Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

[Ranjani Brow]

Tri-Service Akash ?



Akash: Weight 720Kg; Range 30-35Km; Target Speed 600m/s
Barak-8: Weight 275Kg; Range 70Km

[prabhug]

Probably how is the range calculated matters.Look At MIM patriot for comparison.

[Rien]

the astra seeker is imported from agat. until we can succeed in making this seeker domestically, we would not be in position to enlarge the aperture and power to akash dimension to truly take advantage of the much higher packaging volume the akash nose offers vs astra.
difference could be 20km effective range vs 50km effective range...which means a sea-akash could go active quite early permitting the MFSTAR to release it and focus on guiding other missiles, perhaps peridically sending position updates of the target through two-way datalink for the akash to co-relate with its own seeker data.

atleast thats how the next-gen anti-swarm SAMs are supposed to work....lot of active seeker and datalink tech is assumed.

Akash is a hefty 750kg missile and perhaps inappropriate as a ship guided SRSAM as-is to replace barak1 and fill out new ships. Trishul was supposed to be it.

Barak 8 technical specifications

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_8_%28missile%29

Weight 275 kg
Length 4.5 m
Diameter 0.54 m

Akash is

Weight 720 kg
Length 5.78 m
Diameter 0.35 m

So we would need to cut the length down and increase the diameter. The mass saved by the first two steps would let us cut the fuel, and warhead, so this idea might be feasible. The unknown part of this question is besides dimensions, what else does Barak 8 do that the Akash doesn't?

[tsarkar]

Whatever the IN could use from Akash is already in use - the Revati radar

Rajendra was too heavy & the missile being non canisterized would've required to be either marinized or canisterized & made VL capable with BITE.

Plus new algorithms would've had to be written for Naval Applications.

Most initial Akash test failures was because of guidance algorithms, that required further fine-tuning to cover those test scenarios. That is where Trishul too couldn't make the mark.

That is why Astra testing is taking so long.

The most critical part & correspondingly, most of the cost of any tactical missile today is in the control, guidance & homing software & systems.

No one gives ToT for that.

Added Later - Even our new best friend will hold that back http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 49428.aspx

“The Javelin makers are willing to do 97% ToT and want to withhold the algorithms related to core infra-red seeker technology,”

For Brahmos Block II, the SCAN seeker algorithms were developed in India and for Block III G3OM was also developed in India. That enabled the Land Attack variants.

[rakall]

Most initial Akash test failures was because of guidance algorithms, that required further fine-tuning to cover those test scenarios. That is where Trishul too couldn't make the mark.

.

Since the topic came up..

One of the main reasons for repeated initial failures was excessive vibration in the missile.. resonant frequency due to the axial compression of air in the inlets for ram air.. this occurred just before MachNumber to sustain ramjet was attained.. leading to structural failures at times..

This was solved by having a sacrificial plug in the inlets that could be ingested after the MachNumber required to sustain ramjet was attained..

The guidance issues followed.. and were ultimately solved..

[KiranM]

We still need cheap (hence lack of seeker), in great numbers medium range SAM system to cover our vast expanse of land mass. Hence, I guess DRDO worked towards perfecting Akash system to handle aircrafts/ cruise missiles (still the largest threat for our VAs and VPs) in any permutation/ combination of vectors. When you have a large flight of birds you need a shower of arrows, not a handful of uber golden spears.

[Ranjani Brow]

courtesy: twinblade (defenceforumindia)

[Ranjani Brow]

Saurav Jha: So in that context what are some of the new tactical missile systems being developed under DRDO's recently unveiled 'missile autonomy mission'?

Avinash Chander: Our aim via the 'missile autonomy mission' is to cover a wider space as it were. Let me outline some of the new systems being progressed. A new (1)man portable anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) for which design is over and hardware is getting developed. A (2)Longer ranged SAM with a range of 200-250 km is on the drawing board. A (3)quick reaction SAM which can track on move is well-advanced in the design stage. An (4)anti-radiation missile and a (5)long range anti-ship missile which can prevent aircraft carriers from coming within 1500-2000 km of our shores are also being pursued.

Saurav Jha: What is the status of the anti-radiation missile and the long range anti-ship missile?

Avinash Chander: For the anti-radiation missile design is in progress, in fact hardware is being readied for the first trials. We expect successful trials of this ARM from an aircraft in about the next three years.

The long range anti-ship missile is on the drawing board, and we are confident that in about six years we would be able to get it ready. The long range anti-ship missile is going to be a ballistic missile with a seeker which can hit ships at long range.

Saurav Jha: Moving onto the Astra, when can we expect Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) for it?

Avinash Chander: After the first air-launched trials against an actual target which will take place in October-November this year, we will continue to extend its total engagement envelope and by 2015 end we should be looking at induction clearance.

Saurav Jha: Why was the LRSAM beset with delays? What would your perspective be on this?

Avinash Chander: LRSAM is a state of the art system. The Armed forces had actually tried to buy such a system from abroad, but nothing was really available that would come with satisfactory terms (and jingos were sayin' fake JV ). And that is how we got into a joint venture with Israel, the system had to be developed ab initio. So there were issues with respect to radar development, issues with respect to the actuation system as well which was initially supposed to be pneumatic but then had to be changed to electromechanical. Then there was the two pulse motor which was being done for the first time and that got into certain combustion stability problems. But the good news is that all those problems have now been overcome. We launched a massive program on the rocket motor and today we have a motor which is stable and will be tested shortly.

Saurav Jha: Many of the new missiles being developed under the missile autonomy mission will require an on board seeker given their functions. For true autonomy India will have to be sufficient in that domain at some level. So in that context has a new detector fabrication facility for seeker heads been approved?

Avinash Chander: We are committed to setting up a detector production facility. Normal process of dialogue and tendering, taking approvals etc is currently underway. We are going to have a detector production facility for focal point arrays.

On the radio frequency (RF) seeker front also there is a major thrust. Right from the device i.e source of RF to the stabilization system, to the processing, we are starting a national mission kind of thing. Like we did when it came to developing control laws for the LCA. We have also set up a national mission for engines, for the 1500 HP engine. Now we are setting up a national mission for seekers by involving multiple agencies.

We are starting a national mission for seeker and we are confident in the next three years we'll have our own seekers in multiple spectral domains - X band, Ka-band etc.

Saurav Jha: Coming to strategic missile systems. Missile ejection tests for the Agni-V's canister were carried out recently. How successful were these and when will see an actual canisterized launch of the Agni-V?

Avinash Chander: We had two tests and both were quite successful. Prime requirement is that there should be full repeatability matching with the projections. Both requirements have been met and the missile has been cleared to be launched from the canister. It should happen after the monsoon sometime.

Saurav Jha: Has the program for a domestic turbofan for the Nirbhay taken off? What is the rating of this engine?

Avinash Chander: We have taken up the development of this engine and it has come to the bench test level. It is currently undergoing tests and evaluation and we are confident that we can do it. It has 400 kg thrust engine . But once we have the capability we can achieve varied thrust ratings for engines of this class. Incidentally, Nirbhay is coming up in a big way.

http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... ister.html

[Singha]

great to hear all this. as expected the shaurya tech is likely going to be our ASBM core.

[Austin]

Good Interview with Saurav , He has been a source of great info coming out from DRDO.

So we have a Trishul follow on the drawing perhaps referring to Maitri or something new ?

1500-2000 km Long Range Antiship missile is surely AShBM

[arun]

http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... ister.html

That’s quite a smorgasbord served up by Saurav Jha in his interview of Dr. Avinash Chander. Plenty of titbits on a range of missile related issues not to mention a few other issues like engines.:


1.Akash
2.Astra
3.LRSAM
4.A new man portable anti-tank guided missile (ATGM)
5.A Longer ranged SAM with a range of 200-250 km
6.A quick reaction SAM
7.An anti-radiation missile
8.A long range anti-ship missile which can prevent aircraft carriers from coming within 1500-2000 km of our shores a’la PRC DF21D
9.National mission for 1500 HP engine
10.National mission for Missile seeker
11.Missile ejection tests for the Agni-V's canister
12.Turbofan for the Nirbhay
13.Kaveri Tubofan for the planned UCAV.
14.Kaveri Marine Gas Turbine

Looking forward to Part II .

[John]

We still need cheap (hence lack of seeker), in great numbers medium range SAM system to cover our vast expanse of land mass. Hence, I guess DRDO worked towards perfecting Akash system to handle aircrafts/ cruise missiles (still the largest threat for our VAs and VPs) in any permutation/ combination of vectors. When you have a large flight of birds you need a shower of arrows, not a handful of uber golden spears.

KiranM based on my discussion back in early days i thought the decision to have no seeker had to do with issues encountered with SA-6 SAR seeker: prone to jamming, target illumination from start to terminal flight making it vunerable to Anti radiation missile and FCR radar had poor range. Ofcourse with newer technology most of those issues have been resolved with later variants of Buk.

Nice to see my predication of Shaurya AshM coming true . As for long range SAM hopefully it can be canisterized and dual packed into Brahmos UVLS, would allow P-15A to carry..

[vishvak]

Helina successfully tested! 7KM should be a very good range for anti-tank missile. That Helina was tested on Dhruv platform is like sone me sugandh! Good news from DRDO! May be now we won't need super expensive anti-tank missiles when Helina/Nag can do the job! Range of 7KM helps a lot too, again! May be we can have serial production of Helina with Russian assistance perhaps and accumulate enough anti-tank missiles so that we won't have to worry about numbers of anti-tank missiles during even 2-front war!

[RoyG]

Good Interview with Saurav , He has been a source of great info coming out from DRDO.

So we have a Trishul follow on the drawing perhaps referring to Maitri or something new ?

1500-2000 km Long Range Antiship missile is surely AShBM

I have a feeling we will be using the Shaurya or Agni IV platform. The trick is getting past Aegis SM family and future laser counter measures. I am also not sure how practical it will be especially when we are working on a Mach 7 Brahmos hypersonic variant.

[suryag]

Gurus - One thing that I haven't ever seen is a torpedo cum missile. Why don't people make a 3 stage "torpile" which swims the first X amount of distance with first stage, gets out of air with the second and then flies to the target using the third or alternatvely "missed" which flies first and then dives in the terminal stage. This is eminently doable with some good structural research to manage different kinds of stress.

[Avarachan]

Suryag, Russia already makes the Klub 91RE1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3M-54_Klub

91RE1 - No DOD designation. A submarine-launched anti-submarine variant, it consists of two stages, one solid booster with four grid fins and one anti-submarine light torpedo. Its basic length is 7.65 m (25.1 ft), it has a range of 50 km (31 mi). It can reach supersonic speed. The torpedo has a warhead weight of 76 kg (168 lb). It is similar to the American ASROC/SUBROC missile/torpedo system. It follows a ballistic path on the surface, with a speed of Mach 2.5.

[Pratyush]

Helina successfully tested! 7KM should be a very good range for anti-tank missile. That Helina was tested on Dhruv platform is like sone me sugandh! Good news from DRDO! May be now we won't need super expensive anti-tank missiles when Helina/Nag can do the job! Range of 7KM helps a lot too, again! May be we can have serial production of Helina with Russian assistance perhaps and accumulate enough anti-tank missiles so that we won't have to worry about numbers of anti-tank missiles during even 2-front war!

What prevents the services from asking a 10 km range missile.

[vic]

7 km is absolutely useless. The missile is too heavy with short range and looks ugly. Only Imported Maal can do the job. I want an imported missile with green dollars and blondies as side dish. And in addition only IAF and IA Jarnails know best and unless somebody can produce evidence in form of signed and stamped affidavit with 4 Jarnail witnesses, nobody is allowed to praise Nag-Helina missile.

[Rien]

We need orders for the Man portable Nag and the Nirbhay. But we have no money in budget. Oh well, we cancel the Javelin order and fund the Nag. 1 billion dollars can buy us a hundred years worth of missiles and upgrades into the far future. A Cost Benefit Analysis is strongly in favour of the Nag over the Javelin. Any desi maal will be 7-8x cheaper and in this case just as good. Incredible deal.

We need 3 000+ Nirbhay. China already has 2 thousand of these class of missile, and Pak probably has a few hundred. For once, can't Bharati's go into a war with the firepower advantage on our side?

[vishvak]

It is tough to counter sarcasm but how does weight come into picture when range is so much more. Firing and scooting away from still afar has its own weight probably. And how much benefit will have 50 billion rs worth of Nag/Heli-launched-Nag will have since that would be a huge deterrent in numbers - 7km range of shalwar browning of jihadis in tanks.

[member_22539]

^No wonder the americans were all sugary about joint-venturing on javelin. They seem to know how well our programs are going even before they make it public or even conduct tests. Then they offer us old and mature tech, trying to smother our baby in the crib. The prejudiced/corrupt decisionmakers connive with them in this regard as well.

[Rien]

The Javelin order really seems suspect. We should walk away from that billion dollar ripoff.

[vic]

Hellfire is heavier, costlier and two generations behind Nag and any helicopter using Hellfire will suffer "ten times" the attrition of helos using Helina missile for similar effectiveness but Import Jindabad!

[tushar_m]

Saurav Jha: Has the program for a domestic turbofan for the Nirbhay taken off? What is the rating of this engine?

Avinash Chander: We have taken up the development of this engine and it has come to the bench test level. It is currently undergoing tests and evaluation and we are confident that we can do it. It has 400 kg thrust engine . But once we have the capability we can achieve varied thrust ratings for engines of this class. Incidentally, Nirbhay is coming up in a big way.

The engine of 400 kg thrust is quite higher than what is deployed on Tomahawk by US

here are its specs of Williams F107

Performance
Maximum thrust: 2.7 kilonewtons (610 lbf) (for F107-WR-400) 3.1 kilonewtons (700 lbf) (for F107-WR-402)
Bypass ratio: 1:1
Specific fuel consumption: 0.682 kg/kg-h[1]
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 4.6:1

610 ibf = 276.6913457 kg
700 ibf = 317.514659 kg

so with 400 kg engine for nirbhay we are set . The weight & fuel consumption are other factors that we will always assume to be good for cruise missile's

[SanjayC]

It is tough to counter sarcasm but how does weight come into picture when range is so much more. Firing and scooting away from still afar has its own weight probably. And how much benefit will have 50 billion rs worth of Nag/Heli-launched-Nag will have since that would be a huge deterrent in numbers - 7km range of shalwar browning of jihadis in tanks.

You haven't understood the point he was trying to make -- the fetish of army and air force generals to come up with outlandish arguments to curb domestic research and go for imports.

[brar_w]

Saurav Jha: Has the program for a domestic turbofan for the Nirbhay taken off? What is the rating of this engine?

Avinash Chander: We have taken up the development of this engine and it has come to the bench test level. It is currently undergoing tests and evaluation and we are confident that we can do it. It has 400 kg thrust engine . But once we have the capability we can achieve varied thrust ratings for engines of this class. Incidentally, Nirbhay is coming up in a big way.

The engine of 400 kg thrust is quite higher than what is deployed on Tomahawk by US

here are its specs of Williams F107

Performance
Maximum thrust: 2.7 kilonewtons (610 lbf) (for F107-WR-400) 3.1 kilonewtons (700 lbf) (for F107-WR-402)
Bypass ratio: 1:1
Specific fuel consumption: 0.682 kg/kg-h[1]
Thrust-to-weight ratio: 4.6:1

610 ibf = 276.6913457 kg
700 ibf = 317.514659 kg

so with 400 kg engine for nirbhay we are set . The weight & fuel consumption are other factors that we will always assume to be good for cruise missile's

Tomahawk is on its way out. Expect production to end around 2016 at the max. There is some talk about lockheed using the DARPA developed technology for the LRASM and developing a longer ranged missile for the LAW replacement program. Raytheon is also exploring a supersonic Tomahawk which may compete in the LAW program. The goal for the LAW would be greater lethality, survivability and effectiveness in RF and GPS denied environments.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2014 ... awk-Future

[brar_w]

Tri-Service Akash ?



Akash: Weight 720Kg; Range 30-35Km; Target Speed 600m/s
Barak-8: Weight 275Kg; Range 70Km

The current raytheon standard is the ESSM (operational with future blk in development). Its specification are -

Weight - 280 kg
Range - 50 km
Speed - mach 4+



Standard Missile 6 has an approximate range of 370 km (according to Janes) but the exact range is a closely held secret.

[kmkraoind]

Just a noob question. I read somewhere that, the speed of Brahmos missile is such that it enters ships and hull and some times leave the hull. It means Brahmos missile is structurally strong. Then I have my question, can Brahmos be used as anti-submarine missile, can it dive 50-80 meters into sea (with little modifications).

[Indranil]

I don't think so. You can see what happens to a bullet fired into water. I don't think any missile travelling at that speed would be able to penetrate (and structurally survive) more than 10 meters of water.

[member_28305]

Brahmos targetting submarines underwater is out of the question.. because it is an Air breathing MissiLe.. No modification can change that..

[member_28305]

Atmost all it can do is drop a Light weigh torpedo above the submarine's location (cant even imagine the modifications required for tat).. Just as Dr.Abdul kalam envisaged.

[Singha]

there is a version of klub named 91RTE2 (40km range) that release a small torpedo MPT-1UME with speed 55 knots and range 15km.

it is unknown if any of our klub/brahmos ships use this weapon...never heard of it in any article related to IN.

the P28 Kamorta does not carry any ASM/ASWM at all.

[srai]

I don't think so. You can see what happens to a bullet fired into water. I don't think any missile travelling at that speed would be able to penetrate (and structurally survive) more than 10 meters of water.

Here is a video from Mythbusters - Bullets fired from air into water and UnderWater

[Prem Kumar]

there is a version of klub named 91RTE2 (40km range) that release a small torpedo MPT-1UME with speed 55 knots and range 15km.

it is unknown if any of our klub/brahmos ships use this weapon...never heard of it in any article related to IN.

the P28 Kamorta does not carry any ASM/ASWM at all.

This is something that has always intrigued me. An indigenous weapon of the 91RTE2 type (or ASROC) is certainly within the technological capability of DRDO. We have the LWT and expertise in ballistic missiles. We could build a stand-off anti-submarine missile-cum-torpedo weapon. Range could even be as high as 100+ Km. This will free up helos to carry only sonars & enable the decoupling of the sensor and the shooter. This would mean that smaller helos can do the job or a given helicopter can carry more sensors or have more time on station.

Moreover a ship can carry much larger numbers of such a weapon than the ASW helicopter. Subs can be targeted far beyond the range of their sonars (or even the ship's sonars, if they use ASW helos). And once a sub is detected, a salvo of say 3 such standoff missile-torps in some sort of a triangular pattern around the sub location will achieve a high kill probability (a salvo attack is something a ship can do, but an ASW helo cannot). Best of all, unlike a long range torpedo launched from the ship which can be detected by the sub, in this case, the sub wont even know its under attack until it hears the splash of the torps parachuting into the water over its head

[John]

Standard Missile 6 has an approximate range of 370 km (according to Janes) but the exact range is a closely held secret.

That range is against very high altitude non maneuvering targets, in lower altitude its range drops substantially. Also with missile cost of 5 million you can easily bankrupt yourself using this to intercept incoming missiles.

[Aditya_V]

Still at that range SM-6's could take down some HQ-9 or H-9 bombers while they have to fire at targets deeper inland.

[partha]

http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... ganisation

Asked when the country would stop importing missiles, he said the aim is to have adequate capability in this field by 2020-22, adding, an infra-red (IR) seeker detector facility would be set up in the country. "Our target is thereafter (2022) we should not have to import any class of missiles."

"We are working on other variations also, so that we have total envelope of surface-to-air capabilities. In future, we will aim to work on longer range missile of 200-plus kms. We are working on cruise missiles which will cover ship launch, air launch, submarine launch and ground launch versions. We are expecting the second test-launch of Nirbhay (missile) to happen within a month," he said.

[kit]

there is a version of klub named 91RTE2 (40km range) that release a small torpedo MPT-1UME with speed 55 knots and range 15km.

it is unknown if any of our klub/brahmos ships use this weapon...never heard of it in any article related to IN.

the P28 Kamorta does not carry any ASM/ASWM at all.

This is something that has always intrigued me. An indigenous weapon of the 91RTE2 type (or ASROC) is certainly within the technological capability of DRDO. We have the LWT and expertise in ballistic missiles. We could build a stand-off anti-submarine missile-cum-torpedo weapon. Range could even be as high as 100+ Km. This will free up helos to carry only sonars & enable the decoupling of the sensor and the shooter. This would mean that smaller helos can do the job or a given helicopter can carry more sensors or have more time on station.

Moreover a ship can carry much larger numbers of such a weapon than the ASW helicopter. Subs can be targeted far beyond the range of their sonars (or even the ship's sonars, if they use ASW helos). And once a sub is detected, a salvo of say 3 such standoff missile-torps in some sort of a triangular pattern around the sub location will achieve a high kill probability (a salvo attack is something a ship can do, but an ASW helo cannot). Best of all, unlike a long range torpedo launched from the ship which can be detected by the sub, in this case, the sub wont even know its under attack until it hears the splash of the torps parachuting into the water over its head

a good idea actually Prem ..i was thinking a bit further ., say you know only a rough area of the sea where hmm an american seawolf is hiding ... send of a rocket with a payload like a CBU with active sensors and charges in each warhead ..only issue is the technological challenge of inventing a warhead that can penetrate the depths of water required ..and then the submarine hull and finally explode inside the sub !! this kind of tech can probably make the high tech marvels obsolete

[brar_w]

Standard Missile 6 has an approximate range of 370 km (according to Janes) but the exact range is a closely held secret.

That range is against very high altitude non maneuvering targets, in lower altitude its range drops substantially. Also with missile cost of 5 million you can easily bankrupt yourself using this to intercept incoming missiles.

What missiles will be flying at very low altitudes (sea skimming) from that range (300-400 km range)? The sea skimmer mission is for the ESSM and its future blocks anyhow. The entire concept of the SM6 and ESSM and RAM is to tackle the incoming missiles differently. SM6 targets missiles as they are in their cruise profile (either supersonic or subsonic depending upon the missile). The ESSM tackles the missile at its terminal sea skimming stage. SM6 also is meant to destroy aircraft from Stand off ranges before they launch their weapons. The entire point of giving the SM6 that sort of range was to exploit OTH targeting for the future. The current AEGIS baseline allows this to happen. Obviously for any missile the absolute maximum range would be for a medium to high altitude target (most likely a non maneuvering target) and that applies to all. The SM6 has already demonstrated Medium-High altitude OTH targeting including targeting over land when launched from a ship.

The cost factor is relative to what it is protecting. If a 5 Million dollar per missile protects an AEGIS ship or a carrier group out at sea, then 5 million per shot is entirely justified given the sheer cost of the entire group that needs protection. Secondly, the SM6 is in its early days with a small number having been produced. Its costs will come down once its volumes increase over time as usually happens to missiles when they enter full rate production and overcome the learning curve.

[brar_w]

Still at that range SM-6's could take down some HQ-9 or H-9 bombers while they have to fire at targets deeper inland.

Precisely! We also do not know about the SM6's performance at the 200nm expected range since the absolute numbers are classified. The missile was designed for OTH targeting at a time when OTH targeting was not going to be a possibility at IOC but would be added later (Current estimates see the NIFCCA deploy in mid-2015).

http://defensetech.org/2014/04/26/navy- ... se-system/
http://www.janes.com/article/40550/us-n ... pts-at-sea
http://investor.raytheon.com/phoenix.zh ... ID=1849566

Given they began with a subsonic target - The USN has in addition to this aircraft targets (QF4 and QF-16) and supersonic ramjet powered targets as well which would be tried out as this capability is expanded over time, an altitude of 25K for a subsonic cruise missile would mean a horizon of around 200 nautical miles for the Spy1 and with that the Janes article makes some sense (since it cites 370 km of its engagement range). In the future they do not plan on relying on just the E-2D, they plan to introduce NIFFCA into the EA-18G, F-35C post block 4 and also try to incorporate into other network pipelines such as the UCLASS whose RFP's will be released next week. The goal being that every aircraft in the pipeline contributes to the picture with whatever resources it has.

It wouldn't be long before the scope of NIFFCA integration is expanded and the USN launches a few GQM-163A's in different profiles to develop the OTH capability for fast supersonic targets both at altitude (and distance) and sea skimming from closer ranges. They have tested the GQM-163A and the ESSM and the french also asked a few GQM-163As to be shot at their own ships so that they can test their weapons against a ramjet powered supersonic sea skimming target.

http://www.orbital.com/LaunchSystems/Pu ... tsheet.pdf

Its early days for NIFCCA with the capability only showing up in its first iteration next year. By 2020 the entire set of capabilities could look a lot different and there is an ESSM Blk 2 will also show up by then.