Thursday, January 8, 2009

MiG-21 Bison & MiG-27M Upgrade Schematics


38 comments:

sachin_sathe said...

Any pics of the Mig 27 upg ?

Rane said...

Hi,
What is happening with the LCA? When are PV5 and LSP3 going to fly? What happened to MMR and engine selection for LCA MK2? What is the fate of Kaveri?

Please update on these issues.

left wing nut job said...

Were these drawings made by a 4 yr old?

Anonymous said...

What new ordnance will the MiG-27 be equipped with ? Will there be any improvement in anti-ship or air-to-air capabilities with say a podded radar and BVR missiles ?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Sachin Sathe: The photo of the upgraded MiG-27M's cockpit can be found at LIVEFIST.

To Rane: I have no idea when the LCA PV-5 or LSP-3 will take to the skies. The MMR (using the ELM-2052 AESA antenna) is now undergoing integration tests prior to flight certification. Engine selection process is underway and in all probability the GE-built F-414 will be selected due to obvious reasons. The Kaveri turbofan has some fundemental design/performance hurdles to be overcome, a process that will take place over the next five years.

To left wing nut job: I don't know. The Chairman of HAL may be able to throw some light on this as HAL made those drawings.

To Anon@7.20AM: As the upgraded MiG-27M will be operated by the IAF for only tactical interdiction, it will not be required to carry any kind of airborne radar, either internally or in a pod. And no anti-ship missiles or air combat missiles either, although the aircraft can carry Vympel R-60T air combat missiles. The air-to-ground ordnance to be carried will be laser-guided, i.e. laser-guided bombs as well as missiles like the Kh-29L.

Anonymous said...

Trasun,
perhaps you can post your article on howitzers from the Force Magazine on this blog.
Thanks
http://forceindia.net/coverstory7.aspx

Prasun K Sengupta said...

That article is actually is just an update of what appeared in my blog last year. The most owrrying thing is that Army HQ has not yet issued global tenders for the mounted gun system, or motorised 155mm/52-cal howitzers. It was supposed to be released two years ago. The tender exercise to acquire towed 155mm/52-cal howitzers is dead (a sheer wasted effort, actually, as post-Kargil it was evident that what's reqd is not towed field artillery, but motorised field artillery howiters). By 2004 itself, the two separate requirements (for towed and motorised systems) should have been combined into a unified reqmt for motorised howitzers but for some strange reason this has yet to be done. Meanwhile, even countries like Myanmar have acquired such systems, and Pakistan and China will jointly begin inducting into service such howitzers starting this year. Both A K Antony and the NSA are quite confused, by the looks of it.

sachin_sathe said...

prasun, if possible post a detailed comparison of mounted howitzers which are available on market for india? Also wasn't there a prototype design for self propelled howitzer based on Arjun's Chasis?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

Theree isn't any comparison required as the reqmts are quite clear as per the GSQR of the Indian Army for the motorised howitzer. The howitzer must be air-transportable by C-130J-type transport aircraft, it must weight less than 18 tonnes, and it must have been ordered by at least two customers. Based on these, there is only 1 system that qualifies: NEXTER Systems' Caesar.
The BHIM tracked sel-propelled howitzer prototype was co-developed by DENEL/LIW of South Africa and DRDO/CVRDE. But the Army is now asking for a howitzer turret to be mounted on a T-90S hull. The only three such 155mm/52-cal turrets available are Uraltransmash's MSTA-SM, DENEL/LIW's system, and BAE Systems's AS-90.

Bobs said...

I don't think Caesar would make the cut as per sources......What about the g6 SP howitzer that is in use with the armed forces? regarding the options available from the market ,I think Panzer is the best option.....i wish Denel would be off the list soon.....that fiasco had even sabotaged the prestigious AMR project.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

The G-6 was never acquired by India. Also, it is a 45-cal system and not the 52-cal system as mandated by the Army. In addition, it can't be transported by C-130J transport aircraft. The only realistic and viable option which is presently in series-production remains the Caesar. Regarding the tracked SP howitzer reqmt, the Pzh-2000's turret has not yet been integrated with the T-90's hull, which the Army is insisting upon. If the DONAR's turret can be integrated with the T-90's hull, then that system could be a serious frontrunner. Another turret I forgot to mention earlier was that from Samsung Techwin's K-9. I will not recommend the DENEL/LIW turret as it has not been acquired by anyone else and that itself raises severe doubts about the system.

left wing nut job said...

Also, Denel has been playing footsie with the Pakis, helping them with their missile progs. Denel needs to be kept out of the Indian market, for now.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

Not just with India's western neighbour, but with the northern neighbour as well. Just try to compare DENEL's Ingwe anti-armour missile with NORINCO's HJ-9L--you won't be able to tell the difference between the two. The HJ-9L, in turn, has morphed into the Iranian Toophan, again externally there's no difference at all. In another few months this missile will be morphe into something else and be called the Baktar Shikan-2! That's how it goes.

Bobs said...

of course the G6 is in use...i hav seen a few pieces in army camos with the tricolour badge in bikaner in 2006.....i don't know abt its deployment in any other place.

max said...

Denel is already out of indian market due to blacklisting.

sontu said...

g6 has already been inducted

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Bobs & Sontu: Any photos available anywhere of the G-6 in Indian Army colours? So far no one from DENEL/LIW or Indian Army HQ has confirmed the G-6 induction and I'm pretty sure such a piece of hardware would have been paraded in prior Republic Day parades has it been in service. In which year was the G-6 deal inked and how many units were bought?

Bobs said...

"g6 has been inducted" ??????????
----------------------------------
that is news to me. I had seen them at the firing range....btw its a tradition to dress up the samples in army livery complete with the insignia...its possible they were evaluating those.

max said...

check this out at 2:52--g6
the Bhim can be seen at 3:13

Prasun K Sengupta said...

The G-6 was indeed evaluated on a no-cost no commitment basis but that was prior to the blacklisting of DENEL. And no procurement contracts were inked with regard to the acquisition of new 155mm field artillery howitzers between 1999 and 2004. And after the blacklisting od DENEL, the procurement of the G-6 does not arise at all. Therefore, I'm at a loss to understand how the G-6 can possibly be inducted into service by the Indian Army when even official pronouncements and official media interviews given by successive Army Chiefs since 2004 have very clearly stated that the only 155mm howitzers in service are the FH-77B and the upgraded M-46S. Consequently, the existence of a Battery or Regiment of G-6 in India will be a revelation straight out of the X-files!

Raghav said...

Why doesn't DRDO participate in these tenders by developing an indigenous howitzer?

sachin_sathe said...

Then can u post about the caesar system?with the LRMP deal signed and sealed can we expect boeing to pitch the 737-800 as the platform of te next indian AEW&C?(i think the drdo is going to develop a larger version
after the EMB-135 based one).

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Raghav@3:48AM: The reason why the DRDO does not participate in such tender exercises is because there's no core technological competency available in-country to develop such systems. The best route is therefore to encourage India's private-sector and public-sector heavy-industrial giants to team up with foreign OEMs and then conduct a round of competitive evaluations on paper over a 6-month period, then narrow it down to a shortlist of two systems that will be subjected to a round of in-country firepower-cum-mobility trials, with a winner being declared over an 18-month period. But what has happened in practice with four rounds of in-country trials can only be described as farcical and wasted expenditure. Also, I don't understand what more improvements the Indian Army will specify for the LW155 ultra-lightweight 155mm/38-cal howitzer when this gun has already been combat-proven in Afghanistan!!! The same goes for the Caesar as well.

To Sachin Sathe: You can get additional data on the Caesar at:
http://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2008/10/fine-tuning-of-indias-field-artillery.html
With regard to the DRDO's 'indigenous' AEW & CS, the choice of Embraer's EMB-145 is a bad one indeed. The ideal solution would have been to either acquire the G-550 platform and modify it like the way IAI has done (for Israel and Singapore) and then install LRDE-developed AESA and DARE-developed mission management avionics on board; or select the B.737-800 or Airbus A321 and then tie-up with IAI to develop a smaller variant of the PHALCON's non-rotating radome and develop a three-faced triangular AESA antenna array.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Sontu@9:41AM: Any further updates on the G-6 induction? When? How many? Contract value?

max said...

http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=xhnKCKj1LFk&feature=related

check this out at 2:52--g6
the Bhim can be seen at 3:13

sachin_sathe said...

prasun, there was news on internet that 2 Su-30 MKI's are currently in russia and are being modified to use the air-launched PJ-10?Does it mean that the maritime strike role is being handed over to Flanker from the jaguar?If so then was the Harpoon purchase only for LRMP?

sachin_sathe said...

also, what is the progress on the MALE uav? Can u post on that?

Anonymous said...

Prasun K Sengupta said... Pakistan and China will jointly begin inducting into service such howitzers starting this year.

What system pakistan will get?????

do you have any idea about new that Pakistan had received 120 cruise missiles C602 fom China in dec 2008??

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Sachin Sathe: You are automatically presuming here that the air-launched BrahMos will be for maritime strike only. That is not the case and the BrahMos being multi-role is also used for land attack. Therefore, there's no question of the Jaguar IM/Harpoons being replaced by the Su-30MKI/BrahMos. With regard to the Rustom MALE-UAV, things continue to proceed at a snail's pace, despite the IAF repeatedly reminding the DRDO/ADE to think about out-of-the-box solutions, like the Navy has done for its NRUAV/Alouette III platforms.

To Anon@7:44AM: Check out the very first story in this blog and you will get all data on the NORINCO-built SH-1 motorised howitzer. Regarding the C-602 for Pakistan, it is actually the maritime strike version of the 500km-range Babur, mounted on quad launchers and meant for deployment along the coastline. If the Pakistan Navy can combine the capabilities of the Babur and P-3C orion Update IIIs, it will constitute a formidable deterrent against any kind of naval blocade that the Indian navy may decide to mount along a west-east axis starting from the northern Arabian Sea.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Max: The G-6 shown with IAF roundels(?) and the DRDO-owned Bhim (at DEFEXPO 1999) are not Indian Army-owned, as the photos clearly indicate.

Anonymous said...

Anon@7:44AM

thanks man

Pooriemon said...

Prasun, how is that Babur has a range of 500km whereas Brahmos has only 290 coz its bound by MCTR???? is MTCR not applicable to baboon?

sachin_sathe said...

prasun, this developement looks more like a proactive step against the carriers china is going to build and also as an opertunity to validate the
seeker and datalink requirements to make the adm a wooden round. also the mki will suffer some degree of manuevering penalty while its carrying a 2.5 ton cruise missile.as regards to the land attack capability i think the iaf needs a lighter cruise missile that an be carried on all multirole platforms(M 2k and above).the BrahMos is also an expensive item.

as for pakistan navy they ar better of using a combo of babur and the chinese aew aircraft they are buying to increase the reliability
of the system since babur is a subsonic missile and hence will give enough chance for ciws to deal with it also if launched at its max range it will need mid-course updates (which orion cannot provide).their submarine force is more of a worry for IN.

on a diff topic is it possible to use a modified varient of astra for llqrsam?also what is the progress of astra?when are they going to carry out flight trials?(not flight tesing) on Su30-mki?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Pooriemon: You're absolutely right. Between China and Pakistan the MTCR does not apply at all, since they're both all-weather allies and their friendship stretches higher than the mountains and deeper than the oceans! Which is NOT the case with India-Russia relations, but is the case with India-Israel relations.

To Sachin Sathe: No need to worry at all, since the air-launched (by Su-30MKI) BrahMos is ideally suited for tactical air strikes, whereas the ADM is a strategic weapon, given its ability to carry nuclear warheads. When carrying the BrahMos the Su-30MKI need not be highly manoeuvrable as the Su-30MKI carrying the BrahMos will be escorted by other air dominance assets.
Regarding mid-course updates for the Babur's anti-ship variant it is the P-3C that will be employed, and not the ZDK-03 AEW & C platforms as the latter's radar cannot undertake maritime surveillance/reconnaissance.
Regarding the CIWS capabilities required to intercept the Babur, the only credible system will be the Barak-2/EL/M-2248 MF-STAR combination, and not the Barak-1 or Kashtan as they were originally developed to intercept Exocet/P-18/P-20/Silkworm-type anti-ship missiles. Mind you, neither the Barak-1 nor the Kashtan have to date been tested against missiles like the Sea Eagle/Uran-E or Club-S/M. During EVERY test-firing of the Barak-1 and Kashtan conducted thus far by the Indian and Russian navies, the surrogate target as always been P-18/P-20/Silkworm-type anti-ship missiles. During hostilities, the enemy will most likely fire a salvo of anti-ship cruise missiles, like four Baburs or four C-802As against each vessel. Against a naval task forces, the number of such missiles fired at the same time would reach 24, as per naval wargaming scenarios.
Regarding a vertically-launched quick-reaction SAM variant of the Astra, yes it is indeed possible, just as is the case with the VL-Mica and Vympel's R-77.

left wing nut job said...

The USN's RAM is designed precisely for taking on multiple missiles on a similar vector. AFAIK, the RAM was offered to the IN. Has the IN shown any interest in it?

The RAM has a tiny foot print for something that carries 21 missiles!

Prasun K Sengupta said...

The main problem is not the CIWS system itself, but the early warning/engagement sensors and their networking to create a 3-D tracking environment (like the US Navy's CEC). If a long-range optronic sensor like the VAMPIR-NG and the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR AESA can be integrated to give a CEC-type capability, then a successful interception by RAM-type CIWS is possible at a standoff distance of 20nm. The RAM has been officially offered for retrofit on INS Jalashva. But I repeat again, in the absence of a true CEC-type early warning/engagement capability, even the RAM will be incapable of intercepting inbound cruise missiles like the Babur or C-802A.

Rahul Singh said...

Have enough of confusion on which MMR LSP-3 is getting. Is it pure EL-2032 or HAL+ LRDE's MMR using EL-2032 or same using EL-2052's AESA array?

Prasun Sir can you give last word.

Shashi said...

Hi Prasun,

My 1st post & what a pleasure it has been all along reading your blog!! Thank you, Sir.

Reports of India scrapping global tender for 22 attach helicopters - after the three companies could not meet the qualitative requirements...

If none of the shortlisted vendors had the technology or capability, then why in the 1st place the RFP with such complexity was placed?

Doesn’t MoD know that what technology is available and what's just on paper? It took us years of preparation to place an RFP, now again 2~3 years for another RFP? What sense does it make? If we want something futuristic, then why don’t seek an partner so that it can be co developed?

Prasun, can you please clarify?