zeroIf the Akash was that much more advanced than the SA-6, why has it failed to be deployed in significant numbers after almost 20 years of development? Why purchase the Barak indstead? More corruption in the indian armed forces again favouring foreign imports?
Akash has demonstrated to IAF the following:
Akash SAM downs UAV in flight trial
The fifth and last trial successfully took place at 2.15 pm today at Chandipur- on- sea. The missile destroyed an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), which was flying simulating the air attack. The target vanished from the radar screen when the missile was guided precisely in close proximity and the warhead blast occurred, much to the delight of users present in the flight campaign. This is the grand finale of the ten days users campaign meticulously planned by the Indian Air Force.
2 Akash SAM’s hit single target simultaneously
Today a battery of two Akash Surface to Air missiles were test fired on a single target. Both the missiles hit the target simultaneously. The target was a towed body and Lakshya PTA was towing it. The target was at 400 mts altitude, 17 kms range and 700 kms/ph speed.
why has it failed to be deployed in significant numbers after almost 20 years of development?
These systems are under the process of production – deployment. Its under limited series production for IAF. We will not know the status till they have been deployed and verified. Till then it will be deployed in second line of defence (like LCA will go to Sulur or other non-frontline base for familiarisation). It should be slowly phased towards frontline as they get more confident. Its a period of 5 – 10 years we are talking about.
IAF has also MR/SR SAM program’s. Its going with DRDO-IAI co-operation. Its DRDO’s new strategy for quicker development of products. Brahmos example will be replicated across the gamut of weapon development. This is the new DRDO strategy. Another welcome development is that DRDO picked up the skills while developing the weapons lik missiles, aircraft, tanks etc. Now foreign companies are willing to co-develop because they saw the capabilities that DRDO has picked up.
DRDO’s strategy is in line with world wide weapon development trends. When DRDo started, the trend was that all countries develop it in house, so DRDO went the same way. Now, the world has new strategy, DRDO has adopted it. (its openly stated and if you google or bing it, you will able to find it)
Bit related on the cost
Missile orders value outstrips the R&D cost – DRDO
Order values for 2 missiles systems from Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) exceeded the R&D expenditure incurred on 6 missiles. This data is for the year 2006.
Prithvi Missile variants including Dhanush and Brahmos order values till 2006 was Rs 3585 Crores (round figure). These include both the delivered quantities and orders under execution. This data includes the letter of intent purchases forwarded to DRDO from the three services.
This figure is significant as the development cost of Prithvi variants, Brahmos, Trishul, Akash and Nag put togther is Rs 2000 Crores (round figure).
Finally,
Indian MoD hits back at false reports says “Indian missile program completed, not scrapped”
Some section of the media has been reporting “unconfirmed” and “unnamed” sources for reporting imaginary troubles with indigenous equipment research or production.
A section of retired Indian armed forces personnel have taken up agency or joined agencies to peddle foreign arms equipment into India. All the high value projects like Arjun Tanks, Light Combat Aircraft, Missile projects initiated by India have come under the attacks by some section of these personnel who masquerade as “unnammed source” for earning a commission.
India Army has all major ticket import items like helicopters, tanks etc. under Central Vigilance Committee (CVC) scanner, which keeps on a eye over corruption. Some Indian Air Force deals are in CVC scanner too.
zeroSo, you basically agree with my original estimation that the J10 is at least on par with the M2K? :p
I fully agree that J-10 will be as good as the old french tech. why do people find it hard to agree?
zerozeroexternally they are identical, the internals have simply had a fresh makeover; guidance system and other electronics
Baring casing design, what else is similar?
zeroThat doesn’t really surprise me as the Akash is nothing more than a modified SA-6 Gainful.
Which part of SA-6 gainful was modified?
zeroLCA’s final prototype to take off soon
First Published : 26 Jun 2009 08:19:03 AM IST
Last Updated :
BANGALORE: The Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme has achieved another significant breakthrough as its final prototype vehicle PV-5 will soon take to the skies. The PV-5, one of the five prototype vehicles developed by the Aeronautical Development Agency is ready with the Engine Ground Run currently being carried on.
Defence Research and Development Organisation sources told Express that the Engine Ground Run for the PV-5, a two-seat trainer prototype is currently being carried out, before it can be certified to fly.
“The Engine Ground Run precedes the low-speed taxi trial and the high speed taxi-trials, following which the first flight of the aircraft will take place,” said sources. “Once the weather improves the taxi trial will be carried and so will the first flight of the PV-5,” sources added.
Unlike the other four prototypes (PV-1, PV-2,PV-3,PV-4) and the two technology demonstrator (TD-1 and TD-2) aircraft, the PV-5 apart from being a two-seat trainer version of the LCA will be identical to the fighter.
It will be fully combat capable and could be used in that role.
The LCA has completed 1,141 Test Flights successfully as on June 25.
ADA, the technology development agency for the indigenous LCA programme, hopes to get the Initial Operational Clearance before being inducted in the IAF by 2010. IAF plans to have seven LCA squadrons.
zeroTrue.
zero2.5 aka 200 kms times range takes it to exo-atmospheric territory.
zero
J-9 China.
They too had this tailless carnard design.
zeroSharjah, April 2 (IANS) Relations between the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and China are poised to scale new high with bilateral trade touching $19.4 billion last year, WAM news agency reported Wednesday. “Some 2,000 Chinese firms operate in the UAE, and about 200,000 Chinese nationals work in the country, primarily in the construction sector,” the news agency said quoting media report.
Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China in the United Arab Emirates: Gao Yusheng
zeroIt’s not a secret that Gazelle’s range is greater that the official figure. That was confirmed by the chief designer of the system A.Basistov.
“The system showed huge reserves in all parameters….the missile can engage ballistic missiles more than 2.5 the range that was tested until now. It can be used against low-orbit satellites..”“Система показала значительные запасы по всем параметрам. Скоростные противоракеты Люльева 53Т6 могут осуществлять поражение баллистических целей на дальностях в 2,5 раза больших, чем мы сейчас их аттестовали. Система готова выполнить задачи и по поражению низковысотных спутников, и другие боевые задачи”.
All systems have reserves. But is it the optimum parameter? Does it confirm to the confidence levels?
zeroYou’ve not understood what I said, & you fail to see the different circumstances.
In that case, there was already a customer. The French were trying to cut themselves in for a share of the deal. France lost nothing if the deal failed. BTW, there was no refurbishment involved in that case.
In this case, there is no customer yet. The French are tasked with trying to find customers. It is in French interest for any deals to succeed, as if they fail, France will be left with the Mirages. Therefore, the French will want to sell the aircraft first (get the aircraft off their hands), then try to sell refurbishments.
Follow the money. Establish risks, costs, & benefits. Then you can try to predict behaviour.
Qatar wanted to replace it with Rafale. French needed the Rafale export order. But, french still went all the lengths.
If French would not meddle I suppose India will still pick up the planes. The Qatar deal saw that India was on a bargain hunt.
There are enough candidates to pick up the planes if French don’t meddle.
BTW, swerve, your assesment of UAE and China relations are not in tune. You see the oil model and threat matrix. UAE and China have big trade ties and UAE wants to balalce some regional and extra regional influences with Chinese.
zeroYou’ve not understood what I said, & you fail to see the different circumstances.
In that case, there was already a customer. The French were trying to cut themselves in for a share of the deal. France lost nothing if the deal failed. BTW, there was no refurbishment involved in that case.
In this case, there is no customer yet. The French are tasked with trying to find customers. It is in French interest for any deals to succeed, as if they fail, France will be left with the Mirages. Therefore, the French will want to sell the aircraft first (get the aircraft off their hands), then try to sell refurbishments.
Follow the money. Establish risks, costs, & benefits. Then you can try to predict behaviour.
I had a reply, but, after reading this:
The maintainance cost of ROCAF in 2009: around 9000 million NT / 273 million USD.
1. For the spare parts of 56 Mirage 2000-5: 2100 million NT / 64 million USD.
2. For the spare parts of 146 F-16 A/B MLU: 570 million NT / 17.4 million USD.
3. For the spare parts of 120+ F-CK-1: 1600 million NT / 48.8 million USD.
I really don’t want to speculate.
zeroThe French will seek to find customers for them first, & then try to sell refurbishments. But they’ll be happy just to sell them, as they are. Any extra money from refurbishment will be a bonus.
Neither Dassault nor the DGA is crazy enough to spend the very large sum needed to buy the aircraft & refurbish them just to put them in storage, hoping for a customer.
It happened a year (or two?) back. IAF wanted to bid for Qatar Mirages. French wanted to buy from Qatar and sell to India.
zeroAbsolutely. India has pursued a policy of diversification of suppliers in arms purchases for many years (before Pakistan), for much the same reasons.
This is why India needs the LCA project. It should absorb the technologies.
Sign In
