Kuldeepm952
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
- Messages
- 947
- Likes
- 4,969
We have just started on the path of PGMs with the current focus being on static ground targets evident from systems like glide bombs including SAAW, it's clear from SAAW and other weapon brochures that it was never envisaged to hit moving targets, EO or laser guidance is there just to decrease CEP. SANT which was supposed to be greater than 15 km range turns out to be less than 10km missile with possibly just being nag with MMW seeker and LOAL.Data link is already present and its entering trials next year.
View attachment 116884
Also the latest brochure of HELINA speaks of 7Km range and LOBL mode only just like PARS 3LR. NO LOAL, so no AGM with data link tested as of yet.
I think following UK SPEAR munitions like model for ground targets would be best:-
SPEAR Capability 1; Raytheon Paveway IV precision-guided bomb and subsequent improvements to include reduced collateral and penetrator warhead and enhanced capability against moving targets.
SPEAR Capability 2; a 50kg class powered missile, eventually Block 3, Brimstone 2, then Brimstone 3
SPEAR Capability 3; a longer range 100kg class weapon with the ability to be re-targeted in flight using two-way datalinks.
SPEAR Capability 4; upgrades to Storm Shadow to sustain it to its out of service date
SPEAR Capability 5; a longer-range replacement for Storm Shadow.
We are already testing SPEAR capability 1 like systems. Work on Brimstone like missiles would be a great asset though.
Some tech which we still need to prove:-
1.) Experience on design, development and proving turbojet/turbofan powered missiles. Nirbhay missile in doldrums for years with mixed results??
2.) Even on rocket sustainer powered Brimstone like systems we lag in terms of range by a lot. Comparing with Brimstone and SPIKE gen 2 will give a good idea that new gen of such missiles have been able to increase their range by 50 to whooping 100 percent e.g. spike er2.
3.) Rf data link needs to be proved for air to ground munitions.
4.) Need to work on dual mode or maybe even on trimode seekers for future missiles. Unitary IIR and MMW seekers already proven.
So, in all n all we need atleast 5 or more years.
And above all, demand from forces for such weapons to be developed. IAF was never very much keen or interested in the idea of mobile targets destruction through PRECISE STRIKES. No such weaponry present like AGM 65- low punch, ability of seeker to track, transmitting near time imagery to operator being the important parameters.