Search results

I don't know the exact reason for this but integrating a hot launch missile (like MRSAM) into a CCL complex (like UVLM) is not easy, multi-packing is harder. The PG-LRSAM being developed by DRDO is for both IAF and IN. Yes, it is concerning, VLSRSAM will lighten the saturation load a bit but...

I'd be happy to read the parliamentary report that lists MRSAM' range as 0.5-100km and proven wrong. My 'thinking' (statement) is based on a poster released by the developer, MRSAM' effective range is still listed as 70km in new pib press releases. Please link the report you speak of.

1. Intercepting an SRBM is possible, but it can't act as a BMD missile with just 16km altitude. 2. The claim that only Barak-8 can intercept BrahMos is shit, SM-2, Aster 30, SM-6 & ESSM have been tested against BrahMos like target and have performed well. Several SAMs currently serving can...

I was expecting a trash source, Wikipedia is even trashier. The poster I shared mentioned events that happened after the Livefist article about LRSAM range extension, which was picked up by everyone thereafter. MRSAM has an acceptable pk for 1-70km range, this is why it is mentioned in the...

Poor play, the responsibility to prove your statement lies with you. The minimum engagement range with good pk is 1km. It would be good if you use correct figures. The old poster for MRSAM I won't always play along this nicely, be responsible next time.

I'll ask again, please provide us with an official brochure or press release (a news article won't do) where the minimum range of 500m is stated for Barak-8 or MR-SAM. And that's not what layered ADS means. To others, MR-SAM features an active gimballed seeker, and VL-SRSAM will feature an...

Mind sharing that?

He was probably talking about a recent interview of CNS where he didn't mention IAC-2 but mentioned that IN needs to start planning for the replacement of Vikky as it will retire around 2040. He didn't say IAC-2 will replace Vikky, nor did he say Navy dropped the 3 carrier position. He said we...

I'm sorry I missed that s in the 2030s... And I'm suggesting to built two IAC-2, not follow up Vikrant (around 2030). Please read my reply again because I think we are having a misunderstanding here. 5 CATOBARs in PLA N by 2030-> 2-3 003 class (320×79m) & some 004 (larger). The construction...

1. Tonnage isn't what we should run after, a better design is what we need. Large flight deck & hangar capable of carrying 36 fighter jets, 2-3 AEW&C aircraft, 6-8 helis in normal days & further more in surge capacity. 2. Economy will not be $10T (nominal), more in park with $7T. 2 sister ships...

The quoted displacement of IAC-2 is 65k tonne, this is NOT the fully loaded displacement. QE has an *empty displacement* of 65k tonnes, a similar design was said to be on offer for IAC-2, this is from where the loaded displacement of IAC-2 being 75-80k tonne is estimated. QE is expected to carry...

Do you know how much does QE class that was offered for IAC-2 displaces at full displacement? :) Fully loaded displacement of IAC-2 will be more or less 75-80k tonne.:cool1:

You guys know what? This shouldn't even be a debate of "why" IAC-2 is needed. This is a thread to discuss about development on the project & not the argument about if it's needed. Create a different thread for Sub v/s Carrier. Not this.