DRDO and PSUs (10 Viewers)

[fire starter]

View: https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1937153297850458540?t=QjK1UQxoqjdLkxu28hGAoQ&s=19

 

[shade2]

View: https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1937153297850458540?t=QjK1UQxoqjdLkxu28hGAoQ&s=19

Poor DRDO walas have no idea what the emergency procoorment budget is meant for

 

[jaijaganath]

View: https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1937153297850458540?t=QjK1UQxoqjdLkxu28hGAoQ&s=19

Bichara drdo walas don't know these EP are ladla bhau and ladli behena yojana for generals

 

[jaijaganath]

Calm down birather the pilotwa is sittin' on a J10 and the avic account says customer satisfaction and not potential customers, most likely it's about the J10 vs Rafale thing, as in Pakistanis are satisfied with the product they recieved.
J35 naval and J35A both just went into LRIP.
Calm down don't hyperventilate, aise bhi kuch hone wala nahi hai bp mat badhai cortisol tolerance badhao

Despite that it doesn't change the fact regarding our procurement

Kya bp badhana bhai saab ab toh obsession chod diya hai
Infact it's has been long time since I wrote a rant
Hopes nahi hai just ajj mood hua thoda

 

[liberalredditor]

Despite that it doesn't change the fact regarding our procurement

Kya bp badhana bhai saab ab toh obsession chod diya hai
Infact it's has been long time since I wrote a rant
Hopes nahi hai just ajj mood hua thoda

its a masterstroke brother, let them waste money. this is not the era of war as said by topji. we are saving our money by not buying defence equipments, samvidhan says pichhde vanchit shoshit dalit adivasi need money

 

[Anonymous Bharata]

Ok guys hear me out,even the Hypersonic Cruise Missile will reduce its speed to supersonic level in terminal phase, So, my question is why can't we have LRAShM like missile with a Ramjet engine for terminal phase?

 

[liberalredditor]

Ok guys hear me out,even the Hypersonic Cruise Missile will reduce its speed to supersonic level in terminal phase, So, my question is why can't we have LRAShM like missile with a Ramjet engine for terminal phase?

why do you want ramjet for terminal phase? supersonic is enough, even though an advanced ad system strikes it but the debris would have enough kinetic energy to inflict deep scars. ramjet in terminal phase would be unnecessarily complex and expensive

 

[me_itsme]

View: https://x.com/DRDO_India/status/1937004913361355089

Saars how is this possible?
How can DRDO/Suit-Boot gun win and not the Jewish ,Russian or American guns?

did this pass army trials? I hope they change that coldwar era stock and may be add mlok handguard. (maybe sss can develop kits for this)

 

[Anonymous Bharata]

why do you want ramjet for terminal phase? supersonic is enough, even though an advanced ad system strikes it but the debris would have enough kinetic energy to inflict deep scars. ramjet in terminal phase would be unnecessarily complex and expensive

Powered missile has more Kill Probability than unpowered missile in terminal phase, and that too at that long ranges

 

[Gyyaan]

Anybody got something that proves BMD phase1 is already operational?

 

[snakeeyes07]

Re RBU-6000, I can see why IN needs it on many of it's warships, India's western seaboard is pretty shallow which favors submarines. But I don't get the need for all capital ships with > 6000 tonnes to be equipped with 2 RBU-6000 system with reload mechanism which takes up valuable real estate, would rather have more VLS for missiles.

DRDO came up with ERASR which increases range to 8900m. But does this support the homing head type of feature like 90R does? RBU-6000 90R has a seeker range of 130m and can maneuver a bit.

Russia's New 90R1 Sub-Killing Rocket Will Challenge NATO's Underwater Supremacy

Splav, a Tula, Russia-based company specializing in multiple rocket launcher systems for land and naval applications, has unveiled a new guided projectile for the RPK-8 Zapad ('West') anti-submarine rocket launcher system. Independent...

sputnikglobe.com

The 90R has a range between 600 m and 4.3 km, and a depth of up to one km. The range of its acoustic homing head is 130 m. The 90R1 is believed to feature improved range, although these have yet to be revealed in open sources. In any case, Tuchkov noted that "it can be assumed that designers did not increase its depth characteristics, since 1,000 m is beyond the limits of any NATO submarine or torpedo."

 

[johny_baba]

Re RBU-6000, I can see why IN needs it on many of it's warships, India's western seaboard is pretty shallow which favors submarines. But I don't get the need for all capital ships with > 6000 tonnes to be equipped with 2 RBU-6000 system with reload mechanism which takes up valuable real estate, would rather have more VLS for missiles.

DRDO came up with ERASR which increases range to 8900m. But does this support the homing head type of feature like 90R does? RBU-6000 90R has a seeker range of 130m and can maneuver a bit.

View attachment 40866View attachment 40867

you could perhaps only get an answer of this interesting questions from @Binayak95 babu

 

[ArjunMK1A]

Re RBU-6000, I can see why IN needs it on many of it's warships, India's western seaboard is pretty shallow which favors submarines. But I don't get the need for all capital ships with > 6000 tonnes to be equipped with 2 RBU-6000 system with reload mechanism which takes up valuable real estate, would rather have more VLS for missiles.

DRDO came up with ERASR which increases range to 8900m. But does this support the homing head type of feature like 90R does? RBU-6000 90R has a seeker range of 130m and can maneuver a bit.

View attachment 40866View attachment 40867

May be we should ditch the system and build RUM-139 VL-ASROC Anti Submarine Missile equivalent.

It simply uses the Light weight torpedo strapped with an Solid booster. The booster gives some distance (Approx 22 KM for ASROC), from there the Torpedo will have its own range (MK 54 - 9 KM).

We should go with our approach in which TAL Shyena will be the torpedo strapped to an booster. This gives some serious long range Submarine Strikes.

On good side, it may remove the bulky RBU Systems, free up the space for extra VLS which can be used to store these missiles.

US Arleigh Bruke Class destroyers have this combination. They have torpedos and VLS based anti submarine Missiles like RUM 139.

Few people talked about how RBU 6000 can also be used to do shore bombardment. But Navy is looking into Naval Pinaka which may replace that role also. Even an Guided Pinaka with 75KM range will be devasting for enemies.

 

[snakeeyes07]

May be we should ditch the system and build RUM-139 VL-ASROC Anti Submarine Missile equivalent.

It simply uses the Light weight torpedo strapped with an Solid booster. The booster gives some distance (Approx 22 KM for ASROC), from there the Torpedo will have its own range (MK 54 - 9 KM).

We should go with our approach in which TAL Shyena will be the torpedo strapped to an booster. This gives some serious long range Submarine Strikes.

On good side, it may remove the bulky RBU Systems, free up the space for extra VLS which can be used to store these missiles.

US Arleigh Bruke Class destroyers have this combination. They have torpedos and VLS based anti submarine Missiles like RUM 139.

Few people talked about how RBU 6000 can also be used to do shore bombardment. But Navy is looking into Naval Pinaka which may replace that role also. Even an Guided Pinaka with 75KM range will be devasting for enemies.

I agree we need to be focused on UVLS for future design and also put this into P15, P17 when their MLU/refit is due. Other warships can retain RBU-6000 launcher and ER-ASR.

That's where all major navies including PLAN and USN have moved since the past decade or earlier. Russian Navy is a failure and not someone from where much inspirations should be taken from.

If depth charges are needed for whatever reasons then keep the RBU-6000 launcher with ER-ASR already loaded but with no under deck reload mechanism. The space needed for this will something like the chaff launcher or a bit more than that. The limitation of this is that rockets exposed above deck can explode when damaged and put ship out of action.

LWT missile (with glider) similar to RUM-139 is achievable by DRDO.

 

[ArjunMK1A]

I agree we need to be focused on UVLS for future design and also put this into P15, P17 when their MLU/refit is due. Other warships can retain RBU-6000 launcher and ER-ASR.

That's where all major navies including PLAN and USN have moved since the past decade or earlier. Russian Navy is a failure and not someone from where much inspirations should be taken from.

If depth charges are needed for whatever reasons then keep the RBU-6000 launcher with ER-ASR already loaded but with no under deck reload mechanism. The space needed for this will something like the chaff launcher or a bit more than that. The limitation of this is that rockets exposed above deck can explode when damaged and put ship out of action.

LWT missile (with glider) similar to RUM-139 is achievable by DRDO.
View attachment 40871

We sucks at finalizing the UVLS designs. May be Navy is waiting for Kusha Series of Missiles to come. But we should go ahead with hybrid Cold, Hot VLS like chinaman. ASROC kind of missile we already have (SMART), we just need an small version.

Navy is still waiting for maturity of few weapons like VLSRSAM (Which already getting tested in Rajput/Delhi class). We still did not have an ITCM based Cruise Missile, the project is dragging for some time. Also navy may get interest in NG since if it gives same performance in lesser weight, they can leverage it.

Don't see HCM missile for now. Current dimensions were huge and we may need an bigger destroyer for that role.

 

[liberalredditor]

Why do we still have soviet era rbu6000 on our warships, i am sure drdo can develop a much lethal asw alternative to it.

 

[snakeeyes07]

We sucks at finalizing the UVLS designs. May be Navy is waiting for Kusha Series of Missiles to come. But we should go ahead with hybrid Cold, Hot VLS like chinaman. ASROC kind of missile we already have (SMART), we just need an small version.

Navy is still waiting for maturity of few weapons like VLSRSAM (Which already getting tested in Rajput/Delhi class). We still did not have an ITCM based Cruise Missile, the project is dragging for some time. Also navy may get interest in NG since if it gives same performance in lesser weight, they can leverage it.

Don't see HCM missile for now. Current dimensions were huge and we may need an bigger destroyer for that role.

One idea that IN can borrow from Russian Navy is having 1-2 squadrons of shore based SU30MKI. SU30MKI can be a launch platform for HCM type missile in future.

 

[Binayak95]

Re RBU-6000, I can see why IN needs it on many of it's warships, India's western seaboard is pretty shallow which favors submarines. But I don't get the need for all capital ships with > 6000 tonnes to be equipped with 2 RBU-6000 system with reload mechanism which takes up valuable real estate, would rather have more VLS for missiles.

DRDO came up with ERASR which increases range to 8900m. But does this support the homing head type of feature like 90R does? RBU-6000 90R has a seeker range of 130m and can maneuver a bit.

View attachment 40866View attachment 40867

so the RBU 6000 is not technically what we have onboard our warships. its IRL. L&T has retained the basic shape of the RBU launcher, but the reloading mechanism, and targeting machinery is no longer electro-hydraulic. Its entirely electric.

its smaller, lighter, less deck penetration and lesser maintenance intensive.

As to why we still have it -

its a great final defence against incoming torpedoes, against divers and works great against swarming USVs.

And further its far cheaper to fire off a full salvo of 24 rockets than even one ASROC or any VLS'd solution to the above problems.

 

[snakeeyes07]

so the RBU 6000 is not technically what we have onboard our warships. its IRL. L&T has retained the basic shape of the RBU launcher, but the reloading mechanism, and targeting machinery is no longer electro-hydraulic. Its entirely electric.

its smaller, lighter, less deck penetration and lesser maintenance intensive.

As to why we still have it -

its a great final defence against incoming torpedoes, against divers and works great against swarming USVs.

And further its far cheaper to fire off a full salvo of 24 rockets than even one ASROC or any VLS'd solution to the above problems.

But do capital ships like all ships of P15, P17 class need it? Given the primary threat faced from PLAN & PN are salvos of anti-ship subsonic, quasi-ballistic & ballistic missiles. More VLS for SAMs in the space taken by RBU in these ships will come in handy to protect against such missile threats.

As ships operate in task forces during combat, there will be other ships with RBUs available.

Regarding protection from torpedo, something like this can be looked at:

RAFAEL Unveils Torbuster SP Torpedo Defense Suite for Surface Vessels - Naval News

RAFAEL and its subsidiary DSIT Solutions are participating in IMDEX 2023 and are introducing the TORBUSTER SP anti-torpedo system.

www.navalnews.com

 

[fire starter]

View: https://x.com/AdityaRajKaul/status/1937381423352102969?t=24CB-kN9WTjpepKsbh5DHg&s=19