DRDO and PSU's

Arihant Roy said:
Some of the sub assemblies of annular combustor. The TBC coatings.

One of the most critical tech is casting of SC turbine blades using investment casting. I have written about this in detail in DFI.

AL-31FP is already a reliable engine. Only drawback is that it's TTSL is less. 2000 hrs. Vs 6000 hrs of GE F414.

We need to shift to AL-41F1S instead of AL-31FP. This will require minor mods to the air intake and engine nacelles. But nothing major. AL-41F1S has a 6000 hr service life. Max thrust of 142 kN.

VKS ie Russians have already decided to switch to AL-41F1S on their Su-30 SM2.

NPO Saturn has developed another AL-31FP which has the exact same dimensions as the older engine but incorporates tech from 41 to enhance service life to 6000 hrs. New HPT and LPT. New HPC. We can also go for that.
Click to expand...
They will ask for exorbitant amount of money for change, I want to know can we replace those systems from our own systems like in SC blades and reach close to 6000 hr service life?!
 
fire starter said:
Project kusha.
3 types of interceptors.
View attachment 8581
Click to expand...
Or to be more precise; just a single, modular interceptor that can be tailored for different threats.

> You've a missile with similar and hence proven planform of Akash-NG and Barak-8 as the baseline interceptor.
Who's knows maybe we "replace" both Akash-NG and Barak-8 in future with M1 in a bid to declutter things
> Add a medium-thrust but sustained burning booster to it and now you've a long range SAM for maneuvering targets.
> Replace the previous booster with a high-thrust but fast burning booster and now you've a short-ranged ABM.

Pretty ingenious way of having a multi-tier system where instead of making a distinct missile for each tier you just need the additional expense of a booster and a TVC assembly; nothing more than that.

If I'm not wrong then MBDA is the only firm to currently utilize this concept in their Aster series to its full potential.
Screenshot_2024-09-06-18-36-26-25_c37d74246d9c81aa0bb824b57eaf7062.webp
Well to some extent the new Barak-MX series also does it but then again it has just two missile and lacks dedicated ABM capabilities.
Other than that, every multi-tier SAM system uses different missiles.
From Russian/Chinese S-400...
Screenshot_2024-09-06-18-39-14-93_6bcd734b3b4b52977458a65c801426b0.webp
...to USA's Standard Missile series.
Screenshot_2024-09-06-18-40-00-45_6bcd734b3b4b52977458a65c801426b0.webp
 
Ayan Barat said:
Or to be more precise; just a single, modular interceptor that can be tailored for different threats.

> You've a missile with similar and hence proven planform of Akash-NG and Barak-8 as the baseline interceptor.
Who's knows maybe we "replace" both Akash-NG and Barak-8 in future with M1 in a bid to declutter things
> Add a medium-thrust but sustained burning booster to it and now you've a long range SAM for maneuvering targets.
> Replace the previous booster with a high-thrust but fast burning booster and now you've a short-ranged ABM.

Pretty ingenious way of having a multi-tier system where instead of making a distinct missile for each tier you just need the additional expense of a booster and a TVC assembly; nothing more than that.

If I'm not wrong then MBDA is the only firm to currently utilize this concept in their Aster series to its full potential.
View attachment 8593
Well to some extent the new Barak-MX series also does it but then again it has just two missile and lacks dedicated ABM capabilities.
Other than that, every multi-tier SAM system uses different missiles.
From Russian/Chinese S-400...
View attachment 8594
...to USA's Standard Missile series.
View attachment 8595
Click to expand...
M1 missile is different from M2 and M3 missiles.

M1 looks more like Akash-NG whereas M2 and M3 look like MRSAM with different boosters.
 
Fatalis said:
M1 missile is different from M2 and M3 missiles.

M1 looks more like Akash-NG whereas M2 and M3 look like MRSAM with different boosters.
Click to expand...

Anyone please, what's the need for having Akash-G & MRSAM both with similar ranges?
 
username unkown said:
Akash ng indian while mrsam is indo israeli
Click to expand...

Yes, but beyond that?... now shouldn't we settle for one of the two, whichever suits better?

Presently I know of no capability or op.role difference between the two.
 
Bleh said:
Yes, but beyond that?... now shouldn't we settle for one of the two, whichever suits better?

Presently I know of no capability or op.role difference between the two.
Click to expand...
We can't keep manufacturing LRSAM for very long as it's not viable. When you've a smaller home market and also a very unreliable one then the only way to survive is on foreign markets. Today people are all praise for MKU and Tonbo Imaging but imagine what would have happened if they had not received international orders in their initial years.

But the problem with using someone else's IPR like in the case of Barak-8 is that they define the market in which you're allowed to sell it and most of time it's just the home market. PLR can't sell its Tavors or Galils in USA because then they would be eating market share of IWI-US.

Another interesting and quite funny fact is that we also have some IPRs in Barak-8 as it was a joint development; especially the later upgradation to a dual-pulse rocket motor are all ours. So by the same logic, IAI can't sell a dual-pulse rocket motor variant of Barak-8 in international market unless we allow them. This was the whole reason why IAI ditched this whole Israel - India joint venture thing and made a completely new Barak-8 family by the name Barak-MX all by itself so that they can sell it without needing any permission or sharing royalty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

VPN-HSL-250-X250
Back
Top