Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Sep 2013 17:57

is this Bradley carrying a folding mast with a 4 pack of TOW/hellfire?
http://jeremyb1234.files.wordpress.com/ ... radley.jpg

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Sep 2013 19:10

mody wrote:With regards to my question of mounting Nag missiles on BMP vehicles, it was specifically with regards to replacing 2 Konkur ATGMs mounted on each BMP as part of its standard ATGM fitment. I know that NAMICA is based on the BMP-2. However, NAMICA has been specially designed to carry the NAG. Can the NAG be carried by standard BMP-2s as well, as replacement for Konkurs or not? I could be that Nag requires additional equipment, to enable target acquisition etc. and such additional equipment cannot be accommodated in the BMP-2 troop carrier.

That is crux of the situation - NAG is a far more advanced missile and will require a complete rework in terms of electro-optical systems for target acquisition. Plus,we need to keep in mind the dimension angle as well. You cannot shoe-horn a system into BMP-2 unless you design something for it. Also, IA might not be interested in spending the money required for equipping the entire BMP-2 fleet with such a missile. Nag (or a version thereof) should feature on the FICV which is being proposed as replacement for BMP-2.

With regards to the Man portable version of Nag, first the IA has to accept the Nag, in its current form. They have placed only a small order for 700 of missiles with 13 Namica carriers. If IA was really happy with the performance of Nag, then they would make serious effort to get it into service as soon as possible. They would changed operational plans to accommodate this kind of capability and that would lead to a requirement of X-number of Namica's and Nag missiles per formation. This would lead to a much larger requirement of Nag missiles.

I've said this before that Nag has no equivalent in IA service - and given the nature and cost of the system, this will be see a relatively niche deployment. But to expect the IA to change its operational doctrine or organization structure because Nag is available is stretching the argument too far. For good or bad, IA has had very limited ATGM battalions in service and AFAIK, even they don't exist now. So, NAMICA will see deployment with some existing units of IA.

If this were to be a case, then IA would give requirement to DRDO, to develop a Man portable ATGM, having fire and forget capabilities, with IIR seeker and a tandem warhead, just like the Nag.

For all the capabilities of Nag, I'm yet to see even DRDO make a pitch for developing a man-portable 3rd Gen F&F missile - there were some sound bytes but then nothing came of it. Has anyone wondered what is the reason for the same?

Unfortunately, IA is still making Nag jump through hoops. I'm sure that by now IA has seen enough of Nag to make out what type of weapon it is capable of becoming , once the small niggles still plaguing it are ironed out. But still it doesn't seem like IA is fully convinced about it and are not putting their full weight behind the project or asking for further spin-offs based on the development effort so far.

I haven't still being able to figure out why was Nag conceived in the first place - I mean, surely, the largest requirement is in the man-portable version of ATGM. So, why did anyone want to develop such a heavy class of missile with limited deployment? As far as I'm concerned, there is LCA written large over it - scientific enthusiasm rather than practical deployment.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Sep 2013 19:16

nik wrote:<SNIP> At the end of the day, it is a matter of economic viability and the huge order numbers which IA needs is far far ahead of the break even point. <SNIP>.

So, why don't you educate us on two points -

(1) Why was Nag even conceived for development under IGMDP? I mean, surely, as the number suggests, the biggest requirement was in man-portable version. So, why develop something which was not even in service then?

(2) In all these years of development cycle of Nag, why has DRDO not come up with a road map for development of a man-portable version of Nag? Seeker tech limitation is after all only one aspect - why was no parallel plan put in place to develop other aspects? Instead, it was BDL which proposed home made Milan-2T (basically, put together from tech received from France) as advancement over Milan ATGM in IA service - it is a different issue that it failed to meet the minimum technical requirement and was still inducted. As interim measure of course, still 3rd Gen F&F man-portable missile, Spike or Javelin, was inducted.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Sep 2013 19:21

nik wrote: Irrelevance is in the eye of the beholder and your dis-agreement is fine.

Any sane engine development company will strive for commonality of parts (piston, cylinder head,sleeve, rings..) to reduce development cycle. It will all have to be tested, but that did not stop the Chinese and Russians from standing up on their own feet for defense equipment.

At the end of the day, it is a matter of economic viability and the huge order numbers which IA needs is far far ahead of the break even point.

The first step is always difficult, but the next series of development carry and build upon a lot of commonality (most important is Human skills and knowledge which is the REAL bottleneck). We have invested and learnt a lot in the first step, let's continue and pick up speed on following steps. Otherwise capabilities built so hard will wither away (Remember the Gnat).

A 1 billion $$$ order for Nag and variants will make the program sustainable for 10 years and will deliver the next series of missiles. We can transform it in to an export house. Paltry orders is equivalent to killing the project. After this 1 billion $ import order, we can kiss away any further development goodbye. Back to been a handicap with a begging bowl.

OMG. Certainly missed out on a ton of things in my life. Need a rebirth to catch up.

But am glad at least we agree on the 100 and 200CC stuff.

Thanks.

And, congrats on your 100th post.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 07 Sep 2013 20:13

There is huge requirements for FnF missiles and Nag offers a good solution. So why not have a few thousand Nag missiles available as first line of defense since it is heavy and limited use? A powerful first hit counts and it will also free up weight issue quick - why are missiles for anyway and considering its strengths any hit will reduce that much damage from enemy then on.
Same for delivery system. Better if delivery system is also separated in use and throw mode. The IA can't spend all monies available yearly but such an offer can be considered. At present 700 numbers are already considered so why not more for kind of threats on fronts.
Plus there is also advantage of tech development which can be done in parts. In future when and if a series of different ATG/bunker-buster missiles are developed using the tech as stepping stone that would be great too.

As it stands clearly Javelin can only be temporary arrangement as its seeker is barely acceptable as requirement testing clearly showed. It is something similar to amriki plane not making through in MMRCA as per requirements however there is no competition here.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Sep 2013 21:39

rohitvats wrote:I haven't still being able to figure out why was Nag conceived in the first place - I mean, surely, the largest requirement is in the man-portable version of ATGM. So, why did anyone want to develop such a heavy class of missile with limited deployment? As far as I'm concerned, there is LCA written large over it - scientific enthusiasm rather than practical deployment.

The original Nag was a simpler laser guided (semi-active laser homing) design. It was based on having a passive laser seeker and a designator in the firer, and would have been quicker and easier to develop. The IA then asked for a true fire and forget missile with a longer range than existing inventory (4km and above) as these were the ones "latest in tech and likely to be available on the future battlefield". The program was then changed to looking at fire and forget missile, with corresponding seekers. F&F design also meant no human in the loop, so on board intelligence. Also, IA specified other requirements - top attack trajectory, tandem warhead & smokeless propellant. This led to the final design iteration.
The next design iteration involved developing a new CCD seeker, for F&F function. Plus a MMW sensor for all weather operation. CCD seeker was day only, and MMW sensor proved impossible with (then) technology, both Indian and abroad, as compact MMW power sources & transmission chains were yet to mature. Hence the decision to adopt the most complex IIR sensor tech. Which is of course, another story altogether.
In contrast, most man fired missiles (bar the expensive Spikes and Javelins) remain SACLOS (Semi Auto Command Line of Sight) and hence mitigate against weight concerns (dont have to carry onboard seekers and processing for the same, which means less weight - no guidance package + additional power module).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Sep 2013 21:57

rohitvats wrote:(2) In all these years of development cycle of Nag, why has DRDO not come up with a road map for development of a man-portable version of Nag?

It is likely that a roadmap exists but is not public and is classified. Bits and pieces of the roadmap are being made public based on what is being sanctioned by the services over time. The plans for long range PGMs, ARMs etc for instance - were clearly all in the works for a while but only publicly noted recently as they were officially sanctioned. A challenge is that most of these programs - unless cleared by the service - remain funded by internal resources, so development is not speedy & more of a tech eval. until officially sanctioned.

At any rate, a manportable NAG is not likely to be feasible. Its an entirely different design requirement and this class of missile in the roadmap could most probably be SAMHO/CLGM, which has been designed to be both manportable and cannon fired.
http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/lans2/43 ... iginal.jpg
Of course, the IA should be willing to accept a semi-active missile. If they want a F&F missile, then the SAMHO wont be adopted in a man portable role.

A new missile would have to be developed. We/DRDO/services may call it Nag 2/3/4, but it surely will be very different.

The NAG roadmap as known currently will be Nag/Nag MK2 (if sanctioned, and lighter/more performance) and HELINA, which apparently is being evaluated for extension to a Brimstone style capability, which the IAF is very interested in.

Seeker tech limitation is after all only one aspect - why was no parallel plan put in place to develop other aspects? Instead, it was BDL which proposed home made Milan-2T (basically, put together from tech received from France) as advancement over Milan ATGM in IA service - it is a different issue that it failed to meet the minimum technical requirement and was still inducted. As interim measure of course, still 3rd Gen F&F man-portable missile, Spike or Javelin, was inducted.

Lets not get caught up in the confusing reports which put all the missile requirements in one big muddle.
First, the Milan2T is not an Indian missile at all. Its an existing French design, albeit license produced at BDL. The only difference is the T- which stands for tandem. Basically a new warhead to punch through ERA protected tanks. If BDL proposed this, it was clearly to meet an IA req, because pretty much all our opponent tanks have now got or are getting ERA.

The Milan has always been a shorter ranged missile than the Konkurs on the IA BMP fleet, so nothing special in that Milan2T would remain so. Second missile that IA has acquired/BDL has licensed for, is the Konkurs-M. This again, is nothing but the tandem warhead version of existing Konkurs. Where BDL innovated, is FLAME - basically, taking the Konkurs launcher and adapting it for Milan missiles etc. Similarly developing local simulators for both missiles.

At any rate, the Milan2T was a decent decision based on immediate requirements because nothing comparable is available off the shelf and it also offers IA troops the ability to rapidly transition to a familiar weapon.

Meanwhile, ALL these missiles will ultimately have to give way to the next generation of missiles, which are basically either F&F or the slightly previous gen, which come with laser/radio designation (Kornet, Metis-M).

The problem is that any such requirement - as the Spike issue shows - will involve protracted trials and is unlikely to result in a quick decision which meets all MOD/IA criteria. Which are latest tech, and tech transfer for local production, plus prudent pricing. In which case, it makes ample sense to continue both Milan-2T and Konkurs-M assembly in India, before shifting over to the next "latest tech" product, which will take a lot of time to adopt.
If Range is an issue, then it makes sense to increase Konkurs-M (4 km) production but Milan-2T is likely to be more popular with infantry, and SF where every kg of weight counts. At the end of the day, these weapons are defensive systems (even Javelin is 2.5km) and hence, can be used only from ambuscade.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Sep 2013 21:58

^^^ I dont think that is entirely true , from the time I followed IGMPD and this is since 80's Nag was always concieved a F&F missile with Top Attack capability .... if you pick up any magazine from DRDO/IGMPD program there are interview from DRDO scientist which mentions that India was the only country which will have a 3rd Gen Nag F&F missile with top attack capability and it was a unique missile of its type with true F&F capability.

What changed in 90's was the indiginous MMW seeker realisation did not materalise and DRDO later opted for IIR seeker from French for this program and later to be replace by indigenous ones.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Sep 2013 22:09

Austin wrote:^^^ I dont think that is entirely true , from the time I followed IGMPD and this is since 80's Nag was always concieved a F&F missile with Top Attack capability .... if you pick up any magazine from DRDO/IGMPD program there are interview from DRDO scientist which mentions that India was the only country which will have a 3rd Gen Nag F&F missile with top attack capability and it was a unique missile of its type with true F&F capability.

Sorry, but you are wrong. I have the actual published interview with the project director of Nag, which mentions the Semi-Active seeker program and how the program developed.
I can post excerpts but only if I get the time to dig out my notes. Another interesting thing he and others mention is that these tactical programs were to be taken up sequentially, given DRDO resource constraints and Indian technology issues. Then DM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Venkataraman) was the one who essentially created the IGMDP by asking for all these programs to be taken up at once. General Sundarji was also part of these discussions. Pros and cons apart, while Kalam agreed to this, he was not entirely happy and the missile teams themselves were taken aback.

What changed in 90's was the indiginous MMW seeker realisation did not materalise and DRDO later opted for IIR seeker from French for this program and later to be replace by indigenous ones.

No, not quite right again. See the timeline above. Both the CCD and MMW version were to be developed. MMW was kept in abeyance, and is now restarted, whereas CCD has been superceded by IIR. Also, the seeker for Nag has always been Indian, don't confuse the seeker with the FPA which is basically the detector. That is sourced from elsewhere. Rest - optics, seeker gimbal plus assembly, onboard processing hardware software and overall seeker packaging is done in India.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Sep 2013 22:14

Yes please scan and post the interview it would be interesting to read .....since the time i followed IGMPD in 80's Nag was always F&F missile and was a unique missile in the 5 that IGMPD was suppose to develop.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Sep 2013 22:23

Austin wrote:Yes please scan and post the interview it would be interesting to read .....since the time i followed IGMPD in 80's Nag was always F&F missile and was a unique missile in the 5 that IGMPD was suppose to develop.

Most of what is known in public or via interviews etc is what was cleared after IGMDP official sanction. Even that sometimes has stuff which is not revealed since the state of defence journalism in India is pathetic. Who, apart from people on this forum or the net, are interested in such stuff

I was surprised to know that for instance, Akash was to have active homing seeker (not semi-active) and the seeker was dropped because of both weight, complexity issues (compact seeker was not giving desired range) and because WLR proved accurate enough to guide the missile in close enough for a high SSKP. This enabled them to radically reduce the cost of the missile as well.

Another interesting thing, the Akash missile system, specifically for the Army, contracted for a Polish 2D radar from Radwar for surveillance if they could not afford the 3D CAR (which was originally codeveloped with PIT of Poland, with different variants for both countries). Akash team in the 90's was concerned that IA/IAF could only afford a few radars since these were "many crores of Rupees in cost". With the Indian economy growing, this requirement became superfluous. The IA/IAF now purchase far more expensive items.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 07 Sep 2013 22:27

More than the NAG it is the CLGM that is comparable to the contemporary Fire-and-Forget man portable ATGMs. In fact DRDO has even displayed a portable version. It is a few kgs heavier(18.5 Vs 12/14) but has double the range (at 5+ km Vs 2.5km). It just lacks a FaF seeker. In the latest Nag iteration we have already demonstrated the IIR seeker technology which works in even the most demanding environments. So all that needs to be done is miniaturizing the seeker and and using it in a smaller version of the CLGM. Maybe a generic CLU can also be developed which can launch multiple types of missiles, including cheaper laser guided bunker-busters and can also act as laser designator for precision air and artillery. All in all from a technological standpoint we are at a pretty good place to build a Man portable Fire and forget ATGM in a reasonable time frame(IIRC the DRDO chief said they would require only 2(?) years). And anyway the Army already has 1000's of Milans and other Russian Missiles on order, so no reason that they can't wait for a couple of years.
If on the other hand we choose to import/assemble the Spike/Javelin at this stage, we can kiss goodby to any indigenous Man portable ATGM for another 20 years. And thousand of crores or taxpayer rupees to the US or Israel.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Sep 2013 22:30

IIR seeker is passive, and not active. Miniaturizing it is non trivial either. For instance, you are asking for a 5km range, from a seeker which will be much smaller and is currently able to achieve 4km, with the best of what has been provided by one of the world's best FPA detector firms. Otherwise, you have to make it a hybrid system - partial guidance to a point till the seeker locks on.. again, a new design in every sense.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Sep 2013 22:36

Karan M wrote:Most of what is known in public or via interviews etc is what was cleared after IGMDP official sanction. Even that sometimes has stuff which is not revealed since the state of defence journalism in India is pathetic. Who, apart from people on this forum or the net, are interested in such stuff

Actually in the 80's Illustrated Weekly and India Today were the two magazine which used to report on Defence topics and they were quite ok but we never had our own Janes like we have today ....except perhaps Vayu Magazine.

The fact that Nag was conceived as any thing other then F&F is news to me since the time I have been following IGMPD that was always the case.

So any news article you have if you could scan it when you get the time it would be interesting

I was surprised to know that for instance, Akash was to have active homing seeker (not semi-active) and the seeker was dropped because of both weight, complexity issues (compact seeker was not giving desired range) and because WLR proved accurate enough to guide the missile in close enough for a high SSKP. This enabled them to radically reduce the cost of the missile as well.

Never heard of that either Akash was always Command Guidance missile from IGMDP days ....the novelty was its mobilty and Phased Array Radar and it was described then in 80's as similar to US Corpsam program.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 07 Sep 2013 22:51

Karan M wrote:IIR seeker is passive, and not active.

My mistake, corrected.

Miniaturizing it is non trivial either. For instance, you are asking for a 5km range, from a seeker which will be much smaller and is currently able to achieve 4km, with the best of what has been provided by one of the world's best FPA detector firms. Otherwise, you have to make it a hybrid system - partial guidance to a point till the seeker locks on.. again, a new design in every sense.

I'm not saying it is trivial and yes it will have to be a new design. But this seeker will have to perform only upto 2.5 km(typical man portable ATGM range) not 5km. Also the Nag has demonstrated the capability to work at 4km in the most disadvantageous conditions. Do we really know that Javelin or Spike perform 100% as advertised in brochures in the same conditions? Maybe the Spike failing 7/10 times is a pointer(IIRC they claimed it was a "defective" batch or something).

member_27444 · Post by **member_27444** » 07 Sep 2013 23:09

No the seeker may be done but its not performing what it should do.

It's fine we built cryogenic engine and tested components and call for press conference or release details
But the story on launch is different

I can bet most of the DRDo project work in crucible but in the field ....

I don't blame IA or IAF for their concern

There is nothing sophisticated in this age of 3D to make rifle or small arms...
But we import

Same with Abhay to Nirbhay to promised Wankle engine and they post image from English company

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Sep 2013 23:11

Karan M wrote:The original Nag was a simpler laser guided (semi-active laser homing) design. It was based on having a passive laser seeker and a designator in the firer, and would have been quicker and easier to develop.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but did not the plan call for development of wire-guided SACLOS missile along with development of IIR and MMW seeker versions? And the MMW seeker version was dropped because of technological issues? And wire-guided SACLOS version was also dropped considering the issue of wire guidance for long range missile - some reports say DRDO was not able to develop the wire-guided version? Where is this lase-beam riding thing coming from?

Further - none of the laser-beam riding missiles in international market are true man-portable.

On the design aspect, the question still remains - was the original missile man-portable or was even that a vehicle mounted one? All the evidence seen so far states that it was always a specialized vehicle mounted missile.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on the design and use aspect.

Internet reports say that development was sanctioned in 1988 and first test done in 1990 - what was tested in 1990? Any idea?

The IA then asked for a true fire and forget missile with a longer range than existing inventory (4km and above) as these were the ones "latest in tech and likely to be available on the future battlefield". The program was then changed to looking at fire and forget missile, with corresponding seekers. F&F design also meant no human in the loop, so on board intelligence. Also, IA specified other requirements - top attack trajectory, tandem warhead & smokeless propellant. This led to the final design iteration.

The next design iteration involved developing a new CCD seeker, for F&F function. Plus a MMW sensor for all weather operation. CCD seeker was day only, and MMW sensor proved impossible with (then) technology, both Indian and abroad, as compact MMW power sources & transmission chains were yet to mature. Hence the decision to adopt the most complex IIR sensor tech. Which is of course, another story altogether.

What was the initial range envisaged for Nag?

In contrast, most man fired missiles (bar the expensive Spikes and Javelins) remain SACLOS (Semi Auto Command Line of Sight) and hence mitigate against weight concerns (don't have to carry on board seekers and processing for the same, which means less weight - no guidance package + additional power module)

Most countries have already initiated programs to replace the man-portable SACLOS ATGM with F&F missiles - with Spike family leading the charge in Europe. Javelins are the man-portable missiles of the US Army. The most other ATGM that you refer to are on their way out - wherever countries can afford to replace them.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 07 Sep 2013 23:15

Austin wrote: Actually in the 80's Illustrated Weekly and India Today were the two magazine which used to report on Defence topics and they were quite ok but we never had our own Janes like we have today ....except perhaps Vayu Magazine.

I think there used to be a 'Chanakya' magazine also. I had a few months of issues with me. Taken from Pawan Hans office at Safdarjung.

member_27444 · Post by **member_27444** » 07 Sep 2013 23:20

They made it top kill for which the IR sensor / seeker is still under development

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 Sep 2013 23:28

Karan M wrote: It is likely that a road map exists but is not public and is classified. Bits and pieces of the road map are being made public based on what is being sanctioned by the services over time. The plans for long range PGMs, ARMs etc for instance - were clearly all in the works for a while but only publicly noted recently as they were officially sanctioned. A challenge is that most of these programs - unless cleared by the service - remain funded by internal resources, so development is not speedy & more of a tech eval. until officially sanctioned.

Karan - we're putting together two unrelated aspects here.

First - secrecy with respect to a program and news being made public only when the product has matured. Sudarshan LGB is one example which you've quoted.

Second - the development of a product w/o requirement having been provided by the Service(s). Now, unlike HAL, DRDO has not cash-flow coming from sale of anything to Services. So, if the development of a man-portable version is happening w/o sanction from IA, how will the same be funded? Further, development of man-portable ATGM is not exactly a program which can be funded with allocating money from usual R&D budget. It will need to run like a full fledged program with proper funding to see the light of the day.

So, I'm not too sure what we're talking about here. Either IA has requested for smaller Nag and DRDO is keeping quite as per directive or DRDO is using internal funds to develop some technologies in this field which are unlikely to translate into a product.

At any rate, a man-portable NAG is not likely to be feasible. Its an entirely different design requirement and this class of missile in the road-map could most probably be SAMHO/CLGM, which has been designed to be both man portable and cannon fired.

http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/lans2/43 ... iginal.jpg

Of course, the IA should be willing to accept a semi-active missile. If they want a F&F missile, then the SAMHO wont be adopted in a man portable role. A new missile would have to be developed. We/DRDO/services may call it Nag 2/3/4, but it surely will be very different.

The NAG roadmap as known currently will be Nag/Nag MK2 (if sanctioned, and lighter/more performance) and HELINA, which apparently is being evaluated for extension to a Brimstone style capability, which the IAF is very interested in.

Well, the technological challenges need to be understood by key-board ninjas on this forum who think man-portable Nag is simply current Nag ATGM/2.

Coming to the missile linked by you - when was this developed? Would have been a better option than to induct Milan-2T.

Lets not get caught up in the confusing reports which put all the missile requirements in one big muddle. First, the Milan2T is not an Indian missile at all. Its an existing French design, albeit license produced at BDL. The only difference is the T- which stands for tandem. Basically a new warhead to punch through ERA protected tanks. If BDL proposed this, it was clearly to meet an IA req, because pretty much all our opponent tanks have now got or are getting ERA.

I'm not getting caught up in anything - BDL proposed this because of IA requirement but the missile put together by BDL failed to meet the 'diluted' GSQR and but was still inducted. IA wanted to close the requirement completely but was forced to accept the BDL missile as money had already been spent in anticipation of orders from IA.

<SNIP>

At any rate, the Milan2T was a decent decision based on immediate requirements because nothing comparable is available off the shelf and it also offers IA troops the ability to rapidly transition to a familiar weapon. Meanwhile, ALL these missiles will ultimately have to give way to the next generation of missiles, which are basically either F&F or the slightly previous gen, which come with laser/radio designation (Kornet, Metis-M).

And that is why I have not been able to understand any requirement been shown for man-portable missile.

<SNIP>

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 07 Sep 2013 23:34

Amyrao wrote:No the seeker may be done but its not performing what it should do.......................Same with Abhay to Nirbhay to promised Wankle engine and they post image from English company

Another whiner with half baked info cometh

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 07 Sep 2013 23:37

Karan M wrote:I was surprised to know that for instance, Akash was to have active homing seeker (not semi-active) and the seeker was dropped because of both weight, complexity issues (compact seeker was not giving desired range) and because WLR proved accurate enough to guide the missile in close enough for a high SSKP. This enabled them to radically reduce the cost of the missile as well.

Yeah I remember the shock as well, but did they conduct any test with the active seeker. They had made protos of the same.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 08 Sep 2013 00:07

The F&F missiles especially the Javelin are definitely not replacing it predecessors 1:1. Most countries have ordered them in the 100's, some of them in a few 1000's. Nothing compared to the numbers clocked the the likes of MILAN(~350,000), TOW(~700,000+) etc over the years. As per wiki India itself has produced 30,000+ MILANs. It's what you would expect if the cost of the missile jumps up by 10 times.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Sep 2013 01:40

(Quote function is not working for me...please bear with me...

[quote="rohitvats"]

Please correct me if I'm wrong but did not the plan call for development of wire-guided SACLOS missile along with development of IIR and MMW seeker versions? And the MMW seeker version was dropped because of technological issues? And wire-guided SACLOS version was also dropped considering the issue of wire guidance for long range missile - some reports say DRDO was not able to develop the wire-guided version? Where is this lase-beam riding thing coming from?
----------------------

All that I remember is the reference to Laser guided missiles.. No wire guided mentioned...but I can check. MMW seeker as I mentioned was dropped both due to tech reasons and cost (the infra for full development and budgeting was simply not there). The wire guided missile is much easier in comparison and a Sagger, Ss11 type missile was already demonstrated by the DRDO several years earlier, but again a combination of tech advancement etc and changing reqs meant it was not pursued. There was a picture on the net as I recall.

----------------------
RV Further - none of the laser-beam riding missiles in international market are true man-portable.
----------------------

Kornet is technically man portable. Might take some 3 people though. India purchased these post kargil but these were supposedly with blast warheads and not tandem ones, meant to take out sangars without wires snagging.

-----------(------------
RV On the design aspect, the question still remains - was the original missile man-portable or was even that a vehicle mounted one? All the evidence seen so far states that it was always a specialized vehicle mounted missile.
--------------------------

That could well be correct. But by moving to a complex project I am afraid the option for a simplified missile is locked out.

----------------------

RV Please correct me if I'm wrong on the design and use aspect.

Internet reports say that development was sanctioned in 1988 and first test done in 1990 - what was tested in 1990? Any idea?
-------------------------
Will check..
-------------------------

RV
What was the initial range envisaged for Nag?
-------------------------
As memory serves it was around the Milan range, 2 km before the final requirements freeze.

--------------------------

RV
Most countries have already initiated programs to replace the man-portable SACLOS ATGM with F&F missiles - with Spike family leading the charge in Europe. Javelins are the man-portable missiles of the US Army. The most other ATGM that you refer to are on their way out - wherever countries can afford to replace them.
-------------------------

Yes but huge number of TOWs etc remain in inventory and are still being produced. My understanding is that Javelin is a section level weapon. Whereas vehicles continue to be armed with TOW2s in the US.

Also their requirements are different, as can be seen from the fact that Spike had issues with trials in India but aced those in Europe. Chander mentions in an interview that Indian deserts unlike those abroad have high humidity and other issues that make them a problem for IIR seekers. Another thing is that our requirements are massive, which mean that it has to be license produced, which means ToT. Add these together plus protracted trials and the answer is that we will have our Milans and Konkurs in service for a while. They are good, proven missiles and can be very useful.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Sep 2013 02:12

[quote="rohitvats"]

Karan - we're putting together two unrelated aspects here.

First - secrecy with respect to a program and news being made public only when the product has matured. Sudarshan LGB is one example which you've quoted.
-----------------------/--/

It's not sudarshan but a class of weapons with ranges of upto 100 km. SSridhar had posted a report in another thread...

---------------///------------
RV Second - the development of a product w/o requirement having been provided by the Service(s). Now, unlike HAL, DRDO has not cash-flow coming from sale of anything to Services. So, if the development of a man-portable version is happening w/o sanction from IA, how will the same be funded? Further, development of man-portable ATGM is not exactly a program which can be funded with allocating money from usual R&D budget. It will need to run like a full fledged program with proper funding to see the light of the day.

So, I'm not too sure what we're talking about here. Either IA has requested for smaller Nag and DRDO is keeping quite as per directive or DRDO is using internal funds to develop some technologies in this field which are unlikely to translate into a product.
-----------------------------

How tech development works in DRDO is like this..They propose a bunch of systems, and organise their funding accordingly to develop the enabling technologies for certain systems. In other words they work to a product roadmap that is there, but which is not necessarily locked down, because to translate that roadmap into a full one, they need full sanction for the specific products from the services. Like work is going on the AMCA but a full program launch will only happen later if funding is committed post the LCA. What I am saying is that a manportable ATGM could be on the roadmap provided the services agree to it. One thing is that nowadays DRDO does not stop any import. It's systems supplant the import over time. This makes the services more amenable to considering DRDO programs, as the risk factor of not having a system is reduced. In a way while its more challenging for DRDO, it's a sign of their increasing confidence and maturity, organizational wise, as they are confident that their products can match up to what has already been imported. DPSUs are happy anyhow, as one way or the other they get to make everything.

--------------------------------------
RV Well, the technological challenges need to be understood by key-board ninjas on this forum who think man-portable Nag is simply current Nag ATGM/2.

Coming to the missile linked by you - when was this developed? Would have been a better option than to induct Milan-2T.

-------------------------------------------

It was developed over the past 4 years, there was mention of it being an Indian LAHAT. it's reportedly undergoing DRDO trials.
---------------------------------------

RV
I'm not getting caught up in anything - BDL proposed this because of IA requirement but the missile put together by BDL failed to meet the 'diluted' GSQR and but was still inducted. IA wanted to close the requirement completely but was forced to accept the BDL missile as money had already been spent in anticipation of orders from IA.
-------------------/-------------------
Yes, correct, My point is that it's ok that it didn't meet all the requirements but was acquired. At least now the IA has a missile that can take out ERA equipped tanks, acquired in a reasonable timeframe. And since it is a direct replacement of the milan2t, crew will directly transition to it with minimum fuss.

<SNIP>

----------------------------

And that is why I have not been able to understand any requirement been shown for man-portable missile.

----------------------------

I guess it's a question of priorities, army had Milan and Konkurs and before that SS11s and Saggers, so the manportable ATGM requirement was not a priority. Plus DRDO was stuck up in the three tactical missile programs and any proposal from them to start another program would have been shot down.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Sep 2013 02:16

I remember the first time Nag was illustrated graphically in a Frontline issue in the '80s.Pics plus drawings.Wik says that WG was dropped.It was part of a feature on the IGMDP.Range if I remember correctly was 4km,there was some mention of WG.Difficult to locate that issue,some xcpts. from later issues.Here is a 2008 TOI report.

Nag anti-tank missile back in reckoning
Rajat Pandit, TNN Jul 12, 2008, 03.56am IST

NEW DELHI: Eighteen years after it was first tested, the meandering saga of the indigenous Nag anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) is finally entering the climax phase after an expenditure of over Rs 300 crore.

Or so it seems, with Defence Research and Development Organisation planning the "final developmental flight trials" of Nag at Pokhran on July 27-28, which will be followed by the "user-trials" in mid-September, say sources.

Frontline excpts:

Nag, which is currently validating its twin "guidance" options - electromagnetic (millimetric wave radar) and optical (imaging infrared) - was designed as a "fire and forget" top attack system.

The infra-red seeker, developed by the RCI, underwent a number of trials and achieved a major success in the anti-tank missile Nag, developed by the DRDO, G. Satheesh Reddy, Associate Director of the RCI, said. The RCI is working on a laser seeker. “It has also developed a millimetre-wave seeker, which has undergone trials in a Nag missile. After some trials, this seeker can be produced in numbers,” Satheesh Reddy said.

The DRDL has developed Nag, the third-generation fire-and-forget anti-tank missile. It is a top-attack weapon. The missile attacks the enemy tank from the top—it dives into the tank, ripping it apart. Nag has an infrared seeker, which captures the image of the enemy tank and enables it to home in on it. “Very complex processing is involved to get the image of the enemy tank. The all-important image processing technology has been established in Nag. We are working on a better seeker with a new technology,” said Chakrabarti. Nag is fired from ground-based launchers.

Image processing is essential for Nag because it is difficult to identify tanks in the conditions that prevail in India, especially in desert surroundings. Summer afternoons present the most difficult conditions. In the Indian context, dust also poses a big problem in image processing. When the temperature is high, the image clarity suffers. “We have improved its image processing. Final trials are on for acceptance of Nag” by the Army, he said.

Another version is the elegantly named Helina. It is a portmanteau term for helicopter and Nag and the missile is launched from helicopters. Some tests of Helina have been conducted and the results are quite encouraging.

http://www.livefistdefence.com/2008/08/ ... -atgm.html

Here's the press release the DRDO issued today:

India successfully flight tested 3rd generation, Fire and Forget Anti Tank Guided Missile NAG with a range of 4 Km on stationary and moving targets in the presence of users on 5th and 6th August 2008 at Pokhran Ranges. Both targets hit confirming the system capabilities of the NAG Missile.

Dr. Prahlada, Chief Controller, DRDO and Chairman, IGMDP expressing happiness on the last milestone of the programme confirmed that for the first time, Users have witnessed the flight tests of production version of NAG Missile Carrier NAMICA from BEL and Missiles from BDL. NAG Missile has both top and front attack capability and having passive homing guidance achieved through Imaging Infrared (IIR) seeker system and is unique in the world with such capabilities. Many SMEs have participated in the development and of NAG Missile system.

These tests were specially meant to demonstrate the tandem warhead against both stationary and moving targets. With these trials, the development flights stand completed and NAG system is now ready for user trials. The mobility in desert terrain has also been comprehensively demonstrated.

FORCE Magazine's fifth anniversary edition that hit the stands today had a piece about the Nag by Prasun K Sengupta. Some excerpts:

The Indian Army is likely to place an initial order for 443 ‘Nag’ ATGMs, along with 13 ‘NAMICA missile launch vehicles, which are modified BMP-2 tracked infantry combat vehicles each of which houses an inclined swiveling launcher containing eight ATGMs, 12 missile reload rounds, and a target acquisition system using a second generation thermal imager and a laser rangefinder, both with a range of 5.5km. The 42kg ‘Nag’ ATGM makes use of an airframe built out of aluminium alloys, and a DRDO-developed cadmium zinc telluride-based imaging infra-red (IIR) seeker for giving the missile a lock-on before launch capability. It has a flight speed of 230 metres per second, is armed with a 8kg tandem shaped-charge warhead, has a rocket motor using nitramine-based smokeless extruded double band sustainer propellant, has a single-shot hit probability of 0.77 and a CEP of 0.9 metres, and has a 10-year maintenance-free shelf-life. Efforts are now on to develop a mast-mounted missile launcher that will be hydraulically raised out to a height of five metres to enable the NAMICA to acquire its targets out to a distance of 8km.

The DRDO is now developing two new variants of the ‘Nag’ for the Indian Air Force (IAF): the 8km-range ‘Helina’, which will be launched from twin-tube stub wing-mounted launchers on board the armed ‘Dhruv’ ALH and Light Combat Helicopters that will be produced by state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL); and a 10km-range variant that will be launched from tactical interdiction aircraft like the upgraded Jaguar IS. The ‘Helina’ will, like the ‘Nag’ make use of an IIR seeker for target engagement, while the Jaguar IS-launched ATGM will use a nose-mounted millimetric-wave active radar seeker. User trials of these two variants of the ‘Nag’ will be conducted by late 2010. All three variants of the ‘Nag’ will have top-attack capabilities, thanks to the incorporation of a digital autopilot for automatic trajectory shaping. All in all, about 4,000 ATGM rounds of all types (vehicle-, helicopter- and air-launched) are expected to be produced by BDL.

The above "F" mag excpt. has a curious "5m mast launcher" for the same.It must be a world first! Surely it should instead be for mast-mounted sensors and not the missile launchers? Hydraulically raising the 8 cell NAG launcher upto a height of almost 20ft. would require a pretty huge hydraulic system!

The NAMICA system in pics thus far does not appear to have any mast sensors,a drawback.How did they expect LR targeting with such a low profile BMP?

Here are some masts :

HOT:

The sensor platform is mast-mounted and retractable when not required in the reconnaissance role. Sensors include a Thales (formerlyThomson-CSF) Optrosys Castor infrared camera, day TV camera, CILAS laser rangefinder and 1-micron infrared localiser. The system performs target detection up to 7,000m, identification and aiming.

OSIRIS for Trigat/Tiger attack h'copter:

Perhaps the most significant single avionics system fitted upon the Tiger is the mast-mounted Osiris sight/sensor; this incorporates optical TV and thermal cameras, a laser range finder/tracker/designator, and multiple gyroscopes for stabilisation.[55] Osiris performs as the main sensor for target observation and acquisition, providing firing and targeting data via the weapons computer; Osiris also enables entirely-passive target acquisition to be undertaken and was developed to maximise the capabilities of the Trigat anti-tank missile developed in parallel to the Tiger itself.[42] An alternative optical system to Osiris is mounted on the aircraft's roof upon some variants.[36]

The Dingo-2 by KMW has a mast/sensors.

However,leaving the missile aside,I feel that the NAMICA platform from appearances has drawbacks.Where does it fit in with the armoured/cavalry formations? It has no self defence capability against enemy troops equipped with ATGMs who are within range and thus cannot be used for recce purposes.Look at the experience of the Israeli army in the last spat with the Hiz,where they lost several tanks which were not supported by ground troops.So how is going to be used on the battlefield? Is it our desi version of Striker? A tank destroyer brought in from the rear,or if it remains in the rear willl its range be compromised? It will be a sitting duck if brought to the forward areas. It would've been better if the missile was fitted onto an IFCV also equipped with some secondary armament, 7.2mg or even 30mm cannon.There is an L&T re-engineered version (with mast) carrying just 2 NAG launchers,compared to a NORINCO system carrying 8.A massive order for just "13 NAMICAs" is going to make a pinprick of difference on the battlefield in the Indian context! Even if we order a few dozen,where are they going to be deployed,a few hundred kms apart?! The HELINA version makes more sense,but the missile is too large to be a man-portable one from above posts,requiring another missile to fill that role.

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012 ... troop.html

Here is another interesting article/debate on armoured recce and cavalry roles in the British Army and STA (surveillance and target acquisition) capability.
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2013/07/t ... l-fres-sv/

the majority of the Husky’s might retain the current open topped, manned “weapons station” with .50 cal M2 or 40mm H&K GMG, however some might be equipped with the full Selex Roadmaster suite with both mast mounted sensors and RWS. Even better, an Anti-tank version would have its RWS equipped with a Javelin launcher

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Sep 2013 02:21

Sagar G wrote:
Amyrao wrote:No the seeker may be done but its not performing what it should do.......................Same with Abhay to Nirbhay to promised Wankle engine and they post image from English company
Another whiner with half baked info cometh

Correct. Worthless whining.
Both AAD and PAD use DRDL, RCI seekers.
Nirbhay is to be tested again this year and the program is moving ahead.
Abhay was merely a TD program, completed and moved on.
The Wankel engine has been developed and is being used in the Nishant, with 20 engines ordered.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Sep 2013 02:28

Sagar G wrote:
Karan M wrote:I was surprised to know that for instance, Akash was to have active homing seeker (not semi-active) and the seeker was dropped because of both weight, complexity issues (compact seeker was not giving desired range) and because WLR proved accurate enough to guide the missile in close enough for a high SSKP. This enabled them to radically reduce the cost of the missile as well.
Yeah I remember the shock as well, but did they conduct any test with the active seeker. They had made protos of the same.

Don't know that, might have been limited to lab tests and dropped thereafter. Today it's a different thing.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Sep 2013 02:56

Continuation of my earlier post:

First ,a note from Karan's post.Wankel engine for Nishant.A pvt. manufacturer displayed Wankel engines as well as a mini gas turbine at Aero-India.Could be the same being used?

Nag/NAMICA:
After approx. 25 yrs of developing the missiles,at substantial cost and time,and presuming it has met all specs and has been cleared for production and induction into the IA,ordering a measly 13 NAMICAs (each carrying 8+12 missiles) and about 500 missiles in total,when we have the colossal order req. of 24,000 missiles to be imported,to "destroy all the world's tanks" as one wit put it,is a sick joke.
Does the 400+ missile order include those for the heli-launched version (HELINA) too? How many LCHs and armed Dhruv's (can they also carry NAG?),or even MI-17-Vs have been factored in for the missile? It would make far more sense to equip the heli-borne anti-tank/attack assets with the missile and order them in much large quantities for the same,rather than building a few dozen NAMICAs,still waiting for their masts, to be used as "mascots" on the battlefield.According to one report in 2011,the IA intended to have 65 armoured regiments that year.With the IA boosting its artillery and armour on the Chinese border too,a few doz. tank destroyers ,each carrying just 20 missiles when orders haven't even reached 1000 missiles,is meaningless.

As Rohit I think it was who said,that the DRDO should've instead focussed development upon an indigenous light anti-tank man-portable missile for ground troops.perhaps it can use its dev, knowhow from the NAG for a "quickie" man-portable missile,esp. as the numbers to be imported are enormous as well as the cost.Fitted to an ICV ,NAG makes more sense as we will have a requirement to replace our old BMPs,or even improve the capability of existing/upgraded ICVs

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 08 Sep 2013 03:17

Or under strategic dev/manufacturing with Russia in India as per India-specific requirements of shoulder launched missile - along with Brahmos model for mk1 version exports - could be one possibility.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Sep 2013 06:38

Austin wrote:Never heard of that either Akash was always Command Guidance missile from IGMDP days ....the novelty was its mobilty and Phased Array Radar and it was described then in 80's as similar to US Corpsam program.

Exactly. So there is a lot that has not been printed in the lay press. Only in the past few years are at least the DRDO bigwigs giving regular interviews (3-4 a year) and the soundbytes during lab exhibitions, seminars give an idea as well.

Also, another interesting bit. Most of the news on the net says Nag is composite body with composite fins. Actually, it is metal body with composite fins. Guess why? Because metal body proved better for hermetic sealing of the IIR seeker.

vic · Post by **vic** » 08 Sep 2013 08:20

The performance - seeker range required from Nag missile is not possible by any missile - seeker of the world. Javelin missile can fly upto 4km but it's range is stated to be only 2.5km. In Thar desert test conditions the range of Javelin Missile seeker itself will be way lesser than even 2.5 km.

Another point is that Indian Military does not want to use Indian products. Even heavier and with shorter range Nag has tremendous potential if mounted on lighter vehicles. DRDO does not have money to grease files and push them to create requirements. Even today Nag can be deployed everywhere except in hottest part of Thar in hottest months in middle of the day. The point is what else can operate in that conditions?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 08 Sep 2013 09:28

In all the discussion about the 24000 missile imports. One thing that I failto understand. Why cant the tech developed for the nag, be used to develop some thing in the milan class.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Sep 2013 09:31

That's a good point Vic.The MOD should desert test the entire range of ATGMs in service and those being considered/evaluated in a similar T-90,Arjun exercise. The second point is that during the last spat in Lebanon,the Israelis lost a lot of Merkavas to tandem warhead RPGs and ATGMs.RPGs the poor man's alternative to man-portable ATGMs.How well equipped are our infantry with the same? Instead of importing "24,000" missiles,acquiring a decent qty. of new model RPGs (RPG-29s) and lesser number of ATGMs could be a cost-effective option.

Here is a Haaretz report.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/hezbollah-a ... n-1.194528

Hezbollah anti-tank fire causing most IDF casualties in Lebanon
IDF believes Hezbollah also has advanced anti-aircraft missile from Iran particularly lethal against helicopters.
By Ze'ev Schiff | Aug. 6, 2006 |
Ze'ev Schiff

The majority of Israel Defense Forces ground troops casualties, both infantry and armored, were the result of special anti-tank units of Hezbollah, according to intelligence sources.

The same sources note that these units have not retreated from southern Lebanon following the deployment of large IDF ground forces in the area.

The Hezbollah anti-tank teams use a new and particularly potent version of the Russian-made RPG, the RPG-29, that has been sold by Moscow to the Syrians and then transferred to the Shi'ite organization.

Some of the IDF casualties resulted when the rockets struck homes in which IDF troops had taken positions. This was the case when four soldiers of the elite Egoz unit were killed in the village of Bint Jbail. In that case a Sagger anti-tank missile had been used.

The RPG-29's penetrating power comes from its tandem warhead, and on a number of occasions has managed to get through the massive armor of the Merkava tanks.

The IDF had intelligence information on Hezbollah plans to deploy specialized anti-tank teams in order to delay the advance of IDF ground forces. The special focus Hezbollah gave to anti-tank weapons as part of their doctrine was revealed during the raid on the border village of Ghajar in November 2005.

During that attack, Hezbollah fighters attempted to kidnap IDF soldiers, and some of the guerrillas were killed and their bodies left behind.

This was the same unit that fought in Bint Jbail and whose men were killed there.

During the battle at Ghajar, which is inside Israeli territory and has an Alawite population, Hezbollah fighters fired more than 300 anti-tank rockets of different types, including the new RPG-29, which targetted various armored vehicles and two Merkava Mark-2 tanks. One of the two tanks had the necessary armor to deflect the missiles, but the other took a hit to the body.

Following the battle at Ghajar, Israeli inquiries that Russia was transferring modern anti-tank weapons to Syria and on to Hezbollah were received with anger. The Russians demanded proof that this had been done.

Contrary to common practice, Israel transferred to Russia the tail-end of a rocket for analysis. The Russian response was that in the absence of a serial number they were hard pressed to identify it as part of a load delivered to Syria.

The IDF believes Hezbollah also has an advanced anti-aircraft missile, the SA-18, from Iran. It is particularly lethal against helicopters, and even though none of the missiles have been fired against Israel Air Force aircraft, the flights over Lebanon are taking the necessary precautions.

Who Won the Second Lebanon War of 2006?
by Robert Werdine

Here is a good analysis on the same,though dated."Crisis of confidence in armour?{
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land ... arks98.pdf

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 08 Sep 2013 10:10

Karan M wrote:
rohitvats wrote:(2) In all these years of development cycle of Nag, why has DRDO not come up with a road map for development of a man-portable version of Nag?
It is likely that a roadmap exists but is not public and is classified. Bits and pieces of the roadmap are being made public based on what is being sanctioned by the services over time.

there was at least one report (the hindu) alluding to the man portable NAG in the works. it's an old report (march 25, 2005). posting in full below -

M. Somasekhar

Hyderabad, March 24

HAVING successfully completed the development phase of the third generation anti-tank missile Nag, Indian defence scientists are now working on two new versions helicopter launched and man portable.

The helicopter version or ALH-Nag system, is being developed jointly by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and the public sector, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) in association with the Army Aviation, the end user.

The missile system is expected to be integrated into the ALH (advanced light helicopter), the combat aircraft by end June.

It will have the capability to deploy up to eight missiles, according to Mr S.S. Mishra, Project Director of Nag, Defence Research and Development Laboratory (DRDL), here.

The first trial of this version is expected to be conducted towards the end of 2005.

It will give a major tactical advantage to the Army in battlefield, Mr Mishra said.

Missile scientists will also start working on the third generation, `Man Portable' Nag very soon. It would weigh less than 14 kg.

Currently, the US has second generation missiles in this class, Mr Mishra told Business Line.

On March 19, Nag, which has `fire and forget' and homing devices, completed the development trials, after two successful tests at the Army Test Range in Ahmednagar, Maharashtra.

The fifty-sixth and fifty-seventh tests, established all the required capabilities, making it one of the best amongits class in the world, he said.

User trials with the participation of the Indian Army are slated for the end of the year. Thereafter, once the Army places an order, the necessary numbers would be produced by the Hyderabad-based, Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL).

The public-sector, BDL has already taken up the pre-production on a limited scale.

(This article was published in the Business Line print edition dated March 25, 2005)

Helicopter version of Nag under way

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 08 Sep 2013 10:55

pragnya wrote:Missile scientists will also start working on the third generation, `Man Portable' Nag very soon. It would weigh less than 14 kg.

Interesting .. So this means
1. Either the development proved hard and unlikely to yield results soon given that there has been no news on this front lately.
2. Was an internal project, not sanctioned by IA and hence not funded(Most Likely).

Even if such a project was launched today, it is unlikely to lead to a product in 5 years, more likely take up to 10 years.

Either ways, man-portable Nag is not is in the offering anytime soon. So where does that leave the forces who are desperately in need of such a weapon and have a shortage of up to 44,000 AT missiles (per the Week article)? How do you bridge an immediate and critical gap with a non-existent product?

member_27444 · Post by **member_27444** » 08 Sep 2013 11:55

Sagar G wrote:
Amyrao wrote:No the seeker may be done but its not performing what it should do.......................Same with Abhay to Nirbhay to promised Wankle engine and they post image from English company
Another whiner with half baked info cometh

true and agreed because of DRDO, I and you are of the same kind sir.

I have met people who work in DRDO as late as in 2011.
I have fiends, class mates and relatives who work for DRDO and in Armed forces.
I interacted with DG procurement
I have worked with HAL Hyderabad and Koraput
I have worked with OFP Medak and Avadi

but not afraid to admit half baked knowledge. To truly understand Indian Babus, Indian Armed forces leadership and of ourse posters like you who are
so full of err confidence to say have complete baked knowledge is as much mystifying as are others I mentioned.

Anyway lets see when all the hot air that comes from DRDO fends us from enemy.

did some once say army ordered some NAMICA or Anamica? thats to get around Finance babus who may say why not Namica, Army saying we did order let them supply in the mean time Chinese are having hot spicy ming noodles in our Ladakh area.

any way new super EMP weapon will render India Ajay, says DRDO. just you wait PRC. the day of reckoning is about rise in the east
Jai Hind
end of discussion.
yours truly half Pakka

member_27444 · Post by **member_27444** » 08 Sep 2013 12:02

Please keep this handy which will always be true and forever

srin · Post by **srin** » 08 Sep 2013 12:32

Karan M wrote:
Sagar G wrote:
Yeah I remember the shock as well, but did they conduct any test with the active seeker. They had made protos of the same.
Don't know that, might have been limited to lab tests and dropped thereafter. Today it's a different thing.

It was mentioned in the aero-india 2013 lecture on Akash - that the original plan was to go for active seeker and then it was dropped. I've forgotten the exact reason given and will need to go through the video to check it.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 08 Sep 2013 12:38

Amyrao wrote:true and agreed because of DRDO, I and you are of the same kind sir.

Not at all sir I can assure you that in any universe you and I are not the same, never will be.

Amyrao wrote:I have met people who work in DRDO as late as in 2011.
I have fiends, class mates and relatives who work for DRDO and in Armed forces.
I interacted with DG procurement
I have worked with HAL Hyderabad and Koraput
I have worked with OFP Medak and Avadi

Yet you indulge in whining instead of posting something useful from which other's can gain some knowledge and you are not the only one here who has contacts or has met "people" or has worked in institutions so please don't try to "chamkao" by namedropping. You can keep living in your corner of shame and failure, don't try and drag others to it as well.

End of discussion.