Indian Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Developments

[CATS @hunter]

We have meteor, does it make the development of Astra Mk3 easier?

Meteor is not our tech, nor do we produce it, also Astra mk3 has more range than the meteor,

Whereas there's Sheshnag 150 already exists, comes with satcom & AI features, which can do ISR, EW & strike roles, greater range,

Also we already have companies who manufacturers Good quality EO products, we already have wankle engines, and the carbon fibres,
You always don't need to reinvent the tech which already exists in house,
Nor does it have unique designs,

When this drone comes into production & induction, new tech would already will arrive & requirement will change, thus never ending process, nor it's a high tech drone which offers unique technology
So that you have to start from the ground, the tech & design are already proven, a better version are already out there,

It doesn't has to be a 3yr Long process, or instead of going wankle engines change it to a jet powered engine & make it in into a VLO platform, add AI features & ECCM

 

[Shan]

View attachment 47419

Any product that is developed from scratch (even if there are other comparable products present in the market) will undergo these stages. Hence, the timelines in years. These can be shrunk only if there are resources, will, and financing present (amongst a host of other factors). The first two stages each contain sub-stages and can be taxing.

There is a field that is called PLM (Product Lifecycle Management). This chart comes from there. Folks interested can read more about it. The initial stages of development are time and resource consuming. You can take a weapon system that was retired and start tracing its stages. This generic data will allow you to develop a better understanding. Timelines are flexible and can change depending on a host of factors. However, 3-4 years is a good ballpark for now. Induction and growth phases can be dealt with separately. Weapon system development of a similar nature are a good place to start.

 

[CATS @hunter]

3-4 years is standard minimum regardless of weapon system being developed.

From concept phase to design phase to prototyping, internal testing, user validation testing, certification.

If we are developing lets say a new combat knife for soldier expect it to take this minimum time.

It would have made sense when you are developing newer system, the design is similar, the engines are already proven, EO are proven, as there are similar drones already exists & flying with same specs, weight category & ranges, you always don't have to reinvent the wheel,

At the time the drone will come into production, a new requirement & techs would already come up, as you already given the e.g of anduril systems, when the systems are already developed & you have the data, the time frame will reduced

 

[Ashwin]

Meteor is not our tech, nor do we produce it, also Astra mk3 has more range than the meteor,

Whereas there's Sheshnag 150 already exists, comes with satcom & AI features, which can do ISR, EW & strike roles, greater range,

New Space is a different company competing for a similar product. They are also 2-3 years away from maturity. Just because something is flying doesn't mean it's ready. It has just started real testing. Now they have to achieve predefined objectives through iterations.

We have everything to make a ramjet powered BVR. From propulsion to seeker but D&D will take 3-4 years.

 

[babablacksheep]

It would have made sense when you are developing newer system, the design is similar, the engines are already proven, EO are proven, as there are similar drones already exists & flying with same specs, weight category & ranges, you always don't have to reinvent the wheel,

At the time the drone will come into production, a new requirement & techs would already come up, as you already given the e.g of anduril systems, when the systems are already developed & you have the data, the time frame will reduced

Anduril's Barracuda missile is still in development and has not yet been formally inducted into service, although it is progressing toward production. The company has been conducting successful flight tests and is in the final phases of testing and maturation before seeking full-rate production in 2026.

The concept for Anduril's Barracuda began in or around 2023, with the missile family publicly unveiled in September 2024.

*the 6 months claim from andruil is from finalised design to prototype unveiling*


Lets count.
2023-2024, 1st year
2024-2025, 2nd year.
2025-2026, 3rd year.


That is if no further delays happen.
&
Andruil is using mostly off the shelf components, lots of which are not available in India.

Also our development institutions are no way near the time efficiency capabilities that andruil is.


So expecting less than 3 years in our case given the current reality and reality in general, is in the realm of delusion

 

[CATS @hunter]

New Space is a different company competing for a similar product. They are also 2-3 years away from maturity. Just because something is flying doesn't mean it's ready.

The thing here is new space is already offering with better techs,
You always don't need to make same product again, nor this drone is High end product, where you need multiple venders, when there's more than one already existing

 

[CATS @hunter]

Anduril's Barracuda missile is still in development and has not yet been formally inducted into service, although it is progressing toward production. The company has been conducting successful flight tests and is in the final phases of testing and maturation before seeking full-rate production in 2026.

But barracuda already has bagged a deal with Poland for the production of the missiles,
Nor the anduril systems reinvent the same stuff, the made a new system which offers ranges like a cruise missile, added autonomous feature and network targeting, also a low weight, which can be deployed in masses for SEAD DEAD & mass saturation attacks over longer ranges, less cost than the traditional missile, a system which is in between a loitering drone & cruise missiles,

But for the CSIR drones the techs already exists in India, they aren't making something new, also new space is providing a similar stuff, and there's already harop in the service, now Adani is making the longer variants, with whom CSIR drones shares similar design, how exactly is the drone gonna beat them if it's not providing a unique solution,

Products like Swift K, makes more valuable as there no equivalent of such products in India nor we can get them easily, and it's high end product

 

[marich01]

The thing here is new space is already offering with better techs,
You always don't need to make same product again, nor this drone is High end product, where you need multiple venders, when there's more than one already existing

IPR is one major point, NAL one would be sole owned by the GoI. So even if same product many are available in arms market, not everything can be considered as fit for procurement or fit for use. The Brochure spec need to be proven by field trials.

When you already have off the shelf technology, why it taking them 3yrs for completing the project, also at time when there are similar drones already available with better specs out there

hardware is incredibly tough to get right. Just think about the stabilised EO payload part, you will need a year to get a stabilised view datafeed from a flying object like this. Here we are talking about a single 1 way drone covering 1000km.
more importantly, bill of material will be as per NAL, the partner can recommend cots items alternative but that needs approval from project office. Each item goes thru same criteria, then the full & part items going thru the necessary tests and report submission. Huge workload.

 

[Subgradewalker]

The thing here is new space is already offering with better techs,
You always don't need to make same product again, nor this drone is High end product, where you need multiple venders, when there's more than one already existing

I won't comment on the tech part. But this thought process of not needing competition is flawed tbh.

One is a pvt company, relatively new. Another is led by DRDO ( state tech stack). And competition will only keep each other in check. If newspace comes before, with better tech and performance.. then it gets inducted and DRDO DcPP will see it's profits less desirable. Which might prompt the DcPP on their side to expedite the process. Furthermore, having two companies with same product leads to very much needed redundancy, fallback options and war time capacity. DRDO's project run on their own tangent and I doubt that govt will ask them to let go of such projects untill our pvt industry really matured and our intelligence security is strengthened.
While, govt shouldn't curtail development in pvt sector either, no matter the scale.. as it leads to capability building in long term when given ample support by system.

There are many other aspect, which we can discuss on. But that will be a discussion on policy, not technical aspects. So, I will stop here for the thread.

 

[CATS @hunter]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1982372835860586992

A very nice thing put up by baba Kalyani, we have to be product driven country not process driven country

 

[RationalGuy]

When you already have off the shelf technology, why it taking them 3yrs for completing the project, also at time when there are similar drones already available with better specs out there

Its not just putting together the stuff the software to make it run is complex, achieving sensor fusion to make the drone perform well in contested environment with EW spoofing and GNSS jamming by adversary is non trivial as is making the drone fly almost 900 km to hit the target. It may take even more time.

 

[Subgradewalker]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1982372835860586992

A very nice thing put up by baba Kalyani, we have to be product driven country not process driven country

Result of leftists led BA grads ruling the roost in beauracracy for long time. Humanity, poor people blah blah blah. Only kept them rich and our country

 

[babablacksheep]

But barracuda already has bagged a deal with Poland for the production of the missiles,

Poland's state-owned defense group PGZ and Anduril have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to jointly develop and produce the Barracuda-500M cruise missile, this is an initial agreement to build and localize production, not a final contract for induction into service.

MOU, not actual orders.

Deal will move further ahead when barracuda completes development.

Nor the anduril systems reinvent the same stuff, the made a new system which offers ranges like a cruise missile, added autonomous feature and network targeting, also a low weight, which can be deployed in masses for SEAD DEAD & mass saturation attacks over longer ranges, less cost than the traditional missile, a system which is in between a loitering drone & cruise missiles,

The top speed for the Anduril Barracuda family of missiles is approximately 500 knots (575 mph or 925 km/h)


IAI harop also has all the same features of barracuda, the only major difference is speed.
IAI Harop loitering munition.
Maximum speed: 417 km/h (259 mph, 225 kn) .

So its not as revolutionizing as you think.

The indian drone whose development periods you are dissatisfied with is also basically an indian version of harop drone( with more modern features when it enters service).

how exactly is the drone gonna beat them if it's not providing a unique solution,

The intention for these drones is not to be unique or best in its class.
Pakistan will not suddenly get a very dense sophisticated air defense network by 2030.
The development is going forward because forces beleive harop like drone will still be useful in future.

We are also developing barracuda like systems using drdo saaw as base.

 

[CATS @hunter]

One is a pvt company, relatively new. Another is led by DRDO ( state tech stack). And competition will only keep each other in check. If newspace comes before, with better tech and performance.. then it gets inducted and DRDO DcPP will see it's profits less desirable. Which might prompt the DcPP on their side to expedite the process. Furthermore, having two companies with same product leads to very much needed redundancy, fallback options and war time capacity.

The problem it's not competing with new space but it also compete against harop, which is also have longer range loitering drones, and share the similar design, also harop already in the service and there's a familiarity, unless you are offering something different you aren't you going to cut out, or will be in the never ending cycle of catching up with current tech

 

[CATS @hunter]

Its not just putting together the stuff the software to make it run is complex, achieving sensor fusion to make the drone perform well in contested environment with EW spoofing and GNSS jamming by adversary is non trivial as is making the drone fly almost 900 km to hit the target. It may take even more time.

But the thing is the drone ain't offering any of that, the communication range is 200km, & payload delivery range is 900km, there's no autonomous feature which act on its own, it's more of like geran 2,

 

[babablacksheep]

When you already have off the shelf technology, why it taking them 3yrs for completing the project, also at time when there are similar drones already available with better specs out there

Its taking 3 years because tech is available.
3-4 years as said before is the minimum time period to move any concept from concept to ready for induction stage.


As said before even if you were developing a Knife for soldier it will take minimum of 3-4 years to make it ready for induction.

A haroop like drone is more complex than a knife.

 

[babablacksheep]

But the thing is the drone ain't offering any of that, the communication range is 200km, & payload delivery range is 900km, there's no autonomous feature which act on its own, it's more of like geran 2,

It has autonomous features.
Autonamy=fully independent flight, object detection and tracking, loitering ability.

 

[CATS @hunter]

IAI harop also has all the same features of barracuda, the only major difference is speed.
IAI Harop loitering munition.
Maximum speed: 417 km/h (259 mph, 225 kn) .

IAF harop can't be deployed from the fighters jets, whereas a F-15EX can deploy more than dozen of barracuda M class missiles, which has excessive range of 500km and work on network centring mode choosing Thier target independently,

The intention for these drones is not to be unique or best in its class.
Pakistan will not suddenly get a very dense sophisticated air defense network by 2030.
The development is going forward because forces beleive harop like drone will still be useful in future.

But here's the problem the drone may not might even enter the service, it's not cut above to compete with sheshnag 150 nor harop, which has similar class drone like NAL drone, and the production partner is Adani defence, and forces already operate them.

 

[babablacksheep]

IAF harop can't be deployed from the fighters jets, whereas a F-15EX can deploy more than dozen of barracuda M class missiles, which has excessive range of 500km and work on network centring mode choosing Thier target independently,

Barracuda is system intended to by used by fighter jets, its subsystems are packaged in a way to fulfill its intent.

Israeli haroop is not intended for fighter jets.

But in terms of subsystems go the only thing barracuda has that is higher end than haroop is the engine and software( which can also be put into haroop like loitering drones and if desired).

And for autonomous targeting and network Centric communication with other missiles for each missile to independently chose its target

This capability was also shown by soviet shipwreck missile, which entered service in **1980s**



The term "shipwreck missile" can refer to the Russian SS-N-19 "Shipwreck" missile, a supersonic anti-ship missile that could be launched from submarines and ships. While older, its capabilities highlight the historical development of guided missile technology. Modern anti-ship missiles have significantly advanced autonomous capabilities, including a high degree of autonomy, network-centric warfare features, and sophisticated guidance systems. These systems can perform automatic target recognition, sea-skimming, and terrain-following, and are equipped with advanced artificial intelligence, computer vision, and electro-optics.

But here's the problem the drone may not might even enter the service, it's not cut above to compete with sheshnag 150 nor harop, which has similar class drone like NAL drone, and the production partner is Adani defence, and forces already operate them

IPR is one major point, NAL one would be sole owned by the GoI. So even if same product many are available in arms market, not everything can be considered as fit for procurement or fit for use. The Brochure spec need to be proven by field trials.

 

[marich01]

experimental uav, might be the previously cancelled work re-tendered for.