DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[jai jaganath]

 

[karn]

Most important question no one is answering

How do you recover your loitering drone? (the main advantage of loitering drones)

And if you are making a one time use only thing, why not existing ATGMs?

Plus, if you are operating beyond LOS of tank, why even bother with the tank itself? Why not some dedicated attritable BMP, which can keep speed with tank but doesnt need as much money or scrifice much capability?

The main advantage of loitering drones is time on station not reuse.
. ATGMs have a flight time of less than a minute .
Agreed on the bmp part.

 

[Satish Sharma]

Most important question no one is answering

How do you recover your loitering drone? (the main advantage of loitering drones)

And if you are making a one time use only thing, why not existing ATGMs?

Plus, if you are operating beyond LOS of tank, why even bother with the tank itself? Why not some dedicated attritable BMP, which can keep speed with tank but doesnt need as much money or scrifice much capability?

You're not getting it.
This tube launched munitions give atleast 40mins duration and from 2km altitude imagine how long u can see and the level of situation awareness.. if they are anyways used as kamikaze what's wrong in having them. They would hardly costs 10k dollars or less. Atgms doesn't even come close. Atgms costs like somewhere 70k-100k dollars and do u have flexibility like drone can have..
Army has added it in rfi for a reason..
I was just saying putting soany things on turret won't be possible it better to have a 120mm Tube launched kamikaze type munitions.
If a single tank carries even 5 one will get 4-5 hrs of situational awareness..
The drones can be expansible..
And BMP part I guess could be there in doctrine.. but not worth it.

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

You're not getting it.
This tube launched munitions give atleast 40mins duration and from 2km altitude imagine how long u can see and the level of situation awareness.. if they are anyways used as kamikaze what's wrong in having them. They would hardly costs 10k dollars or less. Atgms doesn't even come close. Atgms costs like somewhere 70k-100k dollars and do u have flexibility like drone can have..
Army has added it in rfi for a reason..
I was just saying putting soany things on turret won't be possible it better to have a 120mm Tube launched kamikaze type munitions.
If a single tank carries even 5 one will get 4-5 hrs of situational awareness..
The drones can be expansible..
And BMP part I guess could be there in doctrine.. but not worth it.
View attachment 244886

So many issues

First, 4-5 hours of surveillance is very low (compared to need of surveillance during LSCO). And ATGMs dont actually cost that much (mass produced, comes to around 15k only).

And it still doesnt answer

Why have it on the tank and not in a BMP much behind the tank? On a modified BMP, you can carry much better drones than gun or tube launched ones, bigger endurance etc. Why is it so necessary to have on the tank itself (suboptimal in more ways than one, outlined in my posts).

 

[Arjun Mk1A]

Too much suspense.

 

[NutCracker]

Bsdike Edith walo.. plexiglass le lo km se km
Warn them on twitter

 

[brat4]

How do you recover your loitering drone? (the main advantage of loitering drones)

And if you are making a one time use only thing, why not existing ATGMs?

So many issues

First, 4-5 hours of surveillance is very low (compared to need of surveillance during LSCO). And ATGMs dont actually cost that much (mass produced, comes to around 15k only).

And it still doesnt answer

Why have it on the tank and not in a BMP much behind the tank? On a modified BMP, you can carry much better drones than gun or tube launched ones, bigger endurance etc. Why is it so necessary to have on the tank itself (suboptimal in more ways than one, outlined in my posts).

couple of things:
1) this is loitering + munition drone I believe - which makes "Recovery" of this drone moot.
2) the sruveillance is going to be done by dedicated drones (TAPAS when it finally dawns on the powers to be) and this is more for smaller radius of interest (periphery of the tank)

think of the hidden RPG wielding folks hiding behind rocks/mountains/canopy who can attack a tank - this will neutralize those folks (or atleast keep them wary of the possibility of these types of munitions coming out of the turret)

 

[Smoothbore125mm]

Reguarding my question of cannon fired loitering uav here i have done some research :

Konkors atgm (launched from bmp2)
length-130cm
width-125mm=12.5cm
warhead= 2-3kg

reflek atgm (launched from t90s tanks)
length-69cm
width-125mm=12.5cm

switchblade 600 tube launched uav :
length -130cm
loitering time = 40minutes
range= 40km
warhead= 3-4kg

while i know that installing the drone is hard what my question was that why not develop a warhead which could act like drone while being controlled by someone else (from a safe distance) or the commander itself it could provide crucial information of defensive positions about enemy in a close combat type tank battle where friends and foes are at 3-4km distance whiles looking of certain ambush sites which the enemy could have created

while i didnt make an assumption that the army would want it but the army has specifically mentioned that frcv is supposed to fire loitering munitions and while it fires loitering munitons a cannon launched kamakazi drone would be very beneficial rather than developing an external mount which require a crewmember or infantry to reload externally

so in a sentence i would say an atgm sized kamakazi drone which would loiter for 5-10km 20-30 minutes to be fired by existing cannons and could be controlled by people in ifvs or the commander/controler aiding the tank crew to coordinate strikes giving live info
switchblade type system

 

[mokoman]

Bsdike Edith walo.. plexiglass le lo km se km
Warn them on twitter

Spoiler

 

[Smoothbore125mm]

couple of things:
1) this is loitering + munition drone I believe - which makes "Recovery" of this drone moot.
2) the sruveillance is going to be done by dedicated drones (TAPAS when it finally dawns on the powers to be) and this is more for smaller radius of interest (periphery of the tank)

think of the hidden RPG wielding folks hiding behind rocks/mountains/canopy who can attack a tank - this will neutralize those folks (or atleast keep them wary of the possibility of these types of munitions coming out of the turret)

tapas would be unflyable in a contested airspace

yes this would be a drone mostly focused on checking the battlefield identfying enemy positions take some of them out(THUS KAMAKAZI LOITERING DRONE) it would create panic then would come the tanks which would take advantage of the panic to take out enemies

while the questions of why not mount it on ifv is something indian army guy has to answer who demanded loitering drone option on frcv my mental situation is based on his assessment of having loitering drone on a mbt

 

[Satish Sharma]

So many issues

First, 4-5 hours of surveillance is very low (compared to need of surveillance during LSCO)

it was just my assumption that if 4-5 tube launched drone are carried they can give situational awareness of 4-5hrs look at switch blade drone has 40km range and 40mins endurance. If such 10 are carried it will be more than enough and one can get refuelings too..
And economics factor is there let me tell you switchblade made in usa costs 10k dollars
Javelin costs 250k.

And ATGMs dont actually cost that much (mass produced, comes to around 15k only).

Who said tank launched or MP atgms costs 15k the hellina alone costs 1.3 crore..

And it still doesnt answer
Why have it on the tank and not in a BMP much behind the tank? On a modified BMP, you can carry much better drones than gun or tube launched ones, bigger endurance etc.

Again I have told you switch blade has 40mins endurance and 40km range.. if it is launched from tank how much advantage it can give with not much hassle.. and also damn cheap.. like if it costs 10k in usa to build it will cost half in india. This drone already give descent performance and they are of the size which can be launched from barrel.. switch blade has eo/ir camera so they can be used in night as well. The switblade 300 model has it... It is not hard for us to replicate same system..

Why is it so necessary to have on the tank itself (suboptimal in more ways than one, outlined in my posts).

army has mentioned in RFI, they need it.

Reguarding my question of cannon fired loitering uav here i have done some research :
Konkors atgm (launched from bmp2)
length-130cm
width-125mm=12.5cm
warhead= 2-3kg
reflek atgm (launched from t90s tanks)
length-69cm
width-125mm=12.5cm
switchblade 600 tube launched uav :
length -130cm
Loitering time = 40minutes
range= 40km
warhead= 3-4kg
while i know that installing the drone is hard what my question was that why not develop a warhead which could act like drone while being controlled by someone else (from a safe distance) or the commander itself it could provide crucial information of defensive positions about enemy in a close combat type tank battle where friends and foes are at 3-4km distance whiles looking of certain ambush sites which the enemy could have created
while i didnt make an assumption that the army would want it but the army has specifically mentioned that frcv is supposed to fire loitering munitions and while it fires loitering munitons a cannon launched kamakazi drone would be very beneficial rather than developing an external mount which require a crewmember or infantry to reload externally
so in a sentence i would say an atgm sized kamakazi drone which would loiter for 5-10km 20-30 minutes to be fired by existing cannons and could be controlled by people in ifvs or the commander/controler aiding the tank crew to coordinate strikes giving live info
switchblade type system
download (1).jpg

I'm saying the same damn thing for this long
And Regarding why not mount it on ifv well
If we can carry it like a shell and fire from barrel what's wrong a ifv is not gonna be there forever to give drones to you..

couple of things:

1) this is loitering + munition drone I believe - which makes "Recovery" of this drone moot.

2) the sruveillance is going to be done by dedicated drones (TAPAS when it finally dawns on the powers to be) and this is more for smaller radius of interest (periphery of the tank)



think of the hidden RPG wielding folks hiding behind rocks/mountains/canopy who can attack a tank - this will neutralize those folks (or atleast keep them wary of the possibility of these types of munitions coming out of the turret)

Tapas cannot be used in such contested airspace.they can shoot down but they cannot shoot down such loitering Munition we are talking abt.

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[Blood+]

You're not getting it.
This tube launched munitions give atleast 40mins duration and from 2km altitude imagine how long u can see and the level of situation awareness.. if they are anyways used as kamikaze what's wrong in having them. They would hardly costs 10k dollars or less. Atgms doesn't even come close. Atgms costs like somewhere 70k-100k dollars and do u have flexibility like drone can have..
Army has added it in rfi for a reason..
I was just saying putting soany things on turret won't be possible it better to have a 120mm Tube launched kamikaze type munitions.
If a single tank carries even 5 one will get 4-5 hrs of situational awareness..
The drones can be expansible..
And BMP part I guess could be there in doctrine.. but not worth it.
View attachment 244886

Why not just use an FPV drone from out of an accompanying BMP-2??

 

[Smoothbore125mm]

Why not just use an FPV drone from out of an accompanying BMP-2??

bruh he and me have said it multiple times that its due to the requirement given by army for frcv
it says that the tank must have a drone launching capability so i came up with an idea to have a cannon launched drone munition

 

[NutCracker]

bruh he and me have said it multiple times that its due to the requirement given by army for frcv
it says that the tank must have a drone launching capability so i came up with an idea to have a cannon launched drone munition

Drone Launching capability from main barrel ??

Is this the exact requirement mentioned in RFI ??

 

[Smoothbore125mm]

Drone Launching capability from main barrel ??

Is this the exact requirement mentioned in RFI ??

nah it just said capable to launch drone and coordinate with other drones
its my idea to have a cannon launched uav cause atgm launched from tanks have similar dimensions

 

[Satish Sharma]

Drone Launching capability from main barrel ??

Is this the exact requirement mentioned in RFI ??

I said it because of the other requirements army has put which are going on turret like a anti helicopter missile, Directes energy weapon, APS's radar, hardkill thing, smoke grenade , coaxial gun, jammers , EO system,
I'm still missing something do you think turret will hold another drone ? Instead there are already tube launched drones which can be fired from barrel. RFI has not mentioned to be deployed from barrel but they have said this..

nah it just said capable to launch drone and coordinate with other drones
its my idea to have a cannon launched uav cause atgm launched from tanks have similar dimensions

Bruh I was the one who was ranting this barrel launched drones. Like switch blades..

 

[Blood+]

bruh he and me have said it multiple times that its due to the requirement given by army for frcv
it says that the tank must have a drone launching capability so i came up with an idea to have a cannon launched drone munition

I know and it is stupid.

 

[karn]

I said it because of the other requirements army has put which are going on turret like a anti helicopter missile, Directes energy weapon, APS's radar, hardkill thing, smoke grenade , coaxial gun, jammers , EO system,
I'm still missing something do you think turret will hold another drone on tank ? Instead there are already tube launched drones which can be fired from barrel. RFI has not mentioned to be deployed from barrel but they have said this..
View attachment 244895

Bruh I was the one who was ranting this barrel launched drones. Like switch blades..

That requirement you posted is with regards to normal tank rounds . Indirect fire from tanks has been very common in the ukr war .. perhaps they picked it up from that .

 

[Smoothbore125mm]

I know and it is stupid.

lmao i dont even understand what does the army considers as futuristic or some fesibility studies are conducted or not ?