Total Pageviews

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Barak-8 LR-SAM/MR-SAM For Indian Navy & Indian Air Force

111 comments:

mayank raj said...

hello prasun sir,
I see some impresive topics on ur blogs... As i was not able to come on ur blog for 5 months....
Sir.. Now my question to u is that i was just watching some international def website and there was written that the barak sams jointly developed by israel and india is not a joint developement project but a work share project...to which india is funding..?? This means india would not have any access to the israeli made tech.... Request u to plz tell what the cache...? Thanking u in adv...

Arup said...

Sir , Regarding Eurofighter Typhoon , I asked the following. The evaluation was done in two phases. In one phase , they evaluated the current ac and in the next phase they evaluated the upgraded ac with all the enhancements that would be available from 2015. After P1E and P2E enhancements Typhoons can drop LGB,JDAM,Drop a couple of PGM in a single pass. It matches all capabilties of Rafale.

The French ahve ordered around 2000 AASM kits for its Rafale force . Can we expect IAF HQ to go for atleast half that figure ?

What makes RBE2 , FSO combo superior to E-CAPTOR,PIRATE combo that Rafale was touted to be better than Typhoon in air to air missions when Typhoon was conceived from the very beginning to ba a thorough bred air-superiority jet whereas Rafale was to be a multi-role ac like Super Hornet ?

Are there any possibilities of the entire program being fasttracked , the production rate augmented to cater for IAF's depleting squadron strengths ?

DAshu said...

if the IA & CAPFs along the LAC outnumber their PLA counterparts by more than 10:1. That's because the PLA's Border Defence Regiments have only a skeletal presence all along the LAC, while the IA has heavy forward deployments & outnumber the PLA throughout the LAC during peacetime. --- then how come they are coming inside and setting up a tent ???

Anonymous said...

Sir,
your views on following matters
a> Is it not true when there is internal problem in China it becomes aggressive on border? borders issues with India Japan etc. PLA is becoming more aggressive over the civilian govt.

b> what are the chances that Pakistan becoming a failed state(which eventually will happen by 2020 with current rate) it will transfer/sell much part of the POK to China? can India get a walk over in POK as feared by Gen. Mussuraf.
c> Some astrological prediction about the world states that there will be a great war from 2014 to 2018 and 1/3 of worlds population will perish. china will break into 5 new countries. can this be true?

please comment on this. thank you.

Anonymous said...

Hi,

From the first image we can see our AAD is huge compared to the Barak 8 (in length, dia and weight as well)still it has less range. Is there any specific reason for this? Could you please explain

joydeep ghosh said...

@ Prasun da

i feel these are ominous times where India is looking at a scenario of a 2 front war with Pak China in very near future.

with 2014 fast approaching when US scoots out of Af with tail between 2 legs that will allow Pak to re configure its troop deployment from western section with Af to eastern sector with India.

now with China making such deep incursions and even refusing to back off i see a confrontation on a much bigger scale looming.

Simply speaking Chinese presence in DBO is an indication of them trying to compete a linkup Tibet to Karakoram.

India doesnt have those many men guarding border vis a vis China. I am surprised that we havent started work on Mountain Strike Corps. just by including ITBP into IA fold and merging them with MSC will give us the number, and its high time we revive the Tibetan element of SFF to counter China.

oh btw sometime back you said India doesnt need a/c like RAF Sentinels that are to be retired from RAF by 2015 but just heard IAF will issue RfP for a/c fopr singal intelligence, which i believe suits well with the Sentinels. whats your opinion

thanks

Joydeep Ghosh

Anonymous said...

Prasunda,
Recently India & Russia celebrated 50 years of the service of Mig in IAF. But today Mig is struggling to find new customers & also they are unable to deisgn new planes. All countries r only going for sukhoi models when they strike a deal with Russia. So just out of curiosity I want to ask what is the future of mig aviation. Also according to latest news in the link- http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/russia-ready-to-negotiate-with-india-on-mig-35-fighters_844197.html it indicates that Russia is willing to offer mig35 again. Though I don't want to compare this plane with rafale but I think it would be a cheap option & definitely reduce the logistic support of India giving some quantitaive edge to IAF keeping in mind the hiccups of rafale deal. Plz, share some thought regarding this.

Anonymous said...

Any news regarding Akash mk2? It was to be test fired in december 2012

shobhit said...

since aakash system is command guided, its radar becomes a key target for the enemy...how is it protected from radar homing missiles and other pgm as well as from jamming?

Anonymous said...

A smart payload delivery system being tested in China

http://shanghaiist.com/2013/04/24/husband_keeps_watch_as_wife_poops_in_shenzhen_metro_elevator.php


Fire in the hole!!!!

rad said...


HI Prasun
Your explanation of the terrain and the sheer logistical problems for china to attack india is fantastic, especially with indepth detail of the land . I would not be surprised if some in the military detest you because of your knowledge. I guess every country has civilian analysts and i strongly feel you should be one of them . I would go to the extent of equalling you as india`s answer to americas TOM Clancy!
Israel never failed to develop a cutting edge weapon system and seldom fail at their attempt . This Barak 8 is a piece of cake for them considering the the arrow 3 missile etc.I rest assured about the barak 8.Do post more info on why the airforce and navy rejected it , is it desi yellow journalism at its best again??.

rad said...


HI prasun
It seems that the Barak 8 can run circles around the AAD missile in all aspects, there was an article where an israeli observer noted that the barak is far ahead even as an anti missile missile. The specs uploaded by you confirm that . I would tend to agree , we look like kindergarden children trying to make a missile compared to the arrow -3 etc. We have no option but to learn the pain full way. Why dint we go fora TOT in the barak missile , would they have refused?.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
VMT for replying in details...

The issue with management of project.... could you tell in detail what are those....also can't this testing be fast-tracked as we have more than 10 test aircraft even if all aircraft are on test flight every other day, I think we can do it... or are we still at kindergarten level in testing ...

Is there same testing done while procuring aircrafts from abroad .... or does IAF believes what the OEM has told them?

And if done is the testing of 'phoren' aircraft this much rigorous?

And the issue of Barak 8 missile ... if we don't have the IPR of the systems of Barak 8 then why are we funding the whole project on our behalf only....why not share cost....coz this way only israel could sell this system in international market, right?
and we have nothing in our hand .... we cannot develop it further....whole control will be in israleis hand and they got all the systems developed and tested on behalf of our money.... Lucky israelis....as they spend nothing and will eat the whole fruit...
Pardon my ignorance if there any.

Regards,
A G

AK said...

Hi Prasun, PAK-FA has already been developed. So, what are HAL engineers developing with their Russian counterparts ? The 1st FGFA prototype will arrive in India in 2014. The aircraft is already fully developed but it will take more time to develope it's definitive engines ?

Will the other 50 Su-30 mki be ordered this fiscal year ?

What is the annual overhaul and upgradation capacity for MiG-29 of HAL Nasik. Wasn't the MiG-29UPG upgrade scheduled to be completed by 2013.

Why doesn't our AF doesn't spent much on acquiring standoff PGM and ALCM. Ours is one of the largest in the world. But why do we keep on buying PGM in piecemeal amounts say 100,200. RSaudi AF recently placed an order of 800 Storm Shadows . Why can't we do the same ? Why does IAF still resorts to iron bombs without any range extension kits ? The Ironfist 2013 video released by IAF HQ showed two Mirage 2000 armed with 70s era dumb bombs on a mission to destroy infiltration camps. In actual ops and in real scenarios does IAF follows the same or resorts to smart weapons with adequate standoff range that keep the jets outside the envelope of MRSAM.

IAF armoury doesn't have enough nos of ARM, a vital piece of weaponry in today's modern battlefield . We only have around 150 ARM and that too Kh-31P with a 70 km range.

The coalition expended around 800 anti-radiation missiles during the opening phases of Op Desert Storm, & in intervention in Serbia in 1999. I have read in the press that IAF HQ learns from them and constantly keeps itself updated. If that be so why do we have such a deplorable state of offensive weapons armoury? Why don't we acquire 200 km range Kh-31 PD ARM & 200 km range Kh-59ME in nos for our Su-30s ?

Do you have any updates on Jaguar re-engining and D3 upgrade program ?

What is the present condition of PDV , AD-1 , AD-2 ?

What is the use of electro granitic propulsion in B-2 when it's flies at subsonic speeds ? Does the Ruskies know about this ?

When Americans mastered such technologies in the 70s, the Cold
War was at its height. Didn't the Russians get any wind of it ? Does the Russians have similar black projects and space planes like Space Venture ? Was the crashed alien spacecrafts on moon reverse engineered by DARPA, Skunk Works and was it with its help that Space- Venture was developed.

Yesterday I was going through an article on Hindu gods and goddesses and their origins. I found out that our deities bears a strange resemblance to Sumerian Gods. Their is strong evidence that a nuclear device wiped out Mohenjodaro and Harappa but why do they keep on publishing in the history books that it was wiped out by a flood of Indus? The vimanas described in our Upanishads bears an uncanny resemblance to the beam ships of the Pleidians. Everything seems to be interconnected like Unified Field theory of Physics.

Gessler said...

http://newindianexpress.com/thesundaystandard/Tejas-grounds-Medium-Combat-Aircraft-project/2013/04/21/article1554240.ece

AMCA project put on HOLD.

Good news, I suppose?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Is India’s Nuclear Deterrent Credible?--by Ambassador Shyam Saran

http://southasiamonitor.org/detail.php?type=sl&nid=4982

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: Nothing has been put on hold, since the AMCA Project Team of ADA is presently involved in only academic work, i.e. undertaking systems analysis & in-house computer simulations, & was due to undertake some ‘phoren’ trips to try & find out more about what are the latest available technologies & how they can be acquired by way of risk-sharing R & D. It is only the latter that has now been curbed temporarily due to budgetary constraints imposed by the Union Finance Ministry.

Arjun said...

Hi Prasun,
Great stuff as always.
Is the AAD missile range given as 25km correct as i thought our Endo atmospheric Anti-ballistic Defense had 150 km range, If so how come the MRSAM weighs less than a third of both AAD and Akash and still have 3 times the range. Is our technological know how so far behind Israel?

Sujoy Majumdar said...

PrasunDa,

In the link you provided about Shyam Saran's speech , he says

" Pakistan is reported to have overtaken India’s nuclear weapon inventory and, in a decade, may well surpass those held by Britain , France and China."

Is it true that Pakistan has more nuclear weapons than India ? This is because of China that sold nuclear tech to Pakistan .

Thanks,
Sujoy

Mr. Ra 13 said...

What is the significance of the test fire of short range surface-to-air missile "OSA-AK" from Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Chandipur as on yesterday.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To MAYANK RAJ: The Barak-8 R & D project is indeed a joint venture but not in corporate terms, i.e. it does not involve the creation of a JV corporate entity (like BrahMos Aerospace). Under every such collaborative R & D project, there are work-shares cut out for the involved parties. However, any corporate interfacing between the DRDO & IAI would have been asymmetric, since the former is wholly owned by India’s MoD while IAI is a publicly-listed corporate entity. Consequently, a JV company like BrahMos Aerospace was not created. But a corporate worksharing agreement is now being put in place between IAI, BEL & BDL under which these 3 corporate entities will be able to swap components & sub-systems with one another in order for making the final product, i.e. the Barak-8 missile & its related fire-control systems & command, control & communications systems.
Over & above this, there were similar arrangements worked out in the previous decade for the PDV & AD-1/AD-2 BMD interceptors, plus the SLBMs now being developed by the DRDO’s Sagarika Project Office.

To ARUP: The MRCA version of the EF-2000 Typhoon is still undergoing development & therefore the Swiss would not have been able to evaluate this version of the EF-2000 in the previous decade during the competitive flight-trials. What makes a combat aircraft an MRCA is not just its ability to launch PGMs, but also to navigate its way accurately toward its targets by using radar-operating modes like terrain-following & weather scanning, something the EF-2000 will be acquiring by 2015. Any procurement can be fast-tracked, provided the customer can ensure increased money-flow—an issue that India is now having difficulty with due to the economic slowdown.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To DASHU: Not ‘a tent’, but 12 tents in all, at Raki Nala, 30km south of Daulat Beg Oldie in the Depsang Bulge area in Burthe in Ladakh’s Sub-Sector North, located at an altitude of about 16,300 feet, since the night of April 15. Whether the PLA contingent has come ‘inside’ India is debatable for as long as there’s an undemarcated LAC, i.e. both sides have their own perceptions on what exactly constitutes the LAC. But that is a minor issue which will die out over the next four days, since the PLA contingent has neither dug in for a long haul, nor has it created any firm base for housing permanent infrastructure like helipads, or motorable roads or dirt-tracks. But the one question no one seems to be able to answer in public is: why now & what are Beijing’s intentions behind this move?

To Anon@9.43AM & DASHU: The latest move by Beijing has to be contextualised. Firstly, this has happened AFTER the new President of PRC Xi Jinping for the very first time stated that the Sino-India boundary problem is solvable. Secondly, Beijing under its new ‘Look West’ policy is finally seriously engaging India across multiple fronts & wants to see how maturely India will act, or react. In other words, will India be militarily provocative as was the case in mid-1986 during the Sumdorong Chu crisis in Arunachal Pradesh, or will India deploy just enough capabilities to convince the other side that aggressive moves would invite counter-moves? Based on what has transpired so far, India has made all the right moves by not over-deploying its forces & has, in fact, technically insulted the PLA by not yet deploying the Indian Army’s Ladakh Scouts, but has instead deployed a contingent of ITBP opposite the PLA’s encampments at Raki Nala. To me, this is an action that shows India’s strength, self-confidence & maturity, since it is known to everyone that the PLA contingent will soon re-deploy back to the PRC-controlled part of Aksai Chin. This then brings us to what Beijing really wants from India as part of a grand bargain aimed at ushering permanent peace between China & India. I had, in fact, explained this a year ago & had then stated that what China wants India to do in return, & rightly so, is to convince India to disband the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile & Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile at Dharamsala. If India does not do this, then in Beijing’s eyes, India will forever stand accused as one engaging in doublespeak whenever it reiterates that the Tibet Autonomous Region is an integral part of the PRC. And the closest one has ever come to admitting this in the open was this programme: http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/india-decides-9/should-india-s-response-to-china-s-incursion-be-more-aggressive/272185?hp&video-featured

As for Pakistan, I don’t think it will ever vanish, despite the prevalence of its internal theological & sectarian contradictions. A lot will depend on how Pakistan’s fledgling democracy is allowed to mature. So far, all indications seem to be encouraging, especially if one reads the election manifestos of all the major political parties, especially with regard to relations with India & the over-arching importance being given to geo-economics instead of geo-politics.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.57AM: Indeed the AAD is huge because when the project was initiated in 1997, the missile vehicle chosen for the AAD was already in place & was being developed as the Prahaar NLOS-BSM. Also being developed at that time was the Prithvi-3 NLOS-BSM powered by a single-stage solid rocket & having a range of 600km (which has already been user-certified by the MoD’s DGAQA). However, since the then NDA govt had panicked & wanted a BMD system of sorts, the Prahaar & Prithvi-3 were hastily reconfigured as AAD & PAD. AS for the AAD’s range, what’s shown in the chart above is the vertical range, & not the slant range.

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: I foresee neither a one-front nor a two-front war scenario. Post-2014 Pakistan will be reqd to deploy more forces along its western front since Afghanistan has now officially stated that it does not respect the sanctity of the now-defunct Durand Line & therefore wants to redraw Afghanistan’s eastern boundaries. The PLA incursions are not deep in any sense of the term. It is just 3km inside India’s perception of the LAC, it is a temporary deployment & no one there from either side is carrying offensive heavy weapons like mortars or field artillery or mechanised equipment. SFF was never disbanded, it still exists but is now manned exclusively by Indians of Ladakhi origin, since no Tibetan youngster now wants to join the SFF. RAF’s Sentinel platforms are like JSTARS & are used for battlefield surveillance, not for SIGINT.

To Anon@10.30AM: The heydays of MiG OKB are long over when the Russians themselves are not procuring MiG-designed MRCAs, how can one expect export customers for the MiG-35s & what not? It will be much better for MiG OKB now to focus exclusively on developing UCAVs.

SHOBIT: It is impossible for any tactical airborne jammer to jam the Akash Mk1’s Rajendra L-band BLR target engagement radar. Akash Mk1 Batteries will always be protected by SHORADS capable of intercepting cruise missiles as well as supersonic ARMs. The principal function of Akash Mk1-type SAMs is to force the intruding hostile aircraft to adopt a low-level flight profile & once this happens, usage of ARMs becomes impossible.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAD: VMT & do rest assured that no one—certainly from India’s military—detests me or the likes of me since they all have far better things to do. Also rest assured that no one has rejected the Barak-8. If that indeed was the case, then the IN would in the first place never have even mounted the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR radars on the mainmasts of its three Project 15A DDGs. There’s industrial-level ToT as well as product-support ToT for the Barak-8 programme & that’s exactly what’s now being thrashed out at the corporate-level between IAI, BEL & BDL.

To ARJUN: VMT. AAD’s vertical range is 25km, not slant range. AAD won’t be operationally deployed & its missile-body was originally developed for the Prahaar NLOS-BSM project. The definitive endo-atmospheric interceptors will be the lighter & slimmer AD-1 & AD-2 missiles. Akash was a product of the early 1980s & was a simple reverse-engineering of the 2K12E missile used by the Kvadrat/Kub MR-SAM.

To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: Such soundbytes always emanate from former civil servants whenever they’re addressing open forums. Hence usage of the word ‘reported’, so as to give an element of plausible deniability. Reliable & accurate intelligence assessments will never be spelt out in detail in public, certainly not in India, given the existing mindsets. There’s another such seminar tomorrow in Delhi. Let’s see what gets out from that.

To Mr.RA 13: It was a re-lifed 9M33M3 missile that was taken at random from the existing stockpile & test-fired at the ITR since that establishment has all the radar-based & optronic tracking devices that are not present at other coastal air-defence artillery firing ranges.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AG: Any project is successfully managed if it is vertically integrated & has a single chain-of-command. This was never the case with the Tejas, since the ASR-issuing authority was the IAF, development authority was ADA, & the production authority was HAL. There was never an overall project director reqd for the seamless coordination reqd from all stakeholders & hence the confusion in terms of long-term objectives. On top of all this, there was ZERO skilled human resource pool available to undertake a project of such complexity for the very first time. That’s why I have repeatedly stated that the only probable way forward a decade ago was to lower the bar & first aim for producing a LIFT variant of Tejas Mk1 in lieu of the arrival of the definitive Tejas Mk1 MRCA.
When procuring imported combat aircraft, such R & D challenges are not there since it is a readymade product whose R & D glitches have already been overcome by the OEMs involved. Consequently, service induction of such products is a smooth affair, except for cases like that of the Folland Gnat & HF-24 Marut, for which the IAF was deliberately made to be the guinea-pig.
No one from India is funding the entire R & D project for Barak-8. All involved parties from India & Israel have pooled in their respective financial obligations. The very same format has been adopted for the AD-1 & AD-2 BMD interceptor programmes was well.

To AK: What has been developed so far is only the airframe & engine of PAK-FA. The IAF will get three flightworthy FGFAs for testing–the first in 2014/15, the second in 2017 and in 2019 the final one, which will be the version to be series-produced. The first two FGFA airframes will be used for flight-testing all the various on-board non-Russian sub-systems & sensors that the IAF has specified. Once the entire suite has been fine-tuned & certified by ASTE & CEMILAC on these two FGFAs, the third FGFA, similarly equipped but powered by AL-41 turbofans, will be subjected to a final round of flight-test qualifications by ASTE & CEMILAC & only then will the overall congifuration be frozen & be subjected to series-production.
Remaining Su-30MKIs certainly won’t be ordered this fiscal year.
11 BRD at Nashik can refurbish about eight MiG-29s per annum.
Electro-gravitic propulsion concepts adopted for the B-2B reduce aircraft drag by up to 70%, thereby enabling the B-2B to reach supercruise flight-profiles.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

During the Indian Navy's 50th Aviation Anniversary celebrations on May 9, the IN’s first MiG-29K squadron--INAS 303 Black Panthers—will be formally commissioned into service.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Excellent series of national debates on what Pakistan’s foreign policy ought to be, with presentations given by all major political parties of Pakistan, & equally excellent & objective critiques of such presentations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYR9TExhG8A&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx0yPYr8Icw&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktwwIG_lTq8&feature=player_embedded

Anonymous said...

VMT prasun... :-)

Regards,
A G

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

Does the Chinese TENTS or CAMP hamper
India's ROAD Connectivity to Daulat Beg Oldi Airstrip

The Chinese DEMANDS from India are as follows

1 STOP Night patroling by IA

2 STOP TAILING the Chinese Patrols

3 STOP Aggressive Patrolling by IA
Whatever that means

4 STOP making more Fortified bunkers along LAC

The situation is MORE serious than we are being told

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

In case of Kargil intrusion the Pakis
wanted to disrupt our Convoys going towards Kargil and Siachen sectors

What EXACTLY can the CHINESE TENTS ACHIEVE

Are they present there to keep a watch on us or disrupt our convoys

mayank raj said...

hello sir,
plz see this link ....
http://idrw.org/?p=21301
Looks like we are going to lose an ally....
Your take sir..? What do u think..?

mayank raj said...

actually the point which he said to ht are correct. The russians have been standing with us when no one was.... And they have been supplying us with state of the art and cutting edge even dual use hardwares..... So what india is doing with russia ....is it correct....?? After all they have been our ally from a long time .....? Wat do u think sir....??

mayank raj said...

what the chinese are demanding clearly shows that they are concerned of indian military aggression and they are afraid and wopped..,

iceman said...

Sir,
What is exactly the range of Air force version of BARAK SAM? some reports claim that it is about 120km

Pierre Zorin said...

Prasun I didn't know how a n-submarine worked because I thought N fuel created electricity like Diesel and hence they were quieter. I read now that the stealth weakness of nuclear submarines is the need to cool the reactor even when the submarine is not moving; about 70% of the reactor output heat is coupled into the sea water. This leaves a "thermal wake", a plume of warm water of lower density which ascends to the sea surface and creates a "thermal scar" that is observable by thermal imaging systems, e.g., FLIR.[14] Another problem is that the reactor is always running, creating steam noise, which can be heard on SONAR, and the reactor pump (used to circulate reactor coolant), also creates noise, as opposed to a conventional submarine, which can move about on incredibly silent electric motors. I also read this the US is building a new Ohio Class with electric drive which would make their N submarine the quietest under water. But that is years away. Seeing such cost involved in N technology, is it better for countries like India to actually concentrate on diesel electric submarines with AIP because they could buy twice as many submarines with ballistic / cruse missile launch capability? Pardon my ignorance in this matter but that's why asking someone who knows.

sntata said...

Dear Prasun,
Your analysis of Ladakh border situation in reply to Dashu is very objective. Since there is no chance of India disbanding Tibetan Govt-in-exile or expelling Dalai Lama from India, it is reasonable to presume that relations between India and China can never be cordial. In such scenario, how can any body hope for resolution of border ploblem?

sntata said...

Dear Prasun,
"Indian Army had earlier sent a team of Ladakh Scouts-- an Infantry regiment specialising in mountain warfare- to the DBO sector, manned by the troops of Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP)--soon after the incursion was detected."

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=20082

The Chinese refused to budge and Ladakh Scouts were deployed. So situation seams to be escalating?

Ravi said...

Prasun I been reading ur blog for quite sometime now. I like ur indepth explainations & knowledge on many issues. But I've noticed that u don't criticize china on whatever the issue be...even at this critical time when it has cum into our territory in ladakh more than 10 km...u r trying to downplay their evil intentions by saying that its only 3 km into our area. Is bcoz of communist ideology which is very much visible in ur blogs....the same attitude was shown by the communist parties during the 62 war...Plz show some concern for our country N stop acting as a chinese spokesperson.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Serious warlike situation does exist between India and China. At present China feeling itself aggressive and more powerful. India although feeling fearless but acting dimplomatically with patience like an underdog. However things may gradually improve for India and by about 20/08/2013 the reversal in the situation can be drastically expected, as India will be getting more and more bold and confident and even may be ultimately aggressive with success. Then things will be falling heavily on China I mean if they happen by then.

However China can never be under estimated and India shall be alert but try to refrain from the active war only till about 20/08/2013.

DAshu said...

Mr RA 13 what's so special on that date 20/08/2013 ?? Only 5 more months ...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@9.18AM: No, they don’t, simply because there are no motorable roads connecting DBO to the rest of Ladakh in the first place! The plan for building such roads was presented by Indian Army HQ to the Govt of India way back in 1981 & was approved then under ‘Operation Falcon’. However, by 1988 all such work came to a standstill for unknown reasons & everyone forgot about it. Then, in the year 2000, the plan was revived again, but then again by 2004 everyone forgot about it. China’s demands are not what you’ve stated. In fact, what Beijing wants is for India to dismantle a forward observation post in that area, i.e. a tit-for-tat. More about all this at:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Chinas-LAC-push-aims-to-make-India-sign-pact/articleshow/19733975.cms

To Anon@9.22AM: What Beijing wants is an exchange, i.e. in return for dismantling their present position, it wants the Indian Army to vacate another such position in that sub-sector. It needs to be noted that China is inferior to India in terms of force-levels in this area & therefore it wants to engage India in a dialogue aimed at maintaining a balance of force-levels & if possible, put all this down in writing as a bilateral agreement. The first overture from China on this issue had come last year & you can read all about it at: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/interview/china-has-no-plan-for-indian-ocean-military-bases/article3855313.ece

To MAYANK RAJ: What the report reveals that the Russians are extremely shy to take part in competitive evaluations, since they know very well that their existing array of military hardware that is available for export does not match up to international standards. Incidentally, it is not just in India that the Russians are facing such a dilemma. It is also in Indonesia & Malaysia & to a certain extent in Vietnam that they are facing such competition & have lost some significant contracts there. As far as G-to-G contracts go, Russia already enjoys a total monopoly over them in India & BrahMos Aerospace, FGFA, MRTA & the ATV Project are all proof of this. Therefore, there’s no need for them to complain or groan.

To ICEMAN: Slant range is about 110km.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To PIERRE ZORIN: That is precisely the reason why nuclear-powered submarines have a greater diving depth & can cruise at much deeper depths so as to hide their thermal signatures within the thermal gradients prevailing in the high seas. AIP-equipped diesel-electric submarines on the other hand are reqd for operating in shallower depths. One cannot be a substitute for another. Both types of submarines have their own unique strengths & weaknesses & consequently have niche areas of operations cut out for them.

To SNTATA: It is all about a matter of priorities. It is entirely up to India to make up her mind on whether hosting the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile & Parliament-in-Exile is worth the price to pay at a time when no one else is willing to extend the same courtesy to the Tibetans. I’m against the expulsion of His Holiness The Dalai Lama & he has every right to stay in India as only the spiritual head of the Tibetans. But at a time when neither the EU or the US or anyone else (even diehard Buddhist states like Sri Lanka & Thailand & Myanmar) is supporting the cause for Tibetan independence in any manner, I fail to see how India can stand out as the lone exception. The writing is therefore on the wall & India will one day have to make some tough but pragmatic choices in her own enlightened national interests.
As for the latest standoff, it is obvious by now that the PLA detachment is there only for a very limited duration & has no intention of staying forever, since they’ve not established any kind of logistics resupply network either by road or by air. Therefore, it will all blow off by this weekend.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAVI: I’m not a politician that makes a living by criticising everything & anything under the sun. And I have also been the first one to analyse China’s force postures & military options vis-à-vis India & you can read more about them all at:

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/02/how-china-will-fight-future-border-wars.html

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/03/taking-stock-of-chinas-airpower-build.html

As for the current standoff, it will be next to impossible for India to prove in any court of law that any kind of incursion or aggression as taken place, simply because unlike the LoC where detailed maps delineate & demarcate the areas under the control of India & Pakistan, in case of the LAC, there is no such documentation in existence. Consequently, be it 3km or 8km or even 50km-deep ingress by the PLA, neither China nor India will be able to conclusively prove where exactly the LAC lies & runs. And this is the very reason why no other country thus far has even bothered to make any statement about this standoff. If you really want to show any concern for India, then I suggest you try & seek answers to the following questions:
1) Why did India’s biggest single trading partner create such an incident at this point in time?
2) Why did India since 1988 fail to construct road transportation infrastructure throughout Eastern Ladakh, even though such plans were approved by the then Govts of India in both 1981 & 2000?
3) What exactly is China asking as quid pro quo from India in return for dismantling its camp & withdrawing back?
Engaging in jingoism & zenophobic nationalism is all right in the blogosphere, but in real life this is exactly what led to the 1962 disaster. Therefore, do get real by getting rid of the uncalled-for sanctimonious cockfights.

To Mr.RA13: India’s military options are limited, since the road transportation infrastructure throughout northeastern & eastern Ladakh is pathetic & has been so since the 1980s, despite repeated reminders by the IA & IAF to reverse the slide. However, going by the size of the PLA detachment & the nature of its encampment, it is obvious that they’re not there for the long-haul, nor are they interested in a prolonged standoff like the Sumdorong Chu incident that began in mid-1986 & was finally over only by 1995.

rad said...


HI Prasun
I think it is high time to wake up to realize what communist china is all really about . There are what they truly are ,as a communist say one thing and do the other thing and blatantly deny. Its disheartening to see the gov kiss the arse of the chinese by letting them destroy the local industry in india and else where where the trade balance is always favouring them. Allowing firms like Huwawei and others to eneter and sell in india .This is a right time to declare china as an agressor and stop a ll trade with that country and kick the WTO rules out.we do trade with them so that they can earn money and use that money to buy arms and hit us ?. That the bottom truth.They have done all what they can do by supplying nuclear weapons and all type of weapons to pak and others and they will go on . So it is the right time to form a coalition with countries and be more aggressive , as they only know that power flows from the barrel of the gun(mad man ( Mao tse tung)

rad said...

HI Prasun
Why are we still importing flight control actuators for the LCA , is it too hitec for india or it is not cost effective .?I do remember that we imported from moog before after that we changed to BAE?.

Bhaswar said...

Prasun Sir,

Could you provide the details of exactly what sort of infrastructure we need to build in the NE and Ladakh?

Why are these projects stalled even now, inefficiency or fear of escalation with China?



also,

"To this end, the Kalyani Group has imported from Austrian gun manufacturer Maschinenfabrik Liezen (MFL) a service version of its famous 155 mm, 45-calibre, autonomous gun system, which had impressed Indian gunners when they evaluated it in the mid-1980s (though they bought the Bofors gun instead).

The Kalyani Group has also bought, knocked down and transported to India an entire operational artillery gun factory from Swiss company RUAG. Instead of learning the ropes of manufacturing artillery from scratch, Kalyani’s designers in Pune intend to absorb foreign technology, thereby leapfrogging an extended development process. Unlike many Indian private companies, Baba Kalyani is investing his own money into building capabilities. Given Bharat Forge’s hardcore engineering pedigree, he is confident he has the solution."

What does the above mean, has Kalyani group bought the IPR for whichever gun they're going to make..if so will it have any foreign components?

Bhaswar said...

also

"as the Tatas have done by purchasing the South African company Denel’s entire 155mm/52 calibre Howitzer line. That might have been the second-best strategy to become a commercially viable defence production entity in double-quick time and do right by the country as well."

what does the above mean...I thought that TATA was just building the wheeled platforms while the guns were being manufactured by Denel..wasn't that a JV?

Iceman said...

sir,
Regarding night vision devices BEL manufactures NVD's for tanks, ICV and who manufactures night vision goggles for soldiers? is it BEL or TATA advanced systems?

Mr. Ra 13 said...

To: DAshu
This is only for academic interest and not for anyone to believe, but on 20/08/2013 the transit Mars is entering in to the third house of India. Whereas Saturn and Rahu are already posited in the sixth house. This situation may be theoretically considered better or best for advantages in any warlike situations.

Anonymous said...

Prasunji,

The below material in available on-line over for significant period of time. It states the chromium based material based in front of missile/flying object will reduce the drag by 40%. Does this belong to the same class of electro-gravitics propulsion to enhance range of the missiles? Description below.

"In May 2008 Indian scientists announced they had developed and patented a path-breaking technology that increases the range of missiles and satellite launch vehicles by at least 40%. The enhanced range is made possible by adding a special-purpose coating of chromium-based material to a rocket's blunt nose cone. The material acts as a reactive-ablative coating that forms a thin low density gaseous layer at the tip of the rocket as it approaches hypersonic speeds; this super-heated gas layer reduces drag by 47% (at mach 7–8), thereby allowing range enhancements at least 40%. It has been announced that this technology will be incorporated in future Agni deployments after having undergone ranging and calibration tests."

Initially it sounded like a distracting material put out by some individuals. But by coming to know about electro-gravitics. Seems like this also comes under similar category using different technique. Kindly shed some light on this material. VMT.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

I was thinking that they were already using this reactive-ablative Cr coating and after that they have patented it.

Ravi said...

Prasun,
When somebody enters into ur house without permission & doesn'nt leave then u hav to KICK him out....Everyone worth his salt wud do that. u dont go to a court to prove that he entered forcefully without permission...India has been doing this with Pakistan for ages...they've been bleeding India & its been crying like a baby on the international forums. Thinking OTHERS wud help in this. it has still not learnt one basic fact of survival in this " dog eats dog " world that it has defend ITSELF on its OWN, whever the aggressor is.
Are u suggesting that it is India that has instigated or provoked China to do this at this time. What is it that india is doing thats aggressive & that wud justify this action of China ? Bcoz everyone knows that India under this incompetent govt. has been acting like a weak, timid country. Also the the infrastructure is not being upgraded as the govt. is too busy to care for all these things. SCAMS worth lakhs of crores take a lot of planning & execution. The IDIOTS in south n north block have hardly any time or concern abt the security matters.

Anonymous said...

Prasun,

Why doesn't the IA purchase the AT 4 or Carl Gustav from SAAB rather than purchase expensive Spike or Javelin . The Carl Gustav and AT 4 can do the same job that Spike or Javelin can .

AK said...

Hi Prasun, AL-41F are interim powerplants for PAK-FA. A new turbofan with 176kN wet thrust is being developed. It will be ready by 2014 following which it will be flight tested.

Why doesnt PAK-FA prototypes have serrated wing and control surfaces trailing edges ? Sukhoi will start series production of PAK-FA in 2016 and it will enter service then.Will we go ahead and place an initial order of PAK-FA then ?

When will Tejas mk2 take to the skies & when will it be ready for induction ?

SA-8 sam has failed to hit their targets repeatedly. Any reason for this ?What can be done to rectify it ?

What are the qualitative advantages of Scorpene class SSK over Yuan class barring AIP factor ?How does they compare in terms of IPS, sonars ,ESM ?

Can you post an article on Ex Livewire. You promised to post a thread on IA's artillery modernisation efforts.

Is it possible for Mirage 2000, MiG-29, Su-30mki to evade and decoy BVRAAM like AIM-120 using their internal jammers ?Is their any curriculum included in an air-superiority fighter pilot's training to evade BVRAAM , RF SAM in their kill zones by using a combo of high-g manuevers,jamming in their kill zone. Dropping flares and chaff have become almost obsolete .

Is it correct that A-50I Phalcon have twin DIRCM turrets for protection from IR guided missiles ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Excellent analysis:

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-ladakh-drift/1107668/0

Vivek said...

Prasun da,

It may be excellent analysis but its very disturbing and frustrating to read all this, China has been taking away land from us every year for last so many years and yet India has been standing and watching ??? We have been serving our land to them on a platter? When will we start defending our land ?? What is the point in having such large armed forces and all the sukhoi, agni, arihant and all the nukes if the people who are suppose to run and protect our country do not have the will or balls to defend our land ? No wonder that Pakistan tried Kargil.
And what is the point in showing pok and aksai chin in our map if we don't mind giving away even ladakh or maybe sikkim and arunachal also........do we feel happy by just looking at such maps ?
And after all this we talk about becoming a superpower?
When the hell will we learn to stand up and fight to protect our land, women and children.
All this is just so demotivating, its a strange feeling - want to write so much and take out my frustration and anger.

Bhaswar said...

Prasun Sir,

Is Sumdorong Chu still under Chinese possession like Ajai Shukla Ji has claimed?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIVEK: Here's more:

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/lesson-from-an-unsettled-boundary/article4657978.ece?homepage=true

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: All-weather asphalted roads with functional side-drains (will upload photos of such roadworks across the LAC inside China for comparison, in a new thread by tonight), extensive arrays of solar power-generating farms & wind-turbines that could be installed throughout the uninhabitated portions of eastern & northeastern Ladakh, which alone will generate employment opportunities for tens of thousands of local Kashmiris & make J & K a power-surplus state. This is just one of many such projects that will enable the presently sparsely populated portions of Ladakh to have functional & productive population densities, without which the Govt of India will be unwilling to develop the transportation infrastructure throughout Ladakh. Remember what India’s first PM had said about Aksai Chin back in the 1950s about this area being so desolate where not even a blade of grass grows? Well, I have news for him now! This area has India’s highest thermal efficiency levels for solar power generation & also contains sizeable reserves of rare-earth minerals. All the present-day problems involving such transgressions by the PLA are taking place simply because the Govt of India itself has repeatedly forsaken this region & the excuse for this being that such areas are sparsely populated & that too by nomadic shepherds. Remember what the current PM had said in the previous decade about demarcation of India’s undemarcated Boundaries—i.e. not to disturb those areas that contain settled populations? What this means is that India does not care at all about areas that are uninhabitated. So why blame the Chinese when India’s own political leadership does not bother ensuring its sovereign writ over such regions? The situation is the very same in Arunachal Pradesh, where with great difficulty one can come across populated hamlets housing no more than 500 people at a time.
Bottomline: The Govt of India needs an urgent change of mindset & think about ways of converting unproductive & unpopulated lands into productive areas that can contribute to India’s GDP growth rates.

To BHASWAR: It is already a foregone conclusion now that the Kalyani Group will bag the contract by the year’s end for upgunning up to 800 M-46 130mm cannons into 155mm/45-cal howitzers. OFB on the other hand will bag the contract for producing an initial 114 upgraded & upgunned Bofors FH-77Bs, i.e. 155mm/45-cal howitzers. This contract will in future be expanded to include another 700 units at the very least. The TATA Power SED’s motorised 155mm/52-cal howitzer has already been rejected by Indian Army HQ & MoD & will therefore not be ordered. Sumdorong Chu is still under China’s possession & was never abandoned by China in 1995.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ICEMAN: BEL only assembles the night-vision system. The real sensors embedded within such systems are still imported from France (SAGEM) while others are being supplied by IRDE. TATA too is importing the latest-generation sensors off-the-shelf from Germany & installing them within locally-made gunsights & NVDs.

To Anon@5.25PM: That’s not electro-gravitic propulsion. To get an idea of what electro-gravitic concepts are all about & how they’ve been applied on the B-2B, kindly watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifEgGMFK-VU

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAVI, VIVEK & RAD: Arey mere yaar, the problem is that the one’s ownership of the house you’re referring to in your analogy is ‘notional’. If it isn’t backed up by authentic & certified maps & land deeds, no one will buy the real estate ownership argument & that’s precisely the whole world is silent on this issue. As for whether or not India has instigated & provoked China, details on this are slowly emerging & will continue to do so in the coming days. The fact is that China, believe it or not, is extremely spoofed & scared by the planned Indian force accretions now taking place in Ladakh & Uttarakhand because China right now is unable & unwilling to engage in a futile arms race against India at a time when its military resources are overwhelmingly stretched out for meeting contingencies against Taiwan, Japan & the US in East Asia, against DPRK in the Korean Peninsula, in the South China Sea, & against the Central Asian Republics in case the situation deteriorates in 2014 after ISAF’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. The last thing that the PRC now needs is to open another active front against India. It is for this reason that China is extremely anxious to conclude some sort of a mutually agreeable balance of force-mix in the Ladakh-Aksai China area. Consequently, what you’re now witnessing is a ‘drama’ that’s being played out & which will be resolved over the next 48 hours as part of a ‘win-win’ solution agreed upon by both sides & this in turn will pave the way for the new Chinese PM to visit Delhi on May 20 & jointly with India announce some path-breaking policy initiatives aimed at China & India joining forces & working together to not only resolve the boundary dispute ASAP (President Xi Jinping declared last march that the Special Representative mechanism should strive for “a fair, rational solution framework acceptable to both sides as soon as possible.) but also to work shoulder-to-shoulder to stabilise Afghanistan & Central Asia.
Bottomline: China simply cannot afford to go to war or initiate an arms race against India & both countries don’t want it either. That’s precisely the IA’s Ladakh Scouts & ITBP(F) have pitched tents opposite the PLA encampment in such a way that the PLA personnel have an honourable face-saving exit ahead of them once matters are amicably resolved over the next few hours. However, as I’ve explained above to BHASWAR & I’m sure you will agree, if India steadfastly perceives Ladakh as being just another piece of barren land where not even a blade of grass grows, then one can hardly blame anyone else for coming along & encroaching. Successive Govts of India have since the 1970s ignored not only Ladakh, but the other sparsely populated northeastern states as well, & we all know what & who has come in to fill the vacuum. I also dare say that such tactics of successive Govts of India have proved to be extremely demoralising for India’s armed forces, since no one has bothered to explain to them why are they mandated to hold protect & defend a piece of real estate whose very ownership cannot be defended & explained in a coherent manner by the Govt of India. Very sad state of policymaking indeed!!!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIVEK: All the present-day problems involving such transgressions by the PLA are taking place simply because the Govt of India itself has repeatedly forsaken this region & the excuse for this being that such areas are sparsely populated & that too by nomadic shepherds. Remember what the current PM had said in the previous decade about demarcation of India’s undemarcated Boundaries—i.e. not to disturb those areas that contain settled populations? What this means is that India does not care at all about areas that are uninhabitated. So why blame the Chinese when India’s own political leadership does not bother ensuring its sovereign writ over such regions? The situation is the very same in Arunachal Pradesh, where with great difficulty one can come across populated hamlets housing no more than 500 people at a time.
Bottomline: The Govt of India needs an urgent change of mindset & think about ways of converting unproductive & unpopulated lands into productive areas that can contribute to India’s GDP growth rates. And if that requires resettling migrants from other states in the borderline states, then so be it. The choices are stark: either continue adhering to misconceived notions of tribal ownership over such vast unpopulated areas & risk losing them to encroaching foreigners, or convert such landbanks into functional administrative areas where the writ of the govt prevails.

To RAD: Those items are still too expensive to be indigenised in very small numbers. For the Tejas Mk2 MRCA there will be indigenous stuff like these on-board.

To Anon@10.02PM: Carl Gustavs have been in service since the 1970s with IA. AT-4 is a shoulder-launched expendable LAW, not a guided ATGM. Instead of the AT-4, the IA has the C-90 LAW from Spain’s Instalaza.

Jet Fighter Fan said...

Peasun-ji: for over 8 months, I have been very keenly following your comments and appreciating deep knowledge and vision on defence & technology matters, as particularly related to India. I have just a couple of questions about our LCA Tejas:
1. I believe the Tejas Mk-2 will become a very potent LMRF (may be new abbreviation for Light Multi Role Fighter) when fully weaponised and tested to meet all specified parameters (Is that too much to expect in 2-3 years?) However, I just read in DID Defence Industry Digest) that, on April 21/2013, The Sunday Standard has reported that Tejas is a lemon and cannot fly on its own, without "lifeline" from the ground technicians providing essential monitoring of its flight behavior. Personally, I do not believe it. I feel the ground monitoring, whatever it entails, is confused by the reporter. I am coviced that when fully operionalised, the Tejas Mk-2 will be a very capable fighter; like the little Gnat was in its days. Can you please confirm and clarify?

2. Since India is firmly committed to the PAK-50 full development and co-production with Russia, is there a beed for India to have a simultaneous development of the AMRCA? If at all both are to be developed, can they have enough diversification in their capabilities and mission-allocations to justify induction in the IAF for both of them? Thank you.

rad said...


HiPrasun
was the tata denel venture rejected due to technical reasons or because of denel?.I do feel that for general purposes nothing beats the rpg-7 for cost effectiveness and fire power , the spanish c-90 costs 2500$ where as the rpg-7 costs 200$ per round , though performance wise the former may be a bit better,The US military after coming under fire and being on the receiving end of the RPG-7 in iraq and afghanistan knew first hand the effects of the rpg-7 and i hear there was a passionate plea to incorporate them in their armoury. But i think ego got the better of them.

Anonymous said...

Prasun sir, I have a few ques.
1. In one of old threads of Trishul blogspot , ""India-Specific Assorted News Briefs From Paris Air Show 2009", you reported a contract was inked for EL/M-20600 RTP for upgraded Jaguars ? Then again you said that no such rtp is in service with Jaguar . Which to believe ?

2.How many Elta 2084 have been ordered to date ? In some of your threads i find this figure quoted as 34 and in some other 21 ?

3.When will the 1st Scorpene enter service ? 2015 / 2016 ?

4.Do BMP-1,2 of IA sport MLU adxd-on armour or are they to be upgraded with them during the next upgrade ?

5.DCNS has its own F21 heavy weight torpedos. Then what is the need foe Atlas Seahake ?

6.Has any firm negotiations taken place between MoD and DCNS regarding Barracuda SSN ?you once reported that IN wants to procure eight such subs.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To JET FIGHTER FAN: VMT. Not the Tejas Mk2, but the Tejas Mk1 will first emerge as a potent & reliable LMRF by 2016 when the IAF begins the IOC process with the SP-series Tejas Mk1s. The Tejas Mk2 MRCA’s SP-series version will be available from late 2018 for IOC as per present estimates. As for the Tejas Mk1 requiring three or 24 man-hours of maintenance per flying hour, this is pure hogwash as anyone who witnessed this aircraft’s daily flying demonstrations at Aero India 2011 & 2013 will testify to. During these two expos, a single Tejas Mk1 gave daily aerobatic demonstrations without fail & was never grounded for 3 days. If the ‘desi’ journalists can’t even see & understand this elementary fact of life, then they deserve to be arse-fucked. As for the AMCA, as I have stated several times before, I fail to see what the AMCA will be able to do which the FGFA won’t be able to. Therefore, given the choice between FGFA & AMCA, I will go with the FGFA any given day.

To RAD: The TATA/DENEL proposal for 155mm/52-cal motorised howitzer was rejected due to its foreign content, especially from DENEL. The consensus within the MoD & IA HQ has thankfully been to accord greater priority to those field artillery howitzer options that can be quickly developed & supplied through indigenous means, & from that angle the Kalyani Group’s Project KARAN (indigenously developed & upgunned M-46 155mm/45-cal towed howitzer & OFB’s 155X45 version of the Bofors FH-77B) both came out tops. Way back in 2000, there was indeed a reqmt for RPG-type rocket launchers & both Russia’s Rosoboronexport & China’s NORINCO responded & once the bids were opened, it was discovered that NORINCO’s offer was 60% cheaper than Rosoboronexport’s. The competition was however called off so that Rosoboronexport would not get too embarrassed.

To Anon@12.45PM: 1) EL/M-20600 RTPs were indeed ordered in mid-2009 & were originally destined for the Jaguar/DARIN-3 upgraded aircraft. However, since the DARIN-3 project took longer to proceed than earlier envisaged, these pods are now destined for the Mirage 2000UPGs. 2) 34 EL/M-2084 Arudhra MMRs are on order. 3) Commissioning will be in 2016. 4) Not at the moment. The proposed BMP-2KE ICV upgrade programme will incorporate such composites-built armour panels as well as VRDE-developed BUSK armour. 5) F-21 was never offered for the IN’s Scorpenes because when the RFPs were released for torpedoes, WASS was still an industrial partner of DCNS & therefore DCNS had bid for supplying the Black Shark. DCNS broke up with WASS only 14 months ago. 6) Not yet. But they will take place within this decade for sure.

Unknown said...

Prasun,

Do I see a quadruple naval LAHAT in front of the radar?

AK said...

Hi Prasun, AL-41F are interim powerplants for PAK-FA. A new turbofan with 176kN wet thrust is being developed. It will be ready by 2014 following which it will be flight tested.

Why doesnt PAK-FA prototypes have serrated wing and control surfaces trailing edges ? Sukhoi will start series production of PAK-FA in 2016 and it will enter service then.Will we go ahead and place an initial order of PAK-FA then ?

When will Tejas mk2 take to the skies & when will it be ready for induction ?

SA-8 sam has failed to hit their targets repeatedly. Any reason for this ?What can be done to rectify it ?

What are the qualitative advantages of Scorpene class SSK over Yuan class barring AIP factor ?How does they compare in terms of IPS, sonars ,ESM ?

Can you post an article on Ex Livewire. You promised to post a thread on IA's artillery modernisation efforts.

Is it possible for Mirage 2000, MiG-29, Su-30mki to evade and decoy BVRAAM like AIM-120 using their internal jammers ?Is their any curriculum included in an air-superiority fighter pilot's training to evade BVRAAM , RF SAM in their kill zones by using a combo of high-g manuevers,jamming in their kill zone. Dropping flares and chaff have become almost obsolete .

Is it correct that A-50I Phalcon have twin DIRCM turrets for protection from IR guided missiles ?

Bhaswar said...

Prasun Sir,

One more question.

China apparently has set down a draft/condition that we are to freeze/halt infrastructure construction in these border areas.
Also I believe that they have demanded the dismantling of a forward observation post.

You've outlined the solution where China will pull-back after a "win-win" settlement. What is this settlement?

A) We dismantle the forward observation post and thats it.

OR

B) We agree to their demand and freeze infrastructure build up ans sign on some pact limiting the no. of troops deploy-able/deployed across the LAC?

AT WHAT COST ARE WE GOING TO GET THEM TO LEAVE..CAN WE BE SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT?

Anonymous said...

Prasunji,

Then, does the below information factually correct?

"In May 2008 Indian scientists announced they had developed and patented a path-breaking technology that increases the range of missiles and satellite launch vehicles by at least 40%. The enhanced range is made possible by adding a special-purpose coating of chromium-based material to a rocket's blunt nose cone. The material acts as a reactive-ablative coating that forms a thin low density gaseous layer at the tip of the rocket as it approaches hypersonic speeds; this super-heated gas layer reduces drag by 47% (at mach 7–8), thereby allowing range enhancements at least 40%. It has been announced that this technology will be incorporated in future Agni deployments after having undergone ranging and calibration tests."

Its been for long time on Agni thread. VMT.

Vivek said...

Prasun da,
You sound very optimistic about Indo-China relations going fwd, about solving border issues and even joint international efforts like Afghanistan etc, the main basis of this optimism is that neither country can afford another enemy and further escalation, but somehow one doesn't get the same feeling when one looks at the ground realities, for e.g. China colonizing Tibet, snatching Ladhakh from us, having similar designs for arunachal (their southern Tibet) and POK, keeping Pakistan alive and healthy (including nukes and delivery systems), helping our maoists and NE insurgents, propping anti-India elements in countries like Nepal, encircling and choking us in Indian ocean, controlling all the Himalayan rivers etc are just a few examples, so even a 2 year old kid can make out what China has done so far and what it is upto, obviously India has done absolutely nothing in response except just being happy by having Dalai Lama and Tibetan government in exile here, looking at such history what makes you feel that China's opinion and actions about India would change and it would start respecting India and hence think of having good relations with us, picture somehow doesn't fit in. Your views plz.

chethan said...

Hi Prasun,
A year ago, I came across an old interview with ADA designers who informed that the initial wind tunnel models of Tejas did indeed had canards but were later removed since it added no improvement to the teajs performance.
But according some people, gripen with the same engine as that of Tejas, has a higher AOA and STR rates because of canards as the canards provide higher stall endurance and induces less drag than a twisted cranked delta wing. Similarly, Gripen NG's performance will also be better than tejas MK-2 with same GE-F414 engines. They were of the opinion that ADA had to remove canards as they didn't have the capability to write FBW control laws for a delta canard.
Is it true? Did ADA bumble by removing canards?

Thanks & Regards,
Chethan.

Anonymous said...

Sir, VMT. A few more queries.

1.A ToI report few weeeks ago revealed that a 3rd of IA's T-72 tank fleet is not in good shape. They need new gun barrels,overhaul. Has their overhauling started ? What is the status of these T-72 ?

2.Only 400 BMP-2 are to be upgraded to K standard. These will receive add-on armour. What about the rest of BMP-2 ? They are heavily under protected by today's standards .

3.How many MiG-29 have been upgraded to UPG standard till date ?

4.Two EL/M-2083 radars are in service with IAF. In your thread , IIAF’s Multi-Phase IACCCS Being Enhanced , you said another nine are to be ordered. Any news about this ?.

5.Which EW suite has been finalised for Jaguar Darin 3 upgarde. You named many comapnies Raytheon,BAE systems,Elta ,Rafale in your thread Ambitious upgrade of Jaguars.

6.Which IAF fighter acs will get internal RF towed decoys like Ariel ?

7.How many M-46 are to be upgunned ? 500 as you reported earliar or 800 as you told just now.

8.Which motorised howitzer is IA's preferred choice ? This sort of howitzer has to bought from a foreign OEM as there are no indigenous substitutes .

9.For the LRSR requirement, a competition is presently underway between the ELTA Systems-built EL/M-2288 AD-STAR, THALES-built Ground Master 400, and SELEX Sistemi Integrati’s RAT-31SL. Which system finally won ?

10.What is the approx no of Elta-20600 RTP that was ordered in 2009 ? How many EL/M-2060P pods are in IAF service ? > 20 ?

11.We are slowly moving towards an effects based operation . But where are the standoff PGM required for such missions ?

12.It was from your blog that I learnt that IAF has done its regarding cruise missile defense well. It has put most of the sensors required for tracking and identification in place. But where are the interceptors. Akash mk1 is unable to intercept any sort of cruise missile whether they be terrain hugging or supersonic. IAF bases in NE housing Su-30mki are lying wide open with maybe some Pechoras to guard them. What will happen to the Su-30 and other acs during a mass LACM , ALCM attack which will is most likely take place during the very early hours of a war. Has IAF ever thought of such a scenario and has it worked out the means of protecting such assets. ?

sntata said...

Dear Prasun,
Very gratifying to hear from you that Tejas Mk-1 will be a potent multi-role fighter by 2016, after reading alarming reports about its deficiencies. Have the avionics, radar and weapons-suit for Mark-2 specified?

Bhaswar said...

“The border question is a complex issue left from history and solving the issue won’t be easy. However, as long as we keep up friendly consultations, we can eventually arrive at a fair reasonable and mutually acceptable settlement.

“Pending the final settlement of the boundary question the two sides should work together and maintain peace and tranquillity in the border areas and prevent the border question from affecting the overall development of bilateral relations,”

Sir, the above are Xi Jingping's words. He doesn't seem to be in any hurry to resolve the border issue so how can you be so confident that an amicable solution is around the corner?

Also they've asked for a freeze on troop levels. Doesn't that mean that we will have to stop the raising of the proposed mountain strike corps in the NE along with the two armoured brigades we were putting up for 14th corps and the NE region (one for each respectively?)? Are we going to agree to something like this? Is that what we are going to do to solve the current intrusion, capitulate?

What do they mean by demanding a halt on infrastructure? Are we to not build the road and rail links we need to secure Arunachal and the NE?

Most importantly how are we, the common public to know what GOI will do? They have been secretive about this while the media for its fervor is inept at reporting such issues and would have difficulty matching a person like you even with their combined wisdom. So how are we to know exactly what concessions, if any, shall be made? Most people, the common people- who thought themselves to be at least moderately well informed about such issues are shocked at hearing that Sumdorong Chu is still held by China..how will we know what really goes down this time?

Anonymous said...

If the ‘desi’ journalists can’t even see & understand this elementary fact of life, then they deserve to be arse-fucked". This would have been a capital punishment were it not practised and enjoyed so much by those lot!In fact every foreign trip they make all expenses paid they probably use the spare cash to buy the latest strap ons and 15" beaded vibes! LoL

mayank raj said...

where are u prarun da.... ?
Please read prabhat khabar ranchi edition page 1 and page 10...
Written about india china...
We are totally screwed now....

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UNKNOWN: That’s right. It can also go on board JLTV-type vehicles used for SOF.

To AK: AL-41 will be the definitive powerplant for FGFA. The interim powerplant is the 117S. Better to wait for the definitive FGFA prototypes to emerge instead of opting for an initial batch of T-50 PAK-FAs. Tejas Mk2 will take to the skies no earlier than 2016. Its IOC should get underway by 2019. Regarding OSA-AK, a lot depends on the conditions under which the missile rounds are stored, & on the serviceability-level of the vehicle-based fire-control system. It is too early to reach conclusions on the alleged malfunctions. Scorpene’s on-board sensors & mission management suite & IPMS are at least two generations ahead of what the PLAN’s submarines possess. There’s simply no comparison. That’s why the PLAN is anxious to lay its hands on a couple of Amur 1650 SSKs. Internal jammers on MiG-29UPG, Mirage 2000UPG & Super Su-30MKI will indeed make it possible for such aircraft to successfully jam the on-board data-links & terminal seekers of BVRAAMs. Haven’t yet seen any DIRCMs on board A-50I PHALCONs.

To BHASWAR: Beijing is only asking for one forward observation post to be dismantled. It was only last March that a visiting PLA delegation to India had proposed a freezing of existing force-levels in Ladakh & the Indian side had promised to examine the proposal after conducting a due diligence. At no time did anyone from China demand or request for a freezing of any infrastructure projects anywhere inside India. China had never asked India to freeze its force modernisation efforts in either Uttarakhand or Ladakh or Sikkim.
This is what Xi Jinping had said last March in Durban during the BRICS Summit: “the Special Representative mechanism should strive for “a fair, rational solution framework acceptable to both sides as soon as possible.”
The Govt of India has so far not approved the Mountain Strike Corps proposal, but has merely approved the setting up of a new Corps HQ in Panagarh. The armed forces of both countries know very well that neither side can win a decisive conventional war campaign or capture large chunks of territory anywhere along the LAC at that any such conflict will only be attrition-based, given the nature of the terrain in Ladakh & Sikkim/Arunachal Pradesh.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@4.07PM: Yes, it is true.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIVEK: I sound optimistic because I have firm reasons to believe that China has realised it cannot get embroiled in a futile arms race against India & therefore wants to increase the pace of introduction of a number of CBMs throughout the LAC, pending the settlement of the border demarcation issue. Now let’s look at the ground realities:
1) India had in 1954 itself accepted China’s sovereignty over Tibet & had inked agreements with China regarding this matter. Yet, India till this day allows the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile & Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile to operate from Dharamsala. What does this mean? Why has India shied away from playing its Tibetan card in order to permanently resolve its border disputes with China? Is there any other country in this world that is today willing to play permanent host to the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile & Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile? If not, then why should only India shoulder this burden? In what way has it benefitted India over the past five decades?
2) One cannot blame an encroacher from encroaching when the land-owner itself is not bothered to guard its territory. As I had explained yesterday, it is India that has persistently failed to bring about development along all its borderline states & transportation infrastructure development projects in such states has been moving at a snail’s pace for the past 3 decades. Consequently, even the local populace of such states don’t have a sense of belonging or attachment to such states. Can anyone blame China for such Indian apathy?
3) Regarding J & K, it is China that has forced Pakistan to accept the reality & go for a negotiated solution with India regarding the future of J & K. And how has China done it? It has forced Pakistan to accept the concept of ‘sharing the cake, instead of ‘having the whole cake & eating it as well’. This has been done by China convincing Pakistan to abrogate the 1949 Karachi Agreement by making the Northern Areas (Gilgit-Baltistan) an integral part of Pakistan, which automatically translates into Pakistan dropping its longstanding insistence of implementation of all UN resolutions regarding J & K (for, as per international law, the day Pakistan covets Gilgit-Baltistan, it automatically will also disavow the UN resolutions & this will therefore make it possible for both India & Pakistan to make the LoC into a permanent soft-border between India & Pakistan). This will also then enable China & India to make use of the Wakhan Corridor as a trade transit route when reaching out to Afghanistan & other Central Asian Republics. And last January, when Pakistan had sought China’s support when the decapitations of IA soldiers had taken place, Beijing told Islamabad in no uncertain terms that Pakistan could no longer be expected to count on China’s support if another border flare-up takes place between India & Pakistan. All this is clearly explained by a former Pakistani diplomat in a recent televised debate on Pakistan’s foreign policy options, whose YouTube links I had already posted above.

continued below....

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

4) Maoists & northeastern insurgents are all getting access to weapons & ammo from the lawless badlands of northeastern Myanmar, not China. The Naga NSCN (IM) is almost exclusively armed with M-16s & AR-15s. Does this mean that the US has been arming this separatist insurgent group since the 1970s?
5) How can anyone even dream about encircling & choking India anyone within the IOR? Bangladesh under Awami League & Myanmar under the new democratic regime have both distanced themselves from Beijing & are today closer to India & the West & Japan & Australia, i.e. the string of pearls has become a still-born concept. Instead, it is the ‘desi’ TV news anchors and correspondents have really gone overboard with the much-overhyped Chinese naval threat to the A & C islands and Indian Ocean. BY spending just US$3,000 the management of these ‘desi’ TV channels could have easily obtained the latest 1-metre resolution imagery from either ANTRIX Corp or even DigitalGlobe, which would have revealed the truth to all, which is: there are no Chinese SIGINT facilities or air-defence installations in Myanmar’s Great Coco Island. All that is there is one terminal approach radar for the runway (for enabling IFR operations by India-supplied BN-2 Islander coastal MPAs) and an S-band sea surveillance radar atop a lighthouse off the island's southern tip. So much for investigative journalism!!!
6) Do you really think China will be that stupid by trying to manipulate the flow of water from the Brahmputra, especially since such diversion will affect Bangladesh the greatest? Next week both China & India are meeting up in Delhi to gold the first-ever talks on the Brahmaputra River.

Therefore, the time has now come for India to engage in a fair exchange with China, i.e. either close down the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile & Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile or ask them to re-locate to some other country (let’s see which country accepts them) & in return insist on a time-bound resolution of the Sino-Indian boundary dispute once & for all. China to me is already ready for such a long-awaited swap, & its President Xi Jinping had during the Durban BRICS Summit last March had clearly stated that the Special Representative mechanism should strive for “a fair, rational solution framework acceptable to both sides as soon as possible.” With the help of visionary leadership being displayed by both sides, the time is now indeed ripe for both countries to seize the opportunity & bring permanent peace not only between the two countries, but also resolve the J & K issue once & for all.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To CHETHAN: The AoA issue regarding Tejas Mk1 has been a convulated one. For instance, AoA at what kinds of flight attitude? Instead, a far better way of measuring aircraft agility is by comparing instantaneous & sustained turn rates for different kinds of flight regimes. AS for speculation about ADA removing canards as it didn't have the capability to write FBW control laws for a delta canard, this is total hogwash, since the Tejas’ design configuration was frozen in the late-1980s & at that time ADA had already contracted Lockheed Martin to design the Tejas’ FBW control laws & by mid-1996 such laws were already flight-tested & validated on a VISTA F-16. Such needless speculation arises because everyone is erroneously assuming that ADA began developing the FBW control laws on its own only after May 1998.

To Anon@12.18AM: 1) Bharat Forge has been supplying T-72 gun-barrels since 1999. How can T-72 overhaul begin unless it is first determined which private-sector company will carry it out? 2) BMP-2KE-standard upgrade will proceed in tranches. BEML will do the upgrading. 3) About six. 4) No updates. Evaluation of bids for the aerostats only is now underway. After the aerostat has been selected, the radars will be ordered. 5) ELTA Systems. 6) For now, only the Super Su-30MKI. 7) 800. 8) Caesar. 9) The competition is still underway. 10) 20 & 12. 11) Akash Mk1’s Rohini #-D CAR radars are still experiencing availability problems & their performance has been erratic under different weather conditions.

SNTATA: The avionics suite for Tejas Mk2 was specified way back in June 2012 & I had written about it all in great detail at that time.

Iceman said...

sir,
What about the status of DARE developed radar based fourth gen EWS for su-30mki?

rad said...


HI Prasun
Disaster!! HAL to make Cryo engines for ISRO!!
You have mentioned that the mig-29, su-30mki and mirage upg would be able to jam the seekers of amraam etc, in that sense why hasnt any body fitted a IIR seeker on a amraam or a r-77?.
IT seems the phalcon does not have a dircm because it would be flying well within our land and protected by figgters.I think it is better to be safe than sorry with such force multipliers!
The russians can be stupid to allow the chinese to get 2 amur subs fully knowing that they will be copied. There are export version subs that have incorporated the designs of the kilo subs by china.!

abs said...

@Prasunda
I believe the latest incursion incident of the PLA troops is a strategic move by China to push through a border dispute settlement. China realises that it can't afford to take on the combined might of the US and its allies and India and hence its desperate attempts to forge a border resolution. What do you think?

Vivek said...

Prasun da,
Thanks for the detailed reverts, I sincerely hope that things are sorted out between us and china and we can have a mutually beneficial relationship, I hope your assessment of china is correct and hopefully we will not loose more land to China during our border issue settlement, infact ideally if we dismantle tibetan govt in exile and bury the tibet cause for foreseeable future then we should try to take aksai chin back as part of the settlement.

Anonymous said...

whenever one reads about new mountain divisions being raised for china border there is talk about raising 80-90k soldiers but only 400-500 officers..isn't something amiss??
i mean only 500 officers for like 6 divisions..has somebody gone crazy in IA HQ ??
OR IS THERE A ZERO(0) missing from 500?

Anonymous said...

Today if u watch any debate on TV abt china's actions against India, u wud be shocked to see so many so called " experts " trying to underplay chinese incursions. some even try to justify them saying China is a big rising power which needs to defend its core interests, its India which is rigid & its not being flexible on the border settlement with china. in other words India has to settle it by agreeing to most of the chinese claims, if not all to live peacefully with it. China is using its new found resources to advance its interests here...hence u hear so many chinese voices thru Indian faces.
Electronic media, print media , intellectuals, academics, defence experts...a whole gang to work for it. It hurts to see ( & read ) ur own people working against the nation's interest & forwarding the adversaries' cause.

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

According to you China wants permanent peace with India and is looking for solutions

But HOW DOES this INTRUSION HELP
CHINA in getting a solution

Infact by NOT reacting and Ignoring the Chinese we have made them LOOK
SILLY

Secondly have the Chinese got any FRESH SUPPLIES through helicopters for those 40 odd soldiers

Anonymous said...

sir ,
when are r u gng to post the project sanjay thread..u were posting it by 18th nov sir..please post it..it is high time now..

Anonymous said...

sir ,
don't u think india's CAPF's need extensive re-organisation..
like we can have only 1 Border force to man the entire intl. border of our nations during peacetime..
a single CI force the CRPF ..
& only 1 force to protect public infrastructure & so called vips ..the CISF..
currently we have a pleathora of them..which are used for any purpose on whim of MHA..
& also don't u think we can have a single officers trng academy on line of NDA for the officers of these CAPFs..they can undergo there force specialisation capsules later..& cant we do away with IPS officers heading the hood for such forces..
as far as i remember even highly accomplished IPS officer like k. vijaykumar when he took over CRPF said that he doesn't know much about the force & that he will find out..
i mean there is no dearth of regular crpf officers equally capable of leading it..then y does the job go to an outsider who has never served in it..?

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

Do the Chinese soldiers come out of their tents for a walk or looking around [ ie Other than for answering NATURE's Calls ]

Have they got any electronic / surveillance gadgets

The Indian tent is just close to them

Suppose INDIA MAKES a TENT IN SOME
other sector as is being CONTEMPLATED

And SUPPOSE Chinese pick up a fight
with our soldiers and try to evict them

Then will we ARREST these soldiers
at RAKI NALA or shoot them

mayank raj said...

greetings prasun da,
Sir i was going on ur blog and i found a thread for su -30 mki.... I read it and found that the first batch of 42 jets is to be sent to russia for upgrade to super su-30 mki in 2012 ... The first batch has gone......?? What's the latest status ..?

Ravi said...

Prasun,
Defence enthusiasts like me love u for ur layman like explainations on defence equipment & matters. I'd request u to just keep it to these matters. Bcoz reading ur views on india's latest external crisis, one is shocked ! how can a reasonable man like u is giving authenticity to the chinese aggression.

" One cannot blame an encroacher "

" insurgents are getting weapons & ammo from Myanmar, not China "

" time has now come for India to engage in a fair exchange with China "

And for God sake why r u making China a party in the J&K issue. It is still occupying our part of ladakh, Aksai Chin & the part that Pakistan illegaly gave to it.
So according to u the best solution of J&K is give whole Kashmir to the Pakis, the whole Ladakh to China & India be happy n contended with the WHOLE of Jammu...
Everyone knows China's intentions towards us. U dont hav to be an EXPERT to know who is arming n supporting N.E insurgents, its desire to control the flow of our rivers, its actions in I.O.R. And an illiterate wud know how china occupied an independent country called TIBET.
With the 6 point explaination u hav created serious doubts in the minds of thousands of ur fans n followers abt...

Anonymous said...

Sir, VMT. A few more queries.

1.Akash mk1 cannot intercept any type of cruise missiles. Which interceptor has IAF planned for in CMD program ? Which SAM systems will protect NE IAF bases from massed fire-assaults with NLOS-BSM,ALCM, LACM,TBM ?

2.IAI claims that Barak-8 will be superior to PAC-3 , GEM missiles. Itmeans it will be able to defeat TBM,NLOS-BSM,cruise missiles.

3.In one of your earlier threads , Russian Indian military cooperation to widen in scope and size, you said about SLEP of three P15 DDG and 10 Tarantul class corvettes. What is their status ? Is the SLEP complete ?

4.Does Sea-Dragon suite of Tu-142 have AESA radar ? Have the whole Tu-142 fleet upgraded with Sea Dragon suite?

5.When will 11 BRD start upgrading MiG-29? What is the annual envisioned rate ?

6.Vendor selection for avionics,subsystems, mission sensors was to be completed by this March. Which AESA , irst was selected ?

7.What PGMs are being bought as part of Mirage 2000 UPG deal ? Desi media reported the purchase of 490 MICA missiles. How could it be that no air to ground ordance is aprt of the deal ?

8.Are Damocles LDP, PAJ-FA jammer, ASTAC ,AREOS recce pod part of this deal ?

9.You once reported that there is a shortage of defensive RF jammer pods with IAF. There is only 1/3rd of the required no of pods. Were more pods ordered to fill this gap ?

10.Why does such a large AF like ours possess only 12 EL/M-2060P recce pods in our inventory ?

11.What is the status of PDV,AD-1,AD-2? When will the 1st test firing of PDV take place ?

12.Does MoD have firm plans of deploying BMD shield around NCR and in Mumbai ?

13.Is there any good news regarding Rafale deal ? How far have negotiations proceeded ?

14. What is the satus of Akash mk2 ?

Kimran Singh said...

Prasun,

What HMDS will the LCH employ and what ATGMs (other than the Helina) will it fire?

And do you see any likelihood in exporting the LCH? IIRC the Ecuadoreans were interested in the LCH.

Anonymous said...

India ahead of China in maritime deterrent: Expert

http://newindianexpress.com/states/tamil_nadu/India-ahead-of-China-in-maritime-deterrent-Expert/2013/04/28/article1564840.ece1

Prasun, does make any sense?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ICEMAN: The EWS comprises RWR, LWR, MAWS & AESA-based ELT-568 active internal jammer.

To RAD: Don’t worry, for companies like HAL or BrahMos Aerpospace that are involved in making rocket boosters for ISRO will NEVER screw-up, since ISRO is controlled directly by the PMO. No one will dare screw-up on issues like QA/QC because if they do, then a big ‘danda’ will descend upon them from the PMO. IIR seekers are available with MICA, just like what’s available on the R-27 family of BVRAAMs. And like I explained earlier, next-generation BVRAAMs like MBDA’s Meteor, Raytheon’s FRAAM & Boeing’s Joint Dual-Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM) will feature built-in dual-mode active/passive seekers.
As for China reverse-engineering Russia-origin stuff, they tried to do that with Su-27SKs & here’s what happened: More than 47 Su-27SKs/Su-27UBKs have been lost to crashes, along with more than 40 J-11As so far. China stopped the J-11A project at 95 units after Russia stopped supplying AL-31F turbofans in the previous decade. Originally, China had contracted Russia for supplying AL-31Fs for 200 J-11A/Bs. Consequently, the 105 J-11A/Bs had to be powered by WS-10B turbofans & of these 105 aircraft, more than 40 have crashed so far. So, will China still persist in using the WS-10Bs to power the J-11Bs & J-15s? I very much doubt so & China will have no other option but to beg Russia for additional AL-31Fs. So you see, reverse-engineering has its own pitfalls. In addition, China in late 2011 inked a IPR protection agreement with Russia that contains strict compliance clauses, meaning supply of technical documentation to China for Amur 1650 SSK will be tightly regulated by Russia.

To ABS: If you read the latest thread where I’ve detailed all the CBMs inked so far, you will realise that Beijing had rushed through this latest transgression, since the new Chinese leadership does not want such embarrassing (for both) instances to happen AFTER the maiden visit to India of the new Chinese PM. Therefore, at best, this was a minor tactical operation that was mandated by Beijing to remain strictly within the confines of the 20km demilitarised area that lies on either side of the LAC. Hence, the PLA personnel that are encamped have brought along only their personal sidearms.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIVEK & ABS: Kindly read the latest thread in which all the clauses dealing with CBMs & Rules of Engagement along the LAC are detailed. Here’s my analysis of the future: with economic growth and military force modernisation, India and China are all set to stake a bigger claim in the international system. China already is a global player, and its views count on virtually every issue. India, powered by its economic growth, is gaining recognition as a bigger player in global affairs. If we look at food, China is expected to account for one-half the increase in the global demand for cereals. While India was more or less self-sufficient in cereals, by 2020, she will import up to 30 million metric tonnes. China will consume 40% of the increasing demand for meat. Roots and tubers are important in the Asian diet: China and India will lead the demand here too. China’s agricultural trade deficit is expected to increase to US$33.5 billion, while India’s will increase to US$9.1 billion by 2020.
Water contention, already an area of concern, could grow unless pre-empted with mechanisms like the JWG that India recently suggested & which is likely to be accepted by China. The supply of water is falling in both countries, and demand is growing sharply. China’s supply has fallen by about 15% and India’s by over 25%. China has massive water inequality: northern China has 35% of the population and only 7% of the country’s water resources. Rivers are a key freshwater resource. All of South Asia’s major northern rivers originate in Tibet. China has plans to generate hydroelectricity but may also want to divert river waters as run-of-the-river schemes (that don’t result in decreases in the quantum of water), particularly to its north. While China has begun to share some water data with India, its long range plans, especially on water diversion, are a cause for some concern.

cont'd below...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

The energy picture also suggests that India and China could come into conflict. Global energy needs will rise by 50% by 2030, half of it from India and China. China is already the world’s largest energy consumer. Per capita energy use in India will grow by 56-67% and in China by 60-67%. Oil accounts for about 25% of India’s total energy use. This will rise to 35% in 2030. Over 60% of India’s oil comes from the Persian Gulf, Iran, and other Middle Eastern sources. India reliance on coal is 42% of its total energy use. Her shortfall of coal was 100 million metric tonnes by 2012. Oil accounts for roughly 20% of China’s total energy use. This is expected to rise to 24% in 2030. Its reliance on coal is nearly 70% of its total energy use. Demand for coal in China is growing rapidly and will be 6 billion tonnes in 2025. Natural gas use will also increase substantially in both cases. The key point here is that India and China will increasingly import their oil, coal, and natural gas requirements. Both countries are already foraging for energy in Africa, the Persian Gulf, Central Asia, Eurasia and Latin America. They have even begun to look at the vast tar sands in Alberta, Canada, which may have the second largest reserves of oil after Saudi Arabia. Also, the mix of energy sources of the two countries is different. India is and will be more reliant on oil, and China is and will be more dependent on coal. India and China may be in a position to cooperate on energy. China has perhaps the leading clean coal technologies in the world, which India needs; and China has invested massively in alternative energies, which again India needs—and could get at cheaper rates than from anywhere else.
Folks in India can continue to berate China, but a huge proportion of the problem is inside China itself. As for China’s purported plans to divert water from India and Bangladesh, there are at least two constraints, neither of which is trivial—the engineering challenges of water diversion; and the growing opposition within China. The latter should not be laughed off. For one thing, massive diversion works will have potentially huge environmental and displacement effects. For another, there will be worry within China that some parts of the country are “losing” water to other parts. In sum, China’s plans for water diversion will face significant internal hurdles. These may be more consequential than the external pressures on China. It is worth noting here that Jiao Yong, Vice Minister of China’s Ministry of Water Resources, said in November 30, 2011, that given the technical, environmental, and diplomatic difficulties, the Chinese government had no plans to divert the Brahmaputra. That said, it is perfectly in order for India to continue to press China for hydrological data and greater transparency on its riverine plans.

cont'd below...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Now, let us ask the central strategic question: is war likely between India and China? How and why would the two countries end up? Some fear that China would attack to settle the border issue in its favour or to prevent India’s rise. Some point darkly to the prospect of war over scarce resources, particularly water and energy. Whatever the motive for war, the suggestion seems to be that China would launch a frontal attack as in 1962—either to grab territory or to punish and coerce India in the competition for scarce resources. Is this a realistic possibility? Leaving aside the economic costs of war for China, I would argue that a Chinese frontal attack as in 1962 is unlikely for at least four military reasons. The first reason is nuclear weapons. China has 200+ nuclear weapons, and India has about 100. That induces extreme caution on both sides. Conventional war under the shadow of nuclear weapons may still be a temptation; but as India has discovered in relation to Pakistan, even the side with superior conventional capabilities must be extremely careful given that conventional war could escalate to nuclear confrontation. The successes of the Agni-IV & Agni-V land-mobile ballistic missile tests & on-going development of SLBMs suggest that the Indian n-deterrent will only be strengthened. Secondly, both sides have airpower that will make a conventional war of any duration and decisiveness very difficult. China’s long supply lines, essentially from Chengdu, are highly vulnerable to air interdiction--the trip is over 4,000km by train and over 2,000km by road. Any attempt by China to disable the IAF in the North East and West Bengal in a first-strike will be a challenge, as the IAF is thickly deployed there and will be ready for a disabling surprise attack. To the extent that the IAF remains a viable force, the movement of PLA ground forces and supplies will be quite problematic. Thirdly, while China has the advantage of the heights on the Tibetan plateau, its ability to send large forces into India in this sector is limited by geographical constraints—the routes down into India are narrow and winding, and the PLA will find itself vulnerable to sustained air interdiction if it breaches Indian ground defences. In addition, of course, its supply lines will become increasingly long, while India will have the advantage of ever shortening interior supply lines. Fourth, Chinese forces will have to take account of possible Tibetan instabilities behind them. Having said that, a Chinese attack on India is unlikely because its success is problematic, there are two additional possibilities we must consider. The first is that the Chinese attack will develop quite differently after an initial attack along the LAC.

cont'd below...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Chinese forces could supplement their frontal attack by “leapfrogging” over the Himalayas with air-mobile special operations forces, cut off supplies to the Indian front, and trap Indian units at the LAC. This would depend on China possessing the requisite airlift capability, very large and sophisticated special forces, and the ability to suppress Indian ground defences, especially the air defences. While China clearly is organising itself for quick-strike attacks with sophisticated mobile forces (for various regional contingencies), it is hardly beyond India to counter this, given that the Indian military is aware of new Chinese military doctrines and capabilities. In essence, India must have equivalent air-mobile forces that it would use for swift counter-attacks. Also, suppressing Indian defensive fire-assaults that would emanate from either ground installations or air platforms will be no easy task for the PLA’s airborne forces. Furthermore, even if Chinese special forces established themselves on the ground behind the Indian side of the LAC, they would quickly run short of supplies and would be susceptible to ground and aerial counter-attack, leading to their decimation. In other words, leapfrogging would be a very high-risk strategy for China. The second possibility is that China would attack at sea—for example, in the South China Sea or the Indian Ocean. Given the growing reach of both navies, conflict along these lines cannot be altogether ruled out. However, here again, deterrence should prevail. Clearly, it would be extremely foolish for the IN to pick a fight with China in the South China Sea. India’s naval forces in the area will be small, at least for many years to come, with extremely long communications and supply lines, and they would have little chance against a PLAN force. In the Indian Ocean, the situation would be reversed. In short, if the Indian Navy is prudent and avoids confrontation in the South China Sea and if it continues to modernise its fleet, a naval war also seems remote. In sum, war between the two countries is not very likely unless one or the other engages in highly provocative, ill-judged behavior—and even then, with nuclear weapons and airpower, it would be very risky for China to go to war. I assume here that India will not seek to provoke war.
The basis for cooperation between Asia’s giants exists. There is already a fair amount of cooperation. Cooperation in the future is not a given, and the cooperative system in place today is reasonably sufficient for emerging challenges. However, India and China could do well to look at a wide-ranging, institutionalised form of long-term cooperation. On this may depend the welfare of three billion people and the stability of Asia and international order.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIVEK: The time for India to play her ‘Tibet’ card has already arrived. Dismantling of the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile & Tibetan parliament-in-Exile in return for permanent peace along the China-India border is a reasonable exchange, according to me. After all, I do not relish the prospect of Indian citizens of northeastern origin being mistakenly detained by the Delhi Police everytime the Tibetan refugees descend upon Delhi to protest against official visits by high-level Chinese dignitaries. Therefore, either grant these Tibetan refugees Indian citizenship, or just expel them since India can well do without such nuisance & non-productive human resources. China too is very anxious to stabilise Tibet in any way possible since the unrest there only damages Tibet’s tourism economy & tarnishes China’s image overseas. It is extremely worried about the Tibetan refugees making use of the Uttarakhand route to either get smuggled into Tibet or to flee from Tibet (since the Nepal route has totally dried up since mid-2008). So, in order to plug this gap, the PLA has since 2010 increased its tempo of summertime training deployments in areas opposite Uttarkhand, & the IA & IAF have retaliated by expanding their forces-in-theatre in southeastern Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh & Uttarakhand. This action-reaction spiral is unsustainable for both sides, more so for China since it has to fork out increasing amounts of money that’s reqd to be paid as daily high-altitude sustenance allowances for all PLA personnel that are brought in each year from other parts of China into the high-altitude Tibetan Plateau. Consequently, the only logical thing to do is to do away with the problem, i.e. stop the human trafficking of Tibetan refugees for good & in return have a totally demarcated & delineated international border for both countries.

To Anon@7.55PM: Only two new mountain divisions have been raised. Everything else has been put on hold.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@7.55PM: What they all ought to say is the obvious: it is time for India to play her Tibetan Card in order to secure an equitable & comprehensive border settlement with China. All that China really has been seeking since the previous decade has been the dismantling of the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile & Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile. For how long will India continue to play this Tibetan card? For another 50 years, 200 years? And how exactly does India benefit by playing host to the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile & Tibetan parliament-in-Exile, especially after His Holiness The Dalai Lama resigned as political leader of all Tibetans in 2011, & is today only the Spiritual leader? His Holinbess is most welcome to stay forever at Dharamsala as a spiritual leader & China won’t have any objections at all to that.

To Anon@7.56PM: The PLA encampment can be easily resupplied by road since the Depsang Valley is a gradual slope originating from the Chinese side of the LAC. 8 x 8 ATVs like the ones built by POLARIS can easily bring in perishable commodities. One doesn’t need helicopters for such re-supplies.

To Anon@7.56PM: Relax yaar, have some more patience. This blog is a one-man show, so there are the inevitable time-constraints.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@8.05PM: You’re right about the consolidation of the CAPFs. Take the ITBP for example. It will grow to 63 Battalions by 2015, but a quarter of it will always be posted for internal security purposes like guarding election booths, protecting VIPs, guarding embassies overseas, going abroad for UN peacekeeping operations, etc. And the ITBP likes such postings, since their deployment at forbidding heights along the LAC is boring & accommodation at such border locations is shamefull, to say the very least. Each ITBP border observation post in Ladakh is at least 25km away from each other. On top of that the ITBP reports to Union MHA, meaning if a border transgression by the PLA is detected, the ITBP unit has to first report this to the Union MHA & then this information is relayed to the nearest IA detachment. In other words, there is no seamless integration between ITBP & IA. The PLA’s Border Defence Regiments suffer from no such command-and-control problems. What needs to be noted is that LACs & LoCs are cease-fire lines, not permanent, sovereign & legal boundaries. Therefore, either party along such cease-fire lines can at any time try by any means to alter the status of such lines without any legal consequences. That’s why such cease-fire lines can only be secured by border domination operations & protocols—something which only the IA can do. The ITBP or BSF on the other hand, are trained & equipped for border management operations, i.e. they are effective only in those areas where a permanent & legally sanctified boundary exists. Since the LAC is not such a boundary, the ITBP or even the SSB cannot function effectively anywhere along the LAC.

To Anon@8.08PM: They can always do down the gradual slope towards the Chinese side of the LAC to relieve themselves. Of course this detachment is carrying GPS receivers, night-vision devices & SATCOM terminals. Do browse through the latest thread where the ROEs are all clearly mentioned. Question of a deliberate firefight does not even arise. What is now going on is not an enactment of a Bollywood or Jackie Chan/Jet Li flick.

To MAYANK RAJ: Not yet. The upgrade is now likely to be done in-country, since HAL’s Nashik-based MRO is now gearing up to on on-line.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAVI: I in turn can only request you to get rid of irrationality & uncalled-for hostility. Aggression is committed only against one’s sovereign territory, not against a disputed territory. If you want to label China as an encroacher, then China too will label India as one, since in February 1951, Maj Ralengnao 'Bob' Khathing led an Assam Rifles column to Tawang town and took control of the remainder of the Tawang tract from the Tibetans by removing the Tibetan adminitration. And the lost will go on & on to include Hyderabad, Goa, Junagadh, Sikkim, etc. And have you ever spoken to any insurgent from the North East or have independently ascertained exactly from where & how the arms trafficking has been taking place in the North East? And why should China not be a party to the J & K issue? Doesn’t the LAC lie between China-controlled Aksai Chin & the state of J & K? Or do you need tutorials on the science of map-reading? Have you ever seen the 1st Edition of the Political Map of India published in 1950 which clearly states that the borders of Aksai China & what is today Uttarakhand are ‘BOUNDSARY UNDEFINED’? And what makes you think that Pakistan illegally gave away a part of J & K to China? Pakistan sent a formal note on March 28, 1961 through which it conveyed to China its stand that the boundary should be based on (a) historical evidence; (b) the present situation and (c) customary international law. China took yet another year to respond on February 27, 1962. The agreement was signed in Beijing on March 2, 1963. A boundary protocol marking positions on the ground was signed on March 26, 1965. Pakistan abandoned the old British maps and settled with China on March 2, 1963, on the basis of the MacDonald line of 1899 to the west of the Karakoram Pass. China conceded British Viceroy Lord Curzon's modification of 1905 and ceded 750 square miles of administered territory in exchange for Pakistan's writing off of old maps. China was most reluctant to accept Pakistan's proposal and responded only belatedly. It got no territory. Instead, it was Pakistan which secured from China 750 square miles of administered territory. Now, here’s more news for you: India’s Union MHA’s annual report for 2010-2011 for the very first time officially stated that India has voluntarily accepted 3,488km as being the length of the India-China border, this being done by foregoing areas adjacent to Afghanistan (the trans-Karakoram Tract), which was ceded to China by Pakistan in March 1965. Only if this part of the border was added to the LAC would the LAC have had a length of 4,056km—the figure that’s always parroted by armchair specialists & analysts at various Indian TV channels & seminar circuits. Guess both you & they need to do some serious reading of Govt of India-published official literature!!!
And who ever said that the best solution of J & K is give whole Kashmir to Pakistan & whole Ladakh to China? Was it me? If so, where exactly did I make such remarks? Or is this you losing your mental equilibrium & being spectacularly delirious like those 90% of Indians who, according to Justice (ret’d) M K Katju, are idiots?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KIMRAN SINGH: HMDS for LCH will come from HALBIT Avionics. The entire glass cockpit suite & nose-mounted COMPASS sensor system is also from HALBIT. Presently, only the MBDA-built PARS-3LR is being qualified on the Rudra & consequently, the PARS-3LR will be the logical choice for the LCH as well. LCH like Rudra will always be the preferred models of choice for Andean countries which require such helicopters for high-altitude operations.

To Anon@2.35AM: It makes sense, but China is closing the gap not because the PLAN wants to take on the IN, but because the PLAN is benchmarking itself against the navies of US, Japan & ROK in terms of force projection capabilities.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Interesting analysis:

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/pass-to-better-relations-with-china/article4663659.ece?homepage=true

Anand said...

Hi Prasun,

MoD puts on hold the JV between MDL and pipavav.Dont u think it will affect project 15A and 17A.Do u suspect any favouratism shown to Pipavav?

regards

Anand

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANAND: The JV will be formalised AFTER the release of the DPP 2013 guidelines next month.

tenderstips said...

Hello it’s me,

I am also visiting this site daily, this web page is genuinely fastidious and the visitors are genuinely sharing fastidious thoughts.

We Provide Tenders Information All Our India Based.