Bharat Rakshak

but isn't it a standard OP to procure a twin seater for training purposes? i mean when i look at procurement stats for MiG21,FL,BIS and so on, MiG29, Navy's KUB etc.
I understand that there has been a shift to twin seat config from now on as far as Su30 or PAKFA is concerned. But has that policy shift also been applied to Jaguars?

Would it make sense for India to acquire AC-130 type gunships for mountain warfare?

My take on this is that if provided sufficient aircover, the AC-130 with 105 mm howitzers can pick out targets that are hard to reach for ground based howitzers, also they could stay out of range of potential MANPAD threats..

Air cover against what, MANPADS, AAA and SAM? AC130 is more like a sitting duck.. Even Canberras, MIG 21(?), 23s was shot above Himalayas. AFAIK uncle sam dont even use AC130 during day time.

Sir,
How to upload new picture or youtube videos?? Kindly help me..

I have a noob question. What is the payload bay of Nirbhay missile. Is it possible it to carry 5-6 of R-77 or Astra type missiles in its bay and lurk around important enemy airbases (during war). Once we have confirmed a formation take off from that base, queue the Nirbhay to release the payload, and AAM's taking their targets on their own?

Raogaru the role that you envisage is of a UCAV (Unmanned Combat Aerial vehicle) like Bredator-djinn's cousin Reaper-bin-Pakhanistani, not a cruise missile.

For pictures, upload them on a photo sharing website like photobucket and paste the link here using the 'img' tab.
Videos, upload them on youtube and use the 'youtube' tab.

atreya sir thankx.. with your help i was able to post the pictures... Its in BENIS thread...

Your welcome. And no need to 'sir' me

Using this forum I want to put forward idea of having an inexpensive basic UCAV using Kaveri engine which carries a pair of deadly machine guns and a couple of AAMs to the sky.
Which can attack and down Fishbed swarm attacks !! No need to put even a radar on it.

Identify swarms from a distance of say 300 KMs away using AWACS and activate these ACs keep guiding them (what I call "BATs") remotely towards their targets and burst the guns open.

Cheap way of eliminating Swarms what say guys we already have all the tech at hand just integration and testing is required.

raghuraj,
concept is good. but if enemy fires AAM/SAM towars this drone how will it survive?

No worry we will make them cheap and make them enough we must surprise swarms to achive best results.

When we attack SWARMs enemy can not use SAM as it will be counter productive for say just 5 such BATs attacking a bigger swarm (specially at night) will confuse them, now add tactics to it confused them enough by BATs formation so firing of AAM also cannibalize.

Friends, I have a newbie query...

There has been a lot of news about recent success of Agni IV and about the technologies involved.

When compared to Agni III's weight of 48 tons, A4 with 17 tons is only approx 37% of A3's weight, but approximately compares to the quoted range of A3. I have read about the high-tech navigation innovations in A4 and with the use of composite, the weight has been reduced. But will replacing maraged steel with composites give such an asymmetric advantage to A4 comparatively to its predecessor? If it is, then its a quantum leap in missile tech for us, no?? With this tech, we will be able to develop ICBMs in relatively lower weight class than others, or at least from what was expected from us, no??

Or, is there something more than that meets the eye with respect to Agni III with such an humongous weight of 48 tons??

"If bulava missile took some where around 30 minutes or more to cover a range of 8000+ km. It reached an apogee of around 1000 km.", then, wouldn't the range of A4 be much higher than whats being quoted when it has reached an apogee of 900 km approx??

I guess there's a lot of ambiguity in the officially quoted figures.

But, please do shed some light for the pre-KGite in the Rocket science class...

A&N islands is very vital for our security against China. I personally stayed in Port Blair for around 6 years & I can quite confidently say that our Naval & Air asset there is negligible. We should build a strong navy & air force base there as soon as possible atleast at the same rate as we are doing in the rest of NE region. In case of a standoff with china, we need to make sure that we have choked them within strait of malacca. Under no circumstances we should allow PLAN submarines/surface vessels to sneak into Bay of Bengal.

I guess we need to develop following assests in A&N islands as soon as possible.

1)Base at least 1 squadron of sukhoi 30, preferrably in port blair as its more immune to effects of Tsunami as against Nicobar Islands- Under Airforce control.

2)Base long range bombers with crusie missiles/anti ship missiles as Singha suggested- Under Airforce Control.

3)Base few P8- I aircrafts for surveillance against submarines.- Under Navy control.

4)Long range surveillence equipments such as radars, etc-Under control of Airforce/Army.

5) A full fledged submarine base, with emergency repairing facility- Navy control.

6)Hidden Missile silos dispersed all along Andaman Islands-Army control.

7)Maybe a Carrier battle group in future, permenently stationed in Andamans.

Since, we have an unified command in Andamans, this will help us in improving the joint combat effectiveness of our military.

Why dont interceptors like mig21 have side view mirrors or a camera with wide angle lens ? IMO it will help the aircraft in front know the altitude of the pursuer

thanks a lot. it was great to read.

they have rear view mirrors.

http://rparmanik.wordpress.com/

Did not know where to post.

What is that on a Mirage 2000?

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/68 ... 26395.jpg/

ELTA EL/L 8222 self-protection jammer.

Remora ECM pod

yup, I was wrong.
remora
http://www.acig.org/artman/uploads/ecm_ ... _ready.jpg
8222
http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/FILES/8/26548.jpg

A nice compilation of the LGM-118 testing..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHlYc_MzvLk

I have a question, what is being tested at 1:27?

and a interesting collapsible nozzle @ 3:17

My fellow Birathers, greetings, new here, looking forward to being an active member.

Welcome

Now, you shall be baptized and re-christened by the bradmins

Well being a hardcore fan defence maniac, baptism is best when it's baptism by fire

Bumblebee,
I don't think u caught his drift, its the re-christening which would be fiery

http://i43.tinypic.com/mrg39u.jpg

Saw this gun in OFB pavillion in IITF 2011 along with a much better looking INSAS. Any idea if it's indeed INSAS too ? Both had same magazines and almsot similar dimensions, except for stock
Notice the new colour scheme. I liked it

Jamwal ji, are there are other pics from other angles? Or close ups?
Because the gun right in front looks quite different from the INSAS. The magazine is actually quite longer, almost as big as the INSAS LMG mag. Even that part which you hold in the front while firing (I don't know what it is called) is different from INSAS. It actually resembles MSMC's 'holder'

^^ Looks like ExCalibur

Jamwal mian,
Do you have a picture from another angle???
I don't know why but i feel this is another avatar of the Excalibur.
Added Later- I see Sharmaji has beaten me to it.

i have question

Why didn't we started our LCA with a Russian engine like the pandas till kaveri gets matured what is the reason for going for an American one please gurus throw some light

Atreya jii, It's call stock or butt

INSAS was marked "5.56mm Assault rifle Fixed Stock" while this one was simply marked "5.56mm Assault rifle".
Sorry, I don't have any other picture as this one was taken from a friends phone. Quality is bad because the display was revolving. It doesn't look like Excalibur. Grip area is very different and looks much more ergonomic. Perhaps experts like ArmenT can identify this.

Nearby, there was a picture of a Sten gun with a silencer as long as the gun itself.

EDIT: Found it. Its AMOGH. http://ofbindia.nic.in/products/data/we ... add_31.htm



• AMOGH Carbine 5.56 mm is specially designed and developed for close quarter battle (CQB) role.
• It fires 5.56 x 30 mm ammunition specially developed for carbine role.
• The weapon is ergonomically designed, light in weight, easy to carry, handle, operate and maintain
• Barrel of the weapon is chromium plated for longer life.
• It has ambidextrous lever change operation.
• It is provided with Reflex sight & Bayonet as accessories.

Del

VinayGji,
Could be because the engines have a much better MTBF.

Which Russian engine would you propose they would have used? Assuming that you mean RD-33..
Kaveri and GE-404 have closer diameters while RD-33 has a much larger diameter. On top of that RD-33 has a "much" lower thrust rating.
But even if we discount all that, RD-33 at that time was a highly problematic engine. Remember the smoke and low MTBO of old IAF Mig-29s? So, it was hardly an appropriate engine to be used safely on LCA.

Gaur Ji sorry for not being clear in my question

I was actually proposing SMR-95 A model of RD series for upgrading international 3rd generation jet fighters. where The accessory gearbox is repositioned below the engine, length can be varied depending on the adopted aircraft fuselage. The flight performance and combat efficiency of these fighter equipped with the new engine improved by a factor ranging from 1.2 to 3.0. Owing to the SMR-95 excellent gas flow stability against ambient disturbances, including the use of onboard weapons, there are no restrictions on aircraft control. These engines also have a high rate of thrust increase and, consequently, flight acceleration, which is especially critical for front-line fighters.

which would have been easy since this engine was developed during the mid 90s same time when the Tejas was on the drawing board so the adjustments in the diameter would have been possible because the it dosent mention the minimum diameter of fuselage but the maximum diameter is 1040mm according to klimov and Kaveri 910mm and GE 889mm so adjustment might have been possiable since tejas was still on drawing board or prototype stage . And also GTX-35VS "Kaveri" Full-scale development was authorized in April 1989 if we would have invested in SMR-95 A which was in developmental stage during the same period where the K 10 Program which is a Joint Venture (JV) partnership with a foreign engine manufacturer would have been done with klimov in the 90's rather than July 2007. the hiccups like Kaveri had a tendency to "throw" turbine blades, which required securing blades from SNECMA as well as digital engine control systems and other technical issues would have been solved. critical tech input from klimov might have helped kaveri to achieve its dead line

SMR-95 A

that still gives only 81.4KN!!

how could it have helped (keeping aside design modifications)?

double post

what i mean is SMR-95 A achieved 81.4KN with full operational clearance in 90s if we would have got that tech or a Joint Venture (JV) partnership in the 90's we could have improved it buy now and the tech inputs gained would have been used to solve all the current issues by now and kaveri would have been operational