DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[omaebakabaka]

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

You seem to have no idea, as far as I know SM's are not effective against CMs as they are mostly against BMs, ka 31s and other recon and antisub helis exist on most ships of capable size. You are way off, carriers are tracked minute of minute in zones of interest not just now but since cold war. Next is they will show up on your coast mysteriously? UK could not even protect their ships against subsonic exocets and you want to argue? NATO is an offensive posture, they do not rely on AD as their best strategy and you can see their wonder weapons fail every time against a capable enemy. Again you have no idea about orbits or sats and what is possible and what is not. Read on fishing fleets of China and Soviets and where they generally venture and why....you talk like a pro but your arguments are so weak.....CIWS is last resort and probability of intercepting a serious missile is very low.

 

[binayak95]

You seem to have no idea, as far as I know SM's are not effective against CMs as they are mostly against BMs, ka 31s and other recon and antisub helis exist on most ships of capable size. You are way off, carriers are tracked minute of minute in zones of interest not just now but since cold war. Next is they will show up on your coast mysteriously? UK could not even protect their ships against subsonic exocets and you want to argue? NATO is an offensive posture, they do not rely on AD as their best strategy and you can see their wonder weapons fail every time against a capable enemy. Again you have no idea about orbits or sats and what is possible and what is not. Read on fishing fleets of China and Soviets and where they generally venture and why....you talk like a pro but your arguments are so weak.....CIWS is last resort and probability of intercepting a serious missile is very low.

I have sat in CIC rooms and watched with awe as SM6s intercepted ship launched Brahmos and air dropped harpoons in real time. My arguments are weak it seems. lets not waste time, eh - no one but the chinese are wasting time with Anti carrier BMs, and leave it at that

 

[omaebakabaka]

I have sat in CIC rooms and watched with awe as SM6s intercepted ship launched Brahmos and air dropped harpoons in real time. My arguments are weak it seems. lets not waste time, eh - no one but the chinese are wasting time with Anti carrier BMs, and leave it at that

Sure, Chinese are dumb and Indians too as we are also investing. Get this with some ounce of sense, if Bramhos can hit a ship 100s of miles away then that same missile can hit carrier at a range where its aviation poses threat. Tracking is done by many means in near shores....first you mention SM's which are for different types of interception and 2nd you ignore the UK's debacle against Argentina against a subsonic missile of same nato make.....3rd US Navy itself is concluding that carriers are not peer level instruments based on their own threat perception. You may be army general but you are not making sense....don't pull your rank or whatever, if everyone with a rank or degree is capable then world is only full of experts.

 

[flanker99]

I have sat in CIC rooms and watched with awe as SM6s intercepted ship launched Brahmos and air dropped harpoons in real time. My arguments are weak it seems. lets not waste time, eh - no one but the chinese are wasting time with Anti carrier BMs, and leave it at that

sm6 intercepting brahmos?..what are u talking about?...will that not jeopardize brahmos secrets?

 

[binayak95]

Sure, Chinese are dumb and Indians too as we are also investing. Get this with some ounce of sense, if Bramhos can hit a ship 100s of miles away then that same missile can hit carrier at a range where its aviation poses threat. Tracking is done by many means in near shores....first you mention SM's which are for different types of interception and 2nd you ignore the UK's debacle against Argentina against a subsonic missile of same nato make.....3rd US Navy itself is concluding that carriers are not peer level instruments based on their own threat perception. You may be army general but you are not making sense....

I wasnt in the army but in the navy, and if you keep harping about falklands when Anti Air defences were not competent nor did CIWS exist and where Mirages had to get really close to the carriers - and WHERE argentina lost all the same, then do you know what youre saying yourself?

SM's are general purpose interceptors - which can and have been used not just against CMs but as a general long range strike asset in and of itself.

Brahmos cannot even get past the Kolkata with barak 8 on a good day man. The days of the Brahmos being a whippersnapper that nothing can beat are long gone. You need atleast 8 missile salvo to stand a chance and then you go head to head with AEGIS.

You know what is really funny? The USN's air defence has gone down a notch since the F14 was retired, but you wouldnt know of that either.

US Navy is concluding that carriers are not peer level - what? Have you read the Air Sea Doctrine? And why then are the Japs are rushing to convert the Izumos and the chinks building as many carriers (flawed as they are) as they can - since their A2AD bubble is all conquering?

Get real

 

[binayak95]

sm6 intercepting brahmos?..what are u talking about?...will that not jeopardize brahmos secrets?

Why would it? In a simulated fleet exercise. And its not like the Brahmos is some wonder weapon. Its a derivative of the P800 Oniks after all, with an Indian seeker yeah - but it is not something that is truly revolutionary.

 

[flanker99]

Why would it? In a simulated fleet exercise. And its not like the Brahmos is some wonder weapon. Its a derivative of the P800 Oniks after all, with an Indian seeker yeah - but it is not something that is truly revolutionary.

its still the best we've got isnt it?...i mean why would we fire our best in front of a foreign navy?

 

[omaebakabaka]

I wasnt in the army but in the navy, and if you keep harping about falklands when Anti Air defences were not competent nor did CIWS exist and where Mirages had to get really close to the carriers - and WHERE argentina lost all the same, then do you know what youre saying yourself?

SM's are general purpose interceptors - which can and have been used not just against CMs but as a general long range strike asset in and of itself.

Brahmos cannot even get past the Kolkata with barak 8 on a good day man. The days of the Brahmos being a whippersnapper that nothing can beat are long gone. You need atleast 8 missile salvo to stand a chance and then you go head to head with AEGIS.

You know what is really funny? The USN's air defence has gone down a notch since the F14 was retired, but you wouldnt know of that either.

US Navy is concluding that carriers are not peer level - what? Have you read the Air Sea Doctrine? And why then are the Japs are rushing to convert the Izumos and the chinks building as many carriers (flawed as they are) as they can - since their A2AD bubble is all conquering?

Get real

Whether Argentina lost or not is not the point here....if French did not block the exports then they would have caused more damage. UK pulled nuke threat after bunch of ships being lost and they have to go to their big daddy to send a carrier as a threat too......educate yourself and stick to the point. You are embarassing Indian navy, I have cousins who served in Navy and AF and one of them retired as a commander of ship.

SM's are general purpose? What are you talking about? Where did they intercept a CM or even a BM other than tests? Other day I asked about barak 8 0.5 km interception and you spoke gibberish about that....you have no idea what you are talking about......carriers have their purpose but the point is they are ever more vulnerable especially against capable enemy.....no one said carriers are useles.....

Barak 8 is not an antidote and just like anything it has p-values where it may intercept something just like s-300 or any other AD.

 

[Blackmamba]

Why would it? In a simulated fleet exercise. And its not like the Brahmos is some wonder weapon. Its a derivative of the P800 Oniks after all, with an Indian seeker yeah - but it is not something that is truly revolutionary.

At what range was brahmos detected and at what range did the SM intercept the missile,based on the simulation ?

 

[omaebakabaka]

Why would it? In a simulated fleet exercise. And its not like the Brahmos is some wonder weapon. Its a derivative of the P800 Oniks after all, with an Indian seeker yeah - but it is not something that is truly revolutionary.

Again your ignorance, any supersonic capable missile is a threat....nato did not even have a supersonic CM for a while. Bramhos is a very potent weapon and more capable than onyx in terms of targetting and flight profile.

 

[Blackmamba]

Whether Argentina lost or not is not the point here....if French did not block the exports then they would have caused more damage. UK pulled nuke threat after bunch of ships being lost and they have to go to their big daddy to send a carrier as a threat too......educate yourself and stick to the point. You are embarassing Indian navy, I have cousins who served in Navy and AF and one of them retired as a commander of ship.

SM's are general purpose? What are you talking about? Where did they intercept a CM or even a BM other than tests? Other day I asked about barak 8 0.5 km interception and you spoke gibberish about that....you have no idea what you are talking about......carriers have their purpose but the point is they are ever more vulnerable especially against capable enemy.....no one said carriers are useles.....

Barak 8 is not an antidote and just like anything it has p-values where it may intercept something just like s-300 or any other AD.

None of the new destroyers both chinese and american(aegis) have been designed to intercept supersonic and hypersonic sea skimming cruise missiles. If you look at kolkata class the radar is mounted on a mast
9k= (232×217)
but I doubt kolkata can intercept a hypersonic missile.

 

[DumbPilot]

At what range was brahmos detected and at what range did the SM intercept the missile,based on the simulation ?

I think those may be classified numbers

 

[Blackmamba]

None of the new destroyers both chinese and american(aegis) have been designed to intercept supersonic and hypersonic sea skimming cruise missiles. If you look at kolkata class the radar is mounted on a mast
9k= (232×217)
but I doubt kolkata can intercept a hypersonic missile.

 

[AnantS]

I have sat in CIC rooms and watched with awe as SM6s intercepted ship launched Brahmos and air dropped harpoons in real time. My arguments are weak it seems. lets not waste time, eh - no one but the chinese are wasting time with Anti carrier BMs, and leave it at that

I think hypersonic missiles somehow lessen the interdiction time. I think the hypersonic ship killer missiles are suppose to work in conjuction with sattelites constellation as well as sea based sensors. And the next gen DZ-F is supposed to have manneovarable hypersonic glide vehicle. So they shall be looking for targets than fall on predetermined path.

 

[omaebakabaka]

None of the new destroyers both chinese and american(aegis) have been designed to intercept supersonic and hypersonic sea skimming cruise missiles. If you look at kolkata class the radar is mounted on a mast
9k= (232×217)
but I doubt kolkata can intercept a hypersonic missile.

Defence generally evolves in reaction to offence and its logically debatable on why so.....immunity is one example. All wars are generally fought on strategy and rarely comes down to strength of one unit of something atleast the major wars. Strategy is a result of what units are available.....similar to distributed computing as an example. True defensive strategy is sorts of a guaranteed losses of some kind. I think Chinese have Barak 8 or s300 fort level AD on their type 55 (or whatever). US also has program to use SM3 launchers to address non ballistic as well as lasers and EM guns but none that are deployed as far as I know. US plays the best game when it comes to offensive strategies.

 

[Blackmamba]

Defence generally evolves in reaction to offence and its logically debatable on why so.....immunity is one example. All wars are generally fought on strategy and rarely comes down to strength of one unit of something atleast the major wars. Strategy is a result of what units are available.....similar to distributed computing as an example. True defensive strategy is sorts of a guaranteed losses of some kind. I think Chinese have Barak 8 or s300 fort level AD on their type 55 (or whatever). US also has program to use SM3 launchers to address non ballistic as well as lasers and EM guns but none that are deployed as far as I know. US plays the best game when it comes to offensive strategies.

MF-STAR radar can detect sea skimming missiles at a 30–35 km range, speed of missile is at 4321.8 kmph, it is moving at 1.2 km per second . So you get 28 seconds to respond to that . It also does sharp s manoeuvre at terminal stage, so please enlighten me how intercepting brahmos like missile are not a big thing ?

 

[johnj]

I have sat in CIC rooms and watched with awe as SM6s intercepted ship launched Brahmos and air dropped harpoons in real time. My arguments are weak it seems. lets not waste time, eh - no one but the chinese are wasting time with Anti carrier BMs, and leave it at that

Agree, except one thing- the chinese are wasting time with Anti carrier BMs.
Chinese are not wasting time with AShBM, its a beginning of new eras, & USN always find & field coundermasures. SMs can intercept sea skimming cruise missile [non hypersonic], jets, drones, shipz, helios, ICBM to long range AShBM, & in near future HGV & hypersonic cruise missile .

 

[johnj]

sm6 intercepting brahmos?..what are u talking about?...will that not jeopardize brahmos secrets?

Not brahmos, but brahmos type targets & stimulations. Also there is different type of brahmos, with different flight path. US & EU tested & intercepted mach 3/3.5 vlo low flying targets.

 

[johnj]

None of the new destroyers both chinese and american(aegis) have been designed to intercept supersonic and hypersonic sea skimming cruise missiles. If you look at kolkata class the radar is mounted on a mast
9k= (232×217)
but I doubt kolkata can intercept a hypersonic missile.

No warship can currently intercept non ballistic & endo atmosphere hypersonic missile.
Now US developing interceptor to defect hypersonic missile.. Chinese - first they needed to develop current aegis of USN. Rail gun development also going on.

 

[johnj]

I think hypersonic missiles somehow lessen the interdiction time. I think the hypersonic ship killer missiles are suppose to work in conjuction with sattelites constellation as well as sea based sensors. And the next gen DZ-F is supposed to have manneovarable hypersonic glide vehicle. So they shall be looking for targets than fall on predetermined path.

Its depends on range of the missile.