DRDO and PSUs

Kapil said:
I think our SAMs are :
1. 15 squadrons(8 launchers per squadron) of Akash - out of which first 2+6 were delivered by 2013 and rest 7 were with seeker and should have been delivered by 2019-20. Each of these should have 125 missiles(5 reloads). This should be used for point defence.
2. 9 squadrons(Can someone confirm if it was 18 launchers or 18 battalions) of Spyder SAM. Some 750+750 Python and Derby were ordered with these as per SIPRI. Again, this should be used for point defence.
3. SAMAR 1 and 2 - jugaad solution by IAF to use EOL R73 and R27 missiles. I am not sure if R77s are also being used this way, or will go this way if Astra mk1 gets inducted in good numbers. There should be over 1000 such missiles still in action with SAMAR 1 and 2, not sure about exact numbers though, as R73 and R27 ordering information and EOL details are not public.
4. Old systems. Not sure but some Pechora were 'digitalized' to make them work longer. Someone with more knowledge than I have can pitch in.
5. MRSAM - 9 squadrons having 6 launchers in each. I believe at least 3-4 squadrons should be live now. Used for area defence.
6. S400 - 3 squadrons deployed, all can target western sector. Used for theatre defence.

Add to this IA orders for 2+2 regiments of Akash SAM and 5 regiments of MRSAM.

Except MRSAM, I believe all others are completely delivered and deployed.

So we should be ok against fighter, cruise missile, MALE and HALE UAV defence etc.

We don't have anything against saturation attacks from rockets and drones both(something which is cheap per interceptor round and can be used like iron dome). None of the systems stated above can handle more than 20-30 interceptions before reload(depends on Pk as well but still).
Click to expand...
Adding to this - realised that
1. We should be having 16 (or 24 if the options were exercised) squadrons of Pechoras as well. They were upgraded by private sector involvement with Russia.
2. We have 4 LSP QRSAM systems( I don't know what 'system' means here but guess it must be 4 launchers rather than 4 batteries or 4 squadrons)
 
Pundit Pikachu said:
Recently found out the reason for the excess weight.
1. The Missile has a cooled seeker(compared to uncooled seeker present on Karaok), this is because IA had asked for MPATGM to be able to operate smoothly in scorching heat of Rajasthan, due to this a cooled seeker was necessary, which increased the weight of the CLU
But honestly even then it's still a bit overweight.

2. IA had asked for a minimum engagement range of 200m, which is very less compared to other ATGMs with minimum engagement range of 500m, this necessitated a more complex design and more testing

However nothing explains the gross Incompetence of taking 6 years in developmental trials alone.
God knows when will user trials end and when will it be ordered in large enough numbers.

Both DRDO and IA are masters of endless snail pace testing

I predict LSP will not be ordered before 2027 and Mass production Wil not start before 2030, meaning it took 15 years to reach from concept to mass production which is just SAD 😭😭
Click to expand...
Mann, All my Excuses were false, This Thing is Shite.
Turkish Karaok ATGM overall weight is 25kg, whereas ours MPATGM has a weight of 30kg
Just How delusional was I back then


MPATGM Brochure (From Vigyan Vaibhav 2025)

IMG_20250302_122142.webp

rr.webp

Range : 200m to 2.5 Km
Guidance : IIR Seeker (un-cooled)
Missile Weight: <15 kg
Launcher Weight: <15 kg
Length : ~1300mm
Diameter : 120 mm
Altitude : ???
Speed : ??
Warhead Impact : Tandem Warhead with >600mm on RHA
Propulsion : Smokeless Dual Pulse Solid Rocket Motor
Launcher : Tripod Based
Temprature Range -20°C to +45°C
Shelf Life: 10 years
Status : Under Final User Trials
 
Last edited:
Pundit Pikachu said:
Mann, All my Excuses were false, This Thing is Shite.
Turkish Karaok ATGM overall weight is 25kg, whereas ours MPATGM has a weight of 30kg
Just How delusional was I back then


MPATGM Brochure (From Vigyan Vaibhav 2025)

View attachment 33934

View attachment 33939

Range : 200m to 2.5 Km
Guidance : IIR Seeker (un-cooled)
Missile Weight: <15 kg
Launcher Weight: <15 kg
Length : ~1300mm
Diameter : 120 mm
Altitude : ???
Speed : ??
Warhead Impact : Tandem Warhead with >600mm on RHA
Propulsion : Smokeless Dual Pulse Solid Rocket Motor
Launcher : Tripod Based
Temprature Range -20°C to +45°C
Shelf Life: 10 years
Status : Under Final User Trials
Click to expand...
sab Shi toh h, ye RR kya lga rkha h.
15 kgs for missile + 15kgs for tripod+CLU

Turkish atgm missile weighs a kg more than mpatgm and is 25kg for ready to fire mode because it is shoulder fired only, no tripod weight.

I don't see what this sudden Vishwa vilap is over.

Certify MPATGM for shoulder fire with CLU and it will easily weigh less than 25kgs ready to fire. And minimum changes will be needed if required.

Indian Army asked for tripod, just like UK army asked for tripod with javelin even though it can be shoulder fired.

Seriously though, making an issue of a non-issue is stupid when there are other systems you can do vidwa vilap over.
 
Hawkeye said:
sab Shi toh h, ye RR kya lga rkha h.
15 kgs for missile + 15kgs for tripod+CLU

Turkish atgm missile weighs a kg more than mpatgm and is 25kg for ready to fire mode because it is shoulder fired only, no tripod weight.

I don't see what this sudden Vishwa vilap is over.

Certify MPATGM for shoulder fire with CLU and it will easily weigh less than 25kgs ready to fire. And minimum changes will be needed if required.

Indian Army asked for tripod, just like UK army asked for tripod with javelin even though it can be shoulder fired.

Seriously though, making an issue of a non-issue is stupid when there are other systems you can do vidwa vilap over.
Click to expand...
Are you sure cause, these brochures here seem to suggest otherwise
1746683464416.webp
The weight of CLU seems to solely consist of TAS and CCU and not a tripod.

Anyways here's some other brochures suggesting different values such as 650mm RHA instead of 600mm RHA and Dual Thrust Motor instead of dual pulse Motor and Flight Time of 17 sec
1746683895260.webp
1746684455012.webp
 
Last edited:
Pundit Pikachu said:
Are you sure cause, these brochures here seem to suggest otherwise
View attachment 34000
The weight of CLU seems to solely consist of TAS and CCU and not a tripod.

Anyways here's some other brochures suggesting different values such as 650mm RHA instead of 600mm RHA and Dual Thrust Motor instead of dual pulse Motor and Flight Time of 17 sec
View attachment 34004
View attachment 34008
Click to expand...
Indian brochures are the height of I don't know what is going on. Like seeing 80km range for Akash NG in a Drdo video yet same Drdo poster saying it's 30km later on. Also, see the range vs payload graph for Shaurya and you are supposed to believe that Pralay range is only 400 km with puny 370kg warhead when new gen rocket motor and light weight structure and materials are being used to make the missile. Anything short of 600km is unbelievable. Same for the recently unveiled BM-04 missile based on Agni-P.

In this case, best case to infer your own estimate is by logic, mpatgm is a design after 2015, here is the official pic of clu of mpatgm
1746691101396.webp

It's an integrated clu unlike that of earlier spike atgm where thermal sight was a clip on type on the CLU unit, even Israelis introduced their new ICLU
1746691360654.webp
To this
1746691405922.webp
This has networking capability integrated as well.

There is no way in hell that our CLU weighs some 15kgs even for the world's best worst design.
Infact our CLU seems in class of shoulder fired atgm clus like that of other 3rd gen manportable atgms whose Clus are in class of 5-8kgs. I don't think ours should vary from this range.

1746692098131.webp

In the latest mpatgm developmental test video, no clear picture of clu was seen.
It could be anything in our case, old brochure data, unoptimised tripod weight or design. I just don't know how only a clu can weigh this much like 15kgs. Pretty sure tripod is included in launcher weight.

Even the super duper ultra uber karaok atgm clu looks pretty similiar to Drdo atgm clu, unless ofcourse they changed the design which is unlikely.
 
Last edited:
Bleh said:
While all large Paki cities were engulfed in flame by not a single hit till now in India. ❤️ I almost teared up.

Difference between Chinki & desi tech.

View: https://x.com/FrontalForce/status/1920506565557383516/

View: https://x.com/GoJammukashmir/status/1920502657065656420/

View: https://x.com/Goreunit/status/1920507456918032618/
Click to expand...



Is it Iron Dome is more like an Mortar defense system, since HAMAS rockets behaves like that.

But agreed may be our SAM systems can be used against multiple type of threats. Good to see that we have dense ADS coverage. Same things should be against 5 foot chinaman.
 
Pundit Pikachu said:
Are you sure cause, these brochures here seem to suggest otherwise
View attachment 34000
The weight of CLU seems to solely consist of TAS and CCU and not a tripod.

Anyways here's some other brochures suggesting different values such as 650mm RHA instead of 600mm RHA and Dual Thrust Motor instead of dual pulse Motor and Flight Time of 17 sec
View attachment 34004
View attachment 34008
Click to expand...
Pundit Ji,
Do you still need validation of Indian products after what our air defence showed in last 2 days? The guns were possibly a mix of Soviet and European ancestry but the detection mechanism and fire control was ours. Impeccable performance 👌🏾 Isn't it?

Our agencies are conservative and do not believe in marketing gimmicks. It's frustrating to some of us as we compare our brochures to others and feel sub optimal.
But but but -
They show conservative ranges and payloads in brochures.
The weapons eventually work better than brochures.

I can give you 2 examples:

1. Internal one : Do you want to question the ranges of Agonies based on payloads and rocket fuel?

Or

2. External one : Do you not know the yahoodi drone screwdrivered by one of our dhandhomax company which shocked the forces with its underperformance compared to brochures very recently?
 
So piercing together the SAM systems used over last 3 days from many threads:
1. Upgraded Bofors L70
2. SAMAR
3. Akash SAMs
4. S400
5. Plethora of jamming systems for soft kill.
Maybe starting from Himshakti etc to handheld jammers

I will not curse Antony for 7 days now. He ordered Akash.

Possibly time to re-read that Wings Of Fire again to pass my respect to the scientific community and engineers of our desh.
 
Last edited:
Kapil said:
So piercing together the SAM systems used over last 3 days from many threads:
1. Upgraded Bofors L70
2. SAMAR
3. Akash SAMs
4. S400
5. Plethora of jamming systems for soft kill.
Maybe starting from Himshakti etc to handheld jammers

I will not curse Antony for 7 days now. He ordered Akash.

Possibly time to re-read that Wings Of Fire again to pass my respect to the scientific community and engineers of our desh.
Click to expand...
You’ve missed the MRSAM, S125-Pechoras, Zu-23s and Schilkas.
 
With all the recent developments, I have been assessing the drone use in modern combat (a lot of others in DFI had been discarded them as useless before this recent Ruso-Ukranian war).
A pattern emerges.

These shit are not that useful against proper armies...military-drone-with-a-bomb-at-sunset-combat-drone-royalty-free-image-1686168651.webpReaper_UAV_Takes_to_the_Skies_of_Southern_Afghanistan_MOD_45151418.webp
Low end slow drones carrying munition instead of fighter-jets does not work well. We just shot down 500 of Pakistan's & USA lost a lot of attack drones to Houthis. Being cheaper than manned aircrafts, they do not have any protective sensors & even flares. Cheap-ass small missiles & L-70s are taking them out. But we cannot make them costly either because what makes drone different from a jet is cost.

For quantity over quality we need kamikaze-drones. I think maybe we should standardise & classify our drones, then order class-wise (like we differentiate 105mm & 150mm).

1. Microcopters
Aero_0524_EN.webp
Basically a flying-grenade fired from a launcher or AT4-like canister, this will hover & explode within 1 km range. Just imagine how useful these would be in a CASO!

2. Swarm drones
Switchblade.webp
Simple mortar-launched munitions' modern replacement with optical-feed to fly to given direction upto 10km away on its own & swoop down on target/s identified by user sitting outside it's targets range, through a screen receiving the live footage. Half a dozen can wipe out whole heavy-mortar positions or machinegun nests with ease.

3. Loitering munition
126081254_1977554795719184_2639461818933584506_n.webp
The already under use, essentially LOAL ATGMs that fly away to search & destroy targets upto 15-50kms. Might someday become more effective than artillery!

4. Flying bombs.
Untitled-2145.webp
Basically cheap rotor-powered large payload bombs that flies to the given co-ordinate (more effectively than V1) of a large-area target upto 100km away, without the need for a aircraft. Have been successfully used as compliment to high-end cruise missiles.

Personally I am not sure how effective Ghatak & Warrior are gonna be in actual combat... They're stealthy & more well protected, but why not use 20 flying bombs instead of a Ghatak? Why will a Warrior carry an Astra if itself has no proper radar?




The bandwagon aside I found 2 very good concepts.

1. Hounds
CCCA-DRONE-WITH-AESA-RADAR-copy.webp
Stealthy platform with an IRST/EOTS & Laser designator. Let it fly 100 km ahead of the mother jet & you have an IR-targeting at 150km range. You can now use a Fox2 Meteor/Gandiv with passive homing IR-guidance! You can now use laser-guided glide bombs unaffected by GPS jamming.

2. Screen
37396521ed38a024090178b2c4b15cde.webp
Mount them with EW-pods or mimic the radar signature of actual fighters & you have an unbelievable force multiplayer!









It's you've read this long, just imagine what would happen to us on the night of 8th mai is Pakis has these... then make up your opinion.
 
Last edited:
Bleh said:
With all the recent developments, I have been assessing the drone use in modern combat (a lot of others in DFI had been discarded them as useless before this recent Ruso-Ukranian war).
A pattern emerges.

These shit are not that useful against proper armies...View attachment 34560View attachment 34561
Low end slow drones carrying munition instead of fighter-jets does not work well. We just shot down 500 of Pakistan's & USA lost a lot of attack drones to Houthis. Being cheaper than manned aircrafts, they do not have any protective sensors & even flares. Cheap-ass small missiles & L-70s are taking them out. But we cannot make them costly either because what makes drone different from a jet is cost.

For quantity over quality we need kamikaze-drones. I think maybe we should standardise & classify our drones, then order class-wise (like we differentiate 105mm & 150mm).

1. Microcopters
View attachment 34563
Basically a flying-grenade fired from a launcher or AT4-like canister, this will hover & explode within 1 km range. Just imagine how useful these would be in a CASO!

2. Swarm drones
View attachment 34566
Simple mortar-launched munitions' modern replacement with optical-feed to fly to given direction upto 10km away on its own & swoop down on target/s identified by user sitting outside it's targets range, through a screen receiving the live footage. Half a dozen can wipe out whole heavy-mortar positions or machinegun nests with ease.

3. Loitering munition
View attachment 34568
The already under use, essentially LOAL ATGMs that fly away to search & destroy targets upto 15-50kms. Might someday become more effective than artillery!

4. Flying bombs.
View attachment 34570
Basically cheap rotor-powered large payload bombs that flies to the given co-ordinate (more effectively than V1) of a large-area target upto 100km away, without the need for a aircraft. Have been successfully used as compliment to high-end cruise missiles.

Personally I am not sure how effective Ghatak & Warrior are gonna be in actual combat... They're stealthy & more well protected, but why not use 20 flying bombs instead of a Ghatak? Why will a Warrior carry an Astra if itself has no proper radar?




The bandwagon aside I found 2 very good concepts.

1. Hounds
View attachment 34573
Stealthy platform with an IRST/EOTS & Laser designator. Let it fly 100 km ahead of the mother jet & you have an IR-targeting at 150km range. You can now use a Fox2 Meteor/Gandiv with passive homing IR-guidance! You can now use laser-guided glide bombs unaffected by GPS jamming.

2. Screen
View attachment 34576
Mount them with EW-pods or mimic the radar signature of actual fighters & you have an unbelievable force multiplayer!









It's you've read this long, just imagine what would happen to us on the night of 8th mai is Pakis has these... then make up your opinion.
Click to expand...
We kind of have all such systems either in development or already there but not purchased.

First of all, you need to map out the composition and distribution of such assets. Also, make new units/arms within present military structure to better utilise them and develop expertise overtime which in itself will give birth to more mature concepts over time. Not only this, a parallel expertise will develop as well on how to deter against such threats which will then lead to counter systems, it's inductions and creation of relevant branches/arms.

This will take time, is doable but only if there is a vision, intent and the action that follows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Pundit Pikachu
DRDO VSHORAD
Replies
2
Views
472
Patriots
P

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

Back
Top