Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

[abhik]

^^^
For anti PGM, anti cruise missile defence navsl ciws systems would probably work the best as they are already designed to hit targets with small cross section flying in at low altitudes.

[vic]

After Chinese intrusion tore the chaddi off the import lobby, it seems that they still have not learned. Sabse bada rupaiya bhaiya

[Indranil]

I can't understand the crib here. We don't have either a indigenous gun or a missile of this category. The idea that a nascent private sector can come up with a complete system using Astra (which is just starting to take flight tests) is quite naive. It will still be 3-5 years before Astra is fielded.

They are taking the fastest way to get the private sector up to pace. To think that everything can be gained in a money pinching way is foolhardy in my opinion. We cannot blanket everything with blind nationalism!

[Sagar G]

The tender requires that the gun and the missile should be able to engage aerial targets with and without the use of a fire-control radar.

I don't understand how the system is supposed to work without the FCR ???

[John]

^ Thru EO tracking device.

[koti]

The tender requires that the gun and the missile should be able to engage aerial targets with and without the use of a fire-control radar.

I don't understand how the system is supposed to work without the FCR ???

Check this link. It gives the details of Pantsir-S1. Different sensors and the like are listed here.

[ramana]

AV test campaign must be half way complete. Any progress reports?

[member_24903]

Russians replacing their Tunguska's with Pantsir S1

A truck mounted one , UAE is the financer of the project

[Sagar G]

Check this link. It gives the details of Pantsir-S1. Different sensors and the like are listed here.

^ Thru EO tracking device.

Thank you for the replies guys.

The system is very much doable within the country I don't see any technological hurdle other than the hurdle presented by IA towards indigenization. What happened to "Import only if not doable in the country" policy ???

[member_26622]

Why are we still importing full fledged systems when we practically have key components built and proven? Looks like old habits of Indian defense establishment's are hard to get rid off.

We can build on a proven Akash system by coupling a gun/cannon. A more compact Akash missile for shorter range should not be a new development.
The scope covers naval CIWS+anti UAV deployments...100's of systems are needed to be effective along the borders. Importing a few will not do the job and will likely be of no use after 5 years due to incorrect storage!

If DRDO was a privately run corporation, then they would have jumped at this opportunity. We need to forget importing and instead think about how we can leverage domestic demand to make world class products for 'exporting' to the world (The Chinese have nailed this formula for defense products )

[vic]

There is no urgency for such a weapon platform except push by import Lobby. We Can easily wait for Astra and make do with Akash in the Meanwhile

[John]

We can build on a proven Akash system by coupling a gun/cannon. A more compact Akash missile for shorter range should not be a new development.
The scope covers naval CIWS+anti UAV deployments...100's of systems are needed to be effective along the borders. Importing a few will not do the job and will likely be of no use after 5 years due to incorrect storage!

Compact Akash? it is not missile that can easily be compacted, the ramjet engine for starters cannot be miniaturized. Even Trishul doesn't come close to meeting what current requirement calls for and Aster is just too large for such a system and not to mention we have little to no experience on gun systems, let alone self propelled units.
Keep in mind BAAMS is another contender.

[Indranil]

The system is very much doable within the country I don't see any technological hurdle other than the hurdle presented by IA towards indigenization. What happened to "Import only if not doable in the country" policy ???

Sagar,

It is not as easy as you think. We could build all the missiles for IGMDP except Trishul, which was our QRSAM. Even the Maitri project has not gone far. We can probably have a missile like that when Astra comes onboard (similar to what was done in Spyder). But till then we don't have an answer. Also this will happen only if DRDO delivers. So your countries safety is contingent to a single point of failure.

I would rather work on building a parallel system by involving the private sector. The private sector thinks of only one thing, profit. If making components in India is cheaper or can be made cheaper, they will find a way to do it. Cold hard truth.

We can build on a proven Akash system by coupling a gun/cannon. A more compact Akash missile for shorter range should not be a new development.

I don't like chastising members. But clearly sir, you have no clue of what you are speaking. If this was 2006-8, a lot of members would have burned you really bad. It is a system which is required when Akash has failed.

[member_26622]

It is a system which is required when Akash has failed.

China did it by reverse engineering to make a Type 730 CIWS, leading to LD-2000 land variant. Since we need these systems in high numbers for anti-UAV operations, why not build them in India, either T-O-T or other means.

My contention is that buying off the shelf units is not the best choice given future requirement.

[Singha]

Atleast for the gun system, the ak630 or kashtan gun with a local radar and israeli eo kit borrowed from barak would be most cost effective and permit local manufacture and value addition....mounted on a flatbed truck

As for missiles we already have ordered a large number of spyder system....more could be ordered featuring just the python5 missiles and skipping the derby until hopefully the astra or maitri gets delivered. Why introduce a new missile into the mix.

[abhik]

^^^
The AK630 is already manufactured/assembled by the OFB if I am not wrong. I think the DRDO or the private sector should give making an ingenious systema try even if it means using a lot of ready made imported components.

[Austin]

AK-630M/Barak-1 combi meal is the way to go for Mark-1 , in Mark 2 model we can integrate AK-630M2 Duet and Astra AAM or if DRDO develops similar gun we can integrate it.

[abhik]

Also this will happen only if DRDO delivers. So your countries safety is contingent to a single point of failure.

Its only in India that almost every domestic system under development has a foreign hedge. Often they don't even wait for the domestic program to fail, they just order the import any way.

[Singha]

not too sure of the barak1 ... the IN found it costly and even plans to reuse those from retired kashin and viraat on other ships in future....

ideally even if its a little costlier (being active radar guided), a land based astra or even the mythical maitri is better...for higher % of local parts and skills development + production base.

about the ak630 definitely, we can take a start with it.

[Austin]

not too sure of the barak1 ... the IN found it costly and even plans to reuse those from retired kashin and viraat on other ships in future....

If they have useful service life left good enough to be put to use for couple of years then they would reuse it , even radars etc previously has been put to use.

As a matter of rule command guidance missile like Barak ,Kashtan ,Pantsir etc are cost effective for SHORAD task .

[Sagar G]

Sagar,

It is not as easy as you think. We could build all the missiles for IGMDP except Trishul, which was our QRSAM. Even the Maitri project has not gone far. We can probably have a missile like that when Astra comes onboard (similar to what was done in Spyder). But till then we don't have an answer. Also this will happen only if DRDO delivers.

If I have understood correctly the missile that is being used in the system, then doing an == with the Trishul, Maitri, Astra, Spyder makes no sense and is totally wrong since the missile here is command guided by the FCR or the EO unit. All the missiles that you are talking about have inbuilt seekers in them which makes them costly and also more complex to make. Since that is not the case here so it would be much easier to make a missile for this AD system and well within our capability since we already have experience with Akash. Also remember that Prahaar was built by our young scientists in two years flat. I don't think they will take a decade or so to come up with a missile for this system especially when we have all the buildings blocks for the same ready and in place.

Now talking about the radar again we have the same in the form of Rajendra Radar. It can be cut down to size and made compact for the requirements of this system if that is necessary. Moreover in a couple of years you will hear more good news regarding this.

Now coming to the EO unit here again we have the capability, from technology focus june 2008 pg 5-6

Electro-Optical Fire Control System for Naval Ship

Electro-optical fire control system (EOFCS) for naval ships comprises stabilised electro-optical payload
having second generation TI, CCD camera and laser range finder (LRF) for long range target detection.

Salient Features

Thermal Imager
Type : Second generation
Spectral band : LWIR
FOV : Two discrete

CCD Camera
Type : Inter-line transfer (2/3” format)
FOV : Continuous zoom

LRF
Type : Nd-YAG
Wavelength : 1.064 mm

I don't see any reason regarding why it cannot be utilized in a land based unit.

And finally the AD gun whose development in India has a very interesting story associated with it. Sometimes back ramana garu posted a link of CAG report on ARDE in R&D thread. In that report inside the "Frequent changes to the Qualitative Requirement by the Users" (pg.5) section lies the interesting story about India's attempt to develop an AD gun which goes like this (pg.6, case 2)

Case II: Development of 30 mm Fair Weather Towed Air Defence (AD) Gun System

For indigenization of technology for AD Gun, GSQR was framed by the Army
in October 1985. DDRD in May 1986 sanctioned a Technology
Demonstration project for design and development of Towed AD Gun,
ammunition system and associated technology (Sharp shooter) at an estimated
cost of ` 9.44 crore with the PDC of 5 years. The project was completed in
September 1992 at a cost of ` 8.24 crore, after achieving rate of fire of 1200
rounds per minutes as against rate of 1000 rounds per minute specified in the
GSQR. Later, a Staff Project (SL-PX-2K referred to at Sl No 4 below) was
taken up in September 2000 for ` 17.70 crore to improve upon the rate of fire
to 2000 rounds per minute. The project had to be foreclosed after an
expenditure of ` 14.68 lakh as the Army again changed the parameters of the
gun.

A total of nine changes in the GSQR were made impacting the basic
parameters of the gun system such as caliber, rate of fire, size, number of
barrels, weight etc. as detailed below:

S No.: 1
GSQR No. & Month of Issue : GSQR 554 of October 1985
Specifications of AD Gun : All weather, 30 mm, Towed, Multi-barrel, Rate Of Fire (ROF) not less than 1000 rpm
Revision to GSQR : None
Sanction of Project & its status : RDS–PX-86/ARD-826 in May 1986 for Rs. 9.44 crore. Successfully completed in September 1992 at a cost of Rs. 8.24 crore.

S No.: 2
GSQR No. & Month of Issue : No Revised QR. DRDO unilaterally decided to develop item with enhanced specifications to Multi-barrel, Gatling Gun with ROF 4200 rpm
Specifications of AD Gun : Army in October 1995 suggested two types of AD guns. One with weight around 1000 – 1500 Kg and other weighing 4000–5000 Kg with ROF 1000–2000 rounds in each case.
Sanction of Project & its status : RDR-PX-93/ARD-984 in August 1993 for Rs. 1.98 crore. Since Gatling gun did not meet the user requirement the project was foreclosed in October 1995 at an expenditure of Rs. 48.5 lakh

S No.: 3
GSQR No. & Month of Issue : Draft GSQR of May 1997
Specifications of AD Gun : 30 mm, Towed, Single Barrel, ROF not less than 1000 rpm, and Weight not more than 1500 Kg.
Revision to GSQR : July 1998 Twin Barrel Gun ROF 2000 rpm Weight 3500 – 3800 Kg
Sanction of Project & its status : RDX-PX-97/ARD-1080 in August 1997 for Rs. 9.85 core. Closed in April 2000 at an
expenditure of Rs. 51.19 lakh.

S No.: 4
GSQR No. & Month of Issue : GSQR 767 of January 2000
Specifications of AD Gun : Fair weather, 30 mm, Two Barrel, Towed AD Gun, Weight 3500–3800 Kg and ROF 2000 rpm
Revision to GSQR :
Sanction of Project & its status : SL-PX-2K/ARD-1148 in September 2000 for ` 17.70 crore. Due to decision of the Army to upgrade in service 40 mm L/70 and 23mm ZU Gun, Project foreclosed in October 2001 at a cost of `14.68 lakh.

S No.: 5
GSQR No. & Month of Issue : GSQR 910 of October 2002
Specifications of AD Gun : As a common successor to L/70 and 23mm ZU Gun. All weather, Two Barrel, ROF not less than 1000 per barrel
Revision to GSQR : Amended in May 2004.
Sanction of Project & its status : No project undertaken as GSQR was revised in September 2004

S No.: 6
GSQR No. & Month of Issue : GSQR 998 of September 2004
Specifications of AD Gun : All weather, Towed/HMV mounted, 30/35mm, Two Barrel with ROF 1000 rpm and Weight about 4.5 ton
Revision to GSQR : Amended in August 2006 Light Weight Air Defence Gun
Sanction of Project & its status : No project undertaken as the GSQR was amended in August 2006 and revised GSQR
superseding all the previous GSQRs was received in January 2007

S No.: 7
GSQR No. & Month of Issue : GSQR 1166 Received in January 2007 to replace L/70 and 23mm ZU Gun
Specifications of AD Gun : Towed, HMV mounted, ROF 1000 rpm and weight Not < 6000 Kg
Revision to GSQR :
Sanction of Project & its status : No project undertaken till date by ARDE

No points for guessing why ARDE didn't take up the revised GSQR. The report further states and contends that

In August 2010 the User Directorate in Army HQ stated that revisions to
GSQR in this case had become essential, as the features had become outdated
during preceding 20 years and the proposed gun system was required to relate
to the envisaged air threat. The User categorically denied any responsibility
for the failure in development by DRDO and insisted that they had not agreed
to any dilution in specifications of most critical of the GSQR parameters.
Consequently, even though three R&D projects and one Staff project were
undertaken by the laboratory, the AD Gun system could not be developed by
DRDO to satisfy the frequently revised requirements of the Users. This
resulted in their mid-way closure after incurring an expenditure of Rs. 9.38 crore
on the staff project in addition to the expenditure on the technology
demonstration project.

Ministry in its reply agreed with the audit contention of non
finalisation/frequent changes to QR leading to failure to develop a Gun system
acceptable to the Users.

Now after successfully torpedoing the indigenous effort suddenly out of the blue we have an imminent requirement for an AD system and that too which has a combo of a gun and a missile notwithstanding that this sudden requirement coincides with the development of similar systems in the foreign markets

So your countries safety is contingent to a single point of failure.

See if this is the logic which is making you believe IA in this particular case then India has already failed in ensuring it's safety since we don't have the system yet and even if everything goes well and according to the plan still it would be some 4-5 yrs. before these systems start coming. So by your logic India's safety has already failed and has been in this failed state since long.

I used to buy this argument but that was long time back, given the atmosphere of corruption that persists in India it's only wise to questions such purchases before we do that.

I would rather work on building a parallel system by involving the private sector. The private sector thinks of only one thing, profit.

I agree that the pvt. sector capability in this regard must be built but this particular way of purchase which is nothing but what our despised DPSU's have been doing for decades is not going to build any capability w.r.t. designing and developing complex weapon systems and just because pvt. sector cares for profit doesn't mean that they will become top weapons manufacturer.

If making components in India is cheaper or can be made cheaper, they will find a way to do it. Cold hard truth.

Oh please don't be so naive Indranil, pvt. companies are not involved in doing any charity but business and in business the only interest supreme is your's, nobody else's and FYI Indian pvt. companies are very much involved in skimming off our armed forces.

[John]

If I have understood correctly the missile that is being used in the system, then doing an == with the Trishul, Maitri, Astra, Spyder makes no sense and is totally wrong since the missile here is command guided by the FCR or the EO unit. All the missiles that you are talking about have inbuilt seekers in them which makes them costly and also more complex to make. Since that is not the case here so it would be much easier to make a missile for this AD system and well within our capability since we already have experience with Akash. Also remember that Prahaar was built by our young scientists in two years flat. I don't think they will take a decade or so to come up with a missile for this system especially when we have all the buildings blocks for the same ready and in place.

Trishul is actually CLOS but i believe they want SACLOS or Active/IR guidance, Prahaar is whole different beast: lot simpler being based on existing missile and land attack missile have shorter development spans than SAMs (see how many Land attack missiles Iran/NK have spewed out and their attempts reverse engineer even SA-3 have been colossal failures). Pantsyr was in development for close to decade even though it is basically an improved Tunguska, so expecting DRDO to show develop a brand new system is shorter time window being little too optimistic? Especially considering even Trishul took more than a decade and that was based on proven SA-8 SAM.

[Will]

I think such an order would also help maintain our status of the largest SAM network in the world. This combined with hordes of Akash, Barak-MR/LR, AAD, PAD should ensure our airspace is impregnable. However, AAD and PAD should also be produced in numbers.

We have the largest SAM network in the world? From when? Our SAM defences suk. The Russians had the most dense SAM network or at least the soviets did.

[Indranil]

It is a system which is required when Akash has failed.

China did it by reverse engineering to make a Type 730 CIWS, leading to LD-2000 land variant. Since we need these systems in high numbers for anti-UAV operations, why not build them in India, either T-O-T or other means.

My contention is that buying off the shelf units is not the best choice given future requirement.

Fact 1. China has the gun. We don't have the gun.
Fact 2. It is not for anti-UAV operations, it's for anything flying.
Fact 3. What is the RFP for other than ToT and building in India?

[Indranil]

If I have understood correctly the missile that is being used in the system, then doing an == with the Trishul, Maitri, Astra, Spyder makes no sense and is totally wrong since the missile here is command guided by the FCR or the EO unit. All the missiles that you are talking about have inbuilt seekers in them which makes them costly and also more complex to make. Since that is not the case here so it would be much easier to make a missile for this AD system and well within our capability since we already have experience with Akash. Also remember that Prahaar was built by our young scientists in two years flat. I don't think they will take a decade or so to come up with a missile for this system especially when we have all the buildings blocks for the same ready and in place.

1. You information on Trishul is not right. It does not have a seeker. It is a beam riding missile. Also Akash cannot be made much smaller(it breathes air). We have to have a small solid-fuel based missile. Maitri was supposed to give us the modified composite casings for such a missile. Unfortunately, it has not materialized till now.
2. Prahaar is a modification of a base design. We don't have a base in this case.
3. You grossly over estimate our expertise in this field. We even license manufacture our unguided rockets fired from helis and aircrafts. What is being asked here is another license manufacture. Same setting, different players. Will it create results? Time will tell.

So your countries safety is contingent to a single point of failure.

See if this is the logic which is making you believe IA in this particular case then India has already failed in ensuring it's safety since we don't have the system yet and even if everything goes well and according to the plan still it would be some 4-5 yrs. before these systems start coming. So by your logic India's safety has already failed and has been in this failed state since long.

Of course our state of preparedness is affected by non-availability of weapon systems! Question is how much longer will we keep trying the formula which has not worked in decades. Also, I don't understand what you are proposing as the way forward. Your lament is that IA is corrupt and immoral and hates indeginization of weapons. Ok. So what do we do next? We can't do away with the Army, can we?

If making components in India is cheaper or can be made cheaper, they will find a way to do it. Cold hard truth.

Oh please don't be so naive Indranil, pvt. companies are not involved in doing any charity but business and in business the only interest supreme is your's, nobody else's and FYI Indian pvt. companies are very much involved in skimming off our armed forces.

I don't think you got what I said. I did not speak of any philanthropy. I am speaking of cold-blooded profit making. If you want to make a sustainable environment for design and production of weapons in India. It has to be financially sustainable. And if there is a way to get there, it will be sought more vehemently by people who have profit making as their motif.

[ramana]

Weapon accuracy was a real concern. During upgrade trials, an upgraded MiG-27 conducted an HALR laser-pod assisted drop of a 500-kg dumb bomb from 7.5-km. Its missed distance was 15-metres. This was a dumb bomb, not a PGM.

Key reason why IAF is holding off on stocking up on PGMs??? the MIG 27 and Jaguar upgrades have provided enough accuracy to the venerable bomb trucks force in the IAF.

Paul, Where is the quote from?
Thanks in advance.
ramana

[Paul]

Here you go!

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/07/sp ... ig-27.html

[ramana]

Thanks. I have been looking ofr IAF's attack accuarcy for dumb bombs for quite sometime.

15m from 7.5km means 2 mil accuracy!!!!

I was expecting 20-30 mils.

So AOA!!!! For now point targets are toast.

So how many Mig27s are to be upgraded?

A total of 40 Mig 27's have been upgraded upto 2009; operational in 2 Sqdns (no's 10 and 29).
Another 60+ Mig 27's are operational in 3.5 Sqdns (18,22, 222 and TACDE) The Mig 27's in TACDE should be replaced by SU30MKI's by early next year.

There were reports that another 40 Mig 27's were to be Upgraded from 2010 onwards.....but no confirmation.

Reports on Engine problems still persist.

Paapam Nachiket.

BTW, BRM used to host such articles.

[member_26622]

Fact 1. China has the gun. We don't have the gun.
Fact 2. It is not for anti-UAV operations, it's for anything flying.
Fact 3. What is the RFP for other than ToT and building in India?[/quote]

Fact 1: Yes, we don't have the gun today. Even China did not have the gun until they copied it (multiple sources as per wiki)
Fact 2: I am suggesting that we need more of these units for anti-UAV defense; not that it can or cannot be used against anything flying 'within range'.
Fact 3: It is a Maintenance ToT; not a licence to build. 100 units is not enough to justify TOT and building in India.

My point been that we need more of these units to counter increasing UAV menace from pakistan and China front. 100 will support strike divisions only, likely in one theatre east or west.

[member_20317]

http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/3544 ... nchyh0.jpg

Why is that smoke ring there at the top of A-3? How does it help?

TIA

Also can I reduce the size of the image?

[ramana]

Its the "front end" steering mechanism. Singha calls it snorting bull nosecap.

Missiles can be steered from front end or aft end. Front end is by: jets or canards. Aft end is thrust vector control by:jets, flexible nozzle etc.

[Sagar G]

Trishul is actually CLOS but i believe they want SACLOS or Active/IR guidance, Prahaar is whole different beast: lot simpler being based on existing missile and land attack missile have shorter development spans than SAMs (see how many Land attack missiles Iran/NK have spewed out and their attempts reverse engineer even SA-3 have been colossal failures). Pantsyr was in development for close to decade even though it is basically an improved Tunguska, so expecting DRDO to show develop a brand new system is shorter time window being little too optimistic? Especially considering even Trishul took more than a decade and that was based on proven SA-8 SAM.

You are right about Trishul I mixed up and thought that Trishul had an mmw seeker I agree with you on Prahaar being simpler and being based upon existing missiles and that's what I was also pointing out. Prahaar is now "simpler" because now we have a technical base which we are utilizing to develop ballistic missiles quickly but go a decade back and the same Prahaar wouldn't have looked "simple". By working on Akash and Trishul we have developed technologies which we can now use in one way or the other to atleast attempt and make a missile for the AD system. What's the harm in doing that ??? If you want to cut down on the development time on this new missile then go for a JV. But going for a totally foreign product which won't add a dime worth of knowledge to our nascent armament industry because of the fear that we might not succeed in making the missile is not a sensible thing to do. We have more chance of success now than we had a decade earlier.

Which time window are you referring too ??? By the time this deal comes through if everything goes well I think close to a decade would have passed and that's enough time for us to make an attempt in creating the AD system. I have already pointed out the rest of the building blocks which we have and that's why I am not fully convinced about this proposal and believe that we must make this system indigenously even if we have to take a JV route for certain subsystems. Ironically the pvt. companies selected have worked on indigenous weapon systems developed by DRDO and hence have the "experience" on which IA is placing it's trust upon.

[Indranil]

Fact 1: Yes, we don't have the gun today. Even China did not have the gun until they copied it (multiple sources as per wiki)
Fact 2: I am suggesting that we need more of these units for anti-UAV defense; not that it can or cannot be used against anything flying 'within range'.
Fact 3: It is a Maintenance ToT; not a licence to build. 100 units is not enough to justify TOT and building in India.

My point been that we need more of these units to counter increasing UAV menace from pakistan and China front. 100 will support strike divisions only, likely in one theatre east or west.

Read the report carefully. The maintenance ToT is to be given to BDL and OFB. However the units will be built/assembled/integrated by the private players or BEL.

The idea is that the assembly of the 100 units gives the chosen entity enough insight to design and build their own systems from there on. The private entities have been chosen in such a way. I think TATA power sed has a good chance of coming up with their own system after 10 years. They have a great software team which cracked the artillery software fairly fast. They already build a lot of parts for missiles systems like akash. And they now have experience in integrating their 8x8 to various platforms like artillery gun, spyder, and akash(according to some AI 13 slides)

[Sagar G]

1. You information on Trishul is not right. It does not have a seeker. It is a beam riding missile. Also Akash cannot be made much smaller(it breathes air). We have to have a small solid-fuel based missile. Maitri was supposed to give us the modified composite casings for such a missile. Unfortunately, it has not materialized till now.
2. Prahaar is a modification of a base design. We don't have a base in this case.
3. You grossly over estimate our expertise in this field. We even license manufacture our unguided rockets fired from helis and aircrafts. What is being asked here is another license manufacture. Same setting, different players. Will it create results? Time will tell.

1. Yes I was wrong about Trishul, John earlier as well corrected me. I am not talking about making Akash smaller I know that this will be a new missile system and given our prior experience with Trishul and having also worked successfully on Akash I think we have developed enough technological base to make the missile on our own. If you think we can't then I propose to go for a JV like Brahmos and cut down on the development risk. Maitri was also supposed to give us seeker tech and we weren't exactly going in as a totally junior partner in the JV, IIRC it was said by DRDO officials that technology developed for Trishul would be used in the programme.
2. Yes we have, having worked on Akash and Trishul we have some technology from both which we can put to use.
3. We still do a lot of things that wouldn't make us proud but that hasn't stopped us from creating LCA, Arjun, Akash, Agni, Prithvi etc. etc. Using the same failed setting with different players is going to give you the same results since the "setting" was never meant to make India capable of indigenous arms manufacturing.

Of course our state of preparedness is affected by non-availability of weapon systems! Question is how much longer will we keep trying the formula which has not worked in decades. Also, I don't understand what you are proposing as the way forward. Your lament is that IA is corrupt and immoral and hates indeginization of weapons. Ok. So what do we do next? We can't do away with the Army, can we?

First of all I didn't say that the entire IA was corrupt and immoral but yes there are such elements in our armed forces and unfortunately they are also in powerful positions. When a retired IA guy can walk into the office of a serving General and offer him a bribe so as to keep the gravy train running then it doesn't take an extreme level of intelligence to figure out that our defence forces are also suffering from the corruption rot. If IA was so forthcoming about indigenization then we would have indigenized a lot more than what we have achieved till now. Now if you believe that we suffer from indigenization problem only and only because of lack of technological base and bloody DPSU's then I have nothing more to say to you.

We can do a lot of things to increase indigenization but what we can do in the near future is that we must capitalize on the technological base we have created and not go in for knee jerk foreign purchases. Regarding the system in debate I have already pointed out that we possess multiple technology blocks which we must utilize and wherever weak then go for a JV instead of purchasing the entire system from outside. The system won't be 100% indigenous hence not buy worthy is a foolish way of looking at indigenization.

I don't think you got what I said. I did not speak of any philanthropy. I am speaking of cold-blooded profit making. If you want to make a sustainable environment for design and production of weapons in India. It has to be financially sustainable. And if there is a way to get there, it will be sought more vehemently by people who have profit making as their motif.

Just because pvt. firms are crazy about making profits doesn't mean that they will also become house of excellence regarding military weapons design and manufacture. A lot of money needs to be put at stake by pvt. firms in defence R&D before we see them becoming capable enough to support an indigenous mil-industry complex.

[Indranil]

Sagar,

Trishul was not successful in terms of either guidance or propulsion. DRDO itself asked MoD to go ahead with imports. Maitri is the JV effort which was supposed to give us the missing parts in propulsion and guidance. It is ....

Akash does not give us either the guidance, nor the propulsion.

[Karan M]

Indranilroy, that's plainly wrong. Trishul propulsion worked and worked well. In fact, it was the predecessor of today's Astra in terms of a smokeless propellant with a motor made to similar design. As matter of fact, the short reaction time & the good performance of the propulsion, were noted as one of the most critical design successes of the program, which led the DRDL to persevere with it.
The guidance problems were also solved, with repeated successes achieved in its penultimate trials (for the IAF). The command guidance system was reworked and proved successful. Only the Navy variant was still WIP when the project was shelved. Their needs were substantially different from those of the AF & Army in several respects, and led to significant effort in procuring different hardware for both guidance & trials. If there is any lesson in this, its that the world over, combined triservices requirements, sought to be fulfilled by one design, rarely work out in terms of time & effort. The JSF today is yet another example, with the AF version hobbled by Naval requirements of compact form factor, limiting its aerodynamic potential & the Marine requirement of a lift fan causing more issues.

The LLQRM has little to do with the "failure" of the Trishul in terms of technology, because it envisages an entirely new design effort, both in terms of guidance (fire & forget) and propulsion (jet vanes/TVC). The radar will likely be a derivative of the Aslesha, based on a truck for mobility and with enhanced performance (larger antenna and more power output).
Again, India has experience with both ARH seekers & jet vane based SAM type systems - the AAD is a perfect example.

The DRDO giving clearance for imports is nothing to write home about. They really don't have an option. The services are very adept at holding other systems at risk, if imports are not approved. To keep things going smoothly, DRDO approves of imports, as long as it still has a chance to supplant with its own programs down the line. Where possible, it seeks to get its cut out of otherwise bad deals. The Barak-8 is a perfect example, a high risk paper program sought to be pushed through merely on the claims of a developer who ended up resourcing their own national programs instead. And the Akash program was cut down to all of two squadrons for the AF, at the time. The gentleman who, per the media, was in charge of all this, so nothing hush hush here, was later the representative of the external agency which was to lead this program, is now in the news for the chopper affair. The DRDO sought extensive TOT for its production partners as part of the deal, and a say in the configuration & workshare (however limited). It remains to be seen whether all this is granted.

Having said that, the fact also is that DRDO today is heavily under-resourced, albeit by design (as such decisions keeps imports humming along) and the agency has many programs on its plate, for which its people are already stretched. So it definitely will not be as easy as just putting bits & pieces of other programs together, or leveraging technology easily.
And besides the pvt sector deserves a helping hand (which the DRDO has long pushed for). Having said that, this deal appears very weird, the news report suggests the pvt sector firm has to demonstrate the tech and then transfer TOT to state owned BDL.

So hardly as ground breaking as it appears.

[Indranil]

Thank you.

Can you please point me to:
1. Any literature which says that Trishul's guidance worked for land based systems.
2. Astra's propulsion is the same as that of Trishul.

I would love to learn more.

[Philip]

Trishul failed repeatedly in naval trials.One upright naval officer,now deceased, who recommended Barak instead for our warships was allegedly denied promotion by babudom because he spoke the truth about Trishul. If our warships today have a decent anti-missile defence,it is due to him.

Isn't the Spyder supposed to be on order or under serious consideration? Based upon Israeli Python and Derby AAMs it is supposed to replace our SAM-3/6s.The Pantsir seems an adequate replacement for the Tunguskas.

[member_22539]

Why do I never find you criticizing any Russian weapon system. Do you have any explanation for the recent failures of Russian missiles during trials in India besides "it must be the SDRE's fault"?

[Karan M]

Indranilroy,

For overall technologies achieved with the missile itself (note, not the radar packaging/C3I/guidance etc), here:

http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/labs/DRDL/Engli ... chieve.jsp

CONTROL GUIDANCE ALGORITHM FOR CLOS GUIDANCE

In order to achieve shortest possible range of a weapon system, it is essential to develop CLOS guidance scheme in which missile is guided to the LOS in the quickest possible time. This technology has been developed for the first time in the IGMDP. Trishul system has been developed using this technology and it was demonstrated through 80 flight tests using various kinds of platforms. Required miss-distance (» 10 mtr.) has been demonstrated repeatedly through live firings against targets.

HEIGHT LOCK LOOP GUIDANCE ALGORITHM:

Trishul is the first indigenous supersonic missile having capability of flying 5 meters above the sea-surface. This has been possible by design of a sophisticated height lock loop guidance algorithm using a precision Radio Altimeter as a height sensing device. The sea-skimming capability of Trishul missile has been demonstrated through a large number of live firings from Naval Trishul Shore Installation at INS Dronacharya.

LITHIUM THERMAL BATTERY

Lithium Thermal Batteries have high power density and very long shelf life (in excess of 20 years). Trishul missile borne lithium thermal batteries have been indigenously developed, qualified & produced in large numbers.

DUAL THRUST ROCKET MOTOR

Dual Thrust Rocket Motor has been designed and developed indigenously for Trishul missile. Smokeless composite propellant has been indigenously developed for this Rocket Motor. Rocket Motor has been flight tested several times without any flaw.

LAUNCH CONTAINER

Trishul missile is delivered as ammunition in a FRP canister. This launch container has been indigenously developed with various mechanisms like automatic umbilical retraction, transport-locking mechanism etc., along with its electrical interfaces.

FOLDING FIN TECHNOLOGY

In order to have minimum dimension of the launch container to accommodate more number of missiles on the launcher, folding fin mechanism has been developed for Trishul missile. All the four fins are folded when the missile is within the launch container. They automatically are deployed as soon as the missile moves out of the launch container. Design and implementation of the fin folding Mechanism has been a real challenge. Folding fin mechanism has been qualified through large number of flights tests without any failure.

FLOW FORMING TECHNOLOGY

Novel manufacturing technique called flow forming has been established for manufacturing of Trishul airframe structures. This technology has been successfully utilised for manufacturing of maraging steel rocket motor tubes, and other airframe structures of Trishul. This technology has played crucial role in reducing the hardware weight of Trishul missile.

Note, the dual thrust motor concept is now being implemented in Barak-8, albeit reportedly with a new design, which may be used for Astra-MK2 as well. MK1 benefits from the advances in propellant tech. developed for the trishul - have to check my notes for the exact ref., but trishul was our first breakthrough.

Coming to guidance being successful, its mentioned above, but for more details on how it was resolved, check here:
http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/ind ... /1993/1030

The last bunch of tests were flawless and saw the entire missile-radar combo work for the IAF version. Another similar variant was for the Army.
The IAF then changed its mind and said it wanted a fire and forget system for LLQRM. Its a different matter, that seven years later, the program is inching along thanks to the high costs projected, though the IAF purchased a bunch of SpyDers - which would be just starting delivery now.

BTW, the Trishul thanks to its unique FCS combo - the Flycatcher radar + missile combo - was noted to be very hard to jam, and the Flycatcher was regarded as very accurate & capable. The choice, driven in part by mass purchase of the system by the IA, also complicated design though...