Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

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.
Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Raghunathgb » 30 May 2019 23:36

Zynda wrote:^^It is intentional...the changes mentioned are being carried out not because there is anything wrong with Nirbhay (AFAIK)...can't say anything more than this here.

Is it that manik engine is more efficient than the current russian ones and hence extra weight reduced ?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7394
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Indranil » 31 May 2019 00:24

Don't probe when people in the know are not sure whether they should share any more.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4261
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Kartik » 31 May 2019 00:39

Karan M wrote:Kartik interesting (and good news) is that i-Derby ER is standard fit for LCA as well. Any other sources to confirm this?


Karan, I had tried to get confirmation on this from the Tejas LCA FB page many months ago, but not received any reply as yet.

The problem is that some of these articles (like this one) seem to interchangably use the term i-Derby, whereas the suffix 'i' was for the upgraded variant and not the older Derby that the Indian Navy bought and whose stocks were transferred over to the IAF with the Sea Harrier retirement. So its not clear whether the Tejas integration that some of these articles referred to was with the older Derby or the new i-Derby-ER. My guess is it was actually the older Derby missile.

While the connectors, pylon adaptors, the overall missile dimensions, shape and possibly even weight could be the same, the mass distribution may change on the new i-Derby ER missile compared to the Derby thanks to the modified location and size of the proximity fuse and dual pulse motor. Might possibly require some more work to be done versus just replacing the Derby? I don't know, you're the expert here.

Aviation Week explicitly stated that the integration work for the i-Derby ER and not the Derby is in work.

Unlike the AAIM-120D or Meteor, I-Derby ER will be compatible with aircraft currently cleared to carry Derby. RAFAEL claims it will be able to deliver 80% of the Meteor’s performance at a third of its cost. It is also superior to the AIM-120C7 and more affordable, the company claims. Already cleared on F-16 (Block 52), F-5E, Kfir and Sea Harrier, I-Derby ER integration tests are currently under way on the Indian Tejas LCA.


Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4261
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Kartik » 31 May 2019 01:09

2 launches required before the Brahmos-A is officially inducted into service.

Jane's link

The Indian Air Force (IAF) successfully test fired the BrahMos-A (Air) supersonic cruise missile from a Sukhoi Su-30MKI multirole fighter on 22 May against a land target off the country's east coast in the Bay of Bengal.

The 2.5-tonne, two-stage, air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) - developed by a joint venture (JV) between the Russian Federation's NPO Mashinostroyeniya and India's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) - was launched from a modified Su-30MKI, where a "smooth" launch from the aircraft was verified and "the missile followed the desired trajectory before directly hitting the land target", according to a statement by the government's Press Information Bureau (PIB).

"Today's was the second such live launch of the weapon", around 18 months after the weapon completed its first live test against naval target in November 2017, the PIB stated, adding that "the integration of the weapon on the aircraft was a very complex process involving mechanical, electrical, and software modifications on aircraft".

...

Jane's learned that the missile's induction will begin immediately after two certified launches against a naval and a ground target are carried out, and this test marked the first milestone towards it.

Jane's previously reported that the IAF aims to equip two Su-30MKI (modified) squadrons (totalling 42 fighters) with the BrahMos-A to augment its precision-strike capabilities. In this development, India's Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has similarly readied a second Su-30MKI (modified) at its Nashik complex in western India and will ready the remaining aircraft in phases.


Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 31 May 2019 01:55

ramana wrote:[

All those R77s didn't they know that Fizzleya was getting 120Cs?
.

Not trying to defend iafs procurement disasters but keeping the above comment in mind, question arises.... what choice did the iaf actually have? Were there any alternatives available on the market which were better than the c5? Meteor? Purchase and integration costs would be impossible. The IDerby otoh should be doable in some numbers. Just to get the edge, which they have identified, they need in the short term after having a major incident in which they almost lost a pilot.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4102
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby srai » 31 May 2019 08:46

^^^
The IAF has had plenty of exposure to Western BVR and tactics through Cope India, Indra Dhanush, Garuda, Red Flag and other exercises (Singapore, etc). So it should not be seen as something of a surprise.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4074
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby JayS » 31 May 2019 10:37

Kartik wrote:
Karan M wrote:Kartik interesting (and good news) is that i-Derby ER is standard fit for LCA as well. Any other sources to confirm this?


Karan, I had tried to get confirmation on this from the Tejas LCA FB page many months ago, but not received any reply as yet.


Even I tried it sometime back. But ended up getting confused in Derby, I-Derby and Derby-ER. Even the OEM site itself didn't have clear material. But IIRC, FB Page admin indicated that Derby ER is a go for Tejas. But it wasn't clear if the existing missile integrated itself is the ER version or it was planned for future.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17898
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 31 May 2019 10:45

I Derby are likely the ones tested for the LCA as they were in the right timeframes. I Derby =Improved Derby IIRC = Derby with Software Defined Seeker. I Derby Extra Range = further improvements + dual kick propulsion. Right now, if IAF chooses ER for Su-30, LCA will get that as well most likely. Besides which if production shifts to ER, that's what will be available.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4261
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Kartik » 31 May 2019 10:47

Exactly. Without some confirmation from very reliable sources we won’t know for sure which Derby it is that they’re referring to. But if the Su-30MKI does get the ER variant then one can safely assume that the Mk1A and Mk2 too shall get it.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17898
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 31 May 2019 10:52

ER is my most likely guess as the LCA will be disadvantaged otherwise despite an AESA radar.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1380
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Sumeet » 31 May 2019 12:23

Interestingly Derby ER brochure makes mention of M2K, Su-30 and LCA. :)

https://www.rafael.co.il/wp-content/upl ... ochure.pdf

I Derby ER is designed for simplified integration on leading fighters to include: LCA, Mirage-2000, JAS Gripen 39, Sukhoi-30, F-15, F-16.


Any idea why ASRAAM was choosen over Python-5. We could have commonality with Spyder system which is with IAF.

Meteor, Astra Mk2, I-Derby ER will be a formidable BVRAAM package on IAF fighters. Wish if we can combine this with GaN AESA radar especially a mammoth one in MKI. Thats one hell of a trouble for enemy ECM because they have to deal with Indian, Israeli and French seeker and ECCM tech.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2693
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 31 May 2019 12:54

Karan M wrote:ER is my most likely guess as the LCA will be disadvantaged otherwise despite an AESA radar.

Presently No 45 Sq has IN surplus Derby. As the Tejas numbers increase, new missiles need to be ordered. Logically they should be i-DerbyER.
Last edited by tsarkar on 31 May 2019 12:55, edited 1 time in total.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2416
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby abhik » 31 May 2019 12:55

Sumeet wrote:Interestingly Derby ER brochure makes mention of M2K, Su-30 and LCA. :)

https://www.rafael.co.il/wp-content/upl ... ochure.pdf

I Derby ER is designed for simplified integration on leading fighters to include: LCA, Mirage-2000, JAS Gripen 39, Sukhoi-30, F-15, F-16.

...

^^^
Israelis know who their customers are, if you watch their (tacky) promo animated videos, in some of them SU30 is the blue force fighter and F16 is the enemy fighter.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2693
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 31 May 2019 12:56

Sumeet wrote:Any idea why ASRAAM was choosen over Python-5.

Vibrations issues came up while testing

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2416
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby abhik » 31 May 2019 13:11

And AFAIK Israelis themselves don't use the Deby, they use AMRAAM onlee (which they basically get free from the US).

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52432
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ramana » 02 Jun 2019 02:04

tsarkar wrote:
Sumeet wrote:Any idea why ASRAAM was choosen over Python-5.

Vibrations issues came up while testing



Too many fins on the Python for control.
ASRAAM has TVC for main control and fewer fins.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2996
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby kit » 02 Jun 2019 02:51

deleted, wrong info
Last edited by kit on 02 Jun 2019 17:19, edited 1 time in total.

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 388
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ashishvikas » 02 Jun 2019 10:26

Akash NG trials this year

Akash NG is likely to have a range around 50 km, while its predecessors can hit targets up to 25km.

Additional orders for seven squadrons worth around Rs 6000 crore is expected any time soon.


On LRSAM (Long Range Surface to Air Missile), he said 11 ship sets of orders are already in the kitty with the first set likely to be supplied by March 2020.

Read more at: https://english.manoramaonline.com/news ... rones.html

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2416
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby abhik » 02 Jun 2019 15:08

Why inset the max range of Akash NG 70 kilometers, since it is a clean sheet design (unlike 1S) - leaving money on the table for Israelis?

kurup
BRFite
Posts: 124
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 14:22

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby kurup » 02 Jun 2019 20:37

300 km range missile test from June 04 to 07 from ITR ,
https://twitter.com/kurup89/status/1134792890360578048

SAM test off Gopalpur coast from june 03 to 08 ..... warning ~80 km range ,
https://twitter.com/kurup89/status/1134799779693617153

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10729
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Aditya_V » 03 Jun 2019 12:53

Guys my 2 cents on I-Derby on SU 30, it is BS. When the atlantique incident happened in August 1999, the same journals talking today about I Derby said an R-73 missile fired by IAF aircraft missed and a Python IV missile hit the Alantique, the Truth was only 1 R-60 missile fired from a Mig 21 Bis hit the target. These are similair hit jobs.

Look this was not a Hot war, PAF broke ROE and wasted 5 Amraam's- our SU 30 were on our side of LOC, it was more shot in hope. The Su-30 were out of NEZ so I think this C-5 greater than R-77 is more a marketing tactic.

IF it was really the case the IAF would not have dared to show up on the LOC many times in Mar 19 and even videos taken by people in POK. If what these journos were talling the truth PAf would have been more than happy to show up as well rather than just keep quiet inspite of the 10Km zone been crossed by IAF.

It seems more like IAF was itching for a fight and PAF backing down while our artillery was opening up on the LOC.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17898
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 03 Jun 2019 13:20

I am fairly certain the push for i-Derby ER is not BS. IAF has long been looking for a replacement of its Russian missiles once their hours were used up. The recent back & forth flying across the LOC with warloads would have done that. Many rounds would be life-extended at BDL (why waste the money spent in buying them) but the next replacement had to be there. Mica & Meteor are both off the table, Astra is ghar ki murgi dal barabar, Israel is a "proven supplier" and hence this. In fact, if we don't replace the Su-30 engines and procrastinate on the Su-30 upgrade, chances are we aren't happy with the Russian proposal and may be looking to add the EL/M-2052 to the Su-30 as well to go along with the Israeli missiles. A far stretch but still within the rounds of possibility.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17898
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 03 Jun 2019 13:45

Note this report from 2 years back.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... by-438514/

According to the marketing manager of Rafael’s air superiority systems division, the range of the I-Derby ER is 54nm (100km), and it can be carried on rail launchers or on a "shove" pyrotechnic launcher.

The latter deploys the missile from the aircraft's fuselage, after which the motor ignites, and enables it to carry the missile on centre hard points or those that are located near the fighter's conformal fuel tank.

He said that while the earlier version of the I-Derby is already carried by the Indian air force's LCA and Sukhoi Su-30, an effort is being made to allow the integration of the I-Derby ER on these aircraft.

The Rafael official said the main obstacle is the greater weight of the new version.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2416
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby abhik » 03 Jun 2019 18:08

How hard would it be to integrate Barak-8 missile on MKI? It has a dual pulse motor, weights 275kg - much more than most medium AAMs but probably not enough to limit G loads (I'm guessing), would be a much bigger step up from iDerby/Astra. Range should be at least ~200km.
I'm imagining a *andu buster loadout of 4x Barak-8, 4x Astra and 4x CCM for MKI.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7438
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 03 Jun 2019 21:17

abhik wrote:How hard would it be to integrate Barak-8 missile on MKI?


The Barak-8 had no structural, or life cycle requirements for supersonic air carriage, nor is it configured for air launch in any scenario. Before one ventures into integrating it with the Su-30, one first has to modify it and design/create and test/certify a variant specifically meant for air carriage. This is not a straightforward or cheap thing to do. Missiles designed to sit in launch canisters are designed very differently then those that have to be able to go through multiple cycles on board an aircraft throughout the aircraft's flight envelope...Your ground and air testing requirements are also drastically different.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7394
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Indranil » 03 Jun 2019 21:54

I agree that the missile airframe has to be redesigned and recertified almost completely.

But, at the same time, if India ever decides that it does need a Novator type AWACS killer, it could get there very quickly. The propulsion, warhead and seeker are all there.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7438
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 03 Jun 2019 22:02

Yes, re purposing a SAM or its components like an SRM or seeker is always an option for going for a Long range AL interceptor. That it is done so infrequently (using majority of the missile components or form factor) probably suggests that end users probably look for more optimized solutions more suitable for that mission and carriage. But yes for a niche application it is probably doable but most definitely not as straightforward as simply integrating the B-8 with the Su-30. It will require a major re-design and T&E.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2290
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Cybaru » 03 Jun 2019 22:41

This is going to be a one off ROE to kill awacs. In most cases, you will want to ensure the target is what you think your sensors think it is. I would think low use case and there are better ways of ensuring enemy aew fleet is decommissioned.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17898
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 03 Jun 2019 23:17

Given the missile needs to accelerate, handle G forces, chances are it can handle carriage as well, and even firing from within that envelope. Somebody needs to just get off their behind, and start thinking laterally and work out the possibilities of modifying the missile to be used in such a manner - with adequate modifications.

Iran flew Hawks in place of its Phoenix missiles on their F-14s IIRC. Then came up with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fakour-90

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2416
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby abhik » 03 Jun 2019 23:33

Novator has remained an urban legend all this while, while the russians have moved on to hawking an updated version of older design R-37 (which I suspect will have equally stellar performance as R-77), with chinese investing in their own design.

Also why limit it to "awacs killer" role here, Barak-8 weighs just a little more than R-27 (unlike R-37 etc which weigh 2x), a derived missile should give plenty of (as the americans say) "overmatch" :twisted: against fighters too. NGRAM is one other option, but is probably too heavy.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7438
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 03 Jun 2019 23:45

Setting aside the band aid solution the Iranians have managed to put together (who knows whether it even works or not and what they've managed to patch together borrowing from obsolete AIM and SAM systems), there are two instances of modern SAM being looked at for Air to Air adoption. First was with the PAC-3 and the PAC-3 MSE adoption study for the Boost and Terminal Phase BMD mission under the ALHTK program. There the issues that Indranil and I highlighted were clear. The missile could obviously handle the Gs and stresses of air-carriage like most SAMs could but not the cycle requirements that most AAM have to meet. Hence they were faced with two options, either restrict the requirements, CONOPS, training and envelope or modify the missile more extensively than they wanted. They suggested a middle of the road approach and did a bit of both but the missile was restricted to a podded launch and the platform was to be G limited. Still the missile could not meet the carriage and cycle requirements that an AMRAAM or Aim-54 could for example so plenty of compromise was required compared to what the procedures and processes are/were for other AIM's. The USAF, probably because of those issues, did not pursue that solution but have since funded the ERWn program which will probably use a lot of the off the shelf components form the IAMD program but create a more robust, and restriction-free AL TPI and BPI system. The second instance was when a couple of reporters asked raytheon if they'd ever create an air to air version of their AMRAAM-ER missile which is an ESSM modified with an AMRAAM front end. There too the designers were pretty clear in that the modifications would be extensive enough that no end user would fund them over simply bringing to life their T3 missile prototypes which were designed as AIM from the get go. Creating a robust A2A interceptor which can fit in into an arsenal just like a standard AIM can requires quite a bit of work over and above what a SAM would need. Creating a larger diameter ASTRA that can loft and accommodate a larger warhead is probably a better option. Another option would be to use the larger diameter ARM and modifying it so that it can loft higher. Most of those AEW and high value aircraft like sub-hunters or ELINT/SIGINT assets can't run nor maneuver so you don't need crazy terminal speed or high G maneuverability capability at extended ranges especially if you can pack in a larger warhead compared to your standard BVRAAM.
Last edited by brar_w on 03 Jun 2019 23:58, edited 2 times in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17898
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 03 Jun 2019 23:48

You can use a Barak-8 with limited cycle time as a silver bullet for wartime HVT hunting.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7438
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 03 Jun 2019 23:52

Karan M wrote:You can use a Barak-8 with limited cycle time as a silver bullet for wartime HVT hunting.


Yes you could as long as you can convince the operators that its worth the hassle and compromises are worth it compared to something that is optimized for the role. As I said earlier, given such limited adoption of SAMs as AIM's that's probably not worth it for most end users when they look into the cost of implementing the solution, the operational advantage and weigh it against the cost of a more optimized system or other ways to meeting the need. But each use case is naturally different. Also for very long range intercepts of these aircraft types you are better off with a large diameter boosted missile that can loft very high and fly a ballistic path to the target so how high and fast it can go is probably more critical or important compared to other flight characteristics associated with a SAM.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2333
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nam » 04 Jun 2019 00:08

I always imagined a version of Barak8 for boost phase intercept of Pak BM. With 250-300Kg weight, it is in the ideal range.

With Brahmos integration, we have a hardpoint on Su30 which can carry 2.5 tons.

May be a bigger SFDR might be more sensible. Even better would be a hypersonic Scramjet AAM...

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17898
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 04 Jun 2019 00:12

brar_w wrote:
Karan M wrote:You can use a Barak-8 with limited cycle time as a silver bullet for wartime HVT hunting.


Yes you could as long as you can convince the operators that its worth the hassle and compromises are worth it compared to something that is optimized for the role. As I said earlier, given such limited adoption of SAMs as AIM's that's probably not worth it for most end users when they look into the cost of implementing the solution, the operational advantage and weigh it against the cost of a more optimized system or other ways to meeting the need. But each use case is naturally different. Also for very long range intercepts of these aircraft types you are better off with a large diameter boosted missile that can loft very high and fly a ballistic path to the target so how high and fast it can go is probably more critical or important compared to other flight characteristics associated with a SAM.


Given there is nothing optimized for the role in IAF service for the Su-30s may be well worth it. A silver bullet stock of 40-50 missiles dedicated for the HVTs.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2416
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby abhik » 04 Jun 2019 00:13

Just a few years ago the Israelis themselves were hawking the Stunner missile for Air to Air application: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... th-335570/

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17898
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 04 Jun 2019 01:04

Exactly.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66516
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Singha » 04 Jun 2019 06:32

Is there is a relation between the aim7 sparrow and the evolved sea sparrow essm sam ?
Which came first? I think Aim7 came much earlier

Other examples of air to land transitions are humraam, spyder, mica

Barak8 a2a while not so simple is certainly much simpler than a entirely new missile and with oem help can be done. The shock of ground movement by truck may handle the shock of landings

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7394
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Indranil » 04 Jun 2019 06:35

Brar sahab,

I agree with you that if push comes to shove the best way to extend range of a SAM would be to go for a fatter booster. Essentially what Barak ER is doing. But, there is a limit to that. For ranges beyond 200 km or so, it will give too much of a response time for the HVT to escape.

India might have to go where US did not. The need to take down AeWACS/AWACS flying just east or west of our borders may be a necessity.

IAF has evinced interest in AWAC killers before. China has too. With the asymmetry in these assets tilted towards China, India may be more interested now.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7394
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Indranil » 04 Jun 2019 06:36

Abhik ji,

You are not far off with use of NGARM as AWACs killer. It is one of it's intended roles. We will probably see range extension on it.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashok Sarraff, dnivas, g.chaks, Shakthi and 24 guests