Total Pageviews

Thursday, April 18, 2013

Highlights Of SMM-PPP Seminar On Naval Military-Industrial Indigenisition

SMM India, a subsidiary of SMM Hamburg—the organiser of international maritime trade fairs—organised its third high-level seminar-cum-expo in Mumbai earlier this month, whose theme was: Promotion of Indigenisation Through Tie-ups Between the Customer, Foreign OEMs and Indian Companies. The 3rd SMM India seminar-cum-expo also formed part of India’s 50th National Maritime Day Celebrations. Several interesting insights were provided by various industrial players as well as retired senior-level Indian Navy (IN) officials during the varied seminar sessions.

Perhaps the most far-reaching revelation to have emerged from the seminar concerned propulsion systems for the IN’s future principal surface combatants. The IN has finally zeroed in on integrated full-electric propulsion (IFEP) systems, starting with the six projected LPHs to be procured (two directly from a yet-to-be-selected foreign OEM, two to be licence-built by a MoD-owned shipyard and two to be licence-built by a private-sector shipyard). These LPHs, along with all other major warships to be acquired in future (including the 65,000-tonne CATOBAR IAC-2 but excluding the four Project 15B DDGs and seven Project 17A FFGs) will have IFEP systems. Present-day warships worldwide utilise a combined-diesel-and-diesel (CODAD), combined-diesel-and-gas (CODAG), combined-gas-and-gas (COGAG) or combined-diesel-Electric-and-gas (CODLAG) propulsion configurations. At cruising speeds a CODLAG system employs diesel generators to supply electricity to the electric motors that drive the propeller shafts. When high speeds are required, gas turbines engage the shafts via cross-connecting mechanical transmissions (gearboxes). In an IFEP system-equipped warship, on the other hand, there is no mechanical connection between the prime mover and shaft. Instead, both the gas turbines and diesels are configured as electricity generators. While the diesels provide the vessel’s base load electrical supply, including low-speed propulsion, the turbines are switched in for peak power. The benefits of IFEP include: flexibility in locating machinery (only the propulsion motor needs to be coupled mechanically to the shaft-line); fuel efficiency (when the warship is operated at part load); low noise and vibration; built-in redundancy (electrical machines may have more than one set of windings, fed from different sources, so power is still available if one set fails); reliability (a mean-time-between-failures of more than 100,000 hours); reduced maintenance costs (due, for instance, to the absence of gearboxes); and the scope for increased automation and reduced crew complement.

The IN’s six LPHs will employ fixed-pitch propellers. Controllable-pitch propellers and their associated complex hydraulics are not required since the motor, and thus the shaft, can be electrically reversed. However, the IN is against the procurement of podded propulsion systems—a point that could well go against the Mistral BPD-class LPH that DCNS of France is offering for the IN. It is thus widely expected that the IN will zero in on an IFEP system developed by UK-based but GE-led Converteam industrial consortium for not just the six LPHs, but also for the projected IAC-2 CATOBAR aircraft carrier.

Data On Indian Shipyards
Data On Indigenous & Foreign Contents Of S-2/S-3/S-4 SSBN Production Programme
Data On Indian Industry Involvement In
Scorpene SSK Construction
France-based NEREIDES, represented in India by Flash Forge, continues to be the sole supplier of all VLF reception systems (above) on board the IN’s Type 877EKM Kilo-class SSKs, Class 209/Type 1500 SSKs and in future the Scorpene SSKs.

Project 71/IAC-1/INS Vikrant
For the 39,000-tonne IAC-1 aircraft carrier, the IN has selected the Mk 7 hydraulic damping arresting system from the US Navy, while US-based Wire Rope Industries Inc will supply the arrester cables. Another US-based company, Engineered Arresting Systems Corp, will supply the arrester barriers. In contrast, INS Vikramaditya’s hydraulic damping arresting system was designed by Marine Engineering Research Institute and made by Proletarsky Zavod. Other hardware to go on board IAC-1 include twin side-mounted aircraft elevators and their chain-drives from UK-based MacTaggart Scott, while Wire Rope Industries will supply the ammunition hoisting elevators. The CBRN detection sensors will be supplied by US-based Bruker Daltonics, which has for the past decade supplied almost all the CBRN detection sensors for all three of India’s armed services (while the remaining have come from French OEMs).

For the projected IAC-2, the IN will most certainly opt for a US-origin IFEP system, Electromagnetic Aircraft Launching System (EMALS), as well as the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) system. 
Indian Industrial Involvement In Naval MRO & Naval Armament R & D Activities
More illustrations & narratives to soon follow.


Anonymous said...

u said somewhere that rudra or lch can not carry 8 atgm but i have seen a pics with 4 lahat atgm configuration each side if u want i can send pics.. curious to know..
2,whats the advantage of lch over rudra

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@3.06AM: Of course 8 x Lahat can be carried by LCH & Rudra & even the Dhruv Mk2 can carry 8 Lahat ATGMs & this was even demonstrated in Chile last decade. But what cannot be carried is 8 x HELINA & that’s what I had stated. Check out the weights of the HELINA & LAHAT & matters will then become obvious. If the decision is made to equip the Rudra or LCH with CLGM-type missiles, then it becomes possible for both helicopter-types to be armed with 8 ATGMs. The HELINA ATGM as is now envisioned is too heavy for both the LCH & Rudra to be carried either as four twin-packs or twin quad-packs, especially when both helicopters are also required to carry four Mistral ATAMs for self-protection.
The LCH has been designed primarily to serve an IAFG reqmt for a high-flying helicopter capable of shooting down tactical UAVs. The Rudra, on the other hand, has been developed as a multi-role platform capable of performing several missions like armed utility, gunship, CSAR & MEDEVAC.

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

PLEASE answer my questions

1 Did the PAKIS FAIL to get RUSSIA's approval for getting AL 31 for their J 10 B

2 Will Pak get Upgraded version of RD 93 engine

3 When will the Block 2 of JF 17 be ready and how good it will be

Anonymous said...

prasun, thanks very much for the list of weapons used in Mahabharata.

however,i found some interesting sites, what you think about these. Are these just pure conspiracies or is there some weight in these articles.

share your thoughts and understanding on these.In one of the previous article, you stated that aliens might have warned humans against going to moon.What do you meant by this, is there a disinformation campaign out there to fool the masses? as far as we all know, there is no recorded encounter with a alien by a human kind,but you implied that humans were warned to not to venture into moon.

Anonymous said...

prasun, interesting read.

this article highlights the stupidity adopted by Pakistanis in diplomacy.

rad said...

HI Prasun
The weight of the helina should be around 50 kg.The weight of the launcher could be as much as the missile, this is my guess.So the total weight to carry is about 800kg for 2 quad packs of helina , is 800 kg too much for a powerful heli like the lch?.

rad said...

HI Prasun
What is the missile saraswat was talking about in the aero 2013 speech where he said a new 300km runway denial precsion missile was under development , please elucidate.

raw13 said...

Currently PAF are more than happy with JF-17. Its not easy integrating a completely new jet into the force and at the same time inducting F-16blk52 + MLU'd ones. Not to forget the AR, AEWs, BVRs, etc..Paf's hands are full. Remember they are much smaller then IAF. What is even more interesting, they have been conducting a lot of DACTs with J10s, Su27s in China. The results have been such that they feel they have no need for J10 in A2A role. If they do get j10s it will be for interdiction role.

RD93, they are pretty happy with it (surprised me!). It could offcourse be better with higher servicebility and thrust(they have compensated for this with increasing sqdrn size to 20 aircrafts). It is also unlikely that they will go with WS-13. PLAAF will only buy the aircraft with chinese engine.

Current thinking maybe another 18 blk52 + 14 blk15 MLUd and lots of JF-17s. It is morethan enough for PAF.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,
Have any information on hanger dimensions,no of fighters and helicopters IAC can carry, no of CIWS. My estimate is hanger dimensions as around 144m by 22m so that it can carry 17 NLCA+ 10 Helos as told in an expo. 8*30mm AK630 as counted in image of IAC. Maximum surge load of say 30 NLCA+12 Helos can be expected.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,
The photo of IAC shows open hanger concept so I think in future NFGFA can also be carried though it will reduce the fighters carried in hanger from 17 to 12 nos.Can you please post a full top view of the IAC model though you have posted a beautiful top shot of the island.

Anonymous said...


What is the reason behind giving license for only 3 more (1+3) Arihant class submarines for IN? Why IN is not negotiating to opt for more Arihant class nuclear subs or what could be hurdles for IN in requesting Russia for carrying out design alterations on Arihant desing (Carrying out a design modification on existing proven design will be very drastically reduce the financial burden on IN if we are going to opt for brand new SSN like Barracuda amid the latter being slightly advanced than the former). But the IN also can incorporate the latest techniques it learnt from Scorpene project and could all the way bring out a credible SSN based on Arihant (By including one more nuclear reactor module its power and speed can be increased significantly). Giving unparalleled deadly long legs for IN. Thank you for your valuable replies VMT...

Anonymous said...


In case of LHDs, why can't IN bring out an LHD design based on INS Viraat (With design modifications suiting for a role of an LHD instead of an true aircraft carrier). It will be well below 25000 tons (Since the STOVL deck will not be present). VMT

Vivek said...

Thanks a ton for your reverts Prasun da, not only do you have loads of information/knowledge but your willingness/patience to share it is very commendable, thanks again.
It would be great if you could guide me to the 22 page writeup that you did decade back, can't wait to read.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Prasun Sir,

If the DAE is going to take 15 years to build the 180MW reactor then how can the Arihant follow on sub come out before 2025 as some have claimed? Can the 180MW reactor be used in multiple number for powering an AC?

The Mareech system, is it completely indigenous? Has it been tested yet and validated, if so when will it be deployed and on which platforms?

Anonymous said...

Prasun ji,
Specifications of SU35 are much better than Rafale. I am still not convinced that Rafale is better than SU35. Indian Rafale stands no chance against chinese SU35. I am sure many will agree with me.

I am not against Rafale but cannot accept that its better than su35. su35 is definately 2nd only to F22. You also seem to be inclined for Rafale induction in IAF; is it because of its smaller size and BVR capability? Is the price of the rafale justified ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.07AM: 1) No. AL-31FN is still on track for powering the J-10B/FC-20 M-MRCA. 2) RD-93MA is on track for the JF-17 Block-3, which will also incorporate a nose-mounted IRST sensor. 3) JF-17 Block 2 is now in production at Chengdu & is qualified for being equipped with WMD-7 LDP & C-802A ASCM.

To Anon@10.17AM: There can be no smoke without fire & as remote-sensing technologies continue to advance, the process of re-discovering one’s past will be accelerated. By the admissions of some of Lockheed Martin’s past VPs of its Skunk Works Division & some former officials hailing from GE, Sandia Laboratories, EG & G, & Rocketdyne, the US already has a spaceplane called VENTURE STAR that employs electro-gravitic propulsion systems for reaching the planet Mars within 31 hours. Back in the 1970s itself, patents for such electro-gravitic propulsion systems were awarded to some of the above-mentioned US companies that were involved in programmes to develop such spaceplanes that could then take 5 days to reach Mars. All these are fairly documented facts with authenticated paper-trails. In addition, world-renowned experts in controlled remote-viewing have already established in no uncertain terms that wrecks of ancient spaceplanes are present on the Moon & these were later photographed during the various lunar exploration missions.

To Anon@10.53AM: These are primarily Track-2 diplomacy-related gatherings that do not reflect the officially stated & permissible positions of the involved countries. Therefore, whatever comes out from such forums especially with regard to fissile material stockpiles is just blowing of hot-air & bombastic claims that are not representative of facts on the ground.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAD: There are still several R & D challenges to be overcome before one can state with accuracy that the LCH will indeed be able to carry eight HELINAs in twin quad-packs. Firstly, it remains to be seen whether or not the HELINA equipped with MMW seeker will have a maximum weight of 50kg or less. Secondly, the design of the quad-pack itself & the estimated weight of the missile-launch pylons & of the hermetically sealed cannister housing the HELINA. Thirdly, the design configuration & placement of the MMW radar that will be reqd for target acquisition.
AS for the runway-denial PGM, Dr Saraswat was referring to the 700km-range conventionally armed variant of Nirbhay, which will be lighter than the nuclear warhead-armed & longer-range Nirbhay & will therefore be eligible for arming aircraft like the Jaguar DARIN-3 powered by Honeywell F125 turbofans, plus the Su-30MKI & MiG-29UPG.

To RAW13: For defensive counter-air operations & tactical interdiction the Block 52 F-16C/Ds along with F-16 MLUs are more than adequate for the PAF. The JF-17 Block-1s & Block-2s will be the real MRCA workhorses & once the Block 3 becomes available, then the JF-17 will emerge as a potent tactical MRCA. The RD-93 is a proven workhorse, albeit with increased serviceability requirements but still way ahead of the WS-13 in terms of thrust levels & acceleration. In fact, in 1988 between March 30 & April 16, when the IAF conducted EX Lightning in Pune by pitting the MiG-29B-12 against the Mirage 2000H, the former everytime beat the latter in terms of shorter takeoff runs, plus instantaneous & sustained turning radii. Similarly, when flown by an accomplished pilot who can synchronise usage of the JF-17’s control surfaces with the thrust levels & acceleration of the RD-93 by optimising his usage of HOTAS, the JF-17 even as it now exists remains a potent air combat platform. The FC-20/J-10B continues to interest the PAF due to its potential as an interdiction platform when equipped with LANTIRN-type navigation/targetting pods now being developed by China’s CETC.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@4.27PM: 16 MiG-29Ks & 10 helicopters (mix of Ka-28PL & Ka-31) will be a more realistic estimate for Project 71/IAC-1/INS Vikrant. It is still premature to talk about LCA (Navy) Mks.1/2

To Anon@4.37PM: FGFA-N will have folding wings, just like the MiG-29K.

To Anon@4.40PM: There will be only three (03) Arihant-type submarines—S-2, S-3 & S-4. Not 3 + 1. The existing design of Arihant is too large & therefore cannot be compressed into an SSN. In fact, for the Arihant, a 190mW PWR would have been the ideal powerplant. The 83mW PWR is therefore best employed by a 3,500-tonne SSN. There’s no way anyone in India can mix-and-match designs of the Arihant & Scorpene since India does not have access to the designs of either submarine-type. India only has access to submarine fabrication data. Furthermore, there’s no one in India that can test out & validate detailed submarine designs.

To Anon@4.48PM: No one in their right mind will opt for the Viraat’s design or the Jalashwa’s design as the baseline for an LPH. Technology has advanced by leaps & bounds since these two vessels were designed. To top it all, back until late 2004 the IN wasn’t even interested in LPHs or LPDs. It was onl;y after the December 2004 Asian Tsunami that the IN woke up to the need for such vessels.

To VIVEK: VMT. In the meantime, do watch these:

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: Not 180mW, but 200mW. The only way to expedite its development is by authorising the DAE to first develop such a PWR for the projected IAC-2 aircraft carrier. Maareech is totally indigenous & is on board the three Project 17 FFGs & three Project 15A DDGs & will gradually be installed on all principal surface combatants of the IN.

To Anon@7.22PM: Let anyone first come up with some definitive evidence on the Su-35’s or even Su-30MKI’s ability to engage in terrain-hugging flight profiles, or show it equipped with low-level navigation & targetting mission sensors before even thinking about comparing either of them with the Rafale. And consequently, the question that arises is this: is the Su-35 a true MRCA? If not, then why compare apples with oranges! After all, Russia too has developed the Su-34 for low-level interdiction & if the Su-35 too was capable of low-level interdiction, then there would have been no need to develop the Su-34 at all! So, if at all there is any comparison to be made, then one should pitch the Su-34 & Su-35 against the Rafale, not just the Su-35. Consequently, only the Rafale emerges as true-blown MRCA.

Sujoy Majumdar said...

Hello Prasun Da ,

In your opinion is the Kolkata Class destroyers at par with the US Arleigh Burke-class destroyers ? If not , does it not make sense to purchase the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers from the US .

Thank You,

Anonymous said...

Prasun ji
Thanks for the revert. Cannot differ with your opinion now, i finally get the funda of su34-su35 combo vs Rafale. So Rafale wins.

Bhaswar Kumar said...


Previously you had posted on all the systems on the P-17 frigates along with pictures, the mareech system did not find any mention then. Is it being retrofitted, any pictures sir?

Any idea when we shall start producing our own naval radars and sensors beyond sonars and EW?

If the DAE projects a 15 year time period anyway then how does linking it to IAC-2 expedite the process? Won't the IAC-2 require two such reactors at 200mW?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: What makes the Arleigh Burke-class FFGs superior are the US Navy’s network-centric features & solutions, like Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC). Therefore, it will not be prudent to make a platform-centric comparison between the two types of DDGs. Having said that, in the arena of DDG/FFG designing, the IN’s Naval Design Bureau has attained a fair degree of core technological competence & maturity, all of which now needs to be further nurtured & encouraged, something which cannot happen if imported DDG/FFG designs are sought.

To Anon@1AM: VMT. And do rest assured that the Su-35 is being sought by both the PLAAF & PLAN for deployment against Taiwan & Japan, not India.

To BHASWAR KUMAR: Photos of the Marreech were first posted by me in a previous thread last year. Even the visual above is equally good. The Revathi naval radar (derived from the Rohini) is already in production for the 4 Project 28 ASW corvettes. For the DAE to develop a 200mW PWR, financial sanction has first to be sought. This cannot happen unless & until the S-5, S-6 & S-7 SSBNs are financially sanctioned. And since financial sanction for S-5, S-6 & S-7 will only come by in the next decade, there must be something else or some other platform made available for installing this PWR if the idea is to accelerate & expedite the R & D process of such a PWR. Hence, the IN has proposed that financial sanction for developing the 200mW PWR go hand-in-hand with obtaining financial sanction for IAC-2. Whether this logic will be acceptable to the MoD remains to be seen, since this idea was first mooted by the IN in 2010 & so far nothing has happened.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Why am I not at all surprised! Expect the IN to lead the pack of Indian customers, followed by the IAF & then the IA & CAPFs.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

As far as I remember the readings from the ancient scriptures, the use of the nukes has been reported at least 3 times in different eons (yuga).

The first is during the Satyuga, when Shiva/Indra/Shakra flying in a magnificent aircraft simultaneously fired three nuked missiles at the three Tripura (Tripoli) cities, because the subjective condition was that all those three cities can only be destroyed in just one go and not alternately. Shiva has been given the name Tripurari since then. I assume this event to be earlier than say 15000 BC.

The second instance is during the Tretayuga around 9600 BC, when Rama fought Ravana. Ravana was supposed to be the illegal and illogical Emperor of the Atlantis- Shrilanka axis. Ravana’s theological headquarter was at Shrilanka, but his nukes and weapon base was at Sumatra of the Indonesian Atlantis (Varun Mahalaya Pradesh) which was getting partly and slowly submerged under the slowly increasing oceanic levels due to the end of the ice age period on earth. This weapon base was called the secret naval of Ravana. At that time all the attempts to kill the Ravana failed, then Vibhishana raveled the secret of Ravana’s navel to Rama. Then after as per Valmiki, Rama fired 7 Arrow missiles to the naval of Ravana and as per Tulsidas, Rama fired 17 to 31 (? Memory forgetting) Cobra missiles in to the naval of Ravana. Now it can be inferred that these missiles created huge devastations and some of them even entered directly inside the Krakatua volcano and triggered its huge explosion which created a huge tsunami and set up the global volcanic and earthquake chain reactions. One of them says that when Ravana died, the loud sound of his death reverberated on earth for 3 or 7 times. Also a huge shadow presumably created by the wave of earth rising and falling rapidly traveled all across the earth. So Ravana died under such circumstance and the rising Tsunami swept over most developed but lower parts of Srilanka.

The third instance is during the Dwaparyuga around 5500 BC, when after the defeat in the Mahabharat War, the Commander Shalva (Salvo) filled with anger and rage flew up in his huge but stealthy aircraft. He fired thunderbolt missiles at the Yadava cities of Andhak and Vrishni tribes and completely nuked and annihilated them and their races. Andhak and Vrishni yadavas were valiant friends of Krishna.

Incidentally all the foreign writers under the irregularities of Sanskrit to English to French to and fro German translations have inadvertently changed the names of Shakra and Salvo to Gurkha. So for them everywhere Gurkha flies in aircrafts and fires those nukes. This creates a sense of confusion to many.

Bhaswar Kumar said...


What are the Ajanta and Aparna Electronic warfare systems? Is there any difference between the two- do they have multiple "tranches" in the form of Mk1-2-3? Are they deployed on any of our principle surface combatants? If so what is their function, how good are they and what is the indigenous content on them?

How good is the Humsa-NG? Are we developing/have developed a spherical sonar?

What about the nagan low frequency sonar, whats its role, how good is it, is it deployed and if so then on which platform?

Have we developed/are developing an active-passive ultra low-frequency towed array sonar? If so then at what stage are we.

Which important naval sub systems are we indigenously developing at the moment?

Why oh why are we not using the Astra system to work on a better replacement of the Akash-1 missile- integrated with the existing system?

Why will the US part with the EMALS to us? Won't they attach some serious strings and conditions?

Many thanks for your detailed previous replies.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA 13: Excellent rejoinders indeed! I reckon we can safely infer that some of the major weapon systems employed as WMDs were capable of weather modification/manipulation, while others were chemical weapons, directed-energy weapons, & motion-sensing PGMs capable of distinguishing between actual airborne targets & decoys. Motion-sensing sensors are now being developed in the West for BVRAAMs so that they can easily distinguish between the targetted airborne platform & airborne towed-decoys.

To BHASWAR KUMAR: You will find all the answers in the following threads: those dealing with INS Satpura in threads posted in August 2011, & the other two concerning the DEFEXPO 2012 show report last April. Nagan & Mihir sonars have been rejected by the IN.

rad said...

HI Prasun
What is the logic that a motion sensor uses to distinguish between a towed decoy and an ac?.
Has russia agreed to let the pakis have the engine that comes along j-10, cant we do something.
Is there an israeli version of the lantirn , i believe the lantirn is no longer favoured as the radar sinals can be picked up easily.

Anonymous said...


Recently TOI published two back to back news on scorpenes, first one quoted French ambassador as saying that the first scorpene will be inducted into IN by 2014. While the second one said that there will be a delay of 18 months to the original date of 2015. Whats you take on it??

raw13 said...

@Ra 13,

That is very interesting what you are talking about. What are these scriptures, where can one get hold of them?


I think we agree on JF17. F16 is Multi-role but in PAF it will be too busy defending rather then being able to do any interdiction (just need to look at the exercises they undertake). Especially the MLUd ones. Currently interdiction is in the hands of the 5 Mirage sqdns and that will remain until they are replaced (next 10yrs). Will sustained interdiction ops be a good option in practice against IAF...ummm! It will mainly be standoff, raad, baburs, H4, etc...

That is why i think PAF will skip J10, it offers them nothing over what they currently have except another plane to maintain. Issue is they are not sure about the J-21 either. I think its a case of lets see what IAF does and follow.

Vikram Guha said...

PrasunDa ,

I wanted to comment on this link that you had provided in your earlier post

Did you get a chance to see the comment section ? You will notice that not only are there a number of comments from Chinese people but remarkably they refuse to look down upon India unlike the West . Infact most of the comments state that this in India's internal problem & other's should not interfere .

Infact this is by & large what the average Chinese thinks about India/Indians . They certainly do NOT see us an enemy . Unlike our desi press that regularly churns out stories if Indian traders beaten in China etc etc . Thousands of Indian students are studying medicine & engineering in Chinese universities.

True, China is trying to dam the Brahmaputra but obviously this matter can be sorted through dialogue .

China may not be a friend but it is certainly not the devil that the desi press says it is . Infact we should be careful while selecting our "fair weather" western friends.

When you get some free time please read this story from the BBC . As usual for obvious reasons they hire Indians to castigate everything that is India


KSingh said...


Will the P-15A that is being inducted later this year come equipped with the BARAK-2 or will this system be added at a later date as it is not ready yet?

Bhaswar Kumar said...


When will the Kattupali shipyard be completed, apparently it shall be largest yard in Asia? How will it impact our ship building capacity?

The up-gradation of GRSE was to be completed by March 2012- has it been delayed?

Wasn't MDL supposed to be done with its own up-gradation this year itself?

Is the Pipavav shipyard as capable as the above, it lacks experience in building big naval ships, no? Even it has goliath cranes according to its official website?

I believe that despite all of this the major source of delays in the Navy's insistence to often change some design and features midway and our dependence on foreign sub-systems.

What are we doing to mitigate this problem...are industries being set up to provide these crucial systems?

Found your previous pages, I must say you have outdone anyone else in providing the most accurate details. Very many thanks for that.

1) It seems that we were unable to develop an active/passive ultra-low frequency towed array sonar. Is there any progress on it now, even any plans to develop one to begin with?

2) Why are we having issues with pressure valves, piping and sundry when it comes to naval construction of submarines? Does this problem exist in the case of surface ships also? Are we mitigating this issue actively?

3) How is it that companies like MKU have not landed a contract with the Indian Army itself rather than just the police and CAPFs? They have extensive products and seem to be at par with global quality.

SK said...

"However, the IN is against the procurement of podded propulsion systems—a point that could well go against the Mistral BPD-class LPH that DCNS of France is offering for the IN"

1) Why is the IN against Podded propulsion. Is it due to performance or due to complex maintenance.

2) Why is the order being split between two shipyards, 1 Mod owned & 1 Pvt Owned. I only see wastage of effort & resource in duplication. Will both the shipyards take up the work parallely to reduce delivery time.

3) When can IN expect to take delivery of the first LPH.....2020 ?

4) IN took the right decision by going for the IFEP. Any chance of Dual band composite AESA radar masts on these ships or will it be IN old Fav Israeli EL/M-2282 & M-2248.

5) In your opinion who is likely to get shortlisted. I feel (Speculating) South Korean Dokodo LPH and Spais's Athlas
LPH will be economical than DCNS Mistral.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Prasun Sir

When people talk of the weapons in use during Mahabharat why do they forget about Barbarika and his "Teen Baan"? After all when Lord Krishna asked the assembled warriors how long they would take to finish the war on their own they replied as follows.

Bhishma- 20 days
Dronacharya- 25 days
Karna- 24 days
Arjuna- 28 days

It was Barbarika who's answer was "one minute" and when Krishna tested his power he found it to be so virulent that he had Barbarika present him his head as gurudakshina.

"Krishna disguised as a Brahmin stopped Barbarika to examine his strength. When asked how many days he would take to finish the war alone, Barbarika answered that he could finish it in one minute. Krishna baited Barbarika by mocking him for going to the great battle with only three arrows. On this, Barbarika replied that a single arrow was enough to destroy all his opponents in the war, and it would then return to his quiver. He stated that, the first arrow is used to mark all the things that he wants to destroy. On releasing the third arrow, it would destroy all the things that are marked and will then return to his quiver. If he uses the second arrow, then the second arrow will mark all the things that he wants to save. On using the third arrow, it will destroy all the things that are not marked. In other words, with one arrow he can fix all his targets and with the other he can destroy them. Krishna then challenges him to tie all the leaves of the peepal tree under which he was standing, with those arrows. Barbarika accepts the challenge and starts meditating to release his arrow by closing his eyes. Then, Krishna without the knowledge of Barbarika, plucks one of the leaf of the tree and puts it under his foot. When Barbarik releases his first arrow, it marks all the leaves of the tree and finally starts revolving around the leg of Krishna. Then Krishna asks Barbarika, as why was the arrow revolving around his foot? For this, Barbarika replies that there must be a leaf under his foot and the arrow was targeting his foot to mark the leaf that is hidden under him. Barbarika advises Krishna to lift his leg, since, otherwise the arrow will mark the leaf by pricking Krishna's leg. Thus, Krishna lifts his foot and to his surprise, finds that the first arrow also marks the leaf that was hidden under his foot. Of course, the third arrow does collect all the leaves (including the one under Krishna's foot) and ties them together. By this Krishna concludes that the arrows are so infallible, that even if Barbarika is not aware of his targets, the arrows are so powerful that they can still navigate and trace all his intended targets. The moral of this incident is that, in a real battle field, if Krishna wants to isolate someone (for example: the 5 Pandava brothers) and hides them elsewhere in order to avoid them from being Barbarika's victim, then Krishna will not be successful as the arrows can still trace the target and destroy them. So, nobody will be able to escape from these arrows. Thus Krishna gets a deeper insight about Barbarika's phenomenal power." cont:-

Bhaswar Kumar said...

cont:- "Krishna then asks the boy whom he would favour in the war. Barbarika reveals that he intends to fight for the side whichever is weak. As Pandavas have only seven Akshouni army, when compared to Kauravas eleven, he considers that Pandavas are weak and hence wants to support them so that Pandavas will become victorious. But Krishna asks him, did he seriously gave a thought about the consequences before giving such a word to his mother (to support the weak side). Barbarika guesses that his support to the weaker side will make them victorious. Then, Krishna reveals the actual consequence of his word to his mother:
Krishna tells that whichever side he supports will only make the other side weak due to his power. Nobody will be able to defeat him. Hence, he is forced to support the other side that has become weaker due to his word to his mother. Thus, in an actual war, he will keep oscillating between the two sides, thereby destroying the entire army of both sides and eventually only he remains. Subsequently, none of the side is victorious as he will be the only lone survivor. Hence, Krishna avoids his participation from the war by seeking his head in Charity.

Anonymous said...

Never ever heard of the above version...

Vivek said...

Prasun da,

We know that India was home to such advanced civilization thousands of years back, do you think it was an indigenous civilization i.e. our own brown ancestors were so advanced to have developed and used nukes ? Or is there a possibility that our gods were actually aliens who came from some other planet with all the technology, may be places like swarg, pataal lok, brahma lok, indra lok etc were actually other planets, maybe devas and asurs were originally from some other world, where does atlantis fit in to all this ?
Also, any link between India, Sumerian, Peru, Mexico, Egypt, Indonesia etc in those times ?
Your views would be very interesting
Any other place where one can find answers to such questions, basically about who we are and what all happened in our country/world before us?

Vivek said...

Thanks Ra13 and Bhaswar Kumar for sharing info

Anonymous said...

The news is that Gen (Rt) Musharraf is under arrest in Pakistan. I never thought about a such a scenario- Army will keep quite when its former chief was being arrested by civilian government.

I wonder why the army under Musharraf's patron, Gen Kayani, did not do anything? Is it because Pak Army is against Musharraf? Or it is because Pakistanis has lost the 'love' for its Army and any action by Army to protect Musharraf will just inflame the anger against Army?

If Army does not involve in any of Musharraf's legal proceedings, whether he is convicted or acquitted, will that be a good sign for Pakistan? What about the Mullah controlling the power? Recent research shows more Pakistanis support Sharia Law, and if Mullahs come to power, the much stringent version of Islam will be imposed on people of Pakistan. Will the army can stand up to that? Pak army is in a big shit, I guess.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

To: raw13
Fortunately or otherwise, we have many Books. Such and these instances can be searched in Ramayana (Valmiki & Tulsidas), Mahabharat/ShriMadBhagwat, Shiva Puran, Vishnu Puran etc. However all references to Atlantis herein pertain to my personal research only. All these books may be available in bigger Indian cities or on/through internet. Although they may be a difficult possession in Pakistan.

Mr. Ra 13 said...

I vaguely remember reading about Barbarika somewhere. But perhaps ignored it completely assuming it to be some form of non-applicable black magic.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAD: 3-D motion sensors will apparently sense the movements of all external moving surfaces of an aircraft like tailfins, canards & thrust-vectoring nozzles. When used in conjunction with a terminally-homing active seeker, a BVRAAM or even MR-SAM equipped with such motion-sensors will be able to distinguish between the actual aircraft & its towed-decoy. As for AL-31FNs for the FC-20, the then Russian Ambassador to India in 2010 had stated that Russia is big enough to embrace the idea of a Pakistan equipped with AL-31FN-powered combat aircraft & IL-78MKP aerial refuelling tankers. There’s no Isreali version of LANTIRN or terrain-following radar. Their radar signals can be picked up only by ground-based passive surveillance systems like Vera-E or Kolchuga PROVIDED they’re located along the flight-path of the interdiction aircraft.

To Anon@12.50PM: The Ambassador had said that the 1st Scorpene would be delivered by 2014. Being a non-military person, what he probably meant was that the 1st Scorpene SSK would be launched in MDL’s wet-basin by 2014, following which final fitting-out will be carried out & then the sea-trials will begin & only after all this has been successfully undertaken will the SSK be commissioned into service, probably by late 2015.

To RAW13: As per the PAF’s force-structure plans of the late 1980s, an inventory of 115 F-16s was required for ensuring in-depth air-defence over Pakistan’s elongated airspace. Since only about half of those are now available, there presently exists a critical air-defence void despite the availability of Saab 2000 & ZDK-03 AEW & CS platforms. On top of that, the inventory of ROSE-1/2-standard upgraded Mirage 3s/5s are due for decommissioning by 2022, while the A-5IIICs are no longer available. Therefore, in terms of manned combat aircraft platforms, there already exists a critical void for both offensive air interdiction & defensive counter-air missions. Ra’ad ALCMs & H-4s are meant for usage against forward air bases to the east & therefore will not be useful for deep interdiction missions. The Baburs being the Pakistan Army’s property will not form part of the PAF’s available airpower assets. That’s why there exists a strong case for the PAF opting for a minimum of 60 FC-20s + 150 JF-17s.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KSINGH: By this December, bulk deliveries of Barak-2 LR-SAM rounds will have reached the IN for its three Project 15A DDGs.

To BHASWAR KUMAR: 1) Such projects are multi-phased & are never accomplished in one go. When completed it will be the largest shipbuilding yard in South Asia, but not in the whole of Asia, for the yards at Shanghai & Busan will continue to dominate in terms of size & capacities. 2) Modernisation of both GRSE & MDL has been completed. Pipavav’s shipbuilding capabilities are enormous in terms of industrial capacities. All the metal-bending work required for the first four Scorpene SSKs were done by Pipavav under a subcontract from MDL. 3) For as long as there’s no independent consultant authority reqd to vet the Naval Design Bureau’s warship designs, such delays will take place due to the design not being frozen prior to hull construction. It is primarily a human resource deficiency. Development of new-generation sonars takes at least a decade to fructify & regrettably the NPOL has been unable to adhere to the IN’s reqmt timelines. Consequently, the import option is the only way left. 4) There are no problems with regard to local production of pressure valves, pumps & piping for principal surface combatants. The problem exists only for such hardware meant for submarines. However, there are some deficiencies when it comes to design & fabrication of transmission shafts for larger vessels like DDGs. 5) MKU already has contracts for supplying all-composites-built armour panels for the ICGS’ Griffon 8000TD hovercraft. How it won the contract is another horror story that I will upload in the narrative above soon.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SK: 1) Podded electric propulsion was originally developed for cruise liners & was touted as being only an interim solution prior to the advent of more mature IFEP systems of the type found on the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyers. That’s why the IN too wants to play technological leapfrog by embracing what will be fully mature systems by the latter half of this decade. 2) Because that’s the MoD’s illogical way of spreading the cake between the MoD-owned shipyards & private-sector shipbuilders. 3) By 2018 at best. 4) Integrated main-mast will also be another prominent introduction in the IN’s future principal surface combatants. 5) As things now stand, NAVANTIA, followed by Fincantieri & Hyundai Shipbuilding seem to be the current favourites, in that order.

To BHASWAR KUMAR: No one has forgotten the ‘Teen Baan’. But it is not prominently mentioned because it was never put to use during the Mahabharata war.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIVEK: According to the SANGAM Literature, there was inter-breeding between the Earth’s indigenous inhabitants & the ancient alien visitors. That’s what explains the fable of the Virgin Mary & the Kunti’s impregnation by Surya, i.e. by artificial insemination. Shalva (Salvo)—as pointed out above by Mr.RA 13—is said to have had three airborne cities each having a diameter of 8 miles above the earth & it was he who supposedly attacked the ancient cities of Dwarka (which is 32,000 years old), Harappa & Mohenjo Daro with nuclear weapons from these airborne cities. In both these cities, archaeologists long ago found several examples of soil vitrification, which takes place on Ground Zero after a nuclear explosion. You can see & hear more of all this at:

Atlantis existed at around the same time as Kumari Kandam. The latter was physically linked to present-day Sumatra, Java & Borneo (Kalimantan). The Mahabharata even records a duel between an Atlantean spaceship & Arjuna’s spaceship on the Moon. The Sumerian civilisation came into existence much, much later. Watch this:

To Anon@11PM: Musharraf is a Mohajir & is therefore looked down upon by the ruling Jagirdars of Pakistan & that’s why he’s being made the scapegoat for all of Pakistan’s present-day ills. Had this not been the case, then the remaining members of the Gang of Four responsible for planning & executing OP Badr in late 1998, along with former COAS Gen Mirza Aslam Beg & former ISI-DFs Lt Gen Assad Durrani & Lt Gen Hamid Gul would all have been behind bars by now. But that hasn’t happened & will never happen. And all others now pretending to be heroes & heroines like Imran Khan & Shireen Mazari were more than a decade ago all supporting Musharraf. The mere fact that Musharraf has been confined to house-arrest is proof enough of the fact that there are ‘red-lines’ which the Pakistan Army has drawn & which no civilian authority in Pakistan will dare cross. In both China & Pakistan, political power always & indeed comes from the barrel of a gun.

Pierre Zorin said...

Whilst a lot of focus is on the military, India's weakness is its intelligence and its police. The latest brutalisation of the five year old girl and police reaction tells you that the country is vulnerable to anyone from deep within. What drive such inertia are apathy, indifference and total lack of vision. May be a barrel of a gun motivation is urgently required in India?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To PIERRE ZORIN: Here’s my take.

What drives such inertia? THE AVERAGE INDIAN MINDSET.

What is the solution: SPREADING LITERACY & EDUCATION, without which no one will be able to apply COMMON-SENSE & LOGICAL REASONING, including the vast & unmanageable internal security apparatus as well as the gender-biaised armed forces. That’s how countries throughout the ages have become industrialised, civilised & developed. There are no shortcuts available.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Prasun Sir,

I believe that the following pic is of the indoor RCS measurement facility for scale models at NAL.
How difficult would it be to scale this up to measure the RCS of finished articles? The RCS measurement facilities for proper air-crafts are the same, same structure, just larger.

We also seem to be treating the Tejas canopy with a coating of Iridium-tin oxide and other substances for various reason according to the link below. How does that help?

Anonymous said...

Prasun Ji,

It takes years of research and experience to develop a reliable fighter. The Chinese apparently are ahead of us in aviation tech but certainly not ahead of the US and Russia.How do we believe that their J31-J20 will deliver!!!!!. Russia is still struggling to develop PAKFA, but the chinese are making claims that they have indeed developed these advanced fighters. Why is the US and India so concerned with these chinese toys when they do not even have a reliable engine.They are even denied access the to western technology. Prasun ji what do you think about these chinese fighters are they really that formidable?.

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

The PAKIS on their forum are NOT AT ALL HOPEFUL of getting the Russian
approval for AL 31 for J 10 B

Pakis are waiting for WS 10 / WS 13

YET you have written that Russians will allow AL 31 sale to Pakistan

Secondly WHY CANNOT India stop this
sale WE buy SO much from them

Why cant we exert pressure on them

Also worth noting is the Paki ECONOMIC disaster

to 11. 7 Billion dollars and will soon come down to BELOW 10 Billion

The Pakis are simply finding the
J 10 which is priced at 50 MIllion dollars as TOO expensive

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

It appears that THREE SAAB AWACS of PAKIS have been damaged

ONE was destroyed completely

TWO were badly damaged FORCING the Pakis to enter into a NEW 170 MILLION dollar contract with SAAB for repairs

IT looks these TWO damaged Awacs might not fly again

Then maybe the CHINESE will strip them and take them for a CLOSE LOOK

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun da

Seems the MOD tday unvieled the DPP 2013..It favours indegenisation but nothing reg, the 49% FDI...Even Anand Sharma and P Chidambaram wre pitching fot it...what happened??Did Antony again dragged his feet...He seems to lack some basic sense..He should have joined CPM...Ur take please??VMT

Mr. Ra 13 said...

Some western writers and philosophers have assumed that before the Atlantis there was a huge civilized continent Lemuria. They were mostly correct. Lemuria contained Kumari Kandam and Mahabharat. Mahabharat contained Indonesia to India to East Iran. Srilanka was connected to India. Kumari Kandam was connected to south of Srilaka. All this connectivity through the land was possible only during the ice age. So Lemuria contained Mahabharat and Kumari Kandam. That was Satyuga when the man started his journey from Ethiopia on around 99000 BC through the Arabic and Iranian sea coast through Karachi and Dwarka towards Tamilnadu and Srilanka. This journey was locked at Kumari Kandam around 90000 BC, because South India, Srilanka and especially Kumari Kandam were a paradise for the fruit gatherers and eaters during those days due to the abundance of their natural products. With the change of habitat, the African man started genetically turning in to the Australoid man. This going was smooth till the history’s biggest supervolcanic explosion at Mount Toba (Thoeba/Deva) around 70000 BP at Sumatra Indonesia which created about 10 years of global volcanic winter and created a bottleneck in global human evolution. It covered India under nearly 2-5 metres of ash and only around 2000 to 5000 Indians survived to carry forward the genes of civilizations. Only 10000 of human population survived on the earth.

Sunken Kumari Kandam can be seen at the center of the following photo:

Anonymous said...


Does having terrain hugging flying to carry out attack missions by Rafale edge out Sukhoi 30 mki/Sukhoi 35 BM? In Air Superiority role the formidable Sukhoi outperforms Rafale in air combat? Even in terms of detection weapon load (Mission efficiency with interleaved operations by two man crew), clearly outperforms Rafale (amid the latter is more costlier then the former). So in all the cases we can come to a conclusion that the MOD/IAF are stressing on TOT from Dassault in setting up hi-tech manufacturing units in HAL which will help HAL and Indian research labs to gain valuable technologies?? Your thoughts.. VMT

Anonymous said...


what are the technological gains achieved by Indian Submarine designers during the Arihant Project (As per your comments India still lacks in testing out and validating submarine designs). So what is the degree of Independence achieved in Submarine design by Naval Design Bureau? The Arihant follow On class which is supposed to carry 12+ K4/K5 SLBMs is designed by India? or still there is Russian Design Bureau involvement present in its design. Who is going to test and validate its design (Any Indian establishment setting up facilities to perform testing and design validations to achieve self reliance?).

Apart from SSBN program is there any active SSN program active by Naval Design Bureau? (If its Barracuda then when the first SSN will be commissioned by IN, Who will be the lead constructor? HSL again?)

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: Unless & until a full-scale model of any aircraft is subjected to RCS measurement tests, no realistic RCS measurement data can be obtained. Polycarbonate laminate canopy transparencies for the Tejas MRCA will have an indium-tin-oxide layer & this will result in a 15% decrease in the aircraft’s RCS while also providing IR and EMI shielding attenuation.

To Anon@6.56PM: China-developed aircraft like J-15, J-20 & J-31 are still in the R & D stage & will take several more years to mature. As it is, their avionics suites are still under development, whole in terms of turbofans, the WS-10B lacks adequate thrust while the WS-13 is still under development. I for one have never stated that such aircraft-types are potent or formidable. Of course there are others that love to either project a Chinese bogey against India or use such excuses to make discredited comparisons of the airpower balance between China & India.

To Anon@8.57PM: Well….things can’t get cheaper with every passing day for sure. Nor is there any need to prevent the PAF from acquiring the FC-20. The nature of offensive airpower projection has changed sufficiently in such a way that it does not make any difference at all whether or not the PAF acquires the FC-20.

To Anon@12.49AM: These so-called amendments won’t make any big difference at all, except for MRO activities, for which the private-sector is allowed to bid on a competitive basis for the very first time. Without 49% FDI, no reputed foreign OEM will even bother to undertake joint R & D with their Indian counterparts. Meanwhile, just as I had predicted, AgustaWestland on April 17, 2013 wrote to the MoD for formally initiating a process of “dispute resolution” conc erning the AW-101 contract, i.e. if the MoD continues to withhold progress payments due for contract implementation, then AgustaWestland will have no other choice but to invoke the international arbitration vlause if the MoD unilaterally cancels the AW-101 contract without clear proof of wrongdoing. Looks like the MoD’s ‘chalta hai’ knee-jerk attitudes are now giving more headaches to the present Raksha Mantri than he had ever envisaged.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@2.06AM: Even in air combat the Rafale with its AESA-based RBE-2 MMR comes out superior to the Su-30MKI, but the tables will be turned once the Super Su-30MKI makes its debut. For deep-interdiction missions, the Rafale’s tandem-seat version will be employed, especially when used for launching tactical cruise missiles. There’s no high-tech involved in producing Dassault-designed airframe parts of the Rafale. The real high-tech resides within the avionics suite & M88 turbofan & those are items whose most critical components will always originate from France & no one in India will produce them. And if it was that easy to become an expert in developing combat aircraft by just seeking ToT from foreign OEMs, then by now HAL would already have become one such expert, given the fact that ToT reqd for licence-producing combat aircraft had been obtained in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s & after 2000 from the former-USSR & the UK. Things don’t work out like that in the real world, not even for the Chinese.

To Anon@2.16AM: I had already explained yesterday & also several times earlier that there were/are no submarine designers in India, not even one. Nor is there any independent warship design validating authority in India. The designs of S-2, S-3 & S-4 as well as the projected S-5, S-6 & S-7 SSBNs are all the sole property of Russia’s Rubin Central Marine Design Bureau. And these designs are not for permanent sale. IN’s Naval Design Bureau has never been involved in any aspect of submarine design. Whenever any Indian firm has built submarines, the foreign designers were always on hand to supervise the production effort & they never parted with any of their proprietary design data.

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

Please write something about the
LATEST Chinese incursion

They have set up a TENT in LADAKH

When will Indian Army be allowed to

Do we have any RED LINES AT ALL

kattayikonan said...

Prasun you are right this time also

Bhaswar Kumar said...


what do you think of these excerpts form an article in the New Indian Express that came out today?

"The LCA, in fact, gave creditable flying displays during the AeroIndia show in Yelahanka in Bangalore in February this year, and followed it up with weapons firing to hit both ground and aerial targets during the Iron Fist fire power display by the IAF in the Rajasthan’s Pokhran ranges, again in February this year. “The common man thinks the plane is doing fine, its engine sounds great and the manoeuvres are perfect. But those flying and weapons firing displays are done with ground monitoring and support. The plane is still not ready to flying on its own,” sources stressed"

“Normally, a combat plane is ready for its next sortie following a 30-minute attention from ground service personnel soon after it has returned from a mission. In the case of LCA, after a single sortie of about an hour or so, it needs three days of servicing before it can go for its next sortie,”


Is it really worth it anymore? How can it take 3 whole days to get a plane ready for its next sortie??

S-DUCT said...

Sir,any updates and status on high altitude engine test facilty that is being built by boeing as part of offset to 10 C-17 deal.

Arup said...

Sir, In air combat how can Rafale can have an upper hand over Su-30 mki ? The raw performance from the 1m dia Bars will detect and track Rafale from a huge distance away even before Rafale is able to track Su-30. Rafale has a 55 cm dia antenna which is clearly half that of BARS. A bigger dia radar also translates to greater standoff SAR mapping range.Size does matters. Quantity has a quality of its own. In addition to these a higher peak power output helps to burn through ECM emmisisons.

What you get with Rafale RBE2 is a high degree of sophistication but with BARS you get good performance.

Besides Su-30 has higher aerodynamic performance over Rafale.

Su-30 mki is also cheaper. What it lacks is the terrain hugging feature.

Are there any plans of increasing power output, antenna dia of Rafale. ?

What makes Rafale a better interdictor and strike platform than Typhoon ?

Will any of IN's six Scorpenes have MESMA AIP ?

Anonymous said...

Old video of Al-Khalid mine plough trials:

Anonymous said...

Prasun, why does the Army want to purchase Javelin or Spike when they have a large stock of Kornet E and Kornet E can do the same tasks as Javelin / Spike ?

Anonymous said...

Hi Peasun, I read that OFB was going to make Zittara under license. Why did that not happen? Are they producing any weapons other than INSAS in 5.56x45 cal?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.29AM: What more is there to write about? The REUTERS news-report clearly states that the PLA had erected ‘temporary’ tents, meaning they will be there for a period of no more than 1 week & then go back. One cannot have a permanent presence in such areas in the absence of road connectivity & sustained helicopter-aided logistics (for food & water) is also impossible to maintain in such areas, & therefore the PLA detachment will eventually have to pack up & leave. Consequently, this is nothing but another ‘transgression’ that routinely takes place. Both sides do it from time to time & there are no holy cows in such matters. Therefore, use of force is not reqd in such cases for forcible evictions.

To KATTAYIKONAN: 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, & undertaking 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.

To BHASWAR KUMAR: There are several inaccuracies in that ‘desi’ news-report. Firstly, the Tejas Mk1 have daily aerobatic flying displays in both 2011 & 2013. This would not have been possible had the aircraft been grounded for maintenance-related checks once every 3 days. Secondly, the entire Tejas fleet was grounded last year after certain hydraulic fluid leaks were detected within the landing gear system & as the correct precaution, the fleet was grounded for mandatory checks.

To S-DUCT: Nothing new so far.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ARUP: The scenario you’ve described only applies to games for Playstation. In real-life, warnings of airspace intrusions always come first from ground-based airspace surveillance radars or AEW & CS platforms & therefore a combat aircraft’s airborne MMR is not used for airspace monitoring/surveillance. Consequently, maximum detection range of such radars is totally irrelevant. Secondly, an airborne intruder engaging in terrain-masking won’t be detected by any kind of airborne radar or even ground-based airspace surveillance radars for sustained periods. Thirdly, SAR mapping is only a navigational/target detection tool that is now getting replaced by GPS navigation & passive optronic target acquisition systems like LDPs because new-generation MR-SAMs now being introduced also have home-on-emission & home-on-jam modes of operations. Therefore, the greater the peak-power of an airborne MMR, the more vulnerable the airborne platform becomes to such MR-SAMs. And in present times when hyper-agile WVRAAMs aided by HMDS are available, factors like higher instantaneous/sustained turn rates & supermanoeuvrability have become almost irrelevant. None of the IN SCorpene SSKs will have any AIP on-board, be it MESMA or any other system.

To Anon@12.59AM: Javelin/Spike-type of ATGMs are used not just for targetting armoured vehicles, but also hardened structures like bunkers & buildings. Secondly, such ATGMs are also much lighter than the Kornet-E & are of the fire-and-forget type, while the Kornet-E requires continuous laser illumination till impact.

To Anon@1.16AM: Why should OFB make the Zittara under licence? Acquire the licence from whom?

Anonymous said...


I dont know whether you have answered this before. I could not find it through these comments.

I fail to understand why did we not opt for mesma with scorpene ssk in the first place? You have also stated this that MESMA will be used and not AIP. IF pakistan can get it with agosta why can't we!!!

Anonymous said...

hi prasun,
I am failing to understand one thing why mod and aka are shouting about indegenizing when they don't wanna push it.... For example iaf won't induct lca mk1 in large num but will extend the life of mig which hav cmpleted their extended lifespan too....
Can't they do like order 100 lca mk1 and after mk2 comes conv them into LIFT's wont that b cost effective....
for the issue that lca is short of parameters....wasn't that the issue with dhruv too...see now the dhruv has improved to be a world class we got export order also....

Plus after this move lca will get international recognition being in we may get some export order too.....
so mod could force early induction of lca...
let the people say anything well they are even saying now shit about doesn't matter what others may say.... induction of lca asap
is only way fwd.... in my view it shud hav been done in 2011 itself....

Anonymous said...


Are there any chances of an India China war because the Chinese are going to DAM the Brahmaputra ?

Arup said...

Sir, A lot of thanx for such a detialed and lucid reply.You are definitely the Rolls Royce of defense and aviation blogs.

RBE2 is an AESA and has LPI air to air , air to surface modes. Its emissions wont be picked by ESM and MR-SAM cant lock on to them.

The attacked aircraft will continuosly change its position and jam the missile intermittently and continuously.

I have compared a few radar antenna pics. MiG-29 has a bigger radome than Rafale.But Zhuk-AE aesa aperture is almost the same or slightly bigger than RBE2. I dont know about E-Captor or Vixen-1000E aperture sizes but it is not entirely right to determine a fighter's radar aperture area by just looking at the radome volume.

Maybe Vixen 1000E has 1000 TRM as the same suggests. Many aviation blogspots claim that Rafale has 834 TR elements whereas THALES claims it has 1000+. Is this factually correct ?

What are the various improvements in FSO-IT over FSO ?

How are negotiations with Dassault going ?When will the 1st ac be delivered? Isnt IAF pressing MoD for a faster delivery date and increased annual production ?

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

Theres a thing or two that goes well above my head. In their MRCA evaluation r, the Swiss gave the Typhoon a lower ranking in interdiction, offensive and defensive air missions even after Typhoon has received all its upgrades in 2015 that aims to make it a omnirole ac. WHY IS IT SO ? 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.

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 ?

How many Barak-2 does eacg P-15A DDG carry ?Is it 64 or 48 ? What is its CIWS. P-15A seens to be more capable than BAE Systems Type 45 destroyers.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun da

Ur take on this??The report is interesting...Says India does nt have any IPR rights...So this is why there is no mention of india in all IAI brochures of Barak 8, even in international shows.

There is also utter silence on this project..No footage or photos pf the SAM in India...This Proj is already running behind schedule...Is this report true??What is exactly happening to this proj

Anonymous said...

The report also says that the missile failed to meet the objective requirements of IAF. MoD is to suspend all acquisitions of the LRSAM and MRSAM. What has really happened and why is the IAF not satisfied.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
What is the situation in south china sea... Its seems that china is bullying the neighbours... What is endgame there?
Somebody mentioned that... Its like a bathtub, with all concerned parties pouring there boats some time soon they are going to bump...
Your comment please..

rad said...

HI Prasun
What one earth is going on with the barak sam project , there seems to be disturbing news that it did not meet specs for both the air force and the navy ?. really disturbing, why would israel take us for a ride and it seems we do not have the rights and codes to the seeker ,data link etc ? integration is not an easy task especially when some body with no experiance in integration is given the job , bloody idiots mismanaging everything in this country

KSingh said...


Have you seen this:
"India’s biggest military project with Israel under scrutiny

Is there any truth behind this? And this is going to upset BARAK-2 delviereis for the P-15As, right??

Mr. Ra 13 said...

and I was thinking that the Barak SAM project must be going rightly behind the curtain.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Prasun Sir,

"India is adding four new divisions, with some 80,000 soldiers, to reinforce the seven divisions that already defend the north-eastern states of Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim. Simultaneously, the Indian Air Force (IAF) has beefed up the Tezpur and Chhabua air bases with capable Sukhoi-30MKI fighters. The IAF is upgrading five more air bases and a string of advanced landing grounds (called ALGs) that will allow big helicopters, light fixed-wing aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs, or drones) to operate along the border. Six squadrons of the indigenous Akash anti-aircraft missile system will soon guard India’s vulnerable air space along the Eastern Himalayas. Ground troops remain short of artillery fire support, but batteries of the indigenous Pinaka multi-barrel rocket launcher have been sent to the Northeast. And now comes the news (reported in this newspaper yesterday) that two armoured brigades, with more than 500 T-90 tanks and BMP-IIs will be deployed to the LAC for the first time. One of these will be stationed in Ladakh, while the other will operate in the Northeast."

Q-How much of the above is true?

Q-I believe that the 14th corps already has one armoured brigade, no? This should bring the strength up to armoured division level if another brigade is added as stated above?

Q-Nothing has been mentioned about any artillery corps being positioned in the NE, any plans for the same beyond the M-777s?

Q-What are the planned infrastructure projects for the NE?

Q-Have we made any progress in implementing them?

Sir, I hope you can spare some time to read the following article and share with us how accurate it is?

Q-What do we have top match the Chinese rapid reaction forces (RRF) and their "Resolving Emergency Mobile Combat Forces" (REMCF)?

sntata said...

Dear Prasun,

"Indian Army matches China man-for-man on the border. If China's White Paper figures are authentic, the Indian Army, with 1.2 mn soldiers, is 50% larger than Chinese army."

Can this be true?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.03PM: Read this:

To AG: The problem is much deeper & has all to do with project management. If the fundamentals are not sorted out, everything that is standing over a very weak foundation will collapse like a house of cards. That’s why the end-use/operator (IAF & IN) does not want to place large orders for the Tejas Mk1 & LCA (Navy) Mk1. Unless & until the Tejas Mk1 successfully completes its flight certification regime, no end-user/operator will try to induct it into service. What’s happening now is that the flight certification process is still incomplete & will require at least another 1 year to be completed, at best. Only after that will production of SP-series aircraft commence & only after these are delivered will the IAF begin the IOC process. This is what I have been saying all along & now the ADA too has changed the terminology & is now referring to the earlier IOC-2 as ‘pre-IOC’ phase. And what this means is that the DRDO & AKA have, since January 10, 2011, been lying their arses off to the Indian public.
The Dhruv ALH is still nowhere near to becoming a world-class 5.5-tonne MRH. Had it been a worldbeater with no equals, then by now HAL could have easily obtained its certificates of airworthiness from both the European EASA and the US’ FAA. Since that has still not taken place, it means the Dhruv ALH still is a ‘work in progress’.

To Anon@10.41PM: No way. Also to be considered is the fact that the Brahmaputra River issue does not just involve China & India, but Bangladesh too. Does anyone therefore reckon that China will deliberately make an enemy out of Bangladesh as well???

To ARUP: The exact number of T/R elements & modules within any AESA-MMR is a classified matter & till to date, no OEM from anywhere has given the exact count. FSO-IT incorporates more advanced micro-processors & also features target auto-tracking. When the EF-2000 was evaluated by the Swiss Air Force, none of the air-to-ground modes were operational. But ultimately, the EF-2000 is far more expensive than the Rafale. Each P-15A DDG will have 48 Barak 8s on-board.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@11.06AM, RAD, KSINGH & Mr.RA 13: When delving into news-reports drafted by ‘desi’ journalists, one has to be far more discerning in order to seek out the devil that lurks within the details. So, here goes:
Firstly, go back a few years & you’ll discover that this very same journalist was responsible for erroneously arguing in a series of reports published by DNA India that the Barak-8 LR-SAM/MR-SAM was unnecessary when the DRDO was very much capable of developing such missiles. He then gave the example of the AAD as proof of the DRDO’s capabilities. It was in response to such ill-informed reports that the DRDO went public by stating that while the AAD could pull off no more than 7 G in terms of lateral acceleration, the Barak-8 would attain 80 G. What this ‘desi’ journalist had completely glossed over was the fact that the Barak-8 was being developed as a dual-use weapon: i.e. as an anti-aircraft weapon as well as an anti-cruise missile weapon.
Secondly, it was the DRDO that wanted to acquire technological know-how from the Barak-8 project, especially about the accelerometers & actuation systems, since the DRDO-developed accelerometers & actuation systems have till today not been able to withstand lateral accelerations beyond 50 G. Therefore, from the outset it was decided that the DRDO, IAI & RAFAEL would pool their respective strengths & core competencies together for developing the Barak-8 missile only, with IAI remaining the prime contractor & systems integrator. Consequently, all IPRs for the ‘total weapon system’ inclusive of its command, control & communications suites are held by IAI. That’s the reason why there wasn’t any Indian name given to the missile & it continues to be known as Barak 8.
Thirdly, although IAI & TATA created a JV company called NOVA Integrated Systems in the previous decade for series-producing the Barak-8 & portions of its command, control & communications suites—this being done in response to a DRDO request—the proposal was subsequently overruled by the MoD & instead, BEL & BDL were nominated as the principal Indian contractor & principal Indian subcontractor, respectively in 2012, the reason being given by the MoD that whatever arrangements had been evolved for the Akash SAM project’s industrialisation phase would also hold good for the Barak-8. Subsequently, an MoU was signed on December 5, 2012 between BEL & IAI concerning their cooperation on the Barak-8 naval LR-SAM project. A similar MoU now awaits signature regarding the IAF’s Barak-8 MR-SAM reqmt.
Fourthly, the definitive version of the LR-SAM was showcased for the very first time last February at the Aero India 2013 expo NOT BY BEL, BUT BY BDL. What this means is that while BEL will be responsible for product-support of the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR radars, BDL will be licence-assembling the missile rounds, with local content increasing on a progressive basis for the missile’s control surfaces & actuation systems. The flight-guidance & warhead sections of the missile will all be imported off-the-shelf from IAI. Deliveries of Barak-8 LR-SAM for the IN’s three Project 15A DDGs is on schedule & the first consignments will arrive in India this December.

To GOURAV: Read this:

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: Here’s my response to:

1) On the other hand there is a possibility that the Chinese may choose to initiate a much more localized conflict perhaps somewhat covertly, looking to achieve specific objectives such as a heliborne assault on Tawang for example, by using elements of its rapid reaction forces (RRF) that have been developed in the last two decades. Even in the event of a multi-front all-out war, it is these units that will be used in the opening stages and as such constitute the vanguard of the CA for possible conflict with India.-----------------Such scenrios are limited to only Sony Playstations. In real-life one has to consider the fact that Tawang’s high-altitude location, the PLA’s Mi-171E or Mi-17V-5 helicopters will find it impossible to cruise over the Thagla Ridge at full-load, or even attempt an ingress via the Chumbi Valley opposite Sikkim without being detected.
2) In Chengdu MR, which has under its jurisdiction the Tibet Military District (MD), the highly mechanized 149th Rapid Reaction Motorized Division is the designated REMCF unit. This unit was used to suppress the 2008 riots in Lhasa which showed that although based in Leshan, Sichuan province, it could manoeuvre heavy equipment into Lhasa using the Qinghai-Tibet railway and the upgraded Sichuan-Tibet national highway with relative ease. As such, the 149th can possibly deploy its AFVs/IFVs and APCs for use against India in less than 48 hours.----------------Leave alone 48 hours, heavy equipment brought into Lhasa via the Qinghai-Tibet railway and the upgraded Sichuan-Tibet national highway will take at least 14 days to traverse from their peacetime locations within China’s hinterland, & will take another 10 days at the very least to reach the LAC. Simply put, the element of surprise will be lost quite early for the PLA.
3) Similarly the other REMCF unit that can be brought into play rather quickly is the 61st Plateau Rapid Reaction Motorized Division of No. 21 Group Army under Lanzhou MR which too can reach a point in Tibet within a rather compressed time-frame.-------------Yes, but reaching somewhere in Tibet is not the same as reaching the LAC. There are a very limited number of motorable roads from Tibet right up to the LAC & all of them are vulnerable to interdiction from the air by IAF & by NLOS-BSMs of the IA.
4) Chinese ASF is noted for its use of powered parachutes and paragliders in mountainous areas. It is also worth mentioning that these SFs are specially trained for carrying out decapitating strikes against high value civilian and non-civilian targets in the adversary's rear. Additionally, they are trained and equipped to carry out long duration raids spanning four hours or more.------------------Simply preposterous! Anyone dreaming of using paragilders en mass over high-altitude terrain where wind-conditions are mostly unpredictable will only be courting suicide.
5) Only one division of the 15th Airborne can be moved to Tibet at short notice.------------------The PLAAF has also practiced equipment mobilisations using commercial airliners, but these were strictly for internal security operations. Even if one airborne division is brought into Tibet, it will be employed strictly for defensive purposes since it lacks its own integral field artillery assets reqd for going on the offensive. Therefore, attempting either vertical envelopment operations and/or infiltration by ASFs into Arunachal Pradesh or Ladakh is totally impossible.

cont'd below...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

6) A much better proposition is to give a symmetric response in the form of a mountain strike corps (MSC) or two that can be airlifted into Tibet to seize territory just the way the Chinese possibly intend to in Arunachal Pradesh.-------------------The PLA realised back in 1986 itself that seizing territory in Sikkim or AP will never be a cake-walk & therefore, it has never even practiced such manoeuvres, especially over high-altitude mountainous terrain. The only area in the northeast where offensive manoeuvres can be undertaken by India is in the Chumbi Valley & that too up to a depth of no more than 40km.

Bottomline: one has to first visit the area of operations & appreciate the tyranny of the terrain before scripting nightmarish scenarios that will never stand up to reason or scrutiny.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SNTATA: Are you shocked? What I can state with certainty, however, is that 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.

Guy Stitt said...


I am looking to hire a naval analyst in India. Would you mind emailing me if you have a recommendation.

Thank You

Guy Stitt
AMI International