Nasr VS Parhaar | First Detailed Analysis.

[acid rain]

Nice comparison, noticed that a few specificaations of Nasr are missing, could someone fill it in?

 

[indiatester]

@Aeronaut, @AhaseebA

2 questions:
1) Why only two round system for Nasr? The 8x8 should be able to carry 5-6 for its weight category.
2) What difference would it make between angular launch of Nasr vs. vertical launch of Prahaar

 

[dekho]

Can Prahaar be called an MLRS and not SLBM since multiple missiles are carried in one TEL and no fuelling required prior to launch?

Also is it possible for Prahaar system to transform into ABM-AAD in the battlefield with no major changes and with a flick of switch?

 

[Dazzler]

Can Prahaar be called an MLRS and not SLBM since multiple missiles are carried in one TEL and no fuelling required prior to launch?

No it cannot be, the design philosophy and onboard guidance modes classify it as a SLBM, for Nasr, its 60 km range + onboard guidance systems makes it a BRBM.

 

[Slayer786]

Well both are going to be used for short range areas that means specifically to hit each other troops. Nasr is nuclear tipped, whereas Prahaar does not indiacate it. If that is the case then Nasr has a defintie edge. But to use a nuclear tipped Nasr would change the parameters of the war and is not advisable. So only conventional tipped warhead should be used for Nasr also. In that case, the accuracy and speed will decide the outcome out of the two.
We have the info on speed only for Prahaar, until we get the full info on Nasr it will be pointless to decide which is more lethal.

 

[The Deterrent]

@Aeronaut, @AhaseebA

2 questions:
1) Why only two round system for Nasr? The 8x8 should be able to carry 5-6 for its weight category.
2) What difference would it make between angular launch of Nasr vs. vertical launch of Prahaar

1) It is a 4 round system. See pictures of latest test flight.

2) Little. Nasr vehicle would have to roughly align itself in the direction of the target, and the trajectory can be corrected by the fins on Nasr missile later on. But Prahaar's maneuverability enables it to pitch over in any intended direction when launched vertically.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Part Two

Credit | Zahir Kazmi [ National Defense University Islamabad ]

Nasr on 29th May 2012... 4 cannisters:

and you know from?? India has tested a sub kiloton device in pokhran tests too. Lols we can surprise you.

An it probably weighed a ton!... TNW are a different ball game..

 

[ares]

Prahaar beats Nasr across the board in almost all parameters.

1. Range

2.Diameter, length..Prahaar is longer and has larger diameter, enabling it to carry a bigger,heavier warhead both conventional as well as nuclear (If Indian decides to use it in such a role.)

3. No of missiles carried on each launcher 6 vs 2(4 as per some sources).

4. Most importantly Prahaar has vertical launch tubes enabling it to fire in any direction, from any position (makings of a quick reaction system), where as Nasr has Angular launcher i.e the truck will have to maneuvered in the direction of intended target..before firing the missile.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Prahaar beats Nasr across the board in almost all parameters.

1. Range

2.Diameter, length..Prahaar is longer and has larger diameter, enabling it to carry a bigger,heavier warhead both conventional as well as nuclear (If Indian decides to use it in such a role.)[

NASR has a 500 kg warhead (unconfirmed) can carry several types for warheads including TNs.. while prahaar has 200 kg... no TN warhead.

3. No of missiles carried on each launcher 6 vs 2(4 as per some sources).

4... See the pics above.

4. Most importantly Prahaar has vertical launch tubes enabling it to fire in any direction, from any position (makings of a quick reaction system), where as Nasr has Angular launcher i.e the truck will have to maneuvered in the direction of intended target..before firing the missile.

See this:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...ar-first-detailed-analysis-4.html#post4674280

 

[ares]

NASR has a 500 kg warhead (unconfirmed) can carry several types for warheads including TNs.. while prahaar has 200 kg... no TN warhead.



4... See the pics above.



See this:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...ar-first-detailed-analysis-4.html#post4674280

If Nasr could carry a 500 Kg warhead, it would not need to carry a TNW..it could have carried strategic nuclear weapon.

Nasr is smaller i.e a lighter missile than prahar, which weighs 1.3 tons and carries 200 Kg warhead..there is no way NASR can carry a half a ton warhead.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

If Nasr could carry a 500 Kg warhead, it would not need to carry a TNW..it could have carried strategic nuclear weapon.

Nasr is smaller i.e a lighter missile than prahar, which weighs 1.3 tons and carries 200 Kg warhead..there is no way NASR can carry a half a ton warhead.

I said "unconfirmed" .. sources quoting the figure seem shaddy.. but again we dnt know much nassr anyways.

 

[Kompromat]

Few things

1. NASR & Prahaar are both solid feul, quick reaction battle field tactical missile systems

2. NASR range is 60 KM while Prahaar's range is 150 KMs , while prahaar is able to carry more load aswell & while NASR will fire 2 Prahaar will fire 6 from a single launcher(more diff to keep track of numbers )

3.NASR is basicalli a seucide missile(for neuking own soil to stop enemy advance) while Prahaar as name sugests is an offensive wepon to take war to enemies soil

4.Prahaar is developed so its technikal data is owt but same is not the case with NASR

5.NASR is known(claimed) to carry neukes while indians dint tell this....my guess is judging by indias R&D in this field onli a fool will think India dosent have mini/low yield tactikal neukes

6.Prahaar is more advance , heavy , long range + India unlike pakistan has more means to produce it in large numbers

7.Prahaar is replacement to prithvi & will be a gap filler and is capable of hitting all its potential targets deu to its range and travells faster too but what can a glorified MRBL rocket can achieve with only 60 KM range is realli ..........
Now compare but dont troll

cheers mates

That is because Parhaar and Nasr are not the same class of missiles. The Parhaar is a Short Range Ballistic Missile designed to Replace prithvi series while Nasr is a Battlefield Range Ballistic Missile which will replace the Hatf1 series.

Parhaar has more range and more payload but it also is not as maneuverable and fast as Nasr, you will get the confirmation once i my hands on more data. For Parhaar we have Abdaali and Ghaznavi series to respond with.

Lastly, Parhaar is also a threat for China, which means we can use that mutual threat perception as a reason for further missile technology/counter missile technology developments.

 

[Kompromat]

@AhaseebA

As of now, Nasr is ahead in testing as it has been fired in volleys and poor climatic conditions.
Parhaar has not been fired in volleys yet and its first test date had to be moved, for clear day conditions.

 

[HariPrasad]

For the Information of thread members and viewers. Mr Avinash chander in his briefing termed Prahar as a missile of 2 m CEP.

The new DRDO chief is optimistic on the progress of the LCA and missile programmes and keen on securing technology transfer and access to raw materials
Avinash Chander, chief architect of India’s Agni series of missiles, took over as Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister and Director-General of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) on May 31, succeeding V.K. Saraswat.

Dr. Chander, who played a key role in the successful development of the 5,000-km-range Agni-V, joined the DRDO in 1972 after graduating as an electrical engineer from IIT Delhi.

In an interview to The Hindu, the new DRDO chief speaks about key projects like the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), the future of India’s missile programme, denial of high-end technology to India and the need for increased R&D efforts. Excerpts from the interview:

On the LCA project

The LCA is going well. We said the Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) 2 will be completed by this year end. IOC 2 is progressing very well and in spite of bad weather a number of sorties have taken place. HAL team is working well along with the Air Force and a very well integrated operation is going on. We are very confident that IOC 2 will be completed on time. The Final Operational Clearance is slated for 2014-end. Meanwhile, production will start from this year onwards and we expect that the first aircraft will roll out in 2014. Right now, we have orders from the Indian Air Force for 40, in 20-plus-20 option. The naval version of LCA is also going on well, Prototype Version (PV) 1 and PV2 are getting integrated, and PV1 should be completed by this year end.

On the project’s cost overrun

The cost of LCA is a small fraction of what an F-15 costs. We have developed one of the lowest costing aircraft. We are confident that the LCA will be able to compete very well in performance as well as on cost basis with equivalent aircraft. It will be comparable to Gripen aircraft. The day we start thinking about LCA, you cannot start putting cost on it.

On the missile programme

Agni V is moving ahead. Agni IV and V both are going to be inducted in the next couple of years. We will be going for user trials of Agni IV which has a range of 4,000 km and Agni V which has a range of 5,000 km. Then we are going for Long Range Surface to Air Missile (LRSAM.) and its trials are going to take place in Israel very soon. Astra air-to-air missile programme is also going very well. Astra will be going for the Sukhoi SU-30 launch by this year end. Nag — we had very good tests for seekers also recently, we are confident that Nag will also be able to meet performance requirements of the users in the very severe environmental conditions of the Indian desert. We are also working on futuristic, new long-range surface-to-air missiles of 250 to 300 km range. We are working on multi-range missiles, also on short-range surface-to-air missile. The aim is to become globally competitive in terms of missile accuracy, lethality and range.

On tactical missiles like Prahar

Prahar will go for user trial shortly, this year. Prahar is a good [surface-to-surface] system with a range of 140 km. It will have an accuracy of two metres and that is a very vital addition. We are also enhancing the range of Pinaka rockets from the existing 40 km to 60 km for Pinaka mark II. Prahar will be the third layer to cover up to 140 km, which is a very potent layer.

Comparison with Chinese missiles

In terms of technology and performance, Indian missile systems are comparable with any other system in the world, including whatever our neighbours have — comparable and better also in some cases. Total variety and ranges of the systems are decided based on each country’s individual requirements, how they see the threat and their role in the global scenario. The extent of the arsenal may differ but what we have is comparable with the best.

On India’s quest for high-end technology

For high-end technology, nobody in the world will help you. We have to have our own initiative. This is one area where the country needs to give a lot more thrust. For example, the material gap — on metallic composites or carbon composites or polymeric materials, even sensors, rare earth materials — has been identified as the key area where we need to take up initiatives. Today we have become highly self-sufficient and capable in designing world-class systems whether it is radars, missiles, or sonars, but what we need to strengthen is the sub-system and the components, devices and the raw materials. For the Agni strategic system where we had no option to import, we have gone 85-per-cent indigenous. But similar things have to be done in other areas such as tactical missiles. We require tungsten and other materials which India does not produce. We have to take extra initiative in terms of investment and technology, infrastructure, knowledge generation.

On the role of private sector

Private sector is providing the infrastructure and in many cases they are joining hands with industries abroad but a lot more needs to be done in the private sector in the R&D department. If you see the industrial R&D in the U.S., it is almost 50 per cent of the total R&D expenditure, whereas in India it is very meagre part of it. And most of it is perhaps ceremonial.

On FDI in defence

Let good technology come in, there is no harm. We are not opening up just to get money.

On indigenisation and licensed production

In today’s globalised environment, we have to see what needs to be bought, what needs to be developed and what needs to have transfer of technology. You cannot afford to make everything yourself. It is neither viable nor cost effective in the long-term — and that is where the decision has to be taken.

For example, today in DRDO, if industry can make something, it’s a good thing. We don’t want to start developing [the same thing]. [We] can work on the next higher end products, the higher level of technology. The industry also has to see if something [it is developing] is commercially available at a cheaper price. Life-cycle costs are the critical part. It is not just one-time buying of one thing, the question is how are you going to support it and whether support will be available under all conditions.

For licensed production, if we are able to get good technology that is good. But if it ends with assembling and processes coming from abroad, then we have to see. Again, licensed production for MiGs helped in creating a large infrastructure base and today we are able to go for LCA and other things. To that extent, it has been very helpful. But if you look at the knowledge gained through licensed products, it is a matter of debate. I am not aware of any major system for which we have taken licensed production and then built on it and arrived at a better product. We keep building the same thing, we are not getting the knowledge to build a better system — that is why our licensed production methodologies have to be re-examined. China is doing intelligent reverse engineering and many countries have done that in the past. That is the way of moving forward.

vinay.k@thehindu.co.in

Keywords: DRDO chief, Avinash Chander, Agni series of missiles, Light Combat Aircraft, Indian Defence, key projects in Defence, FDI in defence


http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/interview/developing-a-more-indian-defence/article5045673.ece

 

[The Deterrent]

@AhaseebA

As of now, Nasr is ahead in testing as it has been fired in volleys and poor climatic conditions.
Parhaar has not been fired in volleys yet and its first test date had to be moved, for clear day conditions.

These things don't matter much. Both missiles will be eventually fired in volleys.

For the Information of thread members and viewers. Mr Avinash chander in his briefing termed Prahar as a missile of 2 m CEP.

As I said, there shouldn't be any comparison of Nasr and Prahaar. Nasr is primarily a nuclear delivery system, and it does not matters if its accuracy is 2m or 20m.