Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.


FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
  1. manuf-696x325.png

    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


    Surface-to-air missile test fails on 22 December, submarine test failure five days before raises major concerns over India’s nuclear triad expansion.

    New Delhi: The Indian missile development programme has encountered a setback with two successive failures within a week, including a worrying development in which a submarine-launched nuclear-capable missile got stuck in its testing canister following an unsuccessful test.

    Sources told ThePrint that a recent test of the Quick Reaction Surface to Air Missile (QRSAM) failed during its test on 22 December at Chandipur-on-Sea in Odisha. It hit turbulence within 1.5 seconds of the missile taking off, as an actuator did not respond to a software command, according to sources.

    QRSAM is being developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to meet urgent requirements of the Indian Air Force for protection of vital assets. It is meant to complement the Akash short-range surface-to-air missile. It is supposed to take down fast-moving incoming air targets like missiles and fighter jets at extremely short notice. This was the third test of the missile.

    More worryingly, there has been major concern with the failure of the K-4 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), which is being developed for the nuclear triad to give India the capability to take down long-range targets from under water.

    A test carried out on 17 December ended in failure after the missile did not launch from an underwater pontoon, it is learnt. The missile, believed to have a range of over 3,500 km, is to be equipped on the INS Arihant and Arighat nuclear submarines as a second strike option.

    Sources said that the K-4 missile did not activate during the test, with its battery getting drained after the launch command was given. It is believed that DRDO scientists were even unable to retrieve the missile from the test pontoon following the failure, raising safety concerns for the programme.

    India’s lone nuclear missile-carrying submarine, the INS Arihant, is currently equipped with the 750 km range B-05 SLBM. However, the limited range of the missile and a struggle to keep the Arihant functional raises concerns on the effectiveness of the nuclear triad.

    The 3,500-km range K-4 missile was to be the real game changer, giving India a second strike option over all potential target positions. While it has been tested three times before, the unsuccessful test last week raised concerns as the missile was to be launched from the INS Arihant shortly. Careful assessments are now being made to pinpoint the reason for the failure, and assess whether it would lead to safety considerations for a submarine launch.

    DRDO has also started work on the K-5, a 5,000 km range SLBM that would be fitted onboard nuclear-powered submarines, as well as a futuristic K-6 project to develop an underwater launched missile with a range of up to 6,000 km.


LOL again K-15 not B-05
 

Hendrik_2000

Brigadier
LOL again K-15 not B-05
He might be wrong on the 750km range missile but the story is not about K15 or wrongly designnated B05 Who know it might be internal designation
So the author didn't screw up the gist of the strory.
The fact is INdian SLBM missile suck and unreliable They are still long way from operation nuclear SSBM. Maybe in 10 years judging from China experience. Even with all the help from Russia which I doubt forthcoming due to recent breach of contractual agreement prevent western power from inspecting Russian submarine
PS now who got the last laugh K15 is B05
Development
The Sagarika (K-15, B05) missile is a 700 km ranged Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM).
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
It is reportedly based on the Prithvi design.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



From Wiki Indian SLBM
Armament:

Missiles: 12 ×
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(750–1900 km or 405–1026 mi range) or 4 ×
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
SLBM (3500 km or 1890 mi range)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Torpedoes: 6 × 21" (533 mm) torpedo tubes – est 30 charges (torpedoes, cruise missiles or mines)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

Dizasta1

Senior Member
I have never heard of Submarine Launched SAMs. If this was a successful possibility, then we would've seen major platforms developed by traditional manufacturers of submarines. All I've heard is the Brits tried Sub-Launched SAMs way back called Blo-Fish (go figure!) The Russians also have attempted it on their Kilos. But not something that gained traction as a feasible option. So why would the indians be trying this, is perplexing. Seems like they've got a lot of $$$ to burn.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
India’s Advanced Air Defense Interceptor Destroys Incoming Ballistic Missile in Test

This was the third successful test of India’s indigenously built and designed anti-ballistic missile in 2017.

India has successfully test fired its indigenously designed and built Advanced Air Defense (AAD)/ Ashvin Advanced Defense interceptor missile on Abdul Kalam Island, home to the Indian military’s principle missile test facility, the Integrated Test Range, off the coast of Odisha in the Bay of Bengal on December 28,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to local media reports.

This was the third supersonic interceptor test carried out in 2017. Other tests were conducted on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. The last successful AAD interception test took place in May 2016.

According to sources within the Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO), the Indian Ministry of Defense’s (MoD) research and development wing which oversaw the December 28 test, the AAD interceptor destroyed an incoming Prithvi ballistic missile within 30 kilometers of the earth atmosphere.

“It was a direct hit and grand success,” sources said. “Today’s test was conducted to validate various parameters of the interceptor in flight mode and it was all success,” another source added.

The single stage solid rocket-propelled AAD/Ashin interceptor missile is part of India’s planned two-layered ballistic missile defense (BMD) system and is designed to shoot down incoming enemy missiles in the endo-atmosphere at altitudes of 20-40 kilometers. AAD missiles are terminal phase interceptors capable of intercepting missiles after they re-enter the earth’s atmosphere.
As I
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
earlier this year:

Following the end of the Kargil War and in reaction to China and Pakistan’s growing missile arsenals, India has been working since 1999 on a two-tiered ballistic missile defense system with the PAD [Prithvi Air Defense (PAD)/Pradyumna Ballistic Missile Interceptor] and PDV [Prithvi Defense Vehicle] designed to destroy missiles at exo-atmospheric altitudes of 50–150 kilometers (some sources say 180 kilometers).

The AAD, a hit-to-kill interceptor, constitutes the second tier defense against incoming enemy ballistic missiles. Furthermore, I
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
:

The PDV is slated to replace the existing Prithvi Air Defense (PAD)/Pradyumna Ballistic Missile Interceptor, which has a maximum interception altitude of 80 kilometers. Among other things, the new two-stage solid-fueled PDV interceptor is fitted with an Imaging Infrared (IIR) seeker, developed by DRDO, to distinguish between incoming warheads and decoys.

Both PAD and PDV are designed for mid-course interception. The AAD missile interceptor features an inertial navigation system with mid-course radar updates and active radar homing in the terminal phase. It can reach top speeds of up to Mach 4.5.

India’s homegrown BMD system can purportedly intercept medium-range ballistic missiles traveling at speeds of Mach 3 to 8. Israel, Russia, and the United States are the only three countries to have successfully developed and built an indigenous ballistic missile defense system.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

ougoah

Major
Registered Member
Not sure why they are so certain that "Israel, Russia, and the United States are the only three countries to have successfully developed and built an indigenous BMD". But whatever floats their boat.
 

Hendrik_2000

Brigadier
With only 12 submarine in service not counting the down time India cannot be assured of their silent service
Indian Navy has a submarine problem
By
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
| 30 December, 201\

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

page%2013%20pic%20copy.jpg

Naval Submarine INS Kalvari as it sails after the commissioning ceremony in Mumbai on 14 December 2017. Photo: IANS
All six Scorpene submarines, originally scheduled to be inducted between 2012 and 2017, are slated for induction by 2021, i.e. four years behind schedule.
In 1999, the year when the Kargil War was fought, the then BJP-led NDA government cleared a 30-year plan to ensure by 2030 a fleet of 24 conventional diesel-electric submarines for the Indian Navy. The ambitious plan involved creating two separate assembly lines to build a set of six submarines each, under Projects 75 and 75(I), which were to be sourced from two different countries. This project of building 12 submarines with foreign collaborators was to be followed by India building 12 indigenously designed submarines, thus taking the total to 24. It is expected that by 2030 the then (as of 1999) fleet of submarines would have been decommissioned.
Earlier this month, India inducted its first conventional submarine in 17 years, thus taking the present strength of the Navy’s conventional submarine fleet to barely 14, which are 10 short of the planned strength of 24 supposed to be inducted over the next 13 years, going by the original plan. But that remains a far cry, simply because India has neither contracted purchase of six more submarines from a second foreign source, nor finalised a design to indigenously build 12 conventional submarines. All that India has done until now is to contract building six French-origin Scorpene submarines, the first of which (INS Kalvari) was inducted on 14 December, after being built at the Mazagon Docks Limited in Mumbai, in collaboration with France’s M/s Naval Group.

Interestingly, INS Kalvari took eight years to build and has been inducted five years behind schedule. This is indeed a repeat of history. Slightly over a quarter of a century ago, India in February 1992 inducted INS Shalki, a German-origin submarine that similarly took eight years and four months (100 months) to license, build and assemble at the MDL, instead of the originally scheduled 42 months (three-and-a-half years). The second German-origin submarine, INS Shankul, commissioned in May 1994, had taken even longer to build—10 years (120 months).

All six Scorpene submarines, which were originally scheduled to be inducted between 2012 and 2017, are now slated for induction only by 2021, i.e. four years behind schedule. Although in 2013 the government cleared procurement of another six advanced conventional submarines, until December 2017 no such submarine had been shortlisted, let alone a purchase contract signed.

India’s current conventional submarine fleet of 14 is severely aged. After INS Kalvari, inducted only a fortnight ago, the next youngest conventional submarine with the Navy is 17 years old. INS Sindhushastra, a Russian Kilo Class submarine, inducted in 2000, was the last of the Russian-origin Kilo Class submarine to be commissioned by the Navy. The remaining 12 conventional submarines are an average quarter century old—between 23 to as much as 31 years to be exact. At any point of time, some of these 12 submarines are usually undergoing refit, overhaul or maintenance, thus resulting in fewer submarines actually available for operational deployment. In any case, by 2030 or before, all these 12 submarines would have been decommissioned, leaving the Indian Navy with a severely depleted submarine fleet as it stands at the start of 2018.

As it is, in recent years, this “silent arm” (submarines) of the Navy has been in the news for the wrong reasons. It started with the Navy losing INS Sindhurakshak, a Russian-origin Kilo Class submarine, on 14 August 2013, following a series of explosions on board its torpedo section, which led to the death of three officers and 15 sailors in Mumbai. This marked the first-ever post World War-II peacetime loss of a submarine while docked in harbour. Six months later on 26 February 2014, then Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Devendra Kumar Joshi resigned, marking a first-ever resignation by a naval chief while in harness. Admiral Joshi, himself a distinguished submariner, resigned following an outbreak of a fire on board INS Sindhushastra, another Kilo Class submarine, which resulted in the death of two officers while it was at sea.

page%2013%202%20copy.jpg


Scorpene class submarine, INS Khanderi being launched at the Mazagon Dock in Mumbai on 12 January 2017. Photo: IANS

The Navy’s current total submarine fleet of 16 includes two nuclear-powered submarines, one of which is on a ten-year lease from Russia since 2012. In August 2016, the Navy had quietly inducted India’s first indigenously built nuclear-powered submarine, the INS Arihant, which technically completed India’s nuclear triad and gave New Delhi a credible second strike capability. A nuclear triad involves the ability of a country to execute a nuclear strike from land, sea and air. A second strike capability means the ability of a country to strike back with nuclear weapons after being hit with nuclear missiles and bombs by an enemy country. It is with respect to the latter that a nuclear-powered submarine armed with nuclear weapons becomes vital. Reason: unlike a diesel-electric conventional submarine, a nuclear-powered submarine can travel long distances underwater, undetected, without needing to break surface to snorkel air in order to recharge its batteries, which is when it is most vulnerable to detection. This thus makes it easy for a nuclear-powered submarine to be positioned undetected under sea to carry out a retaliatory strike in case its home country is attacked.

But here again lies a problem. The Akula class submarine, INS Chakra, on lease from Russia, is only for training Indian sailors and is not permitted to carry nuclear missiles or be deployed on operational roles. That leaves the Navy with just one nuclear-powered submarine, the development of which is undoubtedly a major feat, considering that only five other countries possess this highly sophisticated technology. But INS Arihant has its limitations. First, its nuclear reactor has a short refuelling cycle and therefore a limited endurance capacity. Second, the INS Arihant is currently meant to be armed with 12 indigenously developed K-15 SLBMs (submarine launched ballistic missiles), which has a range of just 750 km. This missile range is ineffective against a much bigger and vaster country like China, which, in contrast, has SLBMs with a range of 8,000 km that can target any part of India from long distances. India is currently developing the K-4 with a 3,500 km range and has plans to develop the K-5 with a 5,000 km range. But development of these missiles is several years away, thus raising serious questions on the effectiveness of the naval dimension of the Indian triad vis-à-vis China.

In February 2015, the government sanctioned construction of six nuclear powered attack submarines or SSNs, the first of which is easily a decade away from induction, considering that no deadline has been accorded. These six SSNs are in addition to four INS Arihant class nuclear-powered submarines, with ballistic missiles (SSBNs) that were previously sanctioned and are already in various stages of development. India’s current solitary nuclear submarine with a limited missile range compares very modestly with China, which already has about ten nuclear-powered submarines and that too with greater endurance and long-range nuclear tipped missiles, in addition to over 50 conventional submarines. China is expected to increase its submarine fleet to between 69 and 78 by 2020, according to a US Congress report. Both Pakistan and Bangladesh have contracted purchase of conventional submarines from China, thus adding to India’s increasing security challenge in the Indian Ocean Region.

Just as nuclear weapons cannot replace conventional weapons, nuclear-powered submarines too cannot replace Indian Navy’s need for conventional submarines. India needs a mix of both conventional and nuclear-powered submarines. Conventional submarines are cheaper, have smaller hulls and are easier to manoeuvre, compared to nuclear-powered submarines. Diesel-electric submarines can effectively engage high value targets with its conventional missiles and torpedoes. The Navy is understandably highly concerned about the future of its submarine fleet. It is the political executive that needs to give serious attention to the country’s need for acquiring and maintaining a credible quantity of this conventionally powered sub surface stealth weapon.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
120 Mig-25M remains 125 Mig-21 Bison and 85 Mi-27M retired the 28/12 fortunately 36 Rafale + 40 Tejas with normaly 80 others ordered about 650 fighters 4th AF in the World 5th considering US Navy Aviation
Mig-21 very dangerous !


IAF retires MiG-21M, MiG-27ML squadrons

The Indian Air Force (IAF) retired one squadron each of its Soviet-era MiG-21M (Type 96) and MiG-27ML combat aircraft in late December 2017 in a move that marks a further decline in the IAF’s combat fleet to 32 squadrons: 10 fewer than the sanctioned strength of 42 squadrons.

Air Chief Marshal B S Dhanoa flew the last sortie of an IAF MiG-21M multirole fighter on 29 December from Nal-Bikaner Air Force Station (AFS) in Rajasthan: about 45 years after the first of these platforms entered service in the early 1970s.

Meanwhile, a squadron of licence-built MiG-27ML swing-wing ground-attack aircraft was also retired from IAF service in a ceremony held at Hasimara AFS in the state of West Bengal.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Hendrik_2000

Brigadier
Another accident this time Mig-29K the main fighter of Indian aircraft carrier
They have poor service availability only 15 to 30%. 10 confirm accident due to engine and 50% of engine are rejected due to poor quality
For the fleet, this availability rate was pegged at a record low of 15.9 per cent to 37.6 per cent between 2010 and 2014, perhaps the lowest for any fighter jet in the Indian inventory. A frustrated Navy had suggested design improvements and modifications for the fighter almost on a sortie to sortie basis, leading to long periods in which the aircraft did not fly.
MiG 29K crash followed 8 years of engine troubles & frustration about performance
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
3 January, 2018
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

2018_1img03_Jan_2018_PTI1_3_2018_000146B-696x435.jpg

Fire fighter try to douse a crashed MiG-29 K fighter | PTI Photo
The crash occurred at the Goa airbase after a pilot aborted take-off during a training sortie. The pilot managed to exit the cockpit.

New Delhi: The troubled MiG 29K fleet of the Indian Navy saw its first accident Wednesday, eight years after the fighter was inducted into service as India’s first supersonic carrier-borne combat aircraft. The crash occurred at the Goa airbase after a pilot aborted take-off during a training sortie.

When the pilot tried to bring the accelerating fighter to a halt due to a suspected technical fault, the jet veered off the runway and caught fire. A major incident was averted, with Navy fire-fighters managing to douse the flames before the 6.5 tonnes on fuel on board the aircraft exploded.

Sources said the pilot managed to exit the cockpit after the fighter came to a halt after veering off the runway, and the aircraft is likely to be dragged back to a hanger within a day or two to carry out detailed damage assessment. Contrary to earlier reports, the pilot did not use the ejection seat to exit the aircraft, and was able to exit on his own by jettisoning the canopy.

Previous problems
The MiG 29K fleet was commissioned in 2010 and has a slightly better air safety record than the last Russian fighters to be inducted, the Sukhoi Su-30 MKI. The first Sukhoi loss occurred after seven years of service in 2009.

However, the Indian MiG 29K has been marred by a series of problems since induction, prompting the Navy to look for alternate fighters in the short-term future. In fact, the Navy is expected to issue tenders to procure 57 new fighter aircraft by the middle of this year for operations from existing and future aircraft carriers.

Designed specifically for Indian requirements, the MiG 29K has suffered from several engine failures since its induction, with the Navy repeatedly raising the matter during interaction with the Russian government. In the latest top-level meeting between the two sides last month too, the dismal state of the fighter fleet was discussed.

In the past, there have been at least ten cases in which engine failures have occurred during flight, resulting in a landing with just one functional engine. A recent audit report revealed that out of the 65 engines that India received from Russia for the fleet, at least 40 had to be rejected or withdrawn from service due to technical problems.

Deficiencies have also been seen in the airframe and fly-by wire system of the aircraft. The key parameter that the fleet has failed is the availability rate – the percentage of total aircraft that are ready for operations at any given time.

For the fleet, this availability rate was pegged at a record low of 15.9 per cent to 37.6 per cent between 2010 and 2014, perhaps the lowest for any fighter jet in the Indian inventory. A frustrated Navy had suggested design improvements and modifications for the fighter almost on a sortie to sortie basis, leading to long periods in which the aircraft did not fly.

Of late, however, the fleet availability had seen some improvement, with senior officers commending its performance during the Malabar exercise with US and Japan in July last year.
 

Jeff Head

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Another accident this time Mig-29K the main fighter of Indian aircraft carrier
They have poor service availability only 15 to 30%. 10 confirm accident due to engine and 50% of engine are rejected due to poor quality
For the fleet, this availability rate was pegged at a record low of 15.9 per cent to 37.6 per cent between 2010 and 2014, perhaps the lowest for any fighter jet in the Indian inventory. A frustrated Navy had suggested design improvements and modifications for the fighter almost on a sortie to sortie basis, leading to long periods in which the aircraft did not fly.
MiG 29K crash followed 8 years of engine troubles & frustration about performance
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
3 January, 2018
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Designed specifically for Indian requirements, the MiG 29K has suffered from several engine failures since its induction, with the Navy repeatedly raising the matter during interaction with the Russian government. In the latest top-level meeting between the two sides last month too, the dismal state of the fighter fleet was discussed.

In the past, there have been at least ten cases in which engine failures have occurred during flight, resulting in a landing with just one functional engine. A recent audit report revealed that out of the 65 engines that India received from Russia for the fleet, at least 40 had to be rejected or withdrawn from service due to technical problems.

Deficiencies have also been seen in the airframe and fly-by wire system of the aircraft. The key parameter that the fleet has failed is the availability rate – the percentage of total aircraft that are ready for operations at any given time.

For the fleet, this availability rate was pegged at a record low of 15.9 per cent to 37.6 per cent between 2010 and 2014, perhaps the lowest for any fighter jet in the Indian inventory. A frustrated Navy had suggested design improvements and modifications for the fighter almost on a sortie to sortie basis, leading to long periods in which the aircraft did not fly.

Of late, however, the fleet availability had seen some improvement, with senior officers commending its performance during the Malabar exercise with US and Japan in July last year.
This sentence seems to contradict itself:

"The troubled MiG 29K fleet of the Indian Navy saw its first accident Wednesday, eight years after the fighter was inducted into service as India’s first supersonic carrier-borne combat aircraft. "

I know thye have had engine problems...but I also know some INdian Navy people and those aircraft at sea do not have the "rejected" engines. They reject engines from Russia as they find them and then get new engines to replace them. When they have two good engines for aircraft, they put them in service.

In eight years they have had 8-10 cases where an engine flamed out in flight...but the aircraft were able to land safely.

This is the first crash in eight years.

That is not a terrible record.

Now, I'd lke to see more details about the 15.9 per cent to 37.6% availability. Is this of aircraft that have beeen accepted and put into serice? Or does this include the aircraft who came into India and had to have engines replaced that were bad when they arrved?

if it includes the latter, it is not an accurate portrayal of India's availability of aircraft.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
This sentence seems to contradict itself:

"The troubled MiG 29K fleet of the Indian Navy saw its first accident Wednesday, eight years after the fighter was inducted into service as India’s first supersonic carrier-borne combat aircraft. "

I know thye have had engine problems...but I also know some INdian Navy people and those aircraft at sea do not have the "rejected" engines. They reject engines from Russia as they find them and then get new engines to replace them. When they have two good engines for aircraft, they put them in service.

In eight years they have had 8-10 cases where an engine flamed out in flight...but the aircraft were able to land safely.

This is the first crash in eight years.

That is not a terrible record.

Now, I'd lke to see more details about the 15.9 per cent to 37.6% availability. Is this of aircraft that have beeen accepted and put into serice? Or does this include the aircraft who came into India and had to have engines replaced that were bad when they arrved?

if it includes the latter, it is not an accurate portrayal of India's availability of aircraft.
No doubt All these articles are especialy selectionned to mock Western Armies ...
 

Top