DRDO and PSU's

Pundit Pikachu said:
Because we are penny pinchers, as simple as that.

Anyone with an ounce of logic would think that highly prized assets like missile launchers need to be highly mobile and be based on multiple axle truck (and no I am even not talking about strategic missile launchers like Agni but things like SAM's and MLRS) but no our penny pinching buffoons in the MoD seem to think otherwise
Click to expand...
If we want to move missiles around covertly, using unmarked covered wagons are a better way of doing it. A big TEL on the road won't move unnoticed under satellite cover anyway.
1727787475340.webp
 
Anants said:
In Indian context - rather than off roadability, concealment is biggest asset. Civilian guised truck trailers, train wagons, submarine is the way to go.
Click to expand...

Well, the same Volvo trucks in southern parts of India used to carry to turbine blades. The length looks same. So it better to conceal them as civilian truck rather than Soviet style big ass TEL.
 
ArjunMK1A said:
Well, the same Volvo trucks in southern parts of India used to carry to turbine blades. The length looks same. So it better to conceal them as civilian truck rather than Soviet style big ass TEL.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And train boggies are even better. But with so much sabotage attempts on rail I guess time to introduce tethered drones ahead of trains for scanning tracks for anomalies before train comes.

Also it's not that DRDO did not test Offroad TEL . it did. There was picture of one TEL being tested , but I guess DRDO wisely gave up.
 
Last edited:
Nutcracker said:
With AESA the radome doesn't have rotate anymore. Thats why big part of stability issue might've been become irrelevant now and we could see swift development and induction period. And for Netra 2, that's not going anywhere.
Click to expand...
Yeah so the old 360' project is coming back.
They had showed 4 radars in square design unlike 3 radars in triangular form in phalcon awacs.
netra mk3 would be much much more superior to phalcon or any awacs in service. It would be 4 radars which would eliminate or reduce beam steering, it will also use GaN, it will be 4D.
The performance would be monstrous.
 
Satish Sharma Ji said:
Yeah so the old 360' project is coming back.
They had showed 4 radars in square design unlike 3 radars in triangular form in phalcon awacs.
netra mk3 would be much much more superior to phalcon or any awacs in service. It would be 4 radars which would eliminate or reduce beam steering, it will also use GaN, it will be 4D.
The performance would be monstrous.
Click to expand...

Would 4 sides create 4 gaps as opposed to 3 gaps by 3 sides?
 
Blademaster said:
Would 4 sides create 4 gaps as opposed to 3 gaps by 3 sides?
Click to expand...
Not really.

In every AESA radar you can steer the beams to scan the azimuth upto ±90° and in more capable ones it can go up to ±120°. So in case of a 4 panel arrangement you you can steer the beams 45° on any two adjoining panels to cover the "gap" of 90° between them. Similarly in three panels one you can steer 60° to cover 120° "gap".

Only chance of a "blind zone" is if someone decides to use low steerable AESA in three panels arrangement. Because then only you'd be left with a 30° (120-45+45) "gap".

I'd have doodled it instead of yapping but don't have pen paper.
 
Ayan Barat said:
Not really.

In every AESA radar you can steer the beams to scan the azimuth upto ±90° and in more capable ones it can go up to ±120°. So in case of a 4 panel arrangement you you can steer the beams 45° on any two adjoining panels to cover the "gap" of 90° between them. Similarly in three panels one you can steer 60° to cover 120° "gap".

Only chance of a "blind zone" is if someone decides to use low steerable AESA in three panels arrangement. Because then only you'd be left with a 30° (120-45+45) "gap".

I'd have doodled it instead of yapping but don't have pen paper.
Click to expand...
www.thalesgroup.com

Ground Fire

Ground Fire offers enhanced protection against a wide range of threats and provides our military with the most advanced and secure capabilities to maintain of airspace sovereignty with superior capabilities.
www.thalesgroup.com www.thalesgroup.com

Do you know what kind of jinn GaN elements are they using to get a fricking 90° elevation coverage. Most of the ground based Aesa radars have around positive 60° coverage or at max maybe 70-75° in elevation.
 
Anants said:
India has about 400+ dhruv helicopters compared to 150-200 mi 8. Keep this in mind while thinking crash rates
Click to expand...
Yes but still these are very high crash rates given the service time of dhruvs. Last time they said some components metallurgy was weak when put in hard work would run out of life early. They sorted it out now still multiple crashes happened after this.
 
Satish Sharma Ji said:
Yes but still these are very high crash rates given the service time of dhruvs. Last time they said some components metallurgy was weak when put in hard work would run out of life early. They sorted it out now still multiple crashes happened after this.
Click to expand...
Last time dhruvs crashed because they experimented with lighter components to reduce weight. But that dud not work as it experienced metal fatigue soon, so they reverted to original heavy materials. You should understand Dhruv is evolving product. Let COI come out and then you can lay blame
 
Anants said:
India has about 400+ dhruv helicopters compared to 150-200 mi 8. Keep this in mind while thinking crash rates
Click to expand...
Im not blaming anybody.
I m actually fine with initial crashes that happen as dhruv is our first helo. In first 14 years 16 helps crashed. Which is fine okay. But they're evolving it mk2 then mk3, what did they do then?
Atleast 25 dhruvs have crashed wiki shows 22 in total. Let's disregard those initial 16 ones.
 
Satish Sharma Ji said:
Im not blaming anybody.
I m actually fine with initial crashes that happen as dhruv is our first helo. In first 14 years 16 helps crashed. Which is fine okay. But they're evolving it mk2 then mk3, what did they do then?
Atleast 25 dhruvs have crashed wiki shows 22 in total. Let's disregard those initial 16 ones.
Click to expand...
25 + 16 = 41 crashes in total for 400+ crashes. That is 1 per 40 approximately. Not bad, needs to improve but not bad as first go.

And all mk version are serious upgrades. But in between mks there little upgrades experimentations that also seem to be happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

VPN-HSL-250-X250
Back
Top