Total Pageviews

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

China's Tactical PGMs, & Unguided Bombs Used by Indian Air Force & Indian Navy





What happened to your previous thread on the Javelins/BMP-2K?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SOMETIMES: Deleted that thread by mistake. Will reload it before this weekend with new updates & photos, do rest assured.

Arun said...

Any Update On:


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UJJWAL: 1) In return for procuring the LW-155, BAE Systems, its developer, will transfer to OFB the production know-how for building the LW-155’s barrel as well as for several other related rotables & consumables. 2) Those 6 Qing-class SSKs equipped with Sterling AIP will be much more quieter than the six Scorpenes. 3) No, but performance flaws of the fuel cell-based AIP module. 4) Of course. 5) It is not being considered at all. 6) No, since that version of the Class 209 SSK is specific to only Israel & is therefore not on offer to India. 7) Still a long long long way to go. 8) The project was a non-starter as both the foreign OEMs pulled out.

To KANCHAN: None. Such TELs can’t be imported & have to be developed in-house & this will take at least another 7 years at the very least to achieve. Firepower/mobility demonstrations last for less than a week & are therefore different from user-trials that last for more than 6 months at different firing ranges (Pokhran & Pathankot). Furthermore, during user-trials, all elements of the tracked SPH inclusive of the tracked ammunition resupply vehicle will have to be evaluated. Since such vehicles were unavailable last year after DEFEXPO 2012, the IA never bothered to take the firepower/mobility trials seriously & this is also the same reason why the 155mm/52-cal motorised howitzer from TATA Power SED wasn’t evaluated. The IA insists on a level playing field & therefore cannot be biaised in favour of any one OEM. The best tracked SPH option for the IA is still very much the Bhim SPH co-developed by CVRDE & DENEL Land Systems. And now that the 10-year blacklisting period of DENEL has expired, the CVRDE is now free to legally resume its industrial collaboration with DENEL & complete the Bhim SPH’s R & D cycle by co-developing a customised tracked ammo resupply vehicle for the Bhim.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: 1) I have never been fond of or hostile to any ‘desi’ journalist. Instead, I have consistently taken exception to only the misrepresentation of facts that these ill-informed ‘desi’ journalists frequently engage in. For instance, take this claim: “But with the US, India has only bought equipment over-the-counter. American equipment has not even been manufactured in India with technology transfer, far less co-developed”. THIS IS A BLATANT LIE. And why so? Because the mission computers of the Tejas MRCA, Su-30MKI, MiG-27UPG & Jaguar IS/DARIN-3 have all been produced by the HAL-Edgewood JV company & I had already uploaded their brochures in my Aero India 2013 show report in which there’s ample news about this JV & its activities. The problem arises when folks like ‘desi’ journalists never even bother to read the fine print in these brochures & consequently end up with ludicrous assumptions (the mother of all fuck-ups) & claims. 2) No one in their right mind will set up a dedicated production line for such a limited number (no more than 220) of LW-155 howitzers. In addition, the IA is firmly set on acquiring 155mm/52-cal howitzers in large numbers & does not want 39-cal solutions in large numbers. 3) C-130J licenced-assembly line only makes sense if the orders are large & this can only happen if the IAF selects the C-130J to fulfil its 56-aircraft tactical transport aircraft reqmt. It’s too late for doing the same for Mi-17V-5s since all of them are coming off-the-shelf from Kazan Helicopter Plant in Tatarstan. S-70B Seahawks too will be bought in very limited numbers. However, it makes perfect economic sense for India’s private-sector to set up authorised MRO facilities for the C-130J & S-70B within India so that all such aircraft-types now serving with the US PACOM, AFRICOM & CENTCOM can come to India for their periodic & unscheduled MRO support. But for this to happen, the Govt of India needs to ink the LSA with the US, something the ruling political retards in Delhi cannot comprehend & consequently will never authorise. 4) The likes of Prof Amartya Sen are armchair theorists & commentators who don’t even bother to feel the pulse of the grassroots-level citizens of India. Today, the minorities of India are most concerned about seeking access to employment, education, health services & low inflation, something the UPA has failed miserably to provide. The greatest polarising personality in India since the early 1990s has been L K Advani, not Narendra Modi & it is due to Advani’s theatrics that both Gujarat & UP become communally polarised & now that he has been totally sidelined, the coast is now clear for the BJP to return to power.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: 5) Airmobile means achieving mobility of armed personnel through both fixed-wing & rotary-winged aircraft. Air-assault means achieving mobility of both armed personnel & integral armoured vehicles & medium field artillery systems through both fixed-wing & rotary-winged aircraft. Airborne means achieving mobility of armed personnel only, i.e. only paratroopers. 6) That will once again turn India into an international paraiah. 7) Any ICBM or SLBM whose nuclear warheads can achieve 100-metre CEP is good enough since the warheads in any case will be detonated between 10km & 16km above the target-area for creating maximum destruction. The Trident D-5 SLBM has a 90-metre CEP. Therefore, anyone who is dreaming about achieving 20-metre CEP for any kind of nuclear warhead has clearly lost his mental equilibrium & desperately requires psychiatric help.

To BHASWAR: It had referred to the NVDs from TATA & MKU. The only existing centre within India for R & D excellence on NVDs & optronic sensors is IRDE. No other private-sector company has such in-house R & D capacity.

To SUBIR: 1) Nos are all mentioned in the narrative above. 2) Because the BMP-2s don’t require it & are used by second-echelon forces. BUSK can be added on any time in the field itself to any BMP. 3) The photos above clearly answer this. 4) Identical. 5) Only Konkurs-M, not Kornet-E. Optronic sensors for both are totally different. 6) Google it. 7) In the subcontinent, there’s no terrain that will enable anyone to engage targets 4km away with ground-launched ATGMs. Maximum visibility will be restricted to only 2km due to the terrain’s topography. 8) Of course. 9) Long ago. 10) Who says they’re missing? Furthermore, IA’s ICVs never engage in warfighting over urban terrain or in built-up areas. Helicopter-gunships will have no chance at all to attack IA’s armoured/mechanised infantry formations since such formations will have integral air cover provided by RSHs & Rudras armed with Mistral-ATAMs. 11) Armour panels built with composites is totally different from composite-laminate armour. 12) You’re wrongly assuming that the Kliver turret will be 100% of Russian origin. 13) None of the LSVs & MRAPs available today from anywhere is optimised for high-altitude operations. That is precisely why China has developed at least four different types of LSVs so far. 14) Cummins India & Greaves Cotton already provide several customised solutions & therefore it makes no sense to re-invent the wheel.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SHEKAR: On paper at least the CABS’ EMB-145I AEW & CS offers superior performance parameters.

To BUDDHA: For that, all roads lead to Benaras Hindu University.

To SASI: 1) Because the Greaves Cotton-developed engine isn’t exactly a drop-in installation, & secondly, the engine needs compatibility with the gearbox. It’s no use installing a new engine for which there isn’t a matching gearbox. 2) Next year. 3) One JV—between HAL & Edgewood LLC—is already operational for a long time. The mission computers of the Tejas MRCA, Su-30MKI, MiG-27UPG & Jaguar IS/DARIN-3 have all been produced by the HAL-Edgewood JV company & I had already uploaded their brochures in my Aero India 2013 show report in which there’s ample news about this JV & its activities. 4) Licenced-assembly only. That’s why I keep on harping about the desperate need for indigenous semiconductor foundries. 5) It can be done, but its engagement envelope is limited in terms of slant range when compared to contemporary AAA systems.

To RD: Of course they do & their after-effects have all been well-documented after OP Desert Storm. Field artillery rounds or ATGMs don’t make any use of depleted uranium.

To SAURAV JHA: I had already stated yesterday that the BJP’s electoral win is assured & is a given, for as long as the bigots like RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal & the likes of Swami Adityanand are totally marginalised & made irrelevant while the focus stays on issues of national survival & resilience. The UPA on the other hand hasn’t yet gotten rid of its pre-1991 socialistic hangover & has been losing the war of information domination by the day since 2010 after the Commonwealth Games due to its top leadership’s total inability to communicate coherently with the masses & its constant pandering to its coalition allies (the regional parties that survive on identity-based politicking) in the name of ‘coalition dharma’. There’s nothing wrong, legally, morally or ethically, in ex-servicemen being mobilised by any political party, for causes that are righteous.

To DUSHYANT HARDAHA: It indeed is, provided spoilers & mischief mongers like RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal & the likes of Swami Adityanand are totally marginalised & made irrelevant while the focus stays on issues of national survival & resilience. What Narendra Modi ought to bear in mind is what Emperor Aurangzeb had once famously said: Kingship knows no kinship.

To SOAPSTAR: All three armed services of India require 4,500 such vehicles of various types. There’s no one universal model that fits all roles & that’s why I had uploaded photos of two distinct types of LSVs to serve as illustration. Even if something similar to these two is selected, they will require extensive customisation in terms of overall packaging & weaponisation to ensure their compatibility with not only the mission, but also with the operating terrain. Their service-induction, therefore, won’t begin before 2016 at the earliest.

Bhaswar said...

Will the Bhim SPH then finally be revived? Will producing it allow enough experience to be accrued that in the future a turret can be designed for the prospective DRDO ATAGS and integrated on a Arjun chassis?

OR will another anonymous letter kill the Bhim? Has CRVDE stepped on the peddle and started the work or are they sitting on their hands?

What happened to the OFB modernization plane?

If the current Arjun being tested is the 1A variant then when will the MK.2 variant come out. The list of upgrades- I cannot remember the number but something in the neighborhood of 75 improvements or so was for the 1A variant of the MK.2 variant?

What happened to the contract between DCNS and SEC industries?
I believe that SEC was supposed to manufacture hull hatches, cofferdam doors, ballast vent valves, high pressure air cylinders, weapons handling stations etc.?

DCNS was supposed to train some 40 SEC personnel? In Hyderabad DCNS was also supposed to provide on the job training, technical support to assist in implementation of manufacturing process and quality control procedures for a period of 5 years? What happened to that?

Has IRDE actually been able to produce gen 3 and gen 3+ NVDs, if so how good are they?

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

1. I was not talking in particular about nuke warheads, what i wanted to say was that conventional warheads with 20 m CEP will ultimately render deploying nuke warheads unneeded

2. Please look at the below link, with reported operational cost of 1/10 of F16 do you think India can use this jet as a option to replace the MiG27, Jaguar fleets by further enhancing its features to suit IAF needs & as a much cheaper option than developing AMCA

3. DENEL blacklisting period is over but do you really think MoD will allow DENEL to work in India ever even if its for Bhim SPH (same like Bofors AB). I think Bhim is not needed since as you say focus is now on 52 cal MGS

4. You say India needs vehicles like JLTV but its after Humvee goes into sunset, India doesnt have anything near Humvee so will it be good idea to go for JLTVs


Joydeep Ghosh

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

sorry for these late additions

On the Chindits blog i saw the Chinese Z-9WZ helo which looks just a little big in size to our Dhruv but carries almost the same amount of weapon load as AH-64, how


Joydeep Ghosh

Raghuram said...

Dear Mr. Prasun,
Is there any chance that arjun mk2 will be inducted in sufficiently large numbers into our armed force. Why such love by army for T-90 tanks? Why are they not going for the indigenous product?

Raghuram said...

Dear Prasun,
Why such by Indian army for T-90 tanks when arjun mk2 is available? Why not develop arjun's versions over a period of time and stop imports? Can you enlighten on this?

indian 11 said...

sir ,

1) you have previously mentioned that setting up a production line for just 56 aircraft is not economical..but now u are stating that "licensed assembly" of 56 c 130j can be done in india..
is licensed assembly different from production ? (please forgive my lack of knowledge)
2) y are we buying a plethora of transport aircraft like c 130j super herc, il-214mrta , & showing interest in c27 spartan & now this avro replacement.. moreover we are also upgrading an 32..
what are iaf's intentions..with such diversity isn't iaf producing a logistical mess..
y can't we only order c-130(various variants) & mrta in large no.s & forget abt other new inductions ?

3) u have answered ques above , but i don't seem to find the ques..not even in the previous post ?
in this photo of ins vikrant isn't large part of flight deck missing..
as far as i can make out the whole landing strip is missing..??

Bhaswar said...

AND sir what of the Mahindra and Panhard Colt 4*4 LAV then, it is near as good as a LATV. Weighs 5 tonnes provides Stanag 4569 level 2 ballistic protection and level 3 mine protection.

How much of the components in that are indigenous?

Surely the chassis can be up-armored by the likes of MKU or redesigned to incorporate a V-hull for MRAP level mine protection (after all even the Oshkosh Sandcat was redesigned with the V-hull from the base platform and even its JLTV platform has been armored by Plasan from Israel)?

Shouldn't that be a better option? Perhaps a fully independent suspension system is called for although I think that the pneumatic suspension system should do, no? That leaves us with trials, debugging and optimization for high alt operations and integration of RWS with 20mm cannons or Nag ATGMs.

Subir said...

Sir, VMT for the answers.

1.Who are the OEM of the two optronic sensors one besides the gun mantle with 2 optical apertures and the other behind the commander's hatch with a sinle aperture ?Are they of Russian origin or are they elements of ELBIT Elop TISAS.Pls explain a bit. I am getting confused between Tisas and those sensors. Tisas TI looks different.

2.You said the optronic sensors of the previous BMP-2 turrets and Kliver Tkb-799 are different. But HOW WHEN the Bmp-2 turrets have been upgraded with TISAS and Kliver TKB-799 will also get TISAS .

3.In the KBP pic of the BMP-2 ,the 3rd last pic of the thread, the turret that BMP-2 is having is not TKB-799 Kliver but a Shipunov module.

4.How is TKB-799 better than the previous turret ??THE PREVIOUS ONE COULD ACCOMDATE,THE TURRET BMP-2 IS HAVING IN LAST 3 PICS CAN ACCOMODATE A RC AGS-30 AGL BUT KLIVER DOESNT HAVE A AGL. Does Kliver provides better cannon stabilisation in horizontal and vertical planes ?Exactly what are Kliver's advantages ?

5.In the MKU industries slide showing the various components of BMP-2 armouring there isnt any anti mine composite armour panels for the BMP-2 underbelly .

How was MKU selected over TAML,IEDS of Germany,Rafale ?

6.Previously BMP-2 rear and side armour could be penetrated and the trrops inside could be injured with well placed 7.62X51 and 39mm AP shots. Now with MKU applique armour the BMP-2 protection levels for the rear and sides will conform to a midway standard between STANAG 4569 4 and 5 ??

7.Isnt any type of glide bombs, guided or unguided with swept back or straight wings and of Russian origin is in service with IAF ? If so pls post some of their pics.

8.Recently Russian ordance developers and Bazalt came up with glide wing and guidance tail kits for upgradation of inservice dumb boms into smart affordable standoff PGM AND also new standoff glide bombs- both powered and unpowered. HAS ANY OF THEM OR THOSE KITS MADE THEIR WAY INTO THE IAF inventory ?

9.Why cant ARDE develope glide wing kits for OFB HSLD bombs and their own developed ones ?Addition of inexpensive low tech high aspect ratio wings to the these dumb bombs can increase their range to 25-30 km,the extreme reaches of most advanced E-SHOARADS.They arent rocket tech. AND such a MOD ACROSS THEIR WHOLE STOCSK OF THE WILL BE GREATLY BENEFICIAL IN ENHANCING IAF'S OFFENSIVE AND STRIKE CAPABILITIES
What is the news of ARDE's standoff PGM with avariety of seeker options.

10.RCI Imaraat can develope a tail kit for the existing stocks of OFB,Russian,Arde dumb bombs which will receive nav data from IRNSS constellation of satellites. We can have our own version of JDAM & standoff weapons with the above mentioned kits.

11.What is annual overhaul and upgradation capacity of BEML? BEML can also set up overhaul & upgradation infrasturcture for IA T-72 when HVF Avadi is incapable of doing with the overhaul.
What is the status of the 3rd of IA T-72 fleet which arent combat ready and immobilised due to lack of overhaul? This was in the news some months back.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAGHURAM: Mk1A version of Arjun MBT had 93 specified enhancements, while the Mk2 version will have an autoloader & 1,500hp powerpack. In my personal view, the CVRDE made a mistake by incorporating ERA panels weighing 1.5 tonnes on the Mk1, since installation of an on-board active protection system would have been much more easier as well as lighter. Had this been the case, then the IA could well have ordered more than 700 Mk1s alone, with the Mk2 version of Arjun then becoming the FMBT Mk1 & the Mk3 the FMBT Mk2. Why are such wrong decisions being taken? Primarily due to apex-level project mismanagement within the MoD & IA HQ, which then results in absence of long-term integrated perspective planning & dysfunctional/ill-conceived pre-planned product improvement plans. The blame lies squarely on the doorsteps of the MoD & IA HQ, & has nothing to do with CVRDE. A force of a mere 1,000 Arjun Mk1As enhanced along the lines I’ve suggested above & seamlessly integrated with the DRDO-developed battlefield management system (BMS) & Battlefield Surveillance System (BSS) by using DRDO-developed tactical internet networks, and backed up by HAL-built lightly armed RSH/LUH helicopters (or even the upgraded SA.315B Cheetal) & 140 fully armed Rudra helicopter-gunships can, with great ease, neutralise the Pakistan Army’s combined armoured corps might. Regretfully, this isn’t happening because all the so-called transformative concepts now being articulated by IA HQ have adopted the bottom-up approach, instead of the top-down approach (which ought to have been adopted based on firm directives from the MoD & articulated by HQ Integrated Defence Staff), which in turn has led to excruciatingly slow project implementation & institutional resistance from within.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To INDIAN11: 1) Production-line is totally different from final assembly-line. In the former, structures & components are moulded, machined & rivetted. In case of the latter, only the nuts & bolts are attached since the entire product is supplied by its OEM in semi-knocked-down condition. When engaging in the latter, the workforce also acquires the expertise reqd for assembling as well as stripping-down an airframe for conducting periodic/unscheduled MRO. Hence, if the 56 C-130Js were licence-assembled in India for the IAF by an OEM-authorised & licenced private-sector firm, then this very firm will also be able to undertake MRO work for not only this fleet, but also engage in highly profitable third-party MRO business for other C-130J operators, especially those USAF’s C-130Js operational in the Indian Ocean Region. This in turn will generate jobs for those IAF technicians after they have retired from active service. Similarly, of private-sector shipyards are discriminated against & DPSUs are favoured for constructing the IN’s principal surface combatants, then the private-sector shipyards should be allowed to bid for servicing the warships of friendly foreign navies like the US Navy. This will not only create new job opportunities, but will also allow these shipyards to gain valuable work-experience & expertise from several US-based OEMs. 2) HS-748 Avros of the IAF need to be replaced by C-130Js & not C-27 Spartans, since the new aircraft-type is reqd for primarily transporting the several CAPFs throughout India for rotational internal security deployments, & is not meant for usage of air-maintenance for the IA. 3) Those elements are missing because these are modular structures & therefore will be installed later when the hull is floating in the wet-basin at CSL. In addition, the elevators & the bulky aircraft launch & recovery system too have to be installed first before the top-deck can be constructed.

To SUBIR: 1) ELBIT Systems’ EL-Op subsidiary. 2) BMP-2 turrets only had TISAS. BMP-2Ks’s turret will have TISAS & TSIK. 3 & 4) There are several optional configurations of Kliver. 5) Not reqd. In the Indian context, ICVs like BMP-2s are not reqd to traverse minefields, which in any case will be cleared earlier by the IA’s combat engineering elements. 6) Yes. 7) None. 8) No. 9) They are being designed. 10) Designing the tail-kit is the easy part. The hard part is the design & development of various electronic components that go inside the tail-kit, for which no indigenous R & D capability exists as yet. 11) That is only a BEML proposal & the MoD has not yet approved it. Overhaul of T-72’s hull & turret can only be undertaken by a private-sector company that is also given the contract for upgrading them. No decision has been taken by the MoD for this proposal put forward by IA HQ.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: It is still too early to state whether or not the BHIM tracked SPH will or will not be revived. Because when the Bhim was being developed in the late 1990s, motorised 155mm/52-cal howitzers (mounted gun systems or MGS) were still in their infancy but the latter has since matured & can do everything that the Bhim can & therefore only after the MGS has been exhaustively evaluated by the IA will be decided whether or not to acquire the Bhim, since the number of tracked SPHs reqd is very small—only 120. Mk1A version of Arjun MBT had 93 specified enhancements, while the Mk2 version will have an autoloader & 1,500hp powerpack. In my personal view, the CVRDE made a mistake by incorporating ERA panels on the Mk1, since installation of an on-board active protection system would have been much more easier as well as lighter. Had this been the case, then the IA could well have ordered more than 700 Mk1s alone, with the Mk2 version of Arjun then becoming the FMBT Mk1 & the Mk3 the FMBT Mk2. More than 90% of the structural components licence-built by Indian vendors for the Scorpene SSK have failed their QA/QC tests. IRDE’s family of optronic sensors incorporate some critical foreign-sourced components from Israel & France & are fully up to the specs specified by the end-users. The Mahindra/Panhard Colt 4 x 4 so far doesn’t have any indigenous component. Far better than this option is the Renault LTV that was showcased at DEFEXPO 2012.

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: 1) Even PGMs with pinpoint accuracy will not be able to match the scope & scale of devastation brought about by nuclear warheads. In addition, no one uses nuclear weapons of any type for precision strikes, but for deterrence purposes & as such, nuclear weapons are strategic weapons meant to achieving political objectives, as opposed conventional PGMs meant for achieving operational/tactical objectives. 2) Unmanned but armed MALE-UAVs & HALE-UAVs can do the task at much lower cost when compared to any manned combat aircraft. 3) You’re right, since MGS designs have matured & can do everything that the Bhim can. Consequently, investing money on procuring only 120 Bhim SPHs doesn’t make any economic or military sense from a logistics support point-of-view. 4) JLTVs are reqd for several different missions & therefore there are different types of JLTVs reqd, although a universal chassis can be made use of. For instance, motorised JLTVs are reqd for forward recce, convoy protection, perimeter security, plus airmobile/special operations. Thus far, no one from India has been able to come up with suitable modular solutions, although TATA Motors can well do so if it decides to use the Range Rover as the base platform. 5) Z-9WZ is a militarised Eurocopter AS.365N Dauphin-2 of 1980s vintage that has since been modified & upgraded in China.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

So then why not develop the JLTV in house. It seems like we are to outsource all the bread and butter requirements of the AF while trying to patch together Aircraft carriers and what not. Can't we build an adequate JLTV and LST ourselves?

Bhaswar Kumar said...


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: It is too late to indigenously develop JLTV family of vehicles simply because the R & D process will take far too long to reach fruition, even if the Range Rover is used as the base vehicle. Like it or not, that’s how things are within India’s existing dysfunctional decision-making mosaic. That’s also the reason why the once much-touted Greenfield FICV project has been cancelled for all intents & purposes & the same is the case with the projected indigenous development of an 8 x 8 APC. And given the urgent demands of force modernisation, there is no other option but to select a foreign design & then have it customised & manufactured in-country via a JV, similar to what has been done with the Barak-2 LR-SAM & BrahMos-1. And the US knows this only too well & is therefore offering a range of mouth-watering options, these being several projects that the US DoD had cancelled in the previous decade due to its domestic budgetary constraints. For India, which lags far behind in terms of advanced manufacturing processes, creating JVs with US-based OEMs in selected areas of military-industrial modernisation therefore creates the opportunities reqd for playing catch-up in several vital areas. Regarding SSKs, no one in the world can achieve the levels of QA/QC for the first-of-class or lead boat even under the foreign OEM’s supervision. There are no short-cuts to climbing the learning curve & therefore the first two Scorpene SSKs should have been built by DCNS in France, during which qualified India-based vendors ought to have been imparted hands-on skills upgradation & consequently, they would have achieved an appreciable degree of work proficiency. This time-tested formula, already successfully tried out when procuring the Class 209/Type 1500 SSKs in the 1980s, was thrown into the dustbin in 2005 by UPA-1. And the Scorpene SSK procurement programme NEVER HAD any industrial offsets clause. It was DCNS that unilaterally offered all kinds of work packages to Indian industry in order to sweeten the deal in its favour & for all intents & purposes succeeded in hoodwinking the ill-informed & ignorant civilian decision-makers of UPA-1, including above all the one who is now the President of India (who also ignored the well-intentioned advice of both the IN & MDL) & who is primarily accountable for all the missed production deadlines & cost overruns the plague the Project 75 Scorpene SSK procurement project.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

So what happens now?

Will we gain the adequate manufacturing capability from JVs in JLTVs, APCs, IFVs to in the future produce (only manufacture since we will still have to slog through the R&D on our own) world class products in the segment?

Is all lost then, will the Indian industries never be able to achieve the QC/QR and ergo support indigenous subs or will they eventually do so for the scorpene parts but in a much delayed manner?

So which JLTV then, Oshkosh or AM general's product, perhaps the Sandcat since it has LSV as well as Mine resistant variants?

Which APC will the US offer, will it really allow us to build it in country from our vendors, production line and material?

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Although sir,

One wonders, we need to draw the line somewhere, should we let past mistakes hold our bid for self reliance hostage? The army at the moment has many things on its plate- artillery being the chief area it seems. Would it kill us if we allowed 4-5 years for the indigenous development of a LATV? If we don't start bridging the gap then we'll never get there- We will have to sacrifice something for that. The IA doesn't seem to be clamoring for a JLTV so at least why not wait in that case and let solutions emerge from within the country- officially get our own companies to start a project. Will that kill us? Or then will we again 30 years down the line have to hunt for a foreign replacement because we ever bothered to develop that segment ourselves?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

What will happen next is similar to what’s now happening with the FGFA & IL-214 MRTA joint R & D + co-production. Requisite QA/QC proficiency-levels will be achieved eventually, but at a much delayed rate & at prohibitive costs, all due to myopic apex-level decision-making. For JLTV, the Oshkosh offer is byfar the superior one, while for the APC it will be a variant of the GDLS Stryker 8 x 8. There are several other offers (and not just the five as claimed by ‘God’s Perfect Arsehole’) in diverse areas that will be pursued in future & I will detail them all in a new thread this weekend that will be inclusive of the uploads that I had deleted yesterday. The IA had been asking for JLTV-type LSVs since 2002--it's too long a wait.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

So at the end the SEC industries will acquire the required expertise but at the cost of a much delayed scorpene project? They shall then be able retrench said expertise into Indian submarine projects?

Will the Arjun Mk.2 have composite add on armor like the Leopard 2? Or perhaps the Mk3? How many total Mk1 Mk1A and MK.2 arjuns shall be procured then FOR SURE? Will the Mk.1s and 1as be upgraded to the Mk.2 standard? Or just the Mk1s to 1a standard?

Why hasn't the MKU's instavest, Helmet offerings been integrated into the F-INSAS project given their clear superior quality? Who will provide said components for the project? Is the project even progressing,when shall it be revealed?

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun

Whats Elisra ALQ-903 operating frequency?

Can you share DF accuracies of Virgilius and SPS-3000?

Which frequency Operational Data Link (ODL) uses?

R&S website offers only single airborne SDR = M3AR which is V/UHF only So wheres the truth? Now i highly doubt that R&S wouldnt advertise their radios with HF capability on the other hand Malaysia is separated by sea it seems foolish to not have HF radios.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

It remains to be seen by when these India-based vendors will fully absorb all the intricacies of SSK construction. Right now there are no submarine projects that can be called ‘Indian’ in terms of design. Arjun Mk2s & Mk3s will have modular ceramics-based composite armour panels along with APS. Mk1s will be upgraded to Mk1A standard only during their mid-life refit but their powerpacks will stay the same. Mk2’s design will have significant differences internally as it will have a greater quantum of on-board vectronics. F-INSAS is a network for improving battlefield situational awareness for the foot-soldier & has nothing to do with helmets or vests.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KIMLEESUNG: No one lists out operating frequencies, only the operating bandwidth & frequency envelope is available from the OEM’s brochures. Same goes for DF accuracies of Virgilius & frequencies of ODL as well. R & S developed the HF radio for Su-30MKMs as a customised package & that too for a single customer (RMAF/TUDM) , since very very few air forces ask for such hardware. Therefore, such products are frequently not publicized or listed in company websites.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

So then what of the F-INSAS future soldier? Who will supply our troops with the next generation protection vests, helmets and the likes? Let me guess, America, Russia, perhaps Israel this time?

Why not leverage companies at least like MKUs, can our corrupt babus and brass not even let go of that share of the pie?

What of at least developing a light specialist vehicle in country which actually gets inducted?

Will the Arjun Mk.2 even see the light of day before 2020? But you stated that the Mk.2 would only have an autoloader and new power-pack- so now it will also have composite armor, when can we hope to lay eyes on it?

Pierre Zorin said...

Hi Prasun I was watching a You tube doco on battle tanks and it mentioned the Challenger, Leclerc, Leopard and Abrams as modern technological marvels. Of special interest was the armour of the Challenger they said was a secret and was called Chobham after the town it was developed in. Abrams apparently have a similar armour. Is the Chobham (not sure if this is how you spell) really a secret? Seeing the IA already used British tanks and French ones, was it not feasible to work with the Brits for a Challenger based tank and then perhaps start an independent design and model? I reckon what India badly needs is the expansion of proper education for the masses through not just academic institutes but real hands on technical education. It is very late, but still better late than never - instead of the Soviet 5 year planning crap they would do well to follow Deng Xiao Ping's model which has seen China emerge as an enviable alternative world power today!

Dhruv said...

What are the requirements for setting up aerospace MROs in India in terms of Real Estate, Transport infrastructure and Manpower technical competency? Is the North East or East an ideal location in terms of access to Markets both civil and military as well as skill availability.



joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

you said to #Bhaswar

'And the US knows this only too well & is therefore offering a range of mouth-watering options, these being several projects that the US DoD had cancelled in the previous decade due to its domestic budgetary constraints. For India, which lags far behind in terms of advanced manufacturing processes, creating JVs with US-based OEMs in selected areas of military-industrial modernisation therefore creates the opportunities reqd for playing catch-up in several vital areas.'

It is the specific reason i said India should bring the jet & its makers here and make the jet as a replacement for Jaguar, MiG27 and modify its stealth version as AMCA. This jet has not been offered to US till now and we should not take the US leftovers.

Making this jet may well help bring in more Indian private companies into the defense sector. Hopefully then we can market the plane as a cheaper jet to those who want but cant afford F16.

Btw just learned India is going to issue tenders for 6 subs looks like your view that IN should go for SSN instead of the AIP subs has not got attention.

Instead i still feel IN should go for 18 Scorpene subs and by the time last sub comes out a Indian design based on Type 209, Kilo can be rolled out by 2030.


Joydeep Ghosh

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. 1. After refitting with kockums sterling / DCNS MESMA, would Scorpene be quiter than Quing class sub? 2. What will be the weapons package of pak Quing class SSK? 3. Is Seahake is chosen as preferred torpedo for Scorpene? By which account it is better than WASS Black Shark? 4. Please give a brief details of homegrown Varunastra , TA. Would those be inducted in service or those are complete failure? 5. If Mark 54 would be the torpedo for S-70B2 ASW helos? It was reported that Ratheyon has tested an winged version for better performance. Is IN considering it for its own use? 6. TATA Power SED won a contract to upgrade 30 odd military airfields. Is that complete? 7. I think IA should go for FH-77B05L52 for its 155mm 52 caliber towed gun requirement. As, ARDE will certainly take decades to delelop such a gun , even after this,a number of vital components would be direct off the shelf procurement. IA should procure 400 such gun directly from BAE Systems, and another 1180 should be made in India by a consortium of BAE-Mahindra, OFB-GCF etc. ToT Could easily be made as a follow on order of 1980s deal. What do you say? 8. If selection of Bofors was a right decision? Please give a technical comparison. Thanks, with regards.....UJJWAL

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately Israelis are covering everything in veil of secrecy even frequency range of ALQ-903 is not listed on Elisra webpage thats why i was asking you.

raw13 said...

Challenger II has the latest chobham armour. You can get hold of the material easily enough. Then its years and years of research to determine its formula. Challenger II tank is almost indestructible. In the second gulf war British army let the Iraqis fire at it point blank with 125mm's. They simply bounced off it! Once they knew this, the guys simple charged at the iraqi's. Brits would love to sell Challenger II to india. It would mean they would be able to retain the MBT skills a while longer. At one time even PA was interested in it but the operational cost and numbers needed meant it would never come.

Gessler said...

Sir here is a piece from Indian Express -,d.Yms

"Stage set for longer range Surya"

They say a 6000-10,000km ICBM called Surya, which was until now dubbed as Agni-6, is under development and have also provided some parameters of the supposed missile.

Please tell us if we should take this with a pinch of salt or a truck-load of it?

Gessler said...

And sir,,,I know that you had previously trashed claims of any missile called Agni-6, but what I don't understand is, what are we going to build after Agni-series as far as land-based nuclear deterrence goes?

Surely we can't stop BM development with A-5, can we? Aren't we going to build newer, canisterised MRBMs?

P.S. - Any news about the first K-4 SLBM test?

Thanks in advance, sir ji.

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

sorry for late addition

regarding Smiling Buddha 3 you said it will make India international paraiah, but south atlantic blast didnt make Israel or south africa paraiah or for that matter the reported by some low yield blast by China on Brahmaputra to divert its waters disnt make China paraiah so why will it make India paraiah?


Joydeep Ghosh

Anonymous said...

Prasunda, as you have stated that type 214 has no design flaws, then the type 214 with some modifications may be a good option for IN's future SSK procurement. The important modifications are: 1. Kockums Sterling AIP plug 2. Water ram torpedo propulsion technology as in type 212 3. IRIS-T firing capability from torpedo tube as in type 212 4.A suitable Sub launched missile e.g. Harpoon, Exocet or Nirbhay any of these. 5. Thales Optronics mast in place of periscope as in Scorpene etc. Order could be placed to TKMS. The first 2 could be made at HDW,Kiel. Other subs can be made in India. What do you say? Thanks , with regards......UJJWAL

Lingaraj said...

What's this? Suddenly Subir is quiet, it is all Bhaswar who suddenly becomes Bhaswar Kumar and then fires a number of questions with the inimical style bold with Anonymous designation and tries to cover up track by revealing who the Anonymous is!!! Comeone this is an interactive blog and all voluntary courtesy PKS. No need to play stupid games is there?

Arun said...

Yeah, something is fishy. I reckon it is like Fletch lives movie - one person assuming a number of identities! LoLZ

Subir said...

Sir, VMT for all the answers.

1.Who is undertaking the BMP-2K upgrade program and hw many are to be upgraded per annum ?

2.The pics that you gave of ELBIT's Elop division's TISAS,they are considerably different from the optronic sensors on upgraded BMP-2K scale models and KBP poster of upgraded BMP-2.Then what are those ELOP optronic sensors if not TISAS TI ?

3. What is Elbit systems TSIK ? Have googled it but couldnt find anything significant and of that name .

4.Will IA Bmp-2K have any remotely operated AGL ?How much will be the unladen weight of upgraded BMP-2K inclusive of MKU composite armour ?

5.You said many times previuosly that IAF Avros are being used to trasnport CAPF personnel throughout the country. But arent CAPF personnel transported by rserved trains set aside for them ?Before the Panchayat elections, i have seen an entire company of CAPF personel being deployed by trains.

6.Will you pls provide some info on the various standoff PGM both powered and unpowered and add on wing kits currently in developement by ARDE besides Sudharsan ?

7.What will be the various seeker options of Sudharsan other than laser seeker and in how many different weight categories will it be available ?

If there is an IIR seeker version from where will the ir seeker be sourced ?

8.The electronic media has been harping and also Drdo DG has said Agni-5 can carry 3 warheads to intercontinental ranges. ARE THESE 3 WARHEADS MIRV,MARV? ARE they decoys and fake warheads to confuse enemy ABM defenses ?
How many warheads will the operational Agni-5 carry ?

9.Express news service has been reporting that a new line of ICBM codenmaed Agni-6 is now being developed.Currently Agni-6/Surya will be having a 6000 km range which will be gradually increased to 10000 km and it will also be able to carry 10 warheads.NOW, IT HAS ALREADY BEEN REPORTED THAT AGNI-5 WILL BE HAVING A FULL RANGE OF AROUND 7500 KM MAX. So, then why will Drdo be developing a 6000km range ICBM again IF AT ALL it is being developed OR AGNI-5 is having around 7000 km range ??

10.Is it possible for Drdo to start R&D on a new weapons project without GoI sanctions ?

11.What is the need for GTDS 8*8 Strykers ?Russian BTR-90 or the latest offspring of the BTR series can be acquired and co-produced as an APC with various customisations.The turret can be upgraded with Israeli Elbit El-ops TISAS and TSIK,Thales optronics sensors.Most of the on-board vectronics can be of Western origin as with BMP-2K. If El-Op is selected it will result in lesser spares inventory as many components will be common to both BMP-2 nad BMP-2K upgraded ones. The existing turret can be replaced with heavilhy modified Kkliver one having 30 mm Shipunov,30 mm AGL on a remote fire control station and 4 long to medium range ATGM which cane be a mix of Kornet-E and SAMHO. The base armour can be strengthened by adopting exotic high strength alloys and a greater percentage of composite armour.
OTHERWISE Mku industries composite armour panels can be applied to the entire exterior of BTR. Besides light weight 3rd gen ERA blocks can be added to either the above composite armour over base armour or directy to the base armour inlieu of the com panels.

When and where some portable heavy firepower can be required the BMP-3M modernised turret with the high velocity 100 mm gun can be installed on this BTR. Either the latest BTR can be adpoted by IA with the above mentioned customisations as an upgraded ALREADY DEVELOPED product or it can be jointly RE-MODIFIED INTO A MODULAR PLATFORM.

Whatever it is it will be much cheaper than Stryker 8X8 modular family of vehicles which in turn is absed on Piranha LAV.

12.Oskhsoh JLTV is nt a very good JLTV. It weighs a massive 7 tons.Plasan Sandcat and a ATV from Iveco are the best possible ones.Oskhsoh is currently in the race for the tender to replace HUMVEE of US Army.

Subir said...

13.In 2011 you have posted a beautiful well explained thread on Arjun mk2 variant and the various upgrades it will incorporate.Barring the IMI elements wont mk2 incorporate the rest of the mentioned upgrades like Kanchan mk2,multi-layered multi-functional fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) composite hull/turret sub-structures,co-cured composites integral armour (CIA), which comprises ceramic tiles and rubber sandwiched between two FRP composites layers and CVRDE AND IMI codevepoed NERA for protection from tandem warheads besides APS, and a multi threat warning system from Elbit syetems.

What is the status of SAAB LEDS-150 for the very first T-90S numbering 310.

Vikram Guha said...

Prasun Da ,

Is it true that the BRICS nation are coming up with a separate INTERNET network ?!

How viable do you think this is going to be ?


Bhaswar Kumar said...

Prasun Da,

Apologies if my post caused any inconvenience, I had forgotten to log in and was consequently unable to remove the double post.

@Lingaraj No I am not Subir or anyone else. If you have any issues with Subir, please take them up with him or Pasun Sir.

Subir said...

Hey Lingaraj if u have anything to say say to me.I dont think you will be having any prob with my questions. And i reckon you have also recently developed myopia very recently. Its great you are following in our Cabinet's footsteps.I am not being silent.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: The future all-wired-up soldier is only one component of F-INSAS. As for personal gear, MKU isn’t the only one in India & there are at least three other companies loike MKU that have similar capabilities. LSVs & MRAPs can be developed indigenously for the CAPFs, since the CAPFs’s do not have to encounter RPGs or IEDs made of hooked-up field artillery rounds. Have already detailed everything about Arjun Kk2 & Mk3 in threads earlier this year as well as last year.

To PIERRE ZORIN: India’s answer to Chobham is ‘Kanchan’. In terms of both rolled homogenous armour & composite laminate armour as well as ceramics-based composite armour, India has achieved all the required core technological competencies & is second to none. In fact, when compared to the likes of Challenger-2, M-1A2 Abrams, Leopard-2 & LeClerc, the Arjun is the only one among them all that has clocked the highest number kilometers logged in during mobility trials & this was because the Indian industrial entities took a very long time (15 years) indeed to reverse-engineer the hydropneumatic suspensions that the CVRDE had originally acquired from TEXTRON Systems of the US. That’s why I always have a great laugh whenever the ill-informed India-based jingos always refedr to most China-origin weapons as being reverse-engineered clones of Western/Russian origin. If only such folks knew how big a deal it is to even attempt reverse-engineering!!! In China, each of the major weapons manufacturing OEMs have wholly owned/fully funded R & D institutes & even universities for providing innovative solutions. In India’s case, however, the MoD through the DRDO & DPSUs has failed to evolve a comparable R & D mechanism. What each of the DPSUs needs to do is to establish & fully fund R & D institutes in niche areas whose main goal should be to develop practical innovations through applications-based R & D, while the DRDO & CSIR should set up dedicated & fully funded faculties within existing universities for conducting fundamental R & D. Only then will India be able to match China in terms of the overall quantum of R & D.

To DHRUV: Real estate is available, but transportation, power supply & sanitation infrastructure is sorely lacking throughout the country. Skilled manpower is available in plenty from the armed forces.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: Even for the Jaguar IS, there are more than 300 private-sector SMEs that are vendors for HAL. And no one is giving any leftovers, not even the US. Instead, the US is proposing the joint development of the kind of weapon systems, platforms & sensors that not only incorporate the latest technologies, but that can be used only for high-altitude mountain warfare, an area where even the US armed forces are never expected to get involved with. As for Project 75I, I have been hgearing for the past 3 years that the RFPs are in the final stages of release!!! And yesterday the IN’s VCNS said the same once again during the curtain-raiser ceremony for the NAMEX expo to be held in Kochi starting this weekend. The covert testing of an Israeli sub-kiloton-yield nuclear device in 1979 took place in South Africa in 1979, while there is no proof from any quarter about China having done so in 2005. This is 2013. The geo-strategic environment is never the same for different time-periods.

To UJJWAL: 1) Of course, most definitely so. 2) SLCMs like Babur, plus sub-launched C-802K ASCMs & French heavyweight torpedoes. 3) Not yet ordered, bit has been declared L-1 by the MoD. 4) As of now the Varunastra is considered unfit for usage. 5) Glide-wing kits are not required for helicopter-launched lightweight torpedoes. 6) Not yet. 7 & 8) I still stick to my original assertion about 155mm/52-cal Mounted Gun Systems like Caesar being far superior & versatile when compared to towed 155mm/52-cal howitzers. In 1999 more than 20 FH-77Bs were permanently lost they hurtled down deep gorges while being towed to areas north-east of Kargil. That’s why today there are only 380 FH-77Bs left out of the 410 ordered in the 1980s from Bofors AB. As for Project 75I, nothing else makes any sense but to go for the S-80 version of Scorpene. No self-respecting navy in the world operates two different types of SSKs developed by different OEMs, period. Why? Because it is cost-prohibitive to do so. India could do so for a brief period in the 19080s because the Soviets supplied the first 8 Type 877EKM SSKs at bargain-basement prices. But after the USSR’s demise, these SSKs became a liability & India became broke trying to logistically maintain them throughout the 1990s & their operational availability was less than 30% throughout that decade. Logically, therefore, the OEM (DCNS) that has already teamed up with MDL to make the six Scorpenes will automatically emerge as the L-1 bidder for supplying the six S-80s. This is because selection of a new SSK design will drive up overall indigenous construction costs to unsustainable levels & the time taken to master the learning curve for fabricating an all-new SSK design will be far longer.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To GESSLER: ‘Desi’ journalists always having a knack for failing to distinguish between ‘should’ ‘can’ & ‘will’ & that’s why they’re a confused lot. All that the DRDO’s FG had stated was that the DRDO CAN develop 10,000km-range ICBMs IF reqd. How that ‘can’ had morphed into ‘will’ is anyone’s guess. And here’s another piece of outright rubbish:

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.

To SUBIR: 1) The EME’s Base Workshops, as these are all drop-installations. 2) Already answered that yesterday. 3) Customised solution for India ONLY. 4) Yes. Marginal increase in AUW. 5) Trains are used only for pre-determined deployments during elections. There are several more contingency-based deployments (like riot-control & civilian pacification as in the case of Muzaffarnagar) as well asd deployments to/fro areas not accessible to railways. 7) Only laser-guided as of now. All ADRDE-developed gravity bombs will have LGB kits. 8) MIRVs, not decoys. 10) Never. 11) BTR-90 is fully developed & requires no further enhancement, while the version of Stryker being offered will be co-developed. New-generation ICVs will be heavy & weigh almost 55 tonnes & will therefore act more as destroyers of not MBTs, but ICVs & hardened emplacements containing dug-in hostile infantry—something which neither the BMP-2K nor the BMP-3 can ever hope to accomplish. BMP-3 is 1980s design & cannot be enhanced anymore. 12) JLTVs of tomorrow will have to be heavy if they wish to offer appreciable protection to their crew complement.

To VIKRAM GUHA: Haven’t heard about it.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

When we haven't even developed MIRVs then how can we say that Agni-5 can carry three of those armed with warheads? Even 10 such missiles would then deplete our arsenal of 60-80 warheads significantly?

Sir what in your opinion was the reason for the international observers stating that the yield of Shakti-1 was 35kt max. as opposed to the 45kt claim and the following controversy generated by a certain Indian scientist? In your opinion what is the truth?

If we can develop LAVs for the CAPFs then we can even try and develop RCWS. We may be ordering a foreign RCWS now for one specific platform or two but in the future they will become a varied staple on many platforms. A system akin to the vinghog one 360 protector should not be too difficult, no?

What exactly makes a normal infantry regiment a RPID regiment in the IA? What are its attributes?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: Had already explained above that the ‘desi’ journalists always having a knack for failing to distinguish between ‘should’ ‘can’ & ‘will’ & that’s why they’re a confused lot. In 1998 the thermonuclear device should have been tested in a standalone manner instead of conducting two simultaneous underground explosions. Had that been the case, definitive test-data would have been obtained. But that was not to be. However, the boosted-fission devices worked perfectly & In India’s case that will more than suffice for the future. OFB has already developed a simple RCWS for the MPVs. RAPID means mechanised infantry using the BMP-2s. They are attached to the Pivot Corps-level formations that after OP Parakram have been reconfigured by incorporating those independent armoured brigades that were previously used by Army HQ was reserves. Rest of the infantry are classified as ‘motorised’ that make use of trucks for mobility. In future they will have the 8 x 8 APCs.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

VMT for the replies.

So the device worked perfectly, I had gone through a report by one fellow named Sikka- on seismic activity in Northern India who mentioned the seismic readings from Pokhran-2 and stated that the tests were most likely a success and achieved the desired yield. But how can simultaneous tests pollute the data gathered by the CTBT station in Pakistan?

But that RCWS can be further refined- perhaps embedded sensors for 360 degree view- control and designation by touchscreens- acoustic sensors like boomerang. On this front at least we have time?

Sir isn't it high time that the OFB was disconnected from the Department of Defence Production under Ministry of Defence? Doesn't that serve as the start of the managerial issues?

Bhaswar Kumar said...

So only the boosted fission device worked? Not the actual thermonuclear one (shakti-1)?

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Sir the only boosted-fission device tested that day was Shakti-3 with a yield of just 0.3 KT which was designed to use non-weapons grade plutonium. How can that be termed as validating the design?

There seems to be a rat here.

Which design is preferable, the thermonuclear or the boosted fission? I believe that the US primarily uses the latter now?

Which form of boosted fission is being dealt with here- the form which refers to the "single-stage nuclear bomb that uses thermonuclear fusion on a large scale to create fast neutrons that can cause fission in depleted uranium, but which is not a two-stage hydrogen bomb. This type of bomb was referred to by Edward Teller as "Alarm Clock", and by Andrei Sakharov as "Sloika" or "Layer Cake"" OR the "A boosted fission weapon usually refers to a type of nuclear bomb that uses a small amount of fusion fuel to increase the rate, and thus yield, of a fission reaction. The neutrons released by the fusion reactions add to the neutrons released in the fission, as well as inducing the fission reactions to release more neutrons of their own. The rate of fission is increased so much that much more of the fissile material is able to undergo fission before the core explosively disassembles. The fusion process itself adds only a small amount of energy to the process, perhaps 1%"?

Iceman said...

1.Regarding Indian Army plans to replace Gypsys in which Mahindra and TATA fielded their vehicles.will it be JLTV? it true that Indian navy's project 75i in which 2 will be built in OEM yard and 2 in mdl and 2 in other private shipyard?
3.regarding javelin deal US has already developed cooled sensor for javelin missile then why it is offering co-development for javelin missile?
4.which engine will power RUSTOM-2 UAV?
5.What is the exact range of brahmos missile?some reports say it has a range of 500km?
6.regarding FICV project does indian army plans to import the ICV's?
7.regarding mahindra MRAP did indian army ordered any of it?

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. 1. It was reported that for P75I, 2 will be made at OEM shipyard, 3 at MDL and 1 at HSL.If manufacturing of a single SSK at HSL make any sense? 2. If BEL-WLR is in production or not ordered by IA? How can it perform in comparison to AN/TPQ-37 which is already in service? 3. Is CISMOA and LSA is necessary and good for India? If they can influence military and foreign policies of India as reported by Indian press? 4. Could Nirbhay-SL be integrated in P-75I SSKs? Is there any such plan? 5. According to you, who is the best defence minister of India since independence? Thanks, with regards.....UJJWAL

rad said...

Hi Pasun
You have said earlier that the quing class sub with aip would be superior to the scorpenes, could
you please explain.
Why is that the future submarine costs more than 1 billion$!!

AKHIL SURI said...

Hi Prasun ,

In the GITA was there a timeline provided for the start and end of Kalyug ? I understand that Kalyug started before the Mahabharat but when does it end ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: ‘Very likely’ is not the same as ‘definitely’. That’s why there is need to further test the thermonuclear devices. The only confirmed-beyond-doubt data that was obtained in May 1998 was that from the boosted-fission devices. MIRVs with boosted-fission devices can create the same amount of damage on a particular target as a thermonuclear device. RCWS technology has advanced far beyond the rudimentary device developed by OFB. The demand for RCWS has been outstanding since late 1999.

To ICEMAN:1 ) The IA’s & IAF’s Gypsies are presently used as LSVs for perimeter protection & can easily be replaced by local offers from TATA or Mahindra or Ashok Leyland. However, when it comes to operating inside hostile territory, the reqmt is for heavier JLTV-type vehicles. 2) That formula is for the LPHs, not P-75I SSKs. 3) Co-development of thermobaric & blast-fragmentation warheads optimised for high-altitude mountain warfare. There will be no co-development of guidance optronics. 4) Locally-developed versions of Rotax engines. 5) BrahMos-1 Blocks1/2 have 290km-range while BrahMos-1 Block-3 has 550km-range. 6) No. The plan still remains co-development of FICV with international industrial participation. 7) No.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To UJJWAL: 1) That’s the LPH, not P-75I SSK. For the latter, MDL will be prime industrial contractor while Pipavav will be the sub-contractor. In fact, Pipavav is already doing all the steel-bending work for MDL for the P-75 Scorpenes. 2) No firm orders have been placed because the TEL issue has not yet been resolved. Both the ‘Swathi WLR & TPQ-37 have comparable performance parameters. However, none of them are of any use for mountain warfare. 3) CISMOA is not immediately reqd, but LSA is of vital importance as it will not only create tens of lakhs of new jobs, but it will also allow the country’s private-sector & even some public-sector shipyards to acquire valuable manufacturing skills & also bring in plenty of foreign revenue. For instance, the PLA Navy’s task force on anti-piracy operating in the Horn of Africa can easily go to Kochi for replenishment of fuel & perishable commodities whenever these are reqd. After all, these warships will be in Kochi not for more than eight hours & will be off again once the supplies have been loaded. There are thus no security risks involved & Kochi instead will stand to benefit financially for providing such logistics support services. 4) No. Nirbhay SLCM will be vertically-launched & therefore will not be able to be fired from any existing SSK. 5) Jaswant Singh.

To RAD: AIP-equipped SSKs can cruise almost noiselessly at appreciable speeds in the high seas. SSKs not equipped with AIP on the other hand have to hug the coastlines in order to stay in shallow waters so that their chances of detection remain low. If the S-80 version of the Scorpene SSK is chosen for P-75I, then the acquisition & life-cycle costs of both the six Scorpenes & their six S-80 versions will be considerably lower. Will be heading for Kochi for the MoD-/CII-organised NAM expo ( & more updated info on naval matters will emerge from there.

To AKHIL SURI: I honestly don't have a clue about that.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

VMT for the replies sir,

BUT how will we test another thermonuclear device? Its not possible anymore, is it? Do you see it happening in the future?

Sir why would we co-develop ICV if we are to procure the Stryker IAV? Is there some difference as such in their roles? Or is the IAV the battle taxi so to say while the ICV (co-developed) a replacement or contemporary of the BMP?

When will we see the complete F-INSAS?

Has the battle field management system TCS been made operational- if not then when shall that happen?

Sir will the composite modular armor of the Mk.2 resemble what we see on the Leopard-2 tanks? If so, since you have stated that we are second to none in that category of armor- it shall be completely indigenous? When shall we see the Mk.2 being tested?

Why has the govt released the report on Gen. VK Singh now? What is the truth in that fiasco?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: Whether to test or not depends very much on how the future unfolds & no one can predict with certainty about such matters. The version of Stryker being offered for customisation & co-production will be a pure APC & will at most have only a RCWS. Existing BMP-2s, given their low silhouette & incorporation of a turret, have severe limitations in terms of internal troop-carrying capacity & therefore they are essentially design compromises since they have to act as both ICVs & APCs. The IA wants to overcome such deficiencies by acquiring dedicated heavyweight ICVs & dedicated APCs. The next-generation FICV will therefore be a lot heavier, perhaps even more than 50 tonnes & require a 1,000hp engine, but will be more agile due to integral hybrid electric drive-based powerpack. That’s why all the lighter FICV designs proposed by TATA or Mahindra or Rosoboronexport (BMP-3) have been rejected. In future battlefields, MBTs will have to be accompanied by both heavy tracked ICVs & wheeled APCs. That’s why even Russia has stopped using its BMP-3s with its MBTs & has instead adopted the BMP-T terminator as its heavyweight ICV.
Complete F-INSAS won’t emerge till 2016. TCS has not even been selected, let alone ordered. Various add-on AMAP designs are still being evaluated for Arjun Mk2 MBT. The IA’s internal report was LEAKED to the INDIAN EXPRESS by the Govt of India. It was never released. Obviously it is part of a smear campaign.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

VMT for the replies-

But the IA keeps screaming about how the weight of the Arjun is an issue yet they are willing to accept a 20 ton FICV?

So how many Mk1As will be ordered next year? Can one say anything about that with any surety?

Why are they smearing his name though, to what benefit- he's retired and at best going to sit in BJP's rallies?

Sir is Pipavav able to meet the QC/QR of the hull portions its making for the scorpene?

and what of the BMS?

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. 1. You have stated that Pipavav will be subcontractor of MDL for P-75I project. But, it was reported few months back that L&T will be subcontractor of MDL for submarine solutions( as it has experience of building nuclear power submarine hulls at Hazira facility & new specialised shipyard at Katupally) where as Pipavav will be subcontractor for surface combatants. Please clarify. 2. If Babur SLCM in Quing class SSK would be very effective considering its long range? What might be IN's answer to such a combination? 3. What is the possible time of induction of HJT-36 ? 4. Is IA's COLD START doctrine exists? 5. Mahindra developed AXE vehicle few years back. Could it be utilised as JTLV? 6. Is there any firefinder radar applicable for mountain warfare? 7. Civil aviation is constantly increasing at Baghdogra. IA is trying to set up a new airbase at Dooars. Would it be rational to shift all military aviation installation to new dedicated military airport and leave Baghdogra for sole civil aviation? 8. Is India now self reliant for all kinds of artillery and tank ammunition? If no, which articles are being imported and from which vendor? 9. What is the current status of OFB-Nalanda? Thanks, with regards.......... UJJWAL

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: All such screaming stopped in 2007 itself & no one from the IA is complaining anymore. FICV will weigh close to 50 tonnes, not 20 tonnes. How many Arjun Mk1As will be ordered next year depends on how much money is made available for the capital account of next year’s defence budget. Vindictive politics are being practiced by the UPA against Gen (ret’d) V K Singh. Of course Pipavav has pre-qualified & with authorisation from DCNS. No one said Pipavav is building hull-sections of Scorpene. Pipavav is doing only steel-bending.

To UJJWAL: 1) Totally wrong. MDL & Pipavav have already inked a JV agreement. L & T is a competitor against MDL. 2) Answer is simple: S-2 Arihant/S-3/S-4 submarines should be armed with VL-Nirbhay. 3) Only God knows. 4) Absolutely not. 5) Absolutely not. 6) Absolutely not. 7) Absolutely rational. Air bases should never have to share space with civilian airports. 8) No way. 9) Still in limbo.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

But sir you had stated that around 400-500 Arjuns will finally be procured?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

How many Arjun Mk1As will eventually be procured is not the same as how many Arjun Mk1As will be ordered next year. They are two totally different issues.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Vmt for the replies sir,

So the number pertaining to final acquisition itself still stands at 400-500?

Sir AMAP is a product name of a whole family of composite armor modules developed by IBD- so when you say that various AMAP modules are being tested do you mean India modules which are like AMAP or he actual German AMAP?

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Furthermore sir the AMAP modules are based on advanced aluminium-titanium alloys and nano-composites, it is more advanced than the rolled homogeneous armor. It is also much lighter as such and that is why it can be used in such a varied manner. So how can India do the same?

Anonymous said...

VMT, Prasunda. 1. If the 120 mm 52cal rifled gun of Arjun is sufficient for current scenario? Though rifled guns have higher accuracy ,the smoothbore guns have higher penetrative capability. 2. It was earlier reported that Rhienmetall 120mm 55caliber smoothbore gun was tested in Arjun MBT. Is there any plan to replace the current rifled gun with smoothbore gun? 3. How Arjun 120mm gun can perform in comparison to Rheinmetall 120mm 55cal gun? 4. Was SpyDer SAM system from Rafael delivered ti Indian Army? 5. Which 7.62mm Sniper Rifle would be the ideal replacement for Dragunov SVD of IA? 6. How much progress occured in development of HAL LOH oroject? Thanks, with regards.........UJJWAL

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Sir what will be the fall-out generated by this smear campaign? How badly will this affect the army? How badly will it compromise us? What can be done by the next government to mitigate the issue?

financeblogger said...

In the above article,there is mention of mig and sukhoi aircraft performing take-off and landings on INS Vikramditya during day and night.
Are you aware which sukhoi aircraft is being referred to?

sachin_sathe said... Interesting developments being mentioned in the above link. Your thoughts? Particularly the pg kit, CLGM and other smaller developements?

The pg kit looks like inspiration came from JDAM type unit & can it be future-proofed for use on FGFA if possible?


Bhaswar Kumar said...

Sir the FOG based inertial guidance unit is completely Indian, indigenous?

Your page on the Indian MEMS advancement is unavailable and the link you had provided does not work.

Could you explain a certain technicality- How does a munition like the Taurus KEPD achieve terminal guidance, same for Nirbhay LRCM?

Also a laser guided bomb would need a designation pod- at what ranges can these pods spot ground installations/ vehicles etc.?

An IR seeker on a PGM can be programmed to recognize certain class of targets, yes? Can the same be done for laser guided bombs, if so how?

How will a LBG-NG developed by DRDO work? Can a laser designation pod illuminate targets at ranges beyond 60km, and if so won't continuous lasing be required making it less than a fire-forget munition?

How far have we come along with active seekers? What sort of terminal guidance will the air-launched Brahmos and Nirbhay have?

Vikram Guha said...

Prasun Da ,

In this article on Russia & India Report( link below) the author talks about multi billion defense deals that Manmohan Singh will sign when he visits Moscow next month

Can you please tell me which multi billion defense deals are expected to be signed with Russia ?


Anonymous said...

Dear Sir, ... 146276.ece

how is this kind of cyber hacking onto satellites done ? can this technique be extended to defense installations ? -- muttu

Anonymous said...

meant the above url -- muttu

accidental loser said...

Prasun sir,
I would love to get some opinions on recent bullshiting of the INDIAN EXPRESS. Actually going deep it clearly outlines as an malicious attempt of the PMO who mysteriously kept this matter in deep freezer for 6 months & suddenly after gen V.K. Singh's platform sharing with Sri Narendra Modiji leaked it to a private newspaper. Why no investigation by any criminal investigation agencies conducted!!!! Not even the army who' said of lodging such complaint with the PMO did established a court of inquiry on this. Speaking of off-air interceptors, I can't see a godamn way these cellular interceptors could be used in tapping the defence ministry landlines!!!! Can you say one!!!
And so is the matter of toppling the National Conference-cong alliance. Anybody in his perfect mind would have approached congress 1st & the major opposition pdp or bjp secondly. It makes no sense whatsoever in approaching an independent mla with no political backing to topple a govt even if the governor is in their side. So apparently a sensible army chief wouldn't do that in his best senses
Also one PMO guy was quoted of saying evidences been destroyed by culprits. How can he say that when no criminal investigations were done in this case.
Above all the timing of such an allegation being made public is really a case to look at. What do you say sir ??!!!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: AMAP-type modular armour panels made of ceramics-based composites armour. Any smear campaign mounted against the IA by these arse-fucked politicians won’t destabilise the IA, but it will definitely postpone by several more years the creation of a tri-services special operations command. This is because the TSD was created specifically for conducting tactical SIGINT/ELINT across the LoC & for facilitating the conduct of cross-LoC covert special operations in ways that were sought by the IA since 1986 when the IA’s field intelligence units were not allowed to function beyond 10km from India’s borders (and this in turn severely compromised the IPKF’s OP Pawan in northern Sri Lanka with resulted in heavy casualties for the IA). After OP Vijay this limit was extended to 50km but in today’s scenario even that is insufficient, but agencies like NTRO & R & AW are staunchly opposed to the IA’s Military Intelligence Directorate expanding its physically footprint deep beyond India’s borders (up to a depth of some 300km). Consequently, the IA has had to rely on latest advances in SIGINT/ELINT technologies for information-gathering without violating the restrictions imposed by the Govt of India. But now, thanks to these selective leaks about the TSD made by some treasonous elements within the Govt of India to the INDIAN EXPRESS, and this newspaper now revealing the leaked data in a selective & ill-informed manner without contextualising the data, these treasonous elements appear to be hell-bent on compromising & degrading India’s covert operations/warfare capacities.
All data & photos on MEMS, MINGS, FINGS etc are available on the thread on Prahaar that was uploaded in September 2012 & again in January 2013. The Nirbhay’s thread contains all other info. LGBs can also be guided by man-portable ground-based & hand-held laser target designators.

To UJJWAL: 1) It is not yet 52-cal, but it still is sufficient to counter existing threats. 2) It was never tested. But the Arjun Mk2 FMBT will have a 120mm smoothbore cannon. 3) Rheimetall’s 55-cal 120mm smoothbore is superior to Arjun Mk1A’s 120mm rifled-bore cannon. 4) Yes. 5) The ones from Israel, Switzerland or the US. 6) Fabrication of the first prototype is now in progress.

To FINANCEBLOGGER: Only MiG-29Ks, nothing else.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SACHIN SATHE: The PG kits are almost identical to those already developed by China (see the posters above) & it seems the DRDO has adopted the same path as that adopted by China’s OEMs when it comes to development of GPS-guided small diameter bombs, GPS-/laser-guided tactical PGMs & anti-runway sub-munitions dispensers.

To VIKRAM GUHA: One is the operationalisation of the FGFA’s prototype construction effort & the other is the procurement of 276 T-90AM MBTs.

To ACCIDENTAL LOSER: Any smear campaign mounted against the IA by these arse-fucked politicians won’t destabilise the IA, but it will definitely postpone by several more years the creation of a tri-services special operations command. This is because the TSD was created specifically for conducting tactical SIGINT/ELINT across the LoC & for facilitating the conduct of cross-LoC covert special operations in ways that were sought by the IA since 1986 when the IA’s field intelligence units were not allowed to function beyond 10km from India’s borders (and this in turn severely compromised the IPKF’s OP Pawan in northern Sri Lanka with resulted in heavy casualties for the IA). After OP Vijay this limit was extended to 50km but in today’s scenario even that is insufficient, but agencies like NTRO & R & AW are staunchly opposed to the IA’s Military Intelligence Directorate expanding its physically footprint deep beyond India’s borders (up to a depth of some 300km). Consequently, the IA has had to rely on latest advances in SIGINT/ELINT technologies for information-gathering without violating the restrictions imposed by the Govt of India. But now, thanks to these selective leaks about the TSD made by some treasonous elements within the Govt of India to the INDIAN EXPRESS, and this newspaper now revealing the leaked data in a selective & ill-informed manner without contextualising the data, these treasonous elements appear to be hell-bent on compromising & degrading India’s covert operations/warfare capacities.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

The military intelligence unit set up by former army chief General V K Singh was involved in sensitive covert operations in Pakistan and was even on the trail of 26/11 mastermind and Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Saeed. “Our main task was to combat the rising trend of state-sponsored terrorism by the ISI and we had developed contacts across the Line of Control in a bid to infiltrate Hafiz Saeed’s inner circle,” an official who served with the controversial Technical Services Division (TSD) said. The spook unit was set up after the 26/11 Mumbai attacks on a defence ministry directive asking for the creation of covert capability. Army documents reveal the senior-most officers signed off on the formation of this unit. File No A/106/TSD and 71018/ MI give details of approvals by the Director General Military Intelligence, vice-chief and chief of army staff. The TSD—disbanded after allegations that it spied on defence ministry officials through off-the-air interceptors—was raised as a strategic force multiplier for preparing, planning and executing special operations “inside depth areas of countries of interest and countering enemy efforts within the country by effective covert means”. However, covert ops were the unit’s essential mandate and deniability was built into it and it reads, “The proposed organization (TSD) will enable the military intelligence directorate to provide a quick response to any act of state-sponsored terrorism with a high degree of deniability.” Its task was to carry out special missions and “cover any tracks leading to the organisation”. Though I K Gujral formally shut down covert operations when he was PM in 1997, the TSD carried out several such operations within and outside the country—such as Op Rehbar 1, 2 and 3 (in Kashmir), Op Seven Sisters (Northeast) and Op Deep Strike (Pakistan).

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Is there anyway that such damage to the IA's ELINT capacity can be mitigated, what shall be a BJP led government's stand on this issue?

Sir what is a FOG based IMU exactly (shown in the techfocus pdf)? The same as MEMS based mid-course guidance unit?

So in 3-4 years we will see a whole slew of tactical and glide/powered PGMs? Along with the Nirbhay ALCM?

What happened to the advanced supersonic ALCM- the one with the longer range than Brahmos ALCM?

How can the Brahmos variants have a range of 500km when the MTCR is still operating?

Subir said...

Sir, VMT.

1.Does the LGB kits developed by ARDRE having any glide wing components ?? IF NOT Is the ARDE developing any glide range extended type kits for the existing inventory of dumb bombs of all weight classes in IAF ?

2.Chinese have developed glide wing kits,gps guided tail kits and also in addition to them terminal seekers for almost all of its dumb bomb inventory. All of the new AG ordnance they are developing have standoff ranges and are guided. Almost all of the air dropped bombs displayed at the Zhuhai airshow 2013 had such kits. Gradually PLAAF is shifting towards standoff precision engagement capabilties.But on the other hand IAF still uses those dumb iron bombs produced by OFB and engages ground targets from non standoff near point blank ranges. What had prevented Drdo or/OFB from developing such add on glide wing kits for these dumb bombs for so long ?? Its not rocket science.
A dumb bomb with add on glide wings and a tail kit like JDAM also doesnt costs much but adds new dimensions to strike capabilities.
IAF could also have directed ARDRE to develope wing kits for Griffin 3 LGB and other LGB in its inventory for extending their range to atleast 30 km.When E-SHORADS are having 25-30 km range it doesnt make any sense to drop ordance from 8-12 km away. TAINGE 250 kg glide bomb with 80 km range type tactical PGM can be developed very easily. Its not rocket science or as complesx as desiging MIRV or a exo atmospheric interceptor.

3.Is there any TIANLEI 500 kg dispenser weapons type tactical PGM in IAF inventory ?? Isnt ARDRE developing one ?Its very much like IAI MSOW.

4.You said various add-on AMAP designs are currently being evaluated for Arjun mk2? THEN WHAT ABOUT THESE -.I Kanchan mk2,multi-layered multi-functional fibre-reinforced polymer (FRP) composite hull/turret sub-structures,co-cured composites integral armour (CIA), which comprises ceramic tiles and rubber sandwiched between two FRP composites layers and CVRDE AND IMI codevepoed NERA for protection from tandem warheads besides APS which you had discussed in great detail in ""

5.If one goes by the contents of that thread then Arjun mk2 complete protection package ought to have been developed and tested by one since R&D on them began a long time ago.

6.What actually is TSIK ? Is it survellience and target track and engagement sensors comprising of TI ?Is it comm elements ??

7.The editors of INDIAN EXPRESS who are behind this entire VK-Singh,TSD episode needs to be arse fucked repeatedly until they come back to their senses. The GOI needs a major overhaul. The Congress led GOI have proved time and time again in a consistent manner that the greatest threat to India's interests and sovereignty are not Pakistan or China or any xyz country or terrorist faction but they and they themselves.

8.If TSD is disbanded who is then respobnsible for tactical SIGINT/ELINT and clandestine ops behind enemy lines and active counter-espionage ops within India ? Isnt there any way this unit cab be made actrive once again. It was very pleasing to know that we too have SAD type units for protection of our national interests.

9.Arent there any other other such TSD units which have taken the place and shouldered the responsibilties of TSD and which is completey off the reservation and a black unit.We need more of these units in the field. Why isnt Hafiz Saeed being brought to justice ? A surgical air strike should be authorised on Hafiz Saeed. He and his inner circle needs to be blown to oblivion.

Subir said...

10.Why cant IA HQ take stern measures against Indian express and other electronic media for leaking data pertaining to national security measures ?Now that the data have been leaked what will happen to the under cover operatives who have penetrated many significant Pak spnosored terrorist organisations and those who have made considerable advances towards their objectives. Now with Indian Express's antics all those efforts have gone to waste. Indian Express needs to be named Pakistan express.

11.Arent there any Israeli , foreign origin SIGINT/ELINT sensors deployed all along LoC to keep a hawk' eye on each ane every of their movements and intercept all their communications ?

12.Was there any significat measurable progress on selecting a LSV for replacing Maruti Gypsies and Mahindra jeeps for IA?
isnt there a special LSV armed with machine guns and ATGM developed from Maruti Gypsy for IA spec forces ?

Anonymous said...

Shekhar Gupta's Indian Express leaking these sensitive information of country. Everybody knows who does Shekhar Gupta aligned with. Everybody knows who does he support.

Does India's Media: HT, ToI, IE, NDTV, Times Now, Today Online, CNN-IBN have any credibility? They are very partial, support only the ruling party, support only Gandhi family and publicize news that only suited to them. Where does this end?

rad said...

HI Prasun
can you explain how hte qing class subs a re better than the scorpene?

Pierre Zorin said...

Subir, "The editors of INDIAN EXPRESS who are behind this entire VK-Singh,TSD episode needs to be arse fucked repeatedly until they come back to their senses". How do you know they aren't right now and the ecstasy is making them transcend the real world and slip into that fantasy one?

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Sir what sort of accuracy will the PG kit impart in terms of CEP? The Sudharshan LGB's CEP leaves much to be desired.

The radar altimeter on the Nirbhay means that it will have TERCOM, yes? But what of Digital scene mapping are correlator function? Any chance we will see such features come up?

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. You have recommended S-80 class submarine for P-75I project repeatedly. But, S-80 class submarine , those are being built by Navantia for Spanish Armada, are suffering from severe design flaws. It was reported that there are weight imbalance, it can dive once but would not float back to surface. Moreover, the fuel cell based AIP system become severely underpower, it can remain underwater for 7days only in contrast to designed duration of 18days. Now, Navantia seeks consultation from General Dynamics Electric Boat to rectify the issues. Navantia with DCNS jointly proposed Scorpene design for export. But later Navantia quit and choosed S-80 dessign with Lockheed Martin for Spanish Navy. DCNS, now offers Marlin class submarine for export which is 100% french in design. Should IN go for Marlin class as a follow on order rather than S-80 class? Please clarify. Thanks, with regards.......UJJWAL.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Read this:

Pintu said...

Prasun Da, is it media mismanagement or did the Chinese correspondent mess everything up, or again our media did cook up a story ?

Vikram Guha said...

Prasun Da ,

Northrop recently released this book about the B2 bomber . You can download it from here ( free) in case you haven't read it :


Gessler said...

Sir what is the matter with this title? "China's Tactical PGMs & Unguided Bombs Used by Indian Air Force & Indian Navy" ??

It doesn't make sense, it seems as a list of Chinese bombs used by Indian military!!

Please edit the title!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: The damage has already been caused & time does not wait for anyone to play catch-up. Any BJP-led govt’s stand will be no better since so far no one from that party has even condemned the revelation of such data. In fact, the NDA govt of the previous decade did not even bother to authorise such covert special operations. And there is no reason to believe that any BJP-led govt will in future take the necessary corrective steps, since all their RSS-inspired talk of nationalism is not exactly patriotism, but pure & unadulterated zenophobic nationalism. FOG = fibre-optic gyro. After another 6 years, not 3 or 4 years. Supersonic MRCM is still in the R & D stage & has not yet been test-fired. MTCR is a regime & not a UN-mandated international treaty & its regime-members define or re-define the regime’s guidelines as it suits them. Thus, the US is perfectly free to export T-LAMs to the UK. 3-metre to 5-metre accuracy will be achieved with PG kits. Sudarshan LGB has similar CEP. Thread on Nirbhay contains all data on its on-board avionics & sensors.

To SUBIR: 1) Glide-wing kits are also being developed. This was confirmed as far back as 2004 by ADRDE. 2) Work on developing such kits began both in China & India at the same time last decade but China has succeeded in producing them much faster. 3) No, none. The ADE-developed 300km-range anti-airfield weapon will resemble the airborne dispenser but will be turbofan-powered to attain a range of 300km. 4) All these types of composites are used for various applications & not just for AMAP-type add-on structures. Kanchan is not composites-based. NERA is now obsolete since APS is much lighter & more effective. 5) R & D for Arjun Mk2’s powerpack & vectronics will take more than a decade to be completed, i.e. by 2017. 6) TSIK’s poster explains it all. 8) In peacetime it is the NTRO & IB. TSD can be re-activated any time. 9) Hafiz Saeed is just a poster-boy with a puppy-dog face who is used only for belching out provocative gate-speeches. He has neither the ‘brains’ nor the ‘brawns’. It is the ‘desi’ media that has made him into a larger-than-life figure. 10) How can the IA do that when it is the Govt of India itself that has deliberately leaked all info pertaining to the TSD??? 11) Yes, but these are many a time ineffective due to the bad weather conditions. 12) No progress has been made so far.

To RAD: AIP-equipped SSKs can cruise almost noiselessly at appreciable speeds in the high seas. SSKs not equipped with AIP on the other hand have to hug the coastlines in order to stay in shallow waters so that their chances of detection remain low. If the S-80 version of the Scorpene SSK is chosen for P-75I, then the acquisition & life-cycle costs of both the six Scorpenes & their six S-80 versions will be considerably lower. Will be heading for Kochi for the MoD-/CII-organised NAM expo ( & more updated info on naval matters will emerge from there.

To UJJWAL: Those design flaws were discovered a few years ago & rectified. The flaws involved calculations, & not structural integrity flaws. The S-80’s AIP system uses ethanol, which the IN does not want & wants it replaced by Stirling Engine. DCNS is still the co-owner of the S-80’s IPR minus the ethanol-based AIP module. Marlin is much smaller in size than the S-80. The S-80 is known by DCNS as the SMX-21.

To PINTU: It is a non-story & there was no mess-up by CCTV. Xinhua’s correspondents & photographers were there at Cochin on that day & took several photos of the event.

To VIKRAM GUHA: VMT. However, I doubt if such literature will throw any light on the B-2’s drag-reduction design features & the bomber’s maximum cruise speed.

Bhaswar Kumar said...

Sir, the Sudharshan LGB is said to have a CEP of 10 meters not 3-5 meters? In fact the DRDO is supposed to increase the accuracy for the IAF before the IAF accepts the weapon?

Why would it take so long, if the guidance kit is ready then it should take no more than 2-3 years to validate such a weapon?

Sir I did read the material in the Nirbhay thread, there was no mention of digital scene mapping area correlation function there, ergo my question. Is it a feature planned for the future?

When will this 300km ranged weapon developed by the ADE surface?

How can simple glide-wings take a decade to design when countries have designed whole jet fighters in that time frame?

Will re-starting the TSD cover some of the damage?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: Sudarshan LGB NEVER had a 10-metre CEP. Photo of this LGB seen approachibg its target during its initial flight-trials that I had uploaded last January clearly show the CEP to be 3 metres. DSMAC is not the technique used by Nirbhay. Comments on that thread clearly explain it all. The AAW will surface by 2016 & will enter service in the following decade. Simple systems take more than a decade to mature. The Nishant UAV, for instance, was sought since 1989, but deliveries began in only 2009. That’s how matters shape up in India.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Saab, the Swedish defence major has bagged two orders from Hindustan Aeronautic Limited (HAL), worth $33 million. It is for the serial production of integrated electronic warfare self-protection systems for the Indian Army’s and Air Force’s Advanced Light Helicopter. Deliveries are scheduled to commence in 2014. Development and production of the Saab’s Integrated Defensive Aids Suite (IDAD) will take place at Saab in Centurion, South Africa (formerly AVITRONICS). The IDAS protects crew and aircraft. It enhances the survivability in diverse and dense environments. The system provides a timely warning against different types of threats including, radar, laser and missile by automatically deploys appropriate counter measures. These orders follow initial production orders received in 2008 and further established Saab as a local partner to the Indian industry and provider of high tech products and systems to the Indian Armed Forces. The system has a proven capability on many airborne platforms, including Boeing CH-47 Chinook, Sukhoi Su-30MKM, Eurocopter etc. Deliveries are ongoing for HAL’s Advanced Light Helicopter. “The fact that HAL and Armed Forces continue to order IDAS shows the effectiveness and reliability of the solution”, said Lars-Olof Lindgren, Head of Market Area, Saab India.

This is final confirmation of the fact that the RWR, LWR & MAWS sensors are all being supplied by SAAB for the Rudra helicopter-gunship & will also go on board the LCH. Consequently, the DARE-developed Tarang/R118 RWR has for all intents & purposes been rejected by both the IAF & IA due to sub-optimal performance.

Bhaswar said...

Sir if simple systems like the LWR and RWR are sub-optimal then what is to prevent other systems from SAR seekers, to the Ashwin radar to anything else- Laser seekers of PGMs from being sub-optimal in performance? How does one gauge then where we have been successful and where we have failed?

financeblogger said...

In the above article, following points have been mentioned

1) W.R.T AESA radar, composite panels being hand assembled product. Also the receipt/transmit module on the AESA radar being produced on a limited scale, making it cost prohibitive.
2) Engine to subsequently power T-50 still on paper only.
3)Low observable design of T-50 questioned.
4) Sources in the Indian MOD state that it is cost prohibitive to afford both T-50 and Rafale. If it comes to either or situation, Rafale would be selected.

Request you to clarify on the above four points.

Pintu said...

Many Thanks, Prasun Da, it is very Pathetic as well as shameful to see that in general quality of journalism has eroded so far to the bottom of the drain , in our country, which is evident from the recent happenings. Even local news reporting in provincial languages are simply nightmarish, an example :

The Journalist of this widely circulated Bengali Daily is claiming that India is having the capacity to attack with Agni-V from Mirage 2000 & Su-30 or INS Arihant !!! and in the most cases this type of reporting of national events are being swallowed in by common public.

An unpardonable offence from the Part of media,i.e. misinforming and misguiding the common people, thus failing in its duty.

Prasun Da, can't it be rectified, or is any way out there ? the days are passing, more of this tendency is becoming natural, Is the gullible mindset simply becoming apparent in the common type of journalism in India as a whole, where only miniscule of people like you are doing yeoman's service to provide us with the truth.

Is it time to act from the Government or people rather waiting for 'change of mindset' which will hardly happen in near or distant future ?

Kindly share your views , thanks in advance.

Anonymous said...


Could you please throw some light that how China's bombs are being used by IAF and Indian Navy?

Lingaraj said...

Hee hee hee Gessler is the Anonymous 10:50 I guess trying to seek an answer from PKS's title of this thread! Or a revision of the title and seeing there was no response....

Lingaraj said...

sorry meant Anon 11:50

Raj said...

which 155mm x 52 calibre towed guns are under trial ?

Gessler said...


No, buddy, that wasn't me at 10:50.

Deep Throat said...

Defence Minister AK Antony was once upon a time known as Mr Clean. How clean? Read all about how he and his wife are screwing the taxpayer.

Iceman said...

1.Regarding Indian army APC deal,will there be any follow on orders after the initial 100 units?
2.does Indian army has a requirement for tracked APC? it true that shellbursting happened in OFB 155mm 45 cal gun?
4.are there any effots to increase the range of pinaka rockets to 200km?
5.if p75I tender was floated in november this year will indian navy be able to seal the deal in 2015? it true that arihant submarine lacks stealth features?
7.has any progress made in army's air defence gun deal?since rheinmetall is blacklisted which gun appears to be the frontrunner? it true that lch's FLIR pod made in colloboration with israel? you have any idea when the ARM will be tested?

Anonymous said...

VMT,Prasunda. It was reported that CBI is going to close the case against DENEL due to lack of evidence. It might be followed to several other companies also.MoD so far handled the charges of bribes and blacklisted several companies very irrationally. There is cut throat competition in international arms bazaar & almost all of the vendor try to secure contracts by any means. India have to face it without compromising her own military preparedness. But, MoD specially St Antony blacklists companies randomly depending upon even news reports, anonymous letters etc. So PATHETIC! The bofors ghost not only toppled GoI but also pushed defence preparedness of India by many years. Maj Gen Mrinal Suman has published an article in IDR regarding rational defence procurement policy and handling of such situations.I think its a good job. What do you say? Please elaborate your own version of ideal DPP. Thanks, with regards.....UJJWAL

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: That is the question that even the DRDO can’t answer. QA/QC levels are not consistent even when it comes to strategic weapons like ballistic missiles & cruise missiles. The same problem exists within the various OFB production centres as well as MoD-owned DPSUs. And these problems emerge either during firing trials of prototypes or during routine firing trials when weapons are selected at random from existing stockpiles.

To FINANCEBLOGGER: All composite panels are built with successive layers of raisins that are glued together MANUALLY (all over the world, even in the US & Japan) before being sent to the autoclaves for co-curing. As for cost concerns, today in 2013 only low-rate initial production is taking place. By 2016, series-production efficiencies will become visible. The development of AL-41F turbofan is proceeding, but by now its prototypes should have been made available & their absence can well be problematic. It remains to be seen how exactly the AL-41F will compare with its Western peers in terms of performance parameters & life-cycle costs. It is still premature to judge either the FGFA’s or Rafale’s low-observability characteristics, since active cancellation techniques are still under development in both Russia & France & will be available before this decade ends.

To PINTU: What else is there to share….for, you have already shown very clearly what the professional lapses are.

To Anon@11.50AM: Eyes you have & yet you do not see the punctuation mark on the headline that shows the distinction since last night.

To RAJ: Already covered that topic a few months ago in a previous thread.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To DEEP THROAT: No one’s clean in the political arena.

To ICEMAN: 1) They were never ordered. 2) No. 3) Yes. 4) No. 5) Yes. 6) No. 7) No. 8) It is not made in India, only assembled. 9) Not before 2016.

To UJJWAL: All the evidence reqd was already gathered by the South African Black Scorpions fraud investigation unit in the previous decade itself. So what more does the CBI want??? In all other countries too there is cut-throat competition but in several of them there’s no hanky-panky. Why is this so? Why only in India there is always hanky-panky? Is it because the decision-makers at the MoD & GoI are all ‘baniyas’? Why has there been ZERO hanky-panky whenever India has procured weapons from the US under the FMS channel? Does it mean that the Police’s Special Branch, Military Counter-Intelligence Cells & the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence are all a bunch of imbeciles? All this nonsense is now going on because no one has the gumption to enforce already existing rules & regulations, plain & simple. Furthermore, the drafters of the various DPPs have not done benchmarking studies/analysis of how procurement evaluations & decisions are made in the developed world & due to this the MoD’s bureaucrats are totally unaware about the best practices adopted in the developed countries.

Subir said...

Sir, VMT for the answers.

1.Has ADRDE adopted a Chinese style approach where first the basic type of PG kit will be developed followed by glide wing extended type and then terminal seeker type in a phased manner ? Drdo has already developed and tested the basic PG kit comprising the front seeker and the rear tail kit.

2.What exactly is taking almost 10 yrs to develope wrt to the extended range glide kits? Swept back wide chord wings kits arent plasma phyisics stuff. Its not all that complicated.

3.Why will AAW surface by 2016 when almost all of its components are there already ? A downrated version of the HAL turbofan powering the Nirbhay can be used along with guidance kit from Nirbhay. What more is required is a terminal seeker whether LPI based MMW or IIR which can be imported off the shelf .

4.Once such FT series add on glide kits are developed will they be applied to entire stocks of Russian origin and OFB made dumb iron bombs from 220 lb to 2000 lb ?Then will the those non stnadoff weapons now being used by IAF be relics of the past ?

5.What will happen to all those Tarang mk2 R118 Rwr in service with Jaguar IS,MiG-27UPG,Su-30 mki ?Has Drdo,BEL ironed out the various performance related problems on all inservice Tarangs ?

Are they functioning optimally now ?If not what is the way ahead ?

6.How does IN target hostile ships with 3M54E,Kh-35 and Brahmos at their full ranges when Garpun BAL-E has only 50 km target acquisition,tracking range ?

7.What happened to all the different BTR series ofd wheeled APC and IFV that were procured in good nos from USSR? Are they still in service?

8.What will happen to those TSD operatives who are in covert ops in other countries and those who have infiltrated terrorist outfits now that TSD had been disbanded ? We should have more of such direct action black units .

9. Former COAS Gen V.K. Singh had revealed that IA pays funds to many J&K govt ministers for carrying out certain jobs which he said brings stability to teh region. Are these funds for TSD members ? And why cant Central govt issue thpose ministers the required funds instead of IA ?

10. Many have speculated that a plasma layer surrounds the B-2 bomber and gives it wideband stealth and also reduces drag. Now plasma generally absorbs almost all radio waves.Then how does the LPI SAR radar of B-2 operate ?

Bhaswar said...

VMT for the reply sir,

So we have no way of saying that even if a product is developed that while its design may be kosher its quality itself can be an issue- fluctuating from batch to batch? What is the general trend, average, poor, very poor in terms of the important articles like ballistic missiles, Arjun, Arihant's reactor- at least these things meet QC/QR eight?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SUBIR: 1) Yes. Only laboratory-testing models. 2) Skilled scientific/engineering manpower problems in DRDO, CSIR & NAL. 3) Yes. 4) Only OFB-made bombs. 5) No. They’re still problematic. 6) With shipborne MRHs if they’re available. 7) Decommissioned long ago. 8) TSD personnel never based themselves in other countries. They were never operatives. 9) No. They’re for OP Sadbhavana-type activities. If central Govt gives the money the State will gobble it up for some other purpose (like what Sikkim has done with all the earthquake-relief funds & all that has been revealed in this week’s issue of OUTLOOK magazine) & both the District Collector & Labour Commissioner will be threatened with dire consequences if they were to reveal the truth. When the Army gives the funds, spending of these funds are supervised regularly by the Army & that’s why the results are assured & positive. That’s why the folks of J & K love the Indian Army & hate CAPFs like the CRPF & BSF. 10) Not plasma layer at all, but ionised layer over the wings & at the engine exhausts, which reduce airframe drag by 70% & make the B-2 supersonic.

To BHASWAR: General trend is poor to average. That’s why the IA specified the 93 enhancements on Arjun Mk1. Arihant will meet the QRs because it was built almost entirely by India’s private-sector under Russian supervision.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Interesting reads on China:

Bhaswar said...

So what about our ballistic missiles? Are you saying that the SLBMs we are building and the SSBNs can all go to waste because the missile might suffer from poor quality? Another feather in the cap the, of horrendous and piss poor capability.

sachin_sathe said...

If the range is accurate for a land to land based test prototype of Helina then this could create very interesting possibilities for NAMICA system also the possibility of using a modified version as a lightweight QRSAM should be explored. ur thoughts?

Anonymous said...

To Deep Throat::

Lingaraj said...

Deep Throat have you seen the movie by that name? I forget if Sunny Leone was the throat... :)
And didn't know the Antonys are into threesomes - he she and the tax payer!

buddha said...

Does India have any plan to develop any Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP)like U.S to arm its naval fleet..of off shore vessels to add a good punching fire power

Sir can we expect a thread on alien species and their connection to earth and moon...with elaborate description
it will be helpful to the layman like us
I know you are very busy busy person
Thanks again for your reply to our queries.
Anticipating your kind perusal

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

a few things

1. Just saw pics that some Kenyan troops during the mall siege were using guns that looked like multi calibre guns, but they were clumsy in adjusting the barrel section

You say India is also looking for a multi calibre gun but if this type of clumsiness or difficulty remains while handling such guns then there is no advantage of such guns

2. Just read an article that argued against the need for attack helos like AH64/LCH, arguments given say that attack helos cant be of any benefit whether IA/IAF adopt 'cold start' or IBG formations or in mountains along LoC/LAC owing to power & payload issues

In that case i say that IA/IAF should and must go for V22s whose armed version can perform much better than attack helos as per power & payload issues in above mentioned areas and scenarios

3. Regarding my previous answer i didnt mention 1979 or 2005 anywhere, you did; that means there is much merit in both cases

4. One of the pics you uploaded i see a uncanny similarity with KEPD350, looks like Norinco has copied the bomb too


Joydeep Ghosh

Bhaswar said...

Sir what is the payload in terms of weight which the LCH can carry on its wings?

What sort of e-designing would be required for the addition of MW-radar on top of the rotor, it won't be easy but a LAH will require it?

Considering that the engine and the IDAS are imported- could you list the indigenous (in terms of design if not in manufacturing) and procured/license manufactured components of the LCH separately?

The design of the helo itself is ours yes?

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

Just managed to open the 2 links about China that you posted

in that sequence i am posting the link it shows that China is hedging against the impending energy crisis

To me the China of now is wooly mamoth which thinks that its huge fur coat can help save it from the inevitable changes. The day last of 'princelings' go out of the scene i expect the transition to democracy and eventual break up of China to happen and it might be quicker than what happened in Russia. The economy will be catalyst and children of the 'princelings' who have enjoyed lavish lives, education will be the possible gamechangers


Joydeep Ghosh

Vikram Guha said...

Prasun Da,

(1) Are their any private or govt companies in India that are working on or interested in JV for the production of Low Probability Intercept and Gun Fire Control Radars?

(2) Can foreign OEMs directly sell Low Probability Intercept and Gun Fire Control Radars to private companies in India or the Govt sector shipbuilders?


Anonymous said...

Can this be a man made one ? Your views on this please -- muttu

K. SHEKAR said...


It is being stated in a forum that Astra Microwave had manufactured 100-watt T/R modules for AEW&CS somewhere around 2010.

And then DRDO techfocus magazine claimed this April that 200-watt modules have been successfully developed & tested for AEW&CS.

I know that AEW&CS has TRMM architecture with 8 T/R modules in each TRMM. But how many TRMMs are there in all?

It is being claimed that AEW&CS S-band Active Aperture Array radar has a total of 1,244 individual T/R modules, based on a chart released by Astra Microwave.

It is being said that these 1,244 elements may have been arranged into approx. 150+ TRMM units (8 each).

So does this mean 200-watts output by a single T/R module makes the entire radar give a maximum power output of atleast 240-250kW?

What is the power output of E-3 Sentry and Phalcon AEW system in comparison? A former French C4I expert on the forum has claimed
E-3 radar operates in megawatt-range (1,000+ kW).

Are they right? What is your view on the whole calculation?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR KUMAR: What about them indeed! Facts speak for themselves. 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?
Regarding DRDO-developed ballistic missiles, the existing Agni-1s & Agni-2s are kept in a disassembled state in modules & are assembled only prior to actual launch. Which means the missiles’ QA/QC is dependent entirely on the proficiency of the SFC’s different sets of missile-assembly crew. Automatically, therefore, there’s loss of consistency in QA/QC levels. Had the missiles been canister-encased at an industrial facility, then & only then could QA/QC-levels be consistent & uniform without fail. Therefore, only with the arrival of canister-encased Agni-4 & Agni-5 along with the K-family of canister-encased SLBMs will there be assured & guaranteed fail-safe performance. Not until then & until then the only fail-safe WMD for SFC will continue to be the aircraft-delivered gravity bombs armed with unitary nuclear warhead.
Like I said, facts speak for themselves & jingoism never guarantees anything. For, merely producing a research paper on a cutting-edge product does not automatically translate into acquisition of core technological competency for producing such a product on an industrial scale.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Payload weight is not yet established for the LCH. HAL only states that the LCH’s maximum all-up weight will be 5.7 tonnes. MMW radar can easily be mounted atop any of the two the stub-wings of the LCH. To try to mount it on the rotor-head will require extensive re-designing & be time-consuming. Most of the avionics/instrumentation & navigation system is imported as well. The LCH was designed by TATA Alexys.

To VIKRAM GUHA: 1) The truck-mounted Ashwin active phased-array radar being developed by vData Patterns Pvt Ltd for the DRDO/MBDA SR-SAM can easily be used as an LPI-GFCR. 2) Of course.

To MUTTU: Most unlikely.

To K SHEKAR: ASTRA Microwave has assembled only L-band & Ku-band T/R modules (whose photos I had uploaded just after Aero India 2013), whereas the EMB-145I AEW & CS uses an S-band active phased-array antenna. Therefore, anyone claiming that ASTRA makes S-band T/R modules is totally unaware of elementary facts. No one has to date released any data on the number of T/R modules present on the S-band antenna or their peak transmitting power output. And no one ever will, at least for public consumption, be it ASTRA or THALES or RAYTHEON or IAI/ELTA or EADS/Casssidian or SELEX/Galileo or Northrop Grumman or Phazotron or NIIP Tikhomirov. Therefore, anyone blurting out numbers is only speculating.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SACHIN SATHE: Looks like I will soon have to conduct paid-tutorials aimed at teaching the art of deciphering all the crappy gobbledygook that comes out from the ‘desi’ news-reporters. Firstly, it was the 8km-range HELINA equipped with MMW seeker that was test-fired on September 22, 2013 & NOT 4km-range cooled LWIR-sensor equipped NAG & NOT FROM NAMICA. The missile was test-fired from a customised & raised pedestal out to a range of 7km because the two IA-owned Dhruv WSI prototypes are presently unavailable from HAL to the DRDO for conducting the test-firings. Secondly, a 10km-range version of HELINA is now under development for being launched from fixed-wing MRCAs like Tejas Mk1. Thirdly, there will be no ground-launched version of HELINA. Fourthly, the ONLY DRDO-developed manportable ATGM now being readied for firing trials is the laser-guided 5km-range SAMHO, & not the NAG. Fifth, both the Rudra & LCH will each carry only 4 HELINAs in twin-packs (similar to what has been developed by MBDA for PARS-3LR ATGM) & four Mistral-ATAM air-to-air missiles. This is obvious when once visually examines the stub-wings on both both these helicopters. Sixth, the two-way RF command-video data-link developed by DRDO is for the NAMICA (which now has an ELBIT Systems-developed & BEL-assembled COMPASS optronic turret for target detection/acquisition) & not for HELINA since the HELINA will have MMW seeker (incapable of generating any video imagery of its target) from the very outset & not a cooled LWIR sensor. Thus, as you can see, the ‘desi’ news-reporter was evidently unable to make any sense out of the technical/performance parameters of either the HELINA or NAG or NAMICA & consequently, what has emerged is nonsensical gobbledygook.

To BUDDHA: Not at the moment. And for launching VLAPs like the ERGM one would require 127mm or better still, 155mm naval guns, both of which the IN does not possess.

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: 1) I never said India was looking for multi-calibre gun, but it is both the IA & DRDO that have officially stated that the IA requires multi-calibre assault rifles & it is the DRDO that has admitted that it is developed one such rifle. 2) Whosoever made such observations against attack helicopters is obviously neither literate nor educated. Why? Simply because heavy armoured formations never manoeuvre along mountains, they do so only in the plains as was the case in 1965 & 1971. In addition, attack helicopters are also used for various other roles, like attacking hostile air-defence radars, as was the case in January 1991 when the Apaches were the first to go inside southwestern Iraq to destroy a long-range airspace surveillance radar. 3) You did not mention the years, but mentioned the events which took place in those years. Doesn’t mean there’s any merit in those cases. 4) Such ‘assault-breaker’ dispensers were developed by both Germany & South Africa in the 1980s itself for the Tornado IDS & Mirage F-1s.

K. SHEKAR said...

Sir please see Page 4 of the following PDF file released by CRISIL Research (a market analysis firm) pertaining Astra Microwave Products -

There is a chart on the left side that shows Astra had in FY2010 made 100W T/R modules of an S-band Active Aperture Array radar that has 1,244 total elements.

And the link below is of the DRDO Techfocus magazine April 2014 issue -

It is shown on Page 15 right-side
paragraph that 200W transmit/receive modules have been developed for LSTAR radar (which is what AEW&CS has developed from).

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To K SHEKAR: I tend to go by what the OEM or DRDO states, instead of relying on third-party reports by private consultants. Consequently, the two reports cited by you are contradictory, since one claims that a 100W S-band T/R module was fabricated by ASTRA but the other says that the DRDO has developed a 200W S-band T/R module. If one were to believe what the DRDO has stated, then it means that the 200W T/R module has been selected (instead of the 100W module) for both the L-STAR & its shorter version that is now on the EMB-145I. As I had explained in my DEFEXPO 2012 show report in April 2012, the production version of the S-band radar’s antenna will be shorter than the L-STAR. Therefore, the no of on-board S-band T/R modules cannot be the same for both antennae. Lastly, during both DEFEXPO 2012 & Aero India 2013, ASTRA’s booth never displayed any S-band T/R module, only S-band dual receive module & S-band dual transmit module, & not any combined T/R module. BEL on the other hand showcased its L-band T/R module & C-band quad T/R module. It’s all very clearly shown in my Aero India 2013 show report threads.

Bhaswar said...

Why would the LCH only carry 2 ATGMs per hard-point when most helos can easily carry 4 such ATGMs on each hardpoint. Its just a matter of having an ejector rack that carries 4 ATGMs (stacked in rows of 2, one above and one below). So why can't that be done with the HELINA and LCH?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: You seem to be under the impression that ejector racks can be developed by anyone through some 'Choo Mantar'. It's like assuming that any OEM manufacturing fibre-glass windscreens for automobiles can also make the fibre-glass domes for housing hull-mounted panoramic sonars. FYI all such domes continue to be imported till this day from Germany & the UK.

Bhaswar said...

But sir it can be developed, you did state that multiple ejector racks for munitions designed in country wasn't a mammoth task?

Or are their payload limitations on the LCH?

So once the family of canisterized BM/SLBM/LRCM arise then QC/QR issues will abate, yes?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To BHASWAR: Twin-racks have already been designed by MBDA for PARS-3LR ATGM when mounted on the Rudra & I had uploaded its photo on the Aero India 2013 thread. This same twin-pack will go on the LCH as well. In other words, mo quad-pack like the ones on the Apache or Tigre. If the IA & IAF want, they can easily remove the Mistral-ATAMs & take in two extra twin-packs so that both helicopters will carry 8 x PARS-3LR. For the HELINA, nothing's decided so far, since the HELINA as it is now configured is bigger & heavier than the PARS-3LR or even the Spike-LR.

DJ said...

I just bought Tesla and am amazed by its battery power and range. Could such a tech used in diesel electric submarines instead of expensive AIP systems? I mean can the existing Lead-acid battery packs be replaced by advanced Li ion batteries and negate the need for AIP?

Rajesh said...

@Prasun K. Sengupta O/T What is the status of HAL built IJT (HJT-36 Sitara)? Is IAF looking for foreign vendors? If yes, what planes could be of interest to the IAF in this category?

R0B1Nrex said...

As I was reading the comments about JLTVs and APCs, I was sad that India can't make them. Countries like Turkey have indigenous companies that can design and build APCs. The winning selection for a Taiwanese APC was from Ireland. I hope that with the JVs with America it could take up the techniques for manufacturing and QA/QC that you mentioned. May this be a good learning curve.

mohan saravana said...

Hi there, awesome site. I thought the topics you posted on were very interesting. I tried to add your RSS to my feed reader and it a few. take a look at it, hopefully

I can add you and follow.

Naval Architecture