Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 67891011121314 LastLast
Results 271 to 300 of 413

Thread: Indian Missiles News

  1. #271
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  2. #272
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    61

  3. #273
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,547
    India successfully test fires Astra interceptor missile
    Bhubaneswar, Dec 21, 2012 (IANS)

    India Friday successfully test fired its indigenously developed Astra air-to-air interceptor missile from a defence base in Odisha, official said.

    The beyond-visual-range missile was tested from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Chandipur, about 230 kms from here.

    "The mission was successful. Today the missile was tested from land" ITR director M.V.K.V. Prasad told IANS.

    Prasad said it was a development trial of the missile and the target was an unmanned aerial vehicle which was flown from the same base few minutes before the launch of the missile.

    Astra is envisaged to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft at supersonic speeds in the head-on mode at a range of 80 km and in tail-chase mode at 20 km.

    The Astra test comes a day after the Indian armed forces successfully test-fired medium range indigenously developed Prithvi-II nuclear-capable surface-to-surface ballistic missile from the same test range.

    Both the Astra and Prithvi missiles have been flight-tested a number of times from the same test range in the past.
    http://www.deccanherald.com/content/...res-astra.html

    The launch platform might have been a Su-30Mki as hinted in earlier reports.

  4. #274
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,547
    The guys at BR, while going through online tender applications have stumbled upon what might be a schematic of Nirbhay cruise missile. Check it out.


  5. #275
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,547
    Quote Originally Posted by Twinblade View Post
    http://www.deccanherald.com/content/...res-astra.html

    The launch platform might have been a Su-30Mki as hinted in earlier reports.
    More information about the test in a report by Y.Mallikarjun for The Hindu. The test was another one of the ground launches to verify midcourse guidance and not an air launch which people were hoping for. Another test is planned for today with an actual target by using the seeker of the missile.

    HYDERABAD, December 22, 2012
    Astra missile test-fired successfully

    Y. MALLIKARJUN


    As part of its developmental trials, Beyond Visual Range Air-to-Air Missile (BVRAAM), Astra was successfully launched from Chandipur, Odisha, on Friday to validate its reconfigured propulsion, control and guidance systems.

    The launch was carried out against an electronic target, although Pilotless Target Aircraft Lakshya was used to check the effectiveness of systems such as the ground radar.

    Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) scientists said Friday’s trial was only a rehearsal.

    Second test

    The missile would be test-fired again on Saturday with an actual seeker to intercept Lakshya.

    In Friday’s mission, Astra was guided towards the electronic target in a ground-to-air launch.

    The altitude of engagement was 4 km and all the parameters were validated, the scientists said.

    The missile was also tested for midcourse guidance against an electronic target.

    Designed to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft at supersonic speeds (1.2 to 1.4 Mach) in head-on and tail-chase modes, the missile uses solid propellant and can carry a conventional warhead weighing 15 kg.

    The 3.8-metre long Astra is the smallest of the missiles developed by DRDO.

    Different altitudes

    It can be launched from different altitudes and cover 110 km when fired from an altitude of 15 km, reach 44 km when launched from an altitude of eight km, and 21 km when launched from the sea-level.

    After completion of all developmental trials, Astra will be eventually integrated with combat fighter aircraft Sukhoi-30, MIG-29 and the Light Combat Aircraft.
    http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper...cle4227655.ece

  6. #276
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,547
    HYDERABAD, January 27, 2013
    India successfully test-fires underwater missile
    Y. MALLIKARJUN
    T. S. SUBRAMANIAN


    India on Sunday successfully test-fired the underwater ballistic missile, K-15 (code-named B05), off the Visakhapatnam coast, marking en end to a series of developmental trials.

    In its twelfth flight trial, the 10-metre tall Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM) lifted off from a pontoon, rose to an altitude of 20 km and reached a distance of about 700 km as it splashed down in the waters of the Bay of Bengal near the pre-designated target point.

    According to scientific advisor to the Defence Minister V.K. Saraswat, the missile was tested for its full range of 700 km and the mission met all its objectives. He said the impact accuracy of the medium range strategic missile was in single digit.

    With the completion of developmental trials, the process of integrating K-15 missile with INS Arihant, the indigenously-built nuclear submarine, will begin soon. As many as 12 nuclear-tipped missiles, each weighing six tonnes will be integrated with Arihant, which will be powered by an 80 MWt (thermal) reactor that uses enriched uranium as fuel and light water as coolant and moderator.
    http://www.thehindu.com/news/nationa...?homepage=true

    Interesting tidbit about upcoming nuclear subs. Not one, but two subs are being built in parallel !

    Meanwhile the reactor has been integrated with the submarine and it was expected to go critical in May/ June 2013. Once that was done, the harbour trials will begin.

    Besides Arihant, three other nuclear-powered submarines were being constructed -- one at Visakhapatnam and two at Vadodara. India is also developing K-4 missile with a range of 3,000 km.
    It means they have roped in Pipavav Shipyards for nuclear sub construction !!

  7. #277
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    It mentions the 110 km range and another report mentions VKS asking for Astra redesign to the new standard. So do this mean the MK1 was dropped and they directly moved to the MK2 (100 km+)?

    BTW, HELINA is being developed equivalent to an Indian Brimstone in the latest news. Of course, the HELI part will be dropped. But the aim is to have a Nag which can be launched from all aircraft, and not just helicopters.

    This year, I hope they finalize Prahaar and Shourya (get them to induction) and get Nirbhay, Astra, HELINA and the PDV to a good stage. Plus Pinaka MK2.
    That's going to be a substantial jump in capability.

    This is my list:


    SSMs
    Prithvi, 100-250km range, liquid fuelled
    • Prithvi -1/2/3 - all in service
    • Naval variant: Dhanush, 350km- Navy - in service

    Agni: Have MaRVs, MIRV & countermeasures in development
    • 1/2/3 - in production
    • 4/5 - development, trials successful, 4000km and 5000 km versions respectively

    K-series/SLBM
    • SLBM/B-05: 700 Km range, developed, waiting for Arihant
    • Shaurya: Land version, being tweaked for Army
    • Next steps, 1500 & 3000 km versions

    Prahaar/Strike SSM:
    • 150 km, 200 kg warhead missile to "bridge the gap" between the conventional Pinaka MRLS at 40 km range, to the Prithvi which has a range of 250km to 300 km. Being tweaked for the Army, and awaiting formal Army indent. Stated to have datalinked guidance and will hence be more cost effective/precise than "dumb" missiles. Six missiles can be launched at different targets. Developed from the AAD design of the BMD program.

    Brahmos:
    • Blocks1/2/3 all developed. Block 3 for Navy & Army allows top attack & seeker discrimination of specific targets. In production.
    • AF: Development underway; IAF wants 200+ missiles for 40+ Su-30 MKI. Two trials aircraft sent for modification.
    • Brahmos 2: In development with Russia for hypersonic Brahmos.

    Nuclear deterrent:
    • ALA: Air Launched Article, 200km, nuclear missile for Su-30 force. In development

    Cruise Missiles:
    • LRCM: Ramjet equipped long range cruise missile for all three services, in development, 700km-1000 km range
    • Nirbhay: Subsonic, stealthy 750km+ missile for all three services, first test expected this year

    BMD:
    • Phase 1: PAD & AAD ready for deployment
    • PDV to be trialed this year & will replace PAD for next batch of Phase 1 BMD deployment
    • Phase 2: For Target Missiles > 2000 km class, in development. AD-1 and AD-2, hypersonic missiles

    ATGM/ General purpose:
    Nag
    • Army land version version under refinement, 4 km range. Block1 seeker in production at BDL, Block 2 developed for better performance in Indian deserts @ afternoon.
    • Helicopter version @7km, called HELINA, in development.
    • Further variants for fixed wing strike aircraft under development. RF seeker trialed in 2011-12, presumably for this.
    SAMHO/CLGM
    • Semiactive laser guided missile similar to the LAHAT. Intended for launch by both ground launchers and tanks. In advanced development, probably in trials as prototypes have been displayed already for couple of years now. Finally, alternative available to Milan/Konkurs as well.

    Other programs:
    • ARM: New program announced in 2012; single stage, liquid fuelled with 100 km range (similar to Kh-31P?)
    • Name unknown: Missile with multiple precision guided warheads, range of 200 km for platform. UAVs variants also being explored to "launch PGMs" and then be recovered for cost effectiveness. Tech demo in 2013, with tests of a configured missile in 2015-16.
    • Name unknown: Light antiship missile for naval helicopters: In development, unknown if a formal program is being launched.
    • HSTDV: Hypersonic Tech demo program to develop indigenous hypersonic capability independent from Brahmos program, flight trials to begin soon

    SAMs:
    • SRSAM: Deal with MBDA for codevelopment yet to be signed; reports note range is now 20 km and GOI clearance awaited. Trishul development complete but system wont be inducted
    • LRSAM/MRSAM with Israel: 70km and 100 km + ER versions being developed; due this year
    • Akash: MK1 development complete, in production (8 Sq for AF, two regiments for Army); MK2 variant being developed
    • New SAM: Either LRSAM/MRSAM variant or new design, with range of 150km.

    AAMs:
    • Astra: MK1 variant was to have Range max of 80 km, MK2 of 110 km. Missile was redesigned in 2010-12 and underwent series of trials in 2012, with problems stated to be resolved and complete redesign done. Range now suggested as 100 km+. Perhaps MK2 variant?

    MLRS:
    • Pinaka Mk1: 40km, developed and in production, teething issues with ramping up numbers being resolved
    • Pinaka MK2: 60 KM range, to be trialed this year

    On related note:
    Other PGMs:
    • LGB: Sudarshan MK1 in production for AF. Finally, an inexpensive source of LGBs for the IAF.
    • Sudarshan MK2 with INS/satnav in development
    • Also, a guided bomb of 40 km range noted in 2012.
    I bet I missed a few, but there is no hand held missile planned yet(Javelin/Spike mini etc) ... Or Kh-38 class missiles for the AF... mostly focused on the higher end gear. Still a pretty large portfolio of projects
    Last edited by Teer; 27th January 2013 at 20:01.

  8. #278
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper...cle4346998.ece

    Anti-radiation missile by DRDO to be ready in 3-5 years

    A new state-of-the art, anti-radiation missile that can target enemy radars and communication facilities is being developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

    At present there is no such missile in India’s arsenal, while some advanced countries, including the US, Israel and Russia, have such a weapon, top DRDO sources told The Hindu here on Sunday. (India does have the Kh-31P, Harpy and Harop, so it should have been no indigenous missile like this yet in the arsenal.)

    Design work begins

    The government recently gave the go-ahead for the project, and the design work has already begun at one of the key DRDO laboratories here.

    Sources added that in any war scenario, radar and communication facilities of the enemy would be the first target.

    The new air-to-surface 100-km range tactical missile picks up radiation or signals emitted by radars and communication systems, homes on to the target and destroys the network. (my note: wideband seeker?)

    The missile’s front-end comprises a sensor to pick up various radio frequencies.

    It will be a single-stage, liquid-propelled system, sources said. The missile is expected to be ready in the next three to five years. (similar to Kh-31P?)

    After a series of developmental trials, it will be integrated with fighter aircraft, including Sukhoi and Light Combat Aircraft.

    DRDO scientists have also started work on developing a 150-km range surface-to-air missile (SAM) as part of its plans to have SAMs of different ranges.

    The Akash missile, which has already been inducted into the Air Force and the Army, has an interception range of 25 km. A long range surface-to-air missile (70 km) and a medium range surface-to-air missile (50 km) are being developed in collaboration with Israel.

    Both the systems are likely to be inducted by the users in two years. Both the missiles will undergo a series of trials beginning this year. (great!)

    While the 150-km range SAM will primarily be an anti-aircraft system, some of them will also have anti-ballistic missile capabilities, sources said. (my note: more like TBM capabilities)

    A short-range surface-to-air missile (SRSAM), with a range of 20 km, is also being planned, and the government’s nod for the project is awaited. (my note: with MBDA)

    It will be integrated with fighter aircraft, including Sukhoi and Light Combat Aircraft (this means a universal missile including a dogfight missile! Is this what caused the delay? )
    Last edited by Teer; 27th January 2013 at 19:57.

  9. #279
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    And:

    http://currentaffairs.gktoday.in/201...n-a-year-4534/

    The Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) will complete the technology demonstration of an ambitious project to fire hi-tech Precision-Guided Munitions (PGMs) from a mother missile at various targets simultaneously. After technology demonstration, the first test fire of a 200-km tactical missile to launch the PGMs is projected to be carried out in 2 years.

    What are PGMs?
    Precision-Guided Munitions (PGMs) are miniaturized missiles with small seekers, actuators and on-board computers and will be integrated with tactical missiles having a range of 100-200 km.

    PGMs could prevent collateral damage while attacking multiple targets in a war scenario with sub-metre accuracy. PGMs could be integrated with a surface-to-surface missile or an air-to-surface missile.
    Last Updated: January 15, 2013

  10. #280
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,911
    AAAARGH! More terminological silliness!

    What are PGMs?
    Precision-Guided Munitions (PGMs) are miniaturized missiles with small seekers, actuators and on-board computers
    No - they're any munition with precision guidance, whether tiny or huge.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  11. #281
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,547
    Quote Originally Posted by Teer View Post
    It mentions the 110 km range and another report mentions VKS asking for Astra redesign to the new standard. So do this mean the MK1 was dropped and they directly moved to the MK2 (100 km+)?
    Astra: MK1 variant was to have Range max of 80 km, MK2 of 110 km. Missile was redesigned in 2010-12 and underwent series of trials in 2012, with problems stated to be resolved and complete redesign done. Range now suggested as 100 km+. Perhaps MK2 variant?
    I doubt that is the case. The range of Astra changes depending on whoever is reporting. Some outlets quote the head on range at 8km altitude, some at 15 Km and some quote the tail chase range at 15Km alt. Astra mk-2 was supposed to have dual pulse motor and a range in excess of 150Km (at what launch altitude?) with minimum change of dimensions (the rocket motor being around 2060mm long only). I doubt that has been achieved right now.
    Last edited by Twinblade; 28th January 2013 at 01:04.

  12. #282
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,557
    Quote Originally Posted by Twinblade View Post
    http://www.thehindu.com/news/nationa...?homepage=true

    Interesting tidbit about upcoming nuclear subs. Not one, but two subs are being built in parallel !



    It means they have roped in Pipavav Shipyards for nuclear sub construction !!
    not Pipavav..L&T at its Hazira facility. They were the ones that were involved in the assembly of INS Arihant as well.

  13. #283
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve View Post
    AAAARGH! More terminological silliness!


    No - they're any munition with precision guidance, whether tiny or huge.
    Why bother with the bickering about terminology? It's such a waste of time. Especially since most of these reporters are trying to convey information on a field they barely know. If he/she had said these PGMs as versus PGMs alone, it would have been ok. Look at the meat of the message - that the PGMs in question being developed for this missile are apparently miniaturised missiles in their own right. This is clearly a further development of the concept introduced in the Prithvi which had a bunch of powered munitions as part of its warhead package. But instead of being unguided these should be able to maneuver- the reference to actuators also indicates that. Now this project started somewhere in 2008 (http://icast.org.in/news/2008/feb08/feb22ha.pdf) and they spent the last four years building the tech modules for an operational system as versus just a tech generator for other programs. Right now, India is critically dependent on other nations for PGM tech & these program's are critical to bridge the gap
    Last edited by Teer; 28th January 2013 at 08:09.

  14. #284
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Teer View Post
    Why bother with the bickering about terminology? It's such a waste of time.
    Precision in language matters. Misuse words & you can cause big problems. Battles have been lost because of sloppily written orders, huge sums lost because of imprecise contracts. I've known people say "What does it matter whether we say X or Y? Why waste time over it? Everyone knows what we mean." - and then have a major project held up because someone didn't, & instead interpreted what was written differently (but perfectly validly) from what had been meant.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  15. #285
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,547
    Smaller version of BrahMos missile being developed for IAF
    Last Updated: Tuesday, February 19, 2013, 20:11



    New Delhi: A smaller variant of the 290-km range BrahMos supersonic cruise missile is being developed for arming IAF's fighter aircraft.


    A new version of the missile is to be fitted on the frontline aircraft of Air Force including Su-30MKI, Mirage 2000 and the future inductions such as the 126 multirole combat aircraft, BrahMos officials said on Tuesday.


    For the first time, the Indo-Russian joint venture showcased the model of the new missile at the 15th anniversary celebrations of the tie-up between the two countries.


    "Dr AS Pillai (of the venture) has assured us that BrahMos will be developing a miniaturised version of the missile for our other aircraft and the future inductions," IAF chief Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne said.


    BrahMos officials said the range of the missile would be 290-kms and it would be smaller by around three metres as compared to the present missile.


    At the moment, IAF and BrahMos are working on a Rs 6,000 crore project for integrating an air-launched BrahMos on the SU-30 MKI aircraft to allow the warplane to carry one missile under its belly.


    After the new missile is developed, the SU-30MKI would be able to carry three missiles while other combat jets of the IAF would be able to carry one each, they said.


    BrahMos Aerospace is also planning to carry out the underwater testfiring of the missile in near future which is expected to pave way for its induction into the Indian submarine arm.


    PTI
    Smaller version of BrahMos missile being developed for IAF
    A hindi newspaper has reported its length as 5.4 meters.

  16. #286
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,832
    Brahmos on Rafale for india

  17. #287
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve View Post
    Precision in language matters. Misuse words & you can cause big problems. Battles have been lost because of sloppily written orders, huge sums lost because of imprecise contracts. I've known people say "What does it matter whether we say X or Y? Why waste time over it? Everyone knows what we mean." - and then have a major project held up because someone didn't, & instead interpreted what was written differently (but perfectly validly) from what had been meant.
    What you are saying is undoubtedly correct & to be honest, I do agree with you on the general principle of the thing. However, we live in an imperfect world wherein many of the journalists or people who report on defence are often ...if I pull no punches, cretins (who do a pathetic job or make stuff up when they can't be accurate & are pompous about being challenged - take Sengupta, Aroor, Bedi in the Indian context or several from Janes/AWST whom one could similarly name) or simply, do make mistakes since it was not their field to begin with. A handful of people are sincere or knowledgeable. The truly rare are both. Given this scenario, one has to make allowances for the material & seek insights even so, despite the mistakes made.

    If we stick to quibbling about how many errors these guys make, there is no end to it, and there never will be. At the end of the day, you just make do with what you have in terms of information and seek insight from it.

  18. #288
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897


    http://www.deccanchronicle.com/13012...-year%E2%80%99


    The year 2013 will be Astra Year when the next stage of flight trials for the ‘beyond-visual-range-air-to-air missile’ will be carried out. Tejas, Mirage 2000, Su-30 MKI and Sea Harrie will also be integrated with the same.

    A 1998 Padma Shri awardee, Dr Saraswat revealed that the DRDO has got orders worth Rs 1,42,000 crore in the last five years from defence forces for developing products and the next 3-5 years would witness induction of DRDO-developed weapons and systems to the tunes of `80,000 crores into the forces. The first phase of Ballistic Missile Defence is ready for deployment and can intercept and engage missiles upto 2,000 kms.

    Astra will witness at least eight flight tests in 2013 and hopefully the IAF can start the user trials by 2014 said Dr Saraswat.
    1,42,000 Crore = 1,420, 000 million
    $26 Billion worth of orders for DRDO products in the last five years. A huge change! The basic winners here are the DPUSs who have reaped the windfall of successful DRDO designs and being the designated manufacturers.

    Eight tests of Astra this year & user trials in 2014 confirm that the earlier issues with the original design have been overcome as reported earlier.

  19. #289
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    Updated sections on Astra, SRSAM & Sudarshan.


    SSMs
    Prithvi, 100-250km range, liquid fuelled
    • Prithvi -1/2/3 - all in service
    • Naval variant: Dhanush, 350km- Navy - in service

    Agni: Have MaRVs, MIRV & countermeasures in development
    • 1/2/3 - in production
    • 4/5 - development, trials successful, 4000km and 5000 km versions respectively

    K-series/SLBM
    • SLBM/B-05: 700 Km range, developed, waiting for Arihant
    • Shaurya: Land version, being tweaked for Army
    • Next steps, 1500 & 3000 km versions

    Prahaar/Strike SSM:
    • 150 km, 200 kg warhead missile to "bridge the gap" between the conventional Pinaka MRLS at 40 km range, to the Prithvi which has a range of 250km to 300 km. Being tweaked for the Army, and awaiting formal Army indent. Stated to have datalinked guidance and will hence be more cost effective/precise than "dumb" missiles. Six missiles can be launched at different targets. Developed from the AAD design of the BMD program.

    Brahmos:
    • Blocks1/2/3 all developed. Block 3 for Navy & Army allows top attack & seeker discrimination of specific targets. In production.
    • AF: Development underway; IAF wants 200+ missiles for 40+ Su-30 MKI. Two trials aircraft sent for modification.
    • Brahmos 2: In development with Russia for hypersonic Brahmos.

    Nuclear deterrent:
    • ALA: Air Launched Article, 200km, nuclear missile for Su-30 force. In development

    Cruise Missiles:
    • LRCM: Ramjet equipped long range cruise missile for all three services, in development, 700km-1000 km range
    • Nirbhay: Subsonic, stealthy 750km+ missile for all three services, first test expected this year

    BMD:
    • Phase 1: PAD & AAD ready for deployment
    • PDV to be trialed this year & will replace PAD for next batch of Phase 1 BMD deployment
    • Phase 2: For Target Missiles > 2000 km class, in development. AD-1 and AD-2, hypersonic missiles

    ATGM/ General purpose:
    Nag
    • Army land version version under refinement, 4 km range. Block1 seeker in production at BDL, Block 2 developed for better performance in Indian deserts @ afternoon.
    • Helicopter version @7km, called HELINA, in development.
    • Further variants for fixed wing strike aircraft under development. RF seeker trialed in 2011-12, presumably for this.
    SAMHO/CLGM
    • Semiactive laser guided missile similar to the LAHAT. Intended for launch by both ground launchers and tanks. In advanced development, probably in trials as prototypes have been displayed already for couple of years now. Finally, alternative available to Milan/Konkurs as well.

    Other programs:
    • ARM: New program announced in 2012; single stage, liquid fuelled with 100 km range (similar to Kh-31P?)
    • Name unknown: Missile with multiple precision guided warheads, range of 200 km for platform. UAVs variants also being explored to "launch PGMs" and then be recovered for cost effectiveness. Tech demo in 2013, with tests of a configured missile in 2015-16.
    • Name unknown: Light antiship missile for naval helicopters: In development, unknown if a formal program is being launched.
    • HSTDV: Hypersonic Tech demo program to develop indigenous hypersonic capability independent from Brahmos program, flight trials to begin soon

    SAMs:
    • SRSAM: Deal with MBDA for codevelopment yet to be signed; reports note range is now 20 km with negotiations concluded with MBDA, only GOI clearance awaited. Trishul development complete but system wont be inducted
    • LRSAM/MRSAM with Israel: 70km and 100 km + ER versions being developed; due this year
    • Akash: MK1 development complete, in production (8 Sq for AF, two regiments for Army); MK2 variant being developed
    • New SAM: Either LRSAM/MRSAM variant or new design, with range of 150km.

    AAMs:
    • Astra: MK1 variant was to have Range max of 80 km, MK2 of 110 km. Missile was redesigned in 2010-12 and underwent series of trials in 2012, with problems stated to be resolved and complete redesign done. Range now suggested as 100 km+, but remains to be confirmed. Original range specifications were 80 km in head on & 20 km in tail chase. Amongst other new capabilities mentioned are buddy launch, LOBL and HOBs capability (+/-45 degrees). Reports mention seeker integration challenges have been overcome, with new info stating ", improved multitarget handling and excellent ECCM".

    MLRS:
    • Pinaka Mk1: 40km, developed and in production, teething issues with ramping up numbers being resolved
    • Pinaka MK2: 60 KM range, to be trialed this year

    On related note:
    Other PGMs:
    • LGB: Sudarshan MK1 in production for AF. 50 ordered in first order. Range of 9 km.
    • Sudarshan MK2 with INS/satnav in development, 50 km range noted in 2012, new design will seek to minimize rolling observed with MK1.

  20. #290
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    857
    Quote Originally Posted by Teer View Post
    • Naval variant: Dhanush, 350km- Navy - in service
    Really? On what platform?

  21. #291
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,911
    Trishul development complete but system wont be inducted
    What's wrong with it?
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  22. #292
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    857
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve View Post
    What's wrong with it?
    The Indian Navy adopted the Barak as a standard fit over the Trishul back in 2003. Thereafter the Trishul was run as a technology demonstrator program and then closed down in 2008, so its development is being referred to as complete... sort of. Its been succeeded by the Maitri program, combining elements from the Trishul with those from MBDA's VL-MICA.

  23. #293
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Vnomad View Post
    Really? On what platform?
    Sukanya class OPVs, two of which are publicly reported to have received the Dhanush. Given there are six of the class and that the Navy was very keen to acquire Ballistic Missile capability, more of them having been converted is also a possibility.

  24. #294
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve View Post
    What's wrong with it?
    The Trishul suffered from a legion of problems, many caused by the fact that it was overambitious to begin with. The requirements in turn being driven by the tri-services nature, each service wanting its own unique attributes & challenging the program which also struggled with both hardware and software challenges, plus the impact of sanctions which lead to late local development. Ultimately, the combination of technical challenges and cumulative delays, killed the program.

    The Army for instance, influenced the decision to use the Flycatcher system as the standard acquisition and fire control radar since they had acquired many of the type and wanted a common system to leverage. That in turn had challenges for the FCR hardware since finding compact Ku-band magnetrons for the guidance at the time was very hard. Ultimately bespoke development was required, adding years. The Navy asked for lo-alt interception capability against sea skimmers. Again, they asked for interface to their own radar & existing FCS.

    Many such issues. There really should be some sort of rule deciding to ditch the joint development of systems by the three services once the requirements start diverging significantly. Its a WW issue, if we see the manner in which the STOVL/naval variants of the JSF appear to have enforced all sorts of aerodynamic/size constraints on the overall platform. Plus the ALH program too was dropped by the Navy, though it did come good for the Army & AF.

    The hardest were the ones related to the three beam guidance systems. The missile suffered from oscillations & was prone to losing track. This too was resolved after a decision to redesign the system instead of trying to tweak it in 2003-04.

    After all the issues were resolved, the Trishul went through a series of trials to demonstrate effectiveness and consistency of results. 11 flight tests were conducted which were successful. The Army and AF versions in particular were ready for user trials & induction, but the interest was no longer there.

    However, by that time, the Navy moved on to the Barak-1, the IAF decided that since they wanted fire & forget systems since they could afford these & also since they'd be more suited for surge attacks etc. The Army decided to float a similar requirement for their own V-SHORADS. Like most IA tenders/procurements, this too is unlikely to fructify soon. Anyhow, the program was shelved, with it being relegated to the status of a tech demonstrator.

    The follow onto the Trishul program is now the SRSAM. This will be a circa 20 km missile, with MBDA to contribute tech for the active seeker, and some of the missile airframe. Whereas the rest will be developed by India. The program is now cleared in terms of workshare etc, and is waiting for GOI approval. Might be in the second half of the year, to roll it into the next fiscal.
    Last edited by Teer; 27th February 2013 at 21:12.

  25. #295
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    324
    Wasnt the SRSAM recently agreed upon / contracted between GoI and French?

    It was mentioned to be a $6 billion program.

    ---

    Also, what is the difference between PDV and PAD? I didnt know there was a new missile under development for Phase 1 BMD.

    Thanks a bunch.

  26. #296
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Cantabrigia
    Posts
    1,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Teer View Post
    However, we live in an imperfect world wherein many of the journalists or people who report on defence are often ...if I pull no punches, cretins (who do a pathetic job or make stuff up when they can't be accurate & are pompous about being challenged - take Sengupta, Aroor, Bedi in the Indian context or several from Janes/AWST whom one could similarly name)
    So why are the ‘know-it-alls’ like you not taking over their jobs and showing how it should be done? Some years ago, I travelled back from a defence show in the company of the editor of a well-known defence magazine. He told me that he was always looking out for new talent, and was bemoaning the fact that he could find little.

    But I suspect that you would not survive more than a few weeks under the stress of a newsroom operation.

    Perhaps you should try the simple exercise of counting the number of words in a professional defence magazine and dividing that total by the number of journalists that the magazine employs, and seeing what their weekly or monthly output must be in terms of published pages. Then try to imagine working at that pace for the rest of your professional life.

    Today's mail brought me the latest issue of a magazine in which I have a couple of published items. Only about 7-8 pages in all, but I remember only too well much work and time writing them took. And I have already spotted the first mistake. Perhaps I have qualified as one of your cretins.

    I ‘have it lucky’ at defence shows. I’m a grey-haired gentleman well past retirement age who has only a limited number of professional topics to cover for a limited number of clients. And all these topics are in areas where I have some internationally recognised professional expertise.

    At a recent show, I found myself lunching at the same table as a well-known young lady reporter. (Perhaps she is also on your cretins list?). She had time to eat her starter and a few mouthfuls of the main course before having to grab her briefcase and run to her next appointment. The senior engineer who was hosting the lunch was happy to expound on his subject for another hour or more (much to the delight of one of my professional clients) but the relentless show schedule meant that most of his audience had to move on.

    I asked the editor of a major defence magazine if the lady reporter’s problem was normal. He showed me his diary for that day, with appointments at 30 minute intervals stretching from breakfast time until late evening.

    Even in my younger days I could not have survived that pace, and I’d love to see you trying – moving from a tank company to an aircraft company to an electro-optical company, to a submarine builder, to an electronics company, and finishing up with a small arms company, while effortlessly demonstrating your expertise and knowledge in all these areas.

    I could not do it, and I doubt if you could either. But to stand on the sidelines and criticise? That’s fairly easy.
    Last edited by Mercurius; 27th February 2013 at 22:45.
    Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

  27. #297
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,832
    Of course critcs are easy. "Art is dufficult, critcs is easy". But doese it in anyway exonerate responsability to written words?
    I am in no way trying to point at anyone/any profession. But what you are saying is that either journalists are not numerous enough, either not competent (due to lack of specialization?) enough.
    In the end, who are we (amateurs) meant to trust?

  28. #298
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurius View Post
    So why are the ‘know-it-alls’ like you not taking over their jobs and showing how it should be done? Some years ago, I travelled back from a defence show in the company of the editor of a well-known defence magazine. He told me that he was always looking out for new talent, and was bemoaning the fact that he could find little.

    But I suspect that you would not survive more than a few weeks under the stress of a newsroom operation.

    Perhaps you should try the simple exercise of counting the number of words in a professional defence magazine and dividing that total by the number of journalists that the magazine employs, and seeing what their weekly or monthly output must be in terms of published pages. Then try to imagine working at that pace for the rest of your professional life.

    You may have 1,700 forum postings to your credit, but if the 180 words that made up the posting that I am responding to is a typical length, that means you have generated only some 30,000 words. That’s no more than the equivalent of about 40 pages of a typical magazine or professional journal. Not a lot for someone who has his or her share of a magazine's pages to fill.

    Today's mail brought me the latest issue of a magazine in which I have a couple of published items. Only about 7-8 pages in all, but I remember only too well much work and time writing them took. And I have already spotted the first mistake. Perhaps I have qualified as one of your cretins.

    I ‘have it lucky’ at defence shows. I’m a grey-haired gentleman well past retirement age who has only a limited number of professional topics to cover for a limited number of clients. And all these topics are in areas where I have some internationally recognised professional expertise.

    At a recent show, I found myself lunching at the same table as a well-known young lady reporter. (Perhaps she is also on your cretins list?). She had time to eat her starter and a few mouthfuls of the main course before having to grab her briefcase and run to her next appointment. The senior engineer who was hosting the lunch was happy to expound on his subject for another hour or more (much to the delight of one of my professional clients) but the relentless show schedule meant that most of his audience had to move on.

    I asked the editor of a major defence magazine if the lady reporter’s problem was normal. He showed me his diary for that day, with appointments at 30 minute intervals stretching from breakfast time until late evening.

    Even in my younger days I could not have survived that pace, and I’d love to see you trying – moving from a tank company to an aircraft company to an electro-optical company, to a submarine builder, to an electronics company, and finishing up with a small arms company, while effortlessly demonstrating your expertise and knowledge in all these areas.

    I could not do it, and I doubt if you could either. But to stand on the sidelines and criticise? That’s fairly easy.
    Actually, your post above is an undeserving defense on behalf of fools who deserve none of it.

    Even more surprising, given the rapid manner in which you descended to an ad hominem argument. "Know it all" apparently for just noticing the obvious.

    Why the thin skin? Surprising.

    I can guess at your history - especially given how often you mention it, and your professional history & I'd have placed you in the ranks of the few who are both knowledgeable and sincere.

    But then again - it seems that for all your own achievements, you seem to lack the ability to distinguish between the charlatans who do inhabit your profession, as versus people like yourself.

    If you can't see the difference, more's the pity.

    And what exactly is this rubbish?

    But I suspect that you would not survive more than a few weeks under the stress of a newsroom operation.
    She had time to eat her starter and a few mouthfuls of the main course before having to grab her briefcase and run to her next appointment. The senior engineer who was hosting the lunch was happy to expound on his subject for another hour or more (much to the delight of one of my professional clients) but the relentless show schedule meant that most of his audience had to move on.
    I asked the editor of a major defence magazine if the lady reporter’s problem was normal. He showed me his diary for that day, with appointments at 30 minute intervals stretching from breakfast time until late evening.

    Even in my younger days I could not have survived that pace, and I’d love to see you trying – moving from a tank company to an aircraft company to an electro-optical company, to a submarine builder, to an electronics company, and finishing up with a small arms company, while effortlessly demonstrating your expertise and knowledge in all these areas.
    Oh poor thing! She barely had time to grab a bite to eat. She had a busy schedule, much worse!

    Which world are you living in? You think the rest of the world has it easy?

    In the course of work, millions have gone days & nights without an iota of sleep. Meals are routinely skipped.

    People who routinely work long hours with minimal expectation because their professions & fields require the same.

    You expect me & the millions of other worker bees to have some sympathy for some person who has barely enough time to have lunch (sob, sob) while doing interviews? How freaking hard.

    Ah the toils of this poor journalists life, going to arms shows & spending time talking to people.

    Guess what, been there, done that. Several times over.

    Its NOTHING in terms of both complexity, and stress levels when compared to being a developer, or a manager, or a sales person or one of the umpteen other professions which require back breaking toil at the drop of a hat.

    And given you would have worn those hats one time or the other, do go back & think how relentless your schedule was then. At that point of time. Unless you were one of the rare few who could set his own schedule and operate by that.

    That should also answer your questions why the rest of us are not "taking over" this very hard profession etc etc. Its simply not satisfying for many of us.

    Other folks may like it for a bunch of their own reasons.

    But all of this is besides the point, since none of it, excuses the lack of quality in many "articles", which by your statements, seem to be all around the all important word count.

    I routinely see the worst trash, printed in newsmagazines, defense journals, by asinine journalists or cretins, if you would prefer, by "authors"

    a) lack the expertise in topic of interest
    b) are not interested in acquiring it (as demonstrated by follow on articles remaining mediocre)
    c) have zilch accountability (publish, and publish, who cares)

    Hacks churning out a lot of copy & then repeating the same bilge again and again, with selective "letters to the editor" published - as long as they are adulatory or dwell on the minor errata.

    That coupled that with a tendency of many "journalists" to routinely act like a "know it all" in terms of making bloopers, yet be judgmental, pick sides - yet headline as a neutral observer & so forth...then he/she deserve to be called out.

    I know of one prominent "journalist" who is no longer welcome to visit a prominent region of coverage, after he openly picked sides thanks to commercial interests. Did he change his spots? No, he continues merrily. Without an iota of introspection.

    Many others who routinely write entire screeds without an iota of fact checking. A half hour spent doing research would have been enough. But no, why should they bother?

    Only a very limited bunch of people (DTI's BillS or a handful of "greybeards" in some other defence journals, aviation specialists eg Steve Davies and a few others) can now be relied on to provide some level of serious insight into defence related topics.

    Unfortunately, you, they etc are in the minority & no matter how much you may attack me for voicing that the emperor has no clothes, the reality is that undeserving, overprivileged hacks are the majority, and do spoil the impression the media puts across.
    Last edited by Teer; 27th February 2013 at 22:39.

  29. #299
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by halloweene View Post
    Of course critcs are easy. "Art is dufficult, critcs is easy". But doese it in anyway exonerate responsability to written words?
    I am in no way trying to point at anyone/any profession. But what you are saying is that either journalists are not numerous enough, either not competent (due to lack of specialization?) enough.
    In the end, who are we (amateurs) meant to trust?
    Its all a bunch of excuses.

    Take a look at this forum itself & say Scorpion82's posts on Eurofighter. They are better than 90% of the EF reportage out there. And this is a so called "amateur" as versus a professional defense journalist. If he had that routine access & did it full time, his quality of work would dwarf all the lengthy articles in the expensive trade mags.

    The amount of information here:http://rafale.freeforums.org/

    Is far in excess of what appears in most of the world's media, bar the rare article which is well sourced & sufficiently detailed.

    At the end of the day, its all about sincerity.

    There are far too many "professional journalists" who are going around posturing as experts in a field they don't either care about, or just treat as yet another job

  30. #300
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by killerbean View Post
    Wasnt the SRSAM recently agreed upon / contracted between GoI and French?

    It was mentioned to be a $6 billion program.
    Yes, the final agreements around who'd do what etc were agreed on when Hollande recently visited India. But GOI approval is pending. Because as soon as they do, and the program is launched, money has to be allocated, which is why I'd assume it'll be after the next fiscal starts (later this year).

    ---

    Also, what is the difference between PDV and PAD? I didnt know there was a new missile under development for Phase 1 BMD.

    Thanks a bunch.
    PDV is solid fuelled (primary) with a more sophisticated end game system (second stage). It is likely to have an IIR or a combined IIR/RF seeker system. It should be able to go up higher & take out faster targets as well. Typically, the longer ranged the ballistic missile system, the faster its speed. Since the BMD is all about hitting a bullet with a bullet, even incremental improvements are welcome.
    The solid fueled part (IMO) is amongst the most significant.

    The BMD Phase 1 is technically ready with the PAD/AAD combo, but a PDV would be a more logistics friendly system on account of being solid fuelled. You can deploy it to places wherein Prithvi infrastructure does not exist.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES