Skip to comments.India’s missile defence system ready: DRDO chief (comparable with US Patriot 3)
Posted on 04/30/2012 7:18:17 AM PDT by ravager
New Delhi: VK Saraswat, the chief of Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), has disclosed that the countrys missile defence system is ready for induction.
As per a report in The Indian Express, while speaking on a TV show Saraswat said that as part of the system a two-layer shield the AAD (advanced air defence) and the PAD will be put in place over Delhi.
The system has already undergone four tests as part of which incoming missiles were intercepted and destroyed.
According to Saraswat, Prithvi missiles were modified and used as incoming missiles. The tests showed the system can hit missiles with a range of over 2,000 km.
The DRDO chief said the Indian missile defence system is comparable with the US Patriot 3 system.
India’s claim of a ready to deploy ABM system merits skepticism. The technical challenges are formidable, making such a system implausible until proven by rigorous and realistic testing.
India has carried out multiple successful tests of the Long Range Tracking Radar, the exo-atmospheric PAD anti-ballistic missile (range 50 mi) and the Advanced Air Defense (AAD) anti-ballistic missile (20 mi).
At the end of the day none of the BMDs of the world can provide 100% guaranteed protection against an incoming missile (not even Patriot 3). The India missile shield is just as good as any other.
Looks like India has no intention of being second best to China.
This wikipedia link provides info on the ABM program of US, Russia, China, Japan, India and Israel.
A more detailed info on Indian BMD program.
I doubt that the Indian missile shield is “just as good as any other” if something more than a whiz-bang demonstration for a reviewing stand is the measure. The US and Israel have a stronger technological base than India, have been at anti-missile work for far longer, and have invested far more money in the effort. Moreover, US and Israeli operational experience and immediate need provide an important check against the tendency of weapons developers to rig tests for positive results.
You are saying that without any factual basis to it. You “doubt” Indian missile shield is as good only because of the stereotype and stigma attached to anything Indian.
Talking about technology base in general, India has a bigger and older space program then Israel. India has a vast civilian satellite launch program which has had much better success then Israel. Don't forget it was India that sent the unmanned orbital probe to the moon, not Israel. Infact after the successive failures of Israeli Shavit rockets, the Israeli Ofeq and TechSAR military satellites were launched on Indian PSLV rockets. There are some areas where India is way ahead. Granted India is playing catching in BMD technology, but the gap is actually very small.
Besides US and Russian BMD operational requirements and design are vastly different from the needs of India and Israel. Also there is a lot of scientific/technological co-operation happening behind the scene between India and Israel.
“ tendency of weapons developers to rig tests for positive results.”
You might be confusing India for Iran?
Alas, weapons developers of all nationalities tend to have a degree of technological and engineering optimism that makes them just shy of con men. And sometimes they are con men, rigging tests to generate positive results so as to keep their weapons program going and jobs secure.
India has been launching satellites for over decades now. Not too long ago India launched a NASA satellite, launched lunar orbital probs and even has a manned space mission scheduled. You cannot “rig tests” and “con” your way to launching satellites or space mission. The results are out there for everyone to see. I don’t know what you are talking about really except displaying your obvious bias.
I do think you have confused India with Iran.
India's DRDO has also experienced delays and problems in its indigenous BMD system. As of mid 2010, it had managed to conduct only four tests of its BMD system in the previous four years, and a March 2010 test was aborted due to technical glitches.
Personally, I wish India -- a friend of the US -- full success in the development of its BMD defenses. Yet one does no service in pretending that the effort will be anything less than expensive and fraught with difficulties.
Look I understand on this board people dont really think highly of Indian technological capability. That fine, be happy with your ignorance! I brought out the examples of satellite launches to make the point that Indians have already proven their technological prowess in many major areas. I don't see any need to for them to go “conning” and “rigging” tests on a matter of crucial security need. If you have better evidence as to why you think they conned or rigged their BMD test, please share it with us otherwise keep the bullshit to yourself.
My unflattering reference was to weapons developers in general and not specifically to India. And it is no slight against India to point out the challenges and expense of ballistic missile defense.
you would be surprised at how much the worlds defense sectors keep testing their counterparts—in war technology/capability is not offered unless some sort of test/infrastructure response is being carried out.
Does India have the capability of these missile systems? The real question, the big question for countries around the world in my opinion—has India approached a level of technology where an opponent could not engage simply because countering a bluff might result in collateral damage that would exceed the gains sought?
On this level reside the various weapon systems that are said to exist but cannot be verified—such as atomic weapons for one—or stealth fighters. After all making a huge mushroom cloud of gas appear is not really the same as seeing the destructive power said to exist from such an explosion.
All warfare is based on lies—seeking credible proof from information on the net, is this not somewhat, pardon my bluntness, pointless?
On the large issues, the problem is often less a matter of the information available than of perspective, imagination, and confidence in assessing that information. There are numerous well-documented examples in which outside reporters, analysts, and observers accurately predicted the course of attacks, battles, and wars based on publicly available information. The Internet now makes the necessary raw information widely available.
I remain chastened by repeated speculations by my brother long before 9/11 that Muslim terrorists might use airline hijackings in order to make suicide attacks on the World Trade Center and other targets in the US, with the airliners themselves as the equivalent of cruise missiles. My view at the time was that this was virtually impossible because the size of such a plot would make detection and counter-action by the US virtually inevitable.
Who was I to think that US intelligence agencies and successive administrations would ignore the warnings because they were lulled into complacency by a seeming era of peace and good will? Yet, in retrospect, I realize that I too had been lulled into such complacency and foolishly believed that the US government would be sufficiently imaginative and vigilant to guard against an innovative means of terrorist attack.