If i have to put my trust in one AD system which is foreign and license produce in mass is L70 and its flycatcher radar, Tunguska can`t even hit slow speed drones at least those serving in India ..
Its time Army look into Indian system and DRDO should develop equipment which are already in service, For example radar guided ZU-23-2 ( Fully automated except the reloading ) clones or same for L70 which are vehicle mounted ..
Will these systems be able to fire on the move if mounted? Also, if the requirement is to support Armoured columns, the AD will have to armoured and tracked as well. So which chassis would be the best fit for something like that? I think BMP chassis would work.
A key difference in this system would be that the radar would be on a different vehicle and it will have to pass on the information to all vehicle-mounted L70 or ZU-23-2 which would only rely on Electro-Optical FCS. This makes the entire system vulnerable, especially because a single radar is catering to 4 different gun carrier platforms.
To overcome that, I was wondering if it is possible to mount 4 L70 and a Flycatcher or Atulya radar on a single armoured chassis, but I am not sure if the radar would be compact enough to fit. Maybe they can make a smaller radar for this?
I don't know when we will see such advanced Electronic Warfare systems in our possession to bring down drone and missile attacks ...
Krasukha EW System
View attachment 19406 View attachment 19407
I imagine KALI project is a better tech for the same job. Its more advanced but is also more than a decade away from field deployment. So are all DEW weapons.
An interesting read:
How Good Is Russian Electronic Warfare?
Ignore the humble title and give it a read.
Also, if someone could tell me if NAVIC is also vulnerable to exploitation of the "bearing frequency" concept like the GPS as the article asserts here:-
In the GPS system there is the ‘bearing frequency’ concept. At the basis of the system lies the transmission of the elementary signal from the satellite to the transmitter, therefore the smallest turning off from the assigned frequency even by milliseconds will lead to a loss of accuracy. The transmission of the signal goes in a sufficiently narrow band, according to open data — 1575.42 MHz and 1227.60 MHz, and this is the bearing frequency. Therefore modern jammers are focused directly at blocking it which, taking into account the narrowness of the bearing frequency and possession of a sufficiently powerful noise jammer, to silence it does not constitute a special effort.