Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 25 Oct 2014 22:12

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 2966 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 75  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 02:45 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Posts: 14074
Location: General Error : Bhery Phamous General !
why not have one that can target factors as well ? what about subtractions and additions ?
may be a calculator will do nicely ? :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 03:06 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 30 Nov 2008 01:06
Posts: 550
say enemy's advance party with SAM's is 10km ahead of its artillery and tank positions, they are shelling up to 20kms beyond their own troop front line, you could deploy your own and fight the war of attrition (body count grows not to mention time lost in setting up logistics)

or start using precision weapons, designing warheads with sub munitions isn't outside our own expertise, well that's my opinion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 05:56 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 2803
Location: KhyberDurra
Rahul M wrote:
vasu_ray wrote:
however, a 50km precision weapon that relies less on ground transportation and hence logistics, say fired from Dhruv/LCH further helps the infantry at the front line

someone pinch me !

Allah be prasied, my sarcasm missed the mark. :rotfl:

Let me try a more blunt one.
Can India make a death ray gun that fits the backpack of infantry soldier?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 08:52 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 30 Nov 2008 01:06
Posts: 550
whatever, shoulder fired SAMs exist

one doesn't need Nag's tank killing warhead to disable a artillery gun, or to bombard a post

booster(s) and warhead can be carried separately

is it feasible? anyways, exoskeletons are on the way as well

if 8 helina missiles can be flown on one Dhruv, why not one big booster and a sub munition warhead for increased range?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 09:09 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33288
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
Russia has a prototype air launched ATGM named Hermes with 15-20km range its claimed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 10:10 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Posts: 15140
Location: Chennai
Nag to be produced by Bharat Dynamics
Excerpts
Quote:
The Indian Amy has completed user trials of Nag, which is a modern, all-weather, anti-tank guided missile that can defeat the toughest armours.

The 4-km range, third generation, ‘fire and forget’ missile has been tested on both stationary and moving targets during day and night, according to defence scientists.

The Hyderabad-based defence public sector unit Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL) will manufacture the Nag missile.

In the winter trials carried out last year, the missile achieved six out of six successful hits on both stationary and moving targets. Similarly in the summer trials conducted in the last few days, the success rate has been total, he {Dr. Saraswat} said.

The Indian Army requires a few thousand Nags, each of which costs approximately Rs 50 lakh, when produced indigenously. Defence scientists are also working on a helicopter version, which would be integrated to the ALH (Advanced Light Helicopter).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 10:16 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33288
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
in high altitude will its range slightly increase?

I have a feeling chinese foot and vehicular patrols on those ATVs once spotted
at lorros range can targeted with such weapons ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 10:22 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 30 Nov 2008 01:06
Posts: 550
thanks Singha for the data point on Hermes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jul 2009 14:58 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Jan 2008 16:53
Posts: 180
Quote:
In the winter trials carried out last year, the missile achieved six out of six successful hits on both stationary and moving targets. Similarly in the summer trials conducted in the last few days, the success rate has been total

These 100% success rates for all missiles of DRDO somehow don't excite me. Why and how come all the tests are completely successful? And for the sake of argument, even if a test is 100% successful, then why is there need for repeated testing.
Nag is 100% successful, so was Akash and same for host of other missiles


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 03:49 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Aug 2002 11:31
Posts: 160
Location: Blighty
Babbupandey, have you tested ANY product for industrial purposes?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 04:11 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 08 Dec 2008 06:22
Posts: 82
If Nag missile is going to cost 50 lacs per peice, its hell of a costly missile and its targeting of any vehicle other than tanks wont be desirable. I think the NAMICA driver has to do cost benefit analysis before firing the missile on any target :mrgreen: . The Cost seems to be reason why even after Nag, we are buying Milan II and Konkurs on hundreds.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 04:45 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31
Posts: 1089
Sandipan wrote:
If Nag missile is going to cost 50 lacs per peice, its hell of a costly missile and its targeting of any vehicle other than tanks wont be desirable. I think the NAMICA driver has to do cost benefit analysis before firing the missile on any target :mrgreen: . The Cost seems to be reason why even after Nag, we are buying Milan II and Konkurs on hundreds.

Milan costs about 20 lakhs+ so it is not whole lot cheaper.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 05:07 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 10 May 2005 09:47
Posts: 174
Location: Mumbai
IIRC the IIR seeker component was imported from France.
This must have bumped up the cost.
Any gurus can shed light if the IIR seeker is fully indigenised ?
Bulk production and indeginisation should bring down the cost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 06:08 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 11008
Location: Illini Nation
No expert - even in my dreams - but, isn't the Milan a 2 Km, IR guidance, etc. Nag is supposed to be fire&forget, 4Km, hits the top of a tank, etc?

So, what gives? I would expect the Nag to be a lot more expensive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 06:52 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 29 May 2007 04:16
Posts: 411
NRao wrote:
No expert - even in my dreams - but, isn't the Milan a 2 Km, IR guidance, etc. Nag is supposed to be fire&forget, 4Km, hits the top of a tank, etc?

So, what gives? I would expect the Nag to be a lot more expensive.


Thank You Mullah Rao
Some people want to drink Brut Champagne and call it Dom Perrigone. Any Paki or chinese APC carrying 12-14 soldiers gets hit by Nag and annihilated at 4km range, this 50 lakh is worthe every paisa.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 10:59 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26
Posts: 667
Sandipan wrote:
If Nag missile is going to cost 50 lacs per peice, its hell of a costly missile and its targeting of any vehicle other than tanks wont be desirable. I think the NAMICA driver has to do cost benefit analysis before firing the missile on any target :mrgreen: . The Cost seems to be reason why even after Nag, we are buying Milan II and Konkurs on hundreds.



Refer back to the AI09 notes from BDL:

1. NAG - the missile costs 70lakhs out of which (imported) IIR seeker costs 35-40lakhs.. Konkur-M with the same range costs 10Lakhs.. (the 70lakh figure may be prototype costs.. 50lakh may be serial production costs - just guessing)

2. Indigenous IIR seeker not matured enough.. lot of work remaining..

3. Army does not want a mmw seeker NAG.. the NAG built with mmw seeker is generally larger/heavier than the IIR seeker proto.. that is what happened with the proto built with an imported mmw seeker.

4. IA so far placed LoI 500 Nags. Dont know if they will order more.

5. Army has on order from BDL for 15000 Knokur-M's and 4100 Milans.. there are also 2 export enquiries for Milan's.. File pending with MoD for clearence to service export enquiries


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 17:30 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Posts: 8336
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar
I think he meant to say that all our missiles (except the Agni series which had a few failures) seemed to be successful all the time but are still undergoing user trials and aren't being inducted? (Pandey-ji making use of sarcasm)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 19:55 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Posts: 583
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Singha wrote:
are there new antennas needed or the stick type ones currently in place for cellphone will suffice?

what is the ceiling of these 'radars' - only useful against low flyers or can detect hi-alt planes and drones too ?


Not related to main discussion, but somewhat similar, expecially after seeing some posts about antennas on the skin.

Unlike EW suites and cellphones, whose job is only to obtain the signal, not to triangulate or locate it in space, the Radar needs to do this; thus, physical geometry and arrangement of the elements of the array becomes important.

Conformal arrays are a whole new ball game altogether - if you see a radar, the elements are extremely rigid, and placed in a simple geometrical arrangement (flat, or concave circular or at most, parabolic). However, when you go to flexible arrays or conformal arrays, the simulation, processing and analysis becomes extremely tedious and resource-hungry, scaling up in terms of processing power very very rapidly. Flexible arrays are even worse, since you'll need motion sensors to calculate the exact position and velocity of the individual antenna.

Thus, these sort of arrays for radar uses or DF applications are some way off. May not be too far off, but not in the very near future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 21:04 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10
Posts: 1571
rakall wrote:
Refer back to the AI09 notes from BDL:

1. NAG - the missile costs 70lakhs out of which (imported) IIR seeker costs 35-40lakhs.. Konkur-M with the same range costs 10Lakhs.. (the 70lakh figure may be prototype costs.. 50lakh may be serial production costs - just guessing)

2. Indigenous IIR seeker not matured enough.. lot of work remaining..


Rakall: that's a serious cost differential. Any idea why we didnt go for a Russian IIR seeker (which I assume will be cheaper) - hindsight being 20/20? Also, this just exposes how weak DRDO is in reverse engineering. For all the fun we make of cheap Chinese copy-cats, they are way ahead of us in this area.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 21:24 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 38449
The Nag IR seeker, based on old 1990s data, was based on Mg Cd Telluride(MgCdTe) which is gold standard of IR seekrs. Ga As seekers are old hat. So there is technology development involved downstream. The old style seeker will require more power etc. if its now chosen.

Besides Rs 50 lakhs is $100K and even a dabba tank cost ~$2M. So look at the cost benefit ratio. As for Konkurs is cheaper etc., is it as effective as the Nag is the nagging :?: And isnt Konkurs wire guided so exposes the operator to shoot back?

Repeated successful testing establishes confidence limits. At least ten successful repeated tests(same target and conditions) give 99% confidence levels.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 21:29 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03
Posts: 1154
Even today, cellphone towers triangulate cellphones. In fact they can narrow down a cell phone to a couple of meters, they can track the movement of the cellphone in near-real time.

Why can't a software re-program convert all these towers into a radar network?

BTW all that sci-fi stuff in the latest Batman movie and others where a mega super computer is able to use the entire city's cellphone network as a surveillance device is not sci-fi any more.
I've discovered, that even our ordinary computers with multimedia devices (Speakers) can be a listening device over the internet - doesn't matter if windows software tells you that the mike is switched off or a mike is not connected! This is true, I have seen it on my laptop and my home PC!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 21:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16
Posts: 1511
ramana wrote:
The Nag IR seeker, based on old 1990s data, was based on Mg Cd Telluride(MgCdTe) which is gold standard of IR seekrs. Ga As seekers are old hat. So there is technology development involved downstream. The old style seeker will require more power etc. if its now chosen.

Besides Rs 50 lakhs is $100K and even a dabba tank cost ~$2M. So look at the cost benefit ratio. As for Konkurs is cheaper etc., is it as effective as the Nag is the nagging :?: And isnt Konkurs wire guided so exposes the operator to shoot back?

Repeated successful testing establishes confidence limits. At least ten successful repeated tests(same target and conditions) give 99% confidence levels.


A comparable third generation Anti-tank missile like Javelin cost $78,000(missile) + $162,000 (Launcher Reusable). Spike is supposed to be much cheaper.

Having said that, Nag is ours. If we can indiginise IIR and MW seekers in next 5 years, cost should come down considerably. Otherwise Nag will remain a niche player.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 22:03 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1507
Location: GSLV++
p_saggu wrote:
Even today, cellphone towers triangulate cellphones. In fact they can narrow down a cell phone to a couple of meters, they can track the movement of the cellphone in near-real time.

Why can't a software re-program convert all these towers into a radar network?

Cellphones communicate with the cellular network or can be tricked into communicating with the network. The "time of arrival" and "angle of arrival" data required for positioning a cellphone comes from transmissions from the cellphone itself - which are in the uplink band. The typical GSM cellular network base-station is FDD (frequency division duplex). So the base-station's transmissions in the downlink band are completely filtered out by the base-station's own uplink receivers. This prevents receiver-blocking where the base-station's receivers would be deafened by the base-station's own transmitters.

Enemy aircraft are not going to communicate with the cellular network in the uplink band. Reflections in other frequency bands from the aircraft are physically filtered out. A software upgrade will not suffice. Also note that even if the radio interface is reconfigured, the radio signals cannot be trunked to a centralised processor in analog or digital form because the bandwidth available will be grossly insufficient. Digital signal processing equipment will need to be moved to the "front end" of the network, i.e. every base-station, so that processed reflection information which would be low in bitrate can be transmitted digitally to a centralised processor. So now we need not only a software upgrade but also a radio hardware reconfig and smart/expensive processors at the front end of the network.

My personal opinion, as someone who works with cellular networks for a living, is that it would be far cheaper and better to make an independent network. The system would be completely reconfigurable as needs evolve over time. I also believe such a system is well within current Indian capability.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 22:42 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 2803
Location: KhyberDurra
PratikDas wrote:
p_saggu wrote:
Even today, cellphone towers triangulate cellphones. In fact they can narrow down a cell phone to a couple of meters, they can track the movement of the cellphone in near-real time.

Why can't a software re-program convert all these towers into a radar network?

Cellphones communicate with the cellular network or can be tricked into communicating with the network. The "time of arrival" and "angle of arrival" data required for positioning a cellphone comes from transmissions from the cellphone itself - which are in the uplink band. The typical GSM cellular network base-station is FDD (frequency division duplex). So the base-station's transmissions in the downlink band are completely filtered out by the base-station's own uplink receivers. This prevents receiver-blocking where the base-station's receivers would be deafened by the base-station's own transmitters.

Enemy aircraft are not going to communicate with the cellular network in the uplink band. Reflections in other frequency bands from the aircraft are physically filtered out. A software upgrade will not suffice. Also note that even if the radio interface is reconfigured, the radio signals cannot be trunked to a centralised processor in analog or digital form because the bandwidth available will be grossly insufficient. Digital signal processing equipment will need to be moved to the "front end" of the network, i.e. every base-station, so that processed reflection information which would be low in bitrate can be transmitted digitally to a centralised processor. So now we need not only a software upgrade but also a radio hardware reconfig and smart/expensive processors at the front end of the network.


I suggest that people first understand what the principle as well as difference between:

    Bistatic radar
    Mutistatic radar
    Passive radar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bistatic_radar

Quote:
My personal opinion, as someone who works with cellular networks for a living, is that it would be far cheaper and better to make an independent network. The system would be completely reconfigurable as needs evolve over time. I also believe such a system is well within current Indian capability.

The highlighted part is for sure "Satya vachan".

However I differ on the prior part. There is many practical ways to use Cellular network to realize Bistatic , Mutistatic and/or Passive radars (or a hybrid combination there of). In all cases one needs additional hardware in addition to Cellular network to realize it.

=============Added later ===========
It is passive radar that is easiest to realize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_radar

BTW US embargoed a Balkan country (Czech) that makes passive radars and later co-opted the manufacturer for money to not export to any other country, to ensure no other second/third world country can bye/own it.

IIRC Chinese also have Passive radars.

Indian hands are tied because they think their hands are tied.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VERA_passive_sensor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolchuga_passive_sensor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamara_passive_sensor

Quote:
Open literature sources claim VERA-E systems have been exported to Estonia, Pakistan and the United States. Newspaper reports also claimed that in January 2004 the Czech defence sales company, Omnipol, received licence to sell six systems to China. However, US government pressure on the Czech government resulted in the cancellation of this contract. Civil systems have been widely exported throughout Europe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 23:14 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Posts: 14074
Location: General Error : Bhery Phamous General !
sunilUpa wrote:
A comparable third generation Anti-tank missile like Javelin cost $78,000(missile) + $162,000 (Launcher Reusable). Spike is supposed to be much cheaper.

Having said that, Nag is ours. If we can indiginise IIR and MW seekers in next 5 years, cost should come down considerably. Otherwise Nag will remain a niche player.

this is really unfair comparison. milan, javelin and spike are light man portable ATGMs, entirely different class from Nag. milan and konkurs are also wire guided and hence 2nd gen.

in terms of class and generation, Nag is in the same group as nimrod, hellfire or brimstone.

the germans are currently developing an anti-tank missile with almost identical specifications as Nag called pars.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 23:55 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10
Posts: 1571
I dont think the comparison is unfair. (From Wikipedia) Both man-portable and vehicle-launched versions (extended range) of Spike exists. It is a 3rd gen, fire & forget, top attack ATGM - similar to Nag. Range is similar, with the ER versions having a range of 8 KM. Seeker is IIR. Dimensions are similar to Nag as well.

If you look at Javelin, it has similar stats. The area where Spike and Javelin seem to have an advantage over Nag is that they have man-portable versions as well.

The other missiles you mentioned Hellfire, Brimstone etc - all seem air-launched. So they would be comparable to Helina. Another interesting thing to note is that these air-launched ones all use mmw seekers, which provide an all weather ability. Seems more versatile than IIR seekers. So hopefully we will master mmw tech and the Army (and/or the Air Force in the case of Helina) will accept it


Last edited by Prem Kumar on 07 Jul 2009 23:57, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2009 23:56 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25
Posts: 377
p_saggu wrote:
Even today, cellphone towers triangulate cellphones. In fact they can narrow down a cell phone to a couple of meters, they can track the movement of the cellphone in near-real time.


Not really.. only possible with synchronous networks like CDMA, not gsm or umts. Even with cdma, there are a lot of practical difficulties, oscillators are not upto spec, location of the emitters changes randomly and so on.

Bottomline is, the emitters need to be 'managed' quite well for this purpose. With private companies managing these, the goal is not triangulation, but efficient handling of voice and data. These are sometimes at cross purpose to each other.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 00:57 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 2803
Location: KhyberDurra
Guys forget this phone position tracking. Cellphone based tracking requires a working cell phone and then one can do time of flight to determine location. Here we are talking of detecting and tracking an "RF passive" enemy flying vehicle.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 03:04 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16
Posts: 1511
Rahul M wrote:
sunilUpa wrote:
A comparable third generation Anti-tank missile like Javelin cost $78,000(missile) + $162,000 (Launcher Reusable). Spike is supposed to be much cheaper.

Having said that, Nag is ours. If we can indiginise IIR and MW seekers in next 5 years, cost should come down considerably. Otherwise Nag will remain a niche player.

this is really unfair comparison. milan, javelin and spike are light man portable ATGMs, entirely different class from Nag. milan and konkurs are also wire guided and hence 2nd gen.

in terms of class and generation, Nag is in the same group as nimrod, hellfire or brimstone.

the germans are currently developing an anti-tank missile with almost identical specifications as Nag called pars.


Hmm not really, in fact Nag not being man portable looses against Spike or Javelin. The range, and technology are comparable (even though Javelin and Spike are man portable).

Another way to look at this is, all Nag's are concentrated in one place at one time. One hit to Namika, you loose everything. Apart from the cost, you just just lost the extended range ATM capability. Where as with man portable systems, your assets are dispersed and it is highly unlikely that you loose all of them at one go. It doesn't matter how many Namika's each batallion has, the fact remains that all fire power is concentrated in very distinct, relatively easy to identify and destroy targets.

Unless a man portable Nag is developed, I am afraid Nag will remain a Niche player.

All said and done, the men who developed Nag have their reason and rationale, it is just that the armchair Lieutenant like moi have limited understanding.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 03:44 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55
Posts: 6093
sunil

Man-portable ATGM and NAMICA have their own applications. The former is primarily used by infantry engaging armor, the latter is for armor engaging armor or helicopters/UAV/Aircraft engaging armor. So Nag is not in a niche role. A few NAMICAs accompanying a armored thrust will make a decisive difference to armor-on-armor engagements, a few LCHs equipped with Nag can blunt any armored thrust.

It is not the case that NAMICA is vulnerable to tanks. NAMICA has its own advantages. The range is in excess of 4KM and with LOBL capability, there are very few tanks which can engage the NAMICA. Warfare is all about mobility, detection range and engagement range. Take western tanks for example, Unkil's tanks prevailed over iraqi T72 primarily because of detection and engagement ranges. Most T72 hardly had a chance to fire. We need this kind of advantage over enemy armor in the neighborhood.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 04:59 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Posts: 14074
Location: General Error : Bhery Phamous General !
Quote:
Hmm not really, in fact Nag not being man portable looses against Spike or Javelin. The range, and technology are comparable (even though Javelin and Spike are man portable).

saar ji, missiles in the Nag class can never be man portable, all the examples I've listed are in the 45-50 kg category.

MANP ATGMS come in the 10-15 kg category.

if the second kind was enough, the very countries that make the javelin and spike also make the hellfire and the nimrod would have stuck with the former only! MANPATGMs is simply a class which will be filled by licensed maal in the foreseeable future.

if ever the IA/IAF goes for assault helos in a big way, Nag will have its role. that role can't be filled by the likes of milan 2.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 05:01 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Posts: 1525
Location: Gora Paki
Gents, in regards to the Nag its not fair to compare it with systems such as ze Javelin and others bcoz for the countries that have developed these systems they have had a bucket load of experience and thus have reached where they are now. For the ebil Yindoos this is the 1st gen of a dedicated Indian ATM. In doing so we have caught up quite well with the gora systems. IMVHO if this is our 1st gen then surely the next gen of our ATMs will be even more potent and capable. Take this FWIW but looking at the Nag I very sincerely doubt the 4 km range just given the size of the mijjile I would think that the thing will fly farther than 4 kms may be the ebil Yindoos are just mentioning that as a median range :?:

In terms of Namica being easily detectable, I would imagine that the Namica will be accompanying an armoured force consisting of Tanks, Apcs, ityadi. Given the nature of the Namica it will be shoot n scoot tactics, and not up front engagement like ze tanks. Namica will be a great asset for recce forces. I think of them as a sniper for the armoured forces who will be able to take out multiple armoured targets and evacuate with minimal detection (detection I suppose would be affected by the terrain, the enemy and of course the way the engagement occurs)

JMT


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 05:21 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16
Posts: 1511
Rahul M wrote:
Quote:
Hmm not really, in fact Nag not being man portable looses against Spike or Javelin. The range, and technology are comparable (even though Javelin and Spike are man portable).

saar ji, missiles in the Nag class can never be man portable, all the examples I've listed are in the 45-50 kg category.

MANP ATGMS come in the 10-15 kg category.

if the second kind was enough, the very countries that make the javelin and spike also make the hellfire and the nimrod would have stuck with the former only! MANPATGMs is simply a class which will be filled by licensed maal in the foreseeable future.

if ever the IA/IAF goes for assault helos in a big way, Nag will have its role. that role can't be filled by the likes of milan 2.



Rahul JI, so are you saying that Nimrod, Hellfire and Nag are similar products?

Nimrod weighs twice as much as Nag, has six times the range, Hellfire is is in the same weight class (if there is such classification) as Nag but has double the range and costs half as much as Nag (if we believe 50L as the eventual cost of Nag).

Namica's advantage may be in capability to engage multiple targets rapidly.

Anjun saab why assume that enemy doesn't have similar range missiles to take out Namica? why assume only Tanks will be firing at Namica? How about infantry firing Javelin? or a 12.5 mm anti-tank gun?

Any way even the man-portable anti-tank missiles can and have been mounted on tracked vehicles.

An exact comparison will be with another ATM which is available as vehicle mounted version only. I can't remember any such systems, please list if you know any. (this is a serious question, not sarcasm, I really don't know)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 05:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16
Posts: 1511
andy B wrote:
Gents, in regards to the Nag its not fair to compare it with systems such as ze Javelin and others bcoz for the countries that have developed these systems they have had a bucket load of experience and thus have reached where they are now. For the ebil Yindoos this is the 1st gen of a dedicated Indian ATM. In doing so we have caught up quite well with the gora systems. IMVHO if this is our 1st gen then surely the next gen of our ATMs will be even more potent and capable. Take this FWIW but looking at the Nag I very sincerely doubt the 4 km range just given the size of the mijjile I would think that the thing will fly farther than 4 kms may be the ebil Yindoos are just mentioning that as a median range :?:

In terms of Namica being easily detectable, I would imagine that the Namica will be accompanying an armoured force consisting of Tanks, Apcs, ityadi. Given the nature of the Namica it will be shoot n scoot tactics, and not up front engagement like ze tanks. Namica will be a great asset for recce forces. I think of them as a sniper for the armoured forces who will be able to take out multiple armoured targets and evacuate with minimal detection (detection I suppose would be affected by the terrain, the enemy and of course the way the engagement occurs)

JMT


Andy saheb, I am only comparing the cost to costliest ATM missile in world - Javelin, not weight of the system.

I want to see Nag not only in the armory of IA, but widely exported too. That's why I was comparing cost. I am not dissing Nag.

Just to clarify, before things get heated up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 07:57 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Posts: 1525
Location: Gora Paki
sunilUpa wrote:
Andy saheb, I am only comparing the cost to costliest ATM missile in world - Javelin, not weight of the system.

I want to see Nag not only in the armory of IA, but widely exported too. That's why I was comparing cost. I am not dissing Nag.

Just to clarify, before things get heated up.


AoA Mullah Sunil-nullah dont worry mate I knew you meant well, besied I now think I have been reading BRF to know who ze typical "Fire-Bugs" are...so its all good the United Progressive Alliance is safe... :twisted:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 08:27 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03
Posts: 1154
Can Namica engage multiple targets at once in a salvo launch? This would be a wonderful thing to have, basically we are talking of more number of seekers on the vehicle.

It would be great, if the Namica would sneak upto an enemy tank column, let loose a salvo of 4 or 6 Nags and then be gone before the enemy could try and locate it. Just a few namicas could stop a full regiment dead in their tracks with relative ease.

This is a very potent force multiplier to have. wrt pakistan, where speed is of essence, something like this will ensure that our own tank regiments can quickly burst through anything that the pakis can throw at them. Since we envisage a short war, we are talking all about cold starts, we need the ability to make it short and sweet for our forces.


Last edited by p_saggu on 08 Jul 2009 08:33, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 08:33 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Posts: 1525
Location: Gora Paki
^^^ Well given that ze Nag is a fire and forget missile. I would assume that with no "on-going" guidance required for it to go meet the target, a namica can come out of hiding fire away a few and get the hell outta of there....if they can extend the range say 20% I can see these buggers playing havoc with incoming tank column hidding in the hills snipping a tank and then vanishing....that would be a sight! :twisted:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 08:35 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03
Posts: 1154
Man! there's something wrong with my memory.
I remember DDM's 'Hit-to-kill' line wrt the Nag :rotfl: , but forgot the most important 'Fire-and-forget' line :((


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 09:38 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 65
sunilUpa wrote:
Nimrod weighs twice as much as Nag, has six times the range, Hellfire is is in the same weight class (if there is such classification) as Nag but has double the range and costs half as much as Nag (if we believe 50L as the eventual cost of Nag).

I thought the Hellfire was solely air-to-ground - how much would Nag's range improve if it were fired a2g?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2009 09:45 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 6843
I belibve that Hell fire is laser guided and not fire and forget and besides any airlaunched missile gets a slight advantage in range beacause of A) if the platform is moving it gets a bit of momemtum, or B) launched from a 100 feet or so it does have to fight gravity just to get out of the launcher.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 2966 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 75  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group