jawadNearly half of Russian air-to-air missiles with IAF have homing, ageing problems: CAG report
Putting a big question mark on the performance of the Russian beyond visual range (BVR) air-to-air missiles with the Indian Air Force, an audit report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has noted that nearly half the missiles tested either did not home in on targets during evaluations or failed ground tests because they were ageing much before their shelf lives.
The R 77 (RVV-AE) BVR missiles, fitted on board the Su-30 MKIs, MiG-29s and MiG-21 Bisons, were bought from Russia starting 1996. More than 2,000 missiles were ordered after the Kargil conflict and 1,000 have been delivered.
The CAG report, which will be released soon, is based on evaluations of the missile — its range is close to 90 km — during ground tests, inspections and test firing by the IAF. The missiles were bought at a “cost of Rs 2 crore each” but their failure during tests, says the CAG report, has affected the “operational preparedness” of the IAF.
“All figures in the report are based on air force records. Everything is verified by the IAF,” an official said.
The problem with the missiles was referred to Russia and several teams subsequently visited India to rectify faults. IAF officers familiar with the missiles confirmed that this has been a problem area for long. “It is a known fact that the missiles do not work as we would like them to. Periodic tests that are carried out when they are in storage show their dismal state. We also have problems with spare parts,” said a retired officer who was closely associated with the matter.
Former Air Chief Marshal S Krishnaswamy said: “When the missiles were bought, they were top of the line, world class systems that no other country had. As we did not have our own testing facilities, they had to be tested in Russia. The question to be asked is whether the government approved testing facilities for the missiles in India.”
The IAF has for long enjoyed an edge over Pakistan due to its inventory of BVR air-to-air missiles. In an article on the Pakistani side of the Kargil war — it was published in The Indian Express — the then PAF Director (Operations) Kaiser Tufail admitted that the presence of the BVR missiles with the IAF kept away the Pakistani F-16s from disrupting aerial bombing being carried out by India near the Line of Control.
jawadHuh!? 😮 Force India and Frontier India are poles apart. Can you check again.
My bad
Sorry
jawadThe guy who wrote it is Prasun K. Sengupta. He writes trash on Indian Defence too.
It’s from your preferred defense site
yep you are right, Prasun K. Sengupta have written lot of BS reports previously
jawadThe first single-seat FC-20 prototype was rolled out by CAC last December
By Prasun K. Sengupta
China’s Sichuan-based Chengdu Aerospace Corp (CAC) and its affiliated 611 Institute has begun a hectic but structured flight-test programme for the FC-20 medium multi-role combat aircraft (M-MRCA), whose launch export customer is the Pakistan Air Force (PAF). The PAF has an initial requirement for 36 single-seaters and four tandem-seat operational conversion trainers, and envisages a total requirement for 80 FC-20s distributed among four squadrons.
The first single-seat FC-20 prototype was rolled out by CAC last December and it made its maiden flight last March. Derived from the CAC-built J-10A Vigorous Dragon M-MRCA, the FC-20 incorporates an under-nose modified lightweight air inlet, redesigned vertical tailfin, strengthened underwing inner pylons designed for carrying standoff precision-guided munitions (PGM) like the glide kit-equipped LS-6, nose-mounted infra-red search-and-track (IRST) system, a glass cockpit equipped with a holographic wide-angle heads-up display (HUD), a pair of inverted-gull wings (with the inner upper portion extending slightly downward, while the outer portion extending flat), a fixed in-flight refuelling probe, a large vertical tail, twin ventral stabilisers for providing greater stability at high angles of attack, and a single AL-31FN-M1 turbofan engine rated at 132.4kN thrust with afterburning. In August 2005 China had inked a USD 300 million contract with Russia’s Rosoboronexport State Corp to acquire initial 100 such engines. The entire R&D phase of the FC-20 is being carried out under the oversight of China’s state-owned China Aviation Industry Corp (AVIC).
The FC-20 will be able to carry 4.5 tonnes of weapons payload, and will come equipped with 11 hardpoints for carrying a wide range of air combat missiles (both within-visual-range and beyond-visual-range) and PGMs. The FC-20’s performance parameters include a maximum combat radius of 2,540km (1,370nm) in a hi-lo-hi mission profile, or of 1,310km (710nm) in a lo-lo-lo mission profile when carrying a 1,810kg (4,000lb) weapons payload.
The M-MRCA will have an empty weight of 9,750kg, maximum takeoff weight of 19,277kg, internal fuel capacity of 4,500kg, maximum speed of Mach 2 at high altitude and Mach 1.2 at sea level, takeoff run of 500 metres, combat radius of 1,100km, and a service ceiling of 18,000 metres. The FC-20 has a wingspan of 8.78 metres, overall length of 14.57 metres, height of 4.78 metres, and a gross wing area of 33.1 square metres. The airframe features high-quality welding, but is overwhelmingly of metallic construction, with composites accounting for only 12 per cent of the fuselage area.
CAC and its affiliated 611 Institute are now preparing to roll-out a tandem-seat deep interdictor variant of the FC-20, which, like the single-seater, will be equipped with a laser target acquisition/designation pod, laser-/GPS-guided PGMs, as well as PL-9C within-visual-range and PL-12 beyond-visual-range air combat missiles built by the Luoyang Opto-Electro Technology Development Centre. Design of this variant of the FC-20 is derived from the J-10B operational conversion trainer that made its maiden flight on 26 December 2003.
The FC-20’s tandem-seat variant will feature a stretched forward fuselage and a single-piece bubble canopy. Its dorsal spine will be enlarged to accommodate those avionics displaced by the rear cockpit. The PAF is widely expected to equip its FC-20s with the SELEX Galileo-built X-band Vixen 500E airborne active phased-array fire-control radar. The glass cockpit avionics suite will includes a wide-angle holographic HUD with up-front control panel and a video camera, twin monochrome AMLCD-based multifunction displays, a single colour AMLCD head-down display, infra-red sensors for a helmet-mounted sight, hands-on-throttle-and-stick (HOTAS) controls, ring-laser-gyro-based inertial navigation system, air data computer, ARW-9101A radar warning receiver, Type 634 digital quadruplex fly-by-wire flight control system using a MIL-STD-1553B digital data bus, and a digital fuel management system and stores management system.
The FC-20’s compound delta-wing configuration will offer two important aerodynamic qualities. The swept leading edge of the wing will stay ahead of the shock-wave generated by the FC-20’s nose during supersonic flight, thus making the compound delta-wing a very efficient aerodynamic wing shape for supersonic flight. The leading edge of compound delta-wing will also generate a massive vortex that will attach itself to the upper surface of the wing during high angle-of-attack (AoA) manoeuvres, resulting in very high stall points.
[Full Feature/Report]
jawadN-tipped Agni III set for fresh test
Hemant Kumar Rout
The Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) is set to test-fire India’s most powerful nuke-capable ballistic missile Agni-III. The China-specific missile would be test-fired from a defence base off the Orissa coast soon. Preparations were on for the crucial test, a source close to the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Chandipur-on-sea, 15 km from Balasore, said today. Agni-III test-fire is seen as a deterrent to China’s growing missile power. `The country’s missile programme received a jolt on May 19 when the first training user-trials of the 2,000-km plus range Agni-II missile failed to yield the desired result. The focus now is on Agni-III and its test has become a prestige issue for the scientists involved in the project,’ the source added. Agni-III, which has a velocity of 5 km per second, is a new system, defence sources said. It is a short and stubby, two-stage missile. It weighs 48.3 tonnes and is 16.7 metres tall with an overall diameter of 1.8 metres. It can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads weighing around 1.5 tonnes. It will be propelled by solid fuels, facilitating swift deployment compared to missiles using a mix of solid and liquid fuels. Though the maiden test of the longest range missile in 2006 was a failure, its second trial in 2007 and third test in 2008 were successful. `It is ready for induction but it will require a few more tests before it can go for limited series production (LSP) trials by the armed forces. However, two more years will be required for its operational deployment,’ a scientist said on condition of anonymity. The missile is a deterrent to the Chinese missiles. A successful induction of Agni III will allow India to catch up with China’s nuclear strike capability in the next few years since its range is expected to be long enough to target major Chinese cities like Shanghai and Beijing. India’s ‘Pakistan-specific’ Agni-I and Agni-II missiles have already been inducted in the armed forces. `Our next project is Agni-V missile which is expected to have a strike range of about 5,000 km.
Agni-III, with China in range, to be tested
After basing Sukhoi-30MKI fighter jets in the North-East, India is now all set to conduct another test of the 3,500-km-range Agni-III
ballistic missile next month.
“Agni-III, a 16.7-metre tall missile with a lift-off weight of 50 tonnes, should be tested within a month, towards end-July. This will be another step towards inducting it into the armed forces,” said top defence sources on Friday.
Once fully-ready by 2011-2012, Agni-III will provide India with the capability to strike deep into China, with cities like Shanghai and Beijing well within its potent reach.
India, incidentally, is also working on the 5,000-km-range Agni-V missile, which will have near-ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) capabilities, but it will be ready for its first test only by late-2010.
Asked about the Agni-V on Friday, defence minister A K Antony only said the government was taking “all steps” to build “whatever capabilities” were needed “as per changing threat perceptions” to protect national security.
Both Agni-III and Agni-V are primarily designed to bolster India’s “active credible deterrence posture” against China, especially since it has a clear-cut “no-first use” nuclear doctrine.
China’s expanding nuclear and missile arsenal, of course, has even the US worried. The Chinese DF-31A ICBM, with a strike range of 11,270 km, for instance, can target any location in the continental US.
India’s missile programme is rudimentary by these standards, and even lags behind Pakistan in certain aspects. In fact, only the Prithvi (150-350 km) and Agni-I (700-km) missiles, primarily meant for Pakistan, can be said to be fully operational in the armed forces till now.
The tri-Service Strategic Forces Command is still engaged in conducting “training user-trials” of the 2,000-km Agni-II. The first such Agni-II trial last month “failed to meet the laid-down flight parameters’‘, say sources.
But defence scientists say they are not deterred by a flop or two. The first test of the rail-mobile Agni-III in July 2006 had flopped miserably, spurring them to ensure the second one in April 2007 and the third one in May 2008 were successful.
As for India’s most ambitious missile till now, the Agni-V, the scientists are incorporating a third composite stage in the two-stage Agni-III, along with some advanced technologies like ring laser gyroscope and accelerator for navigation and guidance.
They want the solid-fuelled Agni-V, for which the government has sanctioned around Rs 2,500 crore, to be a canister-launch missile system to ensure it has the requisite operational flexibility to be fired from any part of the country.
jawadChina revives production of JH-7 strike aircraft ????????
Monday, June 08, 2009
By Kaleem Omar
China is now spending upwards of $ 60 billion a year to modernise its military, with the eventual aim of giving it power-projection capability far beyond its borders. In typical fashion, however, Beijing is not rushing pell mell into this endeavour, but is proceeding with due deliberation one step at a time, so as not to alarm its neighbours.
Unlike the United States, China is also not given to throwing its weight about in its dealings with other countries and tends to err, if anything, on the side of caution. Such caveats aside, however, the fact remains that China is becoming stronger and stronger militarily with each passing year and recently announced plans to build its first aircraft carrier battle group. The US has 12 such battle groups, so its going to be a long time before China achieves conventional military parity with America.
Such larger issues aside, China has, meanwhile, decided to revive production of its JH-7 strike aircraft. British and French engine manufacturers are vying with each other to provide China with engine technology to support the potential additional production of 170 upgraded JH-7s.
First produced in the mid-1990s, the JH-7 met with limited success because the aircraft maker, Xian Aircraft Co., Xian, Shaanxi, China, experienced difficulties in manufacturing the powerplant, the WS9 turbofan engine. The WS9 is a version of the Rolls Royce Spey Mk202 that the company builds under licence.
A report in the American weekly military journal Defence News quoted industrial and government sources as saying that China is now planning additional production of the JH-7. According to the report, discussions have been going on with Rolls Royce plc, London, and France’s Societe Nationale d’Etude et de Construction de Monteurs d’Aviation (Snecma), to build engines for the attack aircraft.
Jean-Paul Bechat, president of Snecma, was quoted as saying that his company was having regular discussions with the Chinese authorities about the possibility of fitting the M53 engine to a variant of the JH-7 aircraft. The M53 powers the French Mirage 2000 fighter aircraft.
Another Snecma official familiar with the Asian market was quoted as saying that discussions with China had so far centred on the technical feasibility of replacing the JH-7’s existing engine with the “slightly more powerful” M53.
A Chinese official was quoted as saying that China is building the JH-7. He said the Chinese Navy’s aviation arm is is buying the JH-7. Bringing the JH-7 into widespread service within the Naval Air Force would boost the service’s capabilities, the Chinese official was quoted as saying.
A European industrialist was quoted as saying that the People’s Liberation Army’s Naval Air Force could produce an additional 50 to 70 aircraft, and the PLA Air Force may purchase some 100 planes. Some of the planes to be built will be improved variants of the aircraft, dubbed the JH-7A.
The JH-7, a two-seat, twin-engine, attack aircraft, is in limited service with the Naval Air Force. According to the Defence News report, the naval JH-7 is equipped with standoff anti-ship missiles and would be used primarily for maritime strike missions.
In addition to talks with Snecma, Chinese officials are also discussing the Spey Mk202 with Rolls Royce. Under the terms of a deal concluded in the late 1970s, Rolls Royce has provided several dozen Spey engines to China, with the intention that the Xian Aero-engine Co. was to manufacture the engine under licence as the WS9, says the Defence News report.
A source was quoted as saying that discussions with the British company now focus on Rolls Royce providing further support and sub-components to Xian to support a production run of the WS9. Rolls Royce may also provide a number of additional complete second-hand Spey engines. “We have a long standing relationship with China,” Gary Atkins, a Rolls Royce spokesman, was quoted as saying.
With regard to the Chinese Spey/WS9, Atkins was quoted as saying, “We have been supporting this project in a number of ways, ever since China acquired a batch along with the manufacturing technology.”
According to the Defence News report, there remains considerable political sensitivity surrounding the sale of military equipment to China, which remains subject to a European Union arms embargo, though this covers only weaponry and complete weapons systems.
The Snecma official was quoted as saying that since the discussions with Chinese officials had so far been of a technical nature, his company had not sought approval from the French government. He added, however, that if business discussions get underway, Snecma would first have to get French government approval for any sale.
“It’s a delicate situation because the European Union imposed an embargo on military exports to China in 1989 which is still in place,” the Snecma official said. He said that any export contracts for this type of engine to China would also have to go through the European Union’s code of conduct for arms exports regulations.
The official said that it was likely that China would want to put new engines on the JH-7 in the 2004-2006 time frame, but that these dates were not fixed. China would insist on at least having full repair and maintenance capacity for these engines, he said. Ideally, what they would want “is step by step to reach 80 per cent capacity of building the M53 engine themselves, 10 or 15 years down the road.”
Meanwhile, in another development, Russia and China have clinched a deal to have more Su-27SK fighters assembled at a Chinese aviation plant for China’s Air Force.
The $ 1.4 billion deal involves a contract for the fighters to be assembled at the Shenyang Aircraft Making Factory in Shenyang, Liaoning province.The contract was signed by Chinese defence officials and managers of Russia’s chief arms exporter, Rosvoorouzhenie.
It is not known how many Su-27SK fighters will be assembled under the deal, but the contract reportedly bans the Chinese from exporting any of these jets.
A press report said that Ivan Skrylnik, spokesman for Rosvoorouzhenie, refused to give details about the deal, as did Yuri Chervakov, spokesman for AVPK Sukjoi, which develops and manufactures Sukhoi fighters. Both companies are based in Moscow.
The Russian government was said to have welcomed the cash deal as it would inject liquidity into Russia’s defence industry and keep employees of AVPK Sukhoi and its subcontractors busy for years.
The SU-27SK is an export version of the Russian Air Force’s basic SU-27. The SU-27SK began production in 1991. It has a maximum range of 3,680 kilometres, a maximum speed of 2,125 kilometres per hour and can carry up to eight air-to-air missiles.
Though described by Rosvoorouzhenie as an advanced aircraft, the Su-27SK is today not quite in the same class more advanced models, such as the French-made Mirage 2000-5s or modified F-16s operated by the Taiwanese and Japanese air forces, respectively, according to Konstantin Makienko. Deputy head of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST) in Moscow.
Paradoxically, the fact that the Su-27SK is inferior to the Mirage 2000-5 and even Sukhoi’s own Su-30MKK fighter could turn into a positive development for AVPK Sukho, Makienko was quoted as saying.
“Sooner or later the Chinese will have to upgrade these planes to modern requirements, such as the ability to attack ground targets. This means that Sukho will sign new deals to carry out these upgrades,” Makienko was quoted as saying.
Russia and China concluded a $ 2 billion deal in 1996 to have the Shenyang Aircraft Making Factory assemble 200 Su-27SKs from kits provided by AVPK Sukhoi’s Komsomolsk-om-Amur Aviation Production Association, according to CAST figures. China also signed a deal in 1990 to procure 20 Su-27SKs and four Su-27UBK combat/training fighters.
In another development, a group of Chinese officials visited Moscow in August 2000 to negotiate the purchase of Russian-built A-50 early warning aircraft. The visit came in the wake of the failure of a similar deal between Beijing and Israel for Phalcon early warning aircraft.
The talks focused on an advanced version of Russia’s A-50 early warning and control aircraft, dubbed A-50E, for which the Scientific Production Corporation’s Moscow Scientific Research Institute of Instrument Engineering (MNIIP) has already developed an advanced radar system.
An MNIIP official was quoted as saying that the Chinese were interested in buying several A-50E aircraft.
The Chinese became interested in buying the A-50E in the autumn of 2000 after then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Baruk sent a letter to then-Chinese President Jiang Zemin in July that year informing him of the Israeli decision to back out of the $ 250 million Phalcon sale.
Barak’s decision, which was prompted by heavy American pressure to kill the deal, was made during the US-sponsored peace talks between Israeli and Palestinian leaders at Camp David in July 2000.
jawadThe Phalcon arrival is interesting.
Basically the IAF is very interested in 3 follow on’s to the Phalcons.
Reports have said that the next batch of Phalcons should be based on the Gulfstream as it is a more modern aircraft than the Il-76 – that is absolute rubbish.
The Gulfstream flies higher & has more endurance, and of course reduced operating costs but has its cons as well.
It has no spare seats for operator rest versus the Ilyushin, which has a whopping capacity (I’ll leave the details out for now) surplus in this regard. The Il-76 has more growth capacity as well. In terms of endurance, the Il has IFR which allows it to extend its endurance by many hours.
The S-Band forward/aft radars on the CAEW @ the Gulfstream have a reduced range versus the L Band ones on the sides. Space restrictions limit the crew carried and the number of interceptions controlled & aircraft managed.All in all, if the IAF does choose to replace the Il-76 based Phalcon with a new airframe – its better to choose the A-330 or some Airbus airframe which can offer more or at least equal growth capacity & capability than the original airframe.
The CAEW will be a step down. True, it flies higher which has a tangible impact on the radar horizon, but its other disadvantages are also substantial.
And heres a datapoint, whether it be the Phalcon or the CAEW, both of them are substantially superior to the Erieye-340 to be operated by the PAF.
The Phalcon is stated by the IAF to be superior to the KJ-2000 even considering the best case (for the KJ-2000) scenario.
I wonder whether the new deal being negotiated for 3 additional Phalcons, includes improved equipment fits or just the original specifications.
Then comes the local AEW &C: 3 DRDO AEW &C are on order, with 1 as a testbed.
The DRDO refers to its system as AEW&C, as technically speaking, while it can monitor & direct airoperations in real time, it is not as capable as the Ilyushin Phalcon.
But plans are that a second batch of the DRDO system will also be sought to add upto equal numbers of Phalcons & local AEW&C in service. The basic issue is cost, its been realised that procuring AWACS “off the shelf” is simply too expensive & hence local capabilities need to be relied on.
Here I thought no one have knowledge about the capabilities of Chinese KJ-2000 and KJ-200
jawad1)Is KJ-2000 comparable to the Indian Phalcon AEW&C in term of range endurance radar coverage and its ability to detect, track and control aircrafts
2)Did anyone tried to estimate the length of Radar used on KJ-200 it looks to be bigger than FSR 890 Erieye used on Saab-340/Saab-2000/EMB-145 Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircrafts
jawadHow does this payload configuration compares to western types like Mirage-2000-9, F-16 C/D block52+ (F-16 E/F block 60),Gripen JAS-39 NG etc?
Can four hard points under belly carry anything other then dumbombs and pods? I.e. can they carry BVRAAMs like Typhoons or some sort of PGMs like LS-1/FT-1/2 etc
jawadAGNI-II fails to deliver desired results
Agni-II, countrys nuclear counter strike capability ballistic missile has reportedly failed to deliver desired result.
The trial was conducted from Wheeler Island, part of the integrated test range of Orissa coast on Tuesday at about 10 am.
Reliable sources at the Wheelers Island said the countdown was normal, liftoff was smooth and then disaster struck as the 2000 kms plus range Agni-II missile instead of traveling on the pre-determined trajectory started wandering midway.
The missile deviated from its path after the first stage separation and was meandering at an angle of 180 degree midway. Though it was coordinated to cover a distance of nearly 2000 km, within just 127 seconds it covered 203 km before plunging into the sea, said the source.
The guidance system can correct the missiles midway path deviation if it behaves erratically at an angle of 40 to 60 degree but not beyond that, said a defence scientist. The disaster might have happened due to design and manufacturing faults, he added.
Similarly on July 9, 2006, the maiden test of Agni-III had failed to achieve the target as technical snags were reported during the separation of the first and the second stage.
Agni-II missile was first tested on April 11, 1999, and inducted in the Army in 2004. The trial was conducted by the Army while scientists from DRDO provided the necessary logistical support. The unfortunate development will have a telling effect on the morale of the Army, said analysts.
Several attempts to contact Agni project director, Avinash Chander and ITR director, S P Dash turned futile. There was no official word even from DRDO on the test.
We are still analyzing the statistics about the flight performance and data from the launch pad and the three tracking stations are being thoroughtly examined, said a scientist, who is part of the missile programme. Several defence analysts have criticized the DRDO for the failure.
“Agni project is an established project. In the deployment stage if the missile behaves like this, can we afford to hold the country to ransom security-wise.There should be some sort of accountability from scientists doing the research and development of the DRDO,” said an analyst.
jawadPakistan Army to induct 36 launchers of the 10-barrel, 300mm A-100E MBRL
By Prasun K. SenguptaDetermined to maintain its already commanding lead in the arena of long-range field artillery over its Indian counterpart, the Pakistan Army is gearing up to induct into service two Regiments (or 36 launchers) of the 10-barrel, 300mm A-100E multi-barrel rocket launcher (MBRL) and its related ground-based fire-control systems from Chinas China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corp (CPMIEC) and CETC. Also being acquired are approximately 90 SH-1 155mm/52-calibre motorised howitzers from NORINCO of China, plus three Regiments of the CPMIEC-built HQ-9 long-range surface-to-air missile (LR-SAM) system (these being acquired by the Pakistan Air Force, or PAF)
Austin is Pakistan trying to counter the Brahmos LACM through this acquisition of HQ-9 SAM?
I guess spade-2000 is simply not capable of handling the Brahmos at all
To HuntingHawk
Of which, Pakistan has put into operation a massive number………4
whereas India has ordered a measly 100 for 750$ million with the first order being placed in 1996.
Pakistan operates 14+ falco UAV currently with rest of the 11 UAVs will be delivered this year. These are assembled/produced in Pakistan under agreement. But you are right; Indians really have a good lead over Pakistanis term of deployment of long-range UAVs
jawadThe difficulties of the Greek submarine, the Papanikolis, has probably led Pakistan to reconsider a planned buy of the 214 from Howaldstwerke Deutsche-Werft (HDW), leaving the door open to DCNS’ Marlin, an all-French derivative of the Franco-Spanish Scorpene. HDW is part of Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems.
“We are in the game in Pakistan,” Fougeron said.
The last of three Agosta 90 submarines built for Pakistan’s Navy took to the sea in September, equipped with the Mesma air-independent propulsion (AIP) system, Fougeron said.
The AIP system, which allows the submarine to operate for longer periods underwater, has been used heavily and is working well, he said. Two earlier Agosta 90 submarines have been retrofitted with the air-independent propulsion system.
Interesting news, i did not new that all A-90Bs are now equipped with AIP
jawadMortars, guns and missiles to arm UAE patrol boats
The United Arab Emirates navy has released more details on the weapons fit of 24 fast patrol boats being supplied by Abu Dhabi Ship Building under a AED 935 million ($255million) ordered announced earlier this week Abu Dhabi Shipbuilding along with partner SwedeShip Marine are to build 12 new 26.5m fast patrol boats and upgrade 12 existing Ghannatha-class high-speed troop-carrying craft into the same configuration.
The 24 vessels will be produced in three weapon configurations officials revealed here today at the IDEX defense show. The main armament of half the 24 boats will be the MBDA-supplied Marte anti-ship missile. Four missiles will be carried in two launchers on the rear of the Ghannatha class vessels. The UAE is the first customer for the ship-launched version of what is normally a helicopter weapon.
Six of the boats are to be fitted with the Patria developed NEMO 120mm mortar system.
The remainder will be equipped as gunships equipped with a 27mm cannon supplied by Rheinmetall. The gunships will also retain a troop transport capability. Weapons integration is to be undertaken by Abu Dhabi Systems Integration the ADSB / Selex Sistemi Integrati joint venture.
Officials said the first boat would be ready within 18 months of contract award. In a separate move earlier this week ADSB secured a AED416 deal to build 34 high speed interceptor vessels for the UAE’s Critical National Infrastructure Authority. Capable of 50knots the MRTP16 design come’s from Turkish Shipbuilder Yonca Onuk. The first 12 of the lightly armed vessels will be built in the Turkish company’s yard in Istanbul.
jawadA payload of 300 kg ( semi-armor/HE ) is not small , and range is only restricted by MTCR in its present form , dont underestimate the power of KE to smash stuff.
Do you mean India and Russia Violate the MTCR in future?
jawad2. I personally dont believe the 300km range number. I dont think the missiles Russia and India will field will be so limited, the export missiles to other nations will likely be so limited, but I doubt the real Brahmos is so limited.
3. There is a 1,000km version in the works in any event so that “real” cruise missile you want is on its way.
Brahmost fits its intended roll just fine. Whether the doctrine it was built to fulfill is a good doctrine is guess work until we see a real naval battle somewhere.
2. i thought that MTCR dont allow 300KM version and thats why it always mentioned as 290km. Do you have any official source claiming 300km+ range from India or Russia?
3. Is India alone working on 1000 km version?
Sign In
