Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 407

Thread: Indian Missiles News

  1. #211
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by rayrubik View Post
    The missiles in this photo looks a bit out of place. Can anyone confirm if this is genuine.

  2. #212
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by WinterStars View Post
    The missiles in this photo looks a bit out of place. Can anyone confirm if this is genuine.
    pic seems to be fake but there are real cpictures os same config shown in defense expo




  3. #213
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    are those the pinaka missiles or the prithvi?
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  4. #214
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    336
    certainly not prithvi... Something like the Indian equivalent of the BM 30.

    Edit
    Looks like the board says prahaar, which is a tactical Ballistic missile with active guidance not like dumb rockets from the Smerch.
    Last edited by WinterStars; 1st May 2012 at 12:16.

  5. #215
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by matt View Post
    are those the pinaka missiles or the prithvi?
    Front: Tata 12x12 Prahaar carrier
    Back: Tata (12x12 or 8x8 ???) Pinaka carrier

  6. #216
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Anant View Post
    Front: Tata 12x12 Prahaar carrier
    Back: Tata (12x12 or 8x8 ???) Pinaka carrier
    That is great news...if it comes to fruition..now stick some of those on small boats as well..
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  7. #217
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    322
    Quote Originally Posted by WinterStars View Post
    The missiles in this photo looks a bit out of place. Can anyone confirm if this is genuine.
    I think those are poorly constructed dummy missiles.

  8. #218
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    4,535
    "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

  9. #219
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    kashmir
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by Anant View Post
    Front: Tata 12x12 Prahaar carrier
    Back: Tata (12x12 or 8x8 ???) Pinaka carrier
    Front one truck is TATA 12X12 it is Parhaar Tactical missile TEL a spin-off AAD missile of DRDO.

    and behind TATA 12X12 is Pinaka launcher on Tatra truck 8X8 Both product shown here is from DRDO.
    east or west india is the best


  10. #220
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    http://www.thehindu.com/news/nationa...?homepage=true
    India has developed a missile defence shield which can be put in place at short notice to protect at least two cities, bringing the country on par with an elite group of few nations.

    The shield, developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation, has been tested successfully and an incoming ballistic missile with the range of up to 2,000 km can be destroyed. The system is to be upgraded to the range of 5,000 km by 2016.
    The speed at which they have come up with a PAC 3 type solution is pretty amazing considering the usual delay rate in DRDO projects..

    This will also make the USN happy as it may help them against aggression to Diego Garcia if a combined Pacific Indian ocean strategy is to be in place..
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  11. #221
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,527
    Pallav Bagla might not be the best science and tech reporter out there but he sure gets the first scoop on all the stories. NDTV report on GSLV Mk 3:-
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=jBmyUMDLDPM

  12. #222
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,378
    Quote Originally Posted by matt View Post
    are those the pinaka missiles or the prithvi?
    You thought that those were Prithvi missiles !?

    Look at the diameter of the Prithvi..its a nuclear capable SRBM for God's sake not a rocket!




  13. #223
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,558
    Informative interview of Dr Avinash Chander..

    ‘Quality our concern'

    T.S. SUBRAMANIAN
    Interview with Avinash Chander, Chief Controller, Missiles and Strategic Systems, DRDO

    AVINASH CHANDER has a rare distinction. He is the architect of five of India's strategic missiles – Agni-I, Agni-II, Agni-III, Agni-IV and now the long-range Agni-V. The missiles of the Agni family were developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) of which Chander is now the Chief Controller (Missiles and Strategic Systems).

    As Programme Director, Agni-V, he played a key role in the launch of the long-range ballistic missile on April 19 from Wheeler Island, off the Odisha coast. The launch propelled India into a select club of countries (such as the United States, Russia, France and China) that have the capability to build missiles that can travel more than 5,500 kilometres.

    Chander joined the DRDO in 1972 after graduating in Electrical Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. He obtained his M.S. in Spatial Information Technology from Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad. He has made specific contributions to the Agni programme – its management, mission design, guidance, navigation, simulation and terminal guidance.

    Excerpts from an interview he gave Frontline in Hyderabad on April 21:

    India's successful test-firing of Agni-V has generated much interest internationally.

    Many countries are talking about it. The fact that they are talking about it and are concerned about it shows the impact it has made and how it is fitting into their policies. That is why I called it a game-changer.

    China has reacted in a big way. It says that Agni-V actually has a range of 8,000 km and that India has underplayed it.

    Is it true?

    No comments.

    What made your team confident that Agni-V will succeed in its maiden launch?

    Over the years, our missile designs have been robust except in the case of Agni-III, where the first flight was a failure because there was a lacuna in the design itself. In no other flight did we have a real design failure. Yes, there was again some design lacuna in Agni-IV. But the failure of its first flight was for quality-related reasons.

    A component failed.

    Agni-IV's failure was for quality reasons, but it was not the primary cause. We are now pretty confident of our design strength. We had already tested in Agni-IV the major technologies – such as the composite motors, their conical shape, etc. – that went into Agni-V. But Agni-V had much bigger motors. We had a lot of confidence that our process was well-understood and the missiles' behaviour was well-defined.

    We were testing the new navigation system – the ring-laser gyro system – for the first time and we were constantly upgrading and improving it. By the time we went to Agni-V, we had made 20 systems and tested them on ground in various conditions. A lot of data were generated on their performance. Wherever there was a weakness, it was addressed. We had built-in redundancies to take care of unforeseen emergencies. So we were pretty confident that we would have a total mission success.

    Our on-board computers went through hundreds of runs in various modes. We tested them in various types of conditions – way beyond the actual missile capability – to ensure that neither the system nor the software would fail.

    We now have a system of configuration control and configuration management and an elaborate review mechanism at various stages so that design problems do not slip through. Even with all that, there were occasions when gaps occurred, but in the end we had a rigorous flight review mechanism. This is a practice we borrowed from the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO). When Mr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam came [to the DRDO from ISRO], he made the Agni programme very rigorous. Multiple teams had to go through every item, re-verification was done, and if there was any problem it was rectified on the spot. That was how we were confident that we had captured all the problems for Agni-V.

    Our primary concern was quality. Unfortunately, quality continues to be our concern. If you take a missile of this type, there are hundreds of thousands of connections – components being soldered on the integrated circuit systems. Most of them are made manually in our country. The processes are still not automatic. If any one of these joints fails, the mission fails.

    There are hundreds of people across the country who have done these components. Although we have instituted a strong quality mechanism in various industries working for us, and we have our own quality control supervisors working there, there is nothing like 100 per cent inspection assurance. That was our primary concern. Ultimately, the product is as good as the weakest element in that chain.

    I shall cite a simple case. We purchase components from our vendors. When we were mounting one such component in a package, our inspectors found that it was different from what we had envisaged. It was a fake component.

    Fake?

    Totally fake. It was not from the source we wanted. It was not of the same quality. It did not match the shape of the component we had ordered. But it had the same batch number. So that is the level to which you should make sure that you do not have any problem. We are steadily trying to improve. Today, we have a better quality control system.

    We have created a Strategic Services Quality Assurance Group, dedicated to the Agni class of systems. But at the industrial level, it has to be much, much better. That was the only concern we had [when we launched Agni-V].

    You can simulate vibration, shock and acceleration one at a time. You cannot simulate all of them together. But when a missile is in flight, all of them happen together. That is the most critical environment.

    Besides, there are so many components that are operating for the first time. About 75 per cent of the failures happen owing to a collection of failures. About 15 per cent of failures occur owing to single-shot systems – some weakness somewhere in a system, such as the rocket motors' separation system, which is not testable. The Americans have also failed in some of the anti-ballistic missile trials because the missile's separation system did not work. They are single-shot systems. [The failure in the U.S. happened] not in the missile which was used as an interceptor but in the missile that was used as a target. Hardly 5 per cent of the failures occur because of design lacuna. We put in a lot of hard work for two years.

    How did you achieve this quantum jump in range – from Agni-III's 3,000 km to Agni-V's 5,000 km?

    We went through various steps. One was that we had to make the upper stages lighter. That was the first and most critical factor. We decided to make both the second and third upper stages of composites. That gave us a major benefit in terms of weight. In Agni-III, both the first and second stages were metallic.

    Having made the composite stages, we found that they were coming out better than the metallic stages, strength-wise and property-wise. So we could operate at a higher pressure. So you do not have losses due to gravity, and the losses are reduced. We then went through a total philosophy change. Up to Agni-III, we ignite the upper stage first, then separate the lower stage so that there is no problem of separation.

    We decided to leave behind that culture of space vehicles. We now put big retro motors, which create a thrust of four tonnes each – totally 16 tonnes of thrust – just to separate the stages so that no dead weight is passed on to the upper stage.

    Correspondingly, we decided to make the mission stronger so that there are no interfaces and the separation is clean. We studied and created extensive models to simulate them on the ground in all types of disturbed conditions in wind tunnels. With all that, we could remove the inter-stages altogether. The weight we had reduced by making the upper stages of composites was fed back into the third upper stage. The weight did not increase overall, but the total energy increased considerably. To reach the 3,000-km range, you need a velocity of five kilometres per second. To reach the 5,000-km range, the velocity has to be more than six kilometres a second.

    That was our approach to the repackaging of our vehicle. We made major modifications in the upper stage. V.G. Sekaran, Director, Advanced Systems Laboratory [ASL], DRDO, played a primary role in showing us how to repackage the payload structures so that the weight comes down by 1,000 kg.

    How did the payload structures lose weight?

    The payload structures had become much lighter; the weight was almost 60 per cent less than what it was earlier. It was a very elaborate exercise. We went to all the stages to see how to lose weight, how to repackage, how to reduce length, what technologies are needed for these, what was the modelling needed, and so on. That was how we could pack practically the same weight – from Agni-III, 48 tonnes in weight and 17 metres in length, to Agni-V, 50 tonnes in weight and 17.5 metres in length, but from a range of 3,000 km to more than 5,000 km. We wanted to make sure that all these capabilities were first proven in Agni-IV. We removed the open inter-stage. We had a closed inter-stage. We had composite motors. We had a compact payload. Of course, there is a vast difference between Agni-IV and Agni-V payloads. But the basic system was the same. But Agni-V had much more visibility and we wanted to make sure that all the elements of Agni-V were good. Agni-IV as a system did its job.

    What are your future plans for Agni-V?

    There are three stages of missile development. The first is design. As far as Agni-V is concerned, we have crossed that phase.

    The next stage is proving the canister-launch capability. We have done the canister-launch for smaller missiles.

    Like Shourya.

    We have done for BrahMos also. The ASL is the laboratory which developed the canisters for both BrahMos and Agni-V. The gas generators that propel the missiles out of the canisters are made in the ASL. These technologies are available. They are being upscaled.

    For instance, if I need five or ten tonnes of thrust there [for BrahMos or Shourya], I need 300 tonnes of thrust here because the mass is so much higher. That is upscaling. We know how to do it. So we will be doing missile ejection tests [from a canister]. We have set up a facility for that at Shamirpet, Hyderabad. We will take our canister to that facility, put a dummy missile inside with a small full-scale booster, and eject it. That small motor will push the missile out and you can recover it. It may be damaged. We have to do three or four tests in that condition to establish all the parameters of launch. What is the kind of vibration and shock that are caused? What is the time that the missile takes to come out of the canister? How much heat is transferred to the canister? And how much energy is lost? All these have been modelled. We have to validate these models by experiments. No other way is possible. That is the first priority.

    These experiments will start in May/June. The launchers are already getting ready in the industry – the road-mobile, canister-launch system.

    Private industry is making the road-mobile launcher with the launch platform.

    They are making the launcher to our design. All our products are Indian. The road-mobile launcher will be delivered in May. The canister is ready. The integrated test will start in June. We are aiming for the missile launch by the end of this year. Or maybe by the beginning of next year, because we have to do a number of tests and evaluate them. If everything goes well, yes, by the end of this year.

    A road-mobile, canisterised launch in final, user configuration will take place next year.

    The full, final version in all aspects will be tested in the early part of next year. We want to complete all trials by the end of next year.

    How many trials will you do?

    We need two or three trials from the canister. If two perform very well, we may take a decision to go ahead. Then the production will start. From the production chain, the user will pick some missiles and launch them to validate the production process and then the induction will start. Totally, we will have six more tests before Agni-V is inducted [into the Army].

    Tests by the user?

    Tests by the user will be along with our team. That serves a dual purpose – to train the user in operating the system and to validate the production process.

    So there will be six tests, including the user trials.

    Yes. It is not user trial. It is called pre-induction trial. The user is part of all our trials. Right from the first test, the user is involved – what we are getting, what the performance of the missile is, etc. Every test is a user trial in that sense. Canister trials will happen from June onwards. By December, the canisterised flight will take place.

    V.K. Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, said recently that the DRDO would not cap the Agni programme. So, will we go in for a missile beyond 5,000 km even though we don't need one?

    Dr Saraswat very clearly said there was nothing like a static threat perception. Threat is a dynamic scenario. If tomorrow India's trade requirements go beyond distant regions and it feels threatened by somebody, its requirements will change. The DRDO does not wait for the threat to become a reality before it starts the development. That is why it is a perception. We have to develop capabilities to meet futuristic threats. That is why there is nothing like capping a programme.

    A programme, by definition, is for a limited duration. After we deliver Agni-V, that programme is over. We will work parallely…. MIRV [Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle] is definitely a technology we want to develop and we are going to develop it. We will be creating that capability. Similarly, we will be creating manoeuvring warheads, another capability that is a must. It will give you the ability to target places with high precision, with nuclear or conventional warheads.

    So the role of a missile changes, the threat perceptions change, the dynamic geopolitical situation changes. So there is nothing like capping or not capping a programme. You never cap technology. New programmes evolve as the need arises, but technology development will be a continuous process.

    In fact, the future will require intelligent warheads because the capabilities increase for intercepting ballistic or cruise missiles…. Everybody is developing defences against these weapons. It may take time. But it will happen. So we have to upgrade our weapons. We have to go three steps further – two steps to catch up and one to overtake. In warfare, unless you are better than the best, you cannot win the war.

    Our next step will be to build intelligent warheads which will have the capability to assess the risks and take active or passive action or counter-measures. They will be the warheads of tomorrow, and work has to start now. It may take five or ten years. There is tremendous work that needs to be done to develop state-of-the-art weapons with multiple capabilities.

    China has said that India has a long way to go to match its capability. I cannot comment [on it] because I do not know the Chinese capability. But we know that technology-wise, we have the capability and the knowledge for converting technological capability to build further on it.

    Agni-V has been developed in three years. MIRV may come in two and a half years from now. We want to make that process faster and faster. We have instituted fantastic measures to make it happen – how to make industries respond faster, how to make design-culture faster, how to make in-house quality products, and so on. So we are attacking the problem at various levels. Agni-V is one example of that process happening. We were able to do it in less than three years after the project was sanctioned. No other weapon has been developed in three years.

    There is a perception that Agni-V need not be road-mobile because it is a strategic weapon, which will never be used. It is more a deterrent.

    India is a peace-loving nation. It has never taken an offensive action except when it was threatened. In such a situation, you have to make sure that whatever be your deterrence measures, you are well protected. In today's world, with the way the precision and yield of weapons are going up, it is very difficult to store missiles in static sites. Fifty years ago, we kept the missiles in hardened silos. At that time, the missiles used to land with a CEP [circular error probability] of a few kilometres. Today, they have a CEP of 100 metres. With 100 metres, the kind of defences that you will want is so massive that it will be impractical to have them.

    So what is the way out? It is that you should be mobile. When a target is static, it is most vulnerable. A moving target has better chances of survival.

    A road-mobile missile has many avenues to go. In a city like New Delhi, where hundreds of thousands of vehicles are moving, it is not easy to keep track.

    When does the Army want a canisterised Agni-V from now?

    A canister gives you the best advantages. You can stop on the roadside on the highway, launch from there and go away. You can stop the traffic for five minutes on either side, launch and go away. Your ability to move, your options to launch and your operational flexibility increase manifold. You have a reduced reaction time. Everything is already prepared. Just make the missile vertical in three minutes, and the launching takes another few minutes. So you stop, launch and go off. That does not give the enemy a chance even if he detects you. He does not know from where you are going to launch. Only when you have made the missile vertical for launch will he realise that you are going to launch it. The boost-phase destruction that people are talking of, that is, the missile getting destroyed before it takes off, will not be possible if you have a short reaction time as in a canisterised launch unless you have a space-based radar weapons system. Today, it is non-existent and is not likely to be developed in the next couple of decades at least.

    You say that Agni-V can reach the farthest corners where you want to exert your influence…

    I need not stress the strategic significance of Agni-V. You can see from the responses of others what the strategic significance of this mission is.

    As far as we are concerned, its primary significance is that you have strategic depth. With Agni-V, you can target all potential threat areas. You can go close to the border areas or thousands of kilometres away from enemy countermeasures and launch this missile. That is the most important strategic significance.

    The fact that it can reach large parts of the globe has its own impact – of your acceptance, and more importantly, your arrival as a missile power. We were at the receiving end of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Irrespective of these technology denial regimes, we can do what we need to do. If we can do 5,000 km with all these regimes, we can do anything. We have to set ourselves a goal and we can achieve it. That is for strategic missiles. We are looking at tactical missiles also. We are looking at certain game-changing processes, at longer-range capability, much better kill capabilities than we had thought of earlier. We want to anticipate the future.

    We want to be prepared. In those preparations too, we want to make the user a partner because these will be systems which will neither be made nor be available anywhere else. That is the class we are graduating to. This confidence has come from Agni-V and other systems.
    Link:http://www.flonnet.com/stories/20120601291003600.htm
    PEOPLE.FIRST.MISSION.ALWAYS.
    Have a good one..

  14. #224
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    4,535
    Indeed Nice Interview , Quite detailed and informative.

    It seems all the technologies for A5 was validated in A4 and then it was scaled up for Agni-5
    "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

  15. #225
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,558
    Shows how such a big system can go drastically wrong with one small faulty component..intriguing scenario with the component being totally differenent yet having the same batch no...how could it have happened..
    Good to know the road mobile launcher will be ready by May..I think Tata is the one making it.Hopefullly they will not base it on the Prima.
    I hope team-bhp does a review on that.
    PEOPLE.FIRST.MISSION.ALWAYS.
    Have a good one..

  16. #226
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    4,535
    Quote Originally Posted by rayrubik View Post
    Shows how such a big system can go drastically wrong with one small faulty component..intriguing scenario with the component being totally differenent yet having the same batch no...how could it have happened..
    In rocket science you either get 100 % right or you dont get it all , even a small component which is non-redundant can cause a mission failure ...we had ASLV failure due to dust particle found on critical system chips.

    The batch no with different component is more of quality control issue ....good it was found though on time...ask the russian how many failures they faced with Bulava due to QC issue :P
    "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

  17. #227
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Austin View Post
    It seems all the technologies for A5 was validated in A4 and then it was scaled up for Agni-5
    I think that was made clear just after A-IV test.

  18. #228
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,527
    According to Dr Saraswat, Akash SAM might have 3 production lines (one BDL and two pvt) to fulfill the huge order backlog (at the end of the video)

    http://in.news.yahoo.com/video/natio...-29122283.html

  19. #229
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    336
    Any news about the Arrow 2 for India. India needs some purpose built ABM system to prevent zealots to its west from destroying human civilization.

  20. #230
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    4,535
    Quote Originally Posted by WinterStars View Post
    Any news about the Arrow 2 for India. India needs some purpose built ABM system to prevent zealots to its west from destroying human civilization.
    We dont need them neither Arrow-2 or 3 , DRDO has PAD and AAD which is good for the task , they have underdevelopment PDV , AAD-1 AAD-2 for future ABM roles.
    "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

  21. #231
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    we do not know enough details to say that we dont need Arrow 2..
    Last edited by matt; 20th May 2012 at 13:39.
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  22. #232
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    4,535
    Quote Originally Posted by matt View Post
    we do not know enough details to say that we dont need Arrow 2.. plus the current Indian system will not be in position for some time and only in Cities with the correct infrastructure..so if the Arrow does not have limitations in position/placement etc it would make sense for India to buy it..
    DRDO chief clarified before that neither S-300 ,PAC-3 nor Arrow or other systems meets Indian requirement and it has to be a interceptor designed by us to meet our needs.
    "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

  23. #233
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Austin View Post
    DRDO chief clarified before that neither S-300 ,PAC-3 nor Arrow or other systems meets Indian requirement and it has to be a interceptor designed by us to meet our needs.
    The people in India who have a monopoly on R&D say that only a home grown system with R&D and Development by them will be suitable for India and no one questions it?

    i am not saying that the Indian system should not be finished I also do not feel it will be good to put all the eggs in the DRDO basket as they do not always perform so well...
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  24. #234
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by matt View Post
    The people in India who have a monopoly on R&D say that only a home grown system with R&D and Development by them will be suitable for India and no one questions it?

    i am not saying that the Indian system should not be finished I also do not feel it will be good to put all the eggs in the DRDO basket as they do not always perform so well...
    Matt no offense, but your frequent outbursts of pessimistic views in Indian Threads, dunno why it makes me remember a character from sci fi series:



    I know u care about India but dude have some faith on desi scientists. They are much more qualified & experienced than you and me in their respective fields to take such decisions

    Cheers
    Last edited by Anant; 20th May 2012 at 14:27.

  25. #235
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,527
    Quote Originally Posted by matt View Post
    The people in India who have a monopoly on R&D say that only a home grown system with R&D and Development by them will be suitable for India and no one questions it?
    The users question it. The CAG questions it. A consensus is reached and decisions taken.

  26. #236
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Anant View Post
    Matt no offense, but your frequent outbursts of pessimistic views in Indian Threads, dunno why it makes me remember a character from sci fi series:



    I know u care about India but dude have some faith on desi scientists. They are much more qualified & experienced than you and me in their respective fields to take such decisions

    Cheers
    Love it! no offence taken and fair comment! i dont deny that i come out like that... but its not always without reason...

    Thanks! cheered me up! It was a very constructive way of making a point which is always appreciated! I shall try and be more optimistic..
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  27. #237
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,241
    Quote Originally Posted by Anant View Post
    Matt no offense, but your frequent outbursts of pessimistic views in Indian Threads, dunno why it makes me remember a character from sci fi series:



    I know u care about India but dude have some faith on desi scientists. They are much more qualified & experienced than you and me in their respective fields to take such decisions

    Cheers
    Sadly, whether it's called 'pessimism' or not I feel the same as him there. DRDO, HAL and the like don't have anywhere near a steady track record in delivering outside of the ballistic missile programmes. Delays and cost overruns are the rule rather than the exception and often by the time something is ready for induction the armed forces has already substituted an import and is not all that enthusiastic about the domestic product any more.

    Given the realities in almost every field in India except defence(automotives, for instance) I very much believe the government should cultivate the private sector with the same fervour with which it funds the DRDO and Defence PSUs.

  28. #238
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Witcha View Post
    Sadly, whether it's called 'pessimism' or not I feel the same as him there. DRDO, HAL and the like don't have anywhere near a steady track record in delivering outside of the ballistic missile programmes. Delays and cost overruns are the rule rather than the exception and often by the time something is ready for induction the armed forces has already substituted an import and is not all that enthusiastic about the domestic product any more.

    Given the realities in almost every field in India except defence(automotives, for instance) I very much believe the government should cultivate the private sector with the same fervour with which it funds the DRDO and Defence PSUs.
    Check out the video I posted of interview with Dr Saraswat a couple of posts back. He talks about the same issues.

  29. #239
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,378
    IAF Akash SAM tested successfully again..

    They've now tested several random production batch samples of the Akash for the IA and IAF 5 separate times with only 1 missile suffering a glitch.

    link


    BALASORE: Defence scientists on Wednesday successfully test fired the indigenously-developed Air Force version of the Akash missile from the Integrated Test Range at Chandipur near here. This was the fifth trial of the anti-aircraft system in the last fortnight.

    "The Air Force version of Akash missile was test-fired from the ITR. The trial was successful and met all the mission objectives," a senior defence official said.

    The anti-aircraft missile, with a strike range of 25 km and capable of carrying warhead of 60 kg, was test fired from a mobile launcher at launch complex-III of the ITR.

    The trial, which formed part of the country's routine air defence exercises, was conducted at 7.57 am, an official of Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) associated with the Akash missile project said.

    To re-validate the technology and operational efficacy of the missile, defence forces conducted the trial with logistic support provided by the ITR, the official said. The Akash weapon system, which has its Army version too, was inducted into the armed forces in 2008.

    Wednesday's test-fire came after similar trials conducted from the same test range on May 24, 26, 28 and June 1On June 1, two Air force version of Akash missiles had been test fired successfully in quick succession, the official said.
    Last edited by BlackArcher; 7th June 2012 at 05:23.

  30. #240
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,527
    India Begins $2.2-billion QR-SAM Procurement Effort

    MBDA will be pitching the in-development Indo-French joint short-range surface to air missile (SR-SAM) or Maitri for the competition, in the hope that "enhanced synergies" will see a concept weapon get its big break even before its fully operational. It is not clear if MBDA will field any other product. I hear that MBDA has competition from the Rafael-IAI SpyDer, an upgraded version of Raytheon's MIM-23 Hawk or modified SLAMRAAM and the Russian TOR M1 9M330.
    It would be nice to see Maitri being pushed to at least a tech demonstrator status. If it achieves the performance parameters, sooner or later it should receive a few orders, being a semi domestic product.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 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