DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Kuldeepm952]

Again Bro, it makes no sense.
There's nothing like close range so less time and long range so more time. Absolutely not. How?

What's the closest ranged SAM a country fields? A MANPAD? And reaction time of a MANPAD? You know better than me

Sprint was an anti ballistic missile, weighted more than three tonnes and in less than 15 sec it engaged targets at ranges up to 30 km

Aree bhaiya agar akash-ng and QRSAM lagbhag same h toh, why is there a army version of akash-ng, alti engagement of both is also 14km as QRSAM one was also increased according to tej of janes wala
There has to be something different to warrant this boi below for army, very little reason to believe that range of akash-ng is just 30km

 

[ezsasa]

What are the things that a Akash NG can do but QRSAM can't? Or what are the things that a QRSAM can do but Akash NG can't?
(And I'm asking about significant difference, not something like one's engagement altitude is 10km send other's 15.)

And if they're not that different then what's the point of diverting money in doing R&D for that? What's the point of maintaining two separate assembly line? Or why intentionally increase logistical issues when already it has unintentionally became such a mess?

even if we assume Akash NG and QRSAM share some tech within the missile, the difference is in configuration of the system in it's entirety and intended purpose of the user, for example QRSAM is compact and designed to operate on the move.

these are two separate programs because users wanted two different configurations, and making user specific configurations is par for the course.

 

[Lonewarrior]

even if we assume Akash NG and QRSAM share some tech within the missile, the difference is in configuration of the system in it's entirety and intended purpose of the user, for example QRSAM is compact and designed to operate on the move.

these are two separate programs because users wanted two different configurations, and making user specific configurations is par for the course.

Is that a wise move especially when countries like US are exploring possibilities of using Hellfire as SAM and Standard Missiles as anti-ship Missiles

 

[ezsasa]

Is that a wise move especially when countries like US are exploring possibilities of using Hellfire as SAM and Standard Missiles as anti-ship Missiles

hellfire has been in service since mid-80's. may be not wise to compare our scenarios with murican scenarios. we don't even know how long the current domestic momentum will last, especially if the govt changes.

in my experience, users know what they want, and they won't budge on certain aspects of design. this is why all cars using same engine does not have the same sales numbers.

 

[flanker99]

Is that a wise move especially when countries like US are exploring possibilities of using Hellfire as SAM and Standard Missiles as anti-ship Missiles

thats just them using whats available to them not a good comparison....we have to first know what is the real capabilities of either missiles the brochures figures are all over the place what should we believe?

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Is that a wise move especially when countries like US are exploring possibilities of using Hellfire as SAM and Standard Missiles as anti-ship Missiles

You really think there is merit in a case for using hellfire as SAM, you are joking right??

 

[aspdeepak]

There is nothing like a Quick Reaction SAM and traditional SAM, all have same reaction time and velocity...ESAD turns off, firing signal is generated, squib is fired aur phir lagti hai solid propellant ki g**nd me aag aur शूईईई...

Again wrong about how QRSAM is supposed to be more mobile and keep up with infantry. QRSAM is mounted on truck and one variant of Akash is based on BMP-2; now you tell me, which's more mobile?

It's a simply a result of convergent evolution where Akash evolved into Akash NG and Astra into QRSAM and now we have this weird redundancy that makes absolutely no sense.

There's no cure for stupidity except admitting/learning from that.

The QRSAM is almost the same class a that of the russian panstir.
These missiles are meant for agile and highly mobile operation. Especially at targets which are very close and require very quick response time.

Look at their aerodynamics characteristics. They have frontal fins for very high manoeuvrability.

The QRSAM can launch 6 missiles at rapid succession. These are primarily designed for low flying tactical targets. They are part of the armoured columns in offensive roles.

Where as the Akash NG needs some time between the successive engagements. Targets that can be identified at slightly longer ranges and requires bit more time to engage. Mostly meant for
defensive roles.

If you look at the Spyder missile system from IAI, you can understand the difference of them.
Python - QRSAM (agile)
Derby - SRSAM

 

[johnj]

Again Bro, it makes no sense.
There's nothing like close range so less time and long range so more time. Absolutely not. How?

What's the closest ranged SAM a country fields? A MANPAD? And reaction time of a MANPAD? You know better than me

Sprint was an anti ballistic missile, weighted more than three tonnes and in less than 15 sec it engaged targets at ranges up to 30 km

what is the time required to reach from 0km to 100km, 25 km & 3km away resp, for a mach 2 ufo? is it same ?
Is manpads capable of shooting down mach 3 missile ?
What if fcr only able to detect mach2/3 maneuvering vlo target/ufo less than 25km ?
What if fcr only able to detect maneuvering target less than 5km ?
when fcr going to identify the target in both cases?

 

[Lonewarrior]

You really think there is merit in a case for using hellfire as SAM, you are joking right??

A Sidewinder with IR guidance cost almost 450k, a Stinger in current configuration with inferior IR guidance costs almost 100k and a Hellfire costs 70k with radar guidance...no mate, I'm not joking.

Now you tell what you find so funny?

 

[Lonewarrior]

what is the time required to reach from 0km to 100km, 25 km & 3km away resp, for a mach 2 ufo? is it same ?
Is manpads capable of shooting down mach 3 missile ?
What if fcr only able to detect mach2/3 maneuvering vlo target/ufo less than 25km ?
What if fcr only able to detect maneuvering target less than 5km ?
when fcr going to identify the target in both cases?

In the previous post you had mentioned just two parameters; range and reaction time. So I gave you exceptions for each case.

Now you brought in so much different variable. So let's come back to case of QRSAM and Akash-NG; both solid fuelled, both radar guided, both having similar physical layout and both being developed with same technological proficiency...how's one so much different than other that we can't do it's job using other?

 

[Kuldeepm952]

A Sidewinder with IR guidance cost almost 450k, a Stinger in current configuration with inferior IR guidance costs almost 100k and a Hellfire costs 70k with radar guidance...no mate, I'm not joking.

Now you tell what you find so funny?

Speed and aerodynamics/flight profile of hellfire vs a subsonic target flying at let's say 2.5km altitude with rwr.
Everything Amreeki do is not correct bhaiya ji. Amreeki stuff is always overpriced, fuck crony capitalism and extensive profit guzzlers for that. Our Helina/Nag with a iir seeker will cost one-fourth the price and maybe even lesser with huge orders. But MuH HeLlFire.
Surely you must be joking , right? Think again, Hellfire as a SAM.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

In the previous post you had mentioned just two parameters; range and reaction time. So I gave you exceptions for each case.

Now you brought in so much different variable. So let's come back to case of QRSAM and Akash-NG; both solid fuelled, both radar guided, both having similar physical layout and both being developed with same technological proficiency...how's one so much different than other that we can't do it's job using other?

There is not much difference at all, not even in mobility case if Akash NG IA version is considered. At max reaction time should not differ more than 2 secs between them, both are modern system with many common elements., The largest being adoption of 4-paneled radars for QRSAM, akash ng and VLSRSAM. Perhaps radar of AKASH NG is much better and is not only good as AD role but also for AMD role, anti missile defense.

 

[Lonewarrior]

There's no cure for stupidity except admitting/learning from that.

There's; you can always block someone if you find him too stupid according to your standards.

Look at their aerodynamics characteristics. They have frontal fins for very high manoeuvrability.

Except...QRSAM don't have frontal fins.
Just aft of radome you have four fixed strakes (for God knows why) followed by mid-body folding stabilizer and control fins on the extreme end.

The QRSAM can launch 6 missiles at rapid succession.

Good, that's what a SAM is expected to do. Now if Akash-NG is not able to achieve this feat then it's not a design choices, it's simply not exploiting the full potential.

If you look at the Spyder missile system from IAI, you can understand the difference of them.
Python - QRSAM (agile)
Derby - SRSAM

Excellent example you chose, it'll make things much more clear.
In case of Spyder, the missiles were developed way before the launchers as AAM. They chose to use two different missiles, because they had no other option except repurposing AAMs.

In our case, we are developing both launcher and missiles from ground up; it's not like some army project of mounting old R-73s on a truck; is it? So why not develop a single missile that's capable of both scenarios instead of increasing logistics.

 

[Lonewarrior]

Speed and aerodynamics/flight profile of hellfire vs a subsonic target flying at let's say 2.5km altitude with rwr.

Valid point, perhaps so valid that even mUh AmReEkA never considered using Hellfire for 2.5 km altitude engagement. For that the same launcher firing Hellfire is also having an AIM-9X. Hellfire is for threats like small UAVs.
When Ukraine uses missiles like StarStreak or Osa to shoot down cheap Orlans then you must be going all "wasting expensive missile on cheap drone, clown Zelensky ".
And now when I tell you about a cost effective solution for such threats, then you go "mUh HeLlFiRe". Why mate

Amreeki stuff is always overpriced, fuck crony capitalism and extensive profit guzzlers for that. Our Helina/Nag with a iir seeker will cost one-fourth the price and maybe even lesser with huge orders.

Again, the debate was always about technology or capability; it's completely illogical to bring this point.
As long as a country fails to develop indigenous solutions, it's doomed to get robbed by foreign supplier. Even if that foreign supplier is us.
Ask yourself, Armenia buying PINAKA vs producing a domestic MLRS, which would have been cheaper for them.

Think again, Hellfire as a SAM.

Yes mate, thought it.
As long as Coyote doesn't get matured enough or you don't mention a missile option to engage target at close range under 70k; Hellfire is a SAM for me.

 

[johnj]

In the previous post you had mentioned just two parameters; range and reaction time. So I gave you exceptions for each case.

Now you brought in so much different variable. So let's come back to case of QRSAM and Akash-NG; both solid fuelled, both radar guided, both having similar physical layout and both being developed with same technological proficiency...how's one so much different than other that we can't do it's job using other?

Considering your exceptions- I asked those questions.
Difference similar to f35a, f35b , f35c, f35i, or similar to lca mk1 & lca mk2 in our case.
Currently one major difference is - one is capable of intercepting altitude upto 14km & other 10km. May be, we get a clear picture of two AD s/ms once they enter lsp/initial production. Major difference may be in mobility, fcr algorithms, net centric connectivity, rate of fire etc.

 

[Lonewarrior]

Finaaaally someone seems to get what exactly I'm trying so hard to say

one is capable of intercepting altitude upto 14km & other 10km

If difference between both missiles are like this only; 10km vs 14km or say IR vs RF or Mach 5 vs Mach 2...
basically anything which can't be matched by a simple upgradation then I get it; it's absolute necessary to have two.

Major difference may be in mobility, fcr algorithms, net centric connectivity, rate of fire etc.

But if most of the difference are like this then it's moot to develop two separate system; these are mostly block updates.

If these are the only things that make QRSAM more "quick" than Akash-NG or Akash-NG more capable than QRSAM then you can simply achieve capabilities of Akash-NG by developing QRSAM Mk-1 or vice-versa.

 

[vishnugupt]

QR-SAM:- light, high maneuvering (Like WVR AAM), high mobility, single unit system (Guidence integrated), better capability to kill low Target, small range , low cost.

Akash NG:- moderately heavy, maneuvering ( Like BVR AAM) multiple units (Guidence not integrated in each system) use common source of Guidence, better capability to kill high Targets. Moderate -Long range, high cost.

Use:-
QR-SAM walk in vicinity of infantry, need to we quick and independent, need to address immediate danger like drone, artillery shell, rocket,

Aksha NG:- they usually defend single point or they stay far back from infantry, they make a impregnable wall of defence which should not be breached by Aircrafts.

Why can't use both?? Because you need lighter system if you are working close to war zone as it needs frequent refill and high logistics.

 

[johnj]

Finaaaally someone seems to get what exactly I'm trying so hard to say

If difference between both missiles are like this only; 10km vs 14km or say IR vs RF or Mach 5 vs Mach 2...
basically anything which can't be matched by a simple upgradation then I get it; it's absolute necessary to have two.

But if most of the difference are like this then it's moot to develop two separate system; these are mostly block updates.

If these are the only things that make QRSAM more "quick" than Akash-NG or Akash-NG more capable than QRSAM then you can simply achieve capabilities of Akash-NG by developing QRSAM Mk-1 or vice-versa.

ADS- Air Defence Systems.
Its having multiple elements.
1. Sensor - agree
2. Missile - agree
3. Command & Control Center - not good, becz they use different n/ws.
4. Mobility - not good, one is mobile & other not, a huge difference.
lets assume, both missile & fcr are same still they are entirely different ADS.
But here both missiles also different- range, altitude, rate of fire, means every thing is different with some similarity but both do the same job.
I am unable to fine any data to compare these missiles & ads, only a little info is available.
Hint- akash ng is further development of akash - both iaf & ia uses akash
- qr sam is totally different pgrm, and only for ia.
I think the major issue is mobility.

 

[johnj]

QR-SAM:- light, high maneuvering (Like WVR AAM), high mobility, single unit system (Guidence integrated), better capability to kill low Target, small range , low cost.

Akash NG:- moderately heavy, maneuvering ( Like BVR AAM) multiple units (Guidence not integrated in each system) use common source of Guidence, better capability to kill high Targets. Moderate -Long range, high cost.

Use:-
QR-SAM walk in vicinity of infantry, need to we quick and independent, need to address immediate danger like drone, artillery shell, rocket,

Aksha NG:- they usually defend single point or they stay far back from infantry, they make a impregnable wall of defence which should not be breached by Aircrafts.

Why can't use both?? Because you need lighter system if you are working close to war zone as it needs frequent refill and high logistics.

Both s/ms are huge.
None of them can't handle artillery shell, rocket,
Both used to destroy same targets. drones, missiles, heavy rickets, helio, aircraft
Rest agree.

 

[aspdeepak]

A Sidewinder with IR guidance cost almost 450k, a Stinger in current configuration with inferior IR guidance costs almost 100k and a Hellfire costs 70k with radar guidance...no mate, I'm not joking.

Now you tell what you find so funny?

It's funny because:

Hellfire - short range IIR seeker with tandem warhead designed for defeating slow moving tanks/armoured vehicles

SAM - ranges longer than ATGMS, mostly radar with tungsten fragments upon proximity detonation for agile aircrafts(soft skinned)

It's like comparing a a heavy weight boxer vs lean agile karete guy