There will be a larger version. Heard it from HVT if I remember right.
HAL Combat Air Teaming System (CATS) Program - Updates and Discussion
- Thread starter SammyBoi
- Start date
There will be a larger version. Heard it from HVT if I remember right.
Radar and jammer for Warrior? Not possible. It won't even carry any sensors on its own, only comm system, weapons control, and flight controls. It can be equipped with an IIR seeker though, just not a full-fledged IRST.
It's designed for carrying just 2 SAAWs internally and 2 AAMs externally. So its use case is very limited. After launching the AAMs and SAAWs, it can use its own seeker to launch itself into a target like a CM.
The price goal is $5M per aircraft. So if it can launch 4 SAAWs about 5-6 times over a 3-day period followed by a suicide, that's paisa vasool.
A much larger aircraft powered by even a single HTFE-25 will defeat the purpose of it being expendable.
It will just be a regular joe UCAV in the same class as the Turkish Red Apple or Anka-3. Meaning, I doubt the IAF will be interested in spending tens of millions on such an aircraft compared to the few million expected for Warrior or Abhimanyu.
CATS is going to have all types of UAVs hooked up. Not all of which will be expendable.
The IN apparently wants a deck-based UCAV which could in due course translate into a bigger Warrior (for extra endurance and payload capacity). Unless they choose to go with a navalized ISUAV/Ghatak. One thing is for sure though. There's a bigger jet-powered HALE UAV (RQ-4 class) in the works as part of the CATS program. Saurav Jha confirmed this in a recent IAH episode.
I don't know what you mean by that.
The only UAVs it can carry will be an ALFA carrier, which in turn will carry 6 drones for swarming, each with 5+ kg of warhead. A larger Warrior with HTFE-25 will just carry a bit more.
In any case, an HTFE-25 powered drone will be too expensive to use. The engine itself will cost as much as Warrior 1. Then comes the radar, EW suite etc. The airframe will be 4 to 5 times heavier too. That's an easy $15-20M, and maybe not even VLO at that.
And at least the Anka-3 is a flying wing design. Although I don't think HAL or any other private company in India can pull this off yet.
A deck-based UCAV needs afterburner and supersonic capability. And it will need to be carrier capable, so a whole new design. And due to space limitations, it needs to be sufficiently advanced with a large internal payload, so Ghatak class at the minimum. The bigger and more capable the drone, the better. A drone with 2 Kaveris is an added bonus.
Yeah, a HALE with HTFE-25 under CATS exists but requires IAF approval. But it's a totally different thing, not a CCA.
In any case, DRDO's gonna get first pick, and not just for this program but for every single program coming out of HAL through CATS. The entire CATS program is HAL's hobby project. DRDO can veto it entirely.
Basically, about 6 years ago, DRDO started a program to fund startups for a CATS type project, and NewSpace is one of the companies chosen. HAL decided to enter on their own too, 'cause they want to maintain their monopoly. NewSpace worked with them for a bit, but the main projects in this area are still independent from HAL's projects. So they have their own UCAV and CM. The ALFA is also theirs, which they worked on with the IA.
HAL is just trying to steal this program from smaller startups. And they are trying to capture a bigger market with lame duck projects based on HTFE-25, but HAL has no plans of funding it themselves, unlike Warrior and Hunter.
In simple terms, NewSpace is the official partner, HAL is trying to gatecrash the party.
Here's an example.
Indian Navy signs deal with NewSpace Research & Technologies to develop high-altitude pseudo-satellite for maritime surveillance
NewSpace CEO Sameer Joshi (2R) shakes hand with an Indian Navy official in presence of an MoD official and NewSpace COO Julius A
It's called ARKA. The IAF has also joined the project alongside funding it. So this is the official HAPS project, but HAL and CSIR-NAL have two independent projects in competition.
To date, out of 4 major systems, only ARKA has been approved by the users, alongside ALFA. The Warrior and Hunter programs are still lame ducks, never mind HAL's dream of using the HTFE-25 in CATS.
It seems HAL has modified an HJT-16 Kiran for the OMCA role. I am sure we will hear more about this at AI2025.
A bird with HTFE-25 is in the works. PTAE is only for the current variant, and they're going with that because it can allow for flight testing sooner. Watch from 7:55
All CCAs are not equal. We're going to need multiple types of them. That includes potentially expendable ones (XQ-58 equivalent) powered by PTAEs, as well as non-expendable ones (MQ-28 equivalent) powered by HTFE.
And the Ghost Bat-equivalent Warrior (or whatever it'll be called, described as the 12m-class by HVT) will need an engine in the league of the Pratt & Whitney PW600 that the MQ-28 uses, that means HTFE.
But that's for the future through.
The HTFE-25 version is not in the works, it's a concept for a distant future.
And yeah, while Warrior 1 will be required to create all the MUM-T competencies, it's still secondary to an actual DRDO-led project by NewSpace. The entire goal of HAL CATS is to steal DRDO's own project from the private sector.
Abhimanyu is being designed for actual MUM-T ops, different versions with different capabilities, alongside ALFA. Here, there's a proper ecosystem planned. So I don't see a larger and more expensive Warrior 1 being able to compete with it, let alone something that costs tens of millions in the form of Warrior 2. And if the IAF does end up with a requirement for a Ghost Bat, you can bet DRDO will lead that program too. For example, a SWiFT Mk1A could take over this function, alongside a larger SWiFT Mk2 with HTFE-25.
People don't talk about this much, but SWiFT is already fully autonomous when it comes to navigating and flying. And it can be designed for VLO. And the only reason why Ghost Bat exists is 'cause the Australians don't have anything better. But, as you can see, we can do better.
There are strategic reasons too. HAL already has control over LCA and AMCA. So it's unlikely the IAF will hand over all these UAV and UCAV projects too. For example, we do not know who's gonna be the lead integrator for Ghatak. If not an IAF BRD, it could go to a private company. And it's unlikely for HAL to beat DRDO at this game, no matter how much propaganda they have managed to spew in their favor to the general public.
With that said, the only CATS capability shown on paper that's probably competitive is Hunter, whereas DRDO's stealth LO-ALCM is a much larger missile and is not recoverable. They could probably make an impact with that, as long as they make it sufficiently LO. As for Infinity, even if the forces don't go for it, there's a civilian market here.
I don't know who's gonna make it ultimately, but a requirement for a 12 to 15m-class Ghost Bat or Airbus Wingman-like CCA will be there, eventually. It won't be expendable, obviously.
SWIFT/IUSAV is a flying wing, I doubt it can really be a CCA - it's more for standalone strike or recon, operating on its own. CCAs need to be more maneuverable...there's a reason the models USAF is studying for CCA program are all non-flying wings, even though US has ample experience with designs like X-47A, which are arguably stealthier than something like XQ-67/MQ-28/Gambit.
Essentially, for the LAC we'll be needing something that has the range of IUSAV, but with the flight characteristics of Warrior.
I see your point. But I don't think we are gonna follow this path. They have a long range requirement, we don't.
With a 25 kN engine, you can design a really big UCAV, and with afterburner and 1:1 TWR, we will get an MTOW of 4T. With Warrior 1 type specs, we can even make it 10+T. That's why I find the concept of a Warrior 2 with this engine way on the higher side. It's not gonna be capable enough relative to its cost whereas the USAF has to make concessions if they expect their drones to fly alongside long range aircraft.
Most of the American, Australian, and Turkish drones are being made for 5-6 hours of endurance. Valkyrie has a 5500-6000 km range. Warrior 1's made for 700-800 km range.
The high-end fully autonomous FUFA will meet your expectations. It will be powered by 2 engines in the Jaguar class. So at 1:1 TWR, it should weigh around 8-9T with sufficiently large radar and other fighter-esque sensors.
I suppose that since we cannot afford 1000 CCAs like the USAF, we could end up with much smaller CCAs like Abhimanyu and a smaller number of more advanced FUFAs with larger payloads. So we don't seem to be following in the USAF's footsteps, because we don't function like they do, we are a majority high-end force. The French model is closer to us and their CCA is an advanced Ghatak-class flying wing drone too.
90% of the things you say are in distant future. Not an argument.
What can I say, I'm a futurist. The present is boring.
In order to anticipate the actions of competition, you gotta dabble in futurism.
Futures studies - Wikipedia
And the military's one of the easiest areas to extrapolate things due to the very long gestation period.
Look at all the outlandish predictions I have made over the past decade that have come true. I predicted a massive modernization spree of 700 jets for the IAF. I have done the same for IA and IN too, and they are coming true. I predicted that our defense budget will grow in size by the end of the decade to build up to half the level as the US, and eventually match them over the next decade. So we have production plans for about 1200+ advanced fighters and drones, 30 submarines, way more than 30 large ships, all within 15-20 years, all stuff the US also does at this scale.
Then that warfare will be within the domain of the rich by the end of this decade, it's already coming true, never mind 2030+. Without access to space, cyberwarfare, biotech, and AI, you are gonna be nothing. Then come all sorts of new and expensive technologies for ground forces that only the rich can afford, like a $100,000+ worth equipped soldier.
Another claim was Russia will modernize at a rate faster than NATO can without troubling its economy as much. This came true as well. Their military budget has expanded by 4 times since 2022 without decreasing their social spending. If their modernization budget has increased by just 2 times, that's effectively way more than what the US spends on its own capital acquisitions. Russia's modernization budget is estimated to be three times that of India's.
Futurism.
Futurism is one thing, but presenting it as a fact is not a good way to approach it.What can I say, I'm a futurist. The present is boring.
In order to anticipate the actions of competition, you gotta dabble in futurism.
Sure, but if you're referring to HTFE-25 on Warrior, I just quoted what HVT himself said, "We will come to that... in the future." His words.
And if you have read my earlier posts, I have stated that HAL's CATS program isn't official. HAL is just attempting to hijack DRDO's program using their own money. So this Warrior 2 is just a pie in the sky when there's no guarantee the IAF will choose even Warrior 1. I'm being kind by saying "distant future."
Furthermore, HAL is attempting to turn Tejas Trainer into a Tejas Max as the main fighter for their CATS in order to push the IAF to buy more LCAs. This is after their Jaguar Max attempt failed due to the end of DARIN II. And they are still trying to push SPORT on the IAF too. Quite literally none of these are official programs.
A semi-official HLFT-42 program is going on though. It will replace Hawk if successful.
Obviously, everything is "in the future".
My point was general. This is from another thread. You are making assumptions and presenting them as facts almost daily.
IAF want MRFA today. IAF officals are basically crying about it.
Because the forces actually say whatever they need publicly.
There's a massive disconnect between what forces want and what people think the forces want.
Here's an example.
“It would mirror the outer hull shaping of 212CD. It would presumably integrate either the German AIP or whatever the Indians want sourced from DRDO,” he added.
As per Alex Luck, it's "whatever the Indians want sourced from DRDO" but has no clue that the IN specifically wants foreign AIP. And this is why the Russians and French had to withdraw, and the Spanish were rejected. But now some clueless guy thinks IN will stick DRDO's AIP on it.
And people will read this, and then they will think the IN are the bad guys for not having chosen DRDO's AIP.
And this applies to pretty much every area. In another thread, even the rest of the Internet, people are happily claiming Stryker is just a political deal, but know nothing about what's being offered or why the IA wants it. Similarly, they would like MRFA canceled for vaporware.
And now, HAL has done such a good job marketing itself, people are assuming their CATS is a fact, when in fact neither CATS nor NewSpace's Abhimanyu have been considered by the IAF. So "in the future" can also mean "never," or my much more polite, "distant future," since everybody seems unnecessarily emotional about these things for some reason.
Things get easier when people start listening to the forces. Even after the Varthaman committee recommended buying both AMCA and FGFA, the IAF is actually just sticking with AMCA.
Outside of everything that the forces have revealed, I have always used the words, "I believe", "I think," "I suppose" etc, which all hint towards assumptions.
Yep.
But we have to follow process. And that could take 3 years at the minimum from RFP to contract negotiations, notwithstanding potential delays from the vendor side, like P-75I faced. Even if we assume a quick 1 year to signature, we are still talking 2029. And then 3-5 years for first deliveries, followed by local deliveries from the 6th or 7th year, as per RFI. As per Picdel, the same would be 3rd and 4th year for Rafale. So anytime between 2032-35 for the first squadron. These are facts.
They can squeeze in 2 stopgap F4 squadrons to make up for the massive time gap. A deal by late 2026 will finish by 2031, and the line can keep going from 2032 if Rafale wins. But that's an assumption.
Unless the forces are talking about it, everything is an assumption.
@randomradio
What is the point of having CATS hunter and OMCA if Enemy Radars can be targeted by Missiles
What is the point of having CATS hunter and OMCA if Enemy Radars can be targeted by Missiles
Hunter's a missile, I guess you are talking about Warrior.
CATS Warrior and OMCA are meant to provide mass. You are increasing the number of targets the enemy has to defeat in the air before they can engage your fighters. This helps deplete their aircraft and weapons at a much faster rate. In turn, you also get to carry more weapons and sensors than what a single aircraft can carry on its own.
OMCA is on its last legs, so it can provide training value before retirement, in case there's no war. They can use it as an advanced target as well. During war, it can act as a decoy or drop bombs.
In the American context, a CATS Warrior type system called CCA will carry a radar and EW suite and form a screen in front of fighters over large distances in large numbers. So a pair of F-35s may only carry 8 missiles between them, but 10 CCAs in its Increment 1 configuration could carry 20 additional missiles. So this is a later objective of the CATS Warrior with a more powerful engine.