K Mehta wrote:Comparing the Nag and the Akash configurations throws up an anomaly.
Nag is still mounted on a BMP-2 based carrier while Akash needs to tested on a T-72 chasis.
I find it a bit strange that an anti-tank missile carrier which will be travelling along with the tanks be made up of BMP while a medium range SAM needs to be mounted on a T-72 chasis. Though it can trail a bit and yet be effective.
Question to gurus
Is there a role difference or am I missing something? Do Anti-tank missile carriers trail the tank attack column or are kept for purely defensive posture?
JMTs etc
IIRC...
Nag ~ 42kg, 1.8m => 8 (ready-to-fire) + 12 (reload) rounds ~ 1600 kg + associated systems per NAMICA
Akash ~ 720 kg, 5.8m => 3 rounds ~ 2100 kg +
larger launcher systems per ASPL
The Akash ASPL was configured previously on an
extended BMP wth 7 road-wheels ... proved to be a tad too effete for the whole package. Larger missiles and systems make for a 'less managable' package in terms of CoG, etc, esp when mounted on a ~10 ton BMP chassis. The ~30 ton T-72 chassis, with a beefier powerpack + wider footprint would make for a more stable platform...
The Akash
system, by design, is configured around separate support vehicles for ancillaries, reloads, power-supply, C3I, etc. apart from the Rajendra and 3DCAR. The NAMICA is meant to be a
fully-autonomous package...