Without any doubt, from an organising
standpoint, the expo was a perfect ‘Maha Satyanaas’, thanks to the Goa State
Government’s functioning at neolithic efficiency levels. The following published
comments aptly illustrate the ‘refusing to develop’ mindsets of those in the
decision-making hierarchies of both the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Goa
State Government.
It was refreshing to see the return to
DEFEXPO of exhibitors like South Africa’s ARMSCOR and DENEL Group, and Italy’s
FINMECCANICA.
However, all foreign exhibitors had nothing new
to exhibit, unlike last February’s Singapore Air Show, where DEW-based
air-defence systems were showcased.
Let us now take stock of some of the prominent exhibits that were displayed.
I will try to insert some pertinent observations in between the illustrations above on a regular basis over the next few days in order to contextualise various issues and developments, which demand a lot of clarity due to the extremely confusing signals emanating from the MoD as far as force modernisation plans & targets go.
ReplyDeletePrasun ji: I asked before too, what is the status of Integrated masts on P-17A, and I also wanted to know when can we expect a AMCA prototype. Thanks
ReplyDeleteThank you for the excellent coverage, Prasun ji!
ReplyDeleteConcerning recent developments, I have assembled a few questions to ask;
1) In your recent posts, you have mentioned the possibility of French (Thales) Photonics masts on Indian Navy's future SSNs. I would assume that such a mast would also find application on the future fleet of S-5 SSBNs?
2) Are there any available images of the new Russian 4th generation SSN design that you recently seen on your visit to Roosiland? How do you think the external appearance of this boat would be? Is it incorporating techs like pump-jet propulsion?
3) In some concept images of the supposed S-5 SSBN shown on your blog (like the one attached below) years ago, you have clearly outlined the fact that this boat would be largely based on the Delta-IV design. Is this likely to remain so or are they working on further modifying the design with Rubin? Is the displacement likely to be around the 20,000 ton figure as you previously stated or any scope for reducing it?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-osvhByPGUIY/T8vtZ4OH2SI/AAAAAAAABWo/lCIQg9Q0t3M/s1600/S-5-1.jpg
4) Is the supposed number of launch tubes remaining at 12 or any chance for increase to 16? If not, then obviously IN/MoD have deemed that 12 tubes are enough for the S-5, thanks to MIRVs and more survivable SLBMs.
5) Any progress on FGFA?
6) Where do you personally see ISRO like 10 to 20 years from now? I know I asked this question once before and you had promptly directed me to some links which did indeed provide valuable information.
But I would like to reiterate my suggestion as a loyal follower of your's, you ought to do a thread about ISRO and it's future when you have the time!
PALEEEZ!
Nice post sir .....got many information regarding the shown exhibits of DEf Expo2016
ReplyDeleteIs this sudarshan lgb above? How many ordered by iaf? If sudarshan lgb is ready than why we still buying israeli ones?
ReplyDeletenice coverage
ReplyDeleteHi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for your coverage of the defense expo. I found it very detailed and quite interesting. I am looking forward to your take on the products displayed and their importance in future defense acquisitions.
I always wondered the effectiveness of antisubmarine rocket launchers in front of Indian navy ships which I didn't find in any western ships. How effective are these rockets considering that they might potentially decrease the effectiveness of radar deflective shape of the ship. Particularly affecting the frontal radar cross section, which I feel is the most important.
Thank you,
hi prasun
ReplyDeletethere are are seeker components for w band ie 75-100 ghz displayed . I am surprised to see that because it needs extreme hi tech component to work in those frequencies.
Is the seeker for the nag and some thing else?
will russia be offended if we tie up with ukraine for hi tech solution ,just like india and Pakistan.
I find it extremely ambitious given that not many countries have fielded w band seekers.
I dont think it will take much to put a laser seeker on the nose of a helina to make a missile equal to the hellfire?.Is there any proposal?.
what is the hole below the fin of the helina ? is it a n rocket exhaust ?
Please explain more of the guidance u nit of MBDA for the pinaka . I thought israel was supposed to help us.Is it better?.Is there gps or terminal guidance ?.
Sir,why no info on BMD system at defence expo ?
ReplyDeleteDo you have any updates on AD1&AD2 missiles ?
(1) Staying with exports, Garden Reach has emerged as the lowest bidder for the Phillipines P16-B Navy frigates project. Do you think Garden Reach can bag this contract?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.aseanmildef.com/2016/04/indian-firm-offers-lowest-bid-for-p16-b.html
(2) MIDHANI is saying that MIDHANI has indigenously developed a steering gear assembly for the INS Arihant. Why was MIDHANI selected by the Indian Navy over other competitors?
(3) It is being reported that Heavy Weight Torpedo Varunastra has been accepted by IHQ MoD (Navy) for inductioninto Services with excellent success rate in User Evaluation Trial. Please share your insights on this.
Thanks,
VIKRAM
Hi prasun !
ReplyDeleteThere are a lot of recent developments in recent time, where relience defence is tieing up with a lot of international defence MNCs. What do you think about the prospects of the Company ? Do you think one should invest in it ?
Prasunda,
ReplyDeleteTwo questions.
1. As per this YouTube video(https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq5U_Cy0IB8)
the IACCCS & AFNet of IAF is up & running. Is this true? If yes then did they procured the to-be-ordered S-band LRSR?
2. what exactly are the various advantages as well as disadvantages of a 155/52 howitzer vs a 155/45 one? Which will be more suitable to IA & why?
To MADFOREXBII: 1) That video is of 2011 vintage. Just see who the CAS of the IAF is in that video-clip. 2) Both will be effective, but more about that later.
ReplyDeleteTo SIDDHARTH DHAPOLIA: The question to be asked is why isn't RELIANCE DEFENCE teaming up with any of the Indian DPSUs, at a time when foreign OEMs are all teaming up with such DPSUs. For instance, Fincantieri teaming up withg MDL & NAVANTIA teaming up with L & T.
To VIKRAM GUHA: 1) Emerging as L-1 doesn't mean the offer is the best. That will be decided when the technical compliance parameters are examined. The South Koreans have enormous influence over The Philippines & have been highly successful in exporting theirf hardware to Manila. 2) MIDHANI developed the metallurgical expertise reqd for fabricating the product. The actual product was built by another OEM, based on production methodologies worked out by MIDHANI. 3) No truth in it at all, rest assured.
To PIYUSH DAS: Because it's the DEFEXPO expo, not AERO INDIA. In addition, the DRDO is decades away from offering a workable, functional BMD system. Let the DRDO first come up with credible SHORADS or MR-SAMs & then start worrying about BMD interceptors. No need to make tall claims that cannot be substantiated with verifiable evidence.
To RAD: The W-band MMR seeker has been under development since 1987! I first saw it in a DRDO product directory that was presented to me in Singapore wat back in 1988 by Dr V S Arunachalam. But the NAG & HELINA as of now are both using IIR seekers. That's because the MMR seeker is still too bulky & requires far more miniaturised iterations in order to mature. Terminal guidance for Pinaka-2 MBRL rocket is self-explanatory in the diagram posted above.
To SUMIT SEN: The photo caption says it all. Do check it up. Such PGMs take a long time to be developed, especially in India. Therefore, don't expect it anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteTo SHANTANU KUMAR: There's still no word yet on the final design configuration of the P-17A FFG's integrated mast. You can expect an AMCA prototype sometime after the year 2040 AD.
To GESSLER: 1) The photonic mast selected for the nine remaining Type 877EKM SSKs is the one from L-3 KEO of the US. The S-2/S-3/S-4 SSBNs will have them as well. The S-5/S-6/S-7 SSBNs are still too far away & won’t be available fopr another decade at the very least. Photopnic masts are also available from THALES & SAGEM. 2) Plenty of images are available, but not for public consumption as yet. Maybe they will be shown at the forthcoming IMDS 2016 expo in St Petersburg this June. 3 & 4) The design is the same & it was frozen way back in 2006. No changes in its physical parameters can be made now, be it the displacement or the nos of SLBM silos. 5) None. 6) I will still recommend that book for you to read. It cannot get any better.
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your Comments.
Regarding Syrian War, After Henry Kissinger met Putin following events have happend.
a) Russia Withdrawl from Syrian War (Partially)
b) US Declared ISIS as Terroist Org.
c) Turkey is sidelined.
d) Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal Slams US.
Do you find next US-Russia Plan getting ready?
Thanks
S.Senthil Kumar
http://www.defenceupdate.in/bye-bye-rafale-ministry-plans-buy-f-18/
ReplyDeleteThis article very strongly claims that MOD is going to buy F-18 instead of rafales
I know, I know...
This must be yellow journalism, but sir, don't you think that day by day we have even less reasons to buy rafales !!
Like French are not helping us in SSN project anymore...
As far as some equipments like photonic masts are concerned they will sell it anyway.
To PIYUSH DAS: And what are these "less & less reasons for not buying the Rafale"? And who says that the French are not helping India for the SSN programme? Which company from which country has supplied sound-absorbing rubber tiles & vibration dampeners for the S-2/Arihant? So why all this needless France-bashing when the actual problem is with India's decision-making process, & this has nothing to do with France?
ReplyDeletePrasunDa,
ReplyDelete1 In DefExpo 2016 how successful was Ukraine in striking deals with Indian companies Govt and Private? For example word is that in DefExpo 2016 Reliance & UKROBORONPROM signed a MoU for supply of marine gas turbines that should clear transfer of 3 Russian P11356 frigates to India for fitment.
2 Can you please shed some light about the current & future projects between India & Ukraine.
VMT
Sujoy
Is it worth investing in Relience defence considering current developments or probable future developments ?
ReplyDeletehi prasun
ReplyDeletewhat it this new Amogha -1 missile ? did the forces have a requirement for some ting like this?Indigenous?
Seems like they simply got rid of the long reeling wire in the wire guided Milan/Konkurs series license produced by BDL, in favour of a wireless two way datalink.
DeleteJust a casual observation. Prasun da can tell more on the tech aspects.
you are so heartless :D, but why such a delay? I though after tejas they must have learned a lesson.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thehindu.com/news/international/new-act-in-us-congress-will-institutionalise-indiaspecific-defence-ties/article8429529.ece?homepage=true
ReplyDeleteSir,
ReplyDeleteI was listening a seminar that was given by the Vice Adm. Vijay Shankar, he was also chief of SFC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZpIrZvP0Co&t=685s
He was talking about something like alternate NCA, in case primary NCA remain no more. What does the meaning of this? Alternate NCA is Indian continuity of the govt. program?
Also it looks like everybody in world knows about Chinese proliferation of nukes & missile to Pakistan. But how the hell US govt. ignoring it?
Dear Prasunda
ReplyDeleteLooks like the erstwhile famous spy who came in from the Persian desert "Shri Shri 108 (Ek Sau Aath) Kulbhushan Jadhav Ji" was sending an ironic message to his Indian Lord and Master through his captor's spokesman General Asim Bajwa. Yadav post his capture told the Pakistanis to use a code phrase to inform the Indian authorities in order to demonstrate to them who it was that they had captured. The phrase was “Your monkey is with us". Mind you since all spy dramas are based on myths.
The last monkey sent in mythology by an Indian Lord and Master captured on foreign soil was Shri Shri (108) Hanuman Ji was very Bad News for the concerned captors as he burnt up their entire fabled Golden City before departing having done the job of delivering a message to all concerned.
I hope “Your monkey is with us" is not the start of a very Bad Time for Pakistan.
LOLzzz and ROTFL.
My sincere apologies to all concerned, if I have offended any sensibilities.
Sir, why can't we just sign the bloody Rafale deal??? Every few weeks it is "a few weeks away from being signed" or "dead", why don't we just pull the trigger either way- buy them or scrap the deal. No more of this retarded waiting around running around in cricles that makes us look stupid.
ReplyDelete+ with Modi personally pushing for the Rafale deal in April 2015 and signign the IGA with Hollande in Delhi Jan 2016, I think Modi is about to get a LOT of egg on his face when the deal collapses.
Thank you for the great post Sir. Israeli newspaper globes reported stating IAI ceo that IND and IAI signed hundreds of million dollars worth uav,airdefence,radar systems.If this report is true then MOD signed the deal for Heron-TP? But what about air-defence,radar sys? Please shed some light on this?
ReplyDeletehttp://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/panama-papers-mossack-fonseca-files-iaf-navy-italian-firms/
ReplyDeleteTo ARH93: Not Heron-TP, but Super Heron. Air-defence radars refers to the EL/M-2083s mounted on aerostats.
ReplyDeleteTo MADFOREXBII & RAD: Firstly, can anyone possibly justify developing a 2nd-generation ATGM using radio-command guidance when everyone else in the world is developing 5th-generation ATGMs??? Is this not a sheer waste of R & D funds/resources? FYI here's an example of what a contemporary ATGM or multi-role anti-armour missile is all about:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/griffin/
To SHANTANU KUMAR: Of course I'm heartless. That's because I never think with my heart. Have been blessed with a brain & intellect to do all the thinking. If lessons were truly learnt from the Tejas project, then by now ADA would have been dissolved or merged with the Aircraft R & D Division of HAL. Everyone from various DPSUs that I spoke to at DEFEXPO 2016 concurred with my view without any reservations that it was the DRDO that totally screwed up the Tejas MRCA's R & D roadmap. What excists today is an aircraft built of/for/by scientists. The LCA (Navy) project is the only saving grace & the only success story.
Thanks for the lovely pics especially the seekers.!!!!
ReplyDeleteTo SUJOY MAJUMDAR: Reliance Defence is eyeing the contracts for undertaking the mid-life refits of the first 3 Project 1135.6 FFGs that are due for refit after serving for 13 years in service. Also due is the refit to be undertaken for the first 3 Project 15 DDGs, which will be done by MDL but the gas turbines can easily be sent to Reliance Defence for MRO. In other words, what Reliance Defence is interested in is to tap to existing businesses of MRO for which there exists a captive market & for which there's no competition whatsoever, as opposed to opening a greenfield facility for undertaking product manufacturing. Similarly, when it comes to undertaklng periodic refits & MRO of INS Vikramaditya, there are only two shipyards whose dry-docks can accommodate this aircraft carrier: CSAL in Kochi; & Pipavav.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of new products, Ukraine has nothing to offer to India.
To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: Do read this:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theweek.in/theweek/more/regulating-the-use-of-drones.html
The BSF & ITBP both desperately want to commence usage of UAVs like the Boeing Scaneagle for border surveillance, but cannot do so because the reqd SOPs for drone operations have to be approved by IAF HQ & the MoD is still sitting on the SOP file that has already been submitted by the IAF.
The ITBP & BSF also recently selected SAGEM as the L-1 bidder for supplying 355 uncooled long-range hand-held thermal imagers. The selected model is the JIM-LR. The HHTIs offered by BEL (all IRDE-developed) were rejected as they were proven to be way too inferior in performance.
To RAD: As part of the on-going 'Know Your Adversary' series in this blog, do watch these two programmes on the PAF's Combat Commander's School:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3qOywdxlac&hd=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EyuBLw7FvI&hd=1
Sir, you said that su30mki's airframe can be modified for having internal weapon bay. Is there any plan for such modifications ?
ReplyDeleteIs price the only sticking point for rafale deal ?
I read somewhere that IAF is insisting on developing 2 bases for rafales, whereas French are insisting on building 1.
Can you clear this matter for us ?
hi prasun
ReplyDeletegood video link . An Idiot of a pilot claims that the JF 17 is better than the f-16 !! what is he trying to tell us ?. Another guy tells us that the saab awacs can see ground targets? Does is have SAR capability??.
An idiotic statement that the red flag exercise was costly 100cr!! was reason that India does not take part in red flag exercises!!?? beat that?.Turkey has its own version of red flag anatolian eagle or some thing . High time we set up some thing like this in country.Will US give us the acmi system ?. If not can the Israelis do that like BVR.?
why are we unable to design satellites that have high through put like 100gb like other western sats compared to about 10 in indian sats .
Hi, Is it true that for LCA AESA , DRDO has selected BEL and Astra micro. How long do you think the development cycle will be.
ReplyDeleteSir ji, check this out -
ReplyDeletehttp://tribune.com.pk/story/865768/us-state-department-approves-pakistans-request-for-arms-worth-1b/
Btw, I have ordered the book you recommended "From Fishing Hamlet to Red Planet" by PV Manoranjan Rao. Looking forward to reading it!
Also, this -
ReplyDeletehttp://sputniknews.com/military/20160405/1037484909/usa-navy-orders-bell-helicopters.html
Even a child can see that the duplicitous policy of the US cannot be trusted. How can we have a 'security partnership' when the US arms and aids Pakistan??! Must be a sandbox game for the USA just like they let Turkey arm and finance all the Jihadi head choppers and at the same time 'support the Iraqi Army'. Btw the Iraqi military has complained often that the US coalition jet fighters return to base without even offloading their payload. HUH!!
ReplyDeleteTo GESSLER: LoLz! Read the dateline of that story.....it says April 7, 2015, & NOT 2016. It is now clear that the PA has gone for the WZ-10 attack helicopter from Chiona & not the AH-1Z Viper!
ReplyDeleteTo SANGOS: Read the dateline of that story first, before jumping to erroneous conclusions.
To ABHIJIT MITRA: Even if it is true, the first prototype for flight-testing won't be available for at least another 10 years, rest assured. And before that, a turbofan-powered flying testbed will have to be procured by CABS.
To RAD: Are you suffering from any kind of amnesia? I'm sure you're aware that the IAF acquired 40 sets of the rangeless EHUD ACMI pods way back in the late 1990s & since then they've been in use at TACDE in Gwalior.
To GESSLER: Buying that book on ISRO is an excellent investment & will be a much cherished collector's item--that I guarantee.
ReplyDeleteTo PIYUSH DAS: All those issues were discussed quite a few times before in previous threads. Nothing new to add.
Sir with all due respect I beg to defer with something you've said. When the US army is still using 1970s TOW series as premiere Heavy Anti Tank weapon, what's wrong in BDL developing a similar class Heavy ATGM for use. Infact only recently the Wireless TOW was accepted into US Army. Although in US service the TOW is capable of airborne deployment & so far we had only little success whatsoever in our own efforts to make an Airborne ATGM.
ReplyDeleteI understand too that the need for the development of a new gen ATGM is there, but can it be a substitute to the mass produced MILAN/KONKURS/KORNET series in IA service in magnitude of tens of thousands!!
Rather than being like Griffin/Javelin/Brimstone I really believe that a more suiting future proof ATGM for Indian Armed Forces should be one which will combine a dual band seeker(W band seeker plus backup laser seeker/ImIR seeker) with a kinetic warhead near hypersonic propulsion body. This will guarantee the fool proof destruction of any Armoured platforms with near impunity. Don't you agree????
Sir,
ReplyDeleteLol, looks like lot of defence analyst reading this blog.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/indias-undersea-deterrent/
This is new that people now started to use term MW (Thermal) or MW (Electric) after you pointed out the blunder done by GoI in 2009 in printing those pamphlets.
In previous question I asked about the Alternate NCA (maybe you missed that), I want to add in that,
The Vice Adm also described that to deliver nuke by air need atleast 10 escorts, that is mind boggling. Do you think India ever operationalized air delivery system in large number? I am asking this because that means nukes by air delivery almost need half of Air Force.
Sir,
ReplyDeleteNot to offend you but maybe we know our adversaries better than we know about our own forces. There is nothing about TACDE on internet besides its full form. I was trying to find any documentary on TACDE, but I am unable to find any. Also not any good documentary about AIR FORCE ACADEMY.
Seriously on internet only these 2 pages exist.
http://indianairforce.nic.in/show_page.php?pg_id=85
http://indianairforce.nic.in/show_page.php?pg_id=80
Hi
DeleteThe Su-30MKI has numerous pics with ACMI pods on wingtips. You can Google it for more info.
Here a pic of the Ex Red Flag 2008 in which you can see a single ACMI pod on the wing pylon
http://www.milavia.net/specials/redflag08-4/redflag08-4_1.jpg
Now a detailed pic of the ACMI pod previously posted on this blog
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7fbVuFy83XU/Ube6EUI-BsI/AAAAAAAAFKk/NognU4n70sk/s280/EHUD+ACMI+pod+on+R-73E+missile-body.jpg
To MADFOREXBII: Before going into usage/employment, first let’s get the reqmts right. Guided ATGMs reqd are 2.6km-range, 4km-range & 6km-range, with the first two being infantry-launched, & the 3rd being helicopter-launched. Then there are 2 more infantry-launched weapons, these being the 600 metre-range wireless ATGM for special forces, & shoulder-launched LAW like the SMAW that can be used against both armoured vehicles & hardened bunkers. Altogether, the reqmt is for 160,000 rounds of such weapons (including war wastage reserves) for the western & northern fronts. Getting new-generation replacements will consume more than 2 decades. Until then the Milan-2s, Milan-2Ts & Konkurs-Ms will soldier on. Thus, initiating R & D on a 2nd generation ATGM for service-induction even after 5 years makes no sense at all UNLESS such a missile uses hyperbaric warheads meant for destroying hardened bunkers in high-altitude areas. Therefore, developing such a 2nd-generation ATGM for plains-based anti-armour warfare is simply not reqd. If I were to decide, then I would rather incorporate the 120mm hyperbaric warheads developed for the Arjun MBT on a shoulder-launched LAW-type weapon for mountain warfare.
ReplyDeleteTo ARPIT KANODIA: VMT, but (LoLz!) the author of that article is clearly out-of-sync with contemporary developments. The S-2/Arihant class of SSBNs will comprise only 3 boats—S-2, S-3 & S-4, & not four as alleged. Same will be the case with S-5 SSBN, i.e. S-5, S-6 & S-7. Secondly, IN unlike the Russian & PLA navies, has not gone for the Bastion deployment approach. Instead, the IN’s SSBNs in times of emergencies will be on patrol within the Chagos Trench south of Sri Lanka & east of Mauritius. This has been extensively written about by quite a few ex-IN Chiefs since 2008. No one in their right mind will therefore even contemplate SSBN patrols in the shallow waters of the Andaman Sea, since hostile SSNs can always locate SSBNs in such waters. The key to underwater survivability always therefore lies in lurking in deep waters within ocean trenches, which is akin to what combat aircraft do when undertaking terrain-masking flight-profiles by flying over valleys that have mountain ranges on both sides.
By alternate NCA, what one means is the 2nd-tier national leadership, like the Deputy PM or Speaker of Parliament & the Service Vice-Chiefs. In other words, in times of emergencies, at least 3 hardened NCA shelters buried deep underground are reqd to house such leadership figures. 10 escorts are reqd only when an aircraft is delivering a nuclear gravity bomb. When delivering nuclear-tipped ALCMs only two escorts at most will be reqd.
As for TACDE, yes, I agree that neither DD nor any other private Indian TV channels have to date made any documentary on this establishment, just as there’s no such documentary on the ASTE, or the School of Naval Warfare or the Army’s Mhow-based academic institutions dealing with armoured or mechanised infantry combat.
To MADFOREXBII: That ACMI pod on the picture was supplied by CUBIC Corp to the participating IAF Su-30MKIs because the instrumented ACMI range at Nellis AFB caters to both air combat & air-to-ground strikes. That pod therefore is not part of any rangeless system & neither does it belong to the IAF. The EHUD pod is part of a rangeless ACMI system & is used only inside India & it cannot be taken abroad to any instrumented ACMI range because it will be totally incompatible.
ReplyDeleteYep. Sorry I should've double checked besides it was looking too similar to this one as well.
Deletehttp://www.rocketpunch.biz/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/08nov15_acmi01_b.jpg
So I had my doubts too. Alas I could've a brain like yours to grapple so much :-)
Apologies for the typo , I was referring to the refit of the 3 Project 1135.6 FFGs and 3 Project 15 DDGs
ReplyDeleteThank You
You just snatched away my thoughts... Lolzz... I wish someone really give it a go within BDL & DRDO. But with the know how to manufacture Thermobaric warheads available why work with the Americans for an improved Javelin missile within DTTI?? Only for the Man portable soln???? We can work with the Israelis for an improved Spike man portable variant armed with this warhead. Isn't it??
ReplyDeleteBTW I have one more question, With dwindling no of AEW&CS platforms available with the IAF & the Super Su-30MKI's onboard wing edge mounted secondary L-band surveillance arrays, wouldn't it be more suitable for the Tadiran SpectraLink sourced data links were modified to share tactical air situation data with one another instead of completely relying on the Phalcon
China made a great friendship with a great pauper Albania and Albania was lost in to oblivion. Then China made a great friendship with a great beggar Pakistan and now Pakistan will be lost forever.
ReplyDeletePrasun
ReplyDeleteThanks for a great article on the de expo.
A question of mine remains unanswered from the Previous thread, maybe u missed it. Hence repeating
Why does a 7000 ton ddg have only 32 vls mounted sams as in barak 8. In times of area defense for a carrier group against saturation attacks, re loading is not really a good option.
Both Kolkatta and vizag class have enough space for atleast 32 more in vls for Mr or lr sams and maybe even 16x4 quad packed sr sams extra for a tiered air defense...
There is talk of 32 more barak 8 er being added later to the Kolkatta class and being built into vizag class, giving them both 32 lrsams (120 km plus barak er) and 32 vls + 32 reloadable mrsams (70 km barak 8). How true is this... Esp given that space seems to have been kept on the Kolkatta class
Also any chance of some sr sams like the planned maitri (30 km range) being quad packed and added in 16 more vls tubes making them true area defense ddgs
I was hoping you were going to spill the beans on what's going on with artillery, but I think I'll just provide my cursory observations and you can respond accordingly.
ReplyDelete1) The tracked winner is Samsung-Techwin's K-9. The K-9 is, in fact, based on technology inputs from Rheinmetall, which was ironically blacklisted from the tender. So why pay the middleman when one should go directly to the source?
2) What is the point of a truck-mounted system when any towed artillery can be transported by truck? Plus, towed systems can move independently for short distances.
3) How can a lightweight, heliborne 155mm gun be justified when 105mm systems are not only lighter but can also have more shells transported. After all, helicopter logistics are limited. Is the additional range relevant considering that in a mountainous, high-altitude environment a 105mm will have the necessary range?
4) What is the difference between the OFB-BAE 155mm upgraded Bofors and the Nexter-L&T 155mm Trajan?
5) Under the new IDDM section of the DPP, the two companies that would technically win would be either OFB or Bharat Forge. However, this scenario would only apply if the contract was re-tendered.
6) Is there a requirement for rocket-assisted projectiles for 50+ km range?
To MADFOREXBII: Because the Javelin ATGM is really the market-leader in its class (remember, it passed all tests at Pokhran while the Spike-ER failed) & is the most combat-proven new-generation ATGM today. In addition, the US is also open to hyperbaric warheads being co-developed for the SMAW. There is no such offer from Israel. As for the Super Su-30MKI with L-band AESA-type radars on both wings, one such aircraft flying at medium altitude cis enough to act as an airborne battle management platform when accompanying four or eight Rafale MMRCAs on a deep-strike mission. This package alone will ensure tactical air superiority over the targetted location. Therefore, there will be minimal reliance on bigger AEW & CS p0latforms. This is one type of distributed lethality as far as offensive airpower goes.
ReplyDeleteTo RAJESH MISHRA: Then I have some good news for you. And here it is:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Masood-Azhar-veto-fallout-Government-to-soon-take-a-view-on-putting-China-back-on-country-of-concern-list/articleshow/51702923.cms
China has to realise now that it can no longer have its cake & eat it as well. Beijing must be told in no uncertain terms that actions have consequences that will now bite a lot more, given China’s increasing socio-economic instability due to rising unemployment in the midst of economic slowdown. A signal was already given by NaMo in the US when he held bilateral talks with his US & Japanese counterparts, but he did not with President Xi Jinping. On top of that, once India later this week inks foundational agreements like CISMOA, BECA & LSA, this will send un unmistakable signal to Beijing that India is now part of the coalition of the willing that includes the US, Japan, Australia, ASEAN, ROK & Taiwan. For, it is only when such foundational agreements are inked that DETERRENCE really works & is seen to be credible. There are several apologists still in India that don’t want such agreements to be inked. One such is the present-day RM Manohar Parikkar, who believes in quiet diplomacy in such matters. What he & folks like him don’t realise is what was signed by the US & India in January 2015, when POTUS & NaMo inked the ‘Joint Strategic Vision for the Asia-Pacific & IOR’. This agreement clearly calls for increasing inter-operability between the USN & IN through joint exercises & joint patrols. After all, of what use are joint exercises if joint patrols & joint operations are ruled out? RM Parikkar should also realise that 1) joint patrols (in favour of which ASEAN has been asking for the past 5 years!) cannot be conducted ‘quietly’; & 2) public display of collective military intent is the CRITICAL CORNERSTONE FOR DETERRENCE. So, the sooner these apologists get rid of the ‘Bhoothnaths’ of LSA, BECA, CISMOA & jopint patrols, the better for India.
To CSC: VMT. 1) The issue of re-loading & available stocks of LR-SAMs within a carrier battle-group was discussed at length in several previous threads. 2) SR-SAM project will never take off, rest assured. Instead, missiles like Python-5 mounted inside cannisters will soon emerge as the favoured option.
ReplyDeleteTo ARPIT KANODIA: Looks like the UK is upping the ante against Pakistan:
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35959202
And in a unique development, more than 1 million British citizens have signed a petition to make the UK stop pumping in 700 million Pound-Sterling into Pakistan's educational system every year due to rising corruption. It's all here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=186aR5Sy1gQ
While both the UK & Germany are of the belief that Kulbhushan Jadhav was abducted from inside Iran & was then hanmded over to the ISI:
http://www.india.com/news/india/taliban-sold-alleged-indian-spy-to-pakistan-claims-ex-german-envoy-to-islamabad-gunter-mulack-1077334/
http://www.india.com/news/india/pakistan-arrested-indian-spy-to-build-pressure-on-iran-senge-hasnan-sering-1067775/
And finally, discerning Pakistanis are aghast at the country's armed forces (through the ISPR) going overboard by twitting about the meeting between the PA's COAS & the Iranian President:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lxr9YxRsvyQ
Lastly, watch what former ISI-DG Lt Gen Ziauddin Butt has to say about Gen Musharraf & R & AW's activities inside Pakistan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMT_-cirYtw&hd=1
To GOPU: 1) Firstly, after NaMo cracked the whip last November on-board the INS Vikramaditya during the annual Combined Commander’s Conference, all procurement exercises & plans are now being broken down into CRITICAL, IMPORTANT & ESSENTIAL categories. Consequently, the IA no longer enjoys the luxury of procuring four types of 155mm howitzers. Consequently, topmost priority will be given to hardware accretions reqd for mountain warfare & under the CRITICAL category, 814 MGS like the Caesar will be procured soonest, followed by 145 LW-155/M-777 ultralightweight howitzers & 414 Dhanush 45-cal towed howitzers. OFB officials told me at the expo that the 155mm/52-cal towed version was developed way back in 2011 for plains-based warfare, but the IA prefers the 45-cal solution for areas like Ladakh & Sikkim & Tawang because it is easier to transport & deploy over mountainous terrain. In addition, if at all towed 155mm/52-cal howitzers are to be acquired to replace the 130mm M-46s, then the OFB option will be selected simply because of the sheer communality it shares with existing FH-77Bs & also with the Pinaka-1 MBRLs. This will not only simplify battlefield logistics, but will also reduce acquisition costs. Need of the hour is to cut costs wherever possible without compromising on quality & firepower. I also fully concur with the OFB’s PoV that the ATAGS will end up as yet another of the DRDO’s products that has been (like the Tejas Mk.1 LCA) developed of/by/for scientists. After all, the OGB has been in existence since 1780 AD, while the DRDO knows next-to-nothing about tubed field artillery! Therefore, the IA will not go for tracked SPHs of any type as they’re totally useless for mountain warfare.
ReplyDelete2) MGS can be manoeuvred with far greater ease along mountainous terrain than towed howitzers. Plus, the truck used for towing the howitzer can instead be used for carrying ammo reloads & BMCS charges.
3) 105mm howitzers don’t offer the kind of hit accuracy that 155mm howitzers do. Furthermore, the 105mm IFGs made by OFB have severe problems with barrel life. Hence the decision to do away with the IFGs.
4) The OFB’s 155mm towed howitzers like the 45-cal & 52-cal versions of the Dhanush share a very degree of commonality with existing FH-77Bs & also the Pinaka MBRLs (both use the same RLG-INS & artillery fire-direction system), all of which greatly reduces the IA’s battlefield logistics headaches & acquisition costs. The Caesar also uses the same SIGMA-30 RLG-INS as that used by the Dhanush & Pinaka. The Trajan is an entirely different system that will only increase the acquisition costs.
5) BHharat Forge/Kalyani Group is wasting its time,. Just like TATA Power SED, in trying to bid for the MGS & towed howitzer competitions. The MoD has already decreed that all 155mm howitzers of all types will be built ONLY BY OFB.
6) Nope. Instead, Pinaka-2 rockets using MBDA’s GNSS-based or IRNSS-based course correction system is being developed. IMI’s TCS is no longer available & MBDA’s proposed solution is therefore the best option on the table.
Finally, do read this:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-keen-on-USs-F/A-18-jet-offer/articleshow/51706566.cms
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteFrom the handling of the investigation of the Pathankot incidence the present government's Pak policy appears to be adrift. Your insights would be appreciated.
Best Regards
Raj
For that the Su-30 MKI has to be data linked with the other aircrafts in the strike package. Isn't it??
ReplyDeleteBut as far as I know the Tadiran Spectra link sourced data link can't even share the tactical air situation with other sukhois in the manner that the Russian sukhoi variants can do. It can only communicate with the Phalcon AEW&CS.
Has this deficiency been worked out so far ??
hi prasun
ReplyDeleteI am aware that we have israeli pods , but i was referring to the space and dedicated debrief centers like they show in the film top gun. do we have that ?.
Hi
ReplyDeleteIs the F18 on offer to India is latest with Steath capability , IRST and AESA radar or current model only F18E/F ???
Can you provide all the new features of F18 Stealth Figher and how it stands against Rafale or Sukhoi 30
Dear Prasunji,
ReplyDeleteOnce again thank you as you have surpassed expectation of followers/readers like me by posting plethora of information from Defexpo 2016 with all the behind the curtain's details. I have few queries as follows.
1. You mentioned that IN SSBN will be operating from Chagos trench but given the range of K15 & K4 how will they be able to hit for example say targets in PRC & North Pakistan?
2. Do see you see any substance in all these reports of India being interested in F-18 etc or its just a tactic to either bargain with France or by some lobbyists to highlight products of their clients.
Regards
Pawan
hi prasun
ReplyDeleteAs crazy as it may sound , Is reopening of the jaguar production line do able ?especially after the re engining and putting a 2032 radar in the nose and glass cockpit ,we have a decent multi role ac . Will there be a problem getting critical spares that we cant do ?
Thank you for your answer...
ReplyDeleteI do remember the old discussions on crane reloading at sea of 32 barak 8 in case of need. It seemed unrealistic, this the 2nd part of the question... Any chance of the ER barak 8 being retrofitted as 32 additional vls on the Kolkatta.
Spyder as srsam sounds like a good option with the only disadvantage being the low height ceiling rendering them useless against aircraft anf bombers... Making them useful against missiles in Terminal stage and helos only
Dear Prasunda
ReplyDeleteIn that case, with reference to China's intransigence and our Agreements with the United States, the Nostradamus predictions or more accurately rather the interpretations of his cryptic Quatrains with reference to India's clash with the Yellow Peril (China) with tacit support from the Americas and allies seem to be coming true in a manner of speaking.
My question though is "What is in it for us Indians?" Joint Patrols, CISMOA, etc. are all very fine. Bus is it going to help the Indian economy through more business such as trade with the ASEAN, investment / business in MROs and money for the budding Military Industrial Complex. After all, where else is the sense in incurring costs and allotting our scarce resources, if there are no tangible gains for us while steeping on the dragon's tail and toes.
ReplyDelete@Kustanv Steeping on the dragon's tail & toes? Indians seriously living in another world.
ReplyDeleteDid the China ever asked India before providing Plutonium & nuke design to Pakistan. Did China ever asked before providing nuclear reactor in Khushab that only meant to produce plutonium not electricity. Or Did China asked before providing Missile system including Nsar to Pakistan.
I don't know in which world Indians living who still think China as dragon. When u guys wake up, when China nuke us, then u say we should have formal relations with Taiwan?
@ Arpit, While apologising for the spelling typos, whatever China does, China does for its' own again. Similarly whatever India does, we do to secure our interest and benefit, atleast of those in power.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, we did not stand up for Tibet because we were simply in no position to do so, whatever be the reasons. Similarly we were unable to give the Chinese a bloody nose in NEFA because the Chinese did not chase us to the Plains for a long drawn conflict and instead played to their strengths.
Under the circumstances, it is best to play to our strengths and profit from it rather than be jingoistic. My firm belief is that the reason for the 1963 debacle in addition to our military un-preparaedness were jingoistic feelings and territorial or boundary mindedness i.e. the refusal to lose TEMPORARILY even a square meter of territory for even tactical reasons. Let's face it; neither the Chinese Dragon nor the American Eagle are altruistic powers, let us be an enlightened and strong elephant and protect our interests while profiting from our ventures.
Thanks and Regards
@Kushtav I am not jingoistic, but I m realistic. If we don't stand a chance in Tibet, so why raising offensive Mountain Corp?
ReplyDeleteAlso in geopolitics, neither eagle matters not dragon. Actually China should make fun of us like we behave.
When China refused to accept PoK as Indian, but we still afraid to have a strategic & even diplomatic relation with Vietnam & Taiwan. Why we still accepting one China policy?
You unable to see the world beyond horizon because you already accepted China as 11 feet tall.
@Prasun
ReplyDeleteThe 'erroneous conclusion' appears to be this odd 'defense partnership' between godzilla and kermit the frog. AS if that was not twisted enough, good luck to us facing all the F16s and Vipers gifted to our sworn enemy. Guess we should now salivate with joy over the 'gracious' F/A-18 jet offer.
N@Arpit apropos offensive mountain divisions are in the future Tibet was lost in the 1950s...they will be useful for capturing and seizing new territory and recovery of lost territories in a future eventuality. But that will be about it. A tactical asset but that is about it. It will certainly never liberate Tibet. The time when we could have had a Sikkim Chogyal type rump Tibet with the Dalai Lama as titular head with some of our border contiguous regions was lost 5 decades ago.
ReplyDeleteThanx for your reply and accordingly it is the time that India must take tough and suitable stances against the Red Dragon.
ReplyDeleteHi Prasun very informative article once again however have few questions
ReplyDelete1) Is the Jaguar going to be upgraded with f-125in engine or has it been scraped if it is then when can we expect the same?
2) If not then how will IAF stop the strength falling to below 33 squadrons with no new aircraft being purchased and Tejas nowhere insite?
3) Is there a possible chance to use Kaveri to power the Jaguars incase F125in not showing up?
Please reply
Sir,
ReplyDeleteI watched those videos, and that is amazing that Pakistani people are still struck in ISPR's tweet about R&AW.
No one asking why there is no joint statement released, why no joint Press conference of PM Nawaz Sharif & Prez Rouhani. Why he go alone in Press Conference? Who held a press conference alone in other country? That is bizzare.
Sir, why did you said
ReplyDelete"Finally, do read this:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-keen-on-USs-F/A-18-jet-offer/articleshow/51706566.cms "
Are you saying that govt is really interested in buying F18 ?
Don't you think rafale is far better ?
To ARPIT KANODIA: LoLz! Such theatrics characterise a National Security State, & therefore those hailing from Welfare States find such theatrics rather horrific. The civilians in Pakistan too are squirming about it, exemplified by Ms. Hina Rabbani Khar's observations. The DG of ISPR is on an overdrive to shore up all possible support for the PA because the statements of the PA's COAS about wiping out terrorism inside Pakistan this year has clearly been demolished & disproven by recent terrorist incidents. Consequently, the search has been intensified for finding 'external' scapegoats to shift the blame on to them, so that a perception is created that despite the PA's best efforts, hostile countries are hell-bent on formenting terrorism inside Pakistan. Hence the dessimination of various conspiracy theories about the UK, Afghanistan & India formenting trouble inside Pakistan. In the international arena, however, there are no buyers of such theories.
ReplyDeleteMatters will take a take a turn for the worse for Islamabad when the Iranian President comes calling in Delhi in the near future & after that Iran will announce its decision to acquire Su-30SM combat aircraft in large numbers from Russia & the IRIAF will officially approach the IAF for providing flying training & HAL for providing product support.
In the meantime, earlier today there was a very interesting seminar hosted by the United Services Institution in New Delhi, this being the 14th Major General Samir Sinha Memorial Lecture. The subject was 'Development of Tactical Nuclear Weapons by Pakistan and Implications for South Asia' & the presentation was given by Lt Gen Arun Kumar Sahni, UYSM, SM, VSM (Retd) Former GOC-in-C South Western Command. Chair: General Deepak Kapoor, PVSM, AVSM, SM, VSM (Retd) Former Chief of the Army Staff
Cont'd below...
The Observer Research Foundation will host a discussion on ‘Balochistan at Crossroads--The World Needs a Conscience’ led by Professor Naela Quadri Baloch. The event will be held on 8th April, 2016 from 11.30am to 1pm at the ORF Conference Hall. Professor Naela Quadri Baloch is the President of The World Baloch Women’s Forum and Leader of Baloch Independence movement.
ReplyDeleteJuly 18, 1965 born in Shaal (Quetta) Balochistan. She is daughter of Syed Ahmad Quadri, a well known lawyer and activist for Baloch national rights since 1956, NAP. Her mother Bibi Gul Zarina was an activist for women’s development, founder of the first indigenous NGO Gidan in Balochistan; established many girls’ schools and women’s entrepreneurs in rural areas in 1960s. Professor Naela is married and mother of 3 sons.
1973 Naela Quadri established a unit of Baloch Students Organization at the age of 8 years in grade 5, in her girl’s school during Bhutto military operation on Balochistan; though very tiny but was the first step in formal female participation in Baloch mass politics.
1978 she won High school students union elections for the office of President.
1981 Zia Marshal Law, she initiated protests from the GGC Government Girls Collage Quetta, against death sentence of a Baloch student activist Hameed Baloch by Military court, the protest spread all over Balochistan in form of student’s protests, shutter down and wheel jam. She received threats from the Martial Law Administrator who further ordered cancellation of her enrolment, her name struck off from Grade 12, GGC Quetta.
1983-1987 Naela Quadri lead student’s movement in Balochistan against Zia marshal law as leader of Baloch Student Organization, University of Balochistan.
1984 she started the first campaign ever in Baloch history against Honor killing as a young activist who faced resistance from tribal mindset, still it is a deep rooted custom in Baloch society taking hundreds of lives every year in which 80% are women as the most vulnerable part of society. She worked with assertiveness to eradicate this custom, by writing articles, producing programs for television and radio, public meetings, lobbying with tribal leaders, political parties, NGOs and the United Nations.
1988-1990 Lead historical students movement against pro dictatorship religious extremist party Jamat e Islami’s rule and hold in Punjab University Lahore as Vice President of Progressive Students Forum PSF that changed the socio-political culture of the oldest and largest university of the country.
1992 started teaching in University of Balochistan.
1995 her film against honorkilling “Home Victim” selected for the Fourth World Conference for Women Beijing China, achieved applaud of 40,000 women activists of the world resulted in prompt inclusion of honorkilling as the priority issue of Violence Against Women one of the 12 sections for women’s development in the declaration of UN Beijing 1995.
1998 she lead a protest march against Pakistan’s nuclear tests with her two hundred students in Shaal (Quetta) Balochistan. It was the first public protest in South Asia against its nuclearization, she faced threats of imprisonment from government of Pakistan, and her service record got negative remarks and received Show-Cause Notice from the University administration on directions of ISI.
1999 she delivered a presentation on nuclearization of South Asia in an international conference, Meiji Guakin University Tokyo Japan, she clearly indicated the role of China in Pakistan’s nuclear test 1998 that threw Balochistan in a hell of uncontrolled radioactivity.
cpmt'd below...
1999 she participated in an international event for peaceful conflict resolution; Women Waging Peace, Boston USA as one of its pioneers, this is a continuous movement for women’s role in conflict zones of 110 countries.
ReplyDelete2000 during the severe drought as aftermath of nuclear tests in Balochistan, as a support campaign leader she organized a network “Gidan” of INGOs local NGOs and volunteers to provide support to drought affected areas of Balochistan.
2000 presentation on unification and liberation of Balochistan in Asia Forum for Human Rights (SAFHR) Kathmandu, Nepal
2002 as associate professor she resigned from university to record her protest against direct military control on the University of Balochistan.
2002 selected as executive director of Gidan
2003 She visited five states of USA under International Visitors Program of State Department, where she met with women activists, interfaith groups and think tanks; The Heritage Foundation.
2004-2005 along with five leading social organizations developed a network ASHA against harassment of women at work place.
2006 her husband Mir Ghulam Mustafa Raisani abducted by MI 313 a branch of Pakistan Army, brutally tortured and disappeared for two years in Kuli Camp Quetta.
2006 Gidan ngo declared banned by Pakistan Interior Ministry for the allegations of supporting Baloch freedom movement; the NGO was running a health clinic and a women’s economic activity centre in Marri Camp Quetta (a Baloch marginalized community every day under brutal raids, torture, abductions and mutilated bodies) Gidan office sealed, personal and NGO’s bank accounts seized.
2006-2009 cases of anti state activities filed against her, 9 house raids by Pakistan army, she and her family dispersed and lived underground.
2009 She was a participant in Asia Pacific Women’s Conference, Beijing+15 Manila. At Karachi airport Pakistan’s security forces off loaded her name was in Exit Control List, she was arrested on finding a copy of her presentation during search of her luggage, included a detailed list of 240 abducted Baloch women by Pakistan army.
2010 she started living in exile in Afghanistan. After six months ISAF detected 2 explosive mines in front of her home in Kandhar, she shifted to Kabul.
cont'd below...
2011 she visited 24 provinces of Afghanistan where 4 million Baloch live, supported them to organize in a national level forum The Baloch Shura Afghanistan, she presented the BLC Baloch Liberation Charter in Baloch Shura’s first Counsel Session in Kabul, which accepted by raising hands of 100% counselors.
ReplyDelete2012 she established the World Baloch Women’s Forum, the first ever Baloch organization that has membership from either sides of Goldsmith line, Durand line and Diaspora on a single platform. In the declaration of its first Counsel Session in Mazar e Sharif, Afghanistan, announced call for abolition of all forms of discrimination against women and demanded an independent, united, democratic and gender balanced Balochistan.
2012 Another bomb found in front of her home in Kabul that was timely disposed off by the Afghan Security Forces.
2013 She joined women’s development initiatives for Afghan women; she trained Afghan Women Police to play their role in implementation of EVAW: Law for Elevation of Violence Against Women. Eight suicide attackers were caught alive from her residential street in Kabul.
2014-2015 To redirect propinquity in Baloch and Kurds; she initiated strategy of joint policies and public protests of both Independence Movements, which became more visible during her stay in Vancouver Canada. This strategy got huge appreciation in Kurd and Baloch masses, and got replicated in many countries as a more powerful approach.
She is writer of many articles on politics, security and gender.
Her two books;
No more dishonoring by honor killing.
Parcham e dil (Flag of my heart; poetry) published from Kabul Afghanistan.
Her books: i) The History of Balochistan and ii) Balochistan and the Global Security will be published from British Columbia in coming months.
She is a film maker and has made many documentaries, talk shows and tele-films on issues of gender including men’s issues, peace and social justice, shown in different international events, training programs and television networks.
To RAJ: How is that even remotely possible? India has already shared all that she possesses in terms of material forensic evidence with not only Pakistan, but with the whole world. And here’s one example of such material evidence:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nia.gov.in/writereaddata/Portal/PressReleaseNew/300_1_Pathankot.pdf
To MADFOREXBII: The Su-30MKI can’t, but the Super Su-30MKI will be able to do so. The ODL from Tadiran SpectraLink has several channels of operation & they can be operationalised any time. The ODLs on Russian Su-27 & MiG-31 family-members are used when BARCAP missions are mounted. During offensive air-superiority missions in which DPSAs are involved, all that the escorting Su-30MKIs have to do is to warn through audio channels the DPSA pilots about the prevailing situational awareness pictiure, i.e. from which direction hostile aircraft are approaching from & at what altitude.
To RAD: Obviously ground-based debriefing centres exist in Gwalior. Of what is all the recording of flight manoeuvres by the ACMI pods if there’s no ground-based infrastructure that synthesizes all tyhese recordings into a realistic, true air situation picture? There’s no need for the Jaguar IS’s production line to be re-opened. All of them have plenty of airframe life left in them. Only the Adour engines have to be replaced with F-125 turbofans & they will be able to stay in service till 2040 AD.
To VISHAKH & PIYUSH DAS: Don’t worry, that news-item was paid-news. There’s no truth in it, rest assured.
To PAWAN: VMT. 1) It is therefore evident that the K-4 & K-15 are all technology demonstrators, & the definitive SLBM will haver a range of some 8,000km. 2) Rest assured that the Rafale will be ordered.
To CSC: As of now the IN doesn’t require Barak-8ERs. The IN’s SR-SAM reqmt is actually for replacing the Barak-1 PDMS, i.e. a new-generation close-in air defence system is reqd for protection against inbound ASCMs, & not against combat aircraft or bombers.
To KAUSTAV: What is in it for India? I had already spelt this out several timjes before in terms of generating employment of lakhs of Indians, especially in the MRO sectors. In addition, countries like Japan & Taiwan who now want to make hi-tech investments in countries other than China are eyeing India & Vietnam today. If India can get her fiscal economic & monetary & industrial policies right, then there will be no looking back. Finally, India will have to get rid of this ‘Bhoothnath’ called ToT, & instead focus on joint product development, like the BrahMos-NG, Barak-2/Barak-8ER, the projected fleet of SSNs etc etc. Only this will bring in value-added knowledge into India that’s reqd for building up a sustainable military-industrial complex & its related industrial eco-system in terms of Tier-2 & Tier-3 vendors. Mind you, so far I’ve uploaded only 1/10th of the photos that I took at DEFEXPO 2016. Once I’ve uploaded the rest that show the achiebements of the Tier-2 & Tier-3 vendors, you will get a fairly good idea of how the upstream & downstream elements of a military-industrial complex function.
ReplyDeleteLastly, do take note that prior to surrendering her bargaining chips vis-à-vis Tibet in 1954, India had first surrendered her bargaining chips in Xinjiang, which was annexed by China in 1949 & where India used to have a consulate & a trade representative’s office.
To SANGOS: You’re forgetting that the PAF’s first 40 F-16s will have to be decommissioned by 2020 & there’s no re-engining option available for them.
To RAT: 1 & 2) The Jaguar IS fleet will indeed undergo a re-engining process with the F-125. That’s the writing on the wall that no one can wish away anymore. 3) Kaveri is still another 8 years away from being declared flightworthy. I’m sure no one wants to wait that long for it to arrive.
So if OFB is in charge of all future howitzer construction, then the logical question to ask is does the OFB possess enough organizational efficiency to ramp annual howitzer production to a reasonable level AND also manufacture the associated levels of ammunition, spares, and support vehicles needed for the thousands of 155mm howitzers that will be (eventually) inducted.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you make of the Tata WhAP? It looks like they based it off the French VBCI. And the interview below suggests that they already have orders for the WhAP, which is separate from their FICV vehicle. Is that true?
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2016-03-09/news/71346506_1_ficv-tata-motors-indian-army
Here's a disappointing news
ReplyDeletehttp://thewire.in/2016/04/06/india-rules-out-retaliating-against-chinese-companies-over-chinas-masood-azhar-veto-27927/
BR
Raj
To RAJ: That's a standard negotiating tactic. It is called "unleashing & waving the stick, but choosing not to wield it for the time-being".
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, watch this nitwit of a journalist who, despite his incessant prodding, is unsuccessful in convincing officials of Pakistan's Foreign Ministry to stick it up to India WRT the Kulbhushan Jadhav episode:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T55i1fy27OE
Interesting statistics regarding ISIS recruitment efforts in India:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUDxkHHHrY8&hd=1
To GOPU: That's a problem easily resolved. Just like companies such as Kaman Aerospace & Northrop Grumman act as sub-contractors for Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, the OFB too can outsource various components of such howitzers from companies like Mahindra Defence, Kalyani Group, L & T and TATA, so that OFB is then reqd to only possess a final assembly/integration facility at more than 1 location. That way the annual production rate can be doubled.
ReplyDeleteThe Kestrel is a sound design as an 8 x 8 APC, but it can of course be improved through additional re-engineering. Its modular design concept is of great advantage, as it enables the hull to accommodate various types of turrets. But to date no orders for the Kestrel have been placed from anyone in India.
Dear Sir,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the update and forthcoming ones.
1.What kind of skill sets in manpower would be required for manpower for engineering units and service providers of such MROs with reference to Navy and Aircraft?
2. For Greenfield Units (SMEs), are there any international defence industry standards other than the usual GMP and ISO standards etc. that have to be met to be registered as vendors and/or service providers to the Giant MROs set up by the likes of Boeing, BAE, etc.?
Thanks and Regards Again, Your patience and to the point answers are always very enlightening,
HI prasun
ReplyDeleteI really doubt whether pakistan will retire the f-16 in 2020, they will force the US to service them at their risk.As long as the US f-16 are in servive they will be around. Just as we refused to retire even older mig-21s.
You mentioned that the su-30mki super pilots will warn friendlies about a threat in HF , Well
they can be easily jammed .They did it in Kargil where my friend GP Cpt Perumal told me they
jammed our air to air voice channel very effectively.
If spectra supplies the ODL does it mean they can listen in ?. What about the indian made datalink etc ie datalink 2 ,how good is it?.
Modern HF/VHF military communication systems are based on the jam-resistant burst transmission protocol which consist of Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum waveforms. Directly jamming such signals is very hard. You need to use a Pseudo Noise sequence very close to the one used to spread the original signal. Raw power is insufficient to jam the signal.
DeleteThe reason is that the enemy, who has finite amounts of power, doesn't know when, where & on which spectrum to transmit to jam the signal. It's simply not practical to transmit high power across a broad spectrum for long periods of time. Makes you a bright target for an ARM shot.
But the point for which this is not called jam-proof is If the attacker can detect and isolate the signal they can retransmit with a small delay. The overlapping signals both use the same PN sequence code, and the output will be the sum of the two signals. If this is done repeatedly you can jam the signal.
So in the end it all boils down on your ESM's effectiveness & the sophistication of the in-flight radio that the enemy possess, to effect a successful or unsuccessful jamming.
Thanks for replying have some question related to time-frame of the F-125in engines contract signing and arriving when will it happen? also will Jaguars get new engines along with DARIN upgrade? I personally believe we missed an opportunity to learn the art of fighter aircraft manufacturing with Jaguars back in the 70s-80s.
ReplyDeleteDear Sir
ReplyDeleteThe RAFALE team was to start re negotiations on MARCH 29
What happened ; ANY progress
Did they budge a little
Prasun ji, do you have anything to say about NaMo's recent visit to Saudi Arabia?
ReplyDeleteThat said, I'm very much interested in what could emerge as a result of a possible visit by Iranian Prez to Dilli. VMT for all the analysis.
PS : The book appears very much worth it. Now for a weekend of happy reading.
To RAD: Today there are HF/VHF/UHF software-defined radios (SDR) available, which was not the case in 1999. The ODLs too are software-defined. F-16s due for retirement are the Block 15 F-16A/B units, & not the Block 52 F-16C/D units.
ReplyDeleteTo S. SENTHIL KUMAR: Do go through these:
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/watching-nawaz-sharif/
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/why-we-must-keep-talking-to-pakistan/article8442505.ece?homepage=true
Dada what is the progress on s70b deal??
ReplyDeletePrasunDa,
ReplyDeleteReally great pictures of DefExpo 2016. Many thanks for sharing. Two questions in this regard:
1. You have posted pictures of AIP & Autonomous Underwater Vehicle that L&T has showcased. Have they developed these technologies in house or have they sourced it from some foreign OEM?
2. The picture of GSLs export of 105mm OPVs to Sri Lanka is heartening but in the near future how successful do you think Indian shipyards will be in exporting?
Thanks,
Sujoy
Prasunda,
ReplyDeleteIf the definitive SLBM has to have 8000 km range with 4 mirv, it will take more than 10 years to become a reality. What about our deterrent in the meantime ?
Looks like the current GoI is no different from earlier ones when it comes to going slow on missile testing (Agni V) and working on CISMOA like pacts. Wo'nt we have to curtail our 8000 km SLBM ambitions once we are part of the US alliance ?
To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: VMT. 1) Yes, they were developed in-house by a consortium of companies & DRDO labs, led by L & T as the prime contractor. 2) Not in a global; sense, but within the IOR there will be future success stories in future.
ReplyDeleteTo CAR: In the interim, reliance will have to placed on the Agni-4 & Agni-5. But these will not be a survivable as the SSBN-based deterrent.
To RAJESH: No problems at all. Let them be on the backfoot until they mend their ways, because now they will have to contend with pressure from not just India, but also from Afghanistan, Iran & the EU. Unlike Pakistan that has a parasitic relationship with China, India & Iran present far greater & bigger economic markets for China & therefore Beijing has to now decide how far down the abyss it wants to descend to just for the sake of propping up Pakistan. It is now in the open that the Iranian President left Pakistan as a very angry & disappointed man. This was once again been commented upon on-record by former Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar last night & it can be viewed here:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x42qr7e_benaqaab-7th-april-2016_news
And if you’re in the mood for having a good laugh over the weekend, then listen to the 2nd-half of that same programme in which the nitwit programme-anchor, when interviewing A S Dult, wonders why no active Indian politician figures in the Panama papers leaks & tries to hint that the leaks concerning Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif’s family are the handiwork of R & AW! Watch how A S Dulat gets pissed off at the end of the programme & tells the anchor to buzz off.
In this revealing TV interview, Geneva-based Baloch separatist leader Brahmadagh Bugti states that Kulbhushan Jadhav was kidnapped/abducted from Iran & then brought into Pakistan:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dailymotion.com/video/x41qv9u_live-with-nasrullah-malik-3rd-april-2016_news
to madforexbii
ReplyDeleteGood explanation of spread spectrum SDL. Any idea of the Indian ODL?
To RAD: Today there are HF/VHF/UHF software-defined radios (SDR) available, which was not the case in 1999. The ODLs too are software-defined. F-16s due for retirement are the Block 15 F-16A/B units, & not the Block 52 F-16C/D units.
ReplyDeleteFirstly USAF is increasing the life to 8000hrs... that will always be an option!!! i still want u to bet on it!!!
and by your definition that formula also applies to IAF mirages....... they will be phased out in 2020
@Anonymous The 8000 hours frame life figure is only of those which are above Block 30.
ReplyDeleteAlso the SLEP program you talking about is only for above block 40.
Actually IAF, Israeli Air Force already started to retire A/B.
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/israels-f-16-with-the-most-air-to-air-kills-ever-has-be-1685424102/1685670174
Prasun sir,
ReplyDeleteI have some queries regarding artillery procurement by the MoD. Could you kindly share your thoughts please:
If Bharat forge claims that they have manufactured an ultra light 155mm howitzer, then why is the MoD not considering that option instead of the BAe M 777?
Now that a couple of domestic options are artillery guns are available, why is the MoD going ahead with foreign options like the M 777 and the Caesar?
Why isnt the MoD considering a dual assembly line for 155 mm guns--OFB and Indian private sector?
Another request sir-- I know you have done this in the past, but can you do a special feature on artillery procurement, drawing from your DefExpo visit please?
Regards,
Amit
So no barak 8 er... Then why not use the available space on Dec to add another 32 vls for barak 8 and thus have 64 missiles loaded and 64 reloadable on the 15 series ddgs
ReplyDeleteTo CSC: Because there's no internal volume left for that. So, only 32 ready-to-fire Barak-2s & 32 reloads will have to suffice. Thus, in a carrier battle group, the accompanying four P-15 or P-15A or P-15B DDGs & two FFGs will account for a large number of available MR-SAMs & LR-SAMs.
ReplyDeleteTo ANUP: I had been stating from Day-1 that this affair involved only accounting fraud & now this has been proven true! That means no Indian citizen was bribed in any manner. Therefore, the coast is now clear for Finmeccanica/AgustaWestland to pay liquidated damages to the Govt of India for over-charging the MoD for the AW-101s, following which the matter will be considered settled & outstanding deliveries can begin & the existing mothballed AW-101s in India can be made flightworthy once again.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/With-eye-on-China-and-Pakistan-India-in-talks-to-buy-US-Predator-drones/articleshow/51744677.cms
ReplyDeleteThis story has gotten everything mixed-up. Reality is that the IN & IAF both want Avenger turbofan-powered UAVs & UCAVs, & not Predators. The Super Herons due for delivery later this year & being powered by diesel engines, are better than the Predator or Predator-XP.
To Anon@10.39AM: Do some homework, like ARPIT KANODIA has done!!! The IAF's upgraded Mirage 2000s have new-build SNECMA M53-P3 turbofans & all older M53-P2 turbofans are being replaced by the -P3. That's why the per-unit cost of upgrading each Mirage 2000 is so high. Develop the habit of doing homework, & then talk about betting. Until then, everyone will be more than willing to bet that you've been afflicted with terminal stupidity!
ReplyDeleteHi
ReplyDelete1) Any Progress on Assault Rifles ?? Which Design has been selected ??
2) Is Making Travor Israel Rifle not considered in large numbers??
3) For Bullet proof jacket which companies products have been shortlisted???
To VISHAKH: 1) The Excalibur. 2) No. 3) Already ordered from TAML & MKU.
ReplyDeleteHi Prasunji,
ReplyDeletehttp://idrw.org/ships-and-shipbuilding-in-india-through-a-sino-indian-prism/
The above article shows a possible scenario what kind of situation the Indian Navy will be upto. Is there a alternative design of an FFG (Which GRSE is pitching to Philippines Navy) based on Kamorta class ASW ship which the IN can induct in large numbers very quickly (May be built in private ship yards). What is your take on this. VMT
To AMIT: 1) The ULH shown by Kalyani Group is nothing else but an experimental prototype designed in the 1980s by the late Dr Gerry Bull for China's NORINCO, & subsequently only partially developed by Austria's NORICUM. NORINCO subsequently discovered that 155mm is not a workable option & therefore scaled it down to a 122mm howitzer in both truck-mounted & towed versions. They were first shown during the 2014 Airshow China expo in Zhuhai & I had uploaded their photos in the threads dealing with this expo. 2) No proven indigenous ultralightweight howitzer options are available, & neither are truck-mounted motorised 155mm/52-cal howitzers. All MGS options being considered are of imported origin. 3) The MoD will consider in due time, rest assured. There is no other option.
ReplyDeleteJust to refresh everyone's memory, the Kalyani Group’s Bharat-52 155mm/52-cal towed field howitzer owes its origins to the baseline 155mm/45-cal towed howitzer that was originally designed by the legendary ballistics expert, the late Dr Gerry Bull, in response to a contract awarded to him by China’s NORINCO in 1980. By 1983 the first prototypes were built for Dr Bull by Spain’s SANTA BARBARA & were successfully field-tested in China’s Shenyang MR & opposite Mongolia, following which NORINCO began series-producing them. This very same design was then also sold by Dr Bull (who owned its IPRs) to ARMSCOR of South Africa & it was mass-produced as the GC-45. Again, the very same design was sold by Dr Bull to Austria’s NORICUM & was produced as the GHN-45.
Likewise, the Bharat-45 155mm towed howitzer shown at DEFEXPO 2016 is a service version of the 155mm/45-calibre, autonomous gun system developed by Dr Bull for Austrian gun manufacturer Maschinenfabrik Liezen (MFL). Kalyani Group now wants to manufacture the ULH, the Vharat-45 & Bharat-52 at a facility that the Kalyani Group has also bought, knocked down and transported to India from Swiss company RUAG, which had earlier acquired NORICUM & MFL.
So, what you're seeing now is that what had been first marketed & sold to NORINCO of China in the 1980s & is now being re-packaged & re-sold by the Kalyani Group. Does anyone honestly want the Indian Army to fall for such offers? I hope not.
Had to comment on the link you posted
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dailymotion.com/video/x42qr7e_benaqaab-7th-april-2016_news
That is some FUNNY NEWS!!! LOL , what was the anchor hoping to get ??? LOL
To SS: The projected land warfare is realistic, but not the naval warfare scenario. The PLAN's force modernisation plans are dictated by what the navies of the US, Japan, ROK, Taiwan & ASEAN member-states are up to. Therefore, the only fleet of the PLAN that can possibly have anything to do within the IOR is the South Sea Fleet, which can easily be taken care of by the IN even if elements of this Fleet are located at a dedicated naval base in Ormara (and not Gwadar, which is a deep-sea port & therefore cannot operate as a naval base). While a follow-on batch of four P-28 ASW crovettes will be a welcome addition, what is reqd more irgently are the 15 shallow-water ASW vessels, each of which in turn can operate up to two autonomous surface boats equipped with dunking sonars for persistent ASW sweeps within India's territorial waters around India's major ports & naval bases.
ReplyDeleteTo G: LoLz! Glad you had a good laugh at it. Everyone in that country is going apeshit because no one in the world is willing to buy the theory that a living-and-breathing R & AW operative has been captured inside Pakistan. Nor is anyone willing to fall for the ISPR's POV about this operative lurking within the Sarawan area of southeastern Iran & that he was either abducted from there & sold to the ISI, or that he was handed over by Iran to Pakistan. The Iranian counter-intelligence network through the Sistan province is ruthlessly effective in this area & no non-state actor from any country can operate there without the knowledge of Iran. Therefore, Kulbhushan Jadhav in all probability was abducted from the seas around Chah Bahr outside Iranian territorial waters in international waters, i.e. an act of piracy being committed by a state.
ReplyDeleteThank you Prasun sir for sharing all that info and your insight
ReplyDeleteI hope you do a artillery feature soon
Regards,
Amit
Hi
ReplyDelete1) Can you tell us the changes made to the Excalibur over INSAS Rifle that has made it better product ??
2) IS the gun Excalibur in Testing phase?? or still development phase??
3) When is final GO coming from Army and is Army testing complete??
In your post, you posted a picture with three guns: 5.56mm assault rifle (foldable butt), 5.56mm assault rifle Ex-Caliber mk1, and carbine AMOGH. Could you clearly explain the differences between these three and their projected usage. And what would Ex-caliber mk2 be?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the state of current ammunition levels wrt the WWR? If OFB can't produce enough by itself, why is OFB not sub-contracting more often?
ReplyDeleteTo GOPU: Problem was never with OFB. Problem was with the UPA-2 govt placing orders on an annual basis for only a year's consumption, instead of placing orders for ammunition for a 3-year period. That anomaly has since been corrected. But then arises the problem of ramping up production of fuzes. Clearly one sole supplier of fuzes (ECIL) isn't enough. Therefore, Kalyani has entered the fray by teaming up with Junghans to become a second supplier.
ReplyDeleteSo it appears Kalyani group is merely dealing with BULLshit! :)
ReplyDeleteIndia's indigenisation and DRDO claims remind me of this: imagine you see names like - P. Hasthamaithunan; Chutiya Singh Gunrmaar; Chodnath Pissup - sounds like Indian but whoever will call anyone's child that? So they sound like Indian but never really are nor can they be. Merely sticking up labels to imports would never make them fully Indian products!
ReplyDeletePrasun da,
ReplyDeleteIf Insas Excalibur going to be selected. What will happen to MCIWS rifle. Latter is ambidextrous and have modular design as what heard over internet.
HI Prasun
ReplyDeletePLease give us more details on the k-4 missiles that seems to have been tested again. IN a previous video of the launch the missile seems to drift sideways before the main engine fires, this is seems to be totally different to contemporary sub launched missiles .
More over the rocket exhaust from the nose cap seems to be the major thrust factor in the ejection of the missile. Was there any russian inputs ?. its too sophisticated a matter for drdo to get it right on the first launch itself.
Sir,http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/EXPRESS-EXCLUSIVE-Maiden-Test-of-Undersea-K-4-Missile-From-Arihant-Submarine/2016/04/09/article3370608.ece
ReplyDeleteWill you shed some light on this launch. It is being said that the K-4 was launched in its full operational config from INS Arihant albeit with a dummy warhead. Now if this has really happened, it will mean the SLBM is in its final stages of developement or better still undergoing user trials as this launch involved the SFC.
What is intriguing is that the missile flew north for just 700 km and hit its intended target with a neae perfect CEp. Do we have any test range f testing out missiles inland ? Where was the target located?
Another thing I would like you to briefly explain is the state of the Su-30's upgrade programme? Will it ever take off or is it in the backburner due to the constraints imposed by the meagre budget.
Is Iaf looking forward to install lws and MAW s on its Su-30mki fleet and if so has any progress been made? Or that offer from Alpha electronixs and Cassidian will be just another concept on paper
Sir ji, check out this video about Tata Motors' activities in Myanmar -
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/OE5CUGkhY_E
Do you suppose there could be a market for Kestrel-type 8x8 vehicles for Myanmar? What about Tata's other High-Mobility Vehicles (HMVs) such as the LPTA-series?
Prasunda,
ReplyDeleteGood Morning.
While going through the website of 'Central Glass and Ceramic Institute " (CGCRI) I have come across a very interesting research oriented development by them. They are claiming that they can produce electricity directly from fuel. ( By a fuel cell.)
It means they are producing electricity from fuel without the help of generator ! Or they are converting chemical energy of the fuel directly to electrical energy. If it is true, then it will change the propulsion system of diesel electric submarine drastically. Kindly note that CGCRI is under CSIR. Government of India.
Please read ,
http://www.cgcri.res.in/page.php?id=282
Lastly In don't know whether the scientist them self are aware of the military use of thius product.
Requesting you kindly en-light us on this matter. If it is true that they have made a workable fuel cell then they must be appreciated.
Best regards,
Prasunda, is it true?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/EXPRESS-EXCLUSIVE-Maiden-Test-of-Undersea-K-4-Missile-From-Arihant-Submarine/2016/04/09/article3370608.ece
Kindly clear the mist around the progress of secret sea trial and test fire of K-4 SLBM from INS Arihant.
Thanks, regards
Sir, which fleet support ship is being talked about here?
ReplyDeletehttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/visakhapatnam/HSL-to-build-5-Navy-fleet-support-ships-from-2017/articleshow/51752191.cms
Thank you in advance.
Sarath Kumar R.
Dear Sir
ReplyDeletePlease answer my question
Pakistan wants to BUY DAMOCLES Targetting Pod from France
DO you think this will happen given the Arms embargo on China
Secondly Pakistanis Boast that they are going to get SPANISH INDRA
EW Suite for JF 17
Will this happen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RxHs71x-yw&nohtml5=False
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytnKJ_hOSys
nice documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaiRuQZ_aZo
ReplyDeleteTo BUDDHA: Watch this beautiful profile of Chah Bahr:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdVDewg3miw
To VIJAY: For which aircraft? The PAF already has Sniper & WMD-7 for F-16C/D Vlock 52 & the JF-17. So don't believe all this hogwash from jingoistic fanboys.
To R SARATH KUMAR: The ocean-going refuelling tankers, which will be built to a design provided by Hyundai. HSL will also do medium-refit of two (not 1) Type 877EKMs of the IN, while one will go to Russia.
To PARTHASARATHY: That's nothing new. At DEFEXPO 2016 TATA Power SED too showed such fuel cells. These have applications in mini-UAVs, high-altitude comms radios, HHTIs, as well as power-sources for clothing worn by troops in areas like the ridges around the Siachen Glacier.
To GESSLER: Myanmar is only 1 part of the success story. Such successes have also been achieved by TATA & Mahindra is places like Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, etc etc. Such markets are growing at an annual rate of 14%/15%. The Kestrel 8 x 8 will be ordered by both the IA & IN. Such 8 x 8 APCs are very handy in areas like Ladakh & Jammu. In fact, a version now under development features the Kestrel housing a 15-foot high mast atop which there's a LORROS sensor & a BFSR-SR.
To RAD, UJJWAL & AKASH: The test-firing conducted on March 31, 2016 nearly 45nm away from Vishakhapatnam coast in Andhra Pradesh involved a K-15/B-05 SLBM. This followed the November 25, 2015 successful ejection test of of the K-15/B-05 SLBM for the first time from INS Arihant off Vizag. Two more test-firings of the K-15 are scheduled for the future.
ReplyDeleteOn March 7, 2015 the K-4 SLBM's booster-section was test-fired for the very first time from a submerged pontoon (replica of a submarine) positioned nearly 30 feet deep sea off Vizag as part of ejection tests. Test-firing of the K-4 SLBM from the Arihant are still 3 years away.
To PIERRE ZORIN: Not exactly bullshit, but unnecessary efforts. In the 21st century, show me any one country from the developed world that has more than 1 OEM churning out field artillery howitzers, or MBTs, or ICVs, or APCs. Even in China & Russia, there always only 1 OEM responsible for producing such products. Therefore, for India to try to build up industrial competitors for producing indigenous weapons solutions is sheer daydreaming & an utter waste of money. So how exactly this state of affairs was reached? Elementary, utter criminal negligence on the part of the previous UPA-1/UPA-2 govts, which failed to spell out/articulate the market segmentation parameters. Even today, such articulation is missing in the new DPP. For instance, if a G-to-G deal is inked, will it be a given that a DPSU will always be NOMINATED as the local military-industrial beneficiary or the prime local contractor? Or, is the MoD decides to procure field howitzers only from the OFB, then will the OFB be given the autonomy to sub-contract series-production to private entities like the Kalyani Group in order to ramp-up production deliveries? Or if Kalyani Group's artillery offerings are rejected by the IA, then can the MoD grant licences to Kalyani Group to export those very same products to other countries?
To LINGARAJ: Not in all cases. For instance, in the arena of life sciences, the DRDO has achieved significant successes that have been commercialised. But in areas where it was a novice--like developing MRCA or 155mm/52-cal towed howitzers or 155mm/52-cal tracked SPHs--it has produced more disasters than success stories. It could easily have developed fuel-cells reqd for winter clothing in high-altitude areas (like the Russians have done for their Arctic-based formations), but it chose not to, & instead wasted resources on developing AIP modules for submarines, which have no takers from the IN.
ReplyDeleteTo GESSLER: Further to India-Myanmar defence cooperation, Institute for Systems Studies and Analyses (ISSA), Delhi, has developed INFCOTT-M© Map Converter and Map Copier Software for Myanmar Army. INFCOTT-M© Map Converter and Map Copier Software facilitates generation of Terrain Map Sheet in INFCOTT-M (a computerised tactical training tool developed by ISSA for Myanmar Army) compatible format. A team of scientists from ISSA Myanmar provided necessary user training to the officers of Myanmar Army at Command and General Staff College (CGSC), Kalaw.
ReplyDeleteNow watch well-meaning Pakistani analysts crying about all the damage caused to Iran-Pakistan relations by the ISPR's tweets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjyVRkEbLkc
Thank you much for the info, Prasun ji! I suppose by a mast-mounted electronics, you mean something like this LAV-25 Coyote version?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/medias-media/images/nr/vbl3--lav3.jpg
VMT for the info.
Sir, plz read this article...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.defencenews.in/article/A-quick-update-on-Indias-deadly-Pinaka-Multi-Barrel-Rocket-Launcher-System-4226
It gives quick glimpse of pinaka2 (not mk2) missiles.
Moreover, author has thanked you for your extensive coverage of defexpo 2016 !!!
Article on Russia's future 5th gen Husky nuclear submarine project under development by Malakhit Design Bureau nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-next-two-submarine-projects-feature-some-very-exotic-15618
ReplyDeleteIs this the submarine Indian Navy will select for SSN project?
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteFinally some movement in the right direction.
http://idrw.org/govt-set-to-give-permanent-status-to-top-post-in-indian-military/
Best Regards
Raj
@Ayush
ReplyDeleteAccording to PKS, the submarine is designed by Rubin not Malakhit. But the so-called 'interceptor' variant fits the bill.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/govt-set-to-give-permanent-status-to-top-post-in-indian-military/story-SyxAjQLArssnLehD0LQUsN.html
A step in the right direction, I suppose.
Good explanation as always Prasun but you missed my obvious reference to Gerry BULL in that BULLshit :) Meaning Kalyani is merely tinkering what was left over by Gerry Bull he he he
ReplyDeletePrasun da,
ReplyDeleteJust for curiosity.
Tejas (LCA - IAF version) unable to fire the cannon gun when carrying centreline fuel tank (albeit never had carried). In LCA NP2 DRDO is trying to correct this problem.
Chinkis concerned about what??? The F-18 even as of now lacks the kinetic energy to take on a chinese flanker series of A/c. It further lacks an IRST, internal SPJ suite, incompatibility to indian refueling methods ( drogue & chute type) & the guranteed future proof tech upgrades for the next three decades to dominate the battle field.
ReplyDeleteWith India being a non-signatory to MTCR, expect half of the stand off long range weaponry to be blocked from selling to us. Then there's issue of co-operating with the Americans to modify the platforms for the nuclear delivery role originally planned for Rafale.
So unless the MOD has lost it's brains & exercising terminal stupidity, & so is the IAF, then i don't see any opertunity of SH flying in Indian colours in even twin digit nos leave alone triple digits.
the chinese j10,q5,j7,jh7,j8, older su27, j11, j16 all are deficient compared to the f18 e/f on most if not all counts. we criticize the IAF for having a Soviet era fleet but the chinese have a larger but even crappier Soviet era fleet.
ReplyDeleteother than a few 100 or so su30mkk and its clones their whole fighter fleet is crap. future isnt bright either. only a few dozen su35 are expected to join the plaaf, rest is just crap like j10. the Stealth planes are a long long way from being operationally ready and its a guessing game how good they will really be.
If Iaf wants to nuke pak or china using pgm/cruise missiles on mrcas they have lost their mind. what is the point of modifying su30 to carry Brahmos, having nuke capable jaguar and agni series & k series slbms & Nirbhay lacm? how many delivery vehicles are needed if all you have is 50 to 100 warheads at the most.
for dogfights with the chinese we have our own flankers.Hell even our mig 29 upg are superior to most if not all of chinas fighter fleet.
if kinetic energy is so important then even rafale doesn't stand a chance against the sukhoi 30 or su 35 which have thrust vectoring
refueling probes can always be modified. its not such a great deal.
also MTCR is a farce. just ask the brits. they use trident slbm made in usa as their sole nuclear delivery system. the guidelines of Mtcr dont differentiat between partner and non partner nations, read questions 14,15,16
http://www.mtcr.info/english/FAQ-E.html
anyhow india will be a member before the production line becomes active in india.
lastly, if its just that you don't trust the Yankees, i can understand and i cant blame you for the mistrust.
but then if you wanna be so paranoid about future cooperation with the Americans why buy GE engines for the tejas/lca and for even lca2 and amca. why buy p8i,ch47,ah64,harpoon missiles, c130j,c17,bae howitzers.......
rafale is a great mrca, perhaps even the best, but the SH comes pretty close. if you can get it for a good price say 30-40% less than the rafale then its well worth it.
Also i can't see any scenarios in the next 2-3 decades at least where the US even contemplates any sanctions on India. The fat greedy capitalist Americans will never want to loose a fat juicy cash cow like the indian market
@Kashyap
ReplyDeleteA nuclear triad consists of 1. ground launched
2. air launched
3. sub-surface launched offensive platforms.
While each one compliments the others, no one can completely replace another. Ask the USAF which still operates B6x series air launched warheads, even after possessing a most formidable fleet of ICBMs & SLBMs.
While Jaguar has been modernised to DARIN3 standards, I don't see these ever again be used as a DPSA instead of a CAS fighter in the opening stages of a high intensity conflict. The lack of IRST & the vulnerability of manual FCS to AAA will force these not to attain a terrain hugging flight profile inside hostile air space. In case of the terrain hugging incapable Sukhoi Su-30MKI, the airframe has a huge RCS value which will restrict it's ability to stealthily undertake a high value mission like nuke strike. Plus as the enemy can always see the 40K+ ft cruising Su-30MKI from afar, we'll need a larger escort force to enforce a successful mission. With the serviceability issues with the Sukhoi fleet, generating higher no.s of sorties will be a luxury not affordable in the longer term. So the available sortie hours will have to be intelligently managed & a significance will always be given to platform survivability without escort, to all new kinds of air frames being procured in the future.
now let's come to the SH. First of all so far no MOD/GOI employee has gone on record saying India is procuring SH. Contrary to that the GOI,Gouvernement de la République française & Dassault have officially stated in-numerous times that Rafale is being procured. All the info regarding SH being procured are pure idiotic speculations emerged from equally idiotic journalists.
Now let's come to the technicalities. The SH requires a separate ASPJ configured aircraft (the Growler) to protect itself against enemy SAMs while the Rafale doesn't. The Rafale pilot will have very high levels of terrain awareness while equipped with an on-board IRST feeding impending terrain video maps directly into the TopOwl-F helmet mounted display which negates the need to look down to radar screen for the same purpose. While undertaking terrain hugging flights it could be fatally dangerous for a pilot to intentionally divert his forward vision multiple times to look down for the radar display showing terrain features ahead. In adverse weather/blackout conditions the SH crew will have to unfortunately depend on NVGs and radar displays to undertake operations. Using a NVG atop the JHMCS of the SH will considerably weigh up the effective weight of the helmet. Then again having to endure extra weight with a slightly different center of gravity places a tremendous amount of force on pilot"s necks. This is a serious concern according to contributors to a panel discussion held at the Air and Space Medical Association Annual Scientific Meeting, who mention how air forces around the world already lose a considerable number of workdays due to soft-tissue neck injuries. They conclude that these numbers will dramatically jump as more pilots begin to fly with helmet-mounted devices. The whole point is SH pilots will always be at a greater risk than the Rafale pilots while undertaking deep strike missions inside hostile airspace.
Contd below.
Now let's talk about kinetic capabilities. Contrary to your saying Rafale's all composite delta wing with close coupled canards provides exceptional handling characteristics in all aspects over the SH. it has higher service ceilings, rate of climb, thrust-to-weight ratio & maximum speed over SH. Moreover the Snecma M 88-2 series has demonstrated speeds in the supersonic regime of up-to 1.4 mach on dry thrust alone. add to that the SH's draggy considerably when equipped with external stores. Consequently the Rafale can fly faster,reach higher in lesser time & can super cruise with up-to 6 missiles on external hard-points. So for the same weapon system Rafale can impact a greater kinetic energy than the SH which translates into greater range. In the BVR domain also the Rafale has a clear advantage by being able to add more energy to the BVRAAMs through higher speed and altitude. and the Meteor BVRAAM to be accompanied by Rafale is much more deadlier than the AMRAAM of SH.
ReplyDeletecoming on economies of procurement, had India committed to order 189 Rafale's straightaway, than the per airframe cost would've been drastically lesser than what's being speculated now. Infact if you analyse the actual costs of RAAF acquisition of 24 SHs over a 10 year period, you'll find the costs are comparable to the speculated figures for India's present Rafale procurement effort. In any case the economies of procurement is directly propertional to the scale of procurement. And what's with this Final Assembly Line Transfer farce??? What's more beneficial (a) merely screw fitting sourced sub-systems or, (b) learning instead on how to make sub-systems & then graduate to make in-country developed advanced subsystems & so on??
Think yourselves.
You completely missed my point.
DeleteLET ME EXPLAIN THIS IN SIMPLE TERMS.
I agree with you that the rafale is better than the super hornet.
i mentioned it earlier as well.
My point is , To win a race you don't need to be the best, you only have to be better than the competition.
I do not foresee the IAF engaging the Qatari , Egyptian or French air force in my lifetime
you will never see rafale vs SH in real life.
IAFs most likely engagement will be with the PAF, much less likely with the PLAAF, and even more unlikely with both of them simultaneously.
the Super Hornet is better than anything the Pakis have or will have for the foreseeable future. Hell its even better than anything the chinese have as of today. Even the su35 will be very vulnerable to the SH in a bvr fight.
The only real question is whether the f18 can penetrate the paki and/or chinese air defense better than any aircraft in the IAFs current inventory
The answer to that question is YES
I also mentioned that if it is 30 to 40% cheaper than the rafale then its worth it. ie if its not significantly cheaper then its not worth buying.
it would be great if india procured rafale in large numbers but all i am saying is that if we get the SH at a bargain instead, it will be good as well.
As far as yellow journalism is concerned, its a really of today's world and it isn't exclusive to india.
I agree that buying 10 squadrons of rafale is the most logical way ahead but history tells us that indian defence procurement doesn't run on common sense or logic, be it buying both hdw & kilo subs or mig 23,27,29 and mirage or buying vikramaditya etc etc...
Simply put, i would love to have a balanced diet but my priority will always be to have a full stomach.
Subho's says....
ReplyDeleteI feel moving forward with a Make-in-India proposal for the Super Hornet (Growler) makes a hell lot of sense especially since the Super Hornets will be about half the price of the Rafales. Also, weapons will be much cheaper as well since the French have a tendency to low ball to get in and then arm-twist you at every stage. Heck the Indian version of the Super Hornets can have an up-rated power-plant to give it the thrust/weight parameters desired. After all G.E has committed to working with the Indians on a suitable power plant for the AMCA anyways. Why not power the Super-hornets with the same engine ?
When it comes to electronic warfare and sensors, the Yanks are miles ahead of the French or anyone else in the world. So there's no competition there. If we can piggy ride this opportunity it will create the kind of ecosystem you need in India going forward. That will hardly happen with the Rafales.
Yes, this will come with strings attached but with the Flankers, Mirages and the Mig-29s we will have enough to work with on a Plan-B if need be.
To the Anonymous @12.14 PM
ReplyDeleteDear Nameless,
Rafale will be procured & it's a given. Whether you like it or n't that's your problem. And what you said!!, Mr. Prashun is fully wrong in saying PAF's 1st gen F-16 A/Bs mandatory retirements.... right???
Ok.. So here's some facts to enlighten you.
In Dec 1981, the government of Pakistan signed a letter of agreement for the purchase of up to 40 F-16A/B (28 F-16A and 12 F-16B) fighters for the PAF. The deal would be split into two batches, one of 6 aircraft and the other of 34. The first aircraft were accepted at Fort Worth in Oct of 1982, and the first F-16, flown by Sq. Ldr. Shahid Javed, landed in Pakistan at Sargodha AB on Jan 15th, 1983 as part of a package of 6 'Peace Gate I' aircraft (2 A's and 4 B's).
The remaining 34 aircraft were delivered under Peace Gate II. These F-16A/B's are all Block 15 aircraft, the final version of the F-16A/B production run, and are powered by the Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-200 turbofan. All 40 'Peace Gate I & II' aircraft were delivered between 1983 and 1987. By 1997, 8 aircraft of the initial Peace Gate I & II order have been written off in various mishaps, hence 32 remain in service.
Seven years after the first order, in Dec of 1988, Pakistan ordered 11 additional F-16A/B Block 15 OCU (Operational Capability Upgrade) aircraft (6 A and 5 Bs) under the Peace Gate III program. These aircraft were purchased as attrition replacements and fully paid for, but still awaited delivery in the Arizona Desert.
The reason for this is, Pak got involved in a controversy with the US over its suspected nuke weapons capability. Intel info reaching US authorities indicated that Pakistan was actively working on a nuclear bomb, had received a design for a bomb from China, had tested a nuclear trigger and was actively producing weapons-grade uranium. Furthermore, the F-16A's of no 9 and 11 squadrons at Sargodha AB have allegedly been modified to carry and deliver a Pakistani nuclear weapon. In addition, Pakistan has steadfastly refused to sign the Nuclear NPT.
As a result, in accordance to the Pressler amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act, which forbids military aid to any nation possessing a nuclear explosive device, the US govt announced on Oct 6th, 1990 that it had embargoed further arms deliveries to Pakistan. The 11 Peace Gate III aircraft were consequently stored at AMARC (Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center) at Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona.
In Sept. of 1989, plans were announced by Pakistan to acquire 60 more F-16A/B's. A contract was signed in the same year under the Peace Gate IV Foreign Military Sales Programs, for the delivery of 60 F-16s for US $1.4 billion or approximately US $23 million a piece. By Mar. of 1994, 11 of these planes had been built and were directly flown into the Sonoran desert where they joined the 11 Peace Gate III aircraft in storage. A further six aircraft were stored by the end of 1994, so that a total of 17 aircraft (7 F-16A's and 10 F-16B's) of the Peace Gate IV order were now stored. A stop-work order affected the remaining 43 planes of the Peace Gate IV contract.
Contd below.
The Brown amendment later eased the restrictions on weapon exports to Pak, but specifically excluded the F-16s from this release. Pakistan had already paid $685 million on the contract for the first 28 F-16s (11 Peace Gate III and 17 Peace Gate IV), and insisted on either having the planes it ordered delivered or getting its money back.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of 1998, US announced it would pay Pakistan $326.9 million in cash and up to $140 million in other compensation to settle the eight-year dispute. The $140 million would've included about $60 million in US white wheat that Pakistan would've received during the then current US fiscal year, which began on Oct. 1st. The remaining $80 million in compensation will be negotiated by the two sides. $157 million were already paid earlier.
After the attacks on 9/11 the Pakistani government became a major US ally in the war on terror. It was decided to redeliver those aircraft to Pakistan. Untill now, only half of them has been redelivered in a 2005-2008 timeframe.
Now comes the interesting part. You see by the end of 1997 the PAF was left with only 32 A & B block 15s till 2005 when embargoed f-16 block-15OCUs started to appear. Interestingly on Oct. 4, 2005, a three-member delegation of Pratt & Whitney called on Air Chief Marshal Kaleem Saadat, Chief of the Air Staff PAF at Air Headquarters to present a plaque to the Chief of the Air Staff in recognition of flying the F-16, for over 100,000 accident-free flight hours. So this means the 1st 40 F-16 block 15s of PAF lodged an astounding 100k flight hours alone. But as 8 airframes were already lost by 1997 & the PAF used F-16s extensively only during Kargil war & subsequent Indo-Pak stand-offs it would be safe to assume the remaining 32 airframes would have logged somewhere around 3K flying hours on an average by 2005. after 2005 as other fighters started to grew older & COIN ops started in Pakistan's border provinces, the PAF had no choice but to increase dependency on f-16 airframes. The lack of operational dual-seater trainer variants also made the dual seater F-16 variants the LIFT of choice for rookie pilots under going operational conversion trainings. Thus in average the PAF F-16 logged quite much around 200-250 flying hours a year. The FALCON-STAR SLEP program chosen by PAF, only extends the service life of block-15 airframes to 8000 hours. Going by the above figures one can easily calculate that the first of 6 'Peace Gate I' aircraft (2 A's and 4 B's) will be reaching the end of their service life by 2020 & the remaining aircraft of 'Peace Gate II' will only be following them in the years coming i.e. 2020-25 approx.
Now that you'll know your cocoon of intellectual arrogance is burst, please don't hurt your mobile/laptop/tablet like people do in Pakistan each time after India wins a cricket match against them. And yes, the next time you want to comment, get a name.....!!
To GESSLER: Yes, something similar, but don’t forget there’s a 17-metre high raisable mast with the same sensors that’s mounted on a TATRA heavy-duty truck. So, all in all, the total reqmt for such mast-mounted platforms is about 400 units for the IA. Then there’s the reqmt for the IN’s naval infantry forces.
ReplyDeleteTo PIYUSH DAS: VMT for sharing the weblink.
To AYUSH: The author of that article has PRESUMED that the SSN will be derived from the hull-design of the Project 885 Yasen-class SSGN & hence his assumption about the designer being Malakhit. The facts are otherwise, & are stated below:
Russia’s FSUE Sevmash shipyard at the Arctic city of Severodvinsk had built a hybrid submarine powered by a diesel-electric plant and a small PWR. Designated B-90 and named Sarov, the 3,950-tonne submarine was completed on December 17, 2007. The submarine is known as Project 20120 in Russian design terminology. The Soviet Navy had deployed a Project 651 (Juliett-class) cruise missile submarine (SSG) in 1986-1991 with a similar diesel-electric/nuclear plant. That vessel had a PWR with a single-loop configuration coupled with a turbo-generator. The sea trials had demonstrated the workability of the system, but revealed quite a few deficiencies. Those were later corrected. The B-90 was designed by FSUE Central Design Bureau RUBIN for Marine Technology in St Petersburg. Construction was begun at the Krasnoe Sormovo shipyard in Nizhnii Novgorod (formerly Gor’kiy), and the submarine was then transported through the inland waterways to the Sevmash yard for completion. The sub's hull was a Project Sargan experimental submarine laid down late in 1980s but was not completed due to underfinancing.
To RAJ & GOPU: They are indeed. And the forthcoming of the BECA & Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) will also be steps in the right direction, for BECA will enable India to become a full member of the US-Japan ‘Fish Hook’ SOSUS surveillance network. The LEMOA on the other hand will bring enormous economic & industrial spinoffs because India is located at a unique crossroads: she has proximity to the US’ PACOM, CENTCOM & AFRICOM theatre commands & therefore can offer a lot in terms of MRO facilities/infrastructure for all US-origin airborne & surface warfare platforms that are operational with these 3 theatre commands. What’s now reqd is a greenfield MRO facility for warships along India’s western seaboard, & for this Mangalore will be the ideal location.
To PIERRE ZORIN: In other words, Dr Bull’s shit produced for NORINCO in the 1980s was indeed good shit! There’s no doubt about that, but Kalyani Group is trying to go one step further by doing some innovations with the help of Israel’s ELBIT Systems. But the proof of the pudding lies in its eating & Kalyani Group will therefore have to prove that it’s offerings are BETTER than those of the OFB, which to me is an impossible task. It would therefore be far better if the Kalyani Group focusses on developing turret-mounted, breech-loading 81mm or 120mm mortars of the type developed by RUAG of Switzerland, & offering them for installation on BMP-2 & Kestrel 8 x 8 vehicles.
ReplyDeleteTo KASHYAP: That would be the case, if one listened to channels like ZEE NEWS. But the reality still remains otherwise. A far more realistic assessment of what’s possible with the US can be read here:
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/interview-with-us-under-secretary-of-defence-for-acquisition-technology-and-logistics-frank-kendall/article8462173.ece?w=alauto
To MADFOREXBII & KASHYAP & SUBHO: If you were to read my analysis of the Super Hortnet offer in a thread uploaded in April 2011, it will emerge that the aircraft was being offered with a chin-mounted IRST sensor, plus other enhancements. But in the end, even if the Super Hornet is technologically superior on paper when compared to the Rafale (especially when long-range air-launched PGMs are part of the equation), logic demands that the Rafale offer be picked up. Only if the US had helped in making India a member of the MTCR, then matters could have been different. Right now, even turbofan-/turboprop-powered UAVs are excluded for sale not only by the US, but also by Israel thanks to US pressure.
To MADFOREXBII: Excellent explanation on the TTSL-related issues of the F-16A/B. Hope everyone else also does similar homework.
1) Can you tell us the changes made to the Excalibur over INSAS Rifle that has made it better product ??
ReplyDelete2) IS the gun Excalibur in Testing phase?? or still development phase??
3) When is final GO coming from Army and is Army testing complete??
4) In your main post, you posted a picture with three guns: 5.56mm assault rifle (foldable butt), 5.56mm assault rifle Ex-Caliber mk1, and carbine AMOGH. Could you clearly explain the differences between these three and their projected usage. And what would Ex-caliber mk2 be?
TY Prasun da. BTW I'm aware that Boeing did pitched an nose mounted IRST through SH international roadmap, though i didn't read your article back in 2011. But due to recent developments, I've a doubt on that. In February 2014 Boeing instead flight tested an IRST mounted to a modified centerline fuel tank in Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, California. While IRST was an welcome addition what amused me that they choosed to go for a draggy fuel tank as the housing pod instead of an nose mounted or atleast conformal solution. Now if one were to equip the stealthy single piece EWP to the F-18 he'll have to ditch the IRST pod unless it's certified for use by other hardpoints which is yet to happen.
ReplyDeleteEven if eventually it happens, In case of an aerial war, if the chances for dogfight appears, the pilots will be definitely be forced to jettison the IRST mounting fuel tank to decrease drag on airframe. So if the pilots will be bound to dump the sensors before it could be used in combat what's the need of it at all.
Interesting thing is Boeing have only used the Lockheed sourced AN/AAS-42 in as it is type installation with no whatsoever seeming research on possible alternate mounts/ housing. So if any airforce or USN too will ever be interested in a nose installation or conformal installation will have to be ready to spend a fortune in modifying the existing airframe for above purposes.
Summary: Boeing's not an ediot like Kalyani group :-)
hi prasun
ReplyDeletecan the elm 2052 radar be tied into the FCS of the LCA to provide it a low level dpsa ability.is it technically possible .?.
I feel all this gas on super hornet is just to piss of the french and make them reduce prices .
Is there any space for an IRST on the lca , will israel hep on that . I dont understand why israel with all its tech prowess dose not field a IRST?.IS there one .?
I presume the heron tp is cleared for sale to India unless uncle sam starts playing its old game .
Is it not going to be cheaper and effective to have the BArak 8 as our sole missile for AD rather than design a short range one for billions .The cost will come down if we procure more missiles . More over they will have a larger envelope of protection which will require less missiles as well.THe shorads can be taken care by the spyder system.
Wow atlast Thanks Anony@11:45 , this blog was getting way too serious , we had the RAW guy (but he is MIA) and now we have u!!!
ReplyDeleteWoohoo ppl , rejoice, for we an intellect among us
Thanks Pal
@Anon Seems like you are Fucked Up Beyond Repair. If you unable to grasp some facts of life, then dont blame other.
ReplyDelete""The purpose of the program was to upgrade those structural components identified by ASIP analysis and actual failures in the field to be of most concern. Falcon-Up (Figure 3) included all blocks except blocks 10/15, and when accomplished would provide additional service life to those components, enabling them to reach. the 8,000-hour mark. Air Combat Command, exercising their lead-command influence elected not to support investment in the complete Falcon-Up package for blocks 25/30/32. Therefore the SPO developed a repair program dubbed —SLIP“, or —Service Life Improvement Program“ to bring the aircraft structures up to configuration with the block 40/42. SLIP will go through fiscal
year 04.
https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&ved=0ahUKEwiqqP243ojMAhUBQZQKHZApBRIQFghGMAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dtic.mil%2Fcgi-bin%2FGetTRDoc%3FAD%3DADA407261&usg=AFQjCNGi5ao_p4ki_H0GmV6uUPEKjL1UtQ&sig2=RcQTKyKac7S8aQiYZoLZqQ
As the PKS said, start to do some research before banging your head here.
Further, the SLEP program you talking about which was conceived in 2012, was only for above Block 40, to increase there frame life to 11,000 to 12,000 hours.
And FYI (but I still know you unable to grasp), there are two things on which F-16 was designed, Design Life *& Durability Life.
ReplyDeleteTheoretically design life of initial F-16 was 8000 hours, but practical durability life of initial F-16 was way low.
Hi Prasunji,
ReplyDeleteIs Tejas Mk-II still pursued? or the IAF version of Naval LCA (mentioned as MK-IA) is preferred over MK-II?
Which one is the best approach?
Go for a project to up rate (Dry ~50 and Wet ~90+ thrust parameters ) GE 404 engine and do extensive modifications to Tejas airframe to handle -3.5g to +9.0g stresses. Improve design to reduce drag, Increase internal fuel capacity. Reduce overall weight. Improve radar range and performance, Incorporate IRST etc to the existing Tejas MK-1 and make it a first rate formidable MRCA (Call it Mk-1B).
Or the Tejas MK-II. i.e., Go for clean slate design and do all the necessary rounds of testing work to make it ready for induction. By the time ADA+ team of officials iron out all the issues and make it ready for induction, it might well be beyond 2025. With 5 generation MRCAs entering into airforces around the world with in this decade there will most likely be very little interest shown to induct Mk-II in large numbers.
Your opinion on it? VMT.
@Kashyap,
ReplyDeleteThe SH can penetrate PRC's IADS effectively, i've to agree on that. But the thing is the north-east & ladakh theaters where war will be fought against PRC, are mountainous terrains @least on the Indian side. While this provides IAF fighters a distinct advantage in terms of using terrain masking to avoid detection, it also ups the pilot workloads to considerable levels. Besides the climatic conditions here has a tendency of deterioting time & again, so adverse weather will be a general case. In these conditions i would definitely wanna use an Enhanced Flight Vision System or an IRST so as to increase the pilots safety to undertake operations. This was my point.
@Name less,
What happened...U seem to be out of credible points to debate on PAF F-16s. BTW lemme tell u that both Arpit & I are right if you spend a li'l self research on what's TTSL & TBO of an airframe. While the F-16 has a designed airframe life of 8000 hours, that's an attached with strings figure. it depends upon the type usage of airframe, kind of loads used among others. When the F-16 entered service in 1979, it was expected that the aircraft would be replaced by a successor in 1999. Due to several reasons, both economical and political, it wasn't replaced. In order to maintain the same level of operational capabilities and operational effectiveness of existing aircraft over the next ten to twenty years in this world of ever increasing technology, an extensive modernization program was developed, that later became known as the Mid-Life Update or MLU.
The F-16s airframe had been subjected to more heavy loads than was predicted in 1979. This resulted in several unpredicted hair cracks in some of the airframe's bulkheads. Before an aircraft can be offered for MLU modification, the current state of the airframe is examined in the extensive Aircraft Structural Integrity Program (PACER SLIP).
Because of the F-16s unpredicted heavier airframe load, the aircraft's airframe needed to be overhauled apart from the MLU to allow the airframe to complete 3,500 flight hours. Keeping the aircraft operational until its 5,000th flight hour make the costs involved in the airframe repair / overhaul (R/O) affordable and acceptable, making expensive airframe "re-inspections" unnecessary. The costs of the airframe R/O only form a quarter of the costs involved in the MLU.
So two types of SLEP programs were born along with the MLU. These were FALCON UP & FALCON STAR.The Falcon Up Structural Improvement Program program incorporated several major structural modifications into one overall program, affecting all USAF F-16s. Falcon Up would've allowed Block 25/30/32 aircraft to meet a 6000 hour service life, and Block 40/42 aircraft to meet an 8000 hour service life.
Contd below...
FALCON STAR (Structural Augmentation Roadmap) was an effort to modify the airframe to allow the F-16 to reach the original 8,000 hours estimated for its flight life. The roughly $1 billion program was the result of more than four years of design and planning and ensured the F-16's original service life while allowing for an operational capability beyond the year 2020.
ReplyDeleteUnder the Falcon STAR program, maintainers replaced or repaired known life-limited structures to avoid the onset of widespread fatigue damage. This was done to maintain flight safety, enhance aircraft availability and extend the life of affected components. Before Falcon STAR, some aircraft exhibited fatigue damage as early as 3,500 hours. The entire program involved modifying 13 different structural components, including wing fittings, and reworking skin areas so that, Once modified, the aircraft will meet its designed service life of 8,000 flight hours.
So the TTSL of 8000 hours for F-16 A/Bs were only experimental figures which were impossible to met had an SLEP not conducted.
BTW pehle against us ek match tho jito then bolna ham logo ko cricket ke bare me mat sochne bhai. Warna "Grapes are sour" bolne wala tho bahot milenge wese bhi. Tum koun sa naya ho.
& on Mr. PKS saying f-16 block 52s serviceability issue, even a child can predict that a failed state like yours will never be able to sustain the high demands of spares related expenditures of F-16 fleet if Uncle Sam ever stops, their annual foreign aid from the Coalition Support Fund.
Dear Sir
ReplyDeleteWhat are you hearing about RAFALE and F 18 from your sources
Please share with us lesser mortals
http://defence.pk/attachments/upload_2016-4-12_22-7-17-png.299942/
ReplyDeleteSir,
According to current plan the three Cartosat (2C, 2D & 2E) going to be launched within 1 year followed by Cartosat 3,3A & 3B in 2018,2019 & 2020.
But, the RISAT 2A remission not going to happen before 2020. Dont you think that is pretty late and providing ISR information to armed forces?
http://defence.pk/attachments/upload_2016-4-12_22-8-28-png.299945/
ReplyDeletehttp://defence.pk/attachments/upload_2016-4-12_22-9-37-png.299949/
http://defence.pk/attachments/upload_2016-4-12_22-12-20-png.299953/
To GEESHAN: Improvements are in areas of materials used, both composites-based & new metal-alloys. In addition, the SLR’s design enables various types of scopes to be incorporated, plus the UBGL. The Excalibur is now in the test-phase, which will last till mid-2017. Differences & usages are all self-explanatory.
ReplyDeleteTo MADFOREXBII: The pod-mounted IRST is for those F/A-18s that are already in service. The chin-mounted IRST fitment is only for only those F/A-18E/F Super Hornets that will be ordered in future as International Roadmap versions. No ditching of IRST pod is reqd. Instead, new air combat tactics will have to be employed. For instance, a single F/A-18 with this IRST pod will act as the lookout while flying higher than the rest & will be able to pass on information on acquired targets to other friendly aircraft via the JTIDS data-link.
To RAD: You’re putting the cart before the horse by proposing this. DPSA aircraft today & tomorrow will have to be twin-engined & carry enough fuel to venture deep into hostile airspace with an appreciable offensive payload. On all these counts, the single-engined LCA fails to live up to the mark. Therefore, the LCA is at best only a CAS & defensive counter-air platform. For the LEVCON-equipped LCA (Navy) Mk1 to be used for such missions, only an on-board IRST sensor is reqd & this can easily be accommodated in the nose-section if the MMR fit is done away with. For such missions, MMR is not reqd at all since GCI cues will always be available & furthermore, they will always be accompanied by escorting MiG-29UPGs or Mirage 2000Ns. Therefore, new tactics automatically resolves the problem & does away with the LCA (Navy) Mk1’s need for on-board MMR. In fact, the proposed Combast Hawk will have neither IRST nor MMR & yet the IAF has high confidence in its CAS abilities. So why not show the same confidence in an LCA (Navy) Mk1 with on-board IRST?
Why should India even bother to ask for the Heron TP or Avenger, when HAL is developing the HTFE-25 turbofan? Can’t anyone in the MoD or IAF HQ propose that HAL develop a twin turbofan-powered UAV, with the US companies providing R & D consultancy & technological mentoring? Baby-steps are reqd to be taken, instead of jumping into the unknown by asking for co-development of a turbofan for the AMCA!
To G: RAW13 & his band of brothers have already been rounded up & herded off to a camp for detoxification. Let’s wait & see to what extent he will be detoxified.
To SS: Both are being pursued. Both are good approaches. An IAF-specific version of the LCA (Navy) Mk1 can be used as a LIFT as well as an all-weather interceptor/CAS platform. Just get rid of the MMR & instead install an IRST sensor.
To ARPIT KANODIA: No problems at all. India can always procure off-the-shelf from IAI another SAR-equipped satellite like the earlier RISAT-2.
Here’s what the Pakistan Army would want everyone to perceive about the CPEC & balochistan:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwtOTc2Ouj0
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x43o7rd_hdg-11th-april-2016_news
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x43xeqg_hdg-12th-april-2016_news
But in reality, here’s what is making China have second thoughts on the CPEC. Watch from 25.58 onwards:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv8p1ILJ83Q
If things go this way, the day is not far when China will approach India & Iran to become a fellow investor in Chah Bahr & the north-south corridor.
Here’s a beautiful short video on Chah Bahr:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdVDewg3miw
Interesting Indian panel discussion on Indian investments in Chah Bahr & other ports within the IOR:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQV3lC91e1c
India's Increasing Relations With Middle East Countries:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPpEhuMEkJE&nohtml5=False
Hi Prasunda,
ReplyDeleteVery good morning..
You said to RAD-
" For the LEVCON-equipped LCA (Navy) Mk1 to be used for such missions, only an on-board IRST sensor is reqd & this can easily be accommodated in the nose-section if the MMR fit is done away with.... Therefore, new tactics automatically resolves the problem & does away with the LCA (Navy) Mk1’s need for on-board MMR."
My question is-
Can the IAF version of the LEVCON-equipped LCA (Navy) Mk1 have BOTH? I mean can it's nose-section ACCOMODATE BOTH the MMR and the IRST? Since the Selex ES Skyward-G IRST, which you had earlier said is a compact system and is the front runner, being small & compact enough, i think won't need too much space to fit into the nose-section of the IAF version LEVCON-equipped LCA (Navy) Mk1 along with the MMR!!!
There are various news REPORTS that the IAF version of the LEVCON-equipped LCA (Navy) Mk1 will have AESA radars, the modified Israeli EL/M-2052 MMR.
So what do you think will the IAF go for the AESA MMR or do away with the LCA (Navy) Mk1’s need for on-board MMR and instead install an IRST sensor in order to SUPPORT their NEW tactics???
Hi
ReplyDeletehttp://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/04/india-is-out-but-russia-continues.html
Is this correct and what are implications of this ?? How are they planning to find replacement ?
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteOne More question will the LCA-2 be able to use IRST and MMR both together or same case as LCA-1? If not what can the changes be made now or never. Please reply
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/benefits-outweigh-costs-of-india-us-intimacies-the-strategic-imperative/
ReplyDelete"Make no mistake — the next big game is in the Indian Ocean, through which passes 65 per cent of all Chinese trade, particularly hydrocarbons. The scenario in the South China Sea or the “near seas” is a competition between China and America-Japan. This competition will be decided by technology, anti-carrier strategy and air-sea battle backed by hypersonic aircraft. Indians can contribute very little. On the other hand, the Indian Ocean and, particularly, the Malacca Straits are China’s jugular. In surface combatants, the Indian navy will outnumber the Chinese taskforce 2:1, outnumber the maritime patrol aircraft 2:1, be superior in strategic anti-submarine warfare and satellite communication infrastructure. Why, then, should the Indian navy venture into the South China Sea? If the Chinese pressure the Sino-Indian border, India could put the squeeze in the Indian Ocean."
Prasunji,
ReplyDeleteAn IAF-specific version of the LCA (Navy) Mk1 can be used as a LIFT as well as an all-weather interceptor/CAS platform. Just get rid of the MMR & instead install an IRST sensor.
Going by above suggestion you are actually suggesting the approach to develop role specific aircrafts (Like Mig-21, Mig-23, Mig-27) instead of a true MRCA like Mirage-2000. Tejas is already displaying ground attack capability. Why remove an advanced radar and incorporate only IRST? which works only at limited range? with out an advanced radar how Tejas can incorporate Terrain Hugging flight into its list of capabilities. Can't EL/M-2052 and IRST go together into the current airframe? VMT
@Birbal What Prasun Da is proposing is to remove the MMR, and utilize the space of the MMR with the IRST, and other Navigation LRU's such as ground maping SAR, and Naval LCA MK-1 with the levcon would have better flying characteristics during the low level ground attack operation but it has few flaws
ReplyDelete1. The same things is already present aka Jaguar combat plane, which don't have the RADARs prior to the DARIN-3 Upgrade, and solely depends on its low altitude, terrain hugging, terrain following with its excellent, navigation and guidance instuments and IRST and optronics fitted on its nose which its airframe allows to sustain for extended time period which help it for Radar Detection avoidance. But the problem is that the airdefense of the enemy now includes Aerial Early warning systems too, thus the idea is to give the Multirole capability of some sort of protection with the A2A MMR, and ASHRAM BVR fitted over the wings of the Jaguar.
2 The MK-1 with the Levcon, if lets assume is able to fly, same high G, supersonic flying at low altitude, with the IRST passive sensor, would lack the reliability of the twin engine, when doing ground attack at low altitude.
3 Now a days, the LGB kits are available which can convert the gravity dump bombs to gets converted into LGB and glide bombs, which could be dropped from high altitude, and from the strandoff range.
4 HAL and BAe already have a solution called Combat Hawk, which is more suitable, instead of using LCA MK-1 Naval.
5 Levcon is only added, for the carrier operation, to quickly lift the nose for short takeoff and short landing. And I haven't find any study which could dictate that it will add great flying characteristics in its flight profile substantially. Nor it is needed for IAF. CFT study of the MK-1 even with the overwt. clearly dictates that, which is done Independently by a person named Vivek Ahuja in its blog here.
http://thebetacoefficient.blogspot.in/2015/04/a-preliminary-performance-review-of.html#!/2015/04/a-preliminary-performance-review-of.html
6 What is needed for the LCA, is the Kaveri Engine, around which the Airframe of the LCA Tejas is been designed, because a plane is always designed around a engine, and not vice versa, thus the AIR Intake which was designed by ADA was for the High pressure of the Kaveri, and not for the F-404IN20, which ADA latter tried to patch, which many experts claims, the flaw of the ADA, by opening bypass side ports, to lower down the pressure, and lowering the wt. which the study suggest that even with the 5% reduction of wt. will increase the acceleration performance noticeably.
To BIRBAL: Nope. It has to be either, or. Both cannot go into the LCA Mk.1 because the ADA designers—who never had any experience or exposure to airframe design—screwed up matters. The problem can only be resolved when the entire internal bulkheads are redesigned & re-aligned, and this is what the Tejas Mk.2 & LCA (Navy) Mk2 are all about. So, if the LEVCON-equipped LCA Mk.1 version of the IAF is to be employed as a MRCA (for all-weather defensive counter-air & CAS, plus as a LIFT), then the only realistic option is to do away with the MMR & opt for an IRST sensor & a distributed MAWS array plus the ELT-568 ASPJ suite.
ReplyDeleteTo VISHAKH: Not at all. The Ruskies are insisting on using the PS-90A turbofan which does not have FADEC, whereas the IAF wants a FADEC-0equipped turbofan like the CFM56.
To RAT: Of course. That’s what the LCA Mk.2 project is all about. It will have greater internal volume & internally it will be a brand-new design so that all the shortcomings witnessed in the Mk.1 can be done away with. The Mk.2 will therefore have EL/M-2052 AESA-MMR, an IRST sensor & MAWS suite along with an internal ASJP suite, plus an all-new-design cockpit like the Cockpit-NG.
To SS: Not quite. The resultant LEVCON-equipped Mk.1 will be a true multi-role platform capable of being used for CAS, defensive counter-air & LIFT missions. The Mk.1 doesn’t require any terrain-hugging capability since it does not in any case possess the combat radius reqd for either deep penetration or tactical interdiction. For CAS missions, the LEVCON-equipped Mk.1 will at most be reqd to traverse a distance at low-level of no more than 150km from air bases located in India’s hinterland. And that too only in the first 3 days of an AirLand battle. After air superiority or even air supremacy has been gained, there will be no need for low-level flight profiles or any need for aerial refuellings.
To NIO707: For undertaking CAS missions, terrain-hugging profiles are not reqd since the CAS missions will be mounted in support of friendly ground forces engaged in the contact battle. The Jaguar IS armed with SFWs will be used for tactical interdiction (& not deep strike) behind enemy lines. If hostilities break out in the western front, then the IAF’s first targets for neutralisation will be the Saab 2000 & Karakoram Eagle AEW & CS platforms with the help of long-range PGMs—both ground-launched & air-launched—like the BrahMos-1. Ground attack at low-altitude during CAS missions today no longer require the attacker to fly directly over the enemy. A wide range of lightweight PGMs are available along with laser designation pods & even infantry-carried laser designators/illuminators. That’s why the Combat Hawk too can be used for CAS. But the Combat Hawk isn’t exactly an MRCA. The LEVCON-equipped LCA MK.1 with an internal IRST sensor can be used for defensive counter-air missions when armed with the Derby/Python-5/Targo HMDS combination as well as MAWS & ELT-568 self-protection jammer. On the Combat Hawk there’s no internal volume available for MAWS & internal jammer. LEVCON is reqd for the IAF’s version of the LCA Mk.1 in order to achieve the IAF-mandated AoA & turning radii parameters when it comes to using the internal 23mm cannon during visual air combat. The present-day Tejas Mk.1 suffers from deficiencies in this area. There is ZERO scope for any form of weight reduction on the existing Tejas Mk.1 airframe within a finite period of time. Anyone claiming that this is possible is only bullshitting in total disregard for the laws of physics. Don’t forget that without MAWS & internal jammer today, any MRCA is dead-meat. And those claiming to interview HAL or ADA officials for their ill-researched stories are focussing only on the installation of EL/M-2052 AESA-MMR on the mythical Tejas Mk.1A & they never mention anything whatsoever about the weight penalties to be incurred through the installation of an internal ASPJ & MAWS sensors! One hopes that such ‘desi’ reporters would spend some time with those IAF planners who are responsible for operations analysis & who have the final say on determining what should go on board any Gen-4++ MRCA. Nor can the IAF keep waiting for the flightworthy Kaveri turbofan to emerge sometime in the following decade.
ReplyDeleteSome good news at long-last:
ReplyDeletehttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indian-bases-to-open-doors-to-US-warships-planes/listshow/51805127.cms
http://thewire.in/2016/04/13/with-chabahar-text-finalised-indias-dream-of-a-road-to-afghanistan-gathers-speed-29174/
ReplyDeletethis is big news,
Dear Prasun Sir
ReplyDeletePakistan is going to MAKE 24 JF 17 in ONE YEAR
AND what the hell are we doing : Just negotiating like fools and running around in circles
To ANAND: No one in Pakistan is making any MRCA. It's all being done at CAC's Chengdu-based facility. And no, the figure is not 24, but 16 at best. And to be fair & objective, do include the number of Su-30MKIs being licence-built per annum, the number of Hawk Mk.132s being licence-built per annum, the number of Tejas Mk.1 SP-series being licence-built per annum, & the number of Jaguar IS, MiG-29UPG & Mirage 2000s being upgraded per annum. And only then can one compare apples with apples, i.e. the annual production rate of combat aircraft being built or upgraded in the two countries.
ReplyDeletesir
ReplyDeletesome newspapers are claiming that
india is buying F18 instead of rafale
what's your POV?
Prasunda, VMT for your answers.
ReplyDeleteI have a question thats bothering me for a while now.
Why are we going for the Ka226 when we are developing the LUH ?
It seems extremely stupid to me. Is it just to keep the Russians happy? Sort of a Consolation prize.
I feel like the LUH is going to be shelved if the ka226 deal materializes and that would be a real pity
শুভ নববর্ষের প্রীতি শুভেচ্ছা ও অভিনন্দন
ReplyDelete^^^ আপনাকেও জানাই, শুভ ১৪২৩ এর প্রীতি ও শুভেচ্ছা। প্রসুন দা এবং এখানে উপস্থিত সকলকে জানাই শুভ বাংলা নববর্ষ ১৪২৩ এর আন্তরিক প্রীতি ও শুভেচ্ছা, নতুন বছর সকলের আনন্দে ও সুখে কাটুক।
ReplyDeleteWishing Prasun Da, and everybody here, a very happy bengali new year 1423, may the new year bring joy and happiness to all.
To ARPIT KANODIA: As are these:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-to-invest-20-billion-in-irans-chabahar-port-development-1381864
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=138769
http://theiranproject.com/blog/2015/09/09/kepco-ready-to-build-power-plant-in-chabahar/
And most importantly, this:
http://theiranproject.com/blog/2016/04/13/photos-irgcs-massive-drills-in-southeast-iran-continue-for-second-day/
This is clear signalling by Iran to Pakistan. This is what is called a real gamechanger. The next will come next month when the Indian PM & Presidents of Afghanistan & Iran converge in Tehran next month to formally ink the transit-trade agreement. With that, Afghanistan will finally say an official BYE BYE to all transit-trade offers being made by Pakistan to Afghanistan. Consequently, the most enticing elements of the CPEC & the TAPI pipeline will FIZZLE OUT for good! China now knows this only too well & therefore apart from a few handouts like solar farms, has not yet attained financial closure on any of the other mega-projects associated with the CPEC. The only project being totally financed by China under CPEC is the construction of Gwadar Airport, this once again proving my earlier point about China’s main objective being the securing of an air- logistics base in Gwadar in case China is reqd to evacuate its citizens from anywhere in the Middle East or Africa.
Now, with Iran & India joining forces to economically strengthen Afghanistan, the pressure on the PA to look after its western frontiers with Iran & Afghanistan will increase manifold & will perhaps even reduce Pakistan to bankruptsy due to excessive military spending.
• During his visit to India in 2003, Iran’s then President Mohammed Khatami had mooted the idea of developing Chah Bahar FTIZ into a regional trade and trans-shipment hub.
ReplyDelete• In 2004, Ashok Leyland Project Services and India’s two state-owned railway construction firms formed a consortium with ambitious plans for building the missing rail connectivity and developing Chah Bahar’s port infrastructure. But the work never took off.
• In 2008, India’s Borders Roads Organisation (BRO) finished work on a US$100 million, a 218km-long (135-mile) road from Delaram in north-east Afghanistan’s Nimroz province to Zaranj on the Iran border, opening up the landlocked country to the sea via Chah Bahar and offering landlocked Afghanistan an alternative supply route and reducing its dependence on trucking goods through Pakistan. In addition, India defied US objections to transport 100,000 metric tons of wheat to Afghanistan via Chah Bahar—the first time she was using this gateway to Afghanistan.
• In March 2013, India discussed the possibility of reviving a deep sea pipeline connecting Oman and Iran to energy-deficient India. The proposal was discussed during separate talks between India’s Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid and Yousuf bin Alawi bin Abdullah, the Foreign Minister of Oman and Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. The proposal, first made in the mid-1990s, was revived because when it was proposed the technology for laying such a pipeline didn’t exist. But now there is a similar pipeline has been laid in the North Sea which opens possibilities for the use of similar technology elsewhere. According to the proposal, gas will be transported from Iran to Oman and then onwards to India.
• In May 2013, India announced her participation in the Chah Bahar FTIZ project at a cost of $100 million. The decision to forge a trilateral partnership was announced in Tehran by External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid. In a vast tastefully furnished hall in the Iranian Foreign Ministry where he was flanked by his counterpart, Ali Akbar Salehi, and delegates of the two countries, Khurshid’s words rang loud and clear: “The convergence of views between India and Iran goes beyond the ambit of bilateral relations and extends to the regional and international arena as well. The Chabahar port project is one such area which reflects our commitment to the stability and peace in Afghanistan.”
• In November 2013, just after Iran sealed an initial accord with six countries, including the US, to limit its nuclear programmes in exchange for the easing of some sanctions, Indian Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh met Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Ebrahim Rahimpour to discuss economic opportunities. A team from the state-run Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust, which manages India's largest container port near Mumbai and the Kandla Port Trust, travelled to Chah Bahar in the next few weeks and stayed there for a month for a technical and commercial assessment. The Shahid Beheshti port has the capacity to handle 2.5 million tonnes a year, which Iran would like to increase to 12.5 million tonnes.
• By July 2014, India had allocated US$300 million to invest in development of Chah Bahar FTIZ and had plans to take part in development of railroads from the area and shipping lines in the next steps. India had then proposed to invest $85 million over a year to convert two berths that she will lease at the Shahid Beheshti port for a ten-year-period into a container terminal and a multi-purpose cargo terminal.
Cont'd below...
• On May 6, 2015 India’s Shipping Minister Nitin Gadkari travelled on a day-long tour to Iran to sign a memorandum of understanding for development of the Shahid Beheshti port in Chah Bahar.
ReplyDelete• Iran in mid-2015 proposed a free-trade agreement with India. Rupee-denominated trade with Iran, started in 2012 because of complications arising from sanctions, had almost doubled Indian exports to Tehran to $4 billion between 2012 and 2015. In addition, usage of port facilities in Chah Bahar will cut transport costs and freight time to Central Asia and the Persian Gulf by about a third.
• In December 2015, India pushed for participation in Iran’s Farzad-B oil and gas field in the Persian Gulf, which has an estimated reserve of 12.8-trillion cubic feet, at the India-Iran joint commission meeting (JCM). Earlier, a consortium of Indian oil and gas exploration and production companies, led by ONGC Videsh, had submitted a revised development plan for the Farzad-B gas field in Iran. A consortium headed by ONGC Videsh had discovered the Farzad-B gas field in 2008 in the Farsi offshore block.
• In March 2016, Afghanistan, Iran and India began negotiations over the issue of the establishing a railway line from Chah Bahar port to Afghanistan western Herat province.
• On April 10, 2016, India’s ONGC said that it is ready to invest $20 billion in the development of Iran's Chah Bahar FTIZ by setting up petrochemical (LNG terminal and gas-cracker plant) and fertiliser plants, and has requested Iran to allocate adequate land for this purpose.
• On April 11, 2016, Afghanistan, India and Iran finished negotiations on the text of the trilateral transport and transit pact that will serve as the legal framework to operate trade corridors with the Iranian FTIZ of Chah Bahar as its main hub. The text was finalised at the second meeting of the expert group. Their first meeting had been in Tehran in September 2015.
• The contract between Iran’s Arya Bander and India Ports Global Private Limited, an SPV of the Kandla and Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust, was finalised and will be signed during the Maritime India summit later this week in Mumbai. India’s Union Cabinet also approved a $150 million line-of-credit for the development of Chah Bahar FTIZ.
To DUSHYANT HARDAHA: It is all best explained by the US SECDEF himself here:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyPriSgWGyM
To KASHYAP: I agree, it's crazy to opt for the Ka-226T when the LUH is being developed by HAL. Therefore, in all likelihood, the Ka-226T will be acquired for Pawan Hans & be placed at the disposal of the NDRF, whereas the LUH from HAL will be inducted into service by the IN, IAF & IA.
ReplyDeleteHappy Bhogali(Bohag) Bihu Prasunda from Pallab, a GREAT FAN of your work and work ethics, and to all the fellow READERS of your blog.
ReplyDeleteMay Prasunda continue to ENLIGHTEN US,
AND may you all prosper in your life.
Have you ever done a Bihu dance Prasunda...!!!
very specifically secretary mentioned it is the helmet mounted, not aerial attack drone but drone to defuse bomb.
ReplyDeleteagain..American & India are on the path which needs more time and mutual understanding to get big ticket project.......but going right direction with clear perspective.
hi prasun
ReplyDeletewill the astra make a good shorads? as drdo claims.Is there a move to fit an IIR seeker to it which is a smart thing to do. Astra seems to be hitting electronic targets only ? what is the present situation?.
can the Israeli iron dome be converted into a shorads and anti cruise missile weapon which will be cheap as it is mass produced and also SDR.?
1) Are there still active plans of creating a 'coalition of the willing' to de-tooth Pakistan by 2019? And is the MoD still dithering on the ABM variant of the S-400 when the THAAD is on the table?
ReplyDelete2) Sarkozy said that if he is elected into the next French government that the Rafale could be on slightly better terms than right now. If all else fails, a Mig-35I with foreign avionics can be inducted by the half-way point of the next decade.
3) When will the Mountain Strike Corps be developed into its ideal form: heli-mobile and agile? What are the current plans to progress to that point with regard to the necessary helicopter logistics?
Hello sir I have question about armored vehicle numbers of the IA.
ReplyDelete1. How many T-90 tanks have we ordered so far? How many are we likely to procure ultimately?
2. How many tracked FICV and wheeled Kestrel-like vehicles do you think are required?
3. How many Arjun Mk.2 MBTs will be procured?
4. Will we develop Arjun Mk.3 or go for 50-ton FMBT in future?
Thank you Sir,
Sarath Kumar R.
Subho Noboborsho Prasun'da. Wishing you a very happy bengali new year 1423.
ReplyDeletePrasunDa, wishing you and all your loved ones a very Happy,Prosperous Bengali New Year and Annapurna Pujo.
ReplyDeleteregards,
VIKRAM
Just saw a post that the HTT 40 - just started it LSTT and hopefully first flight next month. Plus read a report that the MoD will buy 60+ of the HTT40 and 35 of the PC7 , so my question is Has the MoD signed the contract for the 35 PC7 and in terms of flying and learning , will there is a difference between the 2 BTT? (other than service and maintenance)
ReplyDeletealso - didnt know that the IA has the FV433 Abbot SPG , has anyone seen them in action (wargames) or have they been phrased out?
ReplyDeletePrasunda,
ReplyDeleteCan't the LUH be used for the Pawan Hans and NDRF as well?
Why do we need another light helicopter at all?
This feels like a repeat of the HDW type 208 and kilo class
It seems like we are giving the Russians a $2 billion face saver after they lost multiple competitions against the Americans and European like mi28N, mig35, mi26, il78md, il214.......
Mr Parrikar is an incompetent spineless buffoon with foot in the mouth syndrome. No wonder the IITs don't even make it to the top 100 education institutions in the world.
I hope this contract dies a slow death before materialising just like the MRTA
Dear Sir
ReplyDeleteThe IAF contingent for RED FLAG took off on APRIL 3
And they will reach ALASKA Today ie APRIL 14
Why did they spend so much TIME in PORTUGAL and FRANCE
Dear, Prasun Da, I have a great respect for you so don't take it otherwise.
ReplyDelete1. Lets end this LCA Tejas stuff, but regarding your answer few counter questions
a) I knew very well CAS, that was to explain, how the present situations demands, i.e why Jaguar, which was armed with the ASHRAM over its wings, so that, it gets some sort of Multirole capability against Aerial threat, and wouldn't have to depend on the other air superiority platform for its protection from the enemy combat planes. But if you still wants, than could you explain the reason for the fitting the EL/M-2032 MMR in DARIN -3 Upgrade.
b) I gave you a link, for a man, who did tried to do Computational Fluid Analysis using his own developed software, which is Flightstream, and though the data is not very accurate, because the real windtunnel data is with the ADA, it gives you a fare idea, and if any person have any doubt, he can validate those data, and the graphs from the the opensource data available for the various planes, such as data provided by NASA for the YF-16-A, that's what I learned. Question arises is how did you come into the conclusion that the LEVCON addition will increase the turn performance of the LCA -- means, on which analysis is this claim of yours is based on, or have you done any study or analysis of your own to back up your claim. In past also you claim that the problem in the design is with the length too short, and now the nose design -- My question is simple does you claim is based on your GUT FEELING or any scientific analysis and calculation or do you have an access to the Windtunnel Data of the LCA Tejas itself which is in possession of ADA/HAL.
c) You are quoting LCA as the scientist product for the scientist rather than the IAF service. My simple question, why do you expect the great product, when there is nothing like DARPA or the IAF R&D in the country, that do the research, and forecast the future requirement of the country, and could dictate the effort in leu with the govt. policies to promote the educational, industrial and the technologies in the country. PS IAF expecting DRDO/ADA to give them the product that would increase the IAF power and effective in suppressing the enemy but, those scientists are not the one who use them, niether the IAF are the ones who is bothered, whether the technology is available in the country, or the country is producing the scientists and engineers of the required level and numbers. Its so easy to bash the DRDO/ADA to delay with the IAF and their unexperienceness, but does who thinks, that does the Industry is so supportive like US, because they are confident about the orders, and the GOI, and IAF is standing at the back solid with uninterruped funds available, just like how for F-35 USAF is standing. Doesn't you ask the question ADA, why taking so holistic approach, when you are so confident, that a single mishap would send the whole LCA program to the Gallow, and the last but not the least, don't we have to start somewhere, and do you expect the perfect product on the start, and don't you consider the LRU's, avionics, Mission Computers developed for the LCA, which can be used in other combat planes nothing.
2. As far as the IRAN-Oman-India pipeline deal, you didn't mentioned the extended EEZ, which Pakistan acquired, and does it affect the Oman-India under sea Oil line Plan.
Dear Sir
ReplyDeleteThere is SOME good news regarding TEJAS
SAAB is working with HAL for Tejas
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/hal-in-talks-with-swedish-firm-saab-for-upgraded-lca-tejas/articleshow/51826134.cms
To NIO707: Firstly, inclusion of AIM-132 ASRAAM on the Jaguar does not give any multi-role capability, but merely a self-defence capability. But even this isn’t reqd if escorting MRCAs are available. As for why the Jaguar IS/DARIN-3 have EL/M-2032 MMRs, it is because these Jaguars will initially be employed for CAS for the first 2/3 days of an AirLand campaign & after that they will be used as tactical interdictors, for which terrain-hugging flight profiles become necessary. If alternate CAS platforms like the Combat Hawk or the IAF-specific version of the LCA (Navy) Mk.1 become available, the Jaguars will be used for both deep-interdiction & tactical interdiction. If the Rafales are acquired in the desired numbers, then the Jaguars will be used only for tactical interdiction while the Rafales become deep-interdictors. But due to the delay in Rafales being procured & the need to decommission the MiG-27Ms & MiG-27UPGs, there’s no other choice but to use the Jaguars as deep-interdiction/CAS/tactical interdiction platforms as an interim measure & hence the EL/M-2032 is installed for terrain-mapping, GMTI & terrain-con tour matching so that terrain-hugging flight profiles can be undertaken. Thius has NOTHING to do with searching for or engaging aerial targets in air combat.
ReplyDeleteAs for Tejas Mk.1’s airframe-related issues & utility of LEVCONS, there’s plenty of written/published material avail;able from ADA & the CAG. In all these published materials, it has been concluded that the following shortcomings have been reported in Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas Mk.1:
1. Absence of Internal Jammer & MAWS affecting survivability.
2. Aircraft performance shortfalls.
3. Maintainability issues.
The published documentation also state that the problem with Tejas Mk1’s airframe design is that suffers from having one of the lowest aspect ratios ever in any MRCA, thereby resulting in high induced drag during air combat. This in turn affects theTejas Mk1’s manoeuvrability in the supersonic flight regime as well & therefore the only available fixes are either incorporation of TVC, or canards—both of which are impossible for incorporation at this stage. If only ADA had accepted the design inputs from GE Aero Engines way back in the latter half of the 1980s, such deficiencies would not have cropped up. So now a thorough redesign of the Tejas Mk2’s airframe is necessary, especially its wing design so as to avoid incorporation of TVC or canards. Furthermore, the important parameters governs the combat aircraft performance are Lift, Drag, Weight and Thrust. The required performance can be achieved by improving the aerodynamic configuration, weight reduction and system upgradation. Leading Edge Controller (LEVCON) is a secondary control surface located at the leading edge of the wing and the fuselage. An important requirement of a fighter aircraft is the Sustained Turn Rate (STR). The IAF’s Tejas Mk1 is not meeting the specified STR requirement. The STR is a strong function of the aerodynamic efficiency. From the wind-tunnel results it was found that the LEVCONs produce higher L/D. A detailed study to implement LEVCONs and identification of other design constraints is under progress.
In other words, no personal GUT feelings or perceptions, no jingoistic daydreaming, no speculation & no self-styled CFD analysis.
Cont’d below…