Total Pageviews

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Setting The Record Straight

Till this day, the overwhelming majority of India’s citizens are ill-informed about the legal status of the State of Jammu & Kashmir (inclusive of PoK), i.e. whether it is legally a part of India or whether it is disputed territory. If asked, they tend to ASSUME that it is disputed territory. However, a careful reading of the UN Security Council Resolution 47 (1948) submitted jointly by the Representatives for Belgium, Canada, Republic of China, Colombia, the United Kingdom and United States of America and adopted by the Security Council at its 286th meeting held on April 21, 1948 (Document No. 5/726, dated the 21st April, 1948), followed by a detailed account of how the Ceasefire Agreement was negotiated and finally inked on July 28, 1949, all prove beyond any reasonable doubt that it is Pakistan that has consistently shied away from implementing the UNSC’s Reolution 47.
Reproduced below is the first-hand detailed account of the entire negotiating process and the benchmarks that were used for drafting the temporary ceasefire agreement. This should, once and for all, clear any doubts that anyone harbours about the legal status of undivided Jammu & Kashmir. 


1 – 200 of 205   Newer›   Newest»
Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To THE INDIAN: Rest assured that I will be uploading all those updates/revcelations as a continuation of the narrative in this very thread. Meanwhile, the Indian NSA has once again been invited to Washington DC to meet with both the new US NSA & Defense Secretary this Friday. Word is that the US will increase its military footprint inside Afghanistan & this time around hot-puruist operations by US soldiers inside Pakistani territory will likely be authorised, just like the now-resumed US drone-strikes. Russia has already greenlighted such plans & hence we are also seeing the USMC getting active inside Syria. Pakistan’s troubles in its western front (along the Durand Line) have just increased as a result of all this because it will have no means of countering such surgical strikes by the US & this then will in turn only cause more internal resentment & rebellious behaviour & it is perhaps for this reason that the PA & Pak Rangers are now involved in counter-terror operations throughout Pakistan so as to minimise the expected blow-backs. But bloody blow-backs there will be as will the consequent losses of innocent civilian lives inside Pakistan. The period between this month & November this year will therefore be extremely crucial for India in the event of India & the US undertaking synchronised counter-terror operations (likesustained cross-LOC raids in India’s case).

To RAD: WRT MARS-1, to be noted is that when they were ordered from Brazil, their ejector/launch pylons were too from the same OEM & this was a one-off deal involving the supply of no more than 40 ejector/launch pylons for the PAF’s upgraded Mirage-3/5 MRCAs. Therefore, these ejector/launch pylons can in theory be used by aircraft like the JF-17 only when the Mirage-3/5 are decommissioned sometime by 2020. In practice, the JF-17 will have to be re-certified for carrying/launching such weapons & no such activity has so far been undertaken. AESA-MMRs using directional jamming can only jam other X-band MMRs. They are not meant to jam anything else. For all other ground-based radars, high-power escort jammers like the DARE-developed HPJ pods will be used. Active expendable decoys don’t need any integration other than that with the dispenser system. Once such decoys do their job, they self-destruct in mid-air. Israeli OEMs have so far not released any data on their AESA-based internal jamming suite. There won’t be any tail-mounted AESA T/R modules. The wing-mounted ones will function in L-band. Glide-bombs of the type being made by DRDO. Especially the heavyweight ones, are meant for launch from cargo transports like An-32RE or C-130H-30. As I explained above, no warships from China will be at Gwadar. They will go to Ormara & Pasni. It is far more expensive to use engines for glide-bombs than to use solid-fuel rockets for boosting the standoff range. Super Su-30MKI deal hasn’t been inked yet. Only deal inked recently was thast for the 2 additional A-50I PHALCONs. As for the JF-17, the Chinese OEM isn’t yet contemplating the development of a quadruplex FBW FCS. Indian MiG-29s never had the RD-93. Only RD-33s are used on them. RD-93 was developed in the late 1990s only for legacy platforms like Mirage F-1 or Mirage-3/5 that reqd re-engining.

To LEONARD: That’s only a wishlist that even you or I can come up with.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ANIK: 1) That’s pure baloney & hogwash. 2) The pre-induction trials are going on right now & will last till this June. 3) Because the S-72 Arihant SSBN is not available as it is undergoing a periodic servicing schedule. 4) It’s the integration of the Rudrastra suite (inclusive of HELINA) with the Rudra helicopter-gunship.

To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: Yes, that may be the number that entered, but not for the purpose of staying put inside India. The Indian estimate of such folks still being holed up inside India is more realistic. There’s only 1 way to terminate this menace: do it like what Bangladesh has done, i.e. kill them by any means & don’t take any prisoners. Unfortunately, the law-enforcement agencies of states like Assam. Tripura & WB are ill-equipped for such taskings & therefore a paramilitary outfit like the Assam Rifles should be entrusted with such search-n-destroy tasks.

To ANTONY: Isn’t it bizarre that whenever publications like AFM have to share anything new about the JF-17, it always gets the data from PAC Kamra instead of obtaining it from the OEM< i.e. AVIC/CATIC of China? That itself should prove to everyone that all such updates originating from PAC Kamra is pure bullshit. Therefore, far more sensibl;e thing to do is top take note of the scale-models of the JFT-17 that are displayed by AVIC.

To FINCH: Where exactly will the NVGs be installed? And who is the OEM for such NVGs? What TAI is doing is modifying the cockpit’s avionics & instrumentation to become NVG-Compatible so that they can be readable at night. The NVGs are always mounted on the pilot’s helmet & are reqd by the pilot to look out for better situational awareness when flying at altitudes of no less than 500 feet AGL. More than 40 of the IAF’s Jaguar IS have had this capability since the mid-1990s. Rest of the stuff like ATPs or howitzers being loost last year is total rubbish.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Leonard said...

But Its not you or I that has come up with it. Its the MoD! Shouldn't it mean that these are some of the capabilities the Armed Forces are seeking and the technologies are required to be achieved in a designated time bound manner as it is based on the LTIPP of the Armed Forces from which flows the 5 year plans which translate the LTIPP into an action plan with committed funding?

Anonymous said...

PAF Air Marshal Muhammad Ashfaque Arain – the second-in-command of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) had last year revealed that the PAF was seeking the Damocles targeting pod for use on the JF-17 and if the Damocles could not be acquired, the PAF would have to settle for ‘unproven’ options, which might explain the ASELPOD purchase.


Sam said...

Sir, thanks for the reply to my question on the Sukhoi T-50. I have a few more:
1. Does the T-50 have a Distributed Aperture System like the F-35 and as the J-20 is rumoured to have?
2. If it's not, can India design and certify one on its own for use in the FGFA?
3. How critical is a DAS for success in air-to-air combat?
4. A general question: What do you think abt the air-to-air capabilities of the F-35? How will it fair against the Chinese 5th gen fighters(J20 and J31) in this regard?
Thank you!

Unknown said...

Dear Prasoon

Do you think india shall try to capture chickens neck area and Haji Pir pass any time this year. it appears that probably they are looking for more cross border strikes. kindly share your thoughts on what would logically most likely happen.

thanks and regards


rad said...

hi prasun
i was not aware that dare has a HPJ pod , i was given to understand we were using elta 8251 jammer and 8222 jammer pods. The only info on Indian pods is the tusker pod. No clear data has been published . Please do give us some dope.

Is the mayavi ew project with israel inclusive of a jammer pod ?is the project finished.Will israel give us cutting edge algorithms for the project .What is our part ?, as we are new to this game?

are we using the KNIRT jammer by russia that is highly rated , why have we not got them ? i believe it was used to jam the aegis equipped warship.

is the rd-33 better than the rd-93 engine ? what about the latest re engine of the mig-29 ? is the overall serviceability and durability better ?

now how do we attack pasni and omara if the chinks station their ships there,?with out damage to the them?

karlo kopp says that there will be aesa modules on the tail fin leading edge for elevation determination and leading edge aesa for azimuth on the super sukhoi?

The Indian said...

Prasun, can you throw some light on the meetings of Doval in Russia recently.Do update us on Dovals meetings in Washington!Could you also enlighten us whether India is planning to change, amend or update its Nuclear Doctrine.Russia appears to have decided on Shtorm class Carrier!What about our carrier Vishal?Any news of the AWACS aircraft that we recently purchased from Israel?Any Technical Details!Does it also involve up gradation of our older AWACS?Do We have anti AWACS missiles? If so details please?Why was K4 missile test cancelled ?Any idea?

Parvesh said...

Namaskar dada. .I have been reading all your post since 2007. ..they are very informative and enlighten a common citizen like me.

All these years you have been claiming that India will have 300+ su30mki but how as the contract says 272 only.
Please provide some clarity regarding the 300+ number
Exact number of sukhoi in each squadron
Currently deployed su30mki squadron
And bases
Future bases for additional sukhoi

Why we are not deploying su30mki in laddakh or kashmir
Is there any plans to deploy su30mki in andman with antiship weapons bcoz andman seems to be vulnerable from Chinese threat and currently no combat aircraft is deployed there

Parvesh said...

Very many thanks for enlightenment of the citizens and clearing the perception of Chinese and Pakistani threat to our country

Bulla said...

What is your opinion on the following

Anonymous said...
It is now time to crush the hashishins once more. Your opinion?

Kaustav said...

Curiouser and Curiouser between India and Pakistan. India today flatly denied having agreed to talks on Indus Water Treaty in Washington and also denied having withdrawn Miyar hydel designs or hold project work, contrary to Pakistani statements yesterday that India had accepted the same. Combined with media articles on possible pre-emptive nuclear strikes by India after Pakistani media counter doctrine to Indian CSD, the situation would seem hilarious, if it did not involve us.

Anonymous said...

@Anon 2.58,

Couldn't agree more with you. It has already been crushed twice. Their production rate is high and every 15 years this will have to be repeated. If I look at the case of northern ireland, eventually we will have to ask the difficult questions and get to the root cause of the problem.

HAL 9000 said...

It says that it has Quad-redundancy in Fly By Wire System. Is that different from a quadruplex FBW?

Is the L-15 trainer configured with a three-axis digital fly-by-wire system?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAD: If you are still unaware of the HPJ pods, then you should go to the AI-2017 threads where its photos were uploaded for the very first time anywhere in this world! There never was an airborne EW project with Israel. They are all fanboy fantasies. RD-33-3 & RD-33MK are a generation ahead of the 1970s-era RD-93. If any PLAN warship is there in Ormara or Pasni during declared military hostilities then it is at PLAN’s own risk. But knowing the Chinese, they will be the first to withdraw from such areas rather than be at the receiving end of naval firepower.

To THE INDIAN: All I can say about IAC-2 is that only block design has commenced, meaning the vessel is divided into various blocks dealing with structures like the propulsion bay, ammo storage bay, island, aircraft storage/MRO bay etc etc.

To PARVESH: The Su-30MKI fleet will total 350 as was revealed by the Russians way back in 2009 at both the Aero India 2009 expo & later at the MAKS 2009 expo as well. All other questions of yours have been answered several times before whenever they were asked by others.

To BULLA: LoLz! The headline suggests it all: speculation. So what’s the use of commenting on baseless speculation? The writer of that piece of fiction WRONGLY ASSUMES that Pakistan will carry out a demonstration of its TNWs on Indian soil. He also WRONGLY ASSUMES that India has the formidable ISTR & C4I capabilities reqd for undertaking a debilitating counter-force strike with conventional weapons. In reality, such counter-force strikes will have to be a multilateral effort & that’s when pacts like LEMOA will come into play. Folks like that author have not bothered to factor in such realities & hence they’re running around like headless chicken with needless speculation. To join him soon will be the likes of George Perkovich, mark my words.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LEONARD: Can you show me even a single LTIPP that has been adhered to by the MoD since 1947? Even 5-year defence plans have been approved only on paper but there was never any schedule of implementation. Haven’t you already seen all this WRT the MSC fiasco? How exactly can you expect as such plans to be implemented when ALL the questions asked on defence/military matters in India’s Parliament are always replied to in writing? Why are such issues never debated in Parliament? Has any LTIPP & its implementation roadmap ever been debated in Parliament? If it hasn’t, then how can you even dream about such LTIPPs bearing fruit?

To FINCH: Firstly, how can any Western piece of hardware ever be integrated with a China-origin platform when the EU member-states, the US & Canada have all imposed embargoes all kinds of military-industrial cooperation with China since the 1989 Tianenmen massacre? How then can such hardware end up in China—even via conduits like Pakistan—for systems integration? Have you or anyone else ever come across any verifiable evidence about systems integration activity taking place in PAC Kamra? All that has been shown to everyone that matters is the final-assembly line for the JF-17. And lastly, if the PAF wants to acquire pods like these ( from Turkey, what then explains the WMD-7 pod that has always been shown alongside the FC-1/JF-17 by both AVIC/CATIC & PAC Kamra? Does anyone reckon that AVIC/CATIC will allow Pakistan to condemn the WMD-7 pod as being inferior by allowing it to procure any non-Chinese pod & that toop for a China-origin platform? So do take all these factors into account before quoting any PAF official & assuming it to be the gospel truth. Such officials have always lied in the past, the most visible of them being claims about exporting the JF-17 to Sri Lanka.

To SAM: Photos of the NO-36 AESA-MMR with distributed asntenna arrays were uploaded in a previous thread way back in 2015.

To UNKNOWN: Let’s wait & see whether or not this present-day govt in Delhi repeates the mistakes of the past. Let’s see if it uses common-sense, or as with the previous govts, continues to think from the heart.

Daedalus said...

"Media reports on India agreeing to halt Miyar project at Pakistan's request are factually incorrect.India never agreed to halt the project."

Leonard said...

Wasn't there a proposal by the EAC to the PM a few years ago that recommended to the government to ‘convert the LTIPP into a defence manufacturing and R&D plan by undertaking a joint working group involving all important stakeholders including the Indian industry and R&D establishment sand in translate the LTIPP into technological and industrial output? Has there been any development in this regard?

Anonymous said...

What do you make of this?


Bulla said...

India and Pak entered into an agreement in 1988, and renewed last month "to prohibit the attacking of each other's nuclear installations of each other. According to the agreement, "Each party shall refrain from undertaking, encouraging or participating in, directly or indirectly, any action aimed at causing the destruction of, or damage to, any nuclear installation or facility in the other country. For the purpose of the agreement it appears that no distinction was made between civilian and military nuclear facilities. Does it also include the nuclear command and control centres? Is that why such a nuclear counter-force strike has to be a multilateral effort?

In any case, what conventional ISTR & C4I capabilities and weapons are reqd for undertaking a unilateral debilitating counter-force strike upon Pak unilaterally? India and Pak entered into an agreement in 1988, and renewed last month "to prohibit the attacking of each other's nuclear installations of each other. According to the agreement, "Each party shall refrain from undertaking, encouraging or participating in, directly or indirectly, any action aimed at causing the destruction of, or damage to, any nuclear installation or facility in the other country. For the purpose of the agreement it appears that no distinction was made between civilian and military nuclear facilities. Does it also include the nuclear command and control centres? Is that why such a nuclear counter-force strike has to be a multilateral effort?

In any case, what conventional ISTR & C4I capabilities and weapons are reqd for undertaking a unilateral debilitating counter-force strike upon Pak unilaterally if push comes to the shove?

rad said...

hi prasun
america supplying az-1 viper gunships with hell fire s and then supplies us a-64 gunships with hell fires . Trying to play us , ie run with the rabbit! hunt with the hounds!!is there a condition that it should not be used against us ?
pak spoilt for gunship choices,ie mi-35,viper ,chinese gunship, turkey a-129 what is happening?

i did refer back and saw the high band jammer , i deduce there is a low band and mid band jammer as well. give us some dope pse , how does it generally compare with the elm-8222?
have we acquired the elm-8251 jammer? what ever happened to the tusker pod?

Sam said...

Sir, I didn't mean the distributed arrays of the AESA. I meant something like the AN/AAQ 37 Electro-Optical sensor suite that combines data from 6 sensors and presents it in the HMD. Does the T-50 have such a system? And what abt my general query regarding the F-35?
As always, thank you!

Parvesh said...

But where all these 350 su30mki are gonna be based. All you have mentioned in previous threads that next deployment will be in tanjavur and hashimara. But where after that

And what about kashmir or andaman

Also please tell the present number of aircraft per squadron

And where the new su30mki are going to be based. I am unable to find any information anywhere...

Anonymous said...

A couple of questions which arise during your reply to FINCH
If EU and US all sanctioned China and no equip can be placed on chinese origin aircraft how come f7 had griffo radars and AIM missles.....
Why did italy in last def expo in pakistan offered or showed its willingness for aesa in thunders....
as per news aselan pods are in PAF inventory, i dont reject your reason regarding chinese equip preference. but IAF also integrates israeli pods and french equip on russian platforms. cant the same be applied to PAF.


1) was shaurya missile only meant for Test purpose?
2)why the were no follow on developmental tests of Prahaar missile? Is the project discontinued??

Ved said...

Dear Prasun,
Below is the link from Rifle factory Ishapore website where the RFI for 7.62*51 calibre rifle is published on 9th Nov 2016. It states that they are looking for partner to produce the rifle and the last date for submission of interest being 9th Dec 2016.

Do you have any information on the same as to have submitted their intent?

Is Ghaatak not finalised yet?

HAL 9000 said...

You asked "Can you show me even a single LTIPP that has been adhered to by the MoD since 1947?"

But Prasun, how do you know that MoD has hot adhered by it? The LTIPP is not even in the public domain!

Finch said...

Can you shed light on the following mentioned in the MODP 2015 yearbook :

1. Contract for construction of 6 Maritime Patrol Vessel (MPVs) for Pakistan
Maritime Security Agency (PMSA) has been signed on 8 Jun 2015

2. Contract for the indigenous development of 1 ship-borne system with 1 Land
Attack Missile and 1 Anti ship Missile. The project will complete by Oct 2018

3. 02 Radar Integ EW Sys/ELINT Sys procured for EURO 80.502 M

4. 500 IR SAMs procured for US$ 39.00 M

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

a. with the Dalai Lama visit to Tawang nearing i expect to see the China India relation heat up with China warning India

btw just learned that 2005 agreement between China India clearly states no area that is populated or is needed to support a population will neither be exchanged, divided or traded. still China wants tawang This clearly means the following:-

1. neither tawang, nor the sliver of land south of chushul (pla regularly objects to construction), pangong tso lake area or any area till DBO will ever be talked about

2. the only area that can be talked about is east of DBO till the 1959 highway almost in a straight line and the entire area east of the highway

3. china feels it has trapped itself by agreeing to the 2005 deal

4. tawang is a bargain chip for gaining a upperhand (u have said this repeatedly)

b. Now its clear GSL will build the 2 admiral grigorwich class ships with 2 built in russia, i feel 2 more such ships will be built at GSL by 2030 taking total to 12 , why:-

1. with godavari frigates and Rajput destroyers up for decommissioning in 5 yrs, there will be huge gap after brahmaputra frigates are also decommissioned post 2030

2. Indian designed frigates are nearing in size to full fledged destroyer with supplement the kolkata vizag destroyers

3 the real slogging will be done by the 12 Talwar/admiral grigorwich frigates

c. Pak refuses to handover kulbhushan jadhav why, any particular reason nizamuddin dargah priest were harrassed, i think bcoz they had voiced their opnion against pak sponsored terror

your take on all these

Joydeep Ghosh

Ludwig said...

Speaking of the large coalition against Pakistan Prasun sir, what do you think about this:
Any special significance?

Bulla said...

And Islamabad just inaugurated the Palestine embassy last month or so.

Is it true that Israeli interest in destroying Pakistan’s Kahuta reactor to scuttle the "Islamic bomb" was blocked by India's refusal to grant landing and refueling rights to Israeli warplanes in 1982 as India did not want to face the blame or the retaliation nor bear any responsibility and Israel, wanted it to be seen as a joint Indo-Israeli strike so that responsibility could be shared?

Bulla said...

Ohh! My bad! Just found out that-

Irresponsible country! The Israelis will take care of them in a jiffy, as they're doing with their moronic neighbours, fired by religious nonsense!

Anonymous said...


1) If the INS Arihant was undergoing servicing, why was a NOTAM/NAVAREA issued for the K-4 test in the first place ?

2) Why not use the underwater pontoon they have ?

3) If these delays continue, it will be early 2020's b4 the K-4 is deployed.


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LEONARD: What you have quoted tantamounts to the ‘tail wagging the dog’. How exactly can any industrial roadmap evolve if the 3 armed services are not willing to invest in ‘common-user’ items? How can critical manufacturing volume/mass be obtained if each armed service adheres to the practice of acquiring its own C4I network & comms systems & land vehicles? Has the IAF or IN been asked to submit their inputs WRT customised variants of the Kestrel 8 x 8? There are tens of thousands of such examples like these where money-wasting duplication has been occurring since the late 1960s. Elsewhere in the world, if someone wanted to become a world-renowned developer/producer of diesel engines, then that OEM secured a mandatory commitment from its host country that the very same diesel engine meant for FAC-Ms, corvettes, warships & submarines would also be used for captive powerplants & railway locomotives. That’s the kind of procurement discipline spanning across various ministries that’s reqd. If anyone expects that only the MoD be the sole driver/financier of such product development projects, then they are living in a fool’s paradise. In India’s case where the reqmts are not too large in terms of volume, unless the 3 armed services synchronise their hardware reqmts wishlists—which is only possible when joint warfighting/joint battlefield logistics become the norm & not the exception—no industry in India will be able to marshal the financial/human resources reqd for achieving any meaningful indigenisation of critical weapon systems. Hence, as I have explained several times before, first & foremost a joint warfighting doctrine needs to evolve from a strategic defence review & only from this can flow out a wishlist of the tools reqd for achieving the desired strategic objectives. It is a scientific & quantifiable process based on the laws of physics & economics & is therefore followed by everyone else who has attained the status of being a major weapons developer, except in India.

To BULLA: That agreement was of 1980s vintage & therefore at a time when none of the 2 countries claimed to be declared nuclear weapons states & consequently none of them could claim to have established nuclear C4I networks/operating protocols in place. Was it therefore possible to give each other such assurances about not targetting each other’s command-n-control facilities? In February 1999 such an offer was made by Pakistan to India, but India rejected it. Pakistan had also proposed that the 2 countries notify each other of impending cruise missile test-firings, but that too was rejected by India.

As for what C4I/ISTR capabilities are reqd for ensuring a pre-emptive counter-force strike, they are the very same capabilities that are today possessed only by the US.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAD: From where are you digging all this out about AH-1Z/Hellfire & A-129s & Mi-35Ms? There are no low-band or mid-band or high-band jammers. HPJ means high transmitting power across all RF frequency spectrums for escort jamming. On top of this the aircraft have their own self-protection jammers that are internally mounted. EL/L-8222 is an escort jammer as well.

To SAM: LoLz! AAQ-37 is a missile approach warning system & hence it comprises 6 units, just like 6 units of a RWR. Inputs from MAWS are displayed on AMLCDs in the cockpit. Only the passive IRST’s inputs are displayed on the HMDS for off-boresight fire-control cueing of the WVRAAM’s IIR sensor. MAWS are already on the Su-35 & therefore logic demands that they will be on the Super Su-30MKI upgrade package, T-50 & FGFA alike, & also on the LCA Mk.2.

To PARVESH: All Su-30MKIs in peacetime are concentrated in six air bases so that MRO & flying training assets can be optimised. Air bases in north-east India, J & K & Car Nicobar are forward bases that do not have any intermediate or depot-level support infrastructure & therefore cannot permanently host any kind of combat aircraft.

To Anon@7/37PM: Do you homework by finding out when was the contract inked for upgrading the F-7P Skybolts. Was it before or after 1989? No one from any Italian OEM made any such statement about their involvement with JF-17 & whatever was reported was all Pakistan-inspired rumour-mongering. For integrating various types of avionics & weapons systems, one requires dedicated integration test-rigs along with the interfacing algorithms supplied by various OEMs whose sub-systems are meant to be integrated. Since India was never subjected to any weapons-related embargoes from the EU, OEMs from Israel & France & South Africa were free to collaborate with Russian integrators & share data reqd for systems integration. This wasn’t & isn’t possible in China’s case due to the EU embargo & Turkey too is covered by the embargo since several sub-systems & sub-assemblies have to be imported by Turkey from various US & European OEMs. And neither the PAF nor PAC Kamra possesses any in-house systems integration capabilities. So, don’t end up comparing apples with oranges, i.e. India with Pakistan.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AVIRAL SINGH: 1 & 2) The Shaurya & Prahaar were being offered by an over-enthusiastic & whimsical DRDO between 2007 & 2011 when some unprofessional jokers within the MoD & Union Ministry of Finance had idiotically asked the IAF which were Rafales reqd for deep interdiction if ballistic missiles could also do the job. When the IAF replies by saying that had this been possible then why was the US, Russia & China continuing to develop & produce & import twin-engined interdictors as well, the jokers & their supporters from DRDO all got arse-whipped & from thereon kept their mouths shut. This incident was also reported sometime in 2013 by THE WEEK magazine as well. Prahaar’s developmental effort was discontinued after the then GoI the 3rd of 3 reviews of India’s strategic deterrence doctrine decided that India did not require any TNWs. Read Shivshankar Menon’s latest book where all this is detailed & he has also mentioned all this in several TV interviews as well over the past 6 months.

To VED: Yes, the OFB is looking for risk-sharing industrial partners from the private-sector to produce this SLR (Ghaatak) for the sake of speedier/quicker deliveries to various end-users.

To HAL 9000: Stated like a certifiable arsehole! Of course they are not in the domain for the general public but they have always been shared with FICCI, ASSOCHAM & CII for the past few decades.

To FINCH: 1) Go to the PN’s website where the press-release regarding the handover of the first 2 of 6 MPVs is hosted. 2) That’s for the C-602 ASCM. 3) It’s the DR-3000 system from THALES. 4) QW-2 MANPADS from CPMIEC to replace the older QW-1s.

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: GSL will take 8 years to build only 2 Project 1135.6 FFGs—this being the conclusion of United Shipbuilding Corp after visiting GSL & finding out that GSL does not have the kind of deep warship-fabrication yards reqd. Pakistan is now demanding that India hand over 15 Pakistani ‘criminals’ hiding in India in exchange for Kulbhushan Jadhav.

To LUDWIG: These are all part of routine contingency plans which, upon being made public, become known as POSTURING.

To SATYAKI: In any NOTAM, no missiles are named or identified. Those who are insinuating that the NOTAM was for an impending K-4 test-firing were speculating.

Anonymous said...


1) True. But there was a NOTAM from off Vizag to a region in the Indian Ocean about 3000 km away - from Jan 30-31 and Feb 18-20 for an ``experimental flight vehicle". Why issue such a NOTAM if nothing was tested in either period ?

2) A similar NOTAM in March 2014 was given for a K-4 test off a pontoon. Why not use the pontoon if INS Arihant is being serviced ?


Leonard said...

I was of the impression that the LTIPP is for the common requirements spanning the 3 armed services to develop the common critical and core technology and it is not for the MOD but for the various public and private R&D establishments to work out a roadmap to developing them, including the necessary funding and their research objectives in specific areas, by tapping all available national resources including the civilian industry, private as well as government enterprises and the academia.

Isnt the Kestrel which is to replace the BMP is only for mechanized forces of the Indian army or will the IAF and IN chip in later for customised variants? Even the US Army's NGCV is the sole project of the US Army.

VMT for the replies.

Anonymous said...

@HAL 9000

JF-17 does have quadruplex FBW - BUT only for ONE AXIS (the pitch axis).
The other 2 axes (yaw and roll) are not. needn't have waited for my answer, you could have just read one line above the line you quoted (on that webpage)!!!


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SATYAKI: NOTAMs are issued in anticipation of impending tests that may or may not be subsequently conducted due to various reasons, even including adverse weather conditions. 2) Again, did that NOTAM say that anything called K-4 will be test-fired from a pontoon? Or are you assuming it to be the case? And why fire the K-4 from a pontoon when the reqmt calls for it to be test-fired from a submarine? Is it just about firing for the sake of firing (like Deepavali firecrackers) or is one trying to achieve something subsantial? If yes, then why waste a huge amount of money on yet another launch from a pontoon? And what is one trying to validate through such test-firings? Launch from a pontoon that has already been established a few times before, or launch from a SSBN as per the test-firing schedule? So then how can a test-firing from a pontoon validate all the test-points that can only be obtained if the reqmt calls for a validation of the SSBN's fire-control system & on-board VLS> Have you considered all this, or are you assuming that any launch from a pontoon is good enough & therefore there's no need at all for such SLBMs to be test-fired from the SSBN's VLS?

Leonard said...

Isnt the LTIPP is for the common requirements spanning the 3 armed services to develop the common critical and core technology and it is not for the MOD but for the various public and private R&D establishments to work out a roadmap to developing them including the necessary funding and their research objectives in specific areas, by tapping all available national resources including the civilian industry, private as well as government enterprises and the academia., and its upto the respective SHQs to initiate SoCs for Design and Development cases from LTIPP? How can there be a synchronised requirement/investment by the 3 armed force?

Isnt the Kestrel which is to replace the BMP is only for mechanized forces of the Indian army or will the IAF and IN chip in later for customised variants? Even the US Army's NGCV is the sole project of the US Army.

VMT for the replies.

Leonard said...

Can you also give us some specifics regarding the Stand Off Long Range (SOLR) Homing (H) Anti-Radiation Missile (ARM), Towed decoy, Tactical Air Launched Decoy, High Accuracy Direction Finder, DIRCM, , Long Range Surveillance Radar and Elevated Radar Network mentioned in the IAF Indigenisation Roadmap here:

Bulla said...

@Anon at 4.04

The root causes are in fact embedded within the religion, and are being taught by the bulk of mainstream Islamic teachers without an iota of spiritual understanding, and this is where the terrorists gets their ideas and even the fundings from. Solution is to go for a root canal procedure ie removing, cleaning or disinfecting the affected/decayed part and then filling as well as sealing the tooth for restoration and added protection.

Bulla said...

In fact I would strongly suggest that western powers should shield themselves and get away from this exercise and let them themselves deal with their 'root' problem by the way they are doing--fighting among themselves, and take the overall responsibility for their minority jihadis and extremists that has inflamed the 'Root' of their politics/ideology until they lose their teeth altogether. In the worst case, they might need an implantation or maybe a punch or two.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LEONARD: No, it never was & it cannot be for as long as joint warfighting doctrines & operating protocols are not established. You are also ASSUMING that the word 'integrated' stands for harmonised tri-services reqmts. It never was & isn't. Instead, integrated means a continuity of reqmts spanning a 15 year-period (and therefore inclusive of the MoD & its sister ministries) so that there are no changes to the pre-set reqmts anytime in between during this period. That’s why the SDRs reqd for IAF, IN & IA are all being procured from different sources. That’s also why the MiG-29UPGs can drop Griffin-3 LGBs while the IN’s MiG-29Ks can’t, & why the IAF’s MiG-29UPGs have ELT-568 internal self-protection jammers while the MiG-29Ks don’t. Each of the 3 services have their own unique QRs even for selecting bullet-proof jackets! And how can any R & D establishment or industrial grouping come up with any industrial roadmap when the global norm is for the end-users (armed forces) to first come up with synchronised hardware reqmts & only then ask for procurement options? Matters proceed in India in ways that are totally contrary to established global norms & hence while the LRDE is authorised to develop active phased-array radars for AEW & CS platforms or for ground-based IACCCS, no thought is given to developing similar radars for warships. In other words, the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing. Nor is the MoD eqwuipped or qualified, unlike other countries, to issue policy-level directives for military industrialisation because the Secretary for Defence Production is also a member of the Board of Directors of every DPSU & therefore he/she can NEVER rule in any case in favour of the private-sector, since doing so would lead to him being accused & prosecuted for criminal breach of trust by the DPSUs.

Read this & you will note the systemic dysfunctionalities:

Kestrel was never meant to replace even a single BMP. Kestrel is an APC while the BMP is an ICV. Kestrel will replace the existing trucks/lorries used by the regular lorried.motorised infantry Divisions. Of course the IN requires APCs for its projected naval infantry formations. The IAF requires them for use by its Garud units for guarding air bases.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To PIERRE ZORIN: Meanwhile, a fully indigenous Made-in-India 'Spiderman' technology demonstrator developed by one of the DRDO's labs recently somehow breached the lab's perimeter security network & is now running amock in Bengaluru. Only CCTV footages of this 'Spiderman' are available as of now & they can be viewed here:

Sincerely hope this cutting-edge technology of the DRDO does not fall into the enemy's hands!!!

Leonard said...

If Kestrel is an APC, How come they mention it as an ICV Platform? Its both I assume.

Bulla said...

There's no doubt that Pakistan that has consistently violated the UNSC’s Reolution's preconditions( to vacate the occupied area of Jammu and Kashmir and other assurances), but isnt it true that India too started shying away from UNSC resolutions due to the biased attitude of the UNSC and issues regarding legality which ultimately resulted in the failure of UNCIP & UNMGIP, and later Pakistan itself nullified the UNSC resolution of 1948 and 1949 by violating the ceasefire line during 1965 and that after the Shimla Agreement, the whole issue has been moved away fron UN to bilateral plane?

Do you think there can be an amicable resolution of the issue through bilateral negotiations?

Anonymous said...


1) Agree that K-4 launches should henceforth be from INS Arihant...

2) The NOTAMS showed some test upto a 3000 km range from of Vizag was anticipated. No more, no less. Since Agni series missiles are tested from APJ Abdul Kalam Island, I guessed it had to be a naval missile. Unless we are beginning tests of something else (very unlikely this soon), it had to be a K-4 test that was anticipated. This test appears to have been postponed for whatever reason.

3) Still, surprising that such a test was anticipated if they knew that INS Arihant would go for servicing, unless the need for servicing was not factored in when the NOTAM was issued.

4) Hope the K-4 tests are on schedule, and the missile is inducted soon. I remember you writing some years ago that the K-4 would be inducted by 2017.

5) The blog seems to indicate that a Chinese flotilla was loitering in the area close to where the test was expected. Could this have something to do with the postponement ? Maybe NOTAMS should be issued with as short a notice as possible.


buddha said...

Oh sir. This is the hight of Jokes...and your skilled narration is really awesome..


Prasun Da,
1) BHEL has some experiece in Gas turbines, should they join hands with GTRE to develop Aero Engines.
2) Has DRDO developed any ground based AESA radars completely on itself. Swordfish and Arudhra radars are israeli..
3)Agni5 which has range of 5000km weighs 50 tons and Agni 4 which has range of 4000km has weight of 17tons. Why so much difference in weight??
4)NGARM is said to have similar design as Kh58.. What is your opinion?
5)DRDO in 2015 has said that they have done some research in Astra 2 missile but still have not started full scale development and are concentrating on Astra1...What is the current status of Astra 2 now?? will it be tested in next 3-4 yrs.?

Pierre Zorin said...

Ha ha ha ha....well it has because in that Book you uploaded re: J&K the author refers to Pakistan as her and the enemy as he - clearly pointing at the she-male nature of Pakistan! I reckon if some of the boys in DRDO were not allowed to think up weird go go gadgets then all of them would have transformed into this sort of technology demonstrators running around the country!

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LEONARD: Both the IA & DRDO refer to the Kestrel as APC & tracked BMO-2 as ICV & its futuristic tracked replacement as FICV.

To BULLA: Looks like even present-day ministers are unaware of PoK being inclusive of Gilgit-Baltistan, just like the PM was last year during his I-Day speech:

To AVIRAL SINGH: 1) BHEL deals with gas turbines for power generation, while HAL deals with marine industrial gas turbines that were previously turbojets now converted for power generation. Turbofan is a totally different piece of cake, as is a turboshaft or turboprop. 2) The Arudhra's version shown at this year's RDP & Ashwini are in-house developments. 3) Because Agni-5 can go out to 7,500km if reqd & it also contains several sub-structures that are made of maraging steel but those are now being re-engineered & will be built of composites. 4) Not similar design, but similar dual-mode guidance, i.e. a passive homing head as well as an IIR sensor for visual target acquisition. 5) Yes, Astra-2 will be tested sometime in 2018.

To SATYAKI: Servicing can also be of an unscheduled type, this being the nature of electro-mechanical systems.

Anonymous said...


1) Is it the existing Agni-5 that can go out to 7500 km or the version after re-engineering the first stage with composite casings ?

2) Would a composite first stage have to be realized before the first MIRVed test ?

3) You said some years ago that the first 12 A-5's would have a single warhead and some penetration decoys. Why did that plan change ?

4) Will China rely on the 10 warhead silo based DF-5C rather than the mobile DF-41 for large scale nuclear firepower ? DF-5C is certain to have a much larger payload than the DF-41.

5) Is the DF-41 about 80 tons in launch mass as claimed all over the internet or more like 50 tons close to the Topol-M ?

6) Are we going to use NEPE type high energy propellants for later variants of the Agni-5 ?


Bulla said...

Even Chitral and Kohistan in NWFP are part of Gilgit-Baltistan and were separated and annexed by Pakistan as part of a conspiracy since 1947, without any politico/legal status.

All these attempts by Pak are to camouflage its illegal occupation and to separate the strategic regions from other parts of J&K (like separating Gilgit-Baltistan from so called Azad Kashmir) by introducing piecemeal changes in those regions and eventually trying to gobble it by trying to draw distinction between the two and creating ambiguity, just like the more recent attempts which indicates Pakistan’s malafide intent for the region.

I think India should start with creating legislative space for G&B and reservations in Indian educational institutions for the people of Gilgit-Baltistan.



Isn't it true that apart from Kashmir & Arunachal, China continues to hold onto territories in Himachal, Uttarakhand and Sikkim ?

Thanks, Sujoy

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SATYAKI: 1) It can attain that range even now but it is extremely cumbersone even when toweed. Hence, weight budgeting is reqd for making it land-mobile to a limited degree. 2) Not just 1st stage. All stages will be reqd to have composites-built fuel storage tanks. 3) Because it was a needlessly expensive proposition. For achieving economies of scale, both the A-5 ICBM & 8,000km-range SLBM need to be of near-identical design in terms of both the missile body & the MIRV section. Hence, concurrent development of both ICBM & SLBM is called for as it is the optimum way of killing two birds with 1 stone, apart from being a far less expensive exercise. 4) DF-5C is a vulnerable & accident-prone system, just like the US' Titan-2 was. Hence, the mainstay of China will be the DF-31A & later the DF-41. 5) Yes, that's the estimated weight. 6) Probably.

To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: No, that's not true. The central sector of the LAC does have some overlapping claims, though. Meanwhile, the 'desi' bandalbaaz has at last realised that he was taken for a ride by gung-ho claims by the DRDO back in 2011. So now he's trying to make amends:

This is the shit he had peddled back in 2011:

Anonymous said...


1) Hope near identical does not mean identical: A5 should not be delayed to wait for the more sophisticated technologies that the SLBM will require. Both being identical will mean A5 can also be deployed only in 2027 or so when the SLBM is deployed.

2) Also, land based missiles without same stringent length restriction can have a simpler MIRV section that is atop stage 3 rather than built around stage 3 as is necessary for a SLBM. Hope A5 is deployed with a simpler such section that is a step towards developing the ``gold standard".

3) All in all, we shoud not be victims of ``best is the enemy of good enough". Cost optimization should not be at the expense of deterrent credibility.


Bulla said...

What do you think will happen to the Trans Karakoram Tract, formerly a part of the Princely state of J&K ceded by Pakistan to China during 1963? How can India approach towards the settlement of the J&K issue with Pak and China?

Gd said...

Hi Prasun,
Leonard & HAL 9000 Speaking about this?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SATYAKI: The definitive deployable A-5 won't be available until 2022 at best. 2) MIRV design & mechanisms for both ICBM & SLBM will be one & the same. The Ruskies & Chinese too have adopted this approach. 3) Deterrent capability has already been proven. What remains to be done is force structure optimisation, i.e. transitioning from a minimum credible deterrence to a credible minimum deterrence.

To BULLA; China itself has officially stated that the future status of this Tract will be decided only AFTER the resolution of the J & K issue.

To GD: No, it is different from the LTIPP, which has more to do with procurement decision-making harmonisation, i.e. ensuring that if the IAF for instance wants more capital funds in a particular year for a major procurement, then the IA & IN will have to wait their turn for that year & make their requests for greater share of the capital funding outlay in the following year. The TPCR is an extremely vague document that shies away from going into the detail, i.e. when it talks about PGMs, it refrains from stating whether these PGMs ought to have singl-mode, dual-mode or tri-mode guifance systems. Hence, suchy a document baffles both the DRDO & industry.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Yesterday's parade in Islamabad:

I still find it hard to accept that the monstrosity called Ra'ad can really be carried by any MRCA! It is twice the size of the Scalp/Storm Shadow/KEPD.

To BUDDHA: Official Government Agencies Worldwide for Investigating Unidentified Aerial Phenomena:

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Japanese JMSDF's flat-tops:

Wonder why this design is not being considered at all for the IN's LPH reqmt.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: If you are interested in learning about all the pieces of real-estate given away by India after August 1947, then do watch this:

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

And believe it or not, the Pak HC to India Abdul Basit yesterday claimed in fron of his Indian audience (inclusive of all those 'desi' patrakaars who had gone to consume freebies like over-spicy biryanis) that pakiustan is the happiest country in South Asia & is poised to embrace greater happiness!!! Watch this:

And no one was there to show him the mirror by revealing to him that Pakistan has the unique distinction of first nurturing Qazis in tens of thousands of Madrassas & then transforming & exporting them on an industrial scale into barbaric Ghazis.

Saboo said...

Hello Prasun,

if you dont find this hard to accept ... what is this monster caryying? ... how many such H-6Ks will be based in the Western theater?

Anonymous said...

1) If 2022 is the best case for A-5 deployment, what is the worst case ?

2) Looks like GoI is very tardy with the transition from minimum credible to credible minimum deterrence, instead of taking nuclear deterrence to a level that can compensate conventional weakness against China.

3) What if China decides to precipitate matters with Pakistan in tow before we make the transition to credible minimum deterrence ?


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SABOO: Those are AKD-20 ASCMs on H-6Ks that are built for standoff maritime strike. In the Western Theatre of PLA, no H-6Ks have been deployed as yet. And only 20 H-6Ks are available.

To SATYAKI: 1) I'd rather not speculate. 2) Nuclear deterrence can NEVER compensate for conventional weaknesses. Had it been the case, then all those declared nuclear weapon states would never have spent money on conventional force modernisation. 3) If China wants to precipitate matters with Pakistan, then it will not only affect India, but also all of China's neighbours since a precedent will be set to the detriment of all signatories to the NPT, including ASEAN member-states, Central Asian Republics, Afghanistan & Iran. Will China be foolhardy enough to commit such a mistake? I think not.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

According to the latest data obtained from PAC Kamra, it has so far overhauled 3 x JF-17 that had entered service with the PAF in 2007. Since this tantamounts to a a mid-life refurbishment/overhaul, and assuming that the JF-17 has been logging in an average of 25 flight-hours per month, this translates into an airframe half-life of 9 years or 108 months or 2,700 flight-hours. Consequently, the total-technical service life of the airframe is 18 years, or 216 months or 5,400 flight-hours. However, the Klimov RD-93 turbofan has a half-life (TBO) of 700 hours, or TTSL of only 1,400 hours of operation. This in turn means 4 x RD-93 will be required to power each JF-17 throughout its service-life. And to date, only 200 RD-93s have been ordered by AVIC/CATIC from the Moscow-based Chernyshev Machine-Building Plant subsidiary of United Engines Corp (UEC), with an option to procure 300 more. Thus, if this option is exercised, it will give enough RD-93s for powering no more than 110 JF-17s, since some RD-93s will be used by the Myanmar Air Force’s FC-1s, as well as by AVIC/CATIC-owned FC-1 prototypes at Chengdu.

Robert said...

"I still find it hard to accept that the monstrosity called Ra'ad can really be carried by any MRCA! It is twice the size of the Scalp/Storm Shadow/KEPD"

----As the Storm Shadow/KEPD is 5.1m long, So is the Extended Range Raad around 10m in length ??


Anonymous said...


1) In what way would a 1962 or worse humiliation inflicted by a China-Pak combination on a militarily weak India set a precedent to the detriment of NPT signatories ? We are not a NPT signatory. On the contrary, it might enshrine China as Asia's hegemon once and for all and force India to accept the new status quo, and enable the rebirth of Nehrzvian pacifist political forces in India.

2) A powerful nuclear deterrent cannot help us coerce other states. That requires conventional force modernization. It can however, enable us to pose a threat of ``snatch Kashmir/Arunachal and you lose some major cities..". Provided we pose a credible such threat, this will deter China from such an adventure.

3) Is a joint China-Pak attack surely going to lead to our defeat ?


Saboo said...

36 bomber Division 107 or maybe the 108 Aviation Regiment, deployed the h-6K. (Scramble list this at Wuhong/Lintong. The fourth one to deploy so far
The new nose radome is housing a modern air-to-ground radar,

Can the AKD-20s carry nuclear payload?

Kaustav said...

Kaustav said...

Can it be so easy or is it to be used for Target practice for SAMs. Of course the USB is technologically strong with access to developed tech.

Asmit S. said...

Sir there's a recent news the Russians sold Friend-or-Foe codes of Iranian SAMs to Israelis.
Sir, can this similar situation happen to us cause even our SAMs are Russian or other foreign based.And sir can you say something on Kill-switch or what we call "Hardware Trogen"?

Thanks in advance.

Here's the article:

Manu Singh said...


What is the update on Kaveri Marine Gas Turbine which was being developed for smaller vessels? It was deemed to be ready a years ago but nothing has been heard about it. Any update?

Anonymous said...


On Brahmos missile, you often refer to how Brahmos-NG will become available for various platforms and the seekers it would carry etc. But as late as the middle of last year, Sudhir Mishra (CEO of Brahmos) had said that they haven't yet started the project and that its too early to even think about it (even though it is probably a viable business concept). There hasn't been any announcement/talk of the Brahmos-NG project commencing even during Putin visit (when there was a lot of chatter about the missile range extension and about the hypersonic variant)

Do you have an idea on when the project may begin, and better yet when it might be completed?


Anonymous said...

1) Another North Korean nuke test is imminent. Should'nt we assume that it is China proliferating ever more advanced nuclear capabilities to Pak and NoKo ?

2) If NoKo eventually demonstrates a thermonuclear weapon, should'nt we assume that China has/will proliferate the same to Pak ?

3) In this case, should we remain content with a minimum deterrent made of fission/boosted fission warheads ?

4) Hope GoI in such an eventuality resumes nuclear testing and goes for a full spectrum nuclear deterrent (including thermonuclear weapons) that ensures escalation dominance over Pak and credible deterrence against China.


Anup said...

Dear Sir,

Is it possible to start production Mil Mi-14 again?
AS per Wikipedia Mi-14 helicopters were decommissioned in 1996 it's true?

Roger said...

Has India shown any interest in joint development with US of the FVL helicopter programme and NGCV/FICV under DTTI?

Anonymous said...’s-‘willingness’-help-air-force

Setup bases in Afghanistan.economically is possible and strategically is it important?


Shantanu kumar said...

Prasun in the report of the parliamentary standing committee on defence the paragraph mentioning Projects in "Major Mission Mode".

Could you put some light on the nature of these projects and level of involvement the Services are putting in these projects? What do you think of the chances of success for these projects?

Also, the paragraph mentions Light Combat Aircraft (LCA)
Air Force Mk-III which I believe is the LCA MKII you mentioned? I am getting very confused with all these conflicting Nomenclatures, Would be grateful if you could clarify them a bit.

Anonymous said...


A visit by an Indian Kashmiri to Pakistan and what he observed. Some very interesting comments. A good source of what the ordinary Pakisatnis think of Kashmir and India.


Anonymous said...

King is coming back? do he faces same fate as Sahara boss?


Anonymous said...

Raad 1 was listed as being 4.8m long. The best way to determine the RAAD II size is to compare the pics of raad 1 and raad II on display.

Raad II:

Raad I

luckly there is a soldier standing next to it in each picture.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To ROBERT: LoLz! The Ra’ad’s airframe is more than 6 metres long, rest assured. What’s always been shown in parades & expos isn’t the exat 1:1 scale-model.

To SATYAKI: 1) Are India’s defences in the same state today as they were in 1962? If not, then how can one envisage a debacle similar to the one of 1962? 2 & 3) In what way will China gain by attacking India? If attacking India was a possibility, then it would have happened way back in 1986, but why didn’t that happen?

To SABOO: The AKD-20 is the air-launched variant of the CJ-10 GLCM & is therefore nuclear-capable.

To KAUSTAV: The US had mastered ramjet propulsion back in the early 1960s itself & is also now developing hypersonic LACMs.

To ASMIT S: The Iranians possess the S-300P version that was already compromised in the early 1990s when China laid its hands on the Croatian S-300P batteries during the civil war in Yugoslavia. But no SAM network remains activated 24/7. They go on-line only after receiving alerts from early-warning gapfiller radars. Hence, if such radars can be tripped or jammed or physically destroyed, there’s no way of alerting the SAM networks.

To MANU SINGH: KMGT was never meant for smaller vessels, but for FFGs & DDGs. It has not yet been able to consistently generate the power reqd for such vessels.

To SCRUTATOR: If BOTH the supersonic BrahMos-NG & hypersonic BrahMos-2K are yet to enter the R & D phase, then why were they being shown in scale-model form in the first place? Furthermore, why are private companies like Data Patterns developing X-band IMAR seekers for such missiles? Are such companies engaging in corporate social service or have they received funding from BrahMos Aerospace for undertaking such work? So, if you want to find out whether or not BrahMos-NG is a firm reality, then kindly submit the questions I’ve raised to the management of BreahMos Aerospace & hopefully you will receive an answer.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To KRITAVARMA: So far, not a single country in the world has so far gone on-record to confirm that North Korea has to date conducted any kind of nuclear WMD tests & what was the content of the atmospheric residue from radiation. If such verifiable scientific data cannot be obtained, then the veracity of DPRK’s claims can never be ascertained.

To ANUP: It can be, but what for? And for whom?

To ROGER: No, not yet.

To RON: No one in Afghanistan is asking for bases of any kind. All that Kabul wants is for someone to buy spares for Mi-17s, Mi-25s & An-32Bs from Russia & Ukraine & supply them to Afghanistan since the Russians can’t supply the spares & this is so because the spares supplies were previously done by US companies that now cannot buy spares from Russia since the 2014 embargo on trading with Russia, & Russia too cannot buy spares from Ukraine because of Ukraine’s embargo on trading with Russia. Hence, in both cases a neutral third party is required to buy the spares from Ruissia & Ukraine & then send them to Afghanistan.

To SHANTANU KUMAR: LoLz! Those reports are meant to be confusing because they only contain obfuscation & are meant to keep the truth away. Hence one sees terms like ‘major mission mode’. Next year one will see terms like ‘critical mission mode’ emerging!

To MPATEL” What he observed & what he was exposed to was only a tiny cross-section of urban Pakistanis who were curious to ascertain the veracity of all the spoon-feeding that the state-controlled media of Pakistan engages in for the sake of maintaining that country’s ‘securitised national narrative’. Ask the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis in rural areas about Kashmir & they will say that they give a damn about such issues at a time when more than 5 crore Pakistani children in Punjab alone are denied access to schools! Here’s a reality check on what the Pakistan of today is & what they say & think about India:

Bottomline: In today’s India the Indian Muslims don’t have to subject themselves to security-friskings before entering mosques or participating in religious ceremonies/processions. In Pakistan, on the other hand, exactly the opposite is taking place. Every mosque there has armed guards outside, everyone entering such places is frisked, & all cellphone networks are shut down for fear of remote-controlled IEDs whenever a religious procession takes to the streets. In Islamabad itself yesterday, all the cellphone networks were shut down for 3 hours so that the parade could not be attacked by those who consider themselves to be ‘model Muslims’.


Has DRDO achieved a breakthrough in Gallium Nitride Technology??

Anonymous said...

My question wasn't about the hypersonic Brahmos at all. I do believe that significant effort is being made by both the Russian and Indian side on this front - and we hear significant chatter about the progress too. But on the Brahmos-NG (miniature version), other than the occasional concept displays there doesn't seem to be much work being done on it.
Sudhir Mishra (Brahmos Aerospace CEO) has said in several interviews that no work is being done on the mini front - they're just waiting for the MOD to approve the concept and sanction the funds.
Even though conceptually it's a great idea, it hasn't gained traction on climbing the priority list!! My personal assessment for its low priority is that it's most advantageous use maybe from the conventional submarines (as an ASCM - even though lower range and lower speed alternatives exist right now), where the required numbers are very limited. The miniature LACM alternative may not be that attractive with the range extension option available for the existing version of Brahmos. The air launched miniature version would be advantageous as the it would increase the launch platform options, but the focus maybe to get the current Brahmos air launched variant operational and inducted first!


Leonard said...

DRDOs 'Major Mission mode' projects means those mission mode projects for which more than 100 crores have been alloted in the current 5 year plan. Out of 530 ongoing projects, 136 is in Mission mode, out of which 44 are termed 'Major'.

Anik said...

Prasun Da,

The Book Dragon on our Doorsteps says that india cannot win a war against Pakistan.Sawhney and Wahab make a critical distinction to win their argument. Pakistan has built military power, India a military force. And they explain: “Military force involves the mere collection of war-withal, that is, building up of troops and war-waging material; military power is about optimal utilization of military force. It entails an understanding of the adversaries and the quantum of threat from each, the nature of warfare, domains of war, how it would be fought, and structural military reforms at various levels to meet these challenges.”

1)Although full scale war is never going to happen and if does then will also involve economic factors.. How do you view the above arguement of Wahab????
2) do you think India will ever have Chief OF Defence Staff and theatre Commands...
3) What are the advantages and disadvantages of current structure of our armed forces??

Roger said...

So a couple of H-6Ks can carry a bunch of nuclear/conventionally armed ALCMs for saturation attacks in our territory? Sould we be wary?

Chirag said...

Hi prasun,
Read an article which says Indian Navy will go for larger submarine under p75i program is it true.According to your knowledge which sub is the best in 4000 displacement category. Thanks

Anonymous said...

1) India's defenses are better than 1962, but China has increased its military for by leaps and bounds. The relative imbalance of power is similar to 1962, as far as I can see.

2) As for what China will gain: territory, hegemony and weakening the less tractable Modi govt. to give political traction to the so called liberals and other elements that are likely to reconcile with China and Pak on the latter's terms. See

All in all, better to be prepared than to assume that war won't happen at all, as GoI seems to be doing. See also Admiral Arun Prakash's warning:


Dr. Dang said...

Detection of radionuclides from a nuclear test provides the clinching evidence to back up initial detection provided by seismic monitoring stations. A portion of the fission products are released in days and weeks following a nuclear explosion. In particular these stations will seek to detect radionuclide noble gasses like Xenon and Argon.

Given the North Korean claim that it conducted a test of a small H-bomb / thermonuclear device, it will be crucial to detect isotopes of Argon (Ar-37) in order to verify the North Korean claim. Though the Argon levels in the atmosphere are low, the international community does not have any prior experience in detecting Argon following nuclear tests. If the North Koreans had conducted a thermonuclear test, most of the residual products would not travel very far and would settle close to the site of the explosion.

In addition, the North Korean leadership has attempted to prevent venting by burying the nuclear device under hard rock like granite. Given this, the probability of cracks developing in the aftermath of a test is less, thereby reducing the chances of detecting radionuclides from the test as observed in the 2009 and 2013 tests.

Radionuclide station in Yellowknife, Canada downwind to DPRK test site has already picked up elevated levels of Xenon 133 during the previous test.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AVIRAL SINGH: LoLz! Not Gallium Nitride technology (i.e. no indigenous production of such semi-conductors. Instead, it is more about developing solutions by using Gallium Nitride electronics. You can read more about what GaN semiconductors here:

To SCRUTATOR: In all his interviews in the AI-2017 show dailies, that same CEO has said exactly the opposite, i.e. developmental work is in full swing! Range extension option isn’t available for BrahMos-A due to weight budgeting reasons. Only ground-launched version of BrahMos-1 Block-3 for IA & IAF that have already been supplied have range extension options during their-life relifing.

To ANIK: 1) Unlike others, I deal with specifics. For instance, what kind of wars is one opining about? While full-scale war with Pakistan is ruled out as it isn’t necessary at all, even in terms of limited high-intensity wars the PA had to back off in 1999 while the PN & PAF did not even dare enter into hostilities. Similarly, in 1986 China too did not dare wage war against India. 2) Those are strategic inevitabilities from which no one can shy away. Whatever has to happen will happen. 3) Current structures are silo-based & compartmentalised that prevent the creation of critical mass in order to exploit crucial breakthroughs on the battlefield. The MoD had promised in writing as far back as 1986 that the IA will be getting all future attack helicopters for its Aviation Corps & yet till this day nothing is happening on this front!

To ROGER: I can’t understand how only 20 H-6Ks can mount any kind of saturation attack. In the earlier thread I had already explained in detail what the PLA was exercising for & for which scenarios.

To CHIRAG: SSNs are logically larger than SSKs, aren’t they? If you’re still harbouring hopes for AIP-equipped SSKs, that’s not going to happen. When there’s no money even for LPHs, how can anyone expect more SSKs when the IN desperately requires SSNs to protect its projected fleet of SSBNs totally baffles me.

Anonymous said...

I forgot to answer you question about 1986: clearly, in 1986, the conventional balance was not as skewed against us as is today. Moreover, the USSR was our firm, powerful ally. Nuclear intimidation was also out of the question for this reason. China's power today is at an altogether different level.


Anonymous said...

This is what Sudhir Mishra (Brahmos CEO) said during the Aero '17 show:

“We have been reinventing ourselves every two to three years. BrahMos is a universal supersonic missile. We are trying to miniaturise the existing missile. We have named it BrahMos NG. It is still on the drawing board and we are talking to various users. We have not committed the funds to it yet. In BrahMos NG, we are trying to bring its weight to 1.4 tonne and the range will be smaller at 120-250 km,”

So, none of the armed forces at this point have fully evinced interest even in the concept or are committed to it; as such Brahmos Aerospace itself hasn't committed any funds to it!

Also, you said "Only ground-launched version of BrahMos-1 Block-3 for IA & IAF that have already been supplied have range extension options during their-life relifing." I thought you said earlier that Brahmos-1 Block-3 supplied to the forces already have extended ranges; while the Brahmos-1 Block 1/2 will be range extended during their 'relifing'.


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SCRUTATOR: By that the CEO means funds for conducting detailed design for the concept demonstration phase have already been released, or else it will not be on the drawing board. Not committing funds means no funding has been asked for conducting prototype development. The Indian Navy 2 years ago during AI-2015 had officially stated its commitment to BrahMos-NG & that's how the whole concept development project began & that's why BrahMos-NG was shown at that expo. If you have any more doubts about this, then do refer back to the news archives of 2015, instead of making assumptive arguments. Furthermore, if none of the Indian end-users have shown any interest as you claim, then what explains this: “It is still on the drawing board and we are talking to various users. Many aircraft including LCA will be able to carry BrahMos NG. The idea is to mass produce the missile so that we can integrate it on a variety of platforms. It is a new business initiative and we see a huge market for it in India and abroad”.

Are you implying that the CEO is wasting his time & the Indian taxpayer’s money by talking to various prospective users in India of the BrahMos-NG? And are these end-users also wasting their time by giving patient hgearings to the CEO?

A few BrahMos-1 Block-3s were delivered first to the IA & these did not have range extension & they will have 550km-range after their relifing in future. Only the IAF's BrahMos-1 Block-3s from the outset had 550km-range. Brahmos-1 Block 1/2 of the IA too will be range extended during their 'relifing'.

To SATYAKI: The military balance isn't skewed even now. In fact, the PLA is nowhere near the LAC in a concentrated manner & throughout the LAC the IA & IAF far outnumber the PLA in terms of deployed manpower & assets. As for the USSR being India's firm ally then, when Mikhail Gorbachev was asked at a press conference in Vigyan Bhavan back in 1986 if the USSR will come to India's aid if another Sino-Indian war breaks out, all that he said was that such a war will never take place.

Srinivasa Nanduri said...

Hi Prasun,

News reports that Russia is trying to broker peace between India and China, how true are those.

What prospects are there for border dispute resolution with Pakistan and China, given the current scenarios.

Also, will a 2008 like crisis come in China ever. I mean with unsustainable internal debt, extreme spending externally, I do not see how China can sustain all this.

Srinivasa Nanduri

Anonymous said...

I more than delighted to know that Brahmos-NG is on the path to fruition. I like the idea and think it's a good addition to the arsenal. I don't intend to make any assumptions, instead am trying to take the statements at their face value.

In April '16, Sudhir Mishra said this to the question: What about the mini-BRAHMOS?

Concept-wise, it is very attractive. But, so many developments are taking place and hence we are not able to come up with a definitive plan. It is much smaller in size and range is quite good and it can be launched from several platforms. An aircraft can carry two or three BRAHMOS-Mini. It can go into torpedo tubes and smaller ships can use them too. Even a missile boat can carry it. It is miniaturization of the missile and its range will not be affected and it will go the full distance in the ideal trajectory. But in other trajectories, it may reduce. We have not started the programme and it is too early to discuss it. But it is one of the business prospects.

During Putin's visit there was an expectation that the agreement between Russia and India would be signed for the development of Brahmos-NG, but no annoucement was made in that regard during or after Putin's visit!

And later during the AeroIndia '17, Sudhir Mishra said that they're still not financially committed to the project.

So, I am just taking things at their face value without making any assumptions. You're however making an assumption based on some connected events/developments. I hope you're right!


Anonymous said...

1) But the PLA can concentrate forces effectively in a few weeks time using their infrastructure so as to achieve local superiority at an area of their choosing.

2) Also, the new generation DF-16, DF-21C (not D) and DF-26 are accurate enough for conventional strikes on strategic assets, as are their LACMs. That can also be used by them in a limited conventional conflict to degrade our strategic/operational assets. Brahms could compensate for this weakness at the operational level if present in adequate numbers and used decisively early on.


Vijay said...

Dear Sir

There is Good news coming from NSA DOVAL's Visit to USA

Let us hope Trump decides to blow off some steam and we can Punish Pakistan

Roger said...

Is it true that the PLAAF has deployed the J-11, the J-10, KJ-500 and the H-6K in rotational deployment in Xinjiang's Hotan?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Dr.DANG: LoLz! Nuclear deterrence is all about signaling of the existence of a credible insurance policy. Now, if someone goes to great lengths to keep it hidden AFTER showing photos of fissile material cores or publicly announcing a successful nuclear test-detonation, then the entire exercise becomes self-defeating. Therefore, if as you claim the North Korean leadership has attempted to prevent venting of radioactive residue by burying the nuclear device under hard rock like granite, then you’re effectively condemning the leadership as retards who view nuclear WMDs as tactical battlefield dominance weapons & not as strategic deterrents.

To SRINIVASA NANDURI: Russia isn’t mediating at all. Instead, it is trying to enroll China into the Eurasian economic union that Moscow has propounded as a parallel to China’s OBOR policy. There cannot be any border resolution with either of them for as long as they both believe that their strategic rationales are far holier than those of others, i.e. they will first have to shed their self-righteous attitudes.

To SCRUTATOR: The situation of April 2016 can’t be the same as that of today. Things change & matters move on. At AI-2017 no one from BrahMos Aerospace explicitly stated that the BrahMos-NG concept had been discarded for good, or that no money has been spent at all on it. Nor is there any need to sign any agreement for developing an additional member of an existing family of weapons, especially during Summit-level meetings, just as there was no such agreement inked for developing BrahMos-1 Block-3 or BrahMos-A. These matters are all resolved & finalised within the JV itself, which is precisely why BrahMos Aerospace is a JV & not just an industrial partnership.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SATYAKI: 1) That’s what the popular but ill-informed perception is. In reality, exactly hopw many thousands of PLA personnel are fully acclimatised for enduring lengthy deployments at such high altitudes? And do you think the IAF & IA are totally blind 24/7 & they will be totally unaware of such reinforcing deployments taking place within a few weeks? And once they become aware, will they just sit tight & do nothing? Is that what the IAF & IA did way back in 1986? 2) BMs can never be used for accurate fire-assaults against any military targets. They can only be used for targetting innocent civilians living in cities. LACMs can be used but they will have to fly at high altitudes if they are to cross the Himalayan ranges & that itself will make them vulnerable to interception mid-way.

To ROGER: Yes, because that’s where one of the live-firing ranges are located for the Western Theatre’s air assets, whose primary orientation is toward the Central Asian Republics. Therefore, it does not mean that they all gathered there to simulate any offensive air campaign scenarios against India & these deployments have been going on since 2010. Nor is Hotan 'close' to the LAC. Before that, in mid-2016 these very same assets minus the H-6Ks were at Lhasa Gonggar & Ngari-Gunsa.

To VIJAY: So now you know why some ‘spoilers’ went out of their way to try to muddy the waters ahead of this meeting. First there was this:

And taking inspiration from that, some retard came up with a further misinterpretation here:

Anonymous said...

1) What about SR/MRBMs with 10-30 m CEP ? They could certainly target key infrastructure, ammunition storage, airfields, etc effectively even with conventional payloads. Large numbers of such weapons are an advantage.


Anonymous said...

I agree that Brahmos-NG concept is not discarded. My peeve has been that it hasn't gained much momentum, and that the concept is still marinating down the priority list. But if you're convinced that things are going full steam ahead, then it is definitely encouraging to hear. It will add a lot of lethality to a great number of platforms!!

Regarding Putin in Goa, he himself came out and made the statement about extending Brahmos missile's range (which was quite uncharacteristic for a leader of his stature to declare something so minor and trivial in terms of business or technology operations!!). Perhaps the summit didn't have much more exciting stuff to declare!!!


Roger said...

Why do you say that the Western Theater's air assets are primarily oriented towards CAR? Their relationship with CAR states are not characterised by discord or animosity and neither they have any border disputes nor do the CAR states have any air force that may concern the PLAAF! Isnt it like saying that IAF assets in Eastern region is primarily towards South East Asian Republics?

Finch said...

Are the JF-17s equipped yet with KG-300G EW Pods and the LS-6 Glide bombs?

Roger said...

And Leh is less than 250 miles from Hotan!

Dr. Dang said...

Let me offer the analogy of the Poker game. Sometimes you underplay and at times you overplay. But you always keep your hand hidden as well as your motivations and intentions. Kim is learning, the stakes are high, he is betting for the pot and he wont put down. We will know if he is a retard or not but for now, he is all in.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SATYAKI: And pray, which country in this world makes such BMs with such CEPs when even countries the US are making JDAMs with CEPs of 30 metres? The best CEP the US claims for BMs is for its own Trident D-5 SLBM & that has a claimed CEP of 90 metres. So in your reckoning has China already attained this capability as well?

To SCRUTATOR: Yes, Putin did go public with the range extension announcement of BrahMos-1 at the BRICS Summit in Goa, but why? And for whom was this statement intended? Could it be China, whose President too was at the Summit-level meeting? LoLLLLLLLLLLLZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!! To some it may be trivial or too trivial, but to some others present there, this was a targetted announcement that hit the bull’s eye. It’s a shame that no one grasped this at that time. If I were Putin I would have jumped at such opportunities to signal to China that: “if you can go behind my back & obtain BM-reelated technologies & MIRV designs from Ukraine, then don’t expect me to sit tight & do nothing!”

Something similar is now being played out in the public domain, especially after that self-deluded (Dr) Narang fella speculated that India has discarded the NFU doctrine in favour of pre-emptive counter-force first-strikes with nuclear WMDs—this of course being his ASSUMPTION because he has simply forgotten to to an audit of the number & type of PGMs in India’s possession, i.e. he never did any analysis of the weapons-to-target matching matrix. Consequently, Dr Shiv Shankar Menon had to clarify that a counter-force strike need not be using nuclear WMDs at all, rather it is perfectly possible with conventional PGMs. So the next question that arises is: but how will India ever be able to field all the ISTR assets to locate & target the hundreds of nuclear WMDs that Pakistan is expected to possess? The answer goes like this: well, what if the nuclear WMDs are not at all in those numbers, instead they can be counted with ten fingers?

So in the not-too-distant time to come the onion will be peeled off some more & it will be revealed to all those retards/arseholes exactly how many nuclear WMDs are in Pakistan’s possession & how they are targeteable with conventional PGMs.

Meanwhile, watch what Pakistani analysts have to say about it since they have accepted Dr Narang's totally flawed conclusions as being the gospel truth:

To ROGER: LoLz! Each & every one of those CARs is ruled by autocratic dictators that are presiding over populaces that are disgruntled due to growing socio-economic instability, i.e. a tinderbox. Consequently, in the event of a mass uprising in any of those countries succeeding in undertaking regime change that ushers in theocratic clergies as the new ruling class, China will have no other option but to militarily intervene & prop up a non-religious ruling regime of its own liking. For, if China doesn’t do so, then it will have to lose Xinjiang as well.

To FINCH: So far no PAF JF-17 has been seen flying with such stuff. Even at the IDEAS 2016 expo the JF-17 on static display was never shown with such stuff.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Interesting reads:

Leonard said...

To what extent does the activities and facilities in Coco Islands support the Chinese military in monitoring the maritime region around the Andaman &Nicobar Tri command as stated by Sumitra Mahajan in the earlier video you posted?

Chinese companies have already won Contract for the Kyaukpyu Deep Sea Port in Myanmar and other footholds in Myanmar.

With India in Sittwe I think a great game will soon unfold in the region if it already hasnt.

Lallan said...

What is your assessment of the following report?

Asmit S. said...

Thanks for the reply sir.

I saw that picture of the board of Uttam Radar which was shown in Aero-India-2017.
It says,"It is capable of tracking upto 6 targets with high accuracy suitable for firing missiles..."

While EL/M-2052 Radar's wiki says,"radar to achieve a longer detection range, high mission reliability and a multi-target tracking capability of up to 64 targets."

So Uttam can track 6 targets,while Elta Radar can track upto 64.Why so much big gap sir?
Are we so backward in AESA Radar technology?

Thanks in advance...

Pierre Zorin said...

" rather it is perfectly possible with conventional PGMs"- so true. I would rather invest in more thermobaric weapons that have N-like effect without the contamination and spread. What's more they can be used at any time. Pakistani N-rattling is very much like the Clint Eastwood versus Black Widows fight. It is also absolutely undisputable fact that what Pakistan claims as its own is in fact Chinese property on lease. Pakistan eunuch will have to borrow a Chinese penis to get laid. To use another analogy - Pakistan wants to walk the beaches with its swim trunk stuffed with a tennis ball to make it look well endowed. The Western world should have declared Charlie's war against China long time ago and get rid off the red capitalists. Change in government might have meant end of hostilities with India and therefore Pakistan would have been left emasculated.

Finch said...

JF-17 is supposed to have been integrated with a stand-off range air-to-surface weapon acc to PAC, announced on the day of rolling out of 1000th Aircraft,

Seems CATIC had earlier integrated the LS-6 with the JF-17

Is it capable of launching the H-2/H-4 SOWs? Or is the PAF going for the GIDS REK for the JF-17s as per reports?

Ravi said...

Dear Sir

On the Subject of PLA of China

Many Chinese people Boast of their large number of
ROCKET Artilerry And the Long Range MBRLs

How do you look at this threat

rad said...

hi prasun
the MTA has been terminated , what is the the next best option for India?.

antonov website claims we are going for the an 178?

why old generation barak missiles on the vikrant which is a high value asset when the barak 8 is available?

give us dope on the ushus 2 sonar which is being installed on the kilo subs, can we that we have come to the level of russian expertise in sonar?

how are we going to interface it with russian CMS and russian torpedos?

3rd ~ EyE said...

Do you think Unmanned Tejas would become a reality ? any thing that prevents it from happening ?

Pierre Zorin said...

Question Prasun. If IL-96 is so unreliable why does Putin choose to fly in one? Would he not be more comfortable in a Su-100 or an extended version of the same?

AniluvG said...

I am not sure it is true.
What do you make of it? I remember you writing that the British cannot go against their own supervised "Accession Agreement".

Anonymous said...

Antony = Leonard = Finch = Old Monk = Scrutator = Roger = Robert = vassili = McTavish = Daedalus = Dr.Dang = Bulla = Saboo = Satyaki = Seeker = Spykar ...... How much marks did I get???

Rancho said...

Lol! 8/16 and you missed a few nom de plumes Mr. Poirot!! BTW why does it matter so much to you?

Calculus said...

= Rancho don't forget!
By the way I know Gerald Shastri is not 21 because he writes English in a style totally foreign to 21 year olds especially nowadays and he won't be waiting to read an Urdu writer's book until made available in English from Penguin. Once again he tried to conceal himself. Me thinks it is Spykar who had a bashing from Prasunji in the past.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LEONARD: I have been coming across such false canards (about China being given access to Great Coco Island) since the mid-1990s & it is indeed hilarious to hear that only in 2014 civil engineering/construction activities were seen, meaning all that was being blurted out by self-styled ‘experts’ (a.k.a conspiracy theorists) & some Indian TV channels before 2014 were just hogwash & wishful speculation! As far back as 2001 Gen V P Malik had written in one of his memoirs that the Indian Army HQ has always had a standing invitation from its Myanmar counterpart to visit the island at any time without notice to see for itself if any ‘anti-Indian’ installation/facility is located there, regardless of whether it is Myanmar-owned or owned by some other country. Needless to say, successive Govts of India have fully trusted Myanmar to keep its word & there is today absolutely no evidence to indicate that Myanmar has broken its promise. And that’s why India is now emerging as a major supplier of high-tech weapons & sensors to the Tatmadaw, which is now beefing yp Great Coco Island to serve as an outpost for guarding Myanmar’s EEZ (which clashes with that of Thailand) in the Andaman Sea. So let’s not swallow all the whimsical & malicious filth being published by armchair specialists who haven’t even set foot on Great Coco Island & who cannot even identify a single piece of Made-in-China hardware positioned in that island.

To ASMIT S: How can any such claim be made about a laboratory concept demonstrator that hasn’t even taken to the skies as yet to prove its target acquisition/tracking capabilities? It could well be 6 or 16 or 46, depending on the quality of the signals processing algorithms.

To FINCH: Yes, & it is the FT-6A SDB equipped with a winged glide-kit that GIDS calls REK. It isn’t the LS-6. But so far no one has seen any JF-17 airborne with such PGMs or any other PGMs nor have they been used in combat.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RAVI: They can always be targetted from the air for destruction since they cannot fire on-the-move. Such TBMs, NLOS-BSMs & MBRLs have been developed to try to make up for the PLAAF’s inferiority when it comes to manned deep-interdiction platforms.

To RAD: MRTA project isn’t dead, only in deep hibernation. Barak-1 isn’t old & is still effective against subsonic ASCMs like C-602 & C-802A. Ushus-2 sonar suite is still a mid-frequency cylindrical-array system utilizing new-generation processors. That’s about it. Sonar suites don’t have to interface with CMS or any fire-control system. They function in standalone mode.

To 3rd EYE: What for? To act as target drones & be shot down? That would be one hell of an expensive exercise. Or does anyone reckon such a platform can engage in intelligent air combat via remote control? Has anyone else in the world achieved such a feat as yet? And if such unmanned platforms are to be used for AAA target practice, then why aren’t all the decommissioned MiG-21s & MiG-23s being converted/modified for such purposes? Bottomline: it’s a worthless idea from technical. Operational & financial standpoints. And the only ones who find such concoctions realistic are those who had written 3 years ago that the IAF is developing PGMs in-house just because an Air Marshal (S B Deo) wanted to show off all his unscientific scale-models fabricated in his personal garage at the Aero India 2015 expo & again on October 8, 2015 at the official residence of the then IAF CAS! And that’s why no one even mentions them nowadays.

To ANILUVG: Of course it is all true, because the Brits have at last realised that Pakistan is today a totally untrustworthy entity. Hence yesterday the UK-based MQM London’s Qaid once again publicly appealed to the Indian PM to come to the help of the Mojahirs in Karachi because “they were originally Indian citizens & therefore India is obliged to come to their assistance” (those were his exact words).

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To PIERRE ZORIN: Is it really so? Never heard any such complaints before. Talking about unreliability, let me share some anecdotal stuff with you all”

During the Afghan Jihad of the 1980s, the agreement between Pakistan & the US was for an allocation of 250 grip-stocks, together with 1,200 missiles, this being distributed among several Afghan Mujahideen teams each with four launchers and 16 missiles. The average hit-success rate by US troops trained on the Stinger was 65% in a non-hostile situation. The YS regarded this as satisfactory. From statistics that were compiled later during actual operations inside Afghanistan, the Mujahideen’s success rate was 75%. The Stingers were most effective when used around air bases in Jalalabad, Kabul–Bagram, Mazar-i-Sharif, Faisabad, Kunduz, Maimana, Kandahar and Lashkargah air. In a 10-month period from the first firing up to August 1987, 187 Stingers were used of which 75% scored direct hits.

By contrast, the Pakistan Army’s efforts with the Stinger were dismal. A number of them were provided to units in the border areas to respond to the countless ‘hot pursuit’ incursions by Soviet Air Force Su-17s, Su-24s & Su-25s into Pakistani airspace. The PA fired 28 Stingers against them without a single kill. This was because the PA did not use the weapon offensively; it did not set out to ambush aircraft, tempt them into vulnerable positions, before catching them by surprise. The PA was content to sit in a static defensive position and wait for a target to come its way, although to be fair that was really its only option in the circumstances on the frontier. In early 1987 the PA claimed to have downed an aircraft with a Stinger near Miram Shah in FATA, with the wreckage falling inside Afghanistan.. There was great excitement, a monumental rumpus & acute embarrassment after it was established that it was a PAF F-16 that had been shot down & that too by another F-16.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LALLAN/TOPSHE: Is it really worthy of any assessment when the authors themselves state that there are several unknowns & uncertainties? Furthermore, these ignorant brats tend to live in self-created silos & are devoid of historical contextualisation, why explains why they tend to view all TELs as being meant for nuclear-armed missiles, thereby conveniently overlooking or choosing to forget that the PA’s operational plans (mirroring those of the PLA) call for using TBMs for conventional deep-strike since the PAF’s manned comnbat aircraft can’t. So here’s ther historical backgrounder for all those ill-informed arse-fucked brats hell-bent on spreading rumours:

The USSR kept to its withdrawal timetable exactly. The last Soviet soldier to cross the bridge at Hairatan to Termez did so on February 15, 1989—this being the 45-year-old widower, Lt Gen Boris Gromov. However, several hundred Soviet soldiers remained in the guise of civilian advisers, especially for servicing and firing the R-17E SCUD tactical ballistic missiles. The Afghan Army at that time still had tremendous superiority in the three As–armour, artillery and aircraft. If it could have brought these assets to the battle & combined them effectively, then the Mujahideen would have been defeated. Afghanistan continued to receive military supplies worth up to $300 million a month from the USSR after February 1989. In the six months following the Soviet military withdrawal at least 3,800 transport aircraft flew in, carrying food, fuel, weapons & ammo. The first six months of 1989 saw the transfer of $ 1.5 billion of military support to Kabul, including 500 R-17E SCUDs. The PA felt both the psychological & physical effects of the SCUDs in mid-1989. Three R-17E Batteries were deployed at Kabul, where they were maintained and operated by Soviet personnel. They were new weapons, introduced to help compensate for the Soviet troop withdrawal, and they were technically complicated, which explained the Soviet crews. A Battery comprised TELs, three re-loading vehicles each with one missile, a mobile meteorological unit, a fuel tanker vehicle towing a pump-unit on a trailer, and several command-n-control trucks. Getting ready to fire took 1 hour. It involved a lengthy survey procedure at the firing position—using theodolites and optical devices—this being completed before the missile could be raised upright for launching. These R-17Es carried HE warheads weighing over 2,000 lbs. The only warning the Mujahideen or PA had was if they heard the sonic bang as the missile crashed through the sound barrier. They were area weapons & thus they never achieved great accuracy. When firing at a range such as from Kabul to Jalalabad, about half the missiles would fall in a circle with a radius of 900 metres. More than 400 SCUDs thumped down among the hills around Jalalabad during the mid-1989 siege & four fell inside Pakistan.

Cont’d below…

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Pakistan’s quest for acquiring conventional warhead-carrying ballistic missiles began in September 1988, when Islamabad inked a contract with Beijing for ‘wet-leasing’ for a 10-year period 80 solid-fuelled single-stage M-11 (Hatf-3/Ghaznavi/CSS-7 Mod 1/DF-11) 280km-range TBMs carried and launched from MAZ-543 8 x 8 vehicles, and 34 M-9 (Hatf-4/Shaheen-1/CSS-6/DF-15) 600km-range TBMs. All of them were armed with conventional high-explosive (HE) or fuel air explosive- (FAE) based warheads. These were acquired so that the PA could retaliate against rocket artillery fire-assaults that Afghanistan could launch inside with its abundant stockpile of R-17Es, although officially these TBMs were claimed to be the PA’s answer to India’s SS-150 Prithvi conventionally-armed NLOS-BSMs. China had then insisted that these missiles, powered by solid-fuel rockets, carry only HE/FAE warheads and remain deployed only in locations at Sargodha and within the lower Hunza Valley. China had then also refused to re-life the missiles beyond 1999, but agreed to re-life them after May 1998. By December 1988, China commenced deliveries of M-9 and M-11 TBMs, with all remaining deliveries being concluded by mid-1992. By early 1990, Pakistan had inked a $516 million turn-key deal with CGWIC and CPMIEC to establish localised MRO facilities for servicing a total of 64 solid-fuelled missiles such as the Hatf-3/Ghaznavi (with a CEP of 250 metres and carrying a 500kg warhead) and Hatf-4/Shaheen-1 (with a CEP of 50 metres when carrying a 1-tonne conventional warhead).
Since 2002, the PA has deployed two Missile Groups each of the Shaheen-1 and Ghaznavi (grouped under two separate Artillery Brigades (these being the Hyderabad-based Missile Brigade South comprising Missile Groups 25, 35 and 40 and the Sargodha-based Missile Brigade North comprising the 14, 28 and 47 Missile Groups). Each such Group comprises 18 Ghaznavi TELs each with one ready-to-fire missile and two missile reloads, and 18 Shaheen-1 TELs each with two ready-to-fire missiles and two reloads. A Group can also be divided into three Batteries (with six Ghaznavi TELs and six missiles plus two reloads and six Shaheen-1 TELs with 12 missiles and 24 reloads). Presently, Batteries of the conventionally-armed Shaheen-1 and Ghaznavi are deployed at Gujranwala, Okara, Mangla Multan, Jhang, Sonmiani, Quetta and Dera Nawab Shah. The conventionally-armed, liquid-fuelled single-stage Hatf-5/Ghauri-1/Nodong-1 IRBMs of North Korean origin were inducted into service on January 8, 2003 under the 47th Missile Group. In addition, the PA has two Babur conventionally-armed GLCM Battalions—the 23rd and 26th Missile Group—with each having four Batteries each with six TELs housing 24 LACMs and 24 reloads and 12 other supporting vehicles, all manned by 175 personnel.

Lallan said...

There are always some uncertainties involved in those kinds of assessments but how are you so certain that all those BMs and CMs all are meant to be conventionally armed since they certainly are dual-capable and their nuclear doctrine is certainly backed by the will and operational plans for possible use at all levels of threat spectrum integrated within its military war-fighting plans all of them which points towards the characteristics of a first-use asymetric-escalation posture if their nuclear preparation since the last two decades is anything to go by. They are in a way compelled to assign and exhibit a high probability and preparation of nuclear use in a conflict with India and trying to place the onus on India to prevent further escalation, all in order to pursue a relentless sub conventional conflict against India, most likely from an illusion that they can eventually force India towards a resolution of the J&K dispute.

Anonymous said...

Are the Baraks effective a?gainst supersonic/hypersonic ASCMs like the CM-400AKGs that we have already seen airborne with JF-17s? Will it have Dual-Ejection Racks for the SD-10s or the FT-6 that has been previously demonstrated? And how many JF-17s are available for maritime strike role?


Neo said...

What do you make of this report?

Topshe said...

What is your assessment of this report?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LALLAN: Instead of concocting further uncertainties & raising ill-informed questions, do take the trouble to read this:

In that book, all the evidences you seek are detailed & documented.

To FINCH: CM-400AKG is still under development & hasn't been inducted into service by anyone. Only 8 JF-17s are available for maritime strike with C-802A ASCMs.

To NEO: Those facilities are meant for garrissioned PLA Border Defence Regiments much likes the facilities available for IA personnel that are in the positioned along the Saltoro Ridge. Those facilities therefore have nothing to enhance the warfighting capabilities of the PLA at high altitudes.

To TOPSHE: That is nothing but yet another attempt to create fear psychosis. And that too when no photo of any naval warship or submarine belonging to the PLAN were even shown in that report. Some folks indeed specialise in creating a money-making business out of such perceptions.

himanshu vij said...

Hi sir
Few questions
According to TOI 2007 report BDL was producing 18 prithvi-2, prithvi-2 prithvi-3 missiles a year, with 18 warheads​. So this means by 2016 some ( 186 ) ??? Has all this happened & by 2017 Indian army was to provided with 250 bramhos , so has this happened ???
& According to shiv Shankar meanon India has a huge no of prithvi missile to deal with Pakistan. , so is this true.
According to parliment report of 2002 we were producing some 18 agni-2 missiles a year? So how many do we have as of now, & the same question for agni-1 how many we have as of now & according to the national interest magzine India has some 15 agni-3 missiles ???
By the way sir , are we agni-4 in good now , coz agni-5 deployment would be very late ,( According to u )
& The recent announcement of DRDO for export of torpedoes to Burma for $ 37 million , sir has India too entered a defense export arena ??? Earliest an order for 21$ to Vietnam for ADVANCED LIGHT TORPEDO & now the same to Burma as well , wants your views on it , & yesterday formal handling over ceremony of DRDO product to navy how , much good is this.

Lallan said...

What about the post 1998 period in which most of the developments regarding Pakistans Nuclear programme including doctrinal concepts, configuration of nuclear forces, delivery systems and nuclear management infrastructure took place?

AVIRAL said...

Prasun Da
1) There were rumours that indian fusion was partially exploded during Pokhran2 tests. If correct then do we have a proper thermonuclear tech??
2)DRDO developed GaN tech but for which on going or future EW and AESA radar project??
3)Do you think LCH is mature enough for induction and how will you compare it with Z10??
4)What is the timeline for completion of XRSAM project??
5)Do you think starting a production line for Gripen/F16/F18 jets in India will kill LCA??
6) What is the progress of DRDO's FRCV and FICV??
7)We are developing substandard roads along China border says CAG.( Army did trials and found that Bofors,Smerch and Pinaka systems can't be transported through these roads because of their sharp curves..What do you say?? Do you think Border road construction should be transferred to NHAI??

Dr. Strangelove said...

AlGaN/GaN-based HEMT has been started in DRDO for the next generation technology for high
frequency, high temperature and high power operation. GaN transistors will meet many strategic needs of DRDO: applications in transmitter-receiver modules needed for phased array radars, EW, jammers, data links, communication, missile seeker heads, power transistors, to name a few

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To HIMANSHU VIJ: LoLz! What was series-produced was just the SS-150 Prithvi & a few SS-250 Dhanush. Both are NLOS-BSMs & not ballistic missiles, they use dry-tuned gyroscopes for inertial navigation & they’re WERE meant for use only for conventional fire-assaults against heavy enemy concentrations & that’s why the IA had specified that the Prithvi-1 SS-150 have a minimum range of 40km. This also means that a Prithvi-1 launched 100km inside India could hit a target 50km inside Pakistan during hostilities. The IA, like all other land forces worldwide, does not conduct artillery strikes if the target is not visible to the naked eye, be it through forward observation posts, LUHs or UAVs. That’s why once the Smerch-Ms started arriving, the Prithvi-1s became obsolete because such MBRLs could hit hostile targets 50km away while staying 40km inside India. Hence, Prithvi-1 production stopped in 2011 itself & some of them were converted to Prithvi-2 by replacing the dry-tuned gyroscopes with TAMAM-supplied RLG-INS (the same that’s used by BrahMos-1 & Nirbhay) & these were used only for demonstrations & were never inducted into service. Once the Pinaka-2 MBRLs become available, all Prithvi-1 SS-150s will be withdrawn from service. Agni-2 & Agni-1 each number only 24 in number. But Agni-2 is now being replaced with Agni-4. No Agni-3s ever entered service. Myanmar’s Navy has procured 3 HUMSA-NG sonar suites & is now procuring TALs. Vietnam doesn’t want TALs, but Varunastras. Watch this videoslip on the USHUS-2 & HUMSA-NG:

To LALLAN/TOPSHE: There were no post-1998 developments except official announcements to reveal all that had been existing since 1993 itself. It’s all covered in that very same book that has a postscript & epiloguie as well. Furthermore, anyone with a modicum of professionalism on such matters (as opposed to armchair commentators you seem to have been mesmerised by) can tell the difference between conventionally-armed BM/CM Batteries & their nuclear-armed counterparts just by looking at their unique field-deployment footprints, i.e, the number & type of support vehicles accompanying the different types of Batteries. You may not be able to tell the difference, but that doesn’t mean everyone else is like you. Kindly try to factor this as well.

To AVIRAL: 1) Those were just rumours. In reality there’s nothing to worry about. 2) DRDO never developed any such technology. It just mastered the science of using such already-developed technologies for application on sensors & seekers. 3) Of course nopt. Where are its on-board self-defence suite? Has anyone seen them installed so far? 4) Hopefully by 2019. 5) Of course. 6) None. 7) China Study Group was formed way back in 1976, not 1997. If all that is said in that report is true, then it means the BRO & Army are not communicating with one another, which I find impossible.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Interesting infrastructure development video-clips:

India-Iran-Russia Rail Corridor


Corridor to J & K

lachit said...


will the naval lca mk2 see development given the navy chiefs recent statement given to hindu .

Anik said...

Prasun Da
You said, "Agni-2 & Agni-1 each number only 24 in number".
If I am not mistaken, China has hundreds of IRBMs.
What is the maximum number of nukes we need for credible minimum deterrence. Articles like these ( do not provide a very clear picture. It says india need 60to500 warheads for CMD.


Dont you think sir different gauges used by different railways on the way to moscow will cause hindrance to this india iran russia corridor

- amit biswas

VINOD KUMAR said... What is your assessment on this news.

Iceman said...

Are you implying that everything one needs to know about the Pakis nuclear arsenal had already been written by Ayesha Siddiqa-Agha and there has been no development since then?

Morpheus said...


You also have to tell the difference between conventionally-armed BM/CM Batteries & their nuclear-armed counterparts by looking at their unique field-deployment footprints, i.e, the number & type of support vehicles accompanying the different types of Batteries.

Asok said...

What is china doing to secure its oversea port facilities in the IOR periphery in Bangladesh, Burma, Maldives and Srilanka and to guard the SLOC in Mallaca strait ? How many warships and submrines can China spare for power projection in this region? Do they have any intention to build quasi bases or listening post in that region like they are doing in the Arabian sea, the strait of hormuz and near Africa?

Srinivasa Nanduri said...

Hi Prasun,

How successful was ajit dovals trip to USA. The joint statement was very vague. And Qari Yasin droned in Afghanistan and a statement from gen Mattis that those who tarnish image of Islam will be not spared. Are this signals from American administration to Pakistan?

Also, can you provide a write up on OBOR/CPEC and India's options. I know you did one a year ago, but seems like lot has happened in between and India has been badly played by China with few options in our kitty.

Anonymous said...


Thanks for the video links. Those are really great projects. I was aware of the second video but first and third were new to me and thus a delight to watch. Once again thanks, it really feels good to know that we Indians are finally taking up cutting edge projects and completing them in record breaking time.

Amol Gupta

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LACHIT: It should, but givem the scarcity of financial resources available for development, I have my doubts, especially when the IN has already issued RFIs only for MRCAs for IAC-2 & ADA cannot respond to it because it does not as yet have the definitive end-product in the form of LCA Mk.2 (Navy).

To ANIK: Yes, the PLA does possess hundreds of TBMs & MRBMs, but again the majority of them aren’t armed with nuclear warheads. The Strategic Rocjet Forces (previously the 2nd Artillery Corps) own & operate all nuclear WMDs, but the PLA’s ground forces too own & operate TBMs, MRBMs & GLCMs. Furthermore, the Strategic Rocket Forces have to contend with the nuclear WMDs of the US, UK, Russia & now India. Thus, its targetting reqmts are numerically far greater than those of India. In my estimation the quantum of India’s nuclear WMD arsenal will ultimately depend on the CMD doctrine’s emphasis on a survivable strategic deterrent, i.e. the size & sophistication of India’s SSBN-based SLBMs.

To AMIT BISWAS: From India only containers will be shipped & the railroad journey will begin from Iran. Rationalisation of railway gauges will be undertaken by Iran to conform to the Russian standard as part of Russia’s Eurasian Customs Union plan.

To VINOD KUMAR: It’s ill-informed speculation. The RMAF/TUDM has no immediate plans for decommissioning its MiG-29N fleet.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

ICEMAN: I never stated anything even remotely approaching your misinterpretation/misplaced perception. All I had stated was that the book contains enough material with which to distinguish between conventionally armed BM/CM Batteries & their nuclear WMD-armed counterparts. To therefore ASSUME that a conventionally armed BM/CM can effortlessly be armed with nuclear WMDs (as most deluded fanboys believe it to be the case) is the height of stupidity compounded by a total lack of respect for the laws of physics. Once this fact-of-life is accepted, then it becomes faily easy to pinpoint those garrisons that operate the nuclear WMD-armed Missile Groups & consequently once their routine missile-launch drills are monitored over a period of time, their likely launch-pads during wartime can be easily identified, since such launch-pads are never selected in random with the blink of an eye, but are instead fully secured areas with several unique built-up structures custom-built for accommodating all the relevant support vehicles. And such launch-pads vary according to the type of red-line prescribed by the SPD during that particular emergency. And for those nerds that don’t know about such red-lines, they have undergone 3 iterations to date, starting from 2002.

To ASOK: Securing overseas port facilities for facilitating maritime trade or transshipment isn’t a crime under international law. Everyone does it. Nor will China be allowed by the US, UK & France to conbstruct any naval Base anywhere in the southern IOR. Therefore, what the PLAN can do is to send its SSNs on regular long-range patrols in that area because in that very same area the IN’s SSBNs will be undertaking their deployments in times of emergencies. Nor will any offshore naval garrison be established within the IOR. But they already have been established in the South China Sea & East China Sea.

সুমন্ত নাগ said...

Prasun Da, from where the Ababeel MRBM has been sourced or procured for Pakistan ?

BTW, Thanks for another enlightening blog.

Anonymous said...


I read that the Dhanush howitzer (155x45 bofors upgrade) is going through yet another round of trials without being inducted.

1) Why this endless set of trials ? Is this an attempt to find some minor flaw and push for imports ?

2) Shoul'nt the GoI push sufficient numbers of these guns down the Army's throat if this cycle of trials causes further delays ?


Asok said...

Isnt it true that China's MSR initiative is essentially a PLAN 's “string of pearls" strategy? and PLAN is already creating a fourth fleet that would eventually consist of 2 CBG based at Hainan Island for securing the SLOC in IOR and the Malacca Strait? and a permanent Chinese task force would soon be operating in the IOR with those Dual-Use Chinese facilities in the IOR playing hosts, as they wrap up their construction of artificial islands in the SCS.

Deepak said...

Prasun Da, If pakistan declares gilgit-baltistan its own province then shouldn't we immediately launch a military offensive in gilgit-baltistan and try to liberate that land?

Unknown said...

Sir is india financing any such gauge conversion projects in iran/central asia upto russian border.
Also what is at stake for iran to be associated with india in this project considering hostile approach by TRUMP administration and israel towards it , with whom india maintains fairly good relationship.

also is there any russian / gazprom plan to bring oil and gas from russia to india via china/pok-afghan areas.

sir few years ago a steel consortium from india was ahead for iron ore mining and steel project in iran. any progress on that??? also is china making any investments in exploitation of afghan resources??-----


Unknown said...

Sir is DRDO constructing any underground missile silos in western sector airbase near pakistan ?? and if yes what is the purpose behind it?? as the same can be neutralised quickly by pakistan air forces first wave of raiding during conflict

Unknown said...




Unknown said...


<< In a recent significant decision, the IN has decided to upgrade the mission management system and mission sensors of its existing eight Tu-142ME LRMR/ASW aircraft by installing on each of them the Novella (Sea Dragon) suite, developed by St Petersburg-based Leninets Holding Company and already operational on board the IN’s five existing IL-38SD MRMR/ASW aircraft. Once completed, the upgraded Tu-142MEs, each armed with torpedoes as well as up to four 3M54E supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, are expected to remain in service until 2024. >>





Samar said...

Dear Prasun Sir,

There is one old news about an Indian POW in OMAN jail, can you please share some info about this.

Thanks and Regards,

RJS said...

Dear Prasun ,

In response to your answer to @Iceman's query , I have a few of my own .Since it's quite clear from your analysis of Dr.A.Siddiqa's book on the strategies , no of TEL ,assorted paraphernalia, no of warheads , etc are all of 1999 vintage .

What in your guesstimate is the strength of NW in Pakistan's arsenal in terms of nos?

What do you think are the yield of its biggest & smallest devices (TNW) ?

What in your opinion are their delivery systems and their nos ( CM , BM , MIRV(?) Fighter Aircraft , etc )?

Have they mastered usage of plutonium in their warheads or are they still manufacturing HEU based warheads ?

What in your esteemed opinion is their stock of fissile material & have they started re processing the same in Pakistan or is the re processing still carried out in China ?

Finally , what exactly is the nature of their collaboration with DPRK ?

Kindly add any other info that you may think is important in the context if I've skipped addressing them in my questions .

Always a pleasure to read your blog & the gold mine of info you shed light on .It's truly our privilege that we get to pick your brains and really appreciate the patience and attention to detail with which you illuminate your answers .

Thanks in advance

Warm regards,


Vijay said...

Dear Sir

My Question is regarding Gen Raheel Shareef leading
some coalition in Gulf Countries

1 Will Pakistan put Troops on the Ground in Yemen

2 What will the GCC PAY to Pakistan for their services

APU said...

These are some very recent reports on China's Naval ambitions in the IOR. Do you agree with their conclusions?

Saboo said...

HI, I Have few queries,

1. What is the status of INS Varsha?

2. When will the A&N islands have a full-fledged fighter base with Su-30s & a full fledged naval base? How many operational-turn-around bases are operational there?

3. When will the Paradip and Tuticorin FOB be operational?

4. Does the IN have a coastal surveillance network for A&N in place? Any plans for placing aerostat mounted radars there?

5. Is china contemplating an ADIZ for SCS?


Lester said...

"As far as India is concerned by bringing the Qinghai region in the Western zone,
PLA has facilitated the rapid induction and deployment of high altitude acclimatised
and trained troops not only into Tibet but possibly into Ladakh for any contingencies.

Indian land borders are now only with Western military zone. This will be probably more efficient from a Chinese perspective as they can have better synergy and orchestrate interplay between application of forces on our Western and Eastern sectors. This particularly is of relevance as the Chinese are strategically on interior lines. India on the other hand, has limited strategic synergy between its Western and Eastern Sectors, being on exterior lines."

-Do you concur?

Abhinav said...

Can tejas be armed with these kind of weapons or it is just for display purpose???

Mukund said...

Looks like this NDA government is losing the battle against the leftists Media and Intellectuals. The media has been successful to change the country's attention to their own news. The recent example is the ban on illegal slaughter house in UP. Even closing of one Kabab shop by 1-3 hours has been the news headline. For the leftist media, one kabab shop was more important that other national issues. They are turning Muslims against NDA govt. What would be the ramifications of this in the next 5 years?
Now there has been call to unite all the opposition parties to fight against NDA in 2019 Parliament Election. If this happens, NDA have face tough battle. The question is will that happen? Just before Delhi election, there was series of Church attacks, which the government could not solve. These so called attacks on churches projected by leftist media as attack on minorities by BJP/RSS/VHP, etc. BJP lost badly in Delhi and Kejriwal got the power. Since then, there was not even a single church attacks - mysterious!
I have a feeling that there could be such kind of staged minority attacks in different part of the country. The question is whether this government is ready for this?

rad said...

hi prasun
when we make high end rlg and fog gyros and inertial systems why are we importing them from france or israel for our missiles and warships

what is the main cause for the delay in the chabar port in iran

the iaf seems to be impressed with the emb -145 awacs and in fact wanted the third one as well. Are there plans to induct more albeit there is scandal ?. THe drdo is going to take another 12 years for a330 awacs

Anonymous said...

Interesting read,

Pierre Zorin said...

Here is a link to satisfy the doubters that Russian products indeed are great and compatible :)

joydeep ghosh said...

@prasun da


why cant DRDO/IA do something like that with Pinaka MBRL

2. why the hell ULFA is threatening the Dalai Lama

3. with Tu142s retiring and IL38 in their last leg of service what has happened to the MRMR requirement with LRMR being done by P8I

4. why was rustom 2 renamed TAPAS 201

5. do you think Panchi the wheeled version of Nishant UAV is a viable option


Joydeep Ghosh

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To LESTER & APU: LoLz!. That same sentence/claim now appears almost word-for-word in 2 different papers, these being:


On paper, they’re both right that the railway tracks into TAR via Qinghai will facilitate troop transportation. In fact, they will enable PLA troops to travel by rail from Qinghai to Lhasa & from there to Shigatse all the way down to the Dolam Plateau & Chumbi Valley. But now come the real questions that no one asks or explores or analyses: 1) Exactly what’s the quantum of ‘fully acclimatised troops’ that can be brought in? 2) Where else inside China can such troops be acclimatised & be trained to fight in very high-altitude areas of the type prevalent in TAR? 3) What’s the use of just inserting troops into TAR if they can’t be supported with food & weapons provisioning to the tune of 46 tonnes per day for a Division-sized formation? 5) Why should the PLA focus only on railways when transportation can be carried out much quicker by air? 6) Are these Indian analysts ASSUMING that the IAF in wartime will be so stupid so as to just sit tight & refrain from damaging the railroad infrastructure inside TAR?

Once folks start scratching their heads when trying to find answers to such questions, it will become evident that all their assumptions about rapid force accretions by rail or even air are totally flawed. Maybe that’s why even the PLA during exercises since 2010 inside TAR has NEVER been able to bring in any fighting formation that is bigger than an infantry Battalion from anywhere outside TAR. Those that have been inducted there during exercises have all been Company-sized, they were inducted by air & that too from the Sichuan & Yunnan provinces to the east. Those interested in such exercises may watch them here:

Anonymous said...

There are news that we are looking to slow our investments into Iran for various reason. What are you thoughts?

Also I have come across this, in more than one place: Is this really happening?


Lester said...

1. Exactly what’s the quantum of ‘fully acclimatised troops’ that can be brought in?"

-I thought PLA far outnumbers(approx 34 divisions with ancillary elements?) the already stretched and undersupplied IA (about 2:1 in terms of numbers if not more?) compounded by the triple assault of weather, terrain and the lack of railroad infrastructure which is still non-existing in some parts.

2. Where else inside China can such troops be acclimatised & be trained to fight in very high-altitude areas of the type prevalent in TAR

-Do they really have a dearth of such high altitude training/staging areas unlike India's pockets of isolated forward positions?

3. Why should the PLA focus only on railways when transportation can be carried out much quicker by air?

-What about their 60,000-km or so of roads network inside TAR well suited for such war-time logistics and mobility for rapid deployment of China’s Integrated forces and to swiftly move heavy equipment, to and from the region?

lachit said...

@joydeep ghosh


ULFA is now a bitch for china since their top leadership is holed up in yunan province of china,

they will bite whoever their new masters orders them to.......

guess the chinese have picked up bad habits from their deep than ass stronger than thread brothers the porkistanis.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To DAS: Looooooooooooolllllllllzzzzzzzzzzz!!!

Just last week in Washington DC at the Indian NSA's meeting at the US State Dept & the new US NSA, it was decided that under the auspices of LEMOA, US cargo vessels will dock at Kandla from where Indian ships will carry all non-lethal cargo meant for ISAF & US forces (whose numbers will be increased in future) stationed in Afghanistan over to Chah Bahr & from there Iranian trucks will carry the cargo consignments all the way north to the ringroad inside Afghanistan. In this way, the US will outsource its non-lethal cargo shipments to India & India in tuyrn will subcontract Iranian railway & trucking companies to do the rest. As a result, the US will no longer rely on the Pakistani G-LoCs via Karachi & afghanistan too will follow suit by outsourcing its imports of perishable commodities from India & the Middle East

To LESTER: 1) Don't think or assume. Instead, produce hard facts by listing out all those 34 divisions, of what type they are & under which Group Army they operate. 2) Do name & identify the locations of such high-altitude training areas that can replicate TAR's climate. 3) Since you are asking questions that are always asked by nitwits, do us all a favopur here by identifying all those lateral/longitudnal road/rail networks that offer connectivity right up to the LAC. A black-top single-lane road meant for an alley is also counted as being part of China's ropad network inside TAR, so do be specific about those roads right up to the LAC, & those roads that ensure connectivity between TAR & the Chinese hinterland, as well as those connecting inner TAR with outer TAR. And if you can't produce specific data, then don't even bother to make any arse-fucked comments from hereon.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, I wasn't aware of this new deal. Is this the outcome of the recent paki blockade of the afghan border, where they didn't even allow any cargo for US, ISAf forces either? I like the iranian mentality. They are natural traders, even in war time they are happy to trade with their enemies. Do you expect the US, ISAF to increase to their previous levels? Do you expect a role of Indian forces?


Vishnu George said...


HAve you seen this excellent speech by Tarek Fateh? The Khan of Kalat wanted to join India, while the Sindhu Hindu majority of E Sindh opposed Pakistani Sindh vigorously.

Fateh raises very valid points of India having a failed national narrative thanks to Chacha Nehru. Present day India is an "amputated" mess. We must become a civilizational state, like Fateh says, because the present day India is a mockery and embarrassment for its people and NRIs.

Jambudvīpa (area of subcontinent) or Bhāratavarsham (governance of subcontinent) is our national heritage, like Chinese Middle Kingdom. (see for more

Also see these damming videos of PAkistan, persecuting Christian minority. From Pak's own military officers!!!

Anonymous said...


You say that allegations of our Thermonuclear test is 1998 failing are rumours.

1) If so, why would Dr. Santhanam, who was in charge of the test site preparations openly express his doubts about the yield ? He could not have been ignorant abou the design yield, etc.

2) If the TN test of 1998 was successful, why limit ourselves to just boosted-fission weapons, when TN of 150 kt yield consume less fissile material and are likely to be lighter ?


Vikram Guha said...

Prasun Da,

(1) RFI for air-to-air missile for LCH, ALH (WSI) response date has been pushed back to April 15,2017. Is the Fire Control System of these aircraft compatible with any air to air missile that foreign vendors may offer?

(2) I understand Western fighter aircraft in the IAF's inventory are not compatible with Russian weapons but are Russian aircraft like Su 30MKI, Mig 29 UPG compatible with western weapons?

(3) Given the huge shortage of conventional submarines in the Indian Navy, what do you recon is the best possible way to increase the number within a short period of time ?



Shonku said...

Hello Prasun

Is Pakistan building a base at Karachi?

P.C. Mitra said...

Hello Prasunji.
Now that MTA airliner is dead, Is Mahindra with the MC-21 and Tata with Sukhoi Superjet in the race for manufacturing regional airliner?

mg6357 said...


I came across an interesting article about "A very stable Pakistani Economy".

please take a look into it.

The writer mentions how much IMF has helped Pakistan and hoe CPEC will drive it's future growth and more.

I think writer failed to even mention the depths of debt, terrorism, illiteracy, poverty etc. Pakistan is facing.

Thanks & Regards

Rohan said...

1.) I had seen an RFQ some time back concerning LPD / LHD type vessels (4 IIRC) for the IN's fledgling Marine Corps style force. But no follow-up news has surfaced afterwards. Has the project gone cold?

2.) With multiple projects in the pipeline for IADS (AAD, ABM, XRSAM, MR/LRSAM, QRSAM), does it still make sense to go through with the large scale purchase of the S-400 system? It seems like there is always a push to import systems that duplicate capabilities of local projects to either undermine the R&D effort or to act as an insurance in case the local product fails. Seems a terrible waste of money.

3.) Any news / updates on status of 2nd Akula-II being leased? We see periodic "news bytes" coming timed to coincide with some diplomatic visits but little in the way of any hard facts or contracts.

4.) Are there any plans to provide CRPF Cobra units with ALH for mobile COIN ops in Red Zone or Valley? Seems a glaring gap in their capability.

5.) Any plans by IN to build a SOSUS-type network in the IOR?

Anonymous said...

"US forces (whose numbers will be increased in future) stationed in Afghanistan over to Chah Bahr & from there Iranian trucks will carry the cargo consignments all the way north to the ringroad inside Afghanistan. In this way, the US will outsource its non-lethal cargo shipments to India & India in tuyrn will subcontract Iranian railway & trucking companies to do the rest. As a result, the US will no longer rely on the Pakistani G-LoCs via Karachi & afghanistan too will follow suit by outsourcing its imports of perishable commodities from India & the Middle East"

i dont understand one thing why would US want move goods through Iran rather than Pak when US relations are deteriorating with iran? what is need to bring in Ind when it can easily transport through Pak from Karachi or gwadar instead of transporting through ind ships n iranian trucks? dont you think it would be nightmare?


Anik said...

Why do you think budget of NSCS was increased???

buddha said...
Atleast Indian Navy is getting some helicopters

The Engdoc Society said...

Your expert views on shortage of ASW helicopters in IN, is n't limiting the capability of IN to a greater Extent and also now some of the MPA have been decommissioned a the requirement of ASW is more than ever and on the other hand MOD has approved purchase of HAL Dhruv For IN and CG, why can n't much needed ASW helicopters be purchased urgently.

Dada can this be the case HAL has modified and developed HAL Dhruv into ASW helicopter

rad said...

hi prasun
bharat karnad , an imbecile ,sometimes speaks some sense. His take that f-16 selection of make in india will face problems due to trump and again no one knows the final cost and catches and tech embargoes that come with it.Uncle sam was never friendly.
his take that the gripen will only come about after 2020 and that too brazil has also ordered it , so they will have to get it first and we will have to wait for it again.
His point that the lca has the lowest radar rcs (which many lca baiters dont know) and we have matured enough to make the lca as good as the gripen according to balaji . he should know as our test pilots have flown the gripen.
though we might not get the same thrust to weight ratio of the gripen we can equal it in all aspects especially the avionics and ew and aesa radar weapons etc apart from the meteor.
i feel we should not get caught like the su-30 mki situation in spite of paying 8 bil $ we have no capacity to make it here.
diverting the money to the lca will be a big boon and we can make even 30 planes a year given resources and sensible management . we can have 300 ac in 10 years and have another modern gnat, small , low rcs , good maneuverability , good radar ew , more importantly made here with no tech
black mail.
what is your opinion?

Amar said...

Dada... Has the PLA deployed the Wing Loong Pterodactyl UAV and the Soar Dragon HALE-UAV over TAR?

Vijay said...


“The demonstration run will happen very soon in 2017 and we will sort out all the issues with the countries concerned,” said an official. Do you think it is feasable or will Pakistan try to play a spoilsport?

SUVO said...

How Beijing play its two-faced game with Myanmar.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To RON: US-Iran relations deteriorating? Really? Then why is Iran continuing to charge in US$ for all its crude oil exports? If the US wants, like it did before the nuclear deal. it can easily contact all financial institutions of the world & declare that all payments made in US$ to Iran either in cash or via SWIFT wire-transfers will be considered illegal tender. The US is perfectly within its right to do so if it so chooses & this can also take place WRT CPEC if the US imposes similar conditions & let's then see if China & Pakistan agree to swap each other's currency for settling payments. The Chinese will be brought to their knees by the US Treasury Dept & the Federal Reserve Board. That takes care of the so-called 'worsening US-Iran relations;.

Now about the 'reliability' of the G-LoCs transiting through Pakistan. Have you counted the number of times Pakistan has unilaterally shut down all traffic through the crossing points along the Durand Line since December 2014? Do you think countries like the US or Afghanistan will tolerate such behaviour forever? Is this wht you call 'easy transportation' through Pakistan? If yes, then you are as terminally stupid as SPYKAR or GERALD SHASTRI or LEONARD or LESTER or THE SEEKER. India has had a steady logistics supply chain for Afghanistan & other Central Asian republics since 2011 & it therefore makes perfect financial sense for the US to outsource all its reqmts to Indian logistics providers since they all have been approved & certified by Iran to undertake such work.

To AMAR: LoLz! What for? Such IAVs have in reality been developed for deployment over the South China Sea, East China Sea & North China Sea over the Spratly & Paracel Island groups.

To MG7357: LoLz! Isn't it ironic that Pakistani commentators themselves are saying just the opposite? Watch this:

Chashma Power Plant closed for C-1 Repairs

Now it seems these unsafeguarded PHWRs of Chinese origin are being run for power generation! If that is the case then they most certainly are not being used for generating weapons-grade plutonium as fissile material--a point to be taken note of by various US-based speculators on Pakistan's nuclear WMD arsenals.

Pierre Zorin said...

Looks like just like our detective story fan Gerald Shastri now we have a Satyajit Ray fan coming out in the form of Shonku aka Prof Shanks and P.C.Mitra aka Feluda.
I am also glad you finally aligned Lester, The Seeker, Spykar, Gerald Shastri, Leonard because they are one and the same.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Have compiled a list of videoclips relating to on-going transportation infrastructure development efforts:

Vizhinjam Port
India's Dedicated Freight Corridor
KRCL Tunnelling
Jammu-Udhampur Highway
Lahaul-Spiti Rohtang Tunnel
Rail Link To Manipur
Jammu Srinagar Highway
North-East India
Nagaland NH-39
Trans-Arunachal Highway
Arunachal Pradesh Highways
North East Roads
North East Roads
Trans-Asian Railway Network
DMRC Stretch Made By China

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 205   Newer› Newest»