Indo-Russian Relations

Discussion in 'Foreign Relations' started by A.V., Feb 18, 2009.

  1. Sridhar

    Sridhar House keeper Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    Sir even i tried to say Bramhos cannot be used a awacs killer role , because of its big size and weight.
     
  2. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,918
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Software changes are the smallest aspect if you need to turn it into an air to air missile.

    We will have to redesign the entire Brahmos airframe, fins, thrusters, air intakes etc. That will change it into an entirely new missile.

    Easier to develop a new missile like the KS-172 rather than upgrade a cruise missile. As you said, it is not restricted by MTCR.:)
     
  3. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    270
    Sorry P2P i think I got drifted from the discussion keeping MTCR in focus. Well when I was in russia I had access to a few top guys and they were telling me that the KS 172 is a totally Indian Funded project. And the Russians were with Vympel as they had already developed a potent LRAAM.
     
  4. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,918
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    That's right. We are Jointly building the Novator version while the Russian Airforce is going to choose the R-37 Vympel version.

    Novator lost the Russian competition to Vympel. India got to choose the Novator version since the Russians will not give us the Vympel version. The Novator KS-172 is inferior to the Vympel R-37.

    The KS-172 is bigger, heavier and we can be sure which seeker is better.
     
  5. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    270
    I still dont understand P2P why we havent got it. It was funded faar back in the year 2002. We still dont hear the news of any tests.
     
  6. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,918
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Only one word.............. Complexity.
    An air to air missile is more complex than an ICBM or a rocket to the moon.

    Long range AAM have THE most complex electronics circuitry.

    The KS-172 JV started in 2004 and not in 2002, atleast officially. Also, it is not yet operational, atleast officially. Defence matters are not so public. So, we cannot be sure about the status of the program.
     
  7. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    270
    I just have a doubt how will the AAM go through a wide range of jamming equipment and the support fighters to kill the AWACS. This itself makes me think a lot. I think most probably the Missile will be passive guided or it must carry an INS with mid course updates from another AWACS.
     
  8. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    21,921
    Likes Received:
    9,248
    if we have it or not should remain secret, this would be a nice suprise for the SAAB eeryie and Y-8 who would be in the range and sitting ducks.
     
  9. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,918
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    The AWACS do not carry jammers. The fighter will focus on firing multiple fox 3s at the target. Meaning if you have 5 KS-172s. Fire all 5 of them to get a confirmed kill. MKIs could probably carry 8 missiles too. Speculating, since MKI can carry 8 tons, 8 missiles will be less than 8 tons.

    Fight the escorts at the same time with your backup.

    The KS will be active and semi active, not passive. Mid course updates will be performed by the Irbis with its extended range. The final 50km(probably) will depend on the active seeker on the missile. The final 50+ MKIs(not sure about the numbers) will get new engines and the IRBIS on production. They will be the ones firing the KS. The earlier MKIs will still need MLUs.

    The fighter will have to fire its missiles at a very high altitude at supersonic speeds. (Supercruise will help)
     
  10. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    270
    P2P...so you are telling that the Novators must be fired in salvos to ensure a kill?...And why must we fight the Escorts?..The whole idea of that range is to destroy the AWACS without engaging the escorts.
     
  11. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,918
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    That's no guarantee mate. The escorts will operate from their best point of engagement. They may or may not stick to the AWACS, especially considering Pak airspace is smaller. There will be other fighters in the vicinity too since we will be operating in enemy territory.

    Salvos are a moot point considering the distance to be traversed. It's debatable. It is just keeping in line with 2 BVR for a target as per Russian Doctrine.

    Past experience indicates that the American experience with the Aim-54 was bad. It was fired at 3 fghters till date(all Iraqi) and they all missed. 2 Mig-25s and 1 Mig-23. Also, the Aim-54 was fire and forget unlike the AMRAAMS. So, Salvos are a good option to increase kill probability.
    Aim-54 was designed to kill Soviet bombers.
     
  12. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,918
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    We will have 2 versions for K-172. One with big boosters for MKI and the other for smaller planes called R-172.
     
  13. SATISH

    SATISH DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    270
    But I thought there was only one version in the making and the MKIs were the only ones that were going to carry it. The Iranians had good success with their phoenixs. I think it all depends on the doctrine. The Russian doctrine always presses on quantity with quality.
     
  14. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,918
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    It's the same version. The K-127 has a large booster for extended range of 400km while the R-172 does not carry the extra booster. The booster is an addon. The R-172 has a range of 300km.
     
  15. mattster

    mattster Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    652
    Location:
    California
    Open question a joint development of missiles, etc

    This is a general question to all the readers of this forum.

    You hear a lot of talk these days about joint development of missiles between developed countries and developing countries.....eg Brahmos, etc.

    It not just India, even other buyer nations are trying to do it.

    I tend to have a very cynical view about these joint development efforts.

    My question is:

    If you are developing a missile system with a technologically advanced country, and they provide the guidance hardware, propulsion system, and materials & explosives technology plus all the simulation capability......then can the developing country that only provides the software for the guidance really claim that this is joint development ???

    I understand the the software may be really complicated....but still as an engineer, this seems like hogwash to me.

    It seems to me like a lot of these so-called joint developments are done by the seller like Russia to create the public perception that the seller nation is really sharing its technology and to give the buyer country a sense of accomplishment.

    I totally understand that from a PR angle.....its really good PR to say to the government and the tax-paying public that we did not just buy the system but we co-developed it. Everybody likes to hear that....its good for business in both countries.

    So Readers.....lets have a rational discussion about this. This post is not intended to denigrate the achievements of anyone or any group. Lets leave the nationalistic chest-thumping fervor out of this debate. I am an Indian myself.

    Plus, I am not just talking about India & Russia......This is being done by a lot of other developing countries too. What do you guys think...is it more fluff than substance ???

    PS: I remember seeing a picture of the Chinese space module when they did their manned mission a few years back........I couldnt help thinking that it looked like a carbon-copy of the early Soviet Soyuz modules !!
     
  16. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,550
    Likes Received:
    1,279
    Location:
    Bangalore
  17. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,550
    Likes Received:
    1,279
    Location:
    Bangalore
  18. I-G

    I-G Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,736
    Likes Received:
    55
    Russia to deliver engines for Indian MiG fighters

    16:0821/08/2009
    ZHUKOVSKY, August 21 (RIA Novosti) - Rosoboronexport and Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) have signed a contract at the MAKS-2009 air show on the delivery of 26 RD-33 series 3 engines to India, Russia's state arms exporter said on Friday.

    The RD-33 series 3 is an upgraded version of the RD-33 powerful RD-33 turbofan engine with thrust vectoring for MiG family fighters. The engine provides superior maneuverability and enhances the fighter's performance in close air engagements.

    In 2005, Russia signed a $250 million deal with India to modernize engines for the MiG-29 fighters of the Indian Air Force. According to the terms of the deal, HAL will make 120 RD-33 series 3 jet engines at its Koraput plant for the upgrade of MiG-29 fighters.

    The current contract will help HAL master the assembly of the RD-33 jet engines and use the experience in the assembly of next generation jet engines.

    "These engines are installed on MiG aircraft, including the MiG-35 fighters, which are participating in the announced tender on the delivery of 126 fighters to the Indian air force," a Rosoboronexport official said.

    Six major aircraft makers - Lockheed and Boeing from the United States, Russia's MiG, which is part of the UAC, France's Dassault, Sweden's Saab and the EADS consortium of British, German, Spanish and Italian companies - are in contention to win the $10 billion contract.

    Russia has said that the first two MiG-35 aircraft will be delivered to India in August for test flights prior to the results of the tender. In late 2009, Russia will conduct a series of flight tests with live firing for an Indian air force delegation at a testing ground in Russia.

    Moscow has also said it is ready to transfer all key technology to India's Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. and provide assistance for the production of the aircraft in the country if MiG-35 wins the tender.

    Russia to deliver engines for Indian MiG fighters | Top Russian news and analysis online | 'RIA Novosti' newswire
     
  19. purplemarco

    purplemarco New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
  20. purplemarco

    purplemarco New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0

Share This Page