Total Pageviews

Monday, February 13, 2017

Aero India 2017 Highlights-1

Let us first browse through the site navigational aspects, shall we?
 Now to the outdoor exhibits.
The Rustom-2 MALE-UAV has been re-named (only God-knows-why) as TAPAS. Now to some of the prominent indoor exhibits.
This is a JDAM-type SAAW under development.
And now comes this bizarre poster being displayed at the Indian Air Force (IAF) booth, which claims that the Super Hornet is in service with the IAF!
Here are two Indian companies that have developed innovative, world-beating engineering solutions (whose IPRs are totally India-owned) that do not get to make headline-news, but which have significant export potential.
The full-scale mock-up of the IMRH was unveiled on February 14. To develop it as a fully certified product, however, is a totally different story, since this requires the industrial cooperation of a strategic industrial partner of foreign origin.
Below are some of the more interesting exhibits.
 This pod (above) was earlier the subject of widespread speculation among several 'desi' internet fanboys in dubious chat-forums who were spreading a false canard about this pod being the SAP-518 from Russia.
Here is the CAPTOR-E AESA-MMR with its swashplate mechanisam in action in both azimuth and elevation.
And being shown for the very first time in India is the EL/M-2083 aerostat-mounted airspace surveillance radar, two of which are already operational with the IAF.
Here are the deployment configurations of Akash-1 SAM
Now we come to the rather interesting QR-SAM project, under which LRDE will supply the truck-mounted active phased-array early warning/engagement radars, while BDL will supply the truck-mounted QR-SAMs and BEL will be overall systems integrator and manufacturer of the radars. The SAM to be used will be a variant of the Astra-1 BVRAAM that will use a locally-developed Ku-band active seeker. It is gratifying to see that a proposal that I had tabled way back in 2007 to the DRDO is now finally coming true.
 Below are more close-ups of the Uttam AESA-MMR.
Below are the DARE-designed cockpits of the Super Su-30MKI.
And the DARE-developed internal ASPJs for both the Jaguar IS/DARIN-3 and LCA Mk.2.
And the DARE-developed MAWS installation for the IAF's 40 Mi-17-IVs.
The HELINA missile's IR-CCD seeker has so far been able to achieve a range of 5km and efforts are on to increase it to 7km. A quad-rack launcher is also under design.
The Ishapore Rifle Factory of OFB has already delivered several Ghaatak 7.62 x 39 SLRs to the Kerala State Police, and its 7.62 x 51 variant is now undergoing field trials with the Indian Army, which has formally committed its determination to acquire them to replace the existing 5.56mm INSAS SLRs.
Some more internal exhibits below.
The Indian Navy (IN) on February 17, 2017 signed a Rs.200-crore contract with TATA Advanced Systems Ltd (TASL)-owned Nova Integrated Systems Ltd for the procurement of 12 Scanter-6000 X-band 2-D surface surveillance radars (SSR) developed by TERMA of Denmark under the ‘Buy and Make (India)’ category. The SSRs and their related command-and-control consoles will be installed on the IN’s Project 1241REM FAC-Ms, and Project 25 and Project 25A guided-missile corvettes. TERMA had earlier supplied Scanter-2001 dual-band (S/X) radars for India’s coastal surveillance system.  Nova’s bid was more than five times lower than the highest bidder. It had quoted US$30 million against rivals Tata Power SED with $44 million and Mahindra Defence Systems with $173 million. The SSR tender was the first to be issued under the ‘Buy and Make (India)’ category. The IN in future intends to procure a total of 31 SSRs, for which Nova is required to provide at least 50% indigenous content. Nova will also provide seven years of guaranteed maintenance and lifetime spares support. The SSR tender was floated in June 2013 and seven domestic companies had submitted their bids. In addition to Nova, Mahindra and TATA Power SED, bids were sent to Broadcast Engineering Consultants India, Data Patterns, Larsen & Toubro and Bharat Electronics Ltd. However, only Nova, Mahindra and TATA Power SED were shortlisted. Nova had teamed up with TERMA, Mahindra had partnered with ELTA Systems of Israel and TATA Power SED represented INDRA of Spain.
Earlier, TASL had on October 8, 2014 teamed up with TERMA for co-developing naval combat management systems (CMS). Subsequently, the two companies jointly established a CMS Development Centre in Delhi to work closely with the IN. 
SATCOM panels atop the CABS-designed A330-220 AEW & CS.
Astra Microwave-built sub-structures for NG-ARM and Astra-1 BVRAAM.
BEL’s airborne SDR (above) for both the Tejas Mk.1A and Super Su-30MKI has been rejected in favour of a RAFAEL-developed system (below) that combines both the SDR and the operational data-link (ODL) imto one single LRU.
DEAL-developed and BEL-built SDR for the Indian Navy.
BEL unveilled its latest STARS-V manpack radio for the Indian Army.
Nucon Aerospace Pvt Ltd-built components.
HAL-developed HTSE 1200 turboshaft for helicopters.
Leonardo (formerly Finmeccanica) had a well-attended booth at the expo.
Army Aviation version of the Rudra with air particle filter fitment.
SHDS Booth.
In response to several queries that I have received about what escort jamming is all about, the following three slides explain it all.


Abhay Jain said...

Prasun Sir,

* Thanks a lot for the posters, keep them coming

* What you have been advocating is happening finally.

* What is this R-UAV project? Have they revived this from the ashes or a new one?



Ved said...

Dear Prasun,
Did you speak to the officials present there for this blunder of F18 in IAF?

What is Dhruvastra in the slide above?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ABHAY JAIN: VMT. The R-UAV is just a concept. No one from India's armed forces has evinced any interest in it so far.

To VED: LoLz! There wasn't anyone at the IAF booth today. At the MIDHANI booth there's a poster showing a NORINCO Type-90B medium tank with Arjun written on it! Will check up with them why such bizarre posters are coming up. Dhruvastra is the twin-rail launcher for the encapsulated HELINA ATGW.

Anup said...


Mistral ATAM is currently been integrated into HAL’s LCH: MBDA
ATAM more important than ATGM ?

Major Update on AWACS India , You don’t wanna miss
Will AirBus do all changes for AWACS India in Airbus 330.

YALLA said...

I thought this was SAAW..

Any small arms there? Please tell me what happened to ARDE's new LMG?

Arpit Kanodia said...


About the HELINA launcher, I think world practice is to develop Quad packed launcher for ATGMs, why twin launcher for HELINA?

Chirag said...

The planned DRDO AWACS on airbus 330 jet,are they technically superior to the existing Israeli phalcon awacs

Anonymous said...

if i am not wrong, in the first poster are they sand filled buckets?

Anonymous said...

Sir will u upload more photos as well !
& Sir what's the status of weapons export to Vietnam.

Raman said...

Prasun: do you actually expect any 'deals' to be signed at this Aero17 ??

also: with the Navy looking at only twin engine naval fighters..... that is a shoo in for more Rafale's.....and also over time for the IAF..........leaving the F-16 for the single engine IAF requirement/keeping Trump-USA happy and on 'our side'.......

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the beautiful pictures, its like being there.

Have also started reading: Thoughts On pakistan by B. R. AMBEDKAR. What a book it is. Written in 1941, it is still amazing and so relevant. He quotes Burke, on page 4. That actually sums up what is happening in J&K. The answer is there on how to deal with it.

M Jheeta

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANUP: Lolz! I had already stated few times before that dubious news-sources should not be reproduced here. For instance, the antenna installation is RADOME, not rotodome since the antenna array will be fixed.

To YALLA: There are often single names given to two different products, like the Arudhra radar. The same is the case with SAAW. This is an aerospace expo & not a defence expo, hence no small arms are being exhibited.

To ARPIT KANODIA: No one at the expo wants to answer that question, just like this question I posed today: If an AESA antenna is being developed for application on MRCAs, why can't a similar AESA antenna be developed for the SAR/GMTI payload being developed for the Tapas UAS?

CHIRAG: We will know that ONLY AFTER 84 months, since the DRDO wants 7 years to develop it!

To ANON@2.59PM: Yup. That's the fire-fighting capacity available at AFS Yelahanka!

To Anon@5.22PM: What exports to Vietnam? One 'desi' patrakaar spreads disinformation on Akash-1 exports to Vietnam while another spreads rumours about EMB-145I AEW & CS exports to Indonesia. These same jokers were harping back in 2002 about exports of ALH & BrahMos-1 to Chile.

To RAMAN: Normally no deals are signed during expos, especially those pertaining to military procurements. The shocking part is that this expo is totally about military aviation. Not a single exhibit is about commercial airliner MRO or flying schools or space applications innovations. That's the shocking part. How then folks keep harping about 'Make in India' is anyone's guess, when the far more important 'Do In India' is totally absent. Criminal negligence of the highest order on the part of the expo organiser (the MoD's Defence Exhibitions Promotion Board), if you ask me.

SUVO said...

RASUN DA,thanks a lot for the pictures.

New Delhi’s interest has so far been limited to securing the Indian Ocean, providing security to Seychelles, Mauritius, the Maldives, and Sri Lanka, without any permanent foreign bases. In October 2014, Vietnam Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung offered the port of Nha Trang on the South China Sea with line-of-sight on Hainan Island for the Indian Navy’s exclusive use, besides agreeing to accord docking rights to Indian naval ships in Cam Ranh Bay.He also offer extensive new offshore oil and gas blocks to up the Indian energy stake in the South China Sea. It is an analogue of the access the Chinese navy enjoys to the Pakistani port of Gwadar. In the western Indian Ocean, there was a long-standing offer to India from the Mauritius government of the two-island set of the Agalegas. The Indian Navy has already hydrographically surveyed the island nation’s extensive sea territories. The 12.5-kilometre-long North Agalega Island has an air strip that can be lengthened and widened to take heavy lifters like C-17s and C-130Js, and to embark P-81s and fighter aircraft, and the South Agalega Island provides deep-water anchorage.Building up these islands as military bases would beneficiary to india.
But why New Delhi is not interested in overseas military bases?

Varunn said...

Sir, is FICV a part of larger FRCV project? And if we have decided to go ahead with it does that mean India will reject recent US offer of joint development of ground combat vehicles?

Abhay Jain said...

Prasun sir,

What's your thought about the latest pdv test? It is being said that they have used indigenous infrared seeker and the test proved HIt to kill capability. How important do you think this very test was and Does this hit to kill capability suggest that we have put together all the required technologies to test anti satellite weapon?


Anonymous said...

Sir what's the status of DRDO AESA radar ? Would Tejas mk-1a will house in Uttam AESA or any other ? Further Dr s Christopher said about an export of $ 2.1 millions to Vietnam for ADVANCED LIGHT TORPEDO

RAHUL said...

Explain this "High Band Jammer Pod". Thanks!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAHUL: It is a twin-pod installation on the wingtips of the Su-30MKI & will be used for escort jamming, i.e. for a strike package only 1 aircraft will be carrying such pods, freeing other aircraft to carry LDPs & not the EL/L-8222 ASPJ pods. A single-pod version is also being developed for the Tejas Mk.2 MRCA.

To Anon@2.28PM: Arey yaar, can't you see the obvious? Just compare this laboratory model with other AESA-MMRs already developed & on offer to the IAF. What does this indicate? Even a specified timescale of 84 months (7 years) for developing the AESA radar for the follow-on A330-220 AEW & CS platforms is far too long a time to develop an engineered solution. The export to Vietnam is that of the TAL, which is being produced by BDL.

To ABHAY JAIN: My view remains the same as before, i.e. test the PDV & AAD against a surrogate target missile that is powered by solid propellant (like those used by the ballistic missiles of Pakistan & China), & not liquid propellant.

To VARUNN: FICV is now in deep hibernation because the BMP-2 ICV upgrade project is being given priority. The FRCV project is also far too convoluted at the moment.

To SUVO: What for? Even China does not have any permanent overseas military base. All logiastics support arrangements made by China with other countries are of a temporary nature & are not permanent installations.

Raj said...


IS it possible to put your 'Trishul' watermark on the sides but crucial part or in a bit lighter version. In some pictures, the watermark covers the whole picture and hinders the view.

Anonymous said...

Prasun sir
Has the production of , of varunastra torpedo began ? & Sir what's your view on indigenization of LCA Tejas & the current level of outsourcing is good for Tejas ?
Sir last thing what's the status of Astra missile.

robibpat9 said...

What will be the consequences if India reject the one china policy and build formal diplomatic ties with Taiwan? Because today we agreed on one china policy at the cost of one India policy. India should ask China to agree on Kashmir as integral part of India otherwise India must shift itself from one china policy. As you have already stated that china has more to loose financially and going to war with India will be foolishness.


Ram Bharadwaj said...


What do you make out of the statement of ACM Dhanoa that RAFALE will be able to counter the J-20 stealth fighters?

Can not the Su-30MKI take on the J20's?

vishakh said...

Hello ,

1) Brahmos : 600 KM Missile is on the works ??

2) NIRBHAY is getting tested next months, what changes have been incorporated??

bhoutik said...

are we likely to see canistered ballistic missiles in pakistan now that they have appeared in north korea? what repercussions for India if so?

AJ said...

Hi Prasunda,

As usual you have better detailed pics for the devil lies in the detail. I am yet to see a pic of LCA MK2. I only saw one pic from you but it was only showing the weapons carriage capacity. Can you please provide more details on it.

Why is ADA marketing AMCA heavily when LCA MK2 will be a reality much earlier?


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAJ: LoLz! Possible? Yes. Probable? No.

To ANON@5.37PM: Not yet. Only orders for various sub-assemblies have been placed & final-assembly will begin this June & deliveries will commence this October.

To ROBIBPAT9: India cannot do it alone. Only if a bunch of industrialised countries & some members of the UN P-5 decide to do it will India find it possible to join the bandwagon. Even then, China will veto Taiwan’s entry into the UN, unless Taiwan stops calling itself the Republic of China & rebrands itself as the Republic of Taiwan.

To RAM BHARADWAJ: He’s right, because the J-20 is nowhere near to emerging as a mature platform. The J-20 has several more hurdles to cross.

To VISHAKH: Lot’s of disinformation being spread by these ‘desi bandalbaazes’ who consistently fail to ask the right questions. What is in the works is not the 600km-range BrahMos, since the BrahMos-1 already has 550km-range & I was the first one to reveal this 2 years ago when the IAF accepted its first batch of BrahMos-1 missiles. 2) The Nirbhay never reqd any design changes. It was always A SOUND & proven DESIGN, having been designed & developed originally by Russia. The last test-firing failed because one of the 2 wings failed to spring-out, meaning it was a problem of the pop-out springs of the actuator.

To BHOUTIK: No. Because Pakistan’s existing TBMs & IRBMs of Chinese origin do not require cannisters.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AJ: VMT. But (LoLz!) how can any definitive scale-model or illustration of the LCA Mk.2 ever emerge when the detailed design itself has not yet been frozen? And this was confirmed today itself by Cmde (Ret’d) Balaji. So, we can now at last blame ADA for spreading false canards since 2011 about Tejas Mk.2 by showing its scale-models & brochures that are externally no different from the Tejas Mk.1!

And earlier today Cmde Balaji himself confirmed to the whole world (via his interview to NDTV) what I had stated way back in 2012: that the wing root will be brought forward (extended) by 350mm & the fuselage will be stretched by 1 full metre. You will recall that at that time I was ridiculed & scorned by several internet fanboys/bastards in several dubious chat forums for stating the design modifications. But what I had stated in 2012 now stands proven in 2017 & that too from the horse’s mouth!!!

Why was there a need for jumping the gun baffles me. It is not ADA that’s marketing the AMCA. It is OEMs like Boeing & Saab & Dassault Aviation that are spreading soundbytes about their potential willingness to help ADA develop the AMCA. But the fact remains that till this day, no financial sanction has been accorded till this day by the MoD for initiating full-scale development of the AMCA.

In fact, what is equally senseless & outrageously ludicrous is all this talk about acquiring a second type of MRCA through licenced-manufacturing. Consider the following:

Any foreign OEM offering its MRCA will be able to supply the aircraft cheaper (as desired by the MoD) & faster (as desired by the IAF) ONLY IF they are all-sourced from abroad in flyaway condition. But if the OEM is reqd to set up a new production facility in India & train Indian workforce to produce them, this will automatically translate into higher costs & severely delayed deliveries. Acquisition of land takes time, placing orders for industrial manufacturing machinery takes time, training human resources to engage in manufacturing takes time. Hence, licence-building a 2nd type of MRCA will not begin 7 years from the date money is released for the project.

On the other hand, creating two final-assembly lines for LCA Mk.2 (one with HAL & one with the private-sector) will be far cheaper & faster PROVIDED this same arrangement & industrial eco-system is also used for producing the FGFA. I am more than willing to be proven wrong in my math, but I challenge anyone to prove me wrong through factoids. Perhaps it was for this reason that HAL deliberately BOYCOTTED the Defence Minister’s press-conference yesterday at the expo site at Yelahanka. For, this RM it seems does not have a clue about PROJECT VIABILITY & hence blurts out soundbytes about 2nd imported MRCA being sought & that too from a strategic partner. Now, the US, Russia & France are all India's strategic partner, but Sweden isn't, meaning the Gripen is out of contention.

SAM-7 said...

hi prasun,

isn't it a waste of time and money to money to mount a radome on the A330, why not use the same airframe of the A-50 and mount an indigineous radar, just like it was done in the case of the emb -145 i . if the IL-76 is as bad as it is potrayed why not use other platforms like 767 or 737 that already have radome mountings designed and engineered.

also, won't you think air force would object to navy buying 57 rafales or superhornets given that it had to downsize its dream MMRCA project, also considering the fact IAC-2 is a mere dream as of yet.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SAM-7: When all over the world no one has developed a 4-array antenna for AEW & CS, what gives CABS the confidence that its engineering solution will be viable? No CABS is saying it will have to mount an extra engine on the A330-220's airframe just so that the power-generation for the 4-array antenna can be met. It is for this reason, it seems, that a twin-engined design like that of the A330-220 & B.777 were considered & the four-engined A-50 wasn't. Where exactly CABS expects Airbus Military to house the extra 3rd turbofan on the A330-220 remains a mystery to me.

MMRCA project won't be downsized, rest assured. In fact, the more Rafales are ordered, the lesser the per-unit costs per aircraft.

Devopriyo said...

Hi Prasun,

Are these information correct

If yes, what are the implications

Sumit sen said...

Dada this means brimstone missile is in service with iaf. Which aircrafts carry them in iaf? Are we licence producing it under bdl ??

Abhay Jain said...

prasun sir,

Tell us your views on Safran helping India complete the development of Kaveri engine.
Is it for real?



Anonymous said...

what do you make of this:

will this drive any of the locals that actually support us into the arms of the pro pak/independence lobby?


SAM-7 said...

It seems to me that ADA , DARE , ARDE , CABS and all such instituions affiliated to DRDO are composed of dreamy eyed scientists who dream of making something great and win awards rather than something that is practical and ecnomicallly efficient.

GOD help them in desiging the intake , exhaust , maintainence and installation/replacement access for that third turbofan.

rad said...

hi prasun
alpha design has made an indigenous x band aesa approach radar. While appreciating that with some skepticism, wouldnt it be not difficult for them to make an aesa radar for air defense like the arudhra ? as the S band and L band active modules have already been developed?. Or pushing it further an airborne radar ? though it is another ball game.
where are the chinese, have they come any idea.?

From the explanations you have given about the cost of having a desi line for another single engine fighter , i would assume that the lca mk2 will be the winner again. Even if the hawk could have been considered as a cas platform why not the lca?

could you explain the role that would be assigned to a single engine fighter?CAS . interdiction, ?air defense?

when you say the wing rootis going to be extended for the lca mk2 is it like the navy version?

what is this 800km version of bhramos??

rad said...

hi prasun
congrats on predicting correctly that the russian will come back to us on the MTA issue . i think that has happened.

the above should be read as data patterns.

i dont understand that the al-41 is the engine given to the chinese on su -35 , i thought it was reserved for pakfa and the super sukhoi??

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To DEVOPRIYO: Totally WRONG. That was expected, coming as it is from such dubious sources as I had said several times before. The AL-31FPs with 2,000-hour TTSLs will be replaced with AL-41FPs ONLY AFTER the TTSL of the AL-31FP has been exhausted. On the 50 brand-new-build Super Su-30MKIs to be delivered to the IAF(for which the contract is now under negotiations), the AL-41FPs will come as standard fit.

To JYOTI SEN: No. The Brimstone was shown only with the Combat Hawk from BAE Systems. Now, don’t confuse the Combat Hawk with the Hawk-I that has been developed by HAL. Combat Hawk & hawk-I are 2 separate/different platforms.

To ABHAY JAIN: SAFRAN is now doing a technical audit of the Kaveri’s design. If an all-new Kaveri is to emerge after incorporating SAFRAN’s recommendations, this process will take at least another 5 years.

To DAS: That remark from the IA’s COAS was totally uncalled for. Dispersing rioting/protesting mobs is an internal security job & it should have been the DGP of J & K State Police who should have given this statement. No self-respecting Army trains its guns on unarmed civilians, even though the civilians may be rebellious.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SAM-7: Not quite true. On the other hand, there is no dearth of ‘desi bandalbaazes’ who tend to give such adverse impressions, like this:

Firstly, DARE was NEVER secretive. It has participated in all Aero India expos since the 1990s. Secondly, the SIVA HADF pod is used in conjunction with the Kh-31P Krypton ARMs & it will also be used along with NG-ARM. So to claim that the SIVA was junked & that it vanished into oblivion is totally malicious. Lastly, does this joker mean to say that the IAF took 17 years to decide whether or not to use the Russia-supplied jammer pods? This to me is the ultimate insult that anyone can heap upon the IAF! The IAF has been involved with the Su-30MKI since 1998 & by 2000 itself it was decided that such jammer pods from Russia will not be acquired by the IAF. And the shell of the SIVA pod will be used to contain the IMR SAR seeker now being developed by Data Patterns & ECIL for the BrahMos-NG, & not for the BrahMos-A, which will use the same SGH SAR seeker developed & supplied by Russia's Granit JSC.

To RAD: Not ALPHA, but Data Patterns. Sure, such companies can fabricate AESA-MMRs if reqd. Single-engined MRCAs are tasked primarily with defensive counter-air & battlefield air interdiction missions. Yes, the LCA Mk.2 will a longer (by 1 metre) than LCA MK.1 & it will feature, if you may like to say so, bigger-size LEVCONs. Had mer Cmde Balaji yesterday & again today & he also confirmed that this time, both the IAF & IN versions of the LCA MK.2 will have identical landing gear designs. And finally, selection of the Cockpit-NG (to be supplied by the HALBIT JV of HAL & ELBIT Systems) is now a foregone conclusion. Even the Gripen-E/Gripen-NG sports the Cockpit-NG.

And BTW, the PRALAY will be a 1,000km-range loitering missile that will be powered by a turbofan for lift/takeoff and this turbofan will be expendable after target selection is made & then homing in on to the target will be a supersonic affair. There you go, now I have given you enough dope to make your day along with a few Guinness Stouts!

Arpit Kanodia said...

One silly question, why ISRO never participate in Aero India? When they have so many solutions to provide.

From launch contracts to GSAT-7. From earth observation to encrypted MilSpec communication solutions.
Now India is part of MTCR, now we can even export liquid engines like Vikas or even CE-7.5 and CE-20. Even showcasing SCE-200 in Aero India.

If ISRO not itself participate in, then atleast LPSC and ISAC should participate, and showcasing various satellite solutions and Liquid engines.

Doesnt space is not part of Aero India?

Unknown said...

Dear Prasun,
What is the actual full reheat thrust of GE 414 INS6? Will it be greater than 98KN?
I believe Tejas MK2 will be a big success. Why then this confusion about single engine combat aircraft? Why at all?????

Unknown said...

Dear Prasun,

I believe Tejas MK2 will be a success in 6-7 years. Why then this tender of single engine combat jets that too proposed under strategic partnership model!!!!? I think soon it will be withdrawn.

Is this the MOD and IAF collusion to just fool around where as the real intent is to make Rafale MII happen????

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ARPIT KANODIA: Not a silly question at all. Because this is reflective of a very deep malaise prevailing within the average Indian psyche, i.e. consistently refusing to use common-sense. That in short explains it all. In other expos like Airsahow China, the pride of place always is given to the space pavilion which is huge. But in Aero India 2015 ISRO had only an insignificant booth! I can go on & on. Why for instance there isn’t a single company exhibiting its commercial airliner/engine MRO expertise? After all, all over the world, the pyramid of aerospace technologies & industries is built upon the foundation of commercial aviation markets. Similarly, no company is exhibiting in areas like ATC/ATM training institutions, ATC/ATM radars/systems, flying training institutions, flight simulators, in-flight entertainment systems, documentation preparation entities for air worthiness certification, etc etc etc. The only reason I can think of is the utter lack of domain expertise in such areas within the expo organiser, which is the MoD’s Defence Exhibitions Promotion Board. In fact, this year’s expo is quite low-key from an exhibitor profile POV. That’s why from Day-2 itself the public were allowed to enter the expo site.

To VED PRAKASH MISHRA: The thrust rating is 98kN with reheat. The confusion about single-engine versus twin-engine is about the so-called second MRCA-type that this Parrikar fella has been talking about without first obtaining a reality check. You will recall that this same fella was spreading all kinds of rumours about the MMRCA procurement. He just doesn’t understand that today there’s simply no scope for having 3 types of MRCAs, i.e. light, medium & heavy. Almost all self-respecting air forces today possess either only MMRCAs & H-MRCAs, or just MMRCAs. Consequently, the Tejas Mk.2 too should be developed as a MMRCA (just like the Mirage 2000N & MiG-29UPG are now), with the Rafale becoming the heavy interdictor/strike platform & the Su-30MKI morphing into the Super Su-30MKI as a truly air dominance combat aircraft.

To RAD: The MRTA is still in ‘stop’ mode. Russia is now offering it with two PS-90A turbofans, as per the brochure being distributed at the expo. As for powerplants, don’t read too much into engine designations since the Ruskies tend to change it quite often. Thus yesterday’s 117S is today’s AL-41. The FGFA will have an all-new-design turbofan with a totally new designation. After the joint R & D protocol is inked between India & Russia later this year, it will take 47 months to roll out the FGFA prototype.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

BTW, work on modifying the first Su-30MKI into Super Su-30MKI will commence within 90 days, according to HAL. Also, funding has been received from the IAF for the first 15 production-series LCHs. In addition, 2 more LUH prototypes are now being built for the sake of expediting the LUH's airworthiness process.

Anup said...

Everytime you said IAF OR IN never select Saab Gripen but why they participate in Aero India & Pitch there aircraft?

Thehundered said...

Prasun what is the TTSL of AL-41FP engines?

"On the 50 brand-new-build Super Su-30MKIs to be delivered to the IAF(for which the contract is now under negotiations), the AL-41FPs will come as standard fit."

are these "50 brand-new-build super Su-30MKIs" part of the 270 Su-30MKIs total IAF will acquire or is it 50 + 270 su-30MKIs? Thanks!

Pawan said...

Dear Prasun ji,
Thanks for sharing so many exciting things from Aero India. It's indeed pleasure to know that some realism is coming in system. News of LCH production order, Super Sukhoi and LUH program are music to ear of any defence enthusiastic.
Some time back you mentioned that LCH is not optimised for IA, is there any plan to do so or army will manage with Rudra only.

john said...

Could you pls tell us the future of NAL SUCHAN UAV. Any takers or another waste ?

rad said...

hi prasun
the big displays in the sukhoi pics are Russian or Indian.?

the multi role heli seems identical to the mi-38 , is it economical to buy from them or re invent the wheel? the russians took 12 years to introduce it ??

the akash squadron seems to be a target rich environment for the enemy, given the huge no of vehicles involved is it good?

the QR sam based on the astra is fine with a rf seeker , but to be more potent we need a IIR seeker is there any movement in that area as the rf seeker can always be jammed .

SAM-7 said...

hi prasun,
got a long list of questions , hope you'll take the pain to answer them .

1.what is progress on su-30 upgrade? will it include western missiles?

2. what are the india specific modifications in rafale that led to its astronomical price.?

3.given that luh is flying now, will the govt cancel ka 226 procurement, given that HAL has good track record with helicopters.

4.what wil be the role of HTT-40 in IAF training structure?

5.are the reports of CAS showing interest in Mi-38 is a reaaly potent platform and can be a worthy replacement to MI-8

coming to army related ones. the caliber shift to 7.62mm finalised? is it 7.62 nato or 7.62 x 39?

7.what will happen to the lakhs of insas rifles and millions of 5.56 rounds? how are they planning to build up their ammunition stockpiles given that we are already short of ammo. that 5.56 rifle pictured above an insas derivative or a new design..please share details if avaiable
9. what is the projected range of the astra based QRSAM? it is indeed a good idea to use astra as a sam.
next step should be to canisterise akash like russians did with the BUK by using folding control surfaces

10. specs of varunastra?if it can be used on kilo why cant it be used on scorpene?

SAM-7 said...

that cockpit of super su-30 looks awfully similar to that of su-35..i hope it is only a coincidence

does akash have any shoot and scoot capability like s-300/400 ?

vishakh said...


Are Air Busting Granade would be included in package for GHATAK 7.62 Rifle for IA ??

Will ABG would be imported or DRDO based???

Pratap said...

More than 100 pakis have died in wave of attacks across pakistan in last 5 days. Border with Afghanistan has been sealed and PA has given a list of 76 people demanding they be handed over to them. How do you interpret this and what do you think is going to happen now in near future?


Prasun Da,

1.What are the benefits that Nova/TASL gets from TERMA, Denmark? IOW, will TERMA transfer the tech behind building Surface Surveillance Radars to Nova/TASL?

2. Didthe Indian Navy choose the offer made by Nova + TERMA simply because it was the least expensive system on offer?



Prav said...

Thanks for the write up Mr Prasun .
A lot of lice stuff showed this time . Despite the usual goof ups a lot of good products fere shows . The RWS 12.7 mm platform for instance as well as the Data Patterns radars seem promising . Especially since things like this are what are imported the most .


Prasun Da,

3. Which institutes, companies in India work on Stealth Technologies? Especially w.r.t reducing heat signature?

Thank You

Kaustav said...

Speaking of SAMs some updates and detais on forthcoming Akash NGs????? and other LR QR varieties....The current rumours are well rumours and low on logic and facts.

Chirag said...

Hi prasun
The new T90 tank which we are aquiring is it up to T90 tagil standard or inferior to it.whats the status of leads 150 aps to be installed on existing ones.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANUP: Why? Only Saab can answer that. Maybe they’re insatiable optimists, I guess.

To THEHUNDRED: It is lesser than 4,000 hours, since the AL-41 is just an advanced version of the basic AL-31. The 50 Super Su-30MKIs will be part of the umbrella inter-governmental agreement inked in the year 2000 under which India had committed to procure a total of 350 Su-30MKIs in different versions.

To PAWAN: VMT. There’s much more to come, rest assured. The IA plans to procure 114 LCHs but the IA’s ground-based infrastructure (heli-bases) has yet to come up for housing such assets. But what has always been perplexing to me is the sequential process of weaponised platform development, which causes delays for nonsensical reasonbs (i.e. total abdication of common-sense). For instance, IA HQ’s MGO Branch, instead of participating in the Arjun Mk.1’s user-evaluations with the 15 pre-production versions of the Arjun Mk.1, decided to enter the scene ONLY AFTER the first squadrons of Arjun Mk.1s had been delivered by HVF Avadi. As a result, platform maturity was affected & the need for Arjun Mk.1A with 93 modifications arose. Had the MGO Branch entered the scene back in the 1990s, then the Arjun Mk.1A would have been available by 2006 itself. Similarly, no efforts were made to create a joint developmental group for incorporating modifications for weaponising both the Dhruv ALH & the LCH from the very outset. As a result, HAL first focussed on platform development & only after this was the DRDO invited to weaponise the platforms. This nonsensical approach has no equals from the rest of the world. It is for this reason that weaponisation of the Dhruv ALH & the LCH continues to face delays.

BTW, a contract will soon be placed for an initial 86 WhAP/Kestrel 8 x 8 APCs. These APCs will be used for trying out the BEL-developed vectronics like BMS & BSS, plus the competing TAC4 G networks on offer.

To JOHN: Mini-UAS & Micro-UAS are meant for use by Battalion-sized/Company-sized infantry units that are equipped with the F-INSAS component of the Battlefield Surveillance System (BSS), i.e. hand-held tablets & palm-tops. The BSS in turn, along with the BMS, cannot be used unless & until the new-generation TAC4G tactical comms system network is introduced to provide the spectrum bandwidth. Thus, no BSS or F-INSAS using mini-/micro-UAS & no BMS can be introduced into service unless the TAC4G is deployed. It’s that simple.

To RAD: They’re from SAMTEL. The IMRH cannot take off without a strategic industrial partner. In addition, the design is of a legacy-type. It would have been better had HAL partnered with Kamov OKB to co-develop the Ka-92 whose design offers a far higher cruising speed than the Mi-38. The QR-SAM with RF seeker is quite effective against manned combat aircraft & will serve the IA’s Corps of Air-Defence Artillery quite well. IIR-guided SAMs are more useful against cruise missiles. And cruise missiles are never used against ground-based on-the-move land warfare formations.

SUVO said...

PRASUN DA,Thanks for sharing Aero India .

U.S state department spokeperson on Thursday told PTI :
"We believe that U.S long-term interests are best serve by supporting Pakistan’s efforts to combat violent extremism and build a more stable,tolerant,democratic society.We are greatful for the sacrifices the Pakistani military and people have made combating terrorism,shutting down terrorist safe havens,& restoring govt. controle to parts of Pakistan that have been used for terrorist safe havens for years."
So, finally no change in U.S policy.May be this is the Kissinger effect on Trump.
How do you interpret this.

satya said...

Sir! what would be role for single engine fighter plane if we already have Su 30mki as air superiority and rafeal will do the rest of jobs . Can't we just wait and till Tejas Mk2 comes.

And We gov is defensive while dealing with China. We can also counter them by supporting Taiwan and Vietnam openly as they do with pakistan.

And why ISRO too much awesome and DRDO always disappoints ? Management problem or Govt not handling them well

Rajdeep said...

Dear Sir

Is it possible that by demanding TOO MANY THINGS
we would loose the entire PAK FA / FGFA project altogether

If Russia decides to Dump India altogether and invite China
into PAK FA ; then what we would be able to do

Why are we throwing so many Tantrums especially when we cannot
even complete LCA successfully on our Own

Ved said...

Dear Prasun,
Need to know how many UCAV projects are running around the world and what is the status in India?

Kambar said...

1) Since the MBDA SRSAM is dead, what will replace the Barak-1 for the IN? Sea RAM, VL Python, or C-Dome? Or can a VL ASTRA QRSAM with an IIR seeker be developed?

2) Is there a need for SHORAD or VSHORADs or can the Akash and QRSAM meet the lower end of the air defense spectrum? Also is there a need for a counter-battery interceptors like the Iron Dome or will such a system be cost ineffective for large countries like India? If so, does that mean India can only acquire C-RAM interceptors once low cost DEW interceptors are developed?

3) Is there any truth/forces committed to buy the purported development of a seeker-mounted Akash 2? Will this have an integrated TELAR to reduce the logistical footprint?

4) Why is cash-strapped Russia developing a separate SSBN, SSGN, and SSN? The French Navy and Royal Navy only have two nuclear submarine classes, SSBNs and SSNs, with cruise missiles on the SSN, while USN SSGNs are old SSBN frames.

5) How effective is the Chinese SH-2 MGS system? Supposedly Pakistan has 100 of these howitzers in service.

6) The PLA have only inducted tracked self-propelled howitzers. What can be inferred from this? Will the Chinese not be able to deploy self-propelled artillery along mountain passes in the TAR? Why have they not inducted a MGS system?

7) Will the IAF upgrade the Hawk mk132 to the Hawk-I configuration? Hawk-I seems to involve the same avionics changes as the Combat Hawk without changing the airframe or requiring new build aircraft.

8) Does the Combat Hawk have tangible export opportunities? For example, will the UK want to order Combat Hawks to train pilots for the F-35? While HAL has 50% share in the project, it looks like BAE is doing all of the marketing for the Combat Hawk and has exclusive ownership of the prototypes.

9) After going through several old posts, it seems that the only operational nuclear warheads are boosted fission warheads. This likely means that the unitary Agni warheads are around 50kT. Also, this means that the warheads need to have their tritium replaced frequently, compared to the thermonuclear warheads that use lithium deuteride which decays at a slower rate.

10) Additionally, it seems that we have no existing nuclear cruise missile warheads for BrahMos or Nirbhay. Eventually, it seems like Super Su-30 and Rafale will get nuclear-armed Nirbhay (a thermonuclear warhead perhaps?), while the army will not opt for ground-mobile nuclear cruise missiles. Can you confirm this?

Kambar said...

11) What is the kT destructive power of the nuclear bombs that the IAF uses?

12) Would SLBMs need a thermonuclear warhead since it would be difficult to constantly maintain a boosted fission warhead?

13) Will the final Agni-V have a thermonuclear warhead?

14) Will the Army upgrade the Agni TELs to the Russian mobile TEL standard, just like China did recently?

15) Which supercomputers are available for nuclear weapons development in India? Is it just the ANUPAM series of supercomputers developed by BARC, or can BARC use C-DAC and CSIR computers? BARC’s ANUPAM series only has approximately 200 TFLOPs of combined processing power, which seems to be grossly insufficient for modern simulations. The Russians and French have several PFLOPs of processing power for military applications.

16) How far away is BARC from validating a thermonuclear warhead family? End of this decade? The end of the next decade?

17) What is the status of BARC PWRs for SSNs and the aircraft carrier? Considering how much power carriers use, will BARC simply install 4-6 SSN PWRs on INS Vishaal, just like the USS Enterprise CVN?

18) In the recent China-Indian border conference you linked, former NSA Shivshankar Menon raised concerns of Chinese interactions with Bhutan. It is very probable to think that the Chinese could claim that the Bhutanese and certain Northern Nepali indigenous peoples are part of the greater Tibetan ethnicity and therefore these areas need to be part of the PRC, similar to the Chinese claims on Ladakh and Arunachal. This would challenge the idea of Indian hegemony in South Asia, and could be revenge if India successfully regains PoK and ruins CPEC’s connectivity objectives. Another alternative is that China may initiate something similar to the Russian action in South Ossetia, Donbas and Transnistria, where they could informally take control of pockets of Nepal or Bhutan by disguising professional soldiers as revolutionary irregulars native to the land. Such a military action could be used for domestic propaganda to increase internal approval of the PLAF, without input from the CPC. Economic sanctions would only work if the US, Europe, and Japan agreed to them, but this would be harder than Russia or Iran since China contributes a lot to the global economy. What kind of contingency plans can be adopted for Bhutan and Nepal?

18) Since the FICV program is not going to start soon, what is the ideal upgrade for the BMP-2? If the BMP-2 gets a 500hp diesel engine, what sort of protection can be outfitted to the BMP-2? Mobility parameters may be reduced in the end but battle survivability is the larger problem.

19) How is the rest of the world switching over to 7.62mm over 5.56mm? All NATO arms manufacturers seem to be sticking with 5.56mm for service rifles. Only second world and third world nations use 7.76mm battle rifles. Stopping power claims are completely subjective in nature, and the US Army Ballistics Lab has concluded that lethality is the same for both 5.56mm and 7.76mm.

20) What is the action of the Ghataak SLR? Direct impingement, short stroke, or long stroke piston?

Kambar said...

21) How will Ghataak be effective for automatic fire as most 7.76mm guns are not? Especially considering that Indian jawans are smaller than their NATO counterparts, they will not handle automatic recoil well. I think a better feature to implement is a compact bullpup design.

22) Will the FGFA be a true MRCA that can be used for deep interdiction missions, like the Rafale?

23) “There were several issues that caused the Rafale deal to collapse, he [Cmde Balaji] says, but he specifically pointed to France’s unwillingness to part with a proprietary RAM that is applied to the Rafale’s canopy. Had the deal moved forward, Rafales completed in India would have been sent to France to receive the coating.” Is this true? You have stated that IAF Rafales would be the same configuration as French Rafales?

24) The IMRH should be designed for the more challenging 12-tonne NMRH role, drawing influence from the H225M or CH-148 instead of the Mil-17, and then work backwards to fill IAF/IA requirements for other IMRH variants. Also the Army/Air Force versions will need hot/high performance and high FOD resistance to work in dusty and high-particulate environments. Will HAL choose the Turbomeca RTM322 or GE T700 (CT-7)?

25) Will HAL later retrofit the Ardiden 3 turboshafts on the ALH/Rudra/LCH/LUH to increase TBO and boost power by 15%?

26) Did HAL give customer flights to potential LCA customers? Are there potential LCA customers, and why would they want LCA mk1A/mk2 over Gripen E?

27) What is the DRDO SAAW? Not to be confused with the DRDO/IAI EMP SEAD SAAW ARM.

28) Do you have details on the FGFA R&D contract? To the lay reader, it seems like the Russians want our money in exchange for the FGFA and maybe some screwdriver tech. Even worse, future PAK-FA derivatives, which way partially paid for, could be exported to China, just like elements of the Su-30MKI found their way into the Su-35, once their J-20 ends up like their J-15/16.

29) Since the Chinese have convinced Turbomeca to give them TOT for the Ardiden 3 turboshafts, how drastically will this improve their lift/attack capability in TAR, since the Ardiden 3 is specially designed for hot and high operation?

Kambar said...

30) The IAF has yet to choose a smart PGM family to JV or co-develop with a local partner from a foreign OEM. Would SPICE or HAMMER be better for the IAF on an integration and cost-basis? Also is there a need for a lower cost PGM/LGB family like the geo-targeted JDAM or PAVEWAY LGBs? . This article states that there is an order of magnitude cost difference between the low and high capability PGMs. What sort of PGM breakdown is the IAF targeting?

31) How many Mig-29UPG and upgraded Mirage are there now? Why are both of these moving so slowly?

32) Does it make sense to order two more ELM 2090 AWACs for $1 billion USD when we could order 4 EMB-145i AEWACs for half that price?

33) How far is the ALG network by BEL from deployment? Do the Chinese have similar facilities for remote airfields in TAR/Xinjiang?

34) Which DRDO lab is developing the Pralay? And what exactly is Pralay? A hybrid between 500km supersonic Brahmos 1 and 1500km subsonic Nirbhay? Who are the users? What platform and role will this Pralay fill?

35) Why does the WSO for the Super Su-30 have a computer mouse? And that too mounted on the left side, bizarrely.

36) Since the Nag missile is nowhere near being frozen for final production, why cant the IAF/IA order the PARS 3LR?

37) From the uploaded slide, are DARE’s MAWS all IR-based? From my understanding, doesn’t water vapor and condensation have a high absorption of infrared radiation, meaning poor performance in wet conditions? Wonder why they choose IR over short wavelength UV (100-300nm). There’s much less UV noise than IR noise too.

38) Are the DRDO thermobaric rounds only airburst or is there a ground burst mode, ie is anyone developing a ground burst fuze?

39) Were there any DEWs or laser weapons showcased at Aero India?

Kaustav said...

The Excalibur and Ghatak assault rifles have their roles and both shall be used

asd said...

Prasun ji,

Here is a salvo of question rockets by Kambar and I am certain you will faint after answering them. If I am available, I will sprinkle water over your face.

RJS said...


I can see why PSK has been avoiding questions of late.

That's a case of overkill @Kambhar.

Arpit Kanodia said...

@kamber are you creating any kind of world record? :P

Rajesh Mishra said...

Now Shri PKS may need to write a huge Mahabharat Puran on defense matters.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SAM-7: 1) Didn’t I say that it will begin in less than 90 days? Why should it carry any Western missiles? Aren’t Russian missiles good enough? 2) Have listed azll that in a previous thread. Nor is the price astronomical by any stretch of imagination. 3) Question of cancellation doesn’t even arise since no contract was ever signed. 4) None as of now. No contract has been placed by anyone in India for the HTT-40. 5) Showing interest is akin to only window-shopping, nothing more. 6) What did I say about the Ghaatak above? Why are you asking me to repeat it? 7) Do you think all existing stocks are to be replaced in 24 hours at the blink of an eye? 8) It is a derivative. 9) 22km. What’s bad about this idea? Neither KUB or BUK are cannister-mounted. 10) Available in the DEFEXPO 2016 thread. Who has ever claimed that the Varunastra is qualified for submarine launches? All HWTs used agaimst submarines are wire-guided. Is the Varunastra wire-guided? 11) Looks are deceptive, akin to a book being judged by its cover, just as many fail to look inside & assume that the Ghaatak is copied from the AK-47 or AK-56. 12) The OEM of S-300/S-400 has so far never claimed that such LR-SAMs have shooty-n-scoot capability.

To VISHAKH: The 40mm UBGL developed by ARDE is based on NATO standard & therefore can fire ABGs. Such ABGs will be locally developed & produced. Only those rounds that are not used adequately in peacetime cannot be produced locally, like 30mm & 20mm ammo for combat aircraft of Western/Russian origin, rounds for ZSU-23-4 & ZU-23, & rounds for AGS-17 AGLs. All these are imported.

To PRATAP: Very simple. Afghanistan too will hand over the list of all Taliban leaders that are based i8n Quetta & request a mutual swap. That should work.

To VIKRAM GUHA: 1) You should recall that TERMA has supplied more than 60 Scanter 2001 radars for India’s coastal surveillance system & therefore there is now sufficient economy of scale for part-building & servicing such radars from TERMA. 2) No. The Scanter 6000 also had the best performance parameters. 3) None. They simply can’t, because they don’t have any practical industrial expertise to fall back on or for benchmarking purposes.

To KAUSTAV: AKASH-2 will be identical to Akash-1 externally, but will be powered by higher energetic propellants that will increase the missile’s range to 40km.

To CHIRAG: It’s the T-90AM/MS. LEDS-150 is meant only for the first 310 imported T-90S & that too only when they undergo mid-life upgrades at HVF Avadi.

To SATYA: Both LCA Mk.1 & Mk/2 are a full generation ahead of the 1980s-legacy design of Su-30. The former two can do at least 3 missions per day, which the Su-30MKI can’t. DRDO disappoints because people expect too much from it. How can DRDO develop anything when the back-up industrial infrastructure doesn’t exist even for prototype development?

To RAJDEEP: Why should Russia invite China when China already has the J-20 under development? No one threw any tantrums about FGFA. It is the Tuskies that have so far failed to develop as earlier promised the FGFA’s definitive powerplant.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KAMBAR: 1) Why should IIR seeker be developed by Astra-1’s SAM version? Which of the two—IIR seeker & RF seeker—has greater range envelope? 2) Can Iron Dome’s missiles intercept manoeuvring airborne targets? 3) Even Akash-1 has a seeker. 4) Who said Russia is cash-strapped? They even have a declining population growth rate. 5) The PA does not possess any motorised howitzers. 6) PLA operates SH-2s in TAR. 7) Yes, when they are due for mid-life upgrades. 8) Several African & Latin American countries are potential customers for the Combat Hawk. Even existing Hawk 200s can be upgraded to Combat Hawk. 9) Boosted fission warheads can go up to 150kT yield. 10) BrahMos-1 was never meant to be nuclear-armed. All 3 armed services will possess Nirbhay. 11) Boosted-fission. 12) Where’s the need for constantly-maintained bossted-fission warheads? 13) Does it really matter? 14) What for? Deployment patterns & norms vary from country to country. 15) Supercomputing processing power undergoes upgrading at least twice a year. 16) It was all done way back in May 1998 itself. 17) BARC was NEVER involved with the design of any PWRs. And it never will. 18) Bhutan ibn turn will claim sovereignty over TAR & Inner Mongolia due to the common lineage of the Mongol race. Does the RFI in the previous thread say anything about 500hp engine? 19) It doesn’t matter what other countries do. Both China & Pakistan are going to use 7.62. 20) It is the same as that of all new-gerneration 7.62 SLRs. 21) Ghaatak will have folding butt-stock. 22) Yes. 23) Why should a complete Rafale be sent to France if only the cockpit transparencies need such coatings? That shows how stupid the news-reporter quoting this claim is. 24) What’s wrong with the VK-2500 engine? 25) That option is always there. 26) No. 27) GPS-guided JDAM-type SDB. 28) Totally wrong assumptions. Even the MIL-STD-11553B digibus developed for the DFCS & weapons management for either FGFA or Su-30MKI is Russian IPR & therefore costs royalty money. Nothing from Su-30MKI found its way on the Su-35 nor are the J-15s & J-16s operational nor will they ever be. And that’s why the J-15 till this day cannot be fully armed. 29) There’s no such ToT. It is only final-assmebly from semi-knocked-down kits. 30) All of them have been mentioned in previous threads. 31) Less than 10 of each. All are moving as scheduled. 32) For how many hours can EMB-145I stay airborne vis-à-vis A-50I? 33) All ALGs have it. China does not possess ALGs. 34) DRDL. Rest has already been answered above. 35) That was for the cockpit simulator. 36) Nag is already in limited series production. 37) IR/UV dual-colour. How can there be condensation when internal heating is there? 38) Do any FAE-type/thermobaric-type warheads have ground-burst fuzes? Ifd you want to destroy a bunker will you want to only suck out the air from inside the bunker or from that whole area?

BROWN DESI said...

Holy are a very patient man Mr Sengupta..
Brown Desi

Kaustav said...


What differences between the two Army and Air force versions of the LCH/LAH should there be other than Air Particle Filter as on the Army Aviation version of the Rudra?

Jayanth said...

Wonder why Sanjay Sharma prefers to use an alter ego Kambar?

Shobhit said...

Prasun ji:Your upload of HAL-developed HTSE 1200 turboshaft for helicopters says that it uses single crystal blade. Has India mastered this critical technology for aero engines?

vishakh said...


1) Is there a plan to provide 360 Coverage to Akash 2 along with lower response time ??

2) Will this hurt Pakisthan ???


Prasun Da,

Since you have often highlighted the products designed by smaller companies like Data Pattern , Alpha Technologies etc:

1. Why is it that there are very few such companies in India?

2. In your experience how much investment(ballpark) is required to start such a company?



Senthil Kumar said...

Dear Prasun,

Is there any solution for this Fake Currency originating from Pakistan. What is the option India has now for this problem.

S.Senthil Kumar

AniluvG said...


It always a pleasure to read your blog. People write the same thing 4-7 years later. Article about the potential of LCA as LIFT.

Sumeet said...

Prasunji 7.62x51 recoil will be huge, have we mastered engineering for rifles with less recoil like SCAR

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KAUSTAV: The IA's Rudras require air-filters at the air-intakes because they fly very close to the ground during CAS missions & they also possess DARE-developed narrow-band RWRs. The IAF's Rudras are tasked with CSAR & are not reqd to hug the terrain when flying & therefore do not require air-filters. The IAF Rudras also sport wide-band RWRs supplied by SaabTech.

To SHOBHIT: The manufacturing technology came from Russia in 2002 itself as part of the Su-30MKI/AL-31FP deal. The supercritical superalloy's development was undertaken by MIDHANI & efforts are still underway. So far, only ceramics-based superalloys for the compressor blades have been developed. But superalloys built with rare-earth materials are still a far cry in both India & China.


To VIKRAM GUHA: There are more than 350 such companies in India today that are supported by more than 3,000 MSMEs. In the aviation industry, if you want to make a few million dollars in profit, then you must be prepared to invest a billion dollars.

capricorn said...


1)Should India try to buy Iranian Long range SAMs until it gets s400?

2) How many s400 batteries will India buy?

3)Should India look at buying Iranian Soumar cruise missile unti Nirbhay is ready?

4) What types of Standoff weapons is India developing for IAF?

5)Will Russia let manufacture of s300 or s400 in India?

6)What is the status of Indian undersea submarine monitoring network project?

7)Is indian developing a missile launched torpedo?

8) What type of glide munitions is India developing?

9)What is the present status of shaurya missile?is longer range planned?

10)Is Shaurya effective against Chinese SAMs?

11) Is India developing a 150 km range SAM?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANILUVG & DEVOPRIYO: LoLz! Didn’t I say several times before not to quote such dubious news-reports from equally dubious sources? For those who don’t know, a LIFT is meant to replicate the capabilities of frontline combat aircraft in terms of both air combat performance & weapons employment. Therefore, why should Bahrain be interested in a LIFT that has ZERO commonality with that country’s F-16s? And what will ADA do if Bahrain asks for the AMRAAM & Sidewinder AAMs to be integrated with the EL/M-2032 MMR on the Tejas Mk.1? After all, Bahrain is most unlikely to settle for either the R-73E or the Derby or Python.

To DUSHYANT HARDAHA: Not heavy, but medium artillery, mostly 130mm howitzers for corss-border shelling.

To ARITRO DATA: 1) And which LR-SAMs are these? 2) Check the thread concerning the S-400. 3) How many Soumars have been built by Iran to date? Or were they acquired from Ukraine 16 years ago? 4) Check out the threads dating back to Aero India 2015. 5) No. 6) Work on it has not yet begun. 7) No. 8) Check out the threads dating back to Aero India 2015. 9) The TD project has been terminated. 10) No one knoiws. 11) No.

Unknown said...

Sir some news spreading about contract between MiG Corporation and United Arab emirate for 5th Gn fighter jt

AVIRAL said...

Sir,S Cristopher during Aero India said that they have signed $21 million contacts with Myanmar to supply advance light torpedoes. Chinese communist party mouthpiece Global Times also quoted him saying the same. Is it true? For we have already supplied 4 HUMSA sonars to Myanmar.. .
Thank you,Sir.

Ankit Singh said...

Some one quoted you in a defence forum about MCIWS being dead.
Is it true then what is the reason?

AVIRAL said...

1) Last year in an interview Raksha Mantri said that Astra and Mag missiles will be inducted in 2017. What do you think.
2) In 2015 we got the news that NGARM will be integrated to Sukhoi in 2016. Will the NGARM and QR SAM be tested in 2017??

3)While reading the documents placed in the parliament stating the defence project cleared for development, I found that some funds were cleared for some anti ship missile development.In an interview in 2015 Dr. G Sateesh Reddy of RCI said:"An X-band seeker for anti-ship applications is also being pursued very seriously and trials will be held in the first quarter of 2015".Which missile??

Please do reply.

Ankit Singh said...

Also sir, the original requirement of the Netra AEW&C was 14 units, then why only 3 is getting inducted?

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,

I found this article very rational. Whats your take on it?