Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1617
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby andy B » 08 Jul 2009 10:07

Aditya_V wrote:I belibve that Hell fire is laser guided and not fire and forget and besides any airlaunched missile gets a slight advantage in range beacause of A) if the platform is moving it gets a bit of momemtum, or B) launched from a 100 feet or so it does have to fight gravity just to get out of the launcher.


Hellphyre is laser and mmw guided. It can also be deployed by land vehicles. The mmw variant used by ze Apache if fire n forget.

The system has been tested for use on the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) and the Improved TOW Vehicle (ITV). Test shots have also been fired from a C-130 Hercules (see photos below). Sweden and Norway use the Hellfire for coastal defense, and Norway has conducted tests with Hellfire launchers on Protector M151 remotely-controlled weapon systems mounted on the Stridsbåt 90 coastal assault boat


Range is mostly stated between 7 and 8 kms for most variants doesnt quite say what the range would be if phyred from land based system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-114_Hellfire

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 08 Jul 2009 13:10

Guess, the prophecy about the discussions going in circles after hiatus of couple of months on BRF is going to haunt us forever. I remember being part of discussion about the role of Nag and NAMICA couple of moons ago ( Rahul M will also remember). Just my 2 cents on dicussion:

1. Cost of NAG:
As one gentleman put it, this is our first effort at developing an ATGM and that too jumping directly to the 3rd Gen. So, as the processes mature over time, we can sure bring the cost down and develop more products in category or " spin offs", if you may.

2. Role of NAG and NAMICA:
I've always felt that IA has lesser than required ATGM assets. This is more so because for a country of our size and what we propose to achieve in a short conflict, the number of Armored Divisions that we have is really inadequate. Compare this is with PA. It knows it will have IA Armored units breathing down its neck and has proliferated ATGMs (and MANPADS) across the entire spectrum of army. They have the heavy TOW in mounted role as well as the Bakhtar Shikan in the MANP ATGM Role.
In our case, the Konkurs and MILANS (and now MILAN-2T) will end up with Infantry Units. What about the dedicated mounted version of ATGMs? These can be part of Recce. Sqns/Regiments of the Armored Brigades/Divisions. Also, we have a unique creature in the Mechanized Regiment in IA called Recce & Observation Battalions. These are surely the candidates for such a sytem. I remember Regiment of Guards had dedicated ATGM battalions (with rest being mechanized). I do not know their present status. Surely, couple of such battalions in the ORBAT of formations slated to fight thrusts from PA Strike Corps will not hurt. Also, a couple of NAMICAs per Sqn. of a Mechanized Regiment can aid greatly in withstanding and fighting off armored assualts from PA.
As for precedence of such dedicated ATGM platforms such as NAMICA, please refer to this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV102_Striker

Even our freinds across the border to west have a dedicated ATGM Carrier concentrated in the ARN.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Katare » 08 Jul 2009 21:20

The philosophy behind NAMICA design is little different than man-portable/vehicle mounted ATGM. NAMICA would be treated as another Tank with similar mobility that can follow/lead tanks in the tank battles. It'll be deployed to provide Indian armor an edge by providing longer detection and fire range over enemy tanks.

Man-portable assets can't run around as fast as NAMICA neither can trucks/vehicles take quick positions in sand dunes of Rajasthan. So yes it'll be a niche player designed for IA for their unique requirements. Spin-offs may come later and provide more variants for other roles but until than enjoy NAMICA.

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby p_saggu » 08 Jul 2009 21:57

rohitvats wrote:As one gentleman put it, this is our first effort at developing an ATGM and that too jumping directly to the 3rd Gen.

No, DRDO has developed indigenous anti tank missiles of all generation. Here is a pic of the 1st gen Anti tank missile that DRDO developed. Although, it was good, apparantly it was not good enough for the army, which went ahead and ordered some anti tank missiles from abroad.

Image

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Surya » 08 Jul 2009 22:12

SS11 is NOT our design

Its a French design which we license produced.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby ramana » 08 Jul 2009 22:45

Surya wrote:SS11 is NOT our design

Its a French design which we license produced.


Surya is right. BDL makes quite few generations of ATGMs. All are wire guided. Nag was a fire and forget missile. When it was conceptualized it was quite revolutionary. F&F were for airborne platforms and even these had to be designated continuously. However the long delays and testing have made unpromising.

SS11 was in response to the Pakis getting West German made one called Cobra by MBB. The Cobra was in turn based on a Nazi ATGM of WWII in prototype stage. SS10 and SS11 were the French version.

ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 361
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby ManuJ » 08 Jul 2009 23:41

Dunno what's the whining about NAG's cost and delay.

Closest ATGM missile to NAG is the Trigat-LR, also known as PARS-3 LR. Development started in 1988, and trials finally ended in 2004. Germany ordered 680 of these missiles for $450 million (unit cost: USD$660,000) in 2006. Delivery will start in 2010. So first missile will be delivered 22 years after development started.

Keep also in mind development cost. In 1995, a DRDO paper had estimated total development cost of Trigat program (both MR and LR) to be $1.4 billion. Don't know what the actual figure came out to be. Compare that to the total cost of NAG program (wiki gives cost at Rs. 300 crore)

While Trigat-LR claims a max. range of 6km, that's for the air-borne version. Tellingly, it doesn't give the range of land version. Though it's primary meant to be mated with Tiger, it can also be deployed on land vehicles.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 09 Jul 2009 00:14

The philosophy behind NAMICA design is little different than man-portable/vehicle mounted ATGM. NAMICA would be treated as another Tank with similar mobility that can follow/lead tanks in the tank battles. It'll be deployed to provide Indian armor an edge by providing longer detection and fire range over enemy tanks.


@Katare: And you're basing you're judgement on the deployment philosophy of NAMICA on what? What you've said is directly opposite to the employment philosophy of an ATGM platform (man portable/mounted/dedicated carriers). NAMICA or anything else wouldn't stand a chance against tanks in a armored battle if it makes the mistake of revealing itself, let alond "lead" tanks in battle. The main advantage of a platform like NAMICA is to use its superior sensor suite and fire from a concealed position. The fact that the missile can be lofted and does not have to be fired on LOS mode is a big advantage. This is where it will fit well with Recce troops, dedicated Tank-Killer units and Mechanized Infantry Battalions providing them with great deterrent.

Man-portable assets can't run around as fast as NAMICA neither can trucks/vehicles take quick positions in sand dunes of Rajasthan. So yes it'll be a niche player designed for IA for their unique requirements. Spin-offs may come later and provide more variants for other roles but until than enjoy NAMICA


As I said earlier, their is an existing consituency for employment of NAMICA and then expand the deploymeny to lesser mortals :D

As for the SS-11 and ATGM "development" experience, I stand corrected. Surya, thank you for the input.

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby sunilUpa » 09 Jul 2009 04:52

India Clears Anti-Tank Nag Missile for Production

NEW DELHI - Two decades after the homegrown Nag anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) was conceived, it has been cleared for production.

The ATGM was indigenously designed and developed by the state-owned Defence Research and Development Organisation [DRDO]. The 4-kilometer-range missile will be produced at state-owned Bharat Dynamics, which will make about 200 missiles in the first year and double that number in following years. The Indian defense forces require about 4,000 ATGMs.

The production of the Nag missile was ordered early this month after successful heat trials in the Rajasthan desert, said a senior Indian Army official. The winter trials of the missile were concluded last December.

All the user tests of the Nag missile have been completed and the Army has given its approval, said a senior DRDO scientist.

The latest trials of the Nag missile were conducted using an advanced imaging infrared seeker head, one of the Army's essential requirements, the Army official added.


[DDM portion of the report]The Nag will replace the existing Russian Konkours and European missile Milan, both of which are manufactured under license by Bharat.[end DDM portion] :rotfl:

The DRDO scientist said focus will now shift to the helicopter version, which will have an extended range of seven kilometers. The air version will be completed in two years, added the scientist. The land version also eventually will have a range of seven kilometers.


:twisted:

naird
BRFite
Posts: 281
Joined: 04 Jun 2009 19:41

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby naird » 09 Jul 2009 05:55

Excellent news........

Finally NAG is in production....strange it's not been covered in major news papers....

Nevertheless , things are finally moving ...NAG is in production ....ATV is going to be launched.....Waiting for LCA production and more orders for Arjun. :D

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby p_saggu » 09 Jul 2009 07:36

Great News!
But the true Jingo is NEVER satisfied. They always want more.

This one is specific to the Nag, but it applies to all DRDO products in general.

[rant] Why can't DRDO make a few display missiles, and do them in metallic green color, Hire some really accomplished ad agency to do the brochures, so that the finish on the display missiles is like they came off a Terminator movie set - all glitzy and $exy? Nag is a product that is comparable with the best in its class, now why don't we market it better? [/rant]

babbupandey
BRFite
Posts: 180
Joined: 15 Jan 2008 16:53

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby babbupandey » 09 Jul 2009 09:21

[rant] Why can't DRDO make a few display missiles, and do them in metallic green color, Hire some really accomplished ad agency to do the brochures, so that the finish on the display missiles is like they came off a Terminator movie set - all glitzy and $exy? Nag is a product that is comparable with the best in its class, now why don't we market it better? [/rant]


That's so true. LOL.
DRDO should even hire a few goras to hard-sell these missiles, maybe even put Made in Israel/USA/Russia/Italy/France sticker on them. I am sure the armed forces will be begging on all fours to buy these missiles and in that case even at double the price. It is the old colonial mentality of armed forces which still lingers in the mindset and is genetically transferred generation-after-generation. This prevents colonels and generals to accept anything made by "bloody Indians".

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4787
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 09 Jul 2009 09:48

babbupandey wrote:
[rant] Why can't DRDO make a few display missiles, and do them in metallic green color, Hire some really accomplished ad agency to do the brochures, so that the finish on the display missiles is like they came off a Terminator movie set - all glitzy and $exy? Nag is a product that is comparable with the best in its class, now why don't we market it better? [/rant]


That's so true. LOL.
DRDO should even hire a few goras to hard-sell these missiles, maybe even put Made in Israel/USA/Russia/Italy/France sticker on them. I am sure the armed forces will be begging on all fours to buy these missiles and in that case even at double the price. It is the old colonial mentality of armed forces which still lingers in the mindset and is genetically transferred generation-after-generation. This prevents colonels and generals to accept anything made by "bloody Indians".


Yes, Pandeyji. All those defence folks who put their lives on the line for India cannot accept anything from Indians... only the rest of BR arm-chair generals know better than the real ones.

babbupandey
BRFite
Posts: 180
Joined: 15 Jan 2008 16:53

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby babbupandey » 09 Jul 2009 10:18

viv wrote: Yes, Pandeyji. All those defence folks who put their lives on the line for India cannot accept anything from Indians... only the rest of BR arm-chair generals know better than the real ones.

Fact remains that Russian/Israeli lobbying is very influential in defence circles. In fact, the lobby is so strong that it can make DRDO shelve it projects in order to sell their own. If I am allowed to go off-tangent for a second, see the classical case of Arjun tank. Army has been postponing comparative trials vis-a-vis T-90 since eternity and the result is order of 124 Arjun tanks against 1200 T-90 tanks.

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4787
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Yayavar » 09 Jul 2009 12:02

babbupandey wrote:
viv wrote: Yes, Pandeyji. All those defence folks who put their lives on the line for India cannot accept anything from Indians... only the rest of BR arm-chair generals know better than the real ones.

Fact remains that Russian/Israeli lobbying is very influential in defence circles. In fact, the lobby is so strong that it can make DRDO shelve it projects in order to sell their own. If I am allowed to go off-tangent for a second, see the classical case of Arjun tank. Army has been postponing comparative trials vis-a-vis T-90 since eternity and the result is order of 124 Arjun tanks against 1200 T-90 tanks.


Reading "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjun_(tank)", I cannot blame the Army. Overall the DRDO is doing its best and developing advanced weaponry is not easy; but it is also incorrect to be uncharitable to the defence when they find indigenous armament deficient. It sometimes is.

babbupandey
BRFite
Posts: 180
Joined: 15 Jan 2008 16:53

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby babbupandey » 09 Jul 2009 12:14

viv wrote:Reading "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjun_(tank)", I cannot blame the Army. Overall the DRDO is doing its best and developing advanced weaponry is not easy; but it is also incorrect to be uncharitable to the defence when they find indigenous armament deficient. It sometimes is.


I guess you are better informed than I am (no pun intended, my only source of information is the internet). The only reason I criticised the defence was because I read that they have "imported is best" mentality + hard selling by lobbyist (which include retired brigadiers and colonels now employed by foreign companies).

AmitR
BRFite
Posts: 322
Joined: 25 Jan 2009 17:13

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby AmitR » 09 Jul 2009 12:24

babbupandey wrote:
viv wrote:Reading "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjun_(tank)", I cannot blame the Army. Overall the DRDO is doing its best and developing advanced weaponry is not easy; but it is also incorrect to be uncharitable to the defence when they find indigenous armament deficient. It sometimes is.


I guess you are better informed than I am (no pun intended, my only source of information is the internet). The only reason I criticised the defence was because I read that they have "imported is best" mentality + hard selling by lobbyist (which include retired brigadiers and colonels now employed by foreign companies).


I think IA is just being made a scapegoat here. The real power in defence purchase lies in the hand of the Netas and Babus. Our army has little or no control over what really gets purchased at the end of a protracted process. IA gets the flack because the are the ones who are using and making the final decision on paper. See Bofors as an example.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Sanku » 09 Jul 2009 13:17

AmitR wrote: making the final decision on paper


IA can NOT even make the final decision on paper. For big ticket items IAs role ends after it sends up it purely technical representation.

That representation essentially a test plan with the results of the equipment on that test plan.

The test plan can include things like ease of tactical items like ease of maintenance etc too.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby koti » 09 Jul 2009 22:32

Does any one have any update on the status of Nirbhay?

Vinito
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 16 Jun 2009 18:33

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Vinito » 14 Jul 2009 01:17

vasu_ray wrote:helina at 7km range puts Dhruv just outside enemy's shoulder fired SAM range, got to have a better one that can target multiples


Is it possible for a infra red guided helina to have a 7 km range...wont we need to have it laser guided or mmw guided to have that reach?

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Kersi D » 14 Jul 2009 01:59

p_saggu wrote:
rohitvats wrote:As one gentleman put it, this is our first effort at developing an ATGM and that too jumping directly to the 3rd Gen.

No, DRDO has developed indigenous anti tank missiles of all generation. Here is a pic of the 1st gen Anti tank missile that DRDO developed. Although, it was good, apparantly it was not good enough for the army, which went ahead and ordered some anti tank missiles from abroad.

Image


This looks like the French Entac anti tank missile which IA bought in 1960/70s. I am not sure if it was made in India

K

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Surya » 14 Jul 2009 02:06

Kersi my friend

Its an SS11 - click on it - it says so :D

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby p_saggu » 14 Jul 2009 02:18

^^^
These pics were all from the DRDO pavilion at the India International Trade Fair 2009 in Delhi.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 14 Jul 2009 10:23

Kersi D wrote: Image

This looks like the French Entac anti tank missile which IA bought in 1960/70s. I am not sure if it was made in India

K

IIRC after Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan's era, this was the first missile that was locally manufactured under license by post-colonial India.

My topiwalla daksha Cheetha rider says that firing this and later Nag was a quantum effect experience (you are here as well there at the same time) ;)

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby shiv » 14 Jul 2009 21:29

Kersi D wrote:
Image


Can you guys see this pic?

Image

aditp
BRFite
Posts: 447
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 07:25
Location: Autoland

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby aditp » 14 Jul 2009 22:07

No

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 15 Jul 2009 02:26

Yes I can see the pic of Alouette helicopter firing the AntiTank missile that very much resembles said missile in discussion.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Austin » 15 Jul 2009 09:30

How do they guide that anti-tank missile from Alouette , its certainly not a F&F missile , and the small chopper does not seem to carry any sort of guidance laser illum etc.

Do they have some operator on board who guides it via joystick ? Must be one of the most difficult thing to do keeping the chopper stable ad hovering till it hits the target , making it self a target.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby ramana » 15 Jul 2009 11:01

Austin its wire guided. The operator has to keep the joystick centered on target and the gizmo generates electric signals to the vanes.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Singha » 15 Jul 2009 11:11

and before anyone starts complaining about the wire spool, in ODS-1 , the apache and cobra helis fired TOW missiles the same way. had to cut and run on some occasions.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Austin » 15 Jul 2009 15:10

My 2 Cents

The problem with this approach in this age and time is first the chopper needs to be very steady till the operator gets the shot , the wire itself has its fair share of problem as Singha mentioned.

The chopper in this case Allouette has to hover couple of hundred meters above the ground to get a nice clean view of the target to accomplish the difficult task of guiding the missile by joy stick.

These days with Manpads available to every jihadi and soldier , chances are that the supersonic Stinger will hit the chopper first before SS11 hits the target , any way the singer type are very autonomous once he gets a good beep and lock of the target at a standoff distance much larger than the SS11/Alloutte he can just hit and run for cover.

What we need is a high supersonic laser guided anti-tank/anti-structure missile , so that it gets a fair chance to reach the target faster without the hassle of operator guiding it and a passive sensor over the rotor/EO system so that the chopper does not have to expose fully most of the times.

The best approach is a Nag type F&F system , minimum exposure , fire and move out.

babbupandey
BRFite
Posts: 180
Joined: 15 Jan 2008 16:53

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby babbupandey » 15 Jul 2009 17:13

I read somewhere that Pakistan uses the same wire-guided technology (supposedly indigenous technology :rotfl: )

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 15 Jul 2009 23:08

shiv ji, how old is that pic ?

OT, why do I see a green mizzile with p saggu written over it ? :eek:
Kersi D wrote:
Image

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 16 Jul 2009 03:48

Austin wrote:My 2 Cents

The problem with this approach in this age and time is first the chopper needs to be very steady till the operator gets the shot , the wire itself has its fair share of problem as Singha mentioned.

The chopper in this case Allouette has to hover couple of hundred meters above the ground to get a nice clean view of the target to accomplish the difficult task of guiding the missile by joy stick.

These days with Manpads available to every jihadi and soldier , chances are that the supersonic Stinger will hit the chopper first before SS11 hits the target , any way the singer type are very autonomous once he gets a good beep and lock of the target at a standoff distance much larger than the SS11/Alloutte he can just hit and run for cover.

What we need is a high supersonic laser guided anti-tank/anti-structure missile , so that it gets a fair chance to reach the target faster without the hassle of operator guiding it and a passive sensor over the rotor/EO system so that the chopper does not have to expose fully most of the times.

The best approach is a Nag type F&F system , minimum exposure , fire and move out.


Allouette /Cheetha is anti-tank role with the old wire guided missile, is a defunct idea as recognized by IAF/IA. That is one of the reasons some of the newly formed Cheetha flights were dissolved.

Even Allouette /Cheetha based FAC (Forward Air Controller) units are for all practical purposes cannon fodder to enemy fire. All military exercises with IA units using FAC alway bring out the fact that by the time FAC is able to see enemy tagret (using pair of binoculors in a vibrating platform that Cheetha is) and before it can bring to bear IAF attack aircafts, the Cheetha FAC aircraft is long dead. I would have been taken down by direct enemy fire and/or MANPADs.

That is the reason why gyrostablisez sight is mimimum requirement for next chopper chosen for FAC role. Of course UAV will also begin supplementing the role but unlikely to replace completely the FAC role because the risk of collision with ground attack fighters.

babbupandey
BRFite
Posts: 180
Joined: 15 Jan 2008 16:53

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby babbupandey » 16 Jul 2009 04:00

Can those UAV's be configured to carry Nag? A light pilotless aircrafts carrying 2-3 missiles each, 2-3 sorties will be enough to bring down the morale of bhailogs across the border on both sides!

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby p_saggu » 16 Jul 2009 04:43

Rahul M wrote:shiv ji, how old is that pic ?

OT, why do I see a green mizzile with p saggu written over it ? :eek:

I took that pic (and several others at the India International Trade Fair, Nai Dilli ? Last year?) I sort of copyrighted it and sent to adminullas hoping it will appear on BRF's photo section.
It never did. :((
Even the Saryu Class Naval OPV never made it to the relevant navy page. :cry:

Klick here
And Heiyar
:(( :(( :((

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16829
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby NRao » 16 Jul 2009 05:02

P_S,

That is a first gen anti-tank missile? Hand delivered? I am not sure, but IIRC BR charter does not allow first gen missiles foto to be hosted. Could be wrong.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 16 Jul 2009 06:43

babbupandey wrote:Can those UAV's be configured to carry Nag? A light pilotless aircrafts carrying 2-3 missiles each, 2-3 sorties will be enough to bring down the morale of bhailogs across the border on both sides!

All wish list items are eminently realizable. No doubt about it.

Willingness to get that as demonstrated by putting money on the table is the disconnect. Output is largely proportional to input, and give 9 months time for the baby to be born (not expect it to happen yesterday). Money and time can get any wishlist fulfilled. Including a Canberra fitted with Mig-21 engines

India gets what it deserves.

For "Khayali Pulav" they get reality of "Khayali Pulav" (Air Castle). All is fair onleee.

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby sunilUpa » 16 Jul 2009 09:52

Junked: France joint missile plan
New Delhi, July 15: New Delhi has junked a proposal from Paris to develop a missile defence system in a joint venture, despite France’s charm offensive that saw Indian soldiers leading the Bastille Day parade on the Champs Elysees on Tuesday.

A senior defence ministry source, when asked today about the defence deals that figured in discussions during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Paris, said that a $500-million (Rs 2,430 crore) proposal from European missile maker MDBA to jointly produce low-level quick reaction missiles (LLQRM) — or short-range surface-to-air missiles (SR-SAMs) — was “not happening”.


now DDM

But in May this year, IAI was blacklisted after defence minister A.K. Antony ordered action against all seven companies named in a CBI investigation into the deals by the former ordnance factory board director-general Sudipta Ghosh. Ghosh’s houses in Calcutta were raided and he was arrested.
:shock: it was IMI moron!

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 16 Jul 2009 12:14

Frankly between 160kg Astra and 276kg MRSAM, the JV for LLQRM did not make sense. If the report is correct then this decision is sensible.

sunilUpa wrote:Junked: France joint missile plan
New Delhi, July 15: New Delhi has junked a proposal from Paris to develop a missile defence system in a joint venture, despite France’s charm offensive that saw Indian soldiers leading the Bastille Day parade on the Champs Elysees on Tuesday.

A senior defence ministry source, when asked today about the defence deals that figured in discussions during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Paris, said that a $500-million (Rs 2,430 crore) proposal from European missile maker MDBA to jointly produce low-level quick reaction missiles (LLQRM) — or short-range surface-to-air missiles (SR-SAMs) — was “not happening”.


now DDM

But in May this year, IAI was blacklisted after defence minister A.K. Antony ordered action against all seven companies named in a CBI investigation into the deals by the former ordnance factory board director-general Sudipta Ghosh. Ghosh’s houses in Calcutta were raided and he was arrested.
:shock: it was IMI moron!


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests