Indian Missile Technology Discussion

sum · Post by **sum** » 24 Oct 2008 13:30

narayana wrote:
narmad wrote:IAF conducts missile simulation
By Aharon Etengoff @ Thursday, October 23, 2008 8:55 AM

The DRDO and Indian Air Force have successfully conducted a missile target simulation exercise.

The Russian-manufactured missile reportedly locked onto and destroyed a tow body suspended from a micro-light aircraft (MCLA). "First the MCLA, also known as unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) was flown from the launching complex-II of the ITR. After making two laps it released a tow body, which was targeted by the missile fired from a Sukhoi-30 lifted up from Kalaikunda airbase in West Bengal," explained an anonymous defence official.
Which missile is this report talking about ?
They Mentioned "Russian Made Missile" but didnt spell out the name,this "anonymous" missile was fired from "SU-30 MKI" do all these point to KH-172

Hope it is the "mythical" Ks-172....

Actually, cannot be ruled out given the "AWACs- killer" role of the KS-172 and the recent acquisition/aolmost acquired status of so many AWACs(SAABs, Y-8s) by Pak...

kidoman · Post by **kidoman** » 24 Oct 2008 16:16

vavinash wrote:Tsung missile apparently???

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=10386

Wat is this Tsung missile???
Never heard of it earlier ..Tried google but to no avail..
Can any1 thrw sm light on this???

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 24 Oct 2008 21:09

that article made almost no sense what so ever. maybe i'm losing my marbles but it looked like an auto-translate of gibberish. don't believe it until i see DRDO or IAF press release on same topic

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 25 Oct 2008 01:52

DRDO seminar on solid propellant rocket motors

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 25 Oct 2008 17:25

Scientists at ITR taste another success

‘‘The air-to-air RVV AE missile fired from a Sukhoi-30 fighter aircraft targeted the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) while during the Wednesday’s trial the Russian Tsung missile had targeted the tow body suspended from the UAV. The Su-30 was lifted up from Kalaikunda airbase in West Bengal,’’ said a source. Sources said both the Russia-manufactured missiles have already been procured by India for the IAF fighter aircraft. The four-km range RVV AE is designed to be used against aircraft, surface-to-air missiles and air-to-air missiles.

sum · Post by **sum** » 25 Oct 2008 17:37

Gerard wrote:Scientists at ITR taste another success
‘‘The air-to-air RVV AE missile fired from a Sukhoi-30 fighter aircraft targeted the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) while during the Wednesday’s trial the Russian Tsung missile had targeted the tow body suspended from the UAV. The Su-30 was lifted up from Kalaikunda airbase in West Bengal,’’ said a source. Sources said both the Russia-manufactured missiles have already been procured by India for the IAF fighter aircraft. The four-km range RVV AE is designed to be used against aircraft, surface-to-air missiles and air-to-air missiles.

Could any guru/jingo who understood whats happening please explain what exactly took place in simpler terms?
Are we inducting a new 4 km range AA missile?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Oct 2008 17:45

sum this was a normal inventory test for IAF's batch of r-77.
rvv-ae/r-77 is IAF's standard russi origin BVRAAM which I'm sure you know all about.
don't know where the journalist got the tsung and the 4km bit from.

I would guess the nearest chinese food takeaway(called tsung) to Mr Rout's home is 4km away.

babbupandey · Post by **babbupandey** » 26 Oct 2008 00:24

When I read the headlines like "Another Milestone in Missile Testing", I expect some Indian missile, or Indian system having been test fired. It's disappointing to see such news which raise hopes so high and the *blip* - all goes away!
It's just another Russian missile, fired from a Russian aircraft by an Indian pilot, that's it!

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 26 Oct 2008 00:44

testing is also a very detailed activity. in this test i bet iaf tested rvvae to see if it met requirements with drdo help. (itr is drdo facility). big thing is all this is getting done in india now, and we dont pay manufacturer million $ to do it for us.

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 26 Oct 2008 02:12

Question to Gurus: How is the menace of UAVs dealt with? I am thinking they can easily fly out of range of anti-aircraft guns, so what options are there? Since they provide real-time field inputs, they will have to be dealt with at times of war.

It would be great to have our own hunter UAV mini/micro at that. Guess all it would probably need to do is, disable the alien UAV somehow. Is there any development in this regard?

Aditya_M · Post by **Aditya_M** » 26 Oct 2008 02:56

Nah, UAVs today are not really faster than a helicopter, and are still large enough to be targeted by both AAA and SAMs. I suppose something like the reaper won't give a very good heat signature though. And using a UAV to kill a UAV may not be the best idea...

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 26 Oct 2008 08:38

a_kumar wrote:Question to Gurus: How is the menace of UAVs dealt with? I am thinking they can easily fly out of range of anti-aircraft guns, so what options are there? Since they provide real-time field inputs, they will have to be dealt with at times of war.

It would be great to have our own hunter UAV mini/micro at that. Guess all it would probably need to do is, disable the alien UAV somehow. Is there any development in this regard?

The problem can be split between UAV and micro-UAV.

Micro-UAV are almost always in range of small arms fire, the problem is aiming. I know of private individuals that can easily make such a system that is BFSR (Indian Battle Field Surveillance Radar) style battery powered optical tracker that only need to be cued by a jawan to a hostile Micro-UAV, the system can then optically track and range it and kill it with a slaved rifle by using only few bullet rounds.

The Small/Medium endurance UAV however are problematic, because they fly so high that people on ground can't see or hear it, and certainly out of range of even an Ack Ack gun. Even long range radars cant see such small and (and now increasingly stealthy) crafts. IMHO the only effective solution to detecting these crafts is passive radars. Once detected, then current battlefield radars (used for SAM and ack acks) can aim it. But expending a SAM will be economically not worth it.

These crafts can be most economically killed IMHO by howitzer fired shells (that carries a seeker kill vehicle) fired at high inclination, after reaching apogee the kill vehicle can de-spins and extend small wings that then steeply dives down to kill its prey (gravity powered flight). Again a optical seeker will survive the launch and be cheap and reliable enough to intercept the target. Unlike an ack-ack gun, the protective bubble of such howitzer based UAV interceptor will extend many tens of kilometers.

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 27 Oct 2008 00:25

These crafts can be most economically killed IMHO by howitzer fired shells (that carries a seeker kill vehicle) fired at high inclination, after reaching apogee the kill vehicle can de-spins and extend small wings that then steeply dives down to kill its prey (gravity powered flight). Again a optical seeker will survive the launch and be cheap and reliable enough to intercept the target. Unlike an ack-ack gun, the protective bubble of such howitzer based UAV interceptor will extend many tens of kilometers.

This is interesting, does such a system exist for real (or under devlopment)?

I still see a few holes in mountaneous terrains (which is most of our hot zones). Howitzers and even expensive SAMs (MANPADs may be insufficient) may be unavailable in lot of terrains.

Btw, Are Howitzers are part of strike corps? Couldn't find any info online..

skher · Post by **skher** » 27 Oct 2008 01:47

Arun_S wrote: These crafts can be most economically killed IMHO by howitzer fired shells (that carries a seeker kill vehicle) fired at high inclination, after reaching apogee the kill vehicle can de-spins and extend small wings that then steeply dives down to kill its prey (gravity powered flight). Again a optical seeker will survive the launch and be cheap and reliable enough to intercept the target. Unlike an ack-ack gun, the protective bubble of such howitzer based UAV interceptor will extend many tens of kilometers.

Um,saar,apogee?! Isn't that still the holy grail for howitzers?

Is the gerald bull tech out?

If this is true,Bhim can't be possibly rejected.

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 27 Oct 2008 11:21

Rahul M wrote:sum this was a normal inventory test for IAF's batch of r-77.
rvv-ae/r-77 is IAF's standard russi origin BVRAAM which I'm sure you know all about.
don't know where the journalist got the tsung and the 4km bit from.

I would guess the nearest chinese food takeaway(called tsung) to Mr Rout's home is 4km away.

Using all my experience of decoding DDM

, I have come to the conclusion that it was Tunguska system which was tested. Its gun range is 4 km.
I dont think this is a small achievement. We can now validate the OEM's specifications for the capabilities of Air to air and surface to air systems on our own.
Another thing this shows is that IAF has now quite a lot of confidence in Lakshya, which is now being used to test the Russian systems.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Oct 2008 11:33

maybe the r77 minimum effective range is 4km.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Oct 2008 11:38

what's with the su-30 then ?

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 27 Oct 2008 12:56

Rahul M wrote:what's with the su-30 then ?

Thats DDM i guess. Su-30 was used for the next test. If he/she cant get the name of the missile tested right, a lot of things can go wrong. Must have been smoking something other than tobacco i guess.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Oct 2008 12:57

k mehta, you are decidedly more skilled at this !

singha ji, IIRC r-77 min range is around 1 km.

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 27 Oct 2008 13:09

Rahul M wrote:k mehta, you are decidedly more skilled at this !

singha ji, IIRC r-77 min range is around 1 km.

Rahul it took me two days. used a lot of permutations and combinations to decipher this DDM code

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 27 Oct 2008 15:21

skher wrote:
Arun_S wrote: These crafts can be most economically killed IMHO by howitzer fired shells (that carries a seeker kill vehicle) fired at high inclination, after reaching apogee the kill vehicle can de-spins and extend small wings that then steeply dives down to kill its prey (gravity powered flight). Again a optical seeker will survive the launch and be cheap and reliable enough to intercept the target. Unlike an ack-ack gun, the protective bubble of such howitzer based UAV interceptor will extend many tens of kilometers.
Um,saar,apogee?! Isn't that still the holy grail for howitzers?

In the domain of ballistics, even a stone thrown on earths surface describes an elliptic orbit (of course assuming no air friction). Thus mathamatically the zenetih the stone reaches to corresponds apogee of that elliptic orbit.

Use of that term was deliberate, since I was awake and conscious when I wrote that, but now I am ready to crash ( but I will not reach perigee though

)

narmad · Post by **narmad** » 27 Oct 2008 22:13

Air-launched BrahMos supersonic cruise missile induction not earlier than 2012: Dr Pillai
The air launched version of the BrahMos will be inducted into the Indian Air Force (IAF) only by 2012, according to chief executive officer and managing director, Brahmos Airspace, Dr A Sivathanu Pillai. ''Trials and tests will be carried out by 2011 and it is expected to be inducted into the IAF by 2012,'' he said
Stressing on the importance of research in nanotechnology, Pillai, who is also chief controller, R&D (ACE & NS) at DRDO, said the organisation would lay more emphasis on this domain. ''Materials such as nano-aluminium, which will augment weight reduction of equipment, will be increasingly used in various defence applications

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 27 Oct 2008 23:15

narmad wrote:Air-launched BrahMos supersonic cruise missile induction not earlier than 2012: Dr Pillai

Do not understand the reason for taking such long time to make the BRAHMOS an ALCM and induct the same in the AF ?
To a lame mane like me ..I feel..corrections/improvements will be needed on the baseline Brahmos are
1. Remove the First stage Booster and adjust the CG for a stable flight/accuracy...(may be they can Enhance the existing 2nd stage RAM to substitute the booster stage,so that it can get a longer range as well while keeping rest of the missile as it is ).
2. Integration of Targetting and Guidance systems on the carrier aircraft (is it so big job which will need another 4 yrs ?)
3. Structural changes in the fuselage and wings of the aircraft so that it can carry these heavy missiles (one in the centerline and two in each wings )….I think to carry a Brahmos ALCM in the centerline launcher..it woldn’t need any significant changes in the aircraft structure, say for SU-30 MKI.

The question is if PAK/CHINA can already complete the integration of a newly developed Babur/Raad cruise missiles (with ranges more than 700 KMs) in their F-16, JF-17 and Mirage -IIIs .Why it takes so much time for India to do the same for a tested missile system like Brahmos..I think it’s agaian a conspiracy to keep the developments slow so that we are always dependant on some other countries and will be spending our heard earned tax paid money to buy some external system worth billions of USD..?

Gurus ..Arun ,please enlighten us what could be the factors and reasons for this issue ?

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 00:02

pls read the previous reports. the brahmos group is waiting for the sukhoi corp to validate the carriage of ~2-3 ton brahmos by su-30 mki, and then confirm that with IAF. this is no easy task but will require months of dedicated modelling (for flow separation & other cfd stuff) plus actual trials and then clearance. this take lot of manpower and effort. rite now sukhoi corp is totally busy with 3 projects: ssj airliner, su-35 and pak-fa so they dont have any manpower to spare. @ hal, is equally busy with su-30 mki production, and getting from phase 3 --->phase 4 (raw material). @ ada is busy with lca. and ada shouldnot modify sukhoi design unless absolute necessary (if sukhoi cannot do it all).

this is why there is delay till 2011 and then cleared for iaf by 2012.
iaf will only clear brahmos on su-30 mki, if sukhoi give clearance. and this is because payload the size of brahmos is not otherwise cleared for mki before. other smaller weapons and carriage can be integrated, tested in india itself. otherwise brahmos corp is very fast with work and have always kept their promise and even delivered before original plans. but here it is sukhoi problem.

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 28 Oct 2008 00:28

All these are known thru media..and we just can't not seat down for years just for Sukhoi's issues.....i wanted to know exact technical issues that Brahmos Aerospace might be facing on GROUND rather than re-printing media published matters...honestly i would not expect Russia to speed up these kind of integration co-oepration because india's growing closeness with US.
So we are seeing Delays due to all funny reasons...Vikramaditya sudden cost issues,Phalcon issues due to Il-76 manufucturing also with AESA radome issues,Su-30 Mki tech transfer issues,T-90 tech transfer issues, Klub class of missiles missing target and hence delay of SubmarineS after MLU....have lots more.
Hence I specially mentioned that atleast centerline integration (atleast one Brahmos missile per Air craft) should not need the Su-30 or even Mirage-2000 or Jaguar to go thru huge changes in fusalge main body.

Essence of my question was to analyse technical issues that we may face on ground and what we can do by OUR OWN scientists/technicians AND BY OUR OWN WILL on fast track basis to safeguard OUR NATION without depending on somebody else till he gives us just a Green Signal .

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 28 Oct 2008 00:36

It looks like a typical answer from DRDO/ADA as for every problem they have an excuse/reason ..instead of a solution ..as how to resolve that problem quickly without delaying the project/induction. We need to learn something from atleast Pakistan if not China ...on how to quickly turn around projects and induct self designed and developed products ..when it is matter of national security or existance.

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 00:58

first learn the basics before writing BS. you asked for an answer and u got it. instead of understanding what it meant, you respond with more whines.

the brahmos is not a toy that u can put on an airframe because "sontu of brf" wants.

the iaf are not fools to go and put a missile on an airframe which can overstress it. for ur information, the brahmos is one of the heaviest missile of its class.

there have been many reports of why and how brahmos corp is doing what it is. and they have already gone and delivered first firing units to army and also developed and started supplies to navy.

instead of reading any of those reports, and drawing proper conclusions you write BS about "It looks like a typical answer from DRDO/ADA as for every problem they have an execuse/reason ..instead of a solution".

...i even forgot to mention that brahmos corp will have to do air laucnh trials also, probably with new seeker. not only did u not know this or correct me, u repsonded with more nonsense.

and about this"
"We need to learn something from atleast Pakistan if not China ...on how to quickly turn around projects and induct self designed and developed products ..when it is matter of national security or existance."

please point out ONE self designed and developed product by pakistan which it has inducted.

half knowledge or zero knowledge is a dangerous thing and u just demonstrated it.

china itself is not putting missile the size of bramos on fighters. it is relying on H-6 bombers.

the so called babur missile test by pakistan is yet to be confrimed and visual evidence show evidence of photoshop giri.

not only do u not know how much testing missile requires, that too of class of brahmos, on top of it when somebody gives u real reasons, u sit and complain.

instead of complaining on brf, go join drdo and/or ADa and get tests done day after tomorrow.

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 01:03

"All these are known thru media..and we just can't not seat down for years just for Sukhoi's issues.....i wanted to know exact technical issues that Brahmos Aerospace might be facing on GROUND rather than re-printing media published matters...honestly i would not expect Russia to speed up these kind of integration co-oepration because india's growing closeness with US."

i have to congratulate u for a post which is remarkable in contributing ZERO to the discussion.
so u say u know all this through media. but then u say it is DRDO/ADA fault when sukhoi does not have manpower. and of course sukhoi should listen to sontu of brf, and stop RRJ program, Su-35 program and PAK-FA because india want brahmos on mki fast.

if tomorrow a MKI is shown to have TTL reduced from x000 hour to one fourth because spars are overstressed because brahmos carrieage was done without sukhoi clearance, u will be fuirst in line to curse ADA.

r u for real?

if iaf wanted brahmos so desparately, they would be crying in media about it. they dont need it rite now. first learn something about the mki before posting.

mki already has kh-59m missile, with 115 km range. 35 rounds were purchased with first 40 flanker itself (yefim gordon, su-27 flanker), and after that for series production many more would be purchased. it also has kh-31 for anti ship and DEAD/SEAD.

instead ur crying about brahmos. first let brahmos production by 2011 meet army, navy needs, iaf can wait. it already is purchasing PGM @ brisk rate.

this is also equally funny.

So we are seeing Delays due to all funny reasons...Vikramaditya sudden cost issues,Phalcon issues due to Il-76 manufucturing also with AESA radome issues,Su-30 Mki tech transfer issues,T-90 tech transfer issues, Klub class of missiles missing target and hence delay of SubmarineS after MLU....have lots more.

what do all these deal have in common apart from russia?
and correct ur information. phalcon radome is from USA suppled to israel. the phalcon is in russia because hello, tell me something, who do u think makes the electronic equipment that will talk to ur sukhois? klub missiles missing target - as if everything we pourchased from france is also 100% ok in first day. israeli soltam gun and tavor was rejected again and again till it got ok. last sub had gyro problem fixed and club tests were successful.
what su-30 MKI tech transfer issues r u talking about? again, absolute BS. HAL Mag clearly says HAL is already at phase 3 (partial raw material). cost escalation in su deal is again part and patrcel of life. have u seen paper lately about raw material and currecny fluctuation?
only 2 deals where russia !@#$%ed up totally is vikramaditya and t-90, but we have our own fault as well...and no pont in talking @ that and screwing up this thread

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 28 Oct 2008 01:05

China has inducted nuclear submarines which are so noisy that they have never made a patrol. Reportedly sailors have received lethal doses of radiation from the reactors.

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 28 Oct 2008 01:12

Yes dear Vikram ..if Everybody in India had to think ..the way you think..then we will be waiting till 2015 or more till Sukhoi gives us Green Signal to have an operational longer range ALCM with IAF

Offcource I learnt only from you that every product that is developed will need a test as well.

Thanks,

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 01:18

Yes dear Vikram ..if Everybody in India had to think ..the way you think..then we will be waiting till 2015 or more till Sukhoi gives us Green Signal to have an operational ALCM with IAF

i can only salaam @ ur mastery about the topic.
do u even understand how a fighter is designed? every pylon is stressed for particular load and the structure cannot take beyond a permissible limit. if IAF induct a lighter ALCM w/in these parameters they can go ahead. how many of these alcm u think r floating about the market and what is their cost?

read recent FH major interview, its not about buying at a market, we have to think of aircraft. it was in response tpo another ddm genius.

who do u think is doing astra trials? sukhoi?

why do u think astra can go on sukhoi with purpose developed software rig and not brahmos?

use something like common sense.

ur second statement is also bs. the actual date is 2011 for testing, and 2012 for deployment. with current expereicnce brahmos is confident they can deliver on time. and they have kept their word so far.

Offcource I learnt only from you that every product that is developed will need an test as well.

if u had actually known it why did u make such a useless reply, contributing zero to discussion?

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 01:23

Gerard wrote:China has inducted nuclear submarines which are so noisy that they have never made a patrol. Reportedly sailors have received lethal doses of radiation from the reactors.

is there a link?

btw, chinese way that is the correct way. in fact, iaf should induct brahmos rite now with sontu approval, and if the plane falls apart on 3rd flight (like f-15s recently), it is all ok.

because sontu @brf can be happy that iaf has alcm (woo hoo!!) just like indigenous expertz in pakistan.

btw, these r all useless:-crystal maze missile on mirage 2000, kh-59m on mki, and kh-31 a/p on sukhoi. never mind, first 2 r man in loop w/terminal imaging and better suited than brahmos rite now for specific targetting for air force.

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 01:27

sontu edits to "operational longer range ALCM with IAF" from "ALCM with IAF"...wow. too good. so he reads about kh-59, crytal maze and then jumps happily and adds two words. and that makes everything A-lrite.

for strike beyond fba (Forward battle area), iaf has already got prithvi 250 km variant. they have SQUADRONS of the stuff.

for targetting emitter they are looking at armed uavs. ur talking about childs play here. the iaf has so much on the table and in induction that brahmos is way low on their list.and brahmos corp is full with orders from army and navy.

and who knows what weapons package will come with mrca.

at least use google before talking about the topic.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Oct 2008 01:28

please mind the abbreviations guys, this is not a sms contest.

edit: and leave each other alone.

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 01:49

the point is the kind of nosnese written without any evidence:

sontu wrote:

The question is if PAK/CHINA can already complete the integration of a newly developed Babur/Raad cruise missiles (with ranges more than 700 KMs) in their F-16, JF-17 and Mirage -IIIs .Why it takes so much time for India to do the same for a tested missile system like Brahmos..I think it’s agaian a conspiracy to keep the developments slow so that we are always dependant on some other countries and will be spending our heard earned tax paid money to buy some external system worth billions of USD..?

questions:

>1 which squadrons r these missiles operational in?
>2 where is the proof of range being 700 km?
>3 what is the guidance for these miracle 700 km missiles?
>4 how many r produced?
>5 what stage trials are in (and pls lets not believe the pak BS of "i did one trial day before yesterday and i can now kill kufr with my new weapon)

so basically sontu had already made his mind up about "conspiracy" and when i posted about actual flight trials & how time consuming they r and why they require OEM involvement (because IAF will insist on it) he responds with:

It looks like a typical answer from DRDO/ADA as for every problem they have an excuse/reason ..instead of a solution

so sivathanu pillai is:

1> involved in conspiracy with russians
2>incompetent

how much BS can one take.

then, how many fighters rite now carry missiles in brahmos class? did sontu list even ONE fighter able to carry the same?

russia was advertising air launched moskit. it is supposedly in service with the su-33. apart from that, do f-15's carry 2.5 T missiles? is it a joke?

even after trials, iaf may decide it doesnt want it on mki, because it impact flight performance, or is too complicated or something.

but its conspiracy according to sontu.

and also, if we read FH Major interview in many publications, he is ok with brahmos coming later. there are many report @ how much firepower sukhois already have, and Iaf already has and is developing, but brahmos should come tomrorow because pakistan/china are more competent and otherwise its conspiracy. iaf buying kh-59, kh-31, crystal maze, putting ARM on more discreet UAVs is not required.

its laughable.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Oct 2008 01:51

babur/raad are mostly based on corresponding chinese designs that have been developed much earlier. even the dimensions are eerily similar.

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 28 Oct 2008 01:53

Vikram_S wrote: for strike beyond fba (Forward battle area), iaf has already got prithvi 250 km variant. they have SQUADRONS of the stuff.

Hats off to you ..So you are saying since IAF has 250 KM range Prithvi, the do not need a longer range ALCM..i.e Su-30's will fire Brahmos well within Indian airspace to cover 300 kms

Also my primitive knowledge says that weight of ALCM version of Brahmos should be substancially low than the GLCM version..as it will use the Speed and Height of launching aircraft to cover the same range. Hence there was a plan to have THREE Brahmos ALCM on each Su-30 ..so please do not cry about weight.
I am only saying ..If there is a will, there is a way too.

Any way thanks for your reply.

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 01:59

Sontu wrote:/quote]

Hats off to you ..So you are saying since IAF has 250 KM range Prithvi, the do not a longer range ALCM..i.e Su-30's will fire Brahmos well within Indian airspace to cover 300 kms

no, i am saying since IAF already has kh-59, kh-31, crystal maze, prithvi and is going to arm UAVs, it can afford to wait for brahmos.

care to give me ur hat now or do i have to make it even simpler?

Also my primitive knowledge says that weight of ALCM version of Brahmos should be substancially low than the GLCM version..as it will use the Speed and Height of launching aircraft to cover the same range. Hence there was a plan to have THREE Brahmos ALCM on each Su-30 ..so please do not cry about weight.

ur absolutely correct about primitive knowledge.

since u have zero clue about what brahmos will weigh even then. please do ur calculation and see how much brahmos will weigh without booster.

and what carrying a 2T missile on centerline + essential other payload will do the MKIs range & drag

I am only saying ..If there is a will, there is a way too.

Any way thanks for your reply.

no. you didnt say that.

u said there was a conspiracy, and then when u were corrected u made more ludicrous claims.

yes there is a will, and there is a way, and the way is known.

it is YOU who is unable to accept the way and making such claims about conspiracy.

if you know so much and want to save MY tax money then go join DRDO/ADA and educate them about miraculous flight testing.

where brahmos can go on MKI without any changes. they will give you mathura peda and garland you.

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 28 Oct 2008 02:04

Rahul M wrote:babur/raad are mostly based on corresponding chinese designs that have been developed much earlier. even the dimensions are eerily similar.

i severely doubt the pakistanis claims of range, and even guidance and even operationalization of RAAD.

the pakistanis are obsessed about opening their pants and checking to see the lenght each time india does a test or develops anything new.

india came up with brahmos. so pakistan ran to uncle hu, and got a few battery of ground laucnhed missile. they named it babur.

and now they have a new missile, with nice photoshop and no actual test result of "operational raad".

these r the same pakistani who claim they were 400% ahead of india and bragged to AFM, and then admitted f-7's were sitting about without radar because the fiar radar was delayed.

pakistanis r born braggarts.

till other day they were saying economy was doing better than india.

now they r in front of world begging.

and we will have sontus coming to BRF after having read on deaf and dumb forum that pakistan/china are ahead.

pak idiots werre thinking they were ahead of india because uncle bush gave some new f-16s. now everything is delayed because uncle wants dollars and is not giving all via free goodies.

poor pakistan.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

they are so ahead of india.

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 28 Oct 2008 02:06

Rahul M wrote:babur/raad are mostly based on corresponding chinese designs that have been developed much earlier. even the dimensions are eerily similar.

Agree, about Babur ..that it is based on the Chineese one but Raad seems to be of latest design with stealth incorporated. I am not saying that these are 100% developed by PAK..so is our Brahmos too not 100% Indian..but I am talking about the quick turn around time from concept to induction and we have all projects delaying ...for years.