Why? What is different about West of Andamans. Take off from peninsula - add 2000 km Su-30 radius + 300 km Brahmos range. Tkaes you all the way up to Persian gulf. Maldives and the Indian ocean sea lanesCosmo_R wrote:Agreed. Dense concentration of HVT. But what role do the SU30MK/Brahmos play in this? Andamans—yes but west of that?shiv wrote: IMO most deadly would be maritime. From Malacca to the Persian gulf ships will be in trouble
Relevant parts...Aditya_V wrote:We are slowly now making various parts of the Missile which will make much more cheaper and cost efficient to field in Numbers.
https://www.bloombergquint.com/business ... ile-system
... Godrej & Boyce received a fresh order to supply airframe fuel management systems for the BrahMos Air-Launched Cruise Missile.
BrahMos Aerospace Ltd., a 50.50:49.50, joint venture between India’s Defence Research Development Organisation and its Russian counterpart has placed an order for an additional 100 airframes from Godrej. “We currently produce two a month, we plan to ramp it up to four in some time,” said Jamshyd Godrej, chairman of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd.
Godrej & Boyce, which has been associated with BrahMos since the year 2000, recently completed the supply of its 100th airframe for the missile. “It took us ten years to understand and develop the technology to master BrahMos Missile,” said Godrej. “We will deliver the additional 100 airframes in the next 3-5 years,” he added.
...
The air version currently has 65 percent of sub-systems indigenously manufactured, while a little more than 50 percent of the entire missile is indigenously produced, said Sudhir Mishra, managing director and chief executive officer of BrahMos Aerospace and director general of the joint venture DRDO-BrahMos. This indigenous component could increase to little over 60 percent in the next 1-2 years, Mishra said.
“I would like entire 100 percent of missile to be manufactured in India, but we want our Russian partners to contribute in this joint venture,” he added.
BrahMos Aerospace is currently working on a miniature version of the missile, called BrahMos NG. The mini version of the missile is still in the design stage and development is a few years away, said Mishra.
India test fired the air version of BrahMos on Nov. 22 from air to sea. Currently, the Sukhoi can carry only one BrahMos at a time. The mini version of BrahMos will enable Sukhois to carry multiple missiles. The air force is expected to undertake a few more tests before inducting it.
BrahMos Aerospace is also looking at extending the missile’s range after India’s full membership to the Missile Technology Control Regime last year, which removed the cap on range to the BrahMos cruise missile. This will allow India to look at developing missiles with an over 300-kilometre range. In March this year, India test fired the extended range missile to hit a target beyond 400 km.
Alpha, Dalta & Ecilon...JayS wrote:Awesome. Seeker details available..?
In AI-2017, Alpha Tech showcased their RF seeker, they said its meant for Brahmos. They had a smaller version for AAM as well.
Excuse the riddles, I was being careful as i didn't know if this information was public knowledge yet. But now I found out it is.raghava wrote:
Alpha, Dalta & Ecilon...
Oh forgive my spelling... I meant Alpha, Delta & Epsilon of course...
Just before noon on September 14 last year, an 11-foot long missile zoomed off from the wing of an Indian Air Force Su-30 MKI fighter jet about 120 kilometers off India’s east coast. Leaving behind a pulse of purple flame, the Astra careened off into the invisible horizon. Tracked both by the two pilots in the jet, another Su-30 flying some distance away as well as an observation team stationed on a ship in the Bay of Bengal, the Astra roared through thin air over a steady cloud deck over 50 kilometers from the jet that fired it, finally smashing into a bright orange British-built BTT-3 Banshee target drone.
The missile had just been fired for the first time, not with a dummy warhead, but with the kind of warhead that would be used against an actual enemy aircraft. The 15 kilogram warhead, built by the DRDO’s Chandigarh-based Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory (TBRL) is like to have exploded bare feet away from the Banshee, bringing its target down towards the sea in a scattered cloud of debris. Later that day, the same Su-30 jet fired another missile, this time at a range much closer to the missile’s maximum range of 75 kilometers. This time too, the weapon blew effortlessly apart its target.
But there was something else in the September tests that had gladdened hearts. Two of the seven Astra missiles tested had undergone a crucial modification. The very heart of their ability to hunt down aircraft in the air, their seeker, had been replaced. The existing Russian Agat 9B1103M active radar seeker used on the Astra had been replaced with an Indian Ku-band seeker developed by the DRDO’s Research Center Imarat (RCI) in Hyderabad. While the Indian Air Force has taken on the task of further testing of the Astra as part of a ‘capability discovery’ exercise with the new seeker this year (in coordination with the DRDO), the very fact that it has committed precious financial resources to pre-production units is proof of its pleasure.
It has been notoriously difficult in the past for the DRDO to persuade its customers to agree to such a ‘concurrent engineering’ approach, given that the military has traditionally been suspicious of the DRDO’s promises. This time, the IAF has been confident enough to sidestep the phased development approach. For Astra project director Dr S. Venugopal and his team, that’s an enormous show of faith.
The Astra has an officially stated range of 75 kilometers. Sanctioned as a project in March 2004 with a budget of just under $150 million (Rs 955 crore), the project missed its completion deadline of February 2013 for a variety of reasons, and now aims to officially wrap everything up by December this year. Crucially, the project team has decided it can complete the task at hand on the Astra Mk.1 without additional funds — a rarity in the pantheon of indigenous development.
The Astra project also involves over 50 public and private firms, leading to consortium of industries building the weapon the system through its final integration line at Bharat Dynamics Ltd in Telangana. Best of all, the systems being proved on the Astra will likely spawn of fully family of air defence weapons from DRDO, all sporting significantly higher indigenous content than in-service systems.
The mono pulse seeker is not AESA. No advantage to AESA but only huge downside for the application & requirement.JayS wrote:Are these RF seekers AESA basically?? Alpha Tech is production partner for LRDE AESA TR modules, including that for Uttam.
Cosmo_R., If I say that withshiv wrote:Why? What is different about West of Andamans. Take off from peninsula - add 2000 km Su-30 radius + 300 km Brahmos range. Tkaes you all the way up to Persian gulf. Maldives and the Indian ocean sea lanesCosmo_R wrote:
Agreed. Dense concentration of HVT. But what role do the SU30MK/Brahmos play in this? Andamans—yes but west of that?
Indian Ocean Sea lanes
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/03 ... ng-it.htmlramana wrote:Pankajs,
Try to post the warhead pictures also.
Very interesting.
i suppose the AESA seeker would be more immune to ECM , besides dual mode seekers seem to be in vogue esp in AAMsHaridas wrote:The mono pulse seeker is not AESA. No advantage to AESA but only huge downside for the application & requirement.JayS wrote:Are these RF seekers AESA basically?? Alpha Tech is production partner for LRDE AESA TR modules, including that for Uttam.
For the image rf seeker AESA will be useful idea, but imho it will have other more important tech challanges to overcome becoz it has to operate at so much higher freq mmw band.
Generic issue, see http://ethw.org/Millimeter_Waves (at the end see Dr JC Bose , he built 60 GHz source & detector using jute made channel -105 years ago)
A US state department spokesperson said on Friday in response to a question on whether the S-400 deal could run into CAATSA trouble, “We have discussed CAATSA with the government of India, and the US intends to work with our partners to help them identify and avoid engaging in potentially sanctionable activity.”
The spokesperson added: “We are engaging with a range of countries to avert future defence acquisitions, and the secretary of state will take appropriate action when and if we determine sanctionable activity has occurred.”
MOSCOW, April 4. /TASS/. A contract for the delivery of S-400 Triumf missile systems to India won’t be signed during the current visit by Indian Defense Minister Nirmala Sitharaman to Moscow, a source in military-diplomatic circles told TASS on the sidelines of the Moscow international security conference on Wednesday.
"All the technical parameters of the contract have been fully agreed; however, the sides have not yet agreed on the price of the deal," the source said.
Some media outlets earlier reported that India and Russia were close to signing a contract on the delivery of S-400 air defense missile systems and that its signing might take place during Sitharaman’s visit to Moscow.
At the same time, the source was optimistic about the prospects of signing the S-400 deal.
"The sides are continuing the negotiations on this sole issue that has not yet been agreed and there are no doubts that the document will be signed shortly," the source noted.
This is in relation to any CAATSA issues and not specific to India acquiring missile defenses or disarmament, world peace or anything else. The end result of this will likely be that India will be given an exception and the law set aside.Singha wrote:And they be perfectly ok selling us billion dollar boat anchors like thaad and pac3 lol
Disarmament and world peace at its best
The S-400 is a surface to air missile system with these types of targets according to Wikipedia:sudeepj wrote:How can we expect an S400 to protect against Cheen that is itself a user of the system? This would be like trying to buy F16s back in 89.
They shot more than 2 AC .... and the biggest achievement is they managed to keep their AD intact in presense of over whelming offensive capability .Good review done by APA http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-04.htmlJohn wrote:Shooting down 2 AC is largely a sign of success and these SAM were upgraded by Russian techs and maintained by Serbians far better than Iraqis did. Most effective SAM employed by Iraq was SA-6 which was obsolete during GW where as Serbians had updated S-125 to be far more potent.
People forget close to 73 coalition ACs where lost in GW. Keep in mind the conflict themselves were far different apart from Terrain, Serbian conflict was limited to primarily to Kosovo and there were lot of limitations on what ground targets can be engaged by NATO due to fear of Russian intervention.
pankajs wrote:https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/03 ... ng-it.htmlramana wrote:Pankajs,
Try to post the warhead pictures also.
Very interesting.
^^^^^^^^Austin wrote:They shot more than 2 AC .... and the biggest achievement is they managed to keep their AD intact in presense of over whelming offensive capability .Good review done by APA http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-04.htmlJohn wrote:Shooting down 2 AC is largely a sign of success and these SAM were upgraded by Russian techs and maintained by Serbians far better than Iraqis did. Most effective SAM employed by Iraq was SA-6 which was obsolete during GW where as Serbians had updated S-125 to be far more potent.
People forget close to 73 coalition ACs where lost in GW. Keep in mind the conflict themselves were far different apart from Terrain, Serbian conflict was limited to primarily to Kosovo and there were lot of limitations on what ground targets can be engaged by NATO due to fear of Russian intervention.
Hmm even the link you posted says the exact same thing unless you want to call 2.1 because an aircraft got damagedAustin wrote:They shot more than 2 AC .... and the biggest achievement is they managed to keep their AD intact in presense of over whelming offensive capability .Good review done by APA http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-04.htmlJohn wrote:Shooting down 2 AC is largely a sign of success and these SAM were upgraded by Russian techs and maintained by Serbians far better than Iraqis did. Most effective SAM employed by Iraq was SA-6 which was obsolete during GW where as Serbians had updated S-125 to be far more potent.
People forget close to 73 coalition ACs where lost in GW. Keep in mind the conflict themselves were far different apart from Terrain, Serbian conflict was limited to primarily to Kosovo and there were lot of limitations on what ground targets can be engaged by NATO due to fear of Russian intervention.
. As i said before this was limited campaign if NATO did decide to engage in manner similar to GW most of air defense would been neutralized in days (with high collateral damage).A total of 815 SAMs were fired at NATO aircraft, of which 665 were radar guided SA-3 and SA-6 rounds. One F-16C and one F-117A were killed by SAM shots, and one F-117A suffered light damage from a near miss. Many SAM shots were unguided due to the radar shutting down to avoid HARM shots
I think another non US F-16 was shot down, and a couple of dozen UAVs. More aircraft were damaged and quite a few helicopters were downed or damaged as well. But as I said, it was an overwhelmingly one-sided air-campaign given how SAM's and AAA have done in past conflicts if one goes back a few decades.John wrote:Hmm even the link you posted says the exact same thing unless you want to call 2.1 because an aircraft got damagedAustin wrote:
They shot more than 2 AC .... and the biggest achievement is they managed to keep their AD intact in presense of over whelming offensive capability .Good review done by APA http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-04.html
A total of 815 SAMs were fired at NATO aircraft, of which 665 were radar guided SA-3 and SA-6 rounds. One F-16C and one F-117A were killed by SAM shots, and one F-117A suffered light damage from a near miss. Many SAM shots were unguided due to the radar shutting down to avoid HARM shots
