A Cruise Missile doesn't do 700kmph at that low altitude. Most Cruise Missiles quoted speed are for high altitudes, at low altitudes its atmost 300 to 400kmph, which is doable to shoot down with IR Homing MANPADs but the engagement envelope is quite small, unless we are standing less than 300m from loci of Missile path.
I wonder if our IACCS is geared up to detection & tracking sub sonic low flying CMs . If that be the case , the last ditch defence can always be the equivalent of last mile connectivity viz the last man in the OODA Loop equipped with a MANPAD be it shoulder fired or preferably tripod mounted.
Procurement & distribution of such armaments with necessary E/O sights for target detection & acquisition can be done in the thousands.
I'd advance this particular line of argument especially to the LAC when we go up against China facing Drone swarms , CM swarms & low flying VLO / LO FA. Station Mountain Warfare SPECIALIST Infantry on peaks or high ground with surveillance & tracking equipment along with these MANPADS to do the needful.
Frankly I don't think this is in the realms of sci fi or futuristic warfare anymore. This IS the time for it .
What are your views ? @Rajput Lion
Last edited:
Most manpads (Mistral, RBS-70) are advertised specifically as having anti-missile/point defence capability at low altitude. I don't think any mfgr would risk upsetting customers and bad press if that wasn't the case.
Many of these systems also come with integrated C2 out of the box for integration into upper echelon C4I like IACCS . If not IACCS, I'd be surprised if the Army's own Aakash Teer didn't have CM tracking capability.
Forward observers in border areas have always formed the first line of our ADGES. They likely carry manpads to shoot at targets of opportunity.
In which case our ITCM Nirbhay , while it'd have greater chances of success against Paxtan will have limited utility against the Chinese.
Whereas previously there were a few here including myself arguing for fast tracking the development of various iterations of the Nirbhay viz the Air, Sea & Undersea versions of it apart from the land version to be inducted in the thousands in view of our upcoming war against China.
Could that be the reason we haven't seen much activity on that front? Prima facie it would seem so.
Looks like we need to focus more on expediting final certification of the STAR missile ASAP as well as it's air launched version for the royalties we pay Russia for the Brahmos is simply too high rendering huge quantities unaffordable apart from the dependencies it creates on them for the RAMJET engine which is going to bite us in conflict time.
Unfortunately this administration is heavily into penny pinching & extremely stingy when it comes to spending on defence procurement. What we're seeing now vis a vis a supplementary budget of ~ 50,000 cr is merely sum allocated to replenish stocks used in the current conflict apart from limited augmentation.
We did see more work on ITCM front than before. Was a matter of replacing the engine with domestic made one. Since the manik are all sort of LSP/proto units and in one test the engine igniter did not work so it plunged into the sea after booster burnout, it should get some repeated testing to prove the engine first. We have seen one LT internal report on this as well. So after 1 successful test of ITCM, there should be few more rounds to prove the ground launched version is stable and reliable. Once this is proven the other versions work can proceed esp the air launched version, in similar manner how Brahmos evolved. The sub launched version is being done in parallel and secretively so we won't know status unless they tell us.
basically way too many programs are going on at the same time and all of those need large budget, while finance dept continuously release lesser fund than requested , plus the really shortfall in manpower as well.
basically way too many programs are going on at the same time and all of those need large budget, while finance dept continuously release lesser fund than requested , plus the really shortfall in manpower as well.
Imo subsonic CMs are still viable. For eg: Russkie Kh-101s have had a fairly good strike rate in Ukraine. You'd have noticed in some videos that they carried onboard countermeasures like flare dispensers (+stealth shaping) for increased terminal stage survivability. Thus far the Nirbhay program's focus seems to have been proving the basic design. Perhaps future Nirbhay variants will have better ew/sp features.
Very interesting
. We aren't there yet but we're most definitely heading in the direction that you have alluded to.
Almost all these cruise missile interception by MANPADS happened during day light for obvious reasons......Stealth shaping is the way forward & speed..... What we really need to do is massive investment in SRBM like Iskander, Lora, PrSM type Systems.
Subsonic CM are cheaper and provide much needed mass. Pvt cos like DG Aero are coming up with so many small TF/TJ engines which could power a whole new gen of small CMs in the JASSM, Spear-3 mould. We have a lot of ongoing programs for MLRS/BMs anyway.
Imo we still need subsonic cruise missiles. Subsonic cruise missiles, Pralays and Brahmos can be launched together to achieve saturation. Launching a lot of subsonic cruise missiles especially if they are stealthy still poses problems for enemy AD.
Won't our Pralay outclass Iskander?