About the writer of these tweets @rathorekaran17 :basant wrote:^^^
The above view shows the army as simple minded and innocent people who cannot think out of box for years. Let's not be so naive as they are smart and sensible when it comes to imported stuff.
ramana wrote:He is a retired Armored Corps Brigadier and commanded Poona Horse.
Trained by Lt Gen Hanut Singh.
Very level headed. No flamboyance.
NauSena (Unofficially?) expressed interest in a V-22 based AEW system a while back (or is it the 737-Dud tail rumour? )darshan wrote:There's a lobby that's working to get AWACS for awhile from a western country for almost 10 years now.
The NAMICAs are meant for GUARDS and MECH INF R&S (Tracked) battalions. They can "see" long distances because they have BFSRs. Once they spot the enemy armor, their job is to track the enemy and steer them towards own armor/ambush positions. To do that, they need to be able to shoot-and-scoot from a long distance. They don't have main guns and their Konkurs are for SHTF self-defense. The user-feedback on the BFSRs isn't too good either; I have heard its screen is too noisy and nauseating to the operator. At this rate, they may have to convert the R&S battalions into World War 2-style Long Range Desert Groups for passive "Road Watch Parties", small-scale raiding and special-forces support.Anujan wrote:The Nag saga is frustrating. First there was a requirement that it should be able to lock on, in extreme ranges, in Rajasthan heat. (why not use main gun or wire guided missiles like konkurs in this scenario?).
IA already deploys several battlefield surveillance radars (BFSRs). The longest ranged BFSR in the IA inventory is the X-band PIT 530 BFSR-MR, which can detect a group of moving people at 18 km, low flying helicopters at 25 km, moving vehicles at 40 km and a 155 mm artillery blast at 15 km. BFSR-MRs are currently deployed with IA's mechanized infantry units (MIUs). These radars originally designed by ELTA are currently being produced by BEL under license.
A few points:ParGha wrote: The NAMICAs are meant for GUARDS and MECH INF R&S (Tracked) battalions. They can "see" long distances because they have BFSRs. Once they spot the enemy armor, their job is to track the enemy and steer them towards own armor/ambush positions. To do that, they need to be able to shoot-and-scoot from a long distance. They don't have main guns and their Konkurs are for SHTF self-defense. The user-feedback on the BFSRs isn't too good either; I have heard its screen is too noisy and nauseating to the operator. At this rate, they may have to convert the R&S battalions into World War 2-style Long Range Desert Groups for passive "Road Watch Parties", small-scale raiding and special-forces support.
I don't see how any of this is an argument against the NAMICA. As Prem mentioned, the NAMICA does have its own target acquisition system. Any problems with the BFSR itself should be taken up with DRDO in order to find a solution. Issues like this crop up in many types of equipment including foreign ones (Catherine TI anyone?).ParGha wrote: The NAMICAs are meant for GUARDS and MECH INF R&S (Tracked) battalions. They can "see" long distances because they have BFSRs. Once they spot the enemy armor, their job is to track the enemy and steer them towards own armor/ambush positions. To do that, they need to be able to shoot-and-scoot from a long distance. They don't have main guns and their Konkurs are for SHTF self-defense. The user-feedback on the BFSRs isn't too good either; I have heard its screen is too noisy and nauseating to the operator. At this rate, they may have to convert the R&S battalions into World War 2-style Long Range Desert Groups for passive "Road Watch Parties", small-scale raiding and special-forces support.
I could be wrong here. But, shouldn't an agency like CAG be pointing out things that aren't working in country's favor?basant wrote:^^^
CAG?
Shouldn't the planning and utilizing what's available on the table have started the day India learned of chinese acquiring light tanks and enemy having better mechanized army? Heck, one would've thought of deploying even semi working prototypes as deterrent/decoy etc. I'm not sure why one couldn't have had daily test flights of HAL built helos within LAC area just for the heck of it as soon as these helos were flight worthy for the terrain. Same for weapons as soon as they were integrated. The real performance of weapons should have been classified anyways. At the least, enemies would have had to do some extra guess work or preparations. Even duds are useful as long as everything's classified about it.ParGha wrote:Seven out of eight (7/8) of all the R&S battalions, and four out of four (4/4) of the R&S tracked battalions are in the Plains divisions -- specifically tasked to operate in the heat of Rajastan and Punjab. To buy NAMICAs for the mountains, either you have to authorize raising more R&S tracked battalions, OR (preferably) authorize raising new anti-tank artillery regiments. Frankly, the artillery brigades are better resourced to use it effectively (with their SATA batteries) and they have a history of anti-tank artillery regiments (37 Coorg, 4 Maratha, etc).
Did we actually work with Elta to get further data processing upgrades? If not, we can't blame them.ParGha wrote:The NAMICAs are meant for GUARDS and MECH INF R&S (Tracked) battalions. They can "see" long distances because they have BFSRs. Once they spot the enemy armor, their job is to track the enemy and steer them towards own armor/ambush positions. To do that, they need to be able to shoot-and-scoot from a long distance. They don't have main guns and their Konkurs are for SHTF self-defense. The user-feedback on the BFSRs isn't too good either; I have heard its screen is too noisy and nauseating to the operator. At this rate, they may have to convert the R&S battalions into World War 2-style Long Range Desert Groups for passive "Road Watch Parties", small-scale raiding and special-forces support.Anujan wrote:The Nag saga is frustrating. First there was a requirement that it should be able to lock on, in extreme ranges, in Rajasthan heat. (why not use main gun or wire guided missiles like konkurs in this scenario?).
DRDO's BFSR was provided to the infantry. Its called BFSR-SR. An upgraded version is now available called BFSR-XR. The DRDO BFSR-SR has been upgraded by some pvt guys for automatic target recognition etc. No idea whether IA picked it up. It also comes with an integrated TI to correlate the targets picked up and image them.nachiket wrote:I don't see how any of this is an argument against the NAMICA. As Prem mentioned, the NAMICA does have its own target acquisition system. Any problems with the BFSR itself should be taken up with DRDO in order to find a solution. Issues like this crop up in many types of equipment including foreign ones (Catherine TI anyone?).ParGha wrote: The NAMICAs are meant for GUARDS and MECH INF R&S (Tracked) battalions. They can "see" long distances because they have BFSRs. Once they spot the enemy armor, their job is to track the enemy and steer them towards own armor/ambush positions. To do that, they need to be able to shoot-and-scoot from a long distance. They don't have main guns and their Konkurs are for SHTF self-defense. The user-feedback on the BFSRs isn't too good either; I have heard its screen is too noisy and nauseating to the operator. At this rate, they may have to convert the R&S battalions into World War 2-style Long Range Desert Groups for passive "Road Watch Parties", small-scale raiding and special-forces support.
In any case, even a noisy BFSR+NAMICA combo (or just the NAMICA by itself) would have been mightily useful in Ladakh now that Chini light tanks have come knockin than having nothing at all. Now we are left scrambling for Sprut tanks which will arrive too late anyway.
We have seen a lot of cribbing from all quarters (civilian and military) about the inadequate capital budget impacting operational capability but it seems things are much worse since we are getting far less bang for the buck than we could be even for the current budget due to several questionable decisions (or rather a lack of them) like this one.
Karan this video featuring 17th Guards has the details of the BFSR-MR.Karan M wrote:DRDO's BFSR was provided to the infantry. Its called BFSR-SR. An upgraded version is now available called BFSR-XR. The DRDO BFSR-SR has been upgraded by some pvt guys for automatic target recognition etc. No idea whether IA picked it up. It also comes with an integrated TI to correlate the targets picked up and image them.nachiket wrote: I don't see how any of this is an argument against the NAMICA. As Prem mentioned, the NAMICA does have its own target acquisition system. Any problems with the BFSR itself should be taken up with DRDO in order to find a solution. Issues like this crop up in many types of equipment including foreign ones (Catherine TI anyone?).
In any case, even a noisy BFSR+NAMICA combo (or just the NAMICA by itself) would have been mightily useful in Ladakh now that Chini light tanks have come knockin than having nothing at all. Now we are left scrambling for Sprut tanks which will arrive too late anyway.
We have seen a lot of cribbing from all quarters (civilian and military) about the inadequate capital budget impacting operational capability but it seems things are much worse since we are getting far less bang for the buck than we could be even for the current budget due to several questionable decisions (or rather a lack of them) like this one.
The R&S units operate the BFSR-MR. This is an Elta unit which is mounted on tall masts. Its license manufactured at BEL.
These systems are easily a decade old and due for an upgrade. Question is whether IA has asked BEL to do so, or even approached Elta.
CAG does its evaluation as per laid out procedure. Evaluation of policies is beyond its scope.darshan wrote:I could be wrong here. But, shouldn't an agency like CAG be pointing out things that aren't working in country's favor?basant wrote:^^^
CAG?
Render of a new Agni missile from an Indian pvt company that does fuse testing & manufactures data acquisition systems for strategic weapon systems. Notice the warhead section with 4 MIRVs. DRDO has been working on MIRVs for a while, current status of it is not known in public.
See also: Drone Swarms -a Growing Lethality…. Where is the World? Where are We? (Lt Gen (Dr) V K Saxena (Retd), PVSM, AVSM, VSM, Distinguished Fellow, VIF)Meet indigenous Flag of India swarm-drone named ALFA-S. With AI-backed netwrk centric feature, >100km range & 1hr endurance, these swarm drone are the future of A2G warfare! An LCA could carry 24 of them
+
General overview:
Each drone is about 1.5-2m long, has foldable wings, and would be carried inside canister housing 8 such drones, battery powered propellers and a HE warhead
+
ALFA-S is the acronym for Air Launched Flexible Asset System
Refer to the same author in 2017 insteadramdas wrote:https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/defe ... 2009-07-23
This 2009 article by Sandeep Unnithan refers to a 3500 km range MIRVed K-X as the INS Arihant's primary armament. The K_X=K-4. So, the K-4 is likely to be MIRVed. Hope it has already been tested in such a configuration. It makes sense, given that 4 K-4's have to replace 12 K-15's.
Why we are assuming IR Astra will be of short range? It will match RF Astra mk1. IR Astra is not your typical short range WVR missile like Python5 or r73.Aditya_V wrote:We also needed this since yesterday, hope it can be launched in TWS mode and the Target aircraft does not know of the inbound missile until its too late.
https://twitter.com/KalitaAbhinav/statu ... 3084500992
#DRDO is working on Astra Passive imaging IR seeker variant which might be ready much before Astra Mk2.
Infrared homing is the basic functionality of a Short Range AAM’s to hunt down its target.
