Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

John · Post by **John** » 20 Nov 2018 18:27

Gyan wrote:Each Barak 8 is around USD 4 MILLION

It is supposed to be around mill each latest order is for 7 systems for P-17A + launchers + MF Star for 770 million. Each system has 32 missiles + spares + training rounds so around 60-70. Even MF Star and launchers are given away for free that works to less than 2 million each. It is really hard to get cost of missile but latest acquisition is closest we ever got to get a good breakdown of its cost.

https://www.janes.com/article/84016/iai ... ndian-navy

sahay · Post by **sahay** » 20 Nov 2018 19:54

John wrote: It is supposed to be around mill each latest order is for 7 systems for P-17A + launchers + MF Star for 770 million.

That's just for the parts that IAI manufactures, that is the radar, seekers etc. The contract from GRSE and MDL to BEL was worth $1.28 billion.

John · Post by **John** » 20 Nov 2018 20:02

sahay wrote:
John wrote: It is supposed to be around mill each latest order is for 7 systems for P-17A + launchers + MF Star for 770 million.
That's just for the parts that IAI manufactures, that is the radar, seekers etc. The contract from GRSE and MDL to BEL was worth $1.28 billion.

Missed that one, BEL order is for assembly of the systems or production of missiles?

I believe for P-15B the order was combined 630 million for both IAI and BEL?
https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/0 ... stem-deal/

sahay · Post by **sahay** » 20 Nov 2018 20:25

I guess BEL was chosen as the system integrator for LRSAM (BEL and BDL were reportedly fighting for it) and it would sign contracts with IAI, BDL and others to procure the system components. Even the P15B contract that you linked was from BEL to IAI for parts manufactured by IAI. It's quite difficult to know the cost of each missile from these contracts as the key components of missiles are split between multiple companies. BDL manufactures most of the missile components while IAI supplies the seekers. If we know the value of contract from BEL to BDL for LRSAM components that BDL is responsible for, that might give a rough idea of individual missile cost without the seeker.

John · Post by **John** » 20 Nov 2018 21:26

Yea its very hard to get a cost breakdown per missile because of inclusion of MF Star which itself should cost around 100-200 million (based on cost of similar systems).

titash · Post by **titash** » 20 Nov 2018 22:35

Viv S wrote:
Livefist wrote:After Big S-400 Deal, Russia ‘Wins’ Indian Army VSHORADS Missile Contest - Livefist
Army sources say while all three systems have had performance or technical compliance niggles since field evaluations began in 2012, the Russian Igla-S had the most significant issues: firing was deemed not successful during field trials, target acquisition continuously failed, and, to top it all, the Igla-S didn’t have a state-of-the-art sight during trials. With today’s declaration of a Russian win, the Indian MoD has signaled that the issues were either addressed, or waivers granted.

Sources tell Livefist that Russia tried to push the 9K333 Verba system into the contest to replace of the Igla-S principally because of the latter’s performance issues in around 2016. However, replacing a product mid-course under an unusually strict set of targets charted out in the RfP was simply not an option, and would have meant an instant reboot to the contest. Russia was told the Verba couldn’t come anywhere near the race, and the VSHORADS contest would only test the Igla-S.
Here we go again. Another future "damning CAG report" in the making. Typical of the loony manner in which our procurement system works. The Russian OEM wants to replace its dodgy offering with a newer system, while the MoD/IA insists on placing a contract only for an older system.

Still.. its the Russians - they have first claim over the Indian treasury. Hell we're willing to place orders sans competition for light helos (instead of indigenous ones), frigates (instead of indigenous ones), assault rifles (instead of an indigenous ones), so what's a few waivers between old friends.

One must keep in mind however that a few things cannot be bought from non-Russians. Nuclear submarines on lease, know-how for constructing and integrating high power density nuclear reactors in a submarine hull, operational & safety procedures (no-one has had more nuclear sub accidents than the russians...gotta say they had on-the-job training), air-breathing engines for Nirbhay, seekers for Astra (till desi ones come online), etc. Not to forget the UNSC veto on Kashmir discussions etc.

All in all, some hafta will have to be paid to your chosen benefactor. The US and France are simply not there yet and the Chinese & Brits will never be there. So, we leak a few $$$ to the Russians until we become an Atomi Taakat with a local MIC.

At least our leadership is taking us there. The Saudis sit on trillions of $$$ worth of oil and still haven't done *anything* with it for the long term

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Nov 2018 12:34

more details on the deal

India OKs $1.5 billion purchase of Russian missile system

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/2018/11 ... -purchase/

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 21 Nov 2018 17:43

Of the 5,175 missiles and associated equipment sought in the VSHORAD program, 2,315 missiles are proposed to be acquired in fully formed condition, 1,260 missiles in a semi-knocked down condition, 1,000 missiles in completely knocked-down condition and 600 missiles will be manufactured by state-owned Bharat Dynamics Ltd.

WTF! Out of 5k missiles only 600 will be "manufactured"? Which idot comes up with these terms?

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 21 Nov 2018 17:46

From all news reports linked above, it appears that the IGLA-S is seriously deficient in meeting the IA's requirements.

Our procurement process is so convoluted, and protracted, that we are never able to procure the best quality/ price combination.

A Deshmukh · Post by **A Deshmukh** » 21 Nov 2018 17:58

abhik wrote:
Of the 5,175 missiles and associated equipment sought in the VSHORAD program, 2,315 missiles are proposed to be acquired in fully formed condition, 1,260 missiles in a semi-knocked down condition, 1,000 missiles in completely knocked-down condition and 600 missiles will be manufactured by state-owned Bharat Dynamics Ltd.
WTF! Out of 5k missiles only 600 will be "manufactured"? Which idot comes up with these terms?

I dont think this info is correct.

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 21 Nov 2018 18:50

Kakkaji wrote:From all news reports linked above, it appears that the IGLA-S is seriously deficient in meeting the IA's requirements.

Our procurement process is so convoluted, and protracted, that we are never able to procure the best quality/ price combination.

Why ? How ?

The new Igla- S is "fire and forget " same as stinger which it was lacking and it has 50% more range. Porkis have been using both stingers and Saab solution (even making rbs-70 since 70's). Army had launched Operation Trishul Shakti to protect the Bahadur post in Chulung when it was attacked by a large Pakistani assault team. On 1 August 1992, Pakistani helicopters were attacked by an Indian Igla missile and Brig. Masood Navid Anwari (PA 10117) then Force Commander Northern Areas and other accompanying troops were killed.

So we have to justify why it does not meet IA requirements

John · Post by **John** » 21 Nov 2018 19:00

krishna_krishna wrote:Why ? How ?

Please read the article by livefist, it mentions it failed to demonstrate ability to acquire targets and sights were not used either.

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 21 Nov 2018 19:06

John wrote:
Please read the article by livefist, it mentions it failed to demonstrate ability to acquire targets and sights were not used either.

You please read it first :

" For starters, the only system that needed to engage in any firing during the final re-confirmatory trials last year was Saab’s RBS 70NG. While the Russian team has been asked to demonstrate the crucial act of target acquisition, the French team were on site as observers.

Each one of the contenders has had compliance issues, though Russia’s refusal to even appear for certain trial rounds during the contest had the other two competitors send up periodic flares. Again, it remains to be seen how these were addressed — or if they were at all. "

So I will take this western leaning bias as an authentic source with a bag of salt. I do not prefer any particular country but Igla-S as a weapon system is a good one and would bet army not picking up any slack product which is too crucial for infantry.

John · Post by **John** » 21 Nov 2018 19:19

krishna_krishna wrote:
John wrote:
Please read the article by livefist, it mentions it failed to demonstrate ability to acquire targets and sights were not used either.
You please read it first :

" For starters, the only system that needed to engage in any firing during the final re-confirmatory trials last year was Saab’s RBS 70NG. While the Russian team has been asked to demonstrate the crucial act of target acquisition, the French team were on site as observers.

Each one of the contenders has had compliance issues, though Russia’s refusal to even appear for certain trial rounds during the contest had the other two competitors send up periodic flares. Again, it remains to be seen how these were addressed — or if they were at all. "

So I will take this western leaning bias as an authentic source with a bag of salt. I do not prefer any particular country but Igla-S as a weapon system is a good one and would bet army not picking up any slack product which is too crucial for infantry.

Just because a piece is critical unless you have proof to back your claim please don't go around questioning sources and getting mad at any one who posts the original source. Going back and forth arguing back about how you think article is wrong and Igla is great system will just end in flame war. Also you missed this, as i said lets wait for more sources to emerge. I am surprised Igla didn't do to well as well but I have no source that can refute the article.

Army sources say while all three systems have had performance or technical compliance niggles since field evaluations began in 2012, the Russian Igla-S had the most significant issues: firing was deemed not successful during field trials, target acquisition continuously failed, and, to top it all, the Igla-S didn’t have a state-of-the-art sight during trials.

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 21 Nov 2018 20:17

^^^ Just because there are no authentic sources does not mean you can rely on bogus paid sources, you can do that if you want (Its a free forum) . I am not trying to prove your article is wrong, just pointed holes in the source you pointed.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 21 Nov 2018 20:48

Krishna do you think the T-90 which India purchased was a good buy?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 21 Nov 2018 20:49

Not everything Russian that we have purchased was A class.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Nov 2018 20:51

Austin wrote:more details on the deal

India OKs $1.5 billion purchase of Russian missile system

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/2018/11 ... -purchase/

MOD has over ruled objection so seems like lifafa

In a Nov. 19 meeting with the three finalists — Rosoboronexport, MBDA of France and Saab of Sweden — officials from India declared the Russian firm’s Igla-S system the winner, a senior ministry of defence official told Defense News.

In May this year, Rosoboronexport was declared the lowest bidder among the three competitors. However, competitors in the program complained to the Indian army that the Russian firm was even allowed to be a finalist, as it had failed two initial technical tests; under procurement guidelines, failure in those tests should have knocked the Igla-S out of the running.

Those objections tied up the award of the program until this month, when the MoD overruled the complaints and stated that the Russian company was fully complaint with competitive rules and did not violate any procedures, according to the defence official.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Nov 2018 20:52

Vijainder K Thakur
‏

@vkthakur
Following Following @vkthakur
More
Russia's $1.47b bid for Igla-S MANPADS was around 40% of the L3 bid from SAAB and around 25% less than the fair cost estimated by the IA, forcing a stunned MoD to setup an empowered committed to evaluate the ridiculously priced Russian offer.

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 21 Nov 2018 21:09

Just got to make sure we are not handed lemon stuff or reconditioned old stock not in use by the Russian armed forces.No way the price can be this low.

John · Post by **John** » 21 Nov 2018 21:16

Karan M wrote:Krishna do you think the T-90 which India purchased was a good buy?

I would ignore his post otherwise this will devolve soon.

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 21 Nov 2018 22:48

Karan M wrote:Krishna do you think the T-90 which India purchased was a good buy?

Karan M "NO" in case of T90 tin cans who broke down in the tank competition and with it all the crap of it being better than Arjun. There can be arguments in other way as well do you believe S400, akula, T72 and su30mmki were bad buys ?

This is OT Karan however my point being using lifafa journo's like Shiv Aroor's whose credentials are well known to brf as to one who peddles certain country's wares and using that as an authentic source to point as something as bad purchase is amateurish.

What we do here at BRF is go to merits with proven sources to say A is good or not.

mody · Post by **mody** » 22 Nov 2018 14:46

One point ignored in all the clutter is that of the payment terms offered by the Russians. It seems to avoid the CAATSA net, we have agreed on rupee payment with the Russians. It seems to have been confirmed during Putin's last visit. No way the French or the Swedes can offer that. Out of the three systems, maybe the IGLA-S is technically the worst. But at the price we are getting it and also the rupee payment terms seems to have clinched the deal. NO hard currency to be given. Payment to be made in Indian rupees.

A Deshmukh · Post by **A Deshmukh** » 22 Nov 2018 16:43

mody wrote:One point ignored in all the clutter is that of the payment terms offered by the Russians. It seems to avoid the CAATSA net, we have agreed on rupee payment with the Russians. It seems to have been confirmed during Putin's last visit. No way the French or the Swedes can offer that. Out of the three systems, maybe the IGLA-S is technically the worst. But at the price we are getting it and also the rupee payment terms seems to have clinched the deal. NO hard currency to be given. Payment to be made in Indian rupees.

valid points, as long as the missile is able to bring down the enemy aircraft and uavs, under all situations.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Nov 2018 17:29

In our use case mainly drones or the odd helicopter

We have bigger sticks for the rest

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 22 Nov 2018 17:50

krishna_krishna wrote:
Karan M wrote:Krishna do you think the T-90 which India purchased was a good buy?
Karan M "NO" in case of T90 tin cans who broke down in the tank competition and with it all the crap of it being better than Arjun. There can be arguments in other way as well do you believe S400, akula, T72 and su30mmki were bad buys ?

This is OT Karan however my point being using lifafa journo's like Shiv Aroor's whose credentials are well known to brf as to one who peddles certain country's wares and using that as an authentic source to point as something as bad purchase is amateurish.

What we do here at BRF is go to merits with proven sources to say A is good or not.

Su-30 MKI - please search under my posts. It will have the data on how much fixing was required, and is still required to compensate for gaps which weren't fixed by the Russians. EW, RWR remain the biggest holdups as does BVR missile capability. But still a 80% working solution.
T-72, ok against regional competition at friendship prices, but we know what it's really worth in a worldwide match-up.
Akula - TINA, so we take what we get.
S-400, we'll only know once we induct.

My point is Aroor is a sensationalist & as you say, not cent-per-cent reliable. However, multiple reports have alluded to the Igla-S being sub-optimal, and when the Russians themselves are inducting the Verba, I do hope we didn't get ourselves a 1.5 Billion $ lemon, which we have to fix on our own money. New sights, new this, new that.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Nov 2018 20:00

Army To Test Fully Indian Man-Portable Anti Tank Missile Shortly

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/11 ... ortly.html

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 23 Nov 2018 01:31

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Nov 2018 10:57

Not sure what is the source of his information does any body even have any official information on trails of these system , His claims are like every all 3 system failed in trail , so backed up by what ?

Else any one can make a youtube video based on unverified personal opinion

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 23 Nov 2018 12:01

Karan M wrote: S-400, we'll only know once we induct.

My point is Aroor is a sensationalist & as you say, not cent-per-cent reliable. However, multiple reports have alluded to the Igla-S being sub-optimal, and when the Russians themselves are inducting the Verba, I do hope we didn't get ourselves a 1.5 Billion $ lemon, which we have to fix on our own money. New sights, new this, new that.

Karan, From what I have read IGLA S failed in hot weather trials. And I am sure that even verba would have failed it. The reason is probably that Hot weather is less of an issue for Russia. Their equipment is probably not ruggedized to same extent as Indians wrt degradation caused by Heat. This is where India will have to develop and improvise its own equipment.

Ofcourse if the testing regimen for Russian equipment was as tough as it is for DRDO and other equipment, not one russian platform (except AK rifles and Nuke submarines) would have been inducted in Indian military.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Nov 2018 12:23

if you want to believe those video all 3 missile have failed hot weather trials and only igla passed the cold trials , so lot of hearsy with no one having any information to facts but just opinions.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Nov 2018 12:25

Here is a sheet from Igla-S manufacturer on the system. its got dual mode passive seeker and ability to intercept a little more than Mach 1 flying target.

https://www.kbm.ru/en/production/pzrk/361.html

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Nov 2018 12:25

Why didnt US Stinger participated in this competition

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 23 Nov 2018 13:28

haridasji,

Will you please PM me your email address.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 23 Nov 2018 13:48

Our GSQRs are so stringent that everything will fail some requirement or other.

Though I think among IR guided manpads only Mistral has FPA and both Stinger & Igla S do not have FPA. Even our NAG and Nag mini has FPA.

We just need a Manpads version of Nag Mini but then imports are essential.

So I conclude by saying that All 3 competing manpads were good & anyone of them will be a fine addition, if we really have to import.

mody · Post by **mody** » 23 Nov 2018 14:26

Austin wrote:Why didnt US Stinger participated in this competition

Seems odd given that Raytheon had been peddling Javlin not too long ago. 5,000 thousand missiles is a fairly good order size.

John · Post by **John** » 23 Nov 2018 14:38

Austin wrote:Why didnt US Stinger participated in this competition

It was offered too late, at one point there was a plan to purchase Stingers directly as gov to gov deal and scrap VSHORAD but it was rejected. Some Stingers came as part of Apache deal.

A Deshmukh · Post by **A Deshmukh** » 23 Nov 2018 16:37

Austin wrote:Not sure what is the source of his information does any body even have any official information on trails of these system , His claims are like every all 3 system failed in trail , so backed up by what ?

There is enough information available in public and private, that all three systems have/had technical problems.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 23 Nov 2018 17:27

Stingers are also slightly outdated as it's upgrade programme was not cleared by Congress. If we had to prefer Russian, then why bother about tender, could have gone ahead with Govt to Govt deal with them for Verpa. Iglas S is much older design

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Nov 2018 17:34

A Deshmukh wrote:
Austin wrote:Not sure what is the source of his information does any body even have any official information on trails of these system , His claims are like every all 3 system failed in trail , so backed up by what ?
There is enough information available in public and private, that all three systems have/had technical problems.

All of them faithfully quote the other , there is zero official information I cane across the competition