Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

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.
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Gyan » 27 Sep 2015 19:43

My guess is that there 3 sets of programs:-

Sudhershan followed by NG-LGB, ie laser seeker guidance kits for 100, 250, 450kg

GPS/IRNSS guided + wing kits for dumb bombs 100, 250, 450 kg

Specialized steath bombs Gurathma like MSOV 1000kg

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 27 Sep 2015 19:54

Thakur_B wrote:Well the NG-LGB was running in parallel to Sudarshan. If Garuda is not NG-LGB then it too shall overlap with Sudarshan. To have a third guided kit project running at the same time from the same organisation seems highly unlikely even in khan chacha land.


From what I hear there are multiple programs running on, problem is (was?) lack of funds since they were all run on discretionary funds from central DRDO fund. Programs for Brimstone type Nag derivative, programs for other PGMs from Prithvi type missile, for light missiles from UAVs and so forth..

I had the same conversation with a chaiwalla who says that the kind of info Jha releases won't be out unless people on the inside wanted that info released or were yearning for their side of story to be heard, given that his articles and tweets cover all major labs of DRDO.


Of course, all that means is that he has contacts and he contacts people to share the actual details. Problem is that it takes a Jha to do this and there is no proper method or channel for DRDO to do this on its own. That's the crux of the issue. Their media management remains ham handed or just lacking which is where the "they have learnt how to handle issues" fails. For instance, while the whole world was going around beating on the LCA and rtd types were busy running it down to push for the MMRCA or wutver, there was not a single clarification from DRDO on test progress and design improvements etc. It took a Bharat Karnad (who frankly is not the best person to debate these details) to actually support the program versus some of the motivated leaks.

A Saurav Jha sees the debate, the FUD, asks and ferrets out details and posts it online. In contrast, the org itself is not doing enough. The DRDO website itself looks like it was designed by some disinterested teenager who was given a month old project. About the only decent things are the handful of publications which get updated regularly and the MOD Annual Reports. Even the press releases are sporadic, and some of the bigwigs open their mouth talk about current challenges, and never reiterate when they are solved, leading to a perception those challenges are there forever.
The MSM gets a free pass to do all sorts of namecalling viz DRDO programs because in part, the org is completely clueless of how to handle the media, vacillating between giving soundbytes to going silent for long periods. It took a decade of vilification for them to even start mentioning the substantial amount of their own products in service or inducted, otherwise whatever delays they were facing were flagged (Arjun, LCA etc) while the successful programs would happily be ascribed to the manufacturers (BEL etc). The more DRDO doesn't manage the media discourse and doesnt supports only those who are impartial vs the pompous Pandits, Aroors etc, the more they will be targeted with fake claims.
Last edited by Karan M on 27 Sep 2015 19:57, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 27 Sep 2015 19:56

deejay wrote:Srai ji, Force Multiplier is a term much bandied about in IAF since ages. A lot of work, study and papers have been written on it for a long time.

Gp Capt Naronha's is a good assessment but not the first on these lines. I do agree with his views. These 'force multipliers' are also things which will need to be acquired and are being acquired.


But have they been translated into reality? From public reports it does seem IAF is mostly focused on big ticket platforms and the force multipliers get short thrift.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4009
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby deejay » 27 Sep 2015 21:31

Karan M wrote:
deejay wrote:Srai ji, Force Multiplier is a term much bandied about in IAF since ages. A lot of work, study and papers have been written on it for a long time.

Gp Capt Naronha's is a good assessment but not the first on these lines. I do agree with his views. These 'force multipliers' are also things which will need to be acquired and are being acquired.


But have they been translated into reality? From public reports it does seem IAF is mostly focused on big ticket platforms and the force multipliers get short thrift.


Karan M: In the public domain big tickets get more space and that is not the IAF's mistake. Infact Gp Capt Naronha's article to me seemed to complement what the IAF has been doing in this department with DRDO. To quote him from the article:

...
Although the IAF’s quest for force multipliers is fairly old, it acquired added urgency when potential opponents also began to deploy such devices. Further, the IAF doctrine of October 1995 gave renewed impetus to offensive operations in what had till then been a force characterised by a defensive mindset. Air defence was to be achieved through deterrence (“I carry a bigger stick than yours!”), as well as by upgrading the IAF’s Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) capability and the entire air defence and communications network. The doctrine also placed emphasis on the induction and operational employment of force multipliers.
...


Honestly, from my view and from what little I know last 10-15 yrs have seen procurement of C130's, C17s, Emb145s , IL78s (Refuellers) and AWACS. Apart from these IAF has inducted Akash systems, radars, etc. Almost all platforms are force multpliers in their usage.

There are the mid life upgrades of Jaguars and Mirages ongoing or scheduled. The upgrades themselves add force multipliers in terms of Avionics improvement.

IAF has also procured Mi 17's, Pilatus, Hawks and Dhruvs. These are mostly non combat purposes.

What issues we see today arise from Made in India vs. Import is another tangent all together. That issue should not cloud our judgement on what the IAF has been doing to keep itself capable or better utilize existing platforms.

I do not agree with the dependence we are creating by buying foreign fighters but that in terms of fighting capability addition the last major acquisition was the Su 30 deal of which incremental orders have followed even in the last 10 years. Even here the Su 30 upgrades being talked about will have the same Force Multiplier effect.

IAF's focus and speed at which it rolled out AF Net across the country is also a major boost in the force multiplier department. Network Centricity, real time field info at HQs and quicker decisions from top downwards are all a step in this direction. It is my opinion and I may be wrong, the IAF is definitely the leader in the pack in terms of force multipliers and focus on such platforms.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55010
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 28 Sep 2015 01:59

deejay and KaranM, What is the IAF doing about fuzes for air dropped bombs. ACM PC Lal memoirs speak of 40% dud rate same as RAF WWII rate!!!

What is a pistol fuze? Seems to be only working one.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 02:20

Deejay I agree some movement has been there but in specific I meant munitions...what has been our progress there in terms of force multipliers... everywhere else its been some progress..but not ideal..also no news on the ODL (datalink either).

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55010
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 28 Sep 2015 04:26

KaranM, DRDO Techfocus

issue on Armaments had a 3 page (4-6) article on a PGM kit for HSLD. Nice pictures of modules were given.
Now this tender for HSLD with Griffen kit could mean that 2012 project also was not realized or could be delayed.


LINK

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 05:19

R sir, was looking for that exact link... that in all probability is the ADE NG-LGB we were discussing earlier. It has both GPS-INS and a laser seeker. IAF will expect nothing but highest performance so IMO it will be in trials till it matches performance of the Griffin 3's we purchased (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ce-225223/)

The above requirement for adapters is for the stock of Griffins we have which are de-facto IAF standard LGB across Su-30, LCA, Jaguar, MiG-27 and possibly even Mirage 2000. I think its more import substitution than anything else.. we have penetrating bombs now we can make them accurate...otherwise we'd have to buy even those (penetrating LGBs) at much expense..(http://www.imi-israel.com/home/doc.aspx?mCatID=66599) .. the HSLD may not go upto 2 mtrs but for most of our requirement it may be enough.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 05:21

Another link on Griffin 3 and how even the DRDO Winged bomb may be similar to
http://defense-update.com/newscast/0609 ... 80609.html

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 28 Sep 2015 05:36

ramana wrote:deejay and KaranM, What is the IAF doing about fuzes for air dropped bombs. ACM PC Lal memoirs speak of 40% dud rate same as RAF WWII rate!!!


Ramana the exact quote is on page 303 of ACM PC Lal's memoirs with reference to the 1971 war
"The effectiveness of Canberras as bombers was perhaps reduced by the fact that the 500 lb bombs were of world war II vintage. They were so old that 40% turned out to be duds"

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4731
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 28 Sep 2015 09:01

Karan M wrote:R sir, was looking for that exact link... that in all probability is the ADE NG-LGB we were discussing earlier. It has both GPS-INS and a laser seeker. IAF will expect nothing but highest performance so IMO it will be in trials till it matches performance of the Griffin 3's we purchased (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ce-225223/)

The above requirement for adapters is for the stock of Griffins we have which are de-facto IAF standard LGB across Su-30, LCA, Jaguar, MiG-27 and possibly even Mirage 2000. I think its more import substitution than anything else.. we have penetrating bombs now we can make them accurate...otherwise we'd have to buy even those (penetrating LGBs) at much expense..(http://www.imi-israel.com/home/doc.aspx?mCatID=66599) .. the HSLD may not go upto 2 mtrs but for most of our requirement it may be enough.


What's confusing is the range quoted for NG-LGB (Garuda?) as 30km to 50km? Range of LGBs (Paveway/Griffin series) is typically around 10km to 12km. So NG-LGB either has some form of ER-glide kit (but according to MOD AR 2014-15 this is not the case; "Garuthma" is the winged version with 100 km range) or is powered like the French AASM.

Paveway-II are being used on Jaguar and Mirage-2000s. Maybe both Paveway-II and Griffin-3 have been integrated on them like on LCA Mk.1.

Lockheed Martin bags deal to supply laser-guided bombs to IAF
PTI Apr 3, 2012, 02.20PM IST

US defence major Lockheed Martin has bagged a deal expected to be worth over Rs 100 crore for supplying laser-guided bombs (LGBs) for the Jaguar fighter aircraft fleet in the Indian Air Force (IAF).

The IAF plans to induct more than 100 bunker-buster LGBs for its Jaguar warplanes to destroy strongly fortified enemy targets.

"We have emerged as the lowest bidders in the deal for supplying LGBs to the IAF. We have offered our Paveway II LGBs for the Jaguars and contract negotiations are on in this direction," Lockheed Martin India head Roger Rose told PTI here.

The IAF had issued a global Request for Proposal (RFP) for the purpose last year, and Lockheed Martin along with Raytheon and an Israeli missile manufacturer had taken part in the tender.

With their capability to pierce hard surfaces, the LGBs can also be used to destroy enemy's concrete runways and fortified locations.

LGBs are guided projectiles that use lasers to strike a designated target with greater accuracy than a gravity bomb and were used with high accuracy by the IAF against Pakistani Army posts during the Kargil war in 1999.

Around the same time, the US had supplied some Paveway bombs to India which could be launched from the Jaguar and Mirage 2000 planes for accurately striking enemy targets.

The earlier lot of the American bombs to the IAF was supplied by Raytheon.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 13:08

We had procured some 200 odd Paveway kits in the past, 1998. The bunker busters you mention were a limited order after that in 2012. In 2001-2003 or thereabouts our Griffin purchases started. That's when Op Parakram also took place so we did rush purchases a lot too..
Interestingly SIPRI etc are almost completely silent about these..or the numbers are very low (isn't realistic IMO).

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4731
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 28 Sep 2015 13:31

^^^

I think the numbers are "very low" compared to Western AF stock levels. The news reports I remember seeing only mentions order value of "tens of million dollars" worth of Griffin kits and not hundreds of million or billions. That would mean LGB kit numbers are in the hundreds (~300-700 units) and not thousands.

FWIW, in one of the Tech Focus (or some DRDO) publication it was mentioned that the IAF planned to order few hundred indigenous Sudharsan LGB kits upon successful trials.
Last edited by srai on 28 Sep 2015 13:43, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 13:43

Yes but are those accurate? I know of several munitions that have not been discussed much but were apparently acquired. Noronha for instance mentions A2G PGMs for the Mirage in large number. But we know of nothing apart from the 30-40 Crystal Maze/Popeyes purchased.

Next, the Russian munition inventory seems very under reported too. SIPRI numbers f.e. were less than what leaked out in Russian press about Kh-31 series missiles IIRC.
We probably have a largeish inventory of KAB-500/1500, Kh-29 type munitions but which has not been reported in public. These will be the primary A2G PGM stuff for the Su-30 and Bison logically speaking and their inventory is probably what the IAF focused on @ the time of the deal. Sipri IIRC doesn't even mention Kh-29s, but we have pics of IAF Su-30s firing them in exercises.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4731
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 28 Sep 2015 13:45

Kh-29 is reported wrongly in SIPRI as Kh-25. The acquisition dates would mean Kh-29 and not Kh-25, which were already retired/out-of-production by then.
Last edited by srai on 28 Sep 2015 13:47, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 13:46

>>What's confusing is the range quoted for NG-LGB (Garuda?) as 30km to 50km? Range of LGBs (Paveway/Griffin series) is typically around 10km to 12km. So NG-LGB either has some form of ER-glide kit (but according to MOD AR 2014-15 this is not the case; "Garuthma" is the winged version with 100 km range) or is powered like the French AASM.

These ranges are actually underreported and for low level profiles. High/Medium alt delivery substantially boosts range! KAB range in that case extends beyond many SAMs.

Aug 21, 2008 - The improvements enable a Paveway III LGB to maintain level flight at low altitude for effective ranges of more than 18 km (10 nm).

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 13:52

srai wrote:Kh-29 is reported wrongly in SIPRI as Kh-25. The acquisition dates would mean Kh-29 and not Kh-25, which were already retired/out-of-production by then.


That's 500 in 1995, in all likelihood for 125 Bisons! But note where is the equivalent for the Su30 MKI? As you can see there is a huge gap there for MKI A2G ordnance.
IAF Kh-29T from Su-30.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/torqueavi ... 5465029780
By applying the same 1:4 rule, IAF's Kh-29 Su-30 inventory would be at least a 1000 units.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 13:54

Another interesting thing to ponder. Is Python-5 only for IAFs SpyDers (leaving LCA out of it)? :)

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4731
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 28 Sep 2015 13:57

IAF MiG-27 w/ Kh-29
Image

IAF Su-30MKI firing Kh-29
Image

500 delivered between 1995 and 2004 (SIPRI). No mention of second order anywhere on the public arena. Most missiles are good for 10-15 years or so under storage conditions and some life-extensions. So we may see some additional orders in the next few years.

But you may be right. There could be more than what's been reported.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 14:50

Point is the order for munitions are placed at time of deal signing by the IAF. MiG-21 Bison deal was signed in 1994. Its "only" PGM was the KAB-500.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Aircr ... Bison.html
The 500 deal, logically, was primarily for the Bisons, though the other platforms which of course would be made compatible.

Its interesting to note that while 140 Su-30 bulk deal was allotted in 2001, there are no SIPRI reports of A2G munitions likewise apart from the Kh-31, Kh-59 of which only 200 units are mentioned and even these are from 1997 and 2001, IIRC in 1996 we signed off on the first 40-50 Flankers. No mention of KAB series bombs, or any other A2G ordnance. These are the Su-30MK weapons available. Would the IAF have not ordered any of the other bombs or rockets? Our existing inventory would not have been sufficient.
http://www.ausairpower.net/XIMG/Su-30MK ... _b_eng.gif
This makes zero sense.

All this clearly indicates to me we have a much larger inventory of A2G Russian origin munitions and hence the IAF's piecemeal orders for LGBs (somewhat) make sense. They are cheaper/versatile than their western counterparts. Another datapoint is that in a conversation, a MiG-27 pilot told me that the original Russian origin PGMs on the non upgraded MiG-27s were very reliable and destructive, in other words they worked. Unlike the reliability issues we have heard around the R-77 so they should be ok since these were first introduced by the soviet union and trialed and tested in the 80's themselves.

In contrast, the Griffins and Paveways are very much required for our western origin aircraft or upgrades, though as usual the Su-30s are also compatible with them.

The IAF continues to be following the same policy apparently. Noronha mentions Mirage 2000s in IAF are getting new A2G kit.
We have only heard of Micas so far. Wheels within wheels.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 15:31

>>But you may be right. There could be more than what's been reported.

For some other examples i am aware of, this is most certainly the case. Information is public but not widely disseminated.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4731
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 28 Sep 2015 15:33

With Rafale deal and Mirage-2000UPG, the most likely A2G weapon would be the French AASM. But at $300,000 per kit I don't know how many will be bought by the IAF. My guess would be low hundreds.

600 MICAs cost around $1.5 billion.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4731
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 28 Sep 2015 15:49

Whether correct assumption or not, the lack of displays of A2G PGMs by the IAF would mean the quantities are on the lower end. If they were in the thousands, we would see a lot more of them everywhere from airshows and firepower demos to other marketing/promotional publications. But they are few and hard to come by.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 17:14

srai wrote:Whether correct assumption or not, the lack of displays of A2G PGMs by the IAF would mean the quantities are on the lower end. If they were in the thousands, we would see a lot more of them everywhere from airshows and firepower demos to other marketing/promotional publications. But they are few and hard to come by.


But we don't see huge numbers of A2A missiles used up in firepower displays either, so that assumption doesn't necessarily hold true. Besides each of these items costs a bomb (pun intended), so they would not be just used up for the sake of displays until and unless a DM is visiting or its the annual exercise. We just see training rounds for A2A and the occasional EW pods used in exercises at most and from those we have a decent idea based on reports of pod acquisitions in parallel.

At best the life expired A2G ones would be used in live fires for experience in a mass fashion - this is exactly what was done with the Kh-23/25 rounds for the MiGs by the IAF. KAB-500, Kh-59 even comes with a training pod so one doesn't even have to drop the bomb.

As regards public firepower demos, we use a few LGBs and KAB-500s every year.. the IAF has so far shown LGB drops from Su-30, Jaguar and Mirage and MiG-27 iirc, with the interesting part that some of the LGB drops were cued by UAVs. KAB-500s are also used regularly. 2004 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKC8WuTLfM8) or 2008 (http://sainiksamachar.nic.in/englisharc ... 08/h3.html) or 2013 (http://www.pressreader.com/india/sps-av ... 1/TextView).

But we know Kh-29s are also there on the Su-30, internal IAF missile trials. So they don't necessarily show "everything" on the public livefire trials but every year they do use up a few LGBs in public trials.

See:http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Galleries/Aircraft/Walkarounds/Su30MKI/
What IAF Su-30 "came with". See reference to KAB-1500 which has not been showed in public if memory is right.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Galle ... 5.jpg.html

Besides, the second assumption is that IAF is very open about its capabilities - reason I'd contest that is the Elta EL8222 transition to SAP-518 is silent with zero fuss in public. First we got to know about that is this image of Brahmos verification testing on Su-30 and HAL press release mentioning the same. http://i.imgur.com/KcAa7XF.jpg

IAF MiG-29 upg also comes with Kab-500, Kh-29 and Kh-31 variants. Also http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-p ... 045218.jpg

SIPRI has no orders specific to the MiG-29 UPG or Kh-29 orders at all. In short, a lot remains out of SIPRI.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1794
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Thakur_B » 28 Sep 2015 18:49

Karan M wrote:>>What's confusing is the range quoted for NG-LGB (Garuda?) as 30km to 50km? Range of LGBs (Paveway/Griffin series) is typically around 10km to 12km. So NG-LGB either has some form of ER-glide kit (but according to MOD AR 2014-15 this is not the case; "Garuthma" is the winged version with 100 km range) or is powered like the French AASM.


Image

This image from techfocus suggests a kit with greater glide than JDAM. JDAM itself has a range of 28 KM.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 28 Sep 2015 19:06

They will never reveal the true numbers and specs of what is in stock. Of course a few of them will be used up every year by pilots who I expect will have to requalify to use certain weapons from time to time. Maybe something like one live firing every year for the requalification.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55010
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 28 Sep 2015 21:54

Karan M wrote:R sir, was looking for that exact link... that in all probability is the ADE NG-LGB we were discussing earlier. It has both GPS-INS and a laser seeker. IAF will expect nothing but highest performance so IMO it will be in trials till it matches performance of the Griffin 3's we purchased (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ce-225223/)

The above requirement for adapters is for the stock of Griffins we have which are de-facto IAF standard LGB across Su-30, LCA, Jaguar, MiG-27 and possibly even Mirage 2000. I think its more import substitution than anything else.. we have penetrating bombs now we can make them accurate...otherwise we'd have to buy even those (penetrating LGBs) at much expense..(http://www.imi-israel.com/home/doc.aspx?mCatID=66599) .. the HSLD may not go upto 2 mtrs but for most of our requirement it may be enough.



Yes lots of confusion. But there is method in madness.

The IAF dumb bomb heritage is UK and FSU.
The UK version is 1000MC which is WWII design and still going strong in UK. OFB makes it. It is a cast steel case with a tail unit.

The Paveway II kits imported via UK are for this one. In Gulf War literature 1000MC has 6 feet (~2m)concrete penetration.

The FSU heritage is the 100-120 Kg bomb.
From pictures elsewhere this comes in two flavors: anti-personnel and blast.
WWII studies show 120 kg aka 250 lbs. are not so useful.
Maybe with precision delivery could be useful.

Now the Mig 27 upgrade etc show ~15m CEP. Shown with Russian FAB-500kg.

IAF has realized not good enough. Hence the PGM programs.

Looks like 2012 era they wanted the HSLD to have a PGM kit.

Either it flopped or is too expensive or can't wait for ever.
Hence the Griffen on HSLD effort.


If you compare images of HSLD and 1000MC you note the nose section is more pointed in former case. That implies a penetration role from beginning. Definitely better than 1000MC.

HSLD nose does not match any overseas bomb series: US Mk8x or the FAB-xxx.
Looks like DRDO own effort. Looks like a more general purpose bomb.

Google shows moulds for the 250 kg version implying its a casting.

Will take the parameters in the tender and come up with numbers based on empirical formulae later in week.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 22:19

>>Now the Mig 27 upgrade etc show ~15m CEP. Shown with Russian FAB-500kg. IAF has realized not good enough. Hence the PGM programs.
>>The Paveway II kits imported via UK are for this one. In Gulf War literature 1000MC has 6 feet (~2m)concrete penetration.
>>Looks like 2012 era they wanted the HSLD to have a PGM kit. Either it flopped or is too expensive or can't wait for ever. Hence the Griffen on HSLD effort.

I don't think its that complicated. IAF has a bunch of dumb bombs - UK origin including some specific types, some special Russian origin ones, plus HSLD which seems to be our bulk one for moderately hardened targets.. IAF wants its LGBs to be compatible across as many dumb bomb types as possible. These include the standard types as versus the BETAB or runway busting ones which aren't suitable for the LGBs.

Some of the interesting things which have happened which will make the IAF realize PGM importance more are exercises like Red Flag.When operating in a heavy EW/AD environ, PGMs quickly become essential.

MiG-27s have Griffin too BTW. They were IIRC the first ones to get it along with the Jags. All the while since 1999, IAF has been busy buying LGBs from Israel for the most part.

DRDO's PGM programs started around a decade back but were hampered by the usual lack of local subsystems etc, so they went around developing the actuators, seekers etc. In 2006, the Sudarshan program was started. After subsystem development, in 2010, first trials started.

Sudarshan trials took place at ADE. By end of trials, the bomb achieved 10m CEP with 9km slant ranges from typical attitude. Whilst useful, it was not sufficient versus the new Griffin Mk3 LGBs with greater range, ability to hit moving targets etc. Higher alt, longer range for Sudarshan hampered by rolling. Another reason IAF will want more range is to keep out of MANPADs envelope. IAF ordered 50 Sudarshans as support. NG-LGB to be 50km, which means GPS/INS micromodule.

So NG LGB program launched at ADE, which is also doing Nirbhay, Rustom-1/2, microUAVs.
Meanwhile LR guided bomb development is taking place at RCI/DRDL which are our "original" munitions guys. They are working on a family of munitions including the 100km one, the family of smart munitions to be deployed from Prithvi type missiles, and Nag derivatives.

In the interim, IAF has standardized more or less on the Griffin as its de facto LGB - at least 2 deals for Griffin and one for the Griffin-3, probably has a bunch of Paveways too (I remember reading about a follow on order post Kargil) and has a range of EO bombs and missiles for its Su-30s and Bisons- KAB-500Kr/1500Kr and Kh-29T.
Also SFW from Textron against any mass armor attack scenario.

ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 371
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ManuJ » 28 Sep 2015 22:24

Karan M wrote:http://www.indiandefencereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/IDR-30.3.pdf

Getting more from less - Gp Capt Noronha

DRDO NG-LGB will have a range of around 50-100 km and should be available soon
IAF has ordered large number of PGMs especially for the Mirage 2000

From the article...which satellite is this?
Later this year, ISRO plans to launch a Multi-
Object Tracking Radar (MOTR) that is likely to
have some military applications.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 22:39

Thakur_B wrote:
Karan M wrote:>>What's confusing is the range quoted for NG-LGB (Garuda?) as 30km to 50km? Range of LGBs (Paveway/Griffin series) is typically around 10km to 12km. So NG-LGB either has some form of ER-glide kit (but according to MOD AR 2014-15 this is not the case; "Garuthma" is the winged version with 100 km range) or is powered like the French AASM.


http://i.imgur.com/KXu7P5s.jpg

This image from techfocus suggests a kit with greater glide than JDAM. JDAM itself has a range of 28 KM.


That bit was from srai, not me. But I agree with you in the range as its dependent on altitude and speed.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 22:41

ManuJ wrote:
Karan M wrote:http://www.indiandefencereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/IDR-30.3.pdf

Getting more from less - Gp Capt Noronha

DRDO NG-LGB will have a range of around 50-100 km and should be available soon
IAF has ordered large number of PGMs especially for the Mirage 2000

From the article...which satellite is this?
Later this year, ISRO plans to launch a Multi-
Object Tracking Radar (MOTR) that is likely to
have some military applications.


Not a satellite, it is a ground based tracking radar whose key advantage is really long range and good resolution (for the range).
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... 300242.cms
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 212224.ece

It can be useful for BMD purposes as an adjunct to the LRTR, but number of targets it scans, ECM etc also need to be taken into account.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17062
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Rahul M » 28 Sep 2015 23:14

any plans for bistatic radars by us ?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 28 Sep 2015 23:32


Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19861
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 29 Sep 2015 01:45

1.MLPGM:

http://www.ibnlive.com/blogs/india/saur ... 48587.html

SauravJha: What is the MMW seeker meant for?

Satheesh Reddy: It is meant for PGMs and for the next generation anti-radiation missile (NGARM).

SauravJha: PGMs of the kind?

Satheesh Reddy:Like the lightweight PGM under development here in RCI at the moment. This PGM has already been test-fired from an unmanned aerial vehicle and a sizeable number can also be carried by a missile like the Prithvi or by an aircraft like the Su-30 MKI. The Prithvi configuration can be used for attacking runways for example.

http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/English/DRD ... -ebook.pdf

MMW Seeker:
Configuration for LOAL operation has been completed and proven in HILS. Interfaces
with OBC, INS and Telemetry were successfully established. Flight trial of PGM seeker range and
angle tracking was established in MI-8 helicopter. Seeker is under productionisation for ATL

...

2. NG -LGB aka Garuda w/wings indeed is Garuthma
GPS/INS Guidance and Control Kit and Glide Fin Kit for 450 kg HSLD Bomb
Ground mechanical adaptation trials of the kit with Jaguar Darin-II were conducted successfully.
Using avionics and seeker for PG kit for 450 kg High Speed Low Drag (HSLD) aircraft bomb, captive
trials have been successfully completed at ITR. The seeker locked-on and tracked the target during the
captive flight

Compare with MOD-AR 15
ASB Glide:
Non-winged version of guided
bomb having a range of 30 km has been
named as ‘Garuda’ and winged version of
this weapon having 100 km range is called
as ‘Garuthma’. Garuda store has been
successfully released from the Su-30 MKI
aircraft during 2013. Transfer alignment and
safe separation have been proven as part
of development trials of Garuda. Wing kit
realization and wind tunnel tests have been
completed as a part of development trials
of winged version Garuthma. Garuthma
drop trials were conducted successfully on
December 19, 2014 in Bay of Bengal off the
Odisha coast.

This report but with 1000kg bomb: http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-in ... ay-2045525
-------------------------------------------------

These appear to be Army projects
New Family of Munitions:
Six types of
munitions are being designed and developed
by DRDO viz. Nipun, Vibhav, Vishal, Parth,
Prachand and Ulka to improve the existing
munitions and enhance its performance.
These are in various stages of technical / user
trials.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4731
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 29 Sep 2015 03:14

ramana wrote:...

If you compare images of HSLD and 1000MC you note the nose section is more pointed in former case. That implies a penetration role from beginning. Definitely better than 1000MC.

HSLD nose does not match any overseas bomb series: US Mk8x or the FAB-xxx.
Looks like DRDO own effort. Looks like a more general purpose bomb.
...


Design was primarily for reducing drag while being carried/dropped at high speeds.

DRDO: High Speed Low Drag Aircraft Bombs
Conventional 1000 lb class of aircraft bombs offer more drag, thereby adversely attesting the operational efficiency of modern high speed aircraft. Keeping this in view. DRDO has designed and developed high speed low drag (HSLD) bombs in 450 kg and 250 kg class suitable for carriage and release by modern aircrafts. These bombs are effective against ground targets like railway yards /bridges, major installations, bunkers, runways and hardened targets.

The bomb consists of two major subsystems, namely. Bomb body filled with HE and tail unit. Two types of tail units, Retarder Tail Unit (RTU) for high speed low level bombing and Ballistic Tail Unit (BTU) for high speed high altitude bombing have been developed for the bomb to be used in different tactical roles.
...


ARDE: Achievements
...
450 kg High Speed Low Drag (HSLD) Bomb

The existing 1000 lb (450 kg) bomb in IAF service is based on the design evolved during World War II and therefore, not optimized for use with the current generation of high speed combat aircraft. This bomb imposes excessive drag penalty in the high speed laydown mode, adversely affecting aircraft performance in general and radius of action in particular. A 450 kg high speed low drag (HSLD) bomb was developed by ARDE. The bomb is now under regular production
...


One can assume 450kg HSLD bombs are replacing vintage 1000lb bombs. Given large quantities in inventory, it would probably take a while to completely phase out (or at least move completely to reserves) the old bombs. Paveway-II LGB kit integration was with the old 1000lb bombs but these are AFAIK less than 300 units. As Karan pointed out, Griffin-3 LGB kit integration is with 450kg HSLD; so that is the future until DRDO efforts, also on 450kg HSLD, bear fruit.

The IAF seems to prefer 450kg/1000lb/500kg bomb for LGB/PGM kit integration. I haven't heard anywhere of it using it for smaller bombs in the 250kg/100kg class. But there are new small munitions under R&D by RCI and other DRDO labs. We will have to wait and see what transpires.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Vipul » 29 Sep 2015 06:06

3­ day fishing restriction in Bay for missile tests.

The state government has announced fishing will be restricted in the Bay of Bengal along the Odisha coast from September 29 to October 1 as the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) will test missiles from the testing centres at Abdul Kalam Island and Chandipur.

"All marine fishermen are instructed not to venture into the sea from 9am to 1pm on these three days. Fishing has been banned during these hours 30 km into the sea from the coast," said additional fisheries officer (marine), Kujang, Biraja Prasan Mohapatra.

The fisheries department has registered a total of 16,848 fishing vessels, including 1,755 trawlers. "During the ban, all the vessels will be barred from venturing into the sea," added the fisheries officer. "We have already held meetings with traditional marine fishermen and convinced them not to fish," added the officer.

The Jagatsinghpur district administration is cooperating with the fisheries department, marine police, port officials, coast guard and fishery organizations in this regard, said, additional district magistrate at Paradip R K Sahoo.

The authorities have warned the fishermen not to venture into the sea during the tests as large parts of missiles will fall into the sea and its nearby areas. Missile parts may also fall on the beach, forests and in nearby villages during the tests, said the fisheries officer.

Villagers are not allowed to collect any parts of the missiles. The authorities have declared 55 km towards the south of missile test ranges in Chandipur and Abdul Kalam Island (Earlier Wheeler Island) as prohibited areas. It is the responsibility of the DRDO to retrieve all the missile remnants.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby PratikDas » 29 Sep 2015 06:32

Do we know what they'll be testing?

India has applied for MTCR membership and the annual meeting of the MTCR is in October. Source: FP: India and the Missile Regime

I wonder if the two are related.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 29 Sep 2015 06:51

maybe the air launched brahmos or pinaka2 or garuthma or all.

does garuthma means mother of garuda?

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 29 Sep 2015 07:04

No inside knowledge here but my intuition tells me that India will not do away with all dumb bombs in favour of PGMs. We may just get a more healthy ratio of PGMs to dumb bombs. From the news over the last couple of decades it appears like the west has shifted lock stock and barrel to PGMs but that is not true. They just have a lot more PGMs, but dumb bombs are not going away soon. Like artillery they are cheap and when delivered accurately they cannot be spoofed. PGMs are unparalleled in achieving certain tasks - a fact that is illustrated too often by that tired old cliche that one reads everywhere on the internet "In WW2 it took X bombs to take out a bridge. In Vietnam it took blah bombs. Now it takes just one" That is true but even so dumb bombs will be retained forever. I think even in the gulf war - 90% or some huge % of bombs were dumb - despite the media focus on PGMs. And as we get further and further away in time from Kargil we get to hear more and more of how much was actually done with dumb bombs and how much with LGBs. Despite my own bloviating breathless YouTube video story about Muntho Dalo and LGBs - I suspect it was all done by dumbo bombos.
Last edited by shiv on 29 Sep 2015 07:12, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 29 Sep 2015 07:08

only the US among all nations has enough PGMs to run a month long high intensity war using 90% PGM ratio. in OIF the ratio had shifted to some 40% PGM from 10% in ODS iirc. they also seem to have elastic production capacity to churn these things out. perhaps long lead items like seekers are stored offline in numbers and pre-cured explosive bombs are stockpiled in the millions in deep bunkers.

the rest of the mob like russia, uk , france, germany et al have PGM only for few days. even in a low intensity war like libya both UK and France ran out of PGMs after a week and ran yelping back to massa for emergency stock replenishment. massa scowled and grumbled but gave them like a indulgent big brah watching a coupla cats running around the yard. :mrgreen:

we need to build inventory and elastic cloudburst production scale of unguided munitions and 105mm/125mm/120mm/155mm ammo first for a 45 day all out pounding first.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests