Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Aug 2015 04:14

indranilroy wrote:For example, look at the CAG report on Arjun/LCA. Since they are facts, not opinions, nobody can refute them: DRDO/ADA/DoD/Armed forces/HAL. Nobody!

Err... the CAG reports are full of dubious interpretations and opinions interspersed with facts. The only reason they are not aggressively countered by the folks they audit is because of the controversy it elicits given the CAGs role and constitutional stature. Otherwise enough folk out there who have been critical of the claims made by CAG folks in terms of interpretations.

srai · Post by **srai** » 28 Aug 2015 07:27

^^^

It was noted in the CAG report of the LCA that they did not wait to get feedback from DRDO/ADA/HAL due to some "time constraints" for publishing the report. As a result, the report presents a skewed viewpoint.

CAG report bangs ADA & HAL; says Tejas Mk-1 will have limited EW capabilities

...
The 63-page report is signed by Rajiv Kumar Pandey, Principal Director of Audit (Air Force) and counter-signed by Shashi Kant Sharma, the CAG of India.
...
“We are used to the CAG reports now. The current report was supposed to have reviewed by the Secretary (Department of Defence R&D) and we are not sure whether it was done. What I understand is that the review hasn’t happened and due to deadline pressures the report has been tabled in the Parliament,” the scientist claimed.
...

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Aug 2015 07:36

They also make some stupid conclusions. Op Vijay ammo procurement CAG report is a classic. It states the Govt was wrong for buying 125mm FSAPDS rounds because war was in the mountains and tanks can't operate in the mountains. This is the capability of some our auditors. It never occured to those geniuses that the war could have spread to the plains.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Aug 2015 08:32

Karan M wrote:They also make some stupid conclusions. Op Vijay ammo procurement CAG report is a classic. It states the Govt was wrong for buying 125mm FSAPDS rounds because war was in the mountains and tanks can't operate in the mountains. This is the capability of some our auditors. It never occured to those geniuses that the war could have spread to the plains.

This is as far as you can get by combining accountants with military strategy.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 28 Aug 2015 18:47

I had a chat with the AG's office beebuls, who do the report that percolates to CAG. More a fight with them. I asked them how do they know anything about the process by which military-industry reached the spec-levels of a weapon or system. This was based on some asinine (even for my civvie brains) comment that one CAG report had on LCA's wings or some such. They said they are not the ones who set the parameters. Apparently there are committees and committees from parliament downwards, that ask them to look into various aspects. They said they do sit down and read as much as they can, to get into the rationale behind a decision. What they have issues figuring out, they ask for more material from the party getting audited. But often times, the military/industry does not divulge info due to various reasons. What will they do at that point? Knowingly make extrapolations, based on half-assed info. That floats to the top and we all pop open gelusils.

In this the military are not alone, every govt dept, every PSU..... whomever they audit, hates them for their anal-retentive questioning. Like dealing with any kind of audit, it is best to engage them to the fullest, answer almost all their questions and file rejoinders. We never hear of rejoinders from military in the open source. Maybe it is there, but press dont find it too juicy to report?

FWIW

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Aug 2015 19:47

HN, their problem is they lack any detailed awareness of a topic or knowledge, so their questions may either be very basic or accusatory without even understanding the context. For instance all the brouhaha over LCA, this feature, that feature, there is not even a basic comparative analysis of other inductions in the IAF to get (self) context. Plus they make categorical accusations without the slightest iota of common sense at times. This program has taken 30 years. Its a failure. Any response you give is untenable. Literally in those words. Of course, the amount of time required to start a basic capability from scratch and get it to 80-90% with the last mile remaining is completely ignored. All this is why (IMHO) CAG is useful for some nuggets of info on QSRs etc but completely pointless when it comes to conclusions and interpolations.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 28 Aug 2015 20:09

Sorry to have started an offtopic conversation.

Karan M wrote:
indranilroy wrote:For example, look at the CAG report on Arjun/LCA. Since they are facts, not opinions, nobody can refute them: DRDO/ADA/DoD/Armed forces/HAL. Nobody!
Err... the CAG reports are full of dubious interpretations and opinions interspersed with facts. The only reason they are not aggressively countered by the folks they audit is because of the controversy it elicits given the CAGs role and constitutional stature. Otherwise enough folk out there who have been critical of the claims made by CAG folks in terms of interpretations.

Point taken. But the day posts here are atleast as good as CAG reports, I would be much happier. Lets move on.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Aug 2015 20:39

CAG reports are "useful" only in that they have GOI data. Per se, that's their only plus - otherwise reports from folks like Anantha Krishna M, TSR, Saurav Jha etc and even Ajai Shukla (his political bias apart) contain fairly interesting information. The LCA CAG report - what in it was "new" that we didn't know earlier? The only real new info was ASL was mandated to make the LCA radome once upon a time and 2nd, the Tarang RWR had issues. That's about it. The first is trivia, the second, could have been (and was) deduced from the facts that Su-30 MKI moved to R118 variants and anyhow, the RWJ would supplant the Tarang so no big deal. Time was when we'd eagerly wait for even the CAG report because there was so little on defence from anyone else. Now at least there are several other channels of information so even these reports have lost their luster so to speak. IMHO, the MOD Annual Reports and Standing Committee on Defence reports are far more detailed and interesting.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 28 Aug 2015 21:31

hnair wrote:I had a chat with the AG's office beebuls, who do the report that percolates to CAG. More a fight with them. I asked them how do they know anything about the process by which military-industry reached the spec-levels of a weapon or system. This was based on some asinine (even for my civvie brains) comment that one CAG report had on LCA's wings or some such. They said they are not the ones who set the parameters. Apparently there are committees and committees from parliament downwards, that ask them to look into various aspects. They said they do sit down and read as much as they can, to get into the rationale behind a decision. What they have issues figuring out, they ask for more material from the party getting audited. But often times, the military/industry does not divulge info due to various reasons. What will they do at that point? Knowingly make extrapolations, based on half-assed info. That floats to the top and we all pop open gelusils.

In this the military are not alone, every govt dept, every PSU..... whomever they audit, hates them for their anal-retentive questioning. Like dealing with any kind of audit, it is best to engage them to the fullest, answer almost all their questions and file rejoinders. We never hear of rejoinders from military in the open source. Maybe it is there, but press dont find it too juicy to report?

FWIW

fairly correct description of Audit.

First rule of AG Audit ( as opposed to Internal Audit or special Audit) is to listen to what Auditors have to ask. Don't say a word more and don't give more than what they ask.
Second rule is to reply in as brief a sentence as possible.
Third rule is do not allow mixing with other staff, especially disgruntled one. Keep them busy elsewhere. They might leak info where there was disagreement in decision making but not reflected in files.
Fourth rule is make them comfortable stay and food and vehicles and probably booze.
But them some are quite intelligent and do get important info. That is how data gets captured into reports. They send very astute auditors to critical and sensitive dept. Financial figures are pretty much accurate. Other aspects may be or may not be.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 28 Aug 2015 22:11

Summarizing Akash

IAF order

1. 02 squadrons ordered on 2008 : Status , Both squadrons operational by 2011-12 at Gwalior and Pune
2. 06 squadrons ordered on Dec 2010 : Status , 04 squadrons Manufactured and the rest will be completed by 2015 , all
the squadrons will be deployed in NE and along LAC
3. 07 squadrons ordered on 2015 : status , waiting final approval from Defense acquisition committee .

IA

1. 2 Regiments ordered 2011 : Induction started

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 28 Aug 2015 22:21

Of akash?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Aug 2015 06:50

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 711262.cms

Akash and Pinaka only true Make in India programs in this list. Rest TOT/CKD/SKD

2. Seven new Akash squadrons for the IAF : The defence ministry is set to clear a Rs 5,000 crore procurement of 'Made in India' Akash missile systems for the air force in a contract that will involve significant private sector participation, with companies like Tata PowerBSE 0.49 % SED and Larsen & Toubro likely to get major work portions.

An air force plan to induct seven squadrons of the Akash anti-air missile systems has been cleared at several levels and is likely to get a final approval from the high-powered defence acquisition committee shortly, sources told ET some time back. Fourteen firing units of the missile will be bought for the seven squadrons.

While state-run Bharat Electronics LtdBSE 1.66 % will be given the main contract under a 'repeat order' - the air force has already contracted for eight squadrons of will be given the main contract under a 'repeat order' - the air force has already contracted for eight squadrons of the missile systems out of which two have been inducted - the major system providers include Electronics Corporation of India, Hindustan Aeronautics, Tata Power SED and L&T, defence ministry officials had told ET.

Induction of the system, which has an indigenous content of 96 per cent will also benefit a number of small and medium scale industries that have been partithat have been participating in the programme. The Akash programme, which was approved for procurement first in 2010, is a major Make in India initiative with the air force cleared to progressively induct 45 firing units over the next few years.

3. 6 new Pinaka regiments for the Army: The army is set to get an artillery boost with a proposal being moved to raise six new regiments of the indigenous Pinaka Multi-Launcher Rocket System (MLRS), a formidable system designed to annihilate enemy targets with a blanket of precisely guided rockets.Impressed by the capabilities of the MLRS — the system is capable of flattening a 3.9 sq km area at a range of 40 km in less than a minute — the defence ministry is also moving ahead to increase the capacity of the Ordnance Factory Board to produce the rockets in India.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 29 Aug 2015 07:04

hnair wrote:I had a chat with the AG's office beebuls,
FWIW

I can sort of gather AG is Accountant General. So what exactly is "beebuls"? Some space faring argot?

So does "anal-retentive" mean a kind of medical condition? Constipation, may be?

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 29 Aug 2015 07:29

vayu tuvan, no more personalized trolling. Thanks

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 29 Aug 2015 07:33

hnair saar: OK. Point well taken. Please accept my heartfelt apologies. Peace.

For the record, I also love your wit and wry humor. Count me as one of your well-wishers and supporters without reservations, if that means anything.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Aug 2015 07:35

>>beebuls = peoples
>> anal-retentive, basically over fussy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_retentiveness

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 29 Aug 2015 07:58

Karan M ji:

I know. I will leave it at that. Let us move on. As you know there are more important issues to tackle not least of which is the subject of this very same thread.

member_28990 · Post by **member_28990** » 03 Sep 2015 18:45

Gurus, I need some kind clarifications after getting confused by different stuff I read on the web.

Are the Shaurya and the Prahaar missiles inducted/operational? Is it true that the Shaurya has a "controlled ballistic" (I dont know what the term really means) trajectory that can achieve mach 5-7 speeds? - if true that might make it a one of a kind missile (closest to iskander maybe).

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 03 Sep 2015 22:57

Wasn't there supposed to be an Agni-IV test around Aug 31?

http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/ ... 980280.ece

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 04 Sep 2015 01:31

India's nuclear posture entering a new phase: Think tank

After nearly two decades of nuclear competition with Pakistan, India with the several long-range ballistic missiles in development is seemingly now paying attention to its future strategic relationship with China, a think-tank report (external link) has said.

"Now, with several long-range ballistic missiles in development, the Indian nuclear posture is entering an important and dynamic new phase. After nearly two decades of concentrating on competition with Pakistan, India's nuclear outlook now seems to be focused more toward its future strategic relationship with China," authors Hans M Kristensen and Robert S Norris said in a report for Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

In the report titled "Indian nuclear forces, 2015", Kristensen and Norris said India was estimated to have produced approximately 540 kilogrammes of weapon-grade plutonium, enough for 135 to 180 nuclear warheads, though not all of that material is being used.

They estimate that India has produced between 110 and 120 nuclear warheads.

The country's fighter-bombers still constitute the backbone of its operational nuclear strike force, but it has made considerable progress in developing credible land-based ballistic missiles as well, the report said.

They include the Agni-4, which will be capable of delivering a single nuclear warhead more than 3,500 kilometres, and therefore able to strike Beijing and Shanghai from northern India.

In 2014, India conducted its first ever sea trial of a nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine, they wrote.

"It will need more than that to arm new missiles it is developing. In addition to the Dhruva plutonium production reactor near Mumbai, India plans to construct a second reactor near Visakhapatnam, on the east coast," it said.

"An unsafeguarded prototype fast breeder reactor is also under construction 650 kilometres south at the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research near Kalpakkam, which will significantly increase India's plutonium production capacity once it becomes operational," the report said.

The original nuclear aircraft are ageing, and India may be searching for a modern fighter-bomber that could potentially take over the air-based nuclear strike role, it said.

coming on the heels of Rafale decision?

srai · Post by **srai** » 04 Sep 2015 03:14

Anyone know if DRDO is working on Universal VLS that could accommodate Brahmos-1 (AShM), Nirbhay (LAM) and Barak-8 (SAM)? IMO, it's time to do that for IN ships; future ship layout management would be a simpler.

DDG (<8000t) -> 64 x U-VLS (32 front and 32 rear)
FFG (<6000t) -> 48 x U-VLS (24 front and 24 rear)
Corvette (<2500t) -> 24 x U-VLS (24 front)

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 04 Sep 2015 03:38

No way a corvette less than 3000 tonne is going to take Brahmos in VLS.

arun · Post by **arun** » 05 Sep 2015 08:22

vasu raya wrote:India's nuclear posture entering a new phase: Think tank

…………………{Image Snipped}……………….

………………. "Now, with several long-range ballistic missiles in development, the Indian nuclear posture is entering an important and dynamic new phase. After nearly two decades of concentrating on competition with Pakistan, India's nuclear outlook now seems to be focused more toward its future strategic relationship with China," authors Hans M Kristensen and Robert S Norris said in a report for Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

In the report titled "Indian nuclear forces, 2015", Kristensen and Norris said India was estimated to have produced approximately 540 kilogrammes of weapon-grade plutonium, enough for 135 to 180 nuclear warheads, though not all of that material is being used. ……………………

The cited Bulletin of Atomic Scientists article titled “Indian nuclear forces, 2015” by Hans M. Kristensen and Robert S. Norris.

Kristensen and Norris claim that India has no nuclear warhead with a yield exceeding 40 KT. See Table 1. :

Indian nuclear forces, 2015

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 05 Sep 2015 09:26

Even our own santhanam sir claims the same while kakodkar sir claims the contrary what maal we gave no one knows

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 05 Sep 2015 10:55

Take all claims with pinch of salt. No one in the know how will announce it publicly.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 05 Sep 2015 11:25

Any updates on this two
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DqQ59e2AqBs/V ... 050916.JPG

whats interesting is the scene matching terminal guidance onboard those concepts. What type of image sensors they might use , MMW seeker looks more promising for stand off distances.

srai · Post by **srai** » 06 Sep 2015 15:35

^^^

They are just concepts designed by one of the IAF's sub-branches. I doubt that team has adequate funding or infrastructure to make that into a reality. Air-launched weapons, even simpler dumb bombs, is a time consuming R&D process, especially the flight integration and trial portions.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 06 Sep 2015 15:38

^The Sudarshan program is ample testament to that.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 06 Sep 2015 17:18

Wasn't the glide bomb actually tested ?

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 06 Sep 2015 17:28

^
http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/English/dpi ... 122014.pdf

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 07 Sep 2015 09:45

Floating test range for missile defence system - Y.Mallikarjun, The Hindu

India is building a unique floating testing range — a huge ship — to overcome the limitations imposed by the land mass for carrying out missile tests of varying ranges for the two-tier ballistic missile defence (BMD) system to protect important cities.

The system seeks to engage and destroy incoming enemy missiles at different altitudes in the endo- and exo-atmospheres.

The first phase of the programme envisages development of interceptors to annihilate incoming missiles with a range of 2,000 km, while the second phase aims to build such weapons to destroy missiles with a longer range.

The system will waylay a ballistic missile and destroy it in mid-air.

India has so far conducted 10 interceptor missile tests, eight of them successful. Most of the trials were conducted in the endo-atmosphere, and a few in the exo-atmosphere. The first phase of the system is expected to be deployed after some more interceptor trials in deployable configuration. Official sources told The Hindu here that currently the missile testing range on Wheeler Island posed certain limitations as people needed to be evacuated from the villages every time a trial took place. More important, the range of the missile had to be confined to less than 300 km. Also, different trajectories could not be tested.

To overcome these problems, scientists at the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) designed the floating testing range — a huge ship with a designated displacement equivalent to 10,000 tonnes.

The state-of-the-art range would have many facilities such as a launch-pad, a launch control centre and a mission control centre.

Work begins

The construction of the range, which has just started, might take at least three to four years for the ship to be ready to conduct the first trial, sources said.

“It will pave the way for conducting trials for different trajectories, varying altitudes and also for higher ranges. We can go up to 1,000-1,500 km without any problem. Currently, we have to conduct simulation tests for longer ranges. Once, this FTR is ready we will be able to carry out live tests,” the sources said.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 07 Sep 2015 10:11

Ooh.... nice. Dual use against the DF series' tests, if need be

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 07 Sep 2015 11:37

SSridhar wrote:Floating test range for missile defence system - Y.Mallikarjun, The Hindu

just could not remember , wasn't a hull of SIGINT ship launched, some weeks back???

srin · Post by **srin** » 07 Sep 2015 12:21

Could this be the mystery ship that HSL is building ? http://www.livefistdefence.com/2014/10/ ... -save.html

Jaeger · Post by **Jaeger** » 07 Sep 2015 12:33

Is this the one that's being built at HSL? There was a 10,000T being built IIRC...

edit: srin, that's the one I'm talking about too.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Sep 2015 13:09

the ships that track missile and satellite launches tend to be of that vizag ship type with multiple large diameter dishes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracking_ship
china already has 5 such ships

they have a separate class of ships to test radars and missiles. 4 such ships.
http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=china-e ... -platforms
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gPXPcpuPZ9E/T ... _72048.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6wdMGQhsdHo/U ... _32592.jpg
^^ all their VLS systems and inclined tube launches are tested on these ships.

being short on funds we might have decided to combine both functions into one ship.

jayasimha · Post by **jayasimha** » 07 Sep 2015 13:33

Jaeger wrote:Is this the one that's being built at HSL? There was a 10,000T being built IIRC...

edit: srin, that's the one I'm talking about too.

i think i found 1 more

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/449 ... ts-rs.html

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Sep 2015 16:21

giant ABM radars have been tested on such ships
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... -23%29.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 055%29.jpg

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 07 Sep 2015 16:34

srin wrote:Could this be the mystery ship that HSL is building ? http://www.livefistdefence.com/2014/10/ ... -save.html

Thank you , I am aging quite rapidly this days

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 07 Sep 2015 16:59

But will they fire missiles from this? or will it carry radar?