DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Gautam Sarkar]

An Advanced version of Shyena (with 25kms range at 25knots & 12kms range at 50knots) is already going through tests.

Any sources for that ?

The range of 650kms is not impossible to make. Ultimately it all depends on the operational setup. long endurance drones like Sea Guardian will help in a big way.

Any detection instrument on aerial platform (including some purported satellite???) will only detect surface or close to surface subs. Deep submerged sub detection via an aerial platform will require sonobuoys (highly doubt technology exists for a satellite to directly detect deep submerged subs.......some kind of permanent sonobuoys could communicate directly to satellites though).

As I said, it the elaborate arrangement for detection that'll be the logistical challenge....building a longer and longer range rocket to encompass a torpedo is kinda trivial task!

All of the above is again a testament to my earlier suggestion (in another post) that P8s are not a cost-effective solution for continuous monitoring!!!! Drones, Sonobuoys, Satellites, SMART torpedos are!

Wasn't talking about the difficulties of making a 650 km missile which in all due probability will be a solid rocket missile. We have plenty of expertise on that. I was wondering about operational use of such a system. You are right though. With an underwater sensor network augmented by sats, drones, P-8Is an effective underwater A2/AD can be enforced. Just hope we get some UVLS too.

Agree with the rest of your post. Don't know about the cost-effectiveness of MALE drones over P-8Is, its not like we have both to compare anyway. I guess we will know, when we have both drones and P-8I, by looking at what the IN decides.

 

[Vijyes]

Any sources for that ?


Wasn't talking about the difficulties of making a 650 km missile which in all due probability will be a solid rocket missile. We have plenty of expertise on that. I was wondering about operational use of such a system. You are right though. With an underwater sensor network augmented by sats, drones, P-8Is an effective underwater A2/AD can be enforced. Just hope we get some UVLS too.

Agree with the rest of your post. Don't know about the cost-effectiveness of MALE drones over P-8Is, its not like we have both to compare anyway. I guess we will know, when we have both drones and P-8I, by looking at what the IN decides.

Sonobuoys of size A weigh 18kg each. DRDO Tapas drone can carry 350kg payload. Assuming other payloads for surveillance weighing 150kg, we can fit 10 standard-size Sonobuoys in Tapas.

On the other hand, P8 can carry 120 Sonobuoy and additional harpoon missiles and several crew on board. Earlier P3 airfraft could carry 80 Sonobuoys with some Harpoon missiles.

The Sonobuoy can transmit and find out objects upto 2km radius. This equals 4km diameter. So, with 10 Sonobuoys, only 40km can be surveyed whereas with 80 Sonobuoy, over 320km length can be surveyed. 120 Sonobuoys can further survey 480km.

The problem with Tapas type MALE drones are that the Sonobuoy carrying capacity is too low and there is no targeting capabilities in terms of missiles like Harpoons.

Unless India develops heavier drones, it is difficult to replace heavier planes with drones. Even planes like Dornier can be used instead of Drones like Tapas for better ASW roles.

I don't see the method in which 650km rocket can be used to target submarines, though. But drone surveillance, unless India gets a very heavy drone, is not useful

 

[Holy Triad]

Status Update of AESA radar Uttam : Shake down sorties were completed in January, 2019 on modified executive Jet hired.

Indigenous AESA radar integration and EMI/EMC tests on LCA ‘Tejas’ LSP2 aircraft are nearing completion and flight evaluation is planned shortly.

 

[Enquirer]

Sonobuoys of size A weigh 18kg each. DRDO Tapas drone can carry 350kg payload. Assuming other payloads for surveillance weighing 150kg, we can fit 10 standard-size Sonobuoys in Tapas.

On the other hand, P8 can carry 120 Sonobuoy and additional harpoon missiles and several crew on board. Earlier P3 airfraft could carry 80 Sonobuoys with some Harpoon missiles.

The Sonobuoy can transmit and find out objects upto 2km radius. This equals 4km diameter. So, with 10 Sonobuoys, only 40km can be surveyed whereas with 80 Sonobuoy, over 320km length can be surveyed. 120 Sonobuoys can further survey 480km.

The problem with Tapas type MALE drones are that the Sonobuoy carrying capacity is too low and there is no targeting capabilities in terms of missiles like Harpoons.

Unless India develops heavier drones, it is difficult to replace heavier planes with drones. Even planes like Dornier can be used instead of Drones like Tapas for better ASW roles.

I don't see the method in which 650km rocket can be used to target submarines, though. But drone surveillance, unless India gets a very heavy drone, is not useful

You're comparing disparate systems!
Sea Guardian can carry almost as many sonobuoys as P8.....and most importantly be in continuous flight 5 times longer than P8, and doesn't require a huge compliment of crew and not to mention the high operational cost!!!!

Why are you comparing high cost imports with a low cost local product? I have always suggested Sea Guardian imports would be more cost effective than P8s

 

[Vijyes]

You're comparing disparate systems!
Sea Guardian can carry almost as many sonobuoys as P8.....and most importantly be in continuous flight 5 times longer than P8, and doesn't require a huge compliment of crew and not to mention the high operational cost!!!!

Why are you comparing high cost imports with a low cost local product? I have always suggested Sea Guardian imports would be more cost effective than P8s

Sea Guardian has 1.4 ton payload. Taking out about 200kg for other items, we will get about 60 Sonobuoys. This will be insufficient to run a sortie 5 times as much as P8. The Sonobuoys are expendable and once dropped, last only 10 minutes. So, to cover large areas, 30 Sonobuoys are needed every hour. Sea Guardians, after dropping its 60 Sonobuoys must roam around as just any other SAR drone for rest of the 20 hour flight. This becomes wasteful.

Sea Guardian drones can at best substitute aerial surveillance of Do228 aircraft in peacetime patrolling. Replacing P8 is not feasible.

 

[Enquirer]

Sea Guardian has 1.4 ton payload. Taking out about 200kg for other items, we will get about 60 Sonobuoys. This will be insufficient to run a sortie 5 times as much as P8. The Sonobuoys are expendable and once dropped, last only 10 minutes. So, to cover large areas, 30 Sonobuoys are needed every hour. Sea Guardians, after dropping its 60 Sonobuoys must roam around as just any other SAR drone for rest of the 20 hour flight. This becomes wasteful.

Sea Guardian drones can at best substitute aerial surveillance of Do228 aircraft in peacetime patrolling. Replacing P8 is not feasible.

I am beginning to think that you're Advaith Tiwari (like every one else suspects).
He too would put out incorrect or partial info and argue relentlessly

Firstly Sonobuoys have much much longer life than what you put out!
Secondly dropping few sonobuoys in a completely NEW direction and area is much more valuable than dropping additional ones in adjacent areas! As such it's not so much of dropping a high density of sonobuoys in a single area, but dropping even a few in different and far flung areas that matter! As such more PLATFORMS that can fly LONGER time is more valuable!!!

 

[porky_kicker]

So you are saying the 50-650 km range as was written in the MoD Annual paper wasn't a typo ? I assumed it to a typo for 65 kms.
If that is the case it would be a very unique system with no international counterparts. The American ASROC for example has a range of 22-25 kms only.
I do worry about the range and speed of the Shyena LWT. Most international lightweight torpedoes have 10-15 km range, where as the Shyena has just 7 km range. Also most LWT have a speed of 40-45 knots, Shyena is at 33 knots.
I do hope we will improve the propulsion set in its next version.

Never said anything about range explicitly.

650km if true is a big range , what I said about satellites has no connection with SMART perse.

Already India is using satellites to detect submarines , the mechanism and resources available is dual use. They managed to develop satellite based optoelectronic and microwave sensors and related technologies , algorithms which can distinguish discriminate hydrodynamic signatures of both ships and submarines and between man made and natural sources including propeller characterization , sub surface generated wakes. However there is margin of error due to various reasons. Since technology is a work in progress , the capabilities is being refined and in the future we will have dedicated purpose built space based assets for ocean surveillance of both surface and sub surface.

There is a classified project for ocean surveillance , no other info on it. It is project CHA******* ( name related to Sanatan dharma ) .

Also let me tell you India already has sensors placed underwater and interestingly it is not acoustic based like hydrophones ( previously they used later complemented and hopefully supplemented ). After what I wrote it is not hard to guess what technology is being used.

There is so many things we don't know.

Anyways regarding SMART range i will go with 650km unless stated or proved otherwise. No confusion regarding it being a standoff system however the range seems tad too much even for me. Let's see.

Also what @Enquirer said regarding TAL speed and range is correct , it's new version has dual endurance and speed mode.

You will find the same info in previous years mod annual report ( which year I don't remember )

 

[Defcon 1]

I will let you guys solve this mystery

View attachment 36443

First version of Astra mk1 with long cord wings


View attachment 36442

This one also has long chord wings

(In the pic only the nose cone is missing)

There is some similarities and there is some dissimilarities between the 2 airframes

But if one compares the two, are they the same missiles ?

If yes then case closed, if no then

Is it a air to air missile ?
Or
Is it a air to ground missile ?
Or
Is it a ground to air missile ?

And thank god you are back..........

 

[porky_kicker]

And thank god you are back..........

Unfortunately no bro , just taking a break for keeping my mind off tension.

Whenever I get the chance I will come back now and then

 

[Vijyes]

I am beginning to think that you're Advaith Tiwari (like every one else suspects).
He too would put out incorrect or partial info and argue relentlessly

Firstly Sonobuoys have much much longer life than what you put out!
Secondly dropping few sonobuoys in a completely NEW direction and area is much more valuable than dropping additional ones in adjacent areas! As such it's not so much of dropping a high density of sonobuoys in a single area, but dropping even a few in different and far flung areas that matter! As such more PLATFORMS that can fly LONGER time is more valuable!!!

I am Advaidhya. The account was restricted in some thread due to OT posts. So, I switched.

My bad. Sonobuoys can have life span upto 8 hours by limiting number of scans per minute. But practice wise, it is generally less than 4 hours.

But, the Sonobuoys are generally dropped in a pattern to have better detection despite the white noise. So, Sonobuoys are never dropped in single in discrete locations and hence consume several buoys at a time.

Yes, I agree that flying more time is advantage. But it is advantage in surveillance of surface, not ASW warfare. It is very inexpensive to track boats and potential smuggling, surfaced submarine etc by flying drones. But ASW requires much more than that. Major advantage of P8 is its large amount of equipment that it can hold torpedoes, harpoon missiles, advanced computers and largenumber of Sonobuoys. Sea Guardian drone can't be used to carry all these.

I don't see why would you recommend sea Guardian drones by overpaying instead of using Indigenous Tapas drones for doing moat of surveillance activities. Since ASW role of Sea Guardian is limited, it is not really valuable for that. Do228 can do better ASW operations than Sea Guardian.

Drones are definitely cheap for surveillance but are limited in ASW surveillance ability.

 

[porky_kicker]

Thrusters of various types.......................

 

[porky_kicker]

Rocket motor ......................

 

[porky_kicker]

I hope people remember this glider assisted torpedo delivery system.

I wonder if SMART will employ this mechanism to deploy the torpedo or go for pure parachute based release mechanism

 

[Enquirer]

Yes, I agree that flying more time is advantage. But it is advantage in surveillance of surface, not ASW warfare. It is very inexpensive to track boats and potential smuggling, surfaced submarine etc by flying drones. But ASW requires much more than that. Major advantage of P8 is its large amount of equipment that it can hold torpedoes, harpoon missiles, advanced computers and largenumber of Sonobuoys. Sea Guardian drone can't be used to carry all these.

I don't see why would you recommend sea Guardian drones by overpaying instead of using Indigenous Tapas drones for doing moat of surveillance activities. Since ASW role of Sea Guardian is limited, it is not really valuable for that. Do228 can do better ASW operations than Sea Guardian.

Drones are definitely cheap for surveillance but are limited in ASW surveillance ability.

The P8 advantage of being able to carry torpedos will be negated by longer range SMART torpedos. As I had mentioned earlier, even with today's logistics a P8 can swoop into an area 500 kms away in no time if/when a drone detects a sub (the sub would have moved just about 25 knots in that time).

My suggestion of using Sea Guardian instead of Tapas is primarily due to the present payload advantage. When Tapas/Rustom can increase their payload capacity, by all means Tapas/Rustom could be used.

Again Do228 is a manned aircraft with very limited endurance...and high operational costs.

I completely disagree with your stand that drones are ineffective at detecting submerged subs, while P8s can. The aerial platform (or satellite) makes little difference....they all have to rely on somekind of sonobuoy.

Also, with improvements in battery technology (& perhaps solar too), longer endurance sonubuoys could come to market.

Net-net. My suggestions are not based on yesterday or even today.....but what to plan for in the coming years.....

 

[Enquirer]

View attachment 36448

I hope people remember this glider assisted torpedo delivery system.

I wonder if SMART will employ this mechanism to deploy the torpedo or go for pure parachute based release mechanism

It's a high pressure ejection from a cannister (borne by SMART). so unlikely a parachute of glider system will be used

 

[porky_kicker]

It's a high pressure ejection from a cannister (borne by SMART). so unlikely a parachute of glider system will be used

You sure ? I don't follow news nowadays

If yes interesting , the torpedo will need to be ruggedized to extreme levels then.

Anyways let's see

 

[Enquirer]

You sure ? I don't follow news nowadays

If yes interesting , the torpedo will need to be ruggedized to extreme levels then.

Anyways let's see

Yes. Sure of high pressure ejection (150 bars).
Agreed that the torpedo needs to handle that.
But if you consider the fact that a rocket is accelerating the torpedo to (probably) Mach 3-4, then it needs to be pretty rugged just to handle the 'journey'. The terminal ejection will be just a minor additional force.
But perhaps you might be referring to the forces emanating from the splash down....I am not totally sure about that though.

 

[sorcerer]

DRDO made Electric Gun and Turret Drive System for Armour Fighting Vehicles, uses CAN based Gyro mech, all set to complete its trial officially by august end.

 

[proud_indian]

@Enquirer @porky_kicker others....

Do we have any plan in pipeline to develop a turbofan powered UAV likes of RQ-4 Global Hawk
I noticed it has got a 34 kn engine and once we have developed HTFE -25 then and all the experience gained developing Rustom / Tapas series of UAVs, maybe then we can take up this endeavour

what's your take guys

 

[Gautam Sarkar]

I will let you guys solve this mystery

View attachment 36443

First version of Astra mk1 with long cord wings


View attachment 36442

This one also has long chord wings but repositioned. Rear wings also repositioned

(In the pic only the nose cone is missing)

There is some similarities and there is some dissimilarities between the 2 airframes

But if one compares the two, are they the same missiles ?

If yes then case closed, if no then

Is it a air to air missile ?
Or
Is it a air to ground missile ?
Or
Is it a ground to air missile ?

I will let you guys be the judge the jury and the executioner.

There is a noticeable taper in front of the mid-section long chord wings on the Astra Mk-1 initial version. Notice just around the part where the Indian flag in painted. Now compare the length from the taper to the beginning of the mid section wings, that length is almost the same as the length from the end of the mid section wing to the rear wings.

In the case of the second picture that's not the case. The taper is much closer to the beginning of mid-section wings and the rear is longer. At least that's how it looks like to me. But then I have very poor eyesight. Its a facetious comparison anyway, we don't know the actual dimensions.To me the second pic seems like an airframe based on the Astra MK-1 initial version but modified.

As far as I know long cord wings are designed to keep the aspect ratio low, that in turn reduces stability an increases maneuverability. However that comes at a price, long cord wings are not efficient for cruising/gliding and are thus used for aero applications where long range cruising/gliding is not necessary. Basically a missile using this kind of wings will have a short sharp violently maneuvering flight, ideal for air to air and in some cases SAM applications. For example look at the MBDA MICA/IR

Before the air frame redesign the Astra first flew in May 2003 with 25-40 km range, a short range compared to the Astra as we know it today.

That reminds me, remember in Aero India 2019 HAL showcased Jaguar MAX concept ? One of the proposed weapons was a IR seeking CCM. Who knows, we might actually end up recycling the discarded Astra MK1 air frame to a CCM. With the NAG missile finslly getting inducted, we do have some relevant experience in the IR seeker dept.

But standard disclaimer, all this is just speculation. Take it with a lump of salt.