Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Oct 2017 02:28

The sharpe is optimized for a standard optical cone with a seeker. This is a very lethal weapon.

srai · Post by **srai** » 15 Oct 2017 04:17

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 15 Oct 2017 11:50

The real deal is a lot more attractive srai!!!!

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Oct 2017 00:56

Video released by the IAF on its 85th Anniversary that features DRDO's new NGARM & SAAW prominently.
https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/918422424927875072

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 17 Oct 2017 16:28

VSHORAD contest: It’s complicated
https://www.stratpost.com/vshorad-conte ... mplicated/

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 17 Oct 2017 16:33

https://twitter.com/saurabhjoshi/status ... 0580287488 --> We are supposed to get five units of S400 missile systems 2 years after the conclusion of contract - Dhanoa

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 17 Oct 2017 21:42

Are we testing Nirbhay with Indian eng this month???

sum · Post by **sum** » 18 Oct 2017 05:42

As per S Jha , yes

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Oct 2017 11:15

Air Launch BRAHMOS Ready to be Tested End 2017

dkhare · Post by **dkhare** » 18 Oct 2017 23:25

From idrw.org, so all usual disclaimers and caveats apply:
http://idrw.org/india-to-purchase-only- ... em-report/

It reports, the IAF intends to purchase just 2 of 4 missiles with the longest ranges - 40N6 (400 km) and 48N6 (250 km). Not purchasing the 9M96E2 (120 km) and 9M96E (40 km) missiles.

Hopefully, they are really happy with the performance of the Akash and MRSAM, to fill in the gap at lower ranges.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Oct 2017 23:54

Idrw has plagarised the article word to word from force which I posted in ABM dhaga, the idrw author who plagarised has a disclaimer to not copy without permission

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Oct 2017 17:04

How delayed acquisition of 2 indigenous weapons systems has sent Indian defence into a tailspin

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 21 Oct 2017 17:26

"The IAF is presently conducting a cost audit of the Akash, first of prime contractor Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and later of Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL), which manufactures the missiles. Project officials say the meetings have been dragging on endlessly for over a year now and the IAF is believed to have questioned the high price of the Akash. In September, IAF officials at a meeting within Air Headquarters even questioned the utility of the Akash when the IAF was getting five S-400 'Triumf' SAM missiles from Russia which had a range of over 400 km. The comparisons, project officials point out, are unfounded. The Akash is a point-defence missile while the S-400 is an area defence weapon."

The IA/IAF really need to understand the strategic utility of buying Indian. They have no qualms in ordering thousand plus unproven T-90s but bicker over the cost of an Arjun, and pay through the nose for imported SE/MRCA but complain over the sticker price of Tejas or whatever. High time, the MOD laid down a policy ensuring a firm deadline for these sort of chai-biscoot sessions and IAF/IA get the message that such foot-dragging is only messing up their own reputation in vendor bases. Many SMEs dont even turn up for IAFs show and tell build spares locally events because of this very issue, that they spend tons in certifying and developing local spares and IAF never places an order.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 21 Oct 2017 18:35

Austin wrote:How delayed acquisition of 2 indigenous weapons systems has sent Indian defence into a tailspin

Defence website Stratpost.com reported in 2013 that India's nearly Rs 5,000 crore order for 145 M-777 howitzers saw a 37 per cent cost escalation of roughly Rs 1,200 crore because the manufacturer, BAE Systems, had to restart a production line it had shut down.

This is also the case with the Akash and Pinaka. "The order for the seven squadrons of Akash were to have come in March 2015, over two years ago. But we are now sitting idle on the Akash. Our supply chain is also sitting idle," says the head of a private sector firm who supplies components to the Akash programme. Another contractor for the Pinaka rocket launcher system says he had last sourced components from his supply chain in 2009 soon after completing the last orders. "If I get the Pinaka order today, it would have been nearly a decade and I will have to locate all those old vendors."

No hue and cry for the cost escalation by BAE! But let our own industry suffer. Let them die. Let us be slaves, no.... too harsh, colonized, hmmm not the contemporary style, allied - yes allied to the objectives of an America first policy. But, we are chanakian onlee and will figure a way to come out on top "later", the meek will indeed rule the earth....so says the Ferengi!

Extremely Dismayed.

sum · Post by **sum** » 21 Oct 2017 18:41

So no Pinaka has been ordered since 2009 and no Akash since 2015??

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 21 Oct 2017 18:58

And people say what import Lobby ? I indigenous defence production is one area where Modi has failed

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Oct 2017 21:09

Karan M wrote:
"The IAF is presently conducting a cost audit of the Akash, first of prime contractor Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and later of Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL), which manufactures the missiles. Project officials say the meetings have been dragging on endlessly for over a year now and the IAF is believed to have questioned the high price of the Akash. In September, IAF officials at a meeting within Air Headquarters even questioned the utility of the Akash when the IAF was getting five S-400 'Triumf' SAM missiles from Russia which had a range of over 400 km. The comparisons, project officials point out, are unfounded. The Akash is a point-defence missile while the S-400 is an area defence weapon."
The IA/IAF really need to understand the strategic utility of buying Indian. They have no qualms in ordering thousand plus unproven T-90s but bicker over the cost of an Arjun, and pay through the nose for imported SE/MRCA but complain over the sticker price of Tejas or whatever. High time, the MOD laid down a policy ensuring a firm deadline for these sort of chai-biscoot sessions and IAF/IA get the message that such foot-dragging is only messing up their own reputation in vendor bases. Many SMEs dont even turn up for IAFs show and tell build spares locally events because of this very issue, that they spend tons in certifying and developing local spares and IAF never places an order.

Many ex IAF / Armed forces Senior officers and MOD Babus eventually join many of these Foreign Firms post retirement and lobby on their behalf and having insider knowledge on how things work are happy to scuttle if possible or delay indiginous system so that it gives breathing space for these firms to show their wares and start a competition with fancy names which then takes a life of its own.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 21 Oct 2017 22:32

Barak-8 Is 5 times more costly than Akash and IAF is doing cost audit of Akash? Smells like Pilatus

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 21 Oct 2017 23:04

Is the above news report true though because companies have been getting Pinaka orders

http://wap.business-standard.com/conten ... 816_1.html

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/20984/ ... euGx8tX7qB

http://www.pressreader.com/india/busine ... 5304917802

It seems more like a pressure tactic from Industry RM, yes some delays by the babus who prefer imports

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Oct 2017 23:21

Defence website Stratpost.com reported in 2013 that India's nearly Rs 5,000 crore order for 145 M-777 howitzers saw a 37 per cent cost escalation of roughly Rs 1,200 crore because the manufacturer, BAE Systems, had to restart a production line it had shut down.

ShauryaT wrote:No hue and cry for the cost escalation by BAE! But let our own industry suffer. Let them die. Let us be slaves, no.... too harsh, colonized, hmmm not the contemporary style, allied - yes allied to the objectives of an America first policy.

The contract finally signed with BAE was for Rs 5,000 crore. With over 80% of the guns delivered from local assembly line.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 21 Oct 2017 23:26

I have a feeling some of these articles are to get more information out. For e.g. Rajat Pandit had stated that IAF refuses to place Akash missiles in the North East but when the DM visited there the report was proved to be false

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 22 Oct 2017 05:51

Akash is deployed at several air bases in the NE
There are news reports to this effect.
Wikipedia notes:

The Indian Air Force has deployed Akash at its bases in
Gwalior (Maharajpur AFS),
Jalpaiguri (Hasimara AFS),
Tezpur,
Jorhat and
Pune (Lohegaon AFS)

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 22 Oct 2017 08:44

Going through BEL website and presentation made it shows Akash orders have been have been placed in FY 2016-17.

http://bel-india.com/Documentviews.aspx ... 9_2017.pdf

So this seems the article was more some sort of Kite fling, perception building.

And I think the no of Pinaka units is being taken out of the public domain and people of interest including foreign Govts - Like Pakis and China want to know

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Oct 2017 09:53

No smoke without fire. Need to know who in procurement is raising these issues. No name is omnious.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Oct 2017 10:17

The question is of deployment number how many squadrons are deployed at different AF bases and these are operational or test deployment.

You can have DM visiting and in background have Akash tel but that does not tell if they have operational squadron of the Sam working and same goes for pinaka

The swuadton deployment with its huge logistics foot print cannot remain hidden

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 22 Oct 2017 11:18

Pinaka production was supposed to be ramped up in a huge way. I remember reading this report in 2013 (http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories ... signer.htm) where it was stated that the production numbers for pinaka rockets would be raised from 1000 to 2000 in 2014 and 5000 from year 2015 onwards with the OFB having the capability of producing maximum 25000 to 30000 rockets annually. Given the usual slippages in schedule one may expect that the enhanced plant capacity would still not have arrived.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 23 Oct 2017 01:38

India Becomes Missile Component Manufacturer
https://i-hls.com/archives/79234

ashthor · Post by **ashthor** » 23 Oct 2017 13:51

Thakur_B wrote:Pinaka production was supposed to be ramped up in a huge way. I remember reading this report in 2013 (http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories ... signer.htm) where it was stated that the production numbers for pinaka rockets would be raised from 1000 to 2000 in 2014 and 5000 from year 2015 onwards with the OFB having the capability of producing maximum 25000 to 30000 rockets annually. Given the usual slippages in schedule one may expect that the enhanced plant capacity would still not have arrived.

Cross-posting from Artillery thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6651&start=3640#p2224858

The second image says 6450 rockets delivered. There was a discussion many pages back where it was said the
production is too slow?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 26 Oct 2017 00:52

See a possible similar use case for the Pinaka Mk1/2?

Marines launch rocket from amphibious ship to destroy target on land 70 km away

During a recent test, a High Mobility Artillery Rocket System aboard the amphibious transport dock Anchorage successfully destroyed a target on land 70 kilometers away, according to the Defense Department.

The test happened Sunday during the ongoing Dawn Blitz exercise, which is integrating both HIMARS and the F-35B into an amphibious force, a Defense Department story says. Marines from 5th Battalion, 11th Marines successfully launched the land-based rocket system from the Anchorage while at sea.

“In an environment where we are operating in contested waters, we are finding a way to be able to support the land force with deeper strike capabilities,” Capt. AJ Kowaleuski, an artillery officer with I Marine Expeditionary Force, said in the story.
..

The exercise comes shortly after Marine Commandant Gen. Robert Neller said that amphibious ships will need to be able to destroy or jam enemy coastal defenses to allow Marines to come ashore.

“You’re going to see precision fire delivered off amphib ships, whether it comes out of tube guns or rockets or delivered from unmanned systems,” Neller said on Sept. 21, during the Marine Corps League’s annual Modern Day Marine expo.

Neller also warned that Marines will have to “fight to get to the fight” in future wars because the enemy will be able to attack U.S. military transport ships and aircraft. However, the Marine Corps’ strategy for fighting in the littorals acknowledges that aircraft carriers and amphibious ships pose ‘lucrative targets’ for enemy aircraft, cruise missiles and other defenses.

Not only are Russia and China developing long-range cruise missiles, but the terrorist group Hezbollah and Houthi rebels in Yemen have successfully used cruise missiles to attack ships. Both groups are backed by Iran. In October 2016, several cruise missiles were fired at the destroyer Mason off Yemen’s coast, but the ship was not hit.

However, Neller said that Marines have destroyed coastal defenses for amphibious operations in past wars, so the issue now is finding ways to do the same thing from longer distances.

“If the enemy has a capability to shoot my large ship or my destroyer or my carrier from a couple hundred nautical miles away — or maybe longer — I’ve got to do something about that,” Neller said. “That’s why it’s important that all of these ships have the capability to do some sort of strike or denial, or some way to suppress that capability.”

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Oct 2017 02:15

I think P Mk2 is similar to HIMARS M270
.

X-posted from Artillery thread...

Thakur_B wrote:

Guided Pinaka Rocket costs ~ ₹70 Lacs, unguided ₹23 Lacs.

Silly of me.

The pictures show M 26 and M26A1 which are the MLRS rockets used in HIMARS.

And P Mk1 and 2 fire the M 26 Alternate Warhead equivalent.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 26 Oct 2017 09:38

30k annual production of pinaka seems way too optimistic, considering we are only making 100k 155 rounds (which probably cost 50-100x less) per year.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 26 Oct 2017 09:46

OFB project to set up manufactering line for annual production of 5k rounds is running around 10 year late. Current production around 1k.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 26 Oct 2017 16:33

What is happening to the Nirbhay with Indian eng test this month??? Already we are on 26th and no news at all.

sum · Post by **sum** » 26 Oct 2017 16:49

Real depressing to see another timeline slip by when it was mentioned that the issues had been recognised and test wsd supposed to be in May

Not sure if no news is good news in this case. The ADE really seems to be jinxed with all its projects in some unknown stages of progress

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 26 Oct 2017 18:14

ashthor wrote:
Thakur_B wrote:Pinaka production was supposed to be ramped up in a huge way. I remember reading this report in 2013 (http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories ... signer.htm) where it was stated that the production numbers for pinaka rockets would be raised from 1000 to 2000 in 2014 and 5000 from year 2015 onwards with the OFB having the capability of producing maximum 25000 to 30000 rockets annually. Given the usual slippages in schedule one may expect that the enhanced plant capacity would still not have arrived.
Cross-posting from Artillery thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6651&start=3640#p2224858

The second image says 6450 rockets delivered. There was a discussion many pages back where it was said the
production is too slow?

Yes but since the images use prices as of 2008, it is possible this 6450 nos is as of 2008 also no? Picture may be taken in May 2017 but data and image could have been prepared years before?

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Oct 2017 18:01

RudraM-II MISSILE ON SU-30MKI AIRCRAFT AT STATIONS 1, 5, 6, 7 & 8 will be tested in near future it seems. Tender out on flutter analysis. 3 weapons config identified. So RCI is working on this missile.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Oct 2017 21:04

JayS, Are you funda aero guy? I have a question if so. If not will keep silent.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Oct 2017 21:09

sum wrote:Real depressing to see another timeline slip by when it was mentioned that the issues had been recognised and test wsd supposed to be in May

Not sure if no news is good news in this case. The ADE really seems to be jinxed with all its projects in some unknown stages of progress

Sum, We don't know how many turbofans they have? It looked like they were success oriented and ordered minimum numbers.

So they have to be extra careful if they are using the Manik which is also new.

There was news that new tests after last failure would be with turbojet engine which means a whole new set of control software.

There is no such thing as jinx in aerospace despite coconut and puja before the test.
Its experience and learn by doing.
One flight test is equal to 100 ground tests and 1000 a paper calculations.
Reason is one really cannot simulate all the forces that act while in flight and how the vehicle responds.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 27 Oct 2017 23:25

JayS wrote:RudraM-II MISSILE ON SU-30MKI AIRCRAFT AT STATIONS 1, 5, 6, 7 & 8 will be tested in near future it seems. Tender out on flutter analysis. 3 weapons config identified. So RCI is working on this missile.

What missile is this?

atma · Post by **atma** » 28 Oct 2017 00:14

I believe it is a new ASM, similar in design to the DRDO new generation anti-radiation missile (NGARM)

http://idrw.org/drdos-rudra-m-ii-missil ... over-soon/