While Russian radar developers and manufacturers have failed to keep up with their Western counterparts in terms of introducing new-generation multi-mode AESA radars for both manned combat aircraft and airborne early warning & control platforms, there is still room for optimism if immediate steps are taken to redress the existing shortcomings. One interesting innovation the V Tikhmirov Scientific-Research Institute of Instrument Design has come up with concerns the ‘smart skin’ concept under which an AESA array’s L-band and S-band transmit/receive modules can be placed anywhere on board an AEW & C platform to generate the relevant radiation field required for achieving 360-degree hemispheric coverage of airspace. For countries like India such a technological breakthrough holds enormous promise, as this will now enable one to do away with conventional AESA antenna designs (like the one selected for the DRDO's to-be-developed AEW & C platform) that impose avoidable aerodynamics and structural penalties. To this end, it will be worthwhile to examine the prospect of modifying new-generation platforms like the IL-214 multi-role transport aircraft (MRTA)--being co-developed by India and Russia and to be co-produced in both countries as well--into an AEW & C plaform that would incorporate the 'smart skin' concept by acommodating conformally-mounted dual-band AESA T/R modules.--Prasun K. Sengupta
41 comments:
How effective will the technique be of a stealth fighter like PAK-FA
its super coool,
2 meter ground resolution along with longest detection range and irbis e defeats even western aesa
as far as detection range is considered irbis out class western aesa..................is it some kind of pr exercise?
except for jamming part is there any real advantage of aesa
The distribution of antenna around the airframe for improved coverage has been around for a while, the 'stinger' on the Su-34 and the F-22's future cheek arrays.
What catches my attention is that these arrays will operate outside the traditional fighter X-band. Putting an L-band radar in the wings of a PAK-FA would have very positive implications for the detection of low observability targets. Turning the aircraft into a sort of multiband flying Nebo-M. Facinating!
to typhoon
Putting an L-band radar in the wings of a PAK-FA would have very positive implications for the detection of low observability target
-----------------------------------
not only on PAK FA l band radar an be incorporated on mig35 or su30/35 as well
Hi Prasun,
Does India possess the know-how required to build Vertical Launch Systems ?
Also why is India buying three more Talwar Class frigates from Russia? I read somewhere that procuring ships from abroad costs twice the amount. What's wrong with the Shivalik stealth frigates? Aren't they supposed to be better?
Thanks!
To Anon@6:32PM: Not quite, because the full potential of AESA radars on board combat aircraft is still in the process of being realised. In addition, the rather bulky volume of Russia-origin AESA and PESA radars when compared to their Western counterparts leaves a lot to be desired, as it occupies more space that would rather be utilised for installing additional processor-based LRUs for other on-board mission management/self-protection functions.
To Anon@1:52AM: Max detection range of an airborne radar does not mean anything at all especially when one is receiving target vector cues from AEW & C platforms. When operating in this manner, AESA radars do not confer any specific operational performance advantages. But when it comes to all-weather precision strike the AESA radar offers a three-fold advantage thanks to its ability to undertake multiple targetting missions all at the same time while retaining the SAR surface scanning mode as well as limited directional jamming. Also, the AESA radar's MTBF is far higher than those of the PESA radar.
To Typhoon: While a dual-band distributed AESA array is desirable on board manned combat aircraft, the principal challenges relate to the need for compactness/miniaturisation and the equally vital cryogenic cooling requirement for the on-board avionics suite. If these can be achieved then the concept of distributed AESA arrays can be declared a success (it already is on board the G550-based CAEW & CS of ELTA Systems). I believe the Italians (Finmeccanica) have already achieved some success in this area through the PicoSAR AESA-based SAR radar payload for tactical UAVs. Rear-facing AESA arrays can also become an integral component of a missile approach warning system and can be used to automatically activate miniaturised directional infra-red jammers.
To Anon@10:05AM: All Project 15A and Project 15B destroyers (built by Mazagon Docks Ltd) as well as the three Project 1135.6 frigates being built at the Kaliningrad-based Yantar Shipyard JSC will have universal vertical launchers for BrahMos missiles (UVLM) designed and fabricated by Larsen & Toubro. The same also goes for the four Kashin 2-class destroyers to be retrofitted with eight-cell vertical launchers for the BrahMos.
Procuring warships from abroad costs more only if you buy them in twos and threes. But when you're procuring nine of them the overall life-cycle costs come down considerably since the end-user will then find it affordable and financially viable to set up the local industrial/spares support infrastructure reqd. In case of the nine Project 1135.6 FFGs Rosoboronservice India Ltd has already been set up to cater for the through-life product support requirements of the nine FFGs plus INS Vikramaditya and also for the three Project 17 FFGs, three Project 15 Delhi-class DDGs, three Project 15A Kolkata-class FFGs and for the three to-be-built Project 15B DDGs.
Do check out the new website created by BrahMos Aerospace Ltd at: http://www.brahmand.com/index.php
Sir, can u pls clarify that "the nine Project 1135.6 FFGs " means IN is supposed to induct nine Talwar class frigates(3 in service+ 3 built+ 3 to b ordered)??
Also u have once mentioned about the aircraft carrier deal gettin delayed because of three additinal platforms which were submarines(sorry but I cant exactly rem. ur post).Can u pls clarify on both the fronts?
If all this is true then what are the tentative dates for their induction in IN and is any1 of them on lease aggrement!!
I read on AW that the Indian Navy is showing interest in the E-2D Hawkeye. You seemed to believe that the Eitam is likely to be selected. Could you tell me more about the situation (who really is the front runner, when a decision is expected etc)?
Thanks
prasunda,
in the new issue of force magazine,u have said that india will procure 50 more su-30mki,,can u divulge some details,,,u have said that total number of MKI will be 320 ,,but i think it will be 280,,50 initially ordered++ 140 licenced,,+ 40 ordered last year,,this brought the figures to 230,,then if 50 is added it comes to 280
by the way i think rather than 50 mki india should go for 50 su-35,,what do u think
To Swapnil: That's right, the contract for the 7th, 8th and 9th Project 1135.6 FFGs has been readied and awaits approval from the Cabinet Committee on National Security.
Regarding the SSGNs, this is what I had posted earlier: The three platforms in question are the three SSGN attack submarines to be assembled in India for the Indian Navy. And no, they will be much smaller in size than the Akula-3s. The cost escalation for refitting the INS Vikramaditya is only a quarter of the figure that is now being negotiated, with the remaining three-quarters being related directly to the increased cost of the three SSGNs. That is precisely the reason why the previous General-Director of SEVMASH has not yet been indicted by any Russian court for kind of financial embezzlement, as he had nothing to do with the mismanagement of funds already made available by India. It was Rosoboronexport State Corp that had bungled internally by not forwarding the progress payments due to SEVMASH, and instead diverted them to Amursky Shipyard for expediting the construction of the Akula 3 SSGN (INS Chakra) and for supplying the pre-fabricated sections of the pressure hulls of the two follow-on Arihant-class SSBNs to the SBC at Vizag. Actually, the money already paid by India should have gone for the SSGN project, since India had already agreed with Russia in 2003 to pay for the three Arihant-class SSBNs with the extra money available to India after the resolution of the Rupee-Rouble debt repayment mechanism struck during the days of the USSR. But Rosoboronexport has been unable to stick to its side of the deal due to its internal administrative and financial mismanagement. Therefore, naturally the per annum cost escalation factor for the SSGN construction programme now has to be accommodated. This is what the fiasco is really all about. Everything else one reads in the public domain is pure shadow puppetry.
The above deal has nothing to do with Project India, which calls for the 10-year lease of ONLY one Akula-3 SSGN. The three new SSGNs are planned to be built at the new submarine fabrication facility that is due to come up under a greenfield project in Tamil Nadu, south of Vizag.
To Nava: Relax, for if you are an IAI shareholder, your share values will only go up. That story on the E-2D Hawkeye 2000 is terribly dated and is of 2005 vintage! At that time, Northrop Grumman was proposing it as an aircraft carrier-based AEW & C platform, but the Indian Navy quickly discarded the option (due to lack of runway takeoff length in the Indian Navy's carriers). Northrop Grumman then proposed a package of six shore-based E-2Ds, but then if the Indian Navy has to exercise that option, then it might as well as go with jet-powered AEW & C platforms, instead of turboprop-powered ones, since the benefits of the former in terms of speed of deployment and endurance are obvious. That's where the Eitam comes in. Any Navy would of course like to have a carrier-based AEW & C platform, but in India's case the only realistic option then is to go for an AEW & C system built around the V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, which will not be available immediately. Therefore, by a process of elimination, the only realistic option remains that of the Eitam.
To Saptarshi Dasgupta da: That article you're referring to (if it appears in the September issue) wasn't written by me. But what I can confirm is that another 50 Su-30MKIs are being sought urgently by the IAF and this urgency can only be fulfilled if these additional aircraft are ordered from and delivered directly by IRKUT Corp. When the last 40 additional Su-30MKIs were ordered the IAF was expecting these to be delivered directly by IRKUT Corp, instead the bureaucratic mandarins of MoD conspired with HAL to have these licence-assembled by HAL AFTER HAL had finished licence-building the first 140 Su-30MKIs.
Given the choice between the Su-30MKI and Su-35, it will be inadvisable to go for the latter, since all the improvements seen on board the Su-35 are also being made available for the Su-30MKI as part a mid-life upgrade package.
To Nava: What I would love to see is the birth of a joint venture project that calls for modifying the IL-214 MRTA into an AEW & C platform, by adapting the Eitam's mission sensors/mission management system to the IL-214's airframe. Being a high-wing aircraft, the IL-214 will be a much better and aerodynamically more stable platform than the existing G-550 and Embraer's EMB-145. Also, the IL-214 features a widebody fuselage as opposed to the EMB-145's narrowbody fuselage.
Myself and the Israeli government jointly own IAI, though I'm the one actually calling the shots :)
Why then hasn't a contract been inked?
And separately, I'd like to repeat my question about India's plans to induct MALE platforms. Which one(s), when and how many of them?
Thanks
Thanks for clearin d doubts about the frigates & SSGN deals.
Can u confirm the followin which i read in a newspaper interview of def. min. some months back-
IN after completion of the Vikrant class IAC(two) would be lookin to build a nuclear powred IAC with 64k tons. and the process of acquirin IAC's would be a continuous one .ie. one by one...uptill a total six are acqiured.
Pls correct me if I hv got any part of it wrong!!!
Hey Nava, as you're undoubtedly calling the shots over and above the IAI Board of Directors, you should have by now received up-to-date SITREPS on marketing updates from the IAI Corporate Mktg office located in New Delhi! (LOL!!!). Regarding contracts to be inked it is a matter of operational priority and budgetary availability, not to mention the intense lobbying of late by Bell-Boeing in favour of the V-22 Osprey's AEW & C variant, despite the recent Cabinet approval for procuring an additional four Ka-31 AEW helicopters (to add to the nine already ordered).
Regarding your query on MALE UAVs, the Searcher Mk2s and Heron 2s are already in service with the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force. Prospects for the Heron TP in India appear dim since the Indian end-users prefer to use homegrown MALE platforms powered by either two Type 912 or more powerful twin Type 915 Rotax piston engines. The Heron TP's sale to non-NATO member-states will be vetoed by the US due to MTCR regulations.
To Swapnil: I would not accord much importance to such statements since the Navy has yet to acquire operating experience with aircraft carriers the size of INS Vikramaditya. Carriers of this size will be ideal to standardise on. But nuclear-powered carriers? I think that's too far-fetched for two reasons: India has yet to acquire the expertise of designing and developing lifelong shipborne nuclear reactors. In case of the Arihant ATV, the Russia-designed and developed on-board nuclear reactor has only a 10-year lifespan and it is of 1980s design vintage. It will take India several more years before it can indigenously design and develop lifelong nuclear reactors.
Ok. But is India capable of indigenous MALE UAV development?
Intense lobbying for the V-22 AEW&C? That looks interesting..the Brits want it too for their navy. Do they have a prototype ready somewhere or is it still on paper?
Will the Ka-31's be used on the aircraft carriers or are they going to operate as shore based assets?
To Nava: Ummmmm...looks like you field mktg reps in New Delhi are not giving you the reqd SITREPS (LoL!). Now, there are two MALE-UAVs under development within India: the Rustom (whose full-scale mockup was displayed at Aero India 2009 in Bangalore last February); and the Pawan, which will resemble a swept-back UAV developed in the 1990s by Astronautics SA of Israel. This UAV is actually an unmanned variant of an all-composite experimental light sporting aircraft designed by Burt (ir is it Dick?) Rutan, who sold the design to India a decade ago. Presently, a competitive bidding process is underway within India to select a consortium of private-sector industrial entities for undertake production engineering development work on these two MALE UAV designs. One of the bidders, the TATA Group, already has a JV with IAI--called NOVA Integrated Systems--for co-producing the Barak-8/Barak-8ER MR-SAMs/LR-SAMs.
PS: Do get in touch with IAI's Board of Directors or the VP of IAI/MALAT through your usual channels to write me a cheque for the 'SITREPs' I've delivered above for your consumption.
To Anon@2:16PM: It is still a paper design, but utilises already developed components, like the V-22 airframe containing the mission avionics suite developed by Northrop Grumman for the E-2D Hawkeye 2000. A flying prototype could therefore be readied within three years in response to firm orders being placed. As for the Ka-31s they're capable of both AEW as well as over-the-horizon targetting for cruise missiles like the Novator 3M54E and 3M14E. Therefore, the Ka-31s will not only be on board the aircraft carriers, but also on board the Project 1135.6 Talwar-class FFGs, or for that matter any frigate or destroyer that can accommodate Sea King-sized helicopters.
to prasun
there are two version of MRSAM one is without booster and one is with booster to give it longer range upto 100-120km
so can you tell that only 70km range version going in navy ships or 100-120km range version too will be on navy ships?
prasun,
does tht mean tht the MKI composition is like 40(bought outright)+190(HAL assembled/built)+ 40(bought again) taking the total to 270 i.e arround 15 sqds @ 18ac/sqd?
Regarding the IL-214 based AEW&C wouldn't the shorter range of platform itself would be a concerned(it is rated at 2500km @ full payload of 18.5 tonnes i think?) Also considering the fact the the first prototype build is some way off in the future such project can become viable around 2017-2018(including Airframe modification and testing) before a definitive prod variant is built so i think the IAF feels it would be easier & faster to use an existing aircraft.Wht do u think?
From the MoD annual Report 08-09:
1)Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) System:
Under the AIP programme for using
this mode for submarine propulsion,
demonstration of relevant enabling
technologies of sub systems pertaining to AIP technology are being demonstrated.Under this a 300W Air – Hydrogen ambient temperature fuel cell stack usingnafion membrane has been developed and demonstrated
2)Primary Radar for Airborne Early Warning
and Control (AEW&C): AEW&C program is to meet the operational needs of IAF. Two systems are to be developed for evaluation.The primary radar has electronically steerable active array antenna with a range of over 3000 km. The primary role of the radaris to provide surveillance for air defence, early warning, capability in aiding in tactical missions against intruding enemy aircraft or in deep penetration offensive strikes. Critical technologies have been developed and a scaled down version of the antenna is in advanced stage of realisation.
3)Tejas programme is now undergoing thenext phase of trials viz., weapon trials and hot weather trials, which will be completedby mid-2009. Weapon Release Trials on Light Combat Aircraft, Tejas with 25 lb,1000 lb and 3 kg bombs at Jamnagar have been successfully completed. First 1000 lbbomb from Tejas has been released on March12, 2009.
Download Link:
http://mod.nic.in/reports/AR-eng-2009.pdf
also from above link
Medium Power Radar, Arudra:
The project was sanctioned in November 2008 todevelop a ground based rotating active array
radar for IAF with 300 km range for Air Defence application.
Is this going to be the main radar for MRSAM? wht do u think?
320 MKIs doesn't make sense! Initially it to be 50 procured from IRKUT then 140 to be assembled by HAL, then another 40 being sought. Now add 50 more to that; we have 280 MKIs.
Prasun any news on Mig-35 ? Any technical details you got from MAKS on Mig-35 ?
prasun was actually lying about mig35
but zhuk ae is now combat ready
To Anon@4:40PM: Both missile-types can go in as the VL missile silo is modular and can accommodate both missile-types.
To Sachin Sathe: Yes, it will reach the 270 figure and this was confirmed way back in February 2009 at Aero India by Alexey Fedorov himself.
Regarding the IL-214, no, its endurance will actually be greater than the G-550 CAEW & CS platform since the IL-214 will have an aerial refuelling probe. Regarding R & D work, all this can be finished off in 24 months once the money is made available. That's because the mission sensors and avionics have already been developed and it is now just a question of installing them on-board the aircraft, AFTER the basioc aircraft gets its certification of airworthiness.
Regarding the MoD annual report, what it does not spell out is that the AIP module has been tested out only in laboratory conditions. Unless and until it is shown to be working inside a functional submarine, such laboratory work has no use for any serious end-user. As for the Arudra MPR, for all intents and purposes it will be the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR.
To Anon@10:42AM: I already mentioned all available data on the MiG-35 in the earlier two posts. And like I said, there are will be no new surprises.
To Anon@12:50PM: Zhuk-AE has only been flight-qualified on the MiG-29M2. It has a long way to go before it can be declared combat-ready. A minimum of 800 flight-hours must be logged in on the definitive MiG-35 prototype before it can be declared combat-ready. As yet, the first tandem-seat MiG-35 has yet to make its maiden flight. Only after the Zhuk-AE finishes undergoing ALL its integration and functional tests on BOTH the single-seat and tandem-seat MiG-35 prototypes will it be declared available for service induction. Still quite a long way to go.
Sir,
How would u take recent reports of chinese incursions in Indian territory and Pakistans ceasefire violation and killing a Indian soldier??
Is it that our soldiers are caught napping or is it that they hv the guns but no license to use at the cost of their own lives??
How would a newbee who has some motivation to join the forces be thinkin about an institution which is regarded sacred in our country but is itself helpless??
Also terryfyin is downplayin of such instances by the government!!!
I know the usual answers would be " to maintain peace, etc, etc", but I hv come firmly to a belief that India would soon be givin its claim over entire kashmir and Tawang region etc. and bow down just to maintain peace(but where is it???????? evryday i hear some soldier gettin shot or grenades thrown)!!
I may b to critical of the situation but as a disturbed Indian who has future ambitions of joinin defence forces, I expect kind of confidence otherwise it would just b a dream!!
prasun
As far as the AIP system is concernedi think the Govt is being conservative as i hav the pdf on it(NMRL presentation including images) so the program if further than being shown.It shows a similar path to russian Kristall system(storing H2 in weak ,unbalanced compound rather tan in pure form. So if proper project definition, money allocation is done then it can be developed and made ready for use in 6-7 yrs(in time for 4th Scorpene or 2nd line ssk project.
The additional procurement of MKI suggests tht the MLU would be of few aircraft(not all) and the oldest ones would be replaced by FGFA.The FGFA project is i think also going to be like MKI where we might see true(asked for) spec aircraft coming around 2020 as in the MKI project whr the asked for specifications are going to be achieved in next 2-4 yrs.
This along with DARIN-III upg of Jaguar,Tejas-Mk.2 will be the basis on which the IAF will do final MMRCA evalutions(inncluding cost)
wht do u think?
Also the proposed launch date of NLCA suggests tht the IN will get MK.2 spec'ed plane from the get-go(thx to their proactive program planning) and would end up having similar weapons pakage as Mig-29k/kub.
wht do u think?
Also the recent interview by Adm prakash suggests tht the next SSBNS would have 16-24 SLBM's and be a modification of current ATV design. As per interview from Force issue.
wht do u think?
To Swapnil: Regarding the reported incursions, you must bear in fact one thing: they cannot be stopped, simply because they're not walking into 'Indian' territory. That whole area is contested and until a binding territorial border is agreed upon and enforced, it is open season for both Chinese and Indian military patrols to wander about eastwards or westwards as far deep as each party wants to. Therefore, expect all this to contunue until the Sino-Indian border is mutually demarcated. And contrary to press reports, the PLA neither speakes nor writes in Cantonese, a dialect used only in southern China and Southeast Asia. The PLA mandatorily speakes and writes in Mandarin, the official language of China.
Regarding cross-border firing, the Indian Army's deployed units under the Northern Command should be issued with new rules of engagement to return 'proportional' fire if fired upon, that's for sure. India has nothing to lose if the exchanges are kept down to small-arms fire levels and not escalating beyond exchanges of heavy machine-gun fire.
To Sachin Sathe: No amount of lab research successes can substitute for installing any experimental or prototype AIP module within the pressure hull of a real submarine and integrating it with the total propulsion system. And for the DRDO-developed AIP module this is most unlikely to happen simply because there are no spare submarines available. That's also the reason why the sub-launched BrahMos has not yet materialised. In any case, none of the Scorpene SSKs will have any AIP modules as metal-cutting for ALL six Scorpenes has already commenced and the design frozen for all six of them (i.e. without AIP modules) in order to make up for the production schedule delays caused earlier. The SSKs to have AIP modules will be the second batch of six SSKs to be built in-country, and not the Scorpenes.
Regarding the Su-30MKI, the MLU will be progressively introduced for the entire fleet, starting 2014. The FGFA's mission avionics suite will be totally different from that of the Su-30MKI.
As for Admiral (Ret'd) Arun Prakash's remarks on the SSBN and its warload of SLBMs, it is only an expressed desire, and not what will become a reality, simply because the SSBN and SSGN projects (under ATV Project Office) are not Navy-driven, but DRDO-driven. Which means, it is the DRDO telling the Navy what is realistically achievable with available resources. Which means the operational SSBN will be able to carry only eight SLBMs which as of now will have a range of only 5,500km, as opposed to the Navy's demand for developing an 8,500km-range SLBM equipped with MIRV-based thermonuclear warheads. This is the most fundemantal dilemma facing the armed forces today: the civilian decision-makers along with the DRDO and DAE simply won;t allow the armed forces to become equal stakeholders in India's nuclear weapons development process.
are there any plans for the three services to go for a modular missiles in all categories[a2a a2g s2a anti ship]
on the lines of joint common missile
standardizing should help
your thoughts on the meteor
To Anon@12:04PM: No one in the world, India included, is developing such 'jack of all trades' missile system capable of executing five different missions.
To Sachin Sathe: Admiral (Ret'd) Arun Prakash's ATV Project analysis does contain a few inaccuracies, though. For instance, when the USSR first offered to lease the Charlie-1 SSGN in the early 1980s, the then Russian Defence Minister was Marshall Dmitry Ustinov, and not Marshall Nikolai Ogarkov, who was then the Chief of the General Staff. Secondly Admiral Prakash mistakenly refers to the DRDO-developed SLBM as the Dhanush/K-15, when it should be the Shourya. But he does endorse my long-held belief that the S-2/Arihant will be a technology demonstrator, something which I had consistently stated since 2004, but which members of India's broadcast media are still are unable to comprehend.
prasun
like the truth abt pokhran-II no one will be allowed to hav an in on wht really happened and wht the realities are especially regarding strategic assets.
As far as the ATV is concerned i think when the news first leaked on net(in 2001 i think) then only it became certain tht first N-sub would be a tech-demo not an operational one only q was was it going to be a SSBN tech demo or an SSGN one(if we could build a n-sub tht too an SSBN without experiment then we would hav be at par with americans by now.
i think adm prakash's interview also suggests tht the next two hulls would be the first two SSGN's while 5th sub would be a true blue SSBN.
Also the selection of reactor suggests the time-frame for BARc & DAE along with DRDO to get a proper current tech reactor working.
Hi Prasun,
Does the Erieye AEW&C have full 360 degrees capability like the phalcon?
There are some videos on youtube suggesting the opposite. I've also found this article which says It is understood that Erieye has some ability to detect aircraft in the 30° sectors fore and aft of the aircraft heading, but has no track capability in this sector.
But the system's brochure says it has 360 radar detection capability.
Can you clear the confusion plz?
Thanks!
To Anon@10:48AM: The Erieye radar CANNOT offer 360-degree airspace surveillance/airborne target tracking capability, period. And I'm not quoting from any brochure, but the actual technical manual of the Saab 2000 AEW & C platform of 2007 vintage! But if one is talking of 'radar detection' meaning detection of hostile (airborne and ground-based) radar emissions, then full hemispheric 360-degree coverage is available through ESM, or radar warning receivers carried on board the platform (be it the Saab 2000, Saab 340 or the EMB-145). This in a way reminds me of Euromissile's claims in the mid-1980s of the Milan-2 ATGM's flight control being 'acquired' by the firing post operator after the missile covers a distance of 25 metres. It was only after undergoing firing simulation training and following that up with actual firing of two rounds of the Milan-2 that I (and other firing post operators) found out that the Milan-2 flight trajectory could be controlled only AFTER it traversed a minimum distance of 75 metres. What I'm trying to say is that the distance between a theoretical claim and practical realities is quite long.
dear prasun,
what nice source! would you mind giving the original source which means magazine or papers...regards.
Hi prasun ,
when this work for LCA Mk2 / Arjun Mk2 will be finished, can u say what modification will be done including weapons.
As per Howitzer guns it is informed field trails will at june, could u give details - vendors / purchase year.
China has MBRL 350 mm (nearly 180 km version & 350 km version ), i like to know india / DRDO has any project (other then 214mm 40/120 km)similar to dragons .
Post a Comment