DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Corvus Splendens]

Lo Jee MPATGM Bhi gaya paani main

maha chaman chutiya
SPIKE missile and CLU has the exact same combined weight of (14+14 kg) but that keeps getting repeat orders

 

[jai jaganath]

I said this long back. Same is the case with VSHORAD.

Although I don't believe WLVN, but it is a fact for both the system.

Yeah u told earlier but why do they want most lightest imean they are using ones who lie in same weight category
And moreover vshorads is in early stage of development why not incorporate what they want from now rather raising alarm later

 

[Chinmoy]

Is it true though? All atgms of this class weighs 14-16kg with launch tube including MMP Akeron. Only spike lr2 weighs 13kg, don't know if with or without launch tube but you get the point. Now those who use tripod launcher with thermal sights, these weigh another 11-13 kgs. Range of the latest missiles are around 5km.

Now current mpatgm weighs 14.5kg missile weight + 14.25kg, pales in range just 2.5km but I think it has more to do with LOBL issue of low resolution seeker or CLU issue and not a insufficient rocket motor, same with FGM-148 javelin as new CLU allowed it to engage 4km+ targets.

Given the above facts weight reduction of 30% of mpatgm missile means 10.25kg weight. Also assume a lightweight clu is developed too since this weight issue of Army won't go away till eternity. That adds up to 15kg AUW, the lightest in its class with 2.5-3km range. Super useful, yes.

So are we like trying to make some world record or something for world's lightest 3rd gen ATGM.

A simple comparison can show that if the news is true requirements are like really ambitious.

MPATGM missile weight wise is as same as Konkurs. At same class with all accessories, it weighs 5 kg more then Spike LR2.

Although Milan weighs half of MPATGM and manufactured by same BDL who is manufacturing partner of MPATGM. But we could say that Milan has half the range. But then too, doubling the mass with doubling the range indicates that we are not working on metallurgy. Moreover, the penetration of MPATGM is lover then Milan as per what available in open media.

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[jai jaganath]

What's the status of astra mk2

 

[Anandhu Krishna]

Then what is the point of all the trials?

They are just trolling everybody at this point. Govt should step in but unfortunately govt is run by babus cos most of the ministers are stupid and babus gets paid to buy foreign equipment just like the generals.

 

[Chinmoy]

Yeah u told earlier but why do they want most lightest imean they are using ones who lie in same weight category
And moreover vshorads is in early stage of development why not incorporate what they want from now rather raising alarm later

First of all, as a developer it is your scope of work to make the system as best as possible. I told this earlier too, indigenous can't be your USP.

Now in same weight category we are using Konkurs. But MPATGM beats it hands down in generation. On other hand Konkurs beat any other ATGM with its range and penetration power. So the intermediate solution is Spike. Spike here beats MPATGM in both range as well as weight.

Now coming to next part. Do you think user gets up one morning and decide to check the weight? These discussion keeps on happening in the course of development. The very point where developers are saying that 30% weight could be reduced indicates that even developers knew about it and working on it.

So don't even think that users don't interact with developers regarding issues from beginning. Its a continuous tug of war game. Developers just want to sell what they developed. No one likes the other person to point out flaws or ask for change in what he have developed. Its general human nature.

 

[Anandhu Krishna]

Is that the BMP turret!!!?

 

[Kuldeepm952]

MPATGM missile weight wise is as same as Konkurs. At same class with all accessories, it weighs 5 kg more then Spike LR2.

Although Milan weighs half of MPATGM and manufactured by same BDL who is manufacturing partner of MPATGM. But we could say that Milan has half the range. But then too, doubling the mass with doubling the range indicates that we are not working on metallurgy. Moreover, the penetration of MPATGM is lover then Milan as per what available in open media.

Incorrect, the weight difference between whole system between Mpatgm and Konkurs-M is very significant, compare the official rosboronexport site data to mpatgm spec sheet

Anti-tank missile system Konkurs-M | Catalog Rosoboronexport

The Konkurs-M anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) system is designed to engage modern tanks fitted with ERA, light armored vehicles, fortifications and engineer structures at ranges of 75 to 4,000 meters,...

roe.ru

Even missile with launch tube weight is significant, since you'll carry the tube instead naked missile, as Konkurs use a complex gas ejection system and hence around 27kg round with tube and another 22kgs for sights+tripod as it needs coarse tracking swivels and hence complexity and weight, MPATGM on other hand needs only a simple composite tube and good enough tripod to swivel missile in particular direction.

Your comment about metallurgy improvement not being done maybe right but that's not really a problem as other atgms started with same weight but evolved like from spike lr to spike lr2 ATGM. Spike LR2 weighs 13kg and MPATGM weighs 14.5kg missile only, so not 5kg difference. Any extra added weight of tripod launcher can be reduced using newer design and lighter clu, insignificant compared to reducing weight of missile.

Penetration can be increased by using new wave shaper warhead designs. Same Wlvn analysis reported a week ago that Drdo is going to increase Helina/nag penetration from 800 to 1100-1200mm same as Kornet with similiar diameter. In theory using same new warhead design Mpatgm penetration can be increased to 800+mm figures by conservative estimates.

A hardest target you can see on a battlefield is probably a tank and even the newest VT4 tank of Pak probably won't survive a 600mm penetration tandem on rooftop.

Can't really compare with Milan as top attack is a thing of MPATGM. Even the Abrams might survive a Kornet to the front but it won't survive a mpatgm to the top turret.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

First of all, as a developer it is your scope of work to make the system as best as possible. I told this earlier too, indigenous can't be your USP.

Now in same weight category we are using Konkurs. But MPATGM beats it hands down in generation. On other hand Konkurs beat any other ATGM with its range and penetration power. So the intermediate solution is Spike. Spike here beats MPATGM in both range as well as weight.

Now coming to next part. Do you think user gets up one morning and decide to check the weight? These discussion keeps on happening in the course of development. The very point where developers are saying that 30% weight could be reduced indicates that even developers knew about it and working on it.

So don't even think that users don't interact with developers regarding issues from beginning. Its a continuous tug of war game. Developers just want to sell what they developed. No one likes the other person to point out flaws or ask for change in what he have developed. Its general human nature.

We all want Gucci stuff but.......
Sir, you have to make a better case against the current mpatgm compared to Konkurs or even the spike of older gen especially spike mr which originally IA wanted to induct in thousands whose reported penetration was 700mm including that for lr version. I have included the correct comparison in previous reply with official data sheets.

There is no valid reason for atleast not inducting a few 1000s missiles and few 100 launchers.

Here's a quick fact check, AUW of whole systems comparision

Milan- 7.1kg without launch tube+26kg Flame launcher= 33.1kg+ some extra weight of launch tube, yeah we in IA negated advantage of lightweight of MILAN by using buly ****** launcher.

https://bdl-india.in/FLAME

https://bdl-india.in/MILAN1

Konkurs-M= around some 40kgs+, source posted previously

MPATGM= 30kgs at max with TOP ATTACK capability

I don't understand what's not WIN-WIN here.

Also I am damn sure MPATGM would cost a whole lot less than MMP and SPIKE LR2. And current MPATGM is still less weight per system than current in service ATGM systems. Even if range is a argument, it's better than Milan2t teams with 1.8km range. Penetration argument is a non-starter as Top attack is a thing.

All IA have to do is be reasonable and see that technologies for next version of MPATGM are already in making with new wave shaper warhead and LOAL features for NAG and SANT in development. Maybe NAGmk2 is for that.

I have objectively tried to find faults in MPATGM but good reasons for that are almost non starters unless missile doesn't works and misses targets most of the time.

 

[Chinmoy]

Incorrect, the weight difference between whole system between Mpatgm and Konkurs-M is very significant, compare the official rosboronexport site data to mpatgm spec sheet

Anti-tank missile system Konkurs-M | Catalog Rosoboronexport

The Konkurs-M anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) system is designed to engage modern tanks fitted with ERA, light armored vehicles, fortifications and engineer structures at ranges of 75 to 4,000 meters,...

roe.ru

View attachment 193952

MPATGM weighs 14.5 kg from this figure. As per BDL Konkurs weighs 16.5 kg.

Even missile with launch tube weight is significant, since you'll carry the tube instead naked missile, as Konkurs use a complex gas ejection system and hence around 27kg round with tube and another 22kgs for sights+tripod as it needs coarse tracking swivels and hence complexity and weight, MPATGM on other hand needs only a simple composite tube and good enough tripod to swivel missile in particular direction.

Your comment about metallurgy improvement not being done maybe right but that's not really a problem as other atgms started with same weight but evolved like from spike lr to spike lr2 ATGM. Spike LR2 weighs 13kg and MPATGM weighs 14.5kg missile only, so not 5kg difference. Any extra added weight of tripod launcher can be reduced using newer design and lighter clu, insignificant compared to reducing weight of missile.

Read again. I said MPATGM with all its accessories weighs 5 kg more than Spike.

CLU and missile in case of MPATGM weighs 28.75 kg sans Tripod whereas Spike missile system with tripod weighs 24.7 kg. I just added 1 kg for tripod, but in reality it would be obviously higher.

Penetration can be increased by using new wave shaper warhead designs. Same Wlvn analysis reported a week ago that Drdo is going to increase Helina/nag penetration from 800 to 1100-1200mm same as Kornet with similiar diameter. In theory using same new warhead design Mpatgm penetration can be increased to 800+mm figures by conservative estimates.

A hardest target you can see on a battlefield is probably a tank and even the newest VT4 tank of Pak probably won't survive a 600mm penetration tandem on rooftop.

Can't really compare with Milan as top attack is a thing of MPATGM. Even the Abrams might survive a Kornet to the front but it won't survive a mpatgm to the top turret.

Changing warhead itself would change the weight. Even the change in seeker would mean change in weight. This could either increase or decrease. So as I already mentioned, this quoted 30% reduction is stated only after studying the system and working on it. But thing to be seen is, whether it could maintain its performance or not.

 

[Chinmoy]

We all want Gucci stuff but.......
Sir, you have to make a better case against the current mpatgm compared to Konkurs or even the spike of older gen especially spike mr which originally IA wanted to induct in thousands whose reported penetration was 700mm including that for lr version. I have included the correct comparison in previous reply with official data sheets.

There is no valid reason for atleast not inducting a few 1000s missiles and few 100 launchers.

Here's a quick fact check, AUW of whole systems comparision

Milan- 7.1kg without launch tube+26kg Flame launcher= 33.1kg+ some extra weight of launch tube, yeah we in IA negated advantage of lightweight of MILAN by using buly ****** launcher.

https://bdl-india.in/FLAME

https://bdl-india.in/MILAN1

Konkurs-M= around some 40kgs+, source posted previously

MPATGM= 30kgs at max with TOP ATTACK capability

I don't understand what's not WIN-WIN here.

Also I am damn sure MPATGM would cost a whole lot less than MMP and SPIKE LR2. And current MPATGM is still less weight per system than current in service ATGM systems. Even if range is a argument, it's better than Milan2t teams with 1.8km range. Penetration argument is a non-starter as Top attack is a thing.

All IA have to do is be reasonable and see that technologies for next version of MPATGM are already in making with new wave shaper warhead and LOAL features for NAG and SANT in development. Maybe NAGmk2 is for that.

I have objectively tried to find faults in MPATGM but good reasons for that are almost non starters unless missile doesn't works and misses targets most of the time.

Just a small question for the essay you have written.

Did IA said somewhere that they would not order MPATGM as it is because of its weight?

Or are we making up this notion from our side that since developer is saying that they could shed 30% of its weight, so it means it would not be ordered?

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Just a small question for the essay you have written.

Did IA said somewhere that they would not order MPATGM as it is because of its weight?

Or are we making up this notion from our side that since developer is saying that they could shed 30% of its weight, so it means it would not be ordered?

Sir, I merely pointed out the flaws in your analysis which was factually incorrect on many points.

I don't thin I implied that IA won't order, it simply doesn't have other choice with current GOI. But I don't particularly like delays for a system which is perfectly a level up from in use systems on all fronts.

You argued for spike as a good mix of Konkurs-M penetration capability and range not me.

Am I wrong in saying that your presented the current mpatgm as a system which is not good enough or atleast implied it. I just argued that your views are not correct. Coming back to your op stating that you always knew this weight reduction was bound to happen so onus is on you to show that it is lacking to tackle threats and is worse than in service atgm which I don't agree with and presented the facts. What does a statement of weight reduction implies in your opinion.

On the difference between rosboronexport and bdl weight figure for missile is all in semantics, weight of missile with launch tube not equals weight of missile without launch tube. And as I said that Konkurs use complex gas ejector ejection system hence the significant weight addition and you carry tube in battle not the internal missile, so that's really a design thing there.

 

[another_armchair]

Long due.. long due.

 

[Aditya Ballal]

Clicked by myself. HAL IMRH Brochure.

 

[STORE]

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Perhaps one of the cleanest video of top attack atgms in Ukraine war showing the effectiveness and why it's hard for hardkill APS to deal with them, just see the angle of attack, there is almost no way you can stop such threats using armour only

 

[WarmongerLSK]

Perhaps one of the cleanest video of top attack atgms in Ukraine war showing the effectiveness and why it's hard for hardkill APS to deal with them, just see the angle of attack, there is almost no way you can stop such threats using armour only

Noob question, why is it harder for APS to deal with them? APS can deal with a much faster APFSDS rounds right?

 

[Rassil Krishnan]

Noob question, why is it harder for APS to deal with them? APS can deal with a much faster APFSDS rounds right?

maybe those hardkill explosive plates are not present at the top of the tank and are much harder to launch at that angle.

 

[vidhwanshak]

Lo Jee MPATGM Bhi gaya paani main

it's heavy. we have discussed it before.