Nick_76I dont understand why you have to be arguementative for the sake of being arguementative.
Its pretty straight forward that a HEAT warhead with three charges squeezed into it, is going to be harder to manufacture and mass produce than one with only two, and that given HEAT rounds are generally to be massproduced at lower cost than single shot ATGM rounds, getting them to be churned out in large quantities off a regular manufacturing line is no joke. Having some fair experience of this field of work myself, I can clearly make out what Jack Hammond is saying makes sense. The manufacturing is key to this weapon, and churning out a production batch of 100,000 rounds, each with the carefully assembled charges would require serious work at the process level, which requires money. And it is here that the round may remain as it is, a prototype, since it might not even offer any substantial advantage over current APFSDS rounds for the Russians to bother with it. They are better served in stabilizing their KE rounds and getting them upto scratch- they have had serious problems in that arena since the fall of the Soviet Union and with the state defence industry requiring some reorganization.
Having said that, it is an excellent piece of engineering, only of somewhat dubious tactical value in terms of cost vs benefit.
You are welcome to ignore this post if you wish. I just said all that I had to, and I see no point in continuing this discussion/ sidetrack vs the original thread.
Nick_76Robert Hewson, editor of Jane’s Air Launched Weapons (JALW), in a March 2003 issue of Jane’s Defence Weekly (JDW) stated, “The basic Astra design uses a metallic airframe with a long low aspect-ratio wing and a single-stage smokeless rocket motor. After launch, the missile will use a combination of inertial mid-course guidance and/or data-linked targeting updates before it enters its terminal acquisition phase. In a head-on engagement, the Astra will have a maximum range of 80 km. The missile’s onboard radio-frequency seeker has been largely designed in India but incorporates a degree of outside assistance, according to DRDO sources. It will have an autonomous homing range of 15 km. The missile’s warhead is a pre-fragmented directional unit, fitted with a proximity fuze. A radar fuze already exists for the Astra, but the DRDO is currently working on a new laser fuze.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MISSILES/Astra.html
The pictures show a conventional seeker.
Nick_76Low key development is going on since 1998, so some initial work may be done. Other aspects of R&D may be speeded up in association with Israel and France. I think that first deliveries for service of around 2010 is very reasonable.
2010 might see LSP (?) missiles, but I’d put the usual two year delay for getting all the minor details worked out and pushing it for production.
It also seems that order for Spyder system has some connection with the development of Astra.
Interesting. Source?
My guess is that Astra will also take over the role of Trishul. Therefore it will be pushed aggressively.
I think so too. The Astra is a Derby equivalent, tho’ heavier, and would allow multiple target engagement and would be a replacement. Would avoid all the Trishul CLOS multiple beam skipping, guidance problems. Would be more expensive but.
Nick_76So considering the break down presented by Nick_76 would you be kind enough to give us according to your understanding the timeline under which you think this BVR Astra would be ready to be handed over to the Airforce or potential buyers (if any/ gov decision).
According to your analysis, writing the software now is the most important task left and other tasks can be subcontracted.
I’d put it around another five- six years for induction/ series production being cleared- 2012.
The reports put an IOC around 2010. FOC could come a couple of years later.
This will also match the LCA production plan, which is what they are looking at.
Basically there are several things that India will have to take care of, in additional to the original post:
Seeker
Datalink + compact inertial navigation system
Software & algorithms
Which are going to be technical challenges but can be overcome.
The Seeker can be made in India, but it depends on what they choose, the AESA Tx/Rx model appears good, but I think they’ll go for a conventional one. Will keep costs lower as well. For the seekers, the processors/ dataprocessing can be managed , and there is experience with integrating avionics grade components, there are others who can manufacture and design antennas.
But they will need a compact gimbal rotational unit for rotating that antenna (even for its radome limited scan limits) and very compact microwave amplification source, ie Travelling Wave Tubes. Again companies do this, but you can cut down on time by taking support from Thales or Agat will definitely help. This is what I presume “support from external sources” means.
Its important to note that the Astra is India’s back-up project for its AAMs. SIPRI states that India ordered 750 R-77’s for its existing MiG-21 upgrades and 3 squadrons of Sukhois already. But as more Sukhois come in, that number will also increase.
The MRCA project will come with its own armaments package, air to air and air to ground.
The Astra is meant to bulk up AAM inventory & for the LCA project. So the developers have some time to work it out and deliver it, ie the IAF has BVR AAMs in plenty already.
Astra’s components (RF seeker) can be reused across projects, perhaps even resuscitating/ replacing the dead Trishul one.
Astra will have a clear advantage over the Aim-120 AMRAAM C-5 and the AA-12/11/10 Adder. 100%. India should also avoid exporting the Astra so its technology/ECM remains a secret. Sounds like a plan.Certainly bad news for PAF, PLAAF and all non-Astra users.
Without exact performance figures its silly to say that the Astra has a clear advantage over these other types.
The Adder is the AA-12/ R-77. The AA-10 is the Alamo. The R-73 is a WVR missile.
Come back when you can hold a serious conversation without resorting to the usual subtle trolling.
Nick_76The seeker for this could be an AESA. I had posted a lab prototype of an AESA Tx/ Rx module seeker from a RCI guy (RCI is what designs Indias missiles) from a conference. Nothing sure of course, its not like DRDO/ RCI would tom tom it.
But its funny seeing how things fit in. There are some five six things that need to be done for a missile
1. Design of airframe– Structural design, CFD and Windtunnel…all can be done at NAL which is one of Asias best institutes. Manufacturing not a problem, dozens of companies available and of course theres BDL.
2. Autopilot, actuators and mechanical assemblies— again, available from the many private companies which subcontract for DRDO, and can design new components as well.
3. Electronics hardware—not a problem for DRDOs private subcontractors. 4800 MIPS boards already designed in India :diablo: , with COTS chips available, just read that on BR. Seeker can be manufactured by any of a half dozen companies in India . Other companies can chip in and develop the microwave components required.
INS and datalink may be an issue, but perhaps french help may be sought here.
4. Propellant. I mean seriously, is this even an issue? DRDO has its own plant, ISRO is launching sats.
5. The most important thing- software.
This #5 is the most important thing. With different modes required for antispoofing/ ECCM and HOJmode ..again India is good in software development, but this is more than just software but relies on algorithms which have to be coded. So that takes research and time.
That will be the time consuming task.
Overall design seems good. It has the same streamlined Mica airframe with low drag but appears to pack more propellant for an expanded no escape zone/ overall range.
Nick_76Zhuk-A.
Nick_76Ah, the official PAF version, lol.
Nick_76Sherlock Holmes he most certainly aint!
As mentioned earlier, the contest is still open.
I think we should have a Greenday contest- how to come up with theories and tie them up into an incoherent whole. The more incoherent, the more marks awarded.
Story has to end with : IAF, IN destroyed by
Block 52 F-16s with AMRAAMs
J-10s with SD-10s
JF-17s with AMRAAMsThe tale has to have thrilling episodes of MiGs “destoryed”.
Please feel free to litter phrases like “PAF has ECM”, “PAF has WVR”, “superb ECCM”, “Falcons will create havoc in electromagnetic spectrum”, “superb intergatin onf chinese planes with westen avincs” thru’out the thrilling tale !
All spelling mistakes & unique catchphrases, pat. pnding, Greenday inc.
Then it will all make sense. Remember, incoherence= more points! Also feel free to cut and paste, absolutely everything else BUT whats been actually asked. Be as confusing, as certain and as WRONG as possible. You will be a winnah!
Nick_76Oh wow! I just figured it out! Qantaz and Nick are both the same person?
Thats true love man!
:dev2:
LOLOLOL! Talk about “depths of frustration” ! That the best you got??
As if the mods cant make out who’s who! :p
Answer the questions.
Nick_76The actual joke is about comparing the PLAAF/PlA to the PAF/PA or implying that the PAF is actually #1 on the IAF/IA’s threat matrix.
Fact is that the IAF is now operating IFR and basing deep to overcome the limitations of the PLAAFs acquired Sukhois. Critical equipment almost always first goes to the formations earmarked against China or dual tasked.
The recent purchase of Tavors (before the license production deal was signed) is a case in point. It went to the low profile SFF (Special Frontier Force) which is earmarked against China. Not Pak.
Nobody sane would look at Pak vs China today and say that the former is a stronger adversary.
But hey, whatever makes Greenday feel better. :p
Nick_76Actually after you scampered off, we were left wondering why we didnt get the answers to the simple questions posted earlier:
Namely:
1. PROOF OF THE PAF SERIES PRODUCTION PLANES GETTING SD-10/AMRAAM WITH WESTERN RADAR
2. PAF’s SO CALLED AMERICAN/ EUROPEAN JAMMERS (BAR THE OBSOLETE F-16 ALQ-184s ORIGINALLY DELIVERED WITH THE F-16S)
3. PROOF OF THE PAF INTEGRATING CHINESE/AMERICAN BVR AAMS WITH WESTERN RADARS ON ITS AIRCRAFT
Here, just so that you cant weasel out this time, I typed it in caps in plain english.
Not so hard to read, is it?
Please, no more b0ll0x about CAC upgrading PAF F7PGs with radar altimeters or TACAN and trying to pass it off as some PAF achievement with BVR armament.
Nick_76No, just helping to stop spread the misinformation thats seems to be all over this forum. If me effectivky correcting some assumptions made by you guys is an source of worry or concern. Its not really my concern. Just as long as you know there is someone here you will be around to correct you lies. 😉
Actually sonny boy, it was pretty effectively shown who was the liar and was pulling stuff out of his/her/whatever wazoo, apart from quoting absolutely meaningless generic babble. 😉 :rolleyes:
But never mind, keep flying the flag of Pakistan high on the internet o brave cyber warrior! 😮 😀
Nick_76Oh good lord! Greenday felt slighted when Harry said that the IAF and IN were not Pak centric ! What?? Pakistan does not merit this?
OUTRAGE! 😀
And there he goes again ! 😀
This should be the humour thread! “How a small ego dictates that the most minor of comments that is perceived as a slight on Pakistan has to be challenged on the internet!” 😀
Before I forget (to round it up):” PAF has Falcons to create havoc in electromagnetic spectrum, PAF has ECCM and WVR”. And of course, IAF and IN are Pak centric. There that should do it. :p 😀
Nick_76“We are greatful for the global support”
Missed a spellcheck. Twice over.
Nice paintjob.
Nick_76First test flights occur for refurbished aircraft too, after they are made airworthy.
First test flights for new aircraft would occur at the Lock Mart facility in the US.
Sign In
