Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Jun 2015 01:44

TSJones wrote:
brar_w wrote:MQ-4C or the Block 40 Global Hawk is going to still bring up issues with MTCR as was the case with South Korea in the past. The US did begin efforts to draw a distinction between Global Hawk and predator like ISR drones and larger nuclear missiles in CAT-1 but it hasn't been incorporated yet, although europeans were also interested in those changes. With the Euro' MALE UAV being developed I think they'll finally get all 34 members to agree to those changes.

The Global Hawk was offered yes, but the word even then was that MTCR changes would need to be made before that deal is finally closed.

http://jamesdrewjournalist.com/tag/mtcr/
yes, I really don't think this system is meant for India. This is a fall back system in the event of a successful first strike attack on our satellite system. A lot of challenges/forward thinking still have to be met before implementation of the fall back feature is realized. Very sensitive matter with US congress critter political backing needed..

BAMS and the G40 have been offered to India as has been reported over the last couple of years. Others are getting it to, including Japan, and Australia. NATO AGS has also been revealed just recently and Northrop Grumman is marketing both the blk. 40 and the Triton to both UK and Norway.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 13 Jun 2015 01:47

A Deshmukh wrote:Development is slow and limited, as most of the items are restricted.
Things that can be used on LCA, cannot be openly used on Rustom.

A Deshmukh wrote:My point being, we usually associate MTCR with missiles.
We are getting to being self sufficient on missiles.

But we may need entry to catch up on UAVs.

My reply

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 13 Jun 2015 01:48

brar_w wrote:
BAMS and the G40 have been offered to India as has been reported over the last couple of years. Others are getting it to, including Japan, and Australia. NATO AGS has also been revealed just recently.

equipment manufactures may want but congress will dispose...

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Jun 2015 01:50

TSJones wrote:
brar_w wrote:
BAMS and the G40 have been offered to India as has been reported over the last couple of years. Others are getting it to, including Japan, and Australia. NATO AGS has also been revealed just recently.
equipment manufactures may want but congress will dispose...

Not on the Triton or the Blk 40. Keep in mind that sensitive, US specific equipment has to be swapped out anyhow, as no third party user has use for it anyway. A block 40 for Japan, or even India is not going to use US satellites and links back to the concerned command. It will have its own SATCOM and data links for talking back to its C2C.

NATO AGS is already being tested, and the first of 5 will be delivered shortly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi_Y3gPW-uk

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Jun 2015 07:31

Sagar G wrote:Tell me the advantages, we already know why Murica wants us to be a part of MTCR now that we have demolished it and shoved it right back in it's paper smitten ass.

There are missile & UAV components (particularly engines) that would become available, not just from the US but also UK & France. Our domestic UAVs & missile systems will get export access to foreign markets with the opportunity of carving out their own cost competitive niche.

Getting sentimental about it as you are doing, will only pre-empt a sensible decision. Fortunately, the GoI especially under the current leadership doesn't suffer from that handicap.

Hobbes · Post by **Hobbes** » 13 Jun 2015 07:35

Viv S wrote:
There are missile & UAV components (particularly engines) that would become available, not just from the US but also UK & France. Our domestic UAVs & missile systems will get export access to foreign markets with the opportunity of carving out their own cost competitive niche.

Would this even matter, as if we are not MTCR signatories the restrictions therein do not apply to us anyway, and we can sell to whosoever we want (excepting perhaps international pariahs like NoKo).

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Jun 2015 07:42

the problem is customers could be put under pressure by mtcr club to not buy such stuff from india.

so lets enter the old boys golf club.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 13 Jun 2015 07:52

Karan M wrote:Being part of the (crooked) cartel means the other crooks treat you better than before. So expect easier imports of some restricted items which may help us with some programs. And some brownie points for the diplomats to negotiate for better treaties etc elsewhere. All this stuff is salami slicing. One by one, you enter all the rich old boys clubs. PRC won't be happy.

You enter, get access to what you want, but ignore club conditions when selling stuff to your customers-that's when India has arrived.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Jun 2015 07:56

problem is most nations are still under thumb of the old boys club for aid and markets. for example would thailand consider buying a 600km ASM and risk covert sanctions and denials on its export markets.

as for the various militias and basket cases, the chinese have a genius for shipping them arms and getting them moving....the fun will start when they equip ISIS with iskander type missiles...or their out of control 'red princes' running illegal arms deals do it.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Jun 2015 14:29

Neela ji, very true. I think for that change in mindset though, SDRE land will take another 100 years.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 15 Jun 2015 04:41

Was this reported?

Israel's Rafael Does a Rafale on Spike ATGM Sales

On June 5, 2015 TNIE reported that contract negotiations between Israel's Rafael and MoD for purchase of Spike ATGMs are stalled over the exorbitant price tag that has now been stuck on the missile.

MoD and the Army have raised several objections to the commercial bids submitted by Rafael in the second week of May.

Besides the cost of ToT, Rafael wants India to pay an additional amount on each missile to be produced in India. As a result, the price of the missile has doubled.

There is more. Rafael wants a 4 percent annual escalation on all supplies, including raw material to be sold to Bharat Dynamic Limited (BDL) and will take no responsibility over any quality issue of the BDL manufactured missiles.

The DAC cleared the purchase of 8,356 Spike ATGMs, 321 launchers, 15 training simulators and associated equipment from Israel's Rafael Advanced Defense Systems on Saturday, October 25, 2014. The missiles and launchers will equip 355 infantry battalions of the Indian Army.

Eventually, 1,900 launchers and 37,800 missiles will be required to equip the 382 infantry battalions and 44 mechanized infantry units of the Army.

The deal estimated to be worth Rs 3,200 crore involves transfer of technology.

It is much much better to get the Nag/Helina/CLGM etc. and then iteratively develop better versions. As the famous line of skunkworks goes: One miracle at a time.

srai · Post by **srai** » 15 Jun 2015 05:17

^^^

Shows that the exporters have learned how to game Indian demand for RFI by smudging figures to be lowest and then when negotiations come for ToT raise prices by huge margins. Bottom line is they know the IA and IAF are in a desperate situation and have a "love" for import. The exporters will eventually get a deal that favors them. In Rafale case, the French got the orders without having to give into ToT demands. Yet, the IAF is still sounding horns on it needs more Rafale. The way it looks the IA/IAF are not at all concerned about building the Indian MIC.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 15 Jun 2015 08:13

^^^^
Did Rafael win the contract in a competitive process? Would be interesting to know the per missile price quoted by them.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 15 Jun 2015 09:28

Karan M wrote:Neela ji, very true. I think for that change in mindset though, SDRE land will take another 100 years.

Saar, look at the evidence. China is part of NPT but violates principles at will. Amreekis profess NP and were fully in the know even during the nuclear-smuggler AQK's tenure at Urenco. If we want to be treated as equals then we must behave as equals. The risk is worth taking. Didnt PokhranII work out in the end. Who has more to lose in 2015? This moral highground is costing us big. The sooner we realize the world is forever a changed place, the better for us. Cant think of Harishchandra type morals anymore.
Absolutely nothing wrong in joining the MTCR. (Let there be cartoons of a turbanned guy entering a suit-boot wearing club. )
Join , get access to components, build and sell at will. Our market for components must be so big, the pull must be large enough for individual members to break free and ignore MTCR guidelines.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 15 Jun 2015 09:42

Bite thee bullet, order CLGM's and Nag's, and develop Hamd held Nag version, since handheld ATGM is very useful for infantry against bunkers near LOC, Massa does not wwant us to have these in numbers against Pakis and Israel will have to tow the line.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 15 Jun 2015 12:09

rohitvats wrote:Would anyone know whether each SA-3 SAM squadron operated by IAF has its own P-12/18 or P-15/19 surveillance radar?

We know that IAF had bought P-12/18 and P-15/19 radars from USSR (as well as P-40) - where these bought as stand-alone radars as part of wider surveillance network? And are SA-3 squadrons fed surveillance data from these stand-alone radars and others like TRS-2215/PSM-Mk2 but themselves don't have dedicated surveillance radars at Squadron level? Thanks.

Rohit
Most installations have 3 SA 3 launchers (4 missiles each) with a single SNR 125 NATO Code Name 'Low Blow' radar, along with the associated facilities. Whereever I have seen P 12/18 radar, there is a SA 3 battery "nearby". I do not know if they are on "talking" terms, so to speak.

Just a small digression. i think the CAR radar is "linked" to the 'Rajendra' radar in Akash SAM batteries

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Jun 2015 15:07

The answer is simple.Open out the design,dev,production of missiles,etc. to the pvt. sector. Identify several entities who can do the business and have them come up with the same. If we could develop our own strategic and tactical missiles,plus Akash,Astra,etc., why have we had failures with Nag when we've for years been using Milan and Russian ATGMs and numerous other AAMs,ASMs,etc..,which should've given us the tech base from which to develop at least just one ATGM!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Jun 2015 15:55

Neela wrote:
Karan M wrote:Neela ji, very true. I think for that change in mindset though, SDRE land will take another 100 years.
Saar, look at the evidence. China is part of NPT but violates principles at will. Amreekis profess NP and were fully in the know even during the nuclear-smuggler AQK's tenure at Urenco. If we want to be treated as equals then we must behave as equals. The risk is worth taking. Didnt PokhranII work out in the end. Who has more to lose in 2015? This moral highground is costing us big. The sooner we realize the world is forever a changed place, the better for us. Cant think of Harishchandra type morals anymore.
Absolutely nothing wrong in joining the MTCR. (Let there be cartoons of a turbanned guy entering a suit-boot wearing club. )
Join , get access to components, build and sell at will. Our market for components must be so big, the pull must be large enough for individual members to break free and ignore MTCR guidelines.

Agree completely, but it will take a complete change in mindset and also India's economic and military power too given how our establishment works.

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 Jun 2015 04:39

Philip wrote:The answer is simple.Open out the design,dev,production of missiles,etc. to the pvt. sector. Identify several entities who can do the business and have them come up with the same. If we could develop our own strategic and tactical missiles,plus Akash,Astra,etc., why have we had failures with Nag when we've for years been using Milan and Russian ATGMs and numerous other AAMs,ASMs,etc..,which should've given us the tech base from which to develop at least just one ATGM!

Have you heard of scope creep from the IA? NAG missile is ready but the IA has request changes to the NAMICA (number of missiles carried, longer mast, etc.). Each time the IA asks for such a change the trials have to go through Winter and Summer seasons (i.e. at least a year if not more just for trials). The IA decision makers fail to grasp iterative development--via Mk.1/2/3--methodology.

Nag waits for sweetheart NAMICA | Emotional DRDL for final orders | Stubborn Army for quality spitfire sys | Climax in Pokhran during carrier re-validation trials

...

The wait has put Hyderabad-based Defence Research and Development Laboratory (DRDL) into an emotional spin, considering that the Indian Army had earlier placed its Acceptance of Necessity (AON) for 443 Nag missiles 13 NAMICAs in 2005. The Army had made it clear then that a firm commitment will only be given once all trials are successful and the system is fit for induction. The Army also projected in their perspective plan the need for 7000 Nag missiles and around 200 NAMICAs.

“As a complete weapon system (Nag + NAMICA) a final commitment will be given only after the Pokhran trials in coming summer. After the user trials in 2010, we had accepted Nag as an ATGM, but wanted integration with launcher improved,” Army sources told Express. The electro-mechanical systems of the two NAMCIAs used during trials (both made by BEL) were found to be below Army's expectations in tough dessert terrain conditions, including reliability concerns propping-up.

Work on Nag weapon system began in 1987 and the day version of the missile proved its mettle in 2000. Then the Army and DRDO top brass wanted the missile to have day and night capabilities, which is said to have developed in 2002. Later, the need for dual sensors was felt, including IR sensor for day/night and CCD (charged coupled device) for day. Finally, in 2007, the development of missile was completed along with NAMICA and user trials in phases were held during 2008-2010, until the NAMICA became DRDL's Nag-ging niece. “We have hence decided to go for two companies (BEL, L&T) and the best NAMICA will be selected after comparative studies and re-validation trials. The competitive evaluation of reconfigured NAMICA is possibly the last hurdle before the Army places the order,” sources said.

The upgraded NAMICA boasts of an advanced fire control system (FCS), advanced sighting system for both gunner and commander and compact auxiliary power unit (APU) which operates inside the hull compartment. “The carrier will offer a better launcher drive mechanism, reduced weight, smooth mobility and amphibious capabilities. Earlier the Army wanted eight missiles on the launcher and four in the stowage. Now, this has been reduced to six ready-to-fire missiles on the launcher only,” sources said.

DRDL claims that the missile can hit target up to 4 km in favourable conditions and up to 3 km in adverse conditions. “It is a very potent warhead which can pierce in excess of 850 mm of armour. A new seeker being developed in-house will take the range to 4.5 km, and guaranteed 4 km under all conditions. So far the project has cost over Rs 300 crore and a total of 80 missiles were developed in the pre-production phase by Bharat Dynamics Ltd. Around 50 missiles were used during trials,” sources said.
...

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 16 Jun 2015 08:05

Philip wrote:If we could develop our own strategic and tactical missiles,plus Akash,Astra,etc., why have we had failures with Nag when we've for years been using Milan and Russian ATGMs and numerous other AAMs,ASMs,etc..,which should've given us the tech base from which to develop at least just one ATGM!

Have you been keeping up with the Nag program, Nag has simply jumped a generation. The specs of Nag/Helina currently under testing are what were touted for Nag 2 (10 km range, longer seeker lock in range, lighter weight etc etc).

The answer is simple.Open out the design,dev,production of missiles,etc. to the pvt. sector. Identify several entities who can do the business and have them come up with the same.

The people who couldn't even present original small arms designs and artillery that wasn't rebranded gora maal, you expect them to make a missile ?

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Jun 2015 08:22

Rafael introduces the I-Derby ER BVRAAM

RAFAEL is unveiling a new, extended range version of its Beyond Visual Range (BVR) active radar-guided air-to-air missile – the I-Derby ER. It is an evolutionary version of the Derby BVR missile unveiled earlier this year at Aero India. The Derby entered service in the mid-1990s and is fielded with six customers worldwide.

The latest variant is equipped with a new seeker that employs an advanced solid-state Software Defined Radar (SDR), based on combat proven technology derived from the Tamir missile, the interceptor used in RAFAEL’s Iron Dome system.

The new seeker is lighter and more compact than its predecessor, thus clearing valuable space which has been used by the missile designers to increase the propulsion system by adding a second mode (kick), accelerating the missile at the terminal phase of the flight. This new addition increases the range of the I-Derby ER beyond 100 km., significantly more than its current “short/medium” range capability.

This “second kick” greatly improves the missile’s performance. “This phase is not serial, but operates independently of the primary rocket propulsion as it is activated at any time during the fight, by the flight control system.” Yaniv explains. The second pulse would likely kick in when the missile is closing on its target, accelerating it and increasing its kinematic envelope, thus increasing its “no escape zone”.

The use of SDR technology means the missile seeker can be reprogrammed with software upgrades including new waveforms, duty cycles and processing techniques, addressing new threats, countermeasures and techniques that may evolve through its lifespan of 20-30 years.

Another advantage of the I-Derby ER is its ability to lock onto targets before and after launch, enabling the aircraft to engage targets at all ranges.

Currently completing development, I-Derby ER will soon be available for delivery for new orders, or replacement of existing stocks. “We already have several customers seeking long-range intercept capabilities, some are looking at I-Derby ER as the most suitable and affordable solution for their requirements,” says RAFAEL.

A major advantage of the I-Derby ER is that it uses the same missile envelope. Unlike the AAIM-120D or Meteor, I-Derby ER will be compatible with aircraft currently cleared to carry Derby. RAFAEL claims it will be able to deliver 80% of the Meteor’s performance at a third of its cost. It is also superior to the AIM-120C7 and more affordable, the company claims. Already cleared on F-16 (Block 52), F-5E, Kfir and Sea Harrier, I-Derby ER integration tests are currently under way on the Indian Tejas LCA.

http://asian-defence-news.blogspot.in/2 ... vraam.html

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 Jun 2015 09:16

^^^

I don't think the I-Derby ER is quite ready. Last I heard was that the LCA team will be using the Derby from IN's stocks to do the integration as the Israelis were taking too long to deliver.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 16 Jun 2015 09:19

Gyani log does anyone know what the current version of Namica carrier looks like?. Seems like its gone some big iterative evolution based on multiple user feedback changes.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 16 Jun 2015 09:26

India should procure a small batch of I-Derby ER, then let academics+industry to examine them and reverse engineer some of the subsystems, then come up with Astra-2 ER.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 16 Jun 2015 09:30

tushar_m wrote:Rafael introduces the I-Derby ER BVRAAM

RAFAEL is unveiling a new, extended range version of its Beyond Visual Range (BVR) active radar-guided air-to-air missile – the I-Derby ER. It is an evolutionary version of the Derby BVR missile unveiled earlier this year at Aero India. The Derby entered service in the mid-1990s and is fielded with six customers worldwide.

The latest variant is equipped with a new seeker that employs an advanced solid-state Software Defined Radar (SDR), based on combat proven technology derived from the Tamir missile, the interceptor used in RAFAEL’s Iron Dome system.

The new seeker is lighter and more compact than its predecessor, thus clearing valuable space which has been used by the missile designers to increase the propulsion system by adding a second mode (kick), accelerating the missile at the terminal phase of the flight. This new addition increases the range of the I-Derby ER beyond 100 km., significantly more than its current “short/medium” range capability.

This “second kick” greatly improves the missile’s performance. “This phase is not serial, but operates independently of the primary rocket propulsion as it is activated at any time during the fight, by the flight control system.” Yaniv explains. The second pulse would likely kick in when the missile is closing on its target, accelerating it and increasing its kinematic envelope, thus increasing its “no escape zone”.

The use of SDR technology means the missile seeker can be reprogrammed with software upgrades including new waveforms, duty cycles and processing techniques, addressing new threats, countermeasures and techniques that may evolve through its lifespan of 20-30 years.

Another advantage of the I-Derby ER is its ability to lock onto targets before and after launch, enabling the aircraft to engage targets at all ranges.

Currently completing development, I-Derby ER will soon be available for delivery for new orders, or replacement of existing stocks. “We already have several customers seeking long-range intercept capabilities, some are looking at I-Derby ER as the most suitable and affordable solution for their requirements,” says RAFAEL.

A major advantage of the I-Derby ER is that it uses the same missile envelope. Unlike the AAIM-120D or Meteor, I-Derby ER will be compatible with aircraft currently cleared to carry Derby. RAFAEL claims it will be able to deliver 80% of the Meteor’s performance at a third of its cost. It is also superior to the AIM-120C7 and more affordable, the company claims. Already cleared on F-16 (Block 52), F-5E, Kfir and Sea Harrier, I-Derby ER integration tests are currently under way on the Indian Tejas LCA.

http://asian-defence-news.blogspot.in/2 ... vraam.html

As soon as Arjun Mk 1/2/3 proves itself, Russia comes up with Armata.

As soon as Astra is beginning to se the light of the day, RAFAEL comes up with "improved" Derby.

IA and IAF simply want foren toys. And MOD is ready to oblige.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 16 Jun 2015 09:32

srai wrote:
Have you heard of scope creep from the IA? NAG missile is ready but the IA has request changes to the NAMICA (number of missiles carried, longer mast, etc.). Each time the IA asks for such a change the trials have to go through Winter and Summer seasons (i.e. at least a year if not more just for trials).

The IA decision makers fail to grasp iterative development--via Mk.1/2/3--methodology.

It is we who have failed to grasp IA logic. NOTHING INDIAN ONLY FOREN.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jun 2015 09:54

How much of this is media inputs writing for some foreign agency? If political parties can buy the media what about he guys who offer white girls and green bucks?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jun 2015 10:20

nag was kept on hook due to smell of javelin and spike in the air. hope Parrikarji nixes the spike deal as too expensive over the whines of its fans...make do with nag and whatever else is available like the 1000s of milan2T that BDL is still making.

same case of astra. the israelis have smelled an opportunity in the 1000s of AA12 and AA10 missiles that are nearing end of shelf life due to age and lack of reliable support system from rus.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 16 Jun 2015 11:27

shiv wrote:How much of this is media inputs writing for some foreign agency? If political parties can buy the media what about he guys who offer white girls and green bucks?

My suspicious mind tells me ~~ 100%

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jun 2015 12:00

Barak-8 on Target

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 16 Jun 2015 12:25

[quote="srai"]
Have you heard of scope creep from the IA? NAG missile is ready but the IA has request changes to the NAMICA (number of missiles carried, longer mast, etc.). Each time the IA asks for such a change the trials have to go through Winter and Summer seasons (i.e. at least a year if not more just for trials). The IA decision makers fail to grasp iterative development--via Mk.1/2/3--methodology.
[quote]...

Delay is the best form of Denial.

srin · Post by **srin** » 16 Jun 2015 13:46

Something smells about the Barak-8. Not the technical aspects - it is probably a very good missile and will help provide IN fleet defence and IAF very good area defence capabilities.

I'm talking about the commercials. The article quoted above says it is IAI's Barak. What happened to the DRDO contribution to the propulsion ? And how come there is no SPV or a special company created (like Brahmos corp) ? Who gets the money from exports ?
Doesn't look as if it has been structured well. It will probably bite us in the back in a few years.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jun 2015 13:58

yahoodis can sell a iPhone to a dung beetle. they are very good salesmen. i am sure there will huge price escalation for israeli supplied components (the expensive seeker and FCS) once the initial euphoria dies down.

we better be careful and atleast do a POC work on Akash-3 with upto 100km range and active seeker. that might control them.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 16 Jun 2015 14:47

IAI seems to be using the dual pulse motor developed for barak-8 by DRDO in their I-Derby.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Jun 2015 18:15

We did the heavy lifting, they leveraged it.

srai · Post by **srai** » 17 Jun 2015 20:57

^^^

Hopefully India put that into contract agreement and will get its share of royalty for the use of dual-pulse tech. Astra Mk.2 will also be making use of the dual pulse tech.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 17 Jun 2015 21:19

According to some old report the rocket motors for Barak 8 was made by DRDO not IAI. So this tech is already with us.

The main reason for Barak 8 is the Seeker tech which we still lag in.

Let me see if i can get that old news

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 17 Jun 2015 21:23

Aug 11/14: Force majeure. India’s Business Standard explains how the recent battles in the Gaza Strip are affecting the LR-SAM program, which was already 2 years late:

“The DRDO confirms that the rockets, filled with highly combustible propellant, were despatched [sic] on a commercial airline, Korean Air, for trials in Israel. After the rocket motors reached Seoul – Korean Air’s global hub, from where they were to be routed onwards to Tel Aviv – the launch of Israeli airstrikes on Gaza on July 8 caused Korean Air to cancel all flights to Tel Aviv…. Consequently, a crucial and secret sub-system of the world’s most advanced anti-missile defence system has been languishing in a Korean Air warehouse in Seoul.”

June 3/11: Industrial. Livefist shows external link an India DRDO presentation that helps break down technology responsibilities within the Barak-8. Indian firms will contribute the pneumatic actuator, dual-pulse rocket motor, and motor arming/safing technologies.

May 12/09: Barak-8. Israel Aerospace Industries unveils a full-scale mockup of the Barak 8 surface to air missile (SAM) for the first time at Singapore’s IMDEX 2009 maritime defense show. Barak 8 is co-developed for use by India, and also destined to equip Israel’s next missile frigates. It appears to be an active-homing missile, too, an ability that current American SM-2 missiles lack, but which the SM-6 under development will have. Aviation Week Ares external link:

“Key features of the 70 km-range Barak 8 missile are an active radar seeker and a dual-pulse solid rocket motor. The first motor pulse propels the weapon through most of its trajectory while the second fires as the missile approaches its target, giving it the energy necessary to defeat evasive action or random weaving. The active seeker means that the missile is autonomous in the endgame, leaving the ship’s radar free to track [DID: illuminate, actually – many passive radars can track hundreds of targets, but illuminate just a couple at a time for targeting] other targets. The missile launcher comprises an eight-round module, three or more of which could make up a typical system.”

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ind ... sam-03461/

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Jun 2015 21:58

TusharM, How does Barak 8 compare to Standard SM-2 or PAC III or MEADS?

srin · Post by **srin** » 17 Jun 2015 22:20

tushar_m wrote:According to some old report the rocket motors for Barak 8 was made by DRDO not IAI. So this tech is already with us.

The main reason for Barak 8 is the Seeker tech which we still lag in.

Let me see if i can get that old news

Astra also uses dual pulse motor. There is the tech part - do we get the seeker technology but I'm more concerned about the money - this is easily worth billions.

So, if for instance, Singapore buys Barak-8 for say USD 100M, how much will DRDO get and how much will IAI get ? With a joint venture company, there is a defined %age. Here I don't see the JV company.