Total Pageviews

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Naval and Maritime EXPO 2013


The following is a show report on the Naval and Maritime EXPO 2013, being held in Kochi, Kerala, from September 23 to 27, about which the ‘desi’ broadcast/print media is either not aware of, nor does not want to be aware of, or couldn’t care at all!
The Indian Navy (IN) seems to have belatedly learnt that it pays to standardise on sub-systems. And that’s why the very same SAGEM-built SIGMA 40 ring laser gyros that equip the Navy’s existing four Class 209/Type 1500 SSKs will in future also be installed on board the eight surviving Type 877EKM SSKs. In addition, the L-3 KEO-supplied Model 86 non-hull penetrating masts that are already on the four Class 209/Type 1500 SSKs will also be installed on the Type 877EKM SSKs. US-based L-3 KEO also owns Italy-based RIVA Calzoni, which has supplied such periscopes and masts for the nuclear-powered S-2/Arihant, S-3 and S-4 submarines. The SIGMA 40 RLG-INS is also on board the three Project 17 FFGs, three Project 15A DDGs, four Project 28 ASW guided-missile corvettes, as well as on the six Project 1135.6 FFGs, the S-2/Arihant and on Project 71/IAC-1/Vikrant. The four Project 15B DDGs and seven Project 17A FFGs too will use this RLG-INS.
Terma of Denmark's combined S/X band coastal surveillance radar for India
 
Pipavav Defence & Offshore Engineering Co Ltd is presently building advanced OPVs (AOPV), which was approved by the CCNS and DAC immediately after 26/11 and for which a global tender was released on March 31, 2010. Seven contenders responded with tender bids and on June 7 the same year, and Pipavav was selected as the preferred bidder. For executing this project, Pipavav has contracted Alion Canada to provide marine engineering, naval architecture and vessel design/construction expertise.
After waiting for almost a decade for the DRDO-owned NPOL to deliver the Nagan low-frequency active towed-array sonar, the IN has decided that enough is enough, and was awarded Germany-based ATLAS Elektronik the contract for supplying its ACTAS ultra low-frequency active/passive towed-array sonar for the IN’s three Project 17 FFGs, three Project 15A DDGs four Project 28 ASW corvettes, and the three upgraded Project 1241PE ASW corvettes (INS Abhay, INS Ajay and INS Akshay), which were also re-engined with MTU-1163 diesel engines two years ago by Kolkata-based GRSE. The ACTAS is also likely to be acquired in future for the IN’s six Project 1135.6 FFGs, seven Project 17A FFGs and four Project 15B DDGs.
Companies that lost out to ATLAS Elektronik included L-3 Communications’ Ocean Systems Division (offering the CDS-100 LFATS) and THALES (offering the CAPTAS). However, for the ultra low-frequency dipping sonar requirement (some 40 units for the to-be-upgraded Sea King Mk42Bs and Ka-29PLs, plus the 16 SH-70B Seahawks that will be ordered in future), the IN is likely to go for the HELRAS from L-3 Communications’ Ocean Systems Division. In other words, the NPOL-developed low-frequency Mihir dipping sonar too has been declared as being unworthy of operational induction by the IN.
For the IN’s requirement for two deep submergence rescue vehicles (DSRV), the Remora from Canada’s Ocean Works and the LR-7 from Rolls-Royce have been shortlisted. The offer for two Project 18270 Bester-class DSRVs from Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corp has been rejected. The process to acquire the DSRV was started more than six years ago, and bids were invited for a second time in 2010, after an anonymous letter of complaint addressed to the MoD had alleged that the Remora DSRV, which was selected way back in 2008, was chosen by dubious means.
Meanwhile, all four OEMs bidding for the Project 75I single-hulled programme—Spain’s Navantia, Germany’s TKMS, France’s DCNS and Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corp—have given in writing their ability to incorporate two separate plug-in in each of their SSK offers, with one plug-in containing an AIP system that is specified by the IN, and the other plug-in containing eight cannisters containing the vertically-launched BrahMos-1 Block-1 supersonic anti-ship cruise missile. This, however, is easier said than done. This is because, while all four OEMs have adequate expertise in terms of supplying the AIP plug-ins, none of them have any experience in incorporating VLS cells for missiles like the BrahMos-1 Block-1. Therefore, should the IN choose to insist on the BrahMos-1 for installation on board the six Project 75I SSKs, it will not only inflate the acquisition costs of the SSKs, but will also pose SSK hull re-design challenges that may further delay the service-induction of these six SSKs.
In my personal view, therefore, if the IN insists on the BrahMos-1, then the IN should also specify that the Project 75I SSKs ought to be double-hulled vessels. And if that happens, then the only logical options available come from TKMS and DCNS. In fact, the latter had unveiled its conceptual SMX-21 SSK at the Euronaval 2002 exhibition in Paris, and it was then touted as being the solution for maximum weapons storage without increasing the SSK’s displacement. Based on twin pressure-hull architecture, the concept allows to load up to 30 heavyweight weapons within a hull that displaces only 2,700 tonnes, thanks to ‘mission modules’ located between the hulls. This architecture allows great flexibility and can accommodate every type of mission, by simply changing the modules. Strong safety improvements are made by separating the crew-living areas from potentially hazardous zones.
For the four Class 209/Type 1500 SSKs, the IN has shortlisted two types of ASCMs: a combination of Novator 3M-54E Klub-S supersonic ASCM and 3M-14E LACM, and Boeing’s UGM-84A Harpoon.
Lastly, a word of caution for all those miserably ill-informed jingos who are under the erroneous impression that China has developed the DF-21D MRBM as an anti-ship ballistic missile. For, just consider the sheer challenges in terms of target acquisition: In case of the South China Sea, three bands of 46 satellites each (138 spacecraft in all) operating in 40-degree inclined polar orbits would be required to provide constant fleet monitoring. The size of the satellite constellation is driven by the need for continuous coverage and high resolution. High resolution dictates low-earth orbits. Low-earth orbits in turn dictate how many satellites must be in each band to avoid gaps in coverage, and also how many bands there must be to cover the whole sea given a 300nm field-of-view per band. Continuous coverage could be achieved from higher altitudes using fewer satellites, but resolution would deteriorate to a point where it was no longer suitable for use as targetting data.

263 comments:

1 – 200 of 263   Newer›   Newest»
sachin_sathe said...

The addition of VL System for an ssk sounds rather inefficient & ridiculously costly also extremely maintenance intensive. The VLS system should rather be kept reserved for a larger but smaller than ATV sized SSN as it can outlast an ssk in Deep sea & the SSK's should with their AIP modules be used as forward hunter-killer units picking off enemy targets of opportunities.

Rather than going through all this drama abt P-75I would it not be easier to refine the Designs for india specific U-209 which were acquired before the scam stopped the project prematurely in 1994 i believe & bring them up-to current std such as better power-plants,better mission suits,weapon systems a more refined external design built to more stringent & finer specifications & so on.
what are ur thoughts?

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. I was waiting for a long time for such a detailed thread about naval systems. 1.If Optronics masts from Thales which is slated to be integrated in Scorpenes under construction are better than model 86 L3 keo non hull penetrating masts? Latest genetation SSNs e.g. Astute, Ohio etc. are now equipped with optronics masts. 2. You have stated that incorporation of VLS into SSK will not be an easy task,but, russian Lada/Amur class already has VLS into it with salvo launch capability. Please clarify. 3. INS Arihant is using UHUSH sonar, reliability of that is not behind doubt. Could it be equipped with Thales 2076 sonar as in Astute class SSN? 4. Which torpedo will equip Arihant class subs? Thanks, with regards.....UJJWAL

Anup said...

Dear Sir,

How & when IN Select Project 17A call frigate ?
How many companies participating ?

AKHIL SURI said...

Prasun ,

1. You said that the IN has shortlisted two types of ASCMs: a combination of Novator 3M-54E Klub-S supersonic ASCM and 3M-14E LACM, and Boeing’s RGM-84A H . Which missile according to you is the better option ?

2. If the NDA comes into power will they adopt a more belligerent stand against China ? Last time when they were in power George Fernandez publicly stated that China is enemy no.1 . I think India even opened military bases in Burma, Vietnam & Tajikistan during the NDA regime .

Bhaswar said...

Sir when ring laser gyroscopes have already been tested on the Agni-5 and are meant to go on-board the Nirbhay then why are we still importing the same product?

If they are not reliable, then we shouldn't even be using them on our deterrent and nuclear delivery platform in the first place, after all our SLBMs will use the same and if they were anything less than adequate then that alone would defeat the purpose of billions of dollars spent on SSBNs in the first place? So what's the reason?

Or are we so crazy that we are willing to use LRG/RLGs which the navy wouldn't want to use on our ballistic missiles? If so then why?

What will be the full list of naval assets required by the Sagar Prahari bal. They will also require Landing ship tanks and Landing ship docks with well decks (again large one's like the Harper's ferry class or San Antonio class LSDs)?

DefenseandAerospace said...

Prasun ,

(1) Now that India has given exemption to the US from the nuclear liability clause will such gestures be extended towards Russia , France & other countries ?

(2) The DRDO-owned NPOL failed to deliver the Nagan low-frequency active towed-array sonar and so the IN has decided to award it to Germany-based ATLAS Elektronik . What are the other such projects of the Indian Army , Air Force & Navy that is hanging fire coz DRDO is unable to deliver ?

Thanks

RD said...

Prasunda,
The picture shown as "submarine based weapon complex" includes a submarine that very much resembles a kilo class submarine. Now an year ago South Korea announced that they will be integrating VLS in 3000 tonne KSS-III class submarine (may be an enlarged variant of type 214) by 2018. Link-
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2013/08/205_86282.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Attack_Submarine_program

If that is the case then may be German TKMS should be the ideal choice for P75I with some Korean help.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SACHIN SATHE: I agree with your POV. However, VL-ASCMs or even VL-SLCMs ought to be on board SSGNs & the S-2/Arihant, S-3 & S-4 boats ought to be configured for such a role. SSNs on the other hand are nuclear-powered hunter-killer submarines optimised for persistent sea-denial as well as for protecting the flanks of friendly SSBNs. As for SSKs, three of the four Class 209/Type 1500 boats have already been upgraded with the very same ISUS-90 combat management system & related new-generation sonar suite from ATLAS Elektronik as that on board the Class 214 SSKs. But MDL’s HDW-trained skilled workforce that existed till the late 1990s is no more there & it will be cost-prohibitive to raise a replacement workforce, since MDL already has an on-going effort to increase the proficiency of those engineers, technicians & welders who are now engaged with the Scorpene SSK production programme. The mistakes were made way back in the 1980s when the Congress-led govts decided to forego the option to have a fleet of 12 Class/Type 1500 SSKs & instead opted for a mixed fleet of Class 209/Type 1500s & Type 877EKMs. This mistake got compounded in 2005 when the UPA-1 govt chose the Scorpene over the resumption of Class 209/Type 1500 fabrication under Project 75. And now again, yet another mistake is being made through the Project 75I programme when it is clearly evident that what the IN requires are another six Scorpenes to add to the six already ordered, plus the commencement of a SSN construction programme similar to the one that Brazil is now implementing along with DCNS.

To UJJWAL: 1) The IN’s Scorpene SSK will have periscopes & optronic masts from L-3 KEO/Calzoni, not from THALES. 2) There’s no in-service VLS lug-in module on board any new-generation single-hulled SSK of Russian origin. 3) It could be, but only when the S-2/Arihant goes for its mid-life refit. 4) TEST-71ME-NK torpedoes.

To ANUP: There’s a dedicated thread about Project 17A FFG in the latter half of last year. Do check it up. The P-17A FFG will be a modified P-17 FFG design.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AKHIL SURI: 1) It is all about undersea warfare tactics. For instance, an SSK can at best shadow a hostile task-force or warship for 6 hours continuously, following which it has to decide how best to attack. While heavyweight torpedoes have 40km/48km-range, a tube-launched ASCM like SM-39 or RGM-84A Harpoon can be used for attacking targets up to the horizon. In either case, an SSK can never engage any moving surface target beyond the horizon since it has to track the target either with its sonar (with an effective range of no more than 15nm), or visually with an optronic mast atop a periscope (in which case visibility is affected by the earth’s curvature), or by a mast-mounted surface search radar that will require the SSK to surface some 45km away from its target for a very brief period. Consequently, it makes no sense at all to equip SSKs with ASCMs that have a range of more than 60km. Nor does it make sense to arm SSKs with tube-launched LACMs with only 290km-range since at best an SSK will have only 3 LACMs on board & even a coordinated attack by a pack of three SSKs each firing three LACMs at the same time will be targetting only shore-based establishments like petroleum tank farms or LNG terminals—something that can be done much more effectively & with far less complexity by four MiG-29Ks each armed with 2 conventionally-armed 700km-range Nirbhay ALCMs or even by a DDG armed with a 32-cell VLS containing Nirbhay LACMs. Therefore, for SSKs, the best on-board ASCM option is either the SM-39 or UGM-84 Harpoon. Surprisingly, the Ruskies haven’t bothered to develop a tube-launched version of the Kh-35/3M-25. Wonder why.
2) That was NOT what George Fernandes had said. He has stated that militarily, India faces the gravest threat from China. He never ever used the term ‘enemy’. In statecraft, no country ever has permanent friends or enemies, only permanent supreme & enlightened national interests.

To BHASWAR: No one can answer those questions with a straight face. Therefore, all I can say is that the facts speak for themselves & they’re INDISPUTABLE. For instance, if the DRDO-developed ring laser gyro-based inertial navigation system (RLG-INS) coupled to GPS receiver is that good, then how come this system is not on board any of the Tejas Mk1 MRCA or on any other combat aircraft of the IAF or on board warship of the Indian Navy or on Pinaka-1 MBRL? Why is it that the SAGEM-built SIGMA-95N RLG-INS is on board the Su-30MKI, MiG-29K, MiG-29UPG, Tejas Mk1, Mirage 2000UPG, MiG-27UPG & Jaguar IS/DARIN-3? Why is the SIGMA-40 RLG-INS on board every Made-in-India & Made-in-Russia warship & submarine acquired or upgraded since the previous decade? Why is the SIGMA-30 RLG-INS on the Pinaka-1 MBRL’s TELs & also on the OFB-built 155X45 howitzer?
SPB will take a long time to grow to its fully authorised/sanctioned strength. Obviously for vertical mobility as well as for expeditionary warfare, the SPB will require LPHs, LCACs, LAHs, lightweight field artillery howitzers, wheeled ATVs & LSVs, 12-tonne NMRHs, and amphibious ICVs.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To DEFENSE&AEROSPACE: 1) Of course, for exemptions cannot be made for favouring only 1 party. In fact, this is the best example of how the Govt of India often likes to take two steps backward & then 1 step forward, thereby creating needless heartburn & utter confusion. 2) For the IN the Varunastra heavyweight torpedo is still unavailable for P-15 & P-15A DDGs, & Class 209/Type 1500 SSKs. Then there’s the autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) which to date has only an on-board underwater camera & side-scan sonar & is therefore unable to be used for underwater mine-neutralisation. On top of all that, diesel engines & gearboxes/transmission shafts for them continue to be imported. And unlike the PLA Navy which since the 1980s has standardised on SEMT Pielstick engines, the IN today has diesel engines supplied by SEMT Pielstick, MTU, Bergen, Almaz & Wartsila—a nightmare for naval logisticians to manage & service such a khichdi/Bhel-Puri. For the IAF, there are several avionics LRUs for Tejas Mk1/Mk2 MRCA that have yet to be indigenised. The MMW seeker for HELINA ATGM that I had sought out & shown after the ISC/DRDO expo at Kolkata last January has been under development since the mid-1980s & I have the DRDO’s Product Directory published in 1987 to prove it. But is it all the DRDO’s fault/deficiency? Not quite, it seems & will dwell more upon this by adding more narratives to the show report on this thread later tonight.

To RD: That illustration shows the Amur 1650 SSK, not the Kilo’s Type 877EKM or Type 636 SSKs. Your comment itself contains the logical answer: The ROK Navy has stuck to HDW (now owned by TKMS) since the late 1980s starting with the Class 209/Type 1200, followed by the Class 214 & now the KSS-3 SSK has evolved from the Class 214, i.e. South Korea has stuck to one single submarine-developer-cum-builder (HSW/TKMS). It has not switched from one IEM to another like India has (by procuring from Russia, Germany & now France) & may yet again do so for Project 75I. Consequently, if India were to follow the logic adopted by South Korea, then the only logical option appears to be the procurement of six units of a larger version (inclusive of an AIP plug-in module) of the existing Scorpenes being built for the IN, followed by developing a nuclear-powered version of this SSK, like what Brazil is doing with help from DCNS & Navantia. They key to acquiring a sustainable & cost-effective navy today is fleet standardisation, for long gone are the days when the USSR used to make mouth-watering offers & the cost of acquiring new-generation weapons platforms/systems—be it imported or indigenous—is by no means cheap. To add to all this, the MoD-owned shipyards are charging amounts for building DDGs that are at the very least Rs.5,000 crores more than what private-sector shipyards are quoting for the very same work-package.

Anonymous said...

Dear Prasun,

Do you have any update on Multiple caliber assault rifle procurement by Indian Army?

Will Indian army go for local make or imported stuff?

Regards
Nikhil

Strike Command said...

Sir will any of IN's existing or future warships be fitted with Nirbhay missiles?

Bhaswar said...

Where is a DDG with a 32 VLS cell for LACMs in the works? Our DDGs have nothing more than 16 VLS cells, one wonder why? Any plans for the same, could the Kolkata class DDG themselves be retrofitted with 16 additional VLS cells? Besides you had stated that the Nirbhay doesn't have a ship launched variant?

SO, we're using less than accurate LRG/RLG on our BALLISTIC MISSILES! HAS SOMEONE FUCK!NG LOST THEIR MIND THAT THEY TOOK THIS DECISION? So what sort of inaccuracy are we talking about in comparison to the imported LRG/RLG?

Basically at the rate we're going Brazil will overtake us in SSN construction by the end of next decade, yes?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To NIKHIL: All three armed services of India will 100% go for the ARDE-developed multi-calibre weapon & its related variants, rest assured. Any initial imports, if any, are only meant for fulfilling immediate operational reqmts.

To STRIKE COMMAND: Not existing warships, but future warships. The IN could have had an excellent opportunity to install the VL-Nirbhay on its four Project 15B DDGs ONLY IF each of the DDGs had all-gas turbine propulsion systems (COGAG), thus doing away with the Bergen diesel engines (the CODOG arrangement) & creating enough space amidships for at least 24 VLS cells. However, that has not been the case, thanks to some ultra-conservative mindset prevailing within the IN’s Naval Design Bureau.

To BHASWAR: The P1-5 & P-15A DDGs can’t be retrofitted with VLS cells for Nirbhay. Ship-launched & submarine-launched variants of Nirbhay are one & the same, but as of now, the IN hasn’t yet specified a ship-launched Nirbhay configuration. As for using the DRDO-developed RLG-INS on missiles & whether they’re good or bad in terms of systems reliability, your guess is as good as mine. Unlike India, Brazil has adopted the universally time-tested path of first developing SSNs before anything else. India, on the other hand, has traditionally been extremely eager to be the global exception, thanks to a regressive mindset, & therefore has chosen the much more challenging path of developing SSBNs first. Just show me any other country in this world that first got into the business of developing supersonic cruise missiles (in 1998) & a decade later (in 2007) decided to develop subsonic long-range cruise missiles!!!

Bhaswar said...

So basically there is a good chance that our primary deterrence against China is running on faulty guidance equipment.

A weak nation should just surrender, if we prove our selves to be weak then we should accept the right of the strong to rule. When our military camps can be attacked with such impunity- as is going on at the moment. Borders breached repeatedly without any retaliation on our part. Even technology offered to us not absorbed properly- on ALL fronts we continue to show the world that we are nothing more than PATHETIC.

GLADDENS ONE'S HEART. IT SURE DOES.

SS said...

Prasunji,

DRDO website specifically says that RLG-INS is being employed in missiles and can also be employed in LCA Tejas. Are we still stuck with importing key components from Ruskies that go in to the RLG-INS? Since a decade earlier a key engineer associated to the project confirmed that the prism and some key components were imported from russia.. So can this be the reason that we can't use the RLG-INS beyond missiles? Or is it the unthoughtful choices of our key decision makers who decide which goes into what. If RLG-INS can be employed in a ICBM class missile which demands highest degree of accuracy (with redundant systems claimed to be highly accurate), then what is the problem in employing the same system in other platforms which are less demanding. Is it cost prohibitive?. If we didn't possess any capable gyroscope system then how come our rockets were capable of launching satellites with high accuracy?
http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/techfocus/oct05/guidance.htm

Siddharth said...

Hey Prasun Da,

What cause China to declare unilateral ceasefire in 1962 war with India.

AKHIL SURI said...

Thanks Prasun Ji .

But the SM 39 and Harpoon RGM 84 are sub sonic missiles whereas Novator 3M-54E Klub-S is a supersonic missile. So how can they be better than the Novator 3M-54E Klub-S ?

Why does India even need these missiles ( Sm 39 , RGM 84 , 3M 54E) since the Brahmos is already there ?

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. 1.If coastal survellience radar from Terma is under consideration? It was previously reported that India has chosen coastal radar from SAAB which is a derrivative of Sea Giraffe radar. 2.Considering origin of different subsystems,how much chinese is Quing class SSK? 3.Regarding upcoming MCMV from Kangnam,which will be the sonar of choice? I think Thales 2193 Sonar will be a good choice.What do you say? 4. Pakistan has imported few Panther 155mm howitzer from Turkey.How can they perform in comparison to Indian Bofors? 5.Pakistan also imported a good number of used USA made M109 at a very cheap rate.How can it impact on the artillery balance with India? Thanks, with regards...UJJWAL

DefenseandAerospace said...

Thank You Prasun .

It seems that the biggest loosers in the Indian Defense Market will be the Ruskies . They hardly have anything to offer to India now .

The Ruskies had send a sizeable delegation to the Naval & Maritime Expo 2013 but will return empty handed .

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Like I stated before, this is what happens when one tries in vain to be the global exception & throws all elementary laws of evolution into the dustbin! Show me one country that successfully developed a fourth-generation MRCA without first mastering the art of developing a basic turboprop trainer, followed by an advanced jet trainer. Show me one country that successfully developed a MBT without first developing an APC & followed by an ICV. Show me one country that developed an ATGM without first developing a LAW. Show me one country that successfully developed an ICBM or SLBM first without first developing a functional ATGM. In other words, what India has been telling the world is that one must first learn to sprint & only after that should one learn to walk or crawl. Can anyone except the convulated ‘desi’ jingos buy such illogic??? Think about it.

To SIDDHARTH: Why. I guess because the PLA reckoned that it had already secured all its military campaign objectives & had indeed taught India a lesson that will never be forgotten.

To AKHIL SURI: So what if they’re subsonic? Does that make them inferior in any way? If that’s the case then why have the IAF & IN acquired AGM-84L Harpoons for their Jaguar IMs & P-8Is? Why has the IN ordered SM-39s for its Scorpenes? Why is the Nirbhay cruise missile subsonic? BrahMos-1 cannot be fired horizontally from any submarine. Any submarine-launched BrahMos-1 can be fired either from an inclined launcher or from a vertical launcher, neither of which are there on any existing SSK anywhere in this world.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SS: Then the question that begs for a compelling answer is: if the ‘desi’ RLG-INS CAN BE used by Tejas MRCA, then by isn’t it already flying on board this aircraft? The imported components inside the ‘desi’ RLG-INS may be very small in terms of quantum, but they’re the MOST CRITICAL components. ICBMs or SLBMs have never demanded highest levels of accuracy: the MIRVs of the MX Peacekeeper ICBM & Trident D-5 SLBM have a CEP of 90 metres at best & that too for targets like hostile ICBM silos or strategic military-industrial production plants (counter-force first-strikes), while for counter-value targets like cities (for retaliatory strikes or second-strikes) the required CEP can be even 500 metres since the warhead will be exploding at least 10km above its target in order to cause maximum destruction. Consequently, in India’s case since her strategic arsenal is to be used only for retaliatory second-strike, having a CEP of as low as 20 metres or 90 metres is simply not required.

Then there’s the issue of unavailability of higher energetic propellants for India’s ballistic missiles, which has been revealed at long-last here:

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/oped/abandon-the-needless-pursuit.html

But this analysis has a few factual flaws. For instance, while Agni-1 & Agni-2 use strapdown inertial reference systems (as do all of ISRO’s satellite launch vehicles), the Agni-4, Agni-5, K-15, Prithvi-3 & Shaurya all use RLG-INS. The Prithvi-1 & Dhanush use a gimballed dry-tuned gyro (also used by combat aircraft since the 1950s until the advent of RLG-INS since the early 1980s) which the DRDO had obtained from Allied Signal (now owned by Honeywell) in the late 1980s. The MIRVs that the DRDO is working on will use fibre-optic gyros (FOG) for terminal navigation.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UJJWAL: 1) Under consideration??? Way back in November 2010 itself the Terma’s Scanter family of combined S-/X-band had been selected & ordered (by systems integrator SAABTech for India’s coastal surveillance system) & I was the first one to write about it when folks like ‘God’s Perfect Arsehole’ were claiming that the coastal surveillance system would be supplied by BEL & would use Israeli radars!!! BEL is now only doing final-assembly of these Terma-built S-/X-band radars FYI. And that photo of the shore-based S-/X-band radar antenna atop its mast was taken last May in Goa & I also have similar ohotos of such installations in Mumbai & Kochi. The Sea Giraffe/RBS-15 combination is used by coastal defence batteries, not coastal surveillance systems. Don’t confuse one with the other. 2) It is 100% made-in-China. 3) I agree. 4) 16 of them in all. It is Panter, not Panther & it is actually a Turkey-assembled FH-2000 155mm/52-cal towed howitzer made by Singapore’s ST Engineering Group. 5) They won’t have any adverse impact since they can easily be located & targetted by a combination of MALE-UAVs & Rudra helicopter-gunships.

To DEFENSE&AEROSPACE: Not quite, since the Ruskies have already secured the largest (in terms of financial quantum) contracts from India, such as co-development/co-production of the FGFA, co-development/co-production of the IL-214 MRTA, co-development/co-production of S-2/Arihant/S-3/S-4 SSBNs & also the follow-on S-5/S-6/S-7 SSBNs, & co-development/co-production of both BrahMos-1 & BrahMos-2. The Ruskies are therefore still 10 steps ahead of their potential competitors.

Anonymous said...

Dear Prasunda,

Thanks for informing that Indian armed forces will go for ARDE-developed multi-calibre weapon.

Can you please inform us when will we get to see the final models on internet? Current pics are really raw.

Will it be possible for you to cover the developments on Trishul blog ? or you think it is too early to request this?


Regards
Nikhil

Bhaswar said...

So what is the final verdict?

Are the LRG/RLGs trash/inadequate or are the foreign components in them significant enough to render using them just as same as using a SIGMA system? IF it is the latter then can these components be locally designed and produced?

I thought that the jury was still out on the S-5 and the subs that would follow- on who would be help us on it? SO basically we won't own the IP/IR for these subs either?

Now that all that water had already flowed under the bridge, what can India do to bring itself back on the right track?

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir,

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/12-killed-in-twin-fidayeen-attacks-in-jammu/article5170068.ece?homepage=true

Regd this , lots have been discussed for the need to do surgical strikes or sub conventional covert operation across the border to eliminate the kashmir insurgency training schools and command centers however GoI for reason unknown to everybody else (i hope atleast they know) is not opting such operations .
Therefore my questions are based on the lack of effective defensive plans/implementaion of such plans and operations for containing such insurgencies/infiltrations

1. Why couldn't the IA neutralize the second offensive without any loss even though IA had the alert about the "militants on run"? Does it show that IA/defence entities lack proper offensive readiness or was it lack of efficient communication ?
2. How do these militants enter the IB even with all sophisticated surveillance techs in place by IA? Is it through tunnels or do they get catapulted across the border ? or is it that IA still lacks sophisticated techs ?
3. How do the US marines and Republic of Korea soldiers manage the Korean DMZ ?
4. How does US marines/NATO manage in Afghanistan ( all successful operation by taliban seems to be 'insider attack' type ) ?
5. How does Israel manage the palestine ?
6. I always see (internet content) IA literally patrolling on foot across the IB .
Why don't they use off-road quad bike with a protective armor ?
7. Why don't the IA put decoys such as fake mines , bollywood CDs, live magazines ,quran books, 'soldiers patrolling' noises that will alarm and alert the border surveillance team or distract the infiltrators to a trap ?
8. The PAK army always uses the decoy of firing across the LoC to infiltrate the militants . Is IA still falling for such decoy ?
9. I understand that several infiltration bids have been successfully neutralized by IA however given that India operate only defensive strategies should it not be 100% and should IA/GoI think few steps ahead of the militants/insurgents/sympathizers ?
10. Does GoI have a think tank team in GoI or IA only for formulating such foolproof defensive measures ?

-- muttu

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To NIKHIL: Maybe they will be unveilled at next year’s DEFEXPO exhibition & if so then they will be available on the Internet for visual inspections/analysis.

To BHASWAR: Obviously the DRDO-developed & HAL-produced RLG-INS containing the most critical components of Russian origin don’t match up in terms of performance to their Western counterparts. If they did, then the HAL-produced RLG-INS would have been flying on the Tejas Mk1 MRCA by now. But that has not happened & will not happen as well & therefore it makes no sense at all to try to indigenise such components because A) the Ruskies won’t allow it, & B) it will be cost-prohibitive to indigenise them since they’re required in very limited quantities & thus, even DPSUs like HAL will be unable to financially sustain such local production efforts. Similarly, all the customised MiG-29s & Su-30s exported to date to countries like Algeria, India, Malaysia & Sudan have the SIGMA-95N on board, which means that Russia-origin RLG-INS are inferior to their Western counterparts.
The jury already submitted its verdict on the projected S-5/S-6/S-7 SSBNs in March 2012 itself when the NPOL distributed a brochure showing the S-5’s design & detailing what NPOL-developed systems will be on board. IPR for the design of all these SSBNs will be the exclusive preserve of Russia’s RUBIN Central Design & Marine Engineering Bureau, do rest assured.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To MUTTU: Sub-conventional special operations are already being undertaken regularly by the IA across the LoC after 16/11. 1) This happened because the security forces (BSF & IA & CRPF & J & K Police) were terribly slack in terms of being pro-active & therefore this a perfect case of a relaxed attitude prevailing in that area. 2) There are not enough surveillance sensors all along the Working Boundary (WB) or all along the LoC. This incident took place at a place where the WB ends & the LoC begins & it is evident that there were no unattended ground sensors deployed in this area. 3) The DMZ is heavily mined & there are layers of unattended ground sensors all networked into a grid. 4) The terrain in which USMC personnel operate or are based in Afghanistan is totally different & far less complex from the terrain prevailing along the LoC. 5) The IDF undertakes high-intensity punitive strikes, something the IA & IAF do not. 6) They ought to use such ATVs. POLARIS is already offering them & I had posted a related news-link about it in the previous thread. 7) Totally impossible, since the infiltrators also possess night-vision devices & conduct detailed recce of the areas all along LoC prior to selecting a particular location. 8) Obviously not. Several infiltrators have already been killed by the IA this year while trying to infiltrate at night. 9 & 10) It can never be 100%. It is a physical impossibility. The only way to deter such infiltration bids 7 terrorist attacks is to strike back at the enemy’s heart, like what the CIA is doing in Pakistan’s FATA area through its drone strikes. When Pakistan recently told US Defense Secretary that it was unable to get a grip on terrorism prevailing in FATA because of its inability to govern this area & that the CIA’s drone strikes were only making the situation worse, John Kerry replied back saying that it was entirely up to Pakistan to impose its writ over FATA & since Pakistan hasn’t been able to do so, the US would continue its drone-strike operations no matter what Pakistan thought about them. It is only such an attitude that will deter Pakistan from launching terrorist attacks against India. Regretfully, India’s ‘Gandhian’ political decision-makers are not of the discerning-type & cannot think logically & thus tend to erroneously believe that a surgical strike inside Pakistan by the IA or IAF will lead to all-out war. Little do they realise that Pakistan today is financially totally incapable of sustaining even a 48-hour full-scale offensive against India & even if the PA relocates its military formations from the Durand Line along its eastern front, then the PA will have to surrender its control over entire FATA, KPK & Baluchistan to the Afghanistan-based Baluch terrorists & FATA’s tribal warlords.

Bhaswar said...

AND the IPR on the reactors which will go on them?

What restrictions will be imposed on their usage, I am sure there will be some? Let me guess, IF someday we were to scrap the NFU we cannot use it for a preemptive strike? Limitations on MIRV numbers, yield of devices, readiness and deployment time of missiles? Which is it?

You had stated that L&T no can design a sub, so how does this add up?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

The IPR of the PWRs is now DAE-owned but this is of no consequence at all since the PWR for S-2/S-3/S-4 has a lifespan of only 10 years. India will never renounce its NFU stance, given the ‘Gandhian’ mindset of India’s ruling-class. L & T only has a virtual reality design laboratory to translate engineering drawings into 3-D graphics. L & T does not have its own in-house pool of naval architects who are the only ones capable of designing naval vessels of any type & evolving their engineering drawings. Similarly, L & T does not have its own in-house hydrodynamic test facilities of the type possessed by the DRDO’s NSTL in Vizag. Lastly, designing a submarine hull is only half the job. The other half is made up of designing & fabricating the standby diesel generators, gearbox, transmission shaft, battle damage control system, etc, none of which are either designed or built in India.

Anonymous said...

prasun sir

1)what we are going to achieve with the "transfer of technology" we are getting with the scorpene submarines?

2)Is it somehow beneficial in terms of technological capability generation for our own indigenous submarine construction in future?

3) Any latest news about NAL Saras?

regards
abhay

Bhaswar said...

VMT for the replies sir, SO what limitations and regulations shall be imposed upon us in terms of the usage of said submarine?

buddha said...

Does Indian Navy have any thought of making(at least 6) larger Destroyer(12000 tons)in the following decade with more fire power like 48/64-cell VLS containing Nirbhay LACM(1200k) and Bramhos 24/32 VL-ASCM /LACM (550k)
Thanks & Regards
( sorry if it sounds like hypothetical)

Ankit said...

Question about S-80-class submarine ?

Does it have VLS System ?

Ravi said...

What is the price of Amur 950 per unit ?

Bhaswar said...

AND sir, was it wise to choose a Russian design? Russian submarines have had more accidents than one can count. French submarines on the other hand have had a largely accident free career.

Or are we saying that L&T Hazira's hull fab and the construction at Visakhapatnam SBC exceeds the quality of construction/fab/manufacturing in Russia? I find that doubtful? Is our construction and manufacturing quality wrt the reactor better than the Russians, again highly doubtful?

So I guess we should be expecting our nuke boats to develop leaks soon enough, or have an accident and sink soon enough- in keeping with our excellent tradition for churning our products with piss poor quality. What do you reckon the odds are?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Hopefully lots of action by tonight on the procurement front !!

One question...........Why has the Jaguar engine upgrade with the Honeywell 125 not been prioritized ?? With the Rafale deal delayed, would it not make sense to do the Jaguar Darin III/Engine upgrade faster ?? and, it would not be too expensive...say 40 engines a year (so 20 Jaguars can be upgraded each year); for first 2 years imported, then assembled by HAL and the some amount of local production....the total lot of 240 engines can be spaced out over 6 years...so cost about @ $ 200 million/year with 30% off-set.......would make it quite cost effective.......

This would somewhat cover for the delayed Rafale deal and make the Jaguar UPG pretty effective.Thanks, with regards.....UJJWAL

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

This is what I had stated on September 19, 2013 at 11:27 PM: “What these ‘desi’ morons can’t even figure out is the fact that the S-2/Arihant CANNOT EVER venture out into the deep sea without an accompanying submarine-tender equipped with a DSRV. And that’s why the S-2/Arihant’s sea trials have been postponed to this November, since the Russian navy submarine-tender that India has chartered for a 12-month period will arrive in Vizag from Vladivostok only in late October. The Agni-4 & Agni-5 will both be cannisterised.”

Looks like this has now been picked by one of the ‘desi’ imbeciles’ & posted at:

http://frontierindia.net/nuclear-submarine-ins-arihant-trials-awaits-rescue-vehicle-russia#axzz2g6Gij1la

DefenseandAerospace said...

Thanks Prasun .

(1)This report suggests that the US will become the largest supplier of defense hardware to India . So clearly the US has edged out Russia , right ?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/6-aircraft-37-helicopters-and-more-on-pm-s-5-billion-shopping-list-in-us-423667?curl=1380291378

(2) If India is signing $5 billion defense contract before the end of this current financial year ( as per the above report)why is the MMRCA deal hanging fire ? I suspect it's because the cost is $12 billion . But then the MMRCA deal is probably more important.


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ABHAY: SSK construction as well as their mid-life upgrading/service life-extension is a much more complicated & challenging process than licence-building a combat aircraft. The human resource workforce that builds SSKs are also therefore qualified to rip the SSK apart & rebuild it again as part of mid-life upgrading/service life-extension programmes. However, acquisition of such skills in no way enables anyone to indigenously design a brand-new SSK. The NAL Saras is a dead-duck just like the HTT-40 & HJT-36 IJT. All three projects were doomed from the very outset.

To BHASWAR: None, for the SSBNs are the exclusive property of India, unlike the leased Akula-2 SSGN which remains Russia’sovereign property. There’s nothing wrong with Russian submarine designs. Most of the fatal submarine accidents in both the former USSR & present-day Russia took place due to human negligence, such as deliberate non-adherence to technical specifications for items like wiring, switches, batteries, etc. In case of the L & T-built SSBNs, no such compromises have been made so far. But of course Russia can’t be held accountable for the IN’s existing deficiencies like the absence of new-generation submarine-tender & DSRVs.

To BUDDHA: As I explained above yesterday, even an 8,000-tonne DDG powered by COGAG propulsion system has enough internal room for accommodating 32 VLS cells for long-range cruise missiles, 16 VLS cells for BrahMos-1, & 64 LR-SAMs like Barak-2. Of course the IN will opt for such DDGs in future since the IN envisages a total projected DDG fleet of 18 vessels in future.

To ANKIT: No. None of the SSKs anywhere in the world has VLS. They all use torpedo tubes for launching ASCMs.

To RAVI: Under US$250 million.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UJJWAL: What makes you say that? No procurement decisions are announced during Summit-level meetings between Heads of State or heads of Govt. F125 turbofans for Jaguar IS can be installed at any operational air base as the turbofan has been designed for drop-in installation. Procurement of F125s will definitely become expensive if HAL is involved in licence-assembling them, like what’s being done for the RD-33-3s for the MiG-29UPG. It is far cheaper & faster to import such turbofans off-the-shelf & instead spend the money on acquiring proficiency in indigenous MRO support for such engines. So far, the IAF has not gained in any way through the Su-30MKI licenced-production programme & its AL-31FP engines are still going to Russia for service life-extension. For imported weapon systems, it is always far better to acquire them off-the-shelf, but invest heavily in their MRO reqmts for the sake of supporting them indigenously. Then & only then will there be enough money to invest massively in indigenous weapons platforms like the Tejas MRCA & also on their future enhancements. Licenced-production of imported weapon systems in no way teaches or empowers anyone to learn to make knowledge-based innovations.

To DEFENSEANDAEROSPACE: 1) Not yet, as I had explained yesterday, in terms of both quality & quantum. 2) No one is signing any US$5 billion contract this fiscal year. At most, Letters of Intent will be issued to the foreign OEMs & the contracts will be inked in FY 2014. However, the Rafale M-MRCA deal could still be inked in FY 2013 due to an improving financial situation, thanks to the recent rapproachment between Iran & the US/EU & lessening of tensions in Syria, all of which will now likely result in a fall in international crude prices & thus give India some much-needed breathing space. This will also enable the US to support India’s investments in Iran’s Chah Bahr port & this could also likely now offer an alternate route for the ISAF forces in Afghanistan to make their exit, thereby leaving Pakistan high-and-dry & Pakistan’s high-stakes gamble in Afghanistan utterly failing. I have very strong reasons to believe that it is such issues that will be discussed & finalised at the White House today. Even Pakistan-based analysts are now claiming that in 2014 when the chosen successor to Afghan President Hamid Karzai comes to power, he will be supported by China, India, Russia, Iran & all the Central Asian Republics & even the US, which in essence will totally corner Pakistan as being the only country in the world that supports the Afghan Taliban. In other words, Pakistan has once again placed its bets on the wrong horse & has fallen on the wrong side of history. And in the months to come, once Iran comes totally clean on its covert nuclear programmes (as the Iranian Foreign Minister earlier today declared to the IAEA & the US/EU/Russia/China), more dirt will come out into the public domain about both Pakistan’s WMD proliferation efforts in Iran through China & the DPRK since the early 1990s. Therefore, do stay tuned for more explosive revelations in the months ahead.

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. 1.IN is considering nuclear propulsion also for its next aircraft carrier after INS Vikrant. Does it makes any sense ? France has one and only nuclear powered aircraft carrier and it made much trouble to them? 2. After delivery of all 5 AWACS from Israel/ Russia, what is the plan to fullfill the operational requirement of AWACS? 3. How good is the indigenous AKASHDEEP aerostat radar in comparison to that of Israel? 4. OFB made 105mm guns are going to be retired. What would be the replacement M777 or Caesar system? 5.If the upcoming meeting between MMS & Sharif would be fruitfull specially considering the current incident of terrorist attack? Thanks, with regards.....UJJWAL

Arup said...

Sir, What is the use of license assembling jet engines instead of procuring them off the shelf ? Why will anyone extend aervice life of Al-31FP when new Al-31FP are being imported off the shelf to replace those ones whose service lives have been exhausted ?

Pls outline and briefy explain the deep upgrades of Sea King mk42 and Ka28 wrt to mmr, avionics,cockpit self defensive suite and weapons suite ?
Is there any time table as to when the actual upgading process will start ?

Has IN officials at that expo disclosed when the 2nd slep contract with Sevmash will be signed for the Kilo fleet ? Will the batch 3 of Talwar class be ordered soon ? Instead of model 86 non penetrating masts why can't n go for optronic masts with thermal imagers,ircameras ?

Why wasn't the 4th Type 209 sub upgraded with Type 212 sensors and sonars like the rwst of the group ?Why wasn't Exocet selected for these subs? It could have lowered operating costs.

What is the purpose of stationing an armoured regiment in Samba ? In an event of hostility where will it be depkoyed ? There were many Cheetah too in the base. If the terrorists hadn't been conatined in time they could have damaged or destroyed them.

Won't the rest of the T-72 be upgraded .Drdo has upgraded just half of the fleet to CIA standards.

Gessler said...

Hi Prasun ji,

Check this news -

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDAQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.indianexpress.com%2Fnews%2Faakash-prahar-missiles-will-be-up-for-display-at-seoul-international-aero-show%2F1175172%2F&ei=utZFUtrvKoXesgalyoGQAQ&usg=AFQjCNE8iYhV9ZWx0IENDz8nNf4K5na1Nw

It says Akash SAM and Prahaar NLOS-BSM are going to be put on display
at Seoul Air Show.

What do you think is the idea behind this move if true? Will anyone be interested in buying them? Atleast some small countries?

BTW, with regard to what you said to BHUDDHA above, that IN plans to have 18 DDGs in future...but 3 P-15A and 4 P-15Bs only make up 7 new-generation DDGs, even if we upgrade the existing P-15s we get only 10.

What will be the other 8 (or 11 if you exclude existing P-15) DDGs? Will we be going for a P-15C ?

K. SHEKAR said...

Mr. Prasun is there going to be a MCH (Medium Combat Helicopter) after LCH?

This video suggests so -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aoTX-amU17Y

Is it based on genuine info or fanboyism?

Also, what do you think of IN/SPB ships operating an amphibious assault LCH?

Bhaswar said...

Sir I think you're reading too much into the "reconciliation" occurring between the US and Iran. There is no way they will actually align together, and it is too late now for the US to shift its GLOC from Pakistan. They will get their share of the pie in Af. The taliban can no longer be contained.

Ravi said...

what are the Armament of INS Arihant apart from K15 & K4

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Why not? Weren't they aligned until 1979? Even to date, more than 50% of all in-service Iranian military hardware is of US origin. Furthermore, it is the Pakistan-based analysts who are sounding the alarm about the Afghan's Taliban's impending demise, not just me.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To K SHEKAR: Speculative fanboy stuff.

Anonymous said...

.............well copied, UJJWAL....................

Anonymous said...

Furthur on the 125 Honeywell engine for Jaguar UPG........your point understood and agreed....it does make more economic, time-wise and QUALITY sense to buy them outright........

The point I was trying to make was....why is the IAF not doing this on a urgent basis ?? It would be very cost effective.....quick....make the Jaguar more potent...limited infrastructure/training needs...and, most important, not only cover for the delay in the Rafale procurement, but also extend the life of a pretty good aircraft.......

R Shenoy said...

Hi Prasun,
Between "Snapshots of MAKS 2013 and China's Tactical PGMs, & Unguided Bombs Used by Indian Air Force & Indian Navy", there was a posting on Indian Army. That one was mysteriously disappeared. I wonder why? :)

In one of the previous threads you commented that it was Palestinian Muslims who trained LTTE in educational institutions across South India. I wonder why there were no news about that? It was difficult for me to digest this. If it was indeed Palestinians who trained LTTE, why didn't India make any attempts to stop that? Where did the money come from? Money laundering - yes to certain extent. But not for a full out war. So definitely some countries must have helped LTTE. Even when IPKF was fighting LTTE, was the training going on across South India?

Don't say Indian intelligence did not find. So something somewhere is stinking! Whole program was not viable without the involvement of certain countries, especially India.

The recent suicide attacks in Jammu was a big set back against fight against the terrorists. 4 soldiers and 4 policemen lost their life, plus 2-4 citizens.

In this year there is sudden spurt in terrorist activities. In recent interview with Al Jazzira, a HM terrorist said there is going to be more terrorist attacks, and suddenly this one in Jammu.
Somebody is doing something in Pakistan, especially Mr. Sheriff came to power.

HM terrorist also said, his group uses Rs.75 stuff to deactivate Israeli built border security equipments to cross. Similarly he uses certain help (AlJ says, bribing BSF) across the border. What kind of stuff he was talking about?

Now, if Afghanistan issue is solved, then those who fight in Afghanistan will be 'jobless' and soon they will turn to India, especially J&K. I feel that the year 2014 will be very crucial. I am very much worried.
The interview, really bad one, the AlJazzira reporter asked no question about peace process, questions were only about attacks. really poor reporting.

Bhaswar said...

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/7027/d7tm.jpg

Sir, saw this pic of the Arjun Mk.1A posted. It has a RCWS unlike the previous pics. Could you please identify what the sand colored box shaped contraption on top of the turret beside the RCWS is?

Also won't any AMAP add on solution face the same problem as the ERA add-on did, that being that one forward facing section of the turret (on the right side) will have to be left as it is due to the sensor there?

SANJEEV KUMAR said...

Prasun da,
According to reports only AW109 and naval panther are bidders for 56nos NLUH Indian navy requirement with 3 months more for HAL to submit its proposal for a version of LUH.

Now if Augusta is disqualified for curruption charges it will be a single vender situation and the tender will be cancelled.

IN requirement is urgent ie by 2016 while HAL LUH will fly only by 2017. How a single engine LUH will satisfy the tender requirement or it will diluted to allow single engine LUH.

Would not naval panther will be best as it is more capable even if it is costlier than AW109?

Bhaswar said...

Also that pic of the Arjun clear shows that the tank has been labeled by even if its makers as the MK.2. So were we wrong in claiming that this it the MK.1A variant?

Vikram Guha said...

Prasun Da,

Did you read the HINDU's article on NSA snooping on Indian establishments in the US ? The link is below :

http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/nsa-planted-bugs-at-indian-missions-in-dc-un/article5164944.ece

I have two questions in this regard ?

(1) Why cannot the Indian Govt. take a tough stand against such intrusions , unlike Brazil or Germany ?

(2) Does India have the capability to design these types of Cyber Weapons like "Lifesaver" ; "Vagrant" that the NSA has used ? If not why ?

As ever , thank you .

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UJJWAL: 1) Nuclear propulsion for the IN’s IAC-2 makes perfect sense ONLY IF a similar propulsion system using the same PWR is also used for the IN’s projected reqmt for nine SSNs. 2) After the 5 x A-50I PHALCONs & 3 x EMB-145Is, the CABS wants to develop a ‘desi’ PHALCON by mounting a fixed triangular array of L-band active phased-array antenna atop 3 x Airbus A330-200. 3) Akashdeep is presently certified for carrying only optronic sensors like LORROS, whereas the aerostats from Israel, the US & Russia are certified to carry airspace surveillance radars. 4) LFGs won’t be retired. They will be transferred from the IA to the BSF. 5) At best what may emerge from this meeting is the decision to set up a new mechanism under which joint delegations (comprising Army & Foreign Ministry bureaucrats) of both countries will be created & provided with hot-lines for jointly investigating ceasefire violations along the LoC. Regarding Jaguar IS re-engining, it is all a matter of procurement priorities of the IAF. Right now, the IAF requires the Rafale M-MRCAs, 15 CH-47F Chinooks & six more C-130J-30 Super Hercules ASAP.

To ARUP: AL-31FPs are being imported for new-build Su-30MKIs & not for replacing any existing AL-31FPs. All existing AL-31FPs that have reached their TBO limits after logging 1,000 flight-hours are being refurbished so that they will be in use for another 1,000 flight-hours, following which their 2,000-hour TTSL will expire. Sea King Mk42B & Ka-28PL upgrades were explained in my previous blog at TRISHULGROUP sometime in 2008 itself. SLEP contracts for the remaining Type 877EKM SSKs are still under negotiations. Project 1135.6 Batch 3 FFGs won’t be ordered this fiscal year. Model 86 is an optronic mast. 4th Class 209/Type 1500 SSK is presently being upgraded. UGM-84A is cheaper than SM-39 Exocet. MBTs & LOHs always co-exist together. Armoured Regiments do need to be forward-deployed in areas like Samba to reduce their mobilisation time to the bare minimum, since across the WB the Pakistan Army’s MBT Regiments can reach the WB in less than 48 hours. More T-72M1s need not be upgraded if the IA decides to acquire Arjun Mk1As in larger numbers.

To GESSLER: They will be displayed only to showcase the DRDO’s core technological competencies. Republic of Korea has already co-developed its KR-SAM with Russia that has far superior performance characteristics when compared to Akash Mk1. Regarding DDGs, if you do the math then you will realise that the IN’s future DDG after Project 15B is now in the drawing boards of the Naval Design Bureau.

To RAVI: Torpedoes. Already answered that previously in this thread.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To R SHENOY: I had deleted that post by mistake, bit will re-upload it with new updates & illustrations early next month, do rest assured. The LTTE cadres were trained by Palestinians (& not merely Palestinian Muslims) & money for this came from the AIADMK, which regularly received financial doles not from any government, but from several India-based NGOs as well as from the then don of Mumbai’s underworld, Varadaraj Mudaliar. Govt of India wasn’t deeply involved with LTTE at all. Instead, Delhi supported factions like EPRLF & TELO that were opposed to the LTTE. There are many other related issues that still haven’t caught the attention of the ‘desi’ print/electronic/broadcast media. For instance, from where did the LTTE receive its weapons supplies? What role did the IN play in restricting such weapons supplies? Why has the LTTE’s No2 Pottu Aman (intelligence chief) never been heard of? Why wasn’t he captured or killed? Was he acting as a ‘deep mole’ for some other country? Was that the reason he was allowed to make a safe getaway & if so, in which country he is now located? What has KP revealed about the LTTE’s global financial support network & who provided India with all the accurate information about the LTTE’s efforts to procure home-made RPGs made in Trichy & Coimbatore? Like I said before, there are still many unanswered questions—answers to which I do possess to a large extent, but it is still premature to reveal them, especially in this blog. Maybe I’ll write a book about all this in future.
The attacks in J & K took place because the fencing along the ‘nullahs’ is not up to the task & what needs to be deployed there are grids of unattended ground sensors, which the IA may now well procure from the US in very large numbers. Such sensors have already been proven to be highly successful when used by the CRPF against the Maoist guerrillas. As for Afghanistan, majority of the Taliban fighters will be absorbed by the various Afghan warlords, i.e. bought over. Money, after all, can solve most, if not all, problems.

To BHASWAR: I’ve explained it all in the bottommost photo in this thread. AMAP can be shaped in such a manner so as to leave rectangular holes for unrestricted FOV for both the IR jammer/laser warner & the gunner’s sight, just like what has been done for the Singapore Army’s upgraded Leopard 2NGs. The OFB-made SRCWS appears overweight & bulky when compared to other RCWS options available from OEMs like ELBIT Systems, RAFAEL, SaabTech, & OTOBreda. What one needs for an MBT is a decent 0.50-cal MG meant for use against hostile infantry forces, & not a 12.7mm anti-aircraft cannon.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SANJEEV KUMAR: Those reports are grossly erroneous. The NLUH reqmt is for light twin-engined helicopter with a MTOW of 4.25 tonnes. Therefore, only the AW-109 & Bell 429 fit the bill. The Eurocopter AS.565 Panther has a far higher MTOW & is being proposed as the 10-tonne NMRH (not NLUH) for FFGs. For the 12-tonne NMRH reqmt, Eurocopter is proposing its EC-725 Cougar. HAL’s LUH is a single-engined helicopter & therefore does not even qualify for the IN’s reqmt.

To VIKRAM GUHA: What’s so surprising about it? To maintain its status as the world’s sole superpower, the US has every right & the means to do all this. What India needs to do is develop its malware-detection capabilities through increased R & D on cyber warfare, like what Dr Mohandas Pai has been calling for all these years, & not go shrieking around about such matters like headless chicken, or cry foul about increasing R & D investments by ZSTE & Huawei in their India-based R & D operations.

Bhaswar said...

Sir what of the naming, its been labeled as the Mark.2 printed on to the chassis itself. So the features such as AMAP which you were detailing are meant for the Mark.3 then?

Bhaswar said...

The FOG system on the techfocus pdf is completely indigenous?

The optics on the SRCWS are completely indigenous? The same should be adaptable for a 50BMG. surely?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Name is ARJUN. Model designation (whether Mk1 or Mk1A) is still provisional. AMAP is still an option suggested by ONLY me (as I had clarified several times before) & by no means has been finalised. FOG is not 100% indigenous. No such high-tech precision can be 100% indigenous by any stretch of the imagination. Leave alone FOGs, no one in India even produces indigenous AMLCDs, even for consumer electronics items. Even China’s FOGs are of Norwegian origin as I had detailed a long time ago when detailing China’s range of NLOS-BSMs. Optronic package for SRCWS comes from Rademec of the UK. Even a simple visual comparison between various available foreign RCWS options & the SRCWS shows that the latter is much heavier & bigger in size.

Bhaswar said...

Sir right on the tank itself is says arjun mk.2 F1.

If the AMAP is your suggestion, then why have we developed AMAP solutions, we have right? Or does your suggestion involve getting a foreign OEM to provide the armoring solutions? IF we have developed AMAP like armor then obviously we will use it in the future.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Watch MIM President & Lok Sabha MP Assauddin Owaisi at his combative best earlier this week as he totally rubbishes his myopic Pakistani counterparts from the PML-N & Jamaat-e-Islami during a debate on ‘India-Pakistan’ Ties held in Islamabad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0usC2ZsGXo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-AWI7EKFQ8

On the other hand, just listen & see how exactly some of the totally inept ‘desi’ journalists are completely bowled over by their Pakistani counterparts simply because these ‘desi’ morons are totally clueless about the real ground situation & they, for reasons best known to them, don’t even bother to raise the issue of systematic state-sponsored human rights violations in Gilgit-Baltistan since the late 1980s. FYI the Shias of Gilgit-Baltistan have been agitating for the past two years for re-opening of the highway linking the Northern Areas with Kargil, which Pakistan refuses to allow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsQvLAyZj5Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FeO8PGCM8M

Ankit said...

Has india ordered additional 2 A-50EI Phalcon awacs ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Singh is still King! Dr MMS’ address to the General Assembly yesterday was as strong & direct as the one delivered by Jaswant Singh back in 1999. India’s message to Pakistan: India is not interested in negotiating about anything with Pakistan for as long as Pakistan is unable to stand up on its own feet & take responsibility for matters within its own soil.

FYI, here’s a slugfest between Indian & Pakistani panelists that was aired yesterday:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXBCWaPTRws&feature=c4-overview&list=UURWFSbif-RFENbBrSiez1DA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dK8EI4gqIA

DAshu said...

but this aman ki asha is total bullshit . India need to show IDF mentality then only Pak would be on her knees and this is the perfect time to get back POK if needed by force .

DAshu said...

and these desi journos!!!! lolzz

Anurag said...

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/oped/abandon-the-needless-pursuit.html

Sir,I have some points to raise wrt this 'article' by Mr Pravin Sawhney .With due respect,I can have say only one thing about the author-'A Big Fucking Liar'.Why??Because just take a look at the specifications of all Premiere ICBMs of present day.For example the American Minuteman 3(6 km/sec),Trident 2 (7 km/sec),or Russian Topol (7 km/sec),Topol M (7.3 km/sec),Bulava (6 km/sec)-all of them come very close to the stated 6.2 km/sec terminal velocity of Agni V.Then where did he pull that 'DOUBLE' out from-his @RSE??!!

And I think the problem of propellant may have been overcome.Because if we take the 17 ton Agni IV's range of 4000 km and apogee of 1000 km with 1.2 ton warhead to be true then for a 50 ton missile the range should be 10k-12k km.

And that's why I have a doubt-if the 17 (16.5 to be precise) ton Agni IV with 1.2 ton warhead can reach 4000 km distance and 1000 km apogee,then why does the 49 ton Agni V and 48 ton Agni III with 1.5 ton warhead give just 5500 km and 3500 km range respectively??

Anurag said...

All most forgot,had one more question to ask:
If China can use its DF 21 as an ASAT,then our Agni IV should also be modifiable to be used as an ASAT weapon against satellites at LEO (Assuming India manages to get a long range X band radar) since it has an impressive apogee of 1000 km??

Would like to know your reply.

Indranil said...

Prasun, can you post the links for the pics of the AOPV from Pipavav?

Gessler said...

Sir read this -

http://www.equitybulls.com/admin/news2006/news_det.asp?id=128198

Pretty good news, no?

Alpha said...

proceeding towards collapse...

http://www.sunday-guardian.com/analysis/freedom-of-expression-goes-missing

Bhaswar said...

In terms of cost how much of the percentage of the Arihant follow on subs will be indigenous?

Around what time will we see Pakistan deploy its own SSBN? They are not going to sit around and watch us steal a march on them?

IF the AMAP is only your suggestion then why have we developed it in the first place? Or is it that we are capable of developing it but have not so far? Or were you referring to a foreign OEM providing the armoring solution?

What should be the direction in which we should work for indigenous helos and fixed wing transport assets with a 20-20 year view in mind? What is being done at the moment? Or will we have to again go and purchase helos once the Mi-17v5s become obsolete in 30 years or so? Same for the strat air-lifters like C-17s?

Even if the SRCWS is relatively heavier how does it matter, the tank is already a 62 ton beast- a hundred kg here or there shouldn't trump the fact that its our design (the RCWS). IF we keep expecting our own industries to develop a world class product in one go itself and from the start then indigenous development will never occur, do the Chinese not settle for equipment which is not as good as what the Americans have? The do, that is how the equipment is later refined and suddenly they find that they can compete with the best. If we do not do the same and keep trying to always aim for that golden foreign product then we might as well right ourselves off as a client state.

Bhaswar said...

Also,

From the 2001 CAG report- http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2001-11-16/hyderabad/27234171_1_t-72-ordnance-factory-cag-report:-

"while hundreds of t-72 main battle tanks (mbts) of the army are long overdue for overhaul, another disturbing fact is that a few hundred of them were fitted with defective barrels, which could cause accidents. the barrels were found defective because they had not been tempered as per specifications. this has been reported by the comptroller general of india (cag). while 454 barrels valued at rs 4 4 crore were rejected because tempering specifications were not followed, an investigation had been ordered into the remaining 305 barrels fitted on the tanks. until march 1998, 35 accidents had taken place in which more than 10 barrels either cracked or burst, said the cag report of last year. according to sources, the defence metallurgical research laboratories (dmrl) in hyderabad also investigated the failure of the 125 mm gun barrels of the t-72 tank and pointed out that the breakages were because of tempering problem. the department of defence production and supplies had awarded the order to supply 774 barrels at a cost of rs 67.73 crore to be fitted on the t-72 tanks. by alloying elements with steel, midhani made hot rolled bars which were sent to ordnance factory, kanpur, for forging. subsequently, they were sent to field gun factory, kanpur, for machining. however, the field gun factory at kanpur carried out heat treatment on the forgings at reduced temperature, which was against the specifications from the original designers. when the heat treatment should have been carried out at 520-570 degrees c, it was done below 430 degrees c, the report said."this has resulted in the defective manufacture of barrels affecting the performance of t-72 tanks,"the cag said."

Is this true? IF so why were the manufacturing procedures listed out by the OEM not adhered to? Why were the barrels tempered at a lower temp.? Do we not have the technology and manufacturing infra to temper them at the required temperature? Is this problem still persisting?

Do we have similar issues with the T-90? Will similar issues crop up with the Arjun's barrels?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANKIT: Not yet.

To DASHU: That’s what the TSD was all about…..& all the covert cross-LoC operations were mounted by IA units patterned along the lines of the IDF-Army’s GIRU-264 detachment. As for Gilgit-Baltistan, Dr MMS clearly & firmly drew the line yesterday when he stated that the state of J & K (inclusive of Azad Kashmir & Gilgit-Baltistan) was an integral part of India & there will never ever be any territorial barter for the sake of securing enduring peace with Pakistan. In other words, India has never given up on Gilgit-Baltistan & more so at present when the Shias & Ismaili Muslims owing allegiance to Prince Aga Khan over there continue to be persecuted by both Punjabi settlers & neighbouring Pathan tribesmen & are increasingly looking forward to India’s help to diplomatically up the ante in concert with the EU & US (like what has been achieved with Baluchistan) & internationalise the issue of systematic human rights violations talking place in Gilgit-Baltistan since the late 1980s. This has put Pakistan in an inescapable bind since in August 2009 Pakistan unilaterally decided to annex Gilgit-Baltistan (because China had put intense pressure on Pakistan to clarify the ‘legal’ status of Gilgit-Baltistan) & by doing so Pakistan itself contradicted its longstanding stand on the issue Kashmir & also ensured that the UNSC’s resolutions no longer apply to J & K—a critical development so far ignored by the India-based ‘peaceniks’ & ‘desi’ journalists—and the stellar behind-the-scenes role played by China in degrading Pakistan’s traditional stand on all Kashmir-related UNSC resolutions). That matters will now become more heated against Pakistan is also evident from Dr MMS’ utterances at the White House two days ago, when he referred to Pakistan as being epicenter of terrorism, an utterance that was cleverly choreographed before, i.e. meaning the US had, prior to the meeting, had approved of the usage of such terms during the meeting. All this, coupled with the on-going rapproachment between Iran & the US, & the coming together of China, India, Russia, the EU & US & being on the same page concerning the post-2014 political landscape of Afghanistan does make the ‘Great Game’ extremely interesting, for this will further solidify India’s case for reclaiming Gilgit-Baltistan & ensuring that both China & India can at long-last have access to Afghanistan’s strategic Wakhan Corridor & through that, to the rest of Central Asia, which traditionally had flourishing cultural & economic ties to the once-undivided India/Hindustan.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANURAG: I had already pointed out some factual errors in that Op-Ed piece you’ve referred to. However, your comparison between the Agni-5 on one hand & the other operational ICBMs & SLBMs still remains imperfect, since the Agni-5 is LIGHTER than other ICBMs/SLNMs. Agni-5 does not weight 50 tonnes—rather, it comes closer to 23 tonnes at the moment. Furthermore, the issue of unavailability of superior higher energetic propellants is TRUE & INDISPUTABLE (a fact confirmed by DRDO engineers last January when I interacted with them at the ISC/DRDO expo at Kolkata) & that’s also the ONLY reason why the PDV exo-atmospheric interceptor has not yet been test-fired. Having said all this, it must be stated that Agni-5 is still in the midst of a pre-planned product improvement programme & out of the 10 planned test-firings, only two have been conducted thus far & the projected operational ‘avatar’ of Agni-5 will never be the one that has been test-fired, since the GoI-authorised version of the operational Agni-5 will have to incorporate both higher energetic propellants as well as MIRVs. Consequently, it will be highly premature to draw any meaningful comparisons between an experimental Agni-5 of today with other operational ICBMs or SLBMs. As for ASAT capabilities, the DRDO had already confirmed back in early 2010 that the PDV would morphe into a surface-launched ASAT weapon.

To INDRANIL: There are no available pix of the AOPV from Pipavav, since the vessel is still being designed by Alion Canada.

To GESSLER: I guess so.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Cost quantum is never a sane method for estimating any product’s indigenous content. Pakistan Navy has no plans for acquiring SSBNs or SLBMs. AMAP-type packages have been developed by various private-sector firms in India for APCs, ICVs & MBTs. What’s the definition for an ‘indigenous helicopter’? A bulky SRCWS always has a negative impact on the turret stabilisation/traverse system. Secondly, both the optronics & 12.7 machine gun are imported. Thirdly, a lightweight mount could easily have been specified & OFB could well have designed/fabricated such a solution that also featured a 0.50-cal MG. Fourth, the IA has unnecessarily complicated matters by insisting on the capability to launch CLGM & have an anti-aircraft MG. Consequently, instead of adopting the OFB/IRDE-developed commander’s panoramic sight that has already proven its success on a retrofitted T-90S, the bulkier COAPS has had to be installed, thereby making the Arjun Mk12A more expensive. Instead of spending money on the CLGM/COAPS combination, money should have been spent on installing APS. In present-day manoeuvre warfare, MBTs do not venture out unaccompanied by LOHs or helicopter-gunships that are armed with AAMs like Mistral-ATAM or Strellets. So where then is the need for the MBT to have its own internally-mounted air-defence system? From this, I can only infer that the IA is fixated on waging battles like what happened in Longewala in 1971 & consequently this has prevented the CVRDE from making meaningful innovations for Arjun Mk1A.

To BHASWAR: Of course it is all true. The barrel-tempering was improper since the OFB factory at Kanour was--at the time of producing these barrels—subjected to repeated power-cuts/load-shedding. This had severely affected the QC/QA-levels of OFB Kanpur. This has been clearly pointed out inb the CAG report, but the ‘desi’ journalists from TOI have failed to incorporate this piece of data in their reports & hence the average public is left with incomplete data & is therefore unable to reach any logical conclusion regarding what the root of the problem is all about.

Bhaswar said...

Our private firms have developed something akin to AMAP? You mean they acquired the know-how through a JV or are repackaging a foreign solution with an indigenous tag like BEL or TATA SEAD? Which companies might these be? After all even companies like Data Patterns are involved in promoting foreign products and developing very little cutting edge tech ON THEIR OWN.

Pakistan will never let go of GB without a war. Its a pipe dream to think that they will and China will not support us in reclaiming GB. Hell they are building a road there to enter Gwadar- if anything they will oppose any such Indian move tooth and nail. How can one even talk of taking back GB without a nuclear war?

Bhaswar said...

ALSO the Pakistani media is reporting that Honbl. PM Manmohan Singh will be engaging Nawaz despite the statement that we cannot negotiate before Pakistan settles its house he is still going to engage in dialogue. Whats up with that?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: There are at least four companies, including MKU. The so-called Gwadar-Kasghar highway is still only at the MoU stage. No firm construction contracts have been inked as yet. Instead, China recently informed Pakistan of its intention to seal the China-Pakistan border from September 28 till October 7. Dialogues always take place everyday between any country & the foreign diplomatic missions located in that country. Holding dialogues does not mean that one is holding negotiations or discussions.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

CABS has issued an EOI & a Global Tender for supplying of L-, S- & X-band TRMMs for its AWACS-I project:

http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/drdojsp/downloadtndr.jsp?tenderName=5001&McrId=CABS*Centre For Air Borne System&p=EOI_6_20_Sep_13.pdf

http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/drdojsp/downloadtndr.jsp?tenderName=4989&McrId=CABS*Centre For Air Borne System&p=INVITATION_FOR_TENDER_CABS_14ATT058.pdf

ADE has floated global tenders for supplying sub-systems for Rustom-2 MALE-UAV:

http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/drdojsp/downloadtndr.jsp?tenderName=4976&McrId=ADE*Aeronautical Development Establishment&p=130022_130913.pdf

http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/drdojsp/downloadtndr.jsp?tenderName=4980&McrId=ADE*Aeronautical Development Establishment&p=130056.pdf

Bhaswar said...

Why is CABS floating a global tender for said TRMs, they have designed S band and L band TRMs anyway? Did they prove to be inferior? Or is it only for manufacturing the TRMs that CABS has designed since fab units do not exist in country? Is that it, that the TRMs will be ours (our IP/IR and design) but manufactured by someone else? Or did our design efforts fail? IF its the latter then how does that effect the ongoing CABS AEW&C project of three platforms?

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

a few things

what you said to #shenoy about Pottu Amman may be true bcoz some reports say that this man was escorted atleast a week before LTTE was boxed in beside the lagoon, that he made out despite Prabhakarans no surrender policy makes me think that he was more powerful than LTTE chief and if not RAW then a agency of P5 nation or a country close to them where tamils are in good number was responsible

Regarding our discussion about Attack Helos in last thread i forgot to mention that the writer said meant that such helos are cold war concept meant to blast advancing russian army in cold plains of europe.

That makes me think if taken into context such helos wont work in hot indian desert or high icy desert and that is why i said we must go for V22. I think in 1991 such helos were successful was becoz the battle was held in not so hot moths and it was mainly a lopsided war.

http://caravanmagazine.in/reportage/boomtown

In the above article i heard for the first time a chap named Sudheer Choudharie who has been a arms dealer even before Verma & Nanda became active. The article also says every country allows arms agents and even India exports arms through agents. The article says that a 'now retired' arms agent says that if GoI legalizes arms agents such corruption will be eliminated (as if similar to legalizing betting & gambling)

your view on these

thanks

Joydeep Ghosh

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Your question indicates that you've asked them without even reading the PDF documents. The EOI is for procuring TRMMs, & not TRMs. The documents clearly state that: The rights of Intellectual Property, developed under the Contract, will be either the property of Govt. of India or jointly owned by the Govt of India and the Development Partner. The holding of rights of intellectual property will be
decided by the Buyer based on the merits of the case. Even where IPR is jointly held, Govt of India will have the marching rights on IPR, i.e., the Development Partner will have to give technical know-how/design data for production of the item to the designated Production Agency nominated by Govt of India. The Development Partner will, however, be entitled to license fee/royalty from designated agency as per agreed terms and conditions. The Development Partner will also be entitled to use these intellectual
properties for their own purposes, which specifically excludes sale or licensing to any third party.

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

sorry for late addition

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-09-29/india/42501324_1_eastern-air-command-super-hercules-lac

i think this way we can expect much better coordination and cooeration between IA & IAF along LAC

thanks

Joydeep Ghosh

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Part-2 of the fiery debate between Indian & Pakistani participants that was aired last night:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43cIk9FNKFY&feature=c4-overview&list=UURWFSbif-RFENbBrSiez1DA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oSezZ_3jOE&feature=player_embedded

By the way, Salman Khursheed yesterday said on-the-record to Voice of America that if Pakistan cannot impose its writ on its own sovereign territory & always attributed acts of terrorism being perpetrated against India to non-state actors operating out of Pakistan, then no one should object if India decides to take on these terrorists inside Pakistan, i.e., just as the US is carrying out drone-strikes inside Pakistan.

Bhaswar said...

That doesn't answer the question sir. We have designed our own TRMMs for the current project so then why do we need to develop them again?

The actual question would be- did the TRMMs DRDO design prove to be useless? If not then WHY do we need to redesign the TRMMs? And if our indigenous design approved to be useless then why is it being used in CABS-Embraer AEW&C program?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Of course it answers the question. To date, only TRMs have been designed by DRDO, & not TRMMs. You ought to pay more attention to the detail, for the devil always lurks within the detail.

Bhaswar said...

so what about the l-star derivative on cabs aew&c? Its not indigenous?

basically we proved our worth again, nothing about the current project is Indian not even the radar?

but you had stated that the TRMs being used in the aew&c project were designed by us in- so how come this shift now?

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

as per discussions in this blog, IA/IAF doesnt want anti ballistics missiles then why is the DRDO going ahead with tests,another test is coming

i think a pressing need is to develop own fleet of UAVs (Rustom 2 delayed again) then funding israeli systems

oh btw would like to know your views on previous points raised

thanks

Joydeep Ghosh

Bhaswar said...

Well sir,which is it?

Did our own TRMs and TRMMs (DRDO claims that it did develop them- http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/labs/CABS/English/index.jsp?pg=compact.html) prove to be failures?

Will these new TRMMs use our (DRDO/CABS) TRMs?

IF our TRMs are pathetic then what will happen to the CABS AEW&C?

Anonymous said...

Is India bound by the US-India nuclear deal not to produce fissile materials
Can India make new weapons by using its unsafeguarded facilities.
SIDDHARTH

Gessler said...

Hello Prasun ji,

1) You have told me that the IN's future DDG after P-15B is on the drawing board at NDB...

What do you think would be the features of such a ship?

Will it be like the Zumwalt-class DDG?

2) PLAN's latest Type-052D DDGs seem to have a quad-packed VLS units, is there any plan on IN's side to fit P-15B with a similar
system as Mk.41 VLS or something?

3) Any progress on BrahMos-II hypersonic cruise missiles? Will the BrahMos-II have both anti-ship and land-attack variants or just ASCM only?

4) Any updates on the 8 LCUs being built by GRSE? Do you have any pictures of that ship under construction sir?

5) When do you expect first P-28 Kamorta to be inducted into Navy? And when is the first P-15A coming? That ship is delayed like forever.

6) There is this supposed supersonic LRCM with 600km range that looks like ASMP-A. Is it powered by a RAMJET, if yes, is it indigenous? When is this missile going to be tested?

7) Any progress on MSMC SMG? I suppose all trials have been successfully passed, right?

8) Any updates on Trichy Assault Rifle?

Thanks in advance.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: That weblink refers to the TRMMs on the antennae of only the 3 x EMB-145Is. The latest EOI for TRMMs is for the entirely different AWACS-1 project. Even the S-band TRMMs for EMB-145I use critical imported components.

Bhaswar said...

Critical components in terms of being manufactured outside or even designed outside? You yourself had stated that the TRMs were designed by us- so what's this all of a sudden?

Did we or did we not design the radar on the CABS AEW&C ourselves, Did we or did we not design the TRMs and MMICs involved ourselves (with manufacturing done outside)?

Even the Patent application by CABS/DRDO of the said TRM is available so then how can someone else design the critical components?

And even if its for the follow on project- why can't the existing TRMs be used- they're good enough surely?

This is very confusing...who designed the TRM/TRMMs for the current project, who own their IP/IR?

Have we failed again?

DAshu said...

I guess these two channels are after some serious TRPs . but I wonder how come these spineless politicians talking tough . from where they got sudden energy and courage

K. SHEKAR said...

Sir will Arjun Mk-2 have Iron Fist APS or Trophy APS?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Obviously those components being outsourced from abroad were also designed & developed abroad. Designing TRMs does not mean even the components are designed in-country, just as locally designing a warship doesn’t mean that the warship’s all on-board systems have been designed & built locally as well. The complete S-band AESA was never designed entirely by CABS. It was done jointly with EMBRAER (which in turn had learnt from Ericsson) & that’s exactly why the EMB-145 platform was chosen. MMICs for this radar were ALL designed & developed abroad & imported. Patent application applies to overall systems configuration & proprietary innovations only & never covers on-board components. As to why can’t existing TRMs be used—it’s like saying that if a particular engine/gearbox combination is optimum for the Ssangyong Rexton, then the very same is equally applicable to JLR’s Range Rover!!!

Bhaswar said...

VMT for the replies.

So, basically India is nowhere on the map? There is NOT a single system that we can build on our own, or can claim as our own?

Do you agree then that we deserve any and all hardships that may be piled upon us in the future, be it a threat from China or inability to stake a claim in the global scene beyond BPOs and call centers? After all we deserve nothing better.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: Pottu Amman is very safe & sound in a SAARC member-country. Attack helicopters like the AH-64 & Tigre have proven their worth in harsh desert terrain as well as over mountainous terrain in Afghanistan since 2002. V-22 Osprey does not come armed with ATGMs. India’s first true arms dealer was the late Admiral Nanda, who was the CNS during the 1971 war & after his retirement in the early 1970s became the agent for companies like MTU & HDW. The Choudhary brothers (Sudhir being one of them) became active in the early 1990s & were the agents for the Russians/Rosoboronexport & they were the ones who introduced the Su-30 to the MoD & IAF & later in the 1990s were agents for several Israeli companies like SOLTAM & ELBIT Computers. Of course every Indian DPSU like OFB & BEL has appointed agents for marketing their products in Southeast Asia, Central/South America & Africa. I even have their business cards. The MoD legalised arms agents inside India way back in 2001, but nothing has come of it & middlemen & consultants continue to thrive & many a time the India-based legal firm appointed to represent foreign OEMs acts as the ‘middleman’ for laundering the commissions. The PDV exo-atmospheric interceptor ( due for its first test-flight this November) is a double-edged sword, since it can also be used as an ASAT weapon. About delays, leave alone the Rustom-2, even the Rustom-1 is delayed by two years so far.

To GESSLER: 1) You are terribly over-estimating the IN’s imagination & your expectations are too high. 2) Not at all. Configuration will stay the same as that of the P-15A DDG. 3) Wind-tunnel tests are still underway. It will be a multi-role cruise missile. 4) Not yet. 5) First P-28 will be commissioned in the first half of 2014, just like the first P-15A. 6) Answered that before several times. 7 & 8) FYI, trials of any assault rifle, SMG/carbine or GPMG takes a minimum of three years to be completed—that’s the global norm.

To K SHEKAR: Trophy. Iron Fist is out of contention since IMI is now blacklisted by the MoD & will remain barred from India till 2021.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Global map for what? Of course India can build entire systems locally! The 'tamanchas' (country-made handguns from Bihar & UP) & OFB-made hunting rifles & DRDO-developed bio-digesters & other life sciences-based solutions from the DRDO & on-board oxygen generation systems (OBOGS) are totally 100% indigenous. About the rest, your guess is as good as mine.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

A word of advice: there’s a huge demand for bio-digesters in India since this will prevent the large-scale public defecation that now takes place. SMEs ought to join forces to produce them in large numbers & even get these manufacturing firms publicly-listed. Future ‘smart cities’ like New Raipur ought to incorporate the usage of such bio-digesters as public toilets as part of their overall urban development masterplan. Such bio-digesters also have huge export potential, for there are other countries in South Asia & elsewhere where public defecating is still an acceptable/tolerable norm (as is the case in India).

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SIDDHARTH: The fissile materials from all of India’s imported nuclear reactors as well as from locally-made safeguarded reactors will be unavailable for weapons development, as per India’s formal commitment to the IAEA. Spent fuel from all such reactors will be reprocessed both locally & abroad under IAEA supervision & all the byproducts will be used solely for civilian purposes under IAEA supervision.

Ni8 Dweller said...

Prasun Da,
Regarding Pottu Amman in a SAARC Member country, What purpose does it serve anyone (if not for some intelligence and contacts) when one has KP, the International Arms Dealer now in SL given LTTE only has it's lucrative International wing out there and no way could have an operational status in SL again considering today's circumstances. What's the end game going to be in SL if 2009 is not one? btwn isn't SAARC India's region of influence if so how didn't RAW get a hand on Potu Amman?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Ni8DWELLER: The end-game was reached in 2009 itself. Both Pottu Amman & KP are inactive & are vegetables. Whether or not India had access to both of them will become known sometime in 2019.

Anonymous said...

Prasunda, 1. How much development occured regarding India sponsored Chabahar port? Is it now ready to transport goods to Afganistan and central asia? 2.How much military significance posseses the China aided Hambantota port to India? 3.Can India effectively neutrilise the String of Pearls? Thanks, with regards.......UJJWAL

Ni8 Dweller said...

Thanks Prasun da. Btwn why 2019? Why keeping alive an ex-intelligence chief? Doesn't bode well since they been in this game.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UJJWAL: 1) The port is already well-developed as you can see through GoogleEarth. Civil enginnering & road construction is reqd for only connecting Afghanistan’s Herat province to Chah Vahr via Zahedan in Iran. Work on that has begun after US$100 million was committed by India 3 months ago. 2) ZERO military significance. China is ONLY constructing the port under a turn-key project just as it had done with Gwadar. 3) What ‘string of pearls’? Where are the pearls located? The only militarised string of military bases that I can see within the IOR are all US-owned.

To Ni8DWELLER: Why 2019? Because the information has been deemed as CLASSIFIED for a 10-year period. Like I said before, both persons are vegetables now & pose no threat whatsoever to anyone.

Ni8 Dweller said...

VMT Prasun Da

AKHIL SURI said...

Prasun ,

Any truth in these assertions that in the 1962 Indo China war , 114 Indian soldiers killed 1400 Chinese soldiers at Rezang La ?

http://defencelover.in/2013/08/25/nobody-believed-we-had-killed-so-many-chinese-at-rezang-la-our-commander-called-me-crazy-and-warned-that-i-could-be-court-martialled-at-rezang-la-114-indian-jawans-killed-1400-chi/

Thanks,

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

i went through the SMX 21 design but eventhough great its still a concept

If adopted can SMX 21 concept be applied on the next 3 or 6 Scorpenes to be ordered and if successful i believe that concept can help boost Scorpene numbers to 18 or can be easily added on to follow on S80/P75I design

You said once Scorpenes are best suited for shallow warfare but DCNS site says its effective in blue water too

on the other hand S80 is reportedly suited for littoral water

You have suggested harpoons and other missiles instead of Brahmos block 1, dont understand why IN will go for block 1s when it can get block 3s

You once said efforts are on to include 155 mm howitzers on ships, if so i think we are going back to battle ship days, isnt it

thanks

Joydeep Ghosh


MPatel said...

The paks seem to be able to obtain production technology from various quarters. The article below confirms that they are producing MKEK 155mm Panter howitzers (after turkey gifted them 12) and turkey also want to gift them (3) T-129 so
that if they like it they can produce it at home.

Q1. On paper T-129 look damn good, what do you think?

Q2. How do do you rate the MKEK 155mm Panter howitzers? I watched soem youtube vids and it looks very good.

Q3. Should india be taking the same approach as pak in aquiring new systems and their production. My guess is that second tier countries will give much more tech transfer to get the order and the right to upgrade.

Q4. there was already a tie up of china /pak/turkey in weapons dev. Is the accelarating? What impact will this have on india?

the references below:

"However, a Pakistani source familiar with the negotiations said Turkey had offered to gift three T-129 helicopters to Pakistan with 2,300 items of spares. The T-129 variant in question was not clarified. The initial T-129A is being used for flight testing while the full specification T-129B is still under development.

Turkey followed the same approach in securing a deal for MKEK 155mm Panter howitzers with Pakistan in 2009. It is now produced in Pakistan by Heavy Industries Taxila."

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130930/DEFREG/309300014/Turkey-Pushes-T-129-Gunships-Pakistan-US-Could-Scupper-Deal

Anonymous said...

The USA has hit back at pak, but there was/is an agreement. When US crossed the line pak hit back by killing US soldiers. Infact there are many articles by US/UK officiers that say pak always take revenge.

If india follow the same. pak already says india is involved in balochistan. What will stop pak hitting india back? also india is always shouting and no one in the west takes note of what india says, especially in india-pak situation.

I have met many paks, as a whole their are mentally insane. I have seen 70 year old paks fight with each other at the wedding, over a precieved insult.

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. 1.MBDA once offered ammunition storage, handling technology to IA, after several fire broke out at different depot. Any further development occured in this matter? 2. How much development occured regarding TAPI gas pipeline? 3. Is there anything new regarding gas exploration at south china sea near Vietnam coast ? 4.What is the current status of Kaladan multimodal project? 5.Would the renovation of Stilwell road be rational? It was revealed that it comes across the ares occupied by Burmese rebel groups and thus renovation of this road may facilitate their activities in NE region. 6. Australia expressed interest to supply uranium to Indian civil nuclear energy sector. Any further development in this matter? 7.IAF once expressed interest to procure Brimestone for Su-30MKI .Any further development? Thanks, regards.....UJJWAL

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Sir even if your idea of including AMAP modules is to be considered, what would be the weight of such a tank with the AMAP and APS added on to everything else?

The army may have agreed to live with the Arjun Mk.1 and MK.2's weight but they have clearly stated that the FMBT is to be less than or equal to 50 tons or so? Which means that in terms of looking beyond 2020-25 they do not want a heavy tanks as such? Or have the parameters of the FMBT changed?

Furthermore given the specs set forth for the FMBT it seems highly unlikely that any further modifications will be made to the Mk.2 variant that is being tested to produce a Mk.3.? Once whatever orders the Mk.2 can garner have been placed the IA will insist that the FMBT be presented and the weight specs be adhered to therefore ensuing that the Arjun itself will never be the base for further modifications unless in the form of MLU for existing Arjun tanks while the FMBT will have to be completely different design. Do you foresee something different?

Vikrant said...

prasun sir, when do see ins arihant and her sister ships sailing on deterent patrols with k-4 and is conversion to ssgn the only long term option on these subs.
Also would like to know your assessmaent of kashmir,the northeast and the red belt.

Subir said...

Sir,

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/interceptor-missile-test-in-the-offing/article5182940.ece

1.Now that PDV is finally ready for its 1st test launch in the last week of November can it be safel assumed that Drdo scientists and technocrats had some successes in the field of high energy high field propellants ?

There has been a 1 year delay with the launch. Drdo first announced the maiden test firing of PDV last year itself and it was gonna happen in December,then it got postponned to Janthen March,then Sep and now its November.

2.Isnt the PDV both a phase 1 and 2 exo-atmospheric interceptor with the capability of intercepting 5000+ km heavy throw weight ICBM ?? The journalist had reported PDV s nly for engaging threats upto 2000 km range.

3.Drdo has revealed that PDV is an all new 2 stage solid fuelled missile. Is the 2nd stage the TVC equipped kill vehicle ?If not where is the hit to kill vehicle ?

4.Has the missile complex of Drdo received any help from any foreign OEM for the KV ?Do we have technological expertise to design,develope and productionise the high tech KV ?

5.What will be the new 2 stage solid fuelled target missile that will be used in the PDV test?It cant be Agni as it will be launched from an IN ship.

Whatever it is can it emulate a solid fuelled ICBM or IRBM class threat ??

6.Has the GOI issued any directives or are the armed forces specially IAF interested in it ?There ought to have be some endtakers when so much of R&D is being carried on it and somany test launches have taken place.

7.Is IAF looking for Kepd 350 for Su-30mki as Drdo wont be able to deliver its SAW within the sipulated timeframe and an immediate requirement is there for those type of tactical cruise missiles .

8.What will happen when Agni-4 and 5 will be cannisterised. I mean they are wooden rounds. Now the actual warhead is kept in disaseemnled state and assembled prior to launch in case of nukes. In case of cannisterised rounds the warhead will be always in place and the missile can be launched ina moment's notice. It will be more akin to a 1st strike instead of the adopted 2nd strike policy.

9.Are there any counter stealth long wave UHF,VHF band radar in IAF service of Russian origin and if not so will IAF go for the latest Nebo series of VHF,UHF radars for keeping an eye on any form of incursions by stealth manned or/and unmanned acs and low observable cruise missiles in case of a contingency. All of teh above sue LPI based radars and radar altimeters and are very difficult to pick up using ESM.

Ankur said...

Prasun Sir ,

(1) Now that the US has decided to jointly produce weapons with India does Russia have any chance in the future to sell/jointly develop weapons with India ?

(2) Does BRICS have any future ?

(3) If the NDA comes into power will India reduce it's role in BRICS given that senior members of the BJP like Arun Jaietly are staunch US supporters ? The West has always considered BRICS to be a rival .

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AKHIL SURI: It is absolutely true, since the PLA in 1962 was using the same ‘human wave’ assault tactics as it had done so in Korea in the early 1950s. Therefore, if the defender is perched atop a dominating position, then even with mere .303s, LMGs & hand-grenades, the defender an exact a heavy toll of the enemy.

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: The SMX-21 concept is indeed revolutionary & DCNS has offered it for co-development, i.e. exactly what the Ruskies did for the S-2/Arihant, S-3, S-4, S-5, S-6 & S-7 SSBNs. What it translates into is that the SMX-21 concept, if embraced by the IN, will be offered SOLELY to the IN & no one else & consequently all IPRs of this SSK will be jointly owned by India & DCNS. Furthermore, the SMX-21’s design can be further modified by India for use as an SSN. All this can only happen if the IN & the Govt of India dares to THINK BIG & be IMAHINATIVE & INNOVATIVE, which, given the present state of affairs, is quite doubtful. Scorpene with AIP plug-in is effective in deeper waters. Any SSK without AIP, not just the S-80, is effective in littoral waters. BrahMos-1 Block-3 is a LACM whose maximum range is only 550km & therefore its sub-launched variant may be well-suited only against those countries with no credible undersea warfare capabilities. Battleships had more than 6 twin-cannon mounts. Future DDGs will have only a single 155mm/52-cal main gun.

To MPATEL: 1) No Panters are being built by POF at Wah, because the IPRs for Panter are not even held by Turkey, but by ST Kinetics of Singapore, since the Panter is only the Turkish name for the FH-2000 155mm/52-cal towed howitzer developed by Singapore & therefore the Panter is only licence-assembled by MKEK. 2) It is most unlikely that the T-129 attack helicopter will be acquired for Pakistan Army’s Aviation Corps primarily due to a) its high cost of acquisition, & b) the PA’s keen desire to avoid procuring US-origin hardware like the T-129’s LHTEC CTS-800 engines. If at all the PA can muster enough funds for procuring attack helicopters, it will most likely be the Harbin Z-19 from China. In any case, the IMF has imposed very strict guidelines for the money it has loaned Pakistan this time, meaning these funds will not be used for procuring weapons.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@2.26PM: Every country has a right to self-defence & so does India. Don’t forget that the Haqqani clan had already attacked India’s Embassy in Kabul twice in the previous decade (something that has been verified by Afghan & NATO’s intelligence agencies). And attacking an Embassy, which is sovereign Indian territory, amounts to openly waging war against India, something the average Indian citizen & the ‘desi’ journalists do not understand & therefore no hue-and-cry is ever raised on such matters.

To UJJWAL: 1) Such offers have also been received from the US & are still under active discussion. 2) None. 3) None. 4) Hardly any meaningful progress. 5) Of course it will be rational for India. 6) That deal has been finalised. 7) None.

To BHASWAR KUMAR: 1) Far less than the 1.5-tonne figure quoted for the ERA tiles. 2) The 50-tonne figure is from the PSQR, not the final GSQR, which is still awaiting release. Anyone wishing for a 50-tonne FMBT is spectacularly crazy, to say the very least, especially at a time when even the Ruskies are developing 65+-tonne FMBTs & the US has come up with a FICV that itself weighs more than 63 tonnes. Once the powerpack with Cummins India’s 1,500hp engine is validated for the Arjun Mk2 along with autoloader & vectorics suite integrated via a MIL-STD-1553B databus & a 120mm smoothbore cannon, the true Arjun Mk2 will be revealed sometime by 2016.

To VIKRANT: Only by 2018, not before that. Once the S-5, S-6 & S-7 SSBNs become available in the following decade, the S-2, S-3 & S-4 will become SSGNs.

To SUBIR: 1) It will be premature to call it a success. Wait for it to be launched. 2) PDV will be able to engage MRBMs like the DF-21 & IRBMs like the M-18/Shaheen-2, at least on paper. 3) 2nd stage contains the hit-to-kill vehicle equipped with IIR sensor. 4) That will be answered once you see for yourself the design of the interceptor missile. 5) Wait & see. 6) None of the three armed services have evinced any official reqmt for the PDV. It is still very much a technology demonstrator. 7, 8 & 9) Already answered them several times before.

To ANKUR: 1) Russia is already co-developing complete weapons platforms like the FGFA & SSBNs & even IAC-1. 2) Of course. 3) Not necessarily.

Ron said...

Sir, Whya has the RM's visit to Russia where he was to finalise many deals put off?Is there any significant reasons behind it ?

vikrant said...

Prasun sir,
1.Regarding p-17a FFG as it is based on P-17 will build times be less,also has MDL/GRSE upgrade been complete to allow modular construction btw nice to hear your view on post 2014 AFG after all those tv panelists predicting doomsday for indian interests.

Ankur said...

Prasun Sir , thanks for your answer . I am sorry I did not describe properly . So I will try again .

(1) Beyond the current engagements that Russia has with India like FGFA , SSBN , IAC 1 is there still possibility of co production in the future now that the US is ready to co produce with India ?

(2) Does India have a future in BRICS if the NDA comes into power because the NDA is more pro USA than the UPA ?

(3) Will the NDA want India to join SCO ?

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
While I was searching the recent bomb/suicide attacks I came across a website and some youtube links.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-O7iEzy0b0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1l5mRP_fzw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zS5viyeLLrE#t=57

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVocTLZf4VI

What I am surprised by these news is that, the whole story Muslims around the world are one, blah blah.. is just a myth, which is what Indian Muslims think.

I see the Egyptian TV anchors cheer when MB was ousted by Egyptian Army and people.

In another interview a HAMAS guy say 30% of Palestinians are of Egyptian and rest from Saudi Arabia, Syria. No there is no such people called Palestinians.

Also saw an interview with Egyptian journalist who said all Arab countries have chemical and biological weapons. But now only Syria has come out openly about it. What about other countries? If the Universal Muslim brotherhood is just a myth, it is very much likely that these weapons will be used against fellow Muslims by different Muslim regime.. So what the world powers will say about it?

What I noticed in India that, these Muslim infighting and massacre of fellow citizens have not been very much highlighted by Indian Media. Indian Muslims are not aware of what is happening in the Muslims countries. For them their enemies are Hindus, Jews and Americans.

Meantime, Muslims and Hindus fight and kill, while the politicians take advantage of even small misunderstanding. How can one make understand the Indian Muslims (in general) that it is time to separate their religion from the universal brotherhood and look to the country first, and they are different from the other Muslims..

In the recent Nairobi massacre, none of the Indian Muslim Group come out against such atrocities. Their silence being taken as token advantage by the group who propagate global jihad against non-believers.

The moment the Muslims and Hindus (Christians as well) understand the real motives of politicians and come out of the their religious shell, India will be a developed country in a decade.

But India need a true nationalistic leader, especially a Muslim leader.

There was a recent study by a German professor, in which it says in the last 60-70 years, out of 11 million Muslims who lost their lives in conflicts, 90% killed by fellow Muslims. That is an astonishingly huge number!!

The Almighty knows where does this end.

A_Peacenik

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RON: That’s because he underwent an emergency surgery at the IA’s Rest & Referral hospital in Delhi last week & is still recovering & therefore he cannot temporarily travel overseas.

To VIKRANT: Yes, all the modernisation works at both MDL & GRSE have been completed. And Pipavav will be building its second giant dry-dock, which will easily be able to accommodate vessels like INS Vikramaditya whenever this vessel is in need of its periodic repairs/refits. Regarding Afghanistan, the post-2014 scenario indeed bodes well for countries like India, Russia, Iran, China & the neighbouring Central Asian Republics because all these countries are now on the same page & there’s hardly anything that Pakistan & the Saudi, UAE & Qatari financiers can do anything about. In addition, the on-going d├ętente between Iran & the US has totally caught Pakistan by surprise, as has Dr MMS’ statement (which had earlier been approved behind-the-scenes by the US prior to the meeting) made in the White House in President Obama’s presence about Pakistan being the epicenter of terrorism. Pakistan-based analysts are now livid & are screaming & alleging on various Pakistani current-affairs TV programmes that India is dancing to the US’ tune, while many other such analysts are now petrified after Narendra Modi 2 days ago warned Pakistan against insulting any Indian PM. To me, this is India’s coercive diplomacy at its best ever & having a totally demoralising effect on Pakistan’s decision-makers, since both Dr MMS & NaMo are on the same page when it comes to upholding India’s supreme national interests, dignity & honour.

To ANKUR: 1) Of course there is. The IL-214 MRTA is on-going & Russia will be involved with IAC-2 as well. The Smerch-M MBRL’s various rockets are being co-produced as well, as are AK-630M CIWS. In future, upgraded versions of these products too will be co-produced. 2) No government-in-power in a multi-polar world can afford to be close to one country at the cost of the other. 3) Of course. Why not?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To A_Peacenik: Well, one has to says ‘hat’s off’ to the Egyptians, especially those from the Muslim Brotherhood, for formenting much of the troubles that presently plague the Islamic Ummah. It was due to the Muslim Brotherhood that the Egyptian-Syrian confederation broke up in the late 1960s & it was due the Muslim Brotherhood’s terrorism that the Syrian Sunnis paid a heavy price at Homs in the early 1980s. Osama bin Laden’s Peshawar-based ideological mentors since the early 1980s were all Egyptians & Al Qaeda’s chief ideologue is still an Egyptian. Universal Muslim brotherhood is indeed a myth. For had it not been the case, then those Muslims working for as long as 27 years in Arab sheikhdoms would have been granted citizenships in such sheikhdoms. As we all know, this is not happening & even when travelling from one Islamic country to another or even when travelling to & from the holy sites of Mecca & Medina, passports & visas are still reqd for all visiting Muslims. Indonesian Muslims continue to be ill-treated by Malaysian Muslims, Pakistani employees continue to be ill-treated by their Arab employers, Filipino Muslims from Mindanao have no qualms about invading East Malaysia, Bangladeshi Muslims are not even treated as human beings in countries like Malaysia & the same also applies to the well-orchestrated sectarian strife underway within Iraq & Pakistan. The literate & educated Indian Muslims are indeed aware of what’s going on globally, but the ordinary illiterate Indian Muslim isn’t, because such subjects are never explained in layman’s terms to them in sermons delivered after the weekly Friday prayers. The Muslim clergy-class is to be held responsible for such omissions. As for data emanating from studies, the same can be said about Christians massacring each other in such large numbers during the twin world wars in the previous century. In the subcontinent during & after partition, it has been estimated that non-Muslims (Sikhs & Hindus) migrating from East & West Pakistan to India left behind some US$22.5 billion (in today’s value) worth of property & assets, while those Muslims who migrated from India to East & West Pakistan left behind some US$2 billion (in today’s value) worth of property & assets.

Bhaswar said...

Sir, the development or at least R&D phase of the FMBT is going to be based on that same PSQR so any change in the GSQR phase will still lead to the same issues that plagued the Arjun?

I was referring to the weight of the full tank with the AMAP? How can the complete AMAP package weigh only 1.5 tons when it would include turret modules, heavy track skirts, front add-on modules, underbelly mine protection modules, turret roof protection modules? It will include all of this yes? IF so then how can it weight a mere 1.5 tons. It is still difficult to believe that Indian companies have developed something akin to AMAP on their own.

AMAP is supposed to be more advanced than the roled homogeneous armor. How can MKU, for all its expertise, trump CRVDE/DRDO on this- or any other Indian private company for that matter? OR is it like TATA using super-bainite armor for the Brits- where they didn't develop the material but can apply it for Indian products if required?
Or is it license production and then re-branding to make it look desi?

Also if what you say is true then whats the point of this current MK.2 derivative. I may be an amateur but I have looked all over and am yet to find a tank with a LTT like the COAPS on any tanks as such- what was the point of that? That space could have been used for the ALWACS and allowed better turret protection even with ERA tiles, no? Will that be part of the changes which one may see in the supposed 2016 iteration?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

http://www.ndtv.com/article/south/supply-of-war-ships-to-sri-lanka-madras-high-court-directs-cabinet-secretary-to-respond-426524?pfrom=home-health

This refers to the two IN’s two Korea Tacoma-designed AOPVs that will be decommissioned from IN service & then refurbished/upgraded for the Sri Lanka Navy.

To BHASWAR: No R & D phase ever takes off based on only a PSQR anywhere in the world. Only academic studies for technology benchmarking do. There are various AMAP packages for different applications. No MBT ever incorporates ALL AMAP packages. Any India-based OEM that acquires a foreign OEM as its subsidiary can acquire the know-how reqd for producing products by the latter. Regarding the Arjun Mk1A’s present-day configuration, I had already commented on it previously above.

Bhaswar said...

Yes sir but the AMAP has a specific composition owned by a specific company so how can we have acquired that?

The the 1.5 ton weight applies only to the turret armor? Sir the tanks which employ such packages all have heavy track skirts, turret modules and front add on modules at the least. So it would only be expected that if Arjun is to incorporate AMAP we would be looking at the same modules (front, turret and side skirts, with slat armor package too), no? Otherwise what would be the point of such an addition?
Similarly if TATA and MKU can provide such advanced armoring solutions and then shouldn't they be involved in any future collaboration with the US for say IFVs and the likes- they should be the sole providers for armoring solutions so that at least the indigenous content can be maximized, no?

Bhaswar said...

Also sir wikimapia shows sumdorong chu on the Chinese side of the LAC. Wasn't this place part of Indian territory?

Deep Throat said...

The truth about the false prophet M K Gandhi

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/local-blogs/dark-matter/7482540/Hero-or-puppet-Gandhi-s-role-in-India-s-freedom

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun

http://idrw.org/?p=27443#more-27443

could you put some light on this..

Regards
Amol

raw13 said...

Indeed I don't think any Panters are being made in Pakistan. Simple reason POF would be shouting about it from the rooftops. Z-19 lacks capabilities that PA need. Z-10 is too untested/unproven and when you are going to buy in small number <40 it too much risk. Also bear in mind that whatever machine they get, its primary focus will IA strike corps (they will be based at Multan). The 44 Cobra have enough life and spare parts to be used to CI/CT for the next 10+ yrs.

WRT media in Pakistan, all it signifies is that Mr Sharif honeymoon is over. Its local politics, the temperature has been rising for the past few weeks. He is simply beginning to realise that peace with India is not a priority for the people.

Gessler said...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/US-submits-list-of-10-defence-technologies-for-transfer-to-India/articleshow/23405768.cms

Sir, can you throw some light on what these 10 technologies could be?

Anonymous said...

VMT, Prasunda. 1. When will HAL TEJAS Mk2 will roll out? 2. You have repeatedly stated that 2 private firms are making 155mm BMCS for IA from technology provided by HEMRL. Which are those companies? Lastly, one request. Please make a mobile app of your blog. Thanks, with regards.......UJJWAL

F said...

Prasun,

Just wanted to double check something with you. With regards to defence procurement in Malaysia the following steps are taken?

1. The respective services register a requirement with MINDEF.
2. A RFI is issued.
3. The Ministry of Finance gives its approval for tenders to be issued.
4. A MINDEF technical and price evaluation team goes through the submitted tenders.
5. The Ministry of Finance gives its approval for contractual negotiations to commence.
6. An LoI is issued.
7. Finally an LoA is signed.

Is this correct and when does the RFP come in?

Vikrant said...

thnx again sir,
1.could you shed some light on p-15a DDG and p-28 sea trials did ins kamorta encounter problems during trials and had to return to GRSE.
2.why arent the boofins at ADA working on a trainer version of tejas and more importantly why is HAL wasting cash on a prop trainer.
3.what is going on in kupwara since the last few days

Vikram Guha said...

Prasun Da ,

At least you take some time off your schedule to educate us about matters related to defence and national security .

Imagine the damage the A$$holes in the media are causing on all topics.Here is an article that talks about the disgusting and ugly media in INDIA

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2433772/How-Delhi-gang-rape-revealed-ugly-truth-Indias-journalists.html

Regards,
Vikram

Vikrant said...

http://www.firstpost.com/india/exclusive-as-pm-talked-peace-pak-grabbed-ghost-village-on-loc-1147267.html?
a piece by praveen swami whose sources are reliable.At the forums some guys(sane ones) were wondering about he possibility of this being a mouse trap use of empty bunkers to lure,immediate retaliation by a mountain brigade (268 brigade) and paras,more than 30 militants being holed up for more than 9 days,does it make sense

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: I don’t understand what you mean by ‘we’. 1.5-tonne ERA package is not just on the turret, but on the frontal hull glacis as well as in the hull-sections on either side of the turret. Side-skirts & SLAT armour of the type seen on Leopard 2NG is required only when any MBT is taking part in MOUT operations for protection against RPGs & LAWs. In India’s case, MBTs won’t be undertaking MOUT operations, period. Consequently, Arjun Mk1/Mk1A require only AMAP protection for the frontal hull & turret, plus only the frontal sides protecting the driver’s compartment. Therefore, trying to apply what’s on the Leopard 2NG on to the Arjun Mk1/Mk1A simply is not required. MKU, TAML & other India-based OEMs are & will be involved in terms of supplying up-armouring packages for MBTs, ICV, MPVs & MRAPs. Sumrodong Chu is still today under the PLA’s control. The PLA never vacated this area.

To AMOL: This has already been discussed several times before & there’s nothing new in this report, just old stuff.

To GESSLER: That report is almost totally wrong. There’s no ToT, just technololgy-sharing. The two are totally different. ToT means teaching you the know-how & know-why. Technology-sharing means both parties bringing their offerings to the table & integrating them to create a weapon system, like what’s now happening with BrahMos-1 & Barak-2. Similarly, for the Javelin, only new thermobaric warheads will be co-developed & each country will produce them 100% in-country, while the propulsion & target acquisition sub-systems will be supplied by the US & be licence-assembled in India. And it’s not 10 technologies, but 10 projects & not 5 as reported earlier by ‘God’s Perfect Arsehole’.

To UJJWAL: 1) Not before late 2016 if everything goes as per plans. 2) On’e based in Pune & one in Delhi. Its photos posted earlier in another thread clearly show the company’s name.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To FARIS: Are you trying to humour me (LoLz!)? Here are the steps: 1) each of the three armed services articulate their respective long-term (15-year) perspective force modernisation plans. 2) This is then prioritised into respective 5-year plans so that the GoM can make financial allocations in sync with the 5-year Malaysia Plans. 3) RFIs are issued on a restrictive basis involving only pre-selected vendors. 4) Based on responses to RFI, a short-list is prepared, while at the same time, the GoM politically zeroes in on the most favoured vendor based on what’s most suited for Malaysia’s supreme enlightened national interests & then issues a LoI. 5) After this, MINDEF constitutes a technical & price negotiations committee to draft the final fixed-price contract documentation. 6) After contract signature, a project team is constituted to monitor contract implementation, including factory inspection/acceptance procedures.
The LoI & LoA process pertains mostly to FMS contracts & has been very very rarely resorted to after 1989, since more than 80% of the major contracts for both MINDEF & Kementerian Dalam Negeri & Bahagian Keselematan Negara have been inked on commercial terms under the G-to-G umbrella.

To VIKRANT: 1) P-15A DDG’s seaworthiness has been proven & validated. However, sea-trials won;y be complete until the validation of the Barak-2 LR-SAM through test-firings & until the arrival of yet-to-be-ordered new heavyweight torpedoes since the Varunastra isn’t yet ready for service-induction. First P-28 ASW corvette during its sea-trials last June encountered some internal flooding & the deficiencies are now being rectified. 2) Tandem-seat version of Tejas Mk1 has already been developed & one of them (PV) is already flying. As for the HTT-40 BTT & HJT-36 IJT, the MoD & its RM needs to put his foot down & prevent such blatant money-wasting exercises. 3) Nothing great. Just another failed infiltration attempt & it gives the IA a great chance to get itself battle-innoculated & engage in some target-firing practice by using its 20mm AMRs, Carl Gustavs & C-90 LAWs.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIKRAM GUHA: Here’s something interesting:

Bangladesh has begun work on its first nuclear power plant, which is to have two Russian-designed reactors and cost up to $4 billion. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina laid the foundation stone on October 2, 2013 for the nuclear plant in Rooppur in the country s northwest. An initial reactor is expected to start generating 1,000 megawatts of power by 2018. A second reactor would later double that capacity to 2,000 megawatts. Bangladesh signed a deal with Russian state-owned nuclear giant Rosatom in 2011 to build the plant. Russia agreed to provide low-cost loans to finance 90 percent of the project. Bangladesh s decades-old gas-fired power plants are unable to generate enough electricity for the country’s 150 million people, with a daily shortfall of about 2,000 megawatts. The Asian Development Bank said Wednesday in its annual economic outlook that Bangladesh s growth is being constrained by poor infrastructure and electricity shortages. There have been growing global concerns about the safety of atomic power since a powerful earthquake and tsunami damaged a nuclear plant in Japan in 2011. Hasina said her government is giving the highest importance to safety issues, and that Russia would take back the nuclear waste produced by the plant. Russia also will train workers to run the plant. Relations between the two countries have been close since Russia backed Bangladesh in its 1971 war of independence with Pakistan. The International Atomic Energy Agency gave Bangladesh approval in 2007 to build a nuclear power plant.

To VIKRANT: It is similar to the IA’s OP Sarp Vinash at undertaken at Hill Kaka in the previous decade & it will be resolved in a similar manner, rest assured. It makes no military sense for terrorists to engage in positional warfare with any army. Consequently, these terrorists were cornered due to availability of timely/actionable ground intelligence & for as long as they’re holed up inside man-made structures, they will be slaughtered by the IA’s Rashtriya Rifles units with 20mm AMRs, 106mm RCLs, Carl Gustavs or C-90 LAWs.

Bhaswar said...

Sir but the IA and RR have NOT slaughtered them, the operation has stretched over a week now, so it doesn't seem all that simple. If the RR could target them so easily then why take so much time? Also if these terrorists have managed to survive being holed up in those dilapidated structures for so long then something is up. The so called village is nothing but run down buildings (6-7) in a clearing. How can terrorists fortify a place like that and last more than a week? Also the hush hush manner of the ops in the sense that only repeat garble is being generated by the TOI on the matter without any firm updates points to something more than just a large infiltration occurring, no?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

The slaughter is still in progress because the ghost village is bang on the LoC & therefore accessible from POK & therefore movement of personnel cannot be restricted nor can the area be fully cordoned off from all sides. Thus, the question of the terrorists being holed for more than a week doesn’t even arise & nor is this a large-scale infiltration.

Bhaswar said...

So then why aren't the terrorists retreating, the structures and the clearing itself are maybe 200 meters away from the LOC, why not pull back and try another attempt some other time? It makes no sense, these insurgents are not attacking some high value target or occupying one either that they are willing to stay put and continue the engagement. Why do you think they are refusing to pull back, what do they gain by staying there or continuing to ingress from across the LOC into the same area? After all if the area cannot be completely cordoned off then it means that they have a path to egress (across the LOC)?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

That's because getting killed—and not just killing—is the central part of the fidayeen cult, especially those fidayeens that hail from Pakistan's Punjab province. These infiltrators are therefore not Kashmiris from either side of the LoC.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Looks like NaMo read my comment/advuce yesterday on investing in DRDO-developed bio-digester-based public toilets!

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Build-toilets-first-and-temples-later-Narendra-Modi-says/articleshow/23422631.cms

Bhaswar said...

So simply because they WANT to die they are persisting?

Even so, by now the IA could have pummeled the structures with RCLs and cannons- even then they should have been dead by now.

How long do you foresee this ops lasting?

Vikram Guha said...

Yes Prasun Da , just yesterday morning I read in Voice of Russia about this Nuclear power plant to be set up in Bangladesh by Russia .

But Bangladesh is an energy surplus country . Piped LPG in Bangladesh is free . Moreover , being an Islamic country Bangladesh like Pakistan gets oil at discounted rate from the Gulf .

So why do they need Nuclear Power ? To develop another Islamic bomb ? That's the last thing that India needs . The number of Jihadis in Bangladesh is already on the rise.

Regards,
Vikram

Vikrant said...

Thanx again sir,
1)could pak army regulars be part of this infiltration attempt,as hinted by GOC of 15 corps.
2)Why isn't the MOD not harnessing the potential of private yards like L&T an pipavav fully,i agree MDL-pipavav have a venture,and L&T is there in arihant project but surely we can do more than thtat cant we?

raw13 said...

Prasun,

Your comments wrt fidayeen cult are almost correct. It is the Deobandi and Wahabi cult and it unfortunately is spreading (or already has) everywhere, even interior Sindh. It was only South Punjab before (20 years or so ago), and now it is being exported to as far as north africa, CA, Turkey and even the gulf countries.

The term that describes them best is salafists, they are not tribal, territorial or racists in any form. They have manged to break the tribal bonds in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen for the first time since the time of our Prophet. If you have any understanding of our people, to do that is something special.

F said...

Prasun,

No I wasn't trying to humour you; I really have no idea how the whole process works :].

In cases where pre-selected vendors are not issued with RFIs, a global tender is issued; is this correct?

Before RFIs or global tenders are issued, approval first has to be obtained from the Ministry of Finance?

Singapore and her recent announcement that ASTER 30 will be bought. In your opinion is this aimed at safegurading the city state against Chinese missiles, against Indonesian modernisatin plans or is it just part of Singapores's pl;ans to replace the i-Hawks with something more capable?



Ron said...

Sir, Why can't Indian army flank these group of 30-40 terrorists,Pak spec forces. Our special forces can overtly or covertly cross into other side of LoC and cut these group from all sides and attack them from the back. If the terrorists had indeed taken cover in the structures of the abandoned village,they can be easily and quickly sent to hell by destroying these structures with Carl Gustav. It will take max 4 shots for each building. Even then why is the op taking so long ? Where are these terrorsts taking cover ? How can they hold out for so many days infront of such a large no our troops .There may be more to this than wat meets the eye.

Similarly why doesn't our spec teams cross overto the other side and occupy their turf or atleast strike at their militarily facilities,PoL dumps in a clandestine manner ?

Bhaswar said...

There is no news coming out of kenar or Shala Bahta? Why the secrecy, why are there is no updates at least on how many fidayeen have been killed? That will not compromise operation sanctity. Something is up sir or else why the media blakcout with the exception of all news agencies quoting a singular speech by the commander of the 10th corps?

Sir there seems to be no news or indication of a smoothbore gun being developed for an Arjun variant. So who is the developer, when did this program start?

Apparently the Kaveri marine gas turbine has endurance issues which need to be rectified? How much time will that take?

Sir I wasn't asking whether we were occupying Sumdorong Chu or not, rather the fact that google maps shows it to be on the Chinese side of the LAC, is that accurate?

Also another online mapping site somehow found out the coordinates of point 5353 in Kargil, apparently that too is just on the other side of the LOC in Pakistani territory,is that accurate?

Anonymous said...

@Bhaswar

point 5353 gives the lie to kargil war. ask any commander that has served there, what that point means. pakis distracted us, made concessions with uncles help and still ended up with the ability to cut the northern supply line. they played chess. we played media.

why they are taking so much time. you seem to have a death wish, whilst sitting in comfort, in front of your monitor. pray tell me if you have ever been shot at? just let them starve...and then boom....we will be doing PA a favour, i hope they remember this.

sntata said...

Dear Prasun,

What is the present status of Indo-Israeli JV LRSAM, for Naval vessels?
The delay in development of LRSAM is holding up INS Vikramaditya's long range anti-missile defence.
The delay also held up Project 15A, with INS Kolkata, the first warship in this series, floating in the docks for the past seven years. INS Chennai and INS Kochi; the other two destroyers in Project 15A, are delayed, too, because of delay in arrival of LRSAM

DefenseandAerospace said...

Prasun ,

(1) Has India stated any timeline for phasing out the T 72 ?

(2) Should the Indian Army sign a contract with Russia ( or any Indian company) to convert a part of their old T 72 into the BMPT-72 Terminator 2 because MBTs will need tank support fighting vehicle like the BMPT-72 Terminator 2

Thank You

Anonymous said...

VMT, Prasunda. 1. CBI is closing the Denel case. If the ban on Denel might be lifted in near future? 2. Denel was also contracted for production of various ammunitions e.g. BMCS,HEAT,practice,illumination,red phosphorus rounds etc. Should OFB start production of those items in collaboration with Denel provided the ban is lifted? 3.Denel made NTW-20 and OFB made Vidhwanshak , which one is superior? 4. National footware design institute has developed snow boots and anti mine footware which are claimed to be cheaper than imported ones. Does quality of it is worth of procurement by armed forces? 5. Is India developing any anti aircraft gun? 6. Please give a brief account of the ARM under development by DRDO. 7. When Astra BVRAAM will be inducted in service? 8. There was a report that Rafale might be armed with russian missiles. Is it true? 9.Several IN warships are in desparet need of Barak-1 SAM. How the roadblocks to procure additional Barak can be removed? Thanks, with regards.....UJJWAL

Ankur said...

Thank You Prasun Ji.

Can you plz explain how Russia is involved in the IAC 1 project ?

purab said...

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?89961-Indian-Armed-Forces/page566
sir , in the above link above , some of the the photos show indian soldiers , while they are wearing the bpj , hardly anyone seem to have the ceramic plates in their jacket..whats the use of such bpj(s) ?
till when will such critical defeciencies remain ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: There are Pakistani snipers perched atop trees in what is a thickly forested area. It is not as easy as it may seem to you. Google maps aren’t prepared by any governmental authority & therefore such boundary demarcations depicted by Google are erroneous.

To VIKRAM GUHA: It is a prestige project. Quite needless, as such resources can easily be devoted to other pressing needs.

To VIKRANT: 1) There’s no difference between Pakistani regulars or irregulars. They are one & the same & follow a single unified command-and-control structure. 2) That’s because of a mental-block & a discredited mindset prevailing among the decision-makers.

To FARIS: MoF’s approval is required when one formulates the five-year procurement plans. Once funding is set aside, the rest of the process involves just the finalization of the procurement priorities for that particular five-year period. The Aster 30s will replace the exist9ing MIM-23B I-Hawks.

To RON: There are Pakistani snipers perched atop trees in what is a thickly forested area & therefore trying to effect entry in this area through regular infantry forces is extremely dangerous. Crossing the LoC is not an option. Had it been so, then the IA would have crossed the LoC in 1999 itself. The onloy way to clear this area of infiltrators is to smoke them out through either field artillery fire-assault, or usage of attack helicopters for staffing the area with unguided air-to-ground rockets.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SNTATA: Barak-2 LR-SAM isn’t holding up anything regarding INS Vikramaditya. I any case, it will take at least 3 years for INS Vikramaditya to be declared a fully operational platform, since the MiG-29Ks, Ka-31s & Ka-28PLs will take at least 3 years to gain enough experience & proficiency that’s required fir operating seamlessly as a carrier battle group. The P-15A DDGs have been floating like that not because of unavailability of the LR-SAM, but due to the absence of proper wet-basins at MDL. Leave along the LR-SAMs, even the heavyweight torpedoes required for these DDGs hasn’t even been selected, leave alone ordered.

To DEFENSE & AEROSPACE: 1) Supposed to begin from 2023. 2) No need, for such modifications can be done in-country by the DRDO’s CVRDE. The 40mm cannon-equipped turret developed for the Abhay ICV technology demonstrator can easily be modified to sit atop the T-72M1’s hull & the IRDE/OFB-developed commander’s panoramic sight for the T-90S MBT’s mid-life upgrade can easily be fitted to such a turret. Lastly, the laser-guided SAMHO version of the CLGM, when equipped with hyperbaric warheads, can easily go on board this turret as well. All that’s required is a laser illuminator/target tracker, which can easily be supplied by ELBIT Systems or even by IRDE. Thus, as you can see, all the elements reqd for developing a ‘desi’ BMP-T are already available in-country & can be put together fairly easily & quickly.

To UJJWAL: 1 & 2) Most of the weapons contracted for earlier with DENEL have already been acquired from other OEMs. 3) NTW-20 AMR is still a superior product. Vidhwansak from OFB still does not have 20mm barrel. 4) That can only be answered after such products are exhaustively field-tested. 5) No. 6) Still in the laboratory-development phase. 7) Maybe by 2016. 8) No. Mirage 2000UPGs will be with Kh-31P. 9) Very easy, just order them under the ‘acceptance of necessity’ clause of the MoD. The same is also applicable to the AW-101 VVIP transportation helicopters. But for such decisions to be taken, one requires clear-headed leaders at the helm at the MoD.

To ANKUR: The complete below-deck aircraft hangarage & MRO bay, along with aircraft landing aid systems will be of Russian origin for IAC-1.

To PURAB: Ceramic plates are inserted in front & rear. But some of them are not having the rear inserts.

Bhaswar said...

SO BASICALLY we are helpless, after all you said it would be a slaughter with the IA engaging them with RCLs and rockets but now it seems like that area/village has slipped from our control. Not surprising though.

Vikrant said...

VMT sir,
1)regarding this op no surprise that Praveen swami broke this story he also come out with sarp vinash insights.What message does GHQ wish to send to us at a time when the western half of their country is practically free of islamabad's and pindi's writ?
2)In NE after many years all big insurgent groups are either on the negotition table or are severely weakened,do you see mmilitancy finally ending in the next 5 years?
regards,

Gessler said...

Sir can you please explain what these Prithvi warheads are?

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/585/s1et.jpg/

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/32/d4gc.jpg/

Are they some sort of MIRV or area-saturation explosives that are scattered over an area?

Gessler said...

Prasun da, just like you said, IAF has trashed HTT-40 project -

http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/iaf-rejects-extravagant-hal-basic-trainer-aircraft-project-113100400950_1.html

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Read this:

http://www.firstpost.com/india/keran-fear-mounts-in-zirhama-village-but-general-claims-it-does-not-exist-1152159.html

To GESSLER: Those are HE-FRAG & anti-personnel cluster submunitions. Of these two, only the former has been inducted into service & while the Prithvi-1 NLOS-BSM is still 500 feet above ground, the warhead’s covering splits open & those unguided rockets armed with HE-FRAG warheads are ignited & descend to the target area (much like rockets fired from 57mm or 80mm rocket pods carried by strike aircraft) in a shower for causing maximum destruction. As for the IAF CAS’ remarks on the HTT-40, they’re indeed welcome but the battle is only half-won since the MoD has not yet officially junked this unwanted & unjustified project. I hope the IAF also junks the HJT-36, & with the money saved from these two needless projects, more money can be allocated for developing the LIFT version of Tejas Mk1.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIKRANT: The message GHQ is sending from Rawalpindi is this: please for heaven’s sake India should force the PML-N-led civilian govt of Nawaz Sharif to start from where Pervez Musharraf was forced to stop in 2008, & not from February 1999 as desired by Nawaz Sharif. For, if matters begin from 1999, then Nawaz Sharif will be able to reject all the good work that been achieved so far in terms of Musharraf’s public declaration on January 2002 & January 2004 about Pakistan not allowing its soil to be used by any terrorist, & the four-point formula will be junked forever, a move which the Pakistan Army is against & also India is against, since this will provide Nawaz Sharif the perfect excuse to continue supporting the Pakistan-based Jihadis. This is because the Pakistan Army, which has already redeployed 180,000 troops to South Waziristan, will be required to deploy a similar number of troops to North Waziristan when counter-insurgency operations begin there in the near future, meaning half of the Pakistan Army will be committed to its western front, leaving the eastern front against India almost defenceless—Pakistan Army’s nightmare scenario. Thus, by ratchetting up the heat along the LoC is a controlled & calibrated manner, the PA hopes to exert pressure on both India & Nawaz Sharif to quickly agree to begin implementing the 4-point formula. However, the main hurdle here is Pakistan’s civilian govt. While in 2008 the excuse given by both the PPP-led govt & the opposition PML-N was that since the 4-point formula was conceived & finalised by a military dictator (Musharraf & his then DGMI Kayani) & since Parliament wasn’t consulted about it, the 4-point formula could not be implemented, Nawaz Sharif’s PML-led govt is now stuck in a time-warp & wants to resume from 1999, which has extremely dangerous repercussions for India as I have explained above. The UPA govt & Dr MMS & Salman Khursheed perfectly understand all this & that was the main reason why Dr MMS’ speech at the UN General Assembly last week clearly told Nawaz Sharif that while India never fears to negotiate, India will never negotiate out of fear & furthermore, the India of 2013 is not the same as the India of 1999 & therefore today’s India WILL NEVER surrender its legal territorial claims (I say this because in 1948 the UNSC formally accepted the legality of the Instrument of Accession of undivided J & K) over POK (Azad Kashmir & Gilgit-Baltistan).

I only wish the ‘desi’ journalists & broadcast TV anchors could see through all this & explain matters in layman’s terms to the average Indian citizen as I have tried to do so above. Furthermore, they ought to give coverage to all the atrocities in Gilgit-Baltistan that has been going on since the late 1980s. Just watch the following to get an idea of what exactly is happening there:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_siytjAdqPM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvqNPtBPlLg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfBgJLnAiW4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBYAMMvskvA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EHggfMyXWk

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Exactly as I had predicted five months ago:

Statement from AgustaWestland on September 4, 2013 announcing the initiation of arbitration proceedings against the Govt of India:

Following the unilateral suspension of the contract to supply 12 AW-101 VVIP helicopters to India—a sanction not provided for the under procurement contract—a request was made to India’s Ministry of Defence by AgustaWestland in April 2013 invoking the contractual provision for bilateral discussions. Since then there have been a series of further requests for discussions. Regrettably, to date, there has been no response from India’s MoD. AgustaWestland’s earnest desire is to have a dialogue with the Govt of India. AgustaWestland remains totally committed to working with the Govt of India to resolve the issues confronting us and to allow the Indian Air Force to receive the equipment it needs. However, we do not see how we can achieve this if a dialogue is not established. The ongoing need to resolve this issue has left AgustaWestland with no other option but to invoke arbitration through Counsel; the next step prescribed by the contract. This is not a step we take lightly. While the arbitration proceedings themselves are confidential, the issues in question relate to the unilateral suspension of the contract. Neither the contract nor the associated Integrity Pact confers such rights on the Indian MoD. AgustaWestland is justly proud to have served the Govt of India for more than 40 years. We want our relationship with India to continue and flourish and consequently we remain deeply concerned at the current situation.
-----------------------------------

Let the fireworks now begin without any further delay & let’s all rock’n’roll!!!

Bhaswar said...

Whatever they do in POK what can we do about it? We can't annex it, they can't even think of secession, they'd be slaughtered. It would devolve into a nuclear war. So what's the point?

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir,

Regd the infiltration by terrorists in Keran sector , i have few questions

1) Is it Pakistani 'Sun Tzu' type decoy to push terrorists from other areas while IA concentrates on Keran sector ?
2) Or do these decoys have much bigger strategy such as deploying counter-surveillance techs along other border areas or deploying tactical weapons on other areas for future use ?
3) Why don't the IA use this infiltration as an opportunity and surprise them with Arjun Mk2 (can be proved if its worth for army), also simultaneously air-drop commandos directly to ground zero (or little further) to gain some intelligence and feedback? Would it help ?
4) The army commander of the area Lt. Colonel Gurmeet Singh quotes "
There were some special troops (involved in the infiltration bid), the training shows it. It is different from earlier attempts" What is different here ?
Is it usage of sophisticated weapons or superior fighting techniques ? Or is it the way they operate not withdrawing and very aggressive ?
5) Was this infiltration a surprise to the IA ? & Do you think more surprises waiting for the IA ?

-- muttu

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: There are several options available. Why should India ever annex that territory when it is India’s to begin with, as I had explained above? It is not that easy as you think it is for matters to degenerate into a nuclear war. Till to date, no nuclear weapons have been used against nuclear armed adversaries by anyone.

To MUTTU: 1) No. All the likely infiltration points are covered by 24/7 surveillance grids. 2) Not at all. 3) Neither of them can be used over such gorbidding terrain & at such heights. 4) It shows that there are no major differences between regulars & irregulars. 5) Not at all. On the contrary, it was detected in the nick of time & suitable countermeasures were immediately effected.

DAshu said...

in 1948 the UNSC formally accepted the legality of the Instrument of Accession of undivided J & K) over POK (Azad Kashmir & Gilgit-Baltistan)-
what is the use ???

and sorry to say I don't see any logic in "The message GHQ is sending from Rawalpindi" explanation. That nation is on the brink of collapse and why India should help PA . once they made eastern border defenseless just retake all the territory with force. Furthermore, if PA is divided between eastern and western they will lose both POK and durand line together which is an excellent scenario for India.

and as you said if US authorized to use Pak being the epicenter of terrorism phrase .why we are waiting to eliminate all those elements inside pak.

now big question is how lion hearted our decision makers are. can they think the unthinkable and do something extraordinary.
Dragon is making all equations complected as Dragon also want POK/Gilgit-Baltistan.

1st time since I started following your blog, I did not see any logic from your explanation. :)

Bhaswar said...

Apparently things are moving along as you had stated on the Kaveri front. The engine is to be flight tested on a Mig-29 to finally validate the K-9 program and then certify it after which the non-afterburning variant will go on the UCAV.

What was the max. thrust achieved by the Kaveri so far? 49-50 Kn dey and 75-78 Kn wet, yes? What is its current weight?

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

You replied to @Vikrant 'Tandem-seat version of Tejas Mk1 has already been developed & one of them (PV) is already flying.' Is this the Tejas LIFT version you always talked about?

Regarding the concepts, just heard SAMs are being tried out from submarines, so even if you say we are not going back to battleship days (155 mm howitzer on ships) looks like we indeed are going back to old days when subs had cannons, planes.

Regarding concepts is it impossible to launch one way UAVs (Harops) or Nishant UAVs from submarines or for that matter fire Smerch or Pinaka salvos from DDGs

Also regarding IAF chief statement that Nyoma ALG as full fledged air base for jets & transport makes me think (may be i am wrong) that this base with Leh airbase will act as launch pads for true air assault IA divisions while the MSC divisions of east will be air mobile ones.

Looks like Russians have understood that sharing aircraft construction business with India makes sense (assembling Sukhoi Superjet 100, Irkut MS-21 passenger jets). It will definately help India expand its profile by working with western & russian aircraft makers

your views please

thanks

Joydeep Ghosh



Vikrant said...

Thnx again sir,
1)correct me if i am wrong but surely these are rather desperate measures taken by a desperate GHQ,the less said about durand line the better.
2)can an aggressive tactical cross-LOC operation be taken up by IA,to give the pakis a bloody nose?
3)Is there a realistic possibility of liberation of a part of POK given the state of affairs of our polity?
4)what are the factors that the navy's indigenisation is successful as oppose to IAF an IA?

Vikram Guha said...

Prasun Da ,

Russia is considering offering India Sukhoi Superjet 100 and Irkut MS-21 passenger jets assembly deals .

http://indrus.in/news/2013/10/04/russia_considering_offering_india_airliner_assembly_deals_29935.html

Do you think it will find any takers whether among the Govt or Pvt . companies ?

Thanks,
Vikram

Bhaswar said...

Prasun Sir,

Here are two videos with Amrullah Saleh- ex intel chief Af-

About past Iranian cooperation with the US which stopped because of unresponsiveness from the US side-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHpuyG3PZp8

Is it in this context that you posit that Iran may come on board wrt Afghanistan IF the US is willing to reciprocate?

Also, his view on what post 2014 scenario will be like.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lW679S-CD0

Even he contends that the state's authority will deteriorate even though the state itself will not vanish. Also he asserts that there is a good chance that foreign investment will dry up, so in either case Indian investment in Af might get hit HARD. Accurate, could you furnish this with your insight?
Isn't the US now talking of zero troop presence there? I think it will be untenable for the US to maintain any troops there given their internal politics and situation.
VMT.

Anonymous said...

@DASHU
On the contrary, there’s perfect logic to what Prasun da has stated. Nowhere has he said that India should help the PA. In fact, Prasun da’s assertions mesh in perfectly with the timelines, especially the increase in LoC infiltrations from 2008, i.e. soon after the civilian govt came to power in Pakistan. The logic behind Prasun da’s explanation will make more sense if Prasun da throws more light on the psyche of the PA’s top-brass.-----Ajatshatru

Magicbullet said...

Hi prasun..by far this is the best defence blog .not just informative but interactive too.on 4oct issue of apas ki baat ..the paki news presenter has predicted break up afganistan along with pakistan swat area ..though in very roundabout way.
What are your views on the afpak future ..is state boundaries realignment possible in current times.

Anonymous said...

Hi prasun

Thanks for replying.

Some questions... Is there going to be developed a kaveri engine with uprated thrust i.e. in range of 75-110 kn.

wether yes or no ... what's your view should it be or not? and why?

VMT in advance.

Regards,
Amol

Anonymous said...

Prasun,

stop HJT 36 IJT
Stop HTT 40
Stop Rafale purchase
instead,

Add 3 more Su30MKI squadrons beyond current plans
Continue and execute Jaguar and Mirage upgrades but through direct purchases of subsystems/turbofans

Procure 4 squadrons of PC-7 direct purchase
Procure 4 squadrons of BAE AJT direct purchase

setup LCA production facility
Procure 100 Tejas Lift ASAP
Continue Tejas Mk1 certification but do not procure
Develop and certify Tejas Mk2 and start production by 2017. Numbers to be decided later.

Procure 100 AH-64D longbow
Procure 24 Chinooks CH-47
Upgrade existing chetaks to cheetal
Wait for LCH and LUH and not procure these from multiple sources
Increase Dhruv, Rudra production to desired requirements
Procure 24 more C130Js
Procure 12 more C17s
(I increased the numbers considering overall requirements)

Set up MROs in India for C17s, C130Js, AH-64 and P8Is through private JVs, Same for SU-30MKIs, PC7s and AJTs

Procure 7 more Phalcons
Develop Embraer AEWC 3 + 9 more jets
Continue development of new AWACs
Execute on MAFI


Is this really all we need from a near term - next 5 years perspective? Is this possible with existing resources, money saved by cancellation of NVA platforms, or expensive 4+gen fighters, and establish MRO facilities. That is, if good decisions are made with a strategic outlook.
Ashish

Bhaswar said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTgsadkMitY

BUT Amrullah is not too optimistic about the future nor too optimistic about the sort of nepotistic politics and politicization of the ANSF.

We should take all of this into consideration, China can very well run its investments even in Taliban infested areas since the Taliban and Rawalpindi would rather castrate themselves and sell their own parents before the even remotely aggravate the Chinese. Iran can settle for a talibanized society as long as it has contacts within, a better relationship with Rawalpindi and limiting KSA's reach and influence with the Taliban. So, should we not qualify your optimism with the flip side that things could go horribly wrong.

After all do you really think that the ANSF as it stands today can fight a protracted proxy war where the militant sanctuaries lie in Pakistan- well beyond their reach. How long can they sustain that when the only people they can target are the expendable talib grunts and not the real leaders?

The only viable way the West can ENSURE that the talibs are brought to the ground is to immediately sanction Pakistan and make its economy implode, that may ensure that it will become highly unattractive for them to engage in Af when coupled with the fact they are always in a race to compete with us.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: In order to comprehend the BIG PICTURE, the proceedings from following two seminars have to be analysed & absorbed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvUK1EObVCI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qVZEw9yFIE

There is also the possibility that post-2014 the US will retain bases in Afghanistan not because of Afghanistan’s internal security scenario, but because of the US’ desire to see Pakistan de-nuclearised & de-militarised. This was confirmed by President Karzai himself in Islamabad when he went to visit Nawaz Sharif. When Sharif asked Karzai about the details of these bases like how many & where & for how long, Karzai reportedly told him that according to the US, none of those bases were reqd for Afghanistan, but for Pakistan since the only unstable nuclear-armed state in the region was Pakistan. The there is another theory doing the rounds that claims that Afghanistan, the US, Israel & India have ganged up against Pakistan & have propped up the Tehreek-e-Tablian Pakistan (TTP) & Baluchistan Liberation Army (BLA) in order to destroy Pakistan’s economy & by consequence, its armed forces. Only after this has been achieved, it seems, will the US move in to take custody of Pakistan’s WMD arsenals.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

TO MAGICBULLET: VMT. It is very much a realistic scenario drawn up by Dr Najam Sethi, since FATA became Talibanised since 1995 & after October 7, 2001 when OP Enduring Freedom began, some 15,000 Pashtuns from FATA went inside Afghanistan to fight alongside both the Taliban & the 55 Brigade that was created & manned by the PA’s SSG for the sake of defeating the Northern Alliance. While the SSG detachment, led by a Brigadier, were evacuated by the PAF C-130s from Kunduz, 10,000 of the 15,000 Pashtuns from FATA were slaughtered by the USAF’s saturation air-strikes. After this, all the retreating Al Qaeda cadres hailing from Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Libya, Tajikistan & Dagestan all converged inside FATA for asylum & together with the surviving Pashtun combatants of FATA, swore to exact revenge from both Pakistan & the US. This is how the insurgency inside FATA began & it has nothing to do with the on-going CIA drone strikes. Thus, the situation today is that FATA is today more attracted towards eastern & southern Afghanistan & is totally alienated from Pakistan. Under these circumstances, abrogation of the Durand Line & a new border re-alignment along the Af-Pak area has now become a distinct reality & gain more strength if Afghanistan relies more on the Chah Bahr port in Iran as its principal outlet for imports & exports & decides to forego the option of using port facilities in Karachi.

To AMOL: No, that option will not be pursued since it will not find any application due to large-scale imports of F414s from GE Aero Engines for the Tejas Mk2 & LCA (Navy) Mk2. Instead, now the Kaveri’s flightworthy prototype is being fabricated & this will deliver 52kN dry thrust & 82kN with reheat & this version of the turbofan will be used for powering future HALE-UAVs & the AURA USAV to be developed by ADE.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: Tandem-seat Tejas Mk1 doesn’t have on-board mission avionics like the EL/M-2032 MMR. But once equipped with such mission avionics, this very aircraft can morphe into the Tejas Mk1 LIFT. And FYI, each of the IN’s Type 877EKM Kilo-class SSKs has, since the time of their deliveries, has had two on-board MANPADS launchers & eight Igla-1 missile rounds. And what’s the use of launching any type of aerial UAV from submarines? Instead, underwater autonomous vehicles will be much more appropriate. While it is fine to make bold pronouncements to construct new high-altitude air bases, it remains to be seen how this feat will be achieved, since a network of all-weather black-topped roads first needs to be built to connect this air base with the rest of Ladakh. And we all know that the BRO progresses slower than s snail or tortoise!!! Without these roads, it will be impossible to transport heavy engineering equipment without such vehicles, raw materials won’t get to reach the construction site, just as is the case in Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim & Nagaland. Procuring Russia-origin regional commercial air transportation aircraft makes ZERO sense for India, since Russia is nowhere near to matching the MRO-related logistics chains like what Boeing or Airbus or Embraer or Bombardier have established worldwide. And that’s precisely why countries like Myanmar, Cambodia & Indonesia have rejected such offers, despite Russia willing to finance 80% of the acquisition costs.

To VIKRANT: 1) Not desperate measures, but a calculated risk as opposed to being a gamble. 2) That’s precisely what is being done with the deployed Bofors L-70s being used as direct-fire weapons. 3) Not now, but by 2016. 4) IAF cannot control HAL & IA cannot OFB or HVF in the same way as the IN controls the shipyards. In all these shipyards, the CMD is always a retired two- or three-star naval officer, whereas in both HAL & OFB & BEL, civil servants, not even technocrats, run the show.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To VIKRAM GUHA: Procuring Russia-origin regional commercial air transportation aircraft makes ZERO sense for India, since Russia is nowhere near to matching the MRO-related logistics chains like what Boeing or Airbus or Embraer or Bombardier have established worldwide. And that’s precisely why countries like Myanmar, Cambodia & Indonesia have rejected such offers, despite Russia willing to finance 80% of the acquisition costs.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Interesting development:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-begins-power-export-to-bangladesh/article5205415.ece?homepage=true

Bhaswar said...

Sir how can the Kaveri provide a wet thrust of 82Kn when the maximum it has produced till date is 70-75Kn wet thrust? Did we actually fix the issues which were bugging the engine? If so what is its current weight? AND how did we fix the issue?

Sir if the Kaveri actually does perform well then we SHOULD NOT drop it even though it will NOT Power the LCA. Instead we should continue R&D into the area on the basis of the experience accrued. After all an existing engine in hand can open up options, if continued research can yield a 100Kn engine then at that time the engine can be used as the basis for a hitherto unplanned project.

Dropping it after mating it with the UCAV and not continuing R&D and product development DESPITE not having any current platform which requires it will KILL all the experience we have accrued. As it is the GTRE's budget isn't exactly earth shattering, we should tighten our belts and continue their funding for further development on the Kaveri IF the 82Kn engine works.

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir,
Thank you for the all your answers.
Would you kindly validate these links and throw some more light to us ?
(1) Plasma Weapons neutralizing nuclear warheads
------
http://www.fas.org/news/russia/1995/tac95060.htm

(2) On Russian missile defense system S-300 SAM in Syria
--------
http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=110043&cid=31&fromval=1&frid=31&seccatid=71&s1=1

(3) Are these the outcomes of plasma weapon experiments
-----
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/watch-israelis-report-seeing-unidentified-flying-object-glowing-in-the-sky-1.435106

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/mysterious-ufo-spotted-on-indiachina-border-by-indian-army-troops/1156760/

--muttu

Anonymous said...

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE5-1/narayanan.html

above link states the same as you stated earlier about the source of pak's n bombs and their delivery systems,
but could it be possible that US &PRC again took control of the bomb...
& if indeed it is true why did India hesitated from retaliating (albeit in a limited) after 26/11....
SIDDHARTH

Gessler said...

Hi Prasun, very thanks for your previous answers.

1) Can you tell me what are the upgradations/additions done to P-15 DDGs in the SLEP upgrade?

In case you already mentioned these, can you tell if there is any previous TRISHUL thread that I must refer to?

2) The first upgraded IAF Mirage has flown in France. When could it be delivered back to IAF in India?

3) The aspect that IAC-2 would displace around 65,000 tons was announced before a decision was taken about what type of propulsion system it would employ.

If IAC-2 gets nuclear propulsion, would the tonnage still remain the same? Would the aircraft capacity increase? I'm asking because a nuclear carrier does not need to carry any fuel tanks for it's own propulsion, that frees up a lot of internal space, right?

4) Any updates on Tejas Mk-2? When is the first GE F414 engine coming?

5) Some people are saying F414-GE-INS6 is actually based on F414 EPE and not F414-400. They say INS6 has a max thrust of 108-118kN and not 98k.

They're reasoning is that F414-GE-INS6 itself means 'F414 engine developed by GE for India w/ 6 stage compressors', which is what the name seems to suggest. Only EDE and EPE have 6 stage compressors, F414-400 has 7 compressors.

Are they right? Is INS6 based on EPE? They say India funded EPE development and the end result is the INS6.

What really is INS6's max flatout thrust really? Do you see the devil lurking in the details?

6) Is IAF favorable towards your idea of Tejas Mk.1 LIFT variant of the twin-seat trainer? Have you yet voiced your suggestion in front of any IAF bigwig?

7) What can we do with INS Viraat after it retires? Scrapping or converted into a museum with the remaining Sea Harriers?

Thanks in advance.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: That question can only be answered by the GTRE, since the figures I’ve mentioned are from the GTRE’s poster on Kaveri shown during Aero India 2013. Wet-thrust output has not yet been validated since the turbofan flown in Russia on an IL-76MD testbed was never equipped with afterburner. The USAV’s series-production version won’t take to the skies in this decade, since the flight-certified version of Kaveri won’t be available until 2018.

To SIDDHARTH: Activation codes for Pakistan’s n-warheads have always been controlled by the PRC, not the US. Therefore, if the PRC does not authorise the usage of WMDs, Pakistan can’t do anything about it & consequently, the only task left for the US then becomes the destruction of the delivery systems, i.e. the ballistic missiles of Chinese origin. India could not retaliate after 26/11 because she at that time did not have the requisite covert sub-conventional warfare capabilities.

indian 11 said...

sir ,
plzz forgive my naiveness , but could u plzz explain the term "covert sub conventional warfare"..?
does india now have dis capability ?

2) are indian special forces really special ?
or just super infantry as alleged ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: 1) Originally, the plan was to arm the upgraded P-15 DDGs with VL-Shtil-1 & BrahMos-1, but now the plan has been modified & in the end the EL/M-2248 & RAN-40L along with Barak-2 & BrahMos-1 are most likely to be installed. 2) It will be delivered after undergoing some 6 months of certification-related flight-tests. The first four such aircraft will by late 2014 be delivered to the IAF for flight-conversion by TACDE’s pilots (over a 180-day period for achieving IOC), after which TACDE will begin the process of finalising the Mirage 2000UPG’s dissimilar air combat & air-to-ground combat tactics, a process that will take 2 years. Therefore, the first fully operational Mirage 2000UPG squadron won’t be available until late 2017. 3) IAC-2’s tonnage will remain the same at 65,000 tonnes & it WILL BE nuclear-powered. 4) First tranche of F414-GE-INS6 will arrive by the year’s end & it is indeed derived from the F414EPE. This does not mean that thrust-levels of both turbofan-types will be the same, because the thrust-levels are always adjustable based on the type of airframe using such turbofans. Therefore, calibrated max thrust of the F414-GE-IN56 will be limited to 98kN & this in turn will translate into greater TTSL. ONLY IF a decision is taken in future to increase the airframe size of the Tejas MRCA as a Tejas Mk3 will it be possible to re-calibrate the F414-GE-INS6 so that its full max thrust-levels can be put to use, & not until then. India never funded EPE development in any manner. 6) Whether or not the IAF wants the LIFT version of the tandem-seat Tejas Mk1 is totally irrelevant, because the writing is there on the wall for all to see (common-sense) & eventually both the IAF & IN will have no other choice but to adopt it as a LIFT. 7) INS Viraat should be decommissioned & sent to the scrapyard, since there’s no available real estate along India’s coastline to host it as a museum. Even now, the INS Vikrant off Ballard Pier inside the Naval Dockyard in Mumbai is a total liability since its existence there has only worsened matters for INS Vikramaditya & added to the congestion problems. Therefore, both INS Vikrant & INS Viraat should be junked & scrapped ASAP after the arrival of INS Vikramaditya.

To ASHISH: Rafale M-MRCA’s procurement cannot be stopped under any condition, since no one is 100% sure of the Tejas Mk2 MRCA’s availability within the specified timelines. Procuring 100 AH-64Ds doesn’t make any sense at all. Instead, the IAF should procure only 22 AH-64Ds that can also be used for CSAR support, while the AAC should procure no less than 150 LAH versions of the LCH. The projected reqmt for CH-47Fs is 60. Existing AS.316B Alouette IIIs & AS.315B Lamas ought to be upgraded into Chetan & Cheetal configurations & they can easily serve effortlessly for another 20 years with the AAC, BSF, ITBP & ICGS. Both the IAF & IN need at least 100 tandem-seat Tejas Mk1 as LIFT. While the IAF requires 12 C-130J-30 Super Hercules, procurement of another 56 C-130J Hercules variants should be authorised for replacing the HS-748 Avros. Total C-17A fleet strength should be authorised at 24 units. Total projected reqmt by IAF for A-50I PHALCON platforms is 12, but this has been objected to by the DRDO since the DRDO wants the funds for developing the AWACS-1 platform using A330-200 airframes. In my personal view, this is a wrong decision by the MoD & instead, the MoD should have mandated that the PHALCON package be installed on seven A330-200 airframes, while total number of EMB-145Is to be procured ought to have been increased to 12. However, all this can’t be procured within the next 5 years for sure. 10 years sounds more realistic.

Bhaswar said...

And what of continuing R&D in aircraft engines. I agree that the Kaveri will NEVER power the Tejas bust that does not mean that we drop it and progress no further once we mate it with the UCAV, no?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To INDIAN11: 1) In layman’s terms, it’s all about what was shown on the Bollywood flick called D-DAY. 2) Of course they are.

To BHASWAR: R & D should always be a never-ending process. But it should be a focussed effort, meaning it would have been far more realistic & financially feasible to have first developed a family of turboshaft engine for helicopters instead of a turbofan for combat aircraft, since far more helicopters are reqd by the three armed services than combat aircraft.

Bhaswar said...

That is completely true.

Btw, to lighten your mood- "HAL’s Engine Test Bed Research and Design Centre (ETBRDC) will work to produce the turbo-shaft engine for the proposed indigenous multi-role combat aircraft being designed by the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA).”Such an engine can alternatively be installed in the fifth generation fighter proposed to be developed jointly by India and Russia,” an official said." From- http://frontierindia.net/proposal-for-hal-allowed-to-co-development-engines#axzz2gwzD7dzu

We can't fix the past, NOW that we have a working turbofan (of whatever capacity and generation) we need to work on it and continue to improve it. Otherwise the MOD will again green-light ab initio development of whatever engine will be prevalent 20-30 years down the line when the ADA or HAL decide to commence on their next demonstration project. We spend peanuts on the GTRE, might as well continue expenditure at that level.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

That’s a good one! (LoLzzz!!!) Guess these ‘desi’ journalists can’t tell the difference between a turbofan & turboshaft engine. BTW, there are three parallel turbofan R & D projects being pursued. One is Kaveri, followed by the one that’s already available for the Nirbhay cruise missile, while the third is the Laghu Shakthi, meant for a twin-engined MALE-UAV now being designed by ADE & whicyh will closely resemble the EADS/Cassidian-developed Talarion UAV.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 263   Newer› Newest»