My goodness 21Ankush, what patriotic dribble!! Ultimate load tests, and G tests and weaponization!! I couldnt understand what you wrote at all. :rolleyes:

For the first production LCA flew? Quick question on the previous TDs and PVs … has any of those prototypes flown with any external stores aside from the two dummy aams? I mean, after 658 some odd flights, how much longer till the fbw is fully tested? Or is the lsp-1 supposed to take over that function? How many +/- gs has the LCA been tested up to or is that info not available yet?

The FBW is considered to be reasonably mature now. The LCA has achieved 1.4 Mach and at AeroIndia the designers/IAF Test pilots revealed that all the test points have been touched bar the final couple of Km altitude. They anticipate that it will be pretty much the same and there wont be a significant difference. But a lot of the work will have to be done during weaponization with different loads, including asymmetric ones. FBW is not an issue, pace of testing is, which depends on how many prototypes are included in the test regimen.

The C-130s and the Harpoons are hardly F-22s and JSF’s ie in a class by themselves. Several alternatives exist.

Seriously though- the i960 case has sounded the death knell for any Boeing or Lockheed sale in the MRCA.

What is interesting about those photos is the conceptual resemblance they show to the Babur launchers, paticuarly the first. Baburs famed out of nowhere first launch was from a launcher with a very strong resemblence to the one in the first picture SOC posted.

Good point, I had said the same thing earlier.

These are the launchers for the LY-60

Those characteristic caps at the end of each tube, with the multiple angled surfaces- they are somewhat of a PRC specialty, imo. The license produced Iranian YJ AShMs have the same on their missile tubes, or at least one test batch whose pictures were released did. And so does the Babur, if we see the TEL with missiles.

Check Babur 😉

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=151569

Now see this other Launch container, with its spars
http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/navalmissile/yj71.asp

It does seem similar to the general spars and layout on the exposed TEL of the Babur with the sides cutaway to show the Baburs for the exhibition.

My 2 Cents.

How exactly is any of these Indian projects relevant in a thread about a Pakistani cruise missile?

It is relevant because someone else- a Pakistani- brought it up, and it merited a reply from an American to which I added. Perhaps a lesson in reading comprehension might help you if you have an issue with keeping a discussion in context.

The irony of the statement is we’re in a thread about a Pakistani weapon and it is suddenly inundated with posts from India on the LCA, MKI, etc.

The irony of course is latecomers to the discussion like you, coming up and stirring the pot. But of course, its what we have come to expect from “The Truth” and “Bearcat”..and please, kindly keep that behaviour to yourself.

In this thread, the “fetish” is not Pakistan comparing itself with India but the other way around.

More drivel. If you dont have the basic comprehension to understand who is replying to whom and for what, ask. We’ll be glad to hold your hand and make you understand. :rolleyes:

HAL is assembling Su-30MKIs. Are they mid-60’s aircraft?

To add..

Not just assembling, but making them as well– By 2009, HAL will be making the complete Al-31 FP as well. The MKI production is going to be one of the most “outsourced” one in HALs history, since several large industrial houses in India will be manufacturing subcomponents, smaller firms will be providing services like test rigs, precision manufacturing of items, and avionics kit, while HAL itself acts as the nodal manufacturers.
Apart from the MKI, the Jaguar and MiG-27 were also manufactured by HAL, and the Jaguar is still in production.

Then there will be the MRCA- in terms of technology it will be the equal of the MKI (conservatively speaking) and perhaps even better, if not surpassing it in combat value. But in terms of technology and local manufacture, the Indian DPP asks for 90% of the aircraft to be built in India.

Then theres the LCA, whose entire aim is to have as much of the aircraft as possible to be designed & manufactured in India. There are some 60 Indian firms already supplying parts to HAL for the LSP.

I’d state that Pak needs to get out of its fetish of comparing itself with India in terms of industrial ability- there is simply no comparison between the two.

Yes I know its an animated image, do you also realise the booster falls off after the initial boost stage so the Babur would look like that.

The animated image shows a squatter, missile vs the real Babur which bears more than a “resemblance” to the PRC CM/LACMs..

Details of NDC manpower are not available im unable to help you there, but they have been the powerhouse of Pakistans missile (balastic missile development). Even if we assume they copied all the chinese/korean designs they have been around for a long time now how can you descredit their expertise.

Again generics! “Powerhouse”, “discredit their expertise”- I am asking you to prove that expertise, you come back with more statements about “power” and “expertise”…sigh!

Who says they “copied”- they were either license manufacturing it, or just inducting it.

There is enough information available on the Al Khalid program and the JF-17 to see Chinese companies have been at the forefront with the development of both of these. Im not discounting chinese help to other pakistan companies in developing Babur either.

Forefront? Thats one way of looking at it. The correct way would be to state that Pakistan is license producing the Norinco MBT-2000 with certain specific modifications and the CATIC JF-17. Do tell me- is it the HAL 30 MKI, or the Su-30 MKI? Even the Su-30 MKI has more Indian involvement than the Pak/s in the JF-17, but does it make a HAL product or a Sukhoi one?

There are over 1500 pictures there can you be more specific to indian related technology related with their cruise missile programs.

Look under the Computers, Electronics section. You will see complete fire control systems (derived from Agni/ Prithvi programs) and onboard guidance computers to Laser gyros.

Outrage?? come again last I saw it was you who was using exclamation marks. You dont have any evidence to prove the babur is a chinese repaint, this is what I have been debating with you. Please prove otherwise. The kind of info your asking is not available this moment in time. I dont discount your theory as Pakistan has a strategic relationship with China its very much likly their chinese friends have assisted.

Exclamation marks are used to make a point! But I havent been attacking your choice of name or handle or making personal comments, see the difference.

I am asking you for evidence to describe why NDC is “powerful”…you say they are…! Thats not evidence- its circular arguementation.

A States:
Prove that what you are saying is correct…
B replies:
I am correct…because….I am correct!!

:confused:

Skimming through some of your listed companies lets have a look:

Larsen & Toubro- Checked their website, generic information about what they do, just mentioning TEL and hydrolics for cruise missile development as you put it dont equate to them doing it, as any joe blogg can put up a website. No pictures of facilities, design/development, manpower ect ect.

My friend- it seems, you havent spent more than a few cursory seconds on the website. Larsen & Toubros financial performance is linked on their website, their entire manpower & facilities are also detailed, their status as an engineering major is also well known- its a multinational based out of India.

This is not NDC which has “expertise” but cant display it- we are talking about a firm with hundreds of millions of $ in worldwide contracts (check news.google.com with the firms name!) & factories worldwide..they manufacture everything from nuclear reactor components, to submarine hulls, to switchgear and even turnkey projects. Each division is equivalent to a company in its own right. And being public, you can go through their annual reports.

Their defence division comes under the heavy engineering division, they also make equipment for Nuclear reactors to naval ships. One of the divisions is even making the complete hull for India’s ATV.

They compete against several firms in India.

Take a look here:

http://www.lnthed.com/hedhome/DEFENCE1/defence.htm

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2004/02/17/stories/2004021702630100.htm

On its own steam and often at its own cost, L&T has produced a number of prototypes of products including missile launchers for the Defence Research Development Organisation, said Mr Mehta. L&T is also pushing for increasing its contribution to the Brahmos programme.

Is L&T only 1 Indian firm working on the Brahmos…??

http://www.hinduonnet.com/2006/02/17/stories/2006021718821400.htm

Dr. Pillai is also the managing director of BrahMos Aerospace, an Indo-Russian joint venture that designed and developed the world’s only supersonic cruise missile and is now engaged in its production and marketing. He was here to ceremoniously receive the first airframe section of BrahMos from the Chairman of Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Company, J.N. Godrej. About 20 Indian and seven Russian companies are making critical systems for the missile.

On the issue of induction of the missiles in naval ships, Pillai said that all tests had hundred per cent success and with the handing over of the F3 section of missile, comprising air frame and fuel tank—designed by Godrej and Boyce—it would now start the assembling of the first actual missile for Navy.

The hardware and software systems for BrahMos is being developed by 20 firms from India and seven from Russia. The assembling would take place in Hyderabad …

Link

http://www.godrej.com/gstory/change/2006/May-jun/HomeBase.htm

Godrej-PCS, has been working on the development of this complex system for almost four years now. The system has more than 2000 intricate precision components and subassemblies.

The division had to master several new technologies for productionising this missile. Also Greenfield manufacturing facilities were required to be set up for its serial production.

Composite Tubes for Missiles- TATA – Again generic lets see some pictures from TATA showing what they are doing.

Google for TATA Composites website, and you’ll have the pictures there! They make everything from composite sleeves for guns to missile tubes..

Oh Joey did it..

Embedded software for the missile- Show us some press releases of satyam and the other companies you have listed giving some explanation on the embedded software they have produced.

My goodness- google it, my friend! Satyam is a billion $ firm- go to their website and look at the embedded software division! They even provide PLM solutions for avionics & IC design! Not just Satyam, theres TCS- Tata Consultancy Services, another Billion$ firm. Then there is Wipro! Each of these has embedded software work.

http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/20050228/market03.shtml

Hindustan Aeronautics & DRDO (Missile INS)- Instead of just listing what they do, as you acuse me of why dont you show some pictures of development facilities, and some pictures of the hardware they developed to embed in the missile.

Pick up a copy of Brasseys or Janes avionics & look under Inertial Nav systems! Or in fact, go to BR, and look at the Ringlaser Gyro- SINS..
In fact theres more here:

http://media.bharat-rakshak.com/aero/v/Display_Stalls/Computer_Communication/

Or here
http://www.drdo.nic.in/pub/techfocus/oct05/guidance.htm

Everything from FOGs to RLGs, and even seekers..

If you google around the BR Media section, you can even see the Indian Ring laser gyros- I think Harry posted that the same RLG INS was used for India’s recent ABM test, it was used in the Interceptor missile. Again developed for the LCA project.

There are more details, but I think the point is made unless you keep insisting otherwise. 😉

Heres a section on Brahmos..
http://media.bharat-rakshak.com/aero/v/Display_Stalls/Brahmos/

It has the Indian TELs……the ECIL (http://www.ecil.co.in) developed the C3I for the Brahmos, including all its comms.

http://www.ecil.co.in/sedproj.htm

Nothing fancy in terms of website presentation, but do tell us whether that level of detail is available on any Pak site, hmm or even the number of projects & general capability.

And FYI, the website does mention all their facilities, personnel, turnover, R&D etc.

You have mentioned Larsen & Toubro many times, it seems they are at the forefront of Indian cruise missile development. Now lets get back to the Babur.

Actually, they are one of the subsystem providers- the point is that whatever they provide can be done by TATA or several other companies & that information is available. They all assist and take technology from, do development for DRDO depending on the project, how complex it is, their own technology.

For example

http://www.tpcsed.com/

Look through that as well- we are talking system level stuff here not even subsystem.

Baburs Guidance- NDC, AWC (companies such as Intergrated dynamics build guidance systems as well)
Missiles Aerodynamics – NDC,AWC
Engine – NDC,AWC

Where are the products? These are again generics.

You state guidance- but what guidance? Accelerometers? Gyros? Or complete Inertial Nav systems? Of what vintage and class? What did Pak do? What is the terminal guidance for Babur? Does it even have terminal guidance?

Aerodynamics- so what did Pak do? Did it check out the entire design? Or assist the PRC?

Engine- not even one LACM class turbojet manufactured by Pak, no designation, no performance details! Whats the thrust, in Kn or Lbs? Whats the size, etc?

NESCOM which was made by merging Project Management Organization (PMO), the Air Weapons Complex (AWC), the Pakistan Maritime Technologies Complex (MTC) and the National Development Complex (NDC) employers more than 50,000 people. This is no small outfit.

How many of those people do what- and what is their track record in developing products on their own, especially subsystems? Please elaborate.

From the above I dont discount chinese assistance in all departments, Pakistani doctrine is not to reinvent the wheel, but to set up the wheel with help from partners and allies.

My simple point is that this doctrine is based upon Paks known weakness/es in product R&D, related to manpower, infrastructure and finance. And a LACM program runs totally opposite to the above- so I would still go with the license manufactured PRC statement.

If its related to the Babur what point would it make in displaying technology that is not for export, but onboard computers and navigation systems have been on display go and have a look on http://www.idaerospace.com/fcs.html that is one company that markets such technology.

I have seen that website- I have also seen East Wests website that claims South African gear as its own. Now I ask you, are you dead certain these are not items acquired by the firm from another European/ S African OEM? Think, dont get angry & answer- then we can dig out details and see whether they fit in.

My point is very simple- Pakistan may have the ability to absorb license production to some degree. But I dont see them having the range of abilities necessary to drive development of a 500-1000 Km LACM.

As recent as 1999, you had Pakistan taking tech transfer of thoroughly obsolete missiles complete with their entire production processes..

” One Indian government official who studied the blueprints described the science as “old and dated,” though he added: “It still works.” “It may be your grandmother’s technology,” he said, “but grandmother still kicks.”

..which is true. It might work, but do allow me skepticism in believing that Pak can now make modern LACMs on its own, when it was willing to pay for tech transfer of thoroughly obsolete scuds a few years back!!