Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
member_22733
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3788
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_22733 » 18 Oct 2015 13:14

Well, I guess now we can say "Law will take its course onleee", you shoot innocent Indians, you spend time in Tihar. Your c*untry just wasted away its fig-leaf of a bargaining chip, if at all it is of any value.

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_23694 » 18 Oct 2015 13:14



Seems realpolitik in play and probably after some time matter will be sorted out in interest of both parties. JMT

member_22733
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3788
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_22733 » 18 Oct 2015 13:18

I dont know if this is "realpolitik". It seems more like a desperate measure that says : "We cannot hurt you or get you to do what we want.... so we are going to use any little power we got against you".

If this is what they think is "realpolitik" eye-taly deserves to be in the dustbin of historical oblivion (where it rightfully belongs). We went so far without MTCR, plizz to keep denying and soon we will have developed the engine tech to make MTCR completely irrelevant.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3792
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby kit » 18 Oct 2015 14:01

don't think what huge advantage MTCR can give India anyway ! .. the transactions between members are guided by MTCR rules ?... different from NSG

rgosain
BRFite
Posts: 439
Joined: 10 Jan 2003 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby rgosain » 18 Oct 2015 14:31

Lokesh Kit, over the past decades India lost vital market share and strategic influence by voluntarily adhering to export controls which were imposed and designed by others, at a time when India was under sanctions by those very groups. For indians, the MTCR is something of a totem pole to which they have devoted vast amounts of efforts and concessions, and it is time to throw in the towel. Look at Brazil, since joining the MTCR years ago, its space and missile programmes have whithered, and this is the lesson for India. This dog and pony show involving the Italians is another attempt to wring further concessions from India, and it is the same with the NSG where China, which was allowed in by the Clintons, are now holding up india's accession no doubt with the help of the US.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramdas » 18 Oct 2015 16:36

There s no point in slowing down missile tests, etc to get MTCR/NSG membership. These are dangled as carrots to extract further concessions that compromise our nuclear and missile capabiliities. The correct response is to accelerate production of our missiles as well as their testing. We should even begin making systems like theAgni-I available for export.

The lack of any Agni series testing in recent months probably has to do with our grovelling to get NSG/MTCR membership. This is sheer stupidity. I expected better from a Modi sarkar. But babus always rule, it seems.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 18 Oct 2015 18:09

+72 sire.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5717
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby vishvak » 18 Oct 2015 18:20

Italy must be the original Pakistan to EU until the Turks took over the mantle with sultanate dreams next to EU. This is a very fine example of 'international' politicking wherein each member of MTCR - ie Italy within EU - has to be entertained (OR ELSE), even though murdered sailors were Indians and within Indian waters. Seems white white Portuguese surrendering at Goa to towelheads should have made a deeper impact in Europe ie clear understanding that days of Colonial times is over in the Indian subcontinent, and each EU member doesn't have to throw tantrums in 'international' fora as if this is white man's burden. After all this, it is not even certain whether MTCR regime will be beneficial to the missile program, or just be eating into supply chain and make the program dependent on all members like Italians.


shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 18 Oct 2015 19:28

Aha! I think I know why Indian wants to join MTCR and why Italy opposes it. It is about UAVs and supply of UAVs to Pakistan. I predict that in a few years Italy will be phucked for this.

Here is an MTCR FAQ. Please read
http://www.mtcr.info/english/FAQ-E.html

Of particular interest are points 14, 15, 17 and 18

14. Are exports to Partners treated differently than exports to non Partners?

The MTCR Guidelines do not distinguish between exports to Partners and exports to non-Partners. Moreover, the MTCR Partners have explicitly affirmed that membership in the Regime provides no entitlement to obtain technology from another Partner and no obligation to supply it. Partners are expected to exercise appropriate accountability and restraint in trade among Partners, just as they would in trade between Partners and non-Partners. Partners are bound by a “no-undercut” policy to consult each other before considering exporting an item on the list that has been notified as denied by another Partner pursuant to the MTCR Guidelines.
Membership gives no rights to import anything

15. Are the MTCR’s Guidelines binding?

No – the MTCR is not a treaty and does not impose any legally binding obligations on Partners. The only activity prohibited absolutely by the Guidelines, to which all 34 Partner countries voluntarily subscribe, is the export of production facilities for Category I MTCR Annex items.
This means UAV manufacture

17. How are export decisions taken?

Export licensing decisions are made by individual countries according to their national export control laws and regulations, and not as group. However, Partners regularly exchange information on relevant licensing matters in order to ensure consistency with the Regime’s overall non-proliferation goals.

18. How is compliance enforced?

Each individual Partner implements the MTCR Guidelines and Annex in accordance with national legislation and practice and on the basis of sovereign national discretion. The MTCR has no regime-wide compliance or verification provisions. When questions arise, Partners consult bilaterally to promote a common understanding of the issue.
Members can try and stop other members from exporting certain things.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 18 Oct 2015 19:37

We can still try and influence them using a bunch of other stuff.

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1858
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby uddu » 18 Oct 2015 19:39

Also China is not a member and has sold ballistic missiles to Pakistan. Agni-II with Vietnam will look really good.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 18 Oct 2015 19:42



Deserves posting in full

NEW DELHI: Just hours before the Agni missile was to be tested in 1989, its pioneer A P J Abdul Kalam received a hotline phone call from a top government official indicating tremendous pressure by the US and NATO to delay the launch.

The man on the other end was none other than T N Seshan, the then cabinet secretary to Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. This incident finds mention in "Advantage India: From Challenge to Opportunity", one of the last books written by the late Kalam which will hit the stands soon.

According to Kalam, a hotline call at 3 AM, only a few hours prior to the launch, could not mean anything good. "Where are we on Agni?" Seshan asked.

"Then without waiting for me to answer, he said, 'We are under tremendous pressure by the US and NATO to delay any impending missile test. There are strong diplomatic channels at work.' Then almost immediately he followed again with the first question, 'Kalam! Where are we on Agni?'" the book, published by HarperCollins India, says.

It was a difficult question for Kalam to answer.

"My mind raced vast distances in the next few seconds. There were intelligence reports of US satellites fixing their gaze on us. I knew the US was putting increasing pressure on the Prime Minister and his office to delay the launch. Worse, there were reports that Chandipur might be struck with very bad weather in the next few days.

"Then there was my team. Hard working, determined young men and women whom we had handpicked for this assignment about one decade ago. They had seen everything. Technology denials, evictions from other nations, tight budgets, media pressure and the frustration of restarting curtailed projects that had been shut down due to lack of critical apparatus...," Kalam wrote in the book, co-authored by Srijan Pal Singh.

"...I calculated all my variables and then clearing my throat said, 'Sir, the missile is at a point of no return. We cannot turn back on the test now. It is too late.' I expected a debate and a barrage of questions from my boss and Seshan. But to my surprise, as the hour hand neared 4 AM, and the sun prepared to rise, Seshan replied, 'Okay,' and then with a deep breath and a pause. 'Go ahead'," the book says.

Three hours later, the Agni missile system was ignited on May 22, 1989.

"It was a flawless test of hope and aspirations of a bunch of young scientists who could not be deterred by any force on this planet. We had made history. The next day, there was a storm in Chandipur which partially destroyed our testing facility. But we all knew that we had already won the race for Agni," Kalam said.


rgosain
BRFite
Posts: 439
Joined: 10 Jan 2003 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby rgosain » 18 Oct 2015 19:57

Vishvak, that is a good point and it means that Italy will blackball any attempt by India at joining the Waseenar or Australia club. Those European aerospace companies with italian partners will have to decide whether it is good for their businesses with India to have unreliable Italian partners
Shiv presently there is nothing to stop India from developing UAV, missile tech and exporting that to where there is a market, apart from the fact that it has wrapped itself into a voluntary adherence to a code that not one of the MTCR members practise eg Italy can sell the UAV tech under the counter to the PRC even though China is not a member of the MTCR.
The Modi admin has shown naivete in not burying the Hyde act and continuing to adhere to MTCR guidelines even when it is clear that there is no chance in hell of India being on board the NSG, MTCR or the other forums. Even though the Obama admin has failed to get India into any of these groups, the GOI should have reminded them that any future energy and aerospace businesses are contingent upon this.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 18 Oct 2015 20:21

rgosain wrote:Shiv presently there is nothing to stop India from developing UAV, missile tech and exporting that to where there is a market, apart from the fact that it has wrapped itself into a voluntary adherence to a code that not one of the MTCR members practise eg Italy can sell the UAV tech under the counter to the PRC even though China is not a member of the MTCR.

I think this is less about the obvious fact that we could export what we feel like exporting, provided there is a buyer. I believe it is more about tripping up and sticking an ungli into the backsides of countries who have double crossed us and screwed us all these years from inside the group.

I see a lot of 3 and 4 letter treaties being undermined by India despite India's strict adherence to their provisions from the outside - i.e without signing or joining. I think CTBT, NSG, FMCT, MTCR etc are all going to be gradually undermined in the following way. India has been first off the mark in achieving all those technologies despite being under sanctions and being excluded. It is only a matter of time before other countries also achieve those goals. Pakistan, NoKo and Iran are getting there. As more countries exceed the limits set by these agreements - those nations will have a choice, just like India, to either flout the treaties or join them. Many of those countries have watched India grow and touch things that are useful for exerting power and may want that for themselves, but they may not be as willing as India to play by the rules from outside the treaties. Letting India into these agreements/treaties will be a signal to all "aspiring nations" that they will only have to join the limitations of those treaties as the most powerful nations are all getting in. Leaving India out of those agreements is a signal that it is perfectly OK to develop disruptive tech and undermine the treaties.

The members of the exclusive clubs will have to decide what they want. In the meantime India has to do nothing to rock the boat. Just keep developing tech but voluntarily abide by the rules. Either we will be let in or the treaties will die. Catch 22

Just my thoughts

rgosain
BRFite
Posts: 439
Joined: 10 Jan 2003 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby rgosain » 18 Oct 2015 20:34

Shiv I must thank you for such well reasoned and erudite analysis and doubt whether I could have articulated such points. One of the things that hasn't been mentioned is that these cartels are against the spirit and laws underpining free trade, that the West often sticks at India. I wonder whether the GOI could impose compulsory licencing upon certain Italian drugs and agrochemicals, all within the spirit of the wto

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2415
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Prem Kumar » 18 Oct 2015 20:35



Any particular advantage that India will accrue if we become part of the club? Seems to me that we are doing quite well without being part of it.

Yes, the argument could be made that we are "abiding by MTCR" rules without being a signatory. That's a grave error IMO, which Modi sarkar doesn't seem keen on fixing either (& I don't think he will, given how eagerly he is courting the West for Make In India. He is a disappointment in this regard). Grave error, because we are voluntarily giving up a bargaining chip with nothing in return.

We are once again begging to be part of a club where we will be admitted after making concessions. Instead of saying *balls* to the club, exporting missiles and have the club beg us to join them after *making concessions to us*.

Its sad that the elephant still thinks its a mouse

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 18 Oct 2015 20:38

Seshan was typical bureaucrat. And Rajiv Gandhi a gutless politician who got top job due to birth.
Instead of absorbing the pressure they passed it onto the scientist in the field.

From the conversation its clear Seshan wants to report back to Rajiv Gandhi he talked to Kalam and was told its at point of no return.
IOW its Kalam's decision to test.

Great job Kalam Saab.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 18 Oct 2015 20:58

Prem Kumar wrote:We are once again begging to be part of a club where we will be admitted after making concessions. Instead of saying *balls* to the club, exporting missiles and have the club beg us to join them after *making concessions to us*.

Look at it this way.

The technology that these clubs claim to control is not watertight. As time goes by more and more and more nations will get them. It so happens that India is one of the early birds - but just behind the club members. Many of these clubs have been designed specifically to stop countries like India from developing tech, but we have done it nevertheless. We need to recognize that other countries too will soon reach those tech goals. Sooner or later there will be more countries with "restricted tech" outside those clubs than inside.

Now exactly what do these club members think? What do they want? if they want to "restrict technology" and keep it to themselves - they have already lost the plot.

But if they want to regulate and reduce the risk of technology getting into the hands of dangerous groups, they will need to admit more and more countries into their clubs.

The club members have been abominably stupid. They cannot see beyond their noses. They have considered India as "an unstable dangerous nation that should not get such tech" India is past that. The fun is only starting now with Pakistan, NoKo and Iran and more countries getting past the "restricted tech" red-line. If they keep pretending - all those agreements will simply die the way the UNSC and CTBT are dying. But if they have any sense they will let in countries that reach the tech and cooperate with them. Whether anyone likes it or not India is an enormous stabilizing force in the world. India will protect its stability even if other groups and nations collapse. It makes sense to co-opt India. Problem is - too many weak and has-been nations like UK and Italy are in the club and their national prestige is at stake.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 18 Oct 2015 22:01

Prem Kumar
Any particular advantage that India will accrue if we become part of the club? Seems to me that we are doing quite well without being part of it.


Lot of subsystems and test equipment. However, our basic concern is that we shouldn't become lazy and attuned to putting together melange of imported parts and saying ok.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 19 Oct 2015 05:25

Karan M wrote:Prem Kumar
Any particular advantage that India will accrue if we become part of the club? Seems to me that we are doing quite well without being part of it.


Lot of subsystems and test equipment. However, our basic concern is that we shouldn't become lazy and attuned to putting together melange of imported parts and saying ok.

Karan MTCR rules say that membership does not give members any tech sharing benefits. Membership is solely based on agreeing not to give anyone anything beyond a particular level of tech.

Despite India and other countries abiding by the rules of MTCR formally or informally, technology is "leaking" or is being developed de novo and more and more countries are crossing the MTCR thresholds. At best MTCR simply delayed the achievement of goals.

When you have more countries outside of MTCR than inside, MTCR will be dead. It will die unless the members change their own views. India's formal membership quest IMO is simply a signal that MTCR nations need to smell the coffee and see that the presence of nations willing to abide is advantageous to the world rather than treating MTCR as a higher caste. Unlike NSG, MTCR does not give any extra privileges and it is not even a treaty. Neither the nations inside or outside the MTCR agreement are treaty bound not to export something.

All you need is "leakage" of a few missiles and guidance systems to ISIS or similar future groups and then this whole MTCR tamasha will be yesterdays story.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 19 Oct 2015 05:40

Shiv official rules of the MTCR apart, being part of the cartel opens up opportunities. It tells the respective establishments you are one of them or playing by their rules making it easier for politicians to push for relaxed exports etc. Basically salami slicing from our side. The big daddy of the cartel is the US as far as the west is concerned. What they say goes.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 19 Oct 2015 08:44

I think MTCR allows countries to purchase weapons that are not restricted by 300 km limit ,else how does US sells Tomahawk cruise missile and Trident SLBM to UK ?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 19 Oct 2015 08:47

yes thats true. it will be death of nirbhay for sure if we can buy kalibr or kh101.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 19 Oct 2015 08:56

Austin wrote:I think MTCR allows countries to purchase weapons that are not restricted by 300 km limit ,else how does US sells Tomahawk cruise missile and Trident SLBM to UK ?

Austin MTCR does not specifically allow that, but it does not disallow. Italy can sell UAV to Pakistan despite UAVs being listed as restricted under MTCR, and Italy is a signatory.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 19 Oct 2015 08:58

Singha wrote:yes thats true. it will be death of nirbhay for sure if we can buy kalibr or kh101.

MTCR does not give signatories the right to import 300 km plus missiles. Please read the MTCR rules linked above.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10417
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Vayutuvan » 19 Oct 2015 09:05

Prem Kumar wrote:Yes, the argument could be made that we are "abiding by MTCR" rules without being a signatory. That's a grave error IMO, ... Grave error, because we are voluntarily giving up a bargaining chip with nothing in return.

Prem Kumar, we can always stop "abiding by MTCR" at a time convenient to us, right?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 19 Oct 2015 09:47

vayu tuvan wrote:
Prem Kumar wrote:Yes, the argument could be made that we are "abiding by MTCR" rules without being a signatory. That's a grave error IMO, ... Grave error, because we are voluntarily giving up a bargaining chip with nothing in return.

Prem Kumar, we can always stop "abiding by MTCR" at a time convenient to us, right?

There is nothing binding on MTCR signatories to abide by the rules. In fact MTCR is simply a racist document that will be rendered stupid looking sooner rather than later.

Abiding or not abiding is a matter of choice. The only advantage of abiding and joining "officially" is to be able to join in consultative discussions to pressure the hypocritical signatories like Italy to stop supplying stuff to our enemies and if they don't stop we can supply to their enemies and thumb our noses at them and say "fug you too"

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 19 Oct 2015 20:18

VT, Once you sign on very difficult to break out. So one principle India had followed was never join any 3 or 4 letter treaty. Most of them are structured against India. The Italian no to India is a good slap in the face for MEA mandarins who rush to get India into treaties before its time.

Austin, US sales to UK are under a different agreement (circa 1961 to abandon the Skybolt missile) which predates the MTCR restrictions.
Please do research before posting as you are a senior member and people will take it as gospel truth.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3792
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby kit » 19 Oct 2015 20:45

Rather be outside MTCR and start exporting missiles and "forget" any limits...india should take this as an opportunity to give certain nations nearby some serious tactical and cruise missile capabilities .. everything to gain and nothing to lose !

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 21 Oct 2015 02:09

I know the Sudarshan got cancelled due to rolling issue with the 1000 # 11A. Shows center of mass is off axis.

Could it work with the 450 Kg HSLD with minor modifications?


Can some one compare Sudarshan wing span with the Griffen 3 wingspan for first order comparison?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 21 Oct 2015 03:20

Sudarshan program is dead and gone. With 9km range, and 10mtr CEP, IAF wants better. To understand why, I went looking at PAF AD..
Anza (VSHORAD) is 5km. Crotale/HQ-7 upto 10-15km. SPADA-2000 25km range.

Dumb bomb from IAF MiG-27 achieved 7.5km with 15m CEP. Su-30MKI, Jaguar will be equal. In short, Sudarshan did not offer much, and was useful only as TD for ADE.

And ADE needs a systematic look to see whether it can step up and do what was asked of it, i.e. be an adjunct to DRDL in missile development.

Nirbhay 3rth test test failure was not a positive sign. And the near complete silence about LGB trials given how important they are to IAF may be a deliberate choice but clearly the program needs to be a top priority.

I would argue that its more important right now than making more Agni variants. MIRV the existing ones if need be, but a range of local cost effective PGMs are war winning.

Some of the Bangalore based labs seem to have lost out on DRDO management focus over the "near" Hyderabad ones. We saw similar stuff with LCA with ADA plodding away on its own and intervention of RM to make things ok.
Last edited by Karan M on 21 Oct 2015 03:25, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 21 Oct 2015 03:22

Finally got a look at this tender.
Karan M wrote:ARDE is working on converting 450kg penetrating warheads (HSLD bombs) to work with IAF's Israeli Griffin LGB kits. :mrgreen:
"to defeat concrete targets with precision"
http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/tenders/vie ... icro=12902



What DRDO wants to achieve is hard target/concrete penetration.
The tender calls for estimating the capability of 450 kg HSLD for two velocities 450 m/sec and 300 m/sec (slightly less than speed of sound which is 343m/sec i.e. 300/343 = 0.9 Mach)

They want to test against two types of concrete of 35 MPA or 5000 psi strength.
- Plain(PCC) or unreinforced and reinforced concrete (RCC).

Target thickness is 3m to 1.5 m.

A number of cases are listed with 0 and 30 degree inclination and 0 & 5 degree AOA.

This kind of gives the LGB limits.
In essence they want to develop penetration curves for the HSLD : Depth vs. velocity for various incidences and AOA for targeting purposes.

To me the HSLD at 450/m sec through 3 m PCC is piece of cake.

When it goes at 300 m/sec against RCC with steel rebar and most difficult could be 3m thickness.
Should be piece of cake for 1.5 m and 2m case for both 0-5 AOA and 0-30 inclination.
The difficulty could be the nose radius of the HSLD could be of the same order of magnitude as the rebar spacing and aggregate size. This could cause J ing!

Don't have actual drawings but it helps is the case had a slight 1-2 degree flair. This would cause it to have center of pressure aft of the cg in the longitudinal axis and stable.

Although ARDE website says sharp nose is for aerodynamic it could also be for concrete target penetration.
With ~45% fill ratio it would be a good blast too. They are using DENTEX which has good insensitivity.


Essentially they need 3D elasto-plastic analysis which some of their former employees might have acquired.


The magic is in the 0.9 mach.
Velocity of sound in concrete is 3300 m/sec. (So it hits at 0.1 Mach-concrete)

I don't know what they are doing about fuzes. This analysis will give first order of estimates for that.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 21 Oct 2015 03:35

If you look at ADE website and products developed they are awful at total product development. Good at sub-system black boxes.
Shows lack of systems engineering skill set.

Rustom/Sudarshan/ Nirbhay all show systems engineering shortcomings.
If the N-3 fault is same as N-1 heads have to roll.


Sudarshan is particularly appalling as it looks like a copy of Griffin on 1000 MC which already has Paveway II.

Black boxes can be copied but fundamental aerodynamics seems to have been lost here.
Rolling implies off axis CG in longitudinal axis. Those canards wont give you control on that.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 21 Oct 2015 03:43

Nice analysis Ramana. Basically give IAF a complete list of targets the HSLD/Griffin combo would be good against. Fuzes, DRDO has a bunch of partners they work with already, a couple are well known..

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 21 Oct 2015 03:50

ramana wrote:If you look at ADE website and products developed they are awful at total product development. Good at sub-system black boxes.
Shows lack of systems engineering skill set. Rustom/Sudarshan/ Nirbhay all show systems engineering shortcomings.
If the N-3 fault is same as N-1 heads have to roll.


Sadly agree, they plodded away with Nishant and Rustom and have developed a lot of subsystems experience, plus contributed to LCA program but even Rustom-1/2 are delayed, and Chander and Saraswat have both gone on record with their frustration. Chander mentioned Nirbhay was a perfect example of how a program should not be run, and Saraswat went public recently stating that we are yet to fly UAVs and are talking of civil aircraft. ADE has got micro-UAVs ready, but no orders. Its a confusing state of affairs.

Sudarshan is particularly appalling as it looks like a copy of Griffin on 1000 MC which already has Paveway II.


Sudarshan looks to have been a "reverse engineered" Paveway 2, configuration wise.
http://jamesdrewjournalist.com/wp-conte ... 72x372.jpg
http://www.inscoms.in/Images/sudershan2.png

They copied it with some idiosyncrasies and it didn't work out. The only good thing is as you said, subsystems. Seekers, actuators!!

Black boxes can be copied but fundamental aerodynamics seems to have been lost here.
Rolling implies off axis CG in longitudinal axis. Those canards wont give you control on that.


I wish some of the DRDL guys were transferred to the ADE and other establishments to "run" weapons programs or at least set them up for a few years. Its not that easy. Our Govt rules mean people who did the painstaking work in IGMDP are happily sitting and either playing with grandchildren or sitting in deemed universities as time pass professorial staff.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 21 Oct 2015 04:07

ADE has new director from ITR experience. Lets wish him luck.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 21 Oct 2015 04:13

He is actually DRDL background!! Good thing!
http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories ... or_ADE.htm

Mr Prasad has done his B Tech in Electronics and Communication Engineering from JNTU, Anantapur. Subsequently he obtained his M. Tech in Instrumentation and Control System from Shri Venkateswara University, Tirupati. He joined DRDL, Hyderabad in 1984 as Scientist ‘B’. He served in various capacities for a period of 28 years i.e. from 1984 to 2012 at DRDL. With effect from May 1, 2012, he had taken over as Director, ITR Chandipur.

In recognition of his significant contributions and achievements while serving with DRDO, he had been deputed as Joint Development Team Leader on foreign assignment to Israel for three years.


Has to be LRSAM program.

Looks like Christopher sir thought the same thing we are thinking about needing a focused program guy at ADE. Overruled selection board and chose him.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 026969.ece

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Cosmo_R » 21 Oct 2015 04:20

shiv wrote:...
There is nothing binding on MTCR signatories to abide by the rules. In fact MTCR is simply a racist document that will be rendered stupid looking sooner rather than later.

Abiding or not abiding is a matter of choice. The only advantage of abiding and joining "officially" is to be able to join in consultative discussions to pressure the hypocritical signatories like Italy to stop supplying stuff to our enemies and if they don't stop we can supply to their enemies and thumb our noses at them and say "fug you too"


+1

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19128
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 21 Oct 2015 06:19

Nirbhay failure was apparently due to failure of control signals between nav system and actuation. Could be issue w/either or midway issue (data transmission).


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests