Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cracks in India's missile shield

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cracks in India's missile shield

    http://www.timesnow.tv/NewsDtls.aspx?NewsID=10616

    Cracks in India's missile shield
    6/28/2008 8:53:11 AM

    The government is known to boast about India's might, but on closer observation one will notice that it is all a veil of deception. India's biggest warships are using defunct missile systems and are not at all ready for battle.

    TIMES NOW has gained access to a defence ministry report that reveals that at least four missile systems are malfuctioning.

    The warships, which are the pride of the Indian Navy, used to guard thousands of kilometers of India's coastline could find themselves sitting ducks in a battle situation. A Defecne ministry report shows A Defence Ministry report shows that missiles on these ships are not in working condition, putting our coastline in clear and present danger.

    India's warships are equipped with various anti ship missiles ranging from the Uran, Klub and others.

    The Uran , which is an anti-ship missile is deployed on some of India's biggest warships like the INS Mysore. The missile in question may have a range of about hundred kilometres, but it cannot be relied upon. Its fire control system is faulty.

    The Klub, another anti ship missile with a range of 220 km is fitted on the INS Talwar and the INS Trishul. But this missile too does not perform to its specifications.

    The anti aircraft missile Shtil used on the Talwar Class frigates has proved unreliable and inconsistent. In fact former Naval chief. Admiral Madhvendra Singh had refused to take delivery of the Shtil.

    Even the Harrier aircraft on the INS Viraat have a lot to complain about. The Sea Eagle missile used by the Harriers do not work well. What makes things worse is the fact that the plant that produced these missiles has been shut down.

    The fact that India's battleships are not battle worthy due to their lack of defences is worrysome and leaves a big crack in India's naval defence. That Indian navy is woefully short of firepower and this fact has been brought to the notice of Defence Minister A K Antony and top officers of the armed forces.

    When quizzed about the Indian Navy's woeful situation, Defence Minister AK Antony said, "See whenever we import certain things from outside, naturally out of these large imports some portion is sometimes defective. That is why I have repeatedly said don't depend always on foreign suppliers."

    Indian Navy is in dire need of an upgrade and the problem is urgent. China has already boosted its presence in the Indian Ocean and the Pakistani threat cannot be ingnored. But with its key missile not fighting fit, kinks are showing up in India's naval armour.

    Naval sources confirm TIMES NOW's report on faulty missiles

    Sources have revealed that the Uran missile system has been facing problems, which are yet to be rectified. TIMES NOW has now got reactions from a Naval spokesperson on the issue. According to the spokesperson, the reports on the defunct missiles are indeed true and the necessary steps are being taken to rectify the issue.

    Here are the spokespersons reactions when questioned about the issue.

    On the Uran:
    "There have been some amount of problems with the Uran. We want them to be rectified and they are being rectified."

    On the KLUB Missile System being defective:
    "There were problems with some versions of the klub but all klubs are not problematic."

    On the Sea Eagle missile system:
    "The sea eagle fired from the harrier has had problems. We are phasing out the missile"

    On the Shthil missile system:
    "While every problem is worrisome, the shtil is not a bad missile"
    Last edited by Shipwreck; 28 Jun 08,, 09:38.

  • #2
    Oh joy business as usual i see
    For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!

    Comment


    • #3
      From offering "a good bang for the buck" to ending "not with a bang but with a whimper".

      :))

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by kuku View Post
        From offering "a good bang for the buck" to ending "not with a bang but with a whimper".

        :))
        Well said. That goes for many things in life. I hope the crack gets patched up. The Harrier is a given. Come on its old. Bring out the new stuff!

        Comment


        • #5
          A military that depends on imports to function will always be like this, dependent on forign nations for its operation.

          The writer thinks too highly of our populations inclination towards military affairs, no one cares even if he spices things up for them.

          I always wonder about all the SAM systems that the IAF and IA operate, do they even work? The latest ones might be what from the early 80s (before i was even born). If they do work then the engineers have done a brilliant job.

          Well the engineers should have our respect anyways, they have kept the MiG-21s in the sky, and we should apologize to the pilots for not being able to give them better equipment.

          How tough is it to maintain all of this equipment, the Indian military has a lot of equipment that is from a entire different era of technology, how do they maintain these machines?

          Comment


          • #6
            There are many reason for faulty ammunition or system, be it a the humble bullet to the most sophisticated missile.

            There are periodic checks by ammunition and systems team of experts of all ammunition and systems for their serviceability. Defective ammunition and systems are replaced.

            This is quite a routine issue.

            If a huge batch is found defective, then it become a matter of concern and inquiry.

            Indigenous as with imported ones face the same infirmities.

            Just to allay apprehensions that the world is collapsing, even the US routine checks its weapon systems, equipment and ammunitions and replaces defective ones.


            Army Replaces Hundreds of Faulty Missiles


            By ELIZABETH BECKER
            Published: March 24, 2000

            The Army said today it had replaced hundreds of Patriot missiles protecting American troops in South Korea, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait after finding a malfunction in the missile's radio link.
            Army Replaces Hundreds of Faulty Missiles - New York Times
            Last edited by Ray; 28 Jun 08,, 16:21.


            "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

            I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

            HAKUNA MATATA

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by kuku View Post
              A military that depends on imports to function will always be like this, dependent on forign nations for its operation.

              The writer thinks too highly of our populations inclination towards military affairs, no one cares even if he spices things up for them.

              I always wonder about all the SAM systems that the IAF and IA operate, do they even work? The latest ones might be what from the early 80s (before i was even born). If they do work then the engineers have done a brilliant job.

              Well the engineers should have our respect anyways, they have kept the MiG-21s in the sky, and we should apologize to the pilots for not being able to give them better equipment.

              How tough is it to maintain all of this equipment, the Indian military has a lot of equipment that is from a entire different era of technology, how do they maintain these machines?
              Regarding the MIG 21

              The Aerodynamics of the MiG 21 in low level flight.

              Unfortunately all fighters are designed primarily for air superiority but end up in the more hazardous low level close support role.

              This was also the case with the MiG 21.From the 1980s the MiG switched to the close support role. New upgrades to make the type suitable for close support also meant a steady increase in weight. The aircraft became more sluggish and unwieldy particularly during the landing and take off and in circuit where the aerodynamic control forces decline as a square of the flight velocity but the inertias remain the same. The weight increase affected the wing, power and span loadings (please refer toTable A- for the MIG the figures on the top of each box are for the FL those below are for the Bis).

              The span loading increases is a good indication of how much more angle of attack has to be generated at a given speed to maintain height. Increase in the angle of attack in turn means more power to stay aloft.

              The wing loading increase shows how much more speed has to be increased to maintain level flight. A doubling of wing loading would mean a 40% increase in flight speed. This also means a doubling of the power required.

              The power loading indicates how much power is available to accelerate the aeroplane should the airspeed fall too low. I have computed the figure for max dry thrust as in a crisis there would not be those few seconds available for the afterburner to kick in before the aircraft impacted.

              A special mention must be made of the low aspect ratio of the MiG 21. The low aspect ratio makes the aircraft "alpha "sensitive. The CL /Cd curve becomes unfavourable in low aspect ratio wings. In other word unless the pilot gets the angle of attack right he may see a very great increase in the drag of the aircraft without any corresponding increase in lift. His total energy would decay preventing the aircraft from accelerating. Translated into reality it means one of the following scenarios: During take off "over rotation" -too much nose up-would mean poor acceleration due to high induced drag and failure to lift off with the aircraft running into the overshoot area at high speed.

              During landing the misjudged alpha would increase the induced drag causing the aircraft to slow down, lose lift and hit the ground before reaching the touch down area.

              During turn into the finals ( or during low level aerobatics) the aircraft is pulling more 'G"s with corresponding increase in induced drag slowing down the aircraft which is already side slipping because of the turn and losing height over ground. A combination of side slip during a turn with high induced drag reducing speed caused unforeseen height loss and a "controlled flight into terrain".

              Very many of the MiG 21s lost were in these three regimes of flight. Even in civil airliners most accidents occur during these three phases but:

              1) The alpha sensitivity of the MiG21 ,because of the low aspect ratio of 2.2, requires much more precision than the same maneuver when executed in an aircraft with a aspect ratio of 5.6 as in a basic trainer.

              2) The continual, if inevitable, weight increase in the MiG 21 meant that the approach speed in the later marks had to be made at a higher and higher speed. This reduced the amount of surplus power available to accelerate away from a "coffin corner "situation". In India the hot weather meant the engine was producing about 12%less thrust and the wing was producing about 12% less lift to begin with.

              3) In case of an emergency, to gain height, the pilot in a Hunter or a Kiran would open up the throttle and pull back the stick- things which are instinctive even in a rookie pilot. Ina MiG the pilot has to push the stick forward, build up his energy and then after a delay of several seconds, pull back the stick to climb away. He may simply not have the time when flying close to the ground.

              4) The CK ejection seat, one of the best for high speed high altitude ejection simply was not good enough for low level by modern standards. One of the clever features of the CK seat was that as the seat left the cockpit the canopy- which was hinged to the front of the windshield in the FL - attached itself to the top of the ejection seat and rotated itself until it covered the entire front of the ejection seat- thus giving unparalled blast protection when ejecting at supersonic speed. I remember a Martin Baker engineer getting very interested in how the thing worked. I had seen the seat but he had not! Unfortunately I was not able to help him. The semi -encapsulation feature delayed ejection in that it took too long to get rid of the canopy after clearing the aircraft and this delayed clear release and deployment of the Parachute. The 300 kmph, 100 meters minimum parameters meant that many low level ejections were unsuccessful.

              The span loading, wing loading the power loading and the aspect ratio of a series of aircraft flown by the IAF is tabulated at Table A.

              Accident rates in supersonic fighters

              The accident rates in supersonic fighters of the same generation as the MiG 21 makes for relevant comparisons.

              Starfighters.

              The German Luftwaffe flew about 950 F 104s from about 1960 to 1987 and lost about 292 of them during the same period. Average loss rates were thus about 11 per annum though the peak loss rate was 28 aircraft in 1965 and about the same in 66. The ejection seat of the F104 was even worse that the MiG 21 for low altitude flying. The Germans corrected that by switching over to the Martin Baker GQ 7 seat sometime in the mid sixties.

              The Canadians lost half of their fleet of 200 CF 104s during a similar period of service. Training was admittedly a problem with the German Luftwaffe which was barely ten years old at the time of the induction of the F104 but the same could hardly be true about the Canadians.

              The true master of the F 104 was the Spanish Ejercito d Aire who never lost a single Starfighter in seven years of service. People said it was due to fine weather over Spain! This usually made the Spanish AF indignant! The British RAF lost over a hundred of their 297 Lightnings in about 25 years of service- a number of them to engine fires which was probably due to a flaw in the detail design. Our MiG losses have been at a much lower rate.

              Flying fighters is a hazardous business and continual stress and training on flight safety and discipline without killing the spirit of the Fighter Pilot is a difficult and skilled art.

              Interestingly the Pakistan Air Fore lost 23 F7s ( Mig 21 equivalents ) in 10 years which approximates the IAFs loss rates, given their smaller fleet size. It is stated that the PAF possibly reports only those crashes which are in populated areas. In fact the PAF is extremely touchy about anything that shows it in a bad light and it would possibly be that their actual crash rate is higher than the IAFs MiG 21s.

              About their image consciousness I remember in the mid 80s there was a review on the PAF in Air International and there were these enormously dirty and dusty MiG 19s with chipped yellow and red paint and oil streaked fuselages and generally looking very neglected though the MiG 19s were right there on the flight line. Someone obviously got (and deserved ! ) a "rocket" because since then I have never seen a PAF aircraft in any magazine that did not look as if it has just come out of the paint booth.

              One notes that there are 4 mid air collisions in the 23 PAF losses reported- the MIGs outward view was never its strong selling point. I feel the mid air collisions were more for this type. A switch to a glass cockpit and bulged hood ( to raise the pilot's eye line) may be useful at least in improving forward view.. Another reason could be due to the very small wing span in comparison to the fuselage length. In formation flying the aircraft would be that much closer together. In a turn, with the poorer visibility sometimes the collision was inevitable.

              What should be the accident rates? Ideally zero.

              However this is not possible in a profession where getting back with a tale to tell or making a hole in the ground can depend on decisions made with a difference of hundredth of a second or a few meters difference in position or height.

              The Western world considers acceptable an accident rate of 1 in 10,000 hours as an 'acceptable". If we can accept this figures at a face value then a simple set of "expected number of accidents " could be created by assuming the number of squadrons and assigning a certain percentage of availability and a certain number of flying hours. This would work out to about 7 aircraft per annum in the 80s and thereafter. The fact that in the tropics the aircraft is flying in a non ISA atmosphere means that the engine thrust and the lift available is lower than available to a European pilot. In addition the flying environment- the ratio of open to densely populated areas, the number and size of birds at low level can alter the accident rate in spite of identical standards of training and maintenance

              More at:

              MiG-21 Accidents - Prodyut M Das


              "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

              I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

              HAKUNA MATATA

              Comment


              • #8
                Navy wants new and better toys. What better way then to 'leak' such reports to the media.
                Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Tronic View Post
                  Navy wants new and better toys. What better way then to 'leak' such reports to the media.
                  Dont always look at things from Conspiracy angle. What if this is not the case and there are actual problems with the missile stock as clearly mentioned by Ray Sir above.

                  Should the Navy not report to the Controllers, about the wastages that it has and the amount required to correct these?

                  Brahmos is flawless right? Wrong. Are there any guarantees that what's produced in 2008 wont malfunction in 2020? There are none.

                  TIMES NOW has gained access to a defence ministry report that reveals that at least four missile systems are malfuctioning
                  If you have access to it then why not publish it and let the readers decide whether its a case of Stock Malfunction or its a case of genuine fraud.

                  You can't the Times Now come clean with figures, and let readers make an opinion. Publish the figures and then let me see how big is the problem, how widespread it is.

                  Till such time this happens, I am not losing sleep
                  Last edited by Sumku; 28 Jun 08,, 19:19.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sumku View Post
                    Dont always look at things from Conspiracy angle. What if this is not the case and there are actual problems with the missile stock as clearly mentioned by Ray Sir above.

                    Should the Navy not report to the Controllers, about the wastages that it has and the amount required to correct these?
                    If you have access to it then why not publish it and let the readers decide whether its a case of Stock Malfunction or its a case of genuine fraud.
                    Errmm... whose saying there are no problems with the systems? Point is that the report was leaked to the media; it is not an official release by the Navy.
                    Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                    -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ray View Post
                      Sir, As you said in the previous post accidents will happen.
                      Along with malfuntioning missiles and bullets, shells, and indeed sometimes men.

                      The question is

                      How much service hours in a year are the MiG-21s along with all of the other older equipment (something like a SAM system including the missile the radar and all other associated euipment) able to give to the military and how much time in maintanence time is required for the service hours?
                      Last edited by kuku; 29 Jun 08,, 05:11.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I really would not know in detail for each type of ammunition or system.

                        As far as ammunition is concerned, there is a shelf life for each type of ammunition. It is inspected annually. Older ammunition is made into training ammunition and the new stock replaces it as service ammunition. In addition, they are still checked annually in most cases and declared fit or unserviceable.

                        Systems also have their annual checks by experts and they determine the residual life.
                        Last edited by Ray; 29 Jun 08,, 09:05.


                        "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

                        I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

                        HAKUNA MATATA

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I always felt sorry for those Mig drivers.
                          Its always difficult to fly aircraft older than you are, heck probably older than your parents even
                          For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Tronic View Post
                            whose saying there are no problems with the systems?
                            Thats exactly what my point is. How big is the problem?

                            Critical Question
                            How many missiles were checked and how many were defective out of it?

                            Very Important Question
                            The missile that has been checked and found to be defective, was it ever checked earlier also and was it faulty then

                            Another Important Question
                            When was the last time that the audit was done. Now in the previous audit some missiles would have been cleared. Were these missiles checked in this audit.Whats the status of the missiles which were cleared the last time?

                            On what basis was the sample chosen?

                            Each single missile must have been tested on various parameters, some of the parameters would have been critical and some not so critical.
                            Now a missile that has been termed as defective, on exactly how many critical parameters did it fail?

                            Unless I get to know the results of these, I would take it as a problem with Inventory stock and normal wear and tear with media exaggerating the report.

                            Originally posted by Tronic View Post
                            Point is that the report was leaked to the media; it is not an official release by the Navy.
                            Frankly, I have a serious problem with this so called anonymous reporting done by the media on the pretext of protecting source.

                            Look Buddy, no one leaked the report.
                            TIMES NOW has gained access to a defence ministry report that reveals that at least four missile systems are malfuctioning.
                            As per Times Now, they somehow gained access to some report. Now Times Now has not specified which report, the report of Audits done by IN which routinely gets submitted to CAG anyways or some other report.

                            Now, If Times Now actually has taken pains to gain access to a so called report then why not publish it in full. Afterall you claim to be the fourth pillar of democracy then why not publish it.

                            Times Now took so much pains to gain access to a report to do what? Publish gist of that report? It it were me, I would publish the full report but Times Now has choosen not to do so.Why?

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X