DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Chinmoy]

I was talking of Astra. Its a BVRAAM.

Nothing to salivate about.

 

[Akula]

L&T Sharang remote control weapon system

http://www.defencenews.in/article/LandT-Displays-New-SHARANG-RWS-586835

 

[IndianHawk]

Technology to go behind a MANPAD would be same as that of a SAM, BUT.... there is one critical aspect which would be a problem for DRDO. IA or IAF would not accept any MANPAD developed by DRDO right now. Why? Because any such system would be much heavier then what IA is using right now, Igla.

Moreover, on seeker front we would have to wait for MPATGM do mature first. Because unlike SAM which uses Active Radar Guidance, any MANPAD would prefer IIR seeker or MmW for that. These are used in NAG and MPATGM and we would have to wait till these platforms reach a maturity point or users show enough confidence in them.

Same is with WVRAAM. Although we have build a BVRAAM and testing it, the physics of WVRAAM would again keep it off RADAR for few more years. Reason, unlike BVRAAM, a WVRAAM would have to undergo a tremendous G force (20 to 25G max). So structural integrity of such a missile is a challenge. And on seeker part again we would have to wait for a IIR seeker to mature.

I agree with most of it except the g forces part.
We have built a manned aircraft already which can handle 8-9g . I'm pretty sure we are capable of building a simple missile which can manuever at 20-30g. The challenges are in seekers which we are already working on and on funding .

Another problem is that world's best wvraam a(aasram, mica , rvv-sd) available to us on decent prices unlike bvr where we face several restrictions. ( MBDA refusal to integrate Meteor with sukhoi for example).

And over defense funding must priorities tech denied to us first and limited funds should be given to those programs on priority.

Like Astra mk2 with dual pulse and sfdr missile
And hypersonics.

 

[aditya10r]

I was talking of Astra. Its a BVRAAM.

Nothing to salivate about.

Happy that we have made something potent

WVRAAM too is within reach but it will require a lot of time money and other resources.
Once MANPAD dev is done we should start working on WVR missile.

 

[Chinmoy]

I agree with most of it except the g forces part.
We have built a manned aircraft already which can handle 8-9g . I'm pretty sure we are capable of building a simple missile which can manuever at 20-30g. The challenges are in seekers which we are already working on and on funding .

Another problem is that world's best wvraam a(aasram, mica , rvv-sd) available to us on decent prices unlike bvr where we face several restrictions. ( MBDA refusal to integrate Meteor with sukhoi for example).

And over defense funding must priorities tech denied to us first and limited funds should be given to those programs on priority.

Like Astra mk2 with dual pulse and sfdr missile
And hypersonics.

Making a missile that could sustain its structural integrity at 20g turn is a different ball game then making a aircraft that could undertake a 8g maneuver. Before going for BVRAAM we did tried our hands on WVRAAM. So its not like we have not tried it.

Excuse of availability of missiles off the self for not developing a indigenous solution is suicidal at the best and thank god that neither IAF nor DRDO is thinking like that. Otherwise anyone would take us hostage. Eg.... Meteor would not be integrated into Tejas if it use a Israeli RADAR. Do you think others would not follow suite?

 

[IndianHawk]

Making a missile that could sustain its structural integrity at 20g turn is a different ball game then making a aircraft that could undertake a 8g maneuver. Before going for BVRAAM we did tried our hands on WVRAAM. So its not like we have not tried it.

Excuse of availability of missiles off the self for not developing a indigenous solution is suicidal at the best and thank god that neither IAF nor DRDO is thinking like that. Otherwise anyone would take us hostage. Eg.... Meteor would not be integrated into Tejas if it use a Israeli RADAR. Do you think others would not follow suite?

My point is about priority of funding. Wvr tech is not as restricted as bvr tech. Ofcourse we need indegenios solutions but we can't develope all at once unless funding are increased in major way.

Btw doesn't DRDO classify Astra as CCM+ bvr?
Same wit mica which works both roles.

Future of aerial warfare is wvr reaching bvr ranges (50-60km) and bvr becoming very long range missile ( 100-150km) .

Also how many Gs our other missile pull , bramhos , Astra , shouraya etc. ?

 

[IndianHawk]

My point is about priority of funding. Wvr tech is not as restricted as bvr tech. Ofcourse we need indegenios solutions but we can't develope all at once unless funding are increased in major way.

Btw doesn't DRDO classify Astra as CCM+ bvr?
Same wit mica which works both roles.

Future of aerial warfare is wvr reaching bvr ranges (50-60km) and bvr becoming very long range missile ( 100-150km) .

Also how many Gs our other missile pull , bramhos , Astra , shouraya etc. ?

Answering my own question

Astra can pull 40g manuever.
According to

https://worldofweapon.wordpress.com/astra-missile/

All other data is same as Wikipedia. But I'm not sure how accurate this is . Somebody with original DRDO data on Astra can probably confirm!

Adding global security also claims Astra as 40g plus capable!
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/astra.htm

 

[Chinmoy]

My point is about priority of funding. Wvr tech is not as restricted as bvr tech. Ofcourse we need indegenios solutions but we can't develope all at once unless funding are increased in major way.

Btw doesn't DRDO classify Astra as CCM+ bvr?
Same wit mica which works both roles.

Future of aerial warfare is wvr reaching bvr ranges (50-60km) and bvr becoming very long range missile ( 100-150km) .

Also how many Gs our other missile pull , bramhos , Astra , shouraya etc. ?

Talking of funding part, in our case it does work in two ways.

1-- DRDO take on a project, makes a report on it and present it to respective customer and board in MoD which then decide on it and accordingly funds are allowed. Example BMD.
2-- Customer asks for a product and DRDO prepares a report. Based on that report finance is provided.

Now government is not going to increase fund unless DRDO presents a project and gets it approved. So the onus lies on DRDO and IAF for any WVRAAM

The engagement range of any WVRAAM is 5 to 50 km. 5 in head on mode, 50 in tail chase mode. Against a dummy target, Astra or any AAM could act as a CCM, but when the target is a highly maneuverable one, the physics gets change dramatically.

G value of any missile would be highly classified. For a cruise missile like Brahmos, it would be as same as that of a fighter. For Shourya it would be even less. But for Astra, I am sure that it could easily take 20G. Whether it could sustain that or not is another matter.

 

[IndianHawk]

Talking of funding part, in our case it does work in two ways.

1-- DRDO take on a project, makes a report on it and present it to respective customer and board in MoD which then decide on it and accordingly funds are allowed. Example BMD.
2-- Customer asks for a product and DRDO prepares a report. Based on that report finance is provided.

Now government is not going to increase fund unless DRDO presents a project and gets it approved. So the onus lies on DRDO and IAF for any WVRAAM

The engagement range of any WVRAAM is 5 to 50 km. 5 in head on mode, 50 in tail chase mode. Against a dummy target, Astra or any AAM could act as a CCM, but when the target is a highly maneuverable one, the physics gets change dramatically.

G value of any missile would be highly classified. For a cruise missile like Brahmos, it would be as same as that of a fighter. For Shourya it would be even less. But for Astra, I am sure that it could easily take 20G. Whether it could sustain that or not is another matter.

Astra can pull much more than 20g . 40g is being reported but we need more accurate source.

So we can deal with gravity . Now the question is why is DRDO not pitching for wvraam I see two reasons
1) forces want aasram right now and won't wait for wvraam .
2) DRDO might want a mica type hybrid missile rather than r73 type. Dual seekers are all the rage in development planning ahead.

DRDO will need more labs more manpower with more projects so overall budget needs to go up

 

[Chinmoy]

Astra can pull much more than 20g . 40g is being reported but we need more accurate source.

So we can deal with gravity . Now the question is why is DRDO not pitching for wvraam I see two reasons
1) forces want aasram right now and won't wait for wvraam .
2) DRDO might want a mica type hybrid missile rather than r73 type. Dual seekers are all the rage in development planning ahead.

DRDO will need more labs more manpower with more projects so overall budget needs to go up

We have never tested Astra against a high maneuverable target, only electronic targets at best for high maneuverability. Now releasing the Astra at Mach 2 itself would mean that it would face a 50G force. But it doesn't mean that it could sustain that much force while maneuvering.

 

[IndianHawk]

We have never tested Astra against a high maneuverable target, only electronic targets at best for high maneuverability. Now releasing the Astra at Mach 2 itself would mean that it would face a 50G force. But it doesn't mean that it could sustain that much force while maneuvering.

It's top speed is quoted at Mach 4.5 shouldn't that mean it could face higher g force.

Still the point is if we design a missile for wv range high g manuevering we have very reasonable probability of success. So main challenge is seeker for wv range and funding not the maneuve ability part .

 

[Tridev123]

It's all OK to discuss about Bvraam's and Atgm etc but we have not focused on a very important requirement. What about indigenous anti ship cruise missile. Just because we have Brahmos, is there no requirement for a subsonic anti ship cruise missile. China fields both supersonic and subsonic anti ship cruise missiles. The. US has only subsonic Ascm-does anybody have info on supersonic Ascm with the US. Subsonic cruise missiles have their own utility and should not be discounted. Subsonic cruise missiles can be made stealthy by body shaping(similar to stealth aircraft like F35, F22 etc) and also special coatings. They can be made low observable to compensate for their low speed. Also a completely indigenous subsonic anti ship cruise missile will only add to our strength.

We need a full family of subsonic anti ship cruise missiles with varying ranges to cater for all possible scenarios.

We already have the building blocks for the missile through the Nirbhay subsonic land attack cruise missile programme.

When will we open a separate thread on India 's indigenous subsonic Ascm here on Indian Defence Forum.

How much time will DRDO need to realise this dream.

 

[Shaitan]

It's all OK to discuss about Bvraam's and Atgm etc but we have not focused on a very important requirement. What about indigenous anti ship cruise missile. Just because we have Brahmos, is there no requirement for a subsonic anti ship cruise missile. China fields both supersonic and subsonic anti ship cruise missiles. The. US has only subsonic Ascm-does anybody have info on supersonic Ascm with the US. Subsonic cruise missiles have their own utility and should not be discounted. Subsonic cruise missiles can be made stealthy by body shaping(similar to stealth aircraft like F35, F22 etc) and also special coatings. They can be made low observable to compensate for their low speed. Also a completely indigenous subsonic anti ship cruise missile will only add to our strength.

We need a full family of subsonic anti ship cruise missiles with varying ranges to cater for all possible scenarios.

We already have the building blocks for the missile through the Nirbhay subsonic land attack cruise missile programme.

When will we open a separate thread on India 's indigenous subsonic Ascm here on Indian Defence Forum.

How much time will DRDO need to realise this dream.

There is a cruise missile that has supersonic terminal stage in the works as well. Unrelated to brahmos and nirbhay.

 

[Tridev123]

There is a cruise missile that has supersonic terminal stage in the works as well. Unrelated to brahmos and nirbhay.

Don't you think that we're already too late in developing and productionising the capability. You remember the US Seventh Fleet threat to India in 1971.The US may no longer be a direct adversary now but Chinese Carrier Battle Groups are an imminent threat. Saturation missile attacks on the Chinese fleet would require large numbers of Ascm. The indigenous subsonic Ascm will be cheaper than the Brahmos and can be mass produced. Since its IPR would be with us we can modify it to keep pace with the changing threat scenario. Like mk1, mk2, mk3 versions etc.

The Chinese are going to build mega aircraft carriers and enter the Indian Ocean sooner rather than later.

 

[Shaitan]

Don't you think that we're already too late in developing and productionising the capability. You remember the US Seventh Fleet threat to India in 1971.The US may no longer be a direct adversary now but Chinese Carrier Battle Groups are an imminent threat. Saturation missile attacks on the Chinese fleet would require large numbers of Ascm. The indigenous subsonic Ascm will be cheaper than the Brahmos and can be mass produced. Since its IPR would be with us we can modify it to keep pace with the changing threat scenario. Like mk1, mk2, mk3 versions etc.

The Chinese are going to build mega aircraft carriers and enter the Indian Ocean sooner rather than later.

Depends on political will to ramp up production after anti ship cruise and ballistic missiles developments are done, which current govs do not have.

 

[Chinmoy]

It's all OK to discuss about Bvraam's and Atgm etc but we have not focused on a very important requirement. What about indigenous anti ship cruise missile. Just because we have Brahmos, is there no requirement for a subsonic anti ship cruise missile. China fields both supersonic and subsonic anti ship cruise missiles. The. US has only subsonic Ascm-does anybody have info on supersonic Ascm with the US. Subsonic cruise missiles have their own utility and should not be discounted. Subsonic cruise missiles can be made stealthy by body shaping(similar to stealth aircraft like F35, F22 etc) and also special coatings. They can be made low observable to compensate for their low speed. Also a completely indigenous subsonic anti ship cruise missile will only add to our strength.

We need a full family of subsonic anti ship cruise missiles with varying ranges to cater for all possible scenarios.

We already have the building blocks for the missile through the Nirbhay subsonic land attack cruise missile programme.

When will we open a separate thread on India 's indigenous subsonic Ascm here on Indian Defence Forum.

How much time will DRDO need to realise this dream.

Lets have a look at India's AShM capability. This include both CM as well as BM.

1- BRAHMOS
2- Exocet
3- Harpoon
4- Klub
5- Switch blade
6- Sea Eagle (in reserve)
7- P-20 (in reserve)

Along with these CM, we have Ship launched Dhanush which could be used as an AntiAC missile.

Upcoming missiles are Nirbhay and Rudra.

Now the real and present threat is submarine force of PLAN. As of now, the CBG doesn't pose a threat to India. So our thrust is at ASW warfare. The present arsenal of AShM is good enough for any over water threat.

 

[Chinmoy]

It's top speed is quoted at Mach 4.5 shouldn't that mean it could face higher g force.

Still the point is if we design a missile for wv range high g manuevering we have very reasonable probability of success. So main challenge is seeker for wv range and funding not the maneuve ability part .

Yes it could handle much greater G, but in a leveled straight flight. Concern for structural integrity comes when it has to undertake high G maneuver. For example consider yourself walking. The G you face is 1G. Now consider yourself traveling in a car at 120kmph in a straight road. The G you would experience would be greater then 1. Now just imagine the G you would feel if you have to take some turns at that speed. The very structural integrity of the car would come into question if you have to do it repeatedly. No OEM would give out the exact detail of engagement maneuver G force any missile could undertake, which is always much low then the stated G. So yes, its a critical aspect to take care of.

As far as seeker tech is concerned, we are still in the learning curve. We would have to wait a bit to master it.

 

[porky_kicker]

AMOGHA - manportable , fire and forget ATGM

 

[Akula]

AMOGHA - manportable , fire and forget ATGM

View attachment 38102

View attachment 38103

What is the status of this Missile?

 

[IndianHawk]

Yes it could handle much greater G, but in a leveled straight flight. Concern for structural integrity comes when it has to undertake high G maneuver. For example consider yourself walking. The G you face is 1G. Now consider yourself traveling in a car at 120kmph in a straight road. The G you would experience would be greater then 1. Now just imagine the G you would feel if you have to take some turns at that speed. The very structural integrity of the car would come into question if you have to do it repeatedly. No OEM would give out the exact detail of engagement maneuver G force any missile could undertake, which is always much low then the stated G. So yes, its a critical aspect to take care of.

As far as seeker tech is concerned, we are still in the learning curve. We would have to wait a bit to master it.

Yes it could handle much greater G, but in a leveled straight flight. Concern for structural integrity comes when it has to undertake high G maneuver. For example consider yourself walking. The G you face is 1G. Now consider yourself traveling in a car at 120kmph in a straight road. The G you would experience would be greater then 1. Now just imagine the G you would feel if you have to take some turns at that speed. The very structural integrity of the car would come into question if you have to do it repeatedly. No OEM would give out the exact detail of engagement maneuver G force any missile could undertake, which is always much low then the stated G. So yes, its a critical aspect to take care of.

As far as seeker tech is concerned, we are still in the learning curve. We would have to wait a bit to master it.

Astra also has tail chase mode with 20 km + range. Wouldn't this mode require high g manuevering as you pointed out? How does tail chase mode work for a bvr and how different it is from CCM?