Above test structure & IR target panel system are usually supplied by Trinitech. They do the ship lockup target also, the one where a temp structure is built on a barge ship or floating platform with IR or target panels mounted on top.NASM-SR test likely soon-ish. or something else maybe, but since the helo on deck is being readied with live store then you know whats coming ....
View attachment 47188
am i missing something or isnt LRLACM exactly what you want?
DRDO need to work on low Observable Subsonic cruise missile..... It's advantage outweighs supersonic & Hypersonic Cruise missiles by a long shot.
lrlacm isn't exactly stealthy, shape wise.am i missing something or isnt LRLACM exactly what you want?
HAL is prototyping one which looks similar to the JASSM. Earlier design was more similar to Taurus.
DRDO need to work on low Observable Subsonic cruise missile..... It's advantage outweighs supersonic & Hypersonic Cruise missiles by a long shot.
So the stealthy shape to work does it need all the detection radars queue up in a single line ?
In a dynamic real time situation the equation is vastly different. In fact USA/NATO countries will never use missiles in a massed way like Rus is using because first they do not produce that many and second the cost is way bigger not every country can afford and third their choice of weapon is always bombs, not missiles for extended period use. Without considering sead op their mil will not venture into next phase of operation.
Bottom line is VLO subsonic missile has its own use but in a very limited case specific way (like the early blitz in Iraq) and under specific conditions to achieve very specific military goals (if enemy capability is sufficiently degraded it does not matter whether you fly stealthy or not).
Think of a situation like
a ninja tiptoeing between shadows to get to its target without being detected
vs
you are tiptoeing to avoid large water filled potholes on road during the rains
While frontal arc reduction is most prioritized but reduction of rcs on other arc's are also done.So the stealthy shape to work does it need all the detection radars queue up in a single line ?
USA will use cruise missiles in mass use.In fact USA/NATO countries will never use missiles in a massed way like Rus is using
Disagree.It's advantage outweighs supersonic & Hypersonic Cruise missiles by a long shot
Anduril has made a mass producable cruise missile too, the Barracuda iirc.While frontal arc reduction is most prioritized but reduction of rcs on other arc's are also done.
Also the highest chances of radar detecting you still comes frontal or near frontal zone.
USA will use cruise missiles in mass use.
They have AGM-158C LRASM, a stealthy cruise missile for anti ship role intended to be the primary anti ship weapon of thier fighter jets.
![]()
Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM)
LRASM is a low-risk, multi-service, multi-platform, multi-mission Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare cruise missile.www.lockheedmartin.com
And I didn't meant that we need to *completely* replace LRLACM with a stealthy cruise missile.
Disagree.
Its more of a standoff munition.Anduril has made a mass producable cruise missile too, the Barracuda iirc.
For dealing with an enemy with sophisticated IADS stand off is the way to go, no longer only stealth. But what was impressive was Andurils feat of making it in 6 months.Its more of a standoff munition.
Rather Than a more sophisticated cruise missile.
Similar to this.
The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is developing a turbojet-powered variant of its Smart Anti-Airfield Weapon (SAAW) to convert the precision-guided glide bomb into a long-range cruise missile
It is indeed impressive, but availability of off the shelf subsystems that andurnil can buy and assemble the weapon,also helped.. But what was impressive was Andurils feat of making it in 6 months.
Higher right angle joint will give high reflectivity thereby detection. As much as many hate the traditional circular missile airframe we use, these are also built with degree of stealth characteristics within due to small frontal arc signature and low reaction time given to adversary.While frontal arc reduction is most prioritized but reduction of rcs on other arc's are also done.
Also the highest chances of radar detecting you still comes frontal or near frontal zone.
Yes, but for few selective specific cases and overall for a short duration of time if you consider a war effort full timeline. Majority of volume of ammo, precision target weapons would still be bombs, rek bombs etc. The destruction power with volume centric approach is unmatched cost benefit wise.USA will use cruise missiles in mass use.
Tomahawk is nothing but sending a 450kg bomb to its destination target via autonomous flying without risking a jet.They have AGM-158C LRASM, a stealthy cruise missile for anti ship role intended to be the primary anti ship weapon of thier fighter jets.
![]()
Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM)
LRASM is a low-risk, multi-service, multi-platform, multi-mission Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare cruise missile.www.lockheedmartin.com
And I didn't meant that we need to *completely* replace LRLACM with a stealthy cruise missile.
Disagree.
I already agree with you in lrlacm not needing replacement with a stealthier cruise missile for its role currently.Higher right angle joint will give high reflectivity thereby detection. As much as many hate the traditional circular missile airframe we use, these are also built with degree of stealth characteristics within due to small frontal arc signature and low reaction time given to adversary.
Correct parameter should be how effective the missile is based on all parameters combined ie stealth, time of flight, detection signature etc
vis a vis to how stealthy one is because that has to fly low and slow for a long long time.
Yes, but for few selective specific cases and overall for a short duration of time if you consider a war effort full timeline. Majority of volume of ammo, precision target weapons would still be bombs, rek bombs etc. The destruction power with volume centric approach is unmatched cost benefit wise.
Tomahawk is nothing but sending a 450kg bomb to its destination target via autonomous flying without risking a jet.
The same principle goes for other variants or new named weapons that is just packaging with additional new tech infusion.
My reply to him, was me saying that lrlacm is not an equivalent to a stealthy cruise missile.am i missing something or isnt LRLACM exactly what you want?
You can do this with SAAW EO, there's already 100kgf & even more thrust engine from NAL & private players at the moment, new space already have the AI tech for such autonomous tracking & targeting missions,It is indeed impressive, but availability of off the shelf subsystems that andurnil can buy and assemble the weapon,also helped.
Its not just anduril, russia has similarly developed a cheap cruise missile from off the shelf chinese commercial parts, including chinese commercial mini turbo jet.
Same with ukraine making a cheap long range cruise missile using old turbofan soviet origin engines that are near the end of their life, previously used in trainer jets.
So many other entities are also exploring similar cheap cruise missile concepts and many even have in use examples.
So andruil is not a pioneer of this concept.
You can do this with SAAW EO, there's already 100kgf & even more thrust engine from NAL & private players at the moment, new space already have the AI tech for such autonomous tracking & targeting missions,
Similar to this.
The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is developing a turbojet-powered variant of its Smart Anti-Airfield Weapon (SAAW) to convert the precision-guided glide bomb into a long-range cruise missile

