DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Lonewarrior]

Naam se pata chal jata hai waise.

Sab ko nahi pata chalta Laxman

 

[Blood+]

Sab ko nahi pata chalta Laxman

Arey main uske naam ka baat kar raha hu, wo Pakistani ladkio ki nehi.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Except the FCAS specs stated bays. No similar claims about the TEDBF has been made by either ADA or HAL or Navy. And they've had two Aero Indias to brag about it if it was in the plans.

Also, you really just compared a 5.5 gen aircraft to a 4th gen carrier born fighter ?

No I think recessed carriage of AAMs like KF21 version1 was confirmed by ADA guy in some video. It's just like some what blending of AAMs under the belly of plane, so not that hard to do like designing a weapons bay.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

I know, but it had MBDA in it

If BAE is developing an internal bay for Tempest by teaming with MBDA UK then why on earth FCAS won't have one if MBDA is also a partner in FCAS?
View attachment 195111
It mentions "Extreme Low Observability", I'm guessing they aren't planning for a recessed mount after such boasting of LO.

Anyways here's a render from Dassault; you can see the seams
View attachment 195112
Even if that's not enough then here you've a concept/render from MBDA
View attachment 195113

First we had LO, then came VLO and now we have another market gimmick Extreme LO, next will be Ultra LO and then Invisible. Another way to milk money I guess.

This FCAS and Tempest is going to be a very very expensive piece of kit. West has a weird ability to jack up the prices of their equipment unnecessarily high.

Some 20 yrs in future, European countries boasting about their top end military with their huge budget around with just some 100-200 of these jets and calling themselves the best military powah while the artillery ammo count doesn't even touch a million mark and ground forces doesn't even reach 100,000 mark.

 

[Lonewarrior]

First we had LO, then came VLO and now we have another market gimmick Extreme LO, next will be Ultra LO and then Invisible. Another way to milk money I guess.

Nope; just the normal way to sell things.
Like cosmetic creams go from BB to CC to BC and toothpastes from salt to mint to cloves; contractors also try their best.

Remember for how long Russians kept fooling everyone with their "plasma stealth"; something so advanced that even MiG-21s can be made invisible. Everyone does that. Even our very own ADA Chief with 5th Minus Generation.

Anyways, the point here was simply that they can't do a KLPD by mentioning Extreme LO and then putting recessed bay.

Some 20 yrs in future, European countries boasting about their top end military with their huge budget around with just some 100-200 of these jets and calling themselves the best military powah while the artillery ammo count doesn't even touch a million mark and ground forces doesn't even reach 100,000 mark.

Yeah; to some extent true.
But things are changing pretty rapidly. Poland's purchase list is a good example.

 

[Lonewarrior]

No I think recessed carriage of AAMs like KF21 version1 was confirmed by ADA guy in some video. It's just like some what blending of AAMs under the belly of plane, so not that hard to do like designing a weapons bay.

First thing first; it is hard.

Almost all AAMs (especially that we'll be using; ASRAAM, Astra and Meteor) are not ment for recessed mount. The attachment lugs are in between the cruciform of fins; so if you mount them keeping the lugs perpendicular to airframe then you have the fins interfering with proper release. So the only option is turning the missile by 45° (as on KF-21) so that the fins are perpendicular to the airframe; but now you have another problem...the lugs are now at 45°. And that's a risky postion to mount missile. Why? Because as it's a recessed bay you can't have a rail type launcher, so the only option is ejection type launcher. But ejection of missiles at 45° and that too while maneuvering at high g can be a huge challenge.

But even after that the reduction in RCS due to semi-recessed mount is very little compared to the pains in building one.

 

[Arpuster]

I know, but it had MBDA in it

If BAE is developing an internal bay for Tempest by teaming with MBDA UK then why on earth FCAS won't have one if MBDA is also a partner in FCAS?
View attachment 195111
It mentions "Extreme Low Observability", I'm guessing they aren't planning for a recessed mount after such boasting of LO.

Anyways here's a render from Dassault; you can see the seams
View attachment 195112
Even if that's not enough then here you've a concept/render from MBDA
View attachment 195113

MBDA UK will provide weapons so collaboration is required for weapon integration in bays and platform. But designs of weapon bay will be done independently by respective OEMs.

I asked for specs of weapon bay of FCAS bcoz u said they are available. Anyways just like we are guessing from renders and descriptions of Dassault, we should also believe in what ADA says.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

First thing first; it is hard.

Almost all AAMs (especially that we'll be using; ASRAAM, Astra and Meteor) are not ment for recessed mount. The attachment lugs are in between the cruciform of fins; so if you mount them keeping the lugs perpendicular to airframe then you have the fins interfering with proper release. So the only option is turning the missile by 45° (as on KF-21) so that the fins are perpendicular to the airframe; but now you have another problem...the lugs are now at 45°. And that's a risky postion to mount missile. Why? Because as it's a recessed bay you can't have a rail type launcher, so the only option is ejection type launcher. But ejection of missiles at 45° and that too while maneuvering at high g can be a huge challenge.

But even after that the reduction in RCS due to semi-recessed mount is very little compared to the pains in building one.

Well ofcourse but my point was they will be specifically for SFDR, just like KF 21s for meteors. Personally I don't care about recessed bays for the reasons you mentioned.

But I still feel that we should have gone with a much stealthier design atleast geometry wise for TEDBF which in theory could have been upgraded to a 5th gen status using IWBs and stealth skin composites and other techs to be developed for AMCA, somewhat like a naval j20 but smaller. Yes, it would have taken a little more time but we know that IAF is not in the picture for AF version of TEDBF and IN is also very keen on 5th gen plane for their AC as they initially asked for it but ADA played safe and settled for a 4+++ plane which would almost have everything 5th gen but not the VLO and IWB. Anyway we are not getting a CATOBAR soon.
My guess is if in future a carrier based 5th gen is needed and AMCA is not deemed to be good for conversion, that would effectively entail a new programme but maybe that would be viable as well, the requirement would easily cross 200 planes alone for IN if our economy continues to grow just fine, and then maybe in future we will have a 5 CATOBAR carriers in some 2050-60 timeperiod.

 

[Lonewarrior]

Well ofcourse but my point was they will be specifically for SFDR, just like KF 21s for meteors. Personally I don't care about recessed bays for the reasons you mentioned.

But I still feel that we should have gone with a much stealthier design atleast geometry wise for TEDBF which in theory could have been upgraded to a 5th gen status using IWBs and stealth skin composites and other techs to be developed for AMCA, somewhat like a naval j20 but smaller. Yes, it would have taken a little more time but we know that IAF is not in the picture for AF version of TEDBF and IN is also very keen on 5th gen plane for their AC as they initially asked for it but ADA played safe and settled for a 4+++ plane which would almost have everything 5th gen but not the VLO and IWB. Anyway we are not getting a CATOBAR soon.
My guess is if in future a carrier based 5th gen is needed and AMCA is not deemed to be good for conversion, that would effectively entail a new programme but maybe that would be viable as well, the requirement would easily cross 200 planes alone for IN if our economy continues to grow just fine, and then maybe in future we will have a 5 CATOBAR carriers in some 2050-60 timeperiod.
View attachment 195135
View attachment 195136

Well here's the bitter truth...we as Indians never do radical innovation. We have always done incremental innovation, and will keep doing that only. Name just five such systems that you'll consider radical. We always try to make what other's have already made instead of making what they'll be fielding.

And as for KF-21's recessed bay; I've only one thing to say...if even before its flight they had to announce that they'll be having a Block 2 with internal bay then it means there's something wrong with this.

Definitely that recessed mount will decrease RCS in frontal aspect. But can you guess what'll happen if it pitches it's nose by event 3-4°!? Radio waves will start bouncing in that circular cavity and light up the radar screen like a Christmas tree.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Nope; just the normal way to sell things.
Like cosmetic creams go from BB to CC to BC and toothpastes from salt to mint to cloves; contractors also try their best.

Remember for how long Russians kept fooling everyone with their "plasma stealth"; something so advanced that even MiG-21s can be made invisible. Everyone does that. Even our very own ADA Chief with 5th Minus Generation.

Anyways, the point here was simply that they can't do a KLPD by mentioning Extreme LO and then putting recessed bay.

Yeah; to some extent true.
But things are changing pretty rapidly. Poland's purchase list is a good example.

I am not convinced about Poland, they talk about all hula bula about that many HIMARS which are even more than that in service with US armed forces. They talk about hundred and thousands of tanks and howitzers from Korea out of nowhere. While in reality only a deal for few 100s have been signed to delivered. The reality of their claims and the reality of deals signed doesn't match at all. Such big deals with direct deal signing especially with Koreans smell of some pockets being warmed.
So, let's wait for a bit and see what they get finally.
And Poland is also not a well known Precision guided weapons/missiles developer. I doubt they will be anytime soon making the guided rockets akin to GMLRS for their few bought from USA and Korea.

One thing surprising to me is that they are literally burning their own inhouse design and indigenous weapons capability in field of armored vehicles and artillery. They produced many of their own weapons but this mass buy from foreign is a sure and slow death for their local arms industry.

One thing naive about ewwropeans is that they believe that ToT is something like handing down everything to them, yeah buddy like Koreans will give you their gold laying geese to you, good luck. We Indians are well known with this ToT drama, at the end it's mostly screwdrivergiri.

Imo this a Panic military buy and mass hysteria in creation that Russians are coming next year to fu*k and loot them. Basically, this is how you see the fruits of Anti-Russianisation of Europe through NATO for decades, propaganda is at max.

There are still questions about the future of EU where I don't think a strong Poland is anybody's wish. And now that American influence is in so deep with Poland, does it even makes sense for Poland to be in EU. The bloc is going to be in a huge turmoil for yrs to come.

With many factors, at best Poland is the frontline proxy state for US against Russia.
Did Russia attacked Poland? NO ,but these bastards have literally send their all weapons to Ukraine. These guys are the single most vile nation I have ever seen which goes to such length against a nation which hasn't done anything to them. Imo if a nuclear strike were ever to take place, Poland would be on the top list, along the Baltics.

 

[Lonewarrior]

I am not convinced about Poland, they talk about all hula bula about that many HIMARS which are even more than that in service with US armed forces.

Makes no sense; we also operate more T-90s than in service with Russia.

Such big deals with direct deal signing especially with Koreans smell of some pockets being warmed.

Ofcourse it can be rigged deal given K2 and K9 and K239 and FA-50 all are coming from a single nation.

But considering all the closest competitors in each category (like PzH 2000's vs K9's price) it can be something as simple as cost effectiveness.

I doubt they will be anytime soon making the guided rockets akin to GMLRS for their few bought from USA and Korea.

Not sure about US, coz US rarely provided ToT. But as for Korean ones, they can. They already are doing quite good in terms of missile given how late they had started.

Imo this a Panic military buy and mass hysteria in creation that Russians are coming next year to fu*k and loot them. Basically, this is how you see the fruits of Anti-Russianisation of Europe through NATO for decades, propaganda is at max

But aren't we currently witnessing something very similar

Did Russia attacked Poland? NO ,but these bastards have literally send their all weapons to Ukraine.

Does Israel waits for Iran to attack?
No, because they've already witnessed what can happen if you wait for your enemy to make the first move.

Same goes for Poland. They have faced enough brunt of World War to not anticipate for any attack.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Makes no sense; we also operate more T-90s than in service with Russia.

We are also closer to Russia in economic terms than Poland ever be to USA. Sure GDP is not the way to measure military strength but still their claim of 500 HIMARS launcher is too big of a claim, and when you associate the cost of ammo and support kit. On top of that they are claiming another hundreds of Chunmoos from S.Korea, even Papa Xi and PLA would blush at that huge of a guided firepower.
Also T90s and BMP2s are tons cheaper and hence the numbers with us, here Poland is taking about much expensive K2s and HIMARS so yeah I doubt them. Here we can produce 3 T90s for the price of 1 K2.

Ofcourse it can be rigged deal given K2 and K9 and K239 and FA-50 all are coming from a single nation.

But considering all the closest competitors in each category (like PzH 2000's vs K9's price) it can be something as simple as cost effectiveness.

Maybe but the record shows that about how S.Koreans do their defnece deal is very shrewd in some cases, so lets just say putting all eggs in one basket is perhaps not the best of idea.
If I were Russia, I would go full ballistic on supporting N.Korea to develop weapons to blunt S.Koreas advantage in area of Sea and Air. Then maybe S.Koreans would like to reconsider.

Not sure about US, coz US rarely provided ToT. But as for Korean ones, they can. They already are doing quite good in terms of missile given how late they had started.

Nobody sells their gold laying geese. It's risky, if Poland develops their own rockets for their Chunmoos and start offering them on market, it will be a competition just like they did against grad rockets, S.Koreans will keep Polish sufficiently dependent on them like never offering the core GNSS kit for rockets as ToT.

But aren't we currently witnessing something very similar

When did we talked about ordering 500+ Pinakas and 1000+K2 type expensive tanks and 1000+ howitzers in the next 5 yrs or so.
Poland is on another level, their Hysteria is funny and foolish at the same time.
You might want to change your thoughts here.

Does Israel waits for Iran to attack?
No, because they've already witnessed what can happen if you wait for your enemy to make the first move.

Same goes for Poland. They have faced enough brunt of World War to not anticipate for any attack.

With the Same thinking, Ukraine tried to poke the Russians and is now suffering. Poland will be well advised not to fu*k up too much otherwise.
About Israelis, sooner or later they have to seek peace, they can only dream to take on Iran one on one forever. It's all bcoz of US and their ways that Iran is being slowed down, times change and when wind blows in support of Iran, I doubt Israel will be fairing this good. Israel and Poland can boost themselves to puch above their weight but for how long, things will have to come at their level eventually.


I would say that you try to see how Polish economy is structured and where a lot of their money comes from and what capabilities or advantage they have. It wouldn't be wrong to say that a lot of their money comes from another wealthy european states taxpayers. Imagine taking Germany's money while throwing them under the bus and siding with US. I doubt this relationship with Germany will continue forever.
Once they can stand their own strongly on economy matters with a good future prospective then these claims of huge military buildup makes sense. Otherwise there's always the way of Pakistan, but I doubt anyone sane wants to be them.

 

[Lonewarrior]

Ukraine tried to poke the Russians and is now suffering

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Any idea of MPATGM seeker is cooled or uncooled one.
Afaik Helina/Nag has a uncooled seeker but cooling is provided externally by the launcher. See bottom right corner

So if acquisition range is highly dependent on the seeker being cooled internally or externally. How does Rafael claims that their Spike ER2 range of 10-16km fire and forget with a uncooled seeker with no cooling provision in launcher

No cooling provision or interface for such on launcher

So, is it safe to say that the claims of fire and forget at even 8km range can prove to be difficult in challanging environment like deserts.

They also use tv sensor which works as, Optical contrast seekers, or simply contrast seekers, are a type of missile guidance system using a television camera as its primary input. The camera is initially pointed at a target and then locked on, allowing the missile to fly to its target by keeping the image stable within the camera's field of view.

Now assuming CCD seeker is used when thermal is not able to acquire target, does that mean it effectively means range penalty in case of low light situation since CCD is a day only sensor and won't be able to operate at night or low light condition. And hence LOAL mode is absolute necessary and useful.

This is from a sim game but this maybe the most accurate data on how the sequence takes place

SPIKE LR - SBWiki

www.steelbeasts.com

One of the bit from above manual

• The IIR (thermal) seeker in the missile is inactive until the 10 second activation timer has elapsed. However, the missile can still be launched and can lock on to targets using its CCD (day) seeker (although this may prove problematic at night or in conditions of limited visibility). Once the 10-second timer has elapsed, you can switch to the thermal seeker, even in mid-flight.
• The cooldown limit on the missile's IIR seeker is 30 seconds. If you wait longer than 30 seconds from the time of activation, the IIR (thermal) seeker on the missile will not work.

Can anybody clarify regarding this limited IIR seeker working time.

For anybody who wants to know inside out of Javelin ATGM https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...YQFnoECDoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0OuOfFiiaCZmfLuT9awnhZ

 

[Kuldeepm952]

 

[Lonewarrior]

How does Rafael claims that their Spike ER2 range of 10-16km fire and forget with a uncooled seeker with no cooling provision in launcher
No cooling provision or interface for such on launcher

Physics : If you need to bring down the temperature of the sensor to generate contrast between background and target then it's a cooled system. But if it can work without all these then it's an uncooled one.

Defence technology : If you need external source of cooling like argon bottles in case of AAMs or BCU in case of MANPADs then it's a cooled seeker. If you don't need any of these shenanigans then uncooled.

And by this definition if the seeker is internally cooled by say a Stirling engine or thermocouple then also it's termed as uncooled.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Physics : If you need to bring down the temperature of the sensor to generate contrast between background and target then it's a cooled system. But if it can work without all these then it's an uncooled one.

Defence technology : If you need external source of cooling like argon bottles in case of AAMs or BCU in case of MANPADs then it's a cooled seeker. If you don't need any of these shenanigans then uncooled.

And by this definition if the seeker is internally cooled by say a Stirling engine or thermocouple then also it's termed as uncooled.

Ok, in military systems, a cooler is used with thermal imagers for better sensitivity and is integrated with imager. Also, we don't use such coolers for a seeker for example in Manpads bcoz that would have some wind up time to reach the desired cooling effect and adds weight and cost to missile. So, we use a BCU which basically injects argon gas in the seeker for cooling effect and enables the seeker to produce contrast for few 10s of seconds enough for acquisition and subsequent guidance to target.

Now, here is a contradiction. How does Spike ER achieves long range as no kind of external cooleing, and if it is cooled internally by Stirling engine or thermocouple then why use BCUs for MANPADS, as claimed spike er range suggests it's sensitive enough for acquiring target without use of any BCU. Also doesn't ground targets require more contrast than aircrafts for target acquisition.

The IIR (thermal) seeker in the missile is inactive until the 10 second activation timer has elapsed. However, the missile can still be launched and can lock on to targets using its CCD (day) seeker (although this may prove problematic at night or in conditions of limited visibility). Once the 10-second timer has elapsed, you can switch to the thermal seeker, even in mid-flight.

The cooldown limit on the missile's IIR seeker is 30 seconds. If you wait longer than 30 seconds from the time of activation, the IIR (thermal) seeker on the missile will not work.

Any idea what does 2nd point means.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Ok, in military systems, a cooler is used with thermal imagers for better sensitivity and is integrated with imager. Also, we don't use such coolers for a seeker for example in Manpads bcoz that would have some wind up time to reach the desired cooling effect and adds weight and cost to missile. So, we use a BCU which basically injects argon gas in the seeker for cooling effect and enables the seeker to produce contrast for few 10s of seconds enough for acquisition and subsequent guidance to target.

Now, here is a contradiction. How does Spike ER achieves long range as no kind of external cooleing, and if it is cooled internally by Stirling engine or thermocouple then why use BCUs for MANPADS, as claimed spike er range suggests it's sensitive enough for acquiring target without use of any BCU. Also doesn't ground targets require more contrast than aircrafts for target acquisition.



Any idea what does 2nd point means.

To clarify things here, I have no issue with 4-5km range for Spike lR with uncooled seeker but as range increases more contrast is needed and hence good cooling is needed. So, Spike ER version with 10-16km range is SUS where no external cooling is provided, doesn't that posses problem in target acquisition at such long ranges.

Let's be clear that each ir/iir seeker has a cooldown time which once active continues to provide clear image for x amount of time and after that image contrast decreases significantly, according to above point in reply, it stops working. Usually this time is less than minute for smaller man portable systems, more inorders of 30 around secs, AAMs like R73 have their own cryogenic cooler while manportable ones don't.

Javelin ATGM has a BCU in its launch tube while there's no sign of such thing remotely on a spike Lr or even ER version launch tube assembly.

So, here's the thing I believe Spike failed trials in Indian Deserts and Javelin passed as we know from trials conducted far back. And it also begs the question about the effectiveness of Spike missile in Fire n Forget operation.

For Javelin, Operator sees target through CLU, activates BCU and as BCU can provide a total 4 min of cooling, allows for multiple target acquisitions if initial acquisition is not achieved by seeker. Also better contrast. Now operator sees target through CLU and then activates IR seeker, now switches to seeker view and on acquiring, fires it and the missile flies. Seeker cooldown time starts and within cooldown time, missile flies to target, hits it and mission done.

For spike, no BCU. Operator sees the target through CLU, switches to tv seeker view, and tries to acquire it, he can then either fire the missile on acquisition or on grid reference here or he can try to acquire it through iir seeker too, he presses the button to acquire the target and cooldown time starts even before flying, so hence the countdown starts and if target not acquired within first limited seconds, seeker is rendered ineffective for long range acquisition and only seeker remaining is tv seeker. Or he can fire the missile on grid or with tv seeker and then he can press the button to acquire target through iir seeker and there are limited amount of times it can reacquire target depending on contrast through man in the loop on independently.

First of all ability of tv seeker to acquire and keep track of targets at long range is not better than that of IIR seeker.
Now this shows how man in the loop capability for Spike is essential feature for it for the way it was designed since design doesn't allows wiggle room for iir seeker target acquisition.
Disadvantage being that in low contrast environment the uncooled iir seeker is very ineffective. Also very low attempts of target acquisition is also problematic. And after first few attempts,, IIR seeker is rendered ineffective or let's just say low effective.

And that's why probably Javelin passed desert trials in India and Spike did not bcoz of the way Javelin missile has a cooled seeker and a BCU which helps a lot for low contrast targets.

Which then ultimately leads me to question if MPATGM has some sort of internal micro cooler for its IIR seeker. I don't see any kind of BCU on its launch tube from prototype pics.
This also leads to the question of what about this new NAGmk2 programme.

And Doesn't this makes Spike ER a situational Fire n Forget missile depending on initial target acquisition by IIR seeker and environmental conditions. Where operator might need to use man in the loop option to acquire target on the final approach of missile on fire on grid target command, if the initial lock is not achieved. 10-16km range seems already too big for a uncooled seeker.p

 

[Swesh]

Something was tested yesterday but was not reported by drdo it was reported by local media may be because of spy case they kept secrecy

 

[Swesh]