Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 25 Apr 2011 16:17

rohitvats wrote: The point is, you don't have answers, apart from usual rants.

How does the IA become bad customer of BRO which is manned by IA officer cadre from Sappers? and same for GREF - which is managed by the IA?

Rohit,

With due respects. You will have to answer some of the previous queries to you in order for me to answer this or future queries from you "in this matter." I don't like one way Q&A. It has to be both sides in order to make a conversation, otherwise it sounds like something else.

My opinion on Army will change based on my perception on their acts and how I interpret them. Please be gracious enough for me to air my opinion unmolested based on my paragraph above.

If you think, I rant, I have noted your opinion.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 25 Apr 2011 16:58

IAF scouting for long-range missiles

The question is that will the IAF have diffrent BVR for diffrent fighters or will the Astra be the single BVR weapon with the IAF. In addition, if the posted article is true, then where does that leave the Astra? Will there be an assurance that it will not face the same situation like that Arjun, NAG. In the event the deal mentioned the article goes ahead.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 25 Apr 2011 17:29

Would the TOW and the Nag be using the same type of explosive in the warhead?

Would the more developed weapons manufacturers be using better explosives / propellants, lighter weight bodies etc etc?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Apr 2011 17:36

I am kind of thinking our R27 and R77 stocks are reaching end of shelf life in blocks...

and since Rus has no in-service replacement, ...

Mica EM and Amraam are the only games in town at present, with Meteor to follow "sometime fter 2015 depending on funding levels" and the JADM (joint air dominance missile) "sometime after 2020" ....

any MRCA choice will definitely bring in a new BVR and WVR aam type.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 25 Apr 2011 17:55

Get the feeling that that the IAF and the rest of the military thinks sending RFIs at the drop of a hat comes at no cost.

kvraghavaiah · Post by **kvraghavaiah** » 25 Apr 2011 18:42

I think, IAF can not depend exclusively on ASTRA. It needs some missiles of better ranges than ASTRA (like 130-150 km range) too. So, it is good to buy long range missiles if available in the market. Also, ASTRA is not still ready for induction. In year 2003, i read a news that Astra will be ready for induction by 2010. Now it is 2011, I think that ASTRA will be ready only by 2015. Astra is in developmental trails yet.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 Apr 2011 18:50

I don't think there is any BVRAAM in the world today that seriously guarantees a kill at ranges above 80 km except in the most ideal circumstances. There is a lot of hype and no manufacturer is going to claim that his BVRAAM has a smaller range than some other missile.

This is what Prodyut Das implies in his latest article - but the reason he quotes is interesting. He says that really long range BVRAAMs need to be big missiles and the race nowadays is to make so called BVRAAMs smaller and lighter to fit on existing platforms including the internal bays on newer "stealth" aircraft.

What is needed is a Brahmos size BVRAAM carried 2-4 per plane on a large fighter. The current bunch are bantam weight and middle weight pretenders in a class that needs heavyweights. We need a 500-1000 kg missile and an aircraft to lug it. Not 150 kg.

In any case if you can carry a missle that hits reliably at 200 km - it will actually need a max range of 300 km. And if you carry a missile with a max range of 300 km you need a big enough radar to see out to 400 km. Our puny fighters of today are not up to the job - at least as per Prodyut Das' eminently believable (to me) arguments.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Apr 2011 19:44

shiv wrote:In any case if you can carry a missle that hits reliably at 200 km - it will actually need a max range of 300 km. And if you carry a missile with a max range of 300 km you need a big enough radar to see out to 400 km. Our puny fighters of today are not up to the job - at least as per Prodyut Das' eminently believable (to me) arguments.

I am not sure besides a BIG Aircraft and BIG Missile to execute long range task which is rightly mentioned , how much of a issue IFF is , lets say if you have a BIG Aircraft like Mig-31 or MKI and BIG Radar like Irbis/BARS , if IFF is really a issue.

Did Prodyut Das mentioned any thing about IFF challenges for long range engagements ?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 Apr 2011 20:03

Austin wrote:
Did Prodyut Das mentioned any thing about IFF challenges for long range engagements ?

I think he does mention IFF in passing - but the article is not aimed at talking AAMs at all - but Das has this habit of picking out a lot of things he sees as absurd and pointing them out ruthlessly. The article talks of the problems of chasing the chimera called "latest tech" when real solutions can be found from what is in hand. He is pointing in the direction of a large fighter using existing tech. But most of what he says is OT for this thread - but I was struck by his pointing out that really long range AAMs don't exist and if they are made they will need long range detection as well. He has been scathing of the internal bays of existing top of the line fighters, and points out how the B-52 could easily and casually be adapted to carry almost anything that the boffins produce by name of missile or munition.

jai · Post by **jai** » 25 Apr 2011 20:30

rohitvats wrote:
chackojoseph wrote: <SNIP> IMHO, IA is a bad customer to desi's. But knowing your Q's and my A's, I want to give the argument a rest.
The point is, you don't have answers, apart from usual rants.

How does the IA become bad customer of BRO which is manned by IA officer cadre from Sappers? and same for GREF - which is managed by the IA?

May be not bad customers in this case, but the fact still remains that a strategic area like Laddakh still remains out of bounds and cut off for half the year even now after all these years...BRO, GREF and Sapper officers notwithstanding. I am sure IA must be the laughing stock of PLA and Porkis on this issue, not to mention Boeing, who stand to make billions selling C 17's.

Certainly not sterling ownership by Sappers there. The CAG report highlighting corruption and irregularities becomes all the more damning considering that Sappers officers and their leadership is being accused of wide scale corruption.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Apr 2011 21:07

jai wrote: <SNIP> May be not bad customers in this case, but the fact still remains that a strategic area like Laddakh still remains out of bounds and cut off for half the year even now after all these years...BRO, GREF and Sapper officers notwithstanding. I am sure IA must be the laughing stock of PLA and Porkis on this issue, not to mention Boeing, who stand to make billions selling C 17's.

Certainly not sterling ownership by Sappers there. The CAG report highlighting corruption and irregularities becomes all the more damning considering that Sappers officers and their leadership is being accused of wide scale corruption.

So, Ladakh remaining cut-off from rest of the country is because of lack of foresight on the part of the Indian Army? How do you know that IA did not ask for all-weather roads or passes all these years? And since you seem to know about these things, can you tell me why the Rohtang Tunnel work was initiated only recently when the feasibility was done as far back as mid-80s? Or why it was delayed further even after start was done in eary 2000s? I'm sure you've reason(s) to blame IA for this as well.

John · Post by **John** » 25 Apr 2011 21:30

Sid wrote:
Nag's size is comparable to TOW, which btw can be fired from even a jonga (i.e. smallest road mobile vehicle in any military). For Nag you will only need a TI sight as it's a fire and forget missile.

As pointed out ToW (which itself is considered big) is much smaller than Nag also Nag has top down attack correct? This is not useful against soft targets has it been modified for that like Hellfire?

For better or worse Nag size is very limiting and no way can it replace Konkurs nor can IA procure it rather than ToW. Yes fault does fall with IA for defining those requirements for Nag but you can't blame the former for procuring other missiles.

What is needed is a Brahmos size BVRAAM carried 2-4 per plane on a large fighter. The current bunch are bantam weight and middle weight pretenders in a class that needs heavyweights. We need a 500-1000 kg missile and an aircraft to lug it. Not 150 kg.

How exactly can this missile chase down target 300 km away? Aircraft are whole different ball park than ships, in 10 minutes it takes for the missile to get there an enemy aircraft could be anywhere in 30k km radius.

So you need to pack a pretty large seeker on the missile to detect targets at that range (even brahmos' seeker has range of only 50-100 km against ships) or you can use mix of guidance from launch aircraft+terminal active seeker.

Also you get into same problem that faced Phoenix where enemy aircraft could simply hit the after burner and disengage and you just wasted a 2 million dollar missile.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Apr 2011 21:42

John, what people fail to understand is that Nag is a dedicated missile on the lines of Hellfire. And it will require dedicated electro-optronics to tap it's maximum potential.

Digressing a bit - unlike PA, IA has very few dedicated ATGM Battalions (under the aegis of Brigade of Guards). What it can do is with a dedicated Recce & Support Battalion for each Infantry Division - these can have a ATGM company with NAMICA. In the short-to-medium term, the price of the system may hinder large scale induction of the NAMICA. I really hope the next F&F ATGM is Indian and no more Javelin.

kvraghavaiah · Post by **kvraghavaiah** » 26 Apr 2011 06:32

I wonder why IAF is so late to procure long range Air to air or surface to air missiles. It should have possessed them readily by now. If it is sending RFPs and RFIs now, when does it get them and when does it induct them? where was the multi billion budget going all these days. Spending on kicked back purchases of army?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Apr 2011 07:35

John wrote:
What is needed is a Brahmos size BVRAAM carried 2-4 per plane on a large fighter. The current bunch are bantam weight and middle weight pretenders in a class that needs heavyweights. We need a 500-1000 kg missile and an aircraft to lug it. Not 150 kg.
How exactly can this missile chase down target 300 km away? Aircraft are whole different ball park than ships, in 10 minutes it takes for the missile to get there an enemy aircraft could be anywhere in 30k km radius.

Of course it is a different ball game. That is what I am saying. The arguments you make hold true even for aircraft 80 km away. By the time a missile flies 80 km the aircraft only needs to let the missile miss by 50 meters - and that is enough for the aircraft to escape. So this business of BVRAAM is a lot of hype.

People talk so much about BVRAAM and kill capability at 100 km plus. Why 100 km? Why not 300 km? After all 300 km would be that much more desirable. The reason for the "100 km" limit is simple - it is the size of missile and the capability of detection, tracking and guidance systems, and the size of missile that can be accommodated on most currently available platforms (planes). If the Tejas gets an Astra that can kill at 130 km - does the Tejas have radar that can track the target from 200 km, identify it and fire the missile so the plane gets hit at 130 km? The same arguments hold true for all aircraft now - including Rafale. Gripen, F-22 etc.

None of them has the capability detect and track at 400 km, nor do they have the capacity to carry a hypothetical 300 km range AAM that can kill reliably at 200 km. That is why everyone is making exaggerated claims that their missile "can kill" at 100 plus km when the practical limit for reliable BVRAAM intercept in this day and age is about 50-60 km. Oh of course you "can kill" at 100 km under ideal circumstances - target not maneuvering and flying level towards you. But if you can kill reliably at 100 km - surely it would be more sensible to scale up and talk of killing at 300 km.

jai · Post by **jai** » 26 Apr 2011 08:10

rohitvats wrote:So, Ladakh remaining cut-off from rest of the country is because of lack of foresight on the part of the Indian Army? How do you know that IA did not ask for all-weather roads or passes all these years? And since you seem to know about these things, can you tell me why the Rohtang Tunnel work was initiated only recently when the feasibility was done as far back as mid-80s? Or why it was delayed further even after start was done in eary 2000s? I'm sure you've reason(s) to blame IA for this as well.

Lets talk about results and not who wanted what. Who is responsible and accountable for the defence of this country ? Creation and maintainance of all border roads is whose KRA and accountability ? Please see my first post on this topic.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Apr 2011 08:23

>> He is pointing in the direction of a large fighter using existing tech.

this is a direction the chinese are officially following - with the J-11 su27 clone and now the newly unveiled J-15 su33 clone. ofcourse in parallel they are also looking at the more stealthier J20 types and perhaps a Silent Flanker as discussed in the china watch thread.

but it needs a certain level of tech to be survivable. the chinese J8 and FBC-1 while being large, do not look survivable enough to me.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 26 Apr 2011 10:11

jai wrote:
rohitvats wrote:So, Ladakh remaining cut-off from rest of the country is because of lack of foresight on the part of the Indian Army? How do you know that IA did not ask for all-weather roads or passes all these years? And since you seem to know about these things, can you tell me why the Rohtang Tunnel work was initiated only recently when the feasibility was done as far back as mid-80s? Or why it was delayed further even after start was done in eary 2000s? I'm sure you've reason(s) to blame IA for this as well.
Lets talk about results and not who wanted what. Who is responsible and accountable for the defence of this country ? Creation and maintainance of all border roads is whose KRA and accountability ? Please see my first post on this topic.

BRO and for that matter IA cannot do anything without government sanction. This is not a banana republic.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 26 Apr 2011 11:45

jai wrote: Lets talk about results and not who wanted what. Who is responsible and accountable for the defence of this country ? Creation and maintainance of all border roads is whose KRA and accountability ? Please see my first post on this topic.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 26 Apr 2011 11:47

kvraghavaiah wrote:I wonder why IAF is so late to procure long range Air to air or surface to air missiles. It should have possessed them readily by now. If it is sending RFPs and RFIs now, when does it get them and when does it induct them? where was the multi billion budget going all these days. Spending on kicked back purchases of army?

Why don't you look up the numbers and let us know - before making wild allegations.

kvraghavaiah · Post by **kvraghavaiah** » 26 Apr 2011 18:14

rohitvats wrote:
kvraghavaiah wrote:I wonder why IAF is so late to procure long range Air to air or surface to air missiles. It should have possessed them readily by now. If it is sending RFPs and RFIs now, when does it get them and when does it induct them? where was the multi billion budget going all these days. Spending on kicked back purchases of army?
Why don't you look up the numbers and let us know - before making wild allegations.

why don't you study the history of Indian politics and keep quiet instead of making ignorant allegations?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 26 Apr 2011 18:24

kvraghavaiah wrote: <SNIP> why don't you study the history of Indian politics and keep quiet instead of making ignorant allegations?

Why don't you regale me with stories of how defence budget was manipulated to ensure IA gets more money for capex and hence, people itself make more money in bribes and how poor IAF/IN got left behind?

Or maybe, the requirement for the IAF came now, as they expect the missiles to run out of life in x years and using the lead time+Indian proclivity of delays in induction, they came out with RFI. And, in their scheme of requirements and order of priority, certain things are being bought now, once the main items have been taken car of.

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 26 Apr 2011 19:59

kvraghavaiah wrote:
kvraghavaiah wrote:I wonder why IAF is so late to procure long range Air to air or surface to air missiles. It should have possessed them readily by now. If it is sending RFPs and RFIs now, when does it get them and when does it induct them? where was the multi billion budget going all these days. Spending on kicked back purchases of army?
why don't you study the history of Indian politics and keep quiet instead of making ignorant allegations?

Looking at your location we don't doubt your capacity to talk about corruption and bribes.. and its political history..

Now coming to defense purchases.. can you tell us how do you know that IAF has no long range missiles? do you know the published and actual ranges of R27 and R77 missiles? whats the range of other comparable missiles? Also do you know that long range radars are required to guide long range missiles? whats the range of fighter based radars in IAF inventory?

IAF is not a fat cat to buy all fancy stuffs as soon as its available in market..

Since Ferrari is available in Indian market, now you should start blaming all Indians for failing to replace their 800s, altos, swifts, i10s & C class with Ferrari by now..

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Apr 2011 20:24

Guys, This is not pertinent to the topic. Please stop here all of you.

Thanks,

ramana

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 27 Apr 2011 09:10

John wrote:
What is needed is a Brahmos size BVRAAM carried 2-4 per plane on a large fighter. The current bunch are bantam weight and middle weight pretenders in a class that needs heavyweights. We need a 500-1000 kg missile and an aircraft to lug it. Not 150 kg.
How exactly can this missile chase down target 300 km away? Aircraft are whole different ball park than ships, in 10 minutes it takes for the missile to get there an enemy aircraft could be anywhere in 30k km radius.

So you need to pack a pretty large seeker on the missile to detect targets at that range (even brahmos' seeker has range of only 50-100 km against ships) or you can use mix of guidance from launch aircraft+terminal active seeker.

Also you get into same problem that faced Phoenix where enemy aircraft could simply hit the after burner and disengage and you just wasted a 2 million dollar missile.

IMO, Brahmos in an A2A mode can be a long range AWACS killer. The fact that Brahmos Block3 was able to discriminate a small target against clutter means that it has a fairly high degree of accuracy. Plus an AWACS aircraft is not going to goon full afterburner and outrun a Mach 2+ missile. If an AWACS aircraft enters the kill envelope of an A2A Brahmos, the only way to save itself is for one of its escort fighters to try & shoot down the missile. At the very least, the presence of Brahmos on an MKI would keep the AWACS 150 - 200 KM inside the Pak/China border.

Of course, all this is assuming that the air launched Brahmos will be used for this purpose, which is speculation on my part

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 27 Apr 2011 11:31

The question pertinent to the BVRAAM requirement ATM is just what is the status of Astra, and will the IAF insist that it gets integrated with the MRCA contenters. If not then the Indian solution will be seeing service in limited numbers for the IAF while we will have a circus of BVRAAMs in service with the IAF. The Russian one for MKI and the 29, MICA for upg M2K, MRCA will come with its own BVRAAM. If the IAF doesnot ask the Astra to be integerated, with the MRCA platform.

This brings me to another question, how far is the Astra from seeing line service.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 28 Apr 2011 10:56

Korean LIG Nex1 submits proposal for sale of Chiron MANPADs to India

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Apr 2011 21:38

$5 billion orders for Akash in the bag.

aviation week:

Indian Army Orders Akash Missile System

Mar 25, 2011

By Anantha Krishnan M. anantha.ak@gmail.com
BENGALURU, India

India’s Cabinet Committee on Security has cleared the indigenous Akash Missile System (AMS) for service with the Indian army, which plans an initial order worth $3.1 billion.

Dr. Prahlada, chief controller for Aeronautics & Services Interaction at the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO), tells Aviation Week that the initial army order will be for two regiments — approximately 2,000 missiles.

“The order also includes ground systems, radars and launchers,” Prahlada says. “Hyderabad-based Bharat Dynamics Ltd. [BDL] will be the principal integrator. This is the first time that the Indian army has placed such a massive order for a home-grown tactical missile system.”

The Rs 14,000 crore ($3.1 billion) contract already has been signed by the army and BDL. The company is expected to make 500 missiles per year, and the first batch will roll out by September 2012. “All the missiles under this order will be of the same version,” Prahlada says.

The prime integrator for the Indian air force (IAF) version of AMS is Bengaluru-based Bharat Electronics Ltd. (BEL). It was Defense Minister A.K. Antony’s decision to split the army and IAF order between BEL and BDL. “This was done to create a healthy competition among Indian defense production agencies,” a DRDO source says.

The order for homegrown missiles is “like having home-made food,” Prahlada says. “It will be reliable, cost-effective and fresh. It will be to your taste, readily available with no hassles. There won’t be issues with spares and contracts. We are sure this order [will] augur well for DRDO.”

The Indian military’s combined orders of AMS, including two radars, have a total worth of Rs 23,300 crore ($5.18 billion). The Akash missile systems consist of a launcher, a missile with a 25-30-km (16-19-mi.) range, control center, multifunction fire control radar and supporting ground equipment.

AMS photo: BEL

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Apr 2011 21:41

interesting to see one regiment in our service will have a stock of 1000 missiles.

other countries try to make a psyops play out of it and create 10 regiments for saber rattling , each with 100 missiles.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 28 Apr 2011 22:44

This would have been the perfect time to create private entities that would license the tech from the PSUs and manufacture to their standards and supply to the IA and IAF.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 28 Apr 2011 22:59

Singha wrote:$5 billion orders for Akash in the bag.
The order for homegrown missiles is “like having home-made food,” Prahlada says. “It will be reliable, cost-effective and fresh. It will be to your taste, readily available with no hassles. There won’t be issues with spares and contracts. We are sure this order [will] augur well for DRDO.”

Reminds me the comment by HAL representative to our IAF chief "We are not a foreign organization. We are not developing LCA for an enemy nation" or something like that. Shows the frustration levels.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Apr 2011 23:06

singha ji link please.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Apr 2011 00:13

Singha wrote:interesting to see one regiment in our service will have a stock of 1000 missiles.

other countries try to make a psyops play out of it and create 10 regiments for saber rattling , each with 100 missiles.

Don't go by those numbers. 1000 missiles per regiment is an absurd number.

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 29 Apr 2011 01:27

RamaY wrote:
Singha wrote:$5 billion orders for Akash in the bag.
The order for homegrown missiles is “like having home-made food,” Prahlada says. “It will be reliable, cost-effective and fresh. It will be to your taste, readily available with no hassles. There won’t be issues with spares and contracts. We are sure this order [will] augur well for DRDO.”
Reminds me the comment by HAL representative to our IAF chief "We are not a foreign organization. We are not developing LCA for an enemy nation" or something like that. Shows the frustration levels.

Right, so they are frustrated because... the Army picked them? I'm failing to see your logic here especially given the sheer size of the contract.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 29 Apr 2011 01:36

rohitvats wrote:Don't go by those numbers. 1000 missiles per regiment is an absurd number.

Negative! If each target is allocated 2 missiles each, that brings it down to 500 per regiment with a higher kill probability(98.5% as opppose to 88%). So unless one knows the opertaional scenarios of how each target is being handled and how many targets are anticipated at any given time, 1000 missiles would be a safe bet! I'm willing to be educated if you think otherwise.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Apr 2011 01:40

anjan wrote: Right, so they are frustrated because... the Army picked them? I'm failing to see your logic here especially given the sheer size of the contract.

I was pointing the difference in those statements. The Akash team is proud to say that it is like home-made food; where as the HAL team is forced to say "we are not enemies".

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Apr 2011 05:09

Craig Alpert wrote: Negative! If each target is allocated 2 missiles each, that brings it down to 500 per regiment with a higher kill probability(98.5% as opppose to 88%). So unless one knows the opertaional scenarios of how each target is being handled and how many targets are anticipated at any given time, 1000 missiles would be a safe bet! I'm willing to be educated if you think otherwise.

If I use your logic, then it seems that Akash Regiment will be expecting 500 sorties against its defended area. You think anyone apart from amirkhan has the capacity to mount that high a sortie number - who has the required number of a/c and serviceability? PAF and PLAAF won't even come anywhere close to effort required to generate that many sorties.

Apart from that, each Akash Group/Regiment is expected to have 4*Batteries with 4 mobile launchers@3 Akash SAM each. This brings the total to 48 ready to fire missiles. Assuming 5 further reloads, we're talking about 240+48=288 Akash missiles per regiment/Group. Which is quite acceptable, IMO.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 29 Apr 2011 06:15

rohitvats wrote: If I use your logic, then it seems that Akash Regiment will be expecting 500 sorties against its defended area. You think anyone apart from amirkhan has the capacity to mount that high a sortie number - who has the required number of a/c and serviceability? PAF and PLAAF won't even come anywhere close to effort required to generate that many sorties.

I think you misunderstood my point. By my logic, 500 sorties aren't expected in a single day or by a single entity! Apart from fighter jets, there are missiles, helis, awacs, re-fuelers, 'local' made UAV's and mini UAV's that either PAF and/or PLAFF can use for recon, or attack(which PAF does not presently have, & as far as my knowledge goes China might have some and would be in the process of revers engineering and providing them to the Pakis). Akash SAM can help bring those down. These cheap local manufactured UAV's could fly say 10 in numbers in tandem with jets and awacs over a 24 hour period would be enough to cause problems to IA. Additionally the most important factor would be offenders COULD not only be one country. With the presence of Chinese troops across LOC, it would only be a matter of time before this escalates from IA and PA to PLA very well being the 3rd wheel. Off the 1000 missile not all would be made available at any point in time to the regiment. I'm sure you are well aware that some well be kept for war reserves, some will be kept for training(? debatable) and others available in storage in posts closer to the IB. Since Akash was designed to be OTM (on the move), it could well be assumed that a certain number would be kept at locations expecting action any time soon and hence my assessment of 1000 missiles allocated to 500 targets (not necessarily sorties). So it's very possible for PAF & PLAAF to have 500 targets for Akash SAM.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Apr 2011 10:16

Singha wrote:The Rs 14,000 crore ($3.1 billion) contract already has been signed by the army and BDL. The company is expected to make 500 missiles per year, and the first batch will roll out by September 2012. “All the missiles under this order will be of the same version,” Prahlada says.

So this is for Mk1 version there is another Mk2 version of a longer range Akash under development.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Apr 2011 10:20

rohitvats wrote:Apart from that, each Akash Group/Regiment is expected to have 4*Batteries with 4 mobile launchers@3 Akash SAM each. This brings the total to 48 ready to fire missiles. Assuming 5 further reloads, we're talking about 240+48=288 Akash missiles per regiment/Group. Which is quite acceptable, IMO.

Looks fine , the 5 reloads are quite high , I would expect 2 reloads per Akash Group.