Total Pageviews

Monday, February 11, 2013

Highlights Of Aero India 2013 Expo: Part-2

The 40 IAI-built EHUD rangeless ACMI pods used by the IAF since the late 1990s required a special pylon interface unit for enabling their fitment on to combat aircraft of Russian origin like the Su-30MKI and MiG-21 Bison, since the EHUD ACMI pods are built to NATO MIL-SPECs and are not compatible with Russia-origin pylons. It is only now that Israel Aerospace Industries has come up with EHUD pods (above) configured for fitment on pylons meant for carrying R-73E WVRAAMs, meaning this new pod will easily interface with aircraft of Russian origin like the MiG-29UPG and MiG-29K, thereby doing away with the need for expensive customised pylon interface units.
 
Chemring’s chaff and flare cartridges are presently used by the Sea Harrier LUSHs, Jaguar IS/DARIN-2 interdictors and Mirage 2000H/THs, all of which have also been fitted since the early 1990s with ALE-40 countermeasures dispensers. The Su-30MKIs presently use Chemring-supplied chaff cartridges.
Elettronica Aster SPA has supplied the Tejas Mk1 MRCA’s brake system’s progressive pressure control valve, while for HAL-developed LUH it has been contracted to supply the hydraulic package, handpump unit, brake unit, main rotor actuator, and tail rotor actuator. For the Dhruv ALH this company is presently supplying the landing gear retraction manifold, sleeve and spool valve assembly, main rotor servo-actuator, tail rotor servo-actuator, and the rotor brake system.
In an era of panoramic AMLCDs that are used by almost all contemporary general aviation aircraft, HAL’s selection of conventional AMLCDs for the cockpit of the Do-228 (above) can only be described as being a retrograde step.
The IAFTS (above) is a very interesting piece if kit born out of the US military experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan, and will prove to be very useful for those Mi-17V-5s that are used for both CSAR and utility missions in support of special operations.
Another version of the GTSU-127, presently on the drawing boards, will go on board the FGFA.
Believe it or not, till today, no India-based OEM has been contracted to supply Ni-Cad batteries for aircraft and helicopters like the Tejas Mk1, HJT-36, Mi-25 and Mi-35, and for the Heron-1 and Searcher Mk1/2 MALE-UAVs. Batteries for all these platforms continue to be imported from France’s SAFT (shown above).
SAMTEL THALES is presently bidding against HALBIT Avionics for supplying the glass cockpit avionics for the HAL-developed LUH. For the Super Su-30MKI programme, the company has been selected for supplying the panoramic AMLCDs and a CSIO-developed HUDWAC (see below). The HUDWAC, also to go on board the Jaguar/DARIN-3 aircraft, will replace the existing ELOP-supplied Type 967 HUDWACs. 
The RAFAEL-supplied Spice 2000 PGM (below) will be integrated with the Mirage 2000UPGs by a joint DRDO-IAF team once the first four Mirage 2000UPGs arrive back in India from France.
The ELT-568 AESA-based internally-mounted jammer (below), presently on board the IAF’s MiG-29UPGs, is most likely to be specified for the Tejas Mk2 MRCA as well.
ADA this time showcased an illustration of the Tejas Mk1 MRCA’s possible weapons configurations (below).
However, when it came to the Tejas Mk2, all that ADA could come up with was a pathetic two-page pamphlet (below).
Shown below are the UGS elements supplied by Textron Systems to the BSF and CRPF for demonstration purposes.
HOTAS-related hardware (below) being supplied by UK-based ULTRA Electronics for various platforms.
Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Elbit Systems Electro-optics-Elop Ltd for the joint development of Compact Multi Purpose Advance Stabilisation System (CoMPASS) for naval applications on February 7, 2013 at the 9th International Exhibition on Aerospace, Defence & Civil Aviation that was held at Air Force Station Yelahanka, Bengaluru. The MoU was signed by H N Ramakrishna, Director (Marketing), BEL, and Adi Dar, Executive VP, Managing Director of Elbit Systems Electro-optics-Elop Ltd. Amol Newaskar, Director (Other Units), BEL, Roy Zentner, Vice President, Business Development & Marketing, Elbit Systems Electro-optics-Elop, and Neri Zin, Senior Director, EO ISTAR Business Unit, Airborne EO & Laser Systems, Elbit Systems Electro-optics-Elop, were present along with other General Managers of BEL. The CoMPASS is a day-and-night surveillance system that includes a colour TV daylight camera, 3rd Generation 3-5 ┬Ám FLIR sensor, Laser Target Designator and Rangefinder (LTDRF) and automatic tracking capabilities, as well as command and control capabilities. It is distinguished by a wide variety of interfaces, enabling integration with various aircraft/helicopter systems, such as mission computer, fire-control, radar, GPS, data down-link and helmet-mounted tracking systems. Its small dimensions, low weight, high level of stabilisation and coverage angles make it an optimal choice for long-range, day-and-night surveillance, target tracking, fire-control applications and search-and-rescue.

117 comments:

Anonymous said...

sir ,
read ur very last comment on the previous post..u have a knack for very detailed and logical answers..but for the 1st time maybe ..ur ans don't satisfy me..u still don't explain the annual intake of 450 pilots/aircrew..where , when , how..
all i know is , in the integrated PoP at AFA every 6 months no more than 100 pilots graduate..

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

I had already explained previously all that was to be explained. If you still cannot figure it out, then there's nothing more that I can do, except to say that one does not have to pass out of just AFA to become an Air Warrior or qualify as aircrew. Nor is it compulsory for all aircrews to be commissioned officers graduating out of AFA.

Pierre Zorin said...

something is changed in this blog Prasun whether you did or a sinister malefactor...I can't open the part 1 it only shows photos etc of followers.also won't allow comments except blogger...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Pierre Zorin: Was't me for sure, rest assured. But in case Internet Explorer doesn't work, do try to open the previous thread with either Mozilla Firefox or GoogleChrome or Opera.

Yotam said...

prasun, on the previous thread you claimed that iron dome would be "totally ineffective at intercepting 300mm MBRL rockets". You are aware that iron dome has in fact intercepted (salvos of) Fajr 5 rockets which are 333mm rockets that have a range of about 75-80 km, right? Your claim is therefore quite baffling...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To YOTAM: Perhaps I was unable to put the matter into perspectve, so kindly allow me to explain: the EL/M-2084 MMR/Tamir combination worked just fine when it came to intercepting two or even three Fajr-5 rockets at the same time. That's perfectly fine since that's exactly what the Iron Dome was dupposed to counter & neutralise. However, in the Indian context, in terms of threat perceptions, the reqmt is for an interception solution (which the Iron Dome presently can't offer) meant to counter as many as 72 300mm MBRL rockets fired less than 2 seconds apart against a single target.

Yotam said...

In fact, iron dome has intercepted salvos of as many as 15 (long range variants of) BM-21 rockets. Given that the effector is capable of dealing with fajr 5 rockets and even heavier rockets (the details are classified, but just a few weeks ago Rafael and the IMOD successfully tested iron dome against a rocket heavier than fajr 5, presumably in the Zelzal class), there's no reason to believe it isn't capable of dealing with similar fajr 5 salvos. As a side note, it's actually easier for the system to deal with salvos of longer range threats because it has more time to calculate interception solutions. You're correct that 72 simultaneous rockets would overwhelm a battery as currently configures- there aren't even enough launchers to deal with such a salvo- one could simply "beef up" the battery by adding more launchers and strengthening the system's main computer... there's nothing sacred about the current 3- launcher-per-radar layout.

Kshitiz Kumar said...

1.read ur comments about how india can never match PRC in terms of military industry is it true and will we never exceed them?
2.sir you also stated in the very same series of answers that IA doesn't need a Attack helo as light as LCH but is forced to these specs like it need a medium weight class helo but as far as i remember it was IA which wanted a high altitude warfare attack helo.your comments?
3.is their been a rise in indian nationalism among youth or a decline?
4.Is the Indian century ever possible?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_century
5.What happened to the 155 mm M777 deal with US?
6.Is this report true if yes then what will happen of DRDO MCW
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_jawans-may-soon-have-top-class-italian-machine-guns_1797581

Avi said...

All old posts are inaccessible. It simply leads to a 'Followers' page on some browsers (Safari on Mac for me). This is a recent occurrence and happened post the first post on Aero India, in case you would like to have a look.

Anonymous said...

to all with blogger problems

the problem is only with internet explorer, perhaps some glitch there. but chrome works fine. i observed same for other blogs also the same issue, so it is not only with Trishul blog.

Sreenivas

Rahul said...

Is Samtel-Thales joint manufacturing CSIO HUD (one which is displayed in this article)?

AFAIK CSIO developed HUD for LCA were to be manufactured at BEL. So why they are opting for two different production houses for bit different models?

Guess i have missed something.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To YOTAM: The core issue that still remains to be answered is this: is a system like Iron Dome a militarily feasible option for large-scale military deployment & usage against an enemy that is likely to employ Batteries of MBRLs, be they 122mm or 300mm, & resort to rocket launches en masse (simultaneously) on the battlefield, or in random sequence against civilian targets/urbanised areas as has been the case in Israel. To date, no one has come up with an air-defence system capable of countering simultaneous volleys/salvoes of MBRL-launched rocket fire-assaults, leave alone deploying them against MBRL-equipped military forces. The same can be said about the Stunner & its effectiveness against simultaneous salvoes/volleys of NLOS-BSMs.

To KSHITIZ KUMAR: 1) Absolutely true. 2) IA was never part of the LCH programme & it never drew up any GSQRs. The LCH is being developed in response to an IAF-specific ASQR & that’s why only the IAF has, to date, committed to procure the LCH. There’s no on-the-record statement by anyone from the IA which says that the IA is either interested in the LCH or will procure a LAH variant of the LCH. 3) There’s been a rise in xenophobic nationalism, but a decline of proud patriotism. 4) Everything’s possible under the sun. 5) It will be inked in FY 2013. 6) Not true, since the operative word there is ‘may’, meaning maybe yes or maybe no.

To AVI: I’m not facing any such problems.

To RAHUL: There are three HUDWACs developed by CSIO. One for the Tejas Mk1 MRCA, one for the HJT-36 IJT & one for the Su-30MKI & Jaguar/DARIN-3. The first two are being produced by BEL, while the third type is being produced by SAMTEL.

Gessler said...

Hi Prasun, how you doin'?

1) Any update on Akash Mk-2? When will it be tested?

2) How many Akash SAMs have been inducted by Army/AF combined?

3) Has full-scale production of Block-3 BrahMos GLCM started yet?

4) How many Block-2/3 BrahMos missiles will the armed forces induct ultimately?

5) What "target" missile will we intercept at 200km altitude in the supposed PDV test-firing in May 2013? Surely Prithvis can't fly out to an altitude of 200km.

6) Whats the maximum altitude Shaurya can reach when it wants to hit a target at its maximum range?

7) Any pictures of the 60km-range MBRL?

8) You have stated that Ardiden-1U is an uprated version of 1H, so what's the 1U's power rating?

9) LRDE says they'll have LCA's AESA radar ready in 2 years atmost,,,any comments? Doesn't that seem a bit of an overstatement?

10) How many T/R modules would the LRDE AESA radar have? And how many would the Vixen-850E?

Aprrox?

11) Any approx average/peak power output figures availble for the indigenous radar?

12) How much would the 750km Nirbhay weigh?

Thanks in advance.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: 1) Probably by the year’s end. 2) More than 250. 3) Yes. 4) About 200 of each. 5) Hopefully an Agni-1. 6) Dunno, since it hasn’t been test-fired so far out to its maximum altitude. 7) Nothing so far. 8) 1U will have about 15% more power than the 1H. 9) Only the laboratory test-model will be ready, not the flightworthy version. 10) No guesses here, since all such information is never released for public consumption by any OEM. 11) None. 12) Slightly more than the Novator 3M-14E LACM.

Vikram Guha said...

PrasunDa,

Is India about to purchase the Javelin ATGM from US ? Newspaper report indicte that the US is hardselling it .

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/Americas/US-pitches-for-Rs-9-900-cr-anti-tank-missile-deal/Article1-1009627.aspx

It's an extremely expensive missile. Will you plz suggest other alternatives .

Thanks,
Vikram

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIKRAM GUHA: In my reckoning it is almost a done deal. Good things of life are expensive, there's no escape from that. Only other expensive alternative is the Spike, but there are no comparable & available less-expensive alternatives, a fact of life that one has to accept & move on.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da: An LCH carries 4 missiles and two rocket pods and so does Rudra then why is the need of a dedicated attack helicopter.The LCH being dedicated attack copter does not even carry 8 anti tank or such missiles along with the two rocket pods.Even though it is dedicated attack copter, in comparison with rudra or other attack copter in the world it carries low weapon load.Is DRDO/HAL planning to increase the weapon payload capacity.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.59PM: You’re right about the weapons configurations for both LCH & Rudra & I assume you’ve already seen the visual I had uploaded in the previous thread which shows the MBDA-designed & an India-based SME-fabricated twin ATGM launch cannister for the PARS-3LR. This conclusively proves that both the Rudra & LCH will each carry ether only four ATGMs (two in each twin-pack cannister) & two 12-tube 2.75-inch rocket launchers, or four ATGMs (two in each twin-pack cannister) & four Mistral ATAMs (two in each cannister), or two 12-tube 2.75-inch rocket launchers & four Mistral ATAMs (two in each cannister). Now, why the need for Rudra & LCH when both carry identical sensors & weapons packages? The answer is simple & it all has to do with the longstanding feud between the IA & IAF over ownership of attack helicopters. The IAF being the traditional owner & operator of attack helicopters, had more than a decade ago firmed up plans for acquiring the LCH. The IA on the other hand officially made a pitch for its own integral indigenously-built attack helicopters only in 2004. However, due to institutional opposition from the IAF & the MoD’s sheer criminal reluctance to resolve this matter, the IA was forced to dilute its demands & the eventual compromise was that the Dhruv Mk4, which the IA had originally wanted only in a general utility configuration (for tactical trooplift & CASEVAC), was subsequently reconfigured as a helicopter-gunship, i.e. a platform capable of tactical trooplift, CASEVAC & aerial attack with ATGMs & unguided rocket pods. This was a terrible mistake with severe long-term repercussions of a negative nature & resulted in the unnecessary development of the Rudra. What should have been done by the MoD in the first place was to put its foot down & firmly rule in favour of the LAH being developed for the Army at the very outset, instead of authorising the LCH’s development for the IAF. Had this happened, money would not have been wasted on developing the Rudra & the IA would have gotten two force-multipliers: Dhruv Mk4 for tactical trooplift & CASEVAC, & the LAH optimised for all-weather forward observation & anti-armour operations. Instead, due to the MoD’s criminal indecisiveness & negligence over the past 15 years, today the IAF has been allowed to get way with the LCH whose primary role is meant to be to shoot down MALE-UAVs, with anti-armour operations being the secondary role. Logic states that the best platform for shooting down tactical & MALE-UAVs is not a heavier twin-engined helicopter, but a single-engined LUH armed with AAMs like Mistral ATAMs (incidentally the HAL-developed LUH will carry four such AAMs). So why on earth was the LCH project approved by the MoD while the IA’s request for LAH was denied? Instead, why was so much money wasted on developing the Rudra when the LAH would have been more well-suited for the IA’s reqmts? Why was the IA’s plea for acquiring a LAH equipped with 8 ATGMs never taken note of? These are the questions that will continue to haunt the MoD for the next several years.

Rahul said...

Prasun Sir, sorry to bother you again, the HUDWAC proposed for MKI upgrade appears to have done away with (opaque)top cover, which i presume was a kind of sun shade. Pardon my ignorance, does this development represents up-the-technological-ladder? If yes, then is there something planned for LCA as well in Mk-2?

Also sir, what is this ABHAYAS system? Looks Lakshya Mk-2 to me.

Thank you!

Anonymous said...

hi prasun,

just read somewhere on internet that rudra could carry weapons as well as could carry troops simultaneously. Is this right? If so then LCH could carry more weapons cause it have to carry only weapons. But if not so then it makes no logic to develop two identical platforms just under different names and little operational difference.

VMT in advance.
A G

Anonymous said...

Prasun da: thanks for the answer@Anon@1.59PM.Is DRDO planning to develop a heavy attack helicopter in lines with apache or may be a modified version of LCH which can carry 16 anti tank or such missiles n future.Does IAF have any plans to have indigenous or they want to be satisfied with just 22 apaches.Also is IAF planning to induct just 22 apaches, will there be follow on for the same

Anonymous said...

IS INS kolkata going to be inducted into the navy this march?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAHUL: The sun-shade is not present on the Type 967 HUFWAC now used by Su-30MKI. It is there only for those Soviet-era HUDWACs on MiG-29Bs & Su-27SKs. The Abhyas is an expendable aerial target drone, while the Lakshya is a reusable target drone.

To AG: The Rudra’s fully weaponised version cannot carry any troops inside since the interior cabin now sports a pintle-mounted LMG plus its ammo boxes. If this is removed & only two 2.75-inch rocket pods are carried, only then will it be possible to accommodate a squad of infantrymen. The LCH in its present form definitely has the power-to-weight ratio required for carrying eight ATGMs provided its stub-wings are further strengthened & re-designed.

To Anon@5.09PM: There are no plans by HAL or DRDO to develop a heavy attack helicopter. Nor has any official sanction been given by the MoD to HAL for developing a LAH variant of the LCH. However, if the stub-wings of the existing LCH are strengthened & redesigned, then it will enable the LCH to carry eight 45kg-class ATGMs or 16 CLGM-type ATGMs. The IAF’s total reqmt for attack helicopters is 60 units.

To Anon@5.14PM: Sometime between May & August this year, not before.

3rd ~ EyE said...

Hi Prasun,

Can you please let us know the road map for Nag Missiles , post it's user trial failure in August 2012 ?

Sujoy Majumdar said...

Hi PrasunDa,

A couple of questions :

(1) After how many tests will the Prithvi BMD and Advanced Air Defence Interceptor be ready for deployment.

(2) India does not have the capability to intercept ICBMS , IRBMs or cruise missiles , therefore there are huge gaps in Air Defense that Pakis and China can exploit at any time . So why isn't GOI purchasing the S 400 of the shelf ?

My fear is that the BMD program will go the MMRCA way . Billions of taxpayers money will be wasted , nothing will come up & eventually GOI will purchase Air Defense systems from abroad .

Many thanx.

-Sujoy

Anonymous said...

Prasun,

Any news on India's UCAV project .

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Your apprehensions regarding LCH Vs Rudra should be an eye opener. However what are the justifications and explanations provided by the perpetrators in this matter, if any.

Rahul said...

Sorry for being vague, i was actually referring to sun-shade equipped HUDWAC of LCA MK-1.

Anyway since you related sun-shade equipped HUDWAC to soviet era fighters, i assume it was referral to older generation of HUDWAC where sun shade was necessary to cut reflection.

Thanks for reply.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA 13: VMT. Regretably, there are no justifications or convincing/compelling arguments forthcoming from those responsible, since they invariably tend to prevail on account of people having short-lived memories. It is for this very reason that:

1) The present-day Defence Minister of India refuses to adjudicate between the IA & IAF, despite the fact that in 1987 itself the then Minister of State for Defence Arun Singh had given in writing the MoD’s commitment to sanction an integral attack helicopter capability for the Army Aviation Corps.

2) Today no one is even recollecting HAL’s efforts to develop the HTT-35 basic turboprop trainer (BTT) & no one wants to ask why & who was responsible for scuttling the HTT-35 BTT’s R & D programme. Had the HTT-35 been developed by 2000, then today there would have been no need for either the PC-7 Mk2 or the HTT-40. Just imagine how much money is now being spent on both an imported solution like PC-7 Mk2 & on HAL’s efforts to re-invent the wheel by insisting on the need to develop the HTT-40.

3) Today almost no one (with the exception of former CAS of the IAF ACM F H Major) wants to question the need for the HJT-36 IJT, i.e. when all around the world, air forces have either primary/basic/advanced flying training aircraft or basic/advanced/lead-in flying training aircraft, why are efforts on to force the IAF to acquire IJTs when, clearly, the IAF now has BTTs (PC-7 Mk2) and AJTs (Hawk Mk132) & what it requires most is not the IJT, but a LIFT for which the Tejas Mk1 tandem-seater is the perfect & most obvious solution.

4) No one is asking why has HAL till today not succeeded in obtaining FAA or EASA certification of airworthiness for the Dhruv ALH. Is it because the helicopter still suffers from unresolved design flaws (as revealed by the IAF last week) or is it because the helicopter is a badly engineered product from a MRO standpoint (also revealed by the IAF last week)?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To 3rd EYE: The Nag ATGM & its NAMICA-based fire-control system is of early 1990s design that made use of technologies available in the 1980s—that’s the basic problem. Consequently, it has become a misfit for the future battlefield. It required radical re-engineering through the incorporation of newer sub-systems like a turret-mounted target acquisition thermal imager that can be used just like a MBT’s panoramic sight & that can be raised via a mast, newer generation IIR sensor for the ATGM that can operate in daytime in the deserts under high operating temperatures, & lastly a reduction of the ATGM’s weight by at least 10kg. Both L & T and BEL were asked to produce their respective re-engineered NAMICA vehicles within an 18-month period, which has since been done, & the visual uploaded above shows BEL’s version of the re-engineered NAMICA that makes use of an ELBIT Systems-built COMPASS turret housing target-acquisition optronics. L & T’s solution on the other hand makes use of a mast-mounted target acquisition sensor developed by Germany’s CASSIDIAN. Work is now underway to further ruggedise the missile’s THALES-designed IIR seeker. But weight reduction of the missile-round is probably impossible now since it will only further delay its service-induction. Furthermore, the MMW seeker now under development is also way too bulky & needs further miniaturization—a task that is unlikely to be accomplished before 2016.

To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: 1) At least 10 successful interceptions each of the PDV & AAD-1 & AAD-2 will be required to be staged before service-induction gets underway. 2) In conventional warfare, the primary missile-based threats will emanate from NLOS-BSMs, cruise missiles & TBMs, & not from IRBMs or ICBMs since nuclear deterrence via retaliatory strike options is already in place. The time to procure off-the-shelf solutions for BMD has long since elapsed, since a lot of money & R & D effort has been spent since 1998 on devising indigenous solutions with valuable inputs coming from both Russia & Israel. Therefore, the DRDO-led R & effort on BMD & even CMD has not entirely an indigenous effort & contains critical foreign inputs.

To Anon@8.56PM: None. Nothing of the kind was shown by any Indian entity at Aero India 2013. The only UCAV displayed at the expo was a scale-model of an UCAV developed by BAE Systems. Even the Neuron UCAV wasn’t showcased by Dassault Aviation.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun da

1)Reg. the IN 120 NMRH tender, it is clear now after aero india 2013 that it is different then the naval LUH tender fr 56 helicopters.56 LUH tender is now in RFP phase,but 120 NMRH is still in RFI stage.LM has proposed MH60R and MH60S,eurodopter offered the EC725 and NH90...Which among these u think will suit IN and eventually win and why?..VMT

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@12.21AM: The IN's reqmt is not for 56 single-engined LUHs, but 56 light medium-twin-engined helicopters. I'm not aware of any reqmt for 120 NMRHs. The only reqmt is for an initial sixteen 10-tonne NMRHs for which the MH-60R, S-70B & AS.365N Naval Dauphin are on offer. EC-725 is on offer to the ICGS, not the IN. For the 56 helicopters, the Bell 429 is the frontrunner. For the 16 NMRHs, the S-70B is the frontrunner.

Mridul baruah said...

Now that A K Antony has made it open that private player would be allowed to compete with HAL. And Mahindra acquiring shares in BAE...do you see any hope of some improvement in the indigenous aviation. Is there any thought/scope of JV for AMCA, so as to complete the aircraft in the given time frame.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To MRIDUL BARUAH: A K Antony’s statement, if indeed he made such a statement, won’t make any difference for as long as the MoD’s Secretary for Defence Production & Supplies continues to be a sitting member of the Board of Directors of all DPSUs. As long as this situation prevails, the MoD’s bureaucracy will always be in favour of the DPSUs & remain biased against the private-sector. Presently, it is unethical & impossible for the Secretary for Defence Production & Supplies to side with the private-sector when he/she himself/itself is a sitting member of the Board of Directors of all DPSUs. He/she will be accused of criminal breach of trust if any kind of support is shown for or extended to the private-sector. Secondly, unless & until foreign OEMs are allowed 49% stake in Indian companies, no major global player will bother to undertake ToT to any Indian military-industrial company. What no one from the MoD or the Govt of India can answer till today is, how come a Russia-based OEM (NPOM) was allowed to pick up a 49.5% financial stake in BrahMos Aerospace Pvt Ltd way back in February 1998, & why, despite this precedent being set, the MoD still prevents foreign companies of non-Russian origin from setting up similar JVCs with their Indian counterparts & continues to limit foreign shareholding to only 26%. And none of India’s so-called honourable MPs have so far even bothered to ask such an elementary question on the floor of Parliament.

accidental loser said...

seems like news are coming thru about an entire AEW&CS being destroyed back in the 15th aug attack on PAF base,Kamra. your take ????

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ACCIDENTAL LOSER: No big deal, since the PAF still has three remaining Saab 2000 AEW & CS & four ZDK-03 Karakoram Eagle AEW & CS platforms--more than enough for its operational reqmts. Of course, the fact remains that such surgical attacks could well recur in future.

Arjun said...

Hi Prasun,
Aren't other GPS-guided munitions like JDAM's a lot cheaper than Spice kits. Will the Electro-optics guidance make a huge difference in Target Acquisition or will solely GPS guidance kits do the job just as well.
The new JDAM Extended Range also has a greater standoff range (80km). I must say CEP of 3 meters sounds awesome, but is it worth the cost?

Anonymous said...

You wrote in your last article:

"All eyes are now focused on the 25km-range Maitri SR-SAM (E-SHORADS) project"
What can you tell us about the interceptor of this SAM ? What is the share of DRDO in this program because interceptor will be most likely MBDA's and Radar of Thales ? Why the delays considering we have been hearing about this project from 2008-09 ? When can we expect the tests ?

"40km-range Akash Mk2 project, both of which have been approved by the Defence Acquisition Council."
What are the changes made ? Can IA, IAF upgrade Akash mk1 to mk2 without serious changes and expenditure ?

There are news reports of Indo-US would work on joint projects and then sell them jointly. Any projects that are being discussed ?

In one of the forum somebody stated that they talked to the drdo people and AESA project has progressed to a considerable stage and it might get ready in the next 2 years. Any information on this ?

Also is India going ahead solo on Kaveri for AMCA ? I am asking because i saw a ppt page from a presentation on the web where instead of seeking the JV, india is asking for some critical tech from French under MMRCA offset which would help gtre to complete a powerful Kaveri on its own. Is it true ?

Would appreciate more info on offset especially now since its not necessary for OEMs to just invest, they can share tech instead and in this economic slowdown many companies might prefer to share tech rather than invest money.

"Therefore, exhibits of E-SHORADS & MR-SAMs like the SpyDer-MR, BAMSE, VL-IRIS, Buk-2ME etc are all last-ditch attempts by foreign OEMs to secure ‘interim’ orders, "
What's E-SHORADS ? What E stands for ?

" to plug such gaps in the medium- and long-terms through bulk procurements of Maitri & Akash Mk2 SAMs. "
Is IA not gonna purchase Indo-Israeli MRSAM ?

Anonymous said...

What happened to air-defence gun purchase after Rhienmetall blacklisting ?

Anonymous said...

"There are different categories of NLOS-BSMs ranging from 40km to 480km, all of which require different interception solutions. Consequently, solutions like Stunner & Barak-2 will both be required."
Best thing for India is to join David Sling project and make sure Stunner can be used as a second interceptor from MRSAM launcher, just like Spyder can use two interceptor as it will reduce the overall operating and procurement cost. Same thing we should do for Akash mk1 and mk2 also.

Anonymous said...

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/navy-keen-on-weaponised-dhruv/article4401783.ece

Navy keen on buying 20 Rudras ??

Anonymous said...

Prasun da ,
India overlooking Russia being unfair rants Russian offical:

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130209/jsp/nation/story_16541680.jsp#.URoEIvKcXSi

Would you say the Russians are being sore looser, or does this have any merits

Anonymous said...

sir ,
now why does the IAF need 60 attack helos..when this role has been transferred to AAC..IAF might require combat helos like lch..but why an attack helo ?

Anonymous said...

sir ,
can u plzz throw some light on dhruv's design flaws revealed by IAF..& WHY is it a badly engineered product..
whywas an helo with design flaws inducted into service..

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Are they really planning penalties on the delivery delays of Vikramaditya. I thought it to be a joke as a token penalty worth Rs 1/-.

Anonymous said...

sir ,
why has the ceo of finmeccanica been arrested..u said this 12 vvip helicopter deal is clear of any wrong doing..

Ju² said...

Hi Prasun!
Do you think that the possible cancellation of the 197 copter deal is a credible scenario? According to you, could such a possibility be related to the VVIP copter case?
Best,

Anonymous said...

Sir has the construction of first P-17A frigate started yet?

Curious Boy said...

Prasun da,
I have few questions for you

1)In your opinion what should be the changes made to the LCH to suit the army's need

2)Do you think the HJT-36 Sitara project is going to be cancelled?

3)Is the DRDO looking forward to use the Akash missile as a SR-SAM somewhat in the role of the maitri missile

Anonymous said...

Both LCH and Rudra can carry 8 Helina class ATGMs.

This was categorically stated in Aero India 2011 seminar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCp85Y30ybk

Gessler said...

Hello Prasun saheb.

1) Now that DRDO/NPOM are looking to build a mini version of ALCM BrahMos for MiG-29K,,,would they also build one to be carried by LCA(Navy)Mk-2?

2) Heard Russian AF is buying Radar Computer (RC)-1 and 2 for their Su-30s from HAL? Can't Russians make better computers themselves? Will PAK-FA/FGFA's radar computers also be from India?

3) Is LCA going to demostrate anything new in this year's "Iron Fist" firepower exercise at Pokhran starting Feb 15?

Has Sudarshan LGB been integrated onto Tejas Mk-1 as yet?

4) Astra BVRAAM's smokeless propellent is great, just like AIM-120 AMRAAM. Will the indigenous ARSEEK Ku-band seeker be superior to the Russian R77's seeker that Astra-1 presently uses?

5) Can you shed some light on the supposed hands-free take off system for N-LCA? What other jets have it?

6) How much external payload can the Shenyang J-15 carry?

7) Rafale's HUD is so amazing and clean. I guess a similar one is included on CockpitNG. Will we also import that or will CSIO develop the HUD part in-house for Tejas Mk-2?

8) What is LRDE's position when it comes to GaN-based AESA modules technology as on RBE-2 radar?

9) Any chance we can have multiple IRSTs/EO sensors on Tejas Mk-2?

10) I heard ISRO's technologies regarding Conformal Antennas were transferred to DRDO and find their way into Tejas Mk-2. So can we expect Tejas M2 to exhibit the same type of embedded antenna designs as on Rafale MMRCA?

11) Will Tejas Mk-2 be able to supercruise with F414-GE-INS6? I think Gripen E can supercruise with F414G that has same thrust rating as INS6?

Thanks in advance.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ARJUN: GPS-guided PGMs are indeed cheaper for those users that have access to Py-codes required for precise navigation cues from Navstar, Glonass & Beidou GPS satellite constellations. But for countries like India that don’t have access to Py-codes, it makes no sense at all to utilize GPS-guided PGMs. In addition, determining the location of as target through GPS requires enormous investments in HUMINT & standoff surveillanc e/reconnaissance platforms like stealthy UAVs of the type that are not available to India. Consequently, the only viable option remains the usage of PGMs using optronic sensors for navigation & terminal guidance.

To Anon@8.11AM: 1) DRDO’s involvement in SR-SAM will be of the same type as that with Barak-2, i.e. propulsion system. Active terminal seeker will come from MBDA. Delays are due to DRDO’s unavailability of adequate human resources, since the entire pool of scientists & engineers have been pre-occupied with the Barak-2 & Akash Mk2 programmes. 2) The only change is the usage of higher energetic propellants for the sustainer rocket for range enhancement. Everything else stays the same & therefore existing Akash Mk1 launchers will also be able to fire Akash Mk2 rounds. 3) Companies like TATA Advanced materials have already begun supplying major airframe structures for the C-130J Hercules & S-92 helicopter to Lockheed Martin & Sikorsky. 4) Which AESDA project? 5) No one will part with critical technologies that will one day create another competitor. The only way ahead is to team up with a foreign OEM & together develop the successor to Kaveri on a risk-sharing & profit-sharing basis. . 6) Foreign companies are already sharing technologies, for instance, with the Scorpene SSK licenced-production programme, the S-2/S-3/S-4 SSBN fabrication, & Su-30MKI licenced-production programme. 7) E-SHORADS is an enhanced-range SHORADS that can go out to 40km, like SL-AMRAAM & VL-IRIS. SHORADS can typically go out to 22km. 8) IA has not yet committed to 70km-range Barak-2 MR-SAM.

To Anon@8.16AM: The project has been put in cold storage. Instead, L-70s & ZU-23-2s are being upgraded.

To Anon@12.41PM: Most unlikely, & is just another example of yellow journalism, given the usage of phrases like “is learnt to have evinced interest” & “the Coast Guard, in the meantime, MAY opt…”.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@2.30PM: This chap Viktor Komardin is quite a character & I’ve known him since 2005. In fact, his brazenness & over-confidence was totally shattered in 2008 when the Royal Malaysian Air Force selected the EC-725 Cougar Mk2 instead of the Mi-17V-5. Since then, he has even failed to sell a follow-on batch of six Su-30MKMs to Malaysia. Just look at the illogic of his remarks:
1) Viktor Komardin, the head of the Russian delegation to India’s military airshow Aero India, alleged that Delhi has bought aircraft, submarines and weapons from western countries at inflated prices without military logic. What is needs to be asked is why then has Russia bought 4 Mistral-class LPDs from France & Searcher Mk2 UAVs from Israel.
2) The C-130J Hercules that the IAF has procured cannot accommodate the Russian-supplied Smerch-M MBRLs. What he then needs to be told is that the IL-76MDs too cannot accommodate T-90S MBTs.
3) Russia also thinks the choice of the Boeing-made Chinook helicopter for the IAF’s heavy-lift needs was wrong. What he does not realise is that the CH-47F is to be procured not just for heavylift support, but also for CSAR at high-altitudes. The Mi-26T2 on the other hand, can’t undertake CSAR missions. Furthermore, a Mi-26Ts requires 100 man-hours of maintenance per flying hour, whereas the CH-47F requires less than 40.
4) He said the French had delayed the delivery of Scorpene submarines to the Indian Navy by three years, as the delivery of the Goshkov carrier has been delayed. “But there is talk in India of imposing penalties on us and not on the French,” he rued. What he needs to be told is that the delays are being caused because the bulk of components supplied by Indian industrial vendors had been rejected due to poor quality-control, & all such components had to be subsequently ordered from French & Spanish vendors.
5) Komardin said that unlike its competitors, Russia did not want to publicise its defence deals with India “because we do not believe in disclosing Indian national secrets”. What he needs to do is read up all that’s already been published thus far (since 2004) about the ATV & Sagarika programmes.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@2.53PM: Because the IA’s Aviation Corps will take at least a decade to put in place the ground support & flying training infrastructure required for supporting the fleet of Dhruv Mk3 & Rudra helicopters. In addition, the intake of aircrew & ground crew for operating & maintaining these helicopters will have to be increased & groomed, both of which are time-consuming processes. Consequently, there is no other option but to allow the IAF to own & operate dedicated attack helicopters like AH-64Ds & Mi-35Ps for at least another decade.

To Anon@2.57PM: It is all beautifully explained here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih8uxdSqADI

To MR.RA 13: Unlikely, because it is good that all the shortcomings & deficiencies are discovered while the Vikramaditya is still in Russia for her sea-trials. AS the Russians possess all the required shore-based product-support facilities, undertaking repairs or re-engineering is easily accomplished there. The problems would have been compounded manifold had they been discovered AFTER the vessel’s delivery to India, since the Indian Navy has yet to begin work on creating Vikramaditya-specific shore-based MRO facilities.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@5.39PM: What I had said was that the contract for 12 AgustaWestland AW-101s was devoid of any wrongdoing from the Indian side, i.e. no bribes or commissions were paid in order to secure the contract simply because the results of the competitive bidding process were made known to both AgustaWestland & Sikorsky in a transparent manner & that’s how the AW-101 had prevailed over the S-92. Financial impropriety is committed only when one wants to appear to be more equal than others in a competitive bidding scenario. In this case, the ASQR originally drafted by IAF HQ on behalf of the Special Protection Group (SPG) was so outrageous that none of the contenders could ensure compliance with the ASQR. Then both OEMs (AgustaWestland & Sikorksy) made representations to the Special Protection Group for diluting the ASQR parameters & this was done. Finally, it emerged that the AW-101 had scored the maximum number of compliance-related points. What happened next is that Finmeccanica over-charged the Govt of India to the tune of 51 million Euros & this amount was routed through Switzerland-based consultant Guido Ralph Haschke & UK-based Christian Michel to Finmeccanica’s CEO Giuseppe Orsi who in turn transferred this money to Italy’s Lega Nord political party.
Now, the ‘desi’ mass-media entities are tying themselves up in knots by speculating that either the IAF HQ or the SPG was financially compromised & induced to declare the AW-101 as the winner of the competition. But so far, no money-trail has been conclusively established & what Italian investigators are suspecting is that money laundering took place in which funds were routed to India through Tunisia and Mauritius. Now, just ask yourself this question: would any India-based arms dealer ever bring inside India his/her ill-gotten wealth, or will he/she prefer to park such funds in an offshore account outside India?
In conclusion, therefore, once the case goes to the Italian courts, it will emerge that there were no corrupt practices followed inside India & all wrongdoings took place within Italy & involved mainly Italian citizens. At the most, the Govt of India will be legally entitled to penalise Finmeccanica for overcharging to the tune of 51 million Euros & will claim liquidated damages from Finmeccanica.

To JU2: I sure do hope that it becomes credible possibility, since the Cheetal helicopters will be more than adequate for performing LUH tasks for at least a decade. And this has no connection to the VVIP helicopter deal. I only wish now that HAL takes a pro-active approach by proposing new enhancements to the Cheetal such as fitment of all-composite main & tail-rotor blades, which will go a long way in minimising the product-support reqmts of the fleet of Cheetals.

To Anon@7.57PM: Not yet. Only work on P-15B DDG has begun.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To CURIOUS BOY: 1) Re-design & strengthen the stub-wings so that each can accommodate four ATGMs, & explore the option of mounting a miniature MMW target acquisition radar on one of the stub-wings. 2) I sure hope it will be, since it has now become operationally irrelevant. If the IAF is forced to acquire the HJT-36 IJT, then it will become the world's laughing stock by acquiring BTTs, IJTs & AJTs but no LIFTs, i.e. adopting a flawed three-stage flying training curriculum. Logic demands that an IJT be acquired only if primary piston-engined trainers are in use....if BTTs are used for the ab-initio stage, then there's no reqmt for the IJT...again this being the global norm. 3) No, since both the Akash Mk1/2 will be used against airborne targets flying at medium altitudes, while the SR-SAM will be employed for low-level air-defence.

To Anon@12AM: There’s huge difference between MAY & WILL. Eight ATGMs like PARS-3LR or Spike-ER, definitely yes, but the much heavier & bulkier HELINA (based on the launcher shown during DEFEXPO 2012 last April), definitely no. The PARS-3LR & Spike-ER & AGM-114 Hellfire are not only smaller, but even lighter than the IIR-guided HELINA. The HELINA fitted with MMW seeker is even bulkier then the IIR-guided HELINA.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: 1) The air-launched BrahMos will be carried by the centerline pylon of both Su-30MKI & MiG-29K in the space available between the twin air-intakes in the belly. On the LCA (Navy) Mk2, is there availability of such space in the belly? 2) RC-1 & RC-2 are meant only for Su-30MKI, Su-30MKM & Su-30MKA. FGFA’s core avionics computer & mission computer will be of Indian origin, but all processors of the AESA-MMR will be of Russian origin. 3) Nothing new…only the employment of Griffin-3 LGB in conjunction with Litening-2 LDP. 4) Not superior, but comparable. 5) It refers to hands-free and non-disorienting takeoff and landings with supplied HUD symbology formats. 6) Sameas Su-33. 7) It will have to be imported. 8) Laboratory-level fabrication has been achieved. Industrial-level mass production is altogether a different challenge. 9) No, not enough space. 10) No. Instead, Cobham of UK’s retractable inflight refuelling probe will be made use of. 11) Unlikely in fully loaded configuration.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Here's a wonderful presentation on the ZW-10 attack helicopter:
http://tv.cntv.cn/video/C10336/3e84410a6944473c99956a9fda3e158c

Anonymous said...

Prasunda,

i remember you told earlier that Indian Navy will not opt for a shore based AEW&C system since it will reveal the position of a carrier group. But I used to wonder with todays satellite, AEW&C and HALE UAVs is it very difficult to identify the position of a big carrier group. Is it not possible to fly the AEW&C in silent mode till the operational theatre (in India's case at best 5000 KM from a nearby shore base and big AEW&C fly 12 hours mission which might reach 7-8000 KM) and help the fighter wing in offensive operation and return especially you told that A-50 PHALCONs can look up to 400NM in territory. Of course it may not help much in defensive operations, but i guess the Ka-31 will suffice there. Ignorance apologized.

Sreenivas

Anonymous said...

Prasunji,

A high ranked IAF Officer explaining about Indian role in FGFA program says that "Ideally only the airframe resembles the current flying prototype (i.e., the PAK-FA) and all the internal parts (i.e., the Sensors, Avionics, Propulsion systems, Actuators, Mission Computers, Senson Fusion technologies etc almost entire parts that fill in the FGFA should be manufactured by HAL)". If this is the case then there is a lot of work that needs be done not only by HAL but by numerous DPSU R&D Labs under DRDO. Is this the case? What is the total contribution from Indian side to the FGFA program? VMT

Anonymous said...

Prasunji,

A Russian official commenting on Indian and Russian ties, states that it is in the best interests of Russia (And its military Industrial Complex) that both Russia and India co-develop a new Medium class stealth fighter (As "he states" both countries were planning to develop new Medium weight category stealth fighters i.e., AMCA, MIG LMFS). Also he hopes for a greater Russian involvement in Joint military projects (On a Cost and Risk sharing nature) of higher sensitive nature (Like new generation hybrid nuclear submarines). He also hopes that this relationship needs to be established quickly to elevate Russian and Indian 50 year old relation ship to newer heights. Although it favours both the nations interests in Joint Military Projects. Is this possible? (He also states that Russian Military is always reluctant to establish relations with Indian Military, He says this with examples of Russian Military cancelling Joint drills and planned exercises many times. He also says that on the other hand American, Israel and French militaries are continously holding Joint Military Exercises to forge relations ships further) VMT

Anonymous said...

Regarding the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper Scam... India is trying to do a cover-up on the chopper scam. Italy would've benefited with the deal, but still they went ahead with investigations and arrested people. They are serious but we are not, the country losing money not serious, but the country gaining money serious about the case.

Anonymous said...

The Indian Express on Wednesday morning reported that SP Tyagi did receive bribes to facilitate the deal. The newspaper wrote, "The 64-page report, filed in the tribunal of Busto Arsizio city for the arrest of Finmeccanica CEO Giuseppe Orsi, gives details of the case being investigated by Italian prosecutors and alleges that the then air chief, SP Tyagi, was instrumental in swinging the deal and was paid a 'certain amount of money, not yet quantified' - through intermediaries."

The three cousins of SP Tyagi - Juli, Docsa and Sandeep Tyagi - received part payments amounting to 100,000 euros from two AgustaWestland managers. Reuters also adds that the warrant reviewed shows that two managers paid the cousins, among others, to swing the 2010 contract for supplying 12 helicopters to India. Italian prosecutors alleged that Orsi hired US-born Guido Ralph Haschke, who had close ties with the Tyagi brothers, to lead dealings in India to secure the contract.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
1.Can LCH and Rudra be fitted out with mast mounted millimeter wave radars by HAL?
2.Why can'nt HAL bid for the 197 Observation/recon helicopter with a advanced version of its Cheetal heli?
3.In times of emergency, can the Rudra be used for troop insertion/CASEVAC?

curious boy said...

Prasun da thanks for answering my queries.
I completely agree with you. The concept of IJT was flawed from its very beginning.The IAF cannot deny its role in the mess that has been created.
I guess the Tejas trainer fully satisfies the need of LIFT in the IAF & should be immediately procured. It will help the Tejas programme.

But you say that PARS 3LR(49 kg) & Hellfire(45-49 kg) are lighter than the Nag(42 kg). Could you give us the true weight of the Nag & Helina.

Akhil Suri said...

Hi Prasun,

Are there any known offensive cyber weapons except for MALWARES ?

Does INDIA have a Cyber Warfare center like the US ?

Thanks,
Akhil

Unknown said...

Prasun,

The Italians have now explicitly named former IAF ACM S P Tyagi. This is getting pretty serious is it not? Before it was just allegations against "Indian officals" now that they have explciclty named a former IAF officer they seem pretty confiudent of wrong doing.


Do you still maintain there was ZERO wrongdoing on the Indian side?


And where do you see things going now? The GOI has already said the remainig delvieries of the AW-101s are on hold for now so is this deal effectively cancelled? Will the 3 in service be returned?


Will there be an offical apology by the Italians for wrongfully accusing Indians of wrong-doing?


Will this affect futre deals between India and AW?


As you can see the Indian media is going ape shit over this story. Is there really no basis in the accustions?


Is India really clean in all this??



If what you say is true then some one needs to seriously needs to get a hold on the Indian media, what they are doing is not only wrong but it is harmful to India as a whole as they are propogating half-truths,lies and assumptions and then this is being repeated across India and across the globe.


The Indian media is making India look a fool.

Do these people have no proffesionlism?

Kshitiz Kumar said...

hey there Prasun
well some questions
1.By what time could you expect Indian navy to be a blue water navy?
2.was there any tender for any Multi role Support Vessel(like Mistral and all)?if yes then what is tis Status?
3.What happened to the Smerch Rocket Deal?
4.What is the status of Sudarshan LGB?has it reached induction stage?
5.what is the status of kamorta class corvettes?



now please answer these questions in detail.will appreciate it
6.By what amount do u believe our GDP increase in the comming years.Could you tell at what rank we could reach?
7.And by what time do u believe we will reach a stage of being a great Power?

Anonymous said...

Prasunji,

Mikhail Pogosyan (UAC Chief) in Aero India 2013 brochure says that the total count of Su-30 MKI ordered by Indian Air Force (Including the latest 42 numbers ordered during Mr.Putin's visit) comes to a total of 272 fighters. But many times according to your calculations the total number of Su-30 MKI fighters orders had already crossed 300 fighters by 2011-2012 time frame, then why this conflicting statements from high ranked officials? which one can be the actual figure?

chethan said...

Hi Prasun,
I came accross a post from a guy who had a chat at Aero India with N-LCA project assistant director and Navy Pilot in charge of N-LCA and he was told that even LCA MK2 will only have a marginal increase in internal fuel capacity and might not result in any increase in combat radius or ferry range i.e range of both MK1 and MK2 will be almost same.Is this true?
Is ADA developing CFTs for LCA MK2??

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SREENIVAS: For persistent monitoring of the movements of surface vessels like CBGs, it is much more economical to have permanent over-the-horizon backscatter (OTH-B) radars (one each along India’s southwestern & southeastern seaboards) & employ HALE-UAVs & LRMR/ASW aircraft for persistent tracking & surveillance of such CBGs. Because monitoring is a 24/7 job while tracking does not last beyond 16 hours at best. Also to be noted is the fact that the incorporation of Telephonics APS-143 radar on the P-8I LRMR/ASW aircraft does enable the P-8I to act as an AEW & C platform as well.

To Anon@11.07AM: Not by HAL alone, but also the growing number of private-sector companies that are already acting as vendors for HAL for the Su-30MKI, IL-214 MRTA & Tejas MRCA programmes. That’s why I deliberately uploaded posters above to showcase the involvement of some of the Indian private-sector companies in such programmes. As these very vendors keep climbing up the value-chain & overcome the technological curves, they will be eminently qualified to take over similar responsibilities concerning the FGFA programme, while HAL will then be able to act as prime systems integrator.

To Anon@12.34PM: Of course he is right, & there are indeed several such projects already underway, like BrahMos-2, IL-214 MRTA, FGFA, & the SSBN programme. Personally, I would also like to see some Russia-developed hi-tech stuff like the frontal & rearward IRST sensors developed for the FGFA also find their way on to the Tejas Mk2 MRCA & LCA (Navy) Mk2. Russia is the first in the world to have developed such distributed-architecture IRST sensors which have a tremendous force-multiplier effect.

To Anon@12.45PM: There’s no cover-up going on in India because the plot was hatched & carried out in Italy & the principal monetary beneficiaries are also based in Italy. Do you mean to say that in return for allegedly favouring the AW-101 for acquisition, the Indian parties will receive only 21 million Euros, while the Italian political parties will receive slush funds worth more than 30 million Euros? What kind of logic is that? Anyone who thinks along such lines, especially in India, can justifiably be called a MORON.

To Anon@12.48PM: It is an open-and-shut money laundering case: the Italians used the AW-101 contract to generate slush funds for political purposes in Italy & there was no hanky-panky involved in the AW-101’s selection process by anyone in India. But the ‘desi’ mass-media of India will as usual run around like headless chicken. After all, what else can one expect from the INDIAN EXPRESS’s Editor who last April had claimed that the Arjun MBT’s cannon was supplied by Rheinmetall & earlier tonight on NDTV made yet another outrageous claim by stating that even after 27 years of R & D the Arjun MBT is yet to enter service!!! If I were to swing such a major deal in anyone’s favour & if I knew what quantum of the contract value is to be paid as commission, I certainly would not be satisfied with a part-payment of just 100,000 or even 500,000 Euros….that’s common sense, which regrettably continues to elude most of the gullible Indians who are basing their conclusions on the ‘desi’ mass-media’s so-called revelations.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@4.55PM: 1), No, not mast-mounted, as it will involve an entire re-design of the airframe. At best, therefore, a stub-wing mounted installation is possible. 2) HAL bid as far back as 2005 & had then offered the Cheetal as an interim solution pending the arrival of the LUH. It was the MoD that then sat on this proposal, leading to valuable time being lost. Here’s another shocking revelation: none of the principal economic advisers to either the Govt of India or the PMO have any access to data pertaining to military-industrial modernisation or strategic matters like energy security issues. They are not even part of the National Security Council & therefore they can neither offer holistic economic advice, nor can they receive any feedbacks on such issues. That’s how dysfunctional the apex decision-making system is. 3) Yes it definitely can, provided the stub-wings are devoid of any weapons fitments.

To CURIOUS BOY: The PARS-3LR & Spike-ER are both below 40kg, while the Nag weighs 48kg. The Hellfire & Brimstone too weigh close to 50kg. Therefore, the aim is to keep the HELINA’s weight too below 50kg. With the MMW seeker, the HELINA weighs close to 55kg.

To AKHIL SURI: No, there are no dedicated full-time cyber warfare centres in India as yet.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UNKNOWN: What the Italian investigations have so far revealed is that there are only allegations. There is not even circumstantial evidence to indicate a money-trial leading directly to former CAS ACM S P Tyagi, hence usage of the term ‘unquantified’ in the report. Secondly, as was rightly pointed out, in 2003 the then PS to PM & NSA the late Brajesh Mishra had decided to dilute the performance parameters (especially the service ceiling) to ensure that a single-vendor situation did not develop. He was right is doing so & as a result of this there was a competitive bidding process involving the Sikorsky S-92 Superhawk & AgustaWestland AW-101. The Eurocopter EC-725 Cougar Mk2 & Kazan Helicopter Plant’s Mi-17V-5 were both disqualified from bidding since they both did not have the ‘stand-up’ cabin as specified by the ASQR. In the end, based purely on performance superiority (including the vital three-engine capability), the AW-101 won, just as it had won the competition to supply the US President’s Marine 1 transport helicopter. Therefore, from a qualitative standpoint, the AW-101 was & ramains without any other equal—period. Secondly, such VVIP helicopters are meant not just for India’s President & PM, but also for other visiting Heads of State & Heads of Govt whenever they have to travel internally within India. The three armed services chiefs too are entitled to use them depending on the seriousness of their requirements. Consequently, a minimum of 12 such helicopters are required. Therefore, for former MPs like Manvendra Singh to say (on TV earlier tonight) that a ‘poor’ country ought to go for only three such helicopters is downright mischievous, ill-conceived, & moronic!!!
Now, coming to the bare-bones of this case, there’s no cover-up going on in India because the plot was hatched & carried out in Italy & the principal monetary beneficiaries are also based in Italy. Does one mean to say that in return for allegedly favouring the AW-101 for acquisition, the Indian parties will receive only 21 million Euros, while the Italian political parties will receive slush funds worth more than 30 million Euros? What kind of logic is that? Anyone who thinks along such lines, especially in India, can justifiably be called a MORON. In conclusion, it is an open-and-shut money laundering case: the Italians used the AW-101 contract to generate slush funds for political purposes in Italy & there was no hanky-panky involved in the AW-101’s selection process by anyone in India. But the ‘desi’ mass-media of India will as usual run around like headless chicken. After all, what else can one expect from the INDIAN EXPRESS whose Editor last April had claimed that the Arjun MBT’s cannon was supplied by Rheinmetall & earlier tonight on NDTV made yet another outrageous claim by stating that even after 27 years of R & D the Arjun MBT is yet to enter service!!! If I were to swing such a major deal in anyone’s favour & if I knew what quantum of the contract value is to be paid as commission, I certainly would not be satisfied with a part-payment of just 100,000 or even 500,000 Euros….that’s common sense, which regrettably continues to elude most of the gullible Indians who are basing their conclusions on the ‘desi’ mass-media’s so-called revelations.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSHITIZ KUMAR: Indian Navy has been a blue-water navy for decades. 2) Not yet, only RFI was released. 3) It is already under implementation. 4) Not yet. Later this year. 5) The first two vessels are being fitted out in the wet basin at GRSE. Can’t answer 5 & 6 since I’m not the decision-maker on such matters.

To Anon@9.59PM: Don’t know which brochure you’re referring to. The Rosoboronexport State Corp press-release gives an altogether different set of figures.

To CHETHAN: That is highly doubtful, since there are quite a few issues still left outstanding as far as mission avionics is concerned. If additional avionics LRUs are required for installation, especially the internal integrated EW suite & its complement of AESA-based ELT-568 jammers & the OBOGS, then there will no more internal volume left for additional fuel capacity. But that should not be a problem, since the Tejas Mk2 & LCA (Navy) Mk2 will both have Cobham-supplied retractable aerial refuelling probes, which the Tejas Mk1 & LCA (Navy) Mk2 won’t have. The CFT option exists only on paper now. Things will get much more clearer once the F414 turbofans start arriving & the Mk2 airframes are built around them & flight-tested. CFTs can then be designed & fabricated, if required, within less than 12 months.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UNKNOWN: This is what the way forward ought to be: deliveries of the remaining nine AW-101s must continue & progress payments for the contract must be made by the MoD. All 12 AW-101s must be commissioned into service ASAP. In addition, the Govt of India must monitor developments AFTER the case has been filed in the Italian Court & based on the Court’s verdict is delivered, & if it results in conviction of certain Italian citizens, then the Govt of India must demand liquidated damages as reimbursement for the over-invoicing done by Finmeccanica to the tune of 51 million Euros.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

It’s finally been settled: TATA Motors-made vehicles will henceforth be used for mounting the Rohini 3-D CAR radar & possibly also the Swathi WLR. Read this: http://tatamotors.com/media/press-releases.php?id=835

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Politicians shall be at least and somehow barred from playing mischief in to the defense deals which are technologically superior and technically justified. Otherwise it will be a repeat of Bofors story every time and we will be short of the best of the guns for all the time to come and etc.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA 13: We are already seeing inept politicians from all corners jumping to ill-conceived conclusions & engaging in mud-slinging, with the Congress alleging that the ASQR was changed in 2003 during the NDA govt’s rule, & the BJP alleging that this has all the hallmarks of the Bofors scandal, & none of the two have even bothered to speak up for the IAF’s need to speed up the induction of the AW-101s ASAP. Instead, we once again are witnessing the knee-jerk reactions like refusing to take delivery of the next tranche of four AW-101s, when all that which needs to be done is to press the claim for liquidated damages so that the over-invoiced amount of 51 million Euros can be recovered from AgustaWestland. This can be easily done by deducting this amount from the remainder of the progress payments that are still due from the MoD. If this is agreed upon forthwith between solicitors & accountants hailing from the MoD’s Finance Branch & from AgustaWestland, then the issue will become a cropper & all unnecessary politicking will be avoidable, & the UPA govt will be able to avoid being called a scam-tainted govt-in-power. This is what folks like the PM & A K Antony need to do immediately in a pro-active manner, thereby displaying decisive leadership. Whether they have the intellect to do so remains to be seen. Folks like your’s truly can only offer such FREE advice in the country’s national interests.

Anonymous said...

Hey parsun, is India building a remote weapon system for Arjuna mk 2 or provided by Israel or France. is Indian companies trying to build anything similar. Plus can you tell me if the any of the orperfating vehicle have any. . . . Thnks

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

I request you to kindly answer my question in some detail

1 Can the LOC BE STORMED SUCCESSFULLY by the Paki suicide bombers and Pak Army

2 Pakis have MILLIONS of ARMED men
who are also religious bigots who would willingly blow themselves up

THEORETICALLY SPEAKING HOW many LAKHS of men would it take for the
Pakis to conquer Kashmir

It appears that AFTER 2014 PAK ARMY
would round up ALL the Afghan and Paki Taliban and make a DECISIVE push for Kashmir

I hope and and pray that INDIA has
WAR GAMED such a scenario where
we have One MILLION Pakis storming the LOC

Rahul said...

If possible please feed us about SARAS program as and how its stands presently.

Thank you.

Sujoy Majumdar said...

PrasunDa,

Many thanks for explaining the contribution of Russia & Israel to the Pritvi BMD & the AAD 1 and 2 programs .

But in this process of sharing knowledge don't Russian & Israeli companies loose out monetarily as they could have sold their systems like Arrow 3 & S 400 ?

Regards,
Sujoy

Anonymous said...

prasun sir did u think hal rudra of hal lch is as good as other attack helicopters in the world

curious boy said...

Prasun da,

I certainly hope better sense will prevail and delivery of AW101 choppers will continue with a monetary penalty. But the truth is that this deal will be cancelled, Agusta will be blacklisted and the three choppers will become white elephants with spare parts scarcity. Also I don't see any other arms deal going through in this FY13-14 with deals being put on hold indefinitely till Pakistan launches another brazen attack slaughtering our people. Then our government will wake up and launch another series of RPF's and then cancel them again. This cycle will continue while our soldier's equipped with antiquated junk die in hundreds and our enemies get stronger.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Just as I had predicted last week, the Maitri SR-SAM project is gaining momentum at last (http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-france-conclude-talks-on-air-defence-deal/article4414152.ece?homepage=true), while the issue of launching the GSAT-7 was also resolved today (http://pib.nic.in/release/phsmall.asp?phid=45428).

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.03AM: Now that the IMI-supplied RCWS cannot be used for Arjun Mk1, other alternatives from RAFAEL, ELBIT Systems & SAAB are being explored.

To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: Not quite, since the Arrow-2/3 would never be allowed for export due to the US veto, while the export of Antey S-300V & V-2500 systems too are likely to be opposed by the US.

Anonymous said...

Tyagi admits that he met one of the middle men at his cousins place - yeah the ones who he claims swore that they had nothing to do with this deal.

One of the other middlemen claims he has met Tyagi 6 to 7 times. What is emerging is that Tyagi was frequenting functions at his cousins place where these crooks hang around.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@6.30PM: What the Italian investogators have done is tie themselves up in knots to an embarrassing level. Firstly, they say that the Italian far-right Lega Nord party is alleged to have received kickbacks to swing the AW-101 deal in Italy. Then they also claim that the Tyagis were paid to swing the deal in AW-101's favour. Now, why would any Italian political party be paid bribes? Who was responsible for selecting the AW-101--the Govt of India or the Lega Nord party? And it was the Govt of India depts that finalised the VVIP helicopter's specs--the PMO & SPG; & not the IAF. Therefore, no one in their right mind would even bother to pay anyone in the IAF. It is thus obvious & beyond doubt now that the IAF/Tyagi angle is now being employed only to deflect attention from the Italian political parties that are the real culprits & only beneficiaries of the slush money. Still, if no one in India sees the obvious & continues to wear blinkers, then all that I can say is that they are only spectacularly MORONIC, much like the ones who believe that taking dips in the polluted & unhygeinic waters of the Ganges will wash off all their sins & those who believe in the concept of 'Ram Rajya' under which a King (Ram) without any iron-clad evidence suspects his wife of infedility & banishes her to the forests while she is pregnant with the King's twin sons. If this is the kind of person that's venerated as a 'Lord', then those continuing to cling on to such beliefs will continue to be taken for a ride by the Swedes, Italians & everyone else in perpetuity. No wonder former Supreme Court Justice M Katju is of the firm belief that 90% of Indians are IDIOTS!!!

curious boy said...

Pransun da,

What impact do you think the recent controversy regarding Finmeccanica will have on other deals inked with its subsidiaries like Selex Galileo?
Selex Galileo as you know is to supply RAN-40L for the vikrant carrier and is looking to set up a JV with Data Patterns.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

To give the story a romantic angle, now even the call girls will appear on the scene.

Bhaiya said...

Prasun Ji ,

India key allies kaun kaun se desh hain ? Aaj PM ne kaha France bhi ally hain . Aap kya kehtey hain ?

Bhaswar said...

Prasunp Sir,

Q-Could you please highlight all the known key specs of the Maitri SAM?

Q-The IN already has the Barak-1, the Business Standard article about the Maitri project claims that it is ALSO meant for the IN. So with the regard to the operational usage of the Barak-1 (10 km range) where does the Maitri (15 km range) fit into the IN's needs?

Q- While the AMCA is conceptualized to have a similar range and role as the F-35 the similarities between the two projects ends there. The F-35 is already flying (barring all the bugs in the aircraft and the persistent criticism it faces) while the AMCA is a decade away from its first flight at best. So why are so many reporters and people hell-bent on comparing the two here in India and in other countries too?

Q- The recent model of the AMCA showcased in Aeroindia points towards a more refined and disciplined design and shaping regime. The edge elignment, shaping and chining seem to be consistent with VLO multi spectrum stealth requirments (barring the absence of the F-22 platypus tail), in fact this detailed shaping extends even into the aft and rear fuselage like in the case of the J-20 (which is absent even in the current prototypes of the PAK-FA). That being the positive part, how can HAL/ADA and other reporters claim that this model is close to the final design when the IAF is clear that the design process will probably end in 2017-18 (or so I read in an article)?

Q- Almost all reports on this project had claimed that the AMCA is meant to be an LO (F-35 like LO platform) platform but now the model suggests that ADA/HAL have set their sights higher at least with regard to structural stealth. But how will ADA/HAL and other DPSUs provide for applique laminate technology, robotic surfacing, using other means rather than conventional riveting, facilities required to maintain the outer mold lining since the shape of the aircraft is so important to its RCS- Repair Verification Radar (RVR) test sets in order to verify the RCS of the aircraft after performing repairs for the same? Isn't it criminal for these agencies to implicitly assert that they can provide all of these things to the end user and in the production of the article within a decade? Or do they simply intend to fly a shell of an aircraft which will have all the requisite attributes for true VLO performance but other than that which will be hollow in terms of avionics integration and MRO and will be of no real use to the IAF?

Thanks in advance Prasun Sir.

Anonymous said...

Sir what are the products being developed by Data Patterns as of now?

Anonymous said...

i was quite surprised to see your comments on Rama. It is not that i was hurt on relegious sentiments but the fact that one thing you overlooked is that Rama didnt just banish his wife for suspecting infidelity. It was when his own country men took the justification that if Sita can be the queen after being in custody of a demon why not any of the countrymen can have infidel nature. In order to be the ideal ruler he showed that there is no room for suspicion on his own rule. If Ram was indeed interested he could have got a lot of concubines/consorts. But a leader has to lead by leading himself as example and not to duck under cover. What will you call a captain who decides to take the first life boat leaving the entire crew in the ship to perish if doomed. A coward or a leader. In Royal Navy it used to be punished by death.
It is true that in the show of idealism he had to sacrifice his personal life (he did the same with his beloved brother Lakshman and had to suicide in Saryu).
If you take a modern view of Ram's life it looks very silly suspicion on fidelity. But one forgets often to look at the other side where the messege is clear that the leader should not be self interested rather than the country. (and wish our leaders looked beyond the votebank and took decisions in the interst of our country)
The same idealism is responsible for us keeping Ram Rajya as the ideal world and the Utopia. If he still held by his wife then there would not having a Ram to be ideal. True the world is far from ideal, but there is nothing wrong in the quest for ideal. Sure ideal world is not an ideal place to live.

Sreenivas

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun da

Few queries:

Abt today's news"India France conclude 6Bn SRSAM (Maitri)deal"..6bn is huge.How many systems will be eventually be procured for armed forces..After sitting idle for 5 years,The Govt. seems to move the deal forward.
What abt the RFI the IA issued few months back for Quick reaction SRSAM which the IA plans to have 8 regiments??Why is India now putting all eggs in the French basket..Dont you think its diplomatic foolishness to do so.Russia now will be more miffed after this..India should have gone for the Russian Vityaz system which is now in trial phase..By this we could have recived these system within short span of time..Even the SPyDEr SR/MR would have deen logical to buy with TOT instead of the MAITRI..Kindly share your views and also pls thro some light on this maitri missile.

And this seems the news for IN 120 NMRH tender:

http://www.shephardmedia.com/news/rotorhub/aero-india-2013-industry-gears-indian-naval-helico/

Ur thoughts pls..VMT

Abhijit said...

Prasun i completely agree with you. 100,000 euros is only about 71 lakh rupees. For a contract of 4000 crores 71 lakh rs bribe is too less considering how Indian bribe system works. And our desi media is just misinterpreting facts and talking all shit. wonder why Tyagi still has not dragged media to court. Bdw does this contract stands cancelled or suspended? will AgustaWestland be black listed?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

TO BHAIYA: O mere bhai, India has inked strategic partnership agreements with countries like France, Russia, Israel & the US. These are the countries that can best be described as India’s enduring allies.

To BHASWAR: 1) The Maitri SR-SAM will be a vertically-launched E-SHORADS with 25km-range. Consequently, it will be ordered by all three armed services. The Indian Navy will use the SR-SAM for arming its three Project 16A Brahmaputra-class FFGs as well as future ASW corvettes. The Army will use the truck-mounted SR-SAMs (six VL cells per truck) to replace the existing Strella-10Ms, while the IAF will use the truck-mounted SR-SAMs to replace the existing OSA-AKM.
2) The IAF has not yet taken a final call on the AMCA & I too believe that if the FGFA is to be procured in as large a number as the Su-30MKIs, then there be no requirement for AMCA & therefore money earmarked for the AMCA project should be better-spent on other critical projects.
3) As I had explained earlier, the IAF is not firmly behind the AMCA project as yet, & the picture will get clearer by 2017.
4) As of now, there is no dedicated experimental flight-test centre of the kind which is required when developing 5th generation MRCAs. Unless & until India comes up with such a facility that includes dedicated RCS measurement facilities, it will be futile to even discuss the prospects for AMCA.

To Anon@9PM: Quite a few LRUs, like the L-band IFF transponders for EMB-145I, Weather Doppler Radar, Ashvin AESA-based multi-mode radar for Maitri SR-SAM, etc.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SREENIVAS: You’ve hit the nail bang on its head, for every coin has two sides, & as you’ve rightly pointed out, idealism triumphs over pragmatism in Indian mythologies. Had pragmatism triumphed, i.e. had Rama made a compelling argument in favour of Sita & explained it all to his subjects & convinced them to place emphasis on logical reasoning instead of believing in heresay, then the India of today would have been something radically different. But the Greek tragedy that continues to perpetuate itself in today’s India is that one is told to believe in a Ramayana that was written down by Tulsidas, & not the one originally composed by Valmiki, whatever that might have been. In other words, instead of focussing on the essence of Hindutva, i.e. the Vedic roots, one is today fixated on the far more diluted sects (followers of Vishnu & Shiva) & cults (the Bhakti cult that are followers of Krishna), all of which in modern times have become perverted & have degenerated into bigotry at the hands of 20th & 21st century propagators of Hindutva like the VHP, RSS etc.

To Anon@9.53PM: I had already stated last week that the SR-SAM is henceforth going to move forward & so will the launch of GSAT-7 naval fleet communications satellite from Kourou in French Guyana. By all accounts, the SR-SAM project will be huge in terms of quantity as all three armed services will procure it. Therefore, the earlier RFIs will henceforth not be followed by RFPs for QR-SAM or SL-QRMs. Not all Indian eggs are on a French basket, & neither will the Russians get miffed since Russia’s navy itself is buying four Mistral LPDs from DCNS.
As for the 120 NMRH story, it is 100% untrue, since the CEO of Eurocopter is on record for having stated (in all show dailies published during Aero India 2013) that the AS.365 navalised Dauphin is on offer (since the reqmt is for a 10-tonne NMRH) & the EC-725 Cougar is on offer for the Indian Coast Guard Service. Problem with the AS.365 (as shown during Aero India 2013) is that it does not have a belly-mounted or even nose-mounted 360-degree search radar, whereas the Sikorsky S-70B Seahawk does (the same Telephonics radar as that which is mounted at the rear of the P-8I).

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ABHIJIT: He will eventually, rest assured, as soon as the fog clears. Presently, the contract stands suspended, not cancelled. AgustaWestland is in the clear about any wrongdoing since no illegal transfer of funds took place from the UK to India. All wrongdoing was committed by Finmeccanica, which is only the group holding company that controls companies like AgustaWestland, Selex-Galileo, Delex AS, etc. The ‘desi’ mass-media is getting confused between different deals, such as:
1) The AW-101 VVIP helicopter deal.
2) The deal for supplying 197 LUHs & RSHs for the Indian Army & IAF, for which the A-119 was disqualified at a very early stage.
3) The deal for supplying 56 LUHs for the Indian Navy & 12 for the Coast Guard for which the A109P & AW-139 are on offer.
4) The deal for supplying A-109Ps for the Delhi State Police’s SWAT team.
It will eventually emerge that for deal nos 2, 3 & 4, Abhishek Verma’s lobbying services were sought & obtained & slush-money was reportedly supplied. But the fact remains that neither of these 3 deals have been signed as yet & therefore no wrongdoing of any kind has been done by any Govt of India functionary till now. Unfortunately, the hyper-ventilating TV channels have not yet been able to figure out this break-down of various different contracts & are consequently WRONGLY assuming that all slush-money from Finmeccanica that has changed hands to date involves only the AW-101 deal, something which is patently wrong & untrue.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

1) too much confusion regarding the SR-SAM. You said that it is an ESHORAD for low level interdiction where as AKASH MK1 and MK2 are for medium level interdiction (but still ESHORAD). what is the difference between low level ESHORAD and Medium range ESHORAD when both of them reach upto 25 or 37 KM (Akash MK2).

2)when you say that S-70 has telephonics radar, does it mean what the IN is looking for is an AEW&C helicopter like Ka-31, you said that the telephonics radar makes P8I to duel function as AEW&C. I thought only surface search radar is only sought.
again apologies for ignorance on the above topics.

Sreenivas

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SREENIVAS: What I had earlier stated is that the Akash was originally meant to be a MR-SAM but its Mk1 version could achieve a range of only 25km, meaning it ended up being no better than an E-SHORADS in terms of lateral range envelope. However, in terms of its service ceiling, being able to reach an altitude of 20km qualifies it as a SAM capable of medium-altitude interceptions. That’s why R & D efforts were launched in 2007 to increase the Akash Mk2’s range to between 35km & 40km, while its service ceiling remains 20km. The SR-SAM, in contrast, will be able to go out to 25km & intercept targets out to an altitude of 12km.
Regarding the telephonics radar, any radar that’s scanning the airspace BELOW can detect manoeuvring airborne objects. The difference is, while in a helicopter flying at an altitude of 1,000/3,000 feet the radar has limited over-the-horizon airspace scanning capability, this very same radar when flying on board an aircraft like the P-8I at an altitude of 20,000 feet & above can scan quite a large volume of airspace. Therefore, shipborne helicopters like the S-70B Seahawk armed with ASCMs or lightweight torpedoes will typically fly at altitudes ranging from 100 feet & 2,000 feet when conducting maritime strike missions, while helicopters like the Ka-31, which are unarmed, will have only 2 types of mission to conduct, which is AEW & surface monitoring. The Ka-31 therefore, does not quite qualify as a multi-role machine.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Interesting report: http://www.isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/iran_ring_magnet_13Feb2013.pdf

Anonymous said...

Prasunda,

thank you very much, that is wonderful logical explanation.
one silly question, when almost all of the current day fighters, cruise missiles and bombers fly at a service ceiling of not more than 15-20 Km why is a SAM called medium altitude interceptors, especially when ballistic missile defense is not a job of normal SAMs. May be too silly question though.

Sreenivas

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SREENIVAS: The answer is elementary. The medium-altitude classification for manned airborne platforms is set at 20km max & at such altitudes only bombers like H-6K, Tu-22M, B-52, B-1B & Tu-160 can fly with appreciable warloads. Beyond that is the high-altitude arena for recce aircraft like the U-2/TR-1 & interceptors like the MiG-31.

Anonymous said...

"The IAF has not yet taken a final call on the AMCA & I too believe that if the FGFA is to be procured in as large a number as the Su-30MKIs, then there be no requirement for AMCA & therefore money earmarked for the AMCA project should be better-spent on other critical projects."
No actually its not true. Whether we like it or not, only one who can stop this project now is Finance ministry or drdo's own failure.
You saw FGFA model, its not even a twin seater. There are reports that IAF is seriously pissed of with HAL and nobody belives they can build anything so IAF has made sure that FGFA is not too different from PakFa and not too many changes have been saught from IAF also so that no delivery delays are made by HAL.
Now because of this IAF knows there's gonna be technology gap and IAF firmly believes that India can't always be a importer.

So IAF is supporting AMCA and they want it to be fully indigenous but how optimistic they are about the capability of DRDO is a different issue.

Anonymous said...

"As I had explained earlier, the IAF is not firmly behind the AMCA project as yet, & the picture will get clearer by 2017."
Thats not true. IAF wants AMCA to be a success and fully indigenous and thats why FGFA is gonna be just like PakFa with very little time so that HAL can deliver them on time. Of course IAF is realistic about drdo's capability and thats why thjey won't talk much about project untill the first prototype flies but man for the first time IN, IAF and MOD are behind drdo and are hoping for a miracle this time.

Both IAF and In knows we won't get critical techs from anyone for future aircrafts and thats why they want AMCA to succeed.

rad said...

hi Prasun
The take off angle of attack in the lca that has been depicted in a montage photograph that shows the LCA in a nearly 45 degree AOA while on take off! And this years LCA show was slightly better than the last aero india. So whats up with the AOA isue when it can nearly stand on its tail!.
Why is the maitri SAM so expensive to develop that it takes 6$ billion?! Is there some thing more than meets the eye? More over all the tech has already been developed by the french ie the seeker , datalink , fuzing etc , so what is the big deal?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.55AM & 12PM: The press conference given by the IAF’s CAS on the afternoon of February 8, 2013 at Yelahanka AFS (whose contents were published in the following day’s show dailies) totally contradicts all your claims & contentions regarding the AMCA.

To RAD: The AoA limitations related to the Tejas Mk1 do not crop up during air combat manoeuvring, but have more to do with the AoA adopted when delivering air-to-ground unguided ordnance & straffing with the internal 23mm cannon. The full production-standard LSP-7 & LSP-8 will be used for flight certification-related clearances concerning the permissible AoA envelope. Luckily the aircraft is not being qualified to carry rocket pods. If it had been, then the AoA reqmt for firing such rockets would have been 45 degrees!
For the Maitri SR-SAM project, US$6 billion covers not just the R & D component, but also the production quantum, hence the total programme cost. Under this, the R & D-related & production-engineering costs are also included for not just the missile, but its VLS cells, fire-control system & command-and-control architectures & sub-systems.

Anonymous said...

i like reading your explanations

Anonymous said...

Sir news is coming in that "middlemen" received commission pacts from Dassault in Rafale selection in M-MRCA.

Others are saying that Rafale was disqualified in MMRCA first but later emerged as L-1 bidder due to the commission pacts only.

What is truth...it looks like AW-101 VVIP helo deal is gonna be scrapped. Will Rafale deal meet same fate..?

Anonymous said...

To Anon @12.34 am

Dont Trust the Desi media..Prasun da says rightly these are headless chickens..Just ask urself a simple question..Info reg. this ongoing investigation in Italy which india MEA has failed to obtain, seems the desi media has got..They are just copy pasting some selective exrepts from italian media..Indian media only offers little sensible talk and a lot of nonsense

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@12.34AM: You will now hear a lot of cacophony ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous. The fact, however, remains that Finmeccanica, a publicly-listed company, is now in the docks & there’s no way the European Union or the EU Parliament will let go of this scandal. Unlike the Bofors & HDW scandals, this time the truth will come out in the following 30 to 90 days since it not only involves the national prestige of Italy, but also of the UK. In the end, therefore, Finmeccanica will most likely have to fork out a sizeable sum of money as liquidated damages & pay back the Govt of India & it will be pressurised to do so by the Govts of both Italy & the UK. This is then likely to lead to a substantial easing of the domestic political pressure that the present-day Govt of India is now facing, & will probably lead to the remaining nine AW-101s being delivered later this year. So far, the MoD has made the right moves in terms of issuing a show-cause notice to AgustaWestland, meaning if no credible answer is forthcoming, then & only then will the contract be abrogated after the next six days, & the MoD will then be legally entitled to claim ownership of the earnest money & encash the bank guarantee that Agusta Westland was reqd to deposit with the MoD at the time of contract signature. I personally believe that the contract should not be cancelled & instead financial damages should be sought through legal means. This is exactly what Taiwan had done when a major scandal had broken out more than a decade ago regarding its acquisition of six La Fayette FFGs from DCNS & THALES. Taiwan did not cancel this contract nor did it surrender its ownership of the FFGs. Instead, it sued THALES & ultimately in a case filed with the International Court of Arbitration, Taiwan won the case & THALES had to pay back US$950 million to Taiwan as damages. Now that is what is known as a win-win solution. Regarding the Rafale, do rest assured that it was indeed L-1 when competing against Eurofighter GmBH & this was officially accepted as such last week by Eurofighter GmBH itself during the Aero India 2013 expo.
And as Anon@1.11AM has correctly explained, the ‘desi’ mass-media is still missing the woods for the tress. While the headless chicken at TIMES NOW are trying in vain to link Abhishek Verma with the AW-2101 deal, HEADLINES TODAY has already proclaimed former CAS of IAF, ACM S P Tyagi, as guilty without any credible evidence. As the 64-page investigation documentation from Italy clearly reveals, Abhishek Verma was involved in a totally different deal involving the future sale of eight A-109Ps for the Delhi State Govt. Similarly, what is true is that some Indian State Govts (like those of Rajasthan, J & K & Andhra Pradesh) that had bought AW-139 executive transport helicopters from AgustaWestland were actually fleeced by these Switzerland-based Italian middlemen. Nor can anyone fathom exactly how & why HEADLINES TODAY is trying to link the AW-101 scandal with the upcoming firing trials in Nyoma, Ladakh, of the various contenders that are bidding for supplying VSHORADS/MANPADS for the three armed services. All in all, therefore, these ‘desi’ journalists are one helluva confused species whose arses need to be hauled to the courts & be sued for defamation.

Anonymous said...

Pls give latest info on su/hal fgfa program

Anonymous said...

What is future of arjun mbt mk2.will army ever order them in large numbers.

Anonymous said...

What is current status of second arihant class sub?

Anonymous said...

1)If isro cryogenic engine is successful on gslv,how will it impact our icbm programme?

2)what is the current progress on f insas?

3) which amphibious assaut ship will be best suited for the indian navy? French,spanish or korea or any other?

4)Will the iac-1 be delivered within this decade?

Anonymous said...

Is this an accurate estimate of indian navy warship fleet by 2030?

In 2030
03 aircraft carriers
15 destroyers
30 frigates
30 corvettes
03 ssbn
03 ssn
12 diesel electric subs
03 large refueling tankers
04 amphibius assault ships
30 landing docks(small)
12 mine sweepers
60 patrole boats