India eyes 'Patriot missile'

Rage

DFI TEAM
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
5,419
Likes
1,001
Here's an article from 2005, when the first buzz about the possible sale of the older-generation PAC-2 was made:


Panic Grips Pakistani Generals
as US Agrees to Sell Patriot
Missiles to India


By Syed Saleem Shahzad
Special to the South Asia Tribune




KARACHI, February 20: Panic has almost broken out in the Strategic and Planning Division of Pakistan Army’s General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi as in the next 24 hours a top level team of US technical experts will land in New Delhi to brief Indian defence experts on US Patriot Advanced Capability-2 Anti-Ballistic Missile System which could shoot down any of the Pakistani nuclear missiles.

New Delhi made its first request to the US for this defence system in November 2002 and it is now that Pentagon has decided to begin the sale process in what the Pakistani GHQ believes would bring a virtual end to the Pakistani nuclear deterrence and tilt the power balance in India’s favor, despite Pakistan’s nuclear capability.

The Army strategists do not believe Musharraf’s closest ally and friend in the War against Terror, US President George W. Bush, could be doing such a devastating thing to Pakistan. “If India gets the Patriot anti-missile defence system, where do we go, because it would be almost impossible to penetrate with the indigenous Ghauris and Hataf missiles that we have,” one worried analyst said.

Indian Defence Ministry has confirmed that a four-member team, led by Edward Ross of the Defence Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), will be in New Delhi from February 20 to 24 to discuss the missile defence system.

The team will present a technical brief to the International Security division of the Ministry of External Affairs and Ministry of Defence. Ross is second in command to General Koffler at the DSCA in Pentagon. Indian media reports say the Pentagon team will interact with officers of the Indian armed forces and the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) during their four-day stay.

The Bush administration gave clearance for a classified technical presentation of PAC-2 system as part of the Next Step in Strategic Partnership (NSSP) agreement signed between India and the US last year.

Surprisingly General Musharraf or his Generals have not yet raised any hue and cry in Washington about this escalation of the arms race in the sub-continent but once the General gets out of his slumber, he is going to make noise like a skeleton on a hot tin roof, according to analysts.

The first indication that Washington was willing to share technical data came after Indian Ambassador to US, Ronnen Sen, flew to New Delhi last November to discuss the missile defence issue with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee. It was then that the government gave clearance to Sen to proceed further.

While the Indian defence establishment is keen to have a look at the PAC-2 system, it has its eyes on the future because this opens the way to PAC-3, the latest upgrade of the anti-missile system developed by US defence majors Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.

PAC-2 is a long-range, all altitude and all weather air defence system to counter tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and advanced aircraft. The range of the missile is 70 km and it can climb to an altitude greater than 24 km. The minimum flight time — time needed to arm a missile — is less than three seconds and maximum flight time is just three-and-half minutes.

Patriots were first put to use by the Israelis in the first Gulf War when Iraqi missiles fired at Israel were intercepted during flight and destroyed. Ever since much advanced versions have been developed. Till date, Washington has shared this technology, updated in 1991, with key allies, including Israel, Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia and Taiwan.

PAC-3 was seen in action in Operation Iraqi Freedom and has a kill rate of more than 95 per cent. Neither China nor Pakistan have this type of anti-ballistic missile capability and the geo-strategic location of Pakistani missiles makes the Patriots more effective as any Pakistani missile could be intercepted in the air while in Pakistani air space or much before it could reach any major Indian city.

Analysts are still not sure why Washington would go for such an escalation but many believe it has lot to do with the intrinsic lack of trust in General Musharraf and his Army Generals, specially their double games and cover ups of the Dr AQ Khan nuclear sales network.

Pakistan defence managers have been claiming over the last few years that a level of deterrence had been achieved with the development of nuclear-capable long and short range missiles and it was this deterrence which prevented India and Pakistan from going to war during the 8-month long armed stand off of troops during the Vajpayee Government.

They concede that lack of spare parts and non-supply of new aircraft had left the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) almost crippled with just a few F-16 fighters after most of them were cannibalized. The US has consistently refused to consider Pakistani requests for new F-16 fighters, although Pakistan has been declared a Non-NATO ally and military sales have resumed to Islamabad.

These sales have so far been all on US terms and the latest goods in the pipeline worth $1.2 billion are basically 8 P-3C Orion reconnaissance aircraft which, many experts believe, Pakistan hardly needs in preference to strike capability F-16s or equivalent aircraft.

So while the official Pakistani media is spinning yarn about the latest CBMs with India and opening of a Bus Service to Srinagar, the GHQ strategists are in a state of semi-shock as all their levers vis-à-vis India have been neutralized and now Washington is willing to provide the Indians with the capacity to neutralize the nuclear deterrent as well.

Independent defence experts believe the Pakistanis lost much of their bargaining power in Kashmir when General Musharraf agreed to a ceasefire in Kashmir, allowed India to build the fence on the Line of Control and when India installed the latest and effective monitoring devices which almost completely stopped the infiltration of Jihadis from the Pakistani side.

Once India was satisfied that Pakistan was no longer capable of keeping the pot boiling inside Kashmir, it launched the political and diplomatic moves to ease tensions and allow more room to Kashmiris. It also announced symbolic withdrawal of Indian troops from Kashmir and agreed to the Bus Service, even dropping the condition of passports for Kashmiris.

Surprisingly within India there is a strong section of defence experts who do not want to acquire the Patriot Missile System from the US.

“There are disarmament fundamentalists who object to missile defence on the basis of obsolete Kissingerian arguments that missile defence will unleash an arms race. There are self-reliance fundamentalists who assert that India can develop its own missile defence technology and therefore does not need any US inputs. Thirdly, there are still veteran cold warriors who cannot forget the Enterprise mission of 1971 and continuing US support to Army-led Pakistani regime,” known defence writer K Subrahmanyam said in an article recently.

But he wrote: “If we act on our own ancient wisdom, in this globalizing and post-Cold War world, mindful of our own national interest and security, we should exploit every opportunity to augment them.”

“India particularly needs missile defence because we have adopted a ‘‘no-first-use’’ doctrine in respect of nuclear weapons. Therefore, a missile defence for our national decision-making center and some part of our retaliatory forces would make our ‘‘no-first-use’’ posture more credible. It would enhance the uncertainties of our potential adversary and act as a disincentive to his ready resort to nuclear weapons.”

Secondly, he wrote: “Pakistan is not in a position to engage in such an arms race without technological inputs from countries like China and North Korea and large scale financial help from Saudi Arabia. In the present international strategic environment, the probability of these developments taking place is not high.”

“The US willingness to share information on the missile defence under NSSP is an indication of America’s recognition of the realities of the globalizing world and India’s role in it…The US is well aware that neither in civilian commerce nor in arms purchases can Pakistan compete with India. The US-Indian technology bridge has no analogue in respect of Pakistan.”

Amid this tightening noose around the neck, the GHQ in Rawalpindi is depending wholly on the personal rapport and skills of General Musharraf and looking up to him whether he would be able to persuade President Bush not to create the huge imbalance in the sub-continent.

"If Musharraf fails, there would be a lot of angry and depressed faces in the GHQ and Musharraf will have to double his own personal security and cut down inter-action with many of his brothers in uniform. He will have to spend more time ensuring his survival," according to an analyst.


The writer is Pakistan Bureau Chief of Asia Times Online. He wrote this piece specially for the South Asia Tribune. Email: [email protected]


Panic Grips Pakistani Generals as US Agrees to Patriot Missile Sales to India
 

bsn4u1985

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
125
Likes
7
Success rate vs. accuracy

The U.S. Army claimed an initial success rate of 80% in Saudi Arabia and 50% in Israel. Those claims were eventually scaled back to 70% and 40%. However, when President George H. W. Bush traveled to Raytheon's Patriot manufacturing plant in Andover, Massachusetts during the Gulf War, he declared, the "Patriot is 41 for 42: 42 Scuds engaged, 41 intercepted!". The President's claimed success rate was thus over 97% during the war.

On April 7, 1992 Theodore Postol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Reuven Pedatzur of Tel Aviv University testified before a House Committee stating that, according to their independent analysis of video tapes, the Patriot system had a success rate of below 10%, and perhaps even a zero success rate. Also on April 7, 1992 Charles A. Zraket of the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University and Peter D. Zimmerman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies testified about the calculation of success rates and accuracy in Israel and Saudi Arabia and discounted many of the statements and methodologies in Postol's report.

According to Zimmerman, it is important to note the difference in terms when analyzing the performance of the system during the war:

* Success Rate – the percentage of Scuds destroyed or deflected to non-populated areas
* Accuracy – the percentage of hits out of all the Patriots fired

In accordance with the standard firing doctrine on average four Patriots were launched at each incoming Scud – in Saudi Arabia an average of three Patriots were fired. If every Scud were deflected or destroyed the success rate would be 100% but the Accuracy would only be 25% and 33% respectively.
Patriot Antenna Mast Group (AMG), a 4 kW UHF communications array.

The Iraqi redesign of the Scuds also played a role. Iraq had redesigned its Soviet-style Scuds to be faster and longer ranged, but the changes weakened the missile and it was more likely to break up upon re-entering the atmosphere. This presented a larger number of targets as it was unclear which piece contained the warhead.

What all these factors mean, according to Zimmerman, is that the calculation of "Kills" becomes more difficult. Is a kill the hitting of a warhead or the hitting of a missile? If the warhead falls into the desert because a PATRIOT hit its Scud, is it a success? What if it hits a populated suburb? What if all four of the engaging PATRIOT missiles hit, but the warhead falls anyway because the Scud broke up?

According to the Zraket testimony there was a lack of high quality photographic equipment necessary to record the interceptions of targets. Therefore, PATRIOT crews recorded each launch on videotape, and damage assessment teams recorded the Scud debris that was found on the ground. Crater analysis was then used to determine if the warhead was destroyed before the debris crashed or not. Furthermore, part of the reason for the 30% improvement in success rate in Saudi Arabia compared to Israel is that the PATRIOT merely had to push the incoming Scud missiles away from military targets in the desert or disable the Scud's warhead in order to avoid casualties, while in Israel the Scuds were aimed directly at cities and civilian populations. The Saudi Government also censored any reporting of Scud damage by the Saudi press. The Israeli Government did not institute the same type of censorship. Furthermore, PATRIOT's success rate in Israel was examined by the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) who did not have a political reason to play up PATRIOT's success rate. The IDF counted any Scud that exploded on the ground (regardless of whether or not it was diverted) as a failure for the Patriot. Meanwhile, the U.S. Army who had many reasons to support a high success rate for PATRIOT, examined the performance of PATRIOT in Saudi Arabia.

Both testimonies state that part of the problems stem from its original design as an anti-aircraft system. PATRIOT was designed with proximity fused warheads, which are designed to explode immediately prior to hitting a target spraying shrapnel out in a fan in front of the missile, either destroying or disabling the target. These missiles were fired at the target's center of mass. With aircraft this was fine, but considering the much higher speeds of TBMs, as well as the location of the warhead (usually in the nose), PATRIOT would most often hit closer to the tail of the Scud due to the delay present in the proximity fused warhead, thus not destroying the TBM's warhead and allowing it to fall to earth.

In response to the testimonies and other evidence, the staff of the House Government Operations Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security reported, "The Patriot missile system was not the spectacular success in the Persian Gulf War that the American public was led to believe. There is little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scud missiles launched by Iraq during the Gulf War, and there are some doubts about even these engagements. The public and the United States Congress were misled by definitive statements of success issued by administration and Raytheon representatives during and after the war."

A Fifth Estate documentary, quotes the former Israeli Defense Minister as saying the Israeli government was so dissatisfied with the performance of the missile defense, that they were preparing their own military retaliation on Iraq regardless of US objections.That response was cancelled only with the cease fire with Iraq.

Psychological effects of the system


Saddam Hussein had vowed to rain down missiles on Israel with hopes of provoking Israel to attack, thus aligning Iraq with a common cause of many Arab nations and possibly causing those who were members of the coalition to withdraw. If this occurred the United States and its allies would lose crucial support and, in Hussein's mind, would not be able to continue the war.

Israel was concerned over the use of biological or chemical agents in the Scuds. The Patriot gave the Israeli government a way to calm its people in the early days of the war

so it can give psychological advantage over our enemy..they will not dare to touch our country.....
 

blade

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
154
Likes
16
If India finally decides to procure PAC III it will be done as a part of a long term planning to operate a number of BMD system in order to gain maximum possible security for our nation. We should remember that currently not many countries are making successful progress in this field through independent research(on the ground). Apart from USA other countries could be stated as follows 2. Israel 3. Russia.
India can be considered as extremely lucky for having established a very close defense tie with all the front line countries pioneering in BMD technology.
There are some intrinsic criticality associated with BMD techs in global term. None of the technologies are perfect where as each system has some special features which make them suitable for certain conditions.
Indian BMD capability can be classified in 2 categories until now
I. Indian true BMD capability started to build up since year 95’. In the period 95’- 01’ India procured a significant number of S 300 PMU II s. Though not as sophisticated as PAC III are capable enough to pose almost insurmountable challenges to any fighter jet around the world (of 4 to 4.5 gen category) but their anti ballistic capability was never tested beyond doubt. Still these system could pose very serious threat to older Chinese IRBMS which Pakistan procured.
II. The indigenous development of BMD tech was one of the most silent & truly secretive projects taken up by India with unprecedented vigor. When commenced no one really believed India to take it as a front line project and pursue with vigor to see it fructifying any time in recent days. India though began with Russian help swiftly turned towards Israel
After realizing the truly unique BMD capabilities developed by Israeli scientists. When compared to US effort Israeli technology offers a more accurate but short range solution to the ballistic threat. Logically speaking present Indian joint venture with Israel in acquiring some of the vital components for her own PAD & future AAD will finally produce a customized ARROW for Indian defense forces.

III. Indian interest in procuring PAC III might be based on some of the key features of this system which is again unique in its own term when compared to other systems. This is the only BMD system that has been used in real time war to detect & destroy enemy ballistic missiles. Even the fact that PAC I/II proved to be some what ineffective against Iraqi scud missiles basically should be counted in its favor as this system got a real time chance to gather very important data on BMD roles. The experience gathered in operation desert storm along with the several independent tests carried out and simulated by US based on the real time data, called for extensive and step by step up gradation of this system. Presently PAC III boasts off a very smart missiles with extremely high agility. It can protect a vast area and has impeccable software design which can provide ultimate situational awareness and procession speed.
CMD: The JV with Israel to produce and procure BARAK MR-SAM is an endeavor to address the crying need of Indian defense to counter Chinese cruise missile threats. As per the initial promise
this system will be capable to counter a number of Arial threats such as aircraft , helicopters , CM’s drones & other unmanned arial vehicles.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,280
Country flag
what will this buy mean to our own BMD program it seems like we are spreading ourselves thinly in too many different projects or buys, if anything we should buy THAAD if offered rather than the patriot I really don't see anything special about patriot compared to our own BMD/AKASH/PAD program but I know we always love the foreign maal so this is the way we are going but i hope we continue our indigenous program after investing so much time and money.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
my 0.02

it seems there are many who say we should not go for this system i say we should go for the PAC 3 as well as S-300, S-400 THAAD and Arrow while also inducting our own SAM's why you ask- my answer, having many different systems overlapping one another makes it that much more difficult for and enemy missile/aircraft to penetrate your airspace, each different system is affected differently by enemy jammers(radar jammers in case of air strike) and so one or the other gets the kill.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,280
Country flag
it seems there are many who say we should not go for this system i say we should go for the PAC 3 as well as S-300, S-400 THAAD and Arrow while also inducting our own SAM's why you ask- my answer, having many different systems overlapping one another makes it that much more difficult for and enemy missile/aircraft to penetrate your airspace, each different system is affected differently by enemy jammers(radar jammers in case of air strike) and so one or the other gets the kill.
BR I agree about the overlap, the reason I like THAAD is the X-band radar which could possibly utilized to make our BMD fullproof right now we are more or less covered with short range missiles and IRBM'S with BMD,SAM'S,SPYDER and our Planes but THAAD would give us coverage against ICBM's and all of the systems together would provide a nice ovelap. But my main concern is I hope the buy does not make us lazy and abandon our own BMD efforts.
 

blade

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
154
Likes
16
what will this buy mean to our own BMD program it seems like we are spreading ourselves thinly in too many different projects or buys, if anything we should buy THAAD if offered rather than the patriot I really don't see anything special about patriot compared to our own BMD/AKASH/PAD program but I know we always love the forign maal so this is the way we are going but i hope we continue our indigenous program after investing so much time and money.
There is a huge difference in the concept of PAC III & THAAD.( hit to kill & hit to kill + blast) are not the same thing. Where as INDIAN PAD is maturing as technology demostrator which will also
provide the vital gap filling at lesser cost.THAAD being a strictly hit to kill system and being still untested in real time war comes in the same league as ARROW. India is already working hard to develope this sytem wich will be a counter for chinese 5000+ BM's under the AAD project. BMD is not like just another project or acquisition. We have to get all that is tested and all that is known to be latest (but not tested ) to have some real credibility in terms of BMD. 10% higher quality tank or jets will not be an issue but 1 enemy ballastic missile will be enough to push india back by 20 years. Being the only tested platform with extream upgradation PAC III also has a substantial psychological effect on adversories. " LETS GIVE IT A TRY, AFTER ALL INDIAN BMD MIGHT BE ANOTHER RUSTOM " attitudes will be taken care off.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,280
Country flag
nice post Blade, honestly the feature I like best about THAAD is the X-band radar if we can get the radar without buying the whole system I am sure we can do wonders with it.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
BR I agree about the overlap, the reason I like THAAD is the X-band radar which could possibly utilized to make our BMD fullproof right now we are more or less covered with short range missiles and IRBM'S with BMD,SAM'S,SPYDER and our Planes but THAAD would give us coverage against ICBM's and all of the systems together would provide a nice ovelap. But my main concern is I hope the buy does not make us lazy and abandon our own BMD efforts.
We should not abandon development efforts but we should not neglect air defense either, the Indian network is in sore need of a revamp, and if the PAC-111 is provided we should take it.
 

blade

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
154
Likes
16
nice post Blade, honestly the feature I like best about THAAD is the X-band radar if we can get the radar without buying the whole system I am sure we can do wonders with it.
Actually currently India is trying for such best picks only but again you know its so hard to get things from this usa people. EVERY ONE should stand up and thank god for giving indian politicians enough sense to have gone for a comprehensive defence pact with israel. Israel is our secret gate way to most sensitive western techs and we should try our best to keep it up. We desperately need it to maintain the adge over china. Things from israel dont come with much strings attached to it may be a little bit of extra under the tabble cash.
sorry for being off topic but seriously i couldnt controll myself.
 

blade

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
154
Likes
16
DRDO Looks Abroad To Mature ABM System

DRDO's Dr VK Saraswat has held a few rounds of preliminary discussions with officials from Lockheed-Martin about rapidly bringing the indigenous anti-ballistic missile system to maturity. Funny how he forgot to mention this at the chest-thumping press conferences he's been holding about the home-grown ABM programme. The Lockheed-Martin Missiles & Fire Control Division based at Dallas, TX has been asked to come forward with a roadmap on how to quickly mature the AAD programme.

The folks here are impressed, but they still have that sometimes irritatingly patronising air about assessing anything that they haven't made themselves from the ground up. So Lt Gen Dennis Cavin, a retired US Army man who now holds a key post in Lockheed's air defence technology division, laughs off Saraswat's somewhat ill-advised sobriquet for the AAD -- that it's 30 per cent better than the Patriot-3 system. Now the Patriot-3 is itself a fairly dubious system -- the 99 per cent kill probability that Lockheed-Martin trumpets is definitely not accurate -- or at least true under very restricted and benevolent test conditions. On the other hand, Lt Gen Cavin is of the view that the AAD's hit-to-kill capability is at best suspect, and it's kill probability is unproven. I told him that you obviously had to wait a few more tests to take a call on that.

Either way, Saraswat and Lockheed seem to concur on one point -- that a few successful tests of a complex technology is only the beginning. The real work actually starts now. Therefore Lt Gen Cavin's team is heading down to hold technical level dialogue with Saraswat and his team to chart out a possible partnership that, if successful, will see an infusion of PAC-3 type technology into the AAD to catalyse its progress to operational clearance. By now, the Americans are pretty clear that they're not going to be able to push the PAC-3 pitch to India with any credibility anymore, what with the successful AAD tests looked at as deep Indian milestones in missile research.

Lockheed-Martin's gameplan was to offer the endo-atmospheric PAC-3 and the exo-atmospheric THAADS (terminal high altitude air defence system) as a layered BMD system, though the MoD is of the view (as far as back as Pranab Mukherjee's time, actually), that if the US is really interested in seeing India well-protected against a missile threat, it should help India's own programme. Somehow, I find that much more gratifying than being forced to cough up billions for a bunch of PAC-3 systems.
Link: LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: DRDO Looks Abroad To Mature ABM System
 

bsn4u1985

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
125
Likes
7
The AN/MPQ-53/65 Radar Set is a passive electronically scanned array radar equipped with IFF, electronic counter-countermeasure (ECCM), and track-via-missile (TVM) guidance subsystems.

The AN/MPQ-53 Radar Set equips PAC-2 units, while the AN/MPQ-65 Radar Set equips PAC-3 units. The main difference between these two radars is the addition of a second traveling wave tube (TWT), which gives the -65 radar increased search, detection, and tracking capability. The radar's antenna array consists of over 5,000 elements that "flash" the radar's beam many times per second. Additionally, the radar's antenna array contains an IFF interrogator subsystem, a TVM array, and at least one "sidelobe canceller" (SLC), which is a small array designed to decrease interference that might affect the radar. Patriot's radar is somewhat unique in that it is a "detection-to-kill" system, meaning that a single unit performs all search, identification, track, and engagement functions. This is in contrast to most SAM systems, where several different radars are necessary to perform all functions necessary to detect and engage targets.

The beam created by the Patriot's flat phased array radar is comparatively narrow and highly agile compared to a moving dish. This gives the radar an unmatched ability to detect small, fast targets like ballistic missiles, or low radar cross section targets such as stealth aircraft or cruise missiles. Additionally, the power and agility of Patriot's radar is highly resistant to countermeasures, including electronic countermeasures (ECM) radar jamming and radar warning receiver (RWR) equipment. Patriot is capable of quickly jumping between frequencies to resist jamming.

india will get an upgraded AN/MPQ-65 radar.
 

bhramos

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
25,625
Likes
37,233
Country flag
India to consider buying Patriot missiles???

India to consider buying Patriot missiles?


India could sign a multibillion-dollar arms deal with the United States to purchase patriot missiles, a report on Indian television has said.

The Indian army has requested a briefing with U.S. officials to discuss the Patriot-3 Anti-Missile System, according to the Times Now television Web site, whose report is unsourced.

The system is expected to include missile launchers and an upgraded AN/MPQ-65 radar to enhance detection in high-clutter environments.

The briefings are likely early next year after which demonstrations could follow. The Times Now report noted that the Patriot missile system was used extensively in the 1991 Gulf war as well as in the Iraq war.

Meanwhile, the Indian air force has informed the Defense Ministry that it wants 10 C-17 military transport aircraft. The aircraft was on show during the India-U.S. training exercises in Agra last month.

No official statements have been issued by the Indian Ministry of Defense.

The National Aerospace Laboratories has confirmed that the third prototype of the Saras civilian aircraft will be ready by the end of 2010.

It was eight months ago that the second prototype of the 14-seater plane crashed during a test flight, killing three people on board, a report in the Hindu newspaper said.

M.S. Chidananda, head of the Center for Civil Aircraft Design and Development, said that Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. would manufacture the aircraft at its Kanpur facility. The aircraft is to be just over 1,000 pounds lighter than the second prototype and is expected to get an airworthy certification by the end of 2011.

The Indian air force said in June that it would buy 15 Saras, a project that was started in 1991 in conjunction with Russian developer V.M. Myasishchev Experimental Design Bureau.

The project almost came to a halt when it was hit by U.S.-imposed sanctions in 1998, after India's nuclear tests in Pokhran. Its maiden flight was in May 2004.

The first prototype weighed around 11,290 pounds using two 850 hp Canadian Pratt & Whitney turbo-prop engines of the push-pull configuration. This was later replaced by an upgraded PT6A 1,200 hp engine that was also used in the second prototype, whose weight was pared down by 880 pounds through use of composite materials.

A court of inquiry into the crash of the second prototype found that wrong engine relight drills given to the pilots caused the crash.

The Saras basic configuration closely resembles the Embraer/FMA CBA 123 Vector, which never went into production.

India to consider buying Patriot missiles - UPI.com

why do we need PAC-III, we already S-300PMU's which are already upgraded twice.
and another way this deal may dump our Indigenous Anti BM sheild program.
are the Politicians doing this deal to just Please US leaders?
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top