Bharat Rakshak

>> A-2-A opposition remains a problem for both PGMs vs Dumb-bombs
true. but a lo-lo-lo bombing run will not need to climb to 10-15,000ft to drop the bombs assuming it ingressed through contested airspace at low level and intends to eggress that way again.
one soln for PGM delivery from treetop level the MBB DASA developed was a dispenser family called Mjoelnir upto 1400kg
http://www.x-plane.org/home/urf/aviatio ... jolner.htm
Range when launched at 50 m altitude and Mach 0.9 is more than 10 km in the direction the aircraft is flying, or 5 km to the side of the aircraft's path. Navigation is by INS and radar altimeter.
----------------
atleast against non-hardened targets maybe this approach makes sense for India

The important thing to note is DRDO version has a computer and MEMs gyroscope allowing it to have Paveway III features. Once the roll issue is mitigated, it could be a very potent system.

We need to wait for more press release (might have been buried in DDM failing to catch the nuances) to understand if on-off control or proportional control(PC) is used. With all that computer and MEMs gyroscope it could be PC. PC will give it more complexity and more flexibility.

Paveway kits attach to a variety of warheads, and consist of a semi-active laser (SAL) seeker, a computer control group (CCG) containing guidance and control electronics, thermal battery, and pneumatic control augmentation system (CAS). There are front control canards and rear wings for stability. The weapon guides on reflected laser energy: the seeker detects the reflected light ("sparkle") of the designating laser, and actuates the canards to guide the bomb toward the designated point.

The original Paveway series, retroactively named Paveway I, gave way in the early 1970s to the improved Paveway II, which had a simplified, more reliable seeker and pop-out rear wings to improve the weapon's glide performance. Both Paveway I and Paveway II use a simple 'bang-bang' control system, where the CAS commands large canard deflections to make course corrections, resulting in a noticeable wobble. This had relatively little effect on accuracy, but expends energy quickly, limiting effective range. As a consequence, most users release Paveway I and II weapons in a ballistic trajectory, activating the laser designator only late in the weapon's flight to refine the impact point.

The weapon is a guidance kit based on the existing Enhanced Paveway II Enhanced Computer Control Group (ECCG) added to a modified Mk 82 general-purpose bomb with increased penetration performance. The new ECCG contains a Height of Burst (HOB) sensor enabling air burst fusing options, and a SAASM (Selective Availability Anti Spoofing Module) compliant GPS receiver. It can be launched either IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit) only, given sufficiently good Transfer Alignment, or using GPS guidance. Terminal laser guidance is available in either navigation mode.

Pinaka rockets successfully test-fired for second day

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 749205.cms

BALASORE ( ODISHA ): Indigenously developed 'Pinaka' rockets were successfully test-fired, on the second consecutive day on Friday, from a multi-barrel rocket launcher (MBRL)

pinaka rockets!! from MBRL!

^ yes Pinaka is an MBRL. But you do not refer it as pinaka rockets on an MBRL. That is grossly misleading.

^ yes Pinaka is an MBRL. But you do not refer it as pinaka rockets on an MBRL. That is grossly misleading.

Snapshots from Tarmak007's video of Sudarshan LGB trial.., showing wobbling of Sudarshan after release:

...
Pave Way generic;
...


...

srai, If you look at the way the test article drops tail first shows there is a CG/CP issue in the initial moments. Am sure it recovers as it does hit the target.
Elsewhere I posted the time line for a paveway II flight. We need to know how many of these were dropped so far and from what aircraft? Jags and LCA?

srai, If you look at the way the test article drops tail first shows there is a CG/CP issue in the initial moments. Am sure it recovers as it does hit the target.
...

2 days to go for the D-day.. at 0.7 Mach

kaiserbill,
The Orpheus 12 and its reheat version sound fascinating... I know where there is more data but I am engaged on writing material for Maurice Egerton's 1909-1914 aeroplanes mainly with a Gnome rotary engine to be used in an exhibition from 24th March to end April at Tatton Park's mansion... then I'll devil the data to complete the Orpheus story.
Jemiba,
Thanks for thread... Wibault died before the BE.53 ran and Kestrel flew .. so he never saw what a great aircraft he inspired... even if it was a mile away from his sketches, but I wonder what he would have made of this?
In summary the design iterations that Wibault was involved with after Bristol picked up the idea and ran with it are (hopefully this ties in with what I have already written!):
The BE48 replaced the centrifugal compressors with the axial Olympus l.p. compressor, using it as a fan;
The BE52 replaced the Orion and its gearbox with the Orpheus, but retained the separate intakes for the core engine;
The BE53 did away with the separate intake and used the fan to supercharge the core, giving more power;
The BE53/2, the first Pegasus, introduced contra-rotation and confirmed the use of four nozzles rather than three.
Reply #17 by tartle on 04 Feb, 2012 12:48
sealordlawrence... you suggested we compare a Viper and an Orpheus... well here goes


Engine mark Viper 600 Orpheus 803

configuration single-stage single-stage
compressor stages 8 7
combustor annular cannular- 7 tubes
turbine two-stage single-stage
T/O thrust lbt 3,750 5,000
Air mass flow lb/sec 58.4 84
Pressure ratio 5.8:1 4.14:1
length in 85.0 96.1
diam in 24.5 32.4
weight lb 790 975
t/w 4.75 5.13

It is not easy to deduce which engine had the earlier birth as redesign and incorporation of new technologies has proceeded apace on both engines. Also the duty is different so optimisation happens around different parameter points. However, as always, t/w ratio is an indicator. The most fundemental difference between the configurations is the bearing arrangement: 3 bearing arrangement on the Viper but only 2 on the Orpheus. This was really the first engine in Stanley Hooker's career that presented him with a clean sheet of paper... so he decided on a two-bearing arrangement as a way to achieve lower weight and then designed other components to achieve a stiff enough rotor assembly to avoid resonance issues. He obviously succeeded!

Viper engine production ended in 1996, but refurbished engines were being supplied as recently as 2009 for newly-built Macchi MB-339CD trainers for the Malaysian Air Force. Production in Britain by what were successively Armstrong Siddeley, Bristol Siddeley and Rolls-Royce exceeded 5,600.

how many mech/aero depts in India incl IITs have a working few jet engines (lets say hawk/gnat size engines) and the ability and instrumentation to completely test them and tinker around with mods on them with manufacturer support as a teaching tool?
my guess is NONE and the situation is unlikely to change until we domestically make a few small engine families even if only for training and teaching purposes because foreign vendors are unlikely to want to help us understand aero engine and develop a base of tinkerers.
or alternately HAL gas turbine engine div should be made to tie up with these depts and build replica facilities .... cost will need to be borne by GOI though.

we arent serious about things, no point blaming anyone. given the drive and money many things can happen atleast at the low to medium end.

how many mech/aero depts in India incl IITs have a working few jet engines (lets say hawk/gnat size engines) and the ability and instrumentation to completely test them and tinker around with mods on them with manufacturer support as a teaching tool?
my guess is NONE and the situation is unlikely to change until we domestically make a few small engine families even if only for training and teaching purposes because foreign vendors are unlikely to want to help us understand aero engine and develop a base of tinkerers.
or alternately HAL gas turbine engine div should be made to tie up with these depts and build replica facilities .... cost will need to be borne by GOI though.

we arent serious about things, no point blaming anyone. given the drive and money many things can happen atleast at the low to medium end.

Country’s first subsonic cruise missile Nirbhay (Fearless) is all set to be tested for its full range of 1,000 km on Tuesday from Chandipur, Odisha.

BrahMos is the country’s supersonic cruise missile.

Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) technologists said on Sunday preparations were in full swing for the launch of the two-stage surface-to-surface missile that uses a turbo-jet engine. The Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE), a DRDO facility in Bangalore, has designed Nirbhay — a derivative of pilotless target aircraft Lakshya. The Research Centre, Imarat, Hyderabad, has developed Nirbhay’s crucial avionics while other DRDO laboratories have played their part in developing it.

Nirbhay, which looks like an aircraft, can drop bombs. It can be remotely controlled and brought back. In this mission, there are no plans to recover it or use it to drop bombs.

Nirbhay takes off from a road mobile launcher after a booster engine kicks the first stage. After the booster separates, the second stage, which has a turbo-jet engine, cruises at an altitude of 500 metres to one km. It will travel for a long time at a speed of 0.67 Mach. Aviation kerosene is the fuel.

“It will cruise in the atmosphere like an aircraft and it is capable of travelling up to 1,000 km,” said a DRDO missile engineer. “The biggest advantage with Nirbhay is that it can be launched from land, air and sea. It is a potent system,” he noted.

Nirbhay can fly over or around hills. It can fly at a very low altitude and avoid detection. Hence it is called a “tree-top” missile. It is a “loitering missile.” It can go around and around a target till it gets an opportune moment to bomb it. The U.S. equivalent of Nirbhay is Tomahawk. Pakistan has a cruise missile called Babur that has a range of 700 km.

A DRDO official said Nirbhay was on a par with the best systems of its class. It was a third variant of India’s missiles, the others being the Agni series and the underwater-launched K-15/B05 missile. Nirbhay has latest navigation and guidance technologies, which were better than Pakistan’s cruise missile, {Now, why do we have to say that and compare ourselves to that wwretched country ?} he added.

Nirbhay's Maiden Launch Tomorrow - T.S.Subramanian, The Hindu

Nirbhay, which looks like an aircraft, can drop bombs. It can be remotely controlled and brought back. In this mission, there are no plans to recover it or use it to drop bombs.

Hmm... A Rambha can carry 6 Nirbhays on its bosoms?

A DRDO official said Nirbhay was on a par with the best systems of its class. It was a third variant of India’s missiles, the others being the Agni series and the underwater-launched K-15/B05 missile. Nirbhay has latest navigation and guidance technologies, which were better than Pakistan’s cruise missile, {Now, why do we have to say that and compare ourselves to that wwretched country ?} he added.

Nirbhay, which looks like an aircraft, can drop bombs. It can be remotely controlled and brought back. In this mission, there are no plans to recover it or use it to drop bombs.