Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 11 Apr 2017 14:16

The image posted by brar w suggests 44 hits. It is possible that some targets were hit by more than one weapon. So that may account for lesser points of impact.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Apr 2017 14:46

Austin wrote:Its more of case of Tomahawk Missile not hitting all the intended target , there were quite a few Hanger with Aircraft intact and 2 SA-6 SAM which were unhit ( 1 got hit ) , 9 aircraft total lost.

So depending on which propoganda one wants to hear both US and Russia are right

You would have to first know whether they targeted all the hangers and all the aircraft on the base. Unless one knows that for sure one cannot really say that. AD and/or hardened shelters may require more than one missile at least during target planning since the long travel time inhibits a shoot look shoot approach using BDA from a drone overhead.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Apr 2017 14:53

brar_w wrote:
Austin wrote:Its more of case of Tomahawk Missile not hitting all the intended target , there were quite a few Hanger with Aircraft intact and 2 SA-6 SAM which were unhit ( 1 got hit ) , 9 aircraft total lost.

So depending on which propoganda one wants to hear both US and Russia are right
You would have to first know whether they targeted all the hangers and all the aircraft on the base. Unless one knows that for sure one cannot really say that. AD and/or hardened shelters may require more than one missile at least during target planning since the long travel time inhibits a shoot look shoot approach using BDA from a drone overhead.

There is no reason why they would target one set of hangers with aircraft and not do the others , why they would target one sam battery and not the 2 others , more likely explaination is the tomahawk missed those targets

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Apr 2017 15:00

There are plenty of very plausible reasons why you would do a limited strike and still leave of other targets. They also left off the runways knowing full well that he would soon start using them again. Perhaps they did not believe that there were aircraft in those shelters when they began the mission planning, or perhaps their intention was not to take out each and every aircraft on that base? Regarding the Air Defenses and how they were attacked, I'd have to get back. I haven't read up on anything that points to how they were targeted or seen before after satellite pictures.

Pratyush wrote:The image posted by brar w suggests 44 hits. It is possible that some targets were hit by more than one weapon. So that may account for lesser points of impact.

Yup the Reuters BDA based on before/after Satellite images showing impact made them come to the conclusion of 44 distinct targets based on impact. Of course there are targets out there where you will use more than 1 missile given the weapon of choice and its characteristics. Sean O Connor, the principle imagery analyst at Jane's took a different approach (posted on SPF) where he used the post strike satellite images to look for impact points and then went back and looked at the UAV footage to find yet impact points that were not easily distinguishable from the initial publicly available satellite images. One would assume that he is working on a detailed analysis for one of the IHS publications.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Apr 2017 15:11

^^ Yes thats the doubtfull part , No one would leave those shelters without hitting even assuming they know if there is aircraft or not , you cant really know every thing , but it turned out the shelters did have aircraft , there are lots of hits in the mission but lots of misses too , mixed bag , Tomahawk like other missiles might have their CEP and have their own rate of failures too.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Apr 2017 15:16

Austin wrote:^^ Yes thats the doubtfull part , No one would leave those shelters without hitting even assuming they know if there is aircraft or not , you cant really know every thing , but it turned out the shelters did have aircraft , there are lots of hits in the mission but lots of misses too , mixed bag , Tomahawk like other missiles might have their CEP and have their own rate of failures too.

The "no one" would love bit is interesting because one needn't view this mission from a tactical perspective because it was more about messaging than a clear cut tactical intervention with a tactical goal. As I had been saying since day-1 if the CENTCOM commander had been given the mandate of taking out the airbase or making sure it was not used a whole different set of events would have transpired.

Of course they do have CEP's and have "their own rate of failures". But if they missed something like say an aircraft shelter you'd know since that is what analysts can distinguish from satellite imagery analysis. Only thing you cannot pick up is catastrophic failure which prohibits the missile from getting to the target which is why they should have been found littered around the countryside if one was to lap up the 3 dozen missiles claim. Of course nothing has really surfaced but the narrative then must have shifted to them being duds and landing in the water which will be harder to refute or prove for that matter.

One cannot also make a "we shot them down claim" because these aren't body to body ballistic missile intercepts which leave little to no wreckage which would have shown up all over the social media by now.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Apr 2017 15:25

Words cant explain why quite a few shelter/aircraft/AD missile were consider tactically OK to be left but hitting the others at the same place wasTactically OK to be Hit

Its clear tomahawk missed those targets , that can always happen with any weapon , May be just wrong intelligence may be they were looking at places where they shouldnt

Any ways this is indian missile thread so my last word

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Apr 2017 15:31

Words cant explain why quite a few shelter/aircraft/AD missile were consider tactically OK to be left but hitting the others at the same place wasTactically OK to be Hit

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7088&p=2141514#p2141514

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Apr 2017 21:48

Guys, While the hit rate of the recent Tomahawks is nice, it belongs in the US weapons thread.
Please be focused on the thread title.
Thanks, ramana

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 Apr 2017 00:48

Fallout of the last failed Nirbhay test:

There is a requirement of transportation of assembled UAV from its integration centre to the launch station without dismantling the various sections as being followed presently. This requires a dedicated special transportation container designed for transportation of cruise vehicle with proper packing.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Apr 2017 01:25

Indranil, Where did you get that from? So the wings unfolding issue could be due to the reassembly at the test site?

Can you or, anyone tell me about the Manik/Lagushakti engine? I asked in the Kaveri engine thread to prevent clutter here.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 Apr 2017 02:06

ramana wrote:Indranil, Where did you get that from? So the wings unfolding issue could be due to the reassembly at the test site?

May be. I got it from a tender by ADE for the transit case.

ramana wrote: Can you or, anyone tell me about the Manik/Lagushakti engine? I asked in the Kaveri engine thread to prevent clutter here.

I already did.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Apr 2017 02:34

Ok. Thanks.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Apr 2017 13:37

8,000 missiles from Israel part of Modi's $250-bn plan to take on China, Pakistan

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 138795.cms

mody · Post by **mody** » 12 Apr 2017 14:07

Akash NG was supposed to have been tested at least 2 years back. Is it being deliberately held back?
With 50 Km range and RF seeker, its in direct competition to Barak-8, only bulkier, but cheaper.
Why sign the deal for Barak-8 for IA. The barak-8 for IA was never part of the original plan. IA has yet to receive the full quantity of Akash missiles for the 2 regiments that they have ordered. Another 5 regiments of MRSAM for the army is a huge order. These will not be replacing any existing system, but is a new requirement. This order will effectively close the door on any future orders for MRSAM for IA for the next 10 years. 7 regiments of MRSAM is enough to cover all their requirements.

Just hope the requirement for QRSAM for the IA and IAF is both satisfied locally. No more orders for SpyDer missiles from Israel.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 Apr 2017 23:23

India makes historic move to issue ammunition tenders to private sector

The Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) has, for the first time, issued a raft of request for proposal (RFP) documents to the country's private sector to support the procurement of ammunition for the Indian armed forces.

The move follows the MoD's decision in late 2016 to allow the private sector to produce ammunition as part of the 'Make in India' initiative and efforts to reduce imports and break the monopoly of state-owned industry.

For several decades only the government's Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) had been allowed to manufacture ammunition, while only a handful of private-sector companies were permitted to act as Tier 2 suppliers producing, for example, fuses and shells.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Apr 2017 01:22

mody wrote:Akash NG was supposed to have been tested at least 2 years back. Is it being deliberately held back?
With 50 Km range and RF seeker, its in direct competition to Barak-8, only bulkier, but cheaper.
Why sign the deal for Barak-8 for IA. The barak-8 for IA was never part of the original plan. IA has yet to receive the full quantity of Akash missiles for the 2 regiments that they have ordered. Another 5 regiments of MRSAM for the army is a huge order. These will not be replacing any existing system, but is a new requirement. This order will effectively close the door on any future orders for MRSAM for IA for the next 10 years. 7 regiments of MRSAM is enough to cover all their requirements.

Just hope the requirement for QRSAM for the IA and IAF is both satisfied locally. No more orders for SpyDer missiles from Israel.

Barak is available now. The Akash NG is not. So the IA took what was available. DRDO has carefully tailored Akash NG not to overlap with Barak-8. 50km range versus 70-90km. It's specs were only recently finalized, so expect two to three years minimum. Before prototypes can appear. Right now DRDO has QRSAM and many other programs to demonstrate.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 14 Apr 2017 09:11

Austin wrote:8,000 missiles from Israel part of Modi's $250-bn plan to take on China, Pakistan

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 138795.cms

Wow 250 billion dollahs over 10 years... That's a lot of moolah... Are these guys just making this up

Marten · Post by **Marten** » 14 Apr 2017 09:25

Cain Marko wrote:
Austin wrote:8,000 missiles from Israel part of Modi's $250-bn plan to take on China, Pakistan

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 138795.cms
Wow 250 billion dollahs over 10 years... That's a lot of moolah... Are these guys just making this up

If we do a basic fact check, we will notice that India's annual defence budget is around the $50bn mark (53 this year?).
Therefore, assuming Capex on one segment alone can be $250bn sounds like hursa-manyura.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 Apr 2017 23:21

Israel Secures Huge Missile Contracts in India

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... ndia[quote]

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) signed a “mega-contract” worth $1.6 billion with India for medium-range surface-to-air missile (MRSAM) systems. The deal is the largest-ever export deal secured by the Israeli defense industry, according to the company. After a joint development with IAI’s own Elta division plus Rafael and the Indian Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) that started in 2009, IAI will supply phased-array radars, command and control, mobile launchers and missiles with active radar seekers to the Indian Army. The MRSAM system is known in Israel as the Barak-8 and was displayed at the Paris Air Show in June 2015.

Israel and India have been cooperating on SAM systems since IAI and Rafael supplied the short-range vertical-launch Barak 1 for the protection of Indian warships beginning in 2000. The deal was controversial because of corruption allegations, but an official Indian government probe found no evidence to support the allegations. In late 2005, New Delhi sanctioned development with Israel of a long-range SAM (LRSAM) to protect Indian warships, and this missile was test-fired from Israeli and Indian warships in late 2015 before entering service with the Indian Navy late last year.

In its latest statement, IAI said that it would supply additional LRSAM systems apparently worth some $400 million for India’s home-built aircraft carrier, INS Vikrant. The LRSAM is known as Barak-8ER (Extended-Range) in Israel, and is reported to have a range of 90 miles. The MRSAM or Barak-8 has a reported range of 40 miles, although Indian media have reported a test-firing to a range of 60 miles, and the main $1.6 billion contract may deliver missiles to the Indian Army with that range.

Joseph Weiss, IAI’s president and chief executive officer, said: “We are proud to be leading this flagship project after a long and joint development process. The current contracts represent an enormous expression of confidence by the government of India in IAI's capabilities and advanced technologies which are being developed with our local partners as part of the Indian Government's 'Make in India' policy.” In addition to the DRDO, IAI is working with state-owned Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) and Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL) plus Larsen and Toubro and other private Indian vendors.

The new Indo-Israeli MRSAMs are replacing old Russian SAMs. But India has also been negotiating with Russia for the advanced, long-range S-400 SAM system and has beendeveloping an indigenous short-range SAM named the Akash.
[/quote]

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 14 Apr 2017 23:36

Our P15A and B are also to be armed with ER. 90 miles is 145 KM. It should give us huge air defense capability.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 15 Apr 2017 00:25

2600 crore Rupees worth of missiles just on Vikrant. ? Did the ddm mean the qhole CBG ?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 15 Apr 2017 01:25

Was this posted here before?

Livefist- Exclusive- Brahmos Corp. to be DRDO's commercial export arm- Begins with Akash SAM

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Apr 2017 04:18

yes..which is why mk1s and ng make so much sense our local units will remaim ahead of the exports

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 15 Apr 2017 04:27

Looks like Akash NG is going to be MRSAM-- rather than Akash++

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Apr 2017 05:02

i just realized
well played drdo well played
we have the missile minus seeker in barak
imported radar, seeker
rest inhouse
the akash ng will fill those gaps. tomorrow, akash xg or whatever if need be.

great. QRSAM and suddenly go slow on maitri..whistles.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 15 Apr 2017 08:06

Lots of attempts have been made to kill Akash over period of time. AAD, Prahaar has been practically killed off. I hope Akash NG does not go the way of Arjun 2.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Apr 2017 08:21

http://www.defencetalk.com/russia-to-la ... ber-69726/

Blackjack mk2 production start in 2020 at 3 annually.
We should have nirbhay and brahmosA done by then as also garuda garudamma and saaw

We need to order 12 of these at 2 per annum and get ourselves a desi b1b

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 15 Apr 2017 09:56

Karan M wrote:i just realized
well played drdo well played
we have the missile minus seeker in barak
imported radar, seeker
rest inhouse
the akash ng will fill those gaps. tomorrow, akash xg or whatever if need be.

great. QRSAM and suddenly go slow on maitri..whistles.

I hope this is not based on my speculation of NG being MRSAM--. I don't have any inside info on this. My speculation is based On the MOD report that says that the missile is solid fuel. However, I remember reading a tender about a year ago for building parts of the two stages of Akash NG's motor. The drawings hinted at a diameter of 350-380 mm. So my theory is that they have mastered the dual pulse motor tech and Akash NG is the amalgamation of Akash 1S's avionics, warhead, seeker etc. with a dual pulsed solid motor to achieve the 50 km range. Since all the parts are well tested, they have the confidence of producing the missile in quick time.

The advantages of having in-house designs, mix and match, upgrade. The space program gave us the Agni series. The dual pulse motor is enabling MRSAM/LRSAM, Astra, QRSAM/SRSAM and now Akash NG.

Just my theory.

vina · Post by **vina** » 15 Apr 2017 10:17

So what motor does the Israeli barak-8,the ones that they use and exported use? I suppose it is their own motor. Is it dual pulse as well?

prasannasimha · Post by **prasannasimha** » 15 Apr 2017 10:33

Prahaar and AS killed off? Wevhad recent tests

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 15 Apr 2017 10:54

prasannasimha wrote:Prahaar and AS killed off? Wevhad recent tests

We had tests of Arjun-2 and Nag also.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 15 Apr 2017 11:36

prasannasimha wrote:Prahaar and AS killed off? Wevhad recent tests

When and why

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Apr 2017 12:37

Indranil wrote:
Karan M wrote:i just realized
well played drdo well played
we have the missile minus seeker in barak
imported radar, seeker
rest inhouse
the akash ng will fill those gaps. tomorrow, akash xg or whatever if need be.

great. QRSAM and suddenly go slow on maitri..whistles.
I hope this is not based on my speculation of NG being MRSAM--. I don't have any inside info on this. My speculation is based On the MOD report that says that the missile is solid fuel. However, I remember reading a tender about a year ago for building parts of the two stages of Akash NG's motor. The drawings hinted at a diameter of 350-380 mm. So my theory is that they have mastered the dual pulse motor tech and Akash NG is the amalgamation of Akash 1S's avionics, warhead, seeker etc. with a dual pulsed solid motor to achieve the 50 km range. Since all the parts are well tested, they have the confidence of producing the missile in quick time.

The advantages of having in-house designs, mix and match, upgrade. The space program gave us the Agni series. The dual pulse motor is enabling MRSAM/LRSAM, Astra, QRSAM/SRSAM and now Akash NG.

Just my theory.

hey i came to this thought while considering what all was israeli in the barak. to be honest i have always thought it to be a political jv forced on india for the usual reasons. so while you are looking at barak->akash ng tech transfer, i was looking at the exact reverse, lol. my take being you can upscale the radar for a 70km missile from a 50km one and the rest of the stuff is already in place, c3i etc because we do that for mrsam.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Apr 2017 12:46

Cain Marko wrote:
Austin wrote:8,000 missiles from Israel part of Modi's $250-bn plan to take on China, Pakistan

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... 138795.cms
Wow 250 billion dollahs over 10 years... That's a lot of moolah... Are these guys just making this up

An average Capex if $25 billion per year over the next 10 years is very much possible ... If Rupee gets Stronger versus USD in next 10 years which is quite possible then the figure in USD terms can even exceed.

mody · Post by **mody** » 15 Apr 2017 15:20

vina wrote:So what motor does the Israeli barak-8,the ones that they use and exported use? I suppose it is their own motor. Is it dual pulse as well?

Most likely it would be. They are already offering the Derby-ER with a dual pule motor. So they already have the technology for the same.

The Barak-8 JV is just like the Brahmos JV. DRDO probably volunteered to develop the dual pule solid rocket for the missile, as otherwise it would have a licensed manufacturing and not JV.
IAI does not need anything that DRDO has developed for Barak-8.
Its good though that DRDO took up the task of developing the dual pulse motor. It delayed the project, but we have gained a critical piece of technology.

Will the Akash NG be a ramjet powered missile or will it be a solid rocket fueled missile? If its going to be the later, then basically it is a completely new missile with only the name being Akash. Akash MK-II as was originally planned was supposed to just add about 10-15 Kms of additional range to the Akask, taking its range to about 40 Kms and adding a RF seeker. The missile was supposed to be radar guided just like the Akash-I, with the seeker taking over for the end game.

Now if it is going to have a solid dual pulse motor, then it will basically be our version of the Barak-8.
I guess we will know for sure only when DRDO reveals the actual specs and tests the missile.

srai · Post by **srai** » 15 Apr 2017 19:00

By 2030, India could become fully self-sufficient on air-delivered AAM and PGMs.

Long Range Glide Bombs (LRGBs) 30km/100km (125 Kg and 500 Kg) -> 1000/year planned; replace Kh-29, KAB-500, Paveway-2, Griffin-3 LGB, SPICE-2000, AASM
600-kg ASM (NGARM, AShM, ASM) -> 1000+ units estimate; replace kh-31, Kh-35, Kh-59, Harpoon, Exocet
Brahmos-A -> (450km/800km) 200 units intent
Brahmos-M -> (300km) 200+ units estimate; replace Kh-35, Kh-59, Harpoon, Exocet
Nirbhay-A -> (1000km) 200 units estimate
Astra Mk.1 (CCM/BVR) (RF/IR seeker) -> 6000+ units estimate; replace R-73, R-77, Derby, Mica
Astra Mk.2 (BVR) -> 4000+ units estimate; replace R-77, R-27, Derby-ER, Meteor

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 15 Apr 2017 19:29

srai wrote:By 2030, India could become fully self-sufficient on air-delivered AAM and PGMs.

Long Range Glide Bombs (LRGBs) 30km/100km (125 Kg and 500 Kg) -> 1000/year planned; replace Kh-29, KAB-500, Paveway-2, Griffin-3 LGB, SPICE-2000, AASM

600-kg ASM (NGARM, AShM, ASM) -> 1000+ units estimate; replace kh-31, Kh-35, Kh-59, Harpoon, Exocet

Brahmos-A -> (450km/800km) 200 units intent

Brahmos-M -> (300km) 200+ units estimate; replace Kh-35, Kh-59, Harpoon, Exocet

Nirbhay-A -> (1000km) 200 units estimate

Astra Mk.1 (CCM/BVR) (RF/IR seeker) -> 6000+ units estimate; replace R-73, R-77, Derby, Mica

Astra Mk.2 (BVR) -> 4000+ units estimate; replace R-77, R-27, Derby-ER, Meteor

True. But will India also become self sufficient in newer weaponry increasingly relevant to 2030's battlefield. Or will it still be playing catch up.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 15 Apr 2017 20:36

darshhan wrote:
srai wrote:By 2030, India could become fully self-sufficient on air-delivered AAM and PGMs.

Long Range Glide Bombs (LRGBs) 30km/100km (125 Kg and 500 Kg) -> 1000/year planned; replace Kh-29, KAB-500, Paveway-2, Griffin-3 LGB, SPICE-2000, AASM

600-kg ASM (NGARM, AShM, ASM) -> 1000+ units estimate; replace kh-31, Kh-35, Kh-59, Harpoon, Exocet

Brahmos-A -> (450km/800km) 200 units intent

Brahmos-M -> (300km) 200+ units estimate; replace Kh-35, Kh-59, Harpoon, Exocet

Nirbhay-A -> (1000km) 200 units estimate

Astra Mk.1 (CCM/BVR) (RF/IR seeker) -> 6000+ units estimate; replace R-73, R-77, Derby, Mica

Astra Mk.2 (BVR) -> 4000+ units estimate; replace R-77, R-27, Derby-ER, Meteor
True. But will India also become self sufficient in newer weaponry increasingly relevant to 2030's battlefield. Or will it still be playing catch up.

That depends on whether we are launching RnD programs for next gen weapons in parallel or not.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 15 Apr 2017 21:44

Akash NG development should have be initiated around 10 years ago when the Akash Mk1 design/testing was completed and production started, instead we basically funded a Israeli system. Today we have the ASEA radars, C4I, seeker (albeit not the bleeding edge), propulsion tech (dual pulse motor) etc building blocks but we don't have the SAM system itself. Instead we are left writing checks to the Israelis/Russians for another 10 years at least.