RudraM Series Air-launched Missiles : Updates & Discussions
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
Rudram 2 officially now is a part of Adani Defence portfolio.
R2 coming close for more tests, from BDL
If materialize we will need proper bombers, not a heavy air superiority fighter for launching that weapon.
The Rudram missile family is our equivalent of the US AARGM-ER. The next logical step would be hypersonic CMs.
Btw wasn't there another missile program called Glidefire?
Btw wasn't there another missile program called Glidefire?
That is for Indian Navy. It is supposed to be an anti ship missile launched from ship.
That seems unlikly. Why would you say that?. There are multiple anti ships missiles under active development like LRAShM, NASM-MR, Brahmos-NG, Nirbhay derivative with seeker etc.
LRSOW is definitely for the Air Force. I'm guessing it will be something the size of the Israeli Rampage. That's something we lack.
How can a long range weapon system be in the size and form factor of Rampage , which is a repurposed rocket ? Unless we know spec IAF asked for, we can not be sure the range and form factor parameter of a standoff weapon system from a long range.
Perhaps the idea is theoretically having similar vectors such as Brahmos systems as shown, 300 km to 450-500km to 800km. This would go with the rudram series range and form factors as well after de-linking R1 aka NGARM from the program (ie NGARM is under project Astra group at DRDL, while RCI makes the Rudrams). The 2 rudrams are 300 and 500km respectively, so it is logical to match Brahmos future plans in this as well.
Later you can derive the rampage like solution from the indigenous system GPRS itself, with the 120km version is ready that can be repurposed as rampage, here the usp being more numbers the jet can carry as a standoff weapon.
Perhaps the idea is theoretically having similar vectors such as Brahmos systems as shown, 300 km to 450-500km to 800km. This would go with the rudram series range and form factors as well after de-linking R1 aka NGARM from the program (ie NGARM is under project Astra group at DRDL, while RCI makes the Rudrams). The 2 rudrams are 300 and 500km respectively, so it is logical to match Brahmos future plans in this as well.
Later you can derive the rampage like solution from the indigenous system GPRS itself, with the 120km version is ready that can be repurposed as rampage, here the usp being more numbers the jet can carry as a standoff weapon.
Any recent news on the SIVA passive targeting/datalink pod the Rudram family is expected to use?
All I could find was a 2017 article from Prasun Sengupta on the pod.
trishul-trident.blogspot.com
All I could find was a 2017 article from Prasun Sengupta on the pod.
SIVA IMR Pod Explained
In simple terms, the SIVA IMR pod is something similar to the ELTA Systems-developed ELM-2060P radar targetting pod, and it will be used f...
trishul-trident.blogspot.com
Since they was going off-topic in the Rafale thread, so replying you here:
But, RudraM-1 has an active seeker that shall lock onto the hostile SAM in the endgame and blow it away even if it's on a run. Only thing the enemy can do there is 'cry & run'. But RudraM-1 still will blow them to smithereens.
Rafale deep inside enemy territory is still under threat whilst MKI with RudraM-1 is completely safe sitting 200kms away from the threat zone.
It's clear that French have realized that Rafale needs that kind of modern SEAD/DEAD weapon hence the development for such a weapon in the F5 version.
TLDR: RudraM-1 is also a DEAD stand-off weapon along with a SEAD weapon.
What I'm saying is that our NGARM/Rudram-1 isn't just a conventional SEAD weapon that makes do with 'Spray & Pray' tactics. It's a game-changing weapon that does DEAD along with SEAD. Just imagine a scenario where Rafale uses low level ingression inside Pak/China territory to lob AASM's from 30 kms away to achieve DEAD. MKI will do the same from 200kms away as NGARM is guided by MKI till the very end along with SAM's own signals. Even if the SAM radar switches off, we've already achieved SEAD there. But.......
But, RudraM-1 has an active seeker that shall lock onto the hostile SAM in the endgame and blow it away even if it's on a run. Only thing the enemy can do there is 'cry & run'. But RudraM-1 still will blow them to smithereens.
Rafale deep inside enemy territory is still under threat whilst MKI with RudraM-1 is completely safe sitting 200kms away from the threat zone.
It's clear that French have realized that Rafale needs that kind of modern SEAD/DEAD weapon hence the development for such a weapon in the F5 version.
TLDR: RudraM-1 is also a DEAD stand-off weapon along with a SEAD weapon.
The addition of an active seeker only increases the accuracy during endgame. Even the new versions of HARM come with it. But the basic problem doesn't change because the first mode of detection before endgame is still a passive seeker, and the enemy needs to be quite incompetent to fall for it. The reason being a SEAD missile is almost entirely dependent on itself, whereas the enemy is using a smart human mind to counter. So you can imagine how stupid human operators should be to get hit by a few missiles that can be easily evaded.
That's why a SEAD weapon has an extremely low kill probablity, never mind that fact that today it can be shot down too.
SEAD is evolving as cyber warfare weapons mature.
Kinetic weapons will be backed by heavy electronic/network attack or they may not need to be used at all. The SUTER program is one example. Then there's a new gen of munitions like the American MALD, British SPEAR and other anti-radition decoys, all capable of complex swarming attacks. These will make it difficult for large AD systems to survive unless integrated with CUAS, decoy transmitters, of their own.
American combination of MALD + HARM + JSOW is lethal for SEAD/DEAD. Read somewhere that we're going to create MALD/J like expendable decoys/jammers from our Abhayas target drone.
Anyways, now Americans have HARM E/AARGM, which just like RudraM-1 has also a hybrid PHH+ MMW seeker. This increases accuracy and results in not only switching-off of radars but complete destruction of 'em along with launchers as well.
The issue with weapons that do not rely on speed is the SAM site can disappear in a matter of minutes. The issue with weapons that use speed is they are cumbersome and expensive to use and are much more easily detected.
Everything else you mentioned for both sides is necessary for SEAD and DEAD, depending on certain limitations, but a quiet kill is still the best method to destroy a SAM site, which SEAD rarely offers.
SEAD only keeps the SAM site busy or switched off. The latter makes it more dangerous, as the A-50 crews found out for themselves in Ukraine. So, if you find a SAM site, the best case is always to destroy it. I don't know if the Rafale is as versatile, but the F-35 has been advertised to be able to destroy a SAM site upon detection within the same sortie using SDBs, at least against SR and MR SAMs. All other jets need plenty of preparation time, hence the need for SEAD to keep the site busy for moments when preparations are not yet complete.