Thursday, October 22, 2009

The BMD Challenge






While India has taken some significant steps toward the development of a homegrown ballistic missile defence (BMD) system since 1998, these nevertheless constitute only the ‘crawl’ phase of the R & D effort, with the ‘walk’ and ‘run’ phases yet to kick in. Several challenges are yet to be overcome, including the development of high-velocity interceptor missiles, a ground-based battlespace management system (BMS), and a three-tier network comprising BMD deployment packages for point defence, for area defence and for theatre defence. The best indications of the shape of things to come are the existing BMD systems already operational in Israel and in the US, and are explained in some detail in the above slides.—Prasun K. Sengupta

54 comments:

NJS said...

Prasun,
Does india as any idea to purchase s-400 SAM's as a interim purpose.

Aegis has been been offered to india from US for Navy, what is the advantage it gives . does india has idea to go for it.

Chinese Air defense ships have been equipped with modified S-300 sam systems for longer range defense , does aegis /any sam will equal to it /india has similar to it.

when Barak-8 long range (extended range ) will be available to india.

Nava said...

Interesting stuff Prasun. I wonder however whether India is playing catch up rather than looking at the next steps in BMD: Air Delivered Interceptors used in conjunction with long endurance UAVs, MKVs (the cancellation notwithstanding), EO fine tracking and discrimination etc.

Anonymous said...

offense is the best defense. it is a huge drain on our resources to build BMD systems or buy them. It needs a host of new technologies to be perfected that will take many years and many billions. instead of trying to protect our installations with BMD we should concentrate on building capability to take out the enemy's installations. if the enemy destroys one of our airbases, we must have the capability to take out five of his airbases. once the enemy understands this, he will think twice before firing a missile at us. this is a quick and cheap way to ensure our security against enemy missiles.

li hung said...

another indeginous project
it requires alot of rd and money.good thing about indian is they always invest big projects because they money available and has genious minds.Always find place to spend money,it doesnt matter if project end up like other projects but at least r & d guys keeping themselves busy.
good project

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

I read a news on a retired Chinese Submarine. DTNews says "Chinese submarine had steamed 38,000 kilometers at sea over its 20 year career. That comes out to less than a week at sea a year. "
If this is compared with the Indian submarines, where does an Indian submarines stand? What is the avg distance travelled/steamed by the Indian submarines?

Also read the news in Shiv's blog on Dhruv Sakti in Siachin by Cap. Hari Nair. Do you think it is great news for HAL? What more HAL can do on Dhruv?

Thanks in advance.
-R

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To NJS: There are no plans to procure S-400 LR-SAMs. Lockheed Martin's AEGIS is the combat management system that icnludes sensors like Raytheon's SPY-1 family of shipborne PESA radar. Compared to the SPY-1, the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR S-band AESA radar is a far more superior product and it is this radar which will go on board the Project 15A and 15B DDGs and the seven Project 17A FFGs, along with the Barak-8 MR-SAMs and Barak-8ER LR-SAMs.

To Nava: I deliberately highlighted TADIRAN's contribution to the Arrow-2/3 theatre BMD programme since most of the time only IAI/MLM and IAI/ELTA receive media publicity when it comes to BMD systems. And these training/simulation systems are the very same ones being used by India for doing various operations analyses pertaining to BMD-related regional threat scenarios. India is playing both catch-up (as per the crawl-walk-run roadmap) as well as looking at the next steps in terms of the BMD systems's vital space-based early warning components.

To Anon@10:12AM: Each Indian Navy submarine on average does three patrols a year, with the duration of such patrols ranging from a fortnight to 60 days (inclusive of replenishment at sea).
Coming to the Dhruv's now-proven and validated performance at such high-altitudes, it is indeed a most welcome news. What HAL now needs to do is obtain the certification of airworthiness from Europe's EASA aviation regulatory authority for this version of the Dhruv. This is because the version of the Dhruv that was subjected to such high-altitude flight-tests is the military version for which the certification of airworthiness from CEMILAC is enough. But when it comes to international marketing for prospective commercial export customers (like search and rescue agencies operating at high-altitudes like those in Switzerland, Nepal etc) neither CEMILAC nor the DGCA are universally recognised certification agencies. Therefore, EASA certification of the Dhruv ought to be a must. At the same time, product development being a continuous and life-long process, efforts to introduce fly-by-light flight control systems and BERP-type high-speed main rotor blades should be speeded up and this will also benefit the LCH project.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

To my query -
"... by 2015-16 the network system will be solved." you answered -
Only the space-based BMD early-warning component.
My question is won't the ground-based BMD early-warning component be solved through very long range LRTRs? Please explain.

To another query -
"...by 2016-17 India will have a robust BMD system like the THAAD and the Aegis BMD systems?" you answered -
Like the THAAD, yes, but not like the shipborne Aegis-based theatre BMD system.
Why not like the Aegis BMD systems?Is it more advanced?

In the second & third of the above photos it is written that that -
The ITB is.....Israeli Boost Phase Intercept System BM/C^3.
My question is -
Is Israel developing an anti-missile system to intercept in the boost phase? For that you need a very high speed(>5-6 km/s)interceptor.
Such interceptors if developed will be useful against land based IRBMs but not against ICBMs or SLBMs as they will be very far away or if they are near to the launch sites.

I think Boost Phase Intercept System is not require by India.It requires only the high speed(>5-6 km/s)interceptors.For Boost Phase Intercept India will have to develop Space-based LASER system.
What do you think?

Thank you.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

Will DRDO apply the design of the Arrow-3 interceptor or the High Velocity Marinized THAAD( option 2 of the slide on THAAD interceptor) into it's next design of PAD i.e. PD-1 7 PD-2?

Do you India developing AEGIS like combat management system and deploying it close to possible Chinese SLBMs launch sites( as you have written earlier that the PLANs SSBNs have to launch their missiles from bult-in undersea launch sites to avoid collision with their own SSNs)?

When do you see India having a robust BMD system comprising high-velocity interceptor missiles, a ground-based battlespace management system (BMS), and a three-tier network of BMD deployment packages for point defence, for area defence and for theatre defence?

This question also asked before by many including me -
Will the KALI system evolve into an effective anti-missile system?
Please answer this time.

Thank you.

ABHINABA said...

To, Prasun da - The most complete (as of 1999) high resolution digital 3d topographic map of the Earth ever assembled was drawn,following landsat,spy & shuttle radar topography missions on which battle planes of Iraq & A fganisthan was drawn & USN commanders says this map is very usefull for selecting trajectory of precision-guided munitions.In Cartosat-1 such 3d imaging technique was present,but it is of low resolution (2.5m^2 spatial & 5m^2 vertical resolution).But, in follow on series of Cartosats such capability was absent.
Any reason?

ABHINABA said...

To, Prasun da - Sorry again for questioning on off-topics:
1>What is the significance of cryogenic technology in intercontinental missile developing for which(allegation of misuse) ISRO waits about 7 years for getting 1st cryogenic engine from Russia?
2>Have you any technical info. about India's 1st dedicate geo-stationary satellite,a naval communications one? 3>Are you not thinking such classified 600-1000 nautical mile footprint of the sattelite over the Indian Ocean region is very limited?

hacker said...

hello prasun da
is india planning a integrated air defense system(IADS)?
for anti aircraft system we will have SPYDER SR-SAM(15 km),AKASH updated(60 km),BARAK8 LRSAM(120 km)but why we do not have any S-400(400 km) like sam for anti aircraft with 400 km range?

for anti ballistic missile defense we WILL have AAD(30KM),PAD-1(80KM),PAD PAV(150 KM) for IRBM.
for ICBM AD-1,AD-2.

what is the status for AD-1,AD-2 are there any model or it is in paper?

regarding AEGIS system it is used as an anti ballistic system but can MF STAR which is primarily used for anti aircraft and cruise missile system can be used as a anti ballistic system as MF STAR with BARAK 8 lacks the range and altitude for anti ballistic system?

thank you .

Anonymous said...

Prasun,
What's going on between India and France in defense cooperation? For Mirage-2000 France is asking exorbitant amount. Scorpene submarine project is delayed. Is there any other deals which are in muddy waters? Are they bullying us? Can you explain what India has to do with France? If France is not willing, what options INdia has in modernization of M2k and building new submarines?

Anonymous said...

"Cambodia,... better relations with the PRC and now Indonesia is following suit. That's why Japan and Vietnam have no choice but to adopt a pragmatic policy of strengthening defence cooperation relationships with the US"

what do ur opinion on this?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/21/AR2009102100746.html?hpid=topnews%E2%8A%82=AR

Why do the japanese want an equal relatonship since their economy depends on the US.why is there such a fundamental shift since the US also provides a nuclear umbrella?what could be at the heart of this bickering?surely they are not fond of the Chinese or are they?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@7:28AM: The ground-based LRTRs at the moment and even in the future will, in standalone configuration, be able to offer only point defence, but when networked, could offer area or even theatre-level early warning. But for this to happen, two tri-services the defence communications satellites have to become operational. The first such satellite has already been mentioned for launch by next year. Only after this will the Integrated Aerospace Command, Control and Communications Sysem (IACCCS) be able to offer continental air defence against ballistic and cruise missiles.
The shipborne element of BMD will be available once the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR/Barak-8ER is commissioned on board the Project 15A and 15B DDGs. But unlike the threat scenarios faced by Japan and US forces deployed to Japan and South Korea, and the US Navy in the Western Pacific, for the Indian Navy the BMD arena is of interest only for point defence, i.e. the air defence of a carrier battle group against emerging Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles like the DF-15A and DF-21C.
For the boost-phase interception scenario, time-on-target or time-over-target is of the essence and that is precisely the reason why Israel has begun taking the necessary steps for developing loitering UCAVs armed with high-velocity interceptor missiles. In India's case, such weapon systems can be developed in-ouse or co-developed as well with Israel and the ASL in Hyderabad is well aware of this need, especially with regard to using such solutions for neutralising the threats posed by Babur-like cruise missiles.

Nava said...

"For the boost-phase interception scenario, time-on-target or time-over-target is of the essence and that is precisely the reason why Israel has begun taking the necessary steps for developing loitering UCAVs armed with high-velocity interceptor missiles"

Do tell :)

Does the word MOAB\MOAV ring a bell?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@8:29PM: It is inevitable that both the definitive PAD and AAD interceptor missiles will have to be hyper-velocity types. As I stated above, the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR/Barak-8ER combination will be capable of intercepting inbound ballistic missiles, but the overall capabilities of a shipborne BMD system will very much depend on the threat perceptions with regard to China's intention and ability to target an Indian Navy carrier battle group with anti-ship ballistic missiles. The three-tier BMD system for India should be commissioned by 2018, and this includes the space-based communications and missile early warning components. I;m not aware of any on-going work on making the KALI a BMD component.

To ABHINABA: Who today requires an independent 3-D topographic mapping capability when Google is offering the same!!! As you've said, 3-D topographic mapping or even stereoscopic imagery is a 'technique' which is dependent on several types of imagery inputs. In India, this process began way back in 1998 immediately after Pohkran-2 and the first tranche of the database (covering Pakistan's Northern Areas and Jammu & Kashmir) was made operational for all three armed services in 2007. Anyone can buy raw imagery (optronic and SAR-based) from DigitalGlobe and Canada's RADARSAT, that's not the problem. But when one wants 3-D GIS-based databases it has to be developed in-house as such databases have synchronised and superimposed grids for field artillery fire direction, battlespace management systems, and field signals/communications networks. Such activities have been well underway in India since the late 1990s and by 2012 the entire Sino-Indian border too will be included in the 3-D database of the armed services and the SFC.
The footprint of the defence communications satellite is more than adequate for securing India's maritime awareness domain. It will not only cover just the Indian Ocean, but also the Arabian Sea, Bay of Bengal and southern parts of the South China Sea.

To hacker: It is not IADS, but IACCCS (see my reply above) and it is not Barak-8 for BMD, but the Barak-8ER LR-SAM. The definitive operational version of PAD will be able to intercept targets at an altitude of 200km. That's the project capability plan as per the IAF's ASQR.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Nava: Yes, it very much so does. Especially against known or pre-surveyed ballistic missile launch sites like those that prevailed in southwestern Iraq a decade ago.

Nava said...

Ah, so we're good to go :) What sort of "necessary steps" have you discerned post-MOAV? BTW, is this IACCCS the system that Rafael offered
to supply pro bono, only to be rebuffed? Could you explain as to who ended up developing it?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@5:16AM: The problems are not what they being made to be. i.e. OEM-initiated delays or OEM-initiated conspiracies. Quite to the contrary, it is the steady appreciation of the Euro over the past five years that has made matters worse for all those EU-based OEMs. hat's why contracts like those of the Scorpene SSK are not exactly fixed-price contracts. For the Scorpene SSK, only the first two vessels have faced fabrication delays, but construction of pressure hull modules for Nos 3 and 4 vessel are way ahead of schedule as MDL has done some innovative forward thinking. Regarding the Mirage 2000H/TH upgrade, I for one wouldn't entirely blame Dassault Aviation or THALES. If HAL and DARE upgrade the Jaguar IS and MiG-27M and co-develop the Tejas Mk1's avionics suite, there's no reason why they cannot do so for the Mirage 2000. The question to be asked is: why is IAF HQ gunning for the Dassault/THALES proposal only, why not ask HAL to prepare its own upgrade proposal in collaboration with DARE and IAI/ELTA?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@7:28AM: This is exactly what happens when an extremely well-meaning but totally inexperienced govt comes to power and ignores the institutionalised bureaucracy that has in essence been running the show for the past several decades. In my view, such nationalistic rhetoric will within six months give way to pragmatism as the US has several pressure levers left to activate in a well-calibrated strategy. A couple of well-selected US leaks of the China-DPRK nexus in joint ballistic missile developments, and using Japanese multinational entities like Toyota and Nissan (and a weak US dollar) to bear indirect domestic pressure on the new govt are bust just a few instances of the kind the kind of leverage the US has to work to its advantage. And don't forget the steadily growing US investment footprint in Vietnam.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Nava: Haven't been able to keep abreast of post-MOAV developments. The IACCCS is a software-defined network I was referring to, not the hardware elements. AFAIK, RAFAEL isn't a participant in this project. The only Israeli participants (in terms of hardware supplied) for IACCCS are IAI/ELTA (for the ground-based and aerostat-mounted 3-D L-band radars, Green Pine LRTR and A-50I/PHALCON), and TADIRAN SpectraLink (BMD simulator of the type shown above and SATCOMS data links).

Nava said...

It would have been a feckin disgrace if you were able to, no? ...

That's odd; I remember hearing about a tender for some sort of aerial C4I system that Rafael offered to develop for India pro bono, and yet was rejected because of some technicality...

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Nava: Indeed (LoL!). But it is an area of intense interest since India also has to face up to the challenges of cruise missile defence, in addition to BMD.

Anonymous said...

HI Prasun,
During the visit to kerala the "missile woman of India" Tessy Thomas said about development of a super sonic engine for Aircraft's by DRDO,do you know anything about this development? If you aware of this please tell me what the He** is this.Is India that much advanced for this technology?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@12:06PM: The only engine that comes to my mind is the Kaveri for the Tejas. Funny how she's being referred to as the missile woman. The first lady with some hands-on experience on guided-missiles that I came across was one from BEL who had in the late 1980s developed the FLAME adaptation kit that enabled the Konkurs launcher to also fire the Milan-2 ATGM.

hacker said...

hello prasun da

1.you said that PAD will ultimtely have a 200km altitude range what RADAR can guide missile upto that altitude the firing radar of current PAD is made for 80 km altitude guidance.

2.what about AD-1 and AD-2 ICBM interceptors and which radar will they use can you say about that

3.BARAK8ER LRSAM has a max range of 120 km
at what altitude it can intercept
and
it is mainly made for protection of the ship or the fleet against aircrafts and cruise missiles can it be used against chinese antiship ballistic missile or SLBM or any other ballistic missiles as ballistic missile intercepts need more than any other SAM.

THANK YOU..

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

WOW....loitering UCAVs armed with high-velocity interceptor missiles for the boost-phase interception.Israel doing research on this new concept will ultimately help India in tackling especially Chinese SLBMs.

As you have written earlier that the Chinese ,like the Russians, prefer to deploy their SSBNs in isolated and well-protected SLBM launch sites( like the vicinity of underground, hardened shore-based launch sites )then if one can identify such sites India can launch a barrage of such oitering UCAVs armed with high-velocity interceptor missiles to destroy them.

Just because of it's close proximity with Israel ,the US and the Europe India will have access to very hi-tech technologies and therefore will be QUALITATIVELY ahead of the Chinese by 2020.What do you think?

Thanks

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

So the S-band & X-band combined APAR-style radar/Barak-8ER LR-SAM combination to be installed on board the Project 15B and 15C DDGs will be capable of intercepting both inbound MRBMs & IRBMs like the DF-15A and DF-21C and supersonic cruise missiles like the Klub, Kh-41 Zubr.
Am i right?

Will the Barak-8ER LR-SAM be ready in time before the launch of the Project 15B DDGs?

Can the above combination be installed on the Project 17A FFGs?

Will the short range Barak-1 anti-missile system be modified in future to take on the supersonic cruise missiles as in the future sub-sonic missiles will give away to supersonic missiles?
Thank you.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

Will the IN go for the turboprop-engine powered E-2D Hawkeye 2000 or the jet-engine powered G-550 CAEW &CS for it,s shore based AEW & C platform?

Recently i have read a report that the IN is interested in magnetic powered catapult-equipped aircraft carrier instead of the steam powered.Does it mean that the next IAC that is going to be build soon will have magnetic powered catapult to help launch fixed-wing aircraft like turboprop-powered AEW & C platforms like E-2D Hawkeye 2000, and aerial refuelling platforms?

ABHINABA said...

Well, you ignore my query about cryogenic engine. Regarding the importance of Google map i can say it is incomplete & it lacks detailed information. For instance Google map did not provides us full vegetational & botanical map of world which is very necessary for research.To fill it we(yes i am a botanist) started a project(for India only) with assistance from different univ.But after some years the noble project was stalled due to lack of co-operation & financial support(which is the main problem of India).

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

To hacker: The LRTRs to be deployed in operational configuration will be upgraded and enhanced to something resembling the Raytheon GBR which is presently used for the THAAD. Presently, the PAD uses the LRTR whereas the AAD uses the Master-A, but the main challenge now is to use a single tracking-cum-engagement radar for the combined PAD/AAD BMD system. The Barak-8ER LR-SAM will be able to intercept targets to a projected altitude of 37km. While the Barak-8 will be able to intercept supersonic cruise missiles like the BrahMos, the Barak-8ER will be able to intercept anti-ship ballistic missiles using depressed trajectories, such as that of the DF-21C and Shourya (yes, the Shourya too can be used as an ASBM).

To Anon@7:05PM: What you're suggesting (deploying armed loitering UCAVs in a pre-emptive first strike against Chinese nuclear ballistic missiles) does not apply to India as the latter has a no first-strike and a retaliatory second strike policy. For BMD, the US definitely (and to a lesser extent Europe) is willing to rope in India along with Australia, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea to co-develop and deploy a regional BMD network.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@8:26PM: The Barak-8 and Barak-8ER will be available for BOTH the three Project 15A and four Project 15B DDGs. For the Project 15A DDG only the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR S-band APAR will be on board, but the four Project 15B DDGs and seven projected Project 17A FFGs will have integrated masts and it is now up to IAI/ELTA to develop the S-band and X-band APARs for fitment into such a single unitary mast, which could also be retrofitted later on to the three existing Project 15 Delhi-class DDGs. For intercepting inbound supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, it will not be the Barak-1, but the Barak-8 that will be the principal interceptor.

To Anon@9:43PM: When operating from shore-based air bases, a turbofan-powered AEW & CS like the G-550 CAEW & CS has distinct advantages over the E-2D Hawkeye 2000 in terms of both speed (to reach the deployment area) and cruising altitude (to offer enhanced over-the-horizon airspace surveillance/battlespace management capabilities). The choice therefore should be obvious.
I'm not aware of any plan of the Indian Navy to have conventional flat-top aircraft carriers (as only these can have any kind of catapult-based aircraft launch system).

Nava said...

Wouldn't one need an arrow 2 class missile to protect ships from the much feared Chinese ASBMs?

Also, I honestly don't understand why one would need an X band radar when operating active SAMs such as the Barak 8. Less range, more susceptibility to current stealth designs. Why is it needed?

And WRT Network centric maritime BMD, you might find this interesting: http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/2/36822.pdf

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To ABHINABA: I refrained from stating anything on cryogenic engines simply because there's tonnes of easily accessible literature on this topic and on the application of such propulsion systems, and I don't have anything of a groundbreaking nature to throw more light on this topic.
Regarding digitised multi-spectral topographical maps for military applications, both DigitalGlobe and RADARSAT can supply these, and deriving vegetation- or botany-related data from them is a specialised area that is catered to by depts like India's NRSA. There are also several foreign entities specialising in supplying GIS-related data packages.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Nava: It all depends on the kind of threat perceptions and the consequent engagement scenarios of the customer. For the US Navy's Carrier Battle Groups, the answer is a definite yes to deploying sea-based BMD systems like Arrow 2/3 or marinised THAAD. For the Indian Navy such a scenario will not apply as the Indian Navy is not expected to deploy its Carrier Battle Groups in the South China Sea in a faceoff with the PLA Navy. But if Pakistan were to acquire and deploy DF-21C-type missiles, then the Indian Navy will have to revisit the issue of sea-based BMD. At the moment, the Indian Navy is only focused on neutralising the threat posed by land-launched subsonic cruise missiles like the Babur/CJ-10.
As to why S-band and X-band APARs on integrated masts are reqd, it is probably best answered by the likes of Lockheed Martin and THALES, both of whom have resolved to developing such integrated masts. Therefore, who am I to throw any more light on this issue?

Nava said...

But you just wrote that the Barak 8ER
will be used against ASBMs... I don't understand. And its not an Arrow 2 class missile, clearly.

I didn't speak of integrated masts per se, but of X band APARS. Thales developed its APAR to be used in conjunction with semi active missiles. But the Barak 8 could be guided by an L band radar, certainly if it indeed has an AESA seeker.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

Nava, the Barak-8ER just like the Patriot PAC-3 can definitely intercept inbound TBMs and ASBMs using depressed flight trajectories. But such interceptions can take place only at the late terminal stage of the inbound ballistic missile's flight and that too at altitudes of less than 40km. Therefore, the Barak-8ER cannot and should not be considered as the magic bullet that guarantees the ultimate solution. And that's precisely the reason why Israel, like India, want to deply BOTH endo-atmospheric and exo-atmospheric hyper-velocity interceptor missiles. There has to be a multi-tier and redundant interception capability in place.
The THALES APAR can be used with Aster 15/30 SAMs equipped with active radars for terminal guidance.

Nava said...

1. The DF-21 is hardly a TBM. It has a range of 2000-3000 KM.Could the Barak 8ER deal with something like that, considering its BMD limitations (well known to me)?

2. Of course the APAR can be used in conjunction with the Aster, but it loses its edge. Who cares if its tracking is extra precise if it's only providing mid course updates?

ASHISH said...

Prasun plz give us update on Nirbhay cruise missile is it cancelled if not will it be able to carry nuclear warheads?

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To ASHISH: The Nirbhay is a cruise missile simulator and will NEVER be weaponised to become any kind of operational cruise missile. The Nirbhay's NPO Saturn-built 36MT turbofans that were ordered in 2007 have not yet arrived in India. That's where things stand.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da,

Thanks.

As you have written the four Project 15B DDGs and seven projected Project 17A FFGs will have a single integrated masts housing both the S-band and X-band APARs.
Will no L-band radar(ship version of the Green Pine APAR )be fitted onto them?
The L-band APARs can detect aircrafts & missiles including stealth aircraft at a much longer range than the S-band and X-band APARs and is also resistant to jamming as the Russians have found out( modular L-band modules that will be housed within a combat aircraft’s forward wings to defeat the JSF).

hacker said...

hello prasun da
IF The Nirbhay is a cruise missile simulator and will NEVER be weaponised
Then what about the subsonic cruise missile of 1000km range with 1000kg warhead which drdo is making?
can you say something about that
THANK YOU....

hacker said...

hello prasun da

what will be the number of SLBM launched (8 or 12) from the next batch of 2 arihant class SSBN and what will be the range of those SLBM?

will the next batch of 2 arihant class SSBN have pump-jet propulsion like the borei class?

IN is getting AKULA 2 class SSN there were reports of a second AKULA can you tell about that and can the second leased sub be the GRANY class current being build in russia ?


THANK YOU ...

hacker said...

Also larger number of SLBM means large sub so a more powerful NUCLEAR REACTOR need to fitted rather than the recently present 85 MW reactor
is there any more powerful reactor being build?

THANK YOU....

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To Anon@6:39PM: Both Lockheed Martin and THALES have concluded after extensive tests and evaluations that the combined X-band and S-band arrays on a single integrated main mast obviates the need for any kind of L-band radar. I'm pretty sure they have some very valid reasons for reaching such conclusions and are much better informed than anyone of us in this matter.

To hacker: I haven;t yet come across anyone from the DRDO or ASL officially stating that they have a sanctioned R & D programme to develop a subsonic cruise missile of 1,000km range with 1,000kg warhead.
It is planned that the operational SSBNs will each have eight SLBMs on board. Not 12. Pump-jet propulsion systems from Russia are still in their early stages and it will take at least another seven years before they are exported.
The IN is getting only 1 (one) Akula-3 SSGN. India never wanted to lease any Akula-2. Only Akula-3. There have been only two Akula-3s built--the Gapard and Nerpa.
As the Arihant is only a technology demonstrator, the 85mW nuclear reactor will suffice. For operational SSBNs and SSGNs, 100mW n-reactors are reqd.

sbm said...

Prasun, I came across some old articles of yours in Military Technology on the tank upgrades planned for India.

I am led to understand that of the T-72 fleet over 690 now have TISAS sights, upgraded armour etc and other upgrades are planned for the rest.

However, what of the T-55 and Vijayantas ?

I know the end of their lives is pending but upgrades of some kind were certainly done to the FCS in the Vijayanta (I think a Marconi/BEL FCS was fitted) and to the T-55 (105mm gun, new FCS etc).

Can you provide any details on India's tank upgrades that took place in the past or are planned for the future ?

For whatever my opinion is worth, your BMD analysis is spot on. I think India is serious about this in a way I have not seen with other programs.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To sbm: I'm always deeply appreciative of your opinions, inputs and analysis. Many thanks. I'm glad you and Nava took notice of the BMD Simulator supplied to the DRDO by TADIRAN SpectraLink in the late 1990s (as its sale was overshadowed by the publicity given to the Green Pine acquisition).
Regarding upgrades for the Vijayanta Mk1 MBT, yes the GEC Marconi/Pilkington Optics fire-control system was licence-assembled by BEL AND 400 of these MBTs were also re-engined with MTU diesel-engines. The upgunned T-55s' turret modifications were designed by Poland and subsequently, the SUV-55 fire-control system was imported from Rudi Cajavec of former Yugoslavia. This very same company was also awarded (as you will recall) the contract for upgrading the T-72M's fire-control system (with the SUV-72 and incorporating a Hughes-built gunner's thermal imaging sight) and advance downpayments were made by 1991. But then the civil war broke out and Rudi Cajavec ceased to exist as a corporate entity (I think it is now in Croatia). And of course, the contractual downpayments made by the MoD were never recovered. Since then the T-72Ms and T-72M1s have been subjected to upgrades in two separate tranches, with Tranche 1 (for the T-72 Combat Improved Ajeya) going to Poland and including El-Op's infra-red camera being installed on the gunner's sight. Tranche 2 involved the T-72CIA (the DRDO component) plus the TISAS suite from ELBIT Systems.
I'm collating a few more graphics and diagrams on theatre BMD networks and will upload them soon.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To SBM & Nava: Kindly check out the three PDFs on Chinese ASBM developments at:
http://www.chinasecurity.us/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=289

sbm said...

Thanks a lot.
How many T-55 and Vijayantas were upgraded ?
I have heard that 135 Vijayanatas received additional Kanchan armour.

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To SBM: Up to 600 T-55s were upgunned and upgraded, while 400 Vijayantas were upgraded, re-engined and up-armoured.

sbm said...

But weren't over 1000 T-55s upgunned under Gulmohar and Panther ?

400 Vijayantas ? I wouldn't have thought the number was so high. I thought the upgrade with respect to uparmouring and re-engining never got past 135.

Anonymous said...

www.india-defence.com/reports/3583

Prasun K Sengupta said...

To SBM: The T-55 upgunning (and related upgrading of its fire-control system) was abandoned half-way as more funding was made available for the accelerated T-72M/T-72M1 imports from the USSR. For the Vijayanta Mk1's re-engining with MTU diesels, the contract which MTU won called for the supply of 400 engines in 1989. The up-armouring of the Vijayantas was kept restricted to the addition of side skirts (made of Kanchan).