DRDO and PSU's

Ayan Barat said:
Okay...so you're saying that there won't be any CA in NAMICA; just NAMI

But Nag is huge Hellfire class missile designed to be an anti-everything weapon for helicopters. It was adopted as ground launched variant because we had nothing at that time, otherwise you'd rarely find Hellfire class ATGMs bolted on side of a turret (Russian BMPT is weird).

But interestingly now we have a thing called MPATGM...almost third the weight (15kg vs 50kg), pretty much same range and optimised anti-armour effect despite smaller warhead because of top attack profile. Everyone uses similar missiles; TOW on Bradley, Javelin on CROWS-J, Kornet on BMP-2.

Also the launchers shown on FICV concept seems bit smaller
View attachment 8965
So again a Ship of Theseus question for you. If I remove the remaining NAMI from your NAMI...is it still a NAMICA?
Click to expand...


NAMICA is Nag Missile Carrier

NAMICA very frankly is outdated & redundant... It was a good starting platform for an ATGM carrier (all eggs in one basket) but now we have better design mounted by 2×dual-launcher on each IFV. That's why they think the don't need another BMP with ATGMs.

An armoured formation will have CLGM, Helina, MPATGM. Most likely NAG will soon be replaced too by Loitering Munitions.
 
Last edited:
Bleh said:
NAMICA is Nag Missile Carrier

NAMICA very frankly is outdated & redundant... It was a good starting platform for an ATGM carrier (all eggs in one basket) but now we have better design mounted by 2×dual-launcher on each IFV. That's why they think the don't need another BMP with ATGMs.

An armoured formation will have CLGM, Helina, MPATGM. Most likely NAG will soon be replaced too by Loitering Munitions.
Click to expand...
We should really move on to long range NLOS Atgm missiles from the Nag missiles class for NAMICA concept like vehicles. It would serve as tactical long fires as well as counter artillery missions as well.
 
Hawkeye said:
We should really move on to long range NLOS Atgm missiles from the Nag missiles class for NAMICA concept like vehicles. It would serve as tactical long fires as well as counter artillery missions as well.
Click to expand...
Indeed .. when the Chinese have aft10 with nlos hj10s already available namica is straight up obsolete .
 
Hawkeye said:
We should really move on to long range NLOS Atgm missiles from the Nag missiles class for NAMICA concept like vehicles. It would serve as tactical long fires as well as counter artillery missions as well.
Click to expand...
karn said:
Indeed .. when the Chinese have aft10 with nlos hj10s already available namica is straight up obsolete .
Click to expand...
Yeah, it came too late or more precisely, the Army dilly-dallied around it for far too long (or was it intentional?? 🤔).
 
Blood+ said:
Yeah, it came too late or more precisely, the Army dilly-dallied around it for far too long (or was it intentional?? 🤔).
Click to expand...
Isn't the same thing happened to lca too but later it was salvaged and orders were placed
Right now they are doing same to prachand and atags ad decade after when thease are out dated they will say thease are out dated we need post cold war era apache and athos
 
username unkown said:
Isn't the same thing happened to lca too but later it was salvaged and orders were placed
Right now they are doing same to prachand and atags ad decade after when thease are out dated they will say thease are out dated we need post cold war era apache and athos
Click to expand...
Nah, LCA wasn't ready to serve as a frontline interceptor in all honesty until recently as opposed to Nag and NAMICA.
 
ezsasa said:
any one remembers why DRDO/IAF did not go the kit direction in design for LRGB (gaurav and gautham)?
or in other words, why was sudharshan concept not further explored?

this would be around 2013..
Click to expand...
It's hard to get data on why an internal project of DRDO got cancelled like how many of us even knew that once there existed a 7.62x42mm cartridge project, let alone it's cancellation.

But my guess would be that a laser guided bomb (either custom or kit based) doesn't have much use in our case where both of our adversaries are near-peer.

There's no point for a plane to remain on station inside enemy territory so that the WSO can keep the target illuminated or insert a bunch of Para-SFs with laser designator or even risk our already scarce UAVs to Pak/Chinese ADS...when we can achieve the same results using GPS guided one's and that too from a stand-off range (remember, LGBs can't have a stand-off launch). Given how low cost MEMS based INS have gotten more precise and FOG ones cheaper, we can now replicated the CEP of LGBs with GPS guided one's because end of day no one was using a 500kg LGB on a moving target. Moving target is the only place where a LGB beats a GPS guided.

Nowadays laser guided bombs are only useful where the adversary is more or less a COIN type scenario; not a LSCO. Like Turkey dropping LGBs on Syrian rebels or US engaging ISIS targets.
 
Blood+ said:
Nah, LCA wasn't ready to serve as a frontline interceptor in all honesty until recently as opposed to Nag and NAMICA.
Click to expand...
For that time lca was good now mk1a is even better even lca mk2 dominates jf 17 just berter weapon package was missing now this gap is also filled
 
Ayan Barat said:
It's hard to get data on why an internal project of DRDO got cancelled like how many of us even knew that once there existed a 7.62x42mm cartridge project, let alone it's cancellation.

But my guess would be that a laser guided bomb (either custom or kit based) doesn't have much use in our case where both of our adversaries are near-peer.

There's no point for a plane to remain on station inside enemy territory so that the WSO can keep the target illuminated or insert a bunch of Para-SFs with laser designator or even risk our already scarce UAVs to Pak/Chinese ADS...when we can achieve the same results using GPS guided one's and that too from a stand-off range (remember, LGBs can't have a stand-off launch). Given how low cost MEMS based INS have gotten more precise and FOG ones cheaper, we can now replicated the CEP of LGBs with GPS guided one's because end of day no one was using a 500kg LGB on a moving target. Moving target is the only place where a LGB beats a GPS guided.

Nowadays laser guided bombs are only useful where the adversary is more or less a COIN type scenario; not a LSCO. Like Turkey dropping LGBs on Syrian rebels or US engaging ISIS targets.
Click to expand...

was thinking of strap on guidance kit attached to a dumb bomb aspect of sudharshan, not the laser guidance part.

is there any public information on at what stage munition is loaded into current LRGB? at the factory or at the airbase. or we can just to wait for IAF to release it in some video.

priority has been given to streamlined surface i.e range, that bit is obvious.
1725983970784.webp
 
ezsasa said:
was thinking of strap on guidance kit attached to a dumb bomb aspect of sudharshan, not the laser guidance part.

is there any public information on at what stage munition is loaded into current LRGB? at the factory or at the airbase. or we can just to wait for IAF to release it in some video.

priority has been given to streamlined surface i.e range, that bit is obvious.
View attachment 9001
Click to expand...
How is Gautham different from a HSLD 450 fitted with a PGHSLD 500 kit
Why develop 1 specific bomb for 1 specific use case, instead shouldn't we go for a more modular approach like the Americans.
they have Dumb Mk 80 series bombs and JDAM/ JDAM ER kits which due to their modularity make the logistics easier and give USAF more flexibility.


1725985350383.png
1725985405565.png

This also got me thinking why isn't there a HSLD 1000 (Indian Mk 84)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

VPN-HSL-250-X250
Back
Top