Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2011 16:23

Yes the issue should have been tackled much earlier , Army should accept some batches of Nag while they work to build new variant of NAMICA with CI TI system for subsequent batches.

It quite silly to say the least to stop induction because few systems are not available. Atleast they can verify and rectify many post induction issue and task that comes across with initial induction of new systems.

Nag took a long time to come to the stage where it is ( i have been tracking its development for 2 decades now ) and it works within the parameter its designed for , no point in delaying it further.

sum · Post by **sum** » 19 Apr 2011 16:43

Nag took a long time to come to the stage where it is ( i have been tracking its development for 2 decades now ) and it works within the parameter its designed for , no point in delaying it further.

Unless there is a point which many on BR were/are suspecting...

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 19 Apr 2011 17:03

This is bullsh*t. Namica has been around for years now. If the army had a problem with it, they should have made changes before. Now they are causing needless delays. They should make a big order and then improve the overall system in batches. Hope this thing doesn't go the Arjun way...

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 19 Apr 2011 18:21

DRDO should stop doing R & D for Army related stuff and concentrate on Navy and somewhat AF... Optimum utilization of critical resources is necessary, why waste for such bunch of people...

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 19 Apr 2011 19:14

The fun is DRDO should keep doing Army R&D. One day, Army will come on the path. Its our prodigal army. We will celebrate when that happens.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 19 Apr 2011 19:34

kvraghavaiah wrote:
nrshah wrote:DRDO should stop doing R & D for Army related stuff and concentrate on Navy and somewhat AF... Optimum utilization of critical resources is necessary, why waste for such bunch of people...
Well said. May these selfish, cruel idiots of army(if they are really so) go to the worst hell.

Lets not go maliging the entire Army here for the decesions of a few along Mod staff, thier political masters, freindly arms commission agents and thier pay masters. The Jawans and officers of the Army are ones who put thier lives daily on the line.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Apr 2011 20:47

^^^^^
This is exactly what the Kalmadi & Raja Gangs Inc. wants you guys to think!! And it looks like they have succeeded in their strategies.

What is CAG doing?

sum · Post by **sum** » 19 Apr 2011 20:51

Lets not go maliging the entire Army here for the decesions of a few along Mod staff, thier political masters, freindly arms commission agents and thier pay masters.
The Jawans and officers of the Army are ones who put thier lives daily on the line.

So, you are saying that no one from the IA was involved in this farcical last minute revamp decision about NAMICA and only MoD was involved??

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 19 Apr 2011 22:10

sum wrote:
Lets not go maliging the entire Army here for the decesions of a few along Mod staff, thier political masters, freindly arms commission agents and thier pay masters.
The Jawans and officers of the Army are ones who put thier lives daily on the line.
So, you are saying that no one from the IA was involved in this farcical last minute revamp decision about NAMICA and only MoD was involved??

Nope, please read the post prior to mine.

May these selfish, cruel idiots of army(if they are really so) go to the worst hell.

That was generally running down all armywallas, I thought that was not in good taste.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Apr 2011 22:21

Maybe it was CBM on Army part. First they dont buy Arjun to make sure they cant dash to Indus. Then they dont buy Nag to ensure the other side cant be stopped. Maybe if DRDO renames Nag as Saif it might find acceptance.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Apr 2011 22:28

or BircStone, Made In Europe or Jabline, Made in USA, or Bihrr, Made in Russia could help as well.

IMFM : Indian Made Firang Maal!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Apr 2011 23:38

SiaK, There used to be erstaz foreign liquor called IMFL= Indian Made Foreign Liquor!

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 20 Apr 2011 00:03

OT but sir its still called that

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 20 Apr 2011 00:54

Import Missiles, Bombs, planes ,tanks, Guns , ammo,
Had any one thought about importing army personnel too ? We can call it Imported Army .

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 20 Apr 2011 04:20

Piggybacking Anti-Satellite Technologies on Ballistic Missile Defense: India’s Hedge and Demonstrate Approach

The Indian approach to developing ASAT weapon technologies is measured and exploratory. It follows the now institutionalized methodology of developing dual-use technologies that have civilian and military spin-offs; or tacking military programs onto already instituted ones. The Indian approach also emphasizes the significance of ‘technology demonstration’ over the proving of operational military systems. Technology demonstration is less provocative externally, allows long lead times for technologies to mature, and is sensitive to the difficulties of building consensus within the Indian political system. This was the path for example that India took in developing nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and ballistic missile systems. To be sure, India has now elected in favor of operational nuclear and missile capabilities. However, for at least a decade, nuclear weapons were part of a hedge strategy. Similarly, chemical weapons were developed but never incorporated into the military’s operational planning. Based on statements from ISRO and DRDO representatives, it appears that any program to validate technologies for a KE-ASAT program would also fit into the genre of a hedge and demonstrate strategy.14

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 20 Apr 2011 07:53

D Roy wrote: I have also spoken to few young DRDO chaps and they seem to have a consensus that not all projects are meant to actually result in an indigenous system. Instead they simply serve the purpose of showing the foreign supplier that a 'credible' indigenous alternative can be created if they refuse to sell the technology to us ...

I don't think anybody will sell a system without embedded Trojans.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Apr 2011 08:33

a chankian interpretation of the MRSAM RFI has been posted by a person who cannot be quoted here. he says army always needs to formalize deals via RFI and RFP and this is a RFI and even for the naval barak2 and IAF LRSAM barak there was a RFI/P process. he says the Barak is the cat and this is just info gathering (MBDA has some aster15/30 land based combo).

btw he also says the Barak has not just active radar seeker but also a IIR seeker hidden behind a sliding window thats opened in terminal phase for effectiveness in high ECM environments.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 20 Apr 2011 08:44

The IA has made up its mind to kill the NAG. When the DRDO modifies the NAMICA with what the IA what it to be. Don't be surprised if it has to under go multiple Summer and Winter trials over the next 10 years. In the mean time to fill the gap the Russian BMP3 based system will be inducted in large numbers with 2nd gen weapons to fill the gap in the IA ATGM capability.

Then the NAG get a quite burial.

PS:- Why can t nag serve the IA in the jeep mounted category.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 20 Apr 2011 08:55

^^^ What are you talking? Jeep has no TI sensors, no Panoramic sights.. Does not have auxiliary power unit and another such 96 defects... First get them all on a jeep and then Army for sure will go for the option if they don't find it outdated by then...

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 20 Apr 2011 10:08

I distinctly remember an article along the lines of : Army sources say: "What is this stupid NAMICA hain? Who ever asked for a missile carrier?!"

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2011 12:21

Prem wrote:Import Missiles, Bombs, planes ,tanks, Guns , ammo,
Had any one thought about importing army personnel too ? We can call it Imported Army .

Why don't you issue an RFI if you're so concerned?

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 20 Apr 2011 12:25

LIG Nex1 submits bid to sell portable missiles to India

SEOUL, April 20 (Yonhap) -- LIG Nex1 Co., a South Korean weapons maker, has submitted a preliminary bid to sell portable anti-aircraft missiles to India, a military official said Wednesday.

"LIG Nex1 submitted a request for a proposal early this year to the Indian government to export the Shingung portable missiles," the official said on the condition of anonymity.

India reportedly plans to buy portable anti-aircraft weapons worth 1.4 trillion won (US$1.28 billion) by 2014.

The Shingung, which means "new bow and arrow" in Korean, was put into service in late 2005 by South Korea's Army. The shoulder-launched missile is capable of hitting targets as high as 3.5 kilometers with a speed of Mach 2.0 and a distance range of 7 km, military officials said.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2011 12:27

Pratyush wrote:The IA has made up its mind to kill the NAG. When the DRDO modifies the NAMICA with what the IA what it to be. Don't be surprised if it has to under go multiple Summer and Winter trials over the next 10 years. In the mean time to fill the gap the Russian BMP3 based system will be inducted in large numbers with 2nd gen weapons to fill the gap in the IA ATGM capability.

Then the NAG get a quite burial.

PS:- Why can t nag serve the IA in the jeep mounted category.

If you have to criticise the army, how about using some logic and reason rather than froth at the mouth and shoot off anything?

Is BMP-3 even remotely close to what NAMICA+Nag system is? Did you look up on BMP-3 before writing this nonsense? And as for why does not IA use NAG in jeep mounted role, why don't you answer that question? Why not spend 30minutes on researching a topic before posting such questions and may be the answer will become clear to you?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2011 12:29

Anujan wrote:I distinctly remember an article along the lines of : Army sources say: "What is this stupid NAMICA hain? Who ever asked for a missile carrier?!"

Which brings me to the question - what was the mandate for ATGM when it was proposed and developed under IGMDP?

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 20 Apr 2011 12:36

Rohitvats ji but you dont deny the fact that Army will request trials in the summer again, the reason cited would be analysis of performance of the panoramic viewer in summer. All in all nag is not going anywhere atleast as long as IA has this attitude. At times I think if ISRO were in DRDO's place i.e., if they had to sell something to their only finicky customer they would have performed as well or as worse DRDO has performed. Anyways this is going OT

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2011 12:38

nrshah wrote:^^^ What are you talking? Jeep has no TI sensors, no Panoramic sights.. Does not have auxiliary power unit and another such 96 defects... First get them all on a jeep and then Army for sure will go for the option if they don't find it outdated by then...

Rather than use wisecracks, why don't you try and answer the question in proper manner?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2011 12:43

suryag wrote:Rohitvats ji but you dont deny the fact that Army will request trials in the summer again, the reason cited would be analysis of performance of the panoramic viewer in summer. All in all nag is not going anywhere atleast as long as IA has this attitude. At times I think if ISRO were in DRDO's place i.e., if they had to sell something to their only finicky customer they would have performed as well or as worse DRDO has performed. Anyways this is going OT

And where have I defended the IA on this stupid requirement at last stage? And even it reqired a better system, than first 13 NAMICA units+NAG missiles should be in IA inventory to learn about the system and draw on the SOPs and fully exploit the envelopment possible. I personally feel every Infantry Division should have an ATGM battalion or R&S Battalion with strong ATGM capability and NAMICA should be part of the same - this baby can be real game changer.

My goat is wrt people calling names and everything else - being frustrated with a particular decision does not mean deriding the Services en masse.

ranjithnath · Post by **ranjithnath** » 20 Apr 2011 12:52

VinodTK wrote:LIG Nex1 submits bid to sell portable missiles to India
SEOUL, April 20 (Yonhap) -- LIG Nex1 Co., a South Korean weapons maker, has submitted a preliminary bid to sell portable anti-aircraft missiles to India, a military official said Wednesday.

"LIG Nex1 submitted a request for a proposal early this year to the Indian government to export the Shingung portable missiles," the official said on the condition of anonymity.

India reportedly plans to buy portable anti-aircraft weapons worth 1.4 trillion won (US$1.28 billion) by 2014.

The Shingung, which means "new bow and arrow" in Korean, was put into service in late 2005 by South Korea's Army. The shoulder-launched missile is capable of hitting targets as high as 3.5 kilometers with a speed of Mach 2.0 and a distance range of 7 km, military officials said.

1.28 billion $ roughly calculates around more than 7000 missiles.isnt that number too high for a manpad system??

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 20 Apr 2011 13:45

Thoroughly dissapointed with the decision akers in the IA. I honstly thought that the top brass of the Army had turned a corner wrt to Orientel thinking with the large scale nod for the Induction of Akash but this is a real killer.

Modifying requirements at the last moment and refusing to induct a weapon system citing that is unacceptable and here is where I hope the political leadership steps in and questions the Army's attitude atleast asking them to come out clean and explain this decision to the tax payers, why can't they induct NAG on a tranche basis like IAF is doing with LCA.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 20 Apr 2011 14:06

rohitvats wrote:

Then the NAG get a quite burial.

PS:- Why can t nag serve the IA in the jeep mounted category.
If you have to criticise the army, how about using some logic and reason rather than froth at the mouth and shoot off anything?

Is BMP-3 even remotely close to what NAMICA+Nag system is? Did you look up on BMP-3 before writing this nonsense? And as for why does not IA use NAG in jeep mounted role, why don't you answer that question? Why not spend 30minutes on researching a topic before posting such questions and may be the answer will become clear to you?

Rohit,

Its good to defend the IA but I did look up un the BMP before I wrote it up. If you read my previous post, you will note that I mantioned it as a 2nd gen system which is what it is. But that is of no concern to you.

BMP 3

9P157 "Krizantema-S" - Anti-tank version with two supersonic 9M123 Khrizantema (AT-15) missiles.

This was the system I had in mind when mentioned the BMP3 based system.

Please read the linked Wiki page, I am sure that you will refute by saying, read it for 30 minutes. FYI , I have been reading up for the past 20 years when it comes to the IDGMP. The IA had plenty of time to study the NAMICA and suggest modifications over the pact 20 years or so, but just when the product has cleared all the trials and has been cleared for production. We have a must have requirement. Without which the product cannot enter service.

I ask again, since you have greater insightes on the IA compared to the others, why hasn't the IA asked the NAG to be a Jeep mounted system? Or even asked for this capability to be developed.

The MPNAG is a seperate discussion. That requirement will be met by an import and that is a seperate issue.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2011 14:46

^^^So, rather posting something specific as ATGM Carrier version of BMP-3 with XYZ ATGM missile, you post BMP-3 and expect the others to second guess your thoughts? how did you forget to mention the version given below the one given by you - the one with Kornet ATGM? It is like talking about IA inducting BMP-2 instead of NAMICA. Please be more specific in your posts.

As for the Jeep mounted version of Nag - who will use such a system? Your line infantry regiments? But they use the manportable ATGM in jeep mounted role with the flexibility of dismounted role...so, why should one duplicate the effort of having two different ATGM in a single battalion? Has it occured to you that it is 2-times heavier and longer than other so called heavy ATGM like HOT and TOW-X - which themselves are considered bulky for any man-portable role. What is the survivability of such a jeep mounted system in todays battle-fields? I think there is a reason that Hellfire has not featured in ground role and same applied to Nag as well in its current form.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Apr 2011 15:39

Finding reasons to go firang (obvious scandal point) was what under the questioning minds, and I don't think anyone here from heart criticize forces hard core. It is very important to understand in meeting requirements and it is even more important that we (our forces) make sure they are done in a manner to accept systems in phased manner. We can have as many tranches as we can, and thus encouraging home grown upgrade industries that can bring private sector to play big [still a scandal point].

I think we are tying to point out the loop holes here.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 20 Apr 2011 15:42

^^^

Most of the points taken.............. But................... how was I to know that members on this thread will not understand the reference when it was made, i.e. BMP 3 based system with 2nd gen ATGM. I dont recall ever mentioning plain jane BMP 3 ??

BTW, BMP3 has 2 different ATGM carrier versions both with 2nd gen ATGMs. I am sure you know that.

OTOH, I thought that the NAMICA was a BMP 2 turret modification onlee.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2011 18:41

^^^Pratyush, the proper name of that system is Khrizantema-S....BMP-3 is just the platform and incidental to the whole thing. If I extend your logic, US MLRS is a version of Bradley IFV.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 20 Apr 2011 21:20

While the Pinaka will not be developed further into a larger system, its success and the experience gained from the program has led the ARDE and its partner organizations, to launch a project to develop a long range MBRL in the class of the Smerch MBRL. A 7.2-metre rocket for the Pinaka MBRL, which can reach a distance of 120 km and carry a 250 kg payload. These new rockets can be fired in 44 seconds, have a maximum speed of mach 4.7, rise to an altitude of 40 km before hitting its target at mach 1.8 and can destroy an area of 3.9 km2. Integrating UAV with the Pinaka is also in the pipeline, as DRDO intends to install guidance systems on these rockets to increase their accuracy. Sagem completed delivery of its Sigma 30 laser-gyro artillery navigation and pointing system to be equipped with the Pinaka multiple launch rocket system in June 2010.[12] The Sigma 30 artillery navigation and pointing system is designed for high-precision firing at short notice. Development and trials will continue and the rocket is expected to enter user trial by 2012.[6]

How true is this?

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 20 Apr 2011 23:08

It is possible that the IA may have enough stock of MILANs and Konkurs in it's inventory with shelf life for more than a few years. Hence may not see the need for another ATGM in it's inventory yet.

The Heli and Jag launched NAGs (HELINA) may see a much bigger order as the IA does not have them in it;s inv. DRDO will do well to ramp it's R&D in anticipation of the req for the LCHs (65+114) on order.

BK's article on IA revamping it's priorities to face the challenges to the north comes to mind. The NAG is meant to accompany the strike corps in the deserts and plains of Punjab to take on the PA. This missile is specifically meant for this scenario ( as part of IGMDP). Time to revamp prioroties to take on new challenges. Is NAG suitable to usage in Ladakh or NE mountains???? With it's 2.6 KM range limit I think not...they need to expand the envelope with longer range to be of use in the Aksai chin area.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 21 Apr 2011 00:16

^^^Rakshaks,

If I may, I’d like to offer a contrarian view. Please note that I am offering this post for the sake of discussion only; and that I am not saying that it is perfectly valid and it completely explains the recent decision to send the NAMICA back to the drawing board; nor am I trying to invalidate anyone’s previous suspicions of impropriety with arms deals for the Indian forces. However, I do think this contrarian view is worthy of discussion at this time, in this thread, so here goes…. <END DISCLAIMER>

I think a lot comes down to the present and near-term perception of the threats confronting India. It would seem that a lot of people on BRF have a drastically different perception of the threat facing India than do the (much better informed) ***Professional*** Military Planners of India. If I were a betting man, I would place my money with those in-the-know. Accordingly, I for one, support the recent decision to upgrade the chassis of the NAMICA and give it improved sites and other capabilities, even if this takes a year or two before a final production specification and design can be ‘frozen’, and the finished model is pushed into batch production. I think this wait for induction of the NAG is reasonable and does not come with inordinate risk in the interim (particularly if the NAG is further improved to increase its single-shot kill probability from the current 0.78 – which I am sure they will be working on as well).

If the valid threat perception is that China and Pakistan are on the verge of attacking India with large formations of armoured vehicles, then it would be wise to rush the NAMICA into mass production right now, even with its perceived and noted deficiencies. However, it would seem that Indian officialdom is not of this opinion, and so I would respectfully suggest that Rakshaks should not be so sceptical of the redesign effort for the NAMICA; because chances are, Indian officialdom is correct in their estimation of the threat facing India.

I think the decision to upgrade the NAMICA was based in part, on a perceived ‘luxury of time’ resulting from the fact that the IA’s anti-tank requirements are presently served with adequacy by a large number of man-portable and jeep-mounted systems (including 4,100 units of MILAN-S & MILAN-ER and 15,000 units (!) of Konkours M, as I noted earlier in this thread). Additionally, there is the IAF’s acquisition of 512 units of Textron Systems CBU-105 from the US (each one being capable of engaging 40 targets, so therefore 512 x 40 = 20,480 dispersed and moving land targets that can be engaged with these ‘Sensor Fuzed Weapons’ alone; never mind the MILANs and Konkours, or any IA tanks, Dhruvs with HELINA, or other anti-tank options).

I also believe there was another critical consideration that no one here has adequately contemplated. It is a very important consideration that would naturally sit “above” the IA. Consider the major military powers in the world today; the USA, Russia, China, France, the UK, plus also countries with advanced militaries like Germany, Israel, Sweden and even Italy and South Africa. Not only do these countries have strong militaries, and not only do they meet a portion of their own military equipment needs through their own domestic industries – all of these countries also have significant defence equipment exports. Indeed, it is essential for the development of a robust national defence capability, to have indigenous production, and for reasons of cost, it is also better if there are significant defence equipment exports, over which R&D and tooling costs can be more widely and thinly spread; ergo, it is essential that India should develop an international clientele for its defence equipments. This is a large part of the reason why the NAMICA is being redesigned.

I believe that the NAG has great potential in the international market, but that selling it would be much harder if it was offered for sale on that old chassis, with only one TI site.

Now, before anyone offers a predictable retort; I’ll explain that export sales are always smoother if the item you are selling has already been inducted into your own armed forces as-is, which is why the “Tranche 1 now with one TI site and torsion bar suspension, then later Tranche 2 with two TI sites and pneumatic suspension” is a non-starter where opening up the export market is a major concern. IMO, it is better to delay induction of NAMICA until it is all that it can be – because the opportunity is there – and also because it will help make sales, which is absolutely necessary for the continued security of India.

My compliments to whoever made this politically risky decision – you truly have the long term best interests of India clearly in sight. I just wish more here on BRF had the same foresight.

JMT

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 21 Apr 2011 00:28

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote: My compliments to whoever made this politically risky decision – you truly have the long term best interests of India clearly in sight. I just wish more here on BRF had the same foresight.

JMT

Thanks. I think you made your view quite clear. We are all stupid onlee.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 21 Apr 2011 03:01

So now we're seeing the die hards trying to spin IA's stupidity as an act of altruism to help DRDO's export potential? Like IA gives a damn if DRDO exports anything.

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Apr 2011 03:38

D Roy wrote:
what makes the DRDO keep quiet, cant they do some unofficial links
Because they are more than happy with the R&D project. Look even as some phoren maal is imported, the R&D on the domestic system will continue .... fauj happy ... drdo happy.

DRDO ne apna research kar diya. production agency to koi or hai.

I have also spoken to few young DRDO chaps and they seem to have a consensus that not all projects are meant to actually result in an indigenous system. Instead they simply serve the purpose of showing the foreign supplier that a 'credible' indigenous alternative can be created if they refuse to sell the technology to us ...

Final delivery and indigenization is not the purpose you see. if it were than things would have been done very differently ...

...

here the idea is simply to keep the gravy train running for various lobbies and as long as DRDO gets its piece why would they complain ?

chal raha hai chalne do.

There are two types of R&D: one is pure science and the other is a combination of science and its integration to prototype/actual product level. Pure science R&D implies the building up of core competencies in critical areas, which can then be leveraged/disseminated to build a whole host of next generation stuff. The second type of R&D is to take pure science breakthroughs to fulfill end-user specification, which includes complex integration of various pieces to build prototypes that can be moved to mass production.

Typically, it is best to separate the research from the end production agencies. R&D teams at the most are geared for researching and building prototypes to validate concepts. The RFI/P specification, and the decision to fund R&D and whether to move it to production rests with the end-user--in this case the IA and MoD. Here, the DRDO, for its part, has done its job and through user-trials has validated the NAG/NAMICA to the end-user.