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.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2769
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Prem Kumar » 28 Jan 2021 09:59

Barak-8, on ships, has a minimum engagement distance of 500m. So, I don't believe Akash-NG fills a gap in coverage. It might just be a replacement of Akash-1/1S, while being a cheaper option of MRSAM with a similar engagement envelope.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2565
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby John » 28 Jan 2021 10:54

Prem Kumar wrote:Barak-8, on ships, has a minimum engagement distance of 500m. So, I don't believe Akash-NG fills a gap in coverage. It might just be a replacement of Akash-1/1S, while being a cheaper option of MRSAM with a similar engagement envelope.

It’s not about the minimum range it is about a layered air defense when which SAM is utilized. Barak-8 is not an expensive SAM any similar active guided SAM will be around similar price, at most 10-20% cheaper which is not reason by itself to justify its development and introduce an added cost of a new system and miss out on cost savings from mass production.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5362
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby jamwal » 28 Jan 2021 14:14

Have I misread it or does Akash NG has active seeker of it's own? So it doesn't needs to be guided to it's target by ground based radars like Akash. 70km maximum range with same velocity is quite good.

QRSAM
Akash-NG
Akash Mk-1
PAD
AAD
Anti Sat Missile
&
Rajendra
Green Pine

What else we need for a desi S-400 type system?

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4322
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nam » 28 Jan 2021 15:35

Akash NG planning to be all Indian Barak8 doesn't make sense as IAF has just ordered B8. It is not going to replace it with Akash NG. IA's MRSAM has been just tested!

Akash NG seems to be a replacement for Akash 1 in the 40-50km range. IA & IAF had different requirements. IA wants fast response( &more rounds), so you have QRSAM. IAF wants lighter footprint and a bit longer range, so you have Akash NG. Both of them seem to use the same BMFR. I feel for IAF, the search radar is Arudhra/Ashwini, while IA has ADTCR.

Why didn't DRDO create a larger version of QRSAM for IAF? The only reason I can think off is that Akash NG is Astra 2, a design which can be used both on air and land. Akash NG without dual pulse is QRSAM!

It will be interesting to see which design IN receives. I feel it will be QRSAM, due to response time & smaller size.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2769
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Prem Kumar » 28 Jan 2021 22:33

Due to stealth & space restrictions, the IN will want the missile hosted in a VLS, which eliminates QRSAM. They have to build a VLS version of QRSAM.

I don't understand why the Army variation of QRSAM needed a slewable launcher? I'd have thought that a VLS launched missile will have a quicker reaction time + can handle multi-directional saturation attacks better.

Perhaps, it makes the missile more complex because it needs additional divert-thrusters to re-orient itself?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9633
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 28 Jan 2021 22:43

Prem Kumar wrote:I don't understand why the Army variation of QRSAM needed a slewable launcher? I'd have thought that a VLS launched missile will have a quicker reaction time + can handle multi-directional saturation attacks better.


When designing air-defense systems, individual components, and concepts of employment one of the trades you have to do is between the launch efficiency and the defended area within a logistical footprint (i.e. how many vehicles do you have to play with which is a function of your logistical footprint). Vertical launch is not the most efficient (on energy and other missile kinematic performance) but it offers the best defended area because each launcher can provide overlapping coverage over the entire defended area. So you can either get better redundancy and overlaping coverage or cover the same area with fewer launchers. A slewable launcher and the missile that comes out of it is more efficient (in terms of missile kinematic performance and energy) but the trade-off is that you are limited in terms of how you orient your launcher so could potentially need more launchers to provide overlapping coverage. So if you value efficiency then you would bias towards a slewable solution whereas if defended area and logistics were driving your design then vertical launch orientation will appeal more.

This is a simplistic look at this without factoring things such as remote or automated slewing of the launcher which is something that future air-defense launchers (and some of the older designs also already use this) will surely use to bridge the gap and try to capture best of both worlds. Another factor is missile and launcher size. The larger the missiles get the more demanding the VL launcher becomes to a point where you may have to trade magazine for getting a more vertical launch angle (if you do not want to grow the overall vehicle size).

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2769
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Prem Kumar » 28 Jan 2021 23:03

Thanks for the insights, brar_w

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4322
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nam » 29 Jan 2021 03:38

I think QRSAM launchers are automatic. It has got a 360 degree turn table.


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9633
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 29 Jan 2021 04:37

A quick reaction short-medium ranged system needs to be. If you look at some of the V-SHORAD systems, they have a slew to cue mode that basically allows them them to be automatically slewed to the best orientation to attack a target that is being fed into its C2 via a third party sensor. But when you are talking about longer ranged and faster (and higher altitude) targets then you have a different trade space. Given certain threats and interceptor performance you may not have time to slew and launch. There you have to position your launchers to cover the various trajectories. This is especially true for incoming ballistic missiles that come high and fast and you need to get a PIP and launch and every second counts. So there are nuances involved that balance efficiency, with defended area, footprint, and other mobility needs. So designers will design for a particular trade space to meet a particular requirement and this is true for most well designed systems like QRSAM and any other VL system for that matter. You just have to study the solution and then deduce what they were prioritizing for.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8207
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nachiket » 29 Jan 2021 05:14

jamwal wrote:Have I misread it or does Akash NG has active seeker of it's own? So it doesn't needs to be guided to it's target by ground based radars like Akash. 70km maximum range with same velocity is quite good.

It is initially guided by the ground based radar till its own seeker goes active and acquires the target. Similar to a BVRAAM like Astra/R-77/AMRAAM. Even the Akash 1S has an active seeker. Only the base Akash does not.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8293
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Indranil » 29 Jan 2021 07:02

^^^ And all Akash 1 will be brought to Akash 1S standard.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12619
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Aditya_V » 29 Jan 2021 07:09

Another question, in QR SAM< Akash NG etc, given thier size.

Are we using AESA's in acquisition and Targeting radar's, there were some pics of AESA seeker's for missiles, can these missiles use an Active AESA seeker for homing phase.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2567
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby manjgu » 29 Jan 2021 09:12

brar_w wrote:
Prem Kumar wrote:I don't understand why the Army variation of QRSAM needed a slewable launcher? I'd have thought that a VLS launched missile will have a quicker reaction time + can handle multi-directional saturation attacks better.


When designing air-defense systems, individual components, and concepts of employment one of the trades you have to do is between the launch efficiency and the defended area within a logistical footprint (i.e. how many vehicles do you have to play with which is a function of your logistical footprint). Vertical launch is not the most efficient (on energy and other missile kinematic performance) but it offers the best defended area because each launcher can provide overlapping coverage over the entire defended area. So you can either get better redundancy and overlaping coverage or cover the same area with fewer launchers. A slewable launcher and the missile that comes out of it is more efficient (in terms of missile kinematic performance and energy) but the trade-off is that you are limited in terms of how you orient your launcher so could potentially need more launchers to provide overlapping coverage. So if you value efficiency then you would bias towards a slewable solution whereas if defended area and logistics were driving your design then vertical launch orientation will appeal more.

This is a simplistic look at this without factoring things such as remote or automated slewing of the launcher which is something that future air-defense launchers (and some of the older designs also already use this) will surely use to bridge the gap and try to capture best of both worlds. Another factor is missile and launcher size. The larger the missiles get the more demanding the VL launcher becomes to a point where you may have to trade magazine for getting a more vertical launch angle (if you do not want to grow the overall vehicle size).


brar ..given that the enemy will generally be coming from a general westerly direction ( pakistan) and easterly/north direction for chini ... isnt the slewable launcher a good compromise?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9633
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 29 Jan 2021 09:18

It may not be a compromise at all. That was my kind of my point. If you are looking from an intercept efficiency perspective it is actually a superior solution whereas if you are looking from a defended area standpoint the vertical launcher can begin to make more sense (and other scenarios as well). Particularly on a quick reaction system where you are talking about lower altitudes and short to medium ranges, if you can slew and launch then you are actually better as you aren't making the missile do that work (the launcher is doing it).

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2567
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby manjgu » 29 Jan 2021 10:44

sorry compromise was not the right word. i meant if we know the general direction of enemy then slewable is the better option. why would a slewable need more launchers if the kinematic performance of missile is better from slewable? isnt coverage a function of radar and missile range ( which is better for a slewable launcher anyway?).. confused. could u please clarify

YashG
BRFite
Posts: 217
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby YashG » 29 Jan 2021 12:38

jamwal wrote:Have I misread it or does Akash NG has active seeker of it's own? So it doesn't needs to be guided to it's target by ground based radars like Akash. 70km maximum range with same velocity is quite good.

QRSAM
Akash-NG
Akash Mk-1
PAD
AAD
Anti Sat Missile
&
Rajendra
Green Pine

What else we need for a desi S-400 type system?


A kick-ass software - hardware enabled - layer that processes data at lightening speed, tested well and deployed. making that software work so many diverse parts where u also don't have full access is a challenge.

Writing great software is a challenge bigger than we imagine.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4332
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby kit » 29 Jan 2021 15:37

YashG wrote:[

A kick-ass software - hardware enabled - layer that processes data at lightening speed, tested well and deployed. making that software work so many diverse parts where u also don't have full access is a challenge.

Writing great software is a challenge bigger than we imagine.


the S400 is described as a system of systems that can be continually upgraded / modified etc , and part reason of India's interest . Indeed the software and processing capability including the ability to discriminate decoys etc are significant.,.. some details look classified as with all systems. S400 export version is by the way different to that in service with Ru

Also a great enabler / force multiplier would be to link the dispersed early warning assets with satellites and complimentary EO/Electronic warfare systems in real time.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2750
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby darshhan » 29 Jan 2021 16:41

brar_w wrote:It may not be a compromise at all. That was my kind of my point. If you are looking from an intercept efficiency perspective it is actually a superior solution whereas if you are looking from a defended area standpoint the vertical launcher can begin to make more sense (and other scenarios as well). Particularly on a quick reaction system where you are talking about lower altitudes and short to medium ranges, if you can slew and launch then you are actually better as you aren't making the missile do that work (the launcher is doing it).


Brar ji, How much work the missile has to do(or energy expended) in order to switch from slewed launcher to vertical launcher in terms of Range Surrendered? For eg if Akash NG has a range of about 50 kms from a slewed launcher. So what will be its range if launched from a vertical launcher?

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2565
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby John » 29 Jan 2021 16:56

kit wrote:the S400 is described as a system of systems that can be continually upgraded / modified etc , and part reason of India's interest . Indeed the software and processing capability including the ability to discriminate decoys etc are significant.,.. some details look classified as with all systems. S400 export version is by the way different to that in service with Ru


I would take Russian marketing with grain of salt, failure of S-300 in Armenia (supposedly upgraded to bring it up to par) and Syria is legendary. OT we can discuss more in Russian thread.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9633
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 29 Jan 2021 19:24

manjgu wrote:sorry compromise was not the right word. i meant if we know the general direction of enemy then slewable is the better option. why would a slewable need more launchers if the kinematic performance of missile is better from slewable? isnt coverage a function of radar and missile range ( which is better for a slewable launcher anyway?).. confused. could u please clarify


If you can *slew* then yes you wouldn't need more launchers. However, depending upon what a particular SAM system is designed for and what you are doing with it, you may not have an option of first slewing and then launching for some targets. This is true with some BMD systems where you have a sensor that has a limited envelope when it comes to altitude coverage (because it is also looking at medium and even low altitude threats so is oriented for a broader coverage) where the reaction time from solution calculation to launch won't allow you to slew in all cases. While the same SAM system may be able to slew and launch against a slower, and lower target. So as i said, it depends on what you are doing. This is why I mentioned that for some use-cases automated slewing or even slew to cue may be the best of both worlds. And also why I referred to "potentially" needing more launchers in some use cases Also what threat and saturations you are looking to counter also makes a difference. Most slewed launchers slew the entire launcher and not individual rounds so technically they are still launching at sector at a time, then re-orienting and launching again if a threat is coming from some other direction. Vertical launch or even near vertical launch gets you the ability to ripple fire rounds from the same launcher at targets in different sectors. But as I said, that may or may not matter at all given the set of operational requirements the designers are designing for and are optimizing their system. It is very much a matter of studying the requirements and designing the system (there is no one clearly superior solution to many of these questions). While we may not have access to actual requirements there is some insight we can gain by trying to back into it by studying the system and figuring out why a certain thing may be designed a certain way.

darshhan wrote:
brar_w wrote:It may not be a compromise at all. That was my kind of my point. If you are looking from an intercept efficiency perspective it is actually a superior solution whereas if you are looking from a defended area standpoint the vertical launcher can begin to make more sense (and other scenarios as well). Particularly on a quick reaction system where you are talking about lower altitudes and short to medium ranges, if you can slew and launch then you are actually better as you aren't making the missile do that work (the launcher is doing it).


Brar ji, How much work the missile has to do(or energy expended) in order to switch from slewed launcher to vertical launcher in terms of Range Surrendered? For eg if Akash NG has a range of about 50 kms from a slewed launcher. So what will be its range if launched from a vertical launcher?


That would be nearly impossible for us to figure out. For some targets it won't even matter. For others it may matter. It really depends on what you are trying to intercept, what angle your launcher is at etc. If you are a short-medium range system and are doing a short range intercept against a fast (especially fast and low) target then naturally you will have to execute a pretty hard maneuver to orient yourself. There you can imagine that there will be some inefficiencies associated with vertical launch. This not translate into loss of operational performance (to spec) but it has a more direct impact on interceptor characteristics and design and ultimately complexity and cost - "There is no such thing as free lunch".

Think of a naval SAM that has to eject then quickly turn and burn to get to a very short range threat (like inside 2-3 km). So you'll add thrust vectoring or more advanced ACM's and have the missile do the work. Whereas if you make the launcher do the work then it becomes more efficient for the missile. Think of how a vertically launched interceptor with TVC (like ESSM for example) will have to execute a sub 1-2 km intercept vs how a Rolling Airframe missile with a with its launcher would execute the same. If you are intercepting at long range and using a lofted profile then the impact may be minimal. So it really depends.

This is not just a launcher vs missile performance trade. Other trades include missile agility (actuation system, ACM's, TVC other systems) and seeker concepts vs the fire-control radar and its ability to discriminate. On BMD systems the trade is between using a more efficient lower frequency targeting sensor and then designing a missile to do the discriminations and end-game PIP error correction from a seeker and kinematic perspective or choosing a sensor that is capable of very advanced discrimination and then optimizing the interceptor so that you can have a larger magazine. THAAD is a good example of the latter with the ability to carry up to 8 rounds per launcher at the expense of a very large, power/cooling hungry and expensive X-band BMD radar. So there are lots of trades that you have to make as you engineer a SAM system. Trades to stay within budget, within technical limitations, within mobility and logistic requirements, commonality etc etc.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10635
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 30 Jan 2021 02:05

https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 05187?s=20 ---> In a recent exhibition, DRDO showcased an AESA seeker to VP Naidu. There are 2 AESA seekers with Vivaldi antenna currently being developed. They are meant to be used on long range AD/BMD & BVRAAM missiles. In 2020, AMPL said that the seekers were in advanced stages of development.

Image

Image

Image

Image

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4322
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nam » 30 Jan 2021 02:14

I think these examples are coming to Aero India.

The importance of that vivaldi X band seeker, is that you can have a fighter FCR using the same type of antenna.

Vivaldi antennas are used for wide band frequency ops, like in jammers. You operate in frequency ranges out of your adversary's RWR frequencies, you have LPI.

I think it is going to be difficult, but i really hope atleast the Uttam for Su30 come with a vivaldi design. Would make a cutting edge AESA radar. Probably khan already has it on F35/F15.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10635
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 30 Jan 2021 06:13

Kakarat wrote: https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1353680736948260865 ---> BREAKING: Maiden test of Akash-NG (New Gen) conducted successfully. Details from @DRDO_India

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 84000?s=20 ---> And USA's plans to sell India NASAMS-2 just went down the drain.

:lol:

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10635
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 30 Jan 2021 06:14

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 06115?s=20 ---> Dual pulse motors derived from Barak-8 is powering both Akash-NG & Astra Mk-2.

https://twitter.com/Firezstarter1/statu ... 68864?s=20 ---> DRDO and its private sector partners developed the dual pulse system for the MRSAM. Part of India's work share. Great that we are reusing it wherever possible.

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 87265?s=20 ---> Forgot to mention it is probably being used with NG-ARM too.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10635
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 30 Jan 2021 06:20

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 14690?s=20 ---> IAF: Astra has already been built-in (integrated) with Su-30MKI fleet and shall be built-in with the Mirage-2000, Tejas and MiG-29 fleets sooner rather than later. IAF added that Astra is capable of engaging long-range targets at a distance of upto 110 km at various altitudes.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55228
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ramana » 30 Jan 2021 06:41

The weapons system will be METEOR, Astra, R73.
Standoff will be SCALP, SPICE, IGB

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 661
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Haridas » 30 Jan 2021 07:05

nam wrote:I think these examples are coming to Aero India.

The importance of that vivaldi X band seeker, is that you can have a fighter FCR using the same type of antenna.

Vivaldi antennas are used for wide band frequency ops, like in jammers. You operate in frequency ranges out of your adversary's RWR frequencies, you have LPI.

I think it is going to be difficult, but i really hope atleast the Uttam for Su30 come with a vivaldi design. Would make a cutting edge AESA radar. Probably khan already has it on F35/F15.

Vivaldi is very appropriate/desirable for its
1. wide bandwidth,
2. end-fire pattern and
3. lesser sensitivity to nearby elements in high density array packaging.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3592
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby fanne » 30 Jan 2021 08:55

It looks like we are maturing fast in RF seeker - Can be used for air to air and A to G. If we make it cheap, it can be used by Army - artillery, Rockets, ATGMS, MORTARS.
Infra and other optical is the next one. RLG and GPS/SAT-based is another area and then the laser. Having 4-5 types of seekers for smart weapons of all kinds gives us a big reach. We have always been good at propulsion. Weaponry wise we are reaching critical mass for smart weapons. Our platforms are also maturing at the same time.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 816
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby mody » 30 Jan 2021 15:20

Which seeker is the Akash-NG using? Is it the same as the Astra MK-1 and Akash-1S or have we developed a new ugraded RF seeker? Some youtube videos are claiming AESA seeker being used. However, I think that is speculation based on the photos of Aesa seekers being shown to the VP, which are most probably going to be used with BMD-Phase II missiles.

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1522
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby sooraj » 01 Feb 2021 15:29

Image 8)

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1522
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby sooraj » 01 Feb 2021 18:45

And shown here, the full extent of the Indian Combat Air Teaming System (CATS) - including the Warrior wingman, the Hunter 'smart' missile and the Alfa-S swarm drones. Details coming up.

Image

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1522
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby sooraj » 02 Feb 2021 15:27

Image
Image

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4322
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nam » 02 Feb 2021 18:56

DRDO doesn't seem to be displaying any in-development kit. Astra 2, Akash NG, Rudram 2/3 etc. Only ADA does..

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ashishvikas » 02 Feb 2021 22:30

sooraj wrote:...

What is in 2nd picture below Akash ?

ernest
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 12
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 15:35

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ernest » 02 Feb 2021 23:15

ashishvikas wrote:
sooraj wrote:...

What is in 2nd picture below Akash ?

looks like QRSAM

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10635
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 03 Feb 2021 07:05

https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 53731?s=20 ---> The AAD missile of Indian BMD uses a Ka-band PDR seeker. The development of the seeker was a major challenge, as unlike other seekers developed so far a BMD interceptor's RF seeker requires very high refresh rates. A multi-agency task force was formed to develop it.

Image

Image

Image

Image

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1522
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby sooraj » 03 Feb 2021 10:47

Image

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1522
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby sooraj » 03 Feb 2021 11:12

Israel’s Elbit Systems has put on display its Rampage air-to-ground missile at #AeroIndia show in Bengaluru

The missile is going to be inducted into the Indian Air Force

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55228
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ramana » 03 Feb 2021 13:11

What are it's specs?

sajaym
BRFite
Posts: 181
Joined: 04 Feb 2019 09:11

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby sajaym » 03 Feb 2021 16:34

ramana wrote:What are it's specs?

Check out page 3 of it's brochure -- there's an attack profile which looks exactly like the Balakot strike profile.

https://www.iai.co.il/drupal/sites/default/files/2020-07/Rampage%20Brochure.pdf

Image


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Rakesh and 48 guests