+1

Pardon me for asking, but are you Pakistani or Chinese?

look you are talking through your hat here. there is no given reason a 1-ton warhead will provoke a retaliation whereas a 500 kg one will not. Nukes are not going to be used just because the prithvi is more effective, thats akin to saying a single Su-30 sortie with 4T of bombs will provoke a nuclear retaliation, say what? if the opponent is stupid enough to launch a strike merely because it sees prithvis coming its way, it will pay the price in terms of a retaliation.

what you dont get is the prithvi with its larger warhead offers more options against more targets. and by virtue of its large inventory and production facilities is more cost effective, at least for the near future.
unless you have exact figures of CEP for the prahar claiming it to be a precision strike weapon (as versus a more effective area weapon, there is a difference) is pointless. long range missiles are not precision strike weapons, unless you put the cost in with expensive terminal guidance. that reduces the flexibility of their employment.

the USP of prithvi, now prahar is they are missiles that can be mass manufactured at reasonable cost and deployed, used in number.

…

I thought the ‘why’ was obvious. Prithvi was a missile that was developed and deployed in large part for the nuclear delivery role. That it can also carry conventional warheads is besides the point. You launch the Prithvi, there’s a high chance the enemy will not want to take chances, will assume it carries a nuclear payload and launch a retaliatory nuclear strike.

The risk is less with a smaller missile like Prahaar which has been specificially developed for an ATACMS-style conventional artillery role.

You have any source for above??

How about these news items:

http://www.inewsone.com/2011/05/02/kaveri-engine-completes-tests-in-russia/47679

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/kaveri-engine-passes-series-of-tests-on-russian-aircraft/669710.html

Like I said, I haven’t been following the program for a while, hence I asked for clarification here. Last I read(somewhere on the BR forums months ago) further tests were some time off(reason not explained) and the Kabini core was supposedly being scrapped in favour of the Snecma JV with the M88.

Kaveri marine was envisaged as one of the ways to recover the cost of the program as in its current stage the engine is not going to pay for itself any time shortly. The kaveri marine was put together from one of the several prototypes that were no longer being tested upon. They are also trying to pitch the engine to the railways to get it in production.

See, saying they can potentially do this and that in the future is one thing, but how do things presently stand with the KMGT? The last news update I can find says that ‘It is doing well’ but it dates back to 2009. Likewise with the railways bit.

I guess with the PAK-FA/FGFA programme underway the IAF can afford to wait another decade or two for the AMCA, but I’d rather development started by 2012 like the ADA originally envisaged. With the current pace of things(JV still in the negotiating stage) that seems unlikely.

Liner missile won’t substitute Bulava

Why exactly is it so important for the Russian Navy to have a solid-fuelled missile anyway? Liquid propellants are naturally superior to solid propellants in performance. The only reason solid propellants are favoured for ballistic missiles is because they can be stored within the missile itself, which means no time is wasted in fuelling and prepping missiles for launch.

For ICBMs on land this is crucial because during a nuclear confrontation they have to launch before they get taken out by the enemy missiles, but ballistic missile submarines are safe from pre-emptive strikes and have the luxury of waiting a little to launch their missiles.

Frankly, if the Bulava is giving this much trouble, and if the Sineva/Liner is already good enough the Russians should just stick with the old missile, or (if the problem is with the Boreis not having enough space) create a shorter version of it.

Yup.. havent you noticed that only us westerners are allowed to wield a big stick and no one else is allowed?

But at least the old girl has been put to use… how long has the hull sat around? 30yrs?

Sure don’t look old to me…

Is that your expert Mk1 eyeball analysis 😮 ?

Just my casual impression.;) Based on the fact that there are fewer signalling lights in the Russian one and a simpler frame overall.

Nice finds!

Check this one (Kuz + Varyag in single shot)
http://picasaweb.google.com/Mick.Elst/AdmiralKuznetsov#5082899159214512018

Very nice! Are they archival pics from the Nikoylaev shipyard in Ukraine?

The Varyag appears to have had slots for the Mars-Passat phased array radar from the get go. I remember reading that its superstructure design had been changed to accomodate mechanical scan radars after the failure of Mars-Passat…?

how did you deduce that ?

Because it was at Hazira that construction of Arihant began years ago. They’re the ones that built the hull before it was taken to Vizag for mating with the reactor and trials, whereas from the above report construction seems to be starting directly at Vishakapatnam(a PSU shipyard recently acquired for defence purposes and promoted by Antony and co as India’s second submarine production base).