Project Kusha / Programme LRSAM / PGLRSAM
- Thread starter Fatalis
- Start date
Love it.Hello hello @Fatalis sirji is it good ?
pic is actually seen and taken by neutronx first since I could not finish watching during lunchtime myself.
View attachment 36064
Please share the video link.
As expected three versions of same missile. Base missile with 150km range without having any booster is awesome news. @Rajput Lion
He heHello hello @Fatalis sirji is it good ?
pic is actually seen and taken by neutronx first since I could not finish watching during lunchtime myself.
View attachment 36064
I was waiting for this day when you will share the images of the missiles out of the blue and make my day.
Thank You.
Last edited:
Replacing the pic , a bit edited.
vanila one is not 150km, more like usual barak 8 range. Basically IN IAF versions would be of different ranges and spec. So the idea of 3 different missiles is alive. Now customized as per user spec. Also the LRSAM IAC is there.
vanila one is not 150km, more like usual barak 8 range. Basically IN IAF versions would be of different ranges and spec. So the idea of 3 different missiles is alive. Now customized as per user spec. Also the LRSAM IAC is there.
Please share the edited pic and also the video for the reference.
If you look closely in the pic shared by @marich01, it is mentioned that M1 is the kill vehicle for M2 and M3 missiles.
LRSAM (IAC) is just MRSAM (70km) for IAC-1.
Vanilla (M1) is larger (>5m) and has a longer range (>100km) than MRSAM. The pulse for PG-LRSAM is much longer than both MRSAM and Akash-NG.
These seem to be the old configuration, even though they are from a recent presentation. There is no 500mm or 730mm booster right now, but there is a 350mm booster (for M2?).
There are two warhead options (2500 vs 6000 frag), I believe the configuration for '>100km' M1, '>250km' M2, and '>350km' M3 has changed.
M3 *might* feature the 450mm second stage and larger warhead.
In my old discussions with @marich01 & @Fatalis, I always maintained that Our Desi LRSAM/XRSAM program should base itself on Akash-NG rather than MRSAM/Barak-8 because of IP/Royalty concerns to the Israelis.
I think the picture of M1 that has surfaced has given me plenty of satisfaction as the M1 looks like(from its planform) nothing but longer Akash-NG. Even 250mm diameter(MRSAM is 225mm) that was leaked sometime ago was a tell-tale sign. Now this picture confirms it.
Now what about M1/M2. Well first let's look at this picture:
Source: Other forum
What does it say? It says that M1 is also the kill vehicle of M2/M3. So, the base missile of all three configurations is the same aided by different stage 1 boosters.
Also to those who are wondering about 150kms range of M1. Well! If Akash-NG has 80kms range(downgraded range of 35 kms notwithstanding), then an elongated version of this same missile could easily hit 150kms.
Slowly but surely, we're getting light on our ambitious project
I think the picture of M1 that has surfaced has given me plenty of satisfaction as the M1 looks like(from its planform) nothing but longer Akash-NG. Even 250mm diameter(MRSAM is 225mm) that was leaked sometime ago was a tell-tale sign. Now this picture confirms it.
Now what about M1/M2. Well first let's look at this picture:
Source: Other forum
What does it say? It says that M1 is also the kill vehicle of M2/M3. So, the base missile of all three configurations is the same aided by different stage 1 boosters.
Also to those who are wondering about 150kms range of M1. Well! If Akash-NG has 80kms range(downgraded range of 35 kms notwithstanding), then an elongated version of this same missile could easily hit 150kms.
Slowly but surely, we're getting light on our ambitious project
Last edited:
Here is the tweet(about diameter of LRSAM/Kusha):
Yeah config definitely has changed , I guess that's why they are happy to show the older projections.
Only scared about @Rajput Lion calling it out akash ng every time DRDO show Kusha and call it LRSAM
Only scared about @Rajput Lion calling it out akash ng every time DRDO show Kusha and call it LRSAM
I know that the Barak-8 has been redesignated MRSAM with the launch of the PGLRSAM. However, I believed that the IAC-specific version was to be a longer ranged weapon than the baseline MRSAM.
The IN wants a tiered AAW cover for the IAC-1 with the VL-SRSAM and IAC-MRSAM forming the close-in and area air defence components (plus there will be PGLRSAM too as BMD/long range AAD too but that's still some time away).
So wouldn't the LRSAM-IAC and Kusha series overlap in coverage?
I'm all for incremental development. But considering that IAI has developed a new Barak MX/MRAD/LRAD family for use by the Isreali Navy and for export, we should have got the IP for what is now an India-specific Barak-8/MRSAM, correct?
The DRDO is, no doubt, using the experience gained from the Barak-8 co-dev program but the changed physical dimensions of the Akash-NG suggests that there are IP restrictions on re-using tech from the B-8 program.
After spending billions of $ on the B-8, we should have got royalties on third-party sales of the B-8 or at least TOT for the seeker and other electronics on it, no?
They developed another series of Barak SAM (LR/MRAD) using the money we spent on Barak-8, they haven't given up IPR or design rights for Barak-8 MRSAM.
Israelis have done everything to restrict DRDO labs from accessing the work done under Israeli workshare. The dual pulse developed by DRDL with 0 Israeli assistance is used in subsequent SAMs (Akash-NG as well as M1). Seeker, electronics and control laws for Akash-NG had to be developed and proven separately.
IAI gets a share each time we purchase Barak-8 MRSAM, but because they use and export the Barak MX family, we get nothing. ToT is only for manufacturing, and is not needed anymore with the development of Akash-NG's advanced seeker.
The Jews are very clever businessmen. They used the dual-pulse motor developed by us for the MRSAM JV and sold the missile to an enemy country like Azerbaijan just by modifying the wings(from high mounted to mid mounted) and changing the name to Barak 8 MR.
Akash NG is nothing but our desi Barak 8(substitute) and maybe the genesis of our future long range Air Defense programmes. That's why I always supported LRSAM/ERSAM with Akash NG as base(with boosters) rather than MRSAM.
This is not true. They developed their own dual pulse motor. We didn't didn't share out tech either.
End of the day, we were a risk sharing partner. They wanted us to make the program viable not out technical support. It gave us very valuable experience.
Why didn't they develop their dual-pulse motor before MRSAM program? And I don't think Barak MX family uses a different dual-pulse motor v/s MRSAM. Only difference is the control surface for the MX family.
Absolutely concur
. But my point was, if IAI sells Barak MX, we don't get any money while they will get near 50% profit for each MRSAM sale. There is disparity here. If we sell Akash-NG to our armed forces or to foreign countries like Brazil, Phillipines and Vietnam(or more), we don't need to share any moolah with them.Why would they when DRDO is responsible for the part ? The difference with Barak MX is that is fully Israeli without any indian IP.
There is difference between indian and Israeli motor. MRSAM reached 90km while Barak MX is limited to 70km.
There is no such disparity when they do not sell anything from indian IP. Our contribution to the project is limited. That's what risk sharing partner means.Absolutely concur
Akash-NG is fully indian IP product. Why would we share anything with them?
AFAIK, only the naval variant dubbed LRSAM was touted as having 90kms range. The IAF/IA variant have identical 70kms range. I think Israelis simply reverse engineered DRDO's dual-pulse motor. Yes, this is my speculation and you obviously don't like speculations, so kindly let's just agree to disagree here.
Having control over full IP rights was my starting point. So I am just happy with the way our PGLRSAM program is heading. That's it.
No same motor. LRSAM is just nomenclature of navy at that time.
Lol no. The opposite is more probable considering the track record of DRDO pre MRSAM.
Also, don't forget the relation between ELM-2084 and Arudhra. That was the catalyst for today's wide range of AESA radars by DRDO.
Starting in the 2000s with the Greepine radar and Elta BFSR, the Isrealis have played a big role in bringing our radar tech up the curve.
Back in the day, all we had was INDRA-1 and INDRA-2 radars in terms of homegrown tech.
The French have played a role too but no comparison to the Israelis.
The Americans were no where in the picture, except the AN/TPQ-37 WLR which failed to meet Indian expectations
Back in the day, all we had was INDRA-1 and INDRA-2 radars in terms of homegrown tech.
The French have played a role too but no comparison to the Israelis.
The Americans were no where in the picture, except the AN/TPQ-37 WLR which failed to meet Indian expectations