DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Srinie]

I am fairly confident that Helina has no LOAL mode may be the capability was transferred to SANT missile

 

[Covfefe]

Last trial of Helina was in 2021. That too was a joint trial. That has been done in Pokhran range. In 2018 test, a new upgraded seeker has been used, but it was a imported one. The test was a partial success then. The inhouse upgraded IIR seeker was tested in 2021. First it was a ground based test of Dhruvastra, then aerial test in Pokhran

Exactly, why couldn't we just go for an aerial test in Ladakh too at the time we were doing in Pokran. 1 year of delay for the same Variant could've been avoided (assuming that missile of 2022 launch is same as the one tested in 2021).

What would be the effect of launching a 40kg+ missile at 5k mtr altitude on the helicopter? Remember that it was a LOBL launch whereas LOAL launch is still pending. Now remember that it was already been demonstrated in ground based test. But when you have to carry it out from aerial platform, you have to work on both the onboard RF transceiver. That too would work or show different characteristic in hot desert and cold mountainous condition.

Arey but these parameters are not new or unknown to the user, that's the point. Why to do things sequentially when you can do it in parallel? Missile weighed the same, Heli behaves the same and climate change has little to no effect on Ladakh's atmosphere in an year- so what did we lose time for? LOAL was anyway not tested. If the objective was to fire an LOBL Helina then could've done with the trials in Pokran itself.

And this Dhruvastra(basically Helina)-Helina(Helina itself with IR seeker)-Sant(Helina with millimetre wave rf seeker) terminology is designed to be confusing so that people stay confused as to what the f is being tested and what has actually cleared trials

 

[ezsasa]

It's time DRDO relinquishs it's fetish of conducting tests validating and then giving TOT to industry for final production . Testing should be the sole responsibility of the production agency will help it in planning manufacturing and upgrading it's facilities accordingly. The present system is just a bloated sloth that should be confined to history books

while this is a valid criticism, once can't wish away testing, all stake holders need to sign off on testing, this is a global standard practice in any engineering vertical. especially when the ghost of INSAS debacle looms over us (from a narrative perspective). initially it was blamed on OFB (plastic magazines) in news papers for years, ultimately it was found out that it was neelkamal's fault because OFB had documents to support their claim, but the damage was already done.

the phase which got kick started after kargil war committee report is still ongoing in terms of domestic defence solutions. to be on the safer side if any reviews needs to happen, it has to happen only after the current phase is comfortably behind us with induction and combat validation.

if DRDO is a stake holder in a product, then DRDO has to sign off. other option is get to a stage where DRDO is not involved in a product, in this case it would one less stake holder, one less round of tests as private company and customer would be the only stake holders. and it's not the case that this is not happening, as we have seen with loitering munitions.

it also seems to be the case that globally, war is the best reformer and validator when it comes to defence related issues. brahmos got inducted in 2005, and combat validation is yet to take place.

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

Why to do things sequentially when you can do it in parallel?

Parallel is great when you get it right, but it is hellish if there is any failure of components. Check why F 35 dev cost is 75x of what contemporary fighters will cost.

 

[Chinmoy]

I am fairly confident that Helina has no LOAL mode may be the capability was transferred to SANT missile

That means LOAL test was a failure, but been reported as success. Right?

Now just imagine a scenario where I would approach user with a foreign missile which would give them both the LOBL and LOAL capability with ToT option, what you think user would do?

On other hand, just think whether user would be right or wrong to ask for LOAL capability before mass ordering it.

 

[Covfefe]

Parallel is great when you get it right, but it is hellish if there is any failure of components. Check why F 35 dev cost is 75x of what contemporary fighters will cost.

Spending 5-10 years on weapon trials, starving for capabilities and running to buy products when skirmish happens - parallel testing of weapons seems cheaper. This missile is pegged at around 120-150k USD. (Hellfire is 150k USD)

 

[radion]

Suppose helina version 1.0 exists,it makes no sense to parallely test it in multiple trials when a new version will be coming up soon.It would be a waste of resources.

 

[Covfefe]

Suppose helina version 1.0 exists,it makes no sense to parallely test it in multiple trials when a new version will be coming up soon.It would be a waste of resources.

So, the supposed 2.0 version will be tested again in Pokran for hot weather trials? And that version 2.0 will be inducted or more versions are always welcome? Did version 1.0 fulfil the requirements laid by the users?

 

[Chinmoy]

Exactly, why couldn't we just go for an aerial test in Ladakh too at the time we were doing in Pokran. 1 year of delay for the same Variant could've been avoided (assuming that missile of 2022 launch is same as the one tested in 2021).

2021 test with new seeker has to be done first in controlled environment. To compare the test result outcome, you have to test it under the same circumstance where you have carried out your past tests. Only after that you go to a completely new environment to test it.

Arey but these parameters are not new or unknown to the user, that's the point. Why to do things sequentially when you can do it in parallel? Missile weighed the same, Heli behaves the same and climate change has little to no effect on Ladakh's atmosphere in an year- so what did we lose time for? LOAL was anyway not tested. If the objective was to fire an LOBL Helina then could've done with the trials in Pokran itself.

And this Dhruvastra(basically Helina)-Helina(Helina itself with IR seeker)-Sant(Helina with millimetre wave rf seeker) terminology is designed to be confusing so that people stay confused as to what the f is being tested and what has actually cleared trials

First of all, we have never deployed a helicopter with ATGM in Leh or Ladakh. How could you know about the parameters without deployment?

Now don't ever say that flight behavior of a helicopter would be same at desert heat and mountain cold. Flight characteristics change drastically with change in temperature and altitude. Even the flight control parameter of the subsonic missile would be different in both condition.

Now lets look at the family tree here to avoid confusion:
1- NAG (range 5 km) ATGM missile for IA------------ Good
2- HELINA (range 7 km) ATGM missile for IA--------- Fair enough
3- Dhruvastra (range 10 km) ATGM missile for IAF--- ?????
4- SANT (range 20 km) ATGM missile for IAF to be used from Jaguar-------- Practical

Now as you see, the different nomenclature is not to confuse you, but to save the projects from bureaucracy. If you go on with NAG for all three projects, the fund allocation you want would not be given to you. So the easiest way out is to segregate one from another on basis of user and specifications.

 

[fire starter]

 

[SUPERPOWER]

First lot may consist of maximum 2 in number i believe..

 

[Butter Chicken]

Clear message from Rajnath Singh that US defence firms will have to make in India to gain market share

Rajnath invites US defence companies to invest in India, support 'Make in India'

“I have insisted that India would focus on co-developmental productions and all the investors should come to India. They are welcome,” Defence Minister Rajnath said.

www.hindustantimes.com

 

[fire starter]

 

[BlackViking]

First lot may consist of maximum 2 in number i believe..

IA: 1
SUPERPOWER: 0

 

[fire starter]

 

[Love Charger]

IA: 1
SUPERPOWER: 0

Turret kidhar hai

 

[BlackViking]

Turret kidhar hai

RCWS

 

[SUPERPOWER]

Turret kidhar hai

Achha hua nahi hai...BMP ka turret dekh ke seedha dil main dard hota hai...

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

Turret kidhar hai

Not IFV, other systems based on it IG. One is observation craft for long range recon.

 

[BlackViking]

The vehicles in background, were they also inducted??