Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 02 Nov 2012 09:17

technically feasible but again why should a huge missile be needed for AWACS. it should be able to detect fighters from 500km away and vector the nearest interceptor squad or run for cover if nothing is available...@ 850kmph to the rear. nearly impossible with current fuel loads for a fighter to start from say 450km away and chase down a AWACS thats retreating at 800kmph. it will generally always fly with a escort of couple fighters if any threat is envisaged.

perhaps a Mig31 Foxhound armed with a high lofted edge of space weapon like a AAD-AAM could do it....climb to 70,000ft and release a couple of these to climb to 120,000ft and then start a mach5 dive onto target.....

imo we are better off adapting the ground launched Shourya to this anti awacs/anti tanker role.....no real size or fuel payload limitations of launch platform.......and it is hypersonic and flies at 120,000ft just the kind of dog we need to chase the hares down.

I know Septimus would strongly approve :mrgreen:

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 02 Nov 2012 13:04

ramana wrote:In Us they have companies that hire them out ot the govt as consultants to ensure the talent is not lost. And moreover to ensure no loss to other side. I wonder why self preservation is so difficult for modern Indians to understand? Some disgruntled underling will whine to a reporter who thinks he has breaking news and publishes it to get his two seconds of fame.


Ramana, there is two aspects to leadership - perform & sustain.

In the perform role, a leader should lead to functional success (Eg successfully managing a project in civil scenario or winning a war in a military scenario). Indians see leaders only in this light.

What our Indians psyche completely misses is the sustain role - building a great organization with leaders at all levels. Very few Indian civil or military leaders actually do that.

The reason Sardar Patel, Sam Manekshaw or Ronnie Pereira are remembered is because they built institutions. Sam created independent leaders at junior, middle & higher levels who could lead us to victory at all levels.

Sidhoji Gujar & Kanhoji Angre build & led strong navies. However they didn’t build institutions. Hence that Navy crumbled to dust 37 years after his death.

We very rarely hear about Fakir Chand Kohli. He built TCS, led it initially & then passed it to successors. He created a self sustaining institution, that thrives even when the market is bad. It is still the market leader.

N R Narayanamurthy & his initial team started Infosys and everyone began worshipping them. Unfortunately, while they were successful in the perform role, they ignored the sustain role. They didn’t groom leaders at every level of the organization.

Unfortunately, “great leaders” are not immortal, nor can they work at full efficiency forever. When they step down, the high, middle & junior leadership, used to following orders from great leaders all their lives. This retards their ability to lead themselves. Their lack ability to independently function under circumstances that’ve invariably changed from the time elapsed since great leader’s time.

This is the reason why Infosys is in a poor shape today while TCS & Cognizant are going great. TCS & Cognizant face same business challenges as Infosys, but their junior, middle & higher management are more agile and unencumbered by great leader's baggage.

Cognizant, Datamatics, i-flex CEO's were all ex-TCS. Why? Because TCS is a leadership factory for itself & the industry.

Creating, idolizing & worshipping great leaders is a horrible flaw in the Indian Psyche. This phenomenon leads to our downfall in the long run despite initial successes.

The article doesn’t touch this issue, but if these honorable gentlemen had built a good organization, then the next level of leaders should have been ready.

They can always resign from their leadership roles on reaching retirement age, and be around as technical advisors.

If there is a need for these people to be still leading their functions, it is clear that the next generation of leaders is not ready. Or they’re stifling the next generation.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 02 Nov 2012 19:12

my explanation is simpler and based on 15 yrs of skulking around the trenches.

take the mahabharata - people our grandpa's age like dronacharya and bheesma is full battle armour were very much in hands -on mode and there were a lot of powerful warriors in the next age age band of 35-50 - kings and allies from all over the realm.

in my opinion there are too few hands on people anymore at the senior levels anymore....focus shifts to running meetings, "operations", revenue planning , figuring how to please the next level up....very little to no interest in solving the real technical problems which bring home the butter end of day. and this not only renders a lot of seniors very process driven and non hands on but ties up many technical people in meetings attempting to explain in kids terms what these seniors do not want to slog and understand...ie even those who want to do real work have some time hijacked by these overlords just so they can ask some 'smart' and 'sharp' questions in endless reviews and feel confident they understand the big picture(they dont!)

atleast thats my exp in itvity.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2540
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby John » 02 Nov 2012 19:29

mody wrote:More then the K-100 I would want to know, whats going on with the Astra project. There is absolutely no news about the project. It was supposed to undergo flight test from Su-30 in beginning of 2013. However, I doubt that will take place.

Not sure why a discussion on this pops up every year or so considering, there have been no news on this even on russian side and even the report suggesting K-100 jv was speculative and there was no confirmation. It make little sense to procure a missile that can be carried by only one platform and to counter a specific threat...

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Boreas » 02 Nov 2012 19:47

John wrote:It make little sense to procure a missile that can be carried by only one platform and to counter a specific threat...

I disagree! The importance of AWACS is phenominal. In war any country that scores even 1 or 2 AWACS kills can impart devastating phycological effect on its opponent. Specially if the opponent is china. Novotor-100 (if it ever enters production) is a must for IAF.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 02 Nov 2012 20:06

Imo novator made sense if had the foxhounds to climb fast to 70,000ft and release.

He better and only option now and more scary is a modified shourya that will either explode a massive 500kg shrapnel warhead of release a half dozen of derby missiles for terminal hunt. Being powered flight at 120,000 ft is a massive advantage in endgame energy and overall range vs a climb, burnout , glide weapon like a typical long range aam of aa9 or k100 type.

You could release a shourya from bagdogra, have it overfly all of sikkim and smack a plaaf awacs orbiting over lhasa with a 250kg payload.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2540
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby John » 02 Nov 2012 20:16

Boreas wrote:
John wrote:It make little sense to procure a missile that can be carried by only one platform and to counter a specific threat...

I disagree! The importance of AWACS is phenominal. In war any country that scores even 1 or 2 AWACS kills can impart devastating phycological effect on its opponent. Specially if the opponent is china. Novotor-100 (if it ever enters production) is a must for IAF.

The same job can still be done by Su-30mki with any BVR missile it is not that easy to protect a large target even with squardon of escort fighters, heck even back in later days of WW2 B-17s had a high loss rate from lone Luftwaffe fighters in spite of having dozens of P-38s escorting them.

Also keep in mind K-100 with its large size can be intercepted by newer generation of AAM, so fire and scoot will do no good if all K-100s are intercepted. So main strategy should to be to keep escorts occupied while one or 2 interceptor go in for the kill.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Boreas » 02 Nov 2012 20:24

@Singha

Good... but that will need a lots of further technology development. Can be a option for future. But imo not feasible in coming decade even with most optimistic timeline.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Boreas » 02 Nov 2012 20:35

John wrote:The same job can still be done by Su-30mki with any BVR missile it is not that easy to protect a large target even with squardon of escort fighters, heck even back in later days of WW2 B-17s had a high loss rate from lone Luftwaffe fighters in spite of having dozens of P-38s escorting them.

Also keep in mind K-100 with its large size can be intercepted by newer generation of AAM, so fire and scoot will do no good if all K-100s are intercepted. So main strategy should to be to keep escorts occupied while one or 2 interceptor go in for the kill.

Not completely disagreeing with what you saying.

However that is an option open for everybody (PAF and PLAAF).. hence the edge which a K-100 may provide won't be their.

Secondly unlike K-100, a fighter based attack will have a VERY high overhead, that includes lives of pilots as well as cost of planes. Hence it won't be an easy decision to make for a commander. When using a a salvo of 2-3 K-100 the risk factor for opponent airforce will be very high, with minimum collateral damage for our air force.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 02 Nov 2012 20:44

Imo this problem is easier or similar than the irbm as asbm problem which the df21c claims to have solved.

Friendly awacs or passive elint birds like rafale get the radiations of hostile awacs or locate the aar tankers from big range like 600km. Shourya gets fired onto predicted position of awacs in the time shourya will take to close the distance. If enemy changes direction, mid course update is a must...being powered and operating at 40km, change of course is possible. Finally the shourya itself csn mount a big radar of 200km range and releas terminal homers or blast the retreating awacs from the top.

We can do it if we work and fund it ...maybe it will take 5 yrs to test a proof of concept and 8 yrs to ioc.

Lack of news on further tests and developments on shourya is infact encouraging..we could be cooking up some nasty stuff down that channel under cover of prithvi tests.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2540
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby John » 02 Nov 2012 21:56

Boreas wrote:Secondly unlike K-100, a fighter based attack will have a VERY high overhead, that includes lives of pilots as well as cost of planes. Hence it won't be an easy decision to make for a commander. When using a a salvo of 2-3 K-100 the risk factor for opponent airforce will be very high, with minimum collateral damage for our air force.

Not sure how having K-100 protects the aircaft from being intercepted, ideal firing range of K-100 will be around 200 km vs around 60 km for BVR missile, so it won't take much for escort aircraft to intercept the Su-30mki post K-100 launch. Even worse if Su-30mki carrying the gigantic K-100 gets intercepted by Su-30MKK, they will have little chance of survival in dog fight unless they dump the missiles'. Keep in mind even China was offered a chance to fund K-100 and they also passed up that opportunity.

Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Yogi_G » 02 Nov 2012 22:27

The PAK-FA should be able to do what the Mig-31 does, with super cruise it is the best platform for shoot and scoot with a -20dBm RCS to boot.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Boreas » 02 Nov 2012 22:45

John wrote:Not sure how having K-100 protects the aircaft from being intercepted, ideal firing range of K-100 will be around 200 km vs around 60 km for BVR missile, so it won't take much for escort aircraft to intercept the Su-30mki post K-100 launch. Even worse if Su-30mki carrying the gigantic K-100 gets intercepted by Su-30MKK, they will have little chance of survival in dog fight unless they dump the missiles'. Keep in mind even China was offered a chance to fund K-100 and they also passed up that opportunity.

K-100 will have a range of 300km (not 200km). Which in some cases will make it possible to shoot an AWACS without crossing indian border. Carrier planes can even get coverage of local SAM network!

Even otherwise anybody who shoots and returns from 200-250KM away has much better chances of getting home in one piece than the one shooting from 100-60km.

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vic » 03 Nov 2012 08:38

LRSAM-MRSAM-Barak 2-8-NG etc whatever you call it is around 276kg and will have a range of 200-400km if launched as AAM. Further if booster equipped it will have a range of around 400-800 km range with weight around 1000-1500kg. AAD missile with weight of 1200kg should have range of 300-500km as air to air missile. But the difficulty is that in absence of DRDO middlemen it is very difficult to sell indigenous ideas. I vote for DRDO setting up middleman lab.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 03 Nov 2012 08:45

I will bet my right leg the chinese are working on something to negate american superiority in awacs and tankers without which usa cannot maintain a hostile posture near areas of chinese interest. once that leg of the stool falls, the deficiences of all middling khan platforms in range and radar would be exposed.

maybe they will name it K-101 to honour the original concept.

Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Yogi_G » 06 Nov 2012 13:57

How useful will a J-Stars type of aircraft in a theater like Tibet? Wouldnt the mountainous terrain bring is sharp line of sight restrictions warranting an "eye in the sky" for the ground movement as well? I am sure China will be planning for J-Stars kind of capability or might augment the ground modes in their AWACS craft to provide better situational awareness to their ground forces.

If so then the novator has another good target to be played against. Expect our PAK-FAs to initially target these 2 types of aircraft with the K-100s, if the K-100 joint work story is true.

member_23962
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 6
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_23962 » 06 Nov 2012 21:19

Any info on the nirbhay missie? It was suppose to be tested in October.

kvraghavaiah
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 16 Feb 2008 17:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby kvraghavaiah » 07 Nov 2012 08:43

pavankv wrote:Any info on the nirbhay missie? It was suppose to be tested in October.


It is postponed to December due to delay in making new launcher for the missile.
This information was posted some days ago in this thread itself.
But I am doubtful about December as well.

I am disgusted with this culture in Indian government run companies, which happens because of basic corruptive, selfish people and reservations instead of quality. So, i stopped thinking about India's wellbeing. It is just waste of time for people like us. We are in the middle of 99.9% irresponsible, careless, mindless people.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8359
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 07 Nov 2012 19:59

^^^

Hasn't TATA has come up with a 12*12, which forms of launch vehicle for the Prahar. That being the case, why, is Tatra having an effect on the Nirbhay program.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Sagar G » 07 Nov 2012 19:59

kvraghavaiah wrote:I am disgusted with this culture in Indian government run companies, which happens because of basic corruptive, selfish people and reservations instead of quality.


Which "company" are you indicating ???

kvraghavaiah wrote:So, i stopped thinking about India's wellbeing.


OH MY GOD !!!!!!!!!!!! India is doomed..........

kvraghavaiah wrote:It is just waste of time for people like us. We are in the middle of 99.9% irresponsible, careless, mindless people.


Why such a higher order person like yourself choose to be between "irresponsible, careless, mindless people" hain ji ????

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Sagar G » 07 Nov 2012 20:06

Pratyush wrote:^^^

Hasn't TATA has come up with a 12*12, which forms of launch vehicle for the Prahar. That being the case, why, is Tatra having an effect on the Nirbhay program.


DRDO has absolutely no problem in using an indigenous solution but that would mean delay in testing and induction of the missile which will be a problem for our defence capabilities, since if a new vehicle is used now all the testing and integration's done on the older one would have to be done on the newer vehicle as well which will lead to delay. This is exactly what DRDO has pointed out in it's letter.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8359
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 07 Nov 2012 20:28

A truck for missile carrying is truck designed for missile carrying. Then why is truck substitution such a huge issue.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8256
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 07 Nov 2012 20:52

Pratyush ji,

The Tata 12 X 12 is the carrier for Nirbhay. Tata had made it clear before at DefExpo'12.

But a launcher is not just the truck bed. I am pretty sure you understand that :)

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Sagar G » 07 Nov 2012 20:55

Pratyush wrote:A truck for missile carrying is truck designed for missile carrying. Then why is truck substitution such a huge issue.


It's not that easy as you make it to be. Each and every missile comes with its unique characteristics and the behaviour of the carrier vehicle has to be studied before certifying it for the said missile.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 10 Nov 2012 03:08

DRDO does not have any problem in accepting a TATA 12x12 or a even a premier padmini if it can do the job... but our armed forces will want gold plated bideshi mal washed in scotch... they will have to do multiple rounds of summer, winter, monsoon, spring tests in Bangalore, Kerala, Rajasthan, Leh, Tawang, Timbuctoo etc before placing a token order of 6 launchers.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8256
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 10 Nov 2012 03:14

Please blame the army when it is due. Here is a case where nothing much is known about the project. I see absolutely no reason to disparage the Army in this case as of yet.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 10 Nov 2012 03:35

indranilroy wrote:Please blame the army when it is due. Here is a case where nothing much is known about the project. I see absolutely no reason to disparage the Army in this case as of yet.

Remember the NAMICA episode, after years of testing they delayed induction citing issues with the carrier. anyway.. let us hope the IA inducts Prahaar and Brahmos on TATA 12x12 platforms in large number...

A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby A Sharma » 10 Nov 2012 07:42

DRDO to conduct eighth ballistic interceptor missile test this month

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is set to conduct its eighth ballistic interceptor missile test any day between November 19 and 22.

V.K. Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, said that while the attacker, a modified Prithvi missile, would take off from the Integrated Test Range at Chandipur, Odisha, the interceptor would blast off from the Wheeler Island and pounce on the attacker in endo-atmosphere at an altitude of 15 km to 16 km. The interceptor missile is called Advanced Air Defence (AAD) system. While the attacker would mimic the path of a ballistic missile launched from a hostile country, the AAD would race at a supersonic speed to intercept the attacker and destroy it.

As the crow flies, the Wheeler Island, off Dhamra village on the Odisha coast, is 70 km away from Chandipur.

Asked what improvements were made in this interceptor mission, Dr. Saraswat said the modified Prithvi missile would have a higher velocity.

“We have improved the accuracy of the interception in the endo-atmosphere… The interceptor will be launched in a hit-to-kill mode,” he added.

The Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) programme aims at protecting India’s vital assets from being targeted by the ballistic missiles launched by hostile neighbours.

Of the seven interceptor missiles tests conducted by the DRDO so far, six have been successful. The first interceptor mission took place in November 2006 in exo-atmosphere at an altitude of 48 km and it was successful. The second test, again successful, took place in December 2007 in endo-atmosphere at an altitude of 15 km. Out of the seven tests, five took place in endo-atmosphere at a height less than 20 km.

After the seventh interceptor missile test on February 10, 2012, Dr. Saraswat asserted that the success confirmed that India’s BMD programme in the endo-atmosphere “is now ready for deployment and the country is now in a position to take it to the next phase of production and induction.”

The maiden launch of Nirbhay, India’s sub-sonic cruise missile, has been further delayed. The launch, which was to take place in November this year, will now be done in January 2013, Dr. Saraswat said.

A DRDO official said the Nirbhay launch was delayed because modifications had to be made in the launcher. While India already had had a successful supersonic cruise missile in BrahMos, it felt the need to develop a sub-sonic cruise missile. Hence the development of Nirbhay, which would fly at 0.65 Mach. The Aeronautical Development Establishment, a DRDO unit in Bangalore, designed Nirbhay, which had been derived from Lakshya, a pilotless target aircraft. Nirbhay is a two-stage, surface-to-surface, terrain-hugging missile. “It takes the oxidiser from the air. So it can travel for a longer duration and a longer distance. Its range is around 1,000 km.”

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Sagar G » 10 Nov 2012 08:44

The Aeronautical Development Establishment, a DRDO unit in Bangalore, designed Nirbhay, which had been derived from Lakshya, a pilotless target aircraft.


If this is true then their is a huge probability that the engine is totally indigenous.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 892
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby nash » 10 Nov 2012 09:59

If we compare the specification of AAD with HQ-9,SM-6 and S-300, then it could be use as sea based ABM missile in future on P-15C destroyer.

Guru log can put more light on it . AAD is a single stage solid propellant missile , weight and dimension are very much similar and guidance is also on par, only thing we need proper platform to integrate all these things.

DRDO should start RnD on VLS and sea based AESA.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 892
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby nash » 10 Nov 2012 10:04

It takes the oxidiser from the air. So it can travel for a longer duration and a longer distance. Its range is around 1,000 km.


Does it mean we are using an air-breathing engine for nirbhay. And if this engine is indigenous then LR supersonic missile on cards.

keshavchandra
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 22:23

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby keshavchandra » 10 Nov 2012 12:46

Sagar G wrote:
The Aeronautical Development Establishment, a DRDO unit in Bangalore, designed Nirbhay, which had been derived from Lakshya, a pilotless target aircraft.


If this is true then their is a huge probability that the engine is totally indigenous.

Current we are using russian turbofan engine. Drdo also have a project on turbofan, but I am not sure in what stage it is now may seniors have some relevent updates.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby shiv » 10 Nov 2012 14:22

keshavchandra wrote:
Sagar G wrote:
If this is true then their is a huge probability that the engine is totally indigenous.

Current we are using russian turbofan engine. Drdo also have a project on turbofan, but I am not sure in what stage it is now may seniors have some relevent updates.


Lakshya uses pretty much the only indigenous jet engine in service in India, the PTAE 7
http://www.airforce-technology.com/proj ... kshya-uav/

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12491
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 10 Nov 2012 14:44

Given that we are openly stating Nirbhay range in 1000Km, don't think Russia would want to openly break its MTCR commitment. So either it will be so indigenous or will be restricted to Brahmos type 290KM. Painting and renaming stuff and claiming it to be indigenous has not been our forte like some of our neighbours

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 Nov 2012 17:45

Either our policy of being a good boy changed or rus might have given some tot and not complete engines.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7737
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 10 Nov 2012 19:53

Shrinivasan wrote:
indranilroy wrote:Please blame the army when it is due. Here is a case where nothing much is known about the project. I see absolutely no reason to disparage the Army in this case as of yet.

Remember the NAMICA episode, after years of testing they delayed induction citing issues with the carrier. anyway.. let us hope the IA inducts Prahaar and Brahmos on TATA 12x12 platforms in large number...


Care to educate how NAMICA is related to TEL issue? Or,are u privy to some internal issues......

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 12 Nov 2012 07:01

Sagar G wrote:
The Aeronautical Development Establishment, a DRDO unit in Bangalore, designed Nirbhay, which had been derived from Lakshya, a pilotless target aircraft.


If this is true then their is a huge probability that the engine is totally indigenous.

Multiple sources have told that Nirbhay's engine is from Bearland... Maybe an indigenous engine is ini the works..

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 12 Nov 2012 07:04

^^^NAMICA is not related to TEL but more to do with the platform... IA tested the Nag missile for years and then after the missile was proven. They delayed induction citing problems with the carrier... Wht issues were there, if there were any, why not bring it up before...

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8153
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby nachiket » 12 Nov 2012 07:18

nash wrote:
It takes the oxidiser from the air. So it can travel for a longer duration and a longer distance. Its range is around 1,000 km.


Does it mean we are using an air-breathing engine for nirbhay. And if this engine is indigenous then LR supersonic missile on cards.

It's a cruise missile. Every cruise missile uses an air-breathing engine. A LR supersonic cruise missile would require a Scramjet engine which would have more similarities with the Ramjet engine used for the Brahmos rather than a regular turbofan engine that will power the Nirbhay.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7737
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 12 Nov 2012 09:37

Shrinivasan wrote:^^^NAMICA is not related to TEL but more to do with the platform... IA tested the Nag missile for years and then after the missile was proven. They delayed induction citing problems with the carrier... Wht issues were there, if there were any, why not bring it up before...


You can do better than bring unrelated issues and then try to defend them with still unrelated arguments.....So, IA used NAMICA for donkey years and then, asked for the improvements. OK. Has IA used TATA/Domestic platform for Missiles for donkey years and then, asked for improvement and hence, there is delay in missile tests? Did IA decide on the platform to be used for missiles in IA Service or was it a fait accompli? How many instances you know of where private companies have been favored over DPSU? With the TATRA scam being what it is, do you think they'd have let go of opportunity to supply still more trucks for missile regiments of the IA?

Let us not confuse issues for sake of it.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests