successfully mounted on the airframe. So far, GTRE has taken only the first few baby-steps by developing small turbofans like that used for Nirbhay & the Laghu Shakthi turbofan for a MALE-UCAV, while HAL has so far developed only the PTAE-7 turbojet. No one has so far even tried to design & build engines for helicopters or turboprop-powered aircraft.

Anonymous said...

"The only two viable light-MRCAs available are the JAS-39 Gripen-NG & JF-17 Thunder, and between these two only a fool will opt for the JF-17. "
Why didn't India tried to enter LCA in the competion. Its not like Malaysia is getting JF-17 or Gripen NG anytime before 2015.
For AWACS option they will have to wait a little but i think DRDO AWACS is better than SAAB's.
Does LCA stands a chance if entered in the competition ?

"The best bet is still the Saab Gripen NG from a political standpoint."
I don't know much about Malaysian but what they get from making Swedish happy ? They will gain maximum if they purchase either F16 Bloth 60 + or Mig35.

"Both MMW & RF seekers are still laboratory-level experimental models & are still years away from entering production, since neither Israel nor Russia are helping India in this matter in any manner."
Isreal has formed a JV with India. Now how much help they are giving that i don't know. As far as laboratory testing and all that things goes. You know alot can be achieved nowadays in the laboratory also and this was proven by the successful test of A5 in the first attempt itself. Also you are wrong, these seekers are being tested on the field also. One seeker was tested last year on NAG missile.
Things are moving slowly but government is too much insisting of having this technology as soon as possible.

"On the other hand, the X-band SAR seekers are nearer to entering production for both the Prahaar NLOS-BSM & Nirbhay cruise missile family."
Thats good news. Who build it ?

"Why are you assuming that the vessel Dupuy de Lôme (A759) is only for intelligence-gathering? It is in fact a vessel for missile telemetry tracking"
I never assumed that.
And you are saying this because you have something to support this statement because i just read the naval section on french ministry of defence website and they say its meant for collection of signals and communications beyond enemy lines. You can also check the the technical specification to prove that.
French and italians both showed a model of a FREMM based warship that will act as BMD system platform during latest edition of euronaval. In short not just track but also engage.

"It is in fact a vessel for missile telemetry tracking & both the IN & PLA Navy already have such vessels."
And can you name the similar ship in IN ?

"IN has been a blue water navy since 1971, a fact that has been officially recognised in writing by the official naval literature of all major navies of the world."
Well Aussies also call their navy as blue water navy. The definition is not clear but what matters is whether our own navy considers itself a blue water navy or the countries like US. The answer is no. IN cannot carry out an operation with a full AC group in South China sea. Arabian sea was a totally different situation, also IN of 1970 was totally different from IN of today. Hell in 1960s IAF had 60+ squadron strength today its close to 30. Things change my friend...

"And the guy who is saying that the unmanned air vehicle is a missile was the very same guy who had claimed that the Nirbhay cruise missile would be turboprop-powered! "
Who are you talking about ? Please don't tell me you are talking about the guy under who this project comes.
Also do you have some proof to support what u are saying ? Some article to saying this person said it ? Because i first saw such thing about Nirbhay on i think business standard or dna and TOi. I am not exactly sure but i didn't read a name of any drdo scientists.

"Do check out his original presentations for proof."
Do you have it ? Please upload it.

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous : 7:32 AM
//"Does LCA stands a chance if entered in the competition ?"//

for the LCA to enter the competition, it has to be first operational at-least in India,and LCA will not be operational until 2015.any talk of LCA entering a competition is day dreaming.

//" don't know much about Malaysian but what they get from making Swedish happy ? They will gain maximum if they purchase either F16 Bloth 60 + or Mig35."//

Mig-35 does not fall in the category of light-MRCA.

//"Arabian sea was a totally different situation, also IN of 1970 was totally different from IN of today. Hell in 1960s IAF had 60+ squadron strength today its close to 30. Things change my friend.."//

this is plain foolish talk, comparing what was in the past with present is totally foolish.The numbers or the quantity might have decreased,but in terms of quality and capabilities, there has been drastic increase, the ships or the fighter aircraft inducted today can perform hell lot of rolls that were not performed by the previous ships or aircraft, the number of ships in the US navy has seen a considerable decline since the WW-2,do you think there capabilities have declined since then, the answer is NO.the ships have declined, the capabilities have increased,the ships that are inducted today in navies are far more powerful than that were available during that time, and these are enough powerful that you don't them in hundreds,few of them will do the job.

the amount of fire power that the previous warships carried was too low, and they were needed in plenty to inflict damage on the enemy,in today's' world, a few destroyers are enough to do the same job.A single Nuke sub carrying a ballistic missile can destroy an entire nation and can bring the war to end.

mahawat singh said...

hello sir,
Could u tell me few things like induction date and noof systems to be procured... For the following....??
Arjun mk2, tejas mk1, tejas mk2, iac 1, iac 2, lch, dhruv wsi, ficv, fmbt,..??
2. Why does india don't want to give private defence groups a market to sell their goods to IA , IAF,ICG and IN ....??
3. I read that p8i is the most sopesticated system in indian armed forces...? How and why...?
4. How much decade or years is india behind from usa russia and china and other western countries in terms of defence , technology, r&d manufacturing etc...?
When do u think about lch, arjun mk1 & 2, tejas mk1& 2..???

Indian said...

Any reasons why these HAL Utility Helicopters are not designed to be STEALTH platforms....?

Anonymous said...

"for the LCA to enter the competition, it has to be first operational at-least in India,and LCA will not be operational until 2015.any talk of LCA entering a competition is day dreaming."
Well Gripen NG is not operational either. And why the hell are we even talking about JF17 ?

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun da

There are media reports that India would end up buying 189 Rafale s..But few concens...Rafale is a good MRCA..no dought.But the delivery would commence at 2015 earliest..After that HAL will deliver 108 rafale starting from 2017 and continue till 2022 at the best..After that making another 63 will take another 4 years min.So in 2025 IAF will have all 189 rafales..But by that time FGFA will have enterd service..Dont you think we should focus more on 5th gen FGFA instead of buying another 63 rafales which is still 4th gen..Or we could get more Super Sukhoi s..Is rafale really that cheaper then FGFA/Super Su30 including life cycle costs...Is it right decision to buy another 63 rafales while that money an be spent on buying more FGFA or Super Su 30...Ur thouhts pls. VMT

KSingh said...

Prasun,

The units on display at Army Days or the Republic day parade- are they paininted in their regular/opertaional paint-job or are they given a special paint job for show at special ceremonies? As some of the paint schemes look absurd and there seems to be no commnality but when you see operation units they are never painted like this.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@7.32AM: How can anyone offer something that has yet to acquire its certification of airworthiness, leave alone entering service with an end-user? If you think the Tejas Mk1 will enter service by 2015, then the marketing activities for such a MRCA will have to commence from 2015, since no one is interested in buying off-the-shelf solutions until they are proven in service. The same goes for MiG-35 as well. The TUDM was never interested in the F-16 or F-15. The India-Israel JV is only for the Barak-2 SAM family & no test-firing trials have been carried out by any DRDO-developed missile fitted with any DRDO-developed MMW seeker. In reality, integration of the MMW seeker with HELINA ATGM is still in progress in the laboratory. Who will build X-band SAR seekers? That was revealed in my DEFEXPO 2012 show report last year. The APOVs of the IN used by the DRDO for missile telemetry tracking offer the same capabilities as the Dupuy de Lôme (A759). And who has ever officially stated that the IN cannot deploy a carrier battle group in South China Sea? As far back as July 2005 such a CBG not only went there but also carried out joint exercises with several ASEAN navies. And how can the IAF have 60+ squadrons of combat aircraft when the MoD never ever sanctioned such numbers. In fact, only 42 combat squadrons have been sanctioned since 1962. And THE HINDU news report never directly quoted any Project Director of DRDO. In fact, all that Dr S K Chaudhuri of RCI had said was that “a surface-to-surface missile or an air-to-surface missile could be equipped with PGMs”. And there’s a huge difference between ‘could’ & ‘will’. In other words, one is talking here about conceptual options, as opposed to firm plans. And you want proof about THE HINDU claiming that Nirbhay cruise missile will be turboprop-powered??? Then read this: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2968219.ece

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To MAHAWAT SINGH: Answers to all your questions can be found in all the previous threads.

To INDIAN: For the very same reason that all other LUHs flying worldwide are also not designed as stealth platforms.

To Anon@9.20PM: Gripen NG will be a derivative of an existing in-service MRCA, whereas Tejas Mk1 has no in-service predecessor. And why JF-17? Because we’re talking about the TUDM & not the IAF.

To Anon@9.45PM: If HAL were to deliver ‘Almost Made-in-India’ Rafales, then it will be able to complete all deliveries only by 2030 at best. Therefore, the best option is to import Rafales in CKD condition & have them licence-assembled by HAL. If that happens, then & only then will the 126 Rafales be able to enter service by 2025. The direct industrial offsets should not be about trying to make each & every nut & bolt of the Rafale locally, but should be about acquiring all the capabilities required for assured through-life product support of the Rafale fleet. If this formula is not adhered to, then the project will suffer the same fate as that of the Scorpene SSK licenced-production effort, which is still suffering from very high QC/QA rejection rates for Made-in-India components like valves, piping, etc. FGFA will start entering service only by 2020 & its deliveries will take place until 2035.

To KSINGH: They are indeed painted as per the end-user’s operational reqmts & reflect the varied nature of the terrain, topography & vegetation of their operating areas.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da
From Anon@9.45

My question was if it will be a good decision to go for 63 follow on rafales or to invest that money to buy more FGFA/Super sukhoi....VMT

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

For the sake of arresting the decline in IAF’s combat aircraft squadrons, there’d no other choice but to go for the additional 63 Rafales. Even if the money for this were to be invested in the FGFA programme, the results will be borne out only two decades later. As for Super Sukhois, they have already been budgeted for & will start showing up by 2016.

Anonymous said...

1.for barak 8 israel said it would transfer all relevant tech. for in house production of the system does this mean the radar, the seeker, the command and control systems will all be manufactured ( not talking about assembly) in india and to whome these thech. will be transfered to psu or to private industries.
2. why no dev. test firings in india (as drdo claims that more than 70% of the system will be developed in india (or is that made in india not sure). why only validation test firing in india?
3. gov. saction of a billion + will go where?
4. is any sub system currently under production in india as they are assuring the first deliv. in may 2013?
5. how much will this "know how" help indian missile programs in near future?
6. is there any more joint dev. with israel?(what happened to th joint dev. of naval uav convertion of chetah rotat. platform?) (also. there are rumers about india borrowing tech. for cruse missile dev. from israel)

Anonymous said...

Three questions,

1) was the scorpene effort a needless one? dont you think that a certain technological capability might have been acheived or atleast tried at.

2) why havent we ever tried to build even a prototype techdemonstrator submarine. I think india never gave the underwater warfare much seriousness like some of our neighbours.

3) Why should we commit on incorporation 4th generation air assets as late as 2025, when in future the info expansion will eventually lead to unmanned or optionally manned combat aircrafts/ bvr, pgms or TBM/NLOS may be as early as 2025? Why not we try to put an extra effort on information based warfare of future.

Sreenivas

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@2.53AM: That was never the plan. The idea was to pool the respective military-industrial resources of the two countries for co-producing various components & sub-systems based on each party’s military-industrial strengths & capabilities. Even if Israel was willing to share its production-engineering know-how with India, the sheer cost of establishing parallel production facilities in India will make most of the DPSUs to go broke. The same applies to the fully instrumented test-firing rangers the kind of which India does not possess. The NRUAV programme was terminated as far back as 2009.

To SREENIVAS: 1) The Scorpene SSK’s licenced-production programme is not a needless effort, but the way the programme was structured was flawed. Of the six Scorpenes, the first two should have been built in France & all the India-based manufacturers/vendors that were selected by MDL & DCNS should have then sent their workforces to DCNS’ shipyards to gain the necessary skills & expertise to fabricate components for the remaining four Scorpenes. That would have been the ideal way to ovcercome the learning curve. This was also the same methodology applied for the Class 209/Type 1500 SSK licenced-production programme in the late 1980s under which the first two vessels were built in Germany & the remaining two by MDL. 2 The S-2 Arihant comes closest to being a prototype technology demoinstrator that is built in India. 3) Manned airborne combat platforms of 4th & 5th generation will remain operational globally till 2050. Unmanned UCAVs won’t be as prolific even by 2025. terrestrial & space-based IW capabilities for improved battlespace situational awareness have existed in India since the past decade & are poised for tremendous growth in the near-term & medium-term.

Anonymous said...

Just wanna stay that I luv the fact that you reply to your fans consistently and informative unlike some broadsword8-) :-$ . In regards to questions related to the topics or unrelated. . With that said. . Are all engines in lch and luh indigenous or just a sticker of made in India and also will KAVERI EVER be completed by Indians or require additional help

ArunM said...

Sir,

Why is the nose section, radome of Rafale even smaller than that of Tejas mk1 ?

How much bigger is the nose section , radome of MiG-29 compared with Dassault Rafale ?

What additional radar modes are IAF asking for ? Additional radar modes proved to be a hindarance in negotiations with UAE .

UAE has also asked for a improved Spectra with more features. Has IAF also asked for the same ?

Why does Rafale carry only 6 AASM when other hardpoints are available for carrying ground ordance? Can this load of 6 AASM be increased ?

Will the very 1st IAF rafales have higher thrust engines and bigger intakes to cater for increased airflow ?

Anonymous said...

seems like paks have been exporting their mentality to north africa:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/OA19Dj02.html

F said...

Prasun,

Is the RMAF expected to order parts from HAL’s Nashik facility?

The PDRM King Air's are not meant for tactical lift but have been fitted with a mission sensors fit [who supplied the system is presently unknown]for ISR work. Why the PDRM would want ISR configured aircraft is beyond me - such aircraft should be operated by the army or the RMAF.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.33AM: VMT: Engines for ALG, LCH & LUH are not indigenously manufactured. In fact, they all reach HAL from Turbomeca in 81% assembled state. It is imperative that further R & D continues on the Kaveri turbofan front. Already, thus far, after the high-altitude flight-tests in Russia, a lot of performance data has been accumulated that will now enable GTRE to go back to the drawing boards & come up with a definitive, flightworthy Kaveri turbofan that will power the projected AURA USAV & if reqd will also be able to power the tandem-seater Tejas Mk1 LIFT sometime by 2017. Therefore, what has been achieved thus far is by no means a wasted effort &, on the contrary, the successes achieved thus far should provide enough encouragement to persevere for at least another decade in order to develop a world-class turbofan without help from any foreign OEM.

To FARIS: That would make perfect sense, since the nearest bonded warehouse for stockpiling Su-30MK-related spares happens to be in Nashik, & not in faraway Irkutsk.
Even for the MiG-29Ns, spares have been & continue to be procured from Nashik.
None of the three Beechcraft Super King Air 350s now in service (9M-PTA, 9M-PTB & 9M-PTC) with the PDRM’s Pasukan Gerakan Udara (PGU) or Air Operations Force have on-board ISR hardware. The remaining two aircraft, to be delivered next month, will have FLIRs (either FLIR Systems' BRITE Star II or L-3/WESCAM’s MX-15i). The only non-Israeli radar-based ISR sensor presently certified for the Super King Air 350 is General Atomics Lynx Block 30E GMTI/SAR radar.

Anonymous said...

sir u said that shakthi engine is less than 10% manufactured in india but may were under the impression that sakthi is a joint dev. with france transfering know how to india also will the indigenous content go up as the production has just started

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@12.28AM: You are getting confused between the Ardiden-1H/Shakti turboshaft for helicopters & the GTRE-developed Shakthi turbofan for UAV.

ArunM said...

Sir,

Why is the nose section, radome of Rafale even smaller than that of Tejas mk1 ?

How much bigger is the nose section , radome of MiG-29 compared with Dassault Rafale ?

What additional radar modes are IAF asking for ? Additional radar modes proved to be a hindarance in negotiations with UAE .

UAE has also asked for a improved Spectra with more features. Has IAF also asked for the same ?

Why does Rafale carry only 6 AASM when other hardpoints are available for carrying ground ordance? Can this load of 6 AASM be increased ?

Will the very 1st IAF rafales have higher thrust engines and bigger intakes to cater for increased airflow ?

Pls ans.

What ammo supplies will the underground tunnels now being constructed in Sikkim ?

How many such underground storage facilites will IA eventually construct ?

Gessler said...

Hi Prasun,

1) I've heard DRDO is planning to test AAD-1 interceptors against multiple target missiles? There was a talk after the Nov 23 test than 6 x enemy missiles will be launched simultaneously and 6 x interceptors will be fired up to take them all out at once?

2) Any export prospects for Akash Mk-1 missile?

3) Is the ATV D01 rocket related to the HSTDV project? How good are tests going so far?

4) Will the Barak-8 be canisterised like S-300/400?

5) Is the max range of both land-based Barak-8 and ship-based Barak-2 the same at 70km? Whats up with this 120-km Barak-8ER variant?

6) Ive heard you sayin that there is no large-enough over-land missile test range to try out Nirbhay's terrain-hugging profiles, so will we take the missile to Russia and test it there during the later tests?

7) Whats your take on future Indo-China relations? Do you think it's ever possible for India-China-Russia to form an anti-West nexus??

8) How many Rafales, how many Tejas, and how many MKIs can IAF ultimately order & procure?

F said...

Prasun,

Question on the Ulan Ude Mil-17Shs that SME Aerospace tried to push to the army about 10 years ago. Which Western company was to have provided the avionics and performed integration?

Do the latest Mil-17s have the avionics [like an auto-pilot and gyro based INS] needed for IFR flights over mountainous terrain?

Has it ever occurred to you that although most combatants in most navies have a chaff/flare launcher, that fewer have anti-torpedo decoys? Could it be solely due to the costs involved? In the USN for instance, although carriers, destroyers and frigates have anti-torp decoys, most LPDs, LHDs, oilers, LSTs and supply ships don't.

You mentioned that IN CBGs have exercised with ASEAN navies before. Has the INS Viraat and INS Vikrant exercised with ASEAN navies before?

To the best of your knowledge is there any truth to reports that PLAN is getting Backfires? If so, why would they need Backfires when what PAN currently has at present, enables it to hit targets anywhere in the Western Pacific and South China Sea? Or are the Backfires intended to hit targets further afield such as in the Indian Ocean.

Where you present at the trials held in PD involving Pars, Piranha, Centauro and Rooikat? Is it true that Pars and Piranha did not perform well at all?

Lastly, would you agree with a writer's opnion that PLANs decision to build an SSBN base in Hainan reflects a key weakness as the Chinese are worried about the survivibility of bases further north?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: 1) That was already the last time done by ‘electronically’ intercepting the ‘electronically-generated’ targets. 2) In an era of fire-n-forget SHORADS, Akash Mk1 does seem outmoded for the export market. 3) They are not related. 4) Of course. Haven’t you seen the photos of a thread of mine in 2011? 5) Yes. The Barak-NG comes with an extra booster rocket for attaining 110km-range. 6) Yes. 7) In an era of globalisation, the issue of forming any kind of anti-West nexus doesn’t even arise. 8) 189 Rafales, up to 340 Su-30MKIs & up to 150 Tejas Mk2s.

To FARIS: 1) The avionics suite was never finalised & therefore there was no shortlisting of vendors. 2) Yes. 3) Anti-torpedo decoys came of age only in the 1990s & since then several types have entered service with the world’s major navies & can be easily retrofitted. 4) INS Viraat did carry out some exercises with the RSN. 5) There are no plans for the PLAN or PLAAF to acquire Tu-22M3s. 6) The Piranha has had problems every time it came along for the CARAT-series of exercises as it got bogged down in soft-soil & marshy terrain in & around Lumut & had to be dragged out by Stormers equipped with winches. The PARS & Rooikat never had such problems. 7) Since the PLAN has to operate over a wide area as far as the Western Pacific, the area up north from Shanghai to Dalian & stretching out to Japan & the Korean Peninsula requires a dedicated base for SSNs & SSBNs, while the latest base at Yulin on Hainan Island is meant exclusively for the South China Sea & Indian Ocean areas of operations.

Anonymous said...

Prasun,

Can you post the video of a Discovery Channel featuring AMCA ? There was a documentary on discovery a few months back which showed designing of AMCA.

financeblogger said...

Is the missile available for export.
As per the article, Mig29 CMT can be equipped with the missile. Upgraded Mig 29's, India will be getting would be Mig 29 SMT. Can the same be equipped with the missile.

abs said...

@Prasunda
1)Whats with the logic of calling a MALE UCAV a "reuasable missile launcher vehicle"?
2)It seems indeed the China-India relations have received a major boost. However given the Chinese adage of "keep your friends close and your enemies closer", if one retrospects, then China has always chosen to befriend a few nations only to go aggressive against them at an appropriate time. This has happened with the US and Russia. So chances are in the future they could again go aggressive against India. I hope our policy makers takes note of this and strives for sufficient economic and military muscle to fend off the Chinese for upcoming "battle of Asia".
3)Do you think the LSVs to be procured by the IA would be used for Pakistan type Recce and Sp Battalions? This would be a much needed boost and free up necessary personnel for offensive roles as compared to defensive roles persisting now.

Gessler said...

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/306489/ins-saryu-commissioned-monday.html

??? Sea trials over ?

mahawat singh said...

hello dada..,
1. Can india make uav's like reapers or predators....??where do we stand in terms of technology with usa???
2i heard some one on defence.in that india has to procure 4 lhd's and they hafe finalised a juan carlor 1,...?is is correct..?if yes tell me something about that lhd...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To FINANCEBLOGGER: It will be available for export only for those countries that can avail of the precision Py navigational updates codes provided by GLONASS-K GPS satellites. Without such precision navigational updates, it is futile to procure such missiles.

To GESSLER: Manufacturer’s sea-trials are over. Following its commissioning, the NOPV will undergo the end-user’s sea–trials & weapons qualification trials.

To MAHAWAT SINGH: 1) Of course it can be done. 2) Nothing of that sort has happened, since the global RFPs for LPHs have yet to be released. The winner will be selected through competitive bidding.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ABS: 1) There’s no logic whatsoever, but the ‘desi’ news-reporter of THE HINDU obviously doesn’t understand this, does he? The GTRE brochure on ‘Laghu Shakthi’ clearly states that this turbofan is being developed for an ‘unmanned air vehicle’. Now, if such a vehicle is used for only launching PGMs & the vehicle itself is not employed as an intelligently guided munition & just harmlessly self-destructs after launching its payloads, then surely it will be a total waste of money. On the other hand, if this vehicle was reusable (i.e. UCAV) then & only then can such a weapon’s techno-economic matrix becomes justifiable.
2) The strategists & decision-makers of China had realised as far back as a decade ago that the situations in both South China Sea & East China Sea will one day require decisive economic & military intervention, if required, for the eventual settlement of maritime disputes. In such a scenario, Beijing clearly realises that it too cannot sustain a two-war front (i.e. against India on one hand & against the combined might of the US, Japan, ROK & ROC/Taiwan). At the same time, the only other country apart from China that has both the economic/military need, means & clout required for contributing to the stability of Central Asia post-2014 is India. It was therefore a combination of all these that pushed Beijing to formulate its ‘Look West’ policy under which an eventual lasting accommodation with India has to be reached in the near future. That’s why one now frequently hears statements emanating out of Beijing that allude to “a world in which there’s sufficient resources for both China & India to share & prosper”, i.e. divide the cake without resorting to oneupmanship. This is exactly what India has been saying as well & is therefore indicative of a large degree of convergence being attained at the topmost decision-making levels of both countries. All that one needs now is visionary statesmanship from both sides to leverage such convergences into permanent, mutually beneficial gains.
3) For 3-D recce purposes, the IA today relies far more on its growing fleet of MALE-UAVs & on ISRO’s fleet of dual-use CARTOSAT family of remote-sensing satellites than the Pakistan Army. Then, under project Sanjay, there’s the Battlefield Surveillance System (BSS) that will be expanded in future with greater numbers of LORROS-type land-mobile sensors, including Dhruv-mounted LORROS sensors. Consequently, on the tactical front, helicopter-mounted sensors like LORROS & also SAR-type radars will be the ultimate gamechanger. Therefore, procurement of LSVs or JLTV-type vehicles will not make any great difference on the battlefield. On the other hand, LSVs & JLTV-type vehicles equipped with ATGMs like the CLGM, 12.7mm heavy machine gun & mini-UAVs are more suited for UN-mandated peacekeeping operations or IPKF-type peacemaking operations, i.e. for waging sub-conventional warfare.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

What defense items have India successfully exported so far with any applauds received.

rad said...

HI Prasun
Defense update, the israeli site claims that the barak 8 , mf-star combo is more superior than the aegis or patriot-3 , whats your take on that claim.
I will never trust the chinese overtures for the simple reason they are not a democracy and that they are biding time so that they can take care of each country militarily and then take care of india at the last. After taiwan , japan phillipines, vietnam etc.Its clear that they are readying for a confrontation with japan , and then do the same to other countries. They will try the best to keep all the above mentioned countries apart by the carrot and stick method .The west is slowly realising that after selling their souls to the chinese by transferring production lines to china for money rather than national intrest has become an uncontrolled genie that is threating to wipe them out .!

Mridul baruah said...

Dear Prasunda .... if you have some time please put up a detailed article on LCA, LCH...it advantages and drawbacks and what's going on behind the scene.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
There is much confusion in the 'desi' press about the underwater missile test carried out on 27th Jan. Was it K-5 or K-15 and was it's rage 700+ KM or 3000+ KM? I am sure with our insight you will be able to through more light on it.

Anonymous said...

Does there any clarity about the engine that is gonna used for this HAL LUH. If they use single Shakti engine then this might require some modification in Rotor and gear box. what is the plan going on that front. Any clarity so far on this..