DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

Dessert Storm

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2020
Messages
1,672
Likes
5,862
Country flag
thanks for reply, any latest known status regarding HAL RUAV?
It's currently in design-development phase. With proper funding, it's achievable in 1 year. Annual report 2019-20 dosen't mention anything about RUAV.
The broad specs are as follows:
The 200 kg UAV, which is equipped with a twin-blade main rotor and a locally developed petrol engine, is stated to have a range of 200 km, endurance of six hours, and a service ceiling of 6,000 m. The platform, the fuselage of which is 4.2 m long and 1.28 m wide, is reportedly capable of flying at a top speed of 200 km/h and can carry a 40 kg payload.(defenceupdate.in)

For more details on kind of payloads
 

vishnugupt

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
2,583
Likes
11,048
Country flag
Ok.
Lets try to bring your crying to a logical end here. Lets have a look at some of the BVRAAM in use with IAF now.

As you could see in the table below, all the missiles we are using now has decades of development and tweaking behind them before being ordered.

Whenever a new missile like Astra is inducted, a whole lot of user tests and trials are conducted around it and documentation is made. Then this documentation goes around for other pilots to study on and make a strategy around the missile to use in real scenario. Multiple exercises are held with the missile and if needed tweaking on its software or hardware are done. Then only it matures as a system. Astra is just a infant now. IAF has to conduct multiple exercise with it to know about its optimum usage envelope.

So yes. It would need more time for Astra to mature as a system.

MissileDevelopmentFirst trialInductionInduction by IAF
MICA
1982​
1991​
1995​
2012​
R-27
1962​
1986​
2012​
R-77
1982​
1992​
2002​
2014​
Derby1980's
1998​
2005​
Please don't give this kind of logics If you have nothing to say then better remain quiet.
According to you, Above said missile were immature when they were inducted?? You mean, relevant countries were fool and inducted immature missiles, some of them even used in War. Meanwhile they has been keep updating our Imported air force about deficiency and tweaking. Once Imported- Cum- Scientist IAF came to know that there no further up-gradating is possible Hence, missile is fully matured and let it Induct. In another words, induct when it become obsolete. Only a IAF's guy can give such logics.

If we go by your logic, Meteor inducted in 2016 and IAF signed the deal in the same year that too without any real war experience. Moreover, IAF has been boasting on Meteor like they themselves gave it birth after profound labor pain

IAF should buy Meteor only after 2026. Sir, why are you not applying your own logic now ?? Why don't we give Meteor to each pilot and ask for optimization and induct only after 2026?? Hain Sir? Why This logic only apply on Astra ??

You want to give Astra to each and every pilot for years of evaluation but Sir, Why IAF didn't bring all these genius pilots on the day of field trials ?? Atleast they should tell under which profile trials need to be done ??
 

SKC

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,659
Likes
29,874
Country flag
180 nm this is baba hazam jamane ki technology
Its a RISK processor for IoT devices. Fairly good start. Apart from mainstream desktop processors, most of such processors utilize higher lithography nodes only. Most Controllers are made using over 100nm process.
This is not a technology area where you can start directly at level world's major companies are working on.
 

SKC

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,659
Likes
29,874
Country flag
Please provide source if you have. Couldn't find any credible links in google.
IBM has done test production on 5nm few years back and they were only first one at that time in the whole world. Their team was also working on 3nm wafers but has not succeeded yet.
Its highly unlikely any Indian facility having Lithography machines of even lower than 100nm, forget about 3nm.
 

SKC

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,659
Likes
29,874
Country flag
Regarding 3 nm technology in iits and iisc: that is true as well as false. The thing to be considered here is that these research institutions have some rudimentary silicon vlsi fabrication technology. Some have electron beam lithograph machine where small features can be made. However those are single devices ( a single diode, or a single mems device etc.) in a small silicon substrate, usually done for educational and research purposes. After fabrication, these single devices are tested for their electrical properties, and if found good results, those results are published in journals.But those devices will never be used by anyone in this world.
Here the point to remember is that it is not a foundry, where batch processing of chips each of which consists of billions of transistors can take place.
In an actual foundry like that of intelligence or TSMC, the node (7nm) is the gate length of each of the billions of transistor of the ic they are fabeicating. Also currently the technology is finfet. We currently have no analogue of these massive foundries in India.
Also same size node from different companies are not actually same in size. Samsung 8nm nodes are smaller and denser then TSMC 7nm node. Intel 10nm nodes again denser and smaller than AMD's 7 nm nodes.
Similarly many so called 5nm test batches are actually larger than new TSMC 7++ nodes.
You can define your node as 3nm based on size of any random part but on global level it could be bigger than other companies 5, 7, 8 or even 10 nm nodes.
 

Apollyon

Führer
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
3,134
Likes
4,573
Country flag
Also same size node from different companies are not actually same in size. Samsung 8nm nodes are smaller and denser then TSMC 7nm node. Intel 10nm nodes again denser and smaller than AMD's 7 nm nodes.
Similarly many so called 5nm test batches are actually larger than new TSMC 7++ nodes.
You can define your node as 3nm based on size of any random part but on global level it could be bigger than other companies 5, 7, 8 or even 10 nm nodes.
Is node defined by actual channel length or gate length?
 

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
8,678
Likes
22,544
Country flag
Please don't give this kind of logics If you have nothing to say then better remain quiet.
According to you, Above said missile were immature when they were inducted?? You mean, relevant countries were fool and inducted immature missiles, some of them even used in War. Meanwhile they has been keep updating our Imported air force about deficiency and tweaking. Once Imported- Cum- Scientist IAF came to know that there no further up-gradating is possible Hence, missile is fully matured and let it Induct. In another words, induct when it become obsolete. Only a IAF's guy can give such logics.

If we go by your logic, Meteor inducted in 2016 and IAF signed the deal in the same year that too without any real war experience. Moreover, IAF has been boasting on Meteor like they themselves gave it birth after profound labor pain

IAF should buy Meteor only after 2026. Sir, why are you not applying your own logic now ?? Why don't we give Meteor to each pilot and ask for optimization and induct only after 2026?? Hain Sir? Why This logic only apply on Astra ??

You want to give Astra to each and every pilot for years of evaluation but Sir, Why IAF didn't bring all these genius pilots on the day of field trials ?? Atleast they should tell under which profile trials need to be done ??
Ok. Now since you started crying over Meteor lets look into that aspect too.

Meteor development started back in 1997.
Meteor development in its current form started in 2003.
Meteor flight trial with Rafale-M started in 2005.
Meteor flight standard functional seeker flight test carried out in 2006.
Meteor test firing from Gripen carried out in 2006.
Meteor integration contract on Gripen was signed in 2010.
Meteor integration on Rafale happened in 2015.
Meteor inducted into French Airforce in 2016.

So now if we take the case of Meteor on board Rafale, we could see that difference between first flight trial and integration or induction is 11 years or a decade. For one decade the missile has undergone tests and tests and tests. French airforce has evaluated it for one decade before officially inducting it. In 2012 itself it has undergone numerous trials and those were user trials.

On its order by IAF, do note that Qatar placed a order on 2015. Lets try to answer some questions now.
Why?
Because on paper it is the most capable AAM as of now.

Why it is so?
Because it has been made by MBDA.

What's so special about MBDA?
It is a consortium of defence companies with Matra defence and BAe dynamics. The consortium can boast of around 45 different kinds of missiles development under their belt. So on technical parameters, their products already held edge over any other OEM even before tests. Moreover, IAF would have access to the documentation of Rafale scientists pilots who tested and validated it on Rafale for a decade.

Meteor is just coming for Rafale as of now. But look at MICA. Its testing aboard MKI has started. So its not like IAF is using the missiles without any tests and evaluation on cross platform. But these systems has a backing of decades of relative research behind them as well as tests to prove their mettle which sadly Astra lacks.

So you could go on and cry as much as you want. But IAF wants to use Astra across all the platforms available and DRDO too designed it for that unlike Meteor. So its testings would go on and on and on unless it gets validated on all the platforms in IAF.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top