Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6007
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 27 Sep 2017 22:31

manjgu wrote:the Meteor manufacturers claim that it can be guided by AWACS or self fighters ( 3rd party).


Do you have a link to their exact claim? It would be important to note, what type of threat, under what scenarios, how far and target RCS etc. Are we talking about a benign interception of a UAV that is not aware of a threat (or unable to do something about it) or a supersonic, 9G fighter with ECM?

As I had mentioned, with lower frequency sensors your kill box will be quite large hence you will need the seeker to compensate by being able to operate within that kill box (assuming that kinematically, you have no problems making the adjustments). This is a dynamic thing and not fixed as it depends upon a host of factors such as target performance (speed, altitude, heading etc) and target RCS. This is how the E2D/SM6 operates under NIFC-CA but this is with a missile seeker nearly twice as large and plenty of space and power for additional processing. Plus on the NIFCCA this capability is only claimed against cruise missiles and not maneuvering figther targets.

An L band or S band AWACS will not have the ability to discrimination from very long ranges like an FCR operating at X band can and for a 7 inch diameter weapon and its associated seeker you need to make sure the missile lands precisely at the right place at the right time so that your intercept is not wasted (on account of the inability of the seeker to find the target).
Last edited by brar_w on 27 Sep 2017 22:35, edited 1 time in total.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1455
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby manjgu » 27 Sep 2017 22:34

a) i am not falling for the brochures... i was just saying its a capability that has been advertised..anybody going in for it will surely test this advertised capability. Similar capability has been advertised for chinese PL 12 i believe. b) I believe if a plane can be guided to an enemy a/c via an AWACS , i see no reason why a missile cant be similarly guided. The AWACS surely gives v precise numerical coordinates/ instructions to a pilot to position the plane wrt to a enemy a/c. the same numerical coordinates/instructions can be fed into a missile as well.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6007
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 27 Sep 2017 22:35

.anybody going in for it will surely test this advertised capability.


How?

The AWACS surely gives v precise numerical coordinates/ instructions to a pilot to position the plane wrt to a enemy a/c. the same numerical coordinates/instructions can be fed into a missile as well.


Discrimination is the key here my friend. Surveillance radars are not as precise as fire-control radars, hence the distinction. The AWACS sensor (modern ones anyway) are designed around efficient long range surveillance of a large amount of air-space and not to provide, precise, medium range fire-control quality tracks which a fire control radar is supposed to. In addition to data link latency, the data going into the missile needs to be of a certain quality that ensures that when it turns its seeker on it finds a target. As mentioned using the kill box analogy, the smaller the missile application the smaller that kill box needs to be.
Last edited by brar_w on 27 Sep 2017 22:38, edited 1 time in total.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1455
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby manjgu » 27 Sep 2017 22:37

he Meteor will be able to get those crucial mid-course guidance updates not just from the jet that fired it, but from “third party” sources as well. These can include other fighters, airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, and land and sea-based radar and electronic surveillance systems that provide their own "sensor pictures" to the missile-firing aircraft via data-link. With many assets contributing to a common tactical network “picture” via common data-link waveform and language it provides information that anyone, including the Meteor-armed fighter and the Meteor itself, can exploit.

In fact, the launching jet’s pilot may never have to use his own radar at all to engage a target. Instead he simply assigns the missile a target on his situational display. The missile then gets continuous updates from third party sources—rather than the fighter that fired it—right up to its final attack sequence.

Even if the data-link does not provide high-fidelity “target tracks” that does not mean they are not engagement quality as the missile only has to have the target within its own radar’s cone of detection in order to initiate the terminal attack phase of its flight. This means getting the Meteor close to the target is good enough.


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6007
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 27 Sep 2017 22:40

manjgu wrote:he Meteor will be able to get those crucial mid-course guidance updates not just from the jet that fired it, but from “third party” sources as well. These can include other fighters, airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, and land and sea-based radar and electronic surveillance systems that provide their own "sensor pictures" to the missile-firing aircraft via data-link. With many assets contributing to a common tactical network “picture” via common data-link waveform and language it provides information that anyone, including the Meteor-armed fighter and the Meteor itself, can exploit.

In fact, the launching jet’s pilot may never have to use his own radar at all to engage a target. Instead he simply assigns the missile a target on his situational display. The missile then gets continuous updates from third party sources—rather than the fighter that fired it—right up to its final attack sequence.

Even if the data-link does not provide high-fidelity “target tracks” that does not mean they are not engagement quality as the missile only has to have the target within its own radar’s cone of detection in order to initiate the terminal attack phase of its flight. This means getting the Meteor close to the target is good enough.


That comes from an aggregator blog and an author whose primary business is selling fast food. Do you have something official?


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6007
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 27 Sep 2017 22:43

Relevant portion :

A two-way datalink enables the launch aircraft to provide mid-course target updates or retargeting if required, including data from off-board third parties.


That is not inconsistent with how other modern BVRAAMS operate. That is not under dispute here. Of course the meteor can receive fire control level tracking data from its launch aircraft or another aircraft that has obtained data from a network. Again, that is fundamentally different from launching a missile, leaving and letting an AWACS 100s of kms away guide it to a kill box. In addition to consistency in the latency of your comms nodes, interceptors of all type require a qualitative threshold of the track data for that data to be tactically useful. It is for this reason that AAMs are guided by X-band radars. Now if you could increase the aperture of the missile thereby allowing more powerful seekers and processing you can move to lower frequency trades in system radars so that you have lower cost, and more efficient sensors (high frequency sensors can get very expensive)..This is employed in SAM systems where S band and at times even lower frequency radars can cue intercepts against appropriate targets. When this is not available, most lower frequency surveillance systems cue other higher frequency systems that then (using data from both onboard and offboard sensors) provide the data to the weapon to prosecute the intercept.
Last edited by brar_w on 27 Sep 2017 22:49, edited 2 times in total.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 913
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Gyan » 27 Sep 2017 22:45

Awacs will not only have to track the target but also know where is the missile fired from the fighter aircraft in 3D space then communicate with it. A non trivial task.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1455
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby manjgu » 27 Sep 2017 22:49

gyan...the idea of 2 way data link is that the missile announces its position, speed, direction etc to anyone on the n/w.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6007
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 27 Sep 2017 22:51

gyan...the idea of 2 way data link is that the missile announces its position, speed, direction etc to anyone on the n/w.


The main reason for including 2 way data links is to make sure that the aircraft and missile can collaboratively prosecute the target (think endgame) terminally, this ensures that the missile has found the right target. It is something that helps overcome ECM advances where the employer of the missile knows that what the missile is going after is indeed the target.. It also helps in re-targeting since it provides valuable information to the controlling aircraft on the kinematic and sensor state of the missile so that the pilot can use it to target something else.

Edit - collaboratively, as in the launch aircraft is aware of the data that the missile seeker is generating in the end game. Flight trajectory (and measuring how close the missile is to it) and end game seeker performance were the two main drivers on the Aim-120D and Meteor for the two-way data link, and drivers for incorporating GPS on the AMRAAM P3I/Aim120D. Keep in mind that besides its propulsion, the meteor uses evolved systems and sub-systems from established european programs. The seeker is an evolution of the one used by Mica and the other systems are also borrowed across the european missile line (which is a good thing since they took so long to field it had they gone in with a completely new system it would have likely been chopped).
Last edited by brar_w on 27 Sep 2017 23:23, edited 6 times in total.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1455
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby manjgu » 27 Sep 2017 22:52

brar_w..a) this is something up your alley... u should investigate and let all of us know about this capability. b) this capability was intially told to me by a frnd who works in Cassidian ( germany). I will try to ping him and get more gyan !!

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6007
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 27 Sep 2017 22:57

I don't think there is much need to investigate. Follow NATO AWACS upgrades...where are the data links that will feed the meteor? Have you heard of any test that has been conducted using this? There is really no official claim of this being the case that I have ever come across for either the Meteor, or the Aim-120D. Talking to reps with the missile and AEW system that actually makes this claim, and have demonstrated it in testing - one gets a clear impression that it is on account of the significantly improved seeker and processing performance (on account a missile many times the size of a typical BVRAAM) and the fact that the intended target is not smart (its a cruise missile). Even then privately, they will not claim comparable PK using this approach.Notice what was demonstrated on JLENS? (where some of the intercepts would have been done by SLAMRAAM). The VHF AESA cued the X-Band PESA - For good reason!

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 913
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Gyan » 27 Sep 2017 23:41

When an aircraft fires a missile then both the missile and aircraft know each other's general position & encryption to communicate. When awacs pop in, from a new unknown position, how to start communicating? And how accurate is awacs to track the smallish missile from long way off?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6007
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 28 Sep 2017 00:27

Precisely gyan..On the E-2D and SM6 NIFCCA concept, the AEW actually communicates track information to the SPY-1 radar which then uses that composite track to update the missile. But there, the missile is significantly larger with a much larger seeker and room for processing.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4128
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Rakesh » 28 Sep 2017 06:14

chola wrote:I’m pretty sure we tested an indigenous seeker on the Astra earlier this summer.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/912028597212155904

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1738
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chola » 28 Sep 2017 14:03

Rakesh wrote:
chola wrote:I’m pretty sure we tested an indigenous seeker on the Astra earlier this summer.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/912028597212155904



Yup, I knew we had a desi seeker on the Astra! Doesn’t have to be 100% local or even work 100%. As long as we have a project in place that we can experiment with and improved.

The R-77 seeker issue is not minor. It has put our current BVR capability in both air force and navy in doubt. Need Astra to be different.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby srin » 29 Sep 2017 01:15

vasu raya wrote:Indian Army might get Pinaka rockets to counter Pakistan's mini-nuclear weapons

"The Pakistanis have been flaunting their tactical nukes which they have developed with the help of the Chinese. At present, we don't have these weapons in our arsenal but if asked by the government, we have the option of developing the Pinaka guided rockets for delivering nuclear warheads at small ranges," government sources told Mail Today.


That's a lame statement if it were true. My response would be: "nuke is a nuke. Their TNW (tactical nuclear weapon) would be countered with our TNW (thermo nuclear weapon). And it is silly of terroristan to threaten to nuke its own territory (because with cold start we'll be very quickly advancing into their territory) and its own civilians. And we have NBC-protected mechanised and armoured forces. And equip our forces with mobile SAMs to shoot down SRBMs"

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1467
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby vasu raya » 29 Sep 2017 01:46

^^^
The current deterrence posture stays as is, maybe its a case of exploration, in news was NK's delivery systems blowing up close to their launch pads, that's preempting with sabotage

however here we don't want any nuclear material recovered from the rocket wreckage unless it can be used to prove the Chinese lineage


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 29 Sep 2017 10:30

Looks like we will have a MTCR like regime for Hypersonic Missile

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2718
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby JayS » 29 Sep 2017 11:00

^^ Sjha has been talking about it for a while now. Even if there is MTCR like regime we should make sure we are on the other side of the fence this time. But for we need some cards and some chips in hand to be able to get a seat on the table. We need some serious investment in hypersonics and fast.

A Deshmukh
BRFite
Posts: 206
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:24

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby A Deshmukh » 29 Sep 2017 12:13

JayS wrote:^^ Sjha has been talking about it for a while now. Even if there is MTCR like regime we should make sure we are on the other side of the fence this time. But for we need some cards and some chips in hand to be able to get a seat on the table. We need some serious investment in hypersonics and fast.

agree +1
We should declare an indigenous hypersonic missile tested successfully (even when not actually tested) and gain entry into any such MCTR-like hypersonic club.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby srin » 29 Sep 2017 12:22

^^ exactly. That's why we should be less worried about hypersonic and more worried about ASAT. That's where the NPT/CTBT style have/have-nots is going to happen next.

sas
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 08 Dec 2016 11:53

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby sas » 29 Sep 2017 21:27

Looks like MTCR like regime for HGV and HCM is in formulation.

Link from AVIATION WEEK article
http://aviationweek.com/defense/can-spread-hypersonics-be-slowed

Can Spread Of Hypersonics Be Slowed?
Jen DiMascio | Aviation Week & Space Technology Sep 29, 2017

Ripe for Restriction

One day after the head of aeronautics at Lockheed Martin declared “the United States is on the verge of a hypersonics revolution,” the nonpartisan Rand Corp. called on China, Russia and the U.S. to reach an agreement that could stop the spread of weapons that travel at speeds of Mach 5 and beyond.

All three countries are working with other nations on hypersonic weapons technologies. Russia is helping India and France. China is assisting Pakistan. The U.S. is aiding Australia, and the European Union and Japan are teaming on a project in hopes of creating a commercial airliner.

The problem is that hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs) and cruise missiles (HCMs) are so fast, and their trajectories so difficult to predict, that they are hard to defend against, according to a report by Rand, funded by the Carnegie Corp. Even lasers would be challenged to penetrate the weapons, which must be hardened against high temperatures just to withstand the heat generated by their speed. If the technology spreads too far, it could threaten regional stability, the report notes.

Richard Speier, one of the study’s authors, helped design, negotiate and implement the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). The study recommends a complete restriction on the export of HGVs and HCMs as well as warheads for either. It would impose case-by-case export reviews on underlying technologies. To implement the controls, the report recommends appealing to Russia, China and the U.S. to reach an agreement. Or hypersonic weapons could be added to the list of MTCR-restricted weapons. Either way, imposing controls is likely to be a heavy lift.

The MTCR was established to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction and so guards against missiles that can deliver weapons of 500 kg (1,100 lb.) or more. But hypersonic weapons might not carry any explosives at all, relying on their high speed to inflict significant damage. “Whatever approach is to be taken, it is likely that the final policy would, like the MTCR, strongly hinder the export of some items and allow the export of others,” the report says. Speier and other authors warn the time for intervention is limited. Asked how long, Speier says, “A few years, but not many.”


It's time to go full steam on HSTDV.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 551
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby nam » 29 Sep 2017 21:46

Full steam and join the regime along with US, Russia & China. We don't want Pakis getting the tech...

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48137
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 29 Sep 2017 23:58

I downloaded the RAND report. Its by Richard Speir the MTCR guy. So another new four letter treaty in works.

Meanwhile US goes full on developing this technology as it will help dominate next two decades China and Russia.
So this stuff not happening.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3870
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Manish_Sharma » 30 Sep 2017 02:51

Ramana ji

The usa Senate by declaring economic war on Russia has already pushed Putin and Russia in a corner. Why would Putin agree to their proposal at all? He can just tell them to go fly a kite, while imparting it even to NoKo.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Gerard » 30 Sep 2017 06:23

ramana wrote:I downloaded the RAND report. Its by Richard Speir the MTCR guy. So another new four letter treaty in works.


Grand Ayatollah Speir is still around. And working on a new Fatwa. India needs to be inside this new club from the inception.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48137
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 30 Sep 2017 06:34

Gerard, The things being considered are like the Shourya missile.
Not the Brahmos type stuff unless we keep saying it is part of that regime.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60481
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 30 Sep 2017 09:31

we need to get our foot into ASAT club by using a Agni1 or Shourya with a KV to take out of old INSAT and a old IRS.

cheen did the same thing a few years ago

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3314
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby hnair » 30 Sep 2017 10:29

From the article:

1) " China is assisting Pakistan. " China itself seems to be early stage testing of experimental articles, wonder if there are any links of this hyper programme with pak? Or is this the usual hot air of these "experts"?

2) India and australia are two countries that had open and independent hyper sonic programs outside the military, either in academia or civilian space agency. Yet the article claims Russia is "helping" India and US is "aiding" Australia :lol:

Conclusions:
1) To get into these silly ayatollah lists of "cool countries", one needs to spread dangerous tech around or one needs to be an irresponsible, loud talker like China.
2) if you mind your own business like India, you are either being helped or is a "dangerous proliferator"

Nothing has changed since the MTCR idiocy, that gave the world the Kim family and the xerox khan walmart

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Gerard » 30 Sep 2017 16:39

Demonstrated capability with potential to proliferate means you don't get excluded

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1467
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby vasu raya » 30 Sep 2017 18:56

Good development, if its not China atleast membership of these private clubs is a motivator and how do they plan to bypass the environment department that is concerned about space debris?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19927
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 30 Sep 2017 20:41

Indian Army wants more tests before ordering homemade anti-tank missile

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/0 ... k-missile/

samirdiw
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 91
Joined: 18 Jul 2017 22:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby samirdiw » 01 Oct 2017 05:31

Austin wrote:Indian Army wants more tests before ordering homemade anti-tank missile

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/0 ... k-missile/


The thermal sensors of the Nag missile are procured from Rafael of Israel and Thales of France, which is one reason for the missile’s high cost.

The second Army official added that the thermal sensors developed by the state-owned Defence Research and Development Organization are still not “up to the requirement.”


Doesn't the DRDO publish a roadmap for the missile with different capabilities for different versions that the army is already aware of? If it doesn't then no wonder the army is paranoid about "up to the requirement" worrying that it may have to live with "sub-standard" stuff. DRDO should come into a written agreement at the beginning of the project itself showing the capabilities of the different versions and the numbers that Army has to buy in consultation with the ministry before embarking on any project.

It is illogical for the army to think that the first version of any stuff that is built in-house will be on par with videsh stuff and at the same time it is on DRDO to show the product roadmap/future improvements. The army cant keep holding on to the future but buy reasonable orders of each block if things have to keep moving. The current method of success or bust is clearly sub par and has to change.

Why do they need to test for another year? Can't they just induct for one regiment and then over the course of the year provide feedback which can be incorporated into the next block. Army has to be given clear direction that desi stuff is not an option but a mandate. This videshi option is actually negatively impacting normal indigenous development that would otherwise take place.

sas
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 08 Dec 2016 11:53

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby sas » 01 Oct 2017 20:28

samirdiw wrote:
Austin wrote:Indian Army wants more tests before ordering homemade anti-tank missile

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/0 ... k-missile/

samirdiw wrote:
Austin wrote:Indian Army wants more tests before ordering homemade anti-tank missile

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/0 ... k-missile/


The thermal sensors of the Nag missile are procured from Rafael of Israel and Thales of France, which is one reason for the missile’s high cost.

The second Army official added that the thermal sensors developed by the state-owned Defence Research and Development Organization are still not “up to the requirement.”


https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/09/29/indian-army-wants-more-tests-before-ordering-homemade-anti-tank-missile/

Quote from above article link

Indian scientists claim they have completed development trials of the homemade anti-tank guided missile known as Nag, but the Army, which will use the munition, says more trials are needed before a formal limited production order is given.

“The developmental trials of Nag ATGM carried out earlier this month have only proven partial success, and many more user trials will be needed,” an Indian Army official said.

“The entire exercise of hot- and cold-region trials of the Nag missile will take more than one year to complete, after which the missile could be ready for production.”

The Army also flagged the high cost of the Nag missile. The cost of the Nag ATGM is about half a million dollars, almost double the price of the Israeli Spike or American Javelin missile, according to a second Army official.

The thermal sensors of the Nag missile are procured from Rafael of Israel and Thales of France, which is one reason for the missile’s high cost.

The second Army official added that the thermal sensors developed by the state- owned Defence Research and Development Organization are still not “up to the requirement.”


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What is it now ? Why are they talking about the cost of imported IIR ?

Recently concluded developmental trials happened with indigenous MWIR.

Are they going to say that Prospina's indigenous 3-8 micron wavelength MWIR cannot be operated at sub-zero temperatures in north-eastern front ?

Also 0.5 mil usd, unit cost for Prospina ? :rotfl: :rotfl:

Not even LSP of Prospina has started, yet they are quoting a unit cost of usd 0.5 million.

Why are they comparing the cost of Prospina with MAPATGM like Javelin and Spike ? shouldn't they compare it with TRIGAT-LR ?

It's just nitpicking from IA or it's convoluted way of showing recent successful trials of Prospina in poor light by the above mentioned article and it's contributor.
Last edited by sas on 01 Oct 2017 23:13, edited 1 time in total.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5076
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Viv S » 01 Oct 2017 21:18

The Army also flagged the high cost of the Nag missile. The cost of the Nag ATGM is about half a million dollars, almost double the price of the Israeli Spike or American Javelin missile, according to a second Army official.

Sounds like BS. The TOW-2, which is the actual analogue to the Nag is priced at about $60-70K (Spike/Javelin aren't that much higher either). There's no way the Nag goes for $500K per missile.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby tsarkar » 02 Oct 2017 07:49

Austin wrote:https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/09/29/indian-army-wants-more-tests-before-ordering-homemade-anti-tank-missile/


Ah ha...Contorted facts from Vivek Raghuvanshi and his unnamed sources to suit his lifafa journalism. The only good news that he couldn't suppress is -

The Army has projected an immediate requirement of 2,000 Nag ATGMs in the short term and 8,000 in the long term. However, the service will place an order for only 500 Nag ATGMs after one year, and the production order will be made in phases.


The "more tests" are exploitation trials to operationalise the system, that we're seeing for Dhanush & M777

The Army also flagged the high cost of the Nag missile. The cost of the Nag ATGM is about half a million dollars, almost double the price of the Israeli Spike or American Javelin missile, according to a second Army official.

This joker is comparing the price of a vehicle mounted Nag system with Commander & Gunner sights and stabilised launchers with tripod mounted Spike with less capable sights. The vehicle mounted Spike will be equally expensive.

Lifafa job for the Israelis whose Spike deal is threatened by Nag

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 990
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Oct 2017 08:46

Viv S wrote:
The Army also flagged the high cost of the Nag missile. The cost of the Nag ATGM is about half a million dollars, almost double the price of the Israeli Spike or American Javelin missile, according to a second Army official.

Sounds like BS. The TOW-2, which is the actual analogue to the Nag is priced at about $60-70K (Spike/Javelin aren't that much higher either). There's no way the Nag goes for $500K per missile.


PARS 3 and spike are the analogues of Nag. Tow is an older design.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashok Sarraff, Karthik S, Vivek K and 61 guests