Yeah the question is why .. the extended range /guided versions are hardly larger than the Older version. Is it a case of too many expensive missiles on a single truck ?This one 90km version . 4 rockets can be seen .
Yeah the question is why .. the extended range /guided versions are hardly larger than the Older version. Is it a case of too many expensive missiles on a single truck ?This one 90km version . 4 rockets can be seen .
total 8 not 4This one 90km version . 4 rockets can be seen .
I think its because of the fins. Not because of the missiles being too expensive. In the unguided version without the fins, the rockets fit snugly in the tube and tube in the pod. With fins, something had to give.Yeah the question is why .. the extended range /guided versions are hardly larger than the Older version. Is it a case of too many expensive missiles on a single truck ?
ErrI think its because of the fins. Not because of the missiles being too expensive. In the unguided version without the fins, the rockets fit snugly in the tube and tube in the pod. With fins, something had to give.
The fins at the rear fold. Ones in front do not. Besides, I don't see any other reason they would reduce number of rockets per pod since it leads to a marginal reduction in operational capability.
Also they,seem to be scale model, we cant rwally percieve dimension differenceThe fins at the rear fold. Ones in front do not. Besides, I don't see any other reason they would reduce number of rockets per pod since it leads to a marginal reduction in operational capability.
Actually now that I look closely, the rear fins in guided rocket look different. If they are articulated, then they also likely don't fold.The fins at the rear fold. Ones in front do not. Besides, I don't see any other reason they would reduce number of rockets per pod since it leads to a marginal reduction in operational capability.
Yeah this seems logical.Actually now that I look closely, the rear fins in guided rocket look different. If they are articulated, then they also likely don't fold.
While the fins on the unguided rockets do fold.
Now the difference appears stark.
If by Pinaka ER you mean the Pinaka Mk1 Enhanced, then its the same length as the original Mk1 rocket. They just put in a better propellant by HEMRL.View attachment 173683
View attachment 173684
MK1 MK2 MK2 GUIDED have same caliber 214 mm, but vary in Length (4.88,5.17,5.17 m). Not sure dimensions of Pinaka ER
That is the Mk2 version, 5.17meters. Same as the guided round.I meant 90 km version
Unacceptable CEP most likely. Its ineffective at those ranges without guidance.Ok just saw its the guided which has 80 , unguided has 60. Not sure why when they are essentialy same missile(same wt,propellant mass)
Nope, they do fold, just check the tech focus on pinaka. If gmlrs can fit in the same pod, why can't pinaka? Only drdo can tell that, most likely it has to do with target transfer interface to rockets within the pod or something.Actually now that I look closely, the rear fins in guided rocket look different. If they are articulated, then they also likely don't fold.
While the fins on the unguided rockets do fold.
Now the difference appears stark.
Dont know much abt future plans of Armenian regarding airdefence or what they have now . But this mbrl vs attack drone need to stop . Apple and orange . Both have their uses . Difference is Attack drone can take video of every single blast from truck to bike and circulate in social media . Mbrls can destroy a entire airbase without much advertisement .Honestly not sure why they are buying pinakas. They already had soviet era rockets that are quite similar to the original Pinakas. What they need are air defence systems to shoot down drones, their own drones and a comprehensive EW system. These pinakas will also be sitting ducks if they cant control their own airspace