DRDO is also working on blended body design HGV
Little more, this one is a 3 staged article, quite big. As of now almost nothing is known to me wrt specs. The last pic graphic is from Neutronx . We have to see if any more info comes out.
Since the SFDR is again getting close to testing , do anyone think programs would benefit each other to develop a solid fuel based DACS ? There has not been much info so far, the mk2 version seems to be liquid fueled as well as the high altitude stage ones. Curous how the subsystems can be improved. This HGV, hot gas valve is very critical and was also developed for SFDR purpose too. So one program can feed off another.
One other reference I read before was from a 2018 paper
One other reference I read before was from a 2018 paper
One area where the current gov. has done a stellar work is in the expansion of our IADS. Few years down the line and our A2/AD network is going to be as good as China which means really formidable.
It's half done . Just hope it doesn't end up as a case of well begun is half done.
I'm referring to quantities , scale of production , intake in thousands as opposed to the drip feed MoD / GoI are indulging in.
A large inventory means a larger associated equipment handling , and there is no guarantee about the stock not giving more duds than qa cleared articles. Basically these are all high end complex systems and in aerospace industry we already have seen the very high rejection rate (hence the higher cost). This is basically why across the world armies that have limited budget also keep a limited inventory because consumption is quite low . It is always better to make the articles during use time than keeping a massive stock and then finding out half of that needing refurb.
Didn't get you ? Are you saying QA is unsatisfactory or products have a limited shelf life . Long ago I happened to read an article on land based ICBMs in silos located inside mountains undergoing refurbishment to their propellants responsible for both - cold launch & thereafter. Can't recall if it was done at site or at the OEM .
Further given these were TN warheads , half life of certain fissile materials there meant it had to replaced with new ones. The entire environment in which they were kept was climate controlled .
Now granted these were strategic systems , hence the emphasis was on safety & efficacy of such systems more than costs but if the failure rate is high , there needs to be a Root Cause Analysis into it at the OEMs end & the user's end .
Let me also share with you another personal incident. Once upon a time one of our system providers who works exclusively with defence establishments got a sizable contract to install HVAC systems for a huge Naval Storage housing torpedoes & other sensitive electronic equipment. The project was initiated & managed by the MES. Now if you know a thing or two about this organisation it's a notoriously corrupt organization.
Most of the tech specs were diluted by our system provider once the tender was awarded to him , to cater to filling in the MES personnels's pockets who willingly signed on the deviations to the tender specifications. What do you think the condition of all those imported systems running into millions of USD will be when the balloon goes up. ?
If the reason lies elsewhere then it's time for our defence planners to become familiar with concepts in mfg like in the auto industry viz JIT aka Just in time pioneered by Toyota. Let me cite a recent example .
Apparently Solar Industry had recently released a statement in the media stating it had reduced the lead time to mfg a certain variant of the Pinaka rocket from some 60 days to 14 . The next step should be to bring it down to 5 & then to 2-3 if we're to cater to China.
You either identify the problem & work on it - Root Cause Analysis at the OEM or the End User & resort to storage of such systems in case of large orders or incase of systems or in certain cases where we can't , lean on the OEM to DRASTICALLY reduce lead time. Make it as a mandatory part of your developmental efforts AND one of the pre conditions in your orders for such items.
basically the complain from the forces go around many articles not clearing during the 5 phase checkout due to some lru failing, and also obsolence of lru which prompting another round of qualification of a replacement lru of similar spec. Variety of problems happen, sometimes the wing actuators fail, before they had hydraulic actuators where one or more of the 4 set would fail, then they got em actuators but each set needing separate control mechanism so for a 4 batch set 1 or more do not work you need to replace it. Now they are going for quad controllers for the same em actuators where instead of 4 separate controllers you need 1 pcb. This is one example of a small problem declaring the full integrated article not suitable for use until it is refurbed. So this problem is there as the control actuators were imported , 100% of it, and replacement would take some time.
Yes a minimum stock a force would always maintain, but depending on experience and consumption rate, you decide how much and what your facility can store, right ? So this would be decision at the HQ level with MoD only clearing a committee decision and making funding available. usually that stock is sufficient for initial period of any wartime situation. But long term high level consumption rate, it is better to make during the time so you can apply suitable system upgrade and not think about missile subsystems failing to work aka not depend on stored inventory entirely.
Then it's both a QA problem & design problem which as you're describing it which would be the Root Cause Analysis ( RCA ) which should find as it's solution a design which will fix the issue as far as hydraulic actuators go or separate controllers although that in turn would raise the justified question of what if that single PCB controlling the actuator also fails.
It could also be related to storage as these instruments can be temperature sensitive as well as being sensitive to dust which is ubiquitous out here & handling or rather rough handling since foreign origin PCBs & actuators are not known to fail in such high numbers .
The larger solution of course is indigenization & rugged ised to meet local condition requirements . It's also called Indianization in the auto industry. Moving ahead that's the only solution as one can't depend on imports of such vital components & sub systems in wartime.
The crux of the matter is what is the stock we'd like to maintain for any given item or system in our preparation for a war against China . You set that as the mission aim & work backwards. This also includes reducing mfg time and / or the lead time for vital components , thus for the entire system for which indigenization is not only essential , it's vital , apart from scale in quick time.
And this needs to be done now in order to streamline our mfg processes & cut down lead time .That's the long & short of it.
Yes if the actuators are made in India and/or drdo designed , which is now the case that RCI is developing various actuation systems rotary ema, aero grade ones, door & hinges etc. But for a long time we had to rely on imported items, some are still put under exempt category under PAC. Its a bit like this
Definitely, although now due to canister container and much more sophisticated digital monitoring system with sensors attached, it has probably come down. Since the older stock were non containerised , this was an issue. hydraulic oil leakage was a problem for Agni trials the first time.
Some of the testing equipment, sensor suit, electronic parts are very few makers , in some cases single oem often that are dual use non mil grade restricted. So in that case its sourcing from supplier with oem certificate attached. Hence many such niche items , they are trying to develop and certify themselves. That would be a long process still, mk1 mk2 and so on.