Opinion Protecting Civilian Lives along LoC and Punjab Border Demands India Implement C-RAM Systems against Swarm Drones and Mortar Attacks

Protecting Civilian Lives along LoC and Punjab Border Demands India Implement C-RAM Systems against Swarm Drones and Mortar Attacks


The nature of conflict along India's borders with Pakistan has significantly changed due to the growing use of drones. Frequent drone intrusions from Pakistan, especially over the Line of Control (LoC) and the international border in Punjab and Jammu, highlight a critical requirement for India.

Experts suggest that India must develop or obtain a specialised defence system, known as a Counter-Rocket, Artillery, and Mortar (C-RAM) system, to counter these airborne threats.

Such technology would greatly improve India's capacity to protect its airspace, as well as vital military and civilian installations, from attacks carried out by drones.

Pakistan is increasingly using drones as a key strategic instrument for various purposes. These include direct attacks, known as kinetic operations, and other activities such as smuggling narcotics, weapons, and fake money across the border.

Amidst heightened tensions in 2025 following 'Operation Sindoor', Pakistan reportedly deployed hundreds of drones, some of Turkish origin, to attack Indian military sites in 15 different areas, stretching from Srinagar to Bhuj. These events show Pakistan's increasing dependence on large groups of drones, or 'swarms', to challenge India's air defence mechanisms and collect information.

India currently possesses an Integrated Counter-Unmanned Aircraft System (C-UAS) Grid along with air defence systems like the S-400, Akash, and the Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO) D4 (Drone, Detect, Deter, and Destroy) system.

While these systems have managed to counter many drone threats, the large number and continuous nature of drone intrusions point to existing limitations in dealing effectively with small, low-flying UAVs.

The challenge is further intensified by Pakistan's partnerships with Turkey and China in producing advanced drones, such as the YIHA-III and Burraq models. These drones are equipped for surveillance, precise attacks, and electronic warfare, adding to the complexity of the threat.

A C-RAM system, exemplified by technologies such as the American Phalanx or Israel's Iron Dome, is specifically engineered to identify and neutralise incoming rockets, artillery fire, mortar rounds, and low-flying aerial threats with great accuracy and speed.

Traditional air defence systems are generally designed to handle larger threats like missiles or aircraft. In contrast, C-RAM systems are particularly effective against small, fast-moving drones that fly at low heights and are often missed by standard radar systems.

Introducing such a system would enhance India's current layered air defence structure, which already includes the S-400 for long-distance threats, the Akash system for medium-range, and the Spyder system for short-range protection.

Implementing a C-RAM type system would offer several key benefits for India's security:
  • Swift Action Against Low-Altitude Threats: Many drones operate below the detection range of conventional radar, posing a challenge for systems like the S-400 or Akash. C-RAM systems, fitted with sophisticated radar and electro-optical sensors, are designed to identify and neutralise these threats instantly.
  • More Economical Defence: The use of large numbers of drones by Pakistan appears aimed at exhausting India's air defence supplies by triggering the use of costly interceptor missiles. C-RAM systems, which can employ directed-energy weapons or less expensive ammunition, provide a more budget-friendly way to counter these threats.
  • Safeguarding Border Communities: Civilian areas and villages situated along the LoC and the Punjab border are often subjected to cross-border shelling and drone intrusions. A C-RAM system could offer vital protection to civilian populations and essential infrastructure, thereby lessening the fear and financial losses caused by such attacks.
  • Addressing Drone Swarm Attacks: Reports of Pakistan using 400 to 500 drones in a single coordinated effort indicate a move towards 'swarm tactics'. A C-RAM system, with its ability to automatically track and engage multiple targets simultaneously, is essential for effectively countering such large-scale drone attacks.
India has achieved notable advancements in developing technology to counter drones. The Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO) D4 system is a key example, created with input from its laboratories in Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Dehradun. This system employs radar, radio frequency sensors, and jamming methods to find and disable drones.

Its effectiveness was reportedly demonstrated during 'Operation Sindoor', where it successfully neutralised Pakistani drone swarms, including Turkish-manufactured models, drawing commendation from American warfare specialist John Spencer.

Furthermore, India's overall counter-drone capabilities have been strengthened by the Integrated Counter-UAS Grid, working alongside systems such as the Akash and the Israeli-developed Spyder.

Despite these advancements, existing Indian systems are not perfectly suited for quickly intercepting large numbers of small drones flying at low heights. Although the D4 system represents progress, its main methods involve electronic jamming and tricking drone guidance systems ('spoofing'). These techniques might not be enough against sophisticated drones that have features to resist jamming.

A C-RAM type system, which includes direct 'hard kill' methods like automatic cannons or laser weapons, would offer a more dependable way to physically destroy such threats.

India possesses the necessary technological expertise to create a C-RAM type system within the country. A potential first step could be to modernise existing air defence gun systems, such as the Schilka which uses radar-guided 23mm cannons, by equipping them with updated fire-control mechanisms and advanced ammunition like proximity-fuse rounds.

Furthermore, 'Project Kusha', a DRDO project aimed at developing a long-range surface-to-air missile system similar to the S-400, could also be designed to include C-RAM capabilities to counter drone threats.
 
C-RAM is good, but an old concept. Low-flying drones will become jet-powered and fly higher soon. An upgraded DRDO Mk2 laser (500MW) + D4 + L70 + Akash NG becomes a seriously strong system, which will take care of superior CH-7s and CM-400/A-400 missiles. But the laser has to reach 40k feet or a 20km range in all directions to make airspace impenetrable.
 
Our L-70s are good, but they are manually operated. We need an automatic CIWS system, land-based. We could look into Rheinmetall Air Defence from Germany; they seem really good. Alternatively, we can mount our AK-630 naval gun on a vehicle setup with radars, like the USA did with Phalanx.
 
Our D4 system worked really well. To enhance it further, a 30mm naval gun and a 300-500 KW laser-based system should also be coupled with radar and integrated to shoot down rockets, missiles, drones, and shells.
 
C-RAM is good, but an old concept. Low-flying drones will become jet-powered and fly higher soon. An upgraded DRDO Mk2 laser (500MW) + D4 + L70 + Akash NG becomes a seriously strong system, which will take care of superior CH-7s and CM-400/A-400 missiles. But the laser has to reach 40k feet or a 20km range in all directions to make airspace impenetrable.
Add Bhargavastra, QRSAM, VSHORADS to that in coming 2-3 years and it becomes even more robust.
 
I see from the comments here that people don't understand the concept of a C-RAM system and why it's important. Let's say the enemy fires a salvo of Katyusha rockets at a civilian area. To intercept those with an Akash system would be too costly ($500K per Akash missile). Furthermore, the system needs to calculate and log the source location of the firing to later bomb that area and destroy the enemy's launchers. So, the cost per interception is very important in this scenario, and the radars need to calculate the ballistic path.
 
RAM is expensive; we can't afford hundreds of them. The 20mm cannon has a lesser range than our 40mm. Moreover, we can make them at any moment as we have the design and the know-how from Bofors a long time ago. The best way is to improve on the 40mm gun, make it more lethal in every way: accuracy, radar, proximity fuze, etc.

But there is another point to be aware of: FPV drones linked by fiber optic cable with a 10 km range, as in the Ukraine war. Not possible to intercept in any electronic way. We will see them in the next skirmish, definitely.

Can anyone tell me the details of the programmable airburst fuze of the 40mm cannon?
 
The best option is to manufacture more of the upgraded L70 guns as we already have the technology and manufacturing capabilities. This is a more cost effective way to intercept all type of aerial threats as we use the air bursting round that fires shrapnel near the threat.

Another option is to manufacture the 30mm multi barrel electric gun but it has a shorter range and the bullet might not be big enough to destroy the threat or it keeps missing.

However, we could combine both of them on a truck and use the most appropriate gun based on the aerial threat we face. This gives us the flexibility and it saves us money by only using a gun that’s appropriate to intercept the threat.
 
Yes, those too. As Kusha takes 3-4 years, I think India should sign up for S-500 joint manufacturing and R&D in India.
From what I see, S-500 is a complementary system to the S-400 and mainly meant for ballistic missile interception. This means we'll only get an additional missile and extra radars meant to complement that missile. But we're already developing our own ballistic missile defence program of which the Phase-I (PAD) is already operational, and in the coming one to two years, Phase-II (AAD) will be fully operational too. So, I don't think going for S-500 would be a good choice, but buying an additional battery of S-400 would be a better choice than going for S-500. Also, Russia has been offering us the S-500 for quite a period; if the IAF was really interested in buying it, they would have shown interest in that.
 
From what I see, S-500 is a complementary system to the S-400 and mainly meant for ballistic missile interception. This means we'll only get an additional missile and extra radars meant to complement that missile. But we're already developing our own ballistic missile defence program of which the Phase-I (PAD) is already operational, and in the coming one to two years, Phase-II (AAD) will be fully operational too. So, I don't think going for S-500 would be a good choice, but buying an additional battery of S-400 would be a better choice than going for S-500. Also, Russia has been offering us the S-500 for quite a period; if the IAF was really interested in buying it, they would have shown interest in that.
Isn't PAD 1/2 operational already? S-500 can push J-35 300 km behind the border. BMD is for ballistic pre-boost stage, although I don't know if BMD can work against 0.1 RCS fifth-gen fighters.
 
Not C-RAM, it's useless for drones which can manoeuvre. Instead, a modified L70 is good. We need them in quantities, with radar and auto mode installed in different locations. C-RAM has a range limit and requires too much ammunition. An L70 truck mounted, modified with radar, night vision, and IR or thermal optics will change everything. Also, an auto loader with swarm mobile truck defence will be more successful. Fragmentation rounds with range sensors will also make it accurate.
 
Our own D-4 system and L-70 did it better. For future, I would like to see WHaP with 30mm gun mounted on top with radar to counter such drones can be handy.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
5,179
Messages
52,142
Members
3,382
Latest member
Hemant Mishra
Back
Top