As part of her planned transition from being a declared nuclear weapons state with ‘minimum credible deterrence’ to acquiring ‘credible minimum deterrence’ status, India is presently undertaking the construction of a mammoth multi-phase shore-based naval base that will be the permanent home for the Indian Navy’s planned fleets of four nuclear-powered ballistic missile-carrying submarines (SSBN), two SSGNs and six nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSN)—dubbed as the most survivable of India’s nuclear triad.
The S-2/ARIHANT S-73 SSGN’s keel-laying ceremony took place on June 21, 1998 carrying the hull codename P-4102. The SSGN was floated on the wet-basin on July 26, 2009 at the Indian Navy-owned Shipbuilding Centre (SBC) at Visakhapatnam. Attainment of reactor criticality criticality was attained on August 10, 2013. Commencement of sea-trials took place on December 15, 2014 and on August 15, 2016 Prime Minister Narendra Modi commissioned INS Arihant into the Indian Navy (IN). The 6,000-tonne SSGN, which was constructed over a 11-year period, has a load water-line measurement of 111.6 metres.
The S-3/Arighat was constructed over a period of eight years. Its keel-laying ceremony took place on October 2009 and the completed SSGN was floated at the SBC’s wet-basin on November 19, 2017. The S-4 SSBN took six years to build. Its keel-laying ceremony was held in mid-2015 and the boat was launched on November 23, 2021. It has a load water-line measurement of 125.4 metres as it houses eight vertical launch-tubes for SLBMs one behind the other. The Arihant and Arighat, on the other hand, house only four vertical launch-tubes.
These three boats will be followed by the bigger S-5, S-6 and S-7 SSBNs, each of which will be powered by a OK-650V pressurised water reactor (PWR) rated at 190mWt, and will house 12 vertical launch-tubes in two rows of six.
Project
VARSHA
Under a contract inked in January 2008, Russia has been providing technical expertise to the IN for building this naval base at a cost of almost US$2 billion to build, which will include twin underwater submarine tunnel entrances leading to separate berths for accommodating both SSBNs and SSNs, a hardened underground tunnel for storing nuclear warheads and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM), plus a command-and-control centre and a related communications station. Civil engineering work on Phase-1 of the Naval Alternate Operational Base (NAOB), being built under the IN’s ‘ Project Varsha’, commenced in 2016 near Atchutapuram, 50km south of Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh.
After soil testing, heavy blasting was undertaken to construct various structures by deploying heavy earth-moving equipment. Boundary wall construction was completed by 2018. Land acquisition process for the NAOB was launched in 2005. In the first phase, nearly 4,500 acres, both private and government land, was acquired in Rambilli, Rajala Agraharam, Marripalem and Vakapadu. Four villages—Velpugondupulam, Revuvathada, Devallapalem and Pisinigottupalem—were totally displaced, following which houses were shifted to a temporary rehabilitation colony. Phase-1, costing Rs.30,000 crore, will be completed by 2022.
Underwater
Communications
Earlier, in March 2012 the construction began for an extremely low-frequency (ELF) communications station near the village of Vijaya Narayanam, about 23km north of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KNPP) in Tamil Nadu. It is co-located with the IN's existing Very Low-Frequency (VLF) communications station (INS Kattabomman), which transmits at 18.2kHz and was supplied by the US-based Continental Electronics Corp (CEC). It may be recalled that CEC was selected as the prime foreign industrial subcontractor by Larsen & Toubro (L & T) to provide its experience and expertise for the design and manufacture of the VLF communications station to support the India Navy Ships (INS) project. The station was commissioned in 2014 after CEC had supplied to VLF transmission equipment for underwater communications, including the Type 124 VLF solid-state transmitter capable of delivering 6MVA (30 SSPAs). This is today the highest power solid-state transmitter operating in the world. Also supplied were a control system, ATUs, transmission line, loads and switches, as well as the RF design of the antenna, which comprises two 470-metre tall slant-feed top-loaded monopole antennae with ground mast. CEC’s expertise lead to satisfy the project’s requirement of increased data capacity of up to 400 baud. The ELF station, which is also being being built by Indian firm Larsen & Toubro, will have nuclear-hardened underground bunkers and was commissioned in 2016. Russia was closely associated with the research and development for this station, which is expected to be similar to Russia's own ELF transmitter at the ZEVS facility near Murmansk. ELF transmission is used to communicate very brief commands to submerged submarines. Such transmissions can travel thousands of miles and through extended depths of seawater. ELF transmissions are generally initiated during circumstances in which conventional communications channels have been disrupted or destroyed.
Reactor
Fuel Production
It was in 1984 that construction began of the Rattehalli Rare Materials Plant (RMP), located near Mysore in Karnataka State, which is a pilot-scale gas centrifuge uranium enrichment plant with several hundred gas centrifuges, and is capable of producing several kilograms of highly enriched uranium (HEU) each year. Construction of the pilot-scale gas centrifuge enrichment facility at began in 1987, took four years to complete, and began operating in 1991. The plant is operated by Indian Rare Earths Limited (IREL), which is a subsidiary of India’s Department of Atomic Energy (DAE). The DAE first confirmed the existence of the plant in 1992. Items that the IREL initially imported to outfit the RMP, such as vacuum pumps, vacuum furnaces, machine tools, vacuum bellows-sealed valves, and canned motors for centrifugal pumps, were subsequently indigenised. Thereafter, work began on producing low enriched uranium (LEU) for submarine-based PWRs at a large uranium enrichment centrifuge complex, the Special Material Enrichment Facility (SMEF), in Challakere Taluk, Chitradurga District of Karnataka. Between 2009 and 2010, an area of approximately 10,000 acres in the Chirtradurga District of Karnataka was diverted for various military-technical and military-industrial purposes. Within this area, 1,410 acres in Ullarthi Kaval and 400 acres in Khudapura were allocated to the DAE’s Bhabha Atomic Research centre (BARC) for the purpose of developing the SMEF. In 2011, India announced publicly her intention to build this industrial-scale centrifuge complex in Challakere Taluk, Chitradurga District (Karnataka). This site has since been dedicated to the production of both highly enriched uranium (HEU) and LEU for military and civilian purposes, although industrial-scale production has yet to commence. BARC has been allotted many more acres in Ullarthi Kaval compared to Khudapura (1,410 versus 400 acres respectively).
Despite such investments, the
fuel for powering the INS Arihant’s and INS Arighat’s PWRs had to be obtained
from Russia. Their PWRs are the third-generation OK-700A/VM-4SG model,
generating 89.2mW thermal (29.73mW electric) and producing 18,000hp when using
44% enriched uranium. The PWR was developed by the OJSC N A Dollezhal Scientific
Research & Design Institute of Energy Technologies (also known as NIKIET)
and which is now part of JSC Atomenergoprom. Such PWRs were series-produced in
Izhorsky Zavod, at Kolpino, near St Petersburg, and at the Nizhny Novgorod
Machine-Building Plant (Afrikantov OKBM). In India, JSC
Atomenergoprom authorised the DAE to licence-produce such PWRs. Such PWRs
have a total technical service life of 35 years and require refueling after 17
years. The reactor core of such PWRs comprises between 248 and 252 fuel assemblies.
Each fuel assembly contains tens of fuel rods, and these vary from the
traditional round rods to more advanced flat fuel-rods. The point of the flat
fuel-rod is to enlarge the surface of each fuel-rod so as to improve the
thermal efficiency. Most of the uranium fuel assemblies are clad in zirconium.
The fuel assemblies in the middle of the reactor core (weighing about 115kg)
are enriched to 22% U-235, while the outermost fuel assemblies are enriched as
much as 45%.
Shore-Based
Support Facilities
According to the IN, a typical SSBN must have a 95-day cycle in which it puts out to sea, steams to within range of its targets, carries out its operational patrol, returns to port where it is refurbished, refitted, and made ready for going again to sea. About 70 of the 95 days are spent at sea. To generate as little noise as possible and to allow the in-house thin-line towed-array sonar array to operate at high efficiency, the SSBN is typically required to cruise at speeds in the range of 5 Knots. The IN defines ‘on-station time’ as the number of days at sea during which an SSBN is within range of its target set. This time depends on the range of the SLBM being carried, the distance an SSBN must travel from port to the point where it is within range, and the speed with which it can travel without being detected. In general, an SSBN's ‘target package’ is adjusted so that in the early stages of the patrol, it is given a more geographically accessible target set. Later on, when far from port, it can accept target packages that are located in more remote regions of the adversary’s hinterland, further from the oceans. To support such operational requirements, a mammoth shore-based industrial infrastructure is required, especially in the domains of PWR engineering and refuelling, fuel storage and the final assembly of recessed SLBMs and their warheads, plus their loading/unloading gears.
Past experience indicates that the most high-risk work is in refuelling the PWR, for the following reasons: The work is done by many different people with varying levels of qualification for the work at hand; and approximately 50 different technical operations are carried out during the process, 25% of which may potentially expose the operators to radiation. The most dangerous situations during the removal of spent nuclear fuel include: Disassembly and mounting of mechanisms for control and safety systems; disassembly and mounting of the reactor lid; removal and replacement of fuel assemblies; refilling of primary circuits in the thermal system and testing of hydraulics; connecting, adjusting and checking of safety devices; manual checking for movement of the compensation register; PWR start-up, measurement of neutrons and thermal measurements and checking. It is for this reason that the NAOB will host hull refit and PWR refuelling facilities located within a dry-dock. Typically, a SSBN or SSN will be brought into a flooded dry-dock, a caisson will next positioned to seal the dock’s entrance, and the dock will be dewatered, lowering the submarine on to supports on the dock floor. Following docking, electrical and cooling water services will be connected to support the on-board electrical systems and the PWR, then the refit activities will commence. Before any refuelling operations take place, the primary circuit will have to be chemically decontaminated to reduce the background radiation in the reactor environment. During refuelling, access holes will have to be cut in the submarine’s hull and a reactor access house (RAH) will be installed over the submarine. The top of the PWR will be removed and a shielded water tank will be installed. Reactor components and single fuel elements will then taken out of the PWR through the water tank into shielded containers. Used fuel will be transferred from the dry-dock to a nearby underground on-site interim storage facility. When all the fuel has been removed, the reactor components will be inspected and serviced, and single new fuel elements will then be installed in the reverse sequence.
The facilities for undertaking final assembly of recessed SLBMs and their warheads, plus their over-ground loading/unloading gears, are being built with the technical support of Russia’s Ekatarinburg-based JSC MIC Mashinostroyenia and the St Petersburg-based Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering. Collectively combing under the umbrella of ‘weaponisation logistics’, this involves the warhead’s fissile cores coming under the custody of the DAR, warhead integration sub-assemblies coming under the custody of the Defence R & D Organisation (DRDO), and warhead/SLBM transport and loading/unloading coming under the IN’s jurisdiction. Custody of the fully assembled warheads will be transferred to the IN at the NAOB’s designated warhead receiving area, with all subsequent handling, processing, and transport being undertaken within a highly restricted area of operations called the ‘limited area’. After arrival, each warhead will be stored in a magazine, remaining within its shipping container. The SLBMs on the other hand will be assembled from component stages within a single above-ground facility called the Vertical Missile Packaging Building (VMPB). The mating of the first two stages of the SLBM will be carried out in the horizontal position. The missile will then raised to vertical and lowered into a liner situated in a ‘loading pit’ until it is about flush with the ground. The liner acts as an environmental cover, shielding the SLBM from view during outside loading operations and providing some protection against small-arms fire.) The SLBM’s third stage will then be mated in this configuration. Only after this will the warheads be transferred from storage to-the VMPB, mated to the SLBM’s third-stage, and the nose-fairing will then attached.
The mated SLBM
in its liner will next be hoisted from the pit, lowered on to a transporter,
and returned to horizontal. The unit will then be either stored or transported
to the explosives handling wharf adjacent to the SSBN parked alongside. At the
wharf, the SLBM in its liner will be erected to the vertical position, hoisted
by crane over the submarine, and lowered (without the liner) into the launch
tube. Once the SLBM is inserted, the liner will be taken away and the launch
tube hatch will be secured. Warheads for the SLBMs will be able to be demated,
mated, or serviced in place without removing the missile from the SSBN. For
this, the service unit will have to be placed over the launch tube, the hatch
opened, the nose fairing removed, and appropriate warhead-servicing operations
performed. The service unit shields warhead-servicing operations from outside
view. Both SLBMs and their warheads can be removed during routine maintenance
or submarine overhaul. Every few years, warheads will have to be removed and
serviced, typically for the replenishment of Tritium. It is estimated that the
great majority of the time during which the fully-assembled warheads will be in
the custody of the IN, it will be either in storage in its shipping container
or deployed on board the SSBN fleet. Only a small fraction of a SLBM’s lifetime
(less than a few tenths of 1%) will be spent in processing, maintenance,
handling, or transport within the limited area. Retired warheads will be
returned to the DAE for storage or disassembly.
Prasun sir,
ReplyDelete1) According to you all 3 Arihant class subs - S-2, S-3 and S-4 will be converted into SSGN or cruise missile submarines? If so, will they be equipped with BrahMos and Nirbhay?
2) So the true SSBN will only arrive with the commissioning of the first of the S-5 class that will see the construction of 6 boats S-5, S-6, S-7 and three other since you mentioned 6 SSBNs?
3) Will the 6 SSN subs also be powered by 190 MW reactor?
4) Is the second slide an accurate picture of the S-5 class? It looks different from the yellow colour submarine model that was seen 2 years ago.
5) When is the K-6 SLBM being developed for the S-5 class expected to be ready?
6) Like Arihant SSGN, did designs for Project 76 Alpha SSN and S-5 SSBN also come from Russia?
Prasunda,
ReplyDeleteVery interesting! If the S-4 is a SSBN (not a SSGN like S-2/S-3), would it be capable of launching long range SLBMs including the K-6 in the future ?
T9BK8
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteAnother spectacular article on the new year!!!! Thanks for everything.
Wish you Prasun and all the readers of this blog a very happy, healthy and prosperous new year!!!
To KAPIL: 1) In theory, all 3 of them can be used as SSBNs, but in practice, housing only 4 long-ange SLBMs on two SSBNs or 8 long-range SLBMs in a single SSBN does not create a credible, survival sea-based strategic deterrent platform, if one follows the thumbrule of no less than 50% of a country’s strategic deterrent being sea-based for survivability. Consequently, until the arrival of the S-5, S-6 & S-7 SSBNs, the S-2 & S-3 will have to be used as SSGNs while the S-4 will be employed as a SSBN 2) The definitive SSBNs will be the S-5, S-6 & S-7. After that the S-4 can be reconfigured to carry long-range ASCMs or SLCMs. 3) No, since the 3 projected SSNs will be shorter than the S-2/Arihant due to the absence of the VLS cells, i.e. they will be pure SSNs, although their 533mm torpedo-tubes will be capable of launching the lighter 530mm BrahMos-NG. 4) Yes, since 2011 ever since the NSTL released a drawing of the S-5. 5) The long-range SLBM will not be available until the latter half of this decade. 6) Of course.
ReplyDeleteTo T9BK8: Not likely, since the long-range SLBMs with 6,000km-range or 8,000km-range will have a greater diameter & will therefore require different kind of VL cells. The VLS cells developed & installed so far can house only up to the 3,500km-range K-4 SLBMs.
What difficulties are delayed the commencement of production activities at Rattenhalli complex?
ReplyDeletePrasunda,
ReplyDeleteIs there an SLBM called the K-5 or are the K-4 and K-6 the only SLBM projects, with Agni-P being the land based version of the K-4 ?
Ashwatthama
Astra-1 BVRAAM's demonstrated maximum range is 88km, while that of the Astra-2 is projected at 160km: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dgd1UceGh24
ReplyDeletehttps://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-set-to-conduct-trials-of-rafale-fighter-s-naval-version-101640980226180.html
https://stratpost.com/indian-navy-has-a-new-plan-to-buy-fighter-aircraft/
Happy New year surprise with this master piece article...
ReplyDeleteHope this new year bring prosper for all.
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteA very Happy New year to you....
The S5 image released outwardly closely resembles the Delta class submarines of the Russia which are slowly being replaced with the Borei /Borei-A class subs in the Russian Navy. Can we expect the internal design to be same as that of the Delta class?
What about the Alpha SSNs? Which Russian design SSN is it likely to resemble if the design is from Russia?
Regards
Raghu
ReplyDeleteHI Prasun
wonder full article which gives one, deep insight into the complexity of the infra structure and investmebt needed to operate a SSBN
PrasunDa,
ReplyDeleteI wish you and all your loved ones joy and success in all walks of life in 2022. Happy New Year.
Regards,
VIKRAM
Wow, thank you sir for this detailed thread.
ReplyDeleteWish you a healthy and happy new year.
Hi Prasun sir,
ReplyDeleteCurious to know why the first image is marked in Chinese. Is this from a Chinese site or publication tracking our boats? If so could you share the source if its public?
Hakimika
Prasun da, happy new year to you
ReplyDelete1) Will the reactor that will power the SSNs also come from Russia like OK-650 and OK-700 were supplied for S-5 and Arihant respectively?
2) You are saying that the reactor for SSN won't be 190 MW OK-650, then powerful will the it be? Will it be of 4th generation or older 3rd generation?
3) Besides some onboard equipment what help can France provide for the SSN and S-5 SSBN projects? The pump-jet propulsion system of the Barracuda will be a great addition. Will France be willing to share it?
4) Now that the construction of the third and final Arihant class submarine is complete, can we expect the the launch of first SSN and the first S-5 SSBN before 2030?
5) Only 3 SSBNs S-5, S-6 and S-7 are planned under the S-5 project. But you mentioned 6 SSBNs. Which are the other 3? Will the S-5 project be expanded from 3 to 6?
6) All said and done, can we expect the final SSN and S-5 submarine to be on par with British, French and Russian submarines in terms of hull design, technology of onboard equipment, firepower and quietness?
7) Navy considering Rafale M and F-18 super hornet for INS Vikrant is good news. Looks like common sense has finally made a comeback. Afterall, why develop a new aircraft (TEDBF) from scratch for which the requirement is not more than 40-50 units?
8) How is the beggar entity on our West arranging the funds for big purchases like 8 SSKs, J-31 FGFA, VT-4 MBTs, HQ-9 and HQ-16 from China and new frigates and corvettes from China and Turkey? Seems very unusual for an entity which can't even pay for it's oil requirment and has to beg the supplier for deferred payment.
Prasunda,
ReplyDeleteJust a small query from a layman ! We can build a nuclear submarine but we can't make a decent diesel electric submarine with AIP system !! What is the problem ?
Best regards
Superb article Prasun. You are simply next level. Many thanks. Wish every one and their family a happy and prosperous New Year 2022.
ReplyDelete@prasun da
ReplyDeleteAm i reading this correct 'Indian Navy’s planned fleets of six nuclear-powered ballistic missile-carrying submarines (SSBN), three SSGNs and six nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSN)' are you sure we're going to have 6 ssbn
Thanks
Joydeep ghosh
Hello sir
ReplyDelete1. How many S5 class submarine are planned to be built?
2. Will the S5 class have 16 or 12 SLBM tubes?
3. Is our SSN under construction and if not when will construction start?
4. Does S4 submarine has a uprated reactor?
5. Will the 90MW reactor be sufficient for our SSN ?
https://youtube.com/shorts/tDEvcQYDBU0?feature=share
ReplyDeleteSir can we not make such facilities in India? Would save a lot of cost of transportation and what not?
Sir what is the status of s4+ submarine and why indian navy wants new plane when it has already mig 29k for vikrant class and third aircraft carrier not seen anywhere.
ReplyDeleteA healthy and peaceful 2022 to you and yours, Prasun!
ReplyDeleteCompared to Yulin, where would INS Varsha likely be in terms of capability and survivability?
Many thanks.
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWish you,your loved ones and the subscribers of this blog a very happy and prosperous new year!As always you are a par excellence.Excellent information!My compliments!Some queries!
1) What problems are we facing in enrichment of Uranium?
2) Is the construction of the naval base proceeding as per schedule?
3)You have stated change of status to a credible minimum deterrence.Please clarify its meaning!
4)Have thermonuclear warheads for use also been fine tuned by us as on date?
5)Are these warheads comparable to those available elsewhere?
6) Are the SSN/SSBN comparable to those elsewhere in noise levels and other capabilities?
7)What about their normal armaments like torpedoes?
China’s 7 Dilemmas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_aH02nxKuQ&t=12s
ReplyDeleteTo BUDDHA, RAGHU, VIKRAM GUHA, DASHU, PRATAP, VED, ANUP, HEBERIAN & THE INDIAN: VMT & wishing you & all your loved/dear ones the very same.
To SANJEEV: Primarily the development of durable high-speed centrifuges. Existing centrifuges developed by the DAE can guarantee about 40% uranium enrichment. But if 60% + enrichment is reqd, then far more advanced centrifuges are reqd.
To ASHWATTHAMA: Only the K-15, K-4 & K-6 SLBMs have been funded for development. Agni-series BMs are all land-launched.
To RAGHU: The Project 955 Borei SSBN was designed by the RUBIN Central Marine Design Bureau to replace the 667BDR Kalmar SSBNs. But Russia’s navy instead chose to opt for the Project 955A Borei-A design. Hence the Project 955 Borei design was scaled down (with fewer SLBM launch-tubes) & shared with the DRDO & the S-5, S-6 & S-7 SSBNs will be built to this design. Later today I will upload above the narrative & slides on the SSN project.
To HAKIMIKA: They are from a China-published magazine called NAVAL & MECHANT SHIPS, issue no.6 of 2021.
To PRATAP: 1) PWRs never came from Russia. Only their design & IPR did. PWR construction was carried out in India & this will be the case for future SSBNs & SSNs as well. 2) SSNs don’t require 190mWt PWRs. Only the future heavier SSBNs will require 190mWt PWRs of the type that powered the Project 971/INS Chakra SSGN. 3) Will present the data on them later today. 4) The SSN project will take off sooner than that involving the 3 heavier SSBNs. 5) Have CORRECTED the data above. 6) Not on par, because by the time they enter service, other nuclear-powered submarine operators will still be a generation ahead. 8) Loans on ‘friendship terms’ are being extended by Beijing.
To PARTHASARATHI: Building/constructing is not a challenge. It is the design & developmental process that is most challenging as it involves a lot of trialn-error for the sake of acquiring the reqd quantum of data-points.
To JOYDEEP GHOSH: Have CORRECTED the data above.
To KAUSHIK: 1) 3. 2) 12. 3) Yes. 4) No. 5) Yes.
To PM: They can be built in India.
To HEBERIAN: Officially, it is named by the IN as Naval Station Rambilli. The entire base has been designed by Russia. BTW Russia had also proposed back in the mid-1980s that a dedicated naval base be built at Beemilipatnam to replace the existing & overcrowded naval base at Vizag.
To THE INDIAN: 1) Primarily the development of durable high-speed centrifuges. Existing centrifuges developed by the DAE can guarantee about 40% uranium enrichment. But if 60% + enrichment is reqd, then far more advanced centrifuges are reqd. 2) Yes. 3) It started wth acquiring minimum credible deterrence & as the years went by, it got transformed into credible minimum deterrence. 4 & 5) Yes. 6) No, they will always stay a generation nehind those of the US, Russia, France & the UK. 7) They will have the same HWTs as those selected for the Scorpene SSKs.
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteRegarding project 955 Borei, 3 units of the design are in service with the Russian Navy and construction of the same was dropped in favour of the improved 955A Borei A class subs with more streamlined hull and acoustics and other improvements.
The slide above presented for the S5 does not resemble the Borei with humps of the missile casing quite prominent in the design. It also does not have the pump her propulsion of the Borei. It more or less resembles the 667BDR Delta class submarines.
Please clarify.
Regards
Raghu
Sir can the tethered drones being developed for Indian navy also act as a sentry in Indian boarders to detect intruders?
ReplyDeleteIf India can enrich Uranium to only 40% then how did we get hold of weapons grade uranium?
ReplyDeletesir Wishing u and the members a healthy and productive new year :)
ReplyDelete1. https://fissilematerials.org/blog/2010/06/india_developing_new_cent.html
as per this article back in 2010, is it the 3rd gen with 5x output of 2nd gen that produces 40% enrichment??
Will the 4th gen carbon composite centrifuge with 10 times output as 2rd (600M/S )and is almost equal to Urenco's TC 12 (620M/S), will be able to produce >60% enrichment??
2. Any idea about american AC100/russian equivalent output/speed??
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267209172_Comparison_of_the_Circulation_Efficiency_in_gas_Centrifuges_with_Different_Geometric_and_Speed_Characteristics_for_Uranium_Enrichment
3. Where is Iran, Pak and China wrt enrichment??
Thank You
Yogesh
GM, Prasun da,
ReplyDeleteHappy new year
1. Do you think the Rafale would be selected for the IAC1, what would happen for the mig29K which are taken as of now
Regards
Aditya
@prasun da
ReplyDeleteHappy New year to you and your family btw i truly think IN should go for 7 SSN bcoz 1 SSN to protect 4 SSBN, SSGN with S2, S3, don't need SSN. But this leaves only 2 SSN for patrolling duty. This means that atleast 1 more SSN is needed
Thanks
Joydeep ghosh
Sir what do you think of the public display of sweets exchange between PLA and Indian soldiers? India's acceptance of fait accompli?
ReplyDeleteAs we know if anyone can tame the dragon it would be Putin, so is he really trying to broker a deal between India and CCP? who initiated/requested him? Indian side ?
And now to boring old lost topic - Why sudden BAT action on LoC by PA when everything is working out smoothly for them ? Am sure he will be labeled as rouge soldier by PA and India will be happy.
Wishing all the best for New Year 2022 to you and all others.
ReplyDeletePrasun da, happy new year to you and your loved ones
ReplyDelete1) As per your information, S-5 will be based on the Borei class. Then why does the exterior design resemble that of Delta instead of Borei? Like Delta, S-5 hull has a hump where VLS cells for SLBMs are placed, whereas there's no such hump in Borei design.
2) After Russian proposal for Armata platform was confirmed now there are reports that France wants to offer the Leclerc design to underpin the future MBT. Among the current options, Armata and South Korean K2 Black Panther platform appear to be favourites to me. Which among these will be best for us?
3) Which foreign contender will be selected to fullfill Navy's requirement of 4 LPDs?
4) Kalyani's recently revealed multi terrain artillery gun system seems to perfect for mountaneous terrain along China border. When is the army placing orders for the same?
5) Today a Paki BAT member trying to infiltrate was dispatched to hell by the IA. How does it impact the so-called ceasefire? Time to unleash the big guns again?
6) Will the design of PWR for SSN come from Russia? How powerful will it be? A version of OK-650 with lesser power? The Barracuda for example is powered by one 150 MW reactor.
7) Times media group is reporting that India is already contemplating additional S-400 systems or the new S-500. Is it true?
8) Will the SSN be capable of firing the future hypersonic BrahMos-2?
9) When are the developmental trials of XRSam expected to commence?
10) An obscure company called JSR Dynamics is working on a 300 mm Smerch like rocket. Is it just a PR stunt by the company or should it be looked at seriously?
To RAGHU: Back in the mid-1990s, this was the design of the Borei-class SSBN:
ReplyDeletehttps://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HCVRUjR5XlM/Wi8oKNdsvrI/AAAAAAAANzM/0-0Rhbb7GskMk7n4IZprDKnfBgyxxT9zwCLcBGAs/s1600/Indian%2BNavy%2527s%2Bprojected%2BS-5%2BSSBN%2BSchematic.jpg
The Russian Navy subsequently had a rethink & ditched this design for the current Project 955A Borei-class SSBN.
To PM: Intruders/infiltrators can be far easily detected by mast-mounted LORROS-type sensors along the LoC. Tethered aerostats over hilly terrain have a habit of breaking off from their tethers & drifting away by strong winds. The same holds true for such aerostats tethered along coastlines.
To BLACKURRANT: Not weapons-grade uranium (which is 95% eniched), but moderately-enriched uranium (not more than 60%), whose supplier is Russia.
To YOGESH: VMT & the very same to you & all your loved ones. 1) The latest centrifuge designs of the DAE are now being trialled & the target is that enrichment of up to 75% be achieved. But this will take at least another 3 years. 3) Iran is doing only 20% enrichment. Pakistan does not have any enrichment capability. Instead, all the uranium enrichment hardware & IPRs it had smuggled out of URENCO of Holland in the late 1970s was supplied to China.
To ADITYA: VMT & the very same to you & all your loved ones. Let’s wait & see how the competitive flight-trials at the Goa-based SBTF play out.
To JOYDEEP GHOSH: VMT & the very same to you & all your loved ones. Not all SSBNs go out on patrols. At best, only 1 SSBN of the IN will be on patrol on any given day.
To ANUP: Here is the original source of information:
China’s Population Footprint: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVaBlat06Sw
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FICkYY7XwAELt5s?format=jpg&name=large
PAF JF-17 Block-3 with PL-10E SRAAMs & PL-15 BVRAAMs:
ReplyDeletehttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/FICkYY7XwAELt5s?format=jpg&name=large
Wonder how the 145km-range PL-15 BVRAAM will be compatible with the JF-17's X-band Grifo-S7 MMR (with 60cm antenna diameter) whose look-up detection range is 150km & tracking range is only 110km, while look-down detection range is 100km & tracking range is 40km.
So the Russians have given us an obsolete design which Russian Navy had rejected for the modern Borei design and we have to accept the rejected design because we have no option?
ReplyDeleteGiven the cost, skills and expertise requirements and potential danger from N related accident/mishaps, is it not best to leave these sort of tech to countries that already have N capability and instead perhaps invest in new non N tech subs with advance AIP considering Indian Navy will never go beyond its territorial waters - not much further if have to anyway?
ReplyDelete^^^^ yes beggars can't be choosers. There is an option, go your own way. Find your own design, expertise and resources.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Prasun.
ReplyDeleteYes, I remember the Beemlipatnam proposal. There used to be a Rear. Adm. Varier who was one of the key personnel kick-starting the Arihant project in Vizag back in the day. An old Foxtrot hand.
My doubt was a bit more detailed in terms of the how INS Rambili compares to the Yulin submarine pen/base in Hainan? I am hopeful that you Zhonguo connections would have given you some insights that this comparison can be based on.
Please share any insights you have.
Many thanks.
Some pictures emerged about the absolute poor build quality of Tejas.
ReplyDeleteAny comments?
I thought jf-17 block 3 had a new aesa radar?
ReplyDeleteTo DASHU: India’s acceptance of the fait accompli was evident last year itself, as explained here:
ReplyDeletehttps://thewire.in/diplomacy/depsang-ladakh-india-china-rajnath-singh-parliament
That’s why no one now talks about de-induction or de-escalation. Instead, only disengagement is being sought. Russia has obliquely upped the ante by authorising the export of BrahMos-1 missiles to The Philippines.
The sudden attempted BAT infiltration in Keran sector was by elements of the so-called Mujahd units of Azad Kashmir. The PA will, like in the past, refer to it as an unauthorised action & disobeying of command instructions.
To KAPIL: 1) Answer is given immediately below your comment. 2) For its FMBT reqmt, the IA wants a platform that is weighing no more than 52 tonnes. Hence, offers of anything heavier from anywhere else won’t be considered. 3) Either Navantia or Naval Group. 4) Not before the conduct of user-trials, which are yet to begin. 5) Not quite. Refer to the reply above. 6) No. 7) No. Only new LR-SAMs will be delivered, as I had explained earlier. 8) No. Only BrahMos-NG. 9) Not in the near future. 10) That company has yet to reveal the conceptual design for such a rocket or MBRL.
To SATYA: Not quite. Nothing inferior about the design. Russia only wanted something better/superior that could launch SLBMs to distances much farther than what India’s projected SLBMs will be capable of.
Hello sir,
ReplyDelete1. Will our SSBN have two crew system?
2. Is there any picture or info graphic available for our SSN,if yes could you please share it.
3. How many nuclear submarines can INS Varsha support?
4. Will a nuclear submarine base be constructed at the western coast?
5. Are the MIRV warheads of indian nuclear arsenal are 40kt boosted fission or 200kt two stage thermonuclear warheads?
Going by the article you shared,
ReplyDeleteIs India on the verge of loosing siachen to china and pakistan?
is horizontal escalation (getting a part of real estate back from POK) is the only way to stop this chinese aggression?
Is the submarine shown in the second slide with 12 VELs bearing the number 935 the final S-5 design? It's a lot different from what was revealed by the NPOL - the design that was rejected by the Russian Navy. The structure design in the second picture is exactly that of the 955 Borei project - the first of which K-535 Yury Dolgorukiy joined the Russian Navy in 2013. If the submarine in second picture is indeed the S-5 then it's a great news. Can you confirm? Thanks
ReplyDeleteSo if IA wants a tank weighing no more than 52tons - does this mean they want a brand new design and product from scratch? No available tank around the world come anywhere close except three T-14 Armata 55t), Leclerc (57t) and K2 Black Panther (55t). Leopard/ MA1 Abrams, Challenger, Merkava - all weigh above 60-65t.
ReplyDeleteprasun,
ReplyDelete1- how many subs is reqd by IN for the next 40 yrs..6 ssn, 2 ssgn , 4 ssbn +6 ssks..thats just 18 subs overall. I guess IN needs about 35 odd to counter the chinese-paki & any other naval poer who may start influencing the IOR region.i think the nuke arsenal needs to be doubled(@24 nuke subs -12 ssn, 6 ssgn, 6ssbn)+ @10 ssks (6 kalavaris, 4 super kavalavris @3000T with vls, pump propulsion, photonic mast)
Prashun Da, Happy New Year.
ReplyDelete1. Pakis are saying that Jf17 block 3 is going to use KLJ7a AESA whereas you just reveal that blk 3 is using grifo s7. What happened to the KLJ7a than?
2. Our Uttam mk2 is going to use GaN based Vivaldi antennas. What do you think it's performance will be compared to Rafale's GaAs based vivaldi. Are our antennas going to be superior in performance?
3. Where are we stand compared to the chinese in the domain of airborne AESA radars? God knows what kind of radars they are using in their newer J10c and J20s.
4. Can the tejas mk2 beat j10c in performance?
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly the 2nd slide image represent. It seems like a brand new design with the torpedo tubes on the side as opposed to the nose, where most Russian subs have it.
Regards
Raghu
To KAUSHIK: 1) Three. 2) None. 3) The entire fleet of nuclear-powered submarines. 4) No. 5) That is yet to be worked out.
ReplyDeleteTo SATYA & RAGHU: The double-hulled Project 935 SSGN was proposed to India back in the previous decade as the baseline design for the SSN, minus the VLS cells. For Russia, the Project 935 design was to have accommodated the Zircon/BrahMos-2 hypersonic cruise missiles. However, the IN has decided to stick to the 1980s vintage SSBN design (that of the S-2/Arihant), which will now be shortened to less than 100 metres length by doing away with the four VLS cells (thereby reducing the submerged displacement to less than 5,000 tonnes) since the IN has a pure SSN reqmt.
To MILLARD KEYES: You are overlooking this fantastic piece of technological innovation:
JGSDF’s Type 10 MBT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGXWsb4f5qU
If High-Nitrogen Steel (HNS) is used for building the 124 Arjun Mk.1As, then the total weight of the MBT will be reduced from 67 tonnes to 61 tonnes while using a 1,400hp powerpack, thereby appreciably increasing the power-to-weight ratio.
To JUST_CURIOUS: The SSGNs can also function as SSNs for monitoring hostile fleet movements, especially carrier battle groups.
To AVIATION: The very same to you & all your loved ones. 1) There is no verifiable evidence of any AESA-MMR for combat aircraft being available from China. 2) More than antenna performance, it is the programmable signals processor’s sophistication that matters. 3) There’s no verifiable evidence to indicate that AESA arrays have been developed by China for even AEW & CS platforms. 4) Yes.
Cmde Jaideep Maolankar on NLCA Project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLPsxYuEPIk
Myanmar Coast Guard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsP_-jcIJY0
CFIT the Result of Mi-17V-5 Crash: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOOXPtcZoZY
why cannot a criminal proceedings be initiated against the defense secretary and IAF chiefs after this report?
ReplyDeleteThanks Prasun, I did look at it but to date have not seen any exports from Japan. I was hoping the IN would acquire the Mitsubishi Maritime surveillance aircraft to augment the P8I fleet - U2 Planes - none of them never occurred. This is why didn't think there is a possibility.
ReplyDeleteHere are two AESA radar offered to pakistan for their jf17 blk 3. One is KLJ7A and the other is LKF-60IE. https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/klj-7-a-and-elm-2052-radar.658428/post-12182529
ReplyDeleteGive it a read - "What china got out of the Su35 purchase,(PLAAF officer interview)". Here also they briefly talked about their AESA radar's capability which is supposedly much superior than the russian Ibris-E.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/LessCredibleDefence/comments/ajx4bx/what_china_got_out_of_the_su35_purchase_plaaf/
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIs it true that we have lost Depsang valley completely to China?
Is their any hope of getting it back?
Regards,
Chintan
Prasunda,
ReplyDelete1) If it is not yet worked out whether the MIRVs would carry 40kt boosted fission or 200 kt thermonuclear payloads, how is it possible that MIRVed payloads for Agni-P (and possibly Agni-5) were recently tested ? You did reply in an earlier thread that MIRV capability was tested for Agni P.
2) How would it possible to certify thermonuclear warheads in the 200 kt range without further testing ?
Satyaki
It's very foolish of the Indian Navy to reject the modern 935 design and stick with the vintage Arihant class obsolete design for the SSN. I hope at least for the SSBN S-5 we take the 935 as the base design. Billions of dollars should not be poured into obsolete 1990s technology.
ReplyDeleteHi PrasoonDa
ReplyDeletehttps://arstechnica.com/science/2022/01/the-most-important-computer-youve-never-heard-of/
America was that advanced in1958... Where are we now?
To DASHU: The problem is much deep-rooted. As a rule, whether or not to fly as per VFR or IFR protocols is decided in the pre-flight preparation stage. One cannot switch from VFR to IFR during the flight. Therefore what needs to be answered is whether the weather forecasts of that fatal day had predicted inclement weather & poor visibility visibility. If yes, then was the decision made to still fly as per VFR protocols? Was this a violation of laid-down mandates of the IAF & thus amounted to criminal human negligence? Consequently, multiple Directorates at IAF HQ will require to be held accountable.
ReplyDeleteTo AVIATION: Existence of pictorial bro hures does not tantamount to the existence of fully-developed & operational products. What one needs to see are fitments like this, which prove matters beyond any doubt:
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-z9J_b6k9VLw/XG0revJhFmI/AAAAAAAAQsE/0teeIXXDGjkkqJs8z5bt7v7QhJlweWmhgCLcBGAs/s1600/Uttam%2BAESA-MMR%2Bon%2BTejas%2BPV-1.jpg
Can anyone in this world show images of any AESA-MMR mounted on the nose-section of a J-16 or J-20 or JF-17? If not, then everything about the existence of China-developed AESA-MMRs is pure speculation, especially China-origin propaganda of the type you have quoted.
To CHINTAN: Not valley, but Depsang Plains. India has permanently lost half of it.
To SATYAKI: 1) Unless the aerodynamic, flight trajectory & manoeuvrability issues of the MIRVs are validated, the yields of MIRVs cannot be finalised. Hence the ongoing developmental test-firings. 2) Through computer simulations.
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteMay I know the reason for why we agreed for such settlement in which we lost Depsang plains, was it military weakness or political weakness?
Regards,
Chintan
Prasun
ReplyDeleteUttam radar first version seems to have
dipole antenna. Drdo has also shown Vivaldi tapered slot antenna which is supposed to be better, but apg 81 of f-35 or apg 77 of f-22 aesa radar seems to have a different shape and definitely not Vivaldi type. Is it a form of dipole antenna only or something more advanced then even vivaldi
Prasunda,
ReplyDeleteWhat do you make out of this assessment by Rajiv Malhotra of the strategic situation in 2030 ?
https://twitter.com/RajivMessage/status/1477347109963808768
Would PLA have advanced so far as to field such a large AI based robotic army by then ?
Ashwatthama
1. Prashun Da, What's your thoughts on this article wrt china already mass producing their J20 and already deploying them opposite to india? https://www.businessinsider.com.au/psychological-effect-f-35-stealth-legacy-fighter-2017-5?IR=T&r=US
ReplyDelete2. Do we own the IPR for the new reactor of the S5 class SSBN or do we just license producing those things?
3. The antennas of F35's An/apg 81 is rather unique. Couldn't make out what kind of antennas they are? Can you tell?
4. DRDO was working on a 16*16 BOR vivaldi planner arrays for the new EW system, what is the possibilities that we are going to have those antennas on the radar of the AMCA?
https://defenceforumindia.com/attachments/img_20210227_145517-jpg.79969/
5. Where we stand in developing EW systems compare to russian and western countries?
What’s the progress on the CATS system? Has there been any progress detailed design, prototype development and first flight targets? When do you think it will be fielded?
ReplyDeleteDear Sir
ReplyDeleteDo you think 36 RAFALES are enough for a Two Front War
Why are we not taking seriously the PAF and PLAAF ,Combined threat
To DASHU & KAUSTAV: The past 24 hours have proven to be quite hilarious due to 2 related events. First, the fiasco WRT the Indian PM’s convoy being blocked by protesters in Punjab. How can the PM of a declared nuclear-weapons state can undertake A 1+ hour journey by road itself is astounding. As a mandatory rule, the PM should not travel by road for more than 30 minutes. But I guess Inda’s ‘netas’ have still not understood what it means to be the PM of a declared nuclear-weapons state. Instead, the ‘ddsi patrakaars’, perhaps taking directions from the Union MHA, are quite happy to contribute to the political mud-slinging thereby throwing the real issue into the backstage. And of course, blaming inclement weather for the cancelled VVIP helicopter flight by Mi-17 from Bhatinda to Ferozpur & Husseiniwalla. Needless to say, the AW-101 could have effortlessly flown the stretch even in inclement weather.
ReplyDeleteWhich then brings us to the on-going efforts at the cover-up WRT the Mi-17V-5 crash of last month. Here is how the cover-up is being attempted even by shameless former air warriors:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYpGPcIyuJg&t=15s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HUYG_G37oM&t=34s
This is how it goes: the crash was due to human error, but the aircrew was not be be blamed & instead the reason for the crash was inclement weather (i.e. Act of God), which happens all the time. None of these retired IAF veterans are willing to explain what is the solution that will prevent such crashes in future, will crashes continue to happen due to inclement weather, why are avionics like terrain avoidance & traffic collision sensors not being installed on IAF Mi-17s? As of now, no answers to these questions are forthcoming from the IAF, nor is any ‘desi patrakaar’ raising them. So, predictably, institutional loyalty will take precedence over the value of life & everything will yet again be brushed under the carpet.
DG ISPR Press Conference 5-1-2022: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwk6uiOZ_ZA
ISPR-Produced Documentary on Karakoram Highway:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SliHOBs_Cag
To CHINTAN: The reason is elementary: the steadily growing bilateral trade figures for fiscal year 2020 & 2021.
To HOODS007: Vivaldi tapered slot antenna is used for wideband-related applications, i.e. for RWRs & EW jammers. Dipole antenna is used for this:
https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijap/2013/179296/
ASHWATTHAMA: Utter hogwash. Also, go through these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0FL9Y-RqEU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxQY71JM8tA&t=21s
To: AVIATION: 1) Pure speculation. And even if J-20 were to be mass-produced, it won’t make any difference because it is neither stealthy nor can it supercruise & its avionics suite is totally unproven. 2) IPR will be owned by India, but India will continue to remain deeply dependent on Russian R & D institutions for data validation since several of the heavy-duty testing labs still don’t exist in India. 3) Standard AESA antenna, just like that of the RBE-2 on the Rafale. 4) Those are for EW/jamming purposes only. 5) In dia is still decades behind the developed countries in such arenas.
To SANJEEV: Matters are still in the conceptual phase. Detailed design has yet to begin.
Excellent description of NLCA Project (despite the questions asked being extremely stupid & idiotic):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLPsxYuEPIk&t=71s
To PANKAJ: Of Course Not. Why else did the IAF originally 126 M-MRCAs?
To RAD: Iranian F-14 Tomcat Ace Reveals His Iraqi MiG-Killing Secrets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3HYrasBB4k
Footprint of US ArmoUred Brigade Combat Team (IBG):
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FITSzOQWQAA79dd?format=jpg&name=large
Regarding the VVIP helicopter
Deletehttps://iadnews.in/2022/01/06/security-scare-to-pm-modi-the-root-cause-brushed-under-political-drama/
Prasunda
ReplyDeleteIndeed, an horrifying state of affairs. Politics & Optics only seem to matter in both instances with Logical Analysis & due diligence going for a toss. A Happy New Year to you too Sir as we no longer seem able to be able to even run to keep our place, forget moving ahead. Is it communal politics or plain idiocy, that's to blame?!
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThe OK-650V is a Russian design. How can India have IPR over it if we are just manufacturing the same here as per the blueprints and specs given by the Russians?
Regards,
Raghu
Prasunda,
ReplyDeleteVMT. Did you post links to Pravin Sawhney's videos as other examples of such hogwash/ pro China-Pak propaganda?
Ashwatthama
Any update on 36 additional rafale jet
ReplyDeleteWill python 5 be the standard weapon used in Tejas MK1A?
Prasun,
ReplyDelete1-IJT completes 6 turn spin tests .. what chance does it stand to be considered by the IAF?
2- why hasn't india taken up the issue of SFJ & Pannu with the US.. as he has been openly calling
Prasunda
ReplyDeletePM of a nuclear power travels by road for over an hour because the CDS of the same nation perishes in an accident caused by CFIT pilot error as necessary add-ons weren't put on these Choppers or the essential AW-101 which have them are mothballed for years. What a tragi-comedy!😉
Why does "IT superpower" India's government sites work so badly?
Pretty much wherever you look it is a disaster, much like other parts of government functioning. https://t.co/DcIYoedV4W
ReplyDeleteHI Prasun
I am amazed at the skill of iranian engineers to integrate a hawk sam onto the f-14 .. again kudos to the guys who kept the phoenoix aim 54 in good condition .. what befuddles me as at that time ..how did the iranians learn the details of the aim-54 to service it as they wewre not exactly a technically strong country.
Again how did they manage to copy the stealth drone of the US and fly it?? that needs loads of understanding of flight aerodynamics of flying wing and wind tunnel testing.?
To KAUSTAV: It is not only IDIOCY, but downright irrational & a major international embarrassment.
ReplyDeleteTo RAGHU: India bought the IPRs for the design of the SSGN & all its internal sub-systems & components. But as I had explained earlier, India still lacks several productgon-engineering expertise & infrastructure. For instance, all the HY-80 steel for constructing the S-2, S-3 & S-4 boats were supplied entirely by Russia. Similarly, all the transmission shafts for the three Project 15A & four Project 15B DDGs were supplied by Russia.
To ASHWATTHAMA: I posted those videolinks only for sharing purposes. Whefher their contents are realistic or hogwash is for the viewers to judge.
To SANTOSH: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-to-test-marine-version-of-rafale-jet-today-101641497076996.html
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/demonstration-of-rafale-fighter-begins-for-navy-at-goa-f/a-18-next-in-march/articleshow/88740199.cms
To JUST_CURIOUS: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/hals-intermediate-jet-trainer-has-cleared-a-major-milestone/article38161914.ece
Additional tests over a 2-year period are reqd. Additionally, the turbofan from NPO Saturn’s service-life has not yet been extended from the present 500 hours to 2,000 hours.
To RAD: If you watch the video again, it is clearly stated there that the US & Israel provided covert technical assistance.
By Col Rajinder Singh, 3 Bihar
ReplyDeleteIn the fog of war, a lot of misinformation flies. Ill-informed but self styled defence experts and politicians always push through home made theories. Some of these so called experts had perhaps never ever seen high altitude terrain in their entire life or service careers. But they must appear on TV channels to narrate true lies. This is what had happened about the scuffle that ensued between IA and PLAGF troops in Galwan Valley of Eastern Ladakh on 15/16 June 2020. Galwan in Kashmiri dialect means “Strong Man” or a Pehelwan (Wrestler). The river emanates at AKSAI Chin and flows East to West for 80km through gorges of high mountains at 17,000 feet. It joins Shyok River in the Shyok Valley. The Galwan River-Valley is named after Gulam Rasool Galwan of Leh, who, as a young boy, had accompanied the British expeditions in the Himalayas as a guide in the late 19th Century. In one of the expeditions in 1899, led by Lt Col Charles Murray to the Pamir Mountains in Tajikistan, the party lost its way due to bad weather. It was young Gulam Rasool Galwan, who found the way through this river-valley. Thus, the river was named Galwan after him. The Galwan River-Valley was one of the flashpoints of the 1962 War. In its 1959 claim-line China had claimed the entire valley upto the confluence of Shyok-Galwan Rivers. The valley became a flashpoint after China constructed a road between Xinjiang and Tibet, without India's consent. The highway is now known as G-219. After building the road, China laid a claim to the area, first in 1959. The valley was defended by a Company of Gorkha Regiment of the IA in 1962 after China had constructed the G-219 through Aksai Chin. And then suddenly this Gorkha locality was surrounded by PLA on July 6, 1962. The brave Gorkha troops remained cut off for three months. On October 4, 1962, a Company of 5 JAT was sent to reinforce the Gorkha Company. PLA fired on this Company and killed 36 soldiers. Ever since 1962, the Galwan River-Valley has been under the occupation of China. Protective Patrol Point-14 is the only point in the mouth of Galwan River-Valley that India controls, is on the LAC. The significance of PP-14 is that it screens China’s peeps into the Shyok River’s confluence with the Galwan River.
India in 2020 built a bridge over this confluence. Besides, a Link Road to PP-14 was constructed from this bridge on the DSDBO Road (Darbuk-Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldie), which is probably the bone of contention. It must be noted that the LAC with China is not marked. Galwan River-Valley had been on the eastern side of the LAC, which is under China’s control. And this has been the case for the last 58 years. Galwan River-Valley was lost during the Prime Ministership of Jawahar Lal Nehru. And it has been status quo since then. Therefore, if Prime Minister Narender Modi says that China has not entered our side of thr LAC, he is right. Those who make noise that he has surrendered to China, have no idea of history and also the ground situation. Most of them forget what Nehru had said of Aksai Chin. To remind these forgetful minds, it is reiterated that he had surrendered it by saying: NOT A BLADE OF GRASS GROWS THERE. As of date, India has not surrendered its claim either on Aksai Chin or Galwan River-Valley. It has only said the obvious reality that the LAC since 1962 is well under Indian Control. And it includes PP-14. India had constructed a road to DBO from Shyok and Darbuk. It is 255km long and it has strategic importance WRT logistics support and also switching of forces to DBO. The point of issue is not this but the Link Road built to PP-14. This is giving headaches to China. The PLAGF suspects that India could launch an offensive towards Aksai Chin using the Galwan River-Valley. PP-14 obstructs the PLAGF’s direct view of the Indian side and eventually a Indian build-up, if any. Even China has built a road from Aksai Chin to this River-Valley.
Cont'd below...
The crisis of June 15, 2020 was due to a PLAGF attempt to come up to PP-14. In fact, it had created a tented camp below it around 10-12 June 2020. This camp was forcibly removed by India on 12/13 June 2020. Probably, some fatalities were suffered by the PLAGF in this action. This perhaps had enraged the PLAGF and again by June 14 it set up a fresh tented camp. This was detected by India on June 15 and it led to a deadly scuffle. Tell-tale marks of the true incident have now begun to appear in many accounts and they have opened up a Pandora’s Box of many a lies. One has to just join the dots to visualise a true picture. At the risk of repetition, it is a known fact that the bone of contention in the Galwan River-Valley is the DSDBO Road and a bridge over the River Shyok and River Galwan confluence. To be frank, it was the 14km-long link from this Bridge to PP 14. This point is at the LAC and is under Indian Control since 1962. And like 1962, it might become the flashpoint of another war, if China does not desist from its aggression. Perhaps, China does not realise that millions of cubic-acre-feet of water had flown through the Galwan River over the last 58 years. The year 2020 is not the year 1962. The significance of this Link Road is that it is a pincer aimed at the Galwan Valley which could further be linked to a China-built road going to G-219. The important tactical advantage of PP-14 is that it screens the PLAGF’s overview of Shyok River and DSDBO Road. This was the advantage China wanted to deny to India. On June 6, 2020 an agreement was reached between the PLAGF and IA commanders to appropriately withdraw from present locations. India was to fall back 1.5km westward and China by 2.5km eastward. The disengagement was to be completed by June 15, 2020. IA troops before pulling out wanted to ensure that the PLAGF too had pulled out. A patrol of 10 men under a Major from 4 Mahar and 16 Bihar was sent to ascertain this fact. They found the tents (un-occupied) were intact and had not been removed as agreed to earlier and they burnt it. As they were returning they were surrounded and captured because the PLAGF was fully armed. As soon as CO 16 Bihar, Col Santosh Babu learnt this, he rushed to the spot with 30 men to negotiate their release. The PLAGF was on a higher ground and the IA patrol party was slowly climbing, since at 15,000 feet the foot movement is very sluggish and slow. One cannot rush and climb. One loses breath. Also the track was so narrow that one could only move in a single file—-one man behind the other. This is why the road to PP-14 was constructed.
ReplyDeleteAs the Col Santosh‘s party was some 100 metres from PLAGF tents (where they were holding our men), they shouted at him to come alone if he wanted to negotiate about the patrol. Col Santosh agreed and moved up with 2 men. It may be noted that the CO and his two men were unarmed, as is the norm in all such flag meetings. After reaching they had a heated exchange for 5 minutes but the PLAGF gave in and agreed to withdraw. As soon as the CO and his men turned, the PLAGF soldiers attacked him with nailed clubs and all the three fell badly wounded. Seeing this rest of the CO’s party radioed it to the base and charged towards the PLAGF soldiers. A hand-to-hand fight began. Indians had bayonets fitted to rifles as an answer to the PLAGF’s nailed clubs and iron rods. It may be noted that IA soldiers are well-trained in close combat and bayonet fighting.
Cont'd below...
PLAGF reinforcements of 400 men joined but so did 200 men from 16 Bihar and adjoining units. Thus it became a joint operation of mixed troops from Artillery, Mahar and Punjab Regiments. 16 Bihar’s troops and other Indian troops went berserk. The Ghaatak Platoons of other Battalions also joined in. PLAGF troops were running helter-skelter. The troops were from 16 Bihar, 3 Punjab, 4 Mahar, 3 Med Regt and 181 Field Regt. It was a joint operation. A minimum of 18 PLA GFsoldiers’ necks were snapped — they could be seen with their necks dangling from their bodies. In this melee a Chinese Bulldozer caused a landslide and with it many PLA soldiers went hundreds of feet into the icy cold Galwan River and probably died. On talking to OC Rear of 16 Bihar, it turned out that Lt Col Maninder Nagpal (2IC), Capt Ajun Deshpande (3 years service), Capt Manangma (2 years) of 16 Bihar were the most daring and they ferociously led their troops to avenge the death of their CO. Another soldier of Artillery Regiment, Sepoy Surinder Singh is stated to have killed 10 PLAGF soldiers with his Kirpan. He is an Amritdhari Sikh. He too got wounded in the head. Though India declared 20 dead, including Col Santosh Babu, China did not give out any casualties. Some Indian estimates put the PLAGF casualties at 43, based on estimates from the 56 helicopter trips coming to collect the casualties, which India had allowed. This does not include the soldiers who went down the river when the landslide took place. Therefore some estimates say that China suffered between 128 and 150 casualties. What about the IA patrol of one officer and 10 men, which was taken Prisoners by China on June 15?. A hush-hush report suggested that they were released on June 18, 2020 in exchange of PLAGF soldiers held by the IA. However, there is an interesting twist in the tale. It is that on the said night, a patrol from 3 Medium Regiment of the IA, had captured a PLAGF Colonel and few other men who were running away from the scene of action where 16 Bihar soldiers had gone aggressive. The release of 10 IA troops was thus a give-and-take of this Col and his men.
ReplyDeleteThank you much for sharing the details��
DeleteRegards
Venky
Prasun
ReplyDelete1- on IJT there are also news of HTFE25 replacing the NPO saturn engine.. guess that will be unrealiastic as it may require airframe changes
2- will this materialize?--Ramjet propelled Artillery shell by IIT-Madras https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SILZMNCpXPw
Prasun,
ReplyDelete3-INDIA To construct Railway lines Till Thailand & Myanmar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IClkM2QGAXY- will this materialize as well?
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing this account of the clash.
But what is not clear is that despite such a full on fight going on over an extended period of time, why didn't either side open fire? Particularly on the chinese side like you have mentioned earlier that these guys are conscripts and not battle hardened professional soldiers wouldn't they be trigger happy? Somehow things don't add up for me unless these reinforcements were also unarmed.
Thanks,
Rajdeep
Thank you sir for such informative information.
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/l74xDad_lys
ReplyDeleteIs this effective??
To JUST_CURIOUS: 1) Not possible as of now. 2) It had already materialised in Norway a decade ago.
ReplyDeleteTo RAJDEEP: Because both sides did not want matters to escalate. After all, moral ascendancy matters a lot in international circles & hence both countries didi not want to appear as being the prime aggressor. All videoclips of that incident show that personnel from either side were not carrying firearms & nor could such firearms be used at close-quarters during such clashes for fear of ending up shooting at friendles.
To RAD: It must be borne in mind that right up till the mid-1990s Iran never displayed any hostility against Israel and hence relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran & Israel were cordial & cooperative till then and that’s how the IRIAF received covert but critical technical assistance from Israel. This in 1986 became official, thanks to the infamous Iran-Contra affair that had the official backing & blessings of the then Reagan Administration. Consequently, obtaining product support for the IRIAF’s F-4 Phantoms & F-14 Tomcats was assured till the mid-1990s. Iran after 1980 began receiving product support for its Northrop F-5A/B/D/E fleets from Vietnam in deals that were brockered by Israeli middlemen running trading offices in Singapore.
And here are some more interviews of IRIAF plots describing their engagements with the Iraqi Air Force:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYmbyUJ9LqY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q5Y_ai4s2Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOElPy7CfE0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj43DHOSIbo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv3gtWZlO1s
Ganda Singh Wala-Hussainiwala Border Checkpost:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PhDk3PIFIw
This is the only checkpost along the IB where the Pakistan Ranger officer crosses over to Indian territory when raising & lowering the flag, while the Indian BSF officer crosses over to Pakistani territory for the flag hoisting/lowering ceremony.
1)drdo astra, saaw bomb can be integrated into rafale and mirage jets??
ReplyDelete2)will French allow it?
3)Is drdo developing any shoulder launch SAM? LIKE stinger...
- Sasi
Bloody coward bat munchers. It looks like attacking unarmed soldiers from behind is in their blood. They did the same thing in 75 at Tulung la also. Hope we avange them in the due time. Om Shanti Bravehearts.
ReplyDeleteHow many Prahaar missiles/launchers/regiments are on order/in service?
ReplyDeletePrasunda
ReplyDeleteThe US's PrSM Precision Strike Missile, successor to the ATACMS, seems more like the Pralay BSM in terms of form & function & may be part of the LBASM - Land Based Anti Ship Missile System. The Pralay based on the K-15/Shaurya has projected versions with MMW for precision strikes with hypersonic powered quasi-ballistic flight path & even ASW or ASuW roles as SMART missile system or even direct strike with accurate guidance system. If the US Army can envisage Long Range Artillery Fires maybe India can do so too. The K-series seems to be game-changers
What would be the Target Aquisition & Seekers required for such long range precision artillery strikes by either the Army or Navy with rocket powered quasi-ballistic hypersonic missiles?
Prasunda
DeleteAddendum - Even NoKo seems to have tested a Hypersonic missile this year 2022 with similar range of 500-700kms. Although, unlike PrSM or Pralay/Shaurya which are rocket powered through-out atmospheric flight & don't have re-entry, this seems to be a ballistic missile like Agni/Pershing with MaRV/BGV or DF-17 type hypersonic gliding reentry warheads. https://www.38north.org/2022/01/another-north-korean-hypersonic-missile/
Dear Sir
ReplyDeletePakistanis are Claiming on their Forum that Pakistan is Getting AL 31 Powered J 10
Does this mean that RUSSIA has lifted the embargo on RESALE of AL 31
Or the Pakistanis are just lying as usual
I don't Russia would Betray India
To AMIT BISWAS: Of course it is effective, like Slat Armour Panels were installed on the front & sides & rear for defeating RPGs.
ReplyDeleteTo SASI: 1) Yes. 2) Yes, if you pay for it. 3) Yes.
To SANJEEV: 1) Only one, with 3 Batteries each with the IA’s three Artillery Divisions.
To KAUSTAV: The IA had embraced the concept of SS-BSMs back in the 1990s with the service-induction of SS-150 Prithvis. However, the deployment footprint was enormous & bulku & the Pralay being solid-fuelled & cannster-encased offers far more flexible & quick-reaction deployments. For target acquisition of the Pralay the same terminally-homing sensors of the type developed for BrahMos-1 & LR-LACM will suffice, albeit with different customised taget recognition algorithms.
X-band Imaging Monopulse RF seeker:
https://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2019/08/desi-x-band-active-phased-array-pars.html
However, target location via airborne recce assets is a must prior to target engagement by SS-BSMs. This is where the RecceLite system comes into play:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8jLylPmYwzE/UOHwx9BhTeI/AAAAAAAADAQ/s5-iHUKFwvU/s1600/RecceLite+pod.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qAAP5EFVVrE/UOHw47E4k1I/AAAAAAAADAY/7mpfM-ZJdHE/s1600/RecceLite+Imagery+Exploitation+System.jpg
This is what was used last year to monitor China’s construction of the bridge to connect the north & south banks of Panggong Tso Lake & which led to this:
https://www.freepressjournal.in/india/government-of-india-denies-allegations-of-violation-of-chinas-airspace
To ANUP: Because China & not India wants to get Russia involved, since no other country in the world is willing to side with China.
IAF P-18M Terek 2-D VHF radar in Ladakh:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FIoJ1YJVcAANnRP?format=jpg&name=large
To PANKAJ: As I had already explained in the previous thread, the J-10CEs are being LEASED by China to the PAF.
Prasun da,
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/QDJKqLRxHgI
Any comments on this.
"China & not India wants to get Russia involved"- that is pretty interesting. But why when ccp is happily enjoying trade surplus and border domination in their favor? What is the real picture here , sir?
ReplyDeleteHi
ReplyDeleteThe following link provides a good read on progress in indigenous semiconductor research and development by Indian R n D organisations.
https://www.strategicfront.org/indias-research-efforts-in-the-micro-controller-and-micro-processor-space-the-story-so-far/
Regards
Raghu
Prasun,
ReplyDelete1-threat calls by SFJ to SC lawyers , how much have the penetrated the system. How voaltile is Punjab now ? is another early 90's scenario brewing?
2-Turkey upgrading Paki subs with APS system - zargana while we debate forever on P75i.. how effective are these are should IN/MoD wake up now? whatever happened to the rusian offer of 3+3 .. that seemed to be the most fastest & realistic one
3-Notam between 27 dec to 31st dec .. what got tested?
4- there seems to be no upadate on Jag upgrades.. is the IAF thinking of replacing them with Tejas Mk 1/2
1. Is the Arjun mk2 is still alive? If it is alive what's the status or the Army only persuing the NGMBT?
ReplyDelete2. Not very surprising but NGMBT shares a lot of commonality with a certain russian tank. Is NGMBT a local licensed production of that 'certain' russian tank or it's a completely new Indeginous tank? And what's it's status?
3. Is the trial of WhAP ever gonna end or will it ever gonna get an order in a substantial number?
4. Will the hot section of the upcoming 110kn engine be entirely french or mix of both india and french?
5. Is there any update on Thermal Barrier Coating or CMC from our side? Do we have enough capability to develop the engine blades for the upcoming 110kn engine?
6. Recently I've got into an argument with some turki fanboys on the subject of developing a jet engine. Those guys are saying that by 2027 they are gonna completely develop a Indeginous engine of a class of F119(f22) for their 5th gen TFX. Upon checking some of their company's capability i found that TEI license manufacture some of the most criticall part for Leap, F110 and GenX engine through a JV with GE. They even got blisk tech from GE through a TOT. Can these license manufacturing provide enough know how & why to develop a LBP Turbofan of F119 class by 2027?
5. What are some of the main problems Kaveri and GTRE facing right now other than the engine blades? We even developed a blisk fan on our own, will the dry kaveri which are meant for Ghatak have a blisk fan of our own?
6. My last question, Do you see india becoming completely Atmanirbhar in low bypass turbofan engine tech within 2 or 3 decades?
Thanks.
To DASHU: Because China is getting rattled by Russia’s approval of BrahMos-1 missile exports to The Philippines. Vietnam already has Yakhonts of the Bastion-P system. What if some more ASEAN member-states begin inducting such missiles that can attack all the China-reclaimed islands in the South China Sea?
ReplyDeleteTo JUST_CURIOUS: Interesting reads:
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/canadian-court-orders-seizure-of-air-india-aai-payment-with-iata-on-devas-multimedia-plea/articleshow/88667342.cms
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/iran-to-cooperate-with-india-in-shipping-wheat-medicines-to-afghanistan-101641738623015.html
https://theprint.in/opinion/security-code/chinas-pangong-tso-bridge-cant-be-countered-with-panic-or-polemic/795943/
Sir pakistan submarine power will increase day by day and it is a real threat for india in coming years .what is indan answer for that please do a post in this matter.Indian ssn no where in sight.How can india handle this threat.
ReplyDeletesir,
ReplyDelete1. i have a doubt. was design of agni v was conceived as a result of learning curve "with sizeable inputs from russians" or " more than sizeable inputs from russians", since i find an uncanny similarity b/w agni v, definitive a5 and k5 slbm to a certain soviet icbm/ its subsequent slbm??
2. india has hugely benefitted form strategic partnership with russia. cud u tell a certain a situation where "russians benefited in terms of technology from DRDO or for the matter from any other agencies??"
Thank you
Yogesh
Interesting Development: https://theprint.in/defence/fugitive-middleman-sanjay-bhandari-sues-french-firm-for-rs-92-crore-commission-in-2011-iaf-deal/800452/
ReplyDeleteNot surprising. It was a mega expansive dirty deal from the very beginning. 100% some IAF biggies are also connected here. I am pretty sure after getting the Mirage upgrade deal the french most probably thought that how corrupt indians and IAF was. Sad.
Deletehttps://twitter.com/RAFAELdefense/status/1341785476521451520?s=20
ReplyDeleteWas this�� customer India?
It's old tweet but still asking.
Thanks.
Hi Prasun
ReplyDeleteWhat to make out of the following news? Another embarrassment.
https://www.defenceweb.co.za/industry/industry-industry/denel-finally-removed-from-indian-blacklist/
Regards
Raghu
Prasun,
ReplyDeleteWhat is going on in Kazakhstan?
Prasun
ReplyDeletePls do a detailed review on this pls ... This deserves a full detailed prasun article
Firstpost: A rare earths roadmap for India: Seeking atma nirbharta in Indian technology.
https://www.firstpost.com/india/a-rare-earths-roadmap-for-india-seeking-atma-nirbharta-in-indian-technology-10270901.html
I hope you agree and then we can all be enlightened
Hi
ReplyDeleteA treasure trove of data on marine nuclear propulsion, reactors and vessels in pdf format. Peter Lobner's articles are quite consice and well organised.
https://whatisnuclear.com/propulsion.html
Regards
Raghu
Are issues with Dhanush guns sorted out? How many guns have been delivered so far?
ReplyDeleteWhat's your thoughts on the hybrid PESA Ibris-E radar? Is it as strong as an AESA radar? Russians are saying that it can scan & track a 3m² target from 350-400 kms away while many others are saying that it can do that only with a precise AWACS cueing. Can it compete with Rafale's AESA radar? And also like to know your thoughts on some alleged report of Egyptian rafale jamming su35's radar and egypt cancelling further Su35 order in favour of more Rafale.
ReplyDelete.
And did you notice that russian weapons don't live up to their hyped advertisement in the actual combat compare to their western counterparts. Ex.- Pantsir
IA COAS PC Today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ukp6PbKJKw4
ReplyDelete@prasun da
ReplyDelete1. is Saudi Iran tug oif war thawing? why
2a TEDBF will just TD for AMCA
2b if TREDBF is chosen why go for testing Rafale M or FA 18 from ski jump of SBTF Goa
2c what happens to Mig 29k
here is my hypothesis on the above
EDBF will just TD for AMCA and IN goes for total 80 Rafale M (obvious choice over FA 18) for INS Vikramaditya / INS Vikrant / INS Vishal after evaluating Rafale M performance from SBTF Goa. AFAIK the Rafale M is samme as Rafale of IAF so can operate in tandem.
then what happens to 44 Mig 29 ks well these jets with strengthened fuselage can operate in tandem with IAF jets and due to their specially modified fuselage can be optimzed to carry Brahmos A like the Su 30 MKI
your views on the above
3 IJT 36 has cleared final hurdle will IAF want them
4. What new missile canbe tested with NOTAM next week
thanks
Joydeep Ghosh
To JUST_CURIOUS: 1) The US-India Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty can easily be invoked now to initiate legal proceedings in the US by the Justice Dept against the SFJ. 2) APS like that has been in service with the IN for more than a decade, i.e. the C-303 decoy from Leonardo’s WAAS subsidiary. 3) Either SMART or Pralay SS-BSM, because the latter is being developed for both the IA & IAF. Air-launched varant of Pralay too is due for flight-testing. 4) Not quite. The Jaguar IS will remain in service till 2035. Though the TEDBF conceptually on paper is an ideal replacement, military-industrial capacity deficiencies prevent the TEDBF project from being realised in the reqd timeframe.
ReplyDeleteTo AVIATION: 1 & 2) Focussing on individual futuristic armoured vehicles & NG-FMBTs is an irrational & unscientific approach when future battlefields will be the combination of NG-MBTs, FICVs, attack helicopters & SS-BSMs being employed together for mechanised manoeuvre campaigns. 2) An initial number of 89 is already on order. 4 & 5) No R & D work is underway in India for developing any 110kN-thrust turbofan. Consequently, the GE F-414 turbofan will have to be imported. Presently, all R & D work is focussed on developing a new variant of 98kN-thrust Kaveri turbofan, whose LP/HP compressor shafts need to be optimised & need synchronising with the gearbox, since the existing shafts give out loud whining noises. 6) Turkey till this day has nolt been able to design its own MBT or attack helicopter or NMRH or LUH or FFG or DDG. It is therefore decades behind India in terms of platform development. And now thanks to the US de-coupling with Turkey WRT F-25 JSF project, Turkey won’t be able to access any turbofan-related & D solutions from either Europe or the US. 7) Becoming 100% self-reliant is not possible in today’s world, unless one accepts certain performance deficiencies, like the Russians have. 8) AESA-MMR will always be superior to PESA-MMR since the former can operate in several modes at the same time, which the latter cannot. Egypt is unwilling to take delivery of its Su-35BMs for fear of CAATSA sanctions, nothing else.
To ANUP: Not quite. That’s why the likes of GRSE are collaborating with L & T Shipbuilding on projects like survey vessels & SW-ASW Craft. Such PPPs will proliferate in future. All Russian Tu-160s are being refurbished. No new-build Tu-160 has rolled out.
To YOGESH: 1) Yes. 2) None. DRDO never comes up with new technologies or discoveries WRT military hardware. It only ‘masters’ technologies that have been developed by other countries, i.e. ‘re-inventing the wheel’.
To GARIMA: Yes.
To RAGHU: But despite that, no contracts have been awarded to DENEL thus far.
To THEINDIAN: Kazakhstan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AA4UqSxJxIw
To CHANAKYA CHATTERJEE: How to Reduce Military Imports:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpTzoU7mezk
To SANJEEV: This will answer your query:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpTzoU7mezk
To JOYDEEP GHOSH: 1) Yes, because fatigue has set in WRT the opposing proxy wars in Lebanon & Yemen. 2) TEDBF is only a paper design & won’t be available for flight-testing till 2035 at best. If the Rafale-M is selected by 2023, then the contract will be placed only by 2025 at best, i.e. at a time when the MiG-29Ks will have to be grounded for undergoing mid-life upgrades. 3) IAF has already stated that it does not want any IJT. No one air force that operates BTTs & AJTs requires any IJT & instead only LIFTs are reqd & are being developed/service-inducted worldwide. If the IAF opts for IJTs then it will only signal that the IAF is an inferior air force. 4) Either SMART or Pralay SS-BSM, because the latter is being developed for both the IA & IAF. Air-launched varant of Pralay too is due for flight-testing.
To RAGHU: India-US War in 2047, Prospects, Possibilities & Prophecy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAuupBORmJg
https://graphics.reuters.com/CHINA-BHUTAN/BORDER/zjvqknaryvx/
https://ehsan313.blogspot.com/2022/01/blog-post_11.html
Prasun,
ReplyDelete1) As usual you are absolutely correct about the Taliban being of greater danger to Pakistan!My compliments to you!
2) What about China? Don't you think that the situation in Xinjiang is a wonderful opportunity for the Taliban?
3)Any link between the Kazakhstan violence and the Taliban?
4) How is Pakistan even able to maintain its armed forces with its financial state? Is China helping there too? Or is it the Saudis?
5)What is present situation of the Panjshir resistance?
https://mobile.twitter.com/VishalBhargava5/status/1481222903618502657
ReplyDeleteStrange unwavering royalties 😀😀
https://www.ultra.group/media-centre/news/ultra-and-mahindra-partner-to-win-major-contract-with-the-indian-navy/
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ultra.group/gb/our-business-units/maritime/sonar-systems/towed-sonar/#acc-lowfrequencyactivetowedbodysource
https://www.ultra.group/gb/our-business-units/maritime/sonar-systems/torpedo-defence/#acc-surfaceshiptorpedodefencesstdseasentor
https://www.mahindra.com/news-room/press-release/mahindra-defence-to-manufacture-integrated-asw-defence-suite-for-indian-navy
https://www.mahindra.com/news-room/press-release/mod-signs-contract-to-procure-11-airport-surveillance-radars-for-indian-navy-and-indian-coast-guard
Hello sir,
ReplyDelete1. What is the progress in SSN program?
2. When will the SSN start construction?
3. Does arihant,S4 and SSN have VM 4SG reactor? Can you confirm.
4. Which torpedo will be selected for IN submarines?
5. What will in indigenous SSN look like?
ReplyDeletehi prasun
the deal with ultra means the death knell for teh desi mareech?
how are we going to to integrate it to aour desi FCS and torpedo
pse give us more details of the manpads being developed and how we were able to get the tech especially the cooled seeker FPA element. i hope they have a data link incorporated
how would you rate the effort can we equla the stinger nad mistral effeciancy?
Those who want to read Pakistan's National Security Policy 2022-2026 can download it from here:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.scribd.com/document/552754000/Nsp#download&from_embed
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteIn your reply to Aviation at January 13, 2022 at 8:36 AM. You mentioned India is working on R&D for 98 KN Kaveri engine. Is it iteration of older one or a new one from scratch. There seems to be no news on internet. This would be a really wonderful development. Can you please shed some light on it.
Thanks,
Amol
Why Pakistan's Latest National Security Policy is Not Worth the Paper it is Written On:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoPB3cTRU08
Prasunda
ReplyDeleteIn addition to rhe fact that aircraft have to be imported for modern generation aircrafts if not of own design & IPR, every nation has it's own defence imperatives & war fighting strategy against a powerful enemy, here the PRC, where imports might not work entirely. In a defensive environment, air superiority fighters like F-22 might be better than F-35 strike fighters. (On that note, the F-22 is to receive IRST & other upgrades). Japan is logical.
Why Japan Is Building Its Own Sixth Generation Stealth Fighter https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/why-japan-building-its-own-sixth-generation-stealth-fighter-199430
1. Is the L band Swordfish (Isreali Green pine copy) or Super Swordfish radar our own or they are just license manufactured?
ReplyDelete2. How is the status of AD1 & AD2?
3. After the installation of High power radar(HPR) in our northern borders and induction of AD1 and AD2, Can it act like our own desi AEGIS Ashore BMD system?
4. What is the situation with ATAGS? Army now wants a hydrolic drive instead of electric. With china breathing down on our neck, can we delay such aquisition of necessary system at the first place?
5. Why don't we induct Nirbhay with russian engine cuz we are going nowhere WRT nirbhay while STFE Manik is in testing phase? And also what happened to Air launched Nirbhay? Is it still on or dead?
Prasun,
ReplyDelete1-https://twitter.com/DefenceDecode/status/1482247722484785152 -- what are the "indigenous" options/replacements here & how is the govt planning to placate Ruskies & the Amrikes?will they be interested in sharing tech/weapons platform in the future? why scrap additional P8I's?
2- UK labour MP padma awardee chini spy..
3- typical ISI -https://idrw.org/isi-hitman-on-trial-over-plot-to-kill-pakistani-activist-in-netherlands/ .. last time the poor Baloch lady got murdered EU brushed it under the carper .. so much for human rights .. how is EU taking this so long as a gori is not killed -all is well i guess .. this is not the first nor will this be the last time ...add the news that India is asking France -who is now the president of EU council to have Eu stop arming pakis --https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/india-urges-france-to-advocate-for-a-ban-on-weapon-sales-by-eu-to-pakistan/articleshow/88796399.cms
ReplyDeleteHi Dada,
When Tejas Mark 1A will be commissioned in IAF and what is status of DRDO projects like MWF, AMCA, and Unmanned Wingman. Will any of these projects materialized soon?
Regards,
Mohan
https://www.bhaskar.com/international/news/pak-army-looking-for-alternative-to-imran-army-chief-nawaz-trying-to-reconcile-preparing-to-challenge-the-article-from-which-sharif-was-punished-129305295.html
ReplyDeleteWhat is this new kichdi
Hi Prasun,
ReplyDeleteThere is news floating around that Government has decided to drop the purchases of Ka-226, 21 MiG-29UPG, P-8I etc.
Any truth in it or internet fan boys speculation?
Regards
ReplyDeleteHI Prasun
If the report thqat the additional p-8 are being cancelled in favour of the c-295 aircraft ,,is it a good move ? can the c-295 have all the capability like te p-8 .. data conectivity net work centric system etc?
@Prasun da
ReplyDelete1. IAF n GoI have decided not to go ahead with 21 Mig 29 deal with Russia and 6 P 8 I deal with USA. this is either we don't have money or bcoz of CAATSA.
2. while USA pressured India not to buy 21 Mig 29 Russia pressed India not to buy 9 8i
3. If it is bcoz of 2nd then we are between devil and deep sea bcoz USA will never remove Russia from CAATSA, and Russia will not allow us to buy USA planes.
4. this means future Super Sukhoi deal and C130 SH both are dead.
5. this means whether you like it or not India will have to go for UAE Mirage tpo shore up numbers for IAF.
6. as for Rafale M/FA 18 trying ski jump it means that India will buy up to 80 Rafale M for its 2 current and 1 future carrier (for sake of commonality with IAF Rafale) and then transfer the 44 Mig 29k to IAF
7. Rafale M/FA 18 trying ski jump also mean that TEDBF is just TD for AMCa bcoz it simply doesn't make sense to develop 2different generation of jets concurrently alongside LCA mk2/MWF
8 possibly Russia knew USA will put spanner in its defense deals with India so allowed Brahmos export to Philipines, I expect a few more orders to be cleared in next few weeks.
your views
thanks
Joydeep Ghosh
1.Dada why India cancelled the plans of not procuring the 21 Mig 29s? Any better deals on the cards?
ReplyDelete2. We also cancelled the additional P8is. Your take on these.?
Do we have pumpjet tech?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.deccanchronicle.com/amp/opinion/columnists/111118/intelligence-agencies-need-a-legal-base.html
ReplyDeleteIt seems more people are liking ur proposal of brinhing Intelligence agencies under the ambit of parliamemtary law
Sir,can you clear the confusions on different sam systems used or being developed by indian armed forces??there are so many different qr-sam ,mr-sam, lr-sam acquisitions by different forces..
ReplyDeleteAny truth in L&T’s emergence as L1 for Ficv?
ReplyDeleteSorry Dada I meant why did India cancel plans of procuring the 21 MiG 29s - it made no sense otherwise.
ReplyDeleteWhen will kalyani get an order for its 155/39 truck mounted Howitzer? & in what numbers?
ReplyDeleteHi
ReplyDeleteSome good news, if true
https://theprint.in/india/rsp-steel-to-be-used-by-indian-navy-for-making-submarines/804940/?amp
Regards
Have been hearing that Vikramidyta hasn’t left for a deployment in more than a year. What’s going on?
ReplyDeletePrasun,
ReplyDelete4- http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2022/01/controversy-over-lipulekh-rages-in-nepal.html
what is this itch which props up intermittently but does not when chini takeover their lands .. inspite of nepali congress being in the driving seat.
5- Rourkela steel mill is to produce steel for Subs .. think you had mentioned sometime ago that India is still dependent on russians for steel for subs.. have we really made some decent metallurgical advancement or that its licensed manufacturing of some old grade steel ?
ReplyDelete1) Finland gets 64 F-35A Block 4 for 8.378 billion euro. The cost of multi-role fighters is 4.703 billion euros and air-to-air missiles AMRAAM and Sidewinder 754,6 million euros. Service equipment, spare and exchange parts, training and sustainment solutions, other related systems as well as sustainment and maintenance services until the end of 2030 cost 2,920 billion euros.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.defmin.fi/en/topical/press_releases_and_news/the_lockheed_martin_f-35a_lightning_ii_is_finland_s_next_multi-role_fighter.12335.news#3c918041
India should have listened to Rajaji and gone into the US-led block during the Cold War...
2) WTF... https://idrw.org/india-to-top-up-over-900-mn-aid-for-lanka-with-1-5-bn-bailout-package/
These snakes will bite India after happily embezzling the funds.
6- https://idrw.org/jvp-beats-anti-india-war-drums-over-oil-tank-farm-deal/#more-274046-- why is it that we are surrounded by idiotic countries.. first nepal now lanka earlier it was maldives..
ReplyDeleteTo RAGHU & JUST_CURIOUS: I wonder why the 'desi patrakaars' can't identify the type of steel. They are known as DMRL-292A & DMR-292B, which are substitutes for tghe imported HY-80 steel from Russia & HLES-80 from ArcelorMittal, with the latter used for building the Scorpene SSKs.
ReplyDeleteTo SANJEEV: That's because the INS Vikramaditya is undergoing a major overhaul of its steam boilers. And no RFPs were released for the FICV project.
To HARSH: The prototypes haven't even been taken to Sikkim or Arunachal Pradesh or Ladakh for field trials. Hence, an order is still far away.
To SUMIT: The procurements are not cancelled, but deferred to the next fiscal year since the capital budgets have already been exhausted for this fiscal year. For instance, the IN has only US$75 million left for capital spending for the remainder of this fiscal year.
To AMIT BISWAS: https://twitter.com/DefProdnIndia/status/1483073409336549384
Only one prototype? https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status/1482823018481008642?s=19
ReplyDeleteSir when will MOD order 36 additional rafale for IAF and 3 additional scorpion class sub for IN?
ReplyDeleteWhich would be the next Artillery deal to reach the signing table?
ReplyDeletePrasunda,
ReplyDeleteShould'nt the Pralay be induced with utmost urgency to deter China from using its current superiority in BSMs to achieve a quick military victory in Ladakh/Arunachal just as Russia might do very soon against Ukraine ?
Ashwatthama
Where are you sir please reply the outstanding queries.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the new changes for the latest Brahmos test?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.saab.com/newsroom/press-releases/2022/saab-awarded-indian-contract-for-at4-support-weapon?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_content=release&utm_campaign=saab-some
ReplyDeletehttps://www.saab.com/globalassets/cision/documents/2022/20220120-saab-awarded-indian-contract-for-at4-support-weapon-en-0-4163013.pdf
Dear Sir
ReplyDeleteI have read a news on internet that China has given J10C export version to Pakistan as aid (free of cost). I do not believe this. China is worse than Shylock in claiming it's pound of flesh.
What are your views on this report.
Prasunda
ReplyDeleteAn interesting article though it is too trite, isolating India being the plan of the whole world.
https://thewire.in/south-asia/debate-india-faces-jointmanship-from-china-and-pakistan-not-two-fronts
Dear Prasun,
ReplyDeleteHow is the AT4 superior than the Carl Gustav gun? May you please throw some light upon it? Further what's happening with IN!!!! Explosion in ship. Disgusting indeed!!! Are we battle ready?
To ASD: Carl Gustav’s launcher is re-usable. The AT-4 is a use-n-throw LAW whose launcher cannot be re-used.
ReplyDeleteTo NIKHIL M: They have been dry-leased, as I hasd explained in the previous thread.
To SANJEEV: Additional range, NAVIC GPS receiver & DATA Patterns-built SAR imaging monopulse seeker.
To ASHWATTHAMA: The Pralay will be inducted in large numbers as a SS-BSM.
To HARSH: Nothing from abroad.
To ANUP: This is what the Indian company says in its website:
https://www.anadrone.com/anadrone/aerial.html
Anadrone Systems Private Ltd, working in conjunction with QinetiQ Target Systems Ltd, UK, is in a unique position of being a one-stop for the supply of aerial targets to meet all Indian requirements. Many of the systems offered are already being manufactured or assembled in india under the Make-II initiative.
And this image of the company’s warehouse in Odisha can hardly qualify as a manufacturing facility:
https://www.anadrone.com/anadrone/img/prod2/2.jpg
To AVIATION: The L-band Swordfigh is licence-built Green Pine. Even with HPRs & AD-1/AD-2, the interception process will be deficient unless space-based early-warning satelltes are in place. Leave alone ATAGS, even Dhanush-45’s deliveries are behind schedule.
To JOYDEEP GHOSH: Russia’s SAMs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5Esx3gdFv0
If the designs of S-3, 4,.....etc. are old and outdated then why navy is accepting it.
ReplyDelete