DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[ezsasa]

You can do that with loitering munitions . It'd be cost effective too compared to outfitting a rocket with EO sensors. Plus given the speed & trajectory of a Pinaka or similar rockets , I'm not sure it can be done. Which is why the best one can do with such rockets is convert them into guided rockets.

when that post was written loitering munitions hadn't entered DFI lexicon except for that israeli one in inventory.

100 kg warhead with 50-100 km range, speed at about 1 km a sec, rockets have advantages over loitering munitions.

if i remember correctly, i was thinking along these lines for this scenario. just that co-ordinates will be sent or target lazed and single rocket is fired from the rear if a convoy comes under sniper or MMG fire up ahead.

 

[Blood+]

Lt Gen P Ravi Shankar is already undertaking the project of developing a RAMJET propelled 155 mm shell with IIT Madras . It's half way there.

Hmm... hope they don't end up costing more than an MLRS rocket.

 

[Azaad]

when that post was written loitering munitions hadn't entered DFI lexicon except for that israeli one in inventory.

100 kg warhead with 50-100 km range, speed at about 1 km a sec, rockets have advantages over loitering munitions.

if i remember correctly, i was thinking along these lines for this scenario. just that co-ordinates will be sent or target lazed and rocket is fired from the rear if a convoy comes under sniper or MMG fire up ahead.

Oh I just noticed that particular post was from sometime in 2020 .

The way I look at it Armies & Air forces operate on different philosophies extending to platforms & ammo where for example if we consider PGMs which usually come for a steep price , are usually under the purview of the more technically oriented of the forces namely the AF & the Navy

In that respect the Army is always given step motherly treatment. They've to make do with relatively less sophisticated cheap & expendable platforms. You'd see that in modern warfare across countries & the time space dynamic.

For the army to use a 100 kg warhead at a 100 km distance in a precision strike , means the ability to look that far forward which today is a possibility & which didn't exist even say 5-7 yrs ago. Anything that far forward would be under the scope of the AF not the Army .

However the advent of drones has complicated issues & in due course will also give rise to turf wars assuming they haven't been ignited in forces operating in silos such as ours . Solutions , therefore , would be generated in due course along with responsibilities of domain.

For the scenario you've come up with , as of now you've 2 cheap solutions both airborne viz HALE / MALE drones armed with ASM on constant surveillance & loitering munitions apart from the conventional time & tested CAS by FA & Hptrs.

 

[Azaad]

Hmm... hope they don't end up costing more than an MLRS rocket.

They'd not be used as an MLRS too. It'd be for special operations.

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[omaebakabaka]

Theatre exploitation. How did Mirages manage to sneak into Balakot.
Create and exploit local conditions. I am not going to say much more.

Well, isn't that because we got nothing else, slow jags or heavy and big mkis or 21s. What could we have used really? I would like to believe Tejas better than mirages over all and really no reason not to be.... Yet to be proven for sure though. Jags are ducks against China most likely in current times, but they are still out nuke delivery planes?

Learn to build domestic or bankrupt yourself with imports and still lose against China on odds

 

[Blood+]

They'd not be used as an MLRS too. It'd be for special operations.

Like the The M982 Excalibur I know, I get that. But if they end up costing more or even only marginally less than a guided rocket, then it'll be completely pointless.

 

[AnantS]

Like the The M982 Excalibur I know, I get that. But if they end up costing more or even only marginally less than a guided rocket, then it'll be completely pointless.

not exactly. Artillery gun can be positioned where MRLS cant be (eg. mountains ) Ramjet artillery allows you to overcome counter artillery battery , provide further reach from borders , faster reloads. It will be even more lethal in direct fire. They will also eventually lead to development of long range ramjet powered tank shells.

 

[Blood+]

not exactly. Artillery gun can be positioned where MRLS cant be (eg. mountains ) Ramjet artillery allows you to overcome counter artillery battery ,

So the use cases are extremely limited in scope. And even in that role, a loitering munition like Lancet would be a lot cheaper and arguably a more effective alternative.

provide further reach from borders ,

Whatever range this sci-fi tech will be able to provide, a 300mm rocket will handily overmatch that every damn time.

faster reloads.

This ceases to be an advantage when the ammo is expensive as fuck and thereby, forcing you to limit its expenditure. And these WILL be hella expensive, rest assured.

It will be even more lethal in direct fire.

No commander worth his salt would ever deign to fire this thing in a direct fire role, under any circumstances (well, unless one of these happens to be the last one left in his inventory and even then it might be a stretch).

They will also eventually lead to development of long range ramjet powered tank shells.

For what??

 

[AnantS]

So the use cases are extremely limited in scope. And even in that role, a loitering munition like Lancet would be a lot cheaper and arguably a more effective alternative.

Drones Accuracy gets affected in high mountains during windy conditions. t affects artillery too but not not to that degree. Drones can damage , artillery can destroy hardened targets. Per Drone (for precision strike) - you need dedicated operator to fine tune precision attack. A single Artillery can target many - that too quickly with devastating effects with couple of crew.

Whatever range this sci-fi tech can provide, a 300mm rocket will handily overmatch that every damn time.

True - but have you seen size of both shell and rocket? Which would be more logistically easier to transport in numbers? Also rockets are not accurate as much as artillery, thats why Army used primarily artillery to support troop moving towards objective in kargil and used MRLS sparingly in comparison to artillery.

This ceases to be an advantage when the ammo is expensive as fuck and thereby, forcing you to limit its expenditure. And these WILL be hella expensive, rest assured.

/initially yes, but cost shall be driven down.

No commander worth his salt would ever deign to fire this thing in a direct fire role, under any circumstances (well, unless one of these happens to be the last one left in his inventory and even then it might be a stretch).

I agree with above, but ramjet due to sheer velocity shall provide great penetration capabilities due to momentum.

For what??

To target beyond LOS? To have a shell with great penetration capabilities? Give bae Bonus like capabilities to tank? I again its just my thought or brain fart

 

[Blood+]

Drones Accuracy gets affected in high mountains during windy conditions.

That maybe the case for FPV drones and alike but things like Harpy and Lancets are more resistant.

t affects artillery too but not not to that degree.

True.

Drones can damage , artillery can destroy hardened targets.

We were talking about in the context of counter-battery fire, weren't we?? Besides, it's a lot easier to make a structure resistant against shells than it is to do against an MLRS rocket.

Per Drone (for precision strike) - you need dedicated operator to fine tune precision attack. A single Artillery can target many - that too quickly with devastating effects with couple of crew.

Well, it may take up to 8 guys to man a single artillery piece by the way.

True - but have you seen size of both shell and rocket? Which would be more logistically easier to transport in numbers?

Again, you are forgetting the meat of the discussion here ; that being the COST factor. If this thing comes out more expensive than a guided MLRS rocket, then the lighter weight would not translate into this supposed logistical advantage you speak of.

To put all of it into perspective, the Excalibur with an estimated explosive filler of about 8 kg or so costs the American exchequer about 70k USD a pop (export price ranges from 100k to 120k) whereas a GMRLS round with a ~100 kg warhead costs about 100k in the domestic market (export price ranges from 220-240k).

And in our context, a guided Pinaka rocket is reportedly costing us about 49k a piece where as a 155mm TGM is said to be going for around 96k a piece!! Now which one would you think would the higher brass find to be a more preferable option??

Also rockets are not accurate as much as artillery, thats why Army used primarily artillery to support troop moving towards objective in kargil and used MRLS sparingly in comparison to artillery.

We ARE talking about guided munitions here though, are we not??

/initially yes, but cost shall be driven down.

As would be the case for a drone or an MLRS rocket.

I agree with above, but ramjet due to sheer velocity shall provide great penetration capabilities due to momentum.

If it has come to that, then the shit has already hit the fan and you might as well pack up and go home.

To target beyond LOS? To have a shell with great penetration capabilities? Give bae Bonus like capabilities to tank? I again its just my thought or brain fart

Nah, you won't need that - a programmable HE round should be more than enough for the vast majority of hardened targets (other than another MBT of course) a tank may expect to come up against in any given battlefield.

Give bae Bonus like capabilities to tank? I again its just my thought or brain fart

Ok, now THAT might be a viable use case.

I again its just my thought or brain fart

Not at all!! And I don't say this as a mere show of formality.

 

[Chinmoy]

Why not?? What's the weight and diameter of SAAW?? From what I see, it should fit inside a 300mm rocket, no??

Weight is 125 kg and length is around 1.85 meter, which is not an issue.

Issue is its dimension. Its height/breadth is around 250 to 300 mm along with non foldable tail fins. Moreover you can't expect a range of 90-100 km with SAAW fired from a SMERCH anyway.

 

[Blood+]

Weight is 125 kg and length is around 1.85 meter, which is not an issue.

Issue is its dimension. Its height/breadth is around 250 to 300 mm along with non foldable tail fins.

I see.

Moreover you can't expect a range of 90-100 km with SAAW fired from a SMERCH anyway.

Why not, if the rocket can propel it to a high enough altitude?? And if that ain't feasible, then how about adding a small turbojet engine to it, kind of like the V1 flying bombs but better?? Will that work??

 

[AnantS]

Again, you are forgetting the meat of the discussion here ; that being the COST factor. If this thing comes out more expensive than a guided MLRS rocket, then the lighter weight would not translate into this supposed logistical advantage you speak of.

To put all of it into perspective, the Excalibur with an estimated explosive filler of about 8 kg or so costs the American exchequer about 70k USD a pop (export price ranges from 100k to 120k) whereas a GMRLS round with a ~100 kg warhead costs about 100k in the domestic market (export price ranges from 220-240k).

And in our context, a guided Pinaka rocket is reportedly costing us about 49k a piece where as a 155mm TGM is said to be going for around 96k a piece!! Now which one would you think would the higher brass find to be a more preferable option??

Ok Thanks for cost perspective, but still I think these shells would give advantage to artillery gun perched on mountain tops. Also I think there shall be price difference between guided and unguided Ramjet Shell (I think there is a place for latter too).

We ARE talking about guided munitions here though, are we not??

Yes we are. Still guided ammunitions are not as precise as artillery. I know in Kargil we did not use Guided artillery but just as an example to convey same difference wrt guided MRLS and Guided Artillery.

As would be the case for a drone or an MLRS rocket.

I think in future Artillery, MRLS both shall require Drone for FO. Drones do make Towed artillery operators more vulnerable.

If it has come to that, then the shit has already hit the fan and you might as well pack up and go home.

Probably - but then we are known to use Anti Tank missile in busting sangars.

Nah, you won't need that - a programmable HE round should be more than enough for the vast majority of hardened targets (other than another MBT of course) a tank may expect to come up against in any given battlefield.

The use that I am envisaging is against armored platforms including MBT

Not at all!! And I don't say this as a mere show of formality.

Thanks.. its an interesting discussion either way.[/Quote]

 

[binayak95]

Well, isn't that because we got nothing else, slow jags or heavy and big mkis or 21s. What could we have used really? I would like to believe Tejas better than mirages over all and really no reason not to be.... Yet to be proven for sure though. Jags are ducks against China most likely in current times, but they are still out nuke delivery planes?

Learn to build domestic or bankrupt yourself with imports and still lose against China on odds

You are missing the point. Why I said Jags are the best at SEAD (after Rafales) is because of the EW suite.

Had IAF really thought this out, they'd have stripped the Su30MKIs, created an Su30MEA(electronic attack) and run with it. That is still possible - with Uttam and domestic EW suite.
Lets see if IAF bites that bullet.

 

[Blood+]

Ok Thanks for cost perspective, but still I think these shells would give advantage to artillery gun perched on mountain tops. Also I think there shall be price difference between guided and unguided Ramjet Shell (I think there is a place for latter too).

Unlikely. At that range, without a guidance mechanism in place, the accuracy will be so drastically reduced that they will become completely useless.

Yes we are. Still guided ammunitions are not as precise as artillery. I know in Kargil we did not use Guided artillery but just as an example to convey same difference wrt guided MRLS and Guided Artillery.

The GMRLs will beg to differ.

I think in future Artillery, MRLS both shall require Drone for FO. Drones do make Towed artillery operators more vulnerable.

By drones, I meant a loitering munition like Lancet. But yeah, you're right.

Probably - but then we are known to use Anti Tank missile in busting sangars.

ATGMs of the older varieties only and they are dirt cheap when compared to guided artillery shells. Ok, perhaps not exactly what you'd call 'dirt-cheap' but many times cheaper never the less.

The use that I am envisaging is against armored platforms including MBT

Yeah, I get that and that could be a viable use case, as I had mentioned in my previous comment.

Thanks.. its an interesting discussion either way.

It is indeed. I mean, that's part of the reason why we are all here, right - so that we can share and brainstorm our ideas??

 

[Chinmoy]

I see.

Why not, if the rocket can propel it to a high enough altitude?? And if that ain't feasible, then how about adding a small turbojet engine to it, kind of like the V1 flying bombs but better?? Will that work??

Creating a specialized ammo is always possible and engine powered SAAW with EO sensor is already work in progress.

I'd love to see a modified 214mm guided Pinaka onboard MKI or Tejas as a cheap standoff weapon package.

 

[omaebakabaka]

You are missing the point. Why I said Jags are the best at SEAD (after Rafales) is because of the EW suite.

Had IAF really thought this out, they'd have stripped the Su30MKIs, created an Su30MEA(electronic attack) and run with it. That is still possible - with Uttam and domestic EW suite.
Lets see if IAF bites that bullet.

I am very hesitant to believe in western hype based on results in Ukraine. China is a very capable power that seem to be able to improvise now as they built up disciplines from space to nuclear to aircraft and subsea. Ew by itself may not give us much against them, it's a full battle capabilities against hans that require more numbers and potential to replace fast any losses. Wonder weapons can be spear head but jags simply don't fit the bill... Still can pull tricks as iaf is better trained and capable in tactics. We simply lack numbers in most practical mid segment like rafales, mirages, Tejas hopefully delivers as numbers are most important in warfare against an opponent like west, Russia or China. Without replacements capabilities we are days endurance at best. I agree with mkis at least some of them in mini awacs and prowler role. Do jags even serve in any euro nations anymore?

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[NoobWannaLearn]