DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Abdus Salem killed]

Should we even talk about this now we need to work more

 

[omaebakabaka]

as per the current rules for past two years, RFI is released by CVRDE for industry partner at prototying stage itself. once prototyping and tests is done, DRDO gives the ToT for free with handholding if required.

not sure what happens beyond this stage, whether DRDO is willing to give ToT to companies beyond development partner i don't know. ultimately only a handful private companies have engine manufacturing capability in India.

Probably not verbatim like this, GOI generally protects public interest in spirit while enforcement is a different game. Meaning if private ever try to package and sell something back to PSU then few clauses may be present to guard against those scenarios. In some countries generally it goes through a consortium that is sort of semi private where royalities are secured on differnet types of models. This is the way DRDO and PSU's should operate and defer these till MIC is productive and sustainable.

 

[ezsasa]

Probably not verbatim like this, GOI generally protects public interest in spirit while enforcement is a different game. Meaning if private ever try to package and sell something back to PSU then few clauses may be present to guard against those scenarios. In some countries generally it goes through a consortium that is sort of semi private where royalities are secured on differnet types of models. This is the way DRDO and PSU's should operate and defer these till MIC is productive and sustainable.

too early for large defence consortiums in India, consortiums are built around I.Ps. as in if a company is integrated into one company's supply chain, their contract prevents them from having access to different company's supply chain. muricans and europeans take I.P very seriously, they go to corporate wars for them.

in our case, for now DRDO is developing the I.Ps and sharing them with industry. the day, private companies have their own high value I.Ps, consortiums may develop.

i am a proponent of consortium approach, but we need to wait.

 

[omaebakabaka]

I dnt knw . Chinese claims they can do it . And USA conducting shock trial of their air craft career to show they can withstand chinese career killer .

Why China's 'carrier killer' missiles may not scare US anymore

Shock trials validate a ship’s shock hardness and ability to sustain operations in a simulated combat environment using live ordnance

www.google.com

It is not as simple to hit an aircraft carrier but its becoming easier to prevent them from coming ever more closer and area access and denial is very real with missiles and shore based mlrs launchers and drone becoming key threats in wars and even low intensity conflicts. Basically AC's are not much use if denial sources are outside combat ranges of aircrafts thereby reducing their primary purpose.

 

[omaebakabaka]

in our case, for now DRDO is developing the I.Ps and sharing them with industry. the day, private companies have their own high value I.Ps, consortiums may develop.

i am a proponent of consortium approach, but we need to wait.

Yes, that is what I also said and MIT, Standford and some other institutes act that way in both consortium and few other models. Free pass is never productive in anything other than spiritual domain but even that leads to misinterpretation and corruption when democratized for instance yoga and so on.

This is the way DRDO and PSU's should operate and defer these till MIC is productive and sustainable.

 

[omaebakabaka]

Seems bleak, but hoping for the best

Shiv Aroor is saying it might be a Rudra.

Hopefully pilot is alive and not seriously hurt.

 

[Bhaubai]

No delay in qrsam induction
Dallo ki gaand jali

 

[Varoon2]

Probably a more authentic report on the Agni Prime MIRV. From "Defense Decode". In Hindi.

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

Probably a more authentic report on the Agni Prime MIRV. From "Defense Decode". In Hindi.

This guy really knows his stuff explains so deeply everything and heard he is quite qualified too only problem is I am not lol Half his explanation goes over my head cause I can't even figure out the words he said

 

[Arihant Roy]

Well, theres a good news.

Our very own Akash mk1 , ie Akash with command guidance is able to intercept ballistic missiles.

While it may not be explicitly mentioned but these are SRBM .

 

[Abdus Salem killed]

Probably a more authentic report on the Agni Prime MIRV. From "Defense Decode". In Hindi.

Can someone explain how many countries have this tech ?

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[lcafanboy]

 

[Swesh]

https://tdf.drdo.gov.in/project/dev...ng-camera-real-time-material-target-detection @Indx TechStyle @Haldilal @Vamsi

 

[Swesh]

https://tdf.drdo.gov.in/project/dev...ng-camera-real-time-material-target-detection @Indx TechStyle @Haldilal @Vamsi

Hyperspectral Signature and its Application | Defence Research and Development Organisation - DRDO, Ministry of Defence, Government of India

Infiltration Zonation & Terrain Analysis using Decision Rules (INTRUDER) software. This software provides infiltration zones and line of Sight (LOS) in 360 degree in 3D.

www.drdo.gov.in

 

[binayak95]

I dnt knw . Chinese claims they can do it . And USA conducting shock trial of their air craft career to show they can withstand chinese career killer .

Why China's 'carrier killer' missiles may not scare US anymore

Shock trials validate a ship’s shock hardness and ability to sustain operations in a simulated combat environment using live ordnance

www.google.com

eh what? Chinese claims are hardly reliable.
The main problem with Carrier killing BMs is the kill chain.
Identifying, acquiring and getting a weapons track on a carrier group from thousands of kms away - very difficult, and dare i say impossible task.

US conducts shock tests on all its ships, and has been doing so since before missiles were invented. Media ke bait headlines ignore karo.

 

[omaebakabaka]

eh what? Chinese claims are hardly reliable.
The main problem with Carrier killing BMs is the kill chain.
Identifying, acquiring and getting a weapons track on a carrier group from thousands of kms away - very difficult, and dare i say impossible task.

US conducts shock tests on all its ships, and has been doing so since before missiles were invented. Media ke bait headlines ignore karo.

I don't think its impossible at all with so many relay opto electronic sats but more than ballistic, cruise missiles are the best means and this is somewhat evident in soviet strategy. BM's have to be maneuverable somewhat to make it possible theoretically. No idea why you think its impossible. No one just launches one BM at a carrier group, whole strategies are employed to keep the escorts working.....effectively the farther carriers are from ones shore the less effective they will become as sole means of offense against a capable opponent.

 

[binayak95]

I don't think its impossible at all with so many relay opto electronic sats but more than ballistic, cruise missiles are the best means and this is somewhat evident in soviet strategy. BM's have to be maneuverable somewhat to make it possible theoretically. No idea why you think its impossible. No one just launches one BM at a carrier group, whole strategies are employed to keep the escorts working.....effectively the farther carriers are from ones shore the less effective they will become as sole means of offense against a capable opponent.

Ballistic missiles are not the same as cruise missiles my friend.
Cruise missiles are typically launched by aircraft/ships that have an active lock on their target - but to do that, you have to know where the carrier is, have to penetrate the carrier's air group and then get into launching position.

Ballistic missile, youre atleast 1500kms away. and satellites cannot track a carrier continuously. between two successive sweeps of a patch of ocean, the CBG has moved hundreds of nautical miles - how do you give weapons track to a missile?

 

[omaebakabaka]

Ballistic missiles are not the same as cruise missiles my friend.
Cruise missiles are typically launched by aircraft/ships that have an active lock on their target - but to do that, you have to know where the carrier is, have to penetrate the carrier's air group and then get into launching position.

Ballistic missile, youre atleast 1500kms away. and satellites cannot track a carrier continuously. between two successive sweeps of a patch of ocean, the CBG has moved hundreds of nautical miles - how do you give weapons track to a missile?

Granits have a range of 700 km and they work in packs and specifically designed to kill carriers and this was 30 years ago. Cruise missiles can be launched from shore and there are many systems to do so and they turn on their own radars when approach is near.....nato has no AD to counter supersonic missiles not to mention hypersonic, many relay sats exist now to track whole carrrier groups at any point in time in the threat zones. Fishing fleets are notorious to do tracking since soviet times and now chinese have a huge army of those around the world. Carriers can only threaten smaller opponents and for anything else they stay out of conflict area due to area denial threats puting them effectively out of combat range as far as aviation goes.

They are still effective but only in conditions that are less than full active war against a peer opponent and they can threaten remote shipping lanes and so US carries lot of weight with them and neither China nor Russia can do anything about it at this time short of submarines taking them out.

 

[binayak95]

Granits have a range of 700 km and they work in packs and specifically designed to kill carriers and this was 30 years ago. Cruise missiles can be launched from shore and there are many systems to do so and they turn on their own radars when approach is near.....nato has no AD to counter supersonic missiles not to mention hypersonic, many relay sats exist now to track whole carrrier groups at any point in time in the threat zones. Fishing fleets are notorious to do tracking since soviet times and now chinese have a huge army of those around the world. Carriers can only threaten smaller opponents and for anything else they stay out of conflict area due to area denial threats puting them effectively out of combat range as far as aviation goes.

Sigh.

Point by point. Granits - 700km range with hi - lo profile, yeah - but why else do you think Russians put so much money into Ka31s and their cruiser carriers - to get some beyond horizon lock on ability. Again, assets in the airspace getting active track - and believe me, had the Russians ever gone to war, their cruisers would have been defending their own waters. Its their subs that would have done the killing.

NATO has no AD? What? SM 3/ SM6 have been designed to shoot down ICBMs boy. Supersonic sea skimming missiles are far bigger threat to capital ships than BMs. And even against those the USN is well equipped. Carrier borne awacs will alert the task force at 100 km out minimum. SM6s and SM3s will start raining down, and after those, there are sea sparrows, rolling airframe missiles, Phalanx CIWS and nowadays even laser based DEWs. The Brits, French and Italians have the excellent Aster 15 and Aster 30 missiles. Brahmos came with a bang into the scene, and inspired many nations to quickly deploy counters (including the IN - barak 8)

Manys sats exist now - umm ok? we have Geostationary sats and Polar sats. polar sats cannot stay in lock, they keep orbiting and china doesnt have the sat numbers to get seamless handover of any patch of sea from one sat to another, given just how hard it is for these sats to develop scale. Geo sats CANNOT be relocated to look at some other area - they are primarily comms and network.

Fishing fleets ? at high seas? WTF? and in an active hostile situation they can approach a carrier battle group is it? have you ever been at sea? you cannot sea 30 naut.miles at sea from the deck of a trawler. kuch bhi bolte ho