DRDO and PSU's

[randombully]

Iss chutiye ka kuch karo koi -

View: https://twitter.com/InsightGL/status/1861602712225489176

"Geopolitical" ones do not tend to have kknowledge about defense.
Mf's doesn't know that both are different categories of engineand developing an entire domestic engine for su 30mki can take 10-15 years or more even when you have experience in engine development.

 

[fire starter]

View: https://x.com/IITKanpur/status/1861453722909581773?t=jwcf18q0PSSwe2WLMBYuMA&s=19

 

[Ayan Barat]

> Need for accuracy in MLRS
I've already said it multiple times but today I'm coming with data on how accurate or to be honest, inaccurate MLRS are.
This is official poster of Pinaka-II; the unguided one

1.5% of range at 60km of max range would be...0.9km. This number becomes bonkers when you compare it with that of tube artillery firing cheap unguided HE shells...M549A1

Almost half the deviation of MLRS
Infact we also have exact data comparing the dispersion of unguided Vs guided rocket artillery at a constant distance but I'm sure about the source of this data...so I don't know

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimwRe1CxGKAKAOk-rwbsSKtCC1rsCOZU6qwz86Zl5qLxuVrJllB-n861o6xyucxhGP_D84heC1mZKcBvHZUzd5N9Xlema2OIcd0BdU4ZEhUITY9jms5AH4-lbqa3dZHD8q1Hi8LMmO5tEf/s1600/TCS+dispersion.jpg

> GMLRS
Each GMLRS is guided using Honeywell's GG1308 ring laser gyroscope, Honeywell's RBA-500 and NavStrike GPS module.
Someone was asking why it was so accurate...you can get specifications for each of them in open source.

> Accuracy of BrahMos Vs Pinaka
There can be multiple factors that may ultimately contribute to the contrast in the accuracy like the presence of an intake channel, better INS or geometry. Without getting the exact bias and drift values of the INS used in BrahMos it'd be foolish to comment on it so other than that I'd say there are three things that may contribute to its accuracy.
• Increased stability

There are more surfaces and also comparatively bigger on BrahMos
• Different trajectory

Pinaka follows a traditional ballistic trajectory with more chances of deviation than BrahMos which follows a bit unorthodox one
• Powered flight
We know that in the endgame phase a BrahMos performs S-maneuvers or climbs to dive down and as both are extremely energy consuming, it's safe to assume that atleast up until that point the engine on a BrahMos is lit and providing some thrust. (A vertical line on the trajectory in the above pic shows the theoretical thrust cut-off point for both the systems.) As BrahMos has a way longer power availability it's chances of accuracy also increases.

> Blast radius Vs CEP
• In GMLRS you get a 90kg one with 1,82,000 tungsten fragments, blast radius is not published but there are multiple videos showing it to be quite good and the CEP is 2-5m. Basically the CEP is just a small fraction of the lethal radius.

• In Pinaka you get a 100kg one with 20,000 tungsten fragments, blast radius of 60m (backward calculated from the Mean Area of Effectiveness of 12000sq m) and a CEP of <30m

The CEP figures of 60-80m is from an older poster

In newer ones it comes down to 30m

It's an impressive feat to half the CEP and deserve to be appreciated. But on a flip side it also means we're closer to the saturation point.

> Cost
• In the poster by DRDO itself the quoted figure of GMLRS is from 2013.

• But we should look at 2024's cost. As per the last disclosed FMS report it was just $110,000

93 lakh Vs 70 lakh is still a considerable diffrence but not so much that it would feel absurd when an army comes up with the argument of "it's bit pricey, but you must consider it being better and more mature and battle tested"
I know it's illogical, but then again end of day you're no different than a FMCG firm trying to sell a toothpaste
• USA has economies of scale, they started earlier, guided Pinaka is still in R&D...all are valid arguments; but sadly for an army looking for a guided rocket in 2025 the only thing that matters is how much it needs to pay in 2025 for getting the most value.

And as always, these are just my yapping with me being terminally retarded...so take it at your own risk

Bit exhausted by all this work, quoting various parts from multiple posts was bit cumbersome so just mentioning everyone involved in that discussion; ask whatever I missed baaki bhul chuk maaf

@Bleh @Azaad @Anants @shuturmurg

Hmm...and you were complaining about my posts the other day.

 

[Ayan Barat]

Iss chutiye ka kuch karo koi -

View: https://twitter.com/InsightGL/status/1861602712225489176

Here's a very simple question you can ask anyone with these kind of shallow takes and trust me, it'll crash their OS

Ask them how much money was spent by Volkswagen or BMW on R&D in one financial year. Just 22-23 for example.
And now ask them to compare that with how much money we've spent to date, from 1985 to develop our very first engine core.

 

[Anants]

> Need for accuracy in MLRS
I've already said it multiple times but today I'm coming with data on how accurate or to be honest, inaccurate MLRS are.
This is official poster of Pinaka-II; the unguided one
View attachment 16700
1.5% of range at 60km of max range would be...0.9km. This number becomes bonkers when you compare it with that of tube artillery firing cheap unguided HE shells...M549A1
View attachment 16701
Almost half the deviation of MLRS
Infact we also have exact data comparing the dispersion of unguided Vs guided rocket artillery at a constant distance but I'm sure about the source of this data...so I don't know

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimwRe1CxGKAKAOk-rwbsSKtCC1rsCOZU6qwz86Zl5qLxuVrJllB-n861o6xyucxhGP_D84heC1mZKcBvHZUzd5N9Xlema2OIcd0BdU4ZEhUITY9jms5AH4-lbqa3dZHD8q1Hi8LMmO5tEf/s1600/TCS+dispersion.jpg

> GMLRS
Each GMLRS is guided using Honeywell's GG1308 ring laser gyroscope, Honeywell's RBA-500 and NavStrike GPS module.
Someone was asking why it was so accurate...you can get specifications for each of them in open source.

> Accuracy of BrahMos Vs Pinaka
There can be multiple factors that may ultimately contribute to the contrast in the accuracy like the presence of an intake channel, better INS or geometry. Without getting the exact bias and drift values of the INS used in BrahMos it'd be foolish to comment on it so other than that I'd say there are three things that may contribute to its accuracy.
• Increased stability
View attachment 16647
There are more surfaces and also comparatively bigger on BrahMos
• Different trajectory
View attachment 16648
Pinaka follows a traditional ballistic trajectory with more chances of deviation than BrahMos which follows a bit unorthodox one
• Powered flight
We know that in the endgame phase a BrahMos performs S-maneuvers or climbs to dive down and as both are extremely energy consuming, it's safe to assume that atleast up until that point the engine on a BrahMos is lit and providing some thrust. (A vertical line on the trajectory in the above pic shows the theoretical thrust cut-off point for both the systems.) As BrahMos has a way longer power availability it's chances of accuracy also increases.

> Blast radius Vs CEP
• In GMLRS you get a 90kg one with 1,82,000 tungsten fragments, blast radius is not published but there are multiple videos showing it to be quite good and the CEP is 2-5m. Basically the CEP is just a small fraction of the lethal radius.
View attachment 16689
• In Pinaka you get a 100kg one with 20,000 tungsten fragments, blast radius of 60m (backward calculated from the Mean Area of Effectiveness of 12000sq m) and a CEP of <30m
View attachment 16690
The CEP figures of 60-80m is from an older poster
View attachment 16691
In newer ones it comes down to 30m
View attachment 16692
It's an impressive feat to half the CEP and deserve to be appreciated. But on a flip side it also means we're closer to the saturation point.

> Cost
• In the poster by DRDO itself the quoted figure of GMLRS is from 2013.
View attachment 16697
• But we should look at 2024's cost. As per the last disclosed FMS report it was just $110,000
View attachment 16698
93 lakh Vs 70 lakh is still a considerable diffrence but not so much that it would feel absurd when an army comes up with the argument of "it's bit pricey, but you must consider it being better and more mature and battle tested"
I know it's illogical, but then again end of day you're no different than a FMCG firm trying to sell a toothpaste
• USA has economies of scale, they started earlier, guided Pinaka is still in R&D...all are valid arguments; but sadly for an army looking for a guided rocket in 2025 the only thing that matters is how much it needs to pay in 2025 for getting the most value.

And as always, these are just my yapping with me being terminally retarded...so take it at your own risk

Bit exhausted by all this work, quoting various parts from multiple posts was bit cumbersome so just mentioning everyone involved in that discussion; ask whatever I missed baaki bhul chuk maaf

@Bleh @Azaad @Anants @shuturmurg

Excellent Post as usual @Ayan Barat !! This clearly explains to @Azaad question the reason why you need fewer Guided rockets than multiple unguided ones - besides cost.
Also Laser Ring Gyro I believe is what deriving cost of GMLRS up - and is what also causing better accuracy in it.

DRDO I believe uses Ring Laser Gyros on Bigger Ballistic Missiles - because of cost. Though it has developed Fiber Optic Gyro - I am not sure if they can use them to enhance accuracy of rockets further. Whether technically and financially it is feasible.

Pinaka - which has been in trials since I was in teens - I believe somehow developer fatigue must have set in - as for quite long Army kept quiet on need for Longer Range Rockets or any enhancements.

 

[Blood+]

Here's a very simple question you can ask anyone with these kind of shallow takes and trust me, it'll crash their OS

Ask them how much money was spent by Volkswagen or BMW on R&D in one financial year. Just 22-23 for example.
And now ask them to compare that with how much money we've spent to date, from 1985 to develop our very first engine core.

I did (admittedly with one or two expletives thrown in the mix), but motherfucker deleted my comment.

 

[Blood+]

Excellent Post as usual @Ayan Barat !! This clearly explains to @Azaad question the reason why you need fewer Guided rockets than multiple unguided ones - besides cost.
Also Laser Ring Gyro I believe is what deriving cost of GMLRS up - and is what also causing better accuracy in it.

DRDO I believe uses Ring Laser Gyros on Bigger Ballistic Missiles - because of cost. Though it has developed Fiber Optic Gyro - I am not sure if they can use them to enhance accuracy of rockets further. Whether technically and financially it is feasible.

Pinaka - which has been in trials since I was in teens - I believe somehow developer fatigue must have set in - as for quite long Army kept quiet on need for Longer Range Rockets or any enhancements.

I don't think so, because otherwise, we wouldn't be getting reports such as this one here -

'Russian jamming renders US-supplied weaponry ineffective in Ukraine' - Times of India

Europe News: The Ukrainian armed forces have stopped using some US-supplied munitions because Russian electronic warfare capabilities have proven to be effective.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

From the article -


Which brings me to another of my pet peeves about the Indian defence community in general. Like seriously, all you guys had to do to render all my yappings about MLRS accuracy was to bring up GPS denial!! That's it!! But instead, you guys chose the option of hard coping and throwing ad hominems like a bunch of five year olds.

 

[Bleh]

> Need for accuracy in MLRS
I've already said it multiple times but today I'm coming with data on how accurate or to be honest, inaccurate MLRS are.
This is official poster of Pinaka-II; the unguided one
View attachment 16700
1.5% of range at 60km of max range would be...0.9km. This number becomes bonkers when you compare it with that of tube artillery firing cheap unguided HE shells...M549A1
View attachment 16701
Almost half the deviation of MLRS
Infact we also have exact data comparing the dispersion of unguided Vs guided rocket artillery at a constant distance but I'm sure about the source of this data...so I don't know

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimwRe1CxGKAKAOk-rwbsSKtCC1rsCOZU6qwz86Zl5qLxuVrJllB-n861o6xyucxhGP_D84heC1mZKcBvHZUzd5N9Xlema2OIcd0BdU4ZEhUITY9jms5AH4-lbqa3dZHD8q1Hi8LMmO5tEf/s1600/TCS+dispersion.jpg

> GMLRS
Each GMLRS is guided using Honeywell's GG1308 ring laser gyroscope, Honeywell's RBA-500 and NavStrike GPS module.
Someone was asking why it was so accurate...you can get specifications for each of them in open source.

> Accuracy of BrahMos Vs Pinaka
There can be multiple factors that may ultimately contribute to the contrast in the accuracy like the presence of an intake channel, better INS or geometry. Without getting the exact bias and drift values of the INS used in BrahMos it'd be foolish to comment on it so other than that I'd say there are three things that may contribute to its accuracy.
• Increased stability
View attachment 16647
There are more surfaces and also comparatively bigger on BrahMos
• Different trajectory
View attachment 16648
Pinaka follows a traditional ballistic trajectory with more chances of deviation than BrahMos which follows a bit unorthodox one
• Powered flight
We know that in the endgame phase a BrahMos performs S-maneuvers or climbs to dive down and as both are extremely energy consuming, it's safe to assume that atleast up until that point the engine on a BrahMos is lit and providing some thrust. (A vertical line on the trajectory in the above pic shows the theoretical thrust cut-off point for both the systems.) As BrahMos has a way longer power availability it's chances of accuracy also increases.

> Blast radius Vs CEP
• In GMLRS you get a 90kg one with 1,82,000 tungsten fragments, blast radius is not published but there are multiple videos showing it to be quite good and the CEP is 2-5m. Basically the CEP is just a small fraction of the lethal radius.
View attachment 16689
• In Pinaka you get a 100kg one with 20,000 tungsten fragments, blast radius of 60m (backward calculated from the Mean Area of Effectiveness of 12000sq m) and a CEP of <30m
View attachment 16690
The CEP figures of 60-80m is from an older poster
View attachment 16691
In newer ones it comes down to 30m
View attachment 16692
It's an impressive feat to half the CEP and deserve to be appreciated. But on a flip side it also means we're closer to the saturation point.

> Cost
• In the poster by DRDO itself the quoted figure of GMLRS is from 2013.
View attachment 16697
• But we should look at 2024's cost. As per the last disclosed FMS report it was just $110,000
View attachment 16698
93 lakh Vs 70 lakh is still a considerable diffrence but not so much that it would feel absurd when an army comes up with the argument of "it's bit pricey, but you must consider it being better and more mature and battle tested"
I know it's illogical, but then again end of day you're no different than a FMCG firm trying to sell a toothpaste
• USA has economies of scale, they started earlier, guided Pinaka is still in R&D...all are valid arguments; but sadly for an army looking for a guided rocket in 2025 the only thing that matters is how much it needs to pay in 2025 for getting the most value.

And as always, these are just my yapping with me being terminally retarded...so take it at your own risk

Bit exhausted by all this work, quoting various parts from multiple posts was bit cumbersome so just mentioning everyone involved in that discussion; ask whatever I missed baaki bhul chuk maaf

@Bleh @Azaad @Anants @shuturmurg

If it's saying accuracy as 60-80m at all times, then CEP can't be the same number.

CEP is the radius where atleast 50% of the rounds will falls, not all. CEP radius is usual ⅓rd or ¼th of the largest deviation.