Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 14 Apr 2013 01:49

The fact is, I answered your question and more. But you won't take it. I don't know of any QR for NAG-MP in public. But neither do I know for the other ATGMs in development like Helina, CLGM. So your argument that DRDO cannot develop a missile without a QR from the Army is baseless.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 14 Apr 2013 01:51

Sagar G wrote:P.S.- Damn you have quick editing skills :lol:

I did not remove or modify anything. I added things.

Just saying. I would not divulge any inside knowledge even if I knew ;-).

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 14 Apr 2013 01:55

Sagar G wrote:
indranilroy wrote:What has BDL been doing. It has been producing Milan 2T for about 3 decades now? Couldn't it have developed the next gen man portable version in all these years?! I know it is a production agency, but 1 with 0 R&D?


Yes that's how MoD has wanted it to be.

Really, this is from BDL's homepage.

While fulfilling its role as a manufacturing agency, the domain knowledge gained has been fully exploited by the Design & Engineering Division of BDL to develop value added items for its customers. A few of the products realized are:
a) Fagot Launcher Adapted for Milan Equipment (FLAME) – An indigenous
launcher for Milan ATGM.
b) Test Equipment for Konkurs Missile.
c) Test Equipment for Konkurs Launcher.
d) Counter Measure Dispensing System (CMDS), etc.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Sagar G » 14 Apr 2013 01:58

indranilroy wrote:The fact is, I answered your question and more. But you won't take it. I don't know of any QR for NAG-MP in public. But neither do I know for the other ATGMs in development like Helina, CLGM. So your argument that DRDO cannot develop a missile without a QR from the Army is baseless.


If we are talking about missiles then you are right to a certain point but similarly baseless was your assumption that they are sitting over it for a decade. At this point of time the status about indigenous man portable ATGM is not publicly known but such was the case with SCB till the just concluded AI-13. So just because there is no news doesn't mean that no work is being done in that regard.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Sagar G » 14 Apr 2013 02:02

indranilroy wrote:Really, this is from BDL's homepage.

While fulfilling its role as a manufacturing agency, the domain knowledge gained has been fully exploited by the Design & Engineering Division of BDL to develop value added items for its customers. A few of the products realized are:
a) Fagot Launcher Adapted for Milan Equipment (FLAME) – An indigenous
launcher for Milan ATGM.
b) Test Equipment for Konkurs Missile.
c) Test Equipment for Konkurs Launcher.
d) Counter Measure Dispensing System (CMDS), etc.


:rotfl:

No need to be so desperate to prove your point I think you should really take a close look at the list and then tell me if you really want to call them R&D "achievements".

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 14 Apr 2013 02:12

Sagar G wrote:
indranilroy wrote:The fact is, I answered your question and more. But you won't take it. I don't know of any QR for NAG-MP in public. But neither do I know for the other ATGMs in development like Helina, CLGM. So your argument that DRDO cannot develop a missile without a QR from the Army is baseless.


If we are talking about missiles then you are right to a certain point but similarly baseless was your assumption that they are sitting over it for a decade. At this point of time the status about indigenous man portable ATGM is not publicly known but such was the case with SCB till the just concluded AI-13. So just because there is no news doesn't mean that no work is being done in that regard.

What do you know about the development of SCB from AI-13. Do you know what generation of SCB technology it is? Do you know how far are we from fielding it in an engine? Do we have the tech to develop any shape and size? Where does that bring us with respect to building our own engines? For example, scientists from GTRE are speaking of shortening the development time frame to 2020 for own next engine. There are tenders for the LP stage fans.

With missiles too it is a long development period. It wouldn't materialize suddenly. For example, with the Helina and CLGM, we can tell that they have been fired a couple of times. If everything goes to plan, you would see these missiles getting inducted 3-4 years later. NAG-MP is nowhere in sight, not even in brochures.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Sagar G » 14 Apr 2013 02:27

indranilroy wrote:What do you know about the development of SCB from AI-13. Do you know what generation of SCB technology it is? Do you know how far are we from fielding it in an engine? Do we have the tech to develop any shape and size? Where does that bring us with respect to building our own engines? For example, scientists from GTRE are speaking of shortening the development time frame to 2020 for own next engine. There are tenders for the LP stage fans.


The point regarding SCB was that till AI-13 the aam abdul didn't know for sure whether we have any capability regarding that piece of tech (although some BRFites constantly said we did). Suddenly seeing those pics without any kind of news about them in public was a pleasant surprise. The same thing can happen in this case as well.

indranilroy wrote:NAG-MP is nowhere in sight, not even in brochures.


An indigenous man portable ATGM has been talked about in the past, IIRC has been done recently as well so I am saying that we must not assume that they are sitting over it and doing nothing about it when the required no's are that big.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 14 Apr 2013 02:37

Sagar G wrote:An indigenous man portable ATGM has been talked about in the past, IIRC has been done recently as well so I am saying that we must not assume that they are sitting over it and doing nothing about it when the required no's are that big.

I hope you are right and a disclosure tomorrow surprises you pleasantly. But I am not placing any money on that happening.

By the way, by sitting on it, I did not mean that they did not do anything. But that the development of such a weapon is many years away.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8311
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 14 Apr 2013 06:30

IRC, the CLGM also has a man portable version IIRC, it has been discussed, in this thread only. That being the case, I hope, that it will as a suitable weapon.

URL

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby uddu » 14 Apr 2013 07:12

India's CLGM. The army can go for this 5km missile rather than the 2km spike.

pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby pentaiah » 14 Apr 2013 08:14

Nag has lot of problems to be resolved and I know that for fact

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_22539 » 14 Apr 2013 11:01

^Care to elaborate WITH references?

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby abhik » 14 Apr 2013 13:55

Pratyush wrote:IRC, the CLGM also has a man portable version IIRC, it has been discussed, in this thread only. That being the case, I hope, that it will as a suitable weapon.

URL

Id of the launcher in the info board, Is it Russian? Konkurs?

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 465
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Gurneesh » 14 Apr 2013 14:39

Unlike Spike, CLGM in its current guise is not fire and forget. Being laser guided, it is more advanced than milans but would be operationally inferior to missiles like javelin and spike (specially when used by infantry).

A good way forward will be to mate CLGM with fire and forget seeker from Nag (or even Helina) to create a 'baby' Nag.

Rahul Shukla
BRFite
Posts: 565
Joined: 20 Feb 2007 23:27
Location: On a roller-coaster.

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Rahul Shukla » 15 Apr 2013 18:33

Unrelated to Indian missiles/munitions, but has bearing on debris related to past/future tests:

How North Korea Tipped Its Hand (Daily Beast)
The U.S. recovered the front section of the rocket used in North Korea’s satellite launch in December, which gave away the status of the regime's nuclear arms program.

Image

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2661
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 15 Apr 2013 23:50

indranilroy wrote:
Pratyush wrote:Which brings on the question, what are the reasons why no MP NAG was developed.

Because they sat over it for close to a decade now. In 2005, I had read reports about scientists starting to work on Helina and Nag-MP. I won't say much more :-? .


I dont think its a question of sitting over it. We dont have the capability to miniaturize, reduce weight, develop cooling packs etc. Its difficult enough getting Nag to work with Namica and same for Helina. With Samho/CLGM, we are taking steps in the right direction. But a F&F man portable ATGM will take some time to materialize

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2661
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 15 Apr 2013 23:53

uddu wrote:India's CLGM. The army can go for this 5km missile rather than the 2km spike.


2 different classes of missiles. CLGM is not F&F. Nevertheless, CLGM needs to be mass produced and mass inducted, but it wouldnt substitute a Spike/Javelin

One hopes fondly that we will place a token order of Spike/Javelin, reverse engineer it, mix & match with Nag/Helina and CLGM technologies and develop our own F&F MANPATGM

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 16 Apr 2013 03:58

Prem Kumar wrote:I dont think its a question of sitting over it. We dont have the capability to miniaturize, reduce weight, develop cooling packs etc. Its difficult enough getting Nag to work with Namica and same for Helina. With Samho/CLGM, we are taking steps in the right direction. But a F&F man portable ATGM will take some time to materialize

I guess sitting over was not the right phase to use. All of us who have tracked the project know that efforts were made. I meant that they did not make much progress on it.

I don't know if DRDO could get Spike's seeker and mate it with CLGM as a quick fix.

anmol
BRFite
Posts: 1869
Joined: 05 May 2009 17:39

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby anmol » 16 Apr 2013 18:00

Mihir wrote:The usual suspects are out in full force, it looks like. :roll:

Image


He is Uncle's contact according to latest wikileak. Admins, can there me a new thread for new Wikileaks called "Plus D" ?



INDO-PAK DISCUSSIONS ON SAARC SIDELINES HINT AT SOME PROGRESS


Date:2007 April 11, 09:02 (Wednesday)

Classified By: PolCouns Ted Osius, Reason 1.5 (B,D)

1. (C) Summary: The recently concluded SAARC Summit (April
3-4) was notable for its lack of major tension over the
perennially contentious issues between India and Pakistan.
Indo-Pak experts on the sidelines of SAARC saw signals that a
proposal may be just around the corner to try to resolve
long-running disputes, but they also cautioned that time is
of the highest essence. As Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz
returned to Pakistan, he also left behind some positive
indications with Kashmiri leaders with whom he met. While
such optimism is helpful, details remain vague. Journalists
in Delhi think Siachen Glacier and/or Sir Creek resolutions
could be possible if Delhi and Islamabad muster the will to
close out these problems. Adding a dose of reality after the
SAARC meetings, the latest of eleven rounds of talks on
Siachen went nowhere, as usual. At least the public vibes
remain good. End Summary.

Kashmir Receives the Obligatory Public Mention at SAARC
-----------------

2. (C) At the Fourteenth Summit of the South Asian
Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in New Delhi
April 3-4, Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz labeled the
difference of opinion with India over Kashmir as "the core
issue" in their bilateral relationship. As reported in the
press, however, Aziz is not believed to have broached the
topic in "any serious manner" during a 50-minute meeting with
Prime Minister Singh. Media also noted that Singh, for his
part, did not use the word "terrorism" in his closing speech
to SAARC delegates on April. Instead, he advised, "We must
also win the war against all forms of extremism and
intolerance in our region." After the conclusion of the
summit, Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee
said that he was "not very much perturbed" by Aziz's
statement, and that it was "nothing new." This led some in
the press to speculate that Aziz publicly mentioned Kashmir
only to placate his domestic audience. In the evening of
April 4, Aziz met with a delegation of Kashmiri separatist
leaders, including Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Shabir Shah, Bilal
Ghani Lone, Fazal Haq Qureshi, Agha Syed Hassan Al-Moosvi,
and perhaps others. Aziz reportedly told the Kashmiris that
their fate is central to Pakistan-India relations, unity
among Kashmiris is important, and demilitarization of Kashmir
is only a step and not an end in and of itself. Bilal Lone
also told us that Aziz hinted that the separatists should
consider participating in Indian election if and when a deal
is struck between the two capitals.

Indo-Pak Proposal Almost Ready for Unveiling?
-----------------

3. (C) Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian
Affairs Richard Boucher met on April 4 with Indo-Pak scholar
Dr. Radha Kumar, journalist and commentator Saeed Naqvi, and
Hindustan Times editor Manoj Joshi to discuss the status of
efforts toward the resolution of the Kashmir dispute and
overall Indo-Pak relations. All agreed that public opinion
in both countries was increasingly ready for a "settlement"
on Kashmir, and that while several issues remained to be
resolved, including the status of Pakistan's Northern Areas,
none of these was "insurmountable." Kumar, Naqvi, and Joshi
estimated that India and Pakistan could come to a solution
within just a few years, mainly requiring the political will


NEW DELHI 00001704 002 OF 005


to see it completed. As a sign of how close the two sides
were, Naqvi noted that last month he had attended a dinner
for Foreign Minister Kasuri at the New Delhi Pakistani High
Commission. Kasuri apparently spoke out of turn when he said
at the dinner that discussions had progressed to the point
that India and Pakistan were nearly ready to announce a
proposal to both countries' publics. Naqvi explained that
the bureaucrats in the room looked very uncomfortable as
Kasuri spoke and afterward the comments were muted in the
press.

4. (C) One issue that Joshi identified as still needing
resolution was the difference between a proposed "joint
consultative mechanism" for Jammu and Kashmir and a "joint
management mechanism," the former being India's suggestion
and the latter being Pakistan's characterization of India's
suggestion. Joshi explained that India would not agree to
joint management because it infers less than full
sovereignty, while a joint consultative framework could be
applied to issues of water, trade, tourism, and agriculture
that would not amount to a loss of sovereignty. Assistant
Secretary Boucher explained that joint management may not

SIPDIS
signify any loss of sovereignty, pointing to a joint
U.S.-Canada water management body.

The Fly in the Ointment: Terrorism
-------------------

5. (C) Boucher also met with former Indian Ambassador to the
United States K. Shankar Bajpai on April 4 to discuss
Indo-Pak relations. On the subject of cross-border terrorism,
Boucher said that he has been disturbed by the Indian
Government's tendency to assume that if a terrorist
organization emerges in a country, then that country's
government is automatically complicit in some way. Bajpai
responded that the Indian Government is only now beginning to
realize that some previously foreign-backed terrorist
organizations have taken on an independent existence. With
regard to Pakistan, Boucher advised that the government there
must do its part by ceasing to differentiate between "good"
and "bad" terrorists, particularly concerning Kashmir. Bajpai
added that some Pakistani government officials also maintain
"warm relations" with Taliban figures as they are
anticipating an American withdrawal from Afghanistan in the
near future. Bajpai further lamented that in addition to
terrorist threats originating in Pakistan--and now
Bangladesh--India has home-grown terrorist elements to
combat, too.

Concessions Likely in Siachen and Sir Creek Disputes?
-----------------

6. (C) Even if Kashmir is not quite ready for settlement,
Manoj Joshi predicted that the Siachen Glacier and Sir Creek
border disputes, also components of the Composite Dialogue,
could be resolved in a few months. This would happen because
each side would make a concession on one issue and receive a
concession on the other--Pakistan would concede on Siachen,
India on Sir Creek. There was an approximate agreement where
Pakistan said it would agree to a redeployment schedule.
Joshi explained that since redeployment inferred movement
from one place to another, a redeployment schedule implicitly
recognizes the current locations of both Indian and Pakistani
troops--something Pakistan had previously refused to
acknowledge through formal troop demarcations. On Sir Creek,
the recently completed joint survey shows that the river
banks have moved into Indian territory, compelling India to


NEW DELHI 00001704 003 OF 005


accept a new border there that gives more land to Pakistan.


A Dose of Jarring Siachen Reality
--------------

7. (SBU) Despite official statements indicating that the
eleventh round of Siachen Glacier talks (April 6-7) "were
held in a candid and constructive atmosphere" and that the
meetings would continue, some blunt words by the Pakistani
side after the talks were widely reported in the Indian
press. One Times of India headline read: "Indians are
stubborn, arrogant: Pak officials." Other papers here said
the Pakistanis balked at the customary Indian insistence on
verification of actual ground positions. The article went on
to say that unnamed Pakistani Defense Ministry officials had
blamed "Indian stubbornness" for the failure and that India's
growing relations with the U.S. were the source of its
"arrogance." Reportedly Pakistani Defense Secretary Kamran
Rasool left the talks to go "straight to his room," where his
Indian counterpart found him and continued discussions. The
lack of progress in these talks, coming right on the heels of
the SAARC Summit, has no doubt disappointed Indo-Pak
watchers, but they can derive hope from the fact that it
appears that the talks will inexorably grind on, although no
date has been fixed for the next meeting, according to the
media.

Better Sooner than Later
-----------------

8. (C) The three Indo-Pak observers also told Boucher that
a resolution on Kashmir was better done sooner than later.
Radha Kumar stated that the government of India should come
to an agreement within six months, because she felt Musharraf
was becoming "weaker and weaker." Saeed Naqvi observed that
both countries' moderates gain from a settlement between
India and Pakistan. By contrast, the lack of a settlement
would bolster violence and radicalization in both countries.
Manoj Joshi agreed, claiming that certain footprints of
recent terrorist attacks in India did not lead to Pakistan,
but were linked to domestic developments. If Kashmir was not
solved soon, he predicted, Islamic radicalism could take root
in India.


Geelani Visa Refusal Good for U.S. and Kashmir
-----------------

9. (C) In a separate meeting with Deputy PolCouns, Radha
Kumar expressed agreement with our recent decision to deny a
visa--ostensably for medical treatment in the U.S.--to Sayeed
Ali Shah Geelani, a Kashmiri separatist leader with ties to
terrorist group Hizbul Mujahideen (reftel). Kumar said the
verdict made American opposition to violence crystal clear to
all. In terms of the political scene in Kashmir, Kumar added
that the decision has strengthened the hand of moderate
Hurriyat separatist Mirwaiz Omar Farooq. She also thought
that the situation could possibly give confidence to
associates of Geelani who are too intimidated by him to talk
and participate more in the peace process, such as Hizbul
Mujahideen chief Syed Salahuddin or some members of the
Jemaat al Islamiya.

Greater Roles for Kashmiris and U.S. in Indo-Pak Talks
Desired
-----------------


NEW DELHI 00001704 004 OF 005


10. (C) Shahbir Ahmad Shah, President of the Jammu and
Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party, spoke with Deputy PolCouns
hours before he met with Shaukat Aziz on April 4. Shah
grumbled that although there was talk of behind-the-scenes
progress between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, there had
been no change in the ground reality in Kashmir. He said
that Kashmiris are confused because they are not involved in
Indo-Pak discussions and it is not even clear who is
representing their interests in general--certainly not Mufti
Mohammed Sayeed of the People's Democratic Party or any other
mainstream politician, in his opinion. Shah lamented the
lack of direct participation by the U.S. in the Kashmir
talks, saying that the U.S. can still wield considerable
influence over both Pakistan and India. He did acknowledge,
however, that the U.S. has a more multi-faceted and
complicated relationship with India these days. Also on the
subject of the U.S., Shah expressed his surprise at the
decision to refuse Geelani's visa at this time. He said that
although he is not in touch with Geelani and the two have
significant differences, Shah thought that the visa would be
granted on humanitarian grounds and not center on a question
of ideologies or advocacy of violence and terror.

11. (C) K. Shankar Bajpai said that a soft-border deal
between Pakistan and India would offer India a political "fig
leaf," but continued, "I,m still far from convinced that the
Pakistanis would go along with it." He added that he
considers the U.S. a stakeholder in resolving the dispute
over the Siachen Glacier. When Boucher asked what more the
U.S. should do, he recommended that Secretary Rice engage
Indian Minister of External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee, whom
Bajpai called a "political animal, not an ideologue." He also
endorsed the reactivation of a now-dormant Indo-U.S.
Commission founded during the time of former Secretary of
State Schultz. Bajpai recommended a revision of the
commission's four subcommittees as a starting point.

A Hands-off American Policy Toward Kashmir is Better
-----------------

12. (S) In stark contrast, Deputy PolCouns talked with All
Parties Hurriyat Conference leader Bilal Ghani Lone the
morning after Lone's April 4 meeting with Shaukat Aziz. Lone
said that Aziz did not elaborate what has been accomplished
through backchannel discussions, but did say with cautious
optimism that talks are "moving at a positive pace." Aziz
told Lone and others at the meeting that April, May, and June
will be very crucial for discussions between India and
Pakistan, with "a lot of papers exchanged." According to
Lone, Aziz said that India and Pakistan would "go to the
masses" in perhaps some kind of special election, but
purposely left that point vague, giving the Hurriyat leader
the sense that he, too, may be able to stand for election if
a deal goes through.

13. (C) Despite the positive rhetoric, Lone said the lack of
further headway on Kashmir was the reason why Aziz, and not
President Pervez Musharraf, had represented Pakistan at the
SAARC summit. When asked if the U.S. could do anything to
support the peace process, Lone responded that the U.S.
should let things work themselves out "in a natural way and
without the U.S. pushing this guy or that guy." He
envisioned a role for greater U.S. public diplomacy in
Kashmir, particularly at the village-level. Lone did not see
the visa refusal for "tension-creating" Geelani as having a
great impact on perception of the U.S. in Kashmir; while
"certain quarters" were displeased, by and large "the friends

NEW DELHI 00001704 005 OF 005


and enemies of the U.S. won't change in Kashmir," he said.
The Geelani visa, he stressed, was a finished issue in
Kashmir. Nobody cared, he emphasized. Lone labeled
Washington-based Kashmiri American Council executive director
Ghulam Nabi Fai, whose tentative March 28 conference Geelani
was invited to attend, as a "dangerous man" and a jihadi who
was not to be trusted, and whom Lone would avoid in an
upcoming trip.

Comment: Optimism Only Sustainable with Progress
-----------------

14. (C) Comment: There is a great deal of optimism about
the progress and future fruits of the Delhi-Islamabad
discussions, with a lot of speculation as to what is exactly
transpiring behind closed doors. The fact that Kashmiris
themselves are feeling left out of the proceedings is
somewhat troubling, but then again Kashmir will never have a
chance at peace until majority stakeholders India and
Pakistan have buried their own hatchets. This level of
optimism in India cannot be sustained indefinitely, however.
If both sides make progress on Siachen or Sir Creek
negotiations, it may signal the possibility of agreement on
far more tricky Kashmir. While our most recent meetings with
Kashmiri and Delhi contacts have yielded two drastically
different recommendations for future U.S. action, we believe
that our private, but firm, push for peace between Pakistan
and India is the best course of action at present.

Ultimately, this SAARC summit will be remembered for the
almost complete absence of rancor between India and Pakistan,
even if the substance was lacking. That itself is a
momentous achievement. End comment.

15. (U) Assistant Secretary Boucher reviewed this message
prior to its transmittal.
MULFORD



ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 16 Apr 2013 21:35

Anmol Please do start a new wikileaks thread and x-post the already posted ones.
We used to have a thread in strat forum, dont know if it still exists.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby krishnan » 17 Apr 2013 12:06

still does

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1171
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby dinesha » 18 Apr 2013 12:36

Following is posted in Broadsword:: Lots of composite casings
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2013/04/b ... gni-6.html


Image

Here's a quiz for the uniformly well-informed readers of Broadsword. Best, second-best and third-best answers get a Platinum, Gold and Silver star respectively.

And, of course, there is the Wooden Spoon...

The questions:

1. What's happening on the Agni-6? (Hint: most of what has appeared on the net is incorrect)

2. What's happening in the photo above?

Ramius
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 15
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Ramius » 18 Apr 2013 17:24

looking at the diameter of the thing its clearly not a 2 m structure......one can clearly see an interstage kind of a thing(a2??).....may be a2 being assembled??

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Klaus » 18 Apr 2013 17:39

dinesha wrote:1. What's happening on the Agni-6? (Hint: most of what has appeared on the net is incorrect)


Including VK Saraswat not getting a 2nd term due to foreign pressure?

I for one would be glad if that report is incorrect.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_23370 » 19 Apr 2013 01:04

IS there an A-6? Or just A-5 MMaRV?

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Victor » 19 Apr 2013 02:32

That looks like the entire Agni 5 assembly less propellant tanks. Stages 1-3 on left and the warhead with smaller diameter which the engineers are congregating around.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby RoyG » 19 Apr 2013 05:29

Agni 5 doesn't have a vented interstage which is shown on the bottom right.


dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1171
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby dinesha » 24 Apr 2013 14:41

Another trial of nuke-tipped Agni V next month
http://newindianexpress.com/states/odis ... 559208.ece
By Hemant Kumar Rout - BALASORE 24th April 2013 10:28 AM
India is readying for the second developmental trial of 5,000-km range nuclear capable ballistic missile Agni-V which put the country in the elite club of six nations including the US, the UK, China, France and Russia, having intercontinental ballistic missile capabilities.

Defence sources on Tuesday said the missile, considered as a “game-changer”, had been planned to be test-fired from the Wheeler Island off the Odisha coast any time in the third week of May. A successful launch of the missile would be another step forward towards its induction in the armed forces, possibly in 2015, though it has to undergo two more trials in the next couple of years.

The missile was first tested successfully on April 19 last year. While the preparation for the second test has already begun, officials are busy fixing the schedule and logistic issues since the missile has to traverse across the Indian Ocean. “Though the Union Cabinet has already given a go-ahead for the mission, the exact date of firing has not been fixed yet,” said a source. As the missile has the striking capabilities close to intercontinental range, prior to the test, an official said, India will have to alert a number of countries including Indonesia and Australia along with the international air and maritime traffic within the test zone.

Sources said a group of scientists associated with Agni-V missile would arrive here on Saturday to oversee the launch preparation. The DRDO is contemplating to conduct the trial by the end of next month as its chief and Scientific Adviser to Defence Minister V K Saraswat, who was instrumental in the success of missiles like Prithvi, Interceptors and even Agni-V, is retiring on May 31. The officials are also awaiting a warship from the Indian Navy to place the Israeli radar acquired recently.

The surface-to-surface canister-launched missile, which can carry a payload of 1.5 tonne, is 17-metre long, 2- metre wide and weighs around 50 tonnes. Initially tested for a single warhead, Agni-V would also feature Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs) with each missile being capable of carrying two to 10 separate nuclear warheads. “Each warhead can be assigned to a different target, hundreds of kilometres from each other and two or more warheads can be assigned to one target. This technology is under development,” said the official.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 24 Apr 2013 22:05

The key points are its canister launch and it takes ~30-45 days prior to a test launch. And the MIRV version has ambitious cross range goals of several hundred km. The lesser number will have farther range due to throw weight reductions.

Wings of Fire says Nov to May is the best season for test flights due to onset of Monsoon.

vipins
BRFite
Posts: 454
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 17:46

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vipins » 24 Apr 2013 23:11

IAF test fires surface-to-air missile OSA-AK from Chandipur
"It was a routine trial carried out by the IAF to train its personnel," said a defence official.Today, three rounds of trials were conducted targeting a tow body supported by pilotless target aircraft (PTA) 'Lakshya'.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Kersi D » 25 Apr 2013 20:13

vipins wrote:IAF test fires surface-to-air missile OSA-AK from Chandipur
"It was a routine trial carried out by the IAF to train its personnel," said a defence official.Today, three rounds of trials were conducted targeting a tow body supported by pilotless target aircraft (PTA) 'Lakshya'.


IAF tests fires a missiles after it has been in use for decades !!!!

And it is also used by IA and IN.

Did we not test it before buying it ?

Did we not test it in India atleast after buying it ?

Is it that only Indian missiles like Nag, Akash, Trishul etc are tested and tested and tested and...... (till they fail) and other (read Russian) equipment are never tested !!!!!

As far as I remember teh T 90S was bought as it could fire a ATGM form its main gun. But it failed in the trials in Rodina AND of course IA accepted (read embraced) the tank with open arms

Me no understand ???

K

pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby pentaiah » 25 Apr 2013 20:24

oopar ka aaam achha, neeche ka kachha




test fired to check LTPD

Lot tolerence percent defectives


Ideally, when a sampling plan is used, all bad lots will be rejected and all good lots accepted. However, because accept/reject decisions are based on a sample of the lot, there is always a chance of making an incorrect decision. So what protection does a sampling plan offer? The behavior of a sampling plan can be described by its operating characteristic (OC) curve, which plots percent defectives versus the corresponding probabilities of acceptance. Figure 1 shows the OC curve of the attribute single sampling plan described above. With that plan, if a lot is 3% defective the corresponding probability of acceptance is 0.56. Similarly, the probability of accepting lots that are 1% defective is 0.91 and the probability of accepting lots that are 7% defective is 0.13.


Image


Figure 1: OC Curve of Single Sampling Plan n=50 and a=1


An OC curve is generally summarized by two pints on the curve: the acceptable quality level (AQL) and the lot tolerance percent defective (LTPD). The AQL describes what the sampling plan generally accepts; formally, it is that percent defective with a 95% percent chance of acceptance. The LTPD, which describes what the sampling plan generally rejects, is that percent defective with a 10% chance of acceptance. As shown in Figure 2, the single sampling plan n=50 and a=1 has an AQL of 0.72% defective and an LTPD of 7.6%. The sampling plan routinely accepts lots that are 0.72% or better and rejects lots that are 7.6% defective or worse. Lots that are between 0.72% and 7.6% defective are sometimes accepted and sometimes rejected.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Kartik » 25 Apr 2013 21:14

source?

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby koti » 25 Apr 2013 21:32

Is it that only Indian missiles like Nag, Akash, Trishul etc are tested and tested and tested and...... (till they fail) and other (read Russian) equipment are never tested !!!!!
Me no understand ???

The tests are done by the developers sab. Russian ones are tested by the Users here.
Big difference.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby koti » 25 Apr 2013 22:07

Missile misses target again
I am lost.
The missile has already been inducted in the army and it was first user trial by the IAF

What?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG54f88nxmU
The Russia-manufactured missile has already been procured by India for the IAF fighter air-crafts.

Again What?
OSA-AK missile has been developed to be used against aircrafts, surface-to-air missiles and air-to-air missiles.

What?
Thereafter, the missile would be fired from the fighter air crafts targeting the PTA.

I give up.
Anyway, I guess there is a possible failure in the third attempt when I am assuming the missile was actually fired.

member_22906
BRFite
Posts: 305
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_22906 » 25 Apr 2013 22:14

Kersi D, it looks like a routine IAF exercise. I was surprised that it found mention in the news

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 25 Apr 2013 22:16

Suddenly, the Indian-made missiles don't look that bad- huh!

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Austin » 25 Apr 2013 22:32

First user trial for OSA-AK for the IAF ? OSA-AK ( NATO SA-8 ) have been in use for 2 decades providing organic air cover .....what is the significance of the joint IAF-DRDO trial ?

pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby pentaiah » 25 Apr 2013 22:40

if only looks could kill, Rekha would be enough for TSP


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests