tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post140337544938213163..comments2024-02-10T23:32:15.095-08:00Comments on TRISHUL: HUMS For Su-30MKIPrasun K Senguptahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00369323150694008798noreply@blogger.comBlogger93125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-50408396483028325732009-05-09T12:11:00.000-07:002009-05-09T12:11:00.000-07:00Anon@7:27AM
Thanks Prasun
i will be waiting for up...Anon@7:27AM<br />Thanks Prasun<br />i will be waiting for uploadsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-54895969429342858712009-05-09T10:01:00.000-07:002009-05-09T10:01:00.000-07:00To Anon@ 2:53AM: The HQ-16 is a motorised, truck-m...To Anon@ 2:53AM: The HQ-16 is a motorised, truck-mounted clone of the Tor-M1E E-SHORADS. <br /><br />To Anon@7:27AM: Yes, this project is a joint Pakistan-Turkey project in which the main technology/systems supplier is Selex Airborne Sensors and Galileo Avionica. Will upload more data and photos on all this in the near future.Prasun K Senguptahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00369323150694008798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-72703149427183474822009-05-09T09:35:00.000-07:002009-05-09T09:35:00.000-07:00Pakistan reported developing armed UAV
By Usman A...Pakistan reported developing armed UAV<br /><br />By Usman Ansari - Staff writer<br />Posted : Saturday May 9, 2009 8:17:26 EDT<br /><br />ISLAMABAD — After years of watching U.S. drones operate along its Afghan border, Pakistan is working on its own Predator-like unmanned aerial vehicle to undertake the same mission, sources here said.<br /><br />The sources said the country’s air force and government-owned defense conglomerate, the National Engineering and Scientific Commission, are flight-testing a new-design aircraft to be equipped with a NESCom-designed laser designator and laser-guided missiles. The Burraq UAV is named for a winged horse creature in Islamic tradition, similar to Pegasus.<br /><br />According to local news reports, Pakistan is focusing its unmanned aircraft efforts on upgrading various older UAVs with Chinese help.<br /><br />But the sources note that no domestically produced UAV is large enough to heft both a missile and a targeting system. The military’s most capable UAV is the air force’s Selex Galileo Falco, which can laser-designate targets for other platforms but cannot deliver munitions.<br /><br />Officials with the Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Defence Production here refused to confirm or deny the program’s existence. A spokesman for the military’s Inter Services Public Relations said it was “not ready to give a statement on the issue at this time.”<br /><br />One former air force officer said the notion of a Pakistan-developed hunter-killer UAV is credible.<br /><br />“You only have to see our track record,” said Kaiser Tufail, a retired air commodore. “We have some fantastic achievements in the field of defense.”<br /><br />Tufail said Pakistan needs such a weapon. Anti-terror operations on the frontier require “hours and hours of round-the-clock reconnaissance,” married with the ability to strike quickly when a target is spotted, he said.<br />Help from China?<br /><br />Analysts were more dubious about Pakistan’s ability to produce a laser-guided missile, but they noted that help might be found in China or Turkey.<br /><br />Turkey, with whom Pakistan has an agreement to cooperate on UAV development, is seeking an armed UAV, preferably the Predator or MQ-9 Reaper. This UAV may someday be armed with the UMTAS infrared guided anti-tank missile being developed by the Turkish firm Roketsan to arm the T-129 attack helicopter.<br /><br />Pakistan could simply produce China’s new CH-3 unmanned combat air vehicle, “or co-produce any number of Chinese components to assemble a unique UCAV,” said Richard Fisher, China specialist and senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center in Washington.<br /><br />“China has also developed the unique AR-1, a 45-kilogram, laser-guided attack missile, apparently designed specifically for light winged or helicopter UCAVs,” he said.<br /><br />http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/05/...rce_UAV_050909/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-31884433237723198152009-05-09T07:27:00.000-07:002009-05-09T07:27:00.000-07:00Prasun what is your views about this
http://www.a...Prasun what is your views about this<br /><br />http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/05/airforce_UAV_050909/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-10226367880085204472009-05-09T02:53:00.000-07:002009-05-09T02:53:00.000-07:00Thanks for Video link and information about the ra...Thanks for Video link and information about the range of HQ-16 Prasun<br /><br />So basically HQ-16 is an Aster-15 / Spyder MR/LR class missile.Is it Chinese made or just another copy of some Russian missile? Does it have active radar guidance?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-84406020603575446152009-05-08T11:12:00.000-07:002009-05-08T11:12:00.000-07:00To Anon@3:36PM: The DSP-type satellites are not li...To Anon@3:36PM: The DSP-type satellites are not like the Glonass or TecSAR/Polaris/RISAT-type satellites. Each DSP satellite is like a mini-Hubble space telescope, but looking at Earth to spot ballistic missile lauches in the boost phase. Neither the Russians nor the Israelis are anywhere closer to even developing such satellites. <br /><br />To Anon@3:44PM: There's no need to elevate the Green Pine LRTR to even a metre above ground since the will not be required to overcome any kind of ground clutter or ground-based physical obstacle. Such radars are normally sited on hilltops or in elevated terrain and are pointed towards the sky. The same also applies to the LRTR for the US THAAD system. <br /><br />To Anon@3:49PM: The Agni-3 was meant to be a technology demonstrator from which the 5,500km-range land-based Agni-5 and submarine-launched, 8,500km-range SLBM are being derived and developed. Most probably the land-based Agni-5 will be test-fired later this year.<br /><br />To Sachin Sathe: The PAD is still being developed to the PAD-1 configuration that can intercept targets like the M-9 and M-11 TBMs in their re-entry phase out to an altitude of 120km. There is also another development project to develop an interceptor missile that can intercept IRBMs and MRBMs at an altitude of 200km.<br />As for the CTOL variant of the Nishant, the mere fact that it is configured for recovery back on land means that it will not be launched one a one-way journey, i.e. as a hunter-killer drone like the Harpy.<br /><br />To Harpreet: Here's another weblink showing the destroyed Al Zarar MBT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9fZIR7Hjkw&feature=channel<br /><br />To Anon@12:15AM: the HQ-16's range is 35km as it is an E-SHORADS.<br /><br />To SUKHOI-30MKI: I did read that analysis quite some time back and ave the following comments:<br />1) It is not called the 'Cold Start Doctrine'. Officially, the Indian Army refers to it as the 'Pro-Active Strategy'.<br />2) The Army prepared this new warfighting doctrine without any official inputs from the Indian Air Force. Therefore, the IAF is now confronting the Army and saying that it will not be able to compensate for the Army's acute lack of field artillery firepower and consequently, will not be able to provide the critical close air support for the first 72 hours of hostilities it is not until 2017 that the IAF have aircraft in sufficient numbers to undertake simultaneous battlefeld air interdiction and close air support sorties. Without such close air support, therefore, the Army will have to wait until 2017 to fully implement its new warfighting doctrine. Of course, things can change if and only if the Army is given a free hand to induct motorised 155mm/52-cal howitzers in large numbers (about 800) and is also empowered to raise its planned Combat Aviation Brigades equipped with attack helicopters and UCAVs.Prasun K Senguptahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00369323150694008798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-85110818424432150432009-05-08T06:09:00.000-07:002009-05-08T06:09:00.000-07:00To Anon@11:57:00 PM:
This video is not complete an...To Anon@11:57:00 PM:<br />This video is not complete and it wrongly identifies the tank as Al-Khalid instead of Al-Zarar.<br /><br />Here is the link-<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJV56caxh1wAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-85987442530211126222009-05-08T00:53:00.000-07:002009-05-08T00:53:00.000-07:00Prasun da, an article of Oxford University on Cold...Prasun da, an article of Oxford University on Cold Start Strategy-http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mert1769/Ladwig,%20Cold%20Start%20NPS%20Paper.pdf says that army would not be able to effectively engage pakistan of atleast 10 more years. What is your analysis on Cold Start Strategy regarding conforting pakistan if we were to fight a war today?SUKHOI-30 MKIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07535946969095796627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-82216715468980262782009-05-08T00:15:00.000-07:002009-05-08T00:15:00.000-07:00Prasun K Sengupta can tell me the range of HQ-16 ....Prasun K Sengupta can tell me the range of HQ-16 . i am not abm=ble to find any hard data on that. only able to find estimates that put it range 40km,65k and 90kmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-69475358763410083482009-05-07T23:57:00.000-07:002009-05-07T23:57:00.000-07:00Harpreet can you prvoide link to video or pictures...Harpreet can you prvoide link to video or pictures of destroyed tank?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-32644781164081599272009-05-07T22:25:00.000-07:002009-05-07T22:25:00.000-07:00Prasun, yes I saw the destroyed tank, but I wonder...Prasun, yes I saw the destroyed tank, but I wonder if the Pakistanis still see it. Take a look at this <A HREF="http://theasiandefence.blogspot.com/2009/05/zardari-urges-us-to-provide-pakistan.html" REL="nofollow">small debate</A> I had yesterday. I tend to stay anonymous on political issues to keep them less charged and less devoid of rationality. <br />Anyway what little emerged of it shows how people justify their beliefs howsoever irrational they may be. Decades of conditioning cannot be undone in a stroke. We should not take the current Pakistani action as a "wake up". They have to be kept under pressure to keep them from doing more flips.<br />With tanks destroyed, troops being ambushed and tens of thousands being displaced I hardly have the heart to ask this "ASIAN DEFENCE" guy what he now thinks of his theory of Pakistan deploying less equipped Paramilitary forces to fight Taliban’s and get funds( US aid) to equip them. Was $500,000 aid for the Paramilitary worth this?Harpreetnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-41503071144684007822009-05-07T19:50:00.000-07:002009-05-07T19:50:00.000-07:00prasun,
Is the PAD a definitive missile for the ...prasun,<br /><br /> Is the PAD a definitive missile for the BMD role or is it a carrier missile to evaluate sensors? It is Liquid fueled and weighs nearly 5 tons(i think) and one TEL seems to carry only one missile? Is a new missile larger than AAD but smaller than PAD in development which will carry sensors and other systems which are being tested on board the PAD? <br /><br />can the ctol varient of Nishant UAV be used in hunter-killer role? It was displayed at the AI-09sachin_sathehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02104023701292128933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-39654929227405429132009-05-07T15:49:00.000-07:002009-05-07T15:49:00.000-07:00when will agni-3 missile be tested ,it was tested ...when will agni-3 missile be tested ,it was tested last in in aprilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-12909522793985773392009-05-07T15:44:00.000-07:002009-05-07T15:44:00.000-07:00gamma de radar can be elevated to 15meters from gr...gamma de radar can be elevated to 15meters from ground level while green pine is too heavy for thisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-17258614618412268932009-05-07T15:36:00.000-07:002009-05-07T15:36:00.000-07:00but prasun one more thing is that there is glonass...but prasun one more thing is that there is glonass and indian and israeli origin satellites in sky as well <br /><br />and number of setellites will only increase and russian and israeli setellites can also be connected to russian and israelis sam systems as well <br /><br />but again aegis sytem is more or less compared to s300 pmu2 <br /><br />because an/spy-1 pesa radar can be compared to 92N2E Grave Stone,CHEESE BOARD PESA radars ,and these russian pesa radars can also be used in 4 faced configuration as used in aegis ships<br /><br />and the range and altitude of SM-2missile can be compared to 200km range missiles of s300pmu2 <br /><br />and setellite guidance can be provided by glonass ,israel and indian setellites<br /><br />but again naval s300pmu2,s400 are lot more cheaperAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-47958398426511101872009-05-07T12:28:00.000-07:002009-05-07T12:28:00.000-07:00To Anon@11:48AM: If I were to devise a techno-econ...To Anon@11:48AM: If I were to devise a techno-economic matrix aimed at examining the viability of procuring the AEGIS system, I'm sure the financial figures you've quoted are well worth it. No complaints from me. Why? Simply because of the awesome theatre air defence capabilities it offers. What you seem to have done is just taken into account the procurement costs and there too you're assuming that the costs only pertain to the acquisition of AEGIS-equipped warships. What you're apparently overlooking is the net-centric capabilities of AEGIS. For instance, early warning of inbound ballistic missiles will not originate from the shipborne X-band AESA radars, but from the US' DSP family of early warning satellites. Only after receiving such inputs from the satellites will the shipborne AESA radar be activated for target acquisition and target engagement. To sum up, these are the capabilities a navy acquires when procuring AEGIS-equipped warships. Imagine if a navy acquires a non-AEGIS system (like APAR) but has to operate without the capabilities offered by the DSP satellites, t will only result in the APAR operating in a degraded and underutilised manner. Therefore, you must realise that if the US is offering the AEGIS to India, it also means that the US is also willing to offer the necessary interfaces with the DSP satellites. Such a capability would not be possible to acquire if India selects the APAR or Sampson or a futuristic X-band MF-STAR, as the US will deny the interfaces. Bottomline: if you buy the AEGIS, you will benefit enormously from the global chain of DSP satellites owned by the US. If you buy anything else, you will be gropping in the dark, totally clueless.Prasun K Senguptahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00369323150694008798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-19880215520900741892009-05-07T11:48:00.000-07:002009-05-07T11:48:00.000-07:00hey prasun what do you think the cost of three aeg...hey prasun what do you think the cost of three aegis sytems offered for p15a<br /><br />just see aussies paying $ 8 billion US for three destroyers fitted with aegis system <br /><br />i think aegis system will not cost more than <br />$ 1.5 billion for three ships but it should be less than a billion dollars for 3 ships ,so aussies paying hefty $ 6.5 billion extra just for 3 shipsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-14279783178763848332009-05-07T11:46:00.000-07:002009-05-07T11:46:00.000-07:00by the way what is aegis system
iF SM-3 missile ...by the way what is aegis system <br /><br />iF SM-3 missile isn't included ,that damn SM-3 missile cost $ 10 million each and if someone wants to buy 50 of these missile he has to pay $ 500 million for that AND EVEN IF price is reduced for SM-3 missile to $ 400 million for 50 of them then it will still be very costly<br /><br />now a shivalik class frigate cost $ 350 million per frigateAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-37711293191198174122009-05-07T11:35:00.000-07:002009-05-07T11:35:00.000-07:00only naval aesa radar available for export is SAMR...only naval aesa radar available for export is SAMRT L AND SAMPSON RADAR <br /><br />MF STAR ISN'T available even now otherwise navy already mouted this radars on thier ships <br /><br />then why navy going for LM08 2D d band radar EVEN WHEN THEY CAN HAVE SAMPSON OR SMARTL RADARAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-59210383181177870482009-05-07T11:30:00.000-07:002009-05-07T11:30:00.000-07:00as if i didn't read all that
americans said they...as if i didn't read all that <br /><br />americans said they could build PESA radars for fighters in 60s <br />but htey couldn't deploy on fighters because of cooling and space in aircraft but russians did that with zaslon radar which was most powerful after this russians had bars N011 which was most powerful when IAF bought this radar<br /><br />even now russinas has irbis e radar which outclasses several western aesa radars altough it is 30 years old tech <br /><br />even europenas use L band aesa radars and still building them <br /><br />and US also deployed their first aesa radar apg63(v2)on fighters only by 2002 and this was the same time when IAF deployed mki with bars,and both apg63(v2) and BARS have similar detection ranges<br /><br />till now US using PESA radars for patriot and AEGIS system and only by 2011-12 thse SAM will get aesa radars <br /><br />L band aesa radars aren't inferior lot more depend on power to be used by radar and each T/R module ,only US making X band land based radars but they are costly and there is no european or israeli X band radar for land based or for navy exixt <br /><br />only europeans have s band sampson and l band smart l radar in production and russians aren't behind with their l band radar<br /><br />israel will have s band radar for export only by 2014<br /><br />US spending much more than russians and europenas but US systems cost much more than russian systems but russians do it in much more cost effective wayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-55599671991148236492009-05-07T11:28:00.000-07:002009-05-07T11:28:00.000-07:00To Anon@10:02AM: Many thks for your compliments. A...To Anon@10:02AM: Many thks for your compliments. A slight correction or clarification, though: I'm not arrogant and disrespectful to those who might wish to share their views, but when 'those' entities come to my blog to give uncalled-for advise (telling me what to do with whom and where) or make unwanted remarks that stink of ignorance, I do have the right to make my rebuttals in kind. If those entities or anyone else want to avoid my rebuttals, all they have to do is stay away from my blog. Afterall, I don't advise others how to run their lives and therefore would like 'those' entities to adhere to the norm of recoprocity.<br /><br />To Harpreet: It is precisely due to the MTCR that Pakistan has thus far been unable to obtain the Predators and have therefore gone to the Italians to obtain the less-capable Falco UAVs that will be fitted with PICO-SAR, a miniaturised synthetic aperture radar from SELEX Airborne Sensors. Pakistan's greatest operational disadvantage is the lack of battlefield surveillance platforms that can look up to 300km deep into the ndian landmass straddling the India-Pakistan border areas. Therefore, the Pakistan Army can only engage in estimates-based warfare for the time-being, unless and until the Army or PAF acquires Predator-like UAVs from China (the WZ-2000). Interestingly, if you recall, the Pakistan Army had way back in the mid-1980s asked the US for the Grumman Mohawks fitted with belly-mounted SLARs for battlefield surveillance, but the deal didn't go through, just like the M-1A1 MBTs and E-2C Hawkeyes (with APS-125 radars) were on the verge of being sold to Pakistan.<br />PS: Hope you've seen the TV news footage earlier today which showed a destroyed Pakistan Army Al Zarrar MBT being disabled by the Taliban by RPGs.<br /><br />To Anon@10:28AM: Dude, claiming that the LR-SAM does not exist means that you're accusing both the Indian Defence Minister and the DRDO of lying! For heaven's sake, the Defence Minister has already officially stated in Parliament that the LR-SAM project exists. What more you do need to believe? As for tech-transfers for bot the MR-SAM and LR-SAM, IAI has already created the JV with TATA called NOVA, while RAFAEL has teamed up with BEL. Both these JVs were officially disclosed during Aero India 2009. Regarding MF-STAR, it has been available since 2007 for anyone to buy. <br /><br />To Anon@10:36AM: The MiG-21bis has been available since the mid-1970s and the upgrade project was taken up only in 1996. Regarding total technical service life, even the MiG-21Ms have a few hundred hours left in them. It would have been a good idea if the DRDO along with IAI (which specialises in autopilots, among other things) had converted these aircraft into unmanned target drones and used them for AAA firing practice or for evaluating the performance parameters of SAMs like the Akash, instead of using the far less realistic 'Lakshya' target drones. I say this because some ex-IAF MiG-21Ms have already been shipped off to IAI where they will be converted into unmanned target drones for the MR-SAM's R & D phase. <br /><br />To Anon@10:38AM: Don;t confuse the PAK-FA with the twin-engined FGFA. The PAK-FA is the alleged Russian equivalent of the F/A-22 Raptor. The FGFA is a totally different platform and until the India-Russia MoU on co-developing the FGFA was inked last year, the DRDO had the MCA project which has now morphed into the FGFA. Therefore, the FGFA and MCA are now the same, and not two different platforms. If you compare the officially stated MTOWs of the FGFA and MCA, you will reach the same conclusion.Prasun K Senguptahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00369323150694008798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-34491776853716556482009-05-07T10:56:00.000-07:002009-05-07T10:56:00.000-07:00To Anon@10:43:00 AM: Put down your vodka. Read thi...To Anon@10:43:00 AM: Put down your vodka. Read this document - <br /><br />http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/solutions/mesa/assets/aesa_techpaper.pdf<br /><br />and start counting how many generations Russia has catching up to do. Remember they are just piecing together their first or second fighter AESA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-53603935231632891442009-05-07T10:43:00.000-07:002009-05-07T10:43:00.000-07:00Boy you have a lot of catching up to do, read the ...Boy you have a lot of catching up to do, read the previous thread.<br />Also GAMMA DE is similar to L-band Green Pine that we have already acquired. Happy!<br />--------------------------<br />read first what i said mfstar isn't available before 2014 and by then russinas also have s,x band radars<br /><br />and green pine radar isn't mobile and what is deployment time for green pine radar compared to 5-10 minutes for gamma deAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-14905252617421332622009-05-07T10:38:00.000-07:002009-05-07T10:38:00.000-07:00PAK FA will be 2 engined and
HAL/ADA better deve...PAK FA will be 2 engined and <br /><br />HAL/ADA better develop single engined 5 gen aircraft or develop internal bays for tejas <br /><br />going for PAK FA AND 2 engined MCA is nothing but a foolish thing to do <br /><br />by developing internal bays for tejas is much more easier thing to do and accomplish than going to develop two engined aircraft from bottom upAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5154280302945875495.post-13278600853970663322009-05-07T10:37:00.000-07:002009-05-07T10:37:00.000-07:00To Anon@ 10:28:00 AM: Boy you have a lot of catchi...To Anon@ 10:28:00 AM: Boy you have a lot of catching up to do, read the previous thread.<br />Also GAMMA DE is similar to L-band Green Pine that we have already acquired. Happy!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com