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.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2960
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Cain Marko » 15 Apr 2018 02:24

Bart S wrote:[

He made a specific datapoint regarding the super-expensive weapon system that we are paying through our teeth for, not having shot down a single cruise missile. Do you have any counters to that point instead of bringing in the sortie generation, yemen and protecting Asad (is that our use-case?). This is the Indian Missiles thread after all and we are specifically discussing the effectiveness of the S400 system in the last few posts.

Uhh do we know how many phyters Rafale has shot down or shornet for that matter? We still be buying no? You think Indian armed forces are stupid to buy something without evaluating the same?

It is indeed the Indian missiles thread and note that it is India that is showing interest in the missile system. Both parrikar/ns and the iaf are keen on the system ...

The Indian Air Force (IAF) recently told the parliamentary panel on defence that the procurement of the S-400 air defence systems developed by Russia is imperative to tackle possible threats from China and Pakistan. The parliamentary panel, on its part, has recommended that funds for this be made available during the year as per the IAF demand.

John
BRFite
Posts: 1652
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby John » 15 Apr 2018 04:27

Cain Marko wrote:How do you know what parts of the s400 are being considered?

Because it has been reported that currently only 5 systems are being considering for air defense and that ABM role will still filled by domestic systems. 5 systems is also hardly enough to provide ABM.

Cain Marko wrote:As far as Russian systems being unreliable and performance in Syria being bad is concerned, it ensured that Assad was not toppled.

OT but no one in West IMO wants Assad gone but they want to prolong the conflict so its Daesh occupied and Iran/Russia will be tying up the resources there.

Cain Marko wrote:Making blanket statements such as these makes little sense, if their performance was so poor, countries would not be looking to buy the s400. We are even seeing modded r27s being used to hit top of the line fighters such as the teens in yemen

I am just pointing out the hype should be taken with grain of salt especially the information from unconfirmed sources like ability to detect stealth, even if Russians S-400 had chosen to keep it offline on purpose it is bad PR for the system. Even if MOD had shown interest S-400 i am pretty sure DDM will have field day with this and which in turn will put S-400 deal which is already in jeopardy even more unlikely.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2960
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Cain Marko » 15 Apr 2018 05:01

John wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:How do you know what parts of the s400 are being considered?

Because it has been reported that currently only 5 systems are being considering for air defense and that ABM role will still filled by domestic systems. 5 systems is also hardly enough to provide ABM.

Cain Marko wrote:As far as Russian systems being unreliable and performance in Syria being bad is concerned, it ensured that Assad was not toppled.

OT but no one in West IMO wants Assad gone but they want to prolong the conflict so its Daesh occupied and Iran/Russia will be tying up the resources there.

Cain Marko wrote:Making blanket statements such as these makes little sense, if their performance was so poor, countries would not be looking to buy the s400. We are even seeing modded r27s being used to hit top of the line fighters such as the teens in yemen

I am just pointing out the hype should be taken with grain of salt especially the information from unconfirmed sources like ability to detect stealth, even if Russians S-400 had chosen to keep it offline on purpose it is bad PR for the system. Even if MOD had shown interest S-400 i am pretty sure DDM will have field day with this and which in turn will put S-400 deal which is already in jeopardy even more unlikely.


1.ABM and short to medium range SAM coverage is already taken care of through aad, pad, b8 and Akash, Spyder. The USP of the s400 is it's ultra long ranged sams, add to that the nebo system and the ADS is almost impregnable.

2. None in the West want Assad to be gone? You've got to be kidding John. How come same logic didn't work for Saddam or Gaddafi? If they just want prolong the war, why did they get rid of those two?

3. Hype, sure I understand. But I'd expect the professionals in the iaf to see through it. Again note that it is the iaf that has put it forward as a very high priority. Assuredly they have no problems in dissing Russian stuff as we have all seen in the case of the mig 35 and even the pakfa. After all, the system could always be tested before buying it, right? Also, why would other countries buy it, especially China with it's homegrown HQ series already so mature?

Not too expensive considering the capability jump imvho.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Thakur_B » 15 Apr 2018 08:59

Indranil wrote:Fascinating thread. Please keep educating us on this topic.

By the way, on Tratec’s website there is a mention of a 70 tin missile carrier( with no picture). So, an yet to be disclosed 70 ton missile. The plot thickens.


Image

x-posting from vehicles thread. Something is happening.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Thakur_B » 15 Apr 2018 09:46

Image
Image
Image

NGARM

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Thakur_B » 15 Apr 2018 09:55

Thakur_B wrote:Vem technologies man portable atgm.
Image


Image
Image

AsiBal MPATGM. Looks like this is the man portable nag.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 61954
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 15 Apr 2018 10:09

being 20m it cannot be a sea launched missile. the outer diameter is huge 3.2m ... the fattest land based ICBMs out there barely cross the 2m mark barring the sarmat/ss18 behemoths. so there must be a inner liner or padded tube planned.

or maybe for once we will not follow the herd but come up with our own template. ..... it matches the size of the latest land ICBMs like DF41 and RS26 Rubezh.

MIRV is 101% certain - 6-10 given its size and thrust.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Thakur_B » 15 Apr 2018 13:01

Image

Love the final Namica avatar.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9948
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby pankajs » 15 Apr 2018 14:00

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/985413886915555328
Livefist Verified account @livefist

India’s StandOff Anti-Tank Missile (SANT) made an appearance at #DefExpo18. A 12-km range version of the HELINA air to surface munition, the weapon is undergoing carriage trials on IAF Mi-35s. First launch likely next year. For the Rudra/LCH/Rustom-II UAS.

Image

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7619
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Pratyush » 15 Apr 2018 16:03

Can SANT be integrated with ah 64?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20744
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 15 Apr 2018 17:08

Thakur_B wrote:
Indranil wrote:Fascinating thread. Please keep educating us on this topic.

By the way, on Tratec’s website there is a mention of a 70 tin missile carrier( with no picture). So, an yet to be disclosed 70 ton missile. The plot thickens.


Image

x-posting from vehicles thread. Something is happening.


MIRV'd capabale ICBM Agni-6 all up weight of more than 60 T

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 034_1.html

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 61954
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 15 Apr 2018 18:31

they will keep the stated range to 5000km by increasing the payload calculation to 15 tons probably.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20744
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 15 Apr 2018 21:03

Singha wrote:they will keep the stated range to 5000km by increasing the payload calculation to 15 tons probably.


You can always keep the range to 5000 km by shaping the trajectory and Agni-6 payload wont exceed 3 - 3.5 T for a full ICBM range of 11,000 km

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 61954
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 15 Apr 2018 22:13

our iCBMs can fly to the moon and back but will keep within the dharmic limit of 5000km.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3964
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karthik S » 15 Apr 2018 22:37

Singha wrote:our iCBMs can fly to the moon and back but will keep within the dharmic limit of 5000km.


:rotfl:

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3964
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karthik S » 15 Apr 2018 22:45

Thakur_B wrote:
Indranil wrote:Fascinating thread. Please keep educating us on this topic.

By the way, on Tratec’s website there is a mention of a 70 tin missile carrier( with no picture). So, an yet to be disclosed 70 ton missile. The plot thickens.


Image

x-posting from vehicles thread. Something is happening.


Gurus, the canister dimensions looks big, so would be for accommodating missile with size comparable to dimensions of Topol M and Minuteman. Especially at 3.2 m, looks like a fat missile.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49307
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 16 Apr 2018 04:11

Could be a missile loading tube for transporting to it's deployment destination.

sahay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 11 Apr 2017 19:45

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby sahay » 16 Apr 2018 04:33

A couple of other photos from Prasun that stood out to me:

Image

Image

Looks like Kalyani Group has entered into seeker manufacturing/development too.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 508
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramdas » 16 Apr 2018 05:29

@Indranil: Does the 70 ton payload of the rotation cum resting fixture mean payload contained inside the canister or payload including the mass of the canister ? If the second option is correct, this may just be for the A-5 canister (or for a marginally heavier A-5 variant that is approx. 55 tons or so). If the former is true, that is fantastic. Hope GoI bulldozes ahead with such programs.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Haridas » 16 Apr 2018 08:56

^^^^ Anybody still doubting Indian MIRV program ?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4069
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby srai » 16 Apr 2018 09:03

Pratyush wrote:Can SANT be integrated with ah 64?

Anything is possible but first the US gov will have to approve and then Boeing would need to be paid for the integration. There would be other restrictions (both from the Indians and Americans) on what and how integration could be done.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20744
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 16 Apr 2018 10:31

Indiginous Missile Seeker for Brahmos

Image
Image
Last edited by Austin on 16 Apr 2018 10:35, edited 1 time in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20744
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 16 Apr 2018 10:34

High Performance X Band Imaging Seeker means Brahmos now has the ability to image the target before it hits should be great for hitting specific land targets among the many due to its ability to have SAR image of the target in its memory due to new seeker

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3964
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karthik S » 16 Apr 2018 17:35

From SJha's handle:

Image

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2119
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby abhik » 16 Apr 2018 18:08

What are those Kalyani seekers for?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 22431
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby SSridhar » 16 Apr 2018 18:51

The dimensions (20m, 3.2m, 70t) all pinpoint MIRVd Agni-VI. Very obvious.

sahay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 11 Apr 2017 19:45

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby sahay » 16 Apr 2018 19:20

abhik wrote:What are those Kalyani seekers for?


The diameter looks pretty thin. If I have to take a guess, AAM or SAM.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Haridas » 16 Apr 2018 20:01

Austin wrote:High Performance X Band Imaging Seeker means Brahmos now has the ability to image the target before it hits should be great for hitting specific land targets among the many due to its ability to have SAR image of the target in its memory due to new seeker


The missile will have to move sideways [i.e not headon) to get target image using SAR and then change course to head on. Stealth & surprise will be somewhat compromised. Also recall that for a slender craft moving at Mach 3 making a 30 to 50 degree turn will be slow.

Mono pulse imaging is one of the claimed feature of the radar, allowing head on engagement.
Last edited by Haridas on 16 Apr 2018 20:08, edited 1 time in total.

John
BRFite
Posts: 1652
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby John » 16 Apr 2018 20:01

Cain Marko wrote:1.ABM and short to medium range SAM coverage is already taken care of through aad, pad, b8 and Akash, Spyder. The USP of the s400 is it's ultra long ranged sams, add to that the nebo system and the ADS is almost impregnable.


S-400 40N6 is for high value targets like AWACS, current order is for around 5 System with around 400 missiles perhaps there may be few 40N6 ordered but i doubt it will be in large numbers due to cost and limited usage.

No system is impregnable as we saw with recent strike 1 S-400 system couldn't defend 40k Sq miles (if you look just amount of area controlled by Assad it is probably not even 10k) it looks they were activated to shoot down cruise missiles. I find it hard to believe 5 systems can cover 1.0 million+ Sq miles. What this illustrates is need for quantity as well and S-400 high price means only few systems can be purchased and it will also affect the number of other systems inducted. If Russia needs deal done need to go back and offer price similar to what was offered for China which will bring #s to 10-12 systems.

Cain Marko wrote:None in the West want Assad to be gone? You've got to be kidding John. How come same logic didn't work for Saddam or Gaddafi? If they just want prolong the war, why did they get rid of those two?

OT again but your confusing the old Obama/Clinton with current admin, no one currently even France or UK want Assad technically gone (even Macron mentioned how he got Trump to focus only Chemical plants).

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1173
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Kakarat » 16 Apr 2018 20:07

sahay wrote:
abhik wrote:What are those Kalyani seekers for?


The diameter looks pretty thin. If I have to take a guess, AAM or SAM.


Most of the electronic items displayed by kalyani are from Israel, they had also displayed Spice series of guided bombs

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3964
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karthik S » 16 Apr 2018 20:10

John wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:1.ABM and short to medium range SAM coverage is already taken care of through aad, pad, b8 and Akash, Spyder. The USP of the s400 is it's ultra long ranged sams, add to that the nebo system and the ADS is almost impregnable.


S-400 40N6 is for high value targets like AWACS, current order is for around 5 System with around 400 missiles perhaps there may be few 40N6 ordered but i doubt it will be in large numbers due to cost and limited usage.

No system is impregnable as we saw with recent strike 1 S-400 system couldn't defend 40k Sq miles (if you look just amount of area controlled by Assad it is probably not even 10k) it looks they were activated to shoot down cruise missiles. I find it hard to believe 5 systems can cover 1.0 million+ Sq miles. What this illustrates is need for quantity as well and S-400 high price means only few systems can be purchased and it will also affect the number of other systems inducted. If Russia needs deal done need to go back and offer price similar to what was offered for China which will bring #s to 10-12 systems.

Cain Marko wrote:None in the West want Assad to be gone? You've got to be kidding John. How come same logic didn't work for Saddam or Gaddafi? If they just want prolong the war, why did they get rid of those two?

OT again but your confusing the old Obama/Clinton with current admin, no one currently even France or UK want Assad technically gone (even Macron mentioned how he got Trump to focus only Chemical plants).


John sir, I'd like it think the other way around. We've got good SAM systems till 150 KM (Barak -8 ER). I highly doubt if we'd get more of missiles with similar ranges for S 400 system. The neighbor to the north needs plenty of AWACS and refueling takers just to cross Tibet with meaningful load. I'd think we'd want to take those out at as far a distance as possible.

John
BRFite
Posts: 1652
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby John » 16 Apr 2018 20:13

^ If you just need long range SAM for dealing with AWACS, Tankers etc. Probably cheaper to use XRSAM for that than complete system like S-400 for 6 billion+, and also i am not sure reliable 40N6 which has not yet entered service. In other hand 48N6E i believe is around 200-250 km. Resident russian experts can correct me :D .

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15077
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karan M » 16 Apr 2018 21:34

Kakarat wrote:
sahay wrote:
The diameter looks pretty thin. If I have to take a guess, AAM or SAM.


Most of the electronic items displayed by kalyani are from Israel, they had also displayed Spice series of guided bombs


Yes seem like rebadged Israeli stuff from Rafael.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6742
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Prasad » 16 Apr 2018 22:21

Their precision guided shells were Israeli. I wondered if the two examples on display were them showing interest in developing a shell like the Excalibur but :( when I saw the tv screen between them running an IAI/IWI (Forgotwhich) video showcasing them.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Haridas » 16 Apr 2018 22:43

sahay wrote:
abhik wrote:What are those Kalyani seekers for?


The diameter looks pretty thin. If I have to take a guess, AAM or SAM.

Millimeter wave based seeker. Most likely in 20 GHz band (assuming my guess on relative size of antenna element & spacing is reasonable). So will be used for terminal engagement for BVR missile.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1173
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Kakarat » 16 Apr 2018 23:46

Prasad wrote:Their precision guided shells were Israeli. I wondered if the two examples on display were them showing interest in developing a shell like the Excalibur but :( when I saw the tv screen between them running an IAI/IWI (Forgotwhich) video showcasing them.


The brochure for both guided shell and rocket displayed at kalyani stall were Israeli IAI there was no mentioning of kalyani in them

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49307
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 17 Apr 2018 02:30

Kakarat wrote:
Prasad wrote:Their precision guided shells were Israeli. I wondered if the two examples on display were them showing interest in developing a shell like the Excalibur but :( when I saw the tv screen between them running an IAI/IWI (Forgotwhich) video showcasing them.


The brochure for both guided shell and rocket displayed at kalyani stall were Israeli IAI there was no mentioning of kalyani in them

Now we understand the angst of the DRDO gent about how private industry is thinking, #MII is screwdrivergiri of imported components.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4069
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby srai » 17 Apr 2018 03:55

John wrote:^ If you just need long range SAM for dealing with AWACS, Tankers etc. Probably cheaper to use XRSAM for that than complete system like S-400 for 6 billion+, and also i am not sure reliable 40N6 which has not yet entered service. In other hand 48N6E i believe is around 200-250 km. Resident russian experts can correct me :D .

5 S-400 would mostly be for protecting few areas like the capital area and strategic command/nodes. There was a quote from an armed force’s officer long time ago regarding S-300 and he said 5 S-300 systems were required just to cover Delhi region.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6458
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 17 Apr 2018 07:58

Thakur_B wrote:
Indranil wrote:Fascinating thread. Please keep educating us on this topic.

By the way, on Tratec’s website there is a mention of a 70 tin missile carrier( with no picture). So, an yet to be disclosed 70 ton missile. The plot thickens.


Image

x-posting from vehicles thread. Something is happening.


ramdas wrote:@Indranil: Does the 70 ton payload of the rotation cum resting fixture mean payload contained inside the canister or payload including the mass of the canister ? If the second option is correct, this may just be for the A-5 canister (or for a marginally heavier A-5 variant that is approx. 55 tons or so). If the former is true, that is fantastic. Hope GoI bulldozes ahead with such programs.


Sir,

I don’t know and am just guesstimating. This poster confuses me more. Here are something’s that we can surmise though:

1. Although a 3.2 mtr diameter ICBM is one of the easiest for India to design, given the S139, I don’t think the missile is 3.2 mtrs wide. Such a missile would be much more heavy than 70 tons. For comparison, the S139 stage has equivalent dimensions 20 mtrs X 3.2 mtrs and weighs nearly 170 tons. Even, if there were interstages, the missile could not weigh 70 tons.

2. This is not for Agni 5. Pictures of the real deal are in public domain. Why would they obfiscate with a CG?

3. So, 3.2 mtrs is most likely the diameter of the canister. It most likely packs in Agni 6, which is MIRV capable and weighs about 60-65 tons. They do say that the payload capacity is 70 tons. But 3.2 mtrs still perplexes me. Generally the canister and the missile fit like a glove.

4. What the hell is meant by manual rotation of the canister? Why would one do that on TEL? So is this part of a TEL? Or are we looking at something else?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34911
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby shiv » 17 Apr 2018 08:03

ramana wrote:
Kakarat wrote:
The brochure for both guided shell and rocket displayed at kalyani stall were Israeli IAI there was no mentioning of kalyani in them

Now we understand the angst of the DRDO gent about how private industry is thinking, #MII is screwdrivergiri of imported components.

IMO the idea seems to me to be to make MII screwdriver giri of DRDO components while DRDO/PSUs go ahead with what they already have infra for - hopefully more efficiently

At least one brochure on this thread )artillery) lists the indigenous and imported components of a PSU artillery piece- and I doubt if pvt companies can do any more magic. The research is going to come from DRDO. JMT


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aditya G, Ashok Sarraff, ashthor, Austin, Jaeger, JayS and 39 guests