Sunday, June 14, 2009

India-Specific Assorted News Briefs From Paris Air Show 2009










Indian company Samtel (hall 4, E16) has launched a full-colour cathode ray tube display at Le Bourget. The CRT is designed for Airbus aircraft and is integrated into a 6 x 6in (150 x 150mm) Thales display unit. Samtel has signed a contract with Thales to develop the CRT through its AS9100-certificated production facilities in India. The unit has been specified under strict supervision by Thales to match stringent air transport specifications and quality requirements. (Why is this being done in India when the world over everyone else is going for AMLCDs is anyone's guess!--Prasun)

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has signed a contract to supply a HAROP Loitering Munition (LM) system to a foreign customer, believed to be India. The contract is estimated to be worth over $100 million. Itzhak Nissan, President and CEO of IAI said: "HAROP is an extremely impressive system, and everyone at IAI is proud of this accomplishment. This is a state-of-the-art loitering munition system, which features accurate detection capabilities and minimizes collateral damage to the surrounding area." Separately, the German Armed Forces and the German Ministry of Defense (MOD) have approved an operational requirement utilizing IAI's HAROP system. The project will be implemented in cooperation with Rheinmetall Defense as the prime contractor. The German MOD has already invested funds for the adaptation of HAROP to its specific requirements. Part of the adaptation was successfully performed by a joint IAI/Rheinmetall Defense team, and a follow on contract is planned for this year. This activity is a reflection of the successful cooperation between IAI and Rheinmetall Defense, which has also included projects involving Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). HAROP is a long endurance LM which can be launched from a variety of platforms, and is equipped with tactical UAV capabilities: high performance FLIR/ color CCD EO seeker with 3600 hemispherical coverage. It searches, detects, attacks and hits high value re-locateable, time critical, land or sea-based, moving targets with pinpoint accuracy at long ranges. A HAROP unit is comprised of LM launchers and a Mission Control Shelter (MCS) that enables missile control with a Man in the Loop operation, engagement or abort attack capability in real time, avoiding collateral damage. The HAROP can be applied to a variety of battle scenarios, including low and high intensity conflicts, urban warfare and counter terror operations. HAROP LMs are launched from transportable launchers and navigate towards the target area, where they loiter and search for targets. Once a target, static or moving, is detected, it is attacked and destroyed by the HAROP LM. The attack can be performed from any direction and at any attack angle, from flat to vertical which is highly essential in urban areas. The operator monitors the attack until the target is hit. Another HAROP LM can observe and send real time video of Battle Damage Assessment (BDA) to the operator. The operator can command to abort the attack in order to avoid collateral damage, returning the LM to loitering mode, and restart the attack later.

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has been awarded multiple orders of 34 units by India of its advanced Multi-Mission Radar (MMR) type EL/M 2084. ELTA Systems Ltd., a group and wholly owned subsidiary of IAI, is the prime contractor and developer of the EL/M 2084. ELTA's MMR addresses an emerging requirement to include all land-based radar functions in one operational unit. MMR combines a Weapon Locator Radar and an Air Defense Radar. The radar detects Surface-to-Surface medium- and short-range missiles, rockets and mortars, calculates the anticipated impact and launching points, and provides target data to air defense weapons systems. MMR is based on Active Electronically Steering Array (AESA) architecture and provides outstanding performance that was combat proven in the recent fighting in the Gaza Strip. The radar is mobile and scalable in order to meet different performance requirements. Scaling is performed by means of an antenna of varying physical size and the amount of transmit-receive (TR) module content. The current orders include 3 different versions of the radar.


Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has recently signed a contract worth tens of millions of dollars to provide India with GRIFFIN 3, the Next Generation Laser Guided Bomb (NGLGB) Kit. The GRIFFIN 3 Kit is an advanced guidance kit which is attached to a general purpose or penetration aerial bomb. Itzhak Nissan, President and CEO of IAI, said: "The GRIFFIN 3 is a product which stands out in its exceptional accuracy and ability to ensure maximum penetration of a general or penetration aerial bomb". The GRIFFIN System provides much better hit accuracy than previous generation kits, even in high wind conditions or when aiming for a moving target. Another important feature of the GRIFFIN 3 is its trajectory shaping capability, which, when used with a penetration warhead, is integral to achieving maximum penetration. The GRIFFIN 3 has an optional GPS guidance feature to enable dual guidance capability, and is one of a wide range of IAI's laser guided munitions. Others include LAHAT, a lightweight missile for helicopters, armored vehicles, and tanks; Nimrod, a longer range laser guided missile; and Fire Ball, a laser guided rocket kit.


Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has recently signed a contract with India to develop and supply the land-based Barak 8 Air and Missile Defense (AMD) System. The Barak 8 AMD, an advanced all-weather, day/night system capable of multiple simultaneous engagements in complex scenarios, provides a 360-degree defense against a wide variety of airborne platforms and munitions from short and medium ranges. The land-based system is based on the Naval Barak 8 AMD system that has been sold to the Israeli Navy and to foreign customers. Itzhak Nissan, IAI's President and CEO said: "We are very proud of the Barak 8 AMD system. IAI employed its technological and experiential knowledge-based on both the Naval Barak 8 AMD system, and on its four decades of work in the aerospace field to reach this significant accomplishment. The system is composed of a combination of IAI-manufactured products, creating a powerful system which can be a cornerstone to any defense plan." The Barak 8 AMD system includes a unique battle management, command, control, communication and intelligence center (BMC4I); an interceptor; and a Land-Based Multi-Function Surveillance, Track & Guidance Radar (LB-MF-STAR). The BMC4I, produced by the MBT Division of IAI's Missiles, Systems, and Space Group, offers both stand alone operation for a single fire unit, and joint task force coordination (JTC). The JTC mode allows for the synergy of all available resources, giving the user maximum operational flexibility. The Barak 8 interceptor, developed in collaboration with RAFAEL Advanced Defense Systems Ltd., can intercept at short and medium ranges. It is dual pulsed and has an advanced seeker, providing all-weather, day/night engagements in complex saturation scenarios. The interceptor is vertically launched from a mobile ground launcher.

The 196kg EL/M 20600 RTP recently ordered for the IAF’s upgraded Jaguar IS is a unique Radar Targeting Pod integrating High Performance Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imaging, Ground Moving Target Indication (GMTI) and Precision Target Tracking.The RTP is a complete All-Weather, Autonomous Real Time System. It provides high quality radar images of ground targets and terrain from Stand-Off ranges, even through clouds, rain, fog, battlefield smoke and man-made camouflage. The RTP incorporates ELTA’s multi-year vast experience in the development and manufacturing of a varietyof radars including Airborne Fire Control, SAR, GMTI and Multi-Mission Suites. The RTP enables:
Long Range, Wide Area Surveillance & Reconnaissance
Detection, Classification, Precision Tracking and Targeting of Ground Targets
Optimized Time Sensitive Targets (TST) engagement
Network Centric Warfare (NCW) support: Target data sharing and “Kill Sequence” execution
Short Sensor-to-Shooter loop
Accurate Geo-location data for targets
Support of a wide variety of Air-to-Ground weapons
Installation on board Trainers, Helicopters andvarious A/C
The RTP supports fighter Air-To-Surface missions:
Real-Time Tactical/Armed Reconnaissance
Precision Strike of Stationary & Moving Ground Targets
Bomb Damage Assessment (BDA)

The EL/K-1891 on board the IAF’s PHALCON AEW & C platform is a full duplex X or Ku Band microwave Satellite Communication (SATCOM) network ideally suited for uninterrupted wideband over-the-horizon (OTH) communication. Each subscriber port of the SATCOM network can be either static or mobile (ground-based mobile, airborne or shipborne) and must be within the satellite's footprint area with its antenna tracking the satellite. Communications between any two subscribers is bidirectional and routed via standard links of a commercial geostationary satellite. The digital data rate on the carrier link can be as high as 128 kbps and can include voice, data and compressed JPEG video. The SATCOM network is employed for military, paramilitary and commercial applications.

293 comments:

1 – 200 of 293   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

The 196kg EL/M 20600 RTP recently ordered for the IAF’s upgraded Jaguar IS is a unique Radar Targeting Pod integrating High Performance Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imaging, Ground Moving Target Indication (GMTI) and Precision Target Tracking.The RTP is a complete All-Weather, Autonomous Real Time System.
---------------------------------------------------
its been on IAI website for quite a while and i was hoping when iaf acquires thse for jaguar and mig27

Anonymous said...

to prasun

EL/M 20600 RTP ,russkies also build pod mounted kopyo radar for su25

Anonymous said...

to prasun

is griffen 3 superior to other similar stuff

Anonymous said...

to prasun

can u tell why jaguar needs engine change ,are original engines too old???

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@2:03:00PM: Not superior as such, but compatible with the in-service RAFAEL-built Litening 2/3 pods, just as the MBDA-built BGLs are compatible with the THALES-built Atlis-2 LDP on the Mirage 2000H/TH.

To Anon@2:05PM: The existing Adour engines of the Jaguar IS are indeed approaching the end of their total technical service lives and the F-125 is therefore worthy of consideration for a re-engining programme. The IAF had realised in the early 1980s itself that the Adour Mk811s were underpowered on the Jaguars especially when operating under hot-and-high conditions. A re-engining programme is therefore long overdue. Coupled with the DARIN-3 avionics suite (whose glass cockpit bears a close resemblance to the architecture of the MiG-29K), the upgrade package will (including AESA radar) will indeed make the upgraded Jaguars a very potent all-weather interdictor/strike aircraft. More than 80% of the DARIN-3 avionics suite will also go on board the Tejas Mk2 LCA.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

Will be going for technical product briefings later today on the CAESAR AESA from EADS and Vixen 500, as they're being proposed for the Tejas LCA Mk2 and JAS-39 Gripen IN. Have also scheduled one-on-one meetings with IAI/ELTA officials for the EL/M-2052 and its applicability on the Tejas LCA Mk2 and upgraded Jaguar IS. Interestingly, the USAF and US Navy are now openly stating that even the THALES-built RBE-2 could be installed on those F-35 JSFs destined for export worldwide.

Anonymous said...

to prasun

can you please throw more light on darin 3 upgrade

Anonymous said...

to prasun

what about breifing on ZHUK AE,is there noone from mikoyan

how radar can be mounted on jaguar only except pod mounted radar ad this pod can be hanged on hardpoint

if radar has to be mounted on nose of jaguar then there is need for redesign

Harpreet said...

Thanks for the updates Prasun, looking forward to more from you.

What implication will import of EL/M 2084 have on Ragendra derived DRDO WLR? What is the status of this indeginous project?

Also can you confirm has Pakistan chosen Grifo S7 or Vixen 500 or the upcoming Vixen 1000 for JF-17.

soutik said...

Prasun Da

Can you please provide any more details and pics of IAI EL/M-2084 Weapon Locating Radar.

Anonymous said...

Sengpupta, did u attend the Paris air show?!!

Subroto said...

Hi Prasun,

1) Is it possible to incorporate IAI/ELTA EL/M-2052 radar for upgrading Mirage 2000H/TH fighter.
Why can't we put this radar in the Mirage 2000 fighter along with the RAFAEL Litening-3 pods and Israeli EW suit?

2) Is this EL/M 2084 WLR is the different from the DRDO made WLR that Indian Army is using. I have heard that Indian Army placed 28 such WLR radar from the DRDO.
Is this is the same radar or different one?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@5:29PM: I believe inb the previous thread I did shed some light on the DARIN-3 upgrade proposal from HAL.

To Anon@5:32PM: Yes, the Jaguar IS' nose section will have to change, but this is no problem as the Jaguar IM already incorporates such modifications and HAL therefore already has all the necessary engineering drawings reqd for fabricating such modified nose sections. There is no need for any pod-mounted radar. No specific briefings on Phazotron's Zhuk-AE in Paris as it is being reserved for the MAKS 2009 expo this August, which I'll be attending as well. If you want to learn more about AESA miniaturisation then kindly go to the Selex Galileo Avionica website and look up the PicoSAR, which is akin to a nose-mounted EL/M-20600 system. The Russians are nowhere near to even developing such systems.

To Harpreet: As far as the EL/M-2084 goes, it has been ordered only for the MR-SAM project thus far. However, since it is a dual-use active phased-array radar also capable of counter-battery operations, its significance will not be lost on the Indian Army for sure. As for the Rajendra PESA radar-based WLR, God alone knows when exactly the product trials and subsequent user-trials will be held. BEL has yet to officially roll-out even the first pre-production prototype and the MoD has NOT YET placed any indents for confirmed WLR orders.
The Vixen 500e, I've learnt, is being offered ONLY for the JAS-39 Gripen NG that is being offered to Brazil. Another serious potential customer remains the PAF for its JF-17 Thunder and FC-20 (Chengdu J-10) procurements. For the JAS-39IN Gripen for the IAF's M-MRCA reqmt, as I long suspected, it is the EL/M-2052 AESA that's being offered, along with Python-5 and Derby AAMs from RAFAEL. In fact, though not yet officially confirmed, both Singapore and Turkey may be the launch customers for upgrading their Block 52 F-16C/Ds with this AESA. Up until last year, the EL/M-2052 was also the preferred AESA for the Tejas Mk1 and proposed Tejas Mk2 LCA. But now, there's a far more financially formidable offer from EADS that includes the CAESAR AESA as well as the EJ200 turbofan fitted with 3-D TVC, over which the IAF has gone ga-ga especially since TVC enable the Tejas Mk2 LCA to operate with optimum payload combinations from high-altitude air bases.

To Soutik Da: At the IAI website's Gallery section you will find good photos of the EL/M-2084 MMR. I've also collected dedicated product CDs from IAI, EADS and Selex-Galileo and will upload them at a later date.

To Subroto: Everything's possible if you have the kind of money demanded by the aircraft OEM for customising the airframe. In the case of the Mirage 2000H/TH upgrade, for reasons unknown HAL decided against developing a DARIN-3-type avionics package and I'm told it was due to Dassault Aviation's unwillingness to part with the aircraft's design engineering data (in contrast BAE Systems has been far far more accommodating with HAL for the Jaguar IS/IM airframes). Thus, IAF HQ was left with no option but to rely on Dassault's advisory role and recommendations and as expected Dassault was willing to charge far less if a THALES-supplied avionics package was selected. This has now happened. But surprisingly the RBE-2 AESA offer for the Mirage 2000H/TH has not been taken up, perhaps due to financial constraints. This also means that instead of the Litening-3 LDP the upgraded Mirage 2000s will have to carry the Damocles LDP and this in turn means even the laser-guided bombs will have to come from MBDA (the BGL) or SAGEM (the AASM PGM).
The EL/M-2084 is an active phased-array radar while the DRDO-developed WLR is PESA-based. The total Army reqmt is for 28 WLRs, but not even one has been ordered as yet as the user-trials have yet to be conducted.

Subroto said...

I think French are always Reluctant when it comes for the Technology transfer/ sharing. Earlier also we have problem with the Mirage 2000 fighter source code issue. They do not want transfer the key technology.

Scorpene deal is also a issue with the French.As per news, first 3 submarines will be without AIP system and will arm with 50 KM range Exocet SM-39 anti-ship missile. India already operating Klub class 300 Km range anti-ship cruise missile which can easily integrate with the Scorpene submarine. Even they only want us to import the MESMA AIP System for the rest 3 submarines from France directly rather transfering the technology to India.

France have to understand that if they want to penetrate the Indian defence market, they have to forget about the Buyer- Seller relationship and have to joint partnership with India for the weapon sysstem and its key technology transfer to India.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Subroto: It is not an issue of transfer of any technology. But sharing the technology, as surely India, unlike China, will not even think of reverse-engineering the entire aircraft for series-production. The issue of transfer does not arise as Dassault will remain the OEM and legal owner of all proprietary design/engineering data pertaining to the airframe, engine and accessories.
Regarding the Scorpene SSK, here again it will be prohibitively expensive for India to acquire any kind of production engineering data related to the MESMA. The same is the case for the SUBTICS combat management suite. What MDL is doing is just fabricating the hull and handling on-board systems installation. Everyting else is being imported off-the-shelf, even the propeller, transmission shaft and all other elements of the propulsion system. One must note that setting up localised production plants for only six SSKs does not make financial sense at all, as the non-recurring costs for setting up such facilities will never be amortised by building just six units. One must look at the entire economics of such projects. A prime example is the ATV, which has seen in the making since 1998 and mind you, it is only a technology demonstrator, not the operational SSBN. Personally, I don't think India has as yet attained the technological capability or financial clout reqd to acquire an operational SSBN that may have a per-unit cost of more than US$5 billion.
Lastly, one must also bear in mind, in the interests of objectivity, that France was taken for a big ride to nowhere by India when earlier pledges to order up to 150 Mirage 2000 M-MRCAs and some 90 Mirage 4000 heavy-MRCAs were not honoured by India and instead the IAF was politically pressured to acquire the MiG-23MFs, MiG-23BNs, MiG-27Ms and MiG-29B-12s. And one only knows too well how disastrous this decision was and how much the IAF had to suffer (it still is) in terms of the highly inflated logistics support costs that had to be incurred to maintain this varied fleet of mission-specific USSR-origin aircraft. Till today the IAF has not yet made public the data that showed the severely diminished serviceability and availability of all the above-mentioned USSR-origin combat aircraft between 1989 and 2001, although several ex-IAF Chiefs have varied references to this issue over the years.

Anonymous said...

to prasun

to acquire the MiG-23MFs, MiG-23BNs, MiG-27Ms and MiG-29B-12s. And one only knows too well how disastrous this decision was
-----------------------------------
to be honest it was better to acquire su24 rather than going for mig23,27 for ground attack aircraft

and for mig29 you must know it was most advance when india got it from soviet union it came with HMS and r73 a unique capability

Subroto said...

Thanks for your reply.

You are right on your point but Indian Airforce want to upgrade and purchase further aircrafts with the AESA radar only.Even updraded aircraft like Jaguar will have AESA radar and accomplish a multi-role task.Definitely IAF will not interest with the RDY radar offer from France as updraded Mirage will have to stay in the IAF till 2030.RBE-2 AESA still underdevelopment and cost also seems very high.What is the best option for the IAF?

Parth said...

Prasun,

The decision to go in for the Ruskie stuff above the Mirage was all due to the heavy infiltration of Indian government and Congress party leadership by the KGB in late 70s to late 80s.

At it's height, the KGB planted 5000 articles a year in various Indian newspapers to shape public opinion while heavily influencing INC/GOI. The Russians suffered a major setback when the INC lost it's first ever election after emergency.

At least this is what I have read so far from several western sources and now disclosed Russian documents, how true is this?

Also, does the Indian Army plan on acquiring a SAR recce system in the near future? Something on the lines off J-STARS or ASTOR/Reython Sentinel?

Parth said...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article567444.ece

Anonymous said...

The decision to go in for the Ruskie stuff above the Mirage was all due to the heavy infiltration of Indian government and Congres
--------------------------------
also one must know that CIA also prohibited india from buying western stuff

at that time india was getting mlitary hardware for dirt cheap prices

and still india bought mirage,jaguar

and in early 60s there was
mirage 3 later mirage 5 were avaialble and then in early 70s mirge f1 and mirage 4000 were available but india did not buy them and at that time there was no influence of russia over india so who was at fault at that time

even israel being much poorer acquired mirage 3 in early 60s and its worth to think india was richer than israel and did not buy these aircraft

just like israel gets aid for US and weapons it buys are heavily subsidized and same thing happened with india so india went for russkie stuff

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@12:56PM: Even with the Su-24s the IAF would have faced the same problems as it had with the MiG-23s, MiG-27s and MiG-29s. The best solution was to increase the number of Mirage 2000s to be procured, something the IAF had planned for as a well thought-out move. Even when the MiG-29B-12 was made available in the mid-1980s to the IAF it came equipped with an antiquated radar that could both detect and engage only 1 target, unlike the Mirage 2000's ability to track 4 and engage 1 at the same time. Also, the MiG-29B-12s initially came with only R-27R and R-60T AAMs, and the R-73Es and HMS came only with the follow-on order for MiG-29B-12s, which were equipped with the Topaz radar that could track 4 targets and engage a single target at the same time. Therefore, at the time the decision was made to acquire the first batch of MiG-29B-12s, it was quite an antiquated design compared to the Mirage 2000s the IAF already had and which were multi-role, while the MiG-29B-12 was not. All in all, a very bad decision to go with the MiG orders in the 1980s.

To Subroto: As of last June the RBE-2 AESA entered the full-scale production phase. Its R & D phase was over by then.

To Parth: It is all true and has been confirmed by official releases of the KGB archives since the 1990s. The CPSU Politburo's official decisions, also now available in the public realm on-line, clearly state that the financial beneficiaries of the commissions from the two mega-deals inked between 1980 and 1984 were Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi. How much more authentic confirmation does one need!!!
The SAR-based recce system is already operational with the Su-30MKI, this being the ELTA-built EL/M-2060P pod-mounted system. It is this system that will be employed for target acquisition for the land-launched BrahMos.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@1:24PM: The CIA never prohibited India from buying anything. It is not the CIA's purview to engage in such acts. That is the responsibility of the US Defense Dept and US State Dept. And as a recent article in FRONTLINE reveals, the US Secretary of State Dr Henry Kissinger in 1974 was very supportive of India openly beginning her nuclear weaponisation programme and had India done so since 1974, then no sanctions would have been imposed and India would then have been able to joint the NPT as a declared nuclear weapons state. But the US could never figure out why the then rulers of India were so bloody stupid in conducting only 1 nuclear weapons test in May 1974, and resuming only in 1998!!! One cannot the blame the US for Indian stupidity.
Regarding Israel getting US weapons at subsidised rates, there's no such thing as subsidisation. What the US does is charge international market rates and only then the US Defense Dept steps in and makes the payment to the US OEMs. Just because Israel does not pay even a single cent for its US-origin weapons does not mean the procurements are subsidised.

Anonymous said...

it was quite an antiquated design compared to the Mirage 2000s the IAF already had and which were multi-role, while the MiG-29B-12 was not. All in all, a very bad decision to go with the MiG orders in the 1980s.
------------------------------
but now mig29 going to get multi role PGM strike capability

not sure whether number of hardpoint will be increased or not on each wing cuz there is space availalbe for this

Prasun K Sengupta said...

Not quite. The way the MiG-29B-12 is being upgraded, it will retain its principal air superiority role and be armed with R-73E and R-77 BVRAAMs, with secondary ground attack capability coming wth Kh-29T and S-24 rockets only. No LGBs and no anti-radiation missiles. That's what RAC-MiG confirmed yesterday. A very modest upgrade but with superior BVR air combat capabilities in the quick reaction alert (scramble) function.

Anonymous said...

which radar in above pic is and what ar those 3 thing i think PGM

Anonymous said...

which anti radiation missile france ofering for rafale

Prasun K Sengupta said...

EL/M-2084 MMR active phased-array radar and the Brimstone PGM. The MBDA-built ALARM or even AGM-88A HARM can go on the Rafale as the avionics suite is of the open-architecture type.

Anonymous said...

well i know for a fact that EL-2052 can easily be integrated on the Jag, Mirage and mig-29. I think we should simply do it because we'll have commonality and this will make life easier and make them more effective.

Russian radars are pretty useless in new technologies and its best to stay away from them.

Rafale and EF are pretty useless as well considering F-16IN and F-18IN on any given fire more weapons out to longer ranges at lower costs. AAGRM is the newest Anti-rad missile which has a longer range than ALARM and can destroy shut down radars as well. AAGRM is deployed on the SH. Thales RBE-2 can be put on the F-35 but no one will actually opt for it since its max. detection range is around 200km which is still not even half of the of the APG-79-v3 which boasts a max. detection range over 500km.
Actually even the Gripen NG's new selex AESA is better than the RBE-2, Gripen NG was supposed to have the RBE-2 but they rejected it, sighting it wasn't good enough. Jas, mirages and mig-29s equipped with a lot of ISsy avio nics would make them the dealiest in their kind across the world.

The mig-29 upgrade should have new things like the MATV nozzel i am sure it can be fitted with it, we dont need to go for mig-35 to have TVC.

Eurofighter being so expensive has a very low chance of getting the mrca and hence the EJ-2000 may not win the LCA engine, the IAF will go for the F-18SH with the 20% increased thrust engine for the mrca and hence GE 414G will win, moreover tvc can easily be integrated on the GE any time, we simply have to order it, LCA mk-2's massive design change suggests that GE could win because the EJ-2000 engine doesn't need too many design changes.

Anonymous said...

Media hides Indian nuclear scandal

: What if the kidnappers have used the Indian nuclear scientist Lokanathan Mahalingam to penetrate the Indian nuclear arsenal and use the material for a future attack on Washington or New Delhi?

Maybe. But you won't hear it on CNN, BBC or the rest of the Am-Brit media.

Why? Because it exposes India's low nuclear safety standards which in turn will embarrass Washington and London, two countries that are keen to use India's cheap soldiers to fight the Anglo-Saxon wars in Afghanistan and China.

Not a single major Am-Brit media outlet covered the story of the kidnapping and murder of a man that holds the key to the Indian nuclear arsenal. There are no scare stories about Indian nukes falling in the wrong hands on either CNN or BBC.

Why? There are two funny reasons.

One is that the Am-Brit liar brigade spent much of its energy in the last two years trying to scare the world about Pakistan's nukes and how the poor Pakistanis are unable to protect them.

And suddenly this happens: a major nuclear security breach in India. And India is something that the Am-Brit liar brigade wants to protect at all costs. Mainly because India is the new slave-soldier of London and Washington and is being groomed to help in sustaining the occupation of Afghanistan and confronting China.

Also, the Americans have just broken all proliferation laws and decided that India is such a responsible nuclear power that it deserves to be given advanced nuclear technology.

Imagine if this incident had happened in Pakistan. The entire Am-Brit media would have been beating the drums of war, reminding the world how dangerous and unstable Pakistan is.

But now the entire Am-Brit enterprise is embarrassed. By the way, the Am-Brit enterprise includes biased British and American diplomats in addition to think-tank types and outright rude and dimwit journalists most of whom think they know more about your country than you do.

What if one of the 14 or so separatist movements and organizations in India kidnapped the scientist to gain access to Indian nuclear bombs?

What if the terrorists have actually gained access to an Indian nuclear facility as we speak, killed the scientist and are now waiting to carry out a major terrorist act?

What if any one of those Indian separatist groups fighting for the independence of 14 out of the 28 states that make up India have used the scientist to sell information or nuclear designs to groups or countries that end up attacking the United States? It is a scary business.

But the Am-Brit media won't cover it. Period.

NOTE: Nor would the Pakistani media, by the way. Pakistani media should have been beaming this story all over the world by now. But 80+ private news channels in the country and a giant state-owned media setup and tens of Press Ministers earning lavish benefits and still nothing to show for it.

Anonymous said...

Oey, who let the dogs out?
Are you reading all this Prasun?

Anonymous said...

As though all of India's nuclear secrets are with one scientist who worked at a "civilian" nuclear plant!!! ....

Anonymous said...

to anon Monday, June 15, 2009 11:40:00 PM

well i know for a fact that EL-2052 can easily be integrated on the Jag, Mirage and mig-29. I think we should simply do it because we'll have commonality and this will make life easier and make them more effective.

Russian radars are pretty useless in new technologies and its best to stay away from them.
---------------------------------
everything can be done,but who

will pay to make weapon compatibility for elta2052,india

and if 2052 is selected for mig29,mirage then both dassualt and mig will just increase the price and its just like america doesn't allow foreign radar on american built fighters and so do mig and dassualt

moreover french already asking 44 million per mirage upgrade and if 2052 selected this price will be over 50 million to make weapons compatible to 2052

and RFP for mig29 and mirage upgrade doesn't states aesa radar

and if aesa radar be the case both russia and france have their own aesa radars and they don't depend someone else

and if aesa be the case zhuk ae already fitted on mig prototype can be fitted on mig29

and from where you got this hollow knowledge that russian radars are useless

Anonymous said...

Why does the missiles in the 3rd pic have headlamps ? Just to make it for night use ?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

Those look like headlamps to you? They're millimetre-wave radar antennae.

Anonymous said...

Incorrect, that's Semi-Active Laser Homing variant of Brimstone 2. BTW What do Brimstone ATGM have to do with "India-Specific Assorted News Briefs From Paris Air Show 2009"

Anonymous said...

To Tuesday, June 16, 2009 10:07:00 AM

Incorrect? You and Prasun are both correct, they're the milimetre-wave seeker of Brimstone ATGM.

Chill out man!

Anonymous said...

Prasun,
there is news on domain-b that Indian is buying 10 C-17 globemasters from the US under the FMS programme acc to ACM PV Naik. Is that true. No other newspaper has any mention of it.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

If that were the case, then by now the proposed sale/procurement would already have been publicly notified by the US State/Defense Depts to the US Congress via the Defense Security Cooperation Agency. As this has not yet happened I wouldn't be inclined to believe whatever anyone has to say about India buying anything through the FMS channel. This is because whenever buys anything under the FMS programme the sale is automatically uploaded on to the DSCA website.

Anonymous said...

Here you go
http://www.domain-b.com/defence/general/20090615_globemaster.html

Prasun K Sengupta said...

As is evident from the story, the storywriter engages in contradictions by first saying that the C-17A has been 'shortlisted', followed by claiming that the C-17A has been 'selected'. Thus, as you can well imagine, if a selection has indeed taken place, then there shouldn't be any shortlisting. It is similar to the recent story about the Indian Army being unable to acquire 155mm ultra-lightweight field howitzers just because Singapore's ST Kinetics has been blacklisted! Far from it, the procurement got delayed the very day BAE Systems withdrew its offer of the LW155 howitzer, thereby reducing the competition to virtually a sole-source contract to be negotiated with ST Kinetics for the Pegasus howitzer. And as we all know, this then becomes a clear violation of the MoD's Defence Procurement Procedures, which insist on a competitive bidding process, instead of entertaining any sole-source contract. Consequently, the only option now for the MoD is to re-issue RFPs in a way that accommodates the demands of BAE Systems and even then this will remain a sole-source contract scenario for as long as ST Kinetics is prevented from bidding. See the goof-up now by the MoD? Fucking nerds are in charge there!!!

Dr. Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

Mr Sengupta and co., some time ago I promised to keep you apprised of my investigation into the purported failure of the last Agni-2 test reported by Hemat Rout.

A colleague of mine has made rigourous checks with DRDO and they all affirmed the success of the trial.

Furthermore I e-mailed Hemant Rout of ExpressBuzz directly and he failed to respond to me - this being about 2 weeks ago. I simply asked him if he stood by his story and he has declined to do so as of now.

Further to the Agni series - BDL is the production agency. It would not have set up a production plant to make 8 or 12 of each. DRDL had the capacity of doing so on its own.

I am led to understand that by 2004 at least 8 of each Agni had been deployed with the army missile groups and that production has been continuing - 2002 for Agni-2 and 2004 for Agni-1 at the rate 9 per year (not sure of the breakdown). It is very unclear, however, if these missiles have simply been produced and stored or issued and deployed. I am inclined to believe the former. Production capacity is supposed to be 12-18 per year according to my sources but I am still investigating.


BTW Mr. Sengupta, I am delighted with an India specific report on the Paris Air Show. Very interesting stuff. But is India actually ordering all of the Israeli merchandise on offer ? Brimstone etc. ?

On the nuclear front - I recall you indicating that India has defined its minimum requirement as 3 MT of Weapons Grade PU. This is correct. It is enough for between 500 and 600 of the most unsophisticated weapons in the 20KT range. Any improvements - and there certainly have been following two sets of tests - will only increase the number of weapons possible therefrom.

The question that should be asked is how far is India from the 3MT ?

Unless the 8 designated "military-power" reactors are used, 3MT is a long way off. If they are used - it won't be long at all.

If reactor grade PU is considered, however, the 3MT may have already been achieved.

The other thing to note is that this dovetails almost precisely into Bharat Karnad's view of where the Indian deterrent will be in 2030.

sachin_sathe said...

prasun,

the latest vayu issue has a pic of LCA dropping a 1000 lbs inert unguided bomb i think the tests were carried out in feb-march the pics clearly shows the litening ldp being carried.Can it be used without the radar to designate targets if so then can u enquire & post abt the weaponization status.

Can u confirm abt the rfp being issued for 100 wvr missiles for the jaguars?would't it be easier to use the Python 5 or Derby(for longer reach) as it is getting El-2032 for RADAR upg?

Also if possible post the differences between the P-8A & P-8I

Anonymous said...

Prasun Check this report also

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/iaf-chooses-boeings-latest-c-17-for-heavy-lift-transport-aircraft_100204806.html

Black Hawk said...

Have we bought any simulators for Phalcon? What is the SATCOM in the AWACS used for? What will the AWACS download from satellites?

Raghav said...

1. Is it true that all regiments with MBT Arjun will be designated as strategic reserve? Where does the Arjun fit in the Army's war plans or in which sector does the Army plan to use it. Has CVRDE developed any simulators for Arjun?

2. What happened to Nag ATGM? Has the army conducted user trials? When will Helina see the light of the day?

3. Any news on the T-72 upgrade? What is the army planning?

Kaushik said...

I thought the Govt. wanted to purposely keep BAE from winning the howitzer contract because Bofors is now a part of BAE. If so why should the govt. re-issue a modified RFP to accommodate BAE?

Like someone said before why can't DRDO or OFB reverse engineer the FH-77 and mass produce it into a truck mounted system? What is preventing them from doing so?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Dr. Sanjay Badri-Maharaj: Many thanks for taking the trouble to share your thoughts and inputs and honouring your promise. However, one thing that nags me till today is why on earth did the PIB or DRDO not release any photos or official statement of the kind they do whenever a ballistic missile is flight-tested. An exception to the norm therefore does not bode well for a declaratory policy on a minimum credible deterrent, bt these are my personal feelings only. Regarding the DRDL's military-industrial capability, while the DRDL can certainly handle final assembly and partial structural fabrication, it would still have to depend on vendors like BDL and HAL to source several structures, sub-structures, components and avionics. This has been the case with all missiles developed thus far under the IGMDP.
Regarding the Israel-origin merchandise being ordered by India, the answer is yes. The Brimstone has been on offer since early 2002 for the upgraded MiG-27Ms and Jaguar IS and is also on offer for the Tejas Mk1 LCA. In addition, it along with the Spike-ER are being offered as part of the IAF's attack helicopter reqmt.
Regarding the 3MT of weapons-grade Pu-239 figure, it is the desired or cherished target, in reality the achieved target to date has been less than 1 MT. Hence the 8 designated nuclear reactors for military-specific reqmts is imperative and of vital strategic importance.
Will post later tonight the nuclear warhead-carrying air-delivered munition (ADM). It is a very interesting concept indeed and its airframe design derives a lot from the Barak-NG LR-SAM design.

To Black Hawk: A mission management simulator is already in place in Agra, but the IAF has yet to order the IL-76MF's full flight simulator.

To Raghav: The Arjun Mk1s will be an integral part of two of the eight Brigade-sized integrated battle groups (to be deployed in Punjab) as part of the Army's 'Pro-Active Strategy'. This was decided upon almost three years ago. As for the Nag/Helina ATGM's future, your guess is as good as mine. Phase 2 of Project Bison (T-72M1 upgrade) has not yet taken off.

To Kaushik: No, that wasn't the case. In fact, BAE Systems withdrew simply because it found the Army's GSQRs to be ludicrous! Plain and simple. New RFPs have to be issued simply only if a competitive bidding process is to be adhered to and then the MoD will also have to de-blacklist ST Kinetics. This is because there are presently only two 155mm ultraweight howitzers available worldwide which are in series-production. There's no other option.
Regarding reverse-engineering the FH-77, there's no need to do so since OFB already has teamed up with BAE Systems/Bofors to offer an improved 45-cal version of this gun and a prototype was in fact displayed at DEFEXPO 2008. The Army should also seriously look at the TATA-OFB co-developed LFG Mk2 105mm light gun that is truck-mounted and is being offered with IMI-developed 105mm laser-guided projectiles. Such a weapon system will be highly effective in high-altitude areas.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Sachin Sathe: As for WVR AAMs for the upgraded Jaguar IS the AIM-132 ASRAAM, IRIS-T, Python-5 and AIM-9X are on offer and along with the selected AAM the IAF will also procure HMDs for the pilots. The EL/M-2032 radar is only on board the upgraded Jaguar IMs (for maritime strike) and hence it makes sense for the aircrew of these Jaguar IMs to have the ELBIT Systems Dash-3 HMD along with Python-5 and derby AAMs.
Whe using LDPs like Litening-2/3 one doesn't need the airborne multi-mode radar. The two of them operate independently of one another. That's why even the existing upgraded Jaguar IS and MiG-27M (both without any integral radar) can be equipped with LDPs once the aircraft are equipped with MIL-STD-1553B digital databus and open-architecture avionics suite.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@10:55PM: Again, a classic error in terms of reporting, as you may have guessed. The term 'shortlisting' applies to the process of choosing the final two or three contenders and opening technical and price negotiations. Only after this, using the process of elimination, the final contender emerges for the definitive round of price negotiations. If IAF HQ has already zeroed in on the C-17a then the reporter should have used the term 'selected' instead of the misleading 'shortlisting'. In this case only the reporter concerned knows best what he's trying to convey. Maybe he can't distinguish between 'shortlisting' or down-selection' and 'selection', each of which connotes a different meaning.

sachin_sathe said...

prasun,

Given the fact tht the such releases are a bit behind times (and the fact tht usually no news is good news)the weapos integration seems to have beengoing on nicely.

Also did u see the new Flanker images on Shiv Aroor's blog it seems the IAF has discreetly disclosed EL\M-2060 recon pod. Also,the two brand new (unseen nos) of MKI's seems like the no.8 pursoots has mooved to Tezpur.wht do u think?

Anonymous said...

What is wrong with the new engined IL-76 with glass cockpit? Why should we go for C-17? It would be a huge drain on our resources to have two different heavy lift planes bcoz such planes need a huge crew for maintenance and also massive facilities for the same. Buying a completely new plane will require another large maintenance crew to be trained and more costly facilities will need to be setup to maintain the planes.
Many partially completed IL-76 airframes are lying around in the Tashkent factory. They can be acquired at a far cheap price than the C-17.

Dr. Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

Mr. Sengupta, your comments are spot on.

With respect to the pictures - I agree. However, I also recall that the user trial of Agni-1 did not result in any photographs being released from the army. Some from DRDO but not the army.

Again, even in off-record comments, the DRDO personnel are very clear - the test succeeded.

WRT the PU stockpile, apparently some - probably the 8 designated military reactors - along with CIRUS and DHRUV have been producing weapons grade plutonium. Even when CIRUS is decommissioned, the others should, even operating at 60% capacity, produce approximately 150-180kg of weapons-grade plutonium per year.

CIRUS and DHRUV alone have produced - after testing etc - 500-600kg. The question is how much has been reprocessed.

It is odd that the Barak 8 be chosen as the basis of the ADM.

Have any performance parameters for the Barak 8 been released ?

Anonymous said...

to anon at Wednesday, June 17, 2009 4:59:00 AM


What is wrong with the new engined IL-76 with glass cockpit? Why should we go for C-17? It would be a huge drain on our resources to have two different heavy lift planes bcoz such planes need a huge crew for maintenance and also massive facilities for the same. Buying a completely new plane will require another large maintenance crew to be trained and more costly facilities will need to be setup to maintain the planes.
Many partially completed IL-76 airframes are lying around in the Tashkent factory. They can be acquired at a far cheap price than the C-17.
----------------------------------
you are ,infact we have no need to buy c17

its much cheaper to upgrade il76 with ps90a or d30kp burlak engine
and with glass cockpit

you should know that australia paid 1.4 billion US dollars for 4 c17

out of this 1.4 billion 800 million was for 4 aircrafts and 600 million was for ground based infrastucture/training

and all the training for crew was done in US and even if training cost around 50-60 million even then the ground based infra cost over 500 million and this is not cheap

so buying c17 makes no sense

Subroto said...

Hi Prasun,

1. Is it possible to integrate Grippen IN with General Electric
F110-GE-132 engine that produces 32,500 pounds of thrust rather taking the General Electric F414-GE-400 engines that produce 22,000 pounds (98 Kn) of thrust.
Grippen NG (IN)seems excellent Multi-role fighter aircraft and will fit in the IAF bill perfectly. Being Light and Advance Multi-role fighter aircraft,it can replace maximum no. of Mig-21 aircraft.Grippen IN sensors can be Israel, French, Sweden and Indian or even with other countries.It can also carry a wide range of weapon system and carry Multi-role task.

2)Can you post more on CAESAR AESA from EADS and Vixen 500 AESA radar and compare it with the Israel EL/M-2052.

3)BAE Systems Bofors FH-77 BW L52 Archer self-propelled artillery system is one of the world best system.India is also using the low level 39 cal bofors artillery gun. Now CBI enquiry is completly over and given clean chit to the company. Why still acquiring such sophisticated gun is getting delayed? Indian Army badly need this Artillery gun.

Do you have any information whether the Indian army is looking for the M982 Excalibur extended range guided artillery shell developed by Raytheon Missile Systems that have a range of 60 KM.

Anonymous said...

Can you describe what is the first image about. The second image is wrongly named Barak NG. It is IAI Stunner.

Anonymous said...

Rafael Stunner

http://pvo.guns.ru/images/expo/eurosatory2008/DSCN1042_DCE.JPG

http://pvo.guns.ru/images/expo/eurosatory2008/DSCN1049_DCE.JPG

Prasun K Sengupta said...

The first illustration is a conceptual collage of the tactical warhead-carrying air-delivered munition to be co-developed by IAI and RAFAEL. It can also carry a conventional warhead and is meant to be the long-range follow-on to the Popeye.
As for the Stunner, it is not an IAI-given name. Stunner is the name given by RAFAEL and Raytheon. More data is available here: http://www.raytheon.com/media/ausa07/docs/factsheets/stunner.pdf
Both the Barak-8 MR-SAM and Barak-NG LR-SAM are being marketed separately by IAI and RAFAEL, although they're both jointly developed by IAI and RAFAEL. For marketing purposes both companies have given different names to the two missiles. Therefore, for IAI the names are Barak-8 and Barak-NG, while RAFAEL refers to them as MR-SAM and Stunner.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Sachin Sathe: Yes, that's the EL/M-2060 SAR pod. Eight such pods arrived in March 2008 and flight qualification trials began last June and commissioning of the accompanying ground-based data exploitation stations is presently underway. 16 such stations have been contracted for. They are air-transportable and containerised.

Nava said...

What's IAI's contribution to the Stunner? The radar seeker? And I believe the Stunner isn't designed to intercept ACs. Does that mean it will be used in India's case as a missile defense system only?

Also, at what stage is this ADM? I was under the impression that it was more advanced than conceptual design. Could you reiterate its performance parameters?

Thanks

Anonymous said...

to prasun

can you please tell me that whether 2060 SAR pod can be fitted to jagaur

as you already indicated that 20600 RTP pod being bought to be fitted to jagaur

whether 2060 pod has been bought for su30 or jagaur

2060 pod wiegh 580kg compared to 198kg of 20600 pod

but power consumption of 2060 pod is less than 20600 pod

power consumption

2060 pod ---- 3.5 kW
20600 pod --- 4.5 kW

Prasun K Sengupta said...

Hey Nava! Welcome back! I had presumed (rightly or weongly) you were called for some kind of routine mobilisation exercises for reservists. Now, as you are well aware, RAFAEL has traditionally been the specialist in rocket/missile propulsion and warhead R & D. IAI's MLM and ELTA Divisions, on the other hand, have specialised in R & D on command-and-control systems, and on-board fire-control and navigation systems. This same kind of co-development path has been adopted for the Barak-8/MR-SAM and Barak NG/Stunner LR-SAM. Now, what needs to be understood here is that the MR-SAM and LR-SAM are India-specific to cater to the unique air defence/anti-cruise missile defence reqmts of India's Army, Navy and Air Force. But at the same time, both IAI and RAFAEL with Raytheon are free to develop derivatives of both missile systems for the larger international export market and which will be different in performance and external appearance from those customised for the Indian market.
As for the ADM, it has now progressed much beyond the conceptual phase (which was two years ago) and what we now see is an emerging design that draws a lot from the Barak NG (this being done to typically keep the R & D costs to the bare minimum and dramatically reducing the project management risks). The real interesting part is the rear-mounted air-breathing booster, which is rather unique. The objective of the designers, I'm led to believe, is to give the supersonic ADM a range envelope of between 300km and 800km as of now. The ADM will be armed with a unitary tactical nuclear warhead. The primnary carrier vehicle of the ADM will be the Su-30MKI (in the belly-mounted centreline pylon).

To Anon@12:09PM: Yes, it can be carried by the Jaguar IS and Mirage 2000 as well as the Su-30MKI. But being a recce system, the EL/M-2060P is best utilised by high-flying platforms to maximise the system's operational footprint and to this end the Su-30MKI becomes the optimum carrier for deep strategic recce missions of the type the MiG-25R was once used for. For tactical recce missions requiring shallow-depth penetration (up to 80km deep into hostile territory), the Jaguar IS and Mirage 2000 will suffice. The EL/M-20600 RTP pod is used for all-weather target acquisition and targetting all in real-time (and not for recce) and therefore is different from the EL/M-2060P, which is strictly used for recce. n many ways, the RTP performs the same role as the RGS radar of the BrahMos (i.e. for target acquisition and engagement). Therefore, while the EL/M-2060P will be used for acquiring target detection data, this data will then be up-loaded on to the RTP and RGS radar, which will then do the SAR imagery correlation in order to achieve positive target ID and high-precision all-weather engagement. In conclusion, therefore, what you get is the ability to launch offensive air campaigns despite bad weather or low cloud cover, and a dramatic reduction in the sensor-to-shooter loop. Overall, this is what is called effects-based operations waged as part of the overall knowledge-based air warfare campaign. On the other hand, when you use photo imagery-based target acquisition/engagement systems like LOROP recce pods and Litening-2/3 LDPs, you are limited only to fair-weather flying in clear skies.

Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

Mr. Sengupta, have any performance parameters for the India optimised Barak-8 MRSAM and the BarakNG/Stunner LR-SAM been released ? Is there any idea as to how many of each type the Indian Air Force will order ?

Nava said...

No, not reservist mobilization, a business trip. But funny that you'd ask, as I just came back from a "reunion" of a certain unit...

Not to nag, but do you know if it's Rafael that produces the Stunner's\Barak NG radar seeker? As to the ADM, I wonder if the design (indeed impressive and unique as far as I can tell)was chosen for the versatility that it offers. I mean there isn't that big a market (for obvious reasons)for that sort
of strategic weapon. Officially there isn't even a domestic one :)
But if you attach a sophisticated, more generic missile to a ramjet booster, you could more easily design different boosters for different ranges and capabilities while still utilizing the same missile for endgame, could you not?
That could yield a formidable family of Popeye successors.

Anonymous said...

to prasun

but jaguar can also go upto 14km and carry 2060p pod and for general purpose or for that matter even in emergency flying at 14km altitude still covers large chunk of area.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Sanjay Badri-Maharaj: No figures on performance or procurement volumes have been 'officially' released as yet, although off-the-record background briefings on projected performance parameters and estimated volumes of production were given at both Le Bourget and last month at the IMDEX Asia expo.

To Nava: As I mentioned earlier, the fire-control (including active radar) and navigation systems come from IAI, not RAFAEL. But this I can state: it appears from the ADM design that for conventional precision strikes some kind of loitering capability for persistent strikes may be in the offing. And such weapons will be used for engaging targets within the deep battlespace, and not for tactical strikes. Afterall, loitering drones like the Harpy and Harop can be employed for suppressing hostile layered air defences only up to a certain depth, and not against theatre-level air defence command-and-control centres embedded deep within the enemy's hinterland. In Inda's case, although the BrahMos gives a formidable offensive strike capability, its primary deficiency is its MTCR-dictated range deficiency. For the ADM, on the other hand, neither Israel nor India are obliged of forced to adhere to any such limitations as neither of them are signatories to the MTCR or NPT. Thus, if such co-development efforts are kept strictly at the bilateral level, then a formidable family of persistent deep-strike ADMs could well emerge in the near future.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@1:53PM: Yes, the Jaguar IS can, but the limitation at the moment is not about cruising altitude. The limitations are about long-range navigation and defensive aids. This limitation will be done away with once the Jaguar IS is progressively fitted with TACAN and an advanced defensive aids suite. But as I stated earlier, the Jaguar IS can be employed for recce using both LOROP pod and EL/M-2060P for tactical recce.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Nava: Regarding the BrahMos, it should read: "primary deficiency is its MTCR-dictated range limitation to 290km".

Nava said...

Oh sorry for being obtuse, it's just that the Stunner employs dual mode guidance, and Rafael seems to be the most likely source for the IIR seeker, so I wasn't sure what to make of your general remarks... Anyway thanks for the clarification.

Well that's interesting. It seems that loitering platforms will play an increasingly central role in the future. I wonder what applications they could have in tactical scenarios. The MBDA fire shadow seems promising in that regard.

To chime in to your discussion about targeting pods, I read an uncorroborated report about Elta unveiling a new combined SAR and EO
targeting pod. Is that true?

Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

Can you share anything regarding either performance of the SAMs and production volumes from those unofficial comments ?

Anonymous said...

to prasun

i know that most radars can scan through clouds but question is


can 2060p pod scan through dust storm as its a common natural enviroment in middle east

as when there is dust storm then laser targeting pod is useless
so americans developed JDAM as solution of this

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun , Any news on Mig-35 from Paris ?
I am waiting for you promised write up on Mig-35 after receiving info from Mig.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,

Are you sure that ADMs can carry tactical nukes ? I have that doubt because of the following.

1. diameter of ADM doesn't look to hold a nuke atleast a tactical one. i assume the second pic holds the real dimension replica.

2. why does Israel develop a nuke capable ADM when she says that she doesn't have any nukes. Don't say that it is just for India. I know that international relations are not like human friendships.

Anonymous said...

to prasun and friends

here is a link for tor missiles system for libya and its fully digital and mobile

http://pilot.strizhi.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/img_4409_m2.jpg


http://pilot.strizhi.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/img_0071_m2.jpg

http://pilot.strizhi.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/img_0083_m2.jpg

http://pilot.strizhi.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/img_0157_m2.jpg

Anonymous said...

Prasun, are we going to upgrade MiG-27 with AL-31 engine. Hurrey!

Anonymous said...

to anon above

india declined this option for unknown reasons but this is pretty effective and if india can reengine jagaur then india must also go for this option

Anonymous said...

To Anon above
India declined this option for the upgrade which was started in 2002.
However the integration testing of Al-31 with Mig-27 has started last year only. Russia won't paint it in Indian colours unless India has paid for it. Russia itself doesnt operate Mig-27 any more.

Anonymous said...

Looks like an Annon who frequents this blog is sucking the juice out of brains of BharatRakshak bloggers by the name of Andrew DeCristofaro. I think you can recognize him by his repititive, stubborn and childish posts.

Anonymous said...

Intresting video on Saab ERIEYE AWAC.

Anonymous said...

and on IAI G550 CAEW

Anonymous said...

Prasun K Sengupta Is it true that Pakistan is manufacturing 60Km Raptor-1, 120Km Raptor-2 and 60Km R-Dater BVRAAM under license from SouthAfrica?Any idea how many were contracted?How they compare to the US JDAM etc?

Anonymous said...

Are you sure that ADMs can carry tactical nukes ? I have that doubt because of the following.

1. diameter of ADM doesn't look to hold a nuke atleast a tactical one. i assume the second pic holds the real dimension replica.

2. why does Israel develop a nuke capable ADM when she says that she doesn't have any nukes. Don't say that it is just for India. I know that international relations are not like human friendships.

Anonymous said...

prasun Can you confirm that china is now working on JF-17 with payload of 5 to 6 ton with low RCS and more powerful version of RD-93 for PAF? When will it be in production? Next batch of 100?

Anonymous said...

to prasun

Am I getting it correctly?


Both the Barak-8 MR-SAM = 70km range?? for navy and army

Barak-NG LR-SAM = Stunner = 120KM?? for airforce with limited ABM capability?

Anonymous said...

French probe alleged Pakistani role in bombing

Lets hope our babus are getting their share of Scorpenes.

Kannan said...

About Su-30MKI crash in StrategyPage.com
But military pilots still make errors even when not practicing for combat. The recent loss of an Indian Su-30 was initially thought to be engine or electronic problems. But the investigation team found that the pilot had inadvertently shut down the automated flight controls, was not aware of it, and believed the aircraft was, for some unknown reason, out of control. The pilot and weapons system operator ejected (the back seat guy was killed when his safety harness broke.) Mistakes like that are made by civil aviation pilots as well, and cockpit electronics are constantly be modified to eliminate as many human errors as possible.

Anonymous said...

TO Anonymous @ Thursday, June 18, 2009 7:33:00 PM


Pakistani is locally producing improved version of 60Km R-Dater BVRAAM under name of H-2 with data link capability and this missile is operational with upgraded F-7/F-7PG and Mirage_III Rose-1 all of which are equiped with the Grifo -7/ Grifo -7PG/ Grifo –M3 for this purpose

Anonymous said...

To Anon above,
What kind of BVR capability does F7PG have. The antenna size of Grifo-F7PG is just 35cm dia. Even Grifo M3/M5 used on PAF Mirage 3/5 seem to be as small as Kopyo radar of Mig-21. Also the power consumption of Grifo radars seems to be unusually low.
Do you have any preformance stats on these radars.

Anonymous said...

India has cleared its largest ever indigenous defence contract worth Rs 45,000 crore to manufacture seven advanced stealth frigates for the Navy at shipyards in Kolkata and Mumbai.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Navy-seals-45-000-cr-deal--seven-warships/479132

7 Ships for $9 billion!
Prasun, do you have any details of this?

Anonymous said...

What in the world is this?.

Anonymous said...

Its MPA vesion of AN-74

Anonymous said...

Antonov An-72P maritime patrol aircraft

Anonymous said...

Antonov presents a new version of AN-74 in India

http://www.india-defence.com/reports/4228


For the first time the programme of AN-74 new multi-role maritime patrol aircraft will be represented to a wide aviation community.

At present, this version of the aircraft is being studied by experts of MoD of India within the frame of tender on delivery of 6 aircraft of such a class for Navy and Coast Guard of the country. The new AN-74 is prepared to fulfill with a high efficiency a wide spectrum of military tasks including: aerial and maritime patrolling, support of military ships with the possibility to counteract to an enemy, carrying out search and rescue operations; electronic and radio reconnaissance; determination of pollution of the sea surface.

If necessary it may be re-equipped easily for transportation people, evacuation of sick and wounded persons. Cargo cabin with volume of 26 m³, highly-mechanized hatch-ramp and airborne loading/unloading equipment allow to perform autonomous loading-unloading and transportation of wide spectrum of cargoes as well as its paradropping. Due to its unique design AN-74 can be operated from poor equipped runways (including ground, pebble, snowy and icy ones). In STOL mode it can transport up to 6 t of cargoes. Simplicity in service, availability of airborne loading equipment provide long-term operation of the airplane far from airdromes. It took the best characteristics of the previous airplanes of the family, which are operated successfully in military divisions of different countries. They were actively used in military operations, carried soldiers, troops of special services, various cargoes, including spacecraft and auxiliary equipment for them, evacuated ill and wounded persons, struggled with pirates, stopped poachers, guarded maritime boundaries, detected and participated in detention of trespasser-ships.

A new version of AN-74 differs from its predecessors with a number of considerable improvements. It made possible realization of conception of a radical modernization of the AN-74, developed by ANTONOV specialists in cooperation with the partners including those from France, Germany and Sweden. It includes mounting the glass cockpit, the newest instruments of piloting, navigation and communication. Besides, power plant and APU, aircraft and engine control systems, fuel, hydraulic systems and many others. The most modern technologies will be used for aftersale support of the airplane, its maintenance and repair.

Within the exhibition negotiations concerning other perspective directions of cooperation will be conducted. ANTONOV is sure that AEROINDIA-2009 will become a starting point of the new joint programmes joining efforts of aviation enterprises of India and Ukraine.

Anonymous said...

If its MPA then why it has "INDIAN AIR FORCE" written over it?

Anonymous said...

Barak Launcher(Land)

Arrow 3

Look whose peeking

Anonymous said...

IAI SIGNS CONTRACT TO DEVELOP AND SUPPLY LAND-BASED BARAK 8 To use Land-Based-MF-STAR

IAI at Paris Air Show

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Nava: You're right, the IIR seeker specialist is RAFAEL while ELTA is more well-known for active radars for terminal homing and that's how RAFAEL and ELTA co-developed the Derby BVRAAM. The same will be the case with the Barak-8 MR-SAM and Barak-NG/Barak-8ER LR-SAM. Regarding the comvining of ISAR/LOROP capabilities in a single pod, nothing of that sort was displayed at the Paris Air Show, and RAFAEL showed the same Recce Lite/Litening-3 pod combination.

To Sanjay Badri Maharaj: To the best of my knowledge the production volumes of both the MR-SAMs and LR-SAMs were disclosed last February at Aero India. The only new developments concern the MR-SAM's EL/M-2084 MMR (which has been highlighted above) and the GB MF-STAR (an initial eight units on order, with another 8 to be ordered in future) for the Barak NG/Barak 8ERs.

To Anon@5:14PM: The EL/M-2060P is an all-weather ISR system.

To Anon@6:37PM: The MiG-35 was shown only in scale-model form with twin modified vertical tailfins. No other information of any kind was released by RAC-MiG.

To Anon@8:03PM: The ADM is being co-developed by India and Israel for both conventional and tactical nuclear strikes. Israel has nothing to to with developing the ADM's tactical nuclear warhead and all efforts in this direction will be 100% Indian. Israel has never said that it does not have or possess any nuclear weapon. Israel officially adheres to an ambivalent attitude and has only officially stated thus far that it will not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

To Anon@8:10PM: Those photos are of the Tor-2ME, which was first shown at MAKS 2007.

To Anon@7:33PM: Only some 80 Raptor 2s were imported off-the-shelf and following that production of the Denel-designed Ra'ad ALCM began. The R-Darter too is in production at Kamra.

To Anon@11:39PM: Yes, a stealthy variant of the JF-17 is indeed under development at Chengdu. It will most probably be powered by a single RD-33-3 turbofan. No production nos have been decided upon as yet and therefore up to 150 JF-17 Thunders will be acquired, followed by about 80 stealthy JF-17s.

To Anon@11:48PM: Barak-8 MR-SAM and EL/M-2084 MMR for the Army, both Barak-8 MR-SAM and Barak NG/Barak-8ER along with EL/M-2248 MF-STAR for the Navy, and Barak NG/Barak-8ER along with ground-based EL/M-2248 MF-STAR for the IAF.

To Kannan: If we all are to believe that the Su-30MKI crashed because its "pilot had inadvertently shut down the automated flight controls" then we can only conclude that the pilot concerned--even though an experienced flyer with thousands of flight hours to his credit--was not experienced enough in EITHER proficient enough in cockpit resource management (which is critical for a two-man crew complement) or mission management. And if you were to dig deeper, all this boild down to one and only one thing: lack of adequate ground-based training practices using cockpit procedures trainers! So far, no one from IAF HQ or MoD has even bothered to raise this pertinent question: what exactly caused an experienced type-rated pilot to take the 'inadvertent' steps?

To Anon@2:55AM: From the Selex Galileo website you can download the Grifo-7PG's brochure. The Grifo-7PG's performance and reliability parameters far outclass those of the MiG-21 Bison's Kopyo.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@6:37AM: The interview with MDL's Chairman that is published in FORCE's June 2009 issue clearly explains everything. The contract value in question is not just about warship acquisition, but also for modernising the two shipyards MDL and GRSE. But that is not the problem. The problem will arise when it comes to upgrading the shipyards and selecting the optimum design for the Project 17A FFG. This is because while GRSE has already teamed up with France's DCNS, MDL is doing the same with Fincantieri. So, which of the two shipyards will offer the winning design for the Project 17A FFG when both shipyards are reqd to work in partnership with one another to build the same warship? The MDL Chairman has also confirmed in the interview that the follow-on Project 15B DDG's design will more or less be the same as that of the Project 15A DDG. And as for the Project 15C DDG's design, this will be of an imported design (just like that of the Project 17A FFG).

To Anon@10:13AM: It is just a marketing gimmick, just like how Lockheed Martin displayed the C-130J, F-16IN and F-35 JSF in IAF colours in Aero India 2007.

Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

For somebody not there at Aero India 2009 is there anything you could share about the production plans and scale ?

I would appreciate your comment on these two stories:

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200906191150dowjonesdjonline000715&title=india-conducts-second-ballistic-missile-test-in-a-month

and

http://www.smartmoney.com/news/on/?story=ON-20090619-000750-1250

You will note:

"The Agni-II missile blasted off from a testing site in eastern India on May 19 and "achieved all its flight parameters without hitch," a senior ministry official told AFP."

Anonymous said...

Thanks Prasun , can you put the picture of the Mig-35 model ?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Sanjay Badri Maharaj: The second news item is clearly wrong. Last Friday's test was the second and was preceeded by the one on May 19. The NOTAM for clearing the airspace over certain FIR sectors over the Bay of Bengal and Andaman Sea in lieu of the latest test-firing was issued a week ago to Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore and I had confirmed this yesterday. Also, the first test-firing on May 19 was indeed a failure due to 'hardware problems', which I'm led to believe were QC-related and relate directly to the inertial navigation system. A joint QC-related audit conducted by ASL, CSIO and HAL early this month conclusively established the production-level QC deficiencies and mandated enhanced ruggedisation of the INS and FCS of the type already adopted for the Agni-3. Very disturbing indeed.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

Regarding the MR-SAM and LR-SAM production runs I will soon dig out the figures for you. Had mentioned them in one of FORCE's Show Dailies for Aero india 2009.

Anonymous said...

grifo 7 radar MTBF is 150 hours
which is on paki f7

kopyo radar MTBF is 100 hours

grifo s7 radar MTBF is 220 hours

and i also know that there is only one person who repetitively uses
these two words "stubborn and childish".

Anonymous said...

but he could say me the same thing to me by posting his name also rather than being anon,i would not mind

Anonymous said...

Prasun, I cant find Grifo-7PG performance figures on Selex Galileo website. Can you provide me a link. Also can you explain how Grifo-7PG with a dish dia of 35cm and 80 watt power consumption is able to outperform Kopyo radar on Mig 21 having a 50cm dish.
Mig 21bis does have a larger nose cone compared to F-7PG

Anonymous said...

Thanks prasun
Prasun K Sengupta said... R-Darter too is in production at Kamra

Is it still in production? imean to say that now PAF ordered SD-10A and Aim120C5 and islooking for Mica/Meteor BVRAAM for JF-17

Prasun K Sengupta said... Yes, a stealthy variant of the JF-17 is indeed under development at Chengdu. It will most probably be powered by a single RD-33-3 turbofan. No production nos have been decided upon as yet and therefore up to 150 JF-17 Thunders will be acquired, followed by about 80 stealthy JF-17s.

any details about the thurst of RD-33-3 turbofan and does it have TVC? MTBO?

Any detail about the Aerrow-3 ABM specs?

Subroto said...

Hi Prasun,

1) Can you post more on CAESAR AESA from EADS and Vixen 500 AESA radar and compare it with the Israel EL/M-2052.

2)Is it possible to integrate Grippen IN with General Electric
F110-GE-132 engine that produces 32,500 pounds of thrust rather taking the General Electric F414-GE-400 engines that produce 22,000 pounds (98 Kn) of thrust.

Raghav said...

If the MiG-35 has not yet been built how will RAC MiG field the plane for the MMRCA trials? The vendors will need to field the plane with all its avionics including the radar for the trials. Now MiG has to build the MiG-35, flight certify it and as it has new designs it will need IOC & FOC which will surely take years. The Zhuk AESA radar should be tested on the MiG-35 platform for bombing, shooting missiles and so on. This will take some more time. So how will MiG field a plane for MMRCA trials that are to begin shortly.
I think MiG is not serious about MMRCA because it knows that it will not win the contract bcoz of Russia's poor product support and India's new found romance with USA.

Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

Mr. Sengupta, what you're saying - and please confirm this - is that the first test on 19 May 2009 suffered guidance problems in the INS (incidentally I am led to understand that that was new) and a second test was generated within a month and succeeded to specifications ?

So one user trial succeeded at last ?

Anonymous said...

to anon at Saturday, June 20, 2009 7:42:00 PM

here is a pic of kopyo radar mounted on mig21-93

http://aerospace.boopidoo.com/philez/Su-15TM%20PICTURES%20&%20DOCS/Overscan%27s%20guide%20to%20Russian%20Military%20Avionics_archivos/Kopyo-MiG-21-93.jpg

the detection range of kopyo radar is much higher than grifo 7 radar on j-7 aircraft and kopyo radar provides much wider scanning angles compared to grifo7

as you yourself have varified that kopyo radar has bigger diameter antenna comapred to grifo 7

Kopyo weighs 120kg, occupies 250dm3, with a 500mm antenna that achieves 29dB gain. Tracking limits of the radar are ±40°. Kopyo has 2 recievers (noise factor 4dB), and transmits with a peak power of 5kw, 1kw average. It uses an MPS data processor, and a TS175 digital computer. Its MTBF is 100 hours.it retains a single target track mode. Search range in lookup is 57km headon and 30 km in pursuit, with a tracking range of 45km, against a 3 sq m RCS target. Lookdown mode ranges are the same in headon but slightly reduced in pursuit mode (20km).

Kopyo has vertical scan, automatic HUD scan (± 14°), optical (pilot selected target on HUD) and helmet close combat modes.Air-to-surface operating modes are comprehensive, something Phazotron only introduced in the current crop of radar designs. There are three mapping modes; low resolution (real beam) at ; medium resolution (Doppler beam sharpening, 10:1); high resolution (synthetic aperture, 100:1). Resolution in low res at 80km is 300x300m, in medum res at 60km is 30x30m, and high res at 60km is 10x5m.Range against a large ship is 200km, a railroad bridge is 100km, a missile boat 80km and a moving group of tanks 20km.

only advantage grifo7 radar has its MTBF which is over 150 hours compared to 100 hours of kopyo

but kopyo outclasses grifo7 in all parametrs

Anonymous said...

to raghav

its not going to be mig its not going to be f18/16 and its not going to be gripen

it will be rafale vs tyhpoon

and as far as poor product support is concern is only related to old aircraft like mig25,23 which india recently retired

if just see how much france want m2000 upgrade its 40 million dollars per mirage upgrade and compare it to russian mig29 upgrade cost,and we suppoed to get decent post sales support after paying this heftly price to france

and consider yourself and if you pay this much hefty price then you also hope to get at least a decent post sales support

Nava said...

Prasun: Well then how do you explain THIS? :) http://www.defense-update.com/newscast/0609/news/tascan_140609.html

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@12:04AM: AIM-120C AMRAAM is destined for the Block 52 F-16s, SD-10A and PL-9C is for the JF-17, while the R-Darter is for the upgraded Mirage 3/5 and F-7PG. The RD-33-3 for the JF-17 will be the same as that on board the IAF's upgraded MiG-29B-12s. No TVC of Russian origin.

To Anon@7:42PM: You have to take into account the emitted power output of the Grifo-7PG/Grifo-M in order to compare it with the Kopyo. The Grifo-5s on the Republic of Singapore Air Force's upgraded F-5S has already demonstrated an MTBF of almost 300 hours. In addition, the programmable signals processor (PSP) of the Grifo-7PG/Grifo-M enables the radar to track and greater number of targets while scanning the airspace. However, simultaneous engagement of four targets with fire-and-forget BVRAAMs remains the same as Kopyo's.

To Subroto: In terms of availability of mature AESA-based airborne multifunction radars, after the Northrop Grumman APG-80 and Raytheon's APG-79, both of which are operational systems, the next-best available systems are the RBE-2, which has already been declared operational, followed by the CAESAR, which has already been flight-qualified on the EF-2000 Eurofighter and now stands ready for series-production. In comparison, both the Vixen 500e and EL/M-2052 have yet to be declared fully airworthy and their flight-test schedules are still underway. That should give you a rough idea of which of the AESA-based airborne multifunction radars are the best options.
Secondly, everything is possible if the non-recurring R & D funding is made available. The question therefore is: which potential customer is asking for this modification and why. If no one requests it, then why waste money on such projects?

To Raghav: Your guess is as good as mine. Frankly, I don't expect RAC-MiG to field the definitive MiG-35 prototype at all. And this is because the Russian Air Force itself is not in favour of acquiring it, preferring instead to go for the upgraded Su-27s (upgraded to Su-35BM standard), Su-34 and the PAK-FA and FGFA. For export markets the principal models being marketed are the Su-35BM and MiG-29SMT along with the Yak-130. On top of that Sukhoi Corp is devoting most of its revenues and human resources on the Superjet 100 while RAC-MiG will most probably play a major role in the MS-21 commercial airliner project. Therefore, in Russia's estimation, developing the MiG-35 only for one probable customer--India--does not make any financial sense. Today's Russia not only has limited skilled human resources, but also limited financial clout. Therefore, it is time to get real and realistic by not expecting RAC-MiG to roll out the MiG-35 prototype anytime in the near future.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Sanjay Badri Maharaj: At the time of developing the Agni-1 and Agni-2 only the strapdown inertial reference system was available from in-country R & D resources and by early 2002 it was decided to replace this guidance mechanism with the RLG-INS, for which R & D efforts had first been initiated for the BrahMos MRCM. As you may well be aware, during DEFEXPO 2008 two specific home-grown RLG-INS were showcased: one for cruise missiles and one for ballistic missiles. Concurrently, both the Agni-3 and Shourya technoloogy demonstrators were the first missiles to be test-fired using such RLG-INS and based on their success, it was decided to incorporate them on board the Agni-1 and Agni-2 as well in order to facilitate simplified and quicker post-deployment launch-control procedures, as mandated by the Strategic Forces Command. The May 19 test-firing was the first one in which two new systems were put to test in an operational scenario: the RLG-INS-based flight/navigation control system, and the accompanying ground-based land-/rail-mobile missile health monitoring/missile diagnostics system. From what I've been told, it was the missile health monitoring/missile diagnostics system that failed to detect and localise the INS-related problems which probably arose during the missile deployment phase (this is to be expected, nothing unusual about this). Thus, as you can deduce, fundamentally from a missile design/fabrication standpoint, everything was catered for and there were no deficiencies as such. What needed to be done was enhanced ruggedisation of the entire land-/rail-mobile launch-control system with fail-safe diagnostics, whuch in turn would ensure a fail-safe missile launch and delivery. This was successfully achieved in the latest test-firing and I'm told this same containerised land-/rail-mobile missile health monitoring/missile diagnostics system will be employed for the forthcoming Agni-3 test-firing as well.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Nava: As the weblink shows, I can still see two separate pods instead of a single unified pod. The TASCAN may well exist as an R & D project, but no such pod was displayed by IAI in Paris. IAI's website on the Paris Air Show has photos of all IAI-developed products and the TASCAN is not one of them.

Kaushik said...

In my opinion it is not a good decision to induct the Agni I,II and the Prithvi. Agni I & II are obsolete and use technology of the 70s. Their small diameter places severe limitations on the type of warheads they can carry. They are difficult to transport and handle as they are not canisterised and need lengthy wagons to carry them. The Prithvi is even more cumbersome to handle than the Agni requiring an assortment of trucks to carry its fuel and it requires a fueling process that is time consuming.
What we need is the Agni III and its successor Agni V. It is believed that Agni V is going to be developed by adding an extra stage to the Agni III. So both these missiles will have many common subsystems and hence help in cost reduction. Agni III gives us the option to use MIRVs and due to its large diameter it can carry an assortment of warheads. It can also be easily canisterised. So for a strategic role what we need is a canisterised Agni III for Pakistan and a canisterised Agni V for China very much like the Russian Topol-M.
To satisfy the tactical requirements we need to urgently develop a 300 Km version of the Shourya that is highly maneuverable and very light and can be canisterised and be carried in batches of three like the Brahmos. In a highly networked battlefield of the future it is only such missiles that can be effective not th Prithvi.

It doesn't make sense for the Army to carry out user trials for the Agni II and Prithvi when they should ideally be concentrating on the Agni III and Shourya. Please comment.

Nava said...

Did IAI give any information about the Harop's RCS? How about the price per unit? It seems that if this drone is to be effective in challenging SEAD scenarios, it has to be either rather cheap or to some extent stealthy. Of course it isn't supposed to be the sole SEAD weapon in most situations, but I wonder how a Harop drone would be able to deal with modern, versatile SAM systems.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Kaushik: Your points are credible. I doesn't make sense to deploy such a diverse range of ballistic missiles and it would seem that the Agni-1 and Agni-2 were interim solutions and should ideally be succeeded by the nuclear warhead-equipped Shourya, Agni-3, Agni-5 and the projected 8,500km-range SLBM. There is a role to be played by the Prithvi but only in the cnventional sense and hopefully a solid-fuelled conventional warhead-armed SS-350 ought to find its way into the Army's two Artillery Divisions. But it needs to be noted that the Agni-1 and Agni-2 are rail car-mounted and fully environmentally protected. Their rail car-mounted transporter-erector-launchers were fabricated by BEML, while their containerised command-and-control modules have been supplied by Dass-Hitachi. It won't be possible for the Shourya to be mounted like the BrahMos. Instead, it will have to go as a single cannistered unit per TEL, just like the Shaheen-1, while the Agni-3/Agni-5 can similarly be mounted just like the Shaheen-2. Hopefully TATA or Ashok Leyland can be roped in (instead of BEML/TATRA) to develop the heavy-duty land-mobile TELs (with right-hand drive, for once!) for the Shourya, Agni-3 and Agni-5.

To Nava: No RCS figures for the HAROP were revealed. The price per unit is close to US$2.2 million. And it will not be used for SEAD missions. Instead, it will be for DEAD (destruction, not suppression) missions. It is a hit-to-kill weapon and as you can see it has its own FLIR turret to look out for and zero in on its target in a shallow dive. Its typical targets will be wheeled/tracked SPAAGs, and forward-deployed low-level gapfiller radars and target engagement radars/SAM illuminators. In other words, the HAROP will be employed in support of the contact battle, and not for the deep battle (for which more advanced standoff PGMs like the Popeye Lite or MSOW or Delilah will be employed against long-range 3-D airspace surveillance radars and against the target engagement radars of long-range SAMs like the S-300PMU and HQ-9). But as you are aware, within the IDF, post-1973, it is the IDF-Army and not the IDF-AF that is primarily responsible for the destruction of forward-deployed ground-based enemy air defence systems (a mission which IDF-AF Col Aviem Sella planned for and directed with great success in 1982 in the Bekaa Valley), wit the IDF-AF concentrating on deep interdiction and SEAD/DEAD missions deep inside hostile territory. But in India's case, this type of doctrinal differenciation and clear demarcation of roles/missions has not yet emerged for mysterious reasons and therefore it is the Indian Air Force that retains operational control over assets like the Harpy/HAROP.

Subroto said...

But why India Airforce has not mentioned whether they need:
1.Single engine or twin engine MRCA aircraft.
2.They need lighter aircraft or heavier aircraft.

Single engine- F-16IN, Grippen IN.
Twin engine- Euro-fighter Typhoon, F/A -18 E/F,MIG-35, RAFALE

If they have made their decision earlier induction would be much faster.

Subroto said...

Hi,

Do you have any information when Indian Army will induct the Israeli made Long Range Artillery (LORA) missile which has a range of 300 KM capable of carrying a payload of 570 Kg with CEP 10 meter. I believe Indian Army has rejected the Russian Iskander-E in favour of getting "LORA".

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Subroto: The IAF's requirement is capability-driven, not platform-centric. In addition, the OEM that offers the lowest life-cycle cost coupled with the maximum quantum of direct/indirect industrial offsets to defray the large procurement costs will wiun the contract. It is that simple. No air force decides from the very outset whether it requires a single-engined or twin-engined combat aircraft.

There are no plans at all to induct the LORA, as the Prithvi SS-150 and SS-250 are more than capable of meeting the operational requirements. The Iskander-E was never considered for procurement as the BrahMos is far more potent and lethal.

Dr Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

Kaushik, to add to what Mr. Sengupta has been saying, the Agni-1 and Agni-2 were developed as low-cost systems that achieve what I would call deterrent level 1. The Agni-3 was always intended to be the main production variant of the Agni-3.

Mr. Sengupta, I would like to extend my appreciation for sharing this information with us. It adds enormously to our understanding of the subject.

Look forward to your details on the LR and MR SAM production.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Dr Sanjay Badri Maharaj: You're most welcome. Will oblige you soon with the envisaged MR-SAM/LR-SAM production figures. One other thing I would like to share with you is the extremely distressing absence of any DRDO-led promotional efforts at Le Bourget this time. One would have expected that having invested financially and technologically to an enormous degree in the Barak 8 MR-SAM and Barak NG/Barak ER LR-SAM projects, one would have at the very least expected the IAI Pavilion to at least highlight the DRDO's roles/participation, but alas, nothing of that sort was visible. The same was the case at last month's IMDEX Asia expo in Singapore, when the Barak-8 shipborne MR-SAM was showcased only by IAI. This now leads me to wonder whether or not the MR-SAM/LR-SAM joint R & D contract involves any kind of profit-sharing between Israel and India if and when it comes to exporting such systems globally, or whether India has surrendered all such rights to IAI! If this the way India's MoD implements its offsets policies, then I'm afraid the prospects of India emerging as an integral part of IAI's global supplier chain for guided-missiles is pretty bleak. Quite disgusting, actually.

Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

Mr. Sengupta - anything is probable.

However, you need to also consider the politics of the game. In India there is still an element of anti-Israeli feeling among certain groups supporting the current goverment.

If one were to examine things, no Indian R&D project with Israel has ever been public to my knowledge.

I suspect that there is the additional issue that DRDO wants to learn quite a few things from Israel in terms of the design and development of these missiles and BDL in their fabrication. Profit sharing may be a secondary issue.

As I say anything is possible with these JVs.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Dr Sanjay Badri Maharaj: Point taken. However, once the MoD's annual report officially reveals the existence of this project (as does IAI through an official press release) I see no reason why the DRDO should not highlight its participation in the two projects through exhibits such as scale-models of the Barak-8 installed on the Project 15A guided-missile destroyers, just as it shows the BrahMos on board such DDGs. In fact, even at Aero India last February, such exhibits were absent. The only plausible reason for this, I suspect, is because the DRDO is developing certain technologies/hardware and is passing them on to Indian industrial offsets beneficiaries like TATA-NOVA to develop the related production-engineering technologies/processes in cooperation with IAI and RAFAEL. By the way, it is TATA-NOVA that will be the prime Indian industrial contractor for both the MR-SAM and LR-SAM. BDL will not be involved in any way with these projects. You may recall that just prior to the last general elections n India, certain newsmedia entities had engaged in 'exposes' about alleged financial impropriety regarding the MR-SAM/LR-SAM projects. These 'exposes' were actually targetting Air Marshal (Ret'd) Ajit Bhavnani, who I believe was heading the Strategic Forces Command prior to his retirement and after retiring he joined TATA-NOVA as its Managing Director.

Sanjay Badri-Maharaj said...

That is interesting and probably true.

TATA NOVA will be manufacturing the missiles themselves ? It would explain the absence of BDL in any discussion of these systems.

Remember how much flak Defence Minister Anthony took for standing firm with the deal ?

Funny - Bhavani did a lot for the SFC and I don't grudge him his little post-retirement positions but somebody obviously did.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Dr Sanjay Badri Maharaj: It is very much true, as those 'investigative' reporters concerned had tried in vain to contact me early last April in order to make their 'juicy' revelations more palatable. TATA NOVA will handle final assembly of the entire system: missiles, VL cells, C4I systems, comms elements, and the target acquisition/target engagement radars. Ajit Bhavnani is only an employee at TATA NOVA and he is not in any position to manipulate anything. He's as clean as it can possibly get. The uncalled-for attack against him was in very bad taste.

sachin_sathe said...

prasun

I get a feeling tht drdo is slowly going to turn into an entity like the DARPA it will focus more on designing and developing high tech solutions and then hand tose over to private setor units for setting up a economically viable production line(somthing tht shud hav been done eons ago.)

Also,Regarding the nuclear deterrent the Agni-2AT was stated to hav a theorotical range of 3000+ km so(by none other thn dr. kalam) i think the current production version must be the AT one. IF this is true then we can expect the Agni-3 itself to hit 5000k mark with a reduced payload.

i know it may sound weird but wud it be possible to reconfigure Akash missile into a long range antiradiation missile if so then it would be a much much cheaper alternative thn using a BrahMos for such purpose.Ur thoughts?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

It should not be 'slowly', but must be expedited if DRDO is to stay relevant. The Agni-2'se series production has already ceased and efforts are now on to series-produce the Agni-3 (hence the accelerated rate of test-firings) and develop the Agni-5 and the projected 8,500km-range SLBM. Reconfiguration of the Akash into an anti-radiation missile like the Kh-31P Krypton is indeed possible and I'm sure the seekers can be obtained off-the-shelf from either Israel or Russia. It can also be employed as a surrogate aerial target for testing the performance parameters of shipborne point defence systems like the Barak-1 and Kashtan-M.

Anonymous said...

To Subroto,
Regarding Grippin IN, Vixen500E is a small AESA meant for small jets like LIFT aircraft. Vixen 1000ES is the AESA meant for Grippin IN. The planned in service date for this radar is 2015 and is expected to slip further like for all such complex projects. No wonder SAAB is actually hoping for MMRCA project to get delayed. This was evident from a recent statement of SAAB CEO where he said that he expects the Indian MMRCA induction to get delayed to 2020 as the selection process was already behind schedule.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@11:32PM: If that's the case then the Gripen IN can as well as retire from the M-MRCA competition, leaving the F-16IN, Eurofighter EF-2000 and F/A-18E/F as the ultimate shortlisted contenders. On the other hand, based on the illustrations released by Gripen Int'l last year, the armaments package shown on the IAF-specific Gripen IN clearly indicates the possibility of ELTA's EL/M-2052 going on board.

Subroto said...

To Anon@11:32:00 PM:
IAF is looking Grippen NG with ELTA's EL/M-2052 AESA (this radar is also going to integrate with the HAL Tejas). Like the MIG-35, Grippen sensors can also integrate with Israeli, French and Indian components. Grippen Technology will have many common features with the Indian Tejas like the AESA and General Electric F414-GE-400 engines. This aircraft can also be use in high- altitude precision strike mission, has STOL ability and can land on a 450 meters strip, Network –centric warfare Technology; capable of carrying wide range of weapons including LGBs, Grippen is truly Multi role fighter aircraft.

It will be interesting to know its capability during its trial in Indian environment.

Subroto said...

Hi Prasun,
I do not know whether these reports are not correct or not but these reports highlighted during mid 2000 about Indian Army requirement for Israeli Lora Missile.


http://www.siliconindia.com/shownews/Israel_developing_missiles_for_India___-nid-23164.html

http://news.indiamart.com/news-analysis/israel-developing-mi-327.html


http://archives.digitaltoday.in/indiatoday/20050214/defence.html

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Subroto: Yes, there was some talk about the LORA but nothing progressed beyond the initial marketing/evaluation stage.

Anonymous said...

Prasun, I have come across nothing thus far to sugges that SAAB will take the pains to work with 2 different AESA integrations on Gripen at the same time.

Gripen NG for India

India's planned 2014 in-service date could drift to perhaps 2020. "The 'first six months' took 18"

A recent strategic agreement with SAAB to equip its Gripen NG with the Vixen 1000ES Fire Control Radar further confirms SELEX Galileo’s excellence in developing state of the art sensor solutions.

There is more than just one zombi in MMRCA competition. You dont disqualify contenders just for the sake of it. IAF will retain Gripen IN in competition as a bargaining chip to the end. Besides never understimate our babus, MMRCA can really get delayed to 2020!

Subroto said...

Do you have any information about the DRDO progress on the Projected 8,500 SLBM for the Indian Navy?

I believe Indian Navy need the 8,500 Km range SLBM in order to launch the missile from the South Indian Ocean and will be China Centric.
Agni V will also be SLBM (with some modification) with a range of around 5,500 Km which will also launch from the same direction and will be Pakistan centric.

This two SLBM will give India true second strike nuclear capability.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@2:26AM: Yopu're absolutely right. To date there exists nothing in the open domain to relate the EL/M-2052 to the Gripen IN. But that doesn't mean such a development is not occuring. The fact remains that the EL/M-2052 has already been flight-qualified by IAI and all its air-to-air and air-to-ground modes of operation were successfully demonstrated to the IAF two years ago. All that now needs to be done is flight-qualify the EL/M-2052 on the Gripen IN. The Vixen 1000ES by contrast will fly for the first time on the Gripen and therefore its technology demonstration/operational mode validation process will take far longer than that for the EL/M-2052. Only after this will the Vixen 1000ES be flight-qualified on the Gripen NG. By the way, I've known Bob Kemp since 1998 when he was BAE Systems' Regional Director for Southeast Asia and he is a frequent visitor to both Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur on his marketing sprees. Therefore, I have more than a fair degree of insight into what will go on board the Gripen IN and why and how.

To Subroto: Design work on the SLBM is still underway and things have not yet progressed to the fabrication stage.

Anonymous said...

Like the insight you had on Barak NG A.K.A. Rafael Stunner? Such cooperations are not secretive. There would have been some official statement to that effect if that were true. IF EL/M-2052 integration with Gripen is so far ahead SAAB would be offering it to all its prospective customers instead of investing its efforts in Vixen 1000ES.

Bobs said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@4:10AM: Precisely, such cooperation is not secretive. It is up to individuals to find out the facts on the ground. Until they do, to many they will remain 'srcretive'. And if one goes by your line of argument then surely at the Gripen IN's website the company would not have hesitated to mention that Vixen 1000ES is being offered. Instead, it only says AESA radar. Lastly, I've never claimed anywhere that the EL/M-2052 integration work with the Gripen is far ahead. I don't know where you got that from. Also, SAAB is not offering the Gripen to anyone. Rather, all marketing work is done by Gripen Int'l, a JV between BAE Systems and SAAB.

Subroto said...

You have mentioned:
Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has been awarded multiple orders of 34 units by India of its advanced Multi-Mission Radar (MMR) type EL/M 2084.
MMR combines a Weapon Locator Radar and an Air Defense Radar. The radar detects Surface-to-Surface medium- and short-range missiles, rockets and mortars, calculates the anticipated impact and launching points, and provides target data to air defense weapons systems.

Now what will happen to the DRDO developed PESA Weapon Locating Radar. Will the project be cancel or Indian Army will use both of the System?

sbm said...

Mr. Sengupta, I would appreciate your thoughts on the following:

1) At Aero India 1998, to a direct question from Paul Beaver of Janes Info Group that the Agni-2 had a range of 3700km.

2) Some of the releases from the MoD following the first test in 1999 have hinted at a range of 3000km and subsequently the May 19 test also hinted at the same.

3) The Agni series has been designed with a very heavy payload capacity of 1000kg.

No Indian fission weapon would weigh that much now especially if the yield is in the 20-40KT range (warhead weight would range from 250-600kg).

Even a large boosted-fission weapon of 200KT would come in at approx. 750kg. A thermonuclear weapon would be even smaller.

[Your views on India's boosted-fission and thermonuclear warhead capability would be appreciated as well.]

Range estimates must therefore move upwards for these lesser payload weights.

Similarly for the Agni-3, the design capacity of 1500kg is not going to be utilized.

As such range estimates for Agni-2 may be from 3000km to 3700km and Agni-3 from 3500km to 5500km.

sbm said...

Mr. Sengupta, just so you know - sbm is me, Dr. Sanjay Badri-Maharaj (a precaution against that bit of nonsense earlier)

Anonymous said...

Prasun K Sengupta DO you have an idea who is the recent launch customer of land based VL MICA SAM SYSTEM?

sachin_sathe said...

i think the simple thumb rule in defence co-op ventures is "if u don't ask we don't tell"

Also if the first date is indeed slipping to 2020 then throw all the paperwork done thus far in the nearest trashcan and either pick the JSF for next project or develope MCA as a separate entity as we are already involved in FGFA with russians.

also regarding BM's i think the efforts are on to develope a universal launch system i.e use same missile for land and sub-surface launch as it will drastically reduce production costs and can also give an extremely compact road or rail mobile system.

Anonymous said...

Prasun K Sengupta does Pakistan have 10 Mi-35????

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx?ItemID=26061

Subroto said...

To sbm@8:16:00 AM:

AGNI III is not built for delivering only single unitary nuclear warhead. Advance version of AGNI III will have MIRV and anti-ballistic missile counter measures.Thus it need a larger payload. Even with 3 MIRVed AGNI III will need a payload of 1500 Kg, each armed with 300 KT * 3 Nuclear warheads.

DRDO scientists are adding a 3rd stage in the AGNI III to become Advance AGNI V BM with a range of 5000 Km. This missile will also have MIRV and will carry anti-ballistic missile counter measures.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Subroto: The EL/M-2084, as you know, is a multi-mission radar whose modes of operation are software-defined. Therefore, depending on the threat appreciation, the relevant modes of operation will be put into effect. However, the primary role of the MMR wll be airspace scanning and target engagement for the Barak-8 MR-SAM Batteries.

To Dr Sanjay badri-Maharaj: If I may, i would rather approach the subject from an operational standpoint rather than focussing purely on theoretically possible range estimations. For instance:
A) Against China what are the strategic targetting imperatives in terms of specific targets: Beijing, Shanghai, Sichuan, southern China? If so, then where exactly will the survivable launch points of India's ballistic missile arsenal be located: northern or north-east India, or central India or the southern peninsula?
B) Against Pakistan what exactly are the areas to be specifically targetted: Islamabad, Sargodha, Rawalpindi, Karachi, or Wah cantonment? And where exactly will the survivable launch points of India's ballistic missile arsenal be located: northern or north-east India, or central India or the southern peninsula?
C) For the SSBN-launched SLBM, what will be the requirement if the SSBN is lurking south of the Maldives and wants to target Shanghai or Beijing? Will a range of 8,500km be desirable?
Only once the above-mentioned strategic targetting issues have been finalised should one begin to plan for and cate to the development and deployment of a suitable range of ballistic missiles. To this end, I'm more inclined to believe, just as you probably are, that the Agni-1 and Agni-2 are interim but credible solutions, but in the long-term, it will be the Agni-3, Agni-5, the 8,500km-range SLBM and the ADM that will constitute the definitive n-triad. Your warhead weight estimations are spot on, but as you are well aware, one also has to cater for MIRV options and decoys in the warhead section.

To Anon@8:53AM: I heard it is reportedly Chad.

To Sachin Sathe: I have no reason to believe that the M-MRCA induction schedule for the IAF will slip. Maybe it will for Brazil or Switzerland or Norway, where the Gripen NG is on offer. But as far as the Gripen IN goes it must be noted that the EL/M-2052 AESA's environmental control system has already been flight-qualified on board an IAI Westwind jet, and its various modes of operation have already been validated. Concurrently, systems integration has already been achieved with an open-architecture navigation-and-attack system and mind you, systems integration takes place on the ground on board the laboratory-based avionics integration rig, and not on an airborne combat aircraft. Only after all this has been done will the EL/M-2052 be installed on board the destined combat aircraft and subjected to operational flight qualification/certification test-flights, which will not exceed 80 flights or 100 flight-hours at most. Therefore, as you can now imagine, the EL/M-2052 is at a far more advanced stage of service induction than the Vixen 1000ES.

To Anon@9:40AM: I'm aware of only one Mi-24D at the Pakistan Army Aviation Corps Museum and this bird was one of the two defecting Afghan Mi-24Ds in the mid-1980s (the second one was fully disassembled ad sent to the USAF's Wright patterson AFB for detailed analysis. If indeed the Pakistan Army Aviation Corps had in-service Mi-35s then we all would have seen them in action as part of the on-going counter-insurgency operations in Swat and FATA.

sbm said...

Mr. Sengupta, Subroto, both of you are correct, of course.

However, there has yet to be a test of a MIRV system. When that happens, we can cater for things.

In the meantime, operational warheads cannot be more than 750kg in total mass.

The question, I should have asked is which of the range estimates for Agni-2 should I give most credibility - 3000km or 3700km ? That has been a question for me since Kalam's 1998 statement.

BTW, any opinion on the reliability or lack thereof of India's boosted-fission and thermonuclear capability ?

Subroto said...

You are right Prasun but India also needs Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system to protect from both Pakistan and Chinese Ballistic missiles. India has deployed some BMD systems like Green Pine Radar for tracking the incoming missile but it also needs powerful X-Band radars system for the High Altitude Area defence.

I guess best system currently available in the world is the Raytheon AN-TPY-2 phased - array radar.

AN-TPY-2 was already deployed in Israel in Sept. 2008 against the growing threat from Iran and also in Japan for the Terminal High Altitude Area defense system.


http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3602951,00.html

www.raytheon.com/businesses/.../rtn_bus_ids_an_tpy2_pdf.pdf

Subroto said...

To sbm@12:06:00 PM:
See that depends on your strategic requirement. India needs to deploy a 300 km- 2500km (Maximum)Surface to Surface Land attack missile with a nuclear warhead. Again if you want to target strategic sites and your missile launchers are in the South Indian Ocean (Ballistic Missile Submarine, SSBN) you will need a range of 5,000 km.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Dr Sanjay Badri-Maharaj: You might as well as address me as Prasun as I reckon we're by now way beyond the initial niceties (LOL!). Regarding the range estimations, I recall that whenever George Fernendes or Jaswant Singh had between 2000 and 2003 made statements in Parliament regarding the production status of Agni-2, the range estimations of "more than2,000km, and 2,500km" were mentioned. In addition, the figures given by senior DRDL and ASL officials in attributable quotes since 2007 for the Agni-3 fall between 3,000km and 3,500km, with the Agni-5 attaining 5,500km. And the SLBM will have to attain 8,500km and this had been officially stated in one of the Navy's vision statements as far back as 2007. Therefore, I personally would regard Dr Kalam's quoted figures on the Agni-2's achievable range of 3,700km as being theoretical estimations at best.
As for the efficacy of the boosted-fission and thermonuclear warhead capabilities, the former is trouble-free and stands validated, while the latter does need additional testing and refinement. Also, for the latter, officially the Govt of India and DAE have reportedly adopted an ambivalent attitude.

To Subroto: There is a detailed and available roadmap for further evolutionary enhancement of the PAD/AAD-based BMD system which calls for developing the PAD-1 and AAD-1 interceptors with almost double the engagement ranges achieved thus far (up to 200km for the PAD-1). But no matter how sophisticated your ground-based early warning system may be, one still requires a space-based missile launch early warning system, a capability that is presently only available to the US via the DSP family of satellites. It is this very early warning that has also been extended by the US to Israel's Arrow-2/3 Batteries and talks are now underway between India and the US on a similar arrangement/connectivity when India's indigenous BMD system enters the deployment phase in future.

Anonymous said...

The first such Agni-II trial last month "failed to meet the laid-down flight parameters''

Agni-III, with China in range, to be tested

After basing Sukhoi-30MKI fighter jets in the North-East, India is now all set to conduct another test of the 3,500-km-range Agni-III
ballistic missile next month.

"Agni-III, a 16.7-metre tall missile with a lift-off weight of 50 tonnes, should be tested within a month, towards end-July. This will be another step towards inducting it into the armed forces,'' said top defence sources on Friday.

Once fully-ready by 2011-2012, Agni-III will provide India with the capability to strike deep into China, with cities like Shanghai and Beijing well within its potent reach.

India, incidentally, is also working on the 5,000-km-range Agni-V missile, which will have near-ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) capabilities, but it will be ready for its first test only by late-2010.

Asked about the Agni-V on Friday, defence minister A K Antony only said the government was taking "all steps'' to build "whatever capabilities'' were needed "as per changing threat perceptions'' to protect national security.

Both Agni-III and Agni-V are primarily designed to bolster India's "active credible deterrence posture'' against China, especially since it has a clear-cut "no-first use'' nuclear doctrine.

China's expanding nuclear and missile arsenal, of course, has even the US worried. The Chinese DF-31A ICBM, with a strike range of 11,270 km, for instance, can target any location in the continental US.

India's missile programme is rudimentary by these standards, and even lags behind Pakistan in certain aspects. In fact, only the Prithvi (150-350 km) and Agni-I (700-km) missiles, primarily meant for Pakistan, can be said to be fully operational in the armed forces till now.

The tri-Service Strategic Forces Command is still engaged in conducting "training user-trials'' of the 2,000-km Agni-II. The first such Agni-II trial last month "failed to meet the laid-down flight parameters'', say sources.

But defence scientists say they are not deterred by a flop or two. The first test of the rail-mobile Agni-III in July 2006 had flopped miserably, spurring them to ensure the second one in April 2007 and the third one in May 2008 were successful.

As for India's most ambitious missile till now, the Agni-V, the scientists are incorporating a third composite stage in the two-stage Agni-III, along with some advanced technologies like ring laser gyroscope and accelerator for navigation and guidance.

They want the solid-fuelled Agni-V, for which the government has sanctioned around Rs 2,500 crore, to be a canister-launch missile system to ensure it has the requisite operational flexibility to be fired from any part of the country.

Anonymous said...

The country’s missile programme received a jolt on May 19 when the first training user-trials of the 2,000-km plus range Agni-II missile failed to yield the desired result.


N-tipped Agni III set for fresh test


Hemant Kumar Rout
The Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) is set to test-fire India’s most powerful nuke-capable ballistic missile Agni-III. The China-specific missile would be test-fired from a defence base off the Orissa coast soon. Preparations were on for the crucial test, a source close to the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Chandipur-on-sea, 15 km from Balasore, said today. Agni-III test-fire is seen as a deterrent to China’s growing missile power. `The country’s missile programme received a jolt on May 19 when the first training user-trials of the 2,000-km plus range Agni-II missile failed to yield the desired result. The focus now is on Agni-III and its test has become a prestige issue for the scientists involved in the project,’ the source added. Agni-III, which has a velocity of 5 km per second, is a new system, defence sources said. It is a short and stubby, two-stage missile. It weighs 48.3 tonnes and is 16.7 metres tall with an overall diameter of 1.8 metres. It can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads weighing around 1.5 tonnes. It will be propelled by solid fuels, facilitating swift deployment compared to missiles using a mix of solid and liquid fuels. Though the maiden test of the longest range missile in 2006 was a failure, its second trial in 2007 and third test in 2008 were successful. `It is ready for induction but it will require a few more tests before it can go for limited series production (LSP) trials by the armed forces. However, two more years will be required for its operational deployment,’ a scientist said on condition of anonymity. The missile is a deterrent to the Chinese missiles. A successful induction of Agni III will allow India to catch up with China’s nuclear strike capability in the next few years since its range is expected to be long enough to target major Chinese cities like Shanghai and Beijing. India’s ‘Pakistan-specific’ Agni-I and Agni-II missiles have already been inducted in the armed forces. `Our next project is Agni-V missile which is expected to have a strike range of about 5,000 km.

Anonymous said...

How Barak-8 LR-SAM 120km compares to chinese HQ-9 125 km?

sbm said...

Prasun, Def Min Fernandes speaking shortly after the 1999 launch cited the 3000km range.

To Anon who posted the articles on the upcoming Agni-3 test. Thanks but the Agni-2 news seems to have been superceeded by:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/090619/world/india_missile_nuclear_test_2

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,

Thanks a lot for helping us understand a lot about the Indian defense. I appreciate a lot, of your time and effort.

But, be aware of this Andrew DeCristofaro, who has been black listed in bharath rakshak, with in a week after joing for all the base less comments and arguments. He talks with a vodka barrel on his head with a tube to his mouth. Please don’t waste your valuable time.

Thanks a lot.

Anonymous said...

And if one goes by your line of argument then surely at the Gripen IN's website the company would not have hesitated to mention that Vixen 1000ES is being offered. Instead, it only says AESA radar.
---------------------------------
Vixen 1000ES is simply called Gripen NG AESA Radar

Anonymous said...

to prasun
How many Dornier 228 are with Indian navy / coast guard and how many of them are employed in MPA role?

Anonymous said...

Hi prasun is PAF buying L-15 supersonic trainer from china? Chinese language media claimed that they are buying 40 of them

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@11:07PM: Not anymore. Check it out yourself at: http://www.selex-sas.com/SelexGalileo/EN/Business/Products/Radar/index.sdo

To Anon@12:19AM: That was decided upon way back in 2006.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ Tuesday, June 23, 2009 12:19:00 AM

Thanks for your reply sir

Prasun K Sengupta said... To Anon@12:19AM: That was decided upon way back in 2006.

Prasun do you hay Any idea about the delivery schedule for PAF
I thought that L-15 has failed and PLAAF have opted for the JL-9 as their supersonic trainer which is cheap and already in service

Kaushik said...

If you fire the Agni II missile without a bomb i.e. if the re-entry vehicle is empty then it can reach 3700 Km +.

Sometime back I came across a very scientific estimate that if the Agni III is fired without a payload from Chandipur, it can even reach Hawaii. If you fire it from Pokhran it can reach the US mainland.

Anonymous said...

Kaushik @ 1:33:00 AM

and Source is bharath rakshak which is full of........

Anonymous said...

Chinese DF-31A ICBM is yet not operational and dont have MITRV

Anonymous said...

Prasun K Sengupta said... Only some 80 Raptor 2s were imported off-the-shelf and following that production of the Denel-designed Ra'ad ALCM began. The R-Darter too is in production at Kamra.


No, Pakistan dont have R-dater never seen a picture of that on any paf aircrafts yet.so no R-dater for paf end of story

Kaushik said...

Not BR. The source was a scientist working in DRDL whom I met in Orkut. I know he works in DRDL bcoz he had posted photographs of himself posing near the AAD-1 assembly rig in his profile.
I asked him about the payload-range combination of the Agni III in one of the threads about the missile. It was he who said that the Agni III goes to 3000 Km with 1.5 tons and with no payload it can reach Hawaii.
Quite surprisingly within a day of posting this information in Orkut, he removed that post and deleted his profile and left Orkut altogether.

Anonymous said...

PAD-1 and AAD-1 interceptors are already good to take down any Chinese DF-31A ICBM they will need super MRV to beat them

Anonymous said...

Prasun K Sengupta do Agni-1 / Agni-2 / Agni-3 and Shourya have terminal guidance system??

Do any of Agni-1 / Agni-2 / Agni-3 and Shourya have MRV to counter HQ-9 (already sold to pa)and its future versions like S-400 copies??

Anonymous said...

thanks Kaushik

Anonymous said...

to prasun

can you please tell which helicopters other contenders going to field for 197 helicopter trials except fennec

and are there other contenders other than c17 for heavy lift aircraft

Anonymous said...

Not anymore. Check it out yourself at:
http://www.selex-sas.com/SelexGalileo/EN/Business/Products/Radar/index.sdo
----------------------------
Tell me something I dont know. You are giveing me back the link I posted here on Sunday, June 21, 2009 11:32:00 PM.
SAAB refers to Vixen 1000ES as Gripen NG AESA Radar because its the only AESA for Gripen.

Do you have any shread of proof to link EL/M-2052 to Gripen IN or this is just your exclusive.

Subroto said...

To Anon@7:00:00 AM:

Vixen 1000ES as Gripen NG AESA Radar will be operational by 2016 only, if everything goes in the right direction.
Indian Airforce (IAF) will announce the winner company by next year without any further delay. Do you think SAB will give away $12 billion without a fight.Grippen IN, if selected will have many modification in the aircraft. Every vendor knows very clearly that any aircraft selected by the IAF will have Israeli footprint.

If the deal is sign by 2011, first batch of 18 aircraft will start arriving by 2013. There will be different AESA radar in the Gripen IN not the Vixen 1000ES (If Gripen is selected).

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@1:41PM: No comparison, actually. The HQ-9 is derived from the S-300PMU1, which was developed in the early 1980s.

To Anon@12:13AM: The combined Do-228 fleet strength is close to 40. Thy're all MPAs, although the Navy's Do-229s have military applications, whereas the Coast Guard Do-228s do not have any RWRs and SIGINT/ELINT sensors.

To Anon@1:32M: As the JL-9 has not yet been selected for service entry by either the PLAAF or PLA Navy (whereas the L-15 already has been), the PAF too has decided in favour of the L-15 Falcon LIFT.

To Anon@4:34AM: There are several photos available showing the R-Darter on board the upgraded PAF Mirage 3/5s, and all these photos are in brochures of the Air Weapons Complex.

To Anon@4:48AM: As strategic weapons or WMDs are not employed as precision-guided munitions there's really no need for terminal guidance systems for those missiles/MIRVs employed as WMDs. Only when a missile like the Shourya is equipped with a conventional warhead for targetting fixed or mobile (like an aircraft carrier) targets will terminal guidance be a prerequisite. Regarding the HQ-9 or S-400's ability to intercept MIRVs it depends on the target engagement/fire-control system's modes of operation. Afterall, the missile will only do what it is told to do by the ground-based engagement/fire-control radars. In the case of the HQ-9 or S-400, they will be able to engage tactical ballistic missiles and IRBMs but when it comes to MIRVs emanating from MRBMs, ICBMs or SLBMs, one needs something like the S-300V/S-2500 or Arrow 3 to do the job.

To Anon@5:53AM: Kazan Helicopter Plant's ANSAT, AgustaWestland's AW-119ARH, and Kamov's Ka-226.
Other than the C-17A Globemaster 2, there's the IL-76TD or IL-76MF.

To Anon@7:00AM: From your comments it would appear that:
a) what you don't seem to know is that the Gripen IN and Gripen NG are two distinct models, and not the same.
b) what you don't seem to know is the detailed offer from Gripen Int'l for the Gripen IN, which have all been explained and detailed in more than five different interviews given by senior marketing officials from Gripen Int'l.
c) What you don't seem to know about is the Gripen IN's weapons and mission sensor packages, which is clearly highlighted and illustrated in Gripen Int'l's website. Nowhere is the Gripen IN shown in these illustrations as being armed with the Meteor BVRAAM. Instead, the weapons package includes the Griffin 3, Derby, Python 5 and Litening 3 LDP. In case you're aware how exactly the the on-board radar is integrated with the navigation-and-attack system and stores management system, you should be intelligent enough to deduce which AESA radar will go on board the Gripen IN.
In case you haven't yet been able to figure out despite the above-mentioned clues, then for you this whole issue will continue to remain an enduring question-mark, whereas for me it will remain as an exclusive, although others like Subroto above have already figured out the obvious, which for you continues to be elusive.

Anonymous said...

Prasun K Sengupta said..To Anon@4:34AM: There are several photos available showing the R-Darter on board the upgraded PAF Mirage 3/5s, and all these photos are in brochures of the Air Weapons Complex.


I am willing to change my stance that no such pictures exists but only when I will see one, so kindly do post one picture of R-Dater with Pakistani Mirage-III and F-7 if you have one PLZ

Subroto said...

To Anon@7:00AM:

And also to add what prasun says:

Compare about Sukhoi- 30MK and Sukhoi 30 MKI.
Same thing will goes with the Grippen NG and Grippen IN.

Now you figure out yourself.

Anonymous said...

to anon at Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:03:00 AM

can u post the link for those brochures so that we can look at those thanks

Anonymous said...

to prasun

which helicopter likely to win for 197 helicopter deal

Anonymous said...

india bought 6 c130j for 1.2 billion dollars

and india going to sign 6 a330 MRTT tankers for 1.3 billion dollars

compare a330 with c130j size and in dimensions and engines

so tell which deal is better

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 11:19:00 AM

it Prasun K Sengupta who said that There are several photos available showing the R-Darter on board the upgraded PAF Mirage 3/5s, and all these photos are in brochures of the Air Weapons Complex

So ask him to post those brochures so that we all can look at those

Subroto said...

Hi Prasun,
You are right on the importance of the space- based early warning system but there are some classes of missiles where the Defense Support Program (DSP) constellation finds difficult to detect and there comes the need for sophisticated ground-based early warning System.

Raytheon AN-TPY-2 phased - array radar, Super Pine phased - array radar and EL/M-2083 Aerostat radars are the world most advance ground -based and air-search radars

Anonymous said...

hey subroto above pleae do some more reasearch and you will find more ground based radars from russia and europe of same capability,deoplybility for sure

please don't get me wrong

Subroto said...

To Anon@June 23, 2009 12:04:00 PM

Pls post those radars of Russian and other Europen countries and compare them with the above mentioned technologies.

Subroto said...

Indian Air Force To Induct MMRCA By 2012-13

Indian Air force planners have set up a time-frame for the induction of its most prestigious $10 billion medium multi-role combat aircraft [MMRCA], under which induction of the aircraft would begin in 2012-13.

A detailed MMRCA induction plan was discussed at the Defence Acquisition Council meeting on 19 June, said sources in the Defence Ministry. The Flight Evaluation of shortlisted aircraft would commence after approval of the Technical Evaluation report in accordance with Defence Procurement Procedures. A comprehensive trial methodology would be followed for evaluating the short listed aircraft. The entire induction process of the MMRCA is expected to be completed in the shortest possible time and aircraft are likely to be inducted by 2012-13.

Besides MMRCA, the Indian Air force is also replacing its Surface-to-air Guided Weapon System (SAGW). Medium Range Surface to Air Missile Systems (MRSAM) are planned to replace the ageing Pechora fleet. Its induction will commence in the beginning of 2012.

Procurement of Short Range Surface to Air Missile System (SRSAM) is also planned to replace the OSA-AK system. This new generation Low Level Quick Reaction Missile System (LLQRM) would be developed by DRDO jointly with other agencies. This system is currently under development and is likely to be inducted into the service in 2011. By 2022, all old SAGW assets would be replaced by state of the art new generation SAGW systems.

A senior Indian Air Force official said the IAF plans to induct Heavy Lift Transport Aircraft and Heavy Lift Helicopters from 2013 onwards as per our Long Term Perspective Plan. A case to procure the aircraft has already been initiated and it is envisaged that the selection and procurement process would be competed as per the plan.

source: indiadefenceonline.com

sbm said...

Prasun, what is your estimate of the Agni-1 and Agni-2 inventories respectively ?

I am given to understand that by 2003-2004, the Groups were operational with 8 launchers apiece and since then production has continued at the rate of 9 per year - 6 Agni-1 and 3 Agni-2. Agni-2 production began in or about 2001while Agni-1 production began in 2002-03.

This would give an inventory of about 20 Agni-2 and 36 Agni-1 or thereabouts, though that is production as opposed to deployed or inducte systems.

sachin_sathe said...

prasun

if Gripen IN is indeed selected then wht sort of impact it will have on the Tejas Mk.2 as both look like they r almost equivalent in performance & will enter service abt the same time i.e by 2014-15.ur thoughts?

the weapon layout for the Gripen IN also indicates the possibily of the Indo-Iseraeli AESA radar tht is in works for the Tejas Mk.2

The focus now seems to be in getting the conventional mass use weapon systems up to the scratch as the current status strategic deterrent level seems to satisfy the current leadership.

p.s Can u post more pics from the paris airshow?

Anonymous said...

PAF too has decided in favour of the L-15 Falcon LIFT.

Prasun do you have Any idea about the delivery schedule for PAF????????????

Anonymous said...

I have heard that PAF has opted for the Spada-2000+ from offers that included the Chinese KS-1A and American SL-AMRAAM for Short to medium range SAM and PA is now looking at the Saab Bofors Dynamics BAMSE RBS-23 for its air defense needs

Anonymous said...

i would rather like Agni-3 with MIRV and MRV and new tests of weapons with yields od 200 to 300kt atleast if not of MT yields to ensure the world of our capabilities

Anonymous said...

Can Barak 8 be developed into a long range AAM. It is about the size of R-27. Its high ECCM capability and advanced seeker combined with long range may give Indian Navy Mig-29K the right weapon to deal with enemy MPAs. Su-30MKI is another candidate for such a heavy BVRAAM. It will significantly expand the no-escape zone against enemy aircraft. At 275kg I think smaller jets should be able to use it as well. Mirage 2000 already uses 270kg Super530D.

Anonymous said...

to prasun and friends


Ukrainian KVANT Active Naval PAR: This radar is most likely that employed by the PLA Navy No. 170 class air defense DDG. This radar serves to put this DDG in the class of the US Aegis radar-equipped destroyers

here is a picture of this radar

http://www.strategycenter.net/imgLib/20050307_10aKVANT.JPG

http://www.strategycenter.net/imgLib/20050307_10bDDG.jpg

Anonymous said...

The Kvant Bureau of Ukraine disclosed some new details regarding its new active phased array long-range naval radar. In early 2004 reports from the Ukraine noted that China had purchased a Ukrainian phased array radar for a new class of destroyers. This presumably is the new 170-class destroyer, the PLA Navy’s most modern air-defense destroyer. While first revealing this radar in France in 2004, Kvant officials at IDEX did not disclose the designation for the new radar, but did provide a photo and some performance details. It is a C-Band radar that has a 150-160km range in broad search mode. In spot mode the radar has a much longer range. It can track about 150 aircraft-size targets. For proper ship defense this centimeter-wave radar should be paired with counter-stealth capable meter-wave radar. China’s 170-class destroyer does just this.

i hope india could also get tis radar its even cheaper than cheapest

Anonymous said...

prasun please don't delete these 2 above comments its nothing wrong in these comments

Anonymous said...

why not go for Lon long range R-37 or K-172 with ranges of 300 km+ to shoot the MPA and AEW&C

Anonymous said...

india is lazy otherwise r37 supposed to be in service today,IAF is more busy to acquire israeli stuff nowdays but thats not going to help

Anonymous said...

So how good is chinese Aegis radar-equipped destroyers when compared to Barak-8 /MR-SAM integrated with the MF-STAR phased array shipborne radar??????????? which Elta claims to be superior to the SPY-1 AEGIS radar. Overall, the MF-STAR / Barak 8 combination is claimed to be superior to the leading US made systems such as AEGIS or Patriot PAC-3 missile systems.

http://defense-update.com/products/b/barak8.htm

Anonymous said...

hey harpreet please don't start comparing

its just the info which i found and posted here for information that everyone can know about this.

chinese got what they wanted and no one else going to give chinese an aesa radar except ukrain or russia but ukrainian stuff is even cheaper than russian stuff and easier to obtain

Anonymous said...

Prasun K Sengupta post those photos which show R-Darter on board the upgraded PAF Mirage 3/5s

Anonymous said...

ATV is still generations behind Akula II and Russian engineers are already involved.Submarine, modelled on the Russian Charlie class submarine

Anonymous said...

to friends

surveillance radar selex gallilio
seaspray 5000e radar on A319 MPA is better than apy10 pulse doppler radar on P8

seaspray5000e is AESA radar and AESA radars have better SAR/ISAR imagery than pulse doppler radars.

Anonymous said...

andrew u spamming idiot

even AESA radars are pulse doppler radars. and there is no rule that says an AESA is necessarily better than a MSA. it all depends on the degree of hardware and software expertise, including clutter rejection and techniques used. first learn something about the topic before eating everyones head, u mule

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 293   Newer› Newest»