Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 26 Apr 2013 02:51

that article is funny

OSA is against air to air missiles also

and procured for fighter aircraft

Sabyasachi · Post by **Sabyasachi** » 26 Apr 2013 03:07

India’s biggest military project with Israel under scrutiny
http://idrw.org/?p=21172

As the government takes a closer look at the project, it is clear that none of the crucial technologies of the system, such as seeker, fuses, radar, tracking system, electronic control systems etc, are coming to India, nor are they being developed by DRDO. DRDO is developing only the propellant, actuators and similar stuff. The rocket motors being developed by DRDO has also failed to meet requirements, sources said.

A source argued that the entire programme was signed only as a work share contract, not as a joint development programme. If it was a joint development programme, the intellectual property rights (IPR) of all technology developed for the project would be held jointly by India and Israel. In this case, despite India funding the entire development, it won’t have IPR access to the technologies being developed in Israel.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Apr 2013 06:08

and thats the whole problem with a lot of these so called "JV" projects...things are never really as rosy as made out in the press releases.

the only thing thats guaranteed is if we go 100% pindigenous and buy just raw components and materials, we get all of whatever is developed.

vina · Post by **vina** » 26 Apr 2013 06:21

India’s biggest military project with Israel under scrutiny
http://idrw.org/?p=21172

Rubbish. Natashas wiggling their hips trying to get someone to hop into bed with them after they were kicked out in the cold.

As far as "sources" and garbage from IDRW, tell them to go take a walk. No one is a fool. All that noise about "HAL cant set up a manufacturing line for Tejas" was clearly an attempt by Natashas to get one of their pi*ps a contract to help set up the line.

This thing is right up that alley.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 26 Apr 2013 07:06

^^^
Prrhaps but in this political environment. It might be enough to get the the project cancelled.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Apr 2013 08:34

In a JV project IP stays with the party that developed it , so what ever Israel contributes is their IP and what ever India does is ours.....we or they can lic built these in India or Israel and pay the fees for IP ....its known by now that DRDO is working on propulsion and ground system launchers etc while Israel is working on Sensors etc

Here is DRDO presentation on LRSAM , which clearly mentions the work areas and responsibilities of two parties

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-pRWKN98mKrE/T ... 00/111.jpg

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Apr 2013 08:48

Sabyasachi wrote:India’s biggest military project with Israel under scrutiny
http://idrw.org/?p=21172

A delay of 4 years this would also delay the commisioning of IN capital ship that depends on Barak-8 namely P-15A...not a good thing IN should have gone for a proven SAM like Aster for P-15A class since R&D project of such nature have inherent delays built into it which affect operational capability. P-15B and P-17A could have opted for Barak-8

vic · Post by **vic** » 26 Apr 2013 11:16

No foreign company should ever be blamed for delays. We should ignore MRSAM-LRSAM is just a larger derby and the R&D cost which should have been pegged around USD 40-80 million is actually USD 800 million. After all, the foreign companies should get some return for the large bribes they pay!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Apr 2013 11:24

People would get bribes any way be it foreign or indian companies , Infact most of the scam in India are made from Indian money paid to indian people .....Corruption is a problem of India and Indian mindset and its a big problem affecting many aspect of life.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 26 Apr 2013 11:40

IAF’s SA-8s SAM failed repeatedly

In a joint exercise by Indian Air Force (IAF) and DRDO, a Russian short range surface-to-air missile was test fired from a defence base off the Odisha coast on Wednesday. The OSA-AK missile reportedly failed to hit a tow body suspended from a pilot less target aircraft (PTA) as it fell down before reaching the target.

Sources said air force personnel conducted the test, a part of target simulation exercise in the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Chandipur on sea during noon.
The missile was fired from the launching complex – III and the PTA was flown from the launching -II of the ITR.

While three rounds of the missile were fired at 11.25 am, 11.45 am and 12.45 pm, the missile was to hit the tow body during the third attempt.

“The missile fell down immediately after take off. Though in initial two attempts the 10-km range missile travelled a certain distance, but during the target simulation exercise it failed to reach the target,” said a source.

It was the third attempt in last three days which also proved futile.

While on Monday the pilot less target aircraft fell down before releasing the tow body and flying for a stipulated period due to technical snags, a similar attempt on Tuesday also failed as the missile could not be fired.

A defence official said the aim and objective of the exercise was to gauge the effectiveness of the missile and killing capabilities mid air.

The Russia-manufactured missile has already been procured by India for the IAF fighter air-crafts.

OSA-AK missile has been developed to be used against aircrafts, surface-to-air missiles and air-to-air missiles.

The missile has already been inducted in the army and it was first user trial by the IAF.

Sources added that if all the preparations go according to the plan, another exercise will be conducted within a day or two.

Thereafter, the missile would be fired from the fighter air crafts targeting the PTA.

WE should buy more Ruskie stuff they are so reliable that in three trials they never hit the target, 2 were a success unlike the Nirbhay FAILURE as they flew a couple of kilometres and the third one was a partial success because the missile got the command to fly but it decided against leaving the launch rail.

I think the fault lies with the target towed by the Indians designed Lakshya as it doesnt know how to present targets to the OSA-AK(just like the case where the Indians were not able to handle the Gorky or the manufacture of too advanced Su-30 or the T-90)

I am pretty sure Chinese wont go closer to any place where there is an OSA-AK deployed. I am pretty sure the other missiles like the tunguska will replicated the great stellar performance of the OSA-AK

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 26 Apr 2013 11:49

pentaiah wrote:oopar ka aaam achha, neeche ka kachha

test fired to check LTPD

Lot tolerence percent defectives

Austin wrote:First user trial for OSA-AK for the IAF ? OSA-AK ( NATO SA-8 ) have been in use for 2 decades providing organic air cover .....what is the significance of the joint IAF-DRDO trial ?

Assuming for a moment that this is not a DRDO attempt of radar/missile being tested under another name, and actually the test of Osa-Aks from the stock -- what is this telling us

1) Poor storage conditions?
2) Product falling short of design life?
3) Some other goof up?

This raises serious questions
1) What is status of the current inventory of Osa-Aks in the forces.
2) What has been the proofing method for inventory health check so far, when were the last tests, where they carried out in time, if so what was the last test, if not why not.

Older ammunition from inventory not working as expected has been a constant problem in India, there needs to be a thorough look at this issue.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 26 Apr 2013 15:38

Assuming for a moment that this is not a DRDO attempt of radar/missile being tested under another name, and actually the test of Osa-Aks from the stock -- what is this telling us

1) Poor storage conditions?
2) Product falling short of design life?
3) Some other goof up?

This raises serious questions
1) What is status of the current inventory of Osa-Aks in the forces.
2) What has been the proofing method for inventory health check so far, when were the last tests, where they carried out in time, if so what was the last test, if not why not.

Older ammunition from inventory not working as expected has been a constant problem in India, there needs to be a thorough look at this issue.

Your comments are hilarious, to put it mildly.

First you doubt whether it was indeed the OSA-AK missile test..
Then you give the benefit of doubt to the customer and "assumes" it to be test of OSA-AK
Then the doubt is about Indians' ability to handle these "Sophisticated Systems" including their storage ..

The flow chart of doubts takes the course like>>

Are the SDREs really capable of storing siphisticated Ruskie missiles? IF YES, Go To>>any othergoofups? >>>IF NO, Go To>>>Is the Product falling short of Design Life? IF NO, go back to original questions and ask subset of questions about health of inventory, proofing methods of inventory health check, when it was carried out...bla bla bla..

FIX the blame on Indian SDRE for any failure anyway, Ruskie systems are so perfect you know?!

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 26 Apr 2013 16:54

geeth wrote: Your comments are hilarious, to put it mildly.

First you doubt whether it was indeed the OSA-AK missile test..

Sir ji, please let me know which language you understand and I will post it again in that language so that you may grasp.

Thanks in advance.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 26 Apr 2013 17:03

^^^English (again) will do...Malayalam, if you can..

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 26 Apr 2013 20:55

geeth wrote:
Assuming for a moment that this is not a DRDO attempt of radar/missile being tested under another name, and actually the test of Osa-Aks from the stock -- what is this telling us

1) Poor storage conditions?
2) Product falling short of design life?
3) Some other goof up?

This raises serious questions
1) What is status of the current inventory of Osa-Aks in the forces.
2) What has been the proofing method for inventory health check so far, when were the last tests, where they carried out in time, if so what was the last test, if not why not.

Older ammunition from inventory not working as expected has been a constant problem in India, there needs to be a thorough look at this issue.

Your comments are hilarious, to put it mildly.

First you doubt whether it was indeed the OSA-AK missile test..
Then you give the benefit of doubt to the customer and "assumes" it to be test of OSA-AK
Then the doubt is about Indians' ability to handle these "Sophisticated Systems" including their storage ..

The flow chart of doubts takes the course like>>

Are the SDREs really capable of storing siphisticated Ruskie missiles? IF YES, Go To>>any othergoofups? >>>IF NO, Go To>>>Is the Product falling short of Design Life? IF NO, go back to original questions and ask subset of questions about health of inventory, proofing methods of inventory health check, when it was carried out...bla bla bla..

FIX the blame on Indian SDRE for any failure anyway, Ruskie systems are so perfect you know?!

How typical indeed.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 26 Apr 2013 21:00

BTW the OSA-AK was upgraded recently ~4years IIRC

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Apr 2013 21:32

suryag wrote:BTW the OSA-AK was upgraded recently ~4years IIRC

Can you explain, what did the upgd involve? Missiles as well or only the radar etc?

As of 2008 this is a report which says that Osa-Ak was working and not a debacle like the one during current test.

X-posting from IA thread.

Nikhil T wrote:Don't drone on about US prowess: Indian Army too has its own Kadet

NEW DELHI: In March 2008, during the joint military exercise, Operation Brazen Chariots, in Rajasthan's Pokhran desert, radar-guided OSA-AK mid-range missiles blasted a Javelin 100NG aerial target into smithereens. That was a moment of validation for Avdesh Khaitan, who had abandoned his law practice with a family-owned firm the previous year to pursue his childhood hobby of aeromodelling.

It would be very interesting indeed to known what is happening to the Osa-Aks.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 27 Apr 2013 21:34

Kartik wrote: How typical indeed.

Indeed typical.

Unfortunately the irony will be lost on the typeset class.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 27 Apr 2013 21:36

Sankuji - LIfecycle extension for missile components on shelves

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Apr 2013 22:44

FIX the blame on Indian SDRE for any failure anyway, Ruskie systems are so perfect you know?!

India should move the UN to have Pakistan fight future wars, with India, in Russia. Then India need not worry about storage, other goofups, etc. And all Russians would work just fine.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 28 Apr 2013 22:30

suryag wrote:Sankuji - LIfecycle extension for missile components on shelves

Thanks a lot, suryag ji, so then the current missile test/failure perhaps is related to the effectiveness of the same program? To validate the lifecycle extension and such?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Apr 2013 05:53

In the "50 years of the MiG 21" book, co authored by Air Marshal Rajkumar that I am reading`now. he comments that K-13 missiles were tested in live firing exercises after they were date expired.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 29 Apr 2013 06:04

Shiv

its common practice as we cannot afford the cost otherwise.

Unfortunately all it gives is the experience of a live fire - in terms of target destruction it's more like a diwali rocket

My friend fired one near Bhuj and it fizzled its way into the sea

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Apr 2013 06:51

Surya wrote:Shiv

its common practice as we cannot afford the cost otherwise.

Absolutely. To beat the same old indigenization drum I have been playing - we are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

If you fire off a non date expired missile and it fails it will get blamed on poor maintenance/storage/improper firing parameters. It gets really costly to keep firing off inventory. If you fire off a date expired one - it failed because it was date expired. It's heads you win, tails I lose for India.

Let me finish reviewing the MiG 21 book -that book is full of material that shows how we managed with stuff that was barely functional. A must read for any jingo who wants to learn the military history of our country

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 29 Apr 2013 08:54

Shivji, is that book available for purchase in Bangalore?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Apr 2013 09:42

Kartik wrote:Shivji, is that book available for purchase in Bangalore?

I am still trying to find out where it will be available for sale. Will post prominently when I find out.

RajD · Post by **RajD** » 29 Apr 2013 10:17

Bad news!! Didn't know exactly where to post it. Since it is from Chandipur posting it in this thread.
http://www.niticentral.com/2013/04/29/o ... 71305.html
Posting in full.
Quote/A string of explosions were triggered after a fire broke out in an underground magazine store of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) at Chandipur, about 15 km from Balasore on Monday morning.

“The fire triggered explosions as it erupted in the magazine store of the Proof and Experimental Establishment (PXE) where shells and ammunition of different capacities and sizes are stored for test,” Officer In-Charge of Chandipur Police station PK Acharya said.

No casualty was reported so far and over a dozen fire tenders were pressed into service to control the blaze, he said, adding that the entire complex was sealed.

Officials of PXE, which is located near the premier missile trial centre Integrated Test Range (ITR), were tight-lipped about the incident but said immediate steps were taken to contain the fire and prevent its spread.

“The fire was restricted to the underground magazine store and no other facility inside the PXE complex was affected due to the incident,” they said.

Different shells and ammunition of various artillery systems, including the 155 mm Bofors field guns are brought to the PXE for test, the officials said, adding that Pinaka rockets are also test-fired from PXE complex.

The cause of the fire was yet to be ascertained and further details were awaited./Unquote.
Can this be a sabotage?
Regards.
Rajendra

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Apr 2013 11:01

shiv wrote: If you fire off a non date expired missile and it fails it will get blamed on poor maintenance/storage/improper firing parameters.

It also gets blamed (mostly rightly) on poor QC at OFBs. That is the biggest villian in terms of non date expired mutions failing, as far I can see (in my completely non statistical anecdotal evidence)

The second biggest blame is using the firing parameters part in terms of geo-graphical/usage conditions (often deliberate extension of the operating envelop by India)

Storage etc do play a role, but usually much lesser, they are blamed far less often as well.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 29 Apr 2013 11:22

^
Since the OSA-AKs were manufactured in Russia, it is presumably not possible to blame the OFBs, so I suggest we blame it on 'storage'

Afterall we have heard 'non-statistical anecdotes' on how QC and storage are really to blame for malfunctioning russian products

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Apr 2013 12:06

arnab wrote:^
Since the OSA-AKs were manufactured in Russia, it is presumably not possible to blame the OFBs, so I suggest we blame it on 'storage' Afterall we have heard 'non-statistical anecdotes' on how QC and storage are really to blame for malfunctioning russian products

This discussion is right up above the posts where you decided to come in and smart alec statements on others behalf before informing yourself of the basics.

Arnab, one suggestion for you, feel free to NOT migrate to every thread I decide to post in, just because you see me posting there.

Thanks
Sanku

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 29 Apr 2013 12:18

Sanku wrote: This discussion is right up above the posts where you decided to come in and smart alec statements on others behalf before informing yourself of the basics.

hmm.. what sort of basics might they be?

anecdote based basics;
statistics based basics;
I judge them as correct arguments because they conform to my beliefs type basics; or
I don't believe Ajai Shukla because they don't conform to my beliefs type basics?

p.s. On whose behalf am I making statements?

And also you misjudge me about pursuing you - do I post in the threads where you interact with the ..er.. meme sahebs

?

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 29 Apr 2013 17:58

The second biggest blame is using the firing parameters part in terms of geo-graphical/usage conditions

Could someone please translate that into English? I couldn't make head or tail of that sentence.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 29 Apr 2013 19:36

Sanku wrote:
pentaiah wrote:oopar ka aaam achha, neeche ka kachha

test fired to check LTPD

Lot tolerence percent defectives

Austin wrote:First user trial for OSA-AK for the IAF ? OSA-AK ( NATO SA-8 ) have been in use for 2 decades providing organic air cover .....what is the significance of the joint IAF-DRDO trial ?
Assuming for a moment that this is not a DRDO attempt of radar/missile being tested under another name, and actually the test of Osa-Aks from the stock -- what is this telling us

1) Poor storage conditions?
2) Product falling short of design life?
3) Some other goof up?

This raises serious questions
1) What is status of the current inventory of Osa-Aks in the forces.
2) What has been the proofing method for inventory health check so far, when were the last tests, where they carried out in time, if so what was the last test, if not why not.

Older ammunition from inventory not working as expected has been a constant problem in India, there needs to be a thorough look at this issue.

More likely reasons -

1) Poor QC
2) Poor product design
3) Outdated technology
4) Low shelf life
5) Not suitable for Indian condition
6) Poor post sales support
7) Lack of authentic Spare part and support infrastructure

Incorrect procurement resulting from IAF's biased approach

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 29 Apr 2013 20:42

Mihir wrote:
The second biggest blame is using the firing parameters part in terms of geo-graphical/usage conditions
Could someone please translate that into English? I couldn't make head or tail of that sentence.

When you can't convince, confuse.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Apr 2013 22:50

I feel that a lot of Russian products are designed for their environments and thus tend to fail more often in Indian.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Apr 2013 23:25

Katare wrote: More likely reasons -

For a purchase which happened 20 years ago and the equipment has in been service for 20 years?

There appears to be repeated and continuing confusion between humor thread and military thread.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 29 Apr 2013 23:29

NRao wrote:I feel that a lot of Russian products are designed for their environments and thus tend to fail more often in Indian.

Except that we are talking about a product which has been working in India for 20 years.

But hey dont let the facts get in the way (not that there is any danger of that happening)

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 29 Apr 2013 23:54

I remembered this old report where CAG found half of our russian BVR missiles were also found to be faulty:

http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/ia ... 47474.html

Nearly half of Indian Air Force’s beyond visual range (BVR) air-to-air missiles that were tested either did not home in on targets during evaluations or failed ground tests because they were ageing much before their shelf lives, a report claimed on Thursday.

As per the report by an leading English daily, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in its yet to be released report has raised serious questions on the usability of the R 77 (RVV-AE) BVR missiles, each costing Rs 2 crore, which are fitted on board the Su-30 MKIs, MiG-29s and MiG-21 Bisons.

India has been procuring these missiles from Russia since 1996 and has even ordered for more than 2,000 missiles after the Kargil conflict out of which 1,000 have already been delivered.

Maybe the french are expensive but their maal is more 'Dada banaye pota barte' type, as there have hardly been any such complaints against their missiles magic etc. on Mirages.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 30 Apr 2013 00:04

Rodina lovers never see reason, they are more russi than the russis when it comes to defending russian products and deriding indian products

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 Apr 2013 00:24

Manish_Sharma wrote: Maybe the french are expensive but their maal is more 'Dada banaye pota barte' type, as there have hardly been any such complaints against their missiles magic etc. on Mirages.

Yes aging of munitions before their shelf life is a problem, that needs regular testing. These are common to all mutitions, and I will try and provide other links to back that up. I mentioned the same before as well.

However it is not clear whether the current case is one of aging before shelf life, or is related to the life extension program. That is what I had asked in the very first post once the news of failure was posted (although it is given that every BRF thread will be doomed IA

IAF

Russia

exercise)

As to French ammunition, yes, I agree with you that no such complaints have been seen, however the amount of french mutions in India is relatively tiny and under realitvely much better storage (that is a often a express mentioned need) -- so a one to one comparison is some what difficult.