The new Garrison HQ of the PLA’s 361 Border Defence Regiment (Unit 69310) was commissioned into service on October 1 in the Zanda County of Tibet’s Ali (Ngari) Prefecture. This is one of three Regiments under the South Xinjiang Military District that is deployed along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) along India’s Ladakh UT.
The other two are the 362 BDR (Unit 32160) located at Ritu County and 363 BDR (Unit 69316)—both in Ali Prefecture. In addition, there are 11 PLA-BDR Regiments deployed along the LAC from Himachal Pradesh in the west right up to Arunachal Pradesh to the east.
And below is the Ladakh-specific logistics hub created by the South Xinjiang Military District for the on-going campaign season.
The PLAGF’s Changsha-based University of Engineering
(which also has campuses at Nanjing, Wuhan, Hefei and other field locations,
has developed removable self-powered thermal insulation cabins (below) for the
Aksai Chin area, to keep the interior temperatures at 15° Celsius when it is
-40° Celsius outside.
PLA-BDR Detachment At Panggong Tso North Bank In August 2020
And East Of Kongka La
Finally, the real picture is emerging, sadly India will watch the annex of GB and later So-called Aazad K silently.
ReplyDeleteBut there is always the possibility of taking a temporary retreat from China front and decimating PA for good. Hope Indian planners go for the option of decimating PA and letting go of some real estate in China front, but a "BIG BUT" can the Indian politicians take this bold step.
65-inch might be extremely nervous now after knowing the reality.
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteI went through your response in the last thread. You told that China is successful in denying India the opportunity to carrying out salami slicing in PoK. Then now it is concluded that India is NOT ready for two front war when it comes to capture PoK.
Being a layman I'm completely confused. Then why such bombastic words like capturing PoK before 2024!!!! Please explain what India needs to do.
PLAGF DF-10A Cruise Missile Firing Drill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKvB_kmETFg
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58F__r2Rpuk
PLA Airborne Corps: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ch5jQh-Q1Uc
SFF Paradrop Drill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imnOMaDH-OM
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteFirstly appreciate the bravery of ppl like you & others who are willing to take such risks for the defense of the nation & also for accurately assessing & reporting the situation/ events.. huge respect!!
This article & your replies on the last thread only mean that we are on the verge of losing GB forever and that a complete chinese takeover is ongoing.. why is this not raised in any of the UN forums . why no threat to the chinese is made w.r.t HK & Taiwan. Why has'nt India being able to convince russia, US & the EU to act more decisively against the chinese expansion. is this the reason why the paki opposition are being brave enough to oppose the "establishment" dikhat on GB beng made a province...also my take is that pakis will go ahead with its plans to make it a 5th province.. is it how this ends? once china establishes itself in GB it will divert indus water too . Is the Indian govt aware of these scenarios ?
Prasun ,
ReplyDeletea rejoinder , U have elaborately explained about all the diff sects within the tibetians .. wy is dalai lama not being decisive about succession in spite of all these developments esp with the arrest of the chinese nationals caught bribing some monks...You had mentioned some involvement of the US in this too .. does india & the US have a plan for post dalai lama period to keep the hans on their toes?
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIn your opinion how long will this neglect of the armed forces for even the most basic necessities will continue!On the other hand the wastage /frittering away of scarce resources on questionable issues continues unabated!This is what happens when the undeserving attain positions of power!I feel deeply for the waste and illogical functioning of many important offices without any accountability as you have rightly brought out!Let us hope that good sense prevails!
To DASHU: Well, all I can infer is that India’s 'netas' do not believe in the adage of “WALK THE TALK. Hence, a lot of symbolic decibels always emerge but hardly any substantial tangibles emerge.
ReplyDeleteTo ASD: You are getting confused because you are not being able to distinguish between what’s being claimed & what the objective ground reality is. For instance, there’s a huge difference between “we have to cater for a two-font war scenario” & “we are fully prepared for a two-front scenario”. On the ground, what this means is that while almost everyone is going ga-gas about the Nimu-Padam-Darcha Road they are overlooking the completion date of that road, i.e. only in 2023. As for capturing PoK before 2024, don’t you think it is a bit too early to be asking this question in 2020, considering that one still has another 4 more years to go? Is it rational to ask such a question?
To JUST_CURIOUS: VMT. The GB issue could have been raised by the Indian PM without any mention of Pakistan in his virtual speech at the recently concluded annual UNGA by saying that just like India had restored normalcy & had begun ushering in prosperity within the UTs of J & K and Ladakh, India would do the same for PoK inclusive of GB. Why such a statement wasn’t made remains unexplained. Perhaps, the ruling elite of India is not adept in utilising the available tools of information warfare, or perhaps the issue of regaining GB is not even exercising the minds of India’s ‘netas’. After all, I have yet to come across a debate in Parliament since the 1970s in which foreign policy & territorial matters are freely discussed during question-hours in either house of Parliament. And it is also this malaise that perhaps could explain India’s failure to keep the issue of Tibetan independence aspirations alive internationally, although India continues to house the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile (Central Tibetan Administration) in Dharamsala. No rational human being will ever be able to rationalise such a glaring & persisting contradiction!
To THE INDIAN: This state of affairs will continue for as long as sound common-sense isn’t applied. For instance, the writing on the wall states that no amount of corporatisation of any DPSU entity will transform a loss-making military-industrial entity into a productive & self-sustaining entity simply because the final levers reqd for operating such entities lies not with the Board of Directors & management of such DPSUs, but with the MoD’s decision-makers, i.e. the Joint Secretaries & Deputy Secretaries. And that’s precisely why despite BSNL’s corporatisation, it still remains financially bankrupt. So, unless the reqd structural reforms are taken at the apex-level, nothing will trickle down below. And that’s precisely why state-owned military-industrial entities in various countries around the world, especially in Russia & China, continue to function productively & profitably. Therefore, to claim nowadays that state-owned entities in India remain unprofitable & productive due to lack of corporatisation or prevalence of labour unions is a sheer no-brainer!
Sir,
ReplyDeleteToday's IAF chief commants:-
IAF's acquisition priority ladder laid out by Chief of Air Staff today:
83 LCA Mk.1A
114 MRFA :- F21
LCA Mk.2
AMCA
F21 on the way?
Let's put it this way Import 114 Rafales (or lesser) in staggered purchases of 36-40 as MRFA. Ensure complete MRO in India for them & on order 36. Make 200+ LCA-Mk2/MWF in addition to 83+40 Mk1A/Mk1. Thus 18 squadrons of LCA/MWF variants, 18 squadrons of upgraded Super Sukhoi std. Su30MKIs. The rest 9+ squadrons would be 114+36 Rafale MMRCA as it gradually replaces Jaguars, Mirage 2000s, Mig27s, Mig29s. If F-21 is bought, it's curtains for Mk2/MWF. GO for 5-6 Gen AMCA & if FSED/flight prototype by 2030 of AMCA, excellent as it replaces over the next three decades, the Su30MkIs As for logistics transport aircraft Dump C295, use AN-32, HS-748 upg & more C-130, also dry/wet lease of these & MRTT.
DeletePrasun da,
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2l-1D9eR3Y
What is this new weapon - Supersonic Missile assisted release of Torpedo, SMART
Seems Hot launch
Prasunda
ReplyDeleteThe public images of the SMART test seems that it is carried by the Shaurya/Sagarika/K-15 missile & it's launcher truck as featured many years earlier in front of 'Sagarika Annexe' named shed at DRDL & at DRDO display on a Republic Day as well as a test couple of days earlier of 'improved' Shaurya, images of which were not released.
SMART obviously, then, can be launched by the Arihant Class, which by all measures is then clearly a SSGN class armed with either 12 Brahmos or 12 K-15 Sagarika(Shaurya) & even SMART. That is what the IN always wanted as with Chakra, N-Subs on perpetual deterrent patrol. Not SSBN, Not Nuke armed MAD Deterrence but a practical long patrol sub like Chakra which will ensure presence of N-Subs on perpetual patrol duty
ho prasun
ReplyDeletedid i hear you corecct ? you said you were in POK ??? how . you being an indian and writing against pakistan ??
Dear sir,
ReplyDeleteDo you see any future for MALD type of active decoys in indian airforce inventory. In today's advanced air defence umbrella of our neighbors isn't imperative to equip our airforce with these kind of SEAD and DEAD weapons apart from SAAW, as EMP equipped SAAW is only useful once we pinpoint enemy's air defence locations, like mechanized/static air defence platforms.
Do you see SAAW it self doing both the jobs of identifying and neutralizing enemy air defence platforms in IAF's war planning.
I strongly recommend to develop varient of SAAW as a airborne active radar and IR decoy to mimic our combat and support platforms during SEAD/DEAD missions. For this it has to have the supersonic speed to replicate combat jets. I appreciate your thought on this.
Mr.Prasun just saw WAR AND PEACE by Anand Patwardhan after seeing this recommended by you to someone on this blog way back in 2011 or 2013 Very good documentary available at Youtube.
ReplyDeleteIt shows that nuclear safety wasnt looked at very seriously.
But still it makes me feel that we need credible nuclear weapons.
Your comments PLEASE.
aarpee
To SIDHARTH: About OFB & its workings, how can OFB be blamed for the INSAS SLR when OFB is only the bulk producer of it & not its developer? If the INSAS is sub-optimal, then its designer & developer must be held accountable along woth the IA’s HQ, which gave the final approval for its service-induction, and not the bulk producer. After OP Parakram, the majority of human casualties within the IA were caused during manual demining operations, which was an outdated practice, & not due to any faulty hardware like defective mines. Consequently, mechanical demining hardware was acquired by the IA from Denmark. In fact, whenever there have been catastrophic explosions within Central Ordnance Depots, they always happened due to ammo with expired shelf-lives being left to rot inside such depots, instead of disposing them off. And do you know how such ammo is disposed off? Contrary to what has been claimed (about being taken to Pokhran & being blown off), all such ammo is loaded on board the IN’s LST-Ls & are then ferried to a location in the southern Indian Ocean where they are thrown off-board. Also, none of the HQs of the DPSUs are Delhi-based. So does this mean that all DPSUs are sub-optimal in their marketing efforts just because their HQs are not Delhi-based?
ReplyDeleteBottomline: Folks should stick to their domain of expertise (like Pakistan-bashing—be it credible or delusional--on TV channels) & not become a mouthpiece for irrational & malicious propaganda.
To ASHISH GAUTAM: 1) As I have stated many times before, the LCH version ordered by the IAF NEVER had any reqmt for ATGMs. The IAF till today wants the LCHs only for shooting down UAVs. Now how exactly will a Mistral ATAM when fired from an altitude of 15,000 feet succeed in shooting down a MALE-UAV flaying at 30,000 altitude remains to be seen. The IA’s LCH variant will be able to fire only 70mm unguided rockets over Ladakh.
2 & 3) Remains to be seen, since even the LCH’s LSP-1 variant is now devoid of such self-defence suites despite such suites already being on board the IA’s Rudra gunships. One wonders why an already integrated self-defence suite on the Rudra has not yet been installed on LCH LSP-1 airframe & to be it is a technological absurdity.
4) Annual defence spending—in case you did not know—is already close to 5% of GDP if the amount of pensions & dearness allowance is factored in, along with the expenses incurred for the development & maintenance of India’s strategic arsenals. Kindly refer to the successive annual reports of the MoD & see if any of them gives any break-up of the annual costs incurred for the development & maintenance of India’s strategic deterrent tools. Such figures have yet to be made public.
5) FAKE NEWS. Shaurya was only a technology demonstrator. Only Prahar BSM has been productionised as the delivery vehicle for TNW warheads.
6) Because neither the IA nor IAF have in-house technology R & D centres that delve into such matters.
7) All-new PIC & CRPC is enacted by any independent self-respecting country, instead of continuing with colonial-era legislations & laws. Since India has failed to do so, it can safely be inferred that in intellectual terms, India is still being ruled based on foreigner-enacted rules & regulations. And neither are the present-day ‘netas’ making matters any better by trying to parachute into trouble-spots & shedding crocodile tears (like the Gandhi siblings & other political parties) during daytime for garnering maximum media publicity, while in the evening they all go back to the cafeterias of their favourite 5-Star hotels in Delhi & laugh over what had transpired earlier in the day! If at all they are serious about ushering in credible governance, then they should stop their theatrics inside Parliament & instead work day-n-night on evolving the kind of legislations that ensure speedier dispensation of justice. Only that will be the true test of their patriotism & professional honesty.
To RAD: Why can’t any Indian citizen visit any territory that is officially claimed by India as being her own? What national & international laws could I have possibly violated? As for my methodologies for entry & return, those are my proprietary IPRs that need to be known only on a need-to-know basis for now.
ReplyDeleteTo ANWAY: LoLz! The F-21 has already begun being downgraded, like in this instance, even by ill-informed ex-IAF officials who have also resorted to bad-mouthing Russia through irrational conspiracy theories:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A16gs98nUmk
The idiotic Lady Editor of SUNDAY GUARDIAN does not even know that China’s S-400 LR-SAMs use Ku-band active terminal sensors while those of India use Ka-band sensors. Similarly, the IAF during Aero India 2011 itself had announced plans for the Super Su-30MKI, but it was the DRDO’s DARE that had failed to develop on-time the various elements of the avionics upgrade package & hence today the IAF finds itself with 3 different types of upgrade avionics suites for the Jaguar IS/DARIN-3, MiG-29UPG & Super Su-30MKI, instead of ensuring fleetwide sub-systems standardisation. In addition, it was not Russia that had sabotaged the HF-24 Marut’s developmental schedule, but India’s refusal to fund the development of turbojets by Rolls-Royce.
To SIDHARTH & KAUSTAV: The SMART issue is an excellent case-study for applying sound common-sense to derive the factoids. Firstly, has anyone in the world so far developed such a weapon system that can deliver lightweight torpedoes (LWT) out to a distance of 650km or even 2,000km (as claimed by this ‘desi bandalbaaz’: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUoj0QFb3BY)? The answer is NO. Similarly, will the SMART be a game-changer, as claimed by this report:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/10/05/explainer-drdo-smart-missile-could-be-trump-card-against-china-submarines.html
Again NO. So, what has been the global track-record thus far in terms of developing air-delivered torpedoes? The 1st such effort was by France, whose Malafon (MArine LAtécoère FONds) was a ship-launched gliding anti-submarine missile (containing a jettisionable LWT) developed in the 1960s. Next came the Ikara--an Australia-developed ship-launched missile, named after an Australian Aboriginal word for "throwing stick". It launched an acoustic torpedo to a range of 10nm (19km):
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ikara-cutway-mod.PNG
The US, Russia, Japan & Europe too have developed such weapons, like these:
http://www.seaforces.org/wpnsys/SURFACE/RUM-139-VL-ASROC.htm
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/29/91RE1_submarine_launched_anti-submarine_missile_from_Kalibr-PLE-Club-S_system_02.jpg/1200px-91RE1_submarine_launched_anti-submarine_missile_from_Kalibr-PLE-Club-S_system_02.jpg
https://s8.hostingkartinok.com/uploads/images/2015/10/86f29765d4d28c2b86c307b8ab2f6767.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/91RE1_submarine_launched_anti-submarine_missile_from_Kalibr-PLE-Club-S_system_01.jpg
https://www.mhi.com/products/defense/type07_vertical_launching_anti-submarine_rocket.html
https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/milas/
What is common between all such weapons is: 1) They are rocket-/missile-launched. 2) They all carry only LWTs. 3) They are launched from both warships & submarines. 4) They have a maximum range of up to 50km, i.e. only up to the visual horizon. So, if all the globally advanced military powers have developed only anti-submarine weapons with such limited engagement envelopes, then we can only safely conclude that all claims about the DRDO-developed missile possessing a range of 650km or close to 2,000km are downright outlandish & delusional, i.e. an aspirational claim to be a ‘Vishwaguru’ only in the virtual world, not in the real world!
Cont'd below...
This becomes even more evident when one understands how exactly an accurate DATUM (location) of a hostile submarine is acquired. The real-time DATUM is mostly supplied by either towed-array active/passive sonar or dunking sonar or air-delivered sonobuoy patterns (all of which can detect underwater vehicles out to a distance of between 16nm & 5nm). Within a minute, a missile or 2 missiles each containing a LWT is launched towards the DATUM. The LWT typically has an underwater cruising range of 20km while its acoustic seeker has a range of less than 500 metres. So, from all this, we can conclude that all missile-delivered LWTs are quick-reaction weapons meant for combatting hostile & moving underwater threats. Consequently, by the time any coastal battery-launched supersonic missile is fired within a short span of 5 minutes & deploys its LWT 650km away after another 3 or 5 minutes, the underwater target would have moved several hundred metres away, well beyond the effective range of the LWT’s acoustic seeker. And that’s precisely no one else has developed such long-range ASW weapons. And that also explains why only the MoD & its RM have congratulated the DRDO for this technology demonstration exercise, and no one from IN HQ has even bothered to issue any statement about it.
ReplyDeleteThe DRDO’s claims would have been realistic & credible had it stated that the SMART has a maximum range of 50km when launched from warships & submarines, instead of being launched by a land-mobile TEL from Wheeler Island. Regrettably, this has not been the case & as shown in these DRDO-origin videoclips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47ucv4exjoQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNsS9sxa7ko
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-YzPzMag_k
To MANIVANNAN SERMAIYA: This can easily be modified to serve as a MALD-type decoy:
ReplyDeletehttps://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bodqQOUYwbA/XNy0zfzNobI/AAAAAAAAROQ/U7cm2-xFk8kcuii4AsiZB4PT2oFwJm6lwCLcBGAs/s1600/Alpha-S.jpg
SAAW by itself cannot identify the locations of its targets. For that, other ISR assets need to be employed, such as space-based SAR sensors & EL/M-2060P SAR-equipped pods & even manned/unmanned ISR platforms. The gathered data must then be embedded within a flight-plan that is generated via a mission-planning system. This flight-plan next must be loaded on to the combat aircraft’s mission computer & from there to a digital map generator (both of which are linked to the on-board stores management system). Only then can the SAAW’s FOG-based inertial navigation system become ready for navigating along a pre-programmed but autonomous flight-path for reaching its targets.
To AARPEE: That documentary caters to only one-half of the narrative, i.e. it talks about what the world ought to be like (idealism), but fails to offer answers about what is reqd to be done to cater for survival in the world as it exists today or is likely to in the time to come (realism).
Dear sir,
ReplyDeleteWhat is the role of Shaurya missile in armed forces or strategic missile forces of india. Are they replacement of any older missile like prithvi or they are just a target missile for future air defence training. If they really just a TD like you said, what kind of technology they are demonstrating.
Is it possible to equip this missile with terminal guidance to be used as anti ship ballistic missile like China's DF 21.
I believe you mentioned once its a replica of Russian Iskander missile which they refused to export to India due to MTCR regulations.(more than 300 km range).
China’s priorities for the development of strategic emerging industries:
ReplyDeletehttps://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/t0222_emerging_industry_opinions_EN.pdf
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/10/05/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-quad-in-charts/
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/india-russia-in-talks-for-sprut-light-tanks/articleshow/78481716.cms?from=mdr
FAKE NEWS, because both T-72CIAs & T-90S MBTs are already forward-deployed in their respective harbours, while all along the LAC the roadways & their related bridges are being built & upgraded to MLC-70 standard.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/india-likely-to-produce-next-generation-fighter-jets-in-a-pvt-sector-led-jv/articleshow/78439692.cms?utm_source=twitter_pwa&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialsharebuttons&from=mdr
Totally IDIOTIC & UN-COMMERCIAL move, as explained below. Instead, such a JV should commence with the MWF R & D effort.
To KAUSTAV: Analysing the IAF CAS’ Remarks of yesterday:
ReplyDeleteStatement: 450 new aircraft needed over next 15-20 years. 83 LCA Mk.1A contract this FY, rollout of 1st SP-series in 2024, delivery completion 3 years after that.
Unexplained: When is the first of 2 LSP Tejas Mk.1As due for rollout? What is the targeted flight-test schedule for these 2 platforms & how many flight-hours will it involve?
Statement: 106 HTT-40s & 114 MRFAs to be made in India. 100+ MWF. 56 C-295s. 2 Sqns of AMCA Mk.1 and 5 Sqns of AMCA Mk2. AMCA target date set by DRDO is 2027, we will get them (inducted) over the next decade.
Unexplained: When will the HTT-40 BTT receive its certificate of airworthiness? What will be the delivery period & at what rate? What percentage of the MRFA will be locally-made in terms of airframe, avionics, engines & accessories? What percentage of the C-295 will be locally-made in terms of airframe, avionics, engines & accessories & in what timeframe? When will the 1st MWF prototype roll out? How many prototypes are reqd for flight-test & certification? How long will this process last? Won’t it make financial sense if the HAL-private-sector JV is not limited to only the AMCA project, but instead it takes off with the MWF production effort? Will AMCA Mk.1 also host the kind of riveting seen on Sukhoi’s Su-57 & South Korea’s KFX? If 2 x GE-built F414s will power AMCA Mk.1, will this produce supercruise in non-afterburning mode?
Statement: Gen-5 platforms should include some Gen-6 technologies. DEW is about 15 years away & IAF wants them in roles like anti missile systems.
Unexplained: Will the Gen-6 technologies apply only to the AMCA Mk.2 & not the Mk.1 variant? DEW is already in use for ground-based anti-drone defence systems. Why not induct them for the air-defence of those forward air bases that are close to the IB? Since conformal DEW suites are already available for VVIP transportation aircraft & helicopters, why not then incorporate them on the yet-to-appear AMCA Mk.1?
Statement: More Rafale direct buy vs MRFA is still under deliberation. Too early to say, various issues to be considered. Five Rafales in country, five more in France. Late October/early November is next ferry. More ferries every 2-3 months, first squadron to be at full strength next year.
Unexplained: Simultaneous service-induction of a new-design MRFA, MWF & AMCA Mk.1 is an impossibility, especially since they are to be built in India at a time when neither the reqd quantum of industrial capacity & the reqd quantum of skilled human resources for such industrial capacity will be available. Inevitably, therefore, LOGIC dictates that the MRFA project be scrapped & instead development of the MWF be undertaken in mission-mode as a public-/private-sector JV.
Cont'd below...
Statement: Engine technology transfer could be part of Rafale offset deal if DRDO and SAFRAN can work out an agreement. Rafale industrial offset details not yet finalised, Kaveri-related ToT a complex issue. Plan is for creating a JV for turbofan production, may or may not be a Kaveri successor per se, but will leverage work done on Kaveri and gas turbines in general. This is all for DRDO to finalise.
ReplyDeleteUnexplained: Engine technology transfer makes sense only if the numerical reqmt is large enough to amortise the costs of creating the industrial eco-system for producing the turbofans. This then translates into incorporation of such turbofans into a large number of platforms, in excess of 350 at the very least. This, however, isn’t possible if the MWF & AMCA are both to be powered by F414 turbofans. Fabrication of a Kaveri variant that uses the SNECMA M88’s core will take 7 years plus another five years of flight-testing—schedules that do not mesh in with the IAF’s stated timeframes for service-induction of both the MWF, MRFA & AMCA MK.1. If the ‘desi’ turbofan is then destined only for AMCA Mk.2, this will translate into very small reqmts in terms of numbers, thereby making the entire venture unaffordable.
Statement: Can’t touch 40 sqns by the end of the decade. 36-38 squadrons would be an achievement.
Unexplained: Although the MoD had approved 42 combat aircraft Sqns, no money was ever sanctioned & instead finance was provided only for 36 sqns. Consequently, the shortfall of 6 Sqns on paper was & is being made up by raising combat-support Sqns for flight refuelling platforms, MRTTs & AEW & CS platforms—which will enable the IAF to claim that it has 42 'combat enabled' Sqns.
Statement: Rafale weapons not planned to go on Su-30MKI. But in general IAF always plans to cross-integrate, and there are some Rafale weapons that can go on other IAF aircraft. Meteor BVRAAM integration across platforms was explored a while ago. Did not go anywhere. For widespread integration across IAF platforms, indigenous weapons will be pursued going forward.
Unexplained: Cross-integration is always possible ONLY IF all the existing platforms have the locally-developed mission computer, stores management system & MMR, since all three use the same software & hence any source code modification or upgradation will be locally undertaken. Only on platforms that host foreign-origin mission computers, stores management systems & MMRs is it reqd to obtain the proprietary software upgrades from abroad—a truly expensive affair.
ReplyDeletehttps://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/forces-in-action-mode-after-cds-bipin-rawat-flags-delays-corruption-in-construction-projects/articleshow/78439791.cms
https://www.opindia.com/2020/09/kolkata-army-recommends-cbi-inquiry-tilted-buildings-housing-project-eastern-command/amp/
To MANIVANNAN SERMAIYA: Presumably you are referring to this:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/shaurya-missile-to-be-inducted-in-strategic-arsenal-agni-5-s-sea-version-by-2022/story-bS1100SkwoGLEXW5ANFQuO.html
A land-mobile & solid-fuelled 750km-range Shaurya TBM makes sense as a delivery platform for tactical nuclear warheads from the safety of the hinterland, unlike the 150km-range Prahar that has to be deployed closer to the targetted area. And no, being ballistic in terms of flight trajectory such missiles cannot be used for anti-ship missile strikes since already-available LR-SAMs can easily intercept them & that’s precisely why worldwide efforts are ongoing to develop hypersonic glide weapons. However, BMs can act as carriers of hypersonic glide weapons, like the DF-17 of China that makes use of the DF-16 TBM. As for long-range precision rocket artillery fire-assaults go, I had already explained & predicted what the future holds, here:
https://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2020/04/punitive-targetted-medium-field.html
Hence, the need of the hour are systems like these:
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RolnRcp3lMw/Xp5G3GkzD6I/AAAAAAAATH0/-4zzUtLma04m-GPSuBD-8phVa8cibnUAwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Lockheed%2BMartin%2BPrSM.jpg
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GG-JE7fJOcs/Xp5G99nKyhI/AAAAAAAATH4/kahYy4Pca58VOohzbisZn8ofSKM4ojOsACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Raytheon%2BDSM.jpg
Therefore, missiles like the Pralay NLOS-BSM need to be service-inducted in such a land-mobile configuration ASAP.
Just curious is SMART cannot be used for target acquired by underwater passive sensor which do not have any targeting weapen but can pass the data to ground or a surface ship for targeting. The time delay still matter but i think it might be tracked with a series of such sensor . you know i am referring to specific channels.
ReplyDeleteTo DINEJA: There is absolutely no need to speculate. As for the scenario you have proposed, a TAAL LWT need not be encased within a 2-stage solid-fuelled supersonic missile. Instead, a single-stage missile can be used & the ultimate proof of the SMART's effective range comes from this NOTAM that was released prior to the test-firing:
ReplyDeletehttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjJP19IUYAEXo-n?format=png&name=medium
A range of either 25km or even 40km is perfectly feasible & practical & missiles with such a range can be engineered to be of shorter length, while the diameter can be made to conform to VLS cells designed for accommodating Nirbhay missiles. The VLS cells can thus become universal launchers, while keeping the diameter limited to 533mm ensures that such missiles can also be fired from existing submarine torpedo-tubes.
PKS Sir,
ReplyDeleteLast time in one of ur blog, u wanted to describe about how Defence & Accounts Services cadre have reached to Apex levels of bureaucracy here in our country! I humbly request u please illustrate (if possible, may be in a new blog!) the steps of how we can reform or restructure the form of doing business in our government and discuss the perennial problems which we may face during such an endeavor? Please also describe how the technocrats in our Government and non-governmental organizations have to suffer in present circumstances?
With Regards
AKS
Hello Prasun,
ReplyDeleteOf late my comments has a disconnect, which I am fine since there is no traction in the current scenario. Thanks for providing blog space for my queries and comments. Continuing on my line of thought; can the strike forces or the (defensive) holding/reserve forces rotated on the Han front and concentrate on the sunni occupying forces of shia land of Gilgit, Baltistan and Shaksgam valley. Your thoughts please. Thanks, Ganesh
Hi Prasun, Could india use 777x or used 777 platform for phalcon awacs new orders than using Ilyushin Il-76? Western aircraft has better availability and spare parts is easy to get for 777 series. Since airforce one for PM is using 777 could we use that for commonality than Ilyushin Il-76. Also, air india would be happy to sell old 777 due to less demand and buy new 777x if demand rises in future.
ReplyDeleteMr.Prasun
ReplyDelete1)How many Pinaka regiments are in service and ordered?
2)Why was Rajiv Gandhi's briefing with Vice Admiral Lakhar abruptly ended by CNS Admiral Tahiliani in Indian NAVY's WAR ROOM during Exercise BRASSTACKS in 1986?
3)Is it true that IAF MIG-29UPGs are equipped Kh-35s for Anti ship role and same for the Indian navy MIG-29K but Kh-31A is not in service with India?
4)Any information on Pak Navy Land based Anti Ship Missiles like C-602 and their numbers and deployment areas?
Thank You
aarpee
Prasun sir, you were missing in action for so many days, were you conspiring with Nawaz Sharif against PA and Niazi? You returned just when Nawaz Sharif and other Paki opposition leaders are coming together against PA and Niazi. Is it just a coincidence?
ReplyDeleteOn a serious note, what do you think will happen at FATF? Will Paxtan continue to be in grey list or is blacklisting finally happening?
Growing anti PA sentiments combined with crashing economy and political and social instability is creating a the right opportunity for commencement of liberation of POK. Hope our Military and Govt are keeping an eye on all if this and also Paki attempts to declare GB as 5th province. Pls give an analysis on this.
To ANUP: Not at all, it is 100% true.
ReplyDeleteTo GANESH: As I had explained numerous times before, the deployed PLAGF formations along the LAC are not offensive-oriented & hence cannot conduct any territorial grab of India-controlled territory. The IA through its mirror deployments has also deployed only defensive formations. That’s what a mirror deployment is meant to be. Hence, neither side has any offensive potential in Ladakh & hence the question of using any such IA formations for offensives elsewhere does not even arise. Matters concerning GB are not as simplistic as they are made out to be in most Indian TV channels. Aspirations of the natives of Gilgit are different from those of Hunza & Baltistan. For instance, the Ismaili Shias are a distinct lot who do not agree on several issues with the Shias of Baltistan because the former is under the influence of Prince Aga Khan, spiritual leader of the Ismaili Shia sect & hence they don’t bear any loyalty to any Ayatollah or Grand Ayatollah. And as a matter of principle, before taking on additional territorial responsibilities, India ought to first fulfill responsibilities within territories already within her control. After all, charity always begins at home. These 3 presentations explain it all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar8Ul6lDPqw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPfKjc8xdhE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWBryUj7FV4
To PSS: Strictly as an AEW & CS platform, the B.777 & A330 are very large platforms. Instead, smaller airframes like the B.767 or A310-300 are far bgetter alternatives. A problem that will crop up in future with the IAF’s A-50I PHALCONs will be the non-Russia mission avionics content on-board, all of which will have to be removed everytime the platform has to go to Russia for refurbishment—this being due to the US & European sanctions imposed on Russia post-April 2014.
To AARPEE: 1) It was already explained here:
https://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2019/10/m982-excalibur-gps-guided-cargo.html
2) Because the then CNS did not want the PM to get educated about the capabilities of the PN & PAF. 3) Yes. 4) It was uploaded by me back in 2009 here:
http://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2008/10/chinas-c-602-ascm-detailed.html
To PRATAP: One can rest assured on 2 givens: 1) Pakistan will continue with the FATF’s Grey Listing & will not be blacklisted. 2) No matter what the differences may be between Pakistan’s civilian & military ‘netas’, when it comes to Kashmir they are all united in seeking to have the entire cake & eating it as well. Let there be no doubt whatsoever about this objective ground reality.
These videos of the IAF's dress rehearsals yesterday clearly show the various sensor-based apertures on the Rafale's airframe:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cZ-BJpd760
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9c_-1884pQ
Prasunda,
ReplyDelete1) This picture shows a different looking soldier among PLA troops (also in a PLA uniform)
https://twitter.com/VishnuNDTV/status/1312402045219999744
Does this indicate Pakistanis (possibly SSG) embedded with the PLA ? Are PLA and Pak armed forces more interoperable than we thought ?
2) Is what the author calls the "5000 km K-5 slbm" in the article below the definitive SLBM (the name being cooked up by journalists) ?
Satyaki
Hello Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThanks for response; after seeing the videos, it is clear the current dispensation has its hands full in terms of undoing the screw ups. It is obvious who is responsible, but not going into it.
My understanding is India (meaning the current mindset of the governing dispensation) is waiting for the fruit to ripe in the tree, fall in its lap without any damage. It does not want the birds, other humans and worms to damage it in any way. Great ideology and mindset, there is no clamor for applying strategy and turning even 10% of chances of victory to 100% through ingenious efforts. It will always be preparing and never be ready for anything worthwhile. Kudos to me and all of us. I end my day-dreaming about India taking its decision based on its self-interest instead of current grandstanding on trivial non-sense. I hope to write again if there is anything relevant based on my skillset and will continue to be avid reader of your blog. Thanks, Ganesh
To SATYAKI: Had already explained earlier that the image is that of an Uighur enlister within the PLA. There are several Uighur as well as Tibetan natives serving with the PLA & this has been going on for a very long time. 2) All such designations are fictional & assumptive in nature & no definitive designation is accorded UNTIL the missile is operationalised. And by that I mean not just installing a SLBM inside a SSBN-based vertical silo, but also catering to the reqmts for shore-based storage & integration of missiles & their warheads--none of which as yet has come up anywhere in India but which are now being constructed under Project VARSHA. Hence, do not fall for usual claims/rants from such 'sadakchaap bandalbaazes' who have no respect for either the physical sciences, or for Mathematics.
ReplyDeleteTo GANESH: This well thought-out assessment will help answer some of your apprehensions:
https://theprint.in/opinion/why-has-indias-china-policy-been-such-a-failure-question-new-delhis-assumptions-first/518232/
Sir,
ReplyDeleteDon't you think that the SMART missile can only be smart if it can have mid-course correction and if the torpedo maneuvers in a outward spiral rotary motion.
Sir,
ReplyDeleteWhats your opinion about chinese faults.
You talked about Chinese 36 Stratagems previously.
But I think this making them confused, and dont know what to do. They making enemy out of everyone, even from there friends.
Now the voices coming out from Pakis against CPEC and China. And Ladakh, what they achieved till now. Yeah, its good to implement 36 Stratagems, but if you don't modernize it, or act like a modern state. Whatever you implement 36 or 50 or 80 Stratagems , it bound to fail. It is no more days of Roman Empire, this is information age.
And I think these 36 Stratagems making them confused, that what to do, follow point 10 or 16, and then oops we need to follow point 26.
Just keep it simple, saam daam dand bhed, and it work quite nicely, if you go into adopting 36 points, and every point going against each other in modern world, you definitely going to fuck up, and start digging your own graves.
And I dont think Chinese are some next level god, that they wont fuck up.
Sir,
ReplyDeleteBrilliant series of articles especially on the Indo China stand off on the LAC since the last few months. I read & shared them with like minded friends who literally devoured them & expressed great appreciation for it.
You had come up with an article or 2 on the SOSUS / Fish hook network a few years ago. Would it be possible to share the links of them here.
Thanks in advance.
Warm regards,
RS
To ARPIT KANODIA: By no means are any of the 36 Stratagems sure recipies for guaranteed successes. Each & every stratagem requires an enabling environment—both internal & external. In China’s case, such environments & the related domestic compulsions & political churns need to be assessed in detail, such as these:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFaGbRYOu9A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW3hRGm-5dU&t=57s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5WP18G1HZc&t=11s
At the end of the day, no one is perfect in any manner & mis-calculations can & have always been made by various powers from time to time.
To RS: VMT. Here is the link:
http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2016/04/defexpo-2016-show-report-2.html
To ANUP: He is merely trying to portray himself as a compassionate & caring person for the poor, while getting delusional about acting tough. In reality, he is neither & is not a well-read person either. For starters, he must begin spending more time reading up the materials in the archives of the Nehru Memorial Library.
To UNKNOWN: Despite being amply evident that the October 5 maiden test-firing of SMART was carried out over a range envelope extending to only 25km, there still exists needless speculation about the range of this weapon, and all because everyone has ASSUMED (always the mother of all fuck-ups) that the TAAL LWT’s carrier-missile was a variant of the 750km-range Shaurya TBM! In reality, just measure the length of the TAAL-LWT + the related ejection mechanism & then superimpose it over the carrier-missile’s airframe & that will tell everyone exactly how much solid-propellant fuel is on-board the carrier-missile & what is the permissible range achieved by such a weapon. Even some ex-IAF officials without adequate domain knowledge on such matters are pitching in & adding to the confusion through disinformation, like this:
ReplyDeletehttps://d2c7ipcroan06u.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/WhatsApp-Image-2020-10-06-at-10.55.44-PM.jpeg
Here’s the reality: for starters, the SMART is planned for installation on the 16 SW-ASW vessels ordered by the IN. Hence, the DATUMS (exact locations) for the submerged target will be supplied by remote-controlled RHIBs equipped with dunking sonar, like this (for which GRSE is the national agent in India):
https://elbitsystems.com/media/Seagull-USV.pdf
Such USVs will be operating as a pair, ahead of to the rear of any SW-ASW vessel or even a larger principal surface combatant like FFG or DDG. Consequently, the total length of the area in which an underwater/submerged threat will be detectable will span a length of at least 40nm, since a dunking sonar’s detection range is not more than 10nm. Hence, the moment an underwater contact is established, instead of wasting up to 7 minutes for any SW-ASW vessel to surge towards the target in the seas while simultaneously activating its on-board heavyweight or even lightweight triple-torpedo-tubes (on the starboard-side & portside, or even amidships), a rocket or missile carrying a LWT can be launched within 1 minute & this vehicle can take at most only another minute to reach the identified DATUM. Thus, the time saved by such a target engagement process will either catch the target unawares or will severely lessen its time to take survival-related countermeasures (like diving into deeper waters). This the operating philosophy adopted by all major navies armed with such weapons, like those of the US, Russia, the UK, France, Japan & now India.
Hence, needless & unscientific ASSUMPTIONS fuelled by ill-informed speculations about SMART’s performance data need to be discarded. As I had stated yesterday, the SMART’s effective engagement envelope won’t exceed 40km (as is the case with all its existing global peers). Nor are 2-way data-links reqd due to the extremely short time-frame (a minute at most) of the engagement & hence a pre-programmed fire-control solution is the only available option. Two-way data-links are employed ONLY WHEN there is either a man-in-the-loop arrangement for illuminating/acquiring the targets, or when a subsonic weapon is used, as this gives enough time for course-corrections to be made by the sensor that’s illuminating the target, be it in the air or on surface. Underwater, course-corrections are possible only through wire-guidance. The SMART like its existing global peers is thus a quick-reaction, within-the-horizon ASW solution of the type that was until now unavailable to the IN’s warships, but has been available only to the P-8I LRMR/ASW platforms that can lay both sonobuoys for obtaining a DATUM & then launch the underwing-mounted Mk.54 lightweight torpedoes.
So let us not stretch matters to unbelievable levels by making the kind of claims that are totally unscientific & are technologically unachievable, even by high-industrialised & technologically advanced countries.
Prasun,
ReplyDelete1-This artcile says the chinese own motor sich .. fact or fake?
http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2020/10/chinese-owned-firm-to-get-iaf.html
2- success of the outcome apart, what is making the govt confident this time around wrt to corporatization . another news today mentioned that the def ministry has asked the unions for a meeting .. is the govt now getting cold feet
3- paki thugs fighting in the armenia- azeri war? can this also be raised on any forums to cornor them?
Mr.Prasun
ReplyDelete1)Why CNS Admiral Tahiliani didnt want PM rajiv Gandhi to know about the capabilities of PAF and Pak navy?
2)Is there any hope for demilitarisation of Siachen Glacier?
3)Mr.Sawhney was tweeting signing BECA with US is harmful and going as far to say that it will
give US command and control of our Missiles is it a joke or what?
Thank You
aarpee
Prasun sir, there are fresh media reports that GOI is in talks to acquire the commercial aircraft division of Embraer. How beneficial would it be for India?
ReplyDelete@Prasunda
ReplyDeleteAny information on Russian nuclear powered cruise missile burevestnik? Does US also possess anything similar or is working on one?
^Ashish
1) Sir would manpower still be a problem if we drew a 3 division mountain strike core out of RR, and replace them with an AR modelled paramilitary drawn from CAPF and led by army?
ReplyDeleteInternal security will be stretched thin temporarily.
Alternatively if army wants to retain CI role, we can milk a company per battalion as happened in 1971 (Maj Gen Sukhwant Singh's book mentions that) and still raise 1.5 div/ 4+ brigades worth of troops. If needed e cam attach 1 crpf company temporarily to RR battalions and work on integration into ops.
Will need to raise extra arty and air defense bgds to support in both above scenarios.
2) As you said nukes ensure no invasions can take place across IB and i believe particularly for sparsely populated Thar/cholistan, I think we can do away with three corps?
Here is the math -
As per open news from july we shifted atleast 1 armd bgd to Ladakh and 2 inf div are tied down protecting UK and HP respectively drawn from two strike corps.
This means we have two strike corps worth versus their two. And all that remains in excess is 2 armd bgds.
These armd bgds can convert 2 inf divisons im desert into two new RAPIDS and free 2 more inf bgd for mountain warfare.
That's basically 4+2 bgd = 2 new div for LOC.
Doing away with third strike corps based far away is a view several vets shared on twitter.
In addition 5 battalions of paras can be expanded into 6 and converted into 2 heliborne light bgd for vertical envelopment in mountains?
Our two strike corps in next decade can be reformed into each having 2 Integrated battle divisions or follow 1 armd div + 2 mech div format for swifter deployment and harder punch in attrition war against their strike corps in Punjab.
Cont
Contd (VSJ above)
ReplyDeleteMy concerns are the same. The defenses will harden in GB as it is no longer being ignored by Pakistan.
Also several force accretions will happen post 2023 in Pak navy and possibly PAF.
China has also begun lengthening and adding more runways in Tibet.
Meanwhile our air force strength is set to drop hard if MRFA is pushed in these economic conditions.
It is quite scary because unhatched AMCA is being pushed as a done deal by 2031 timeframe.
Meanwhile ISTAR, EW, AWACS and MRTT hang in air.
We can easily and cheaply prepare for 2023
Finishing raising current MSC with 2 div or 3 IBG gives us complete deterrence against ground attack by China in hyped two front threat.
Plus all we need to do is try to induct and order CIWS/CRAM, new brahmos/prahar rgmts, order atgms and aams for helos, 100+ namica and 200 APC, 20+ LCH, 5+ netra (after dropping ban), more sharangs and dhanush with few thousand excaliburs and increasing orders of tejas mkiA, 2+2 sq sukhoi and mig29 along with HAS to cover LOC and LAC in JK/L all to be readied by 2023 october along with a moratorium on any weapon retirements.
Will need to increase delivery of on-order sams and other missiles.
3) Will shourya be SFC asset only?
4) will quad have collective defense format?
5) IAF chief again insists on MRFA but question remains where's the money?
Thanks in advance
Sorry missed named tag in previous post.
To ANUP: Yes, the 3M22 Zircon is indeed the BrahMos-2:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZN6xV3VpTA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kD9fzqptlc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EfB6ISsGdw
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YhwISgP5cEw/URJQUjaqlCI/AAAAAAAADr8/WWQHNjoZH_k/s1600/BrahMos-2+MRCM-1.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-N3K-vPtMMEM/URJQlpRf1GI/AAAAAAAADsI/6OEDmJ6p-vE/s1600/BrahMos-2+MRCM-2.jpg
Some basic info on the LUH from HAL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55TzHgKaO1M&t=16s
Evolution of German MBT Designs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwvxVFb6Rzc
Attitudes & Values within Indian Army: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeHx7KnpB1o
https://www.stimson.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/TheWellingtonExperience-SA-092820-WEB.pdf
To JUST_CURIOUS: Regardless of whether or not Ukraine-based Motor Sich is owned by any other country, the fact remains that both the design & manufacturing house ( Klimov JSC & its OKB) & the airworthinerss certification authority for the VK-2500 are now in Russia. So is the OEM for the Mi-17 family of helicopters. Hence, logic dictates that Motor Sich is no longer able to issue certificates of airworthiness for any VK-2600 engine built by Motor Sich. Hence, the MoD has no choice but to stick to the Russia-based OEMs for the Mi-17’s engine, gearbox, accessories & airframes that require servicing. If the MoD continues to stick to Motor Sich just because its commercial offer was L-1, then Russia will refuse to cooperate with the IAF for overhauling the Mi-17V-5s at the Chandigarh-based BRD. All this needs to explained in detail to those ignorant IRS-origin bureaucrats now working within the MoD, or there will be sheer disaster in terms of product-support for the IAF’s Mi-17 family of helicopters.
To AARPEE: 1) Already answered that yesterday. 2) Not for as long as the PA’s 323 Brigade is stationed at Dansum, Goma & Gyari. 3) Then you ought to ask him to explain in what way it will be harmful, i.e. the methodology must be explained. If no such explanation is forthcoming, then it means his conclusions are irrational & unscientific.
ReplyDeleteTo SATYA: In talks with whom? Talks within the Govt of India or talks with Embraer? It is most likely the former & hence no progress will be made.
To ASHISH: Nothing new about it. Developmental efforts are still continuing.
To VSJ: 1) Why the hell should the IA be involved in any counter-insurgency operations? Doesn’t India possess enough CAPFs to do this job? Are the terrorists attacking with field artillery, rocket artillery, MBTs & ICVs & ATGMs? Why can’t the NSG be used for counter-terror operations along with the state-level police forces? In my view, the RR should have been disbanded a long time ago in the previous decade itself, which would have freed up 65,000 IA personnel. 2) The days of Strike Corps are long gone. Today, the need is to invest in large attack helicopter fleets that can deliver firepower the equivalent of an Armoured Division much quicker & over far longer distances. Similarly, long-range solid-fuelled rocket artillery assets are reqd to replace the old SS-150 Prithvi liquid-fuelled NLOS-SS-BSMs. In addition, the surplus infantry forces from the IA’s Southern Command & Western Command need to be re-allocated to the Northern Command, Eastern Command & a new North-East Command & most of them must be air-mobile, for which far more CH-47F Chinook helicopters & C-130J-30 Super Hercules transports need to be procured, instead of the smaller C-295s. Everything today boils down to the speed of deployment by air & the battlefield tempo on the ground, with the latter being dependent almost entirely on the quantum of effects-based fire-assaults brought in by ground-based tube/rocket artillery & attack helicopters, and backed up by HALE-UAVs & MALE-UAVs functioning as real-time ISR platforms. 3) Yes. It will also be the launch vehicle for the 3M22 Zircon/BrahMos-2 hypersonic cruise missile. 4) Yes, starting with the four-nation Malabar naval exercises. 5) MRFA will eventually take the form of additional Rafales, but the IAF’s CAS needs to respect the laws of evolution by according greater priority to the MWF & not the AMCA.
Prasun ,
ReplyDelete1- why does the west NOT want pakistan in FAFT blacklist? what benefit do they get or expect?
2- US running with the hares n hunting with the hounds ?? --https://www.defenseworld.net/news/28016/GE_Engines_to_Power_Pakistan___s_Turkish_built_MILGEM_Corvettes
Hi Sir..
ReplyDeleteAn off topic request.
I have read a comment about British and Russian search for ancient scripts in Himalayan mountain during WW2 time, can you guide me to that post I have search for days and didn't come up with any result.
You can choose to ignore if I am asking too much of your precious time..
Dear Prasun hope u are doing well.
ReplyDeleteRead this piece by Pravin Sawhney and saw his latest Video on this same subject;
http://forceindia.net/bottomline/game-of-thrones/
Are we so hopelessly outmatched as he seems to suggest.
I know you have previously stated that there is tendency to grossly overestimate Chinese tech and overall military strength, and I have read enough OSINT sources and of course your own thoughts on the weaknesses and flaws in PLA war-fighting capability. Pravin Sawhney though seems to suggest otherwise. Pls do share your thoughts on this.
Also, as you have repeatedly said, the PLA forces amassed at the Border or in the rear areas was never sufficient for a offensive, so arent we playing into their hands by revealing our entire deployment patterns, logistics, air-defence, airlift, fire-support, Spec-ops etc. By now they would have gathered a wealth of info from Satellite & Signals intelligence as well as gotten a good measure of the whole range of our capabilities and typical responses during a future round of hostilities.
How do we counter this. Thanks
Prasun,
ReplyDelete1-Now ukraine supplying turks --https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTi0H7HAHXQ .. Ukraine has become a problem child selling itself to the highest bidder thus becoming a goto place by all rogue states (china pakis now turks). the west seemed to have so much invested in Ukraine given their stance on crimea issue.. Why are they not stopping it from selling high tech wares. turks are playing their game well using russians/ chinese & west to suit their needs
2- any new update on the smerch replacement system(u had mentioned that there will be no further versions of pinka with longer range)? since this will play an imp role against the paki-chinese nexus in POK sooner or later, ditto in the tibetian plateau
3- Any update on a 122mm version of pinaka rocket?
prasun,
ReplyDeleteCame across IMRH new update thru this snap --https://twitter.com/writetake/status/1314088551479300103/photo/1 is this going to happen ? given that world over helis are now getting features to become faster & stealthy with push propellers & stealthy design.. this looks pretty old school with traditional tail rotor design.. why not go for ka 92? the info shared is that IMRH is being targetted to replace older mi 17's. Will there be room for the more advanced & faster KA 92? you had mentioned that russia has already started working on finalising the ka 92 design
For the very first time, the IAF today publicly revealed the combination of Crystal Maze PGM & Pegasus data-link pod for man-in-the-loop guidance:
ReplyDeletehttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjxlyhLVcAAozYS?format=jpg&name=medium
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjxlyiGVoAA6ctv?format=jpg&name=medium
I had earlier revealed the existence of this combination with imagery back in 2018 in the EX Gagan Shakti thread:
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AhuGgW8e0Zs/XHiFZ3Nlb0I/AAAAAAAAQ1Y/3s7CmwjOTVIPYwE1WAVG4LRRrB8xwcPOgCLcBGAs/s1600/Crystal%2BMaze%2BPGM%2B%2526%2BLitening-2%2BLDP.jpg
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZBBww9ymTFE/WvoxR6L-rzI/AAAAAAAAO4k/XL_mlYsZsEowKwIncfwbnVn6U8KI3TWAQCLcBGAs/s1600/PopeyeLite%2BPGM%2B%2526%2Bits%2BPegasus%2Bdata-link%2Bpod.jpg
To JUST_CURIOUS: 1) If Pakistan gets into the FATF blacklist, then none of the PA soldiers stationed in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will be able to send their monthly remittances back home. Same for all the Pakistani labourers working abroad. Hence, such compulsions will see to it that Pakistan remains in the grey-list. 2) The US has still not accorded State Dept approval for exporting any such hardware to Turkey. Even approval for the Honeywell CTS-800 engines for the T-129 attack helicopters ordered by the PA is being withheld & hence airframe construction hasn’t yet commenced. 3) In India, R & D efforts take a long time to reach fruition. Hence, work on a 300mm precision-guided MBRL rocket will begain ONLY AFTER all such work on the 214mm Pinaka-2 has been completed. 4) There still is no convergence of opinion on the conceptual design of the airframe between the IAF, IN & IA, as evidenced by this admission here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55TzHgKaO1M&t=19s
The author of this Vblog & the owner of that Twitter handle are one & the same, yet, he seems to be confused & propagating FAKE NEWS about the status of the IMRH project.
To KIDDO: A more balanced opinion can be found here, with illustrations:
https://theprint.in/opinion/china-has-taken-lac-clock-back-to-1959-india-not-in-a-position-to-take-back-aksai-chin/519101/
However, the Ret’d General is mistaken in ASSUMING that the 1959 LAC claim-line of China is likely to be China’s offer for a permament boundary solution, since China is only asserting this claim-line as the LAC, i.e. a temporary ceasefire line. What this means is that China is only trying to buy time, say another 3 years & this explains why China still officially claims that the whole of Ladakh is disputed territory & does not recognise India’s sovereignty over it.
OPSEC measures like camouflaging is SOP for any army & this complicates matters for the PLAAF & PLAGF since China does not possess any SAR sensor-equipped Low Earth-orbiting overhead recce satellites.
To NEWCOMER: Even in the 1980s China discovered several Sanskrit manuscripts that it wanted to be translated with India-based experts. But this hasn’t yet happened, despite the existence of academic institutions like the Nalanda University. Several authentic accounts of the existence of such manuscripts exist in the Kolkata-based ASIATIC Library & such accounts were garnered from missionaries of the Ramkrishna Mission who had travelled to various monasteries of Tibet in the early part of the 20th century.
ReplyDeleteHi Prasun,
Two articles mostly saying it is up to India to now settle things as per the 1959 proposal:
https://asiatimes.com/2020/10/china-india-standoff-an-opportunity-in-crisis/
https://theprint.in/opinion/china-has-taken-lac-clock-back-to-1959-india-not-in-a-position-to-take-back-aksai-chin/519101/
What is happening now? China achieved what it wants. Why will it want to back out now? India in a way has extended itself. The threat to CPEC/POK is now negated.
They got us, our sorry for the language, "by our balls", so to speak and do not see how can anyone come to the above conclusion.
Your comments, please.
regards,
Srinivasa Nanduri
Whatever we see on the TVs regarding the ongoing war between Armenia and Azerbaijan, I am surprised not to see any firing from the Assault Rifles.
ReplyDeleteHi Prasun, Do indian armed forces need MQ-9 Reaper armed drones from US else could we buy chinook, c-130 aircraft, MH60R for that same price? Especially for navy since it has p-8 poseidon aircraft and planning to buy more of the same in future why they need armed drones.
ReplyDeletePrasun da,
ReplyDeleteRequest some clarity on 59 claim line, in all maps in public domain it's a line that's much to the east of our perspective of LAC, also if it's a line based on actual ground position as in Nov 59 then it has to be to the east only as Chinese took lot more territory between 59 and 62 and during the 62 war.
However, the confusion is that if it's actually logically to the east of LAC then what's out issue, isn't it better to accept that as LAC, but Gen Panag says that 59 claim line is actually much to west of Lac specially in Depsang, Pangong and Demchok......so is 59 claim line to the west of our Lac and is that the area that Chinese have now occupied or denied our patrols to.
Pl help in understanding where does the 59 claim line actually lie
Thanks in advance
Rgds
Vivek
PrasunDa,
ReplyDeleteIn your response to a fellow poster you wrote:
"What this means is that China is only trying to buy time, say another 3 years...."
Is China trying to buy time (these 3 years) to augment its capabilities before launching a massive attack on India?
Thanks
To SRINIVASA NANDURI & VIVEK GUPTA: I had already explained it all in the previous thread on September 30 & here it is again:
ReplyDeleteChina continues to tie itself up in knots over the LAC issue, with the latest being its claim to adhering to the 1959 version of the LAC, despite it having advanced far more westwards both in 1960 & 1962. Next, it will state that the 1959 LAC offer too was meant to be a temporary arrangement (like a temporary ceasefire line) since China has since 2009 declared that it considers Ladakh to be disputed territory & hence is not part of India. It will then try to bolster this PoV by pointing out that even Pakistan’s latest political maps do not include Ladakh. Thus, by default, if Ladakh does not form part of India or Pakistan, then it must be belonging to China. This is how the arguments will play out in the coming weeks. But what China is forgetting is that back in 1959 it itself had conceded that Ladakh was a part of India when it took part in the boundary (not LAC) negotiations, the conduct of which I had highlighted here:
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-evLLEnNAW-Y/XyNuEzpVcgI/AAAAAAAAUMo/C5Bt0Iaoi_0Cc8WuoEBGgfKbhGW4tYhFQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/TAR-2.jpg
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C2y25p8usYk/XyNuGB8znEI/AAAAAAAAUMs/JyYlwKkI8iMXZQ_PDe9D3suLEO3DYaRiwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/TAR-3.jpg
And here are the details of all those negotiations:
http://www.archieve.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/1960BorderTalksbetweenIndiaChina.pdf
http://www.archieve.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/OR_Part_1.pdf
http://www.archieve.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/OR_Part_2.pdf
http://www.archieve.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/OR_Part_3.pdf
http://www.archieve.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/OR_Part_4.pdf
http://www.archieve.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/ORC_01-32_Part1.pdf
http://www.archieve.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/ORC_33-57_Part2.pdf
http://www.archieve.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/ORC_58-75_Part3.pdf
https://www.claudearpi.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/1963-Chinese-Agression-in-Maps.pdf
It is now up to India to reveal to the whole world that it was China that failed to produce any supporting documentation for justifying its 1959, 1960 & 1962 territorial claims back then & this situation prevails even today. Hence, under international law, China stands no chance at all in any negotiating table against India.
To SUJOY MAJUMDAR: Yes indeed & here are the targets set for the PLA:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/cover-story/story/20180514-xi-jinping-plan-peoples-liberation-army-into-modernised-world-class-force-1226452-2018-05-03
Full mechanisation of the PLAGF has now been reset for 2024.
PLAGF at Kongka La: https://twitter.com/shen_shiwei/status/1314189950024253441
To PSS: Worldwide, armed UAS platforms have been successfully used only in airspaces where no air-defence coverage exists. Consequently, for India to use armed UAS inside contested airspace like those over PoK is a no-brainer. But yes, they can be used at sea against pirates or smugglers, provided actionable intelligence is available. If the intent is to use killer-drones against terror launch-pads or camps located on reverse mountain-slopes, then the HAROPs in service with the IAF will more than suffice, as proven during the recent armed clashes between Azerbaijan & Armenia.
To RAJESH MISHRA: That’s inevitable, since both countries rely on national conscription & their regular armies are quite small in numerical terms & hence both are very wary about sustaining manpower losses.
To SRINIVASA NANDURI: China’s tactical territorial gains in the Depsang have been offset by the IA’s territorial gains to the east of Chushul that now overlook the PLAGF’s garrisons in the Spanggur Gap. Hence, if China wants the threat at Spanggur Gap to be eliminated, then it will have relent in the Depsang Plains & retreat eastwards back to its April 2020 positions. Hence, presently, the ground situation can only be described as a STALEMATE, with neither side being able to claim victory. But that is not what bothers me, since the larger objective of China remains where it is & remains uncontested by India, which is China’s claim since the previous decade that the entire Ladakh region is disputed & is not part of India. So, what are India’s preparations for neutralising this claim? Is China therefore saying that its 1959 LAC claim-line is only of a temporary nature because it it has already stated before that the Sino-Indian frontier’s length is only 2,000km-long & does not include the frontiers with either Ladakh & the Trans-Karakoram Tract? This is what India needs to focus upon (no one from India is even admitting this reality) since all on-going talk & speculation about the LAC is only a temporary distraction invented by Beijing.
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIf PLAGF aspires to be world-class by 2050, then
1. Will it capture Taiwan? Won't USA and Taiwan have any plan to counter it.
2. What's India's response to this modernization of PLA?
"So, what are India’s preparations for neutralising this claim?"
ReplyDeleteWhat India possibly can do about it? Maybe that dreaded 'ChinaStudyGroup' is working overtime not to let anyone in India discuss the real Ladakh issue which you are referring to for a long time now. Hard to digest that no one in the decision-making circle is aware of this fact. The only solution that I can see is to physically separate Chini with Pak by taking over Pok except for the so-called Azad-Kashmir which can wait for a later time.
In a separate note, the current ACM is not a very bright head. Your recent statement/unexplained section above gives solidity to my assumptions(which may be a cause of all fuck ups 😆 ).
To ASD: Check out the new slides that I have uploaded above a few minutes ago. 1) No one can capture & rule over a territory whose native inhabitants will be extremely hostile & will resist invasion by any & all means. And that is why there’s ample time between now & 2050 to severely erode China’s war-waging capabilities. 2) India’s response has been extremely slow. For instance, while experimentation on various types of IBGs should have begun way back in 2004, they finally got doing only in 2017. Similarly, both time & money were wasted on the so-called Mountain Strike Corps, when more resources ought to have been spent on procuring new types of long-range rocket artillery, attack helicopters plus additional airlift platforms like CH-47Fs & C-130J-30s & C-17A Globemaster IIIs.
ReplyDeleteTo DASHU: India’s options are crystal-clear & common-sensical, i.e. confront China head-on by asking that if the 1959 claim-line is now being portrayed as sacrosanct, then why the hell did China advance further westwards with its claims in 1969 & physically went even further westward in 1962? And if China does not have any historical treaty or map to back-up its claims, then no such claims will be entertained & instead India’s claims will have to advance further eastwards on the strength of historical documentation that is in India’s possession & that prove India’s historical & traditional rights over areas east of Himachal Pradesh & north of Uttarkhand & even north of the Depsang Plains all the way up to Haji Langar & Zaidullah.
Let us give the benefit of doubt to the IAF’s current CAS. Perhaps his limitation lies is not being able to verbally articulate all that he has to say. Then there’s also the self-imposed reticence WRT discussing technological matters, such as mid-life upgrades of the Jaguar IS/DARIN-3, MiG-29UPG & Super Su-30MKI. In terms of symbolism, whether one likes it or not, it does give the appearance of the IAF’s leadership not being tech-savvy. At least the previous CAS used to use terms like NTCR mode, software-defined radios, Level-2 digital terrain elevation imagery, BVRAAM gap, etc etc.
To SATYAKI: ISRO's RLV to make autonomous landing at DRDO's Chitradurga airport:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhe2GA6dV6k
PLAGF Heliborne CASEVAC Drill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xf0w3LPJMyU
Here are 2 polar opposites: the first link describes in great detail what the situation inside J & K and Ladakh UTs (WRT the LAC standoff) is all about:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6N1sMaspi8&t=10s
And this 2nd link reveals what must be the DUMBEST Indian citizen to be in existence, for she (a 'desi patrakaar', of course) has still not been able to figure out China's motives & intentions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0i2SgIK0mA4&t=4s
One can see the two ex-career diplomats cringe in response to her utterly stupid/irrational questions. The look of disdain & utter contempt on their faces is clearly visible.
ReplyDeletehi prasun
there is news that the the IAF wants to order 5 more emb 145 awacs due to many delays as usual. NOw one of the qualities that was to be incorpaorated was more unjamable radar !! now is it so that the radar was jammed by the pakistanis in the recent balakot confrontation? whata shame and how did they manage that? given it to be an aesa radar and given that they dont seem to have powerfull jammers to jam awacs.
IN the interview in rjyasabha tv air marshall sinha says that there are escort jammers with the IAF??
Admiral Amjad Khan Niazi Takes Charge as New CNS of Pakistan Navy:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmmcadBjrlo
PN will be acquiring one Type 041 Yuan-class SSK on gratis as a training/conversion vessel. Plus, 10 LRMR/ASW platforms using second-hand/pre-owned Airbus A230 airframes will be procured from China for replacing the existing eight P-3C Orion Update-3 platforms. New naval aviation bases already up & running in Turbat & Ormara, with the former now hosting a China-supplied SSK VLF communications station & the latter also serving as the storage area for the PN's sea-based nuclear deterrent & will also host an OTH-R station. Jiwani is where a China-supplied SIGINT facility is up & running to monitor the entrance to the Persian Gulf. PN Marines to be expanded to Division-strength while SSG (N) will be expanded to be Brigade-strong. And here's the laughable part: 'desi' hypersonic warship-launched P-282 missile is under development.
Prasunda,
DeleteWet lease or second hand either is very practical. The IN & IAF still contemplate such acquisitions while crying for budgetary allocations. Atleast the Netra AEW & Wet lease of MRTT seems to be on. Ofcourse, there are limitations to this, but with war looming even the CAG saying that late Mi-17 upgrades are not useful, with war looming, they might just give the necessary bang for buck thru all weather vertical lift capabilities by giving service for another 2+ years which might be critical.
IMHO as with paki the time for talk with China is OVER for now. And just strategic dominance of the Himalayas will fall short. A thorough defeat of the CCP/PLAXX will only cut it. We need to move heaven,earth and ocean to achieve this objective. Am no military expert but I know all great battles were won by choosing it's place,time and weapons.so am all ears to whoever has a time bound doable roadmap!?
ReplyDeleteQuestion - Do PPs 10-13 at SSN lie outside the LAC from our PoV? The redlined lac of google maps seem to suggest so from Jivan to Raki Nala! Am assuming the PPs lie inside our lac since we patrol there just like Finger8 of Pangong Tso. I think google earth shows finger4 toeing the CCP version!!Surprise? VMT
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteHi Prasun,
Thank you for your reply.
Found this below discussion with Yun Sun and Tanvi Madan, really interesting. Mostly reinforces your views on the current situation. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btyzAq-eORY
regards,
Srinivasa Nanduri
Prasunda,
ReplyDelete1) Armenia seems to have lost a lot of military assets to drones in its recent conflict. There are even videos of Pantsirs and S-300 launchers being taken out by Azeri drones. Were these assets taken out by Turkish TB-2s or by Harops ?
2) Does India have enough local AD assets to prevent TB2-like drones from causing severe attrition ?
Satyaki
PrasunDa,
ReplyDelete1 Will Dassault allow IAF to integrate the Rudram-1 anti radiation missile with the Rafael?
2 You stated that Firangis have well & truly done some serious studies of ancient Indian texts to have now come up with the following after mastering the Quantum Physics & Quantum Mechanics. Will you please state which ancient Indian texts firangis were studying in order to master Quantum Physics & Quantum Mechanics?
Thank You
VIKRAM