India - WikiLeaks
India
i. Missiles
ii. Overview
iii. Modernization Plans
i.
BrahMos/PJ-10 SLCM
• BrahMos A – air launched variant (developed for integration with Su-30 MK1)
• Brahmos S – submarine-launched variant
• BrahMos MKII
Inducted into Indian Army – July 2007
- 50 BrahMos are expected to be produced every year.
Variants:
Indian Army Version
The Indian army variant utilizes a mobile-launch system derived from a Tatra truck, which can carry three BrahMos missiles. The system's fire-control system is integrated with the launcher.
The army version utilizes a different guidance system and has been integrated with different types of warheads, according to Indian army requirements. It has terrain-hugging and infrared-seeking capabilities.
BrahMos-A
An air-launched variant being developed for integration with India's Su-30MKI fighters. The program reportedly includes strengthening the wings and other structural adjustments to the Su-30 to enable it to carry the BrahMos. The fighter is expected to be capable of carrying three of the missiles.
Submarine-Launched Variant
Identical to the standard version. In order to be able to launch the missiles, subs must be fitted with a 25-ft (7.65 m) cylindrical module that houses the missile and fire-control system. The missile can be launched from submerged subs at a depth of up to 200 ft (60 m), according to company officials.
BrahMos Mk II
The Mk II is a proposed hypersonic variant of the BrahMos missile, utilizing scramjet technology to attain speeds of up to Mach 8. It may be a reusable system capable of delivering payloads at long range before returning to its base.
Reports of:
Novator 3M54/3M14 Club
Media reports indicate India has fielded some Novator 3M-54 Club (SS-N-27 Sizzler). The air launched variant has been marketed on the Su-32FN/34 but there are no reports as yet of hard sales.
Zvezda 3M-24/Kh-35U Uran
Dubbed the Kharpunski the Kh-35U Uran (AS-20 Kayak/SS-N-25 Switchblade) is the Russian equivalent to the US RGM-84/AGM-84 Harpoon. The missile is available in surface launched and air launched versions (AKU-58 adaptor) and was publicly canvassed as an option for India's Tu-142 Bear upgrade - it is already deployed on the New Delhi class DDG.
In development:
Sudarshan
KOCHI: After registering significant success with conventional missile systems, India is all set to test its first laser-guided missile at the Interim Test Range, Balasore, Orissa.
The missile, Sudarshan, is the latest weapon system developed indigenously to occupy the niche of a precision delivery mechanism. It can neutralise any target in a 800-1,000 km range with a zero margin of error.
Developed by the Aeronautical Development Establishment, Bangalore, Sudarshan is a versatile missile that can be used by the army, navy and air force. It suits the requirements of the artillery for a long-distance strike weapon. The navy can also fire it from an onboard launcher.
“The first version will use a ground-based launcher. However, subsequent ones could be fired from a flying fighter or drone. This will enhance the range,” a source told to this website's newspaper.
Sudarshan will use a laser of a specific frequency bandwidth to locate the target. The laser creates a heat signature on the target. The missile recognises the signature and homes in on it even if the target is moving, sources said. “The target can be spotlighted using laser beamed from a ship or air. The onboard systems can light it up and the missile follows the reflected light to reach targets that need pinpoint accuracy,” said the source.
However, unlike the practice of giving continuous laser guidance to a missile using an aircraft or a handheld designator, Sudarshan’s instrumentation enables it to chase a target once the navigation systems lock in on it.
The ADE is equipping the missile with global positioning system technology. Like all modern missiles, it will have a three-dimensional locking mechanism using latitude, longitude and elevation.
The preliminary trials, the sources said, were satisfactory. A dummy target was lit up using a laser fired from a battle tank. The missile’s navigation system picked up the light and eliminated the target. Sudarshan’s final trials are expected to take place within three months.
ii. India’s Missile Overview
Introduction
India views its nuclear weapons and long-range power projection programs as the key to maintaining strategic stability in the Asia-Pacific region, deterring Pakistan, safeguarding against potential nuclear threats from China, and attaining great-power status. Among all the developing states with aspirations for weapons of mass destruction and long-range power projection capabilities, India alone has achieved a unique degree of success. Outside the group of the five legally accepted nuclear weapon states and Israel, India perhaps harbors the most sophisticated ballistic and cruise missile programs in the world. India's strategic missile programs have matured to the extent that New Delhi can now deploy short- and medium-range nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles in an operational mode against Pakistan and China. Four decades of investments in a missile-related design, development, and manufacturing infrastructure have also made this sector less vulnerable to long-term disruption by technology denial regimes. More significantly, India's sophisticated civilian satellite launch capability makes it one of the few developing states theoretically capable of building an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) within this decade.[1]
India continues its wide-ranging pursuit of ballistic and cruise missile capabilities. It also carried out two successful tests of its 3,000-3,500 km range Agni-III ballistic missile in April 2007 and May 2008, and a successful test of the K-15 (Sagarika) submarine-launched ballistic missile in February 2008. Apart from its ballistic missile arsenal, India has inducted the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, the product of an Indian-Russian joint venture, into its armed forces.
Indian defense planners are also looking toward introducing basic changes in the missile development process. In January 2008, the Indian government announced that the IGMDP would end by the close of the year.[2][3] The focus will now be on serial production of the missiles that are part of the program and for some specific missile systems, foreign collaboration will be considered.[3]
Historical Overview
India's missile programs can be roughly divided into five phases. During the first phase (1958-1970), India's missile ambitions were confined to building a first-generation anti-tank missile (ATGM) and developing a three-ton thrust, liquid-fueled rocket engine most likely based on the Soviet SA-2 sustainer motor. Both projects were undertaken by the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) with the objective of gaining scientific expertise and creating a technological infrastructure to build modern missiles indigenously in the long term; there were no plans for the immediate serial production of missile systems. However, the DRDO's technical and organizational shortcomings, opposition from the armed services, and weak support from politicians and civilian bureaucrats in the federal government resulted in the failure and ultimate termination of both projects.[4]
Phase II of India's missile program spans the decade of the 1970s. During this period, the DRDO undertook two significant projects. The first, Project Devil, was an attempt to "reverse-engineer" the Soviet SA-2 surface-to-air missile (SAM). The second, Project Valiant, was an ambitious attempt to develop a 1,500km-range ballistic missile. Both projects emanated from an alliance of interests between scientists in the DRDO, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, and some of her influential bureaucratic advisors. Design competence and political symbolism were the primary objectives of both projects. For these reasons and because of the peculiarities of India's civil-military relations, the armed services were kept at the margins of the decision-making process. However, India lacked the scientific, engineering, and industrial base to build a long-range ballistic missile. Due to faltering progress, the Indian government terminated the Valiant program in 1974. On the other hand, Project Devil proved to be a partial success. Although Indian engineers were unable to reverse-engineer the SA-2 missile system entirely, they apparently succeeded in developing two solid-fuel boosters and a three-ton, liquid-sustainer engine for the Devil missile.[5]
The Indian government revived the flailing missile program in 1980 and in 1983 launched the Integrated Guided Missile Development Program (IGMDP) to develop a family of strategic and tactical guided missiles. The IGMDP involved the development of two strategic ballistic missile systems: two variants of a short-range ballistic missile (Prithvi), and a medium-range technology demonstrator (Agni). Under the program, the DRDO also sought to develop medium- and short-range SAMs (Akash and Trishul), and a third-generation ATGM (Nag). The years 1980-1994, the third phase in India's missile program, marked a crucial turning point. During this period, India's forays into missile building were transformed from exercises in technology-gathering, reverse-engineering, and design competence into a full-fledged program to build a series of operational missile systems. By 1996-1997, the successful development of the Prithvi-1 (150km-range) provided India with the technical option to deploy a limited nuclear strike capability against Pakistan. Similarly, two successful flight-tests of the 1,400km-range Agni missile validated India's "re-entry vehicle" technology. The Agni program thus served as a building block for the design and development of longer-range ballistic missile systems--systems that would provide India with a nuclear strike capability against China in the future.[6]
The fourth phase of India's strategic missile program stretches from the mid-1990s until 2000. This phase was characterized by the partial success of IGMDP, and limited serial production of the Prithvi and Agni ballistic missiles. As a result of the armed services commitment to actually purchase indigenous missile systems, the DRDO has been able to shift its focus from technology demonstration to modifying missile systems to meet the field requirements of the user in terms of deployment and operability. Capitalizing on its successes with the Prithvi and Agni, the DRDO embarked on programs to develop shorter- and longer-range versions of the Agni (Agni-1 and Agni-III), a supersonic cruise missile (BrahMos) with Russian collaboration, and a naval variant of the Prithvi (Dhanush). The DRDO is also believed to be developing a sea-launched ballistic missile, the Sagarika, which is expected to become operational by 2010. In addition, India has sought U.S., Russian and Israeli collaboration in the development of an anti-tactical ballistic missile (ATBM) system.[7]
During the fifth phase, which roughly stretches from 2001 until the present, DRDO has sought to improve the performance of the ballistic missiles developed during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Key initiatives in this phase include the incorporation of features to improve the "hit to kill" capabilities of the missiles and the use of newer and lighter materials in the construction of the missile systems.[8] Among other priorities are projects to manufacture BrahMos variants for the different services, the hypersonic variant of the BrahMos, the development of 'smart' missiles that are smaller, lighter, agile, and can home in on targets with great accuracy; the development of hypersonic vehicles, nanotechnologies, homing guidance, very large systems integration, miniaturized electro-mechanical systems, system on chip, and newer materials such as ceramics and lightweight composites.[9] The DRDO has also made some progress on its building its anti-ballistic missile capability. Two successful tests of components of this system took place in November 2006 and December 2007.
Current Development/Operational Status of Strategic Missile Programs
Prithvi
Developmental work on the single-stage, liquid-engine Prithvi ballistic missile started in the early 1980s.[10] Flight-tests of the 150km-range/1,000kg-payload, army-version of the missile (Prithvi-1/SS-150) began in 1987[11] and lasted until late 1993. In recent years, the missile was tested in May 2007. Subsequent to user trials with the Indian Army in 1994, the missile entered serial production at Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL), Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh).[12] The Indian Army has already raised two missile groups--333rd and 334th Missile Groups--both based in Secunderabad (Andhra Pradesh), to handle all logistical and operational details related to the Prithvi. During peacetime, the missiles and their support equipment are reportedly stored in Secunderabad, Jalandhar (Punjab), and Jammu (Jammu &Kashmir).[13] Current numerical estimates of the Indian Army's Prithvi inventory range from 75-90 missiles[14] and reports published in 2003-2004 suggest that that the Army might acquire an additional 30-50 missiles.[15]
Flight-tests of the 250km-range/500kg-payload, Indian Air Force (IAF)-version of the Prithvi (Prithvi-2/SS-250) started in 1993.[16] The IAF subsequently inducted the Prithvi-II in 2004.[17] Nevertheless, some reports in 2005 stated that the IAF was not too keen on the Prithvi-II and favored acquisition of an air-launched version of the BrahMos.[18] The IAF's two missile squadrons--one of which may be called the 2203 Squadron--are reportedly based in Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh).[19] However, the missiles will be moved closer to the border with Pakistan during a crisis or war. The IAF's Prithvi inventory is estimated at 25, although more recent reports suggest that the service might acquire an additional 50 missile systems.[20]
The army's variant of the Prithvi-II was test-fired in May 2008 for the first time since the missile was handed over to the army in 2006.[17][21] This test was also the first with an extended range of 350 km for the army version.[17]
The third variant of this missile is the Prithvi-III, versions of which have been referred to variously as Dhanush, Sagarika, and K-15. Reportedly, the Prithvi-III is the same as the Sagarika submarine-launched ballistic missile that is under development.[22] In 1998, the DRDO had announced that it was developing a 350km-range, naval-version of the Prithvi (Dhanush/SS-350).[23] The first test of the Dhanush in April 2000 ended in failure.[24] However, after two subsequent successful tests, the DRDO declared in September 2002 that Dhanush was "ready for induction after successful trials at sea."[25] In October 2004, DRDO conducted the first successful underwater launch of the Dhanush from an especially designed canister placed in an artificial body of water.[26][27] The DRDO also declared a subsequent off-shore flight-test of the Dhanush in November 2004 from the INS Subhadra a success.[28] The missile and its sub-systems have also been referred to by the project name K-15 and have been placed on a fast track development path. In December 2004, Indian Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee informed parliament that development flight-tests for the Dhanush had been completed.[29] It might be noted that the K-15 (also known as the Sagarika) was tested successfully in March 2008 (for more details on the K-15/Sagarika test, see below).
Prithvi also has a role in India's pursuit of an anti-ballistic missile capability. Variants of the Prithvi, including the Prithvi-II, were used in "attacker" and "interceptor" mode in the tests of India's fledgling anti-ballistic missile system in November 2006 and December 2007.[30]
The Prithvi is mainly a Pakistan-specific missile system and has reportedly been configured for nuclear delivery. [If we assume that the Sagarika or Dhanush or the K-15 are versions of the Prithvi-III, then this missile would form the mainstay of India's submarine launched ballistic missile arsenal, which has China as its primary focus as part of New Delhi's quest for a triad of delivery systems.] In addition, the DRDO has designed a variety of conventional warheads for use in different battlefield support roles. The Indian government is believed to have upgraded the alert status of some nuclear-capable Prithvi missile units during the Kargil war with Pakistan (May-July 1999),[31] and during the Indo-Pakistani military standoff that lasted from December 2001 until October 2002.[32] Reports in 2003, however, stated that the Indian government no longer planned to use the Prithvi as a nuclear delivery system. Instead the missiles would be armed with conventional warheads and be used as long-range artillery to attack Pakistan's strategic and theater reserves.[33] However, as of 2008, the Prithvi-I and the Prithvi-III both remained part of the India's existing and proposed nuclear delivery systems.[34][35]
Agni
In the early 1980s, the hybrid, two-stage (solid-motor/liquid-engine) Agni was conceived as a "technology demonstrator" (TD) to test propulsion, staging, and re-entry technologies for applications in medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missile systems. Work on the 1,200-1,500km-range/1,000kg-payload Agni TD most likely began in 1983. Between 1989 and 1994, the DRDO conducted three developmental flight-tests, of which two were successful.[36] Although flight-tests were suspended between 1995 and 1998, research and development on an improved variant continued uninterrupted.[37] Testing was revived in 1999.[38] Between April 1999 and August 2004, the DRDO conducted three successful developmental flight tests of the rail-/road-mobile, two-stage, all solid-fueled, 2,000-2,500km-range/1,000kg-payload Agni-II.[39]
In 1999, the Indian government approved the development of a rail-/road-mobile, single-stage, solid-motor, 700-800km-range/1,000kg-payload variant of the Agni missile. This variant, which was later dubbed as the Agni-I, was conceived as a bridge between the short-range Prithvi and the longer-range Agni-TD and Agni-II ballistic missiles. Between January 2002 and June 2004, the short-range variant of the Agni has been tested thrice successfully.[40] Senior Indian defense officials have suggested that although more user flight-tests are in the offing, the missile is ready for induction into the armed services. The Indian Army is raising two missile groups--444th and 555th--to induct and manage the Agni-I and II variants.[41] Although the Indian government stated in 2006 that the Agni I & II have been inducted into the armed forces, it is unclear to what extent they have actually been operationalized.[87]
After years of rumors that a test of the 3,000-4,000 km-range variant of the Agni ballistic missile, the Agni III, was imminent, India finally flight-tested the missile on 9 July 2006. However, the missile, which is 16 meters tall, weighs 48 tons, and capable of delivering a 1.5 ton warhead, failed within 50 seconds of launch. Officials at India's Defense Research & Development Organization (DRDO) initially suggested that the failure likely resulted due to separation problems between the two-stage missile's first and second stages.[42] However, a subsequent report published in Force magazine suggests that test failure could have resulted from either: (a) malfunctioning gimbaled nozzles in the first stage; (b) irregular flow of propellant in the first stage; or (c) problems with the solid propellant itself.[43]
Subsequently, the Agni-III was successfully tested in April 2007 and May 2008. According to a senior defense scientist, a "truly deliverable version" was tested in May 2008 and that the missile was ready for induction into the armed forces.[44] Other reports stated that the army might receive the missile in 2009 following a flight trial.[45]
The Agni missiles have been designed and developed for delivering nuclear munitions. Despite earlier suggestions of the Agni's potential conventional role, this is now unlikely for reasons of cost-effectiveness and accuracy.[46] The Agni-I will most probably replace the Prithvi for nuclear-targeting missions against Pakistan. Although the longer-range variants of the Agni will inherently be capable of targeting Pakistan as well (the Agni-I, with its 700 km range is probably Pakistan-specific), they are primarily being developed to give India a nuclear deterrent capability against China.[45]
Reports in May 2008 stated that the Indian government has given the go-ahead to develop the Agni-V missile, with a range of 5,000 km and above in the next two years, although other reports have stated that the missile will be a key nuclear delivery system in seven years, with the first test flights expected in 3-4 years.[47][48] With the Agni-V, India will be able to credibly target parts of northeastern China (including Beijing) from launchers that do not necessarily have to be located close to the border with China. There were reports in summer 2007 that New Delhi had approved the Agni III* (Agni III Star), with a range of 5,000 km, but the 2008 reports indicate that the next missile in the Agni series after Agni-III would in fact be the Agni-V, rather than the Agni-IV or Agni-III*.[49] The Agni-V was not part of the original IGMDP which provided the framework for India's missile development plans since 1983.[47] The missile will involve adding a third stage to the Agni-III.
BrahMos
Increasingly, a key component of India's missile force is the BrahMos cruise missile. This is a 280-300km-range/200-300kg-payload, supersonic cruise missile in joint partnership with the Russian entity, NPO Mashinostroyeniye. The joint development work on the missile was started in 1998, while the joint company establishing the program was registered in 1995.[50] Derived from the Russian anti-ship missile called the Yakhont, the BrahMos is a dual-mode cruise missile, with its primary mode as an anti-ship missile, with a backup capability to attack shore-based, radio-contrast targets. The missile features a two-stage propulsion system employing a solid propellant booster with a liquid ramjet engine. Russia is believed to be primarily responsible for the propulsion system and systems integration, while India has responsibility for the on-board guidance system.[51] The first test of the missile in India was conducted in June 2001[52]; it was followed by a second flight-test in April 2002.[53] Three developmental flight tests were conducted in 2003[54] followed by an additional three tests during 2004.[55] During two tests conducted in November 2003 and 2004 respectively, the missile was successfully used to destroy a moving target from a warship at sea.[56] The missile is now in serial production.
The BrahMos was originally planned for a coastal defense (land-to-ship) role but in recent years it has been tasked with multiple objectives – navy (ship-to-ship) and army (land-to-land) besides ongoing development on submarine-launch and air-to-air versions.[57] Developmental flight tests of the naval variant of the BrahMos were reportedly completed in 2004 and the same year, the Indian Navy placed a "letter of intent" with the joint Indo-Russian venture BrahMos Aersopace Ltd. to acquire an undisclosed number of the cruise missiles.[58] The missile has since been inducted into the navy.
In March 2008, the Indian government conducted the first test of the naval version of the BrahMos against a land target, confirming its sea-to-land attack capability.[59] The DRDO is also developing a submarine-launch version and an air-to-air version of the BrahMos that is due to be tested in 2008 and 2009.[60] For these versions, the navy's Kilo-class submarines and the air force's Sukhoi aircraft are likely to be used.[61] The CEO and Managing Director of BrahMos Aerospace Ltd. Dr. A. Sivathanu Pillai stated in December 2004 that development of the Air Force variant is expected to be completed within the next three to five years.[62] The Air Force version of the BrahMos will have reduced length and weight, employ a new booster and a cap nose.
India is also developing an army variant of the missile. Delivery of the missile to the army commenced in June 2007. Two tests of the Army variant had been successfully conducted in June and December 2004.[63]
The next stage of the BrahMos development process is the production of a hypersonic variant (i.e., with a speed of over Mach 5), laboratory tests of which had taken place by May 2008.
Some defense observers believe that the India will likely to use technologies acquired and developed under the BrahMos program to develop longer-range nuclear capable cruise missiles in the future.[64] Reports in may 2008 stated that the DRDO is developing a hypersonic missile that can also be used as a long-range cruise missile.[65] The project, termed the Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle (HSTDV) project is being developed in collaboration with the Israeli Aerospace Industries (IAI).[66]
According to some estimations, in the next decade, India will purchase about 1,000 BrahMos missiles for its military, while about 2,000 missiles will be for export purposes.[67] India and Russia have announced plans to export the BrahMos to friendly "third countries" with mutual consent. Production facilities for the BrahMos are being established in India and Russia; 20 Indian and 10 Russian companies are expected to participate in its manufacture.[68] In 2004, BrahMos Aerospace Ltd. had signed an agreement with Russia's main arms export agency--Rosoboronexport--to market the missile in the international market.[69]
Nirbhay
In July 2007, Indian defense scientists announced the proposed development of a new cruise missile system, the Nirbhay (Fearless). Nirbhay will be a 1,000 km-range subsonic cruise missile that can be deployed on multiple platforms.[70] A technology demonstrator is scheduled to be completed in early 2009. With its terrain-hugging capability, the missile would be able to avoid detection ground radar.[70]
Sagarika
In February 2008, India tested its K-15 submarine-launched ballistic missile from a submerged pontoon in the Bay of Bengal. This missile had been tested four times previously, although with very little publicity.[71] As noted above, the K-15 (also called the Sagarika or ‘Oceanic') has also been known previously as Prithvi-III and Dhanush.
India's Aeronautical Development Establishment is rumored to be developing a submarine-launched missile with "significant engineering assistance," especially in underwater launch technology, from scientists associated with quasi-public research institutes in Russia.[72] There has been considerable debate over the Sagarika's characteristics. Indian defense analysts have described it as a cruise missile program[73], but the U.S. Department of Defense has categorized the Sagarika as a submarine-launched ballistic missile, although with the 2008 the debate has been settled in favor of the latter description. The range, propulsion, payload, and other technical parameters of this missile remain unknown, except that it will probably arm India's nuclear submarine, the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV).[74]
Development work on the missile apparently began in 1992.. Reports in 2008 stated that the K-15/Sagarika will be launched from a submarine in about two years and subsequently from a nuclear powered submarine (the Advanced Technology Vessel-ATV) under construction which will be ready for sea trials by then.[71]
Despite the submarine focus of the Sagarika, the missile can also be launched from land and mobile launchers.[104] The missile weighs about 7 tons and can carry nuclear warheads that weight up to 600 kg over a range of about 700 km.[71][75]
The Sagarika program is believed to be driven by India's long-term goals to achieve a secure sea-based, second-strike nuclear capability.
Avatar
India reportedly plans to fly a hypersonic plane in 2007. An eight-meter technology demonstrator is being built by the Defense Research & Development Laboratory (DRDL) in Hyderabad; the demonstrator vehicle will be powered by a "Scramjet" engine that takes in oxygen from the atmosphere and burns liquid hydrogen. The hypersonic prototype will apparently be a precursor to the DRDO's Aerobic Vehicle for Hypersonic Aerospace Transportation (AVATAR).[76] The proposed Avatar will be able to take off and land like an aircraft and will also be able to place a payload of 1,000kg in low-earth orbit. The vehicle would be capable of performing about 100 re-entries into the atmosphere. According to a DRDO official, the primary function of the vehicle is to act as a "reusable missile launcher, one which can launch missiles, land ... and be loaded again for more missions." The official estimates the total cost for the project to be about $2 billion with a developmental period of 10 years. Components of the Avatar program such as the Scramjet engine are being developed and tested at India's premier missile laboratory - Research Center Imarat (RCI), Hyderabad.[77]
Role of Ballistic and Cruise Missiles in India's Proposed Nuclear Strike Force
In the long term, the Indian government envisions a "minimal deterrent" based on a triad of land-, air-, and sea-based nuclear forces. Ballistic and cruise missiles will be key components of the envisioned nuclear strike force.
At present, the Prithvi-I, Prithvi-II, Agni-I and the Agni-II are the ballistic missiles in service with the Indian Army and Air Force respectively, although there are some doubts over the operational status of the latter two (see above). The Prithvi missiles are inherently nuclear-capable, and an undisclosed number of Prithvi-1 missiles have reportedly been modified to deliver nuclear warheads. However, the Prithvi suffers from several limitations such as its short-range, liquid-fueled engine, which add to the logistics burden, and fuel toxicity, which increases the difficulty of handling the weapon system in the field. Hence the Prithvi missiles will most likely be replaced by the Agni ballistic missiles for nuclear missions. The existing and proposed inventory of missiles will most likely be reassigned to perform conventional battlefield support functions. The DRDO is also developing a 350km-range naval-variant of the Prithvi: the Dhanush. The Dhanush is currently undergoing flight-trials. In 2004, DRDO conducted an underwater launch of the Dhanush from a specially designed container placed in an artificial body of water. The underwater test suggests that India is developing submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM) technology. However, the IN has not made a decision to deploy the Dhanush on board surface warships citing limitations of range and problems related to the missile's hypergolic and toxic liquid fuel. Nor does the IN possess submarines capable of carrying and launching ballistic missiles. Despite these limitations, the Indian Navy might acquire a small number of these missiles and deploy them on board surface warships as part of the inter-services organizational battle to acquire a stake in the proposed "minimal deterrent."
The short-, medium-, and intermediate-range variants of the Agni ballistic missile are likely to be the mainstay of India's land-based missile force in the future. In comparison to the Prithvi, each of these variants of the Agni combines the advantages of longer-range, higher-payload, and solid-fueled motors. Although India is developing an intermediate-range ballistic missile and presumably has the technology to build intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), it appears to have stopped well short of actually building an ICBM. In June 2004, the Scientific Advisor to India's Defense Minister Dr. V. K. Aatre told reporters that "...we [India] have all the technologies...it (ICBM) needs a larger engine, longer burning time, improvement in the guidance system, among others... it's not a question of whether we can build an ICBM or not, but whether we want an ICBM, which I am not going to talk about."[78] New Delhi's restraint in this regard is probably the result of a conscious political choice to avoid threatening or challenging the legally recognized members of the nuclear club, with the exception of China, which India regards as a potential long-term threat to its security. Furthermore, as India moves in the direction of an operational nuclear force, Indian elites perhaps feel reduced pressure to rely on technological symbols to demonstrate political resolve.
Thus, although the Indian government gave approval for the 5,000 km range Agni-V in May 2008 (which can target China more credibly), there were reports in 2007 that New Delhi had capped the range that limit and would not go for a full-fledged ICBM.[79][80] Such a decision was seen as a "goodwill gesture" especially at a time of negotiations between India and the United States on their bilateral nuclear agreement.[80]
India's quest for a secure, sea-based, second-strike capability centers on its submarine-launched missile: the Sagarika. The Sagarika, which is expected to arm India's ATV, has suffered from program delays and is not expected to become operational before 2010. There has been some controversy over whether the Sagarika belongs to the cruise or ballistic class of missiles, but since the Sagarika's test in February 2008, it has been referred to as a ballistic missile.
In addition, the DRDO is also developing a supersonic anti-ship cruise missile, the BrahMos/PJ-10, in close collaboration with the Russian entity NPO Mashinostroyeniye. Three versions of the missile are under development: a naval version for surface and sub-surface vessels; a land-attack Army version; and an aircraft-based version. Although the BrahMos is primarily an anti-ship cruise missile, many observers believe that the technologies acquired and developed under the program will most likely help India develop nuclear-capable long-range cruise missiles in the medium- and long-term.
Custody/Command and Control
India does not maintain a constituted nuclear force on a heightened state of alert. The nuclear-capable missiles, non-nuclear warhead assemblies, and fissile cores are maintained in a de-alerted state by the individual armed services, the DRDO, and the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), respectively, with plans to reconstitute them rapidly during an emergency or national crisis.[81]
After much debate, deliberations, and delay, the Indian government has entrusted operational control of India's nuclear missile force to the Indian Army. Although the Indian Air Force deploys an undisclosed number of nuclear-capable bombers and is actively planning to upgrade the air leg of the dyad, it has lost the inter-organizational battle with the Army for custody of India's nuclear missile force.[82]
Although the nuclear-capable missiles and aircraft are under the control of individual armed services, India's consolidated nuclear force is administered by a tri-service Strategic Forces Command (SFC).[83] Due to the delay in the appointment of the proposed Chief of Defense Staff (CDS), who will ultimately head a joint tri-service command, the commander-in-chief of the SFC currently reports to the Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee. Ultimately, however, the SFC will report to the CDS, who will act as the "single-point" military advisor to the Indian government and act as the interface between the civilian executive and the armed services.[84]
At the level of the civilian executive, India's Nuclear Command Authority (NCA) is responsible for the management of its nuclear forces and for making all decisions pertaining to the use of nuclear weapons. The NCA is a two-layered structure. It comprises a Political Council (PC) and an Executive Council (EC). The PC is chaired by the prime minister and is the "sole body which can authorize the use of nuclear weapons." The decisions of the PC are conveyed to the EC, headed by the prime minister's National Security Advisor, who then interfaces with the SFC to execute the political directives of the PC.[85]
Import Dependency and Export Controls
After four decades of investments in its aerospace sector, India has succeeded in achieving a relatively high-degree of autonomy in the development, engineering, and manufacture of first-generation ballistic missiles. As a result, international "technology-denial" regimes can at best delay and add to the opportunity cost of India's ballistic missile programs. However, such regimes cannot disrupt them in the long term.
With the help of Western European and North American aerospace companies in the late 1960s and 1970s, the Indian government created an elaborate infrastructure for the development and manufacture of solid and liquid propellants, composites, structural materials, navigation, avionics, flight control, launch support equipment, computers, and software needed for civilian satellite launch vehicles. At about the same time, the Indian government also began creating an infrastructure for designing, developing, testing, and building guided missiles. This included "aerodynamic, structural, and environmental test facilities, liquid- and solid-propulsion test facilities, fabrication and engineering facilities, control, guidance, rubber, and computer facilities." [86]
After the launch of the IGMDP in 1983, the DRDO further expanded and refurbished these facilities, and gained competence in the areas of solid propellants, composites, and advanced metallurgy. In 1987, India's Defense Research and Development Laboratory inaugurated a new state-of-the-art facility for designing and building modern missiles at Imarat Kancha near Hyderabad. The new facility was named Research Center Imarat (RCI). It includes "an inertial instrumentation lab, full-scale environmental and electronic warfare test facilities, a composites production center, high enthalpy facility, and a missile integration and check out center."[87] In addition, India has built a dedicated test range on its east coast in Orissa (Chandipur-On-Sea) to test "long-range missiles, air defense missiles, high 'G' maneuverable missiles, weapon systems delivered by aircraft, and multi-target weapon systems." Range tracking and acquisition radars and some of the support equipment for this test range were imported from the United States and Russia in the 1980s and 1990s.[88]
Senior Indian defense officials have publicly claimed that India now has the capability to design, develop, and produce any type of missile.[89] They have claimed that the import content of the Agni and Prithvi ballistic missiles has been reduced to about ten and five percent, respectively.[90] However, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency believes that India "still lacks engineering or production expertise in key missile technologies" and continues to import missile-related and dual-use technologies and goods from entities in Russia and Western Europe.[91]
Despite its emergence as a potential "second-tier" supplier state, India is not a member of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). New Delhi rejects participation in the MTCR on grounds that India is a victim of such technology-denial regimes, that such regimes are insensitive to India's national security needs, and they interfere with the peaceful uses of space technology. In the past, senior Indian defense officials such as Sivathanu Pillai and Dr. Abdul Kalam have expressed the view that Indian missile programs, both strategic and tactical, are not only aimed at providing the Indian military with weapon systems, but also to generate exports.[92] In 1994, the Indian defense ministry's Department of Defense Production and Supplies included the Prithvi in its catalogue of defense items available for export. Although no Prithvi exports have occurred to date, Indian defense officials have suggested that India may sell some of the missile's subsystems in the international market.[93] Indian and Russian officials have publicly expressed their intent to export the BrahMos/PJ-10 cruise missile to friendly "third countries" with mutual consent.[94]
But since the late 1990s, especially after the nuclear tests in May 1998 and the subsequent strategic dialogue with the United States, the Indian government has apparently resolved the internal debate on exports in favor of robust export controls on strategic nuclear, missile, and related dual-use goods and technologies.[95] However, the recent indictment of the Indian company NEC Engineers Private, Limited, for illegally exporting material and equipment that could be used in the manufacture of solid propellants for missiles to Iraq has raised doubts about the efficacy with which Indian export control regulations and laws are policed in practice.[96]
Stakeholders in India's Missile Program
A stakeholders' analysis shows that India's missile program is supported by a diverse coalition of actors and institutions. This composite group is united by a common string of shared values; but members of the coalition also represent different, though often interrelated and overlapping, individual and institutional interests. Since the stakeholders' interests sometimes conflict, missile-related organizational and technical outcomes are determined by collective bargaining among them.
The programmatic narrative of India's missile development activities also reveals that the diversification and growth of the missile coalition has partially transformed the underlying mandate of the missile program. During the 1960s and 1970s, for example, the missile programs were characterized by political symbolism and technological determinism. Both characteristics were the outcome of the domination of the DRDO and its political patrons in the coalition. However, technological symbolism and the DRDO's organizational interests are now giving way to strategically determined political objectives and the operational requirements of the armed services.
In the 1960s and 1970s, the DRDO and a handful of politicians and their civilian bureaucratic aides in the federal government, made up the primary stakeholders in the missile program. Due to the peculiarity of India's civil-military relations, the armed services were largely excluded from defense planning related to strategic weapon systems. Furthermore, the armed forces doubted the DRDO's competence in producing major high-technology weapon systems. Due to the specificities of these institutional relationships, India's missile programs were not based on actual user requirements. The goal was technology gathering and "reverse-engineering." Since there were no plans for the serial production and manufacture of actual weapon systems, the DRDO did not build sustainable alliances with government-owned public sector entities. Similarly, the secrecy surrounding the programs effectively excluded private sector companies, quasi-governmental research institutes, and the growing body of civilian strategic analysts, who occupy influential positions in India's civil society, from participation.
Since then, however, the DRDO has succeeded in building a relatively robust alliance with the military. Limited production of the Prithvi and Agni ballistic missile systems has also given government-owned public sector companies a stake in the missile program. The DRDO's adoption of a consortium approach by subcontracting research, development, and manufacture to semi-autonomous institutions and private sector companies has also added to the list of the stakeholders in the missile program. Furthermore, the program has gained legitimacy due to support from vocal elements among India's lobby of civilian strategic analysts.
Strategic missile systems such as the Prithvi and Agni series have emerged as the center of the DRDO's efforts to develop major weapon systems. These weapon systems are not only important politically and strategically, but more so because they represent the DRDO's first success in developing a major weapon system that has gained acceptability from India's armed services. Even though the Prithvi and Agni represent vintage technologies from the 1950s and 1960s, in the Indian context, they are considered relatively state-of-the-art because of international curbs on the sale of long range missiles, and because India happens to be among the select few countries that has managed to develop them, despite technology denials from the United States and other developed countries. In India's case, the ballistic missile programs have helped the DRDO partially transform its image from an institution that was synonymous with program failures to an organization that symbolizes organizational and technological excellence. Equally significantly, the success of both programs has provided political cover for the DRDO's inability to overcome developmental problems related to the Akash and Trishul SAMs, which were originally conceived as parts of the IGMDP in the 1980s.[97]
Future Trends
India's missile coalition has capitalized on the success of the Prithvi and Agni programs to seek political support for new missile programs. Proposed programs include both defensive and offensive missile systems. The list of defensive systems includes ATBMs designed to provide "point defense" for India's nuclear command and control centers and high-density population targets. Offensive weapon systems include an intermediate-range version of the Agni ballistic missile, the BrahMos cruise missile, and the Avatar program that would theoretically be capable of launching nuclear strikes from outer space.
The former Vajpayee government's political conclusion that U.S. ballistic missile defense is inevitable and the DRDO's case for a limited ATBM capability have produced a historic shift in the India's position on ballistic missile defense; from opposition, India has resorted to outright support for the U.S. program. The flip side, of course, is that India's missile coalition expects technological assistance from the United States and its allies to build a limited ATBM system capable of intercepting short-range ballistic missiles. In the interim, however, the DRDO hopes to integrate Russian S-300 SAMs or the Israeli Arrow-2 with the indigenous Rajendra phased-array radar system. In this context, India has also acquired the Green Pine radar system from Israel for purposes of detecting long-range ballistic missile launches.
In its push for an ATBM capability, the DRDO has received support from the Indian Air Force. The Air Force, which has lost the battle against the Army for overall control of India's missile-based nuclear delivery systems, now appears to be backing the ATBM project to safeguard its redefined organizational goals as an air and space force. The Air Force is also actively pushing the BrahMos cruise missile project. The DRDO hopes that the BrahMos cruise missile could ultimately be configured for launch from air-, land-, and sea-based platforms. Thus in the future, the Air Force could be expected to make the case for an air-leg of the proposed "minimal deterrent," using long-range strike aircraft with a standoff cruise missile capability. In this regard, the Air Force is also likely to support the DRDO's futuristic Avatar reusable space launch vehicle. The Avatar could theoretically be used as a nuclear delivery system with a global strike capability; it could also serve as an asset to strike enemy space-based surveillance and communication targets, or for ferrying civilian and military payloads into space. Should this project become successful, there could be a consolidation of interests between the DRDO, the civilian Indian Space and Research Organization (ISRO), and the Indian Air Force with active support from India's political leadership.
The DRDO is also actively consolidating its alliance with the Indian Navy by developing sea-launched versions of the Prithvi ballistic missile and by planning to configure the BrahMos cruise missile for launch from submarines and ships. The current version of the BrahMos has an anti-ship capability, but future systems will incorporate a land attack capability. The current sea-based version of the Prithvi (Dhanush) is limited by its short-range (350km) and liquid-fueled engine. The missile's short range and the dangers associated with liquid fuel on board submarines and surface ships make it unlikely that the Navy will accept the Dhanush for active deployment. However, the development of the Dhanush will most likely enable the Navy to stake a claim in India's emerging nuclear deterrent. There is also positive evidence to suggest that India is developing an SLBM capability. India's draft nuclear doctrine, which should be read as a statement of ambitions and future intent, does envisage a sea-based nuclear capability for reasons of operational flexibility and survivability. If New Delhi does indeed succeed in acquiring nuclear submarines and cruise missile technology from Russia in the near term, an Indian sea-based nuclear capability could emerge by the end of this decade.
Despite rumors and occasional calls from Indian missile scientists for the development of a global strike capability, it is doubtful that an ICBM program will have support from India's political elite or its military leadership. Unlike the 1970s and 1980s when the political accent was on developing technological artifacts for demonstration and symbolism purposes, current Indian programs have a greater national security component. Since Indian strategic and military elites only perceive potential nuclear threats from China and Pakistan, it is feasible that India might restrict its ballistic and cruise missile programs to intermediate- and medium-range systems as a conscious political choice to avoid ruffling sensibilities of the other nuclear weapon states. Such a decision could also partly be a function of the growing strategic partnership with the United States and the need to cooperate with the United States and Israel in developing a limited ballistic missile defense.[98]
Finally, the centrality of strategic missiles in the DRDO's organizational priority of interests, potential nuclear threats from Pakistan and China, and the growth and expansion of India's missile coalition have ended the technological fragmentation within India's high-tech nuclear, missile, and civilian space sectors. At their inception in the late 1960s, India's missile programs were hampered by the fragmentation in India's high-technology sector. The federal government made no attempt to harmonize, complement, or integrate the technological and organizational strengths of the civilian space sector and the DRDO's missile laboratories; neither did the government impose any specific national security objectives for this high-tech sector or what has also been described as India's "strategic enclave." For example, the subterranean nuclear explosive project was executed in 1974 without any reference to the DRDO's missile programs.
However, that situation has now changed. Since the early 1980s, the Indian government has attempted to end the fragmentation within India's "strategic enclave" and give it a strategic direction. In this regard, the IGMDP and the Agni program marked the beginning of cooperation between the ISRO and the DRDO. By the late 1980s, the DRDO and the DAE launched joint programs to weaponize nuclear devices and modify a limited number of air breathing platforms and ballistic missiles for the delivery of nuclear munitions. Cooperation between the three sectors of India's "strategic enclave" continued in the 1990s. During this period, the DRDO and the ISRO jointly worked on the second phase of the Agni program; likewise, the DRDO and the DAE cooperated in the design, development, and weaponization of more sophisticated nuclear warheads. The Vajpayee government's authorization of nuclear tests in May 1998 and subsequent decision to build a "credible minimum deterrent" have now created an overarching strategic framework for cooperation among these organizations.
Further changes in the missile development process can be expected, especially with respect to collaboration with other countries. In February 2008, New Delhi announced that the IGMDP will end by the close of the year.[2] The emphasis will now be on serial production of the missiles developed under this program. Crucially, some specific projects might involve foreign collaboration, although strategic projects will be developed "in house."[2][3]
After over three decades, India's guided missile program has now assumed a self-sustaining character. Unlike the 1970s, the missile program is now guided by a clear strategic vision and buttressed by a diverse coalition with strong organizational stakes in politically and strategically determined technological outcomes. In retrospect, the guided missile program has not only become central to India's proposed "minimal deterrent," but more significantly, it has emerged as the symbol of an independent, self-reliant, and strategically autonomous Indian state.
iii. Modernisation Plans of the Indian Army
By: Gurmeet Kanwal, Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi
Despite the army leadership’s best efforts, the ongoing Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) had, till recently, almost completely bypassed the Indian Army. For well over a decade the army’s efforts to modernise had been thwarted due to political neglect and lack of adequate budgetary support. The funds made available for modernisation are extremely limited and a large portion of these funds is surrendered year after year. For Financial Year 2006-07, a sum of Rs 3,000 crore was surrendered as unspent. The fact that 155 mm ammunition for the Bofors howitzer had to be imported from South Africa during the Kargil conflict in 1999 tells its own tale of persistent shortages. Had the conflict not been confined to the 150 km frontage of the Kargil sector, T-72 and 130 mm medium gun ammunition too would have run short and it would have been politically embarrassing for the government as well as the army. In the plains the army would have had to fight with obsolete Vijayant tanks and several other vintage equipment that were unsuitable for combat. However, sustained efforts by Army HQ have now borne fruit and the army’s modernisation drive is once again well underway.
In the prevailing era of strategic uncertainty, while terrorism has become the primary threat, the external and internal threats and challenges faced by India are such that a large army is still required to be maintained. Also, a high degree of preparation and operational readiness is still necessary as conventional war, though improbable, cannot be categorically ruled out. At the same time, heavy capital investments in modern defence equipment are undoubtedly a drain on a developing economy that is ill-equipped to handle the burgeoning defence expenditure. Several eminent analysts have recommended that qualitative upgradation should be accompanied by quantitative downsizing of personnel strength of the army. However, given its responsibilities for border management and the manpower-intensive low intensity conflict that the army is involved in, this is easier said than done.
Future conventional conflict on the Indian s ub-continent will in all probability result from the ongoing low-intensity limited war on the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan or the unresolved territorial and boundary dispute with China and will be predominantly a land conflict. The Indian Army seriously lacks a potent firepower punch, especially in the mountain sector. Precision-guided munitions (PGMs) have still to enter service in numbers large enough to make a real difference. The reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition (RSTA) assets necessary for the optimum exploitation of even the existing firepower assets are grossly inadequate. Automated command and control and decision support systems have been on the drawing boards for several decades but are yet to mature.
In a future conventional war that will be fought under the nuclear shadow, manoeuvre will be extremely limited. This restriction will lead to much greater emphasis being placed on firepower to achieve the laid down military aim. Hence, it is imperative that artillery modernisation is undertaken with alacrity so as to generate firepower asymmetries on the future battlefield. After a long spell of keeping the powder dry, action on modernisation of the Indian artillery is livening up once again. Since January 2008, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has issued three global tenders for 155mm guns and howitzers for the mountains, the plains and self-propelled guns for the deserts. Summer and winter trials are expected to be held over the next one year and, red tape permitting, contracts may be awarded as early as in the first half of 2010.
Artillery firepower had paved the way for victory during the Kargil conflict. Despite the lessons learnt in Kargil, modernisation of the artillery had continued to lag behind. The last major acquisition of towed gun-howitzers was that of about 400 pieces of 39-calibre 155mm FH-77B howitzers form Bofors of Sweden in the mid-1980s. This gun had proved its mettle in the Kargil conflict. Just when a contract for 120 tracked and 180 wheeled self-propelled (SP) 155mm guns was about to be concluded after years of protracted trials, South African arms manufacturer Denel, a leading contender for the contract, was alleged to have been involved in a corruption scam in an earlier deal for anti-material rifles (AMRs). The other two howitzers in contention, from Soltam of Israel and BAE (Bofors) of Sweden did not meet the laid down criteria according to the COAS and Army HQ recommended fresh trials, setting the programme back at least three to four years. Another key issue was that the howitzers that had been offered were technology demonstration models and not guns that were in actual service with the home country armies.
The probability of the next conventional war breaking out in the mountains is far higher than that of a war in the plains. With this in view, the artillery recently conceptualised a requirement for a light-weight towed howitzer of 155mm calibre for employment in the mountains. Neither the present Bofors howitzer nor its replacement will be capable of operations in the mountains. A light-weight 45-calibre 155mm howitzer weighing less than 5,000 kg, with a light but adequately powered prime mover, is ideal for the mountains. The gun-train should be capable of negotiating sharp road bends without the need to unhook the gun from the prime mover. The two British 45-calibre 155mm howitzers that competed for the US contract for a similar howitzer some years ago – the UFH (Ultra-lightweight Field Howitzer) and the LTH (Light-weight Towed Howitzer) – could be considered for licensed production with transfer of technology.
In January 2008, the MoD floated a Request for Proposal (RfP) for 140 pieces of ultra-light 39 calibre 155mm towed howitzers for use by the Indian Army’s mountain formations and, presumably, by its rapid reaction divisions – as and when these are raised as it will be easy to transport by air. 140 howitzers will be adequate to equip seven medium artillery regiments and will cost approximately Rs 3,000 crore. The RfP has been reportedly issued to UK’s BAE Systems (which now owns Bofors), for the M777 howitzer claimed to be the lightest in the world at under 4,220 kg, and to Singapore Technologies for the Pegasus SLWH.
India has floated a global tender for the purchase of 400 155mm towed artillery guns for the Army, to be followed by indigenous manufacture of another 1,100 howitzers, in a project worth a whopping Rs 8,000 crore. The RFP was issued to eight prospective bidders including BAE, General Dynamics, Nexter (France), Rhinemetall (Germany) and Samsung (South Korea). An RfP has also been issued for 180 wheeled self-propelled guns for around Rs 4,700 crore for employment by mechanised forces in the plains and semi-desert sectors.
Since the Bofors 155mm Howitzer was introduced into service, the indigenously designed and manufactured 105 mm Indian Field Gun (IFG) and its (not so) light version, the Light Field Gun (LFG), have joined the 75/24 Indian Mountain Gun, the 100mm Russian field gun and the 122mm Russian howitzer on the obsolescence list. Approximately 180 pieces of 130mm M46 Russian medium guns have been successfully “up-gunned” to 155mm calibre with ordnance supplied by Soltam of Israel. The new barrel length of 45 calibres has enhanced the range of the gun to about 40 km with extended range ammunition.
A contract for the acquisition of two regiments of the 12-tube, 300mm Smerch multi-barrel rocket launcher (MBRL) system with 90 km range was reported to have been signed with Russia’s Rosoboronexport in early-2006. This will be a major boost for the long-range firepower capabilities of the army. If this weapon system had been available during the Kargil conflict, Pakistan’s brigade HQ and forward airfield at Skardu and other targets deep inside POK could have been hit with impunity. Extended range (ER) rockets are being introduced for the 122 mm Grad MBRL that has been in service for over three decades. The ER rockets will enhance the weapon system’s range from 22 to about 40 km. A Rs 5,000 crore contract has also been signed for the serial production of the Pinaka MBRL weapon system, another DRDO project plagued by time delays and completed with help from Larsen and Toubro and the Tatas.
The modernisation plan of tube artillery alone is likely to cost Rs 13,000 crore. The major acquisitions will be of initial lots of 400 towed howitzers of 155mm calibre, with a barrel length of 52 calibres, costing about Rs 4,000 crore, 140 ultra-light weight 155mm towed howitzers, with a barrel length of 45 calibres, costing Rs 3,000 crore and 180 SP 155mm howitzers costing Rs 5,000 crore. The “Shakti” project for a command and control systems for the artillery, called Artillery Combat Command and Control System (ACCCS), has reached the stage of maturity and is now being fielded up to the regimental level.
The BrahMos supersonic cruise missile (Mach 2.8 to 3.0), with a precision strike capability, very high kill energy and range of 290 km, was inducted into the army in July 2007. It is a versatile missile that can be launched from TATRA mobile launchers and silos on land, aircraft and ships and, perhaps in future, also from submarines. Fifty BrahMos missiles are expected to be produced every year. Efforts are underway to further increase its strike range. BrahMos Aerospace has orders worth Rs 3,500 crore from the army and the navy, which has opted for the anti-ship as well as the land attack cruise missile (LACM) versions. These terrain hugging missiles are virtually immune to counter measures due to their high speed and very low radar cross section and are far superior to sub-sonic cruise missiles like Pakistan’s Babur. Chile, Kuwait, Malaysia and South Africa have shown interest in acquiring this missile.
The Indian army is extensively engaged in ongoing internal security (IS) and counter-insurgency operations (CI) and simultaneously needs to prepare itself for a future border conflict that may spill over to a larger conventional war in the plains. In keeping with these twin requirements, Army HQ have apparently decided to upgrade the IS and CI capabilities of infantry battalions as well as enhance their Infantry firepower-mobility-EW (electronic warfare) punch for a possible war in the plains against Pakistan or in the mountains against China. The Army Chief’s modernisation vision is to “adapt to high-end technology, improve night-fighting capability… (and) information technology, information warfare and network centric warfare.”
Despite its large-scale employment on border management and extensive commitments in Internal Security and Counter Insurgency operations, infantry modernisation had been languishing for several decades when the Ministry of Defence (MoD) finally cleared a visionary plan to modernise the army’s infantry battalions by according “in principle” approval in the form of Modification 4B to the war establishment (WE) of a standard infantry battalion in 1998. However, no funds were specially sanctioned for this purpose till the BJP-led NDA government approved the expenditure of Rs 3,500 crore in September 2003. Thereafter, approval had to be sought on file for each new weapon system or piece of equipment on a “case-by-case” basis as has become the norm. It is by now well-known how each such case chronicles the saga of an uphill struggle to get approval first from the MoD, then MoD (Finance) and, finally, the Ministry of Finance (MoF). All this is only possible after the DRDO has first certified that the weapon system or equipment in question cannot be developed and manufactured indigenously and such a certificate is hard to come by.
While 250 Kornet-E anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) with thermal imaging sights have substantially increased the anti-tank capability of infantry battalions, most efforts to modernise the equipment held by infantry and Rashtriya Rifles (RR) units are aimed at enhancing their capability for surveillance and target acquisition at night and boosting their firepower for precise retaliation against infiltrating columns and terrorists holed up in built-up areas. About 200 hand-held BFSRs with practical ranges up to seven to eight km where clear line of sight is available, 2,000 hand-held thermal imaging devices (HHTIs) with ranges up to 2,000 metres for observation at night and stand-alone infra-red, seismic and acoustic sensors with varying capabilities have enabled infantrymen to dominate the Line of Control so completely that infiltration has come down to almost a trickle.
The newly acquired weapons, which complement these surveillance and observation devices, include: 1,500x84 mm rocket launchers, including some disposable ones; 1,000 AMRs (anti-material rifles); 8,000 UBGLs (under-barrel grenade launchers); 4,000 new generation carbines; 300 bullet proof vehicles; and, several hundred accurate sniper rifles. However, the numbers acquired and the ammunition stocks are still inadequate and need to be made up more rapidly. While the INSAS 5.56 mm assault rifles have now been in service for almost 10 years and proved to be effective, the light machine gun (LNG) version is still facing teething problems and the carbine version for close quarter battle has not found favour with the army. New 5.56 mm assault rifles of bull-pup design with an integrated laser range finder and grenade launcher are under development. Efforts are also being made to provide infantry platoons and sections with integrated GPS-based navigation system, secure light-weight walkie-talkie radio sets and better protective gear with a helmet that incorporates a built-in head-up display.
The mechanised infantry is now equipped with the BMP-2 ICV Sarath of which over 1,000 have been built since 1987. A new variant is the 81 mm Carrier Mortar Tracked Vehicle (CMTV) that is based on the chassis of the Sarath ICV and has been indigenously developed to enhance the integral firepower available to mechanised infantry battalions. Other variants include a command post, an ambulance, armoured dozer and engineer and reconnaissance vehicles. Mechanised reconnaissance and support battalions need better surveillance radars, fire-and-forget ATGMs and effective night fighting capability. However, their capabilities can be upgraded on a lower priority compared with infantry battalions that are engaged in border management and IS/CI operations.
The army’s infantry battalions also need their own mini or micro UAVs like Elbit’s Skylark or Rafael’s Skylite, among others, to partly reduce the extent of patrolling necessary in internal security environment and to improve their surveillance capability in conventional conflict. These UAVs should have a range of about 10 to 15 km, should be light-weight (less than 10 kg), hand-launched, carry a single payload, e.g. a daylight video camera or infra-red camera for night operations, and should be inexpensive enough to be dispensable. A mini ground control station should be authorized at battalion HQ for planning and control. Ideally, these should be indigenously designed and developed and locally manufactured.
A new DRDO project, that is reported to be ongoing, aims to equip future soldiers with lightweight force multipliers. Soldiers of the future will have miniaturised communication and GPS systems, small power packs, weapon platforms and smart vests with fibre-optic sensors. The soldiers will also have better and lighter combat fatigues, boots, belts, ammunition pouches, rucksacks and rations in the form of meals-ready-to-eat. Though somewhat akin to the US Army’s Land Warrior programme, the Indian Army programme for modernisation of infantry battalions will result in only incremental changes. However, these would be significant enough to make a difference on the battlefields of the Indian sub-continent. The infantryman’s average combat load is approximately 27 kg, including the 3.06 kg 5.56 mm INSAS assault rifle and its “on weapon” ammunition. If this can be reduced by even a few kg, it will enable the soldier to improve his agility in battle and counter-insurgency operations. Ultimately an infantryman has to be prepared to engage in hand-to-hand combat and agility can make a difference between life and death.
For over 350 infantry battalions, plus about 150 Rashtriya Rifles, Assam Rifles and Territorial Army battalions, these major changes will be extremely costly to implement and will spill over at least 10 to 12 years – that is, if the funds can be found. What is certain is that there is no alternative to making the financial commitment that is necessary to enhance the operational capabilities of the army’s infantry battalions. Without modernising this cutting edge of its sword, the army will soon begin to resemble the armies of India’s lesser neighbours.
The indigenously designed Arjun main battle tank (MBT) has been in the pipeline for over two decades. Though the tank has many good features, it has consistently failed to meet the army’s GSQR for an MBT and orders have been placed for only 124 tanks to be manufactured. The lack of progress on the Arjun MBT had slowed down the pace of armour modernisation. India then signed a deal with Russia to acquire 310 T-90S tanks in the year 2000. Subsequently, India began to assemble these tanks at Avadi. It has recently been reported that in addition to these, India has decided to acquire another 347 T-90S tanks and assemble them within the country.
The first Indian assembled T-90S (Bhishma) rolled off the production line on January 8, 2004. While T-90S Russian tanks have provided new teeth to India’s strike formations in the plains and corrected the imbalance that had resulted from Pakistan’s acquisition of T-80 UD from Ukraine and the Al Khalid tanks jointly designed with China, a large number of T-72 (Ajeya) tanks are still awaiting modernisation. The lack of a suitable fire control system and night fighting capability are major handicaps. As soon as the obsolescent Vijayanta tanks are phased out of service, it will be time to also discard the old T-55s as well as they can no longer be either upgraded or modernised. Armour modernisation is now proceeding apace and can be classified as a success story.
The air defence (AD) of mechanised forces is another area that is crying for attention. The Kvadrat missile system that has been the backbone of AD for strike formations since the early 1970s are now ageing and need urgent replacement. With the DRDO’s indigenous Akash medium-range and Trishul short-range missile projects not making major headway, it is time to start looking at import substitutes. In fact, the assets of Army Air Defence corps of the army are grossly inadequate to provide effective protection against enemy aircraft during war. This young corps requires substantial capital infusion to really come into its own.
Another DRDO project that is way behind schedule is the Nag anti-tank missile system. The antiquated Jonga-mounted SS-11 B1 anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) system has been replaced in missile battalions by MILAN shoulder-fired ATGMs. However, a vehicle-mounted missile system like the Nag is definitely necessary for reconnaissance and attrition tasks. The experimental Plan AREN tactical communications system for strike formations needs early replacement. The ability to carry broadband data needs to be enhanced in particular. Even the more recent static communications network called ASCON lacks ISDN capability for the real-time transmission of maps and streaming video.
While some Stentor long-range BFSRs have been in service for over a decade, medium-range radars are still to be acquired. At least about 30 to 40 weapon locating radars (WLRs) are required for effective counter-bombardment, especially in the plains, and only a few have been procured so far. Israeli Searcher-I unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been introduced into service but these are few in number and it will be a long time before these will really make a difference by providing a real-time surveillance capability so that ground forces can initiate action even as a fresh input is received. Only a small number of Searcher – II UAVs, with an upper ceiling that makes them suitable for the mountains, have been acquired.
An automated command and control and decision support system for use by the General Staff is still a far cry and so are supporting systems like the battlefield surveillance system and air space management system. The urgent requirement of real-time satellite reconnaissance systems has still not been accepted despite the nuclear overhang under which the armed forces now operate. Even though the cameras on India’s remote sensing and cartographic satellites now have sharply enhanced resolutions, less than one metre, military-grade photographs of still better resolution are needed to be purchased from the open market. These sources may dry up quickly during war.
A “system of systems” approach must be followed so that scarce RSTA and communications resources can be synergistically configured and optimally exploited. The war in Iraq fought in March-April 2003 was based on the concept of “network-centric warfare” in which surveillance sensors, targeting systems and “shooters” are fused together in a seamless “system of systems” that reduced response time between the acquisition of a target and its destruction to 15 to 20 minutes. While such a system may take over a decade to establish, a beginning must be made right away.
PGMs are increasingly gaining currency as weapons of choice in conflict on land, both to accurately destroy critical hard targets quickly as well as to avoid or at least minimise collateral damage. During the Gulf War I in 1991, despite all the CNN-generated hype of smart bombs flying unerringly through ventilators, PGMs formed less than 10 percent of the total high explosive dropped over Iraq and were rather inaccurate. The “collateral” destruction of an air raid shelter harbouring women and children has been too well documented to bear recounting. The coalition forces did not destroy a single Iraqi Scud missile launcher. In Kosovo, PGMs accounted for about 30 per cent of the ordnance dropped and accuracies had improved considerably by 1999. In the post-September 11, 2001 retribution inflicted on the Taliban militia and its al Qaeda supporters in Afghanistan, the share of PGMs had risen to nearly 60 percent. In Gulf War II in Iraq, the ratio of PGMs went up to nearly 70 per cent. The Indian artillery does not have any PGMs worth the name. Only limited quantities of the Russian Krasnopol PGM have been imported for the Bofors 155 mm howitzer. Among others, the Bofors Bonus PGM is a suitable candidate, subject to successful trials in the deserts and the mountains.
Finally, the approach to army modernisation must be more focused; the priorities must be clearly established and then adhered to. The government must give a firm commitment in terms of funds and the Ministry of Defence must streamline its procedures and processes for speedy procurement of high priority weapons and equipment. It is time to institute a rolling, non-lapsable defence modernisation fund of Rs. 25,000 crores as a viable method of ensuring that defence procurement is not subjected to the vagaries of annual budgets. The present situation is disturbing and, if allowed to go on indefinitely, will seriously compromise the army’s preparedness to fight the next border war that inimical neighbours like Pakistan can be expected to thrust on India.—(ADNI)
(The writer is Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi.)
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.