Quantcast
Channel: TRISHUL
Viewing all 283 articles
Browse latest View live

From Prithvi To Pralay

$
0
0

Although precision-guided, conventionally-armed surface-to-surface battlefield support missiles (SS-BSM) first developed by the US began to surface in the late 1980s and were subsequently combat-proven throughout the following decade in the Middle East, it was in the late 1970s  that precision-guided SS-BSM solutions first emerged from the USSR, and were followed by those from China and Israel. The first precision-guided BSMs to enter service were the 70km-range 9K79 Tochka and the 400km-range 9K714 Oka built by KB Mashynostroyeniya’s (KBM) Votkinsk Machine Building Plant.
These were followed in the late 1980s by China’s 600km-range DF-15/M-9 ballistic BSMs developed and built by the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corp’s (previously known as the 5th Aerospace Academy) Academy of Rocket Motor Technology (also known as the 4th Academy), and the ballistic 290km-range DF-11/M-11Hatf-3/Ghaznavi BSM, developed and produced by the Sanjiang Missile Corp (also known as the 066 Base).
However, the most widely employed and fielded precision-guided SS-BSM to date remains the Lockheed Martin-built MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATacMS), which weighs 1,670kg (3,690lb), is 13 feet (3.96 metres) high, has a diameter of 24 inches (2 feet, or 610mm), finspan of 1.4 metres, and has a weapons payload of either 560kg (1,240lb) or a 227kg (500lb) unitary warhead. Service ceiling is 50km, while the range is up to 300km. The powerplant is an Atlantic Research-built 40,000lb (18,144kg) static thrust solid-propellant rocket. Inertial guidance is provided by a Honeywell H700-3A ring-laser gyroscope coupled to a GPS receiver using secure, high-accuracy PY-code navigational updates from the US’ Navstar constellation of GPS satellites.
The M74 warhead dispenses 950 M42 anti-personnel/anti-materiel (APAM) sub-munitions that are cast forward at a 45-degree angle over the target area, producing a 33,000 square-metre (360,000 square feet) footprint. Another type of sensor-fuzed munitions, once dispensed, glide to their pre-programmed target area, and each selects a target within its assigned acoustic segment of the formation. Once a target has been acquired by the terminal infra-red seeker, the weapon guides to terminal impact and uses a tandem shaped-charge warhead to destroy the selected armoured vehicle. Effectively, 18 ATacMS equals the impact of 792 155mm artillery rounds. ATacMS’ launch can be as much as 30 degrees off axis, and the missile is steered aerodynamically by electrically-actuated control-fins during the descent phase, modifying the flight path from a ballistic parabola. Offsetting the launch angle and descending semi-ballistically complicates the enemy’s ability to trace trajectory back to the launch vehicle.
Russia’s answer to the ATacMS was the 9K720 Iskander-E SS-BSM. Built by KBM, it is a 3.8-tonne solid-fuelled, single-stage BSM with a range of 280km and capable of carrying a payload of up to 480kg, which includes cluster sub-munitions, high-explosive fragmentation or penetrating charge unitary warheads, plus thermobaric (fuel-air explosive) and electro-magnetic pulse detonation warheads. Claimed to have a CEP of 7 metres, the Iskander-E comes equipped with dynamic gas thrusters and aerodynamic fins for controlling the missile in flight. A ring-laser gyro-based inertial navigation system (RLG-INS) brings the missile into the target area, where an optronic sensor scans terrain around a target and compares it to the image downloaded into its on-board computer before launch. This makes the missile independent of GPS navigation and resistant to jamming. The missile has a 10-year shelf-life.
In India, the Indian Army (IA), which had closely followed the development and employment of the 9K79 Tochka and the 9K714 Oka precision-guided SS-BSMs, also keenly desired such a rocket-artillery capability, since they could be swiftly employed for causing heavy attrition losses of dug-in, multi-echelon enemy land forces formations in the plains that stood in the way of an advancing IA Strike Corps over a frontage of up to 70km in depth and 120km wide. This consequently gave rise to the requirement for SS-BSMs like the liquid-fuelled Prithvi-1 in the 1990s and the solid-fuelled Pralay for the future battlefields.
The first Prithvi-1-equipped Missile Group was 333 (raised in June 1993 and commissioned in October 1995), followed by the 444 (raised in October 2003) and ultimately the 555 (operational by January 2005), each equipped with a total of 75 liquid-fuelled, conventional warhead-armed, 150km-range SS-BSMs, including reserve rounds). The three Prithvi Missile Groups formed part of the ORBATs of the Indian Army’s three dedicated Artillery Divisions—40, 41 and 42.
Each Prithvi Missile Group is made up of two Sub-Groups that in turn are made up of two Troops. Each Troop has two mobile autonomous launchers (MAL). Thus, each Group has 8 launchers and almost 24 support vehicles (including the Fuel Carrier, Missile Transporter, Oxidiser Carrier, Warhead Carrier). However, in times of hostilities, the missiles will be pre-fuelled (the shelf-life of the liquid propellant is 10 years) before being deployed to their launch sites where only three vehicles—the MAL, power supply vehicle and one Mobile Command Post (MCP)—would be employed. The Prithvi SS-150—officially described by the DRDO as a tactical surface-to-surface missile and by the Army as a battlefield support missile--is fuelled by a liquid propellant (a 50:50 combination of isomeric xylidine and trimethlyamine), with the oxidizer being inhibited red fuming nitric acid (IRFNA). The propellant has a 260 specific impulse as specified by the IA, which required a range fluctuation between 40km (with a CEP of 110 metres) and 150km (with a CEP of 220 metres) when using dry-tuned gyros for inertial navigation and this could only have been achieved by a variable total impulse best generated by liquid propellants.
Following its launch, the SS-150’s ascending trajectory takes it to an altitude of 30km following which it adopts either a steep downward trajectory at nearly 80 degrees, or a lift-augmented descent trajectory. As far as the latter option goes, there are six flight-path variations available (which are pre-programmed prior to launch) in order to defeat or confuse anti-ballistic missile defences. All Prithvi-1/SS-150 SS-BSMs carry up to five types of conventional warheads. It is evident from all this that the SS-150 will, during, hostilities, be employed for massed but effects-based fire assaults against largely static targets like troop concentrations and POL storage sites, this being done in order to severely degrade the hostile force’s theatre-level and strategic reserves before they could become effective in the forward tactical battle areas.
Although the DRDO had in the previous decade developed a solid-fuelled Prithvi-3 Precision-guided SS-BSM with a CEP of 30 metres at its maximum range of 600km (through the adoption of RLG-INS units imported from the TAMAM Division of Israel Aerospace Industries), the IA was dissatisfied with its solid-propellant’s low burn rate of 10 millimetres per second and instead had specified a solid-propellant with a burn rate of minimum 70 millimetres per second. This became available only in 2015 from the DRDO’s Nashik-based Advanced Centre for Energetic Materials (ACEM), following which it was decided to develop the Pralay precision-guided SS-BSM as a derivative of the cannister-encased, land-mobile Shaurya SS-BSM, which can carry a 1-tonne nuclear warhead over a distance of 750km, weighs 6 tonnes, has a diameter of 0.74 metres and is 10 metres long.
The Shaurya’s solid-fuel, two-stage solid-fuelled rocket accelerates the missile to six times the speed of sound before it reaches an altitude of 40km (125,000 feet), after which it levels out and cruises towards the target, powered by its on-board fuel. The Shaurya has already demonstrated a CEP of 30 metres out to a range of 750km.
The Pralay on the other hand has been designed to have a maximum strike range of 500km and weighs 6 tonnes. With a 1,000kg all-conventional payload (five types of warheads are available), it can travel a distance of 350km and if the payload is halved, then the Pralay will be able to go as far as 500km. In both cases, the CEP attained will be 30 metres. The time taken from missile-launch till warhead detonation over-target will be considerably lesser than that attained by either the Prithvi-3 or Shaurya, primarily due to the usage of higher energetic solid-propellants with high burn-rate.
But it needs to be noted that the Pralay will NOT be used by the IA to hit targets located 500km or 350km inside hostile territory. Rather, the Pralay’s MALs will be located in the IA’s rear-areas—typically located 150km inside friendly territory—and will be used over a frontage of up to 70km in depth and 120km wide inside enemy territory, with the width and depth of the frontage being determined by the integral ISTR capabilities of the IA Strike Corps’ Battlefield Surveillance System (BSS) network, comprising both land-based optronic sensors and MALE-UAV assets using land-mobile SATCOM-based VSATs for battlespace network connectivity.
(To Be Concluded)

IAF's Almaz-Antey S-400 Triumf ADMS Deployment Plans Explained

$
0
0

Following the signature of a contract on October 5 that is valued valued at US$5.43 billion, the Indian Air Force (IAF) is all set to receive its initial five squadrons of the Almaz-Antey S-400 Triumf ADMS, with deliveries commencing in late 2020.
Plans call for eventually expanding this LR-SAM network into five Brigades in the following decade, and deploying them for the air-defence (against hostile manned combat aircraft, SRBMs, TBMs and LACMs) of major cities and industrial corridors located in western and central India.
The sector-wise command-and-control posts of each of these Brigades will be integrated with the IAF’s already-operational five nodes of the Integrated Air Command, Control & Communications System (IACCCS) at Barnala (Punjab), Wadsar (Gujarat), Aya Nagar (Delhi), Jodhpur (Rajasthan) and Ambala (Haryana).
Initially, the S-400 ADMS will come equipped with only the 380km-range 40N6E LR-SAMs, which were declared by Russia as being ready for series-production following a series of user-assisted successful test-firings last August.
In the following decade, the 40N6E LR-SAMs will be joined by the 77N6-N and the 77N6-NI LR-SAMs, having top speeds of 7km/second and also being the first LR-SAMs of Russian origin to possess INERT warheads, i.e. warheads that do not contain any explosives and instead, are ‘hittile’, meaning they will destroy inbound IRBMs or MRBMs by sheer force of impact. Both these missiles are still undergoing development.
The most revolutionary element of the 77N6-N and the 77N6-NI hypersonic LR-SAMs will be their on-board nose-mounted, Ka band millimeter-wave active phased-array radar seekers and their real-time discrimination algorithms required for fire-control and guidance of hit-to-kill interceptors. To this end, the radar seekers have been designed with a rigid mount and narrow beam to provide precise angle metric accuracy. The combination of metric accuracy, wide bandwidth, and high Doppler-resolution capabilities makes them excellent sensors for real-time discrimination, for they can provide extremely accurate identification-processing estimates of motion differences caused by mass imbalances on real and threat-like targets.
The 77N6-N and the 77N6-NI LR-SAMs will be new-generation replacements for the 1980s-era 9M82 and 9M83 LR-SAMs that had equipped the Almaz-Antey S-300VM and Antey-2500 strategic air-defence systems.
Since the IAF’s S-400 LR-SAMs will be high-value assets, they will require in-depth air-defence protection as well. For this, the IAF had ordered four squadrons of the RAFAEL-built SpyDer system back in 2013, but an amended contract had to be inked on August 3, 2015 following which deliveries commenced in February 2017 and were completed by August 2018.
Also to be enlisted are the services of close-in weapon system (CIWS), for which the IAF wants to procure 244 cannons along with 228 search/fire-control radars, and 204,000 programmable bullets.

The Multi-Phase Castration Of HAL: From Early 1960s Till To Date

$
0
0

Off late, it has become extremely fashionable to refer to the MoD-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) as a ‘strategic asset’ and shed crocodile tears about the ‘diminishing status’ of India’s premier and oldest aerospace manufacturing corporate entity. However, a fact-check reveals that those very political parties and their ‘netas’ who are today crying hoarse over HAL receiving step-motherly treatment were in the yesteryears the very ones responsible for subjecting HAL to multi-phase castrations which have since proven to be catastrophic for HAL today.
Phase-1 Of Castration: The 1960s
During this period, the process of castration started soon after the 1962 Sino-Indian border war, when a confused India refused to heed the well-intentioned advice of the US (which, as the quiet but steadfast ally of India) to devote her limited financial resources on the creation of an indigenous combat aircraft development-cum-manufacturing capability. While the US had advised India to import only limited quantities of combat aircraft of foreign origin, it had also offered to bear the cost of developing the indigenous, supersonic HF-24 Marut medium multi-role combat aircraft (M-MRCA).
The US had proposed for the Indian Air Force (IAF) the importation of highly subsidised (as part of a military assistance programme) Douglas F-4D Skyray, equipped with a Westinghouse APQ-50A search radar and 16,000lb thrustPratt & Whitney J57-P-8 turbojet. This combat aircraft was designed exclusively for the high-altitude interception role, with a high rate and angle of climb. It had set a new time-to-altitude record, flying from a standing start to 49,221 in 2 minutes and 36 seconds, all while flying at a 70-degree pitch angle. The proposed F-5D Skylancer was derived from the F-4D and was intended to be a Mach 2-capable successor to the Skyray when powered by a General Electric J-79 turbofan.
However, for reasons that have only been partially explained to date, India refused to procure either the Douglas F-4D Skyray or the Northrop F-5A Freedom Fighter, and instead kept on insisting on the need to procure off-the-shelf up to three squadrons of Lockheed F-104G Starfighter interceptors, along with the parallel importation of MiG-21PF interceptors and the subsequent licenced-manufacturing of follow-on variants of the MiG-21. It was this lack of clarity-of-thought that sealed the fate of the HF-24 Marut, as explained by the slides below.
The HF-24 Marut was conceived to meet an IAF Air Staff Requirement (ASR) that called for a multi-role aircraft suitable for both high-altitude interception and low-level ground attack. The specified performance parameters called for a speed of Mach 2 at altitude, service ceiling of 60,000 feet, and a combat radius of 805km. Additionally, the ASR demanded that the basic design be suitable for adaptation as a lead-in fighter trainer, an all-weather combat aircraft and for ‘navalisation’ as an aircraft carrier-based aircraft.
India’s first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal ‘Chaachaa’ Nehru tried to attract leading aeronautical designers from the West to develop the HF-24. It was to his credit that he convinced Dr Kurt Tank from Germany to take up this assignment along with his able deputy Engineer Mittelhuber. Both arrived at HAL in Bangalore in August 1956. As head of the design team it was Tank who gave the design shape and substance. A full-scale representation (wooden glider) of the projected HF-24 was ready by early 1959. A flight-test programme was initiated with this glider on April 1, 1959. The design was given the designation of Hindustan Fighter 24 or simply HF-24.
Assembly of the first HF-24 prototype (HF-001) commenced in April 1960 and after a comprehensive three-month ground-test programme, HF-001 (later re-numbered BR-462), with the late Wing Commander (later Group Captain) Suranjan Das at the controls, flew for the first time on June 17, 1961. The HF-24 was then powered by twin Bristol Siddeley Orpheus 703 Mk.1 turbojets each rated at 21.57kN thrust. The wings were designed to carry four pylons rated at 454kg each. In addition, each wing carried about 700 litres of fuel in the integral tanks. An integral tank means the internal space within the wing is sealed up and filled with fuel floating between the structural members. This means each wing carried a payload of about 1,425kg of fuel and weapons. All this was achieved within a commendably short period of 15 months from starting of design to assembling a flightworthy airframe and finally, to the maiden flight.
On June 27, 1961 the BR-462 prototytpe was shown to Prime Minister Nehru. By November 1961, a structural test airframe had been completed and was subjected to extensive structural and functional tests in rigs designed and fabricated by HAL. On October 4, 1962 a second prototype (BR-463) joined the flight-test programme and the two prototypes were extensively tested by Das and a team of three IAF test pilots for aerodynamic stability, engine operating protocols, armament stowage, instrumentation, emergency procedures, etc. HAL and the IAF conducted 1,800 test-flights between 1962 and 1967 to iron out the defects of the Marut. In April 1967 No.10 ‘Flying Daggers’ Squadron became the first unit to be equipped with India’s first indigenous MRCA. The Marut eventually equipped three IAF Squadrons: No.10 Sqn, No.220 ‘Desert Tigers’ converted in May 1969 and the No.31 ‘Lions’ in March 1974. India thus became the sixth country to design and fly a homegrown supersonic combat aircraft after the US, UK, USSR, France and Sweden.
The design of the HF-24 had been based around the expected availability of the afterburning Bristol Siddeley (later Rolls-Royce) Orpheus BOr.12 engine rated at 30.29kN dry and 36.34kN with afterburning, which Rolls-Royce had planned to develop. Unfortunately, the British requirement for this powerplant was discarded and the Indian Govt of India under the then Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri in a shortsighted decision declined to underwrite its continued development even though the developmental budget (which the US had offered to provide) was only £13 million. This catastrophic decision was to bedevil the Marut programme permanently.
The HF-24’s design team was consequently forced to adopt the non-afterburning Orpheus 703 Mk.1, which also powered the Folland Gnat L-MRCA, as the permanent solution. Although HAL did develop an afterburning version of the Orpheus 703 Mk.1, and called it the HJE-2500 (rated at 25.44KN thrust with reheat), the IAF refused to service-induct the HF-24 Mk.1R variant using such engines. Though the IAF considered the prospect of using the Tumansky RD-9F turbojet (rated at 37kN with afterburner, it was ultimately rejected on grounds of surging and limited MTBO.
Phase-2 Of Castration: The 1980s
As revealed below, the IAF had a detailed plan for up-sizing the Folland Gnat as a contemporary L-MRCA with the help of HAL and friendly international; aerospace OEMs like BAE Systems (then British Aerospace, which had proposed to co-develop with HAL a digital fly-by-wire flight-control system for both the Jaguar IS interdictors of the IAF as well as for the projected L-MRCA) and SNECMA Moteurs, whose turbofans were available for import.
However, all such well-intentioned roadmaps were junked by India’s then gullible, ill-informed and ignorant political leadership and instead, the programme for indigenously developing the ‘Tejas’ light combat aircraft (LCA) was initiated in August 1983, when the MoD sanctioned an interim development cost of Rs5.6 billion for carrying out the project definition phase (PDP). The MoD consequently split the programme into the Technical Development Phase and Operational Vehicle Development Phase. The DRDO subsequently obtained feasibility studies from three leading aircraft companies (British, French and German). Use was made of these studies in presenting a case to the Govt of India for indigenously designing and developing the LCA. In an unusual step, a ‘Society’ was set up to oversee the LCA’s developmental process. At its apex was and still is a 15-member General Body, whose President is the Defence Minister. The next rung is a 10-member Governing Body, whose Chairman is the Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister and Secretary DRDO. The third rung is a 10-member Technical Committee, headed by the Director of the DRDO’s Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), which was established on June 16, 1984. In October 1985, the IAF issued the LCA’s ASR. The projected requirement then was for 220 LiCAs (200 single-engined combat aircraft and 20 tandem-seat operational conversion aircraft), with service-induction commencing by 1994. On January 7, 1986 at a conference room in Delhi’s South Block which houses the offices of the MoD, officials of ADA unveilled detailed plans for developing and manufacturing the LCA. Subsequently, the Project definition (PD) phase commenced in October 1987 with the help of Dassault Aviation as project consultant, and the PD phase was completed in September I988. So, what went wrong and why? It is all explained in the following slides.
And where do matters now stand? The slide below illustrates how GE Aero Engines had in mid-1987 envisioned the LCA Mk.1’s airframe to be.

Instead, this is how it has turned out to be!
Phase-3 Of Castration: The 1990s
This decade was the most critical and disastrous. What was required was long-term strategizing, which was to have been followed by the articulation of an industrial roadmap catering to both military and commercial aviation requirements. Instead, that decade turned out to be all about lost opportunities and ill-conceived decision-making processes. For instance, while the IAF had decided in the mid-1980s itself that it would require basic turboprop trainers (BTT), advanced jet trainers (AJT) and lead-in fighter trainers (LIFT) for its future fixed-wing flying training requirements, there was no corresponding industrial roadmap conceived for indigenously meeting such requirements. Despite this, the HTT-35 BTT’s full-scale mock-up, was designed and fabricated in-house by HAL in the late 1980s and rolled out in the early 1990s—all in all a four-year effort.
 
The objective at that time was to team up with a global avionics supplier (most probably THALES) and co-design the semi-glass tandem cockpits and offer the aircraft for evaluation by the IAF by 1998. However, after 1994 the HTT-35 disappeared, literally! One can only speculate on what exactly happened to this full-scale mock-up, or on why did the MoD or the IAF develop a coordinated ‘memory loss’ on the need to series-produce the HTT-35 almost a decade ago! For it was realised as far back as 1998 that the induction of fourth-generation combat aircraft would force the IAF sooner than later into undertaking a critical revision of its flying training practices that included basic flying training, advanced flying training, and lead-in fighter training (LIFT).
Despite this, the HTT-35 BTT was scrapped (only to be reborn in the following decade as the HTT-40), and instead of calling for the development by HAL of the HJT-36 as a swept-wing AJT, the IAF in its all-knowing wisdom wrongly decided 19 years ago to have the HJT-36 as an intermediate jet trainer (IJT). This perhaps explains why the IAF has, since 2008, been maintaining sustained silence over HAL’s inability to develop the HJT-36.
On September 29, 2009 the MoD cleared the acquisition of 181 BTTs for the IAF and on May 24, 2012 a contract worth US$640 million (Rs 3,780 crore) was inked with Switzerland-based Pilatus Aircraft Ltd for procuring off-the-shelf 75 PC-7 Mk.2 BTTs, together with an integrated ground-based training system and a comprehensive logistics support package. Concurrently, the MoD decreed that HAL develop the indigenous HTT-40 BTT, for which an order for 106 units was promised. However, the MoD on February 28, 2015 approved the IAF’s move to exercise options for procuring an additional 38 PC-7 Mk.2s, thereby reducing the number of HTT-40s to be acquired to 68. HAL was required to set up a production line in Bengaluru with a rated output of two HTT-40s in the first year (2017), followed by eight in the second year and 20 aircraft from year-three onwards. By 2012 HAL had sanctioned Rs.177 crore ($30 million from its own internal funds for the preliminary design phase and detailed design phase activities.
The first HTT-40, powered by a Honeywell Garrett TPE 331-12B engine, was first rolled out in February 2016 and was first test-flown in May. On October 29, 2015, the MoD decided to carry on with the HTT-40’s development despite the IAF stonewalling HAL’s detailed project report (DPR). The IAF stated that while an imported PC-7 Mk.2 would cost Rs.38.3 crore, the HTT-40 would be 25% more expensive, or Rs.43.59 crore at 2011 prices. The extra cost per HTT-40 includes Rs.1.81 crore as the cost of production; and Rs.7.11 crore as the cost of design and development, of which the IAF is required to pay 80%. A 16% rise in the cost of foreign exchange at that time added another Rs.1.97 crore per aircraft, taking the price up to Rs.43.59 crore. To this was to be added another 4.5% annual inflation costs to, which were on a 2011 base. That raised the HTT-40’s per-unit cost to Rs.59.31 crore in 2018 and Rs.64.77 crore in 2020.
Added finally to all these was the direct operating costs of maintaining the airworthiness of two separate types of BTTs equipped with two different types of turboprop engines and avionics suites—a luxury no other air force in the world enjoys! All such headaches could have been avoided had the HTT-35 BTT been developed and ordered by the late 1990s.
Similar was the case the HAL-developed HJT-36 IJT, whose development was sanctioned in 1999 with an initial funding of Rs.180 crore. On March 7, 2003 the first HJT-36 prototype made its maiden flight, following which the Cabinet Committee on National Security in March 2005 approved an order for 12 limited series-production HJT-36s, which were slated for rollout by 2008 and service-induction by 2011. In mid-2005, HAL and Russia’s Rosoboronexport State Corp signed a $350 million contract to licdence-build 250 NPO Saturn-developed AL-55I turbofans, with an option for 1,000 more. HAL had then estimated that the per-unit price of each HJT-36 would be around $10 million for a 225-unit order.
The first batch of AL-55Is began arriving two years later than scheduled in June 2008 and the first HJT-36 prototype equipped with it undertook a 30-minute flight on May 9, 2009. HAL was, however, not able to fit the standby generator on the aircraft. The HJT-36 prototypes subsequently met with accidents in February 2007, February 2009 and April 2011, causing further setbacks.Eventually in August 2014, the MoD admitted in Parliament that the project was well behind schedule, while HAL admitted that the HJT-36 was overweight and suffering from serious aerodynamic problems that have implications for air safety due a design flaw.
The AL-55I, which initially had a time-between-overhauls (TBO) of only 100 hours, subsequently had its TBO increased to 300 hours, with its total technical service-life (TTSL) being pegged at 400 hours. But the IAF wanted the TBO be about 1,200 hours, since an IJT is required to fly six to eight sorties daily, clocking around 10 hours. If the TBO is just 100 hours, the turbofan will have to be replaced every 10 days. This will require more engines and overhauls, apart from the IJTs sitting on ground for longer periods.
In all, the project to develop the HJT-36 has proven to be a total waste of the Indian taxpayers’ money, since the IJT requirement became redundant and unnecessary from the day (March 26, 2004) the MoD had inked the contract with BAE Systems for procuring an initial 66 of 123 Hawk Mk.132 AJTs (including 17 for the Indian Navy). The final nail in the coffin of the GJT-36 was struck on May 24, 2012 when the initial 75 PC-7 Mk.2 BTTs were contracted for.
The 1990s also witnessed total lack of clarity when it came to commercial aviation industrial developmental activities. What was required was a holistic approach that encompassed not just the co-development and series-production of a family of regional commuter jetliners (starting with 30-seaters, and then stretching the airframe to include 40-seaters and 50-seaters as had been done by Brazil’s Embraer and Canada’s Bombardier Aerospace), but also the domestic production of a range of aircraft cabin interior fixtures and upholstery, plus the localisation of periodic maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) activities for those airliners that were being imported from Boeing and Airbus (such activities, to this day, are outsourced from MRO centres located in Malaysia, Singapore and Sri Lanka).
By the early 1990s, while HAL had settled down to licence-build more than 100 Dornier Do-228 19-seat STOL twin-turboprop aircraft for both commercial and military customers in India, the time was then ripe for HAL’s Aircraft Research & Design Centre (ARDC) to be expanded for undertaking the co-development and co-production of another new-generation product from Dornier—the 33-seat Do-328 was designed and initially series-produced by Germany’s Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH (in 1996 that firm was acquired by the US-based Fairchild Aircraft Inc and the resulting corporation, named Fairchild-Dornier, continued series-production of the 328 family in Germany, and also developed and produced the follow-on 44-seat 428JET variant of the regional commuter jetliner).
Instead, HAL was ONCE AGAIN totally sidelined and the then Govt of India in May 1998 created the Centre  for  Civil  Aircraft  Design  &  Development  (C-CADD)  as  the nodal point  of the National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) under the Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR),  with  a mandate to play a lead role in the design and development of small and medium sized civil aircraft. So henceforth, NAL became the lead designer-cum-developer for civil aviation aircraft, with HAL merely acting as the prime industrial contractor. Consequently, NAL, being essentially a laboratory like ADA with no available human resource expertise required for designing and developing any type of aircraft, quickly began the process of making erroneous decisions, starting with the attempt to develop a 14-seat twin turboprop-powered commuter aircraft called ‘Saras’.
The ‘Saras’ had already been developed in 1991 as the ‘M-102 Duet’ by Russia’s JSC V Myasishchev Experimental Machine Building Plantwhich later opted out of the project due to financial constraints and offered to sell all IPRs of this project to C-CADD in June 1998. The then NDA Govt’s Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs in June 1999 approved sanction for the C-CADD to complete the M-102 Diet’s developmental process, following which in September 1999 the project was renamed as ‘Saras’. Russia’s Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute TsAGI and Gromov Flight Research Institute (GFRI) were roped in as project consultants. NAL next received an order from the IAF to supply 15 ‘Saras’ aircraft, whose delivferies were to begin in 2014 and conclude in 2017.The first HAL-built prototype (PT-1) was powered by two Pratt & Whitney PT6A-66 turboprop engines and its maiden flight took place on May 29, 2004. The ‘Saras’ was originally proposed to have a weight of 4,125kg but it increased by about 24% to 5,118kg. Two prototypes have been produced to date. The second prototype (PT-2) was built by HAL with composite materials to decrease its overall weight by 400kg compared to that of the PT-1. PT-2 was powered by twin uprated Pratt & Whitney PT6A-67A engines and it made its maiden flight on April 18, 2007.This prototype crashed near Bidadi, situated 30km away from Bengaluru, in March 2009 during a routine flight-test.
Another consultancy contract was inked between the C-CADD and TsAGI and GFRI on February 18, 2011 under which the two Russian parties were required to assist C-CADD in weight-budgeting and aerodynamic optimising the airframe of the ‘Saras’ (by conducting wind-tunnels tests at TsAGI), plus assistance for ensuring the certification of airworthiness of the aircraft, since India’s state-owned Directorate General of Civil Aviation is only an endorser of foreign CoAs and it does not possess the kind of human resources required for undertaking any CoA-related tasking of an industrial nature.
Thus, as a result of Russian assistance, the C-CADD was able to make the following modifications to the airframe of PT-1N: significant reduction of control forces, optimisation of nacelle design (for the engine mounts), modifications of the environmental control system and cabin pressurisation system, installation of an automatic stall-warning system, modification of linear flap-tracks and trim-taps on the elevators, enhancement of rudder area for better controllability, modification of flight-test instrumentation, modification of electrical systems for reducing voltage losses, and provision of nose boom for the air-data system for redundancy, .Apart from above modification on the aircraft, the following additional safety measures have also been ensured by the team.
Despite all this, the project’s funding was terminated in 2012, but was revived in 2016 following which NAL assembled a young team of 40 engineers and technicians for working on the project for the next nine months.The modified PT-1N prototype made its maiden flight on January 24, 2018 from the IAF’s Aircraft & Systems Testing Establishment (ASTE) in Bengaluru. According to C-CADD, the production version of ‘Saras’ will be a 19-seater and will undergo both civil and military certification processes for which two Limited Series prototypes will have to be built at a cost of Rs.500 crore. If all goes well, then the first series-produced ‘Saras’ will be handed over to the IAF. The C-CADD has estimated a total domestic requirement for 160 ‘Saras’ aircraft. What, however, eludes an answer is what exactly will the ‘Saras’ be able to offer that the 19-seat HAL-built Do-228 STOL commuter aircraft cannot? And why was C-C-CADD tasked to develop a 14-seater twin-turboprop commuter when HAL had already begun licence-producing 19-seater twin-turboprop commuters more than a decade earlier? Why was the development or co-development of a 30-seater twin-turboprop or twin turbofan-powered commuter not considered at all?
Phase-4 Of Castration: The Previous Decade
(to be concluded)

Airshow China 2018 Expo Highlights-1

$
0
0
Airborne Multi-Mode Radars
Air-Defence Guided-Weapons
The FM-2000 SHORADS (above) is meant primarily for export and it visually resembles the TOR-M1 SHORADS, which China had acquired in the 1990s from Russia. The replacement for these TOR-M1s is the FM-3000 (below), which was recently service-inducted.
The FM-90 SHORADS (below) is presently in services with the armies of Bangladesh, China and Pakistan.
Air-Defence Radars
Avionics
Battlefield Support Missiles
NLOS-BSMs of Chinese origin are presently being marketed by two state-owned entities: China National Precision Machinery Import & Export Corp (CPMIEC), and Aerospace Long-March International Trade Co Ltd (ALIT).
CPMIEC’s 2-tonne B-611MR missile is designed to attack supply lines, warehouses, ballistic/cruise missile launch sites, SAM batteries, command-and-control centres, air bases, road/railway transportation hubs, and area targets in urban surroundings. Armed with a 480kg HE warhead, the B-611M has 280km range. Up to two cannister-mounted B-611Ms can be carried by a wheeled TEL.
Another NLOS-BSM from CPMIEC is the P-12, which made its public debut in November 2006. Up to two P-12s are carried in an enclosed compartment mounted on a 6 x 6 TEL. The P-12 has a range of 150km, and it comes armed with either a 300kg HE blast fragmentation warhead, or a cluster warhead containing 19 anti-armour sub-munitions. Both the B-611M and P-12 have a CEP of about 2 metres when using a RLG-INS coupled to a GPS receiver, plus an optronic sensor for terminal homing. CPMIEC’s latest NLOS-BSM offering is the vertically-launched joint attack rocket & missile (JARM) system, which can fire both the 280km-range BP-12A and the 200km-range SY-400 from a common launch platform. The improved BP-12B BSM has a range of up to 295km. The JARM, which made its public debut in November 2010, makes use of combined GPS-RLG-INS navigation systems to achieve a CEP of 3 metres  A typical JARM Battery comprises ten 8 x 8 TELs housing either 80 SY-400s or 20 BP-12As, or a combination of both.
ALIT’s latest product is the M-20. Capable of striking targets between 70km and 270km, the all-weather capable M-20, with a Mach 3 cruise speed, comes armed with both a 200kg unitary high-explosive (HE) blast-fragmentation warhead for engaging high-value and time-sensitive targets, as well as a sub-kiloton yield tactical nuclear warhead. Two P-20s housed inside cannisters are mounted on a 8 x 8 transporter/erector/launcher (TEL). For navigation purposes, use is made of a RLG-INS coupled to a GPS receiver (for receiving high-accuracy navigational updates in secure PY-code from China’s ‘Beidou’ constellation of GPS satellites), and an infra-red sensor for terminal homing that gives the missile a CEP of less than 10 metres.
Combat Aircraft
Helicopters
The design and capabilities of the joint AHL heavilift helicopter co-development project between China and Russia have been revised. The helicopter now has increased in maximum takeoff weight to 38.7 tonnes, putting it in the class between the CH-47F Chinook and the Mi-26T. Similarly, the maximum range of the AHL helicopter has been increased from 630km to 800km, with ramp access for 10 tonnes internal payload, or 15 tonnes underslung load. The initial agreement to jointly develop this helicopter was signed by the two countries in 2016.
Space Technology
Supersonic Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles
Thrust-Vectoring Nozzles
The adjustable cover-plates on the exhaust nozzle—the so-called ‘turkey feathers’—are designed with saw-tooth edges to reduce the J-10B M-MRCA’s radar cross section (RCS). TVC nozzles of such a design have proven to significantly reduce both RCS and infra-red signature. The J-10B equipped with a thrust-vectoring nozzle that is fitted to the homegrown Woshan WS-10B3 turbofan, whose TTSL has yet to be established.
Turbofans
Beijing has dramatically stepped up the development of new-generation turbofans and turboshafts since the turn of the century, with at least US$23.7 billion being invested on R & D activitiers between 2010 and 2015. The principal R & D players are the Shenyang Liming Aero-Engine Groupfor the Shenyang Aircraft Co; Xi’an Aero-Engine Group for the Xi’an Aircraft Co; and Chengdu Aero-Engine Group/Guizhou Liyang Aero-Engine Group for the Chengdu Aircraft Co. In addition, AVIC Commercial Aircraft Engines (ACAE), a company formed in August 2016 with an investment of around $7.5 billion and through the merger of 24 companies with about 10,000 employees, is spearheading the development of turbofans for commercial airliners and business jets now being developed by Commercial Aircraft Corp of China, Ltd (COMAC).
Being developed are the 78kN-thrust CJ-500 turbofan and the 80kN-thrust WS-12C Tianshan turbofan for mid-sized business jets, the 340kN-thrust CJ-2000 turbofan for the Sino-Russian CR-929 widebody airliner, and the 196kN thrust CJ-1000AX Changjiang turbofan for the C-919 narrow-body airliner. This is a twin-spool, unmixed, high-bypass ratio direct-driven turbofan with clockwise co-rotating spool and five bearing-support struts for rotors. It includes a first-stage fan, three-stage booster section, 10-stage high-pressure compressor, single annular combustor section, two-stage high-pressure (HP) turbine and a six-stage low-pressure (LP) turbine.
The Shenyang-Liping WS-20 high-bypass turbofan for the Xian Aircraft Industrial Corp Y-20 Kunpeng strategic airlifter has been developed to produce 14 metric tonnes of thrust, which will enable the Y-20 to achieve its maximum payload of 66 metric tonnes. Touted as China’s most powerful turbofan to be developed to date, the WS-20 has been flight-tested on an IL-76 testbed since 2014. The WS-10A is a low-bypass, two-shaft turbofan in the 130kN-thrust class. This engine had a TBO of only 30 hours, while the AL-31F turbofan powering the Su-27 had a 400-hour TBO. The WS-10A has suffered blade warp and destruction both during ground testing and also under high-RPM, rapid-turn conditions in flight that produce high centrifugal and g-forces. China’s third-generation single-crystal turbine blades can withstand temperatures of up to 2,000 degrees Celsius) and have found application on the 140kN thrust WS-10B turbofan, which has a TTSL of 1,500 hours. However, China still is far away from mastering the production technologies for superalloys, thermal barrier coatings, powder metallurgy, and single-crystal blades using rare-earth metals. The 150kN-thrust WS-15 Emei, designed for the Chengdu J-20 stealthy MRCA, exploded during a ground running test in 2015 due to quality-control issues with its single-crystal turbine blades. Lastly, there is the 49kN-thrust Minshan turbofan that has been developed for the for Hongdu L-15 lead-in fighter trainer. Turboshaft engines already developed by China include the 1,300shp WZ-9 for attack helicopters, 2,400shp WZ-10 for medium-lift helicopters, and the 525shp WZ-161 for light medium twin helicopters.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
Chinese companies like ASN Technology Group, China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp (CASIC), China Aerospace Science and Technology Corp (CASC), Zhuhai Yintong Energy, Weifan Freesky Aviation Industry Co, and AVIC Defense presently account for most of the UAVs and UCAVs built thus far. ASN Technology Group works closely with the Xian-based Northwestern Polytechnical University’s UAV Institute, and the Beijing- and Nanjing-based Universities of Aeronautics and Astronautics (BUAA), Beijing Technology Company, Hebei Electric Power Reconnaissance Design Academy, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Shaanxi Engine Design Institute, Guizhou Aviation Industry Corp (GAIC), and the Chengdu Aircraft Design and Research Institute.
The CH-5 (above) is powered by a 456kW WJ-9A turboprop engine, while the CH-4 is equipped witha Rotax 014 piston engine imported from Austria’s BRP-Powertrain. More than 60% of all components for the Wing Loong family of UAS platforms come from private-sector companies of China. The CH-5 has a maximum takeoff weight of 4,200kg, nearly four times greater than the CH-4. Of its six hardpoints, four of them can carry double payloads, giving the UAS a potential payload of ten air-to-surface precision-guided munitions. Maximum takeoff weight is 4,200kg, maximum external load-carrying capacity is 480kg, maximum cruise speed is 370kph, service ceiling is 9km, and endurance is 20 hours. While the CH-4 is in service with China’s armed forces, the CH-5 has to date been ordered only by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. On March 16 last year, Saudi Arabia’s the King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology signed an industrial partnership agreement with the state-owned China Aerospace Science & Technology Corp (CASC) to establish a manufacturing plant in Saudi Arabia for as many as 300 CH-4 and CH-5 UAS platforms.
The CaiHong (Rainbow)-7 (above), developed by the 11th Research Institute of China Aerospace Science & Technology Corp (CASC) is a high-altitude, long-endurance, stealthy platform with claimed significant penetration capabilities. The flying wing measures 72 feet (22 metres) wide and has a maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) of 13 tonnes, payload of 2 tonnes, and top speed of Mach 0.75. While the aircraft remains in the developmental stage, a corporate video shows that first flight is planned for 2019 and it will enter production by 2022. If successful, it will validate the capabilities of China to develop a fly-by-wire flight-control system for a large, tailless flying wing and could even pave the way for the country’s next-generation H-20 strategic bomber project.
The China Academy of Aerospace and Aerodynamics (CAAA) has developed the CH-10 tilt-rotor UAV (above) that is a new-design vehicle integrating helicopter and fixed-wing aircraft technology. The main mission of the CH-10 is to accompany large- and medium-sized warships or ground forces and to conduct intelligence, reconnaissance, detection, communications relay, search, target identification, and relay guidance to ground stations. The shift of flight modes is done through the tilting rotor. It can take off and land on destroyers and frigates.
The Cloud Shadow (below) is a family of swept-wing platforms. Though AVIC says this UAS first flew on May 16, 2016, it has not specified which variant. There are three variants now being promoted: imagery reconnaissance (designated CS-1), electronic reconnaissance (CS-2), and reconnaissance-strike (CS-3). Each of them is powered by a WP-11C turbojet mounted between the butterfly tails, providing a claimed maximum speed of 281 Knots and cruise speed of 227 Knots. Endurance is five hours and cruising altitude is 41,000 feet. Maximum takeoff weight is 3,200kg, while the wingspan is 66 feet. The first two variants have an internal 200kg payload capacity, while the CS-3 has an external payload of 400kg, spread across four pylons (two of which are of the twin-rack type). According to AVIC, a full load-out consists of a single FT-7A 100kg range-extended, precision-guided glide-bomb, and a pair of LS-6/50s, the 50kg version of the LS-6 laser-/TV-guided bomb. The CS-2 features a pair of ELINT/COMINT sensors in a fairing below the nose. AVIC claims a frequency range of 0.8-18GHz at up to 400km for the former and 0.1-2GHz at up to 200km for the latter. The CS-1 carries SAR and long range oblique photographic (LOROP) sensors. An operational concept image in the presentation shows the CS-1 flying 18km inside hostile airspace, and with effective standoff ranges for the LOROP of 68km, and 70km for the SAR. The GCS can be provided in fixed, vehicle-mounted or portable configurations, and features six user-defined touch-screen displays, a QWERTY keyboard with separate numerical keypad, and two joysticks. This can be used to control both the CH-4/CH-5 and Cloud Shadow UAS platforms. AVIC also provides data-links, including a C/UHF-band line-of-sight link, Ku-, Ka- and S-band satellite links, an L-band miniature link for the A-Hawks, and all associated ground terminals.
The JY-300 early-warning UAV (below) from the China Electronics Technology Group Corp’s (CETC) 38th Research Institute was first unveiled last June. It features miniaturised active phased-array radar strips installed on the two sides of the fuselage and the leading-edge of the wings. Unlike most conventional UAVs with a radar payload, the integrated and conformal design of the JY-300 reduces drag and thus retains most of the UAV’s inherent flight performances. CETC claims that the radar suite has a range of around 620 miles (1,000km) and can provide surveillance of hostile warships, helicopters, and missiles from a standoff range. Additionally, the UAV presents a smaller radar cross-section, and the unmanned and cheaper nature of the platform allows the user to free up heavier manned AEW &CS platforms for more critical airborne battle management operations.
China Aerospace Science & Industry Corp’s (CASIC) turbofan-powered WJ-700 high-altitude, high-speed UCAV (below) strongly resembles the MQ-9 Reaper and CH-5 UCAV, with a turbofan replacing the rear-mounted propeller. The WJ-700 has an MTOW of 3.5 tonnes, and endurance of 20 hours. CASIC describes the WJ-700 as designed for long-range anti-ship missions, anti-radiation missions, as well as electronic warfare and jamming. The concept model suggests four underwing pylons for a variety of munitions, including the CM-502KG anti-ship cruise missile and the CM-102 anti-radiation missile.
Two unmanned helicopters made test-flights in 2017 on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. While the AV-500W conducted firing tests at an altitude of 4,300 metres in Qinghai province on November 18, 2017 (according to Jiangxi provincial office of science, technology and industry for national defence), at 4,600 metres above sea level, on November 9, 2017 an XM-20 multi-rotor unmanned drone took off and landed with a full payload.The AV-500W had earlier climbed to an altitude of 5,006 metres during tests on October 31, the maximum achieved by a domestically-made unmanned helicopter.These VTOL-UAVs have applications in counter-terrorism, drug policing, border patrols, meteorology and mapping.The aircraft were developed by a helicopter research and development institute in Jingdezhen, Jiangxi province, owned by AVIC.The institute began work on unmanned helicopters in 2004.
AVIC had revealed two updated designs of its AV-500W VTOL-UCAV at the fourth China Helicopter Exposition held in Tianjing in mid-September 2017. The AV-500W was unveiled at the 2016 Zhuhai Airshow. Its designers from the China Helicopter Research & Development Institute have now given the AV-500W a smaller and sleeker appearance. The design concept is similar to that of the Northrop Grumman MQ-8B Firescout, but one-third the weight of its Western counterpart. The airframe measures 7.2 metres/23.6 feet long, 2.3 metres/7.5 feet high and 1.6 metres/5.2 feet wide, and its maximum takeoff weight has been reduced from 470kg/1,036 lb to 450kg/992 lb based on the latest specifications. The VTOL-UCAV has a maximum speed of 170kph, and a combat radius of 200km. The primary armaments include the new FT-8D anti-armour guided-missile carried on four underwing hardpoints. The FT-8D is a semi-active laser-guided missile with a range of up to 5km.  According to AVIC, this missile was tested in the early half of 2017 and yielded satisfactory results. The AV-500W can also carry conventional bombs, as well as external loads relevant to search-and-rescue operations. Countries in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates, have shown interest in this VTOL-UCAV, especially for counter-insurgency missions. The AV-500W is the armed variant of the AV-500 civilian UAV, which is 2.415 metres high, 7.204 metres long and can take off at up to 470kg maximum weight, with mission payloads not exceeding 160kg, including 120kg of equipment, including an optronic ball, a SAR radar and other communications devices.The UAV has an 8-hour autonomy in flight and is capable of reaching 4,000 metres of altitude at a maximum speed of 170kph.
PGMs
UAVs For Tactical Transportation & Airspace Surveillance
Mini-UCAVs For Urban Counter-Terror Operations
Combat-Support Platforms 
Stealthy UCAV Concept
(Many More To Come)

24 Arjun ARRVs Being Ordered From HVF & BEML For Delivery By 2021

$
0
0
The Arjun ARRVs will support the two Arjun Mk.1 and two Arjun Mk.1A Regiments that will be permanently deployed in Rajasthan, since the Indian Army has decided that they will never be employed in the plains of Punjab and Jammu. Instead, all the upgraded T-72M and T-90S MBTs will be used in the plains of Punjab as well as elsewhere in Jammu & Kashmir and the North-East.

Miscellaneous Year-End Jottings

$
0
0

Wu Jian Qi, the CETC Group’s Chief Engineer, confirmed at a recent presentation that a metric-wave radar detected and traced the route of a USAF F-22 Raptor at a distance of 450km in 2013, whereas none of the other PLAAF radars saw it. Presently a series of radar clusters each comprising a JY-26 UHF-band and SLC-7 L-band active phased-array radar, JY-27A Skywatch-5 VHF-band radar, and a YLC-8B UHF-band 3-D radar, are deployed throughout coastal China.
First Type 055 DDG of the PLA Navy Undergoing Sea Trials
Pakistan Navy’s CSTC-Developed Type 054AP F-22P Batch-2 FFG Design
AVIC-Developed Z-20 Medium-Lift Utility Helicopter
NORINCO-Developed ZTQ-105 Light Tank Meant For Deployment In TAR

Compendium Of Indian Army's Cross-LoC ‘Jawaabi Karavaee’ (Retaliatory Action) Raids Since 1998

$
0
0

On the night of March 26-27, 1998 the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) had massacred 29 Hindu villagers at Prankote and Dhakikot by slitting the throats of their victims, which included women and infants. In late April 1998 the massacre of 21 villagers in Binda Mohri Sehri, 600 metres across the Line of Control (LoC) inside PoK, and the bombing in June of a Lahore-bound train, shortly after an explosion in Jammu, are both believed by Pakistan to have been carried out by Indian security agencies. Pakistan admitted on May 4, 1998 that an Indian Army (IA) special operations forces unit had killed 22 civilians at the village of Binda Mohri Sehri in Bandala, in the Chhamb sector. Two villagers were decapitated and the eyes of several others were allegedly gouged out by the raiders, who comprised a dozen men, all dressed in black. They struck in the middle of the night and dropped leaflets to mark the attack. “Vengeance Brigade,” one leaflet said. “Evil deeds bear evil fruit,” said another. “Ten eyes for one eye, one jaw for a single tooth,” said a third. The Pakistan Army (PA) claimed to have recovered an India-made HMT wrist-watch from the scene of the carnage, along with a hand-written note which asked: “How does your own blood feel?”

In late 1999 the IA’s Capt Gurjinder Singh Suri, posted on the LoC with 12 Bihar Regiment took a platoon of ‘Ghaataks’ across the LoC to take out Pakistani posts in retaliation of an earlier attack. While Captain Suri was killed in the assault, he was posthumously awarded the Maha Vir Chakra, India’s second-highest military gallantry award.

On the night of January 21-22, 2000, in a raidauthorised by then Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and conducted by India’s 9 SF (Para), seven PA soldiers were captured in a raid on a post in the Nadala enclave, across the Kishanganga (Neelam) River. The seven soldiers, wounded in fire, were tied up and dragged across a ravine running across the LoC. The bodies were returned, according to Pakistan’s complaint to UNMOGIP, bearing signs of brutal torture.  This raid was intended to avenge the killing of Capt. Saurabh Kalia, and five soldiers–sepoys Bhanwar Lal Bagaria, Arjun Ram, Bhika Ram, Moola Ram and Naresh Singh–of the 4 Jat Regiment.

On the night of February 24/25, 2000, the IA, as part of a retaliatory cross-LoC raid (to avenge the death of an IA officer who was killed while patrolling along the LoC and whose body was taken across the LoC to Kotli), killed 14 residents in the village of Lanjot in PoK’s Nakyal sector after its SF (Para) forces had crossed the LoC. They returned to the Indian side and threw the severed heads of three of them at the PA soldiers manning their side of the LoC. This cross-LoC raid began at around midnight when the IA commenced an artillery bombardment with mortar shells in order to forcibly confine the local residents to their homes. Next came the attack on the targetted house, where the annual Khatam (complete recitation of the Quran in one sitting) was then taking place. Eight of the 14 killed were of the immediate family (most of who were serving with the PA at that time), while the others were cousins, uncles and aunts. The heads of three men were cut off while another’s arm was chopped off and the latter was taken back across the LoC as a souvenir. There were two girls who were hiding underneath a blanket, and thus they went unnoticed. Two other children died on the way to the hospital in Kotli, City, while 12 others died on-the-spot in the house.

In retaliation, in the early hours of February 27, 2000, Muhammad Ilyas Kashmiri of the JeM (formed after breaking up with the Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami, or HuJI) along with 25 HuJI combatants attacked the IA’s Ashok listening post in the Nakyal sector at Nowshera, Rajouri district, and ambushed and killed seven IA soldiers, and beheaded 24 year-old Sepoy Bhausaheb Maruti Talekar of the 17 Maratha Light Infantryand left behind his decapitated body. Talekar’s severed head was then paraded in the bazaars of Kotli in PoK. Soon thereafter, Ilyas was felicitated by the then COAS of the PA, Gen Gen Pervez Musharraf, and rewarded with Pakistani Rs.1 lakh for bringing back “the head of an Indian soldier” (Ilyas was reportedly killed on June 3, 2011 by a CIA-mounted drone strike against a compound in the Ghwakhwa area of South Waziristan).

On March 2, 2000 when LeT militants massacred 35 Sikhs in Chattisinghpora, a raiding team from 9 SF (Para) was sanctioned by PM Vajpayee to carry out a raid inside Pakistan. Led by a Major, the team went into Pakistan and came back after killing over 28 Pakistani soldiers and militants.

On September 18, 2003 Indian troops, Pakistan alleged, killed a JCO, or junior commissioned officer, and three soldiers in a raid on a post in the Baroh sector, near Bhimber Gali in Poonch. The raiders, it told UNMOGIP, decapitated one soldier and carried his head off as a trophy.

On June 5, 2008, the PA’s troops attacked the Kranti border observation post near Salhotri village in Poonch, killing 2/8 Gurkha Regiment soldier Jawashwar Chhame. The retaliation, when it came on June 19, 2008, was savage: Pakistani officials have since alleged that IA troops beheaded a PA soldier and carried his head across in the Bhattal sector in Poonch district. Four Pakistani soldiers, UNMOGIP was told, had also died in the cross-LoC raid.

On the afternoon of July 30, 2011,the PA’s Border Action Team (BAT) struck a remote post near Karnah in Gugaldhar Ridge in Kupwara. TheIA subsequently hushed up the beheading of Havildar Jaipal Singh Adhikari and Lance Naik Devender Singh of 19 Rajput Regiment. The BAT stormed the post while a handing-taking over process was on between 19 Rajput and 20 Kumaon in 28 Division’s area of responsibility, and conducted the beheadings and took the heads along with them to the other side. The BAT had used rafts to penetrate India’s defences along the LoC. The bodies of the two dead soldiers were sent to their families in Uttarakhand in sealed caskets as they were badly mutilated, and cremated as such. A few days after the beheading, the IA discovered a video-clip from a Pakistani terrorist who was killed in an encounter while crossing into J & K, showing Pakistanis standing around the severed heads of Adhikari and Singh displayed on a raised platform. After repeated recce over a two-month period, the IA launched the retaliatory OP Ginger on August 30.Five Indian and three Pakistani soldiers were killed in an unrelated  shooting between August 30 and September 1, 2011 across the LoC at the Keran sector in Kupwara district/Neelum Valley. On the night of August 31, an Indian border post was fired at by Pakistani troops.

On August 30, 2011 three PA soldiers, including a JCO, were beheaded in an IA cross-LoC raid on a post in the Sharda sector, across the Neelam Valley in Kel. Maj Gen S K Chakravorty, the then GOC of 28 Division, had planned and executed this operation. To carry it out, at least seven reconnaissance—ground-level and aerial surveillance conducted by Searcher Mk.2 MALE-UAVs—missions were carried out to identify potential targets. Consequently, three PA posts were determined to be vulnerable: Police Chowki, a PA post near Jor, and the Hifazat and Lashdat lodging points. The mission was to spring an ambush on Police Chowki to inflict maximum casualty.Different teams for ambush, demolition, surgical strikes and surveillance were constituted. The operation was deliberately planned for being conducted just a day before Eid-ul-Fitr as it was the time when the PA least expected a retaliation. About 25 soldiers from the SF (Para) reached their launch-pad at 3pm on August 29 and hid there until 10pm. They then crossed the LoC to reach close to Police Chowki. By 4am on August 30, the planned day of the attack, the ambush team was deep within enemy territory waiting to strike. Over the next hour, claymore mines were placed around the area and the raiding party took positions for the ambush, waiting for clearance through a secure communications channel. At 7am on August 30, the raiders saw four PA soldiers, led by a JCO, walking towards the ambush site. They waited till the Pakistanis reached the site, then detonated the mines. In the explosions all four were grieviously injured. The IA raiders then lobbed grenades and fired at them. One of the PA soldiers fell into a stream that ran below. The raiders then rushed to chop off the heads of the other three dead PA soldiers. They also took away their rank insignia, weapons and other personal items. The raiders then planted pressure-IEDs beneath one of the bodies, primed to explode when anyone attempted to lift the body. Hearing the explosions, two PA soldiers rushed from their post but were killed by a second raiding team waiting near the ambush site. Two other PA soldiers tried to trap the second team but a third raiding team covering them from behind eliminated the two. While the IA raiders were exfiltrating, another group of PA soldiers were spotted moving from Police Chowki towards the ambush site. Soon they heard loud explosions, indicating the triggering of the pressure-IEDs planted under the body. At least two to three more PA soldiers were killed in that blast. The operation had lasted 45 minutes, and the IA team left the area by 7.45am to head back across the LoC. The first team reached an IA post at 12pm and the last party by 2.30pm. They had been inside enemy territory for about 48 hours, including for reconnaissance. At least eight PA troops had been killed and another two or three more may have been fatally injured in the action. Three Pakistani heads—of Subedar Parvez, Havildar Aftab and Naik Imran—three AK-47s and other weapons were among the trophies carried back by the SF (Para) raiders. But this was not without the heart-pounding moments. 28 Division HQ got a message on its secure line that one of the IA raiders had accidentally stepped over a landmine and blew his finger while exfiltrating. He came back safely with his buddies. The severed Pakistani heads were photographed, and buried on the instructions of senior officers. Two days later, the then GOC of XV Corps turned up and asked the team about the heads. When he came to know that they had been buried, he was furious and asked the SF (Para) to dig up the heads, burn them and throw the ashes into the Kishenganga, so that no DNA traces are left behind. Those instructions were complied with.

On January 8, 2013 a 15-member BAT of the PA, wearing black combat uniforms, crossed the LoC from in Krishna Ghati sector (falling under 10 Infantry Brigade in Mendhar, Poonch district). Earlier, this BAT had been stationed at Barmoch BOP in PoK across Atma Post (manned by 13 Rajputana Rifles) a fortnight before and was watching the daily movements of IA personnel. On that day, Lance-Naik Hem Raj and Lance-Naik Sudhakar Naik of 13 Rajputana Rifles were on a routine area domination patrol in Barasingha in Mendhar sector, 200km north of Jammu. Daybreak was still several hours away, the night was dark, the fog thick, and visibility almost zero. Patrolling there involved walking around over a stretch that was beyond the fence that protected India-held territory. Every border sector had been divided into grids, each under a commanding officer. There were four to seven forward posts (beyond the fence) every kilometre, with five to eight soldiers in each. The posts were alerted about the patrols; while on patrol, the scouts did not talk, smoke, use flashlight or carry cellphones. They did not even use aftershave, the smell of which could be picked up by dogs accompanying the Jihadists. The patrol that included Hemraj and Sudhakar was playing safe, by not venturing far beyond the fence. They mostly remained nearly 500 metres short of the LoC. The party had seven troopers and as per the decades-old practice, and had divided themselves into three pairs, with the commander attaching himself to one. Each pair was to remain within line-of-sight of another, but that was impossible in the thick fog and the thick woods. The result: the pair that was to keep Hemraj and Sudhakar in its line-of-sight did not see who were shooting at them in the fog; they only heard reports of automatic firearms firing away. As the second pair leapt for cover, before rushing to reinforce Hemraj and Sudhakar, they, too, came under fire. This fire, they realised, was not coming from the woods, unlike the bullets that had felled Hemraj and Sudhakar. This was cover-fire, coming from the hilltops on the Pakistani side of the LoC. Very unlike jihadis, and very much military-like. The Jihadi infiltrators would have fired at everyone in sight. Here, the enemy was killing only two; the cover-fire was being provided only to keep the rest of the patrolmen away. The intention was to kill two, and only two, and then seize their bodies. IA posts returned fire and the exchange lasted several hours, well past daybreak. As the fog cleared by 10.30am, a couple of remaining IA patrolmen saw the enemy—clad in dark black, the uniform of the PA’s Special Service Group (SSG), known as the Black Storks. The cover fire, the patrolmen knew, was being provided by 29 Baloch Regiment, which had been there for several months. As the firing finally ended at 11:32am, the sight in front froze them. Hemraj and Sudhakar lay dead and frozen in pools of blood, far away from each other. Sudhakar’s head was missing; Hemraj had deep slashes on his neck, indicating a failed beheading bid. This happened between Chhatri and Atma posts in Mankote area of Krishna Ghati. The beheading was done by one Mohammad Anwar Faiz alias Azhar, a resident of Jabbar Mohalla of village Sher Khan (Rawlakote) who also was the local guide for the SSG. He ran a shop in Barmoch Gali in PoK, and he was also involved in the beheading of an IA Captain in 1996 in the same Mendhar area. (A divisional commander of the LeT and a Pakistani national, he was killed on July 13, 2015 at Rajouri.  A group of four LeT fidayeens, all Pakistanis, tried to infiltrate and wore combat dresses at 3.30am during heavy rains by crossing Panjal Nullah close to the village of Sagra Balnoi in Mankot sector of Poonch district. Alert IA personnel of 25 Division intercepted the fidayeens and opened firing, leading to heavy exchange of firing that continued for 90 minutes during which Faiz was eliminated, while three others escaped back to PoK).Till January 9, the BAT was camping at Tattapani and was also involved in planting anti-personal mines in Helmet, Chattri, Dayal Top, Atma and Rocket BOPs of the IA’s 10 Infantry Brigade. The consequent phone call was short and sombre. Lt Gen Vinod Bhatia, the IA’s then DGMO, spared pleasantries and told his Pakistani counterpart, Maj Gen Ashfaq Nadeem, that India did not want to escalate tensions, but Pakistan had to respect the LoC. Before he hung up, Lt Gen Bhatia reiterated that Pakistan must probe and take appropriate action against its soldiers who had violated the LoC and mutilated the bodies of two Indian soldiers. This was the third hotline call between the two DGMOs since a localised confrontation had begun on January 6. While the IA had immediately retaliated with increased mortar-based artillery firepower, New Delhi tried to stop tensions from spiralling out of control. It advised the IA to stay calm. However, it was aware of the anguish and anger within the IA over the mutilations. The then Indian PM Dr Manmohan Singh chose the Army Day celebration at the Indian Army COAS’ residence on January 15 to send a strong message to Islamabad: “After this dastardly act, there can’t be business as usual with Pakistan,” he said. “Those who are responsible for this must be brought to book. I hope Pakistan realises this.” What this meant was that payback time was guaranteed at a time and place of the IA’s choosing. And thixs payback came on July 28, 2013 when the IA carried out a retaliatorylow-intensity, shallow cross-LoC raid. It later emerged that between that date and early August, PoK residents Zafran Ghulam Sarwar, Wajid Akbar, Mohammad Wajid Akbar and Mohammad Faisal left their homes in the Neelam Valley, and never came back. Pakistan subsequently claimed that they were innocent herb collectors, who were kidnapped by IA special operations combatants during a cross-LoC raid. The IA only admitted that five unidentified men were shot dead by IA troops in the same area, about 500 metres on the Indian side of the LoC after they were suspected of being guides for Jihadists wanting to corss the LoC.

On August 6, 2013 PA troops killed five Indian soldiers in a cross-LoC strike in Poonch. The five Indian soldiers were sitting ducks in a well-planned ambush by a BAT about 450 metres inside Indian territory. 14 Maratha Light Infantry (MLI) had just arrived in the Sarla battalion area of the 93 Infantry Brigade, stationed along the LoC north of Poonch, to relieve 21 Bihar Regiment. An IA patrol headed out from Cheetah, a post 7km west of Poonch, along the Betaad nullah, or moutain stream, which heads towards the LoC. They were headed for Delta, an occasionally-occupied position half-way to another major post, code-named Begum. These IA posts guarded the areas around the village of Khari Karmara, facing the PoK village of Bandi Abbaspur. 21 Bihar Regiment’s Shambhu Sharan Rai, Vijaykumar Ray, Premnath Singh and Raghunandan Prasad, and 14 MLI’s Pundlik Mane and Sambhaji Kute, were sent out on a patrol to familiarise the newcomers with the terrain. Elsewhere on the LoC, troops would have been extremely cautious about resting in the course of a patrol. The troops had no reason to expect trouble, though: the Chakan-da-Bagh sector, home to a trading post where cross-LoC trade is conducted, had long been peaceful. Late on that fateful night, the men bivouaced at a position some 450 metres across the border fencing that runs some distance away. Kute was put on guard duty, while the other men rested. Kute, the only survivor, later said that he saw the patrol come under fire from multiple directions. He was, however, unable to provide substantial further detail—bar saying he thought some 20 men, some in uniform—had executed the pre-dawn ambush. Forensics later showed that the slain men were killed with single shots, fired at almost point-blank range, evidence of a surgical, well-planned ambush. Kute’s less-than-complete testimony led the then Indian Defence Minister A K Antony to issue an ambiguously-worded statement soon after the attack, saying that it was carried out by “20 heavily armed terrorists along with persons dressed in PA uniforms”. Antony’s statement appeared to refute an earlier statement by the IA, saying the killings were carried out by terrorists “along with soldiers of the PA”. Earlier in January, after the beheading of Lance-Naik Sudhakar Naik, Antony had expressly charged Pakistan’s SSG with the outrage. Following protests in Parliament, Antony issued a fresh statement blaming the PA for the killing. IA officials claimed that elements of the 801 Mujahid Battalion were also involved in this attack. Subsequently, 21 Bihar Regiment’s Commanding Officer Col C S Kabsuri, under whose command the patrol team operated; 91 Infantry Brigade’s Commander Brigadier S K Acharya, who was Kabsuri’s immediate boss and Acharya’s boss and 25 Infantry Division GOC Maj Gen V P Singh—were in the  gunsights of a Court of Inquiry probing the incident. So was the GOC of the Nagrota-based XVI Corps, Lt Gen B S Hooda, who was then commanding these officers.

On January 13, 2014 the then COAS of the IA,  Gen. Bikram Singh said that a strong reply had been given to last year’s cross-LoC raids by Pakistan, referring to reports that 10 Pakistani soldiers had been killed in an IA-staged cross-LoC surgical strike.

In the early hours of September 18, 2016 four Fidayeen terrorists of the LeTattacked the rear office of an infantry battalion of the IA’s 12 Infantry Brigade HQ in Uri, which killed 20 IA Jawans. The terrorists were using two sets of ICOM of Japan-made wireless sets, which were inscribed with the words ‘bilkul naya’ (brand new) in Urdu and ‘new’ in English. The wireless sets were among 48 items, including two map sheets, seized from the attack site. While one of the map sheets was burnt, the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) went about deciphering four coordinates mentioned on the other—8440, 8605, 2842 and 3007. Also recovered was a mobile phone made by Indian firm I-KALL, plus two GPS locators built by US-based Garmin (with pre-fed coordinates of two locations—Galwama and Rafiabad, Muzaffarabad—at least 6km from the LoC). The terrorists also carried packets of juice made in Karachi. Twenty-six wrappers of high-protein chocolate bars, six Red Bull cans, three empty packets of ORS and other medicines with 'Made in Pakistan' stamp were recovered as well. A mission plan that was annotated in Pashto was also recovered and itrevealed that the terrorists were to kill unarmed IA troops, then storm a medical aid unit near the Brigade administrative block and blow themselves up in the officers’ mess.The plan deciphered by military experts indicated that the terrorists were drawn from the banned terror group, Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) that recently started working under JeM’s command and calls itself ‘Guardians of the Prophet’. The Fidayeen aquad attacked the administrative block where unarmed soldiers were refilling diesel in barrels from fuel tanks. The terrorists lobbed 17 hand-grenades in three minutes, which ignited the dump and resulted in a massive fire burning barracks and tents in a 150-metre radius. Three of the four terroristswere in their early 20s. Together, they had taken nearly 169 bullet hits—their intestines, chest and arms were riddled with bullet holes.

The IA had since 2008 been monitoring the following launch-pads used by the PA to infiltrate its ‘Sarkari Jihadi’ detachments into Jammu & Kashmir: from Bhimber Gali towards Shopian and Anantnag; from Leepa towards Baramula; from Jura towards Sopore; from Athmuqam towards Kupwara; from Dudhnial, Tejian, Shardi, Tattapani and Kel towards Machhal; and from Saonar and Sardari towards Kupwara and Sopore. Finally, eight launch-pads spread over a linear 250km frontage and located at Athmuqam, Dudhnial, Chalhana, Leepa, Kel and Tattapani were chosen for targetted for destruction. They were across the areas under the jurisdiction of 19 Division (in Uri), 28 Division (in Kupwara) and 25 Division (in Rajouri). A couple of IA strike-teams slipped out between the Beloni and Nangi Tekri battalion areas in Poonch sector south of the Pir Panjal and across the Tutmari Gali in the Nowgam sector after sunset on September 28, 2016. By 2am, the teams were on the following targets:

Target-1: Dudhnial, Neelum Valley 34 42 09.97 N, 74 06 28.75 E

Target-2: Mundakal, Leepa Bulge 34 17 21.1 N, 73 55 25.7 E

Target-3: Athmuqam, Keran Sector 34 34 48.65 N, 73 57 01.09 E

Targets 4, 5 and 6 were diversionary in nature.

For targets 1, 2 and 3, Instalaza C-90 LAW & 40mm UBGLs were employed by 4 and 9 SF (Para). For targets 4, 5 and 6, AGS-30 AGLs, 7.62mm MMGs, 12.7mm HMGs and 81mm/120mm mortars were employed.

In the Leepa Valley, the IA’s SF (Para) combatants crossed the LoC and positioned themselves on ridges directly overlooking the village of Mundakali. Two PA observation posts (OP) and a makeshift mosque located at some distance east of the village were destroyed at 5am. Two other posts higher up in the mountains were also hit. At least four PA soldiers were injured in the attack, which lasted from 5am until 8am. A similar advance by the SF (Para) in the Dudhnial area of Neelum Valley further north was conducted. LeT camps in the Khairati Bagh village of Leepa Valley and the western end of Dudhnial village in the Neelum Valley had been hit. Two PA soldiers were killed in diversionary attacks—one in Poonch, and one in Bhimber sector, further south. A total of nine PA soldiers were injured in these cross-LoC raids. Another diversionary attack occured in the Madarpur-Titrinot region of Poonch sector, where a PA OP was destroyed and one soldier killed between 4.30am & 6am. Terror laubch-pads in the Samahni-Mandhole area of Bhimber or in Tattapani of the Poonch-Kotli area could not be attacked since they were located behind ridges that serve as a natural barrier against direct-fire. In Leepa, six wooden structures housing terrorists between the villages of Channian and Mundakali were not targetted, since a ridge that runs along the east bank of the nearby stream covered them from the IA positions on the LoC. Likewise, in Neelum, most terrorist camps—such as the ones at Jhambar, Dosut and in the Gurez Valley area further east—were located in the valleys below at a safe distance from the LoC and were therefore not targetted by the IA’s cross-LoC assault teams. According to the PA, an exchange of fire between PA and IA troops began at 2:30am on September 29 and continued till 8am in the Bhimber, Hot Spring, Kel and Leepa sectors inside PoK. Hot Springs, Kel and Leepa come under the jurisdiction of the IA’s XV Corps, while Bhimber Gali comes under the XVI Corps. Subsequent independent reportage (by both the BBC& The Indian Express) revealed that an IA ground assault did occur in the Madarpur-Titrinot region of Poonch sector, west of Srinagar, where a PA post was destroyed and one soldier killed. In Leepa valley to the north, the IA’s combatants crossed the LoC and set themselves up on ridges directly overlooking the village of Mundakali. A PA post located at some distance east of the village was hit. Two other posts higher up in the mountains were also hit. At least four PA soldiers were injured in the attack, which lasted from 5am until 8am. A similar advance by the IA in the Dudhnial area of Neelum valley further north was beaten back by the PA. At least one PA soldier was injured there. Two PA soldiers were killed in the attacks--one in Poonch, and one in Bhimber sector, further south. A total of nine soldiers were injured in the IA’s assaults. In Leepa, the IA’s combatants first opened fire in the valley at around 5am, hitting a PA post near Mundakali village and blowing up a mosque adjacent to it. A PA soldier who was preparing for pre-dawn prayers was hit and injured. Fire was also directed at two other posts higher up in the hills, one of which served as the PA’s forward headquarters in Leepa. Bunkers at these posts were partly destroyed and their communications system was paralysed for some time. This meant that PA troops stationed down in the valley and at the Brigade HQ took a while to realise what was going on. The soldier who was injured at the Mundakali post was given first-aid by villagers, and then transported to the military-run hospital in Leepa on a motorbike. Nearly two dozen villagers helped put out the fire that had engulfed the mosque. The PA did not take long to get their act together and fired back from the remaining bunkers, pushing the IA’s combatants back from the ridges overlooking the Valley.

At Dudhnial in the Neelum Valley, the action took place further up in the mountains, away from the village. A few villagers were awakened by gunfire. There, the IA’s combatants had advanced well beyond the LoC when their movements were detected and were fired upon. Two local eyewitnesses who visited Dudhnial, a small hamlet some 4km across the LoC from India’s nearest forward post, Gulab, ahead of the town of Kupwara, reported seeing a gutted building across the Al-Haawi bridge from the hamlet’s main bazaar, where both a military outpost and a compound used by the LeT were sited. Al-Haawi bridge is the last point where infiltrating Jihadists are loaded with supplies before beginning their climb up to the LoC towards Kupwara. Local residents revealed that loud explosions—possibly rounds fired from Instalaza C-90 LAWs—were heard from across the Al-Haawi bridge late in the night, along with intense small-arms fire. Five, perhaps six, dead-bodies were loaded on to a truck early next morning, and possibly transported to the nearest major LeT camp at Chalhana, across the Neelum River from Tithwal, on the Indian side of the LoC. The subsequent Friday prayers at a LeT-affiliated mosque in Chalhana, ended with a cleric vowing to avenge the deaths of the men killed the previous day. The LeT Jihadists gathered there were blaming the PA for failing to defend the LoC. In Leepa, some five or six wooden structures housing terrorists between the villages of Channian and Mundakali had not been targetted. A ridge that runs along the east bank of the nearby stream covers them from the IA’s positions along the LoC. Likewise, in Neelum, most terrorist camps-such as the ones at Jhambar, Dosut, and in the Gurez Valley area further east-are located in the valleys below, at a safe distance from the LoC. The LeT’s launch-pad dwellings in the Khairati Bagh village of Leepa Valley and the western end of Dudhnial village in Neelum Valley were attacked and hit. At Dudhnial, some local residents who helped carry military munitions to the PA’s forward posts the weekend following the IA’s cross-LoC strikes said that they had seen one or two damaged structures close to a PA post near the LoC. Following the strikes, there was an increased influx of Jihadists in the Valley.

At Leepa, a complex of some 25 hamlets located at the bottom of the Qazi Nag stream flowing down from the mountains above Naugam, on the Indian side of the LoC, was among the “launch-pads” targetted in the cross-LoC raids. Local villagers there saw a LeT-occupied three-storied wooden building destroyed near the hamlet of Khairati Bagh. Three or four LeT personnel were thought to have been killed in this raid, while the others fled into the adjoining forests after the firing began. Interestingly, the Jamaat-ud-Dawa’s charitable wing, the Falah-i-Insaniyat Foundation, had held a major eye-surgery camp in Khairati Bagh in August, using the opportunity to deliver speeches on alleged atrocities committed by IA soldiers in Kashmir. Khairati Bagh was, until 2003, a major LeT base, which was slowly scaled down once the unwritten LoC ceasefire went into place in November 2003 and the LeT’s cross-LoC operations slowly declined. It remains, though, of key importance to the LeT, offering multiple lines of access into northern Kashmir through Chowkibal and the Bangas Bowl. Fire and explosions were also heard from the east bank of the Neelum River in Athmuqam, the district headquarters. The fighting appeared to have taken place near PA camps along the Katha Nar stream that empties into the Neelum River just north of the town. A bustling town that serves as a hub for tourism and commerce, Athmuqam is also a major military hub, with several PA facilities located on ridges along the east bank of the river, sheltered from the IA’s field artillery bombardments. The ghost villages of Bicchwal and Bugna, almost entirely abandoned by their residents who fled when terrorism in the Kashmir Valley began in 1990, are barely 2km from Salkhanna, the first village on the Pakistani side of the LoC, and the last loading point for jihadist infiltrators. A local eyewitness who visited the Neelum District Hospital in Athmuqam said he heard that several LeT personnel had been killed and injured, but said no bodies had been buried locally.

Down south, in the Poonch, Kotli and Bhimber areas, it was more or less the same story: IA’s combatants coming forward from their positions on the LoC, taking unsuspecting PA soldiers by surprise both due to the suddenness of the attack and the intensity of the fire and then pulling back once the PA had a chance to respond. Unprepared, and having a numerical disadvantage generally, the PA soldiers made use of their firepower to the fullest, exhausting their ammunition. In the days following the attack, hundreds of villagers in PoK were pressed into service for hauling artillery shells and other ammunition to the PA’s border posts to replenish their supplies. The Jihadists continued to maintain safe houses in bigger cities like Muzaffarabad. But they shifted their launch-pad dwellings near the PA’s garrisons along the LoC and away from the villages. There were no reports of any of the terrorist camps in the Samahni area of Bhimber or in the Poonch-Kotli area having been hit. Such camps were mostly located behind ridges that serve as a natural barrier against direct Indian fire.

On October 28, 2016 Pakistan-origin Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) terrorists, assisted by covering fire from PA troops, conducted a cross-LoC attack in Machchil sector of Kupwara district. The terrorist killed IA trooper Mandeep Singh, 26, and beheaded his body before fleeing back.

On November 22, 2016IA Rifleman Prabhu Singh was beheaded by a BAT of the PA’s SSG at Machchil, while two other IA soldiers were ambushed and killed. An abandoned (and subsequently recovered) night-vision monocle used by the BAT was likely transferred by the United States to the PA for use in combating terrorists of the Pakistani Taliban along the Durand. This is not the first time that such nigh-vision devices with the marking ‘US Government Property’ had been recovered in counter-terrorism operations inside J & K. An unidentified IA officer who was deployed near Machchil in 2015, later revealed that his unit, which had eliminated four terrorists in an encounter at that time, had recovered an identical device.Other than the night-vision device, there were other clear indicators of a Pakistani hand in the attacks. A medical gauze recovered was marked ‘Pakistan Defence Forces’, while medicines had markings of manufacturing plants in Lahore, Karachi and Multan on them. Other equipment recovered included a tactical radio-set, several ammunition cartridges, wire cutters, food items, binoculars and sleeping bags.

On May 1, 2017 two IA soldiers were beheaded and another injured in a SSG/BAT operation in the Krishna Ghati sector in Poonch district.

On the night of December 25-26, 2017 a small team of six IA Ghaatak combatants surreptitiously crossed the LoC in the Rawlakot-Rukh Chakri sector of PoK to kill at least three PA soldiers (including a Major) and injure a few others.The limited ‘tit-for-tat’ operation was carried out to avenge the killing of four IA soldiers, including Major Moharkar Prafulla Ambadas, by a SSG/BAT at Keri in Rajouri sector of J & K on the afternoon of December 23.‘Jawabi Karavaee’ (retaliatory action) was required for establishing moral ascendancy. It was a localised, selective targetting cross-LoC raid around 300 metres inside PoK. A patrol from the 59 Baluch Regiment, under the PA’s Rawlakot-based 2 AJK Mujahid Brigade, was first hit and left stunned by an IED that had been placed earlier by the Ghaataks.The Ghaataks, who were lying in wait, next opened fire to maximise the damage before swiftly returning to their own side of the LoC, with the IA’s posts giving them covering fire.

On September 18, 2018 in the Ramgarh sector of Samba district in Jammu, Border Security Force (BSF) Jawan Narendra Kumar was abducted and butchered by a SSG/BAT squad. Kumar’s throat was slit and his eyes gouged out. The JeM on October 18 released pictures of Kumar’s belongings on social media that included his bullet-proof jacket, five magazines INSAS rifle and his mobile phone.

On October 21, 2018 an IA patrol team was ambushed by a group of heavily-armed SSG/BAT from Pakistan in Sunderbani Sector in Rajouri district, killing three IA soldiers—Havildar Kaushal Kumar of Nowshera, Lance Naik Ranjeet Singh of Doda and Rifleman Rajat Kumar Basan of Pallanwala—and seriously injuring a fourth. The incident took place at about 1.45pm. The IA’s soldiers immediately took positions and eliminated two SSG/BAT members. The IA’s ‘Jawabi Karavaee’ (retaliatory action) took place on October 23, when a cross-LoC fire-assault was launched against the PA’s administrative HQ in Hajira area, which also targetted about three terrorist sanctuaries. This action came days after the PA had also pounded the IA’s 93 Infantry Brigade HQ and an IA camp in Poonch on October 23, 2018. The IA used both 120mm mortars and 105mm light artillery ammunition and pounded the PA’s administrative HQ with nearly 12 rounds in the wee hours of the day. The IA Indian had exercised restraint, and avoided targetting the civilian population in PoK towns in close proximity of LoC like Hajira, Bandi Gopalpur, Nikial, Samani and Khuiratta despite the fact that the PA has settled Punjab-origin ex-servicemen and retired government servants much to the chagrin of the disconcerted local populace there.

In the pre-dawn hours of December 30, 2018 combatants of the the IA’s 19 Infantry Division thwarted yet another ‘treacherous attempt’ by the PA’s SSG/BAT to launch a strike on an IA post located amidst thick forests along the LoC at Naugam sector in Kupwara district and killed two intruders. The subsequent recovery by the IA of abandoned arms and ammunition indicated that the PA intended to carry out a “gruesome attack” in that sector. The SSG/BAT intruders were wearing combat uniform like regular and carrying stores with Pakistani markings. Some of the intruders were also seen in BSF and old-pattern IA uniforms as part of a deception. They had intruded well-equipped with IEDs, incendiary materials, explosives, and a plethora of arms and ammunition. They were assisted by heavy covering fire of high-calibre 12.7mm heavy machine guns, 60mm mortars and RPG-7 rocket launchers from the opposing PA posts. Their movement was nonetheless detected by the IA’s LoC surveillance sensors and ther subsequent firefight lasted a few hours. The IA subsequently contacted the PA so that the latter could claim and take back the bodies of the two killed intruders.

End Of A Sordid Chapter, While A New Positive Chapter Begins

$
0
0

On January 25, 2019, when India and South Africa on formally agreed on a three-year programme to boost their two-decade-old strategic partnership in key areas such as trade, defence, maritime security and information technology (the “strategic programme of cooperation” was announced by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and visiting South African President Cyril Ramaphosa after delegation-level talks at Hyderabad House in Delhi), it was indicative of formally ending a sordid and highly embarrassing fiasco, for which India’s UPA-1 government is the sole party to be blamed. Due credit for achieving such a success must also be given to the relentless and inexhaustible behind-the-scenes efforts of Ms. Ruchira Kamboj, High Commissioner for India to South Africa & Lesotho.
The needless fiasco was the creation of rival, offshore-based weapons import/export lobbies that was entirely successful for derailing for the next 13 years the growing India-South Africa cooperation in the arenas of military-technical and military-industrial cooperation that formally began in late 1995 when South Africa’s DENEL Group began cooperating with the Indian MoD-owned Combat Vehicles R & D Establishment for co-developing the ‘Bhim’ 155mm/52-cal tracked self-propelled howitzer (for which the CVRDE supplied the hull of the Arjun Mk.1 MBT while DENEL supplied and integrated the T-6 howitzer turret for/with the hull).
Fast-forward to June 1999, when against a requirement projected by the IA, the MoD concluded a contract with the NASCHEM subsidiary of DENEL in January 2000 for 7,300 rounds of 155mm illuminating rounds at a total cost of $11.98 million (Rs.52.47 crore). Subsequent audit scrutiny by the CAG revealed that:
(A) At the time of the induction of the 155mm/39-cal Bofors FH-77B towed howitzers in 1986, illuminating ammunition of only 18km range had been procured from Bofors. The requirement was changed in 1997 to 24km-range, which was then available only with NASCHEM, making it a single vendor situation.
(B) As against the rate of $1,440 per round inclusive of transfer of technology (ToT) for licenced-assembly by the MoD-owned Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), which had been contracted for by the MoD with the NASCHEM subsidiary of DENEL in 1997, the MoD contracted a rate of $1,641 in January 2000 (without ToT). The escalation of 14% over two years in US$ terms with no ToT rights appeared high and partly attributable to the weak negotiating position because of a single vendor situation.

(C) In the follow-up to the ToT contracted for in 1997, the OFB had taken steps to create industrial facilities for licenced-manufacture of the 24km-range illuminating rounds and reported in August 2000 that it could start production by December 2000. However, no orders were placed.

(D) Although the requirement was projected in June 1999, the contract was concluded only in January 2000, with the deliveries commencing only in May 2000.
Against a requirement projected by the IA mid-June 1999 for OP Vijay, a contract was concluded with Electronics Corporation of India Ltd (ECIL) in October 1999 for 67,000 electronic fuzes for 155mm artillery rounds and 400 fuze-setters at a total cost of Rs.81.59 crore. The fuzes were to be imported/assembled from components imported from the REUTECH subsidiary of DENEL. Approval of the Defence Secretary was obtained based on the technical offer of ECIL, which indicated that the fuzes would not be of a vintage earlier than 1994. As per the contract, the delivery was to begin in October 1999. After failing to adhere to this time schedule, ECIL made a request in November 1999 for the supply of one category of fuzes (M-8513) of 1989 to 1992 vintage being held by the South African Army as against the 1994 vintage indicated in the technical offer. The approval was communicated by ECIL to REUTECH in May 2000. Subsequent audit scrutiny revealed the following:
(A) The technical offer from the ECIL/REUTECH team had indicated that the M-8513 fuzes would have a minimum shelf-life of 10 years without deterioration when stored under controlled “arsenal magazine storage condition” i.e. 21 +/- 2 degree Celsius and relative humidity not greater than 60% and six months when stored in open terrain. However, based on the submissions made by ECIL during negotiations, the contract indicated a shelf life of 15 years. Therefore, in terms of the technical offer, the 6,118 fuzes of 1989 and 1990 vintage proposed in November 1999 to be supplied had completed their shelf-life and the balance 8,882 fuzes would be completing their shelf-life within the next two years.

(B) In fact, even before the MoD had accorded the approval to the proposal, the ECIL/REUTECH team had supplied 15,000 fuzes of 1989-1990 vintage in December 1999 and 95% of the contracted amount for these fuzes (Rs.17.27 crore) was paid to the team. The MoD was only able to withhold the balance 5% and negotiate it as a discount.

(C) The interest of the MoD was sought to be protected by obtaining a corporate bank guarantee worded in very general terms stipulating that the ECIL/REUTECH team would undertake to perform its obligations under the contract. No signed corporate guarantee was, however, available in the records of the MoD furnished to the CAG for auditing in April 2001. In this context, is is pertinent to note that ECIL is a company wholly owned by the Government of India and the final obligation would ultimately vest with the Govt of India itself.
(D) While the original approval was accorded by the Defence Secretary, being the competent financial authority, the decision for accepting fuzes worth Rs.17.27 crore of such vintage was taken by the Joint Secretary himself. In any case, the first lot of fuzes of the old vintage came only towards the end of December 1999. But since OP Vijay was over by August 1999, this merely resulted in transfer of old fuzes from the stockpiles of the South African Army to the IA at a cost of Rs.17.27 crore to the Consolidated Fund of India.
The MoD concluded a contract in July 1999 with the Mechem subsidiary of DENEL Denel for the supply of 100 NTW-20 Anti Material Rifles (AMR) and 1 lakh rounds of ammunition (14.5mm and 20mm) at a total cost of US$5.4 million (Rs.23.22 crore). Even though the AMR fell short of the range specified in the GSQR by 24% and there was no assurance regarding performance of the 20mm ammunition (which had only been designed for altitudes up to 6,500 feet ASL), the AMR and its ammunition were selected in view of the then-prevailing operational urgency (due to OP Vijay). The AMRs also did not have a carrying handle, open telescopic day sight and a compatible night-sight, which were recommended for inclusion in the contract by Indian Army (IA) Headquarters. Subsequent audit scrutiny by India’s Comptroller & Auditor-General (CAG) revealed that acceptance of the equipment could not serve the operational requirements of OP Vijay as the delivery of the first six AMRs scheduled within 15 days of the signing of the contract actually came only in December 1999, several months. Another 35 AMRs with 1 lakh rounds of ammunitions came only in March/May 2000. The balance came later. Audit scrutiny further revealed that the modifications pertaining to night-sight and carrying handle were never made in the contract. Inspection of the AMRs in June 2000 revealed that they had been supplied without the telescopic open sight and that the conversion kit for the 14.5mm barrel lacked accuracy. The AMRs were, therefore, not cleared for issue. The MoD stated in August 2001 that IA HQ had informed it that the Directorate General for Quality Assurance (DGQA) had cleared the NTW-20s for service-induction in November 2000.
Against an urgent requirement projected by the IA on June 17, 1999) for 155mm red-phosphorous rounds to gain the advantage of incendiary effects in addition to smokescreen-laying during OP Vijay, a contract was concluded in August 1999 with NASCHEM for 9,000 rounds at a total cost of $12.69 million (Rs.55.1 crore). A technical delegation of the MoD and IA had visited South Africa in June/July 1999 and cleared NASCHEM as a single vendor. The contract also envisaged free ToT to be finalised with the OFB. Even though the ammunition was projected as required for OP Vijay, the contract concluded on August 20, 1999 stipulated the delivery of the first 1,200 rounds only four months after the export licence was obtained by Pretoria, and the balance from six to nine months. However, the first lot of 1,200 rounds were received at the Central Ammunition Depot at Pulgaon only in June 2000, 10 months after OP Vijay was over and the inspections had not been completed as of October 2000. The MoD intimated that the delay was caused primarily due to problems in getting chartered ships through the Ministry of Surface Transport for the consignments. CAG audit scrutiny revealed that this issue had been raised by NASCHEM during negotiations in July 1999 and steps could, therefore, have been taken by the MoD in advance to arrange emergency transportation of at least the first consignment. Alternatively, the problem in shipping should have been considered before deciding to source this ammunition, which was required urgently.
On November 29, 2001 the SOMCHEM subsidiary of DENEL was contracted to supply the OFB with a complete ToT package worth Rs.2,160 crore for setting up an industrial facility by November 2005 at Nalanda in Bihar’s Rajgir district for licence-producing 800.000 bi-modular charges (BMCS) per annum. However, the MoD in April 2005 blacklisted the entire DENEL Group after unsubstantiated allegations that it had paid kickbacks to Vara Associates, a company based in the Isle of Man, to help secure five contracts from India between July 1999 and April 2005, to supply the IA with 1,000 NTW-20 AMRs and more than 300,000 rounds of ammunition. No irregularities were found during subsequent investigations in South Africa, the Isle of Man, Switzerland, India and the UK. By the time DENEL was blacklisted by the MoD for no discernable reason, SOMCHEM had already passed on the industrial know-how to OFB for producing the BMCS modules, while 400 NTW-20s had been delivered by MECHEM. The contracts with India involved the supply of 700 NTW-20s off-the-shelf, plus knock-down kits for another 300 NTW-20s (for licenced-assembly by the OFB’s Trichy-based factory) and 398,000 rounds of ammunition.
The OFB Trichy-assembled NTW-20s are now known as the Vidhwansak multi-calibre AMR and contrary to widespread rumours, they have not been indigenised. The same goes for the Mk.1 AGLs supplied by MILKOR of South Africa, which were licence-assembled by OFB Trichy, while their 40mm grenade rounds are still being supplied in kit-form to a dehra Dun-based private company for final assembly.
Meanwhile, in order to replace SOMCHEM, Israeli Military Industries (IMI) was contracted in March 2009 to partner with OFB Nalanda for a Rs.1,200-crore project for producing the BMCS modules. In addition, IMI was contracted to partner with the OFB’s It is also in a joint venture with the OFB’s factory at Khamaria in Madhya Pradesh to make 155mm cargo ammunition (howitzer-delivered cluster munitions designed to maim hostile infantry forces. However, IMI too got blacklisted by the MoD in 2011, following which the OFB’s Nalanda-based factory is now scheduled for commissioning only in March 2019, when series-production of the BMCS modules (whose industrial know-how from SOMCHEM has since been mastered by the DRDO’s HEMRL) will commence.
The MoD announced on September 6, 2018 that it had formally terminated the blacklisting of the DENEL Group after the MoD and the “South African side” signed a “final settlement agreement” on July 19, 2018 following a South African delegation’s visit to India between July 16 and 19 July of the BRICS Summit. In a statement the MoD said that its decision 13 years after it had blacklisted DENEL came after inking a ‘Settlement Agreement’ under which DENEL waived off nearly $100 million that it would have been entitled to after arbitration proceedings following DENEL’s blacklisting. So now, in the words of President Ramaphosa, DENEL is now looking at a “result-oriented” partnership with India. It may be recalled that the strategic partnership between India and South Africa was established in March 1997. DENEL is thus now well-positioned to bag the contract for military-industrial cooperation with the OFB’s Khamaria-based factory for producing 155mm cargo rounds. In contrast, Pakistan Ordnance Factories had in 2014 teamed up with France’s Nexter Systems for licence-producing such rounds, while NORINCO of China began producing such rounds earlier this decade. To date, the OFB has succeeded ion producing only the following types of 155mm rounds:

Yet another lesser-known fact is that the SaabTech-supplied AMLCD-based display processors, radar warning receivers, laser warning receivers and missile approach warning systems found on-board the Dhruv WSI/Rudra and the Light Combat helicopter are in fact originally developed and built in South Africa by AVITRONICS, which is now a subsidiary of Saab. These very sensors are also on board the Su-30MKMs of the Royal Malaysian Air Force, while the AVITRONICS-developed-and-built laser warning receiver is part of TATA Power SED’s offer to install them on the IA’s T-90S MBTs as parts of Saab’s LEDS-150 active protection suite.
In addition, the health-and-usage monitoring suite (HUMS) on board the Indian Air Force’s Su-30MKI H-MRCAs and Hawk Mk.132 AJTs too are sourced from South Africa. For further details about them, read this:
http://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2009/05/hums-for-su-30mki.html

BVRAAMs, LRAAMs & ASMs Powered By SFDR

$
0
0

The successful ground-launch and flight-testing on February 8, 2019 of a solid-fuel ducted ramjet (SFDR) as the propulsion sustainer component that has been indigenously developed by the MoD-owned Defence R & D Organisation’s (DRDO) Hyderabad-based Defence R & D Laboratory (DRDL) for a futuristic beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) meant to destroy hostile MRCAs, makes India the sixth country after the US, Russia, France, South Africa and China to have achieved success in this arena of rocket propulsion.
The DRDL-developed SFDR on the DRDO-developed BVRAAM, which is initially using the missile-body of the indigenously developed Astra Mk.1 BVRAAM, comes attached to a solid-fuel rocket booster to propel the BVRAAM to speeds at which SFDR can start operating.
The SFDR cycle is the same as the ramjet cycle except that the fuel exists in solid form within the chamber and the stoichometry of combustion is controlled by the regression rate of the fuel. The fuel is not a propellant in the solid rocket motor sense, but a pure fuel, inert without external oxidizer much like in a hybrid rocket motor. A wide range of fuels can be used from polymers such as PMMA or PE to long-chain alkanes such as paraffin or cross-linked rubbers such as HTPB. Because the fuel exists in the solid form, inclusion of solid metals is significantly easier than in a liquid-fuelled ramjet. SFDRs also offer significant advantages such as: Extremely simple compared with liquid-fuelled rockets or ramjets since, in its simplest form, a SFDR is basically a tube with a fuel grain cast in it; higher fuel density in the solid phase for pure hydrocarbons and even higher if metal additives are used; easy inclusion of metal fuels such as boron, magnesium or beryllium, which raise the heat of combustion and/or the density and therefore the density impulse capability compared with liquid ramjets; solid fuel acts as an ablative insulator, allowing higher sustained combustion chamber exit temperature levels (and hence specific thrust) with less complexity; fuel is stored within the combustion chamber, allowing for more efficient packaging and higher mass fractions than liquid ramjets; and no need for pumps, external tankage, injectors or plumbing for fuel delivery.
The earliest known SFDR Patent was filed in the US by Cordant Technologies Inc as far back as 1959. The patent can be viewed here:

While the solid-fuel booster rocket/SFDR combination has been a tried-and-tested means of propulsion, it has limitations of maximum engagement ranges against agile and manoeuvring targets like manned combat aircraft, which can bleed the energy of the BVRAAM. To improve terminal-stage manoeuvring, present-day BVRAAMs use multi-pulse solid-fuel rocket motors, with the second pulse-firing taking place only in the terminal stages after the BVRAAM’s Ka- or Ku-band active seeker has locked on to its target. The MBDA-developed Meteor BVRAAM was the first to do away with the need for multi-pulse solid-fuel rocket motors by incorporating a throttleable ducted rocket (TDR) version of a solid-fuel ramjet developed by Germany-based Bayern-Chemie. The TDR functions as an extended sustainer with variable thrust being generated by a solid propellant, but can sustain high thrust-levels for far longer periods since it acquires its oxidiser from the air. However, both BVRAAMs and LRAAMs using SFDR have a limitation: ramjet motors are heavier and take time to reach maximum speed in the initial phases, and are thus less agile. Consequently, BVRAAMs and LRAAMs using SFDRs will be less effective against agile MRCAs, but the LRAAM will be highly effective against lumbering combat-support platforms like AEW & CS aircraft and aerial refuelling tankers.
Elsewhere in the world, Russia’s Vympel JSC (now part of Tactical Missiles Corp) had by the early 1990s completed developing the SFDR-powered RVV-AE-PD BVRAAM, which hosts rear-mounted lattice-type aerodynamic control surfaces. However, this BVRAAM has not yet been series-produced.
Instead, Russia has opted for a two-stage solid-propellant rocket propulsion system for its Novator R-172S LRAAM.
In the US, Raytheon had in the 1990s developed a SFDR-equipped FRAAM variant of the AIM-120 AMRAAM. But like the RVV-AE-PD, the FMRAAM has not yet entered series-production.
Throughout the late 1970s and 1990s, Somchem of South Africa pursued R & D on SFDR-based propulsion under Project Integral, with the objective being to power both BVRAAMs and MR-SAMs (developed by KENTRON) using SFDRs. The latter, known as SAHV, was first displayed in 1995 with a rounded glass nose-section housing an IIR guidance system.  To avoid over-heating of the IIR seeker during the MR-SAM’s Mach 2.3 flight to its target, the SAHV’s nose-section was fitted with a cap that was jettisoned only in the final stages of the engagement.
Making its debut at the Airshow China 2018 expo in Zhuhai last November was the HD-1, China’s first anti-ship missile using a solid-fuel ramjet combustor and a SFDR—both developed by CASC’s No.4 Institute. Developed and built by the Guangdong Hongda Mining Co, the 2,200kg HD-1’s maiden flight-test took place in October 2018. The HD-1, like the still-classified YJ-18 anti-ship missile, employs a tandem single-stage solid-propellant rocket booster—as opposed to wraparound boosters to reduce drag—for missile launch and acceleration to a forward velocity suitable for efficient operation of the ramjet’s intake system, which comprises four air-intakes arranged in an ‘X’ configuration around the missile body. Tapered control surfaces are mounted on the intake housings near the nozzles. The HD-1 has a length of 8.3 metres, with a missile body and booster diameter of 375mm and 650mm, respectively. Cruise speed is quoted as 2,716kph, while terminal cruise speed being 4,321kph, with the missile cruising at altitudes of up to 15km (49,212 feet) and performing sea-skimming manoeuvres at altitudes between 16 and 32 feet. The missile’s maximum range is 290km.
Coming back to the DRDO’s efforts to develop a BVRAAM or LRAAM using SFDR, the principal challenge remains the development of an internal data-link that will receive targetting cues from a friendly AEW & CS platform, since the AESA-MMR of the MRCA launching such an LRAAM will not be able to detect or track hostile combat-support platforms flying at distances beyond 300km. Furthermore, if the LRAAM is tasked with the destruction of hostile combat-support platforms, then the LRAAM will have a launch-weight of more than 250kg. However, if the idea is to develop a BVRAAM like the Meteor, then a maximum engagement range of 150km will suffice, while the launch-weight will have to be kept down to 220kg at most.

Aero India 2019 Highlights-1

$
0
0
Highlights of February 20
Looks like ADA has taken all my earlier recommendations quite seriously, if the maiden display of the Tejas AF Mk.2 MWF is to be believed!
The 23mm GSH cannon will be located on the red-coloured section between the canard and wing-rrot on the starboard side. Below is the Jaguar MAX being developed by HAL.
HAL is now also into turbofan-powered UAS platforms that can be remote-controlled by MRCAs!
ISRO this time has a sprawling pavilion, but its exhibits are extremely poor, scarce and there is no one to man this pavilion!
Miscellaneous Exhibits
The BrahMos-2 missile will have an X-band imaging monopulse seeker (below) developed and built by DATA PATTERNS, while a similar-looking Ku-band seeker developed by ECIL will go on-board the Nirbhay LACM.
Highlights of February 19
To Be Concluded

Decoding The IAF's February 26 Non-Military Pre-Emptive Airstrike & February 27 Air Combat Over PoK

$
0
0
Out of the earmarked strike-package of six IAF Mirage 2000s, it can now be safely inferred (based on local eye-witness accounts from Jabba Village in Balakot) that in the pre-dawn hours of February 26, three Mirage 2000s sequentially made a 360-degree circle around the target, following which one after another they conducted the air-strike (as per local eye-witnesses) on Jabba Top (at an elevation of 4,000 feet above sea-level) at Kagan Gali along the Kunhar River inside the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan.
Each of the three Mirage 2000s were armed with three OFB-built 1,000lb high-speed low-drag bombs, thereby accounting for a total of nine HSLD bombs being dropped.
In the IAF’s MRCA inventory, the most versatile platforms are the Dassault Aviation-built Mirage 2000s as they have highest number of weapons-to-target-matching combinations, a feat that will be equaled in future by the Dassault Aviation-built Rafale M-MRCAs.
The aerial confrontation on the morning of February 27 involved eight F-16s, four Mirage-IIIs and four JF-17s of the PAF, and two MiG-21 Bisons, two upgraded Mirage 2000INs and four Su-30MKIs. But there was only one aerial engagement, this being between two PAF F-16s and two IAF MiG-21 Bisons.
While one MiG-21 Bison successfully engaged and shot down a tandem-seat F-16 (B or D variant) with one R-73E IIR-guided missile, this very MiG-21 Bison was shot down by one AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM missile fired by another F-16. Another AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM was unsuccessfully fired toward the second MiG-21 Bison, and this missile eventually harmlessly landed inside Indian territory.
There are only two plausible reasons why the PAF preferred to use BVRAAMs instead of SRAAMs for this aerial engagement: 1) The PAF was unsure whether or not the IAF’s Su-30MKIs equipped with IRST sensors would join the battle (if they were to, then they would have easily had the upper hand since they can cruise at higher altitudes from where the R-73E SRAAM/Sura-1 HMDS combination can be used with devastating effect); 2) The PAF, devoid of all-aspect SRAAMs that can be guided wide off-boresight by the Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS), was extremely vary of initiating within-visual-range engagements due to the guaranteed and combat-proven lethality and superior engagement envelope of the R-73E SRAAM/Sura-1 HMDS combination found in the MiG-21 Bison and Su-30MKI.
The only plausible reason why all other IAF MRCAs airborne in that area were directed NOT TO engage the PAF strike force was because the latter was maintaining a 10km distance from the LoC (as per the 1989 bilateral agreement on confidence-building measures) between India and Pakistan) while at the same time dropping its LGBs from altitudes varying from 10,000 feet to 15,000 feet. So, all the four PAF MRCAs involved in the actual air-to-ground strike were inside the airspace of PoK. In retrospect, this appears to be a wrong interpretation of the 1989 bilateral agreement, which in turn led to a flawed rules of engagement put in motion by the IAF.
Another plausible reason that explains the IAF’s reticence to engage the PAF’s large-sized strike package is the lack of tactical data-links (TDL) on-board the IAF’s fleet of combat aircraft and on the fleet of AEW & CS platforms, which prevents the latter from providing real-time airborne battle management cues to airborne IAF combat aircraft while operating inside contested/hostile airspace. TDLs come in two types: the L-band TDL for two-way line-of-sight communications; and a UHF-band SATCOM TDL, for which the IAF’s combat aircraft need to be equipped with SATCOM receivers.
(to be concluded) 

Selected Excerpts From A Primer On Pakistan-Orchestrated 'Jihad'

$
0
0

While the international Jihadi brigades were regrouping in Afghanistan and Pakistan throughout the 1980s, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate was staffed by religiosity-enthused personnel who were the direct handlers of the Afghan Jihad and no different in their thinking from the international Jihadis. When they launched the forward strategy in the Central Asian regions of the Soviet Union to orchestrate the defeat of the Red Army in Afghanistan in 1986, the centrifugal force was again this saying of the Prophet Muhammad, with the strategy underscored that Afghanistan was to be the main battlefield and Pakistan’s tribal areas the strategic backyard of the Muslim resistance. From there the theatre of war was to branch out into Central Asia, India, and Bangladesh. The ISI moulded the whole theatre of war and oriented volunteer groups accordingly. The organisation known as Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami came into existence with the help of the Pakistani military apparatus. Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami was the first Pakistani Jihadi organisation, and was formed in 1984. It hailed from the Deobandi school of thought. It used to recruit youths for the Jihad against the Soviets. The premier Islamic party of the country, Jamaat-e-Islami, was already very active in the recruitment of Pakistani volunteers and sending them for the Jihad. Actually, the raising of human resources was not an issue for the Jihad against the Soviets, as there was already a very powerful indigenous Afghan resistance movement which did not really require any external fighters to assist it. The real motivation behind the formation of Harkat-ul Jihad- i-Islami was to draw out the boundaries of the theatres of war—beyond Afghanistan—in the Central Asian Republics and in India. It was pure coincidence that after 9/11, first the Pakistani military establishment’s ‘strategic depth’ pattern in Afghanistan and then the whole Jihadi network which the Pakistani intelligence apparatus had set up through the Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami slipped from the ISI’s hands and fell into the lap of Al-Qaeda. From then on Al-Qaeda used both the Afghan theatre and the Jihadi network to define the boundaries of the theatres of war according to its own perspective and strategic direction.

The network of Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami had emerged from Deobandi Islamic seminaries. Its commanders were educated in different Deobandi schools, which were also their main recruitment grounds. The Deobandi school of thought has always been the most influential political, religious, and Sufi school of South and the Central Asia. Although the Darul Uloom Deoband (an Islamic school) was founded in 1879 by Maulana Qasim Nanoonthvi in the district of Saharanpur Uttar Pradesh (India), it was actually a deep-rooted religious, Sufi, and political legacy of Central Asian Naqhsbandi Sufi order adopted by various South Asian Muslim reformists. These included Mujadid Alf Sani (1564-1624), Shah Waliullah 1703-1762), and Shah Waliullah's grandson, Shah Ismail (1779-1831). Sheikh Ahmed Sarhendi, better known as Mujadid Alf Sani—which means a reformist for next ten centuries-inspired strict monotheist Islamic values against the Mughal emperor Akbar’s secular order of Din-e-Ilahi, to force the Mughal dynasty to revert back to the Islamic system. The hardline Sunni orthodox Mughal ruler, Aurangzeb Alamgir, is said to be the byproduct of Sarhendi’s teachings. Similarly, with the rise of the Hindu Marathas and the decline of the Mughal Empire, Shah Waliullah appeared on the horizon. Shah Waliullah, a Naqshbandi Sufi like Sarhendi, continued the legacy of Sheikh Ahmad and through his writings, pointed out the faultlines in the social, political, educational, economic, and spiritual orders which had caused of the decline of Muslim rule in India. Shah Waliullah’s influence ran through the whole region from Central Asia to South Asia, and that is why when he wrote a very detailed letter to Ahmad Shah Abdali (a warlord from Kandahar) asking him to give up his life of ease and fight against the Maratha dynasty, Abdali invaded India and ransacked the Maratha dynasty.

Shah Waliullah’s teachings were carried forward by his son Shah Abdul Aziz and grandson, Shah Ismail, the ideologue of the pioneering Jihadi movement in South Asia in the beginning of the 19th century. This influence of the Shah Wali Ullahi family thus laid the foundation of the Darul Uloom Deoband. The Darul Uloom Deoband was a trustee of Shah Waliullah and his family's legacy and promoted madrassas (schools of Islamic learning) across the whole of South Asia. It also promoted the different Sufi orders of Qadri, Chushti, Suharwardi, and Naqshabandi. The majority of Sufi Khaneka in the extended South and Central Asian region are affiliated with the Deoband School of thought. Last but not the least, this school of thought was the flag bearer of all the Jihadi movements from the19th century onwards, such as the Syed Ahmed Brelvi, the Faraizi movement, and the Reshmi Romal movement (the twentieth-century silk handkerchief movement), leading into the 21st century Taliban movement. The Darul Uloom Deoband launched the movement of religious education through a trained faculty, and promotes a network of Islamic seminaries from the Northern Caucasus and Central Asia to Bengal and Myanmar. The political map of the whole region changed in the twentieth century as the Caucasus and Central Asian areas were occupied by the former Soviet Union, while some areas were captured by communist China, both of which banned religious education. However, the migrant Central Asian Muslims in northern Afghanistan, including Badakshah, Balkh, Maza-e-Shareef, and Takhar, retained their old religious linkages. The Darul Uloom Deoband school of thought was the major academic influence under which scattered Central Asian religious and Sufi orders were united. It also trained Muslim academics in India and sent Muslim scholars back to Afghanistan, where they built large and small madrassas to revive old religious values, Sufism, and politics.

After the partition of British India, several leading religious scholars of the Darul Uloom Deoband came to Pakistan and established Islamic seminaries there, such as the Jamiatul-Uloomul Islamia in Binori Town, the Darul Uloom in Karachi, and the Jamia Ashrafia in Lahore. The International Islamic University founded in the late 1970s in Islamabad was also influenced by the Deobandi school of thought. These religious schools became centers of learning for the whole region, and Muslims of Uzbek, Tajik, and Turkoman origin who had fled the Soviet Union because of its religious restrictions, as well as Muslims from the Chinese province of Xinjiang, and from Myanmar and Bangladesh, migrated to the Islamic republic of Pakistan. Some of them sent their children to the Islamic seminaries of the Deobandi schools where they were provided with free board and lodging, food, clothing, and education. Pakistan's intelligence apparatus tapped this network to extend its reach from Central Asia to Bangladesh through the formation of the Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami of Pakistan. They then tapped these schools as the major source of recruiting Central Asians to pitch them into proxy wars against the Soviet Union in the Central Asian Republics and the Caucasus. The Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami simultaneously recruited Pakistanis, Kashmiris, and Bengalis (Bangladeshis) trained in Afghanistan for ‘bleed India’ operations after the Soviets had been defeated. However, they soon became too big to be controlled by Pakistan’s intelligence apparatus. Meanwhile, a network of Muslim students from Central Asia was being trained for guerrilla operations around the world. These students were first sent to training camps of organizations which had Tajik and Uzbek roots, then transferred to Afghanistan for further training in the camps of Hizb-i-Islami Afghanistan led by Gulbaddin Hikmatyar, and Jamaat-e-Islami led by Afghanistan's Professor Burhanuddin Rabbani and Ahmad Shah Masoud. These two major Mujahideen organisations had a sizeable number of commanders in northern Afghanistan, where a number of students from Pakistani seminaries were also being prepared by them to mount an insurgency against the Soviets in Central Asia. Both the Hizb and the Jamaat were ideologically close to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood. They had not only read the revolutionary teachings of Syed Qutb and Hasan Al-Banna but were also under the influence of ultra-radical Arab fighters, as most of these Arabs had fought against the Soviets under the banner of the two Afghan organisations. Muslim Central Asian fighters were earlier orientated to Deobandi Sufi religious values. Their subsequent inclusion in Jamaat-e-Islami and Hizb-e-Islami's training camps, and their interaction with Arab militant camps, familiarized them with Muslim Brotherhood literature. Those connections actually laid down Al-Qaeda's roots in Central Asia.

The ISI’s initial target was to tap into the underground Naqshbandi Sufi movements in then Soviet Muslim territories, and these students infiltrated Central Asia through Hizb-e-Islami Afghanistan, Jamaat-e-Islami Afghanistan, and Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami, with the dual tasks of cultivating the Sufi orders, as well as ordinary Muslims who had continued practicing Islam despite the repressive Soviet political system. Trained in the Afghan Jihadi camps, the Central Asian youths connected with the underground Sufis and prompted them to revolt against the Soviet system for the restoration of Muslim values. Thousands of Holy Qurans were smuggled into the Central Asian Republics, together with the literature of the Muslim Brotherhood. These efforts bore fruit in Central Asia's political arena when the foundations of the Islamic Renaissance Party were laid in Tajikistan in 1990, and then later in Uzbekistan and other parts of Central Asia. The establishment of the Islamic Renaissance Party was a proxy operation against the Soviet Union, backed by the CIA and perpetuated on the ground by the Saudi and Pakistani intelligence agencies with the help of Afghan Mujahideen and the Pakistani Jihadi organisations. But with the seeds of radical Islam planted, matters began to spin out of the control of these agencies.

The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and this further emboldened the Islamic Jihadi movements in Central Asia. The Uzbeks, Tajiks, Turks, and Chechens who had participated in the Afghan Jihad went home after the liberation of their territories in September 1991. There was then a US campaign to promote democracy in the Central Asia Republics, but the Jihadis rejected the idea of democracy and established underground Islamic cells aiming to promote Islamic revolution throughout Central Asia. These Islamic cells were ideologically motivated by Muslim Brotherhood teachings and initially supported the ideology of Hizbut Tahrir, a non-militant Islamic revolutionary group which stood for the establishment of a caliphate but through a demonstration of street power rather than armed militancy. But they later turned to Akramia, a breakaway faction of Hizbut Tahrir, which believed in militancy. A sizeable number of Islamic Renaissance Party members also joined the underground Islamic militant movements. During the Tajikistan civil war in the early 1990s, underground cells played a significant role. At the height of hostilities in 1992 most of the people owning allegiance to the Islamic Renaissance Party and other underground Islamic cells fled to Afghanistan. Jamaat-e-Islami Afghanistan's commander Ahmad Shah Masoud brought these Islamic groups into his fold and organized them under the banner of the United Tajik Opposition, which had regrouped in northern Afghanistan. The husband, of the chief of Hizb-e-Islami Afghanistan, Gulbaddin Hikmatyar's niece, Humanyun Jarir, played a major role in sending these volunteers from northern Afghanistan into the Central Asian Republics to fuel the unrest.

Meanwhile, Central Asian Islamic militants needed financial backing, which nobody offered except the Arab camps in Afghanistan. The ideological connection was the persuasion that Osama bin Laden used, and this was strengthened by the financial support he provided to the Uzbek, Chechen, Chinese (eastern Turkestani), and Tajik fighters. As a result, all these factions moved from northern Afghanistan to Kabul and Kandahar under the Pashtun-dominated Taliban government in Afghanistan. After the US invasion of Afghanistan, this Central Asian diaspora moved to the Pakistani tribal areas, mostly to North and South Waziristan. Interestingly, except during the initial fight after the US invasion of Afghanistan, Chechen, Uzbek, and Chinese fighters were mostly not used in the Afghan battle. Al-Qaeda deliberately held them in reserve. The ultimate purpose was to eventually send them back to the Farghana Valley (the boundaries of which touch almost all of the Muslim republics of Central Asia, as well as Chechnya and the Chinese province of Xingjian), and from there expand the war to encompass the whole region.

GHAZWA-E-HIND
By the early 1980s Jamaat-e-Islami’s Al-Badr camp came under the command of Bakht Zameen Khan, who organised a network of thousands of Pakistani volunteers to fight against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Their main training camps were established in the Afghan province of Paktia near the Pakistani regions of Parachanar, Khost, and Nangarhar. Initially the ISI used Al-Badr’s camps to train Kashmiri separatists, and the largest indigenous Kashmiri organisation, Hizbul Mujahadeen, was raised in Al-Badr’s Afghanistan camps. However, ISI strategists felt that for the Ghazwa-e-Hind (the promised ‘Battle for India’) there was the need for a structure which stood on more solid foundations. Al-Badr camps were run by the Jamaat-e-Islami, whose men came from a middle-class urban background. They had been educated in secular schools. They were committed to the cause of Jihad, but their commitments were unlikely to be lifelong (no more than five years at best) because of their background, which was part of their being. ISI’s Ghazwa-e-Hind project required networking not only in Jammu & Kashmir (J & K) but in the whole of India—and in India’s neighbouring countries like Nepal and Bangladesh. There was a need for people who came from simple rural backgrounds with no leanings towards a middle-class ‘upward mobility’ structure. The Harkat-ul Mujahadeen, whose network was governed by the Deobandi school of thought—from Central Asia to Bangladesh—was therefore thought more suitable for the Ghazwa-e-Hind operations.

The ISI almost simultaneously opened theatres of war in Central Asian regions and in J & K in the late 1980s, when various newly organised Kashmiri organizations including Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami and Hizbul Mujahadeen confronted Indian security forces in J & K. Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami applied the same strategy in India as it had earlier applied in Central Asia. India was a far easier place to lay down networks. Initially the Qadri Sufi order was used as a cover for ISI activities. One of the top Sufi clerics in Pakistan, Mubarak Ali Shah Gilani, cooperated with the ISI on that front, and soon an underground network was laid in India with the help of Sufis, especially in Hyderabad. While Kashmiri militants escalated hostilities, the Indian underground network was asked to keep a very low profile. The network was to enhance its activities on the recruitment front only. Soon the Ghazwa-e-Hind project had reached Uttar Pradesh, where its target was youths being educated in secular schools. By the late 1990s, Aligarh University became a hotbed of underground militant intrigues, but there was not as yet any plan for the launch of real Jihadi activities in India. Meanwhile, Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami had firmly established itself in Bangladesh through networks of Deobandi Islamic seminaries. The purpose, however, was not to disturb the social and political structure of the country, but to facilitate the future Ghazwa-e-Hind project for a steady supply line of Muslim fighters from Bangladesh once Jihadi activities had begun in India. The timeframe was closely linked with the hype on the Kashmiri separatist movement.

After the death in a C-130 aircraft crash of Gen Zia-ul-Haq in August 1988 and the formation of a new government led by the Pakistan Peoples’ Party, the era of Jihadist Generals such as Lt Gen Hamid Gul in Pakistani military headquarters came towards an end, and strategies such as Ghazwa-e-Hind transformed into ‘bleed India’ projects became more of a purely functional proxy operation rather than a deep-rooted Jihadi perception. Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami was still the favoured network, but in the late 1990s the Pakistani establishment suddenly stopped pushing Ghazwa-e-Hind. Instead it dreamed of the creation of a greater Pakistan stretching from Afghanistan (from a strategic depth angle) to Bangladesh. The Central Asian module of the military establishment was shelved in the late 1990s. This was the time when theJihadi elements started looking in another direction, although still cooperating with the Pakistani military establishment. A hardline Deobandi Taliban rule in Afghanistan was the great morale booster for Jihadis reared by Pakistan’s military establishment. But the Jihadis were also closely monitoring newly emerging equations. The events of 9/1 1 changed the world, as well as the Jihadi mindset. The ISI’s forward strategyin the 1980s against the Soviet Union (and against India) was ready to deliver the desired national goals on the regional strategic front when 9/11 happened in 2001. But, by that time so many events had taken place that it was Al-Qaeda which benefited from the harvest.

Earlier, thousands of Farghana Valley fighters of ethnic Uzbek, Tajik, and Turkish origin, along with fighters from the Chinese province of Xinjiang and the Republic of Chechnya, gathered in an Afghanistan under Taliban rule. The diaspora from Central Asia and North Caucasus badly needed money, arms, and training to fuel insurgencies in their home regions. The Taliban provided them with sanctuaries, but it did not have enough money to keep its own movement afloat, leave alone fund insurgencies elsewhere. As a result, dozens of Chechens, Uzbeks, and the Chinese left Afghanistan and settled in Turkey. Turkey provided them with housing and money, and encouraged their struggle, although under the strict vigilance of the state’s intelligence apparatus. That situation was unacceptable to commanders such as Juma Namangani and Tahir Yaldochiv of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and Hassan Mahsum of the Eastern Turkestan Islamic Party (China), who had progressively lost control over their men living in Turkey. But they did not have alternative sources of funding. Al-Qaeda took advantage of this and developed close contact with these groups. It provided them with money and training. Although there is no proof of the organisational attachments of these groups with Al-Qaeda, there is no denying Al Qaeda’s ideological and financial influence over them in the late 1990s. That was the time when the Pakistani Jihadi organisations reared by ISI became a serious threat to India. According to one estimate, between 1980 and 2000 approximately 60,000 Pakistanis and had been trained in different Afghan militant camps, and at the time of 9/11, at least 10,000 Jihadis were active inside J & K (they used to be launched from Pakistan on a rotational basis). These insurgents not only troubled the 400,000 Indian security forces (including Indian Army and police forces) but emboldened the Pakistan Army to orchestrate military adventures like the Kargil Operation in 1999. Militants also dared to hijack IC-814, took it to Kandahar, and then exchanged the passengers with their prisoners who were languishing in Indian jails. The Jihadis also carried out an attack on the Red Fort in Delhi in December 2000 and even planned an attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001. Simultaneously, the Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami was gaining a firm foothold in Bangladesh at the instigation of the ISI to pave the way for the rout of the pro-India elements there. Harkat carried out an assassination attempt on Sheikh Hasina Wajid and many of her supporters in 2000. This brought India under so much pressure that an alliance that supported a coalition with Pakistan won the Bangladeshi elections in 2001. By the year 2001, strategically speaking, Pakistan had become the most influential country from Central Asia to Bangladesh. It was about to translate that for a better bargain with India as well as Iran and the United States when 9/11 occurred. The entire world changed, and so did Pakistan's strategic objectives.

On December 23, 2005, retired Captain Khurram wrote in an e-mail message to me: Dear Dr. Sahib [the Taliban refer to any person who is reasonably familiar with the English language as Dr, so Khurram and his friends used to call me Dr because I was an English-language journalist], Assalam o alaikum. I started reading your articles a couple of months back and concluded that you are probably amongst those very few analysts who have real insight into the Pakistani Jihadi cadres. I read your last article ‘Armed and dangerous: Taliban Gear Up’, and before making any comment. I would now like to introduce myself. In 2001, I was serving as an assault commander of the elite anti-terrorist Zarrar Coy from Pakistan’s Special Service Group (SSG). 9/11 was a strange volcano. It divided people on strong ideological lines. I was also struck by the Jihadi waves and joined the LeT, whose training in 1998-1999 was revolutionised by a former Zarrar Coy NCO, who on retirement, joined this outfit. His specialised urban assault training proved to be the most important element in the series of fearful LeT Fedayeen attacks on Indian Army installations. The culmination of those attacks came with the deadly attack of the Kalu Chak which brought a furious Indian PM Vajpayee to Jammu beating the war-drum. Shamshad, known as Abu Fahad Ullah, was martyred in 2000, and suddenly there was a lull and stagnancy in the training of the LeT. My brother, a former Army Major, hung up his boots right after 9/11. On his release from service, he joined the LeT. One of my unit officers also followed suit. I joined the outfit soon after, without caring for the consequences. After one year all three of us came out of the LeT, dejected after facing the conspiracies of their leadership. There is enough to say about the extreme hypocrisy, luxuries, and evils of these so called Pakistani Mujahideen leaders, but that isn’t the objective of my e-mail to you. The aim of my writing to you is linked with your article above. Once inside the LeT cadres, I came to know about their tactics, logistics, and black-market activities. Moreover, I learned about the difference in the ideologies and tactics of the different groups, namely Al-Qaeda, Taliban, and the Pakistani Jihadi groups. Terrorism is my favorite topic. The last time I wrote a feature article on this was in The Nation on October 31, 2004. It was about the desperate demonstration of the Chinese hostage rescue. With this background and having studied the tactics of the Tamil Tigers in depth, I would like to make the following comments: You have quoted senior Pakistani security officials, on the condition of anonymity, as saying the Al-Qaeda and Taliban are developing new links with the Tamil Tigers for logistics support. I would like to add that most of the security officials in Pakistan do not have any real insight or understanding on/of these cadres. After 9/11 they have re-moulded the pan-Islamist view of world domination by the Pakistani Mujahideen organisations into a nationalist outlook i.e. liberating Kashmir only. The Pakistani organisations were probably the largest in the world in terms of cadres, logistics, and support base to stop [Mujahideen] from attacking the US interests, against which they had been raising slogans for years. To break this tide from joining Al-Qaeda and Taliban inside Afghanistan was a huge task. The officials can claim some success for this but the real credit goes more to the corrupt leadership inside organisations, rather than the security and the intelligence hierarchy. So, at least I do not believe all they claim. Most of what they say is based on some internet story or book which they have read about insurgency, or a presentation given by them in the past to earn an A grade in a compulsory course. Two Tamil Tigers headed the group responsible for all their big deals—shipments of explosives from Rubizone Chemicals Ukraine, shipments of LMGs, rounds and guns from Russia, SAMS [missiles] from Thailand and Burma. They chartered ships in the corrupt PAN HO LIB [Panama, Honduras and Liberia] territories. They even bribed an Israeli weapons dealer and diverted a shipment of mortar rounds to their bastion of Jaffna. They forged end-user certificates and in many cases used the end-user certificates of third-world armies, e.g. Bangladesh. But all these are memories of the pre-9/1 1 world, when the US counter-terrorist forces had their eyes closed. Where have those happy times disappeared after 2001? What to talk of moving across borders? I know how many obstacles these cadres faced just moving things from city to city. In the given situation, only the Iraqi Al-Qaeda had the ability to operate across borders. Taliban, I really doubt. The sudden upsurge in the Afghan resistance, I feel, is due to the changed policy of Al-Qaeda to exploit Iranian channels from Iraq. If we look at the chronology of attacks in Afghanistan, it doesn’t seem that any kind of advanced weaponry is used anywhere. The changed trend is the adoption of the suicide bombings by the Taliban. The downing of Chinook and other gunships may be attributed to the RPG fire, since it has a history. The only possibility of logistically supporting the Taliban/Al-Qaeda with SAMs is from Iraq via Iran, with Pakistan out, because of the infiltration of the security agents into these organisations, a fact the Al-Qaeda has only lately understood. The Tamil Tigers themselves have been searching hard for the latest weaponry, since the time they were black-listed by Scandinavia, from the Far East, Central America, West Africa to the jungles of Jaffna in the post 9/1 1 scenario. The Al-Qaeda/Taliban can do anything—from killing people to stoning to death, but the one thing they are very strict about is no hashish, no marijuana! I noticed in my one year with them that printing fake money and smuggling was their favourite all-time pastime, but drug-dealing is strictly prohibited through all kinds of ‘Sbaree Fatwas’ issued by the respected Arab Ulema. Anyhow sir, this e-mail is for the sole purpose of letting you know that I am a fan of your articles and wanted to give you my views and bit of personal experience on the topic! I am in the Great Lakes region and importing rice. But I have learned how the Europeans, Americans, and the Israelis are robbing the Congo out of its huge mineral wealth including uranium, which is also an interesting topic! I also lived from 2001 to 2002 in Sierra Leone, West Africa, as a peacekeeper. Once we entered its diamond-rich eastern Kono province to find it was completely out of the control of the capital and the world. How we got weapons back from the rebels, held the elections, made the government, and finally sent the diamond-rich country back into the lap of England. This is also an interesting story which demands your attention.

Thanks and wishing you great writings.
Khurram
D R Congo

Captain Khurram came from a Kashmiri family of the Salafi dispensation. His story is a telling account of how the infusion of Al-Qaeda’s ideology and Islamic ideas convinced some middle-ranking officers in the Pakistan Army to become ‘blood brothers’ and adopt successful war strategies in the South Asian theatre of war. Ritualistically and otherwise, Khurram was a practicing Muslim. He was clear in explaining his religious viewpoints and political convictions on contemporary national issues. This made him particularly popular among his SSG colleagues. When he was deployed to Sierra Leone in 2001 and 2002 as part of the UN peacekeeping mission, he was extremely disturbed about the confusion of the local Muslims there. They were clearly identifiable as Muslims by their names, but they were totally unfamiliar with the details of their faith and obligations as Muslims. Khurram built a mosque and a madrassa in Sierra Leone, despite the opposition of his commander, Brigadier Ahmad Shuja Pasha. (who later became a Lieutenant-General and the Director-General of Inter-Services Intelligence, ISI). Pakistan’s policy turnaround on the Taliban after the US invasion of Afghanistan had disillusioned the whole of the middle cadre of the country’s armed forces. But unlike his other colleagues, who remained silent critics of the policy, Khurram and his elder brother Major Haroon Aashik decided to take practical steps to rectify this. Haroon, an equally competent officer, took early retirement from the Pakistan Army in 2001 after Pakistan had decided to support the US-led War on Terror. Khurram left the Army in 2003 on his return from Sierra Leone. Both brothers then joined the LeT, but soon realised that the LeT was only a civilian extension of Pakistan’s armed forces.

The events of 9/11 also brought a change in LeT policies concerning Afghanistan. The LeT advised its cadre to stay away from Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Haroon and Khurram were not only excellent Army officers, but also concerned Muslims. Thus this became a bone of contention. Haroon’s inspiration came from the Salafi school of thought, and was the result of his reading habits. He extensively read classical Muslim academics like Imam Ibn-e-Tamiyyah, Ibn-e-Khaldoun, and Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab. Among modern-day Islamic scholars, he studied the works of the Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Syed Qutb, as well as the founder of the Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Syed Abul Ala Maududi. Additionally, and even after retirement from the Army, Haroon continued to read up on military strategies in military journals and through extensive internet surfing. Haroon never kept his criticism of the Pakistan Army a secret. He was a vocal critic of the country’s armed forces. He visited his old military comrades frequently and taunted them on their weak Islamic beliefs, and for serving in Pakistan’s armed forces, which he considered a continuation of the old British colonial army. He often cited the example of how the Frontier Corps still showcases its wars against ‘tribal insurgents’ like Haji Saheb Taragzai and the Faqir of Ipi, who had fought against the British Indian forces before independence. Haroon motivated his former colleagues to leave the Army, referring to it as a purely mercenary force. He advised them to do something else for a living. Several of his colleagues took his advice seriously and left the Pakistan Army. In the meantime, Haroon had found a new comrade in Commander Muhammad Ilyas Kashmiri, a veteran Kashmiri fighter, who had been roughed up by Pakistan’s armed forces time and again. He decided to sever his ties with the Kashmiri struggle and move to North Waziristan with his family.

Major Abdul Rahman was another officer who resigned from Pakistan’s armed forces and joined Maj Haroon. Their first and foremost aim at the time was to go to Afghanistan to fight against the NATO troops there. Khurram and Rahman then went to the Afghan province of Helmand and fought against the British troops. Khurram died in the battle in Helmand province in 2007. Rahman came back alive, but alone. Khurram’s death became a source of inspiration for both Haroon and Rahman. Haroon was by now seriously involved in Afghanistan. He saw the death of his brother as martyrdom and dedicated his life to the Afghan resistance against the NATO forces. By 2006, Kashmiri was part of Al-Qaeda’s Shura and his 313 Brigade came under Al-Qaeda's discipline. Soon after, Haroon reduced his business engagements and frequently journeyed to South and North Waziristan to take part in guerrilla operations against NATO forces in Afghanistan. Haroon had fought in the Kargil war in 1999 and often cited the cowardice of the Pakistani officers. He was convinced that the Pakistan Army was incapable of fighting any major battle. Haroon’s exposure to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda had fired his imagination. The ‘soldier with a mission’ stood up in him. He engaged in extensive physical training and made himself super-fit. His relations with Al-Qaeda grew and he soon became part of its inner circle. The fusion of Al-Qaeda’s ideology and his own commitment and capabilities as a professionally trained army officer saw him loom large in the South Asian theatre of war. Haroon began evaluating the Afghan war theatre from a new perspective. Thousands of brave Taliban, ready to kill or to be killed, stood before him, but their obsolete guerrilla tactics prevented them from emerging on top. The Taliban made a successful comeback in 2006 in Afghanistan, but their casualty rate was very high. At least 2,000 Taliban fighters were killed in the spring offensive of that year, while NATO’s casualties were less than 200. Haroon was convinced that if the Taliban clung to old war techniques, the aerial firepower and military machine of the US would eliminate them by 2008. There was a need to develop novel guerrilla tactics through new schools of thought with the fighters oriented to new disciplines. Haroon felt that the Arab guerrilla fighters had a better sense of war than the Taliban but their ideas were limited. They did not have the capacity to strategise the war to advantage the Taliban. Rahman and Haroon jointly worked on this. They went to libraries and studied the most successful guerrilla battles against the United States in Vietnam. After extensive reading, both concluded that without more advanced weapons and improved strategy, success in Afghanistan could not be achieved. Haroon then went to North Waziristan and gave his presentation to senior Al-Qaeda commanders. He laid out two models of insurgencies, one related to Vietnamese guerillas operating against the US, and the other to the Tamil Tigers operating against the government of Sri Lanka.

He advocated that a start be made in the Afghan provinces of Khost, Paktia, and Paktika, with a three-pronged Tet-type offensive strategy, similar to the one that Gen Giap had used in North Vietnam in the 1960s to defeat the US. He proposed that the first phase of operations involve armed opposition to the NATO forces in these provinces. In the second phase, the militants would target isolated security posts and military personnel. Militants would capture and hold these isolated posts for 24 to 48 hours and then melt away. In the third phase, they would spread the insurgency to urban areas and the federal capital. Haroon emphasized that the central idea of Gen Giap’s strategy was to catch the enemy by surprise, and he placed emphasis on the training of select warriors for special operations. They were to use sophisticated arms acquired by insiders. The Arab militants paid close attention to Haroon’s presentation and discussed it with regional commanders such as Sirajuddin Haqqani and Mullah Nazir. (The strategy was later successfully employed in Pakistan’s tribal areas against Pakistan’s armed forces.) Haroon developed a ‘guerrilla’ mortar gun of a type available only to some of the world’s more advanced military forces. The gun was so small it could be hidden in a medium-sized luggage bag. Unlike the normal mortar gun, the length of which makes it difficult to hide, this gun could be transported easily. Haroon also developed a silencer for the AK-47, hitherto available only to a select few internationally. This became an essential component of Al-Qaeda’s special guerrilla operations. He then visited China to procure night-vision devices (NVD). The biggest task was to clear them through the Customs in Pakistan. Haroon called on his friend Captain Farooq, who was President Musharraf’s security officer. Farooq went to the airport in the President’s official car and received Haroon at the immigration counter. In the presence of Farooq, nobody dared touch Haroon’s luggage, and the NVDs arrived in Pakistan without any hassle. (Farooq was a member of the Hizbut Tahrir, a fact discovered by the military intelligence as late as nine months after his posting as Musharraf’s security officer. After being spotted, he was briefly arrested and then retired from the Pakistan Army.) Once a level of sophistication had been reached, the Mujahideen prepared for special operations. The combatants for these operations all emanated from North Waziristan. An attack on the Serena Hotel Kabul in January 2008, a Taliban strike on the national day parade in April 2008 in Kabul, multiple bombing attacks in Khost in May 2009, and an attack on the Kamdesh US base in Kunar in September 2009, are just a few examples of the successful guerrilla operations they launched. In most cases, the Taliban donned Afghan armed forces or Afghan Police uniforms, and in almost every attack they had insiders providing them with information on the targetted complexes’ entry and exit points.

Neither Haroon nor Kashmiri favoured gathering adherents randomly for these special operations. They recruited the best and most ideologically motivated youths to their 313 Brigade. These youths were given special guerrilla training, including swimming and karate lessons, shooting and ambush techniques, and were familiarised with explosive devises as well as reconnaissance. The 313 Brigade fell strictly under Kashmiri’s control. The role of Al-Qaeda's Laskhar al-Zil (Shadow Army) was to coordinate with other groups. Several different groups of the Mujabideen were then inducted into the Laskhar al-Zil. Haroon had the Taliban widen their war perspectives. He then presented his most important assessment of future operational procedures to Kashmiri and Al-Qaeda’s other leaders. This was a comprehensive plan to sever the NATO supply line of containers from the port of Karachi to Afghanistan. Of these shipments, 80% go through Pakistan’s tribal area to the Khyber Agency and 20% use the Chaman-Kandahar route. Haroon next planned a masterstroke to organise attacks on NATO supplies running through Pakistan into Afghanistan in January 2008. The focal point was the Khyber Agency. This key transit point accounted for most of the NATO supplies needed to battle the Afghan insurgency. Laskhar al-Zil was assigned to execute the plan. Ustad Yasir, an Afghan, was appointed in the Khyber Agency as the project head. The chief of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Hakeemullah Mehsud, although then only an ordinary foot solider, was sent from South Waziristan to coordinate the action. Al-Qaeda knew that Laskhar al-Zil operations in the Khyber Agency would not receive any support from the locals as the majority of the population of the Khyber Agency belongs to the anti-Taliban Barelvi school of thought, which believes in Sufism. There were several local groups from the Deobandi School (a pro-Taliban Muslim sect in Pakistan), but they had good relations with the Pakistan Army and local tribes who stood against creating a law-and-order situation. Haroon suggested that Laskhar al-Zil establish its sanctuaries in the neighbouring Orakzai Agency and make Dara Adam Khail its base. His strategy aimed at pressurising the local tribesmen to remain neutral in the Taliban attacks on NATO convoys. Future Taliban attacks were then launched from the Orakzai Agency on a daily basis. Later militants succeeded in establishing their own strong pockets in the Khyber Agency in 2009-10. Suicide attacks followed. In one, the warlord Haji Namdar, who had initially been the local facilitator for attacking the NATO supply line, and who had supported the Pakistan Army against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in the Khyber Agency, was killed. The other powerful warlord of the area, Mangal Bagh, learned from this lesson and remained neutral. The Taliban attacks rose to the point of Pakistan having to close its borders several times in December 2008. Haroon next contemplated widening the attacks on NATO supplies. He was convinced that this would be the key to NATO’s defeat in Afghanistan. He visited Karachi several times, and set up efficient teams there to monitor the movement of NATO’s shipments arriving at the port. These teams were to study how the NATO shipments were passed on to the various contractors. Each and every detail was closely examined, including the companies which had the contracts for the shipments. Several contractors were abducted in Karachi and the rest given warnings to break with NATO, or suffer the consequences. NATO commanders were taken aback by these new developments, and more so when in the last months of 2008, the Taliban virtually stopped their attacks across Pakistan and Afghanistan and shifted their entire focus towards blowing up NATO supply arteries. In Karachi, most of the contractors had been abducted, or were on the run. At the Peshawar terminal, almost every other day the Taliban suddenly appeared, carried out rocket attacks on NATO convoys, and disappeared into the Khyber Agency. Almost every day 20 to 40 NATO convoys were set on fire or looted.

The Pakistani Taliban released a picture to the Pakistani press of a US Humvee being used by the Taliban in the Orakzai Agency. This sent shock waves through Western capitals. The stories published in the international press of missing NATO aircraft engines said to be in the possession of the Taliban added to Westerners' concerns. The NATO command wondered who was guiding the Taliban. The immediate suspect was the Pakistani military establishment, but there was no hard evidence of this. Western intelligence fully examined the profiles of all the leading Arab commanders in North Waziristan and those who had been commanding the Taliban in Afghanistan, but was unable to track anyone with the required knowledge or skill to successfully pursue this strategy. The rising shortage of supplies in the provinces of Helmand, Ghazni, and Wardak seriously affected the patrol capabilities of NATO forces during the latter months of 2008. In April 2008, NATO struck a deal with Russia in Bucharest to send its supplies through Russia and Central Asia. On the sidelines of the 45th Munich Summit in February 2009, an agreement was simultaneously reached between Iran and United States for Iran to allow some non-military NATO shipments through the port of Chabahar. Permission for supplies through Iran, however, was given only to individual countries like Italy, France, and the United Kingdom - not NATO as a whole. But neither of these routes proved an economically viable alternative to the Khyber Agency route, through which 70 percent of NATO supplies still moved.

Haroon wrote me an e-mail after the Bucharest conference in April 2008, citing Wikipedia. He also sent a map in another e=mail: A landlocked country, surrounded entirely by other landlocked countries, may be called a ‘doubly landlocked’ country. A person in such a country has to cross at least two borders to reach a coastline. There are only two such countries in the world: Liechtenstein in Central Europe. Uzbekistan in Central Asia. Uzbekistan has borders with four countries—Turkmenistan to the southwest, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to the south and east, with Kazakhstan and the Aral Sea to the north—that border the landlocked salt-water Caspian Sea, from which ships can reach the Sea of Azov by using the Volga-Don Canal, and thus the Black Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, and the oceans. There was no doubly landlocked country in the world after the 1871 Unification of Germany until the end of World War-I. This was because Uzbekistan was part of the then Soviet Union; while Liechtenstein borders Austria, which had an Adriatic coast until 1918. Haroon’s assessment was correct. NATO tried to move its supplies on the Central Asian routes to northern Afghanistan, but was not able to transport more than 10 to 15% of its requirements because of the much higher cost of transportation cost through the ‘doubly landlocked’ region. Pakistan remained the main supply route.

Maj Haroon was elated. He was playing the role of a General. This was something he could never have achieved in the regular Army, given his time of service. He bought a non-custom Pajero off-road vehicle from North Waziristan at the dirt-cheap price of PKR 125,000 and used it to travel through North Waziristan to Karachi. When night fell, he stayed in Army messes in the countryside. Being an ex-Army officer, he was allowed that facility. He always kept his Army-issued revolver on him with lots of bullets in case he was obstructed at any checkpoint, but his imposing bearing and unmistakable military accent in both English and Urdu always prevented this from happening. With his success in evading identification and capture, he looked forward to broadening both his, and through him Al-Qaeda’s, network. Every visit brought forward new comrades. Most of them were from the LeT, a few from other Jihadi outfits, but there were a number from the Pakistan Army as well. Through his close connections in the Pakistan Army, Haroon was able to develop an effective intelligence network. In 2007 he became aware that the US had taken a new view on the South Asian terror war, and had arrived at the conclusion that the problem lay in Pakistan. The US did not want a partnership with the Pakistan Army to defeat the Taliban or Al-Qaeda, it wanted to place US personnel inside the Pakistan Army to fight it. In 2008 the US took over some bases in Pakistan in order to launch Predator drone attacks against Al-Qaeda in Pakistani tribal areas. The same year the US bought land in Tarbela, 20km from Islamabad, and allocated US$1 billion for the extension of the US embassy in Pakistan’s capital. Earlier, in 2007, US war contractors had arrived in Pakistan. They interviewed and selected a group of Frontier Corps personnel to be trained as a counter-insurgency force. In Pakistan’s ISI, a counter-terrorism cell was established, with the officers to be trained in the US. They were to visit the US at regular intervals to allow the US administration to assess them and their conviction about fighting the War on Terror. The US establishment focused on making personal contacts at all levels in the Pakistan Army to set the stage for a conclusive war effort against Al-Qaeda. Haroon was privy to all of this, and busied himself working on a strategy to generate a crisis in the Pakistan Army. His avowed aim was to have the Pakistan Army sever all ties with the US. Using terror tactics was the only way Haroon knew to jolt the conscience of his former comrades-in-arms. He made a list of the senior ranking Army officers involved in anti-terror activities, and decided to make a horrible example of them to deter others from joining the US. The name of retired Maj Gen Ameer Faisal Alvi came to mind. Faisal had commanded SSG operations in Angor Ada on October 2, 2003 when 2,500 commandos had been airlifted into the village of Baghar, located near Angor Ada, with aerial support from 12 helicopter gunships. According to local residents, some of the helicopters flew from the Machdad Kot US air base from across the border in Afghanistan. Witnesses reported that 31 Pakistani soldiers and 13 foreign fighters and local tribesmen were killed in the action. A large number of Taliban combatants fled. In that operation several high-profile Al-Qaeda commanders, including Abdul Rahman Kennedy, were killed. Several others were arrested and transported to Guantanamo Bay. The attack was burned into the mind of Al-Qaeda and it mulled over the setback, especially since as, at that time, there had been no open hostility between it and Pakistan. Tracing the address of Alvi, who was British-born, was not a problem. After developing personal differences with the then Chief of the Army Staff, Gen Musharraf, Alvi had been forcibly retired from the Pakistan Army. After his retirement he worked as the CEO and Executive Director of Redtone Telecommunication Pakistan Ltd, a private telecommunications company in Pakistan. On November 19, 2008 while he was on his way to work, Haroon followed him. His plan was to waylay the retired General when he slowed down at a speed breaker near the PWD colony in Islamabad, where the General’s passage would be obstructed by two accomplices. Everything went according to plan. Haroon jumped out of his car and killed Alvi with his Army revolver. The murder sent shock-waves through the military rank and file. Intelligence outfits could read the fine print: both former and serving Army personnel were to be future targets. But they remained tight-lipped. The murder of Alvi was not Haroon’s sole mission, he was on the lookout for similar targets. The killing of the retired Army official was not purely an act of vengeance, it was to serve as a reminder to the serving military cadre that one day they too would retire and could suffer a similar fate. However, there was more to Haroon than being just an assassin. He was rapidly re-organising the aft cadre of the Jihadis and changing their mindset to fight a more disciplined war against the US.

The first time I met Maj Haroon was at his Lahore residence in September 2007. He was clearly a religious person from his appearance. He had a long beard and wore a prayer cap and the traditional Pakistani shalwar-qameez (a unisex form of dress similar in manner to the shirt and pants worn by Westerners). When I met with him later, I found a different person. He had trimmed his beard, shed some weight, and wore Western attire. But in his private life Haroon was a devout Muslim. At one time he came to visit me at the Avari Towers Hotel in Lahore and said his prayers in my room. There were pictures on one wall of the room, and he covered them all with a sheet as he considered them prohibited under Islam. Haroon was closely watching developments in Pakistan. He was in touch with all of his former colleagues in the armed forces (except those who were part of the military operations), including a Major General who was the officer commanding the garrison in Peshawar. The General had tried to reach Haroon many times to condole with him on the death of his brother Khurram, but Haroon had not responded. Meanwhile Haroon was getting information on expanding US influence from his old Army colleagues. Being an avid internet surfer and book reader, he was well-informed about state apparatus procedures, their manipulations and strategies. He focussed on altered plans to counter them before the state could use them. He realised that if the US continued to enjoy the success it had had up till then, Pakistan’s Army would ultimately have no choice but to bow down to it. The US was already promoting a role for India in Afghanistan as a countervailing force to Pakistan. Haroon knew the US was playing on the existing rivalry between India and Pakistan to encourage Pakistan to engage more fully in the US War on Terror. He saw this as a carrot-and-stick game aimed at luring the Pakistan Army into the trap of committing itself to fight the Jihadis. From 2007 onwards, Haroon worked on a counter-strategy along with his Ameer (commander), Muhammad Ilyas Kashmiri. The essence of this strategy was to expand the terror war into India. In the first phase Haroon aimed to conduct a 9/11 type event in India, which he thought would surely lead India to declare war on Pakistan. Haroon assessed that once that happened, the Pakistan Army would have no choice but to pull its troops out of the military operations against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda on its western front. Haroon assigned Major Abdul Rahman, the close friend and former colleague of his slain brother Captain Khurram, for the Indian operation. Rahman was a living encyclopedia on Indian affairs. Haroon then set up an India cell and worked to expand the network to its maximum limits. Haroon had left the LeT but was still in touch with its field commanders. He was aware of the LeT’s strengths and weaknesses. The LeT’s main strength was its connection with Pakistan’s military establishment and its resources. Its weakness was limited vision. Haroon would often discuss these aspects with the LeT commanders, who considered him a totally trustworthy person because he was a Salafi as well as a retired Army officer. Haroon used his connections for the execution of Al-Qaeda’s plan. He was aware that in late 2007 the ISI had decided on the launch of a new uprising inside J & K and LeT was to be used for it. Funds were allocated and LeT was given the green light by the ISI to launch the operation. That was the routine proxy war plan. But after the fencing of the LoC, the infiltration of terrorists into India became difficult. The LeT then had to use the deserted coastal area of Thatta (in the southern Sindh province of Pakistan) to move its fighters into India. From there they moved on into J & K.

Haroon met with a LeT commander, Abu Hamza, and advised him not to waste his time and resources on futile exercises inside India. He told Abu Hamza that he would draw up a more effective strategy for the cause. Haroon next turned to his expert on India, Rahman, to brief him more fully on the country. Rahman had visited India many times. He had photographs and maps of all the important targets in India. He identified the areas in Mumbai where Caucasian foreigners lived, like Nariman House and the Taj Mahal Hotel. Haroon informed Abu Hamza that they would travel on a Pakistani boat initially and then capture an Indian trawler to land from. He told Abu Hamza that once they were in position to launch a massive operation it would force India to the negotiating table to discuss an advantageous settlement on J & K. Abu Hamza forwarded the plan to the LeT commander-in-chief Zakiur Rahman Lakhvi, who immediately left for Karachi to organise the operation. Lakhvi spent two months in preparation before the November 26, 2008 attacks in Mumbai. He worked night and day to select and train the combatants who were to carry out the mission. When the selected combatants were thought to be fully prepared to proceed precisely along the lines of Haroon’s plan, they were launched. Haroon devised the mechanism of indirect communication for Abu Hamza, drawing the guidelines for instructions to the infiltrators, which were conveyed from countries other than Pakistan. The Mumbai attacks stunned the whole world. The event was a great test for India as the regional superpower. One of the attackers, Ajmal Kasab, was taken alive, and during his grilling he told his Indian captors the whole story of how, where, and when he had been given his training. All links led to Pakistan, and India geared itself for a limited war on Pakistan, which was to include air strikes on LeT camps in Muzaffarabad, in PoK, the LeT headquarters in Muridke, in Pakistani Punjab, and its seminaries in Lahore. This could have been the beginning of a fourth India-Pakistan war.

Al-Qaeda’s objective in undertaking the Mumbai 26/11 attack was to provoke a war between Pakistan and India. All hostilities between the Pakistan Army and the terrorists would then come to a halt in the Swat Valley in Pakistan’s KPK province, as well as in the tribal areas of Bajaur, Mohmand, and the two Waziristans. Pakistani Taliban leaders Mullah Fazlullah and Baitullah Mehsud announced that they would fight alongside Pakistan‘s armed forces in an India-Pakistan war, and the Director-General of ISI, Lt Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha, confirmed this understanding in his briefing to national and foreign correspondents, when he called Fazlullah and Baitullah Mehsud Pakistan’s strategic assets. The stage was all set to change the dynamics of enmity and friend-ship in the region when Washington put its foot down. Washington hurriedly sent several officials to India and Pakistan to advise their governments that any war between them would only benefit the terrosists. Washington assured India that Pakistan would cooperate fully in the investigation of the Mumbai attacks and arrest those who had been responsible for their planning. Watching his plan fail, Haroon advised Rahman to use another approach for the 313 Brigade. LeT structures were now under siege because of US pressure on Pakistan, and hence of little value. Rahman journeyed to India again to acquire more information and photograph sensitive installations. These included India’s nuclear research laboratories in Mumbai and Hyderabad. He also took photographs of the National Defence College, India’s Parliament building, and some other high-profile government offices in Delhi. Rahman always drew up a contingency plan for assaults on different targets. In this case, if the terrorists were unable to hit India’s National Defense College during the day when several senior military officials were present, they were instead to attack the Indian Parliament. Rahman was arrested after a 313 Brigade combatant, Zahid Iqbal, was picked up by the ISI in Islamabad on July 2009 and identified him. But as he had not been involved in any terrorist act in Pakistan, he was released and soon back at work planning the sabotage operations in India using the 313 Brigade. However, information was leaked to the FBI before he could proceed with the action, and the entire team, including Rahman, was captured.

In October 2009 a conspiracy was unearthed in Chicago by the FBI. Two suspects were arrested, David Headley and Tahawwur Rana. Their interrogations revealed that they had been planning to attack the National Defence College in Delhi and India’s nuclear facilities. The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, which had published allegedly blasphemous cartoons featuring the Holy Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him), was also on the hit-list. The conspirators all belonged to Kashmiri’s 313 Brigade. Their affidavit exposed the roles of Major Haroon and his aide Abdul Rahman in the recruitment and orientation process. Kashmiri was optimistic about giving India a far bigger jolt than the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai when I interviewed him on October 9, 2009. “So should the world expect more Mumbai-like attacks?” I asked. “That was nothing compared to what we have planned for the future,” he replied.

Extracts from the FBI’s affidavit: After visiting Denmark in January 2009 [David] Headley travelled to Pakistan to meet with Individual A. During this trip, Headley travelled with Individual A to the Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) region in north-west Pakistan and met with (Ilyas) Kashmiri. Headley returned to Chicago in mid-June 2009. Following Headley’s return from Pakistan, Headley communicated by e-mail with LeT Member A regarding the status of the Northern Project. Because LeT Member A responded that he had “new investment plans”, coded language for the planning of a different attack, Headley and Individual A began to focus on working with Kashmiri to complete the attack on the newspaper. In late July 2009. Headley travelled again to Copenhagen, Denmark, and to other locations in Europe. When Headley returned to the US, he told a Customs and Border Patrol inspector that he was travelling on business as a representative of an immigration business. Headley’s luggage contained no papers or other documents relating to such business. Following Headley’s return to Chicago in August 2009, Headley used coded language to inquire of Individual A on multiple occasions whether Individual A had been in touch with Kashmiri regarding planning for the attack. Headley expressed concern that Individual A’s communications with Kashmiri had been cut off. In early September 2009, Individual A called Headley to report that Kashmiri might be dead. Headley expressed dismay and concern, and said that Kashmiri’s death means “our company has gone into bankruptcy then,” and that “the projects and so forth will go into suspension.” Shortly after initial press reports that Kashmiri had been killed in a drone attack in Pakistan, Headley and- Individual A had a series of coded conversations in which they discussed the reports of Kashmiri’s death and the significance of Kashmiri’s death for the projects they were planning. Individual A sought to reassure and encourage Headley, telling him, among other things, that “This is business sir; these types of things happen.” According to the affidavit, Headley also talked about A’s friend “Harry.” A was Major Abdul Rahman, who was in charge of the India cell, and Harry, his friend, was Major Haroon.

Before the arrest of Rahman, Haroon had approached his LeT and Army friends. He convinced them to take part in the battle against NATO in Afghanistan. He took them to the Pakistani tribal areas and trained them in modern guerrilla warfare. In a matter of a few years the 313 Brigade came to be held in high regard in Jihadi circles for its expertise and resourcefulness. However, as more missions appeared on the horizon, more resources were required. Money had always been lacking for the war, and Haroon was now facing a situation in which he did not even have enough money to buy fuel for his car, let alone pay hotel bills during his travels. To keep going, he sold his Corolla station wagon and resorted to a modest style of living. At one point he sold his AK-47 silencers in the Dara Adam Khail market, but even that did not generate enough money. Their monetary situation forced Haroon and Kashmiri to think of an alternative strategy. This was kidnapping for ransom. However, they would only abduct non-Muslims. Haroon came to Karachi and contacted an old army friend, retired Major Abdul Basit. The only help Haroon sought from Basit was to spy on Satish Anand, a renowned film producer. Satish is a Hindu, an uncle of the famous Indian actor Juhi Chawla and son of the renowned film distributor Jagdish Anand. With the information he had received from Basit, Haroon came back to Karachi and abducted Satish for ransom, thinking his family to be rich. He took the film distributor to North Waziristan, only to discover that all the estimates about his money were wrong. Satish did not have liquid funds. He owned properties but in captivity he could not sell them. Satish was told to contact his family-members and ask them to raise a ransom, but it was to no avail. The abductors then made Satish an offer: they would release him if he embraced Islam. They did not kill Muslims. Satish embraced Islam and promised to make a documentary on the militants. It is still a mystery whether or not any money was paid for his release, and if so how much, but what is true is that Satish came back safely to Karachi and refused to register any case against his abductors. He was also tight-lipped about their identities. Haroon was eventually arrested in February 2009 in Islamabad while he was trying to abduct Sarwar Khan, a member of the Qadyani sect. (The Qadyanis are considered non-Muslims under Pakistan’s Constitution.) Several cases, including the murder of Faisal Alvi, were then lodged against Haroon. Haroon had served under some leading military officers, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of the Staff Committee, Gen Tariq Majeed (now retired), while his brother Khurram had served under the Director-General of ISI, Lt Gen Shuja Pasha. I am sure that the Pakistan Army command, who knew of their professional skills, would miss these two brothers, very much like the Saudi establishment might have missed Osama bin Laden. These are the stories of Islamists pushed by circumstances onto a particular track, and then indoctrinated. They then became counterproductive, if not useless, for Muslim establishments that decide to go along with the US designs of a new world order in the post-Cold War era.

On March 3, 2009, only a week after Haroon’s arrest in Islamabad, around ten gunmen attacked a bus carrying the Sri Lankan cricket team on its way to play in Pakistan’s second largest city, Lahore. The pattern of the attack suggested that the attackers had no intention of killing the cricketers, as they sprayed bullets only on the escorting policemen. When the policemen fled, the gunmen tried to hijack the bus. This was prevented by the bus driver who kept his wits about him and drove the vehicle past the gunmen to safety. Six of the policemen escorting the team bus were killed, and seven crick- etersand an assistant coach were injured in the attempted hijack. Rocket launchers and grenades were left on the site of shooting, as were water bottles and dried fruit. Officials said the incident bore similarities to the deadly November attacks in Mumbai. ISI claimed the incident was an action taken by militants trained by Haroon, and that the intention was to capture the cricketers and hold them hostage until they could be exchanged for the captive commander.

All the Western strategic experts wondered how Taliban’s rag-tag militia, which was on the verge of collapse, had in a few short years rehabilitated itself and come up with hugely effective guerrilla tactics. These strategists wondered how the guerrillas’ skills, which had been virtually non-existent till 2005, had suddenly transformed. NATO failed to comprehend that there could be a strategist behind the change. That strategist was Haroon, who had been shuttling continuously between Pakistan’s tribal areas in the two Waziristans and Karachi, undetected. In Al-Qaeda circles Haroon is today held in as high regard as Abu Hafs (killed in 2001) for his military operations and strategy. While walking on the sandy shores of the Arabian Sea near my Karachi sea-view residence with Haroon, it was hard for me to believe that this was the person who had moved the internal dynamics of the war in South Asia from Afghanistan to India. Like al-Zawahiri, Haroon’s whole life was the movement. Every part of his mind was focused on formulating a strategy to win the war against NATO. While walking near Karachi’s Clifton beach he never once appeared to enjoy or comment on the cool breeze, or the sight of the awesome waves. Instead his eyes were rivetted on the oil terminal as he pondered strategies to block NATO’s shipments from the port in Karachi to land-locked Afghanistan. Haroon shared his thoughts with me every time he came to Karachi in 2008, when I was living in the city. He said: Dr Saab, the victory of Khurasan is near. I am certain that if the Mujahideen succeed in severing the NATO supply-lines from Pakistan by 2008, NATO will be left with no choice but to withdraw by 2009. And, if the supply-line is cut by 2010, NATO will leave Afghanistan by 2011. This strategy is of critical importance in this war game. NATO’s claim of an alternative supply route through Central Asia is a joke. It is so long and complicated that the economy of the whole of Europe and the United States would collapse under the financial strain. The only other option is to move the NATO shipments to Iran. But if you study history, you will see that relations between the ancient Persian Empire and Roman Empire were strained. Similarly, in this battle, although Iran facilitated the US invasion of Afghanistan against the Taliban, it is still looking to defeat America and its NATO allies. I don’t think that Iran would allow NATO any permanent route for its supplies through its territory.

Haroon saw the climax of the battle coming in 2012: This is the time the Mahdi [the ultimate reformist leader] will make his presence felt. By all the reckonings and the estimates of Muslim scholars he has already been born. By 2012, he will come forward to command the Muslim forces in the Middle East and defeat the Western forces led by the Anti-Christ [Dajjal\. I used to spend hours walking with Haroon on the sea shore in the evenings, trying to understand the Al-Qaeda perspective on various issues. It was doubly perplexing for me that while the West doubted the loyalty of the Pakistan Army in the War on Terror in Afghanistan, believing it to be hand-in-glove with the Taliban, the Taliban were repeatedly attacking Pakistan’s armed forces, believing their loyalties were pro-West. Haroon was the perfect source of enlightenment on this, as not only was he a former officer of the Pakistan Army, he had also personally served under the command of several leading Generals, including Gen Tariq Majeed. Haroon said: “Their [the Pakistan Army’s] support to the Afghan Taliban is purely tactical. It does not come from any conviction. This kind of support to the insurgencies in neighbouring countries is given by states for its nuisance value—and to gain influence in the region. The Pakistan Army also supports LeT, but only as the means of waging a proxy war against India. India does the same with its fifth columnists in Pakistan. If the situation changes, the Army will also change its policies on India. For instance, the ISI used to launch LeT men in Calcutta [India] for acts of sabotage. These men were always arrested. Some because of their long beards, some because of the Salafi rituals they practiced, and some because of the language they conversed in. Whenever they carried out an operation, they were found and arrested. The Pakistani intelligence agencies wondered why ISI operations in India were always exposed while Indian proxy operations in Pakistan never came to light. The reason became clear to them later. The Indian saboteurs in Pakistan were rarely Indian. The Indian intelligence hired Pakistanis as their proxies. Pakistan decided do the same, and in 2007 and 2008 it used the Indian underworld to carry out bomb blasts in Delhi and other places. For the first time the Indian security agencies were clueless about the origin of the saboteurs. Now Pakistan does not need or want to use the LeT any more”. “But if that is the case, what prevents Pakistan from completely dismantling LeT?” I asked. He answered: “They still require LeT for many reasons. First, after their U-turn following 9/11, Pakistan lost its Islamist allies one by one. LeT is their only ally in Pakistan. There is one major reason for this. The Pakistan Army is culturally Punjabi. Approximately 60% of its strength comes from the rural areas of Punjab. LeT comes from the same background. LeT is from the Ahle-Hadith school of thought [the South Asian version of the Saudi Wahhabi school] and in this school of thought khuruj [revolt] is not allowed. In other words, LeT is a pro-establishment group. The Pakistan Army does not feel threatened by it.”

Comparison between the various Muslim societies and the successes or the failures of local insurgency movements was Haroon’s other favourite topic. “Dr Sahib, Islam is a universal message for all of mankind, but it does not ignore local themes, culture and traditions,” he remarked when we discussed the philosophy of Michael Aflaq, the founder of Arab Baath Party, and how Islam was practiced by Saddam Hussein in both letter and spirit. “But isn’t it against the basic spirit of Islam to paint this great religion in a narrow perspective of Arab nationalism, as did Michael Aflaq and Saddam Hussain?” I argued. He answered: Dr Sahib, there is no denying the fact that Islam is culturally Arab, but I don’t think that there is any harm if somebody supports the Islamic state on the basis of Arab nationalism. That happened in the time of Umar Bin Khattab [the second Muslim Caliph and the Prophet Muhammad’s companion], when he gained the support of some Iraqi Arab tribes on the basis of Arab nationalism during the war against the Iranian imperialism. “Then what do you think of the Muslim Brotherhood, which condemns Arab nationalism and the Baath ideology?” I asked. “I don't know enough about their perspectives, but I do believe that in wars for the protection of an Islamic state, nationalist themes can be used,” Haroon replied. I often confessed to Haroon that I could not understand the rationale of wars in which thousands of non-combatants are killed. His answer was: Big causes demand big sacrifices. History witnesses that innocent people are often killed in wars and otherwise. In peace they are crushed by the tyrannical systems. Life is only for those who chose to play an active role on one side of the fence or the other. The rest are anyway caught in no-man's land.

Haroon is now in Adyala jail, Rawalpindi. The senior police officer who interrogated him and exchanged notes with me admitted he was impressed with him, and is at a loss to understand how Haroon got himself arrested for a crime like abduction for ransom. He quotes Haroon frequently and is proud he has had the chance to meet such a revolutionary in his lifetime. He wondered why Haroon’s life is such an under-reported story. Haroon continues to share his views on the need to defeat NATO forces in Afghanistan with his interrogators. Sometimes the loneliness and the emptiness of jail depress him, but his convictions bring him back to the world, and he lives for another day. His is another story of Al-Qaeda’s One Thousand and One Nights tales which lead to the promised ‘End of Time’ battles. Meanwhile his colleagues in Waziristan look forward to his coming back to the tribal theater of war. They are convinced that his ideas and presence would lead them to victory.

Al-Qaeda was looking for a person who was a master of guerrilla warfare with a global perspective, someone able to think over and above his own personal interests. Once again a crisis in the Kashmiri militants' camp provided it with an opportunity to benefit and to breathe its soul into a new order. This came with the attack on the Pakistani President Musharraf in late 2003, which resulted in a massive crackdown on the Pakistani Mijahideen fighting for the right for self-determination in J & K. During the course of investigations, any shred of doubt about a person was enough to nail anybody connected with Jihadi circles, no matter how well-connected he was with Pakistan’s military establishment. The supreme commander of Jaish-e-Mohammad, Abdullah Shah Mazhar, was one of the people picked by the ISI when it found a person by the name of Asif Chotu financing the attack. Asif had once been a member of Jaish-e-Mohammad. He later joined Al-Qaeda. Abdullah Shah Mazhar gave me this account of his days in detention: I was picked up from Karachi and taken in a vehicle. The last building I saw was the Sultan Mosque in the Defence Housing Authority. After that I was blindfolded and taken to a bungalow. I was offered good food and treated with all good manners. I was asked few questions about Asif and how much I knew of him, and my possible involvement in attacking Gen Musharraf. I told them categorically that although Asif and I had studied together in a madrassa, I knew nothing of his activities, and nor was I involved in his purported plot to assassinate Gen Musharraf. The military officer told me that I had three days to think, after which he would hand me over to people who would not be nice to me. My answer remained the same: I had no idea what Asif Chotu had been up to. Abdullah said that in next three days he was shifted to another location, which was a military barracks: Nobody came to see me except for a person who used to give me food and water. Then one day I was taken to the airport and to another city, possibly Lahore. There I was not asked a single question. They simply hanged me from the roof as a butcher hangs a chicken before slaughter—my hands and legs were tied together with a rope and I was strung up to a roof. Each muscle and bone of the body cried with pain. After an hour they pulled me down and then took off my shalwar (Pakistani trousers) and beat me on my hips with a thin cane. Each hit of the cane ripped off my skin. Throughout this time nobody spoke to me. When I was near-unconscious, I was shifted to a small cell. After a few hours a man came, slid the small window in the door open, and asked me to give him my hand. I gave my hand and he put some ointment into it and told me to spread the ointment over my wounds. Abdullah said that after this, there was a brief interrogation session, then he was left in isolation. He was given a chamber pot to use as a toilet. After six months he was declared innocent. A Brigadier came to him and tendered his apology for the harsh treatment. He offered monetary compensation, which Abdullah refused with thanks. Abdullah then returned to Karachi and became engaged in routine work, without any thought of revenge. But there were other people like Ibne Amin (real name Bin Yameen) from Swat who were detained in the same detention cells and refused to forget the vicious treatment meted out to them. Ibne Amin later became the most influential Taliban commander in the Swat Valley.

Another person, who, unlike Mazhar, adopted the path of defiance against the state of Pakistan was Commander Muhammad Ilyas Kashmiri. His name still terrifies the Indian military establishment. Among the guerrilla commanders of today’s world nobody has attained the type of success Kashmiri had as a field commander. His track record and his complete submission to Al-Qaeda impressed the Al-Qaeda leaders. He was quickly included in Al-Qaeda’s Sbura and later given command of Al-Qaeda’s operations. This was Al-Qaeda’s turning point. Al-Qaeda was now able to operate independently. It gathered together commanders like Qari Ziaur Rahman and Sirajuddin Haqqani, and its soul shifted into a new organisation, Laskhar al-Zil. Its best brains, men like Haroon and Ziaur Rahman, were members of Laskhar al-Zil. Born in Bhimber (old Mirpur) in the Samhani Valley of PoK on February 10, 1964, Ilyas passed the first year of a mass communication degree at Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad. He did not continue because of his involvement in Jihadi activities. The Kashmiri freedom movement was his first exposure in the field of terrorism. Then there was the Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami (HUJI), and ultimately his legendary 313 Brigade. This grew into the most powerful group in South Asia, with a strongly knit network in Afghanistan, Pakistan, PoK, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh. According to some CIA dispatches, the footprints of 313 Brigade are now in Europe, and it is capable of carrying out the type of attack that saw a handful of terrorists terrorize the Indian city of Mumbai in November 2008. Little is documented of Ilyas’s life, and what has been reported is often contradictory. However, he is invariably described by the world’s intelligence agencies as the most effective, dangerous, and successful guerrilla leader in the world. Kashmiri left the Kashmir region in 2005 after his second release from detention by the ISI, and headed for North Waziristan. He had previously been arrested by Indian forces, but had broken out of jail and escaped. He was next detained by the ISI as the suspected mastermind of an attack on then-President Musharraf in 2003, but was cleared and released. The ISI picked Ilyas up again in 2005 after he refused to close down operations against Jammu & Kashmir. His relocation to the troubled Durand Line sent a chill down spines in Washington. The US realised that with his vast experience, he could turn the unsophisticated battle blueprints in Afghanistan into audacious modern guerrilla warfare. Ilyas’ track record speaks for itself. In 1994, he launched the Al-Hadid operation in the Indian capital, New Delhi, to secure the release of some of his Jihadi comrades. His group of 25 included Sheikh Omar Saeed (the abductor of US reporter Daniel Pearl in Karachi in 2002) as his deputy. The group abducted several foreigners, including UK, US, and Israeli tourists, and took them to Ghaziabad near Delhi. They then demanded that the Indian authorities release their colleagues. Instead the Indians attacked their hideout. Sheikh Omar was injured and arrested. (He was later released in a swap deal for the passengers of the hijacked Indian Airlines IC-814) Ilyas escaped unhurt. On February 25, 2000, the Indian Army killed 14 civilians in the village of Lanjot in PoK after its SF (Para) forces had crossed the Line of Control (LoC). They returned to the Indian side and threw the severed heads of three of them at the Pakistan Army soldiers manning their side. The very next day, Ilyas conducted a guerrilla operation against the Indian Army in Nakyal sector after crossing the LoC with 25 fighters from 313 Brigade. They kidnapped an Indian Army officer and beheaded him. This officer's head was then paraded in the bazaars of Kotli in PoK.

Ilyas’ deadliest operation took place in the Akhnoor cantonment in Jammu & Kashmir against the Indian Army following the massacre of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002. In this, he planned attacks involving 313 Brigade being divided into two groups. Indian Generals, Brigadiers, and other senior officials were lured to the scene of the first attack. Two Generals were injured (in contrast, the Pakistan Army did not manage to injure a single Indian Army General in three wars), and several Brigadiers and Colonels were killed. This was one of the most telling setbacks for India in the long-running insurgency in J & K. With Kashmiri’s immense expertise in India-specific operations, he stunned Al-Qaeda leaders with the suggestion that expanding the theatre of war was the only way to overcome the present impasse. He presented the suggestion of conducting such a massive operation inside India that it would bring India and Pakistan to war. With that, all proposed operations against Al-Qaeda would be brought to a grinding halt. Al-Qaeda excitedly approved the proposal to attack India. Kashmiri then handed over the plan to a very able former Pakistan Army Major fom the Special Service Group (SSG), Haroon Ashik, who was also a former LeT commander who was still very close to LeT chiefs Zakiur Rahman Lakhvi and Abu Hamza. Haroon knew about a contingency ISI plan for a low-profile routine proxy operation in India through LeT in the event of an all-out war between India and Pakistan. It had been in the pipeline for several years prior to 9/11, but the eventual official Pakistan policy was to drop it. The former Army Major, with the help of Ilyas Kashmiri’s men in India, hijacked this very ISI contingency plan and turned it into the devastating attacks that shook Mumbai on November 26, 2008 and brought Pakistan and India to the brink of war. According to investigations, the attackers travelled across the Arabian Sea from Karachi, hijacked the Indian fishing trawler Kuber, killing the crew, then entered Mumbai in a rubber dinghy. The first events took place at around 20:00 Indian Standard Time (1ST) on November 26, 2008, when ten Urdu-speaking men in inflatable speedboats came ashore at two locations in Colaba. They targetted the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, the Leopold Cafe, the Taj Mahal and Oberoi Trident hotels, and the Jewish Centre in Nariman House. They held people hostage and then killed them. The drama continued for almost 72 hours. The entire world was stunned by 26/11. It was almost identical to 9/11 in that it aimed to provoke India to invade Pakistan in the same manner as 9/11 prompted the US to attack Afghanistan. The purpose of 26/11 was to distract Pakistan’s attention from the ‘War on Terror’, thereby allowing Al-Qaeda the space to manipulate its war against NATO in Afghanistan.

However, the decision-makers in Washington had read between the lines. They rushed to India and Pakistan to calm nerves and prevented a war from breaking out. Significantly though, during the time Pakistan and India stood eye-to-eye, the fighting between Pakistan’s military and Al-Qaeda militants came to a complete halt. While the sword of an Indian invasion was hanging over the head of Pakistan, the militants were saying Qunut-e-Nazla (prayers in days of war) that they would not be forced to fight against a Muslim army. They prayed that Al-Qaeda and the Pakistan Army would join and fight India together, instead. Timely US intervention had prevented this, but while the Pakistan military was readying for a showdown with India, the terrorists availed themselves of the opportunity to mount attacks on NATO supply-lines in the Khyber Agency. This left Pakistan with no choice but to close down the transportation link between Pakistan and Afghanistan for several days during December 2008. This had a devastating effect on the NATO forces in Afghanistan, especially those based in the provinces of Ghazni, Wardak, and Helmand. NATO troops there faced serious fuel shortages and had to suspend operations. Due to the tense situation on its eastern borders with India, Pakistan’s participation in ‘Operation Lion Heart’ was tepid, and it was forced to strike a deal with the Pakistani Taliban, on their terms, in Swat at the beginning of 2009. Several actions followed, including a new operation in the Swat Valley, operations in South Waziristan and Mohmand, and the killing of Baitullah Mehsud. But these did not faze the militants. Their retaliation came in the form of an attack on the GHQ in Rawalpindi on October 10, 2009, and a high-profile massacre of some of Pakistan’s military officers in Rawalpindi’s military mosque during Friday prayers on December 4, 2009.

From LCA Mk.1 To MWF-AF Mk.2: Mapping The Progression

$
0
0
 Tejas Mk.1 LCA
Tejas Mk.1A LCA
LCA-AF Mk.2
LCA Navy Mk.2
MWF-AF Mk.2

How Modernisation of IAF’s Fleet of MRCAs Has Been Mis-Managed & Ill-Conceived Since The Mid-1990s

$
0
0

If anyone wants to go deep into why the Indian Air Force’s (IAF) fleet of multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) was sub-optimally utilised on the morning of February 27, 2019 over the skies of Jammu & Kashmir, then the following details need to be taken into account.
To improve the beyond-visual-range (BVR) capability of its MiG-21bis light-MRCAs, the IAF in 1995 selected the Phazotron NIIR-developed Kopyo (Spear) multi-mode monopulse pulse-Doppler radar, which was to be fitted on to each of the 125 MiG-21bis at a cost of US$840,000 (Rs.2.89 crore) per unit. The Kopyo was to be used in both the air-defence and ground-attack role for guiding air-to-air missiles and air-to-ground precision-guided weapons. A CAG audit noticed conducted in November 2009 revealed that since its induction, the performance of the Kopyo had not been satisfactory due to various inadequacies in the air-to-ground range (AGR) mode. One of the reasons for the poor performance was the software, which was still under development/modification as of July 2009. The IAF stated in November 2010 that specialists from Phazotron NIIR were sent in November 2010 to India to load new applications software to resolve the inaccuracies in AGR mode. However, there was no improvement in the AGR mode further.
The audit also noticed from the report submitted by the IAF’s South-Western Air Command in December 2010 that missile integration checks were successfully completed only in December 2010. India’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) stated in November 2012 that AGR mode did remain inconsistent and inaccurate, but the BVR capability of an aircraft pertains to its capability to fire air-to-air missiles. The error in accuracy of AGR mode thus affected the delivery of air-to-ground weapons only and did not affect the BVR capability of the upgraded MiG-21 Bison fleet. The MoD also stated that further trials did not result in any significant inputs that could improve the AGR mode further. The MoD’s contention was in conflict with its reply on sub optimal performance of radar sub-assemblies and non-integration check of Vympel R-77/RVV-AE BVRAAMs till July 2009, which affected the MiG-21 Bison’s BVR capability during this period and expiry of life of several R-77s in December 2010.
The self-protection jammer (SPJ) is a critical electronic warfare (EW) equipment of any combat aircraft that contributes to the success of a mission. The MoD in February 1996 had procured 92 EL/L-8222 SPJ pods (82 for the IAF and 10 for the Indian Navy) from Israel Aerospace Industries’ ELTA Systems. Out of the 82 pods, 50 costing Rs.152 crore were for the MiG-21 Bisons, which were to be delivered between December 1997 and July 1999. However, these were actually delivered between August 2000 and December 2004. It was observed in February 2011 that during series upgradation, all the 125 MiG-21bis were modified for carriage of SPJ pods. However, only 50 SPJ pods were procured. A case was initiated by IAF HQ in July 2005 to procure an additional 36 SPJ pods for the MiG-21 Bisons to cater to 70% of the MiG-21 Bison fleet and the approval of the MoD’s Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) was obtained in January 2006. However, the proposal for procurement of additional SPJ pods was not processed in view of the limited residual life of the aircraft. Thus, only 43% of the MiG-21 Bison fleet was equipped with SPJ pods, leaving the remaining aircraft vulnerable to detection by hostile airborne multi-mode radars, thereby affecting the operational capability of IAF.
What also remains unexplained is why were multi-purpose SPJ pods (that can also accommodate guided-missiles and precision-guided weapons under them) available from OEMs like SaabTech of Sweden and TERMA of Denmark were never considered for procurement. Such fitments, interestingly, were available since the mid-1990s for light-MRCAs like Saab’s JAS-39 Gripen. 
As per the contract of March 1996, there was a provision for Transfer-of-Technology (ToT) for manufacture and repair/overhaul of the MiG-21 Bisons and their sub-systems by the MoD-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL). However, ToT could not materialise in spite of the IAF’s efforts, as well as those of MoD and HAL. Hence, IAF HQ directed HAL in May 2003 not to pursue the ToT for manufacture of the aggregates and suggested to establish diagnostic and repair/overhaul facilities for the Kopyo radars and other sub-systems of the MiG-21 Bison on a fast-track basis by January 2008. A CAG audit observed in April 2010 that though the repair facilities for Kopyo had been established by August 2008, these facilities by March 2009 needed further instrumentation for diagnosis and testing at an additional estimated cost of Rs.4.50 crore by HAL. Further, the full complement of training on repair of LRUs of the Kopyo could not be imparted by the OEM specialists due to non-availability of sufficient population of Cat ‘D’ repairable items, since most of the repairable items had been sent to Phazotron NIIR for repairs. Hence, additional training was required to be imparted to HAL personnel by deputation from Phazotron NIIR at an estimated cost of Rs.1.80 crore.
The audit also observed by April 2010 that repair and overhaul facilities for the Kopyo  set up by HAL strictly fell under the category of second-line repair, which was also being established as intermediate-level facilities in all the MiG-21 Bison operating squadrons,  and full-fledged depot-level facilities had not been set up by HAL. In April 2010, IAF HQ stated that setting up of depot-level maintenance/repair/overhaul (MRO) facilities had not been considered economically viable since the present facilities were being used only for the MiG-21 Bisons, and the same would not be useful after withdrawal of these aircraft from service. The calendar life of the MiG-21 Bisons had been extended by March 2010 to up to 40 years. Due to non-availability of complete MRO facilities, 297 LRUs of the MiG-21 Bisons and 564 LRUs of the MiG-21bis were offloaded to the Russian OEMs for repair/overhaul during the period from April 2007 to November 2009, against a long=term repair agreement (LTRA) concluded in April 2007 by HAL with the Russian OEMs involving a total repair cost of US$976,593.52 (Rs.4.33 crore). The MoD stated in November 2012 that efforts made to set up MRO facilities for components of the Kopyo MMR had not been successful and instead of setting up full MRO facilities, only diagnostic and repair facilities were proposed for HAL. The MoD further stated (November 2012 and March 2014) that in the absence of MRO facilities, all LRUs and components had to be sent to various Russian OEMs for repairs.
In March 2008, IAF HQ inked a contract with Russia’s RAC-MiG for upgradation and life-extension of 63 MiG-29B-12 air superiority combat aircraft. The contract was to be carried out in two stages i.e. (a) design and development (D & D) work in two years (2008-2010) on six aircraft in Russia and (b) series-upgrade of the remaining 57 aircraft in India (2010-2014). All of these were to be fitted with the D-29 EW suite, each of which comprises a Unified Receiver Exciter Processor (UREP) that encompasses a digital radar warning receiver (RWR), electronic support measures (ESM) and electronic countermeasures (ECM) elements, along with the ELT-568 self-protection jammer transceivers imported from Italy-based Elettronica.
Based on ASORs prepared by IAF HQ in October 2006 for an integrated EW suite for fitment on the IAF’s fleet of MiG-29B-12s, the DRDO’s Bengaluru-based Defence Avionics Research Establishment (DARE) proposed in October 2007 the joint development of a state-of-art EW suite (D-29) with Elisra of Israel. In March 2010 the MoD sanctioned this project to DARE under Mission Mode (MM) for design and development of the D-29 at a cost of Rs.168.85 crore with a PDC of 33 months (December 2012). Accordingly, DARE in April 2010 signed a tripartite agreement with Israel’s Ministry of Defence and Elisra at a cost of US$26 million (Rs.115.57 crore) with a PDC of 28 months (by August 2012).
Meanwhile, based on another MoD sanction in March 2009, DARE signed a contract with RAC-MiG for the structural modification of six MiG-29B-12s (which were already in RAC-MiG’s possession for upgradation) for fitment of the proposed D-29 suite at a total cost of US$14.25 million (Rs.74.10 crore) with a PDC of 20 months (November 2010). During structural modifications, RAC-MiG encountered issues related to positioning and installation of the D-29’s LRUs, for which DARE in June 2011 suggested certain additional structural modifications on the six MiG-29 airframes.
However, three MiG-29UPGs after upgradation were delivered in December 2012 to the IAF by RAC-MiG (without the DARE-specified additional modifications) for facilitating the training of IAF pilots on the upgraded aircraft. The D-29 was fully developed by DARE in March 2013 but it could not be evaluated on the first three MiG-29UPGs received in India without the additional modifications, which was necessary to carry out testing of the D-29 suite. The remaining three aircraft, after upgradation and structural modifications (including additional modification) for fitment of the D-29 suite were received in India only in December 2013 due to delays by RAC-MiG.
The evaluation of the D-29 was further held up till October 2014 since the IAF used the upgraded MiG-29UPGs for testing various other mission-specific systems that were fitted by RAC-MiG for upgrading the aircraft. Thus, there was lack of synchronisation of upgradation with structural modifications (including additional modification) of the IAF’s fleet of MiG-29B-12s and development of the D-29 suite. By March 2015, DARE had spent Rs.199.82 crore on the development of the D-29 suite and structural modifications of the MiG-29B-12s.
(to be concluded)

GRSE Inks Contract For Supplying 8 ASW-SWC To Indian Navy

$
0
0

The RFP for building 16 anti-submarine warfare shallow-water craft (ASW-SWC) to be built to an Indian design was issued in April 2014.
It was in December 2017 that Cochin Shipyard Ltd’s (CSL) offer (based on a warship design provided by Vik Sandvik Design India Pvt Ltd) was selected as the L-12 bid, with the L-2 bid coming from Kolkata-based Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Ltd (GRSE).
The following year, India’s Ministry of Defence decided that both CSL and GRSE would share the cake by each building eight of the ASW-CWCs.
While CSL estimates its orders for the eight vessels to be worth Rs.5,400 crore, the contract inked yesterday with GRSE is worth Rs.6,311.32 crore.
The first ASW-SWC is slated for delivery by GRSE within 42 months of contract signature, following which two vessels will be delivered every year. Scheduled project completion period is 84 months.
The 42-month period timeframe given for the rollout of the first ASW-SWC is awfully long, considering that the vessel will displace only 750 tonnes. This in turn indicates that the Indian Navy has not yet decided on the fitment of various sensors and weapon systems due to go on board the vessels—this being also the case with all warships designed to date by the Indian Navy’s Naval Design Bureau.
This consequently has led to only 33% of a warship’s superstructure being floated at launch-time (usually within  a three-year period), while the rest of the superstructure takes more than five years to be completed, thereby leading to prohibitive cost-overruns and highly visible compromises in build-quality. For this, the Indian Navy, and not the DPSU shipyards, is primarily to be blamed and held accountable.

Glimpses Of DRDO's Key Thrust Areas For Product Innovation

About SDRs, Jaguar MAX & Alpha-S Multi-Purpose UAS

$
0
0

Certification-related testing of the DRDO/DEAL-developed High Frequency (HF), Very High Frequency (VHF) and Ultra High Frequency (UHF) software-defined radio (SDR-NC), covering a waveband of 3 megaHertz to three gigaHertz, has been completed, thereby paving the way for Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) to commence series-production of the SDR-NC units for all now Indian Navy principal surface combatants and submarines.
The SDR-NC accommodates 10 waveforms for carrying voice and data traffic with proprietary encryption and frequency-hopping communications security. In terms of data rates, rates of 9.6 kiloBits-per-second (kBps) are achievable when using the HF radio, although this increases to 200kBps when using the VHF radio. The SDR-NC comprises a single HF radio and two VHF transceivers. Given the size of the programme, BEL expects deliveries of the SDR-NCs to continue until around 2025. In the airborne domain, BEL is moving towards the third phase of testing of the airborne version of the SDR-NC.
The V/UHF transceiver has been undergoing testing on an Indian navy-owned and Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd-built (HAL) Dornier Do-228-101/201 turboprop. The third test phase is expected to commence by the end of this July, prior to the commencement of additional testing. Tentatively, BEL expects to commence production of the airborne SDR-NCs in 2020.
For the Indian Air Force (IAF), the combat aircraft-type to incorporate SDR will be the Jaguar IS/DARIN-3, which is expected to enter squadron service by this August. The SDR used is the HAL-developed SOFTNET SDR-2010.
The SDR-2010 was originally developed for the Super Su-30MKI project.
For the projected 83 Tejas Mk.1A L-MRCAs, the SDR selected is RAFAEL Advanced Defence Systems-developed BNET-AR.

'Desi' Active RF Seeker For Astra-1 & Astra-2 BVRAAMs, QR-SAM & Akash-1S E-SHORADS

$
0
0

Technological convergence coupled with engineering innovation have resulted in the indigenous Ku-band active RF seeker developed by the DRDO’s Hyderabad-based Research Centre Imarat (RCI) being adopted for use by three different types of guided-missiles: the Astra-1 beyond visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM), the land-mobile QR-SAM for both the Indian Army and Indian Air Force, and the Akash-1S E-SHORADS for both the Indian Army and Indian Air Force.
Given the huge requirement within a short timeframe for this seeker, parallel final-assembly lines are now being created within the state-owned Bharat Dynamics Ltd, VEM Technologies and the Kalyani Group.
It may be recalled that during the DEFEXPO 2018 expo at Chennai, Kalyani Group had unveilled its version of this seeker, which was then known as ‘Netra’. VEM Technologies, on the other hand, had been showing its version of the same seeker since 2015.
The maiden test-firing of an Akash-1S surface-to-air missile equipped with this Ku-band actiove RF seeker was conducted on December 5, 2017from the Launch Complex-III at Integrated Test Range at Chandipur in Odisha. This was followed by two successive test-firings on May 26 and 27, 2019.
Following a final round of user-trials of the QR-SAM and Akash-1 before the year’s end, series-production of up to 4,000 rounds each of the QR-SAM and Akash-1S will commence next year.
The very same RF seeker will also equip the projected Astra-2 BVRAAMs powered by SFDRs.

And Here Come The SPICE-1000 PGMs For Punitive Cross-LoC Air-Assaults

$
0
0

A transformational change in counter-terror operations doctrine that originated two years is now set to be the ‘NEW NORMAL’. The Govt of India has mandated that the Indian Air Force’s (IAF) offensive air-delivered firepower replace the Indian Army’s fire-assaults (i.e. the IAF becomes the lead service-provider and initiator of kinetic operations) when it comes to undertaking sustained low-intensity military operations across the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu & Kashmir in order to raise the costs for the Pakistan Army (PA) and maintain moral ascendancy all across the LoC.
Following negotiations that began two years ago, India’s Ministry of Defence on June 6, 2019 inked a Rs.300 crore contract with Israel’s RAFAEL Advanced Defence Systems under which the IAF will be acquiring on a fast-track basis (with deliveries taking place within 90 days of contract signature) an initial 100 SPICE-1000 precision-guided munitions (PGM) kits for fitment with 500lb, 1,000lb and 2,000lb bombs. Each SPICE-1000 kit costs about US$480,000.
The Spice-1000s, to be carried by the IAF’s upgraded Mirage-2000 M-MRCAs and Jaguar IS/DARIN-3 interdictor aircraft, will be used in conjunction with the already-acquired RAFAEL-supplied RECCELITE tactical recce pods, thereby enhancing the SPICE-1000’s ability to rapidly respond in engaging time critical targets (such as rear-area field artillery emplacements and their command/control fire-direction centres) located on reverse mountain slopes) from stand-off range.
The decision to acquire the SPICE-1000s came after it was realised that the IAF’s existing SPICE-2000 PGMs that are without glide-wings can go out to only 60km-range when launched from an optimum altitude of 3km along a shallow glide-path. However, this leads to the launch-aircraft being exposed to hostile MR-SAMs (Like the Pakistan Army’s LY-80E LOMADS) over contested airspace such as those prevailing within PoK. Hence, PGMs with high glide-ratios (more than 20) are required so that the launch-aircraft can launch the PGMs from longer distances without affecting the PGMs’ ability to undertake top-attack flight profiles in their terminal stages. The SPICE-1000 will allow the Mirage-2000s to attack their ground targets 100km away while cruising at launch altitudes ranging from 10,000 feet to 15,000 feet ASL.
The SPICE-1000 guidance comprises a forward section kit that houses the sensor package, an inner small wing-kit, and the control section replacing the tail of standard bombs. All in all, the SPICE-1000 has tail control planes and inner small wings totalling six control surfaces in four tail-control surfaces and the two control surfaces shaping the small wing. The resulting weapon has a range of 100km, with less than 3-metre Circular Error Probable (CEP). This PGM has day, night and adverse weather capability because of its dual infra-red IR/CCD-TV seeker and advanced scene-matching algorithms. At close-in ranges (20km), the PGM recognises the target and correlates it with the pre-loaded imagery (acquired either by overhead recce satellites, or RECCELITE or HUMINT) stored into memory. This capability translates into the ability to overcome target location error and GPS jamming. This PGM can also choose among 100 potential targets and multiple weapons can be released at the same time, thereby providing simultaneous attack against various targets located across a given tactical battle area.
Acquisition of such PGMs using optronic sensors has acquired added priority after an appreciable increase in the availability of  HUMINT resources (informants) throughout PoK (inclusive of Gilgit-Baltistan) since 2015, when Pakistan began the forcible acquisition of huge tracts of land from the native inhabitants of PoK with paltry financial compensation for the construction of hydroelectric projects (by diverting existing river-flows) and motorways under the auspices of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) masterplan. All this has led to enormous resentment and disgruntlement among the inhabitants of PoK, who are now determined to seek revenge by any and all means.
Apart from arming the upgraded Mirage-2000 and Jaguar IS/DARIN-3 platforms with the SPICE-1000/RECCELITE combination, there also exists the possibility of arming the 40 Tejas Mk.1s with the same combination, since the Tejas Mk.1 has already been qualified to carry the RECCELITE pod. Each Tejas Mk.1 therefore could eventually be armed with 2 x SPICE-1000s for launching them from standoff distances from within friendly airspace.

DRDO's HSTDV Project A Multinational R & D Effort

Viewing all 283 articles
Browse latest View live