Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 12 Dec 2011 23:37

Hope DRDO has sorted out the "improvements sought in the NAMICA" too. This was the reason for delay in induction last year. IMHO, IA indeed placed an order for 400+ missiles and around 13-15 NAMICAs, correct? or were there more?

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 13 Dec 2011 00:19

According to this article in The Hindu:
http://www.bharatrakshak.com/NEWS/newsr ... wsid=17006

The production of the third generation hit-to-kill Nag missile is expected to commence after the final user trials with deliverable version of missile carrier NAMICA are conducted next summer. Modifications and improvements have been carried out in NAMICA as per the Army's requirements.

The modifications in NAMICA are already done as per requirement by the army.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2011 01:06

Did IA ask for ERA on Namica?

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 13 Dec 2011 01:23

I think they might have asked for all weather and all terrain endurance for NAMICA.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 13 Dec 2011 01:25

-deleted-

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 13 Dec 2011 01:28

SagarAg wrote:I think they might have asked for all weather and all terrain endurance for NAMICA.

Exactly what would that entail considering the fact that the base vehicle would remain the BMP-2?

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 13 Dec 2011 01:56

nachiket wrote:
SagarAg wrote:I think they might have asked for all weather and all terrain endurance for NAMICA.
Exactly what would that entail considering the fact that the base vehicle would remain the BMP-2?

A nice article on NAMICA-NAG by Col AK Sharma (Retd):

http://www.defstrat.com/exec/frmArticle ... px?DID=303

NAMICA's (see box) inability to pass muster on certain issues has resulted in the Army seeking an improved version. Reportedly the main observations are related to the height and weight of the delivery vehicle and its inability to float. DRDL has taken cognizance of the observations and has effected design changes accordingly. Not only has that lowered the silhouette of the vehicle but has also resulted in weight reduction by one ton. A lighter NAMICA with modifications to increase buoyancy is likely to negotiate water obstacles as per Indian Army's requirement. Less weight will also result in reduced load on the engine and offer better reliability & durability particularly during the summer.

The main points are height and weight of the delivery vehicle and its inability to float.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Dec 2011 08:15

is the base BMP2 capable of being fitted with flotation collar to cross water bodies? I assume it is not capable of underwater snorkeling, which in any case sounds very risky to me.

vic · Post by **vic** » 13 Dec 2011 09:07

We need to have Nag mounted on lighter platforms like 4x4 trucks for use in cold strike formations and mountains. Something like jeep mounted Milans in heavier mode. Nag can act as a very powerful sniper rifle to take out enemy bunkers at long ranges (especially in mountains). Hellina with 2 way data link can be fired in parabolic ballistic mode for taking out important tactical targets.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Dec 2011 13:06

Singha wrote:is the base BMP2 capable of being fitted with flotation collar to cross water bodies? I assume it is not capable of underwater snorkeling, which in any case sounds very risky to me.

It can swim and snorkel at ease
http://cdn.wn.com/pd/42/10/69f9b1c273bc ... grande.jpg
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/dat ... _MRB_3.jpg
http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/s ... ws_001.jpg

And that's an IA CIA swimming in Sikkim with a snorkel that gives it much better fording depth than Arjun

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/7858/f214.jpg

VinayG · Post by **VinayG** » 13 Dec 2011 13:58

Singha wrote:is the base BMP2 capable of being fitted with flotation collar to cross water bodies? I assume it is not capable of underwater snorkeling, which in any case sounds very risky to me.

singha ji it cam swim so i think it dosent need underwater snorkeling

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Dec 2011 14:04

how much time , assuming the banks of canal on both ends have been blasted would a tank or IFV regiment of 55 vehicles need to cross over with zero resistance at the other end?
so far the pics I see are of exercises that involve small number of vehicles perhaps to show off to the media, not the real stuff with 100s of vehicles needing to cross within couple hrs with potential of artillery dropping down on the assembly areas.

makes me think for anything major, pontoon or folding bridges would need to be layed instead.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 13 Dec 2011 14:47

Singha wrote:how much time , assuming the banks of canal on both ends have been blasted would a tank or IFV regiment of 55 vehicles need to cross over with zero resistance at the other end?
so far the pics I see are of exercises that involve small number of vehicles perhaps to show off to the media, not the real stuff with 100s of vehicles needing to cross within couple hrs with potential of artillery dropping down on the assembly areas.

makes me think for anything major, pontoon or folding bridges would need to be layed instead.

Perhaps IA must have down such exercises. In my VERY hu\mble opinion this inforamtion would / should not be revealed by IA.
K

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 13 Dec 2011 15:08

Singha wrote:how much time , assuming the banks of canal on both ends have been blasted would a tank or IFV regiment of 55 vehicles need to cross over with zero resistance at the other end?
so far the pics I see are of exercises that involve small number of vehicles perhaps to show off to the media, not the real stuff with 100s of vehicles needing to cross within couple hrs with potential of artillery dropping down on the assembly areas.

makes me think for anything major, pontoon or folding bridges would need to be layed instead.

I saw men laying a (small) bridge manually in something like under 2 minutes in a demonstration. I suspect 55 vehicles will be across at 6 vehicles a minute. 9 minutes. Canal sides will not be blasted - but bunds may have to be crossed. A ditch cum bund is a pretty good obstacle.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Dec 2011 15:46

Image posted by Vinay has snorkel at back. If payload is light, it floats. If payload is heavy, it snorkels. Once across and the other side is cleared, then sappers lay bridges.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 13 Dec 2011 18:30

The BMP series is an amphibian vehicle by design. The Argument of light weight swimming and heavy weight snorkeling defeats the purpose of designing a swimming vehicle for Infantry.

The NAMICA will be similar to the base vehicle when it comes to its motor components.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 13 Dec 2011 18:52

SagarAg wrote:
Reportedly the main observations are related to the height and weight of the delivery vehicle and its inability to float.

These are two very important specs that simply could not have been missed by DRDO while developing NAMICA.

Marut · Post by **Marut** » 13 Dec 2011 18:58

^Unlikely. But the 120mm mortar saga proves it's not impossible either. They missed weight and dimensional constraints in that project as well.

There is hardly any info to make a value judgement on this, hence I choose to look the brighter side - NAMICA will meet all IA requirements and enter service after successful completion of trials next year.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 13 Dec 2011 19:02

Going through PSG blog. I don't know why but he bears so much ill will particularly against Prithvi and seeing the tone one can say generally against drdo. Repeated utterings can't morph into facts. None of the Prithvi missiles tested for a foreseeable time is of or within 150km range. All those tests indicate a range of ~ 300km, same as that of Brahmos.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Dec 2011 19:59

On the BMP-II floating, the thing floats with full complement of troops. That is how it crosses canals/water bodies and comes on shore. The infantry dismounts after crossing over (if required) and fight along side the armor and BMP-2.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Dec 2011 20:04

^^^ Dont know why sane people even bother read PCG's writings, including our Austin. I had earlier contacted MoD on his mis-reporting. Apparently in Indian journalism, speculation or mis-information can be printed as opinion. Unless something is grossly factually incorrect, no one can be pulled up. The corrective action is limited to printing the correct information. Since in defense matters, the powers-that-be are extremely sensetive to giving out correct information, chaps like PCG have a free run. PCG is a parasite thriving because of the lack of pest control. I find him to be the Rakhi Sawant of defence journalism - thriving on cheap sensationalism.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Dec 2011 20:05

Kanson wrote:Going through PSG blog. I don't know why but he bears so much ill will particularly against Prithvi and seeing the tone one can say generally against drdo. Repeated utterings can't morph into facts. None of the Prithvi missiles tested for a foreseeable time is of or within 150km range. All those tests indicate a range of ~ 300km, same as that of Brahmos.

Kanson Sir, please don't waste your energy on that blog. Just take what makes sense. The fellow is habitual liar and plagiarist. Please see my posts in the Defense website thread - you can clearly see the instances where he has lifted articles word-to-word and passed them as his 'analysis'. He simply passes off fancy words taken from here and there strung together in a sentence as insight.

His biggest blooper was calling Prahaar nothing but re-named Israeli rocket. Again, please see the Defense Website Watch Thread on BRF. Apart from Prithvi, he has vitriolic hatred for DRDO/DPSU and all other organizations.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Dec 2011 20:07

tsarkar wrote:<SNIP> I find him to be the Rakhi Sawant of defence journalism - thriving on cheap sensationalism.

Sir, that is a keeper. I am going to spread that far and wide.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Dec 2011 20:50

I've always wondered under what conditions do wade, deep ford or swim. I have believed it depends on weight.

Wade http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU68_Xba6xI
Deep ford http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVdZrzLv ... =endscreen

Wading or swimming or deep fording - not clear. This is an IA CIA at Sikkim http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/7858/f214.jpg

This one is clearly wading but has a snorkel in the back to deep ford http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-r3rzBZCKOfM/T ... 781249.JPG

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 14 Dec 2011 05:15

Check this out from Hemant Kumar Rout - I didnt see other newspapers carry this:

http://expressbuzz.com/thesundaystandar ... 42151.html

Some salient points:

“The test will be conducted by the naval personnel to gauge the effectiveness of the indigenously built anti-ship missile,” an official told The Sunday Standard.

While one will have a range of 250 km, the other will have a capability to hit targets 500 km away. Scientists also have planned to acquire a reach of 500 km through this missile by mounting a lighter warhead.

It can be used as an anti-ship weapon as well as for destroying land targets depending on the range

Hmm - anti-ship being mentioned twice. DDM or is something else cooking?

vic · Post by **vic** » 14 Dec 2011 08:41

He seems to have used the term "anti ship" instead of "ship launched", ddm as usual

vic · Post by **vic** » 14 Dec 2011 08:45

For our cold strike and mountanious regions, we actually need lighter platforms fo Nag, Pinaka, Brahmos, Prahaar etc. We need to have a Single pod - 6 Rocket version of Pinaka mounted on 4x4 truck and if possible even single rocket version mounted on even lighter platforms. Similarly we need to have Nag mounted on lighter platforms like 4x4 trucks. Something like jeep mounted Milans in heavier mode. Nag can act as a very powerful sniper rifle to take out enemy bunkers at long ranges (especially in mountains). Hellina with 2 way data link can be fired in parabolic ballistic mode for taking out important tactical targets. In fact we should develop Nag versions which can be broken down and backpacked up for launch from unexpected places.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Dec 2011 08:48

I get the feeling they are experimenting with a light anti ship warhead and seeker here, for later modified use on prithvi-1 as a desi 1200km range x 500kg warhead x Mach10+ ballistic DF21ASBM

or same thing applied to Shourya.

we know the "2m diameter" trishul thing reported faithfully for years a deliberate plant to send a message out.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Dec 2011 09:05

Yes,the PRC's cacaphopnic drumbeat about its "ASBM",being able to kill US carriers created a stir and ripples which are still lapping the shores of planners.While the initial scepticism/scare has subsided,an acknowledgement that the threat is a real possibility has sunk in.US ABM defences using SM-3 missiles has already been proven and one is in no doubt that many countermeasures are being developed to counter the threat,the PRC's shortcomings being lack of a network of maritime milsats to give its assets real time intel. and adequate LRMPs to challenge the USN in the Pacific.

We already have the naval version of Prithvi aboard some of our OPVs,and the DRDO/IN has taken the opportunity to further develop the land-attack missile into a longer-ranged ASBM.What the mandarins can cook up,"so can we",appears to be the attitude,given that the PLAN after years of speculation, has now finally unveiled the former Varyag as its new carrier undergoing sea trials,with more carrier construction planned.A Dhanush ASBM would be a very potent weapon with which to counter any entry into the IOR by PLAN carrier task forces,which can easily be detected thanks to the IOR chokepoints.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 14 Dec 2011 10:14

MBDA pitches Mistral for Indian VSHORAD tender

sum · Post by **sum** » 14 Dec 2011 10:21

vic wrote:He seems to have used the term "anti ship" instead of "ship launched", ddm as usual

Well, somehow this Hemant Kumar Rout guy seems to have good sources at ITR....he was the only guy who had posted about A-IIP failure and few other "scoops" when there was no info at other outlets.

So, i would assume he has printed whatever was quoted as is and would not dismiss the report as DDM without checking further.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 14 Dec 2011 10:30

The good thing about the Mistral is if we run low we can borrow some from Pakisatan the French sold them this missile too

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 14 Dec 2011 16:30

A Quantum Leap
Agni-4 Launched

India successfully test-fired the most advanced long range missile system Agni-4. The missile was launched from a road mobile system from Wheelers' Island off the coast of Odisha. The missile followed its trajectory, in a text book fashion, attained a height of about 900 kms and reached the pre-designated target in the international waters of Bay of Bengal. All mission objectives were fully met. All the systems functioned perfectly till the end encountering the re-entry temperatures of more than 30000C.
The missile is one of its kind proving many new technologies for the first time and representing quantum leap in terms of missile technology. The missile is lighter in weight and has two stages of solid propulsion and a payload with re-entry heat shield. The composite rocket motor, which has been used for the first time, has given excellent performance. The missile system is equipped with modern and compact avionics with redundancy to provide a high level of reliability. The indigenous Ring Laser Gyros based high accuracy INS (RINS) and Micro Navigation System (MINGS), complementing each other in redundant mode, have been successfully flown in guidance mode for the first time. The high performance onboard computer with distributed avionics architecture, high-speed reliable communication bus and a full digital control system controlled and guided the missile to the target. The missile reached the target with a very high level of accuracy. Radars and electro-optical systems along the Coast of Odisha have tracked and monitored all the parameters of the missile. Two Indian Naval ships located near the target witnessed the final event.
Defence Minister, Mr AK Antony congratulated the DRDO team on its achievement. Dr Vijay Kumar Saraswat, Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister, Secretary, Department of Defence R & D and Director General DRDO, who witnessed the launch, congratulated all the scientists and employees of DRDO and the Armed Forces for the successful launch of Agni-4. Mr Avinash Chander, Chief Controller (Missile & Strategic Systems), DRDO and Programme Director, while addressing the scientists after the launch, called it 'a new era' in the modern long-range navigation system in India.
Ms Tessy Thomas, Project Director Agni-4 and her team prepared and integrated the missile system and launched the missile successfully. The missile, having a capability to carry strategic warheads for the forces, provides a fantastic deterrence to the country.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 14 Dec 2011 22:18

sum wrote: Well, somehow this Hemant Kumar Rout guy seems to have good sources at ITR....he was the only guy who had posted about A-IIP failure and few other "scoops" when there was no info at other outlets.

So, i would assume he has printed whatever was quoted as is and would not dismiss the report as DDM without checking further.

Yep - Mr. Rout has been right in the past & had the scoop well before anyone else. Plus the report clearly states anti-ship twice (& also makes it clear that the missile itself is ship launched). So, its not a typo.

I have a feeling something is cooking.

The ASBM concept (if its proven) defeats the USN philosophy of "kill the archer" (accomplished by a 500 Mile protection bubble around a carrier group). How do you defend against a BM that can be launched from anywhere inland (or from a ship) 1000KM away and hurtling down at Mach 10? Putting ABM defences in each CBG raises the cost exponentially, not to mention the technological challenge like over the horizon radar tracking & early warning.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 14 Dec 2011 23:33

Prem Kumar wrote:...

The ASBM concept (if its proven) defeats the USN philosophy of "kill the archer" (accomplished by a 500 Mile protection bubble around a carrier group). How do you defend against a BM that can be launched from anywhere inland (or from a ship) 1000KM away and hurtling down at Mach 10? Putting ABM defences in each CBG raises the cost exponentially, not to mention the technological challenge like over the horizon radar tracking & early warning.

I thought the US "Aegis Combat System" was supposed to defend against ASBMs. I guess it becomes a question of latency and capacity, wherein a CBG would have to defend against multiple inbound ASBMs in short order.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2011 07:52

Prem Kumar wrote:Check this out from Hemant Kumar Rout - I didnt see other newspapers carry this:
http://expressbuzz.com/thesundaystandar ... 42151.html
Some salient points:
Scientists also have planned to acquire a reach of 500 km through this missile by mounting a lighter warhead.

There was also a project to add another stage, a solid I Stage, to the Dhanush to increase the range.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Dec 2011 08:24

have the DD21 ships started building yet? these have space for longer missiles and bigger radars. I get the feeling apart from land attack, these might be repurposed to mounting the big bad part of the sea borne ABM kit n kaboodle and one attached to each CVBG, with the Aegis ships dedicated to usual AAW with SM6 and SM2-blockX.

skaranam · Post by **skaranam** » 15 Dec 2011 10:30

Missiles to get smarter with onboard desi chips

BANGALORE/.HYDREBAD: : Indian missiles are set to go lighter and smarter with the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) on the verge of launching a System on Chip (SOC) component, to be embedded on to the onboard computer (OBC). The SOC will give a tech advantage to the scientists to either increase the range of the missile or the warhead, depending upon the mission. The processing speed also will go up 6-7 times with SOC

VikB · Post by **VikB** » 15 Dec 2011 11:32

1. Dhanush page shows photo of two Carnatic vocal singers where underneath it says "dhanush"

2. My bad but kindly indulge. where is IIR seeker for Nag being taken from? mean it is not indeginous. Israeli or Russi?

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 15 Dec 2011 12:07

VikB wrote:1. Dhanush page shows photo of two Carnatic vocal singers where underneath it says "dhanush"

2. My bad but kindly indulge. where is IIR seeker for Nag being taken from? mean it is not indeginous. Israeli or Russi?

Neither- France.