Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Apr 2011 14:42

we do not have any wheeled recce vehicles - stryker types

neither we have any modern tracked IFV like bradley/warrior/cv90

neither we have any light tanks.

we probably form the wooden standard in recce units among the major armies.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 17 Apr 2011 15:25

yeah we are disappointing as far as mechanization of any kind is concerned ... ( okay we do have a few BMp-2s now , 1950 + actually given that last DRDO techfocus that I had provided the link to

0

But : we have inducted drones early on and from aero india one got a sense that a number of squad level tactical UAVs are on their way as well.

Also we do have our own BRDM-2 "striker"

for armoured recce. we have Milan armed jeep conversions ....

we are also bringing in the mahindra axe ....

I guess we may still have a Ferret or two lying around. And also some BMPs modified for the job.

We had over 800 BTR-60s at one time and loads of Skots. But somewhere the Army decided - bhench*d yeh sab wheeled APC bakwaas hai chalo tracked IFV rakho or Tin Can ka utpadan badaao. So we have this strange military which has loads of tanks but its infantry still rides into battle in shaktimans.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 17 Apr 2011 15:38

^

DRoy ji,IMHO APC is a conjugate of tanks in modern warfare, plus it has various roles to perform which depends upon its design , but there are so many roles other than safely and swiftly carrying personnel that it should not be ignored ,like anti tank roles, communication etc. Since we do not have a large number of attack choppers,we need them even more.
The entire idea of racing tin can tanks into the enemy territory without manpower from behind is flawed. For example see how many apc/tank piggi army has,just for comparision in the same theatre of action.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 17 Apr 2011 15:43

India to build an integrated Air Defence System

get ready for Indian THAAD

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 17 Apr 2011 15:51

Arrey Samayji,.
Ye log argue karenge -"we have over 2000 IFVs that can carry 7 troops and that is good enough for a strike corps. Plus they can "fight" their way alongside the Tincans. Wheeled APC leke kya hoga?

Army speak - "Arrey hamare log sarhad tak jald isliye nahin pahuuch rahein hain kyunki in DRDO waalon ne ek aisa bhains tank banaaya hai ki hamare tin cano ko railway siding mein park karne ki jaga nahin mil rahi hai!"

O.k last off-topic post. No more. I swear.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 19 Apr 2011 02:00

Nag induction likely to be delayed

HYDERABAD: The induction of third generation anti-tank Nag missile is likely to be delayed by more than a year with the Army seeking improvements to the specially-made missile carrier, Namica.

After the completion of the missile's “final validation trials” in the Chandan Air Force ranges in Rajasthan in July last, it was anticipated that it would be inducted into the Army this year. During the trials, the missile proved its capability against both moving and stationary targets, covering varying ranges of 500 meters to 2,600 metres.
...
...
With the Army seeking additional features such as providing a “panoramic sight” for two commanders, against the present system of having only one such facility for the ‘gunner,' the Namica is being totally redesigned.

Two systems would be made — one by Bharath Electronics Limited (BEL) and the other by Larsen & Toubro.

Following a comparative evaluation of the two carriers in the summer of 2012, the configuration of the production version would be selected.

Asked about induction, sources in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) said, “It is up to the Army to decide.”
..
...
Meanwhile, the first demonstration flight test of the 7-km range Helina, the airborne version of the Nag from a helicopter, is planned to be conduced early next year. Recently, flight-testing from a ground-based launcher to establish the guidance scheme featuring “lock-on after launch” concept was conducted successfully at a range of 4.2 km, the sources said adding the DRDO proposed to carry out a guided flight test against a tank target by the end of the year,
...

strange, the army could have ordered the first version of the Nag system, and suggested improvements as it started using them, and then ordered the next version with updated sights etc and other improvements later on.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 19 Apr 2011 02:03

Putnanja ji it is not strange this is expected from the IA. Had they placed orders then that would be strange.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Apr 2011 02:57

Do they want a 3-D X-Box with it?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Apr 2011 03:57

Perhaps it gives them just enough time to sneak in a phoren ATGM?

Just a thought.

srai · Post by **srai** » 19 Apr 2011 04:31

suryag wrote:Putnanja ji it is not strange this is expected from the IA. Had they placed orders then that would be strange.

Even if IA places orders eventually (probably 2 to 3 years from now), they will only order 2 NAMICAs ... and complain about the production line not being able to churn out 100/year

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 19 Apr 2011 04:46

With the Army seeking additional features such as providing a “panoramic sight” for two commanders, against the present system of having only one such facility for the ‘gunner,' the Namica is being totally redesigned.

I have almost always sided with the army. This is

for even me.

Which army changes its requirements like this?! No word till final evaluation and then BOMB!

And I wonder how many anti tank systems have panaromic vision for both commanders!

I really don't know what gives here. I don't want to say it but it stinks!

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 19 Apr 2011 05:02

^^^ I may be mistaken, but don't I remember reading that the NAMICA was nothing but a T-72 with the turret popped-off and replaced with the NAG launcher? If this is the case, then it's understandable that the IA would want a wholly redesigned, purpose-built chassis, with better performance than the T-72. (Admittedly, I might be wrong about this.)

Also, don't I remember reading about 15,000 units of MILAN ordered a couple of years ago? If this order has been fulfilled, it could be that the IA is fielding these ATGMs until the NAMICA is ready with the NAG. (Again, I might be wrong about this.)

Furthermore, having two 'eyes-on' would enable the gunner to hit one target and quickly fire on a second target that the commander has in his sights. This could be a very important feature of NAMICA, and if it is unique among anti-tank systems, it would provide a tangible battlefield advantage.

QUESTIONS:
1) Is what I've written here true, about the current NAMICA being nothing but a retrofitted T-72?
2) Has that order of 15,000 MILANs been fulfilled?

srai · Post by **srai** » 19 Apr 2011 05:06

^^^

Please do some research and reading before posting. Just google ... and take a look at the NAMICA ... does it look like it's a T-72 chassis???

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Apr 2011 05:37

srai wrote:^^^

Please do some research and reading before posting. Just google ... and take a look at the NAMICA ... does it look like it's a T-72 chassis???

I may be wrong about this, but people who say "I may be wrong about this" are escapists. Leave deliberate loop holes via which they escape.

JMT, which is another way of saying the same.

JMT.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 19 Apr 2011 05:38

Dear srai and NRao,

I didn't say NAMICA was a T-72 chassis -- I was just asking a simple question, and I even noted that I might be wrong to raise the question.

However, now that you've asked me to Google about it, I did find this, in the third-to-last paragraph of...

http://www.indiadefenceupdate.com/news73.html

The indigenous Nag( Snake) 4km-range anti tank missile is also undergoing final trials and can be launched from a modified BMP-1 tracked armoured vehicle called NAMICA or a T-72 chassis.

Please note that the chassis of a tank is not visible unless you are looking underneath the tank. What you see from the sides is the "tank" part of the tank, which sits on top of the chassis, with the turret sitting on top of the "tank".

Forgive me if my question was unclear.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 19 Apr 2011 05:42

^^^ Also, while Googling just now; I read that the IA had ordered 4100 MILANs back in 2008, and 15,000 Konkurs M at around the same time. If these orders have been fulfilled by now, it could be the reason why the IA feels it has the breathing room to send the NAMICA back to the drawing board. JMT

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Apr 2011 05:49

RK,

Sorry.

A very slow night. Bulls play at an unearthly hour and I find it hard to keep awake for them.

Guess the Raptors are done. Which is why you are googling for ATGMs.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Apr 2011 05:59

Helo based ATGMs are the best option for IAF, especially thinking about our high number of tank filled neighborhood. I am thinking of dedicated Helina helos perhaps housing more than 16-32 helinas in one sortie from a single specially designed helina-helo. So, a 20 helo squad integrated with AWACs, can do the right job in quick time.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 19 Apr 2011 07:32

how low can we stoop!! The Arjun and now the Nag!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 19 Apr 2011 07:47

Ravi sir,

I have just one question. Even if the Namica is BMP-2 or T-72 chasis based. How do arrive at a conclusion that it is inferior just based on that. Besides, in all probability they will not change the chasis in one year. So it is clearly not about the chasis.

I don't know what the Army is thinking, I was thinking that may be since they don't see any war in the coming decade, they think that they can afford the time to get a near "perfect" machine.

The Nag as a missile is ready and I don't think anybody will question that. For want of panaromic view induction is being pushed back 2 years !!!

But I see one good thing. I think this is the first time that there will be comparative study for two models, one from L&T and the other from BEL. I think this will be the first time that this is being done. IMHO, it is a good step.

sum · Post by **sum** » 19 Apr 2011 08:36

The induction of third generation anti-tank Nag missile is likely to be delayed by more than a year with the Army seeking improvements to the specially-made missile carrier, Namica.

Sigh....

Something tells me the same thing will happen to the 155 mm when a local variant is finally produced and offered to the IA... the IA will send it back for "redesign" and would prefer to be 155 mm artillery nude rather than inducting a local variant and then suggesting improvements in next batches..

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Apr 2011 09:17

"if you cannot kill the rider, shoot the horse"

NAMICA has been in existence for atleast 10 years. granted the Nag may not have been ready for this entire period, but it took them so long to eval it and suggest changes NOW ? regardless of missile, the mobility and sensors can be eval'ed anytime by a serious user.

the stage looks set for another $2 billion deal for some large ATGM as a "gap filler"

sales of blue label and italian marble bathrooms will be strong as usual.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 19 Apr 2011 09:33

Atleast we are able to note down the history on how Army kills all the projects.

ON FB, me and an Oxfordian were screwing up a ex MoD babua responsible for Army purchases. He claimed that DRDO never delivered and he did his best "satisfy" his client "the army." His tenure co-incided with Arjun Tanks trials and T-90 induction. Also, his tenure co-incided with a time when India had no money to buy equipment at all.

darshan · Post by **darshan** » 19 Apr 2011 10:36

Singha wrote: the stage looks set for another $2 billion deal for some large ATGM as a "gap filler"

+1

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 19 Apr 2011 11:11

So the tincans can make the crew *faint* with 50 deg celsius but in NAMICA the IA wants a "panoramic view" ?? One day, these decisions will prove to be so wrong.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 19 Apr 2011 11:21

indranilroy wrote:... Even if the Namica is BMP-2 or T-72 chasis based. How do arrive at a conclusion that it is inferior just based on that. Besides, in all probability they will not change the chasis in one year. So it is clearly not about the chasis.....

If I were a 'betting man' (which I generally am not), I would bet that the final version of NAMICA would have the same kind of pneumatic suspension that we now see on the Arjun. This chassis innovation, along with dual, panoramic sites for the gunner and the commander, plus the Gen-III NAG, would together make the NAMICA a trully formidable system.

A pneumatic suspension would add to the NAMICA's cross-country speed, provide greater comfort to the crew, thus keeping them in better battle condition, and perhaps more importantly; this would also help to protect all those delicate electronics that are certainly in the NAG and its targetting systems. I would imagine that missiles are a tad more delicate than are tank rounds, which typically do not have any electronics in them (although, this is changing too).

A pneumatic suspension for the NAMICA would be a significant improvement over the current chassis, whether or not it is based on the BMP-1/2/3 and/or the T-72. It may even enable the NAMICA to fire the NAG while at speed over rough terrain, thus improving the combat effectiveness and survivability of the entire piece of kit.

JMT

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 19 Apr 2011 11:30

Need a Hazare to set this right.Where is Berwal uncle with his 96 faults. These guys need to be pulled up for acting so childishly, there needs to be end to their brazenness, i dont really know what makes the DRDO keep quiet, cant they do some unofficial links. Mr.Clean needs to do something this cannot go on forever. There is a well established trend, ask for the moon, crow that DRDL didnt reach the moon they just made it to the exosphere, get some bideshi maal, and when the DRDO reaches the moon ask them to deliver Mars. Does anyone understand what this constant shifting of goalposts does to the morale of the scientists. Sincere scientists will get tired of this and their motivation will start evaporating with passage of time.

jai · Post by **jai** » 19 Apr 2011 11:31

The above news pieces on the MR SAM and NAMICA reconfig. somehow makes me very suspicious. There definitely seems to be more to each of these stories than visible right now.

MR SAM - The project has been going on for years now, have they only just found out that it was going to get delayed ? Did they outsource the whole project to the Israelis and forget about it all these years when they were supposed to be jointly creating the product and project managing it.

Not sure if this is another way to bring in sub par US equipment with some neta getting richer by millions on our tax money. Also not sure if this is another way of pleasing the US if finally we are not going for US fighters.

Namica - Again, were the Army sleeping all these years, and only now woke up when DRDO asked for NAMICA induction ? Ploy to import Spike and Javelins ?? More of the above - some Netas trying to please someone some where or / and getting richer in the bargain ??

Maybe I am too suspicious and thinking through my hat, but looking at the drama that's been going on with modernization and new equipment induction the last few years, and seeing our "National Leaders" in one corruption scam after another one thinks it is unlikely that defence would be spared when every other department is being milked....apologies if OT and on the rant...would love to be proved wrong though..

jai · Post by **jai** » 19 Apr 2011 11:35

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:
indranilroy wrote:... Even if the Namica is BMP-2 or T-72 chasis based. How do arrive at a conclusion that it is inferior just based on that. Besides, in all probability they will not change the chasis in one year. So it is clearly not about the chasis.....

A pneumatic suspension for the NAMICA would be a significant improvement over the current chassis, whether or not it is based on the BMP-1/2/3 and/or the T-72. It may even enable the NAMICA to fire the NAG while at speed over rough terrain, thus improving the combat effectiveness and survivability of the entire piece of kit.

JMT

Sigh....you are right, only I hope our dear generals then do not complain that it is now over weight and reject it basis that; and I am otherwise known to be an optimist

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Apr 2011 11:51

my thought process is a COTS honda CRV v6 with some Nag pods welded to the roof (libyan rebel style) is the best next-gen ATGM platform for the IA

multilink trailing arm suspension proven for millions of miles around the world in all climates - per certified.

has AC and comfortable seats. michelin 16" tyres. good speed. good range. good price (just 28L only onroad)

we can afford 1000s of these for 100s of namica. when not in use people can fold the seats, turn the AC on and use for cool sleeping in the heat.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 19 Apr 2011 12:04

^^^ also good brand ambassadors

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 19 Apr 2011 12:12

The taxpayers money is pumped in to produce these weapons and platforms and is being wasted by the meager number ordered by IA. If CAG wants to find mismanagement of funds let this be it. If the customer is not assuring orders, there is no point putting more money into research. DRDO should be forced to show profit by marketing and selling their inventions. And that means it is time to look for more accomodating customers.

Let IA keep inducting token number as it is doing now - will infuse product confidence for prospective global customers.The whole pretext that DRDO is doing a service (by developing weapon systems) to cater to the force's needs is wrong. There is no real need for IA to get a product developed in the country.

And lets face it - as pained as DRDO is to see that their systems are not inducted in numbers, and the worry about not breaking even etc, that concern does not manifest into accountability, profit making or job security. CAG should insist that DRDO creates and patents products - make royalty sharing knowhow with PSUs/private companies, finding international customers, reinvest profit into more research, etc.

IA is a lost cause for indigenization.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 19 Apr 2011 14:04

what makes the DRDO keep quiet, cant they do some unofficial links

Because they are more than happy with the R&D project. Look even as some phoren maal is imported, the R&D on the domestic system will continue .... fauj happy ... drdo happy.

DRDO ne apna research kar diya. production agency to koi or hai.

I have also spoken to few young DRDO chaps and they seem to have a consensus that not all projects are meant to actually result in an indigenous system. Instead they simply serve the purpose of showing the foreign supplier that a 'credible' indigenous alternative can be created if they refuse to sell the technology to us ...

Final delivery and indigenization is not the purpose you see. if it were than things would have been done very differently ...

See making a good atgm, inducting it in numbers and then spinning of whole families of tactical missiles is not for India, noooo it is for China. it is for nations that really want to be powerful and independent.

here the idea is simply to keep the gravy train running for various lobbies and as long as DRDO gets its piece why would they complain ?

chal raha hai chalne do.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Apr 2011 14:16

Before anyone jumps around claiming CT for phoren maal, just remember that neither Spike nor Javelin or anything else is replacement for NAG and NAMICA system.....anything being imported is for man-portable ATGM requirement.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Apr 2011 14:25

er um ...but the Kornet is ... let us wait and watch...a new RFP should be coming out.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2011 14:36

With the Army seeking additional features such as providing a “panoramic sight” for two commanders, against the present system of having only one such facility for the ‘gunner,' the Namica is being totally redesigned.

The purpose of having two Panoramic Sight is I suppose here they are probably talking of TI sights , so right now only the gunner has it , which means while the gunner tracks ,identifies and designates the target via his TI sight , the commander has no ability to track and identify the other till the gunner does it.

So having an additional sight would mean the commander can track and designate the target and hand it over to the gunner , the gunner can use it to designate the missile while the commander can independently track for other targets.

Not having a second TI for the commander is what I would suppose a drawback unless the commander has other optical sights to do it which I am not aware , but they should have thought about this much earlier and added it much before rather then waiting for the last moment when the missile is ready but the vehical system needs more time.

Another option would be to have a BMS in place where all NAMICA vehical can communicate via data links and can track ,designate target among them self while there is a command vehical which keeps track of the over all picture and keeps designating target to the NAMICA , the BMS option would be an expensive one and would need C4I in place.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2011 14:41

Singha wrote:er um ...but the Kornet is ... let us wait and watch...a new RFP should be coming out.

Kornet is not a F&F system but a laser guided one ,Hermes is but there is no indication that it is operational.

Spike or Trigat is the only option for F&F system.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Apr 2011 15:20

Austin, even the arjun tank commander does not have indep TI and no plans have been announced for one. TI is not cheap.

only the western heavy MBTs (and maybe gold plated light tanks like M3Bradley) seem to have indep commander TI. all else will have optical.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2011 15:35

No doubt TI is and will be expensive , but you can bet NAMICA missile carrier with 12 Nag missile on it will be much more expensive then any MBT out there , so it will just boil down to the trade off of not having an additional TI versus having it.

If they need cheap stuff they can just opt for day only optical sight or 3rd Gen IR sight.

sum · Post by **sum** » 19 Apr 2011 16:07

^^ All this need is fine but did it REALLY take until the end of user trials for the IA to have this realization of such a major issue?

Why was all the drama of the trails done if the end result was a complete re-haul without accepting the existing system?