India’s hypersonic missile ambitions have garnered significant attention, but a closer look suggests that the country’s claims might be more aspirational than actual. While hypersonic technology is often seen as a key strategic advantage, several factors—from reliance on foreign technology to untested capabilities—indicate that India’s progress in this field may be overstated.
Also See: Indian Defence Ministry Claims 2025 will be ‘Year of Reforms’
Reliance on Foreign Technology and Delayed Timelines
India’s BrahMos-2 missile, often highlighted as a flagship hypersonic project, relies heavily on Russian technology, particularly for its propulsion system. While India contributes to the missile’s airframe, over 70% of its core components come from Russia. This dependency undercuts India’s claims of developing a fully indigenous hypersonic system, making it clear that the country has a long way to go before achieving full self-reliance.
Moreover, despite frequent announcements, India has yet to field any operational hypersonic weapons. Unlike China and Russia, which have already deployed combat-ready systems like the DF-17 and Avangard, India’s missile program has not resulted in any operational hypersonic weaponry. This delay raises questions about the maturity of India’s technology and its ability to match the operational readiness of its global competitors.
India has conducted several tests of its hypersonic technologies, including the Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle (HSTDV), but these tests have largely taken place in controlled environments, far from the unpredictability of real-world scenarios. Without tests under more complex, real-world conditions, the reliability of these systems remains uncertain. Further complicating matters, there is no publicly available data on the precision of India’s hypersonic missiles—critical information when it comes to high-speed weaponry. This lack of precision testing only deepens doubts about the effectiveness of India’s missiles in actual combat.
Limited Resources and Technological Gaps
The timeline for India’s hypersonic missile development has been inconsistent, with multiple delays and vague updates. The BrahMos-2, initially expected to be operational by 2020, remains in development. In contrast, China’s DF-17 was deployed in 2019, and Russia’s Avangard became operational in 2018. These delays and shifting deadlines further undermine the credibility of India’s claims regarding the state of its missile program.
Another major hurdle is the development of materials capable of withstanding the extreme conditions required for hypersonic flight. Heat-resistant materials are crucial for protecting missiles as they travel at speeds greater than Mach 5. India has made limited progress in this area, while both China and Russia have already developed the necessary materials to protect their hypersonic systems during flight.
Furthermore, India allocates a smaller proportion of its GDP to defense R&D compared to China and Russia, limiting its ability to catch up with these technological powerhouses. For example, India spends about 2.4% of its GDP on defense, but much of this budget is directed toward conventional forces rather than cutting-edge technologies like hypersonic weapons. In comparison, China and Russia have prioritized defense R&D, enabling them to stay ahead in developing advanced weaponry.
India has also downplayed several test failures, particularly with its HSTDV program. These failed attempts have not been fully disclosed, with only the successful tests highlighted in public reports. This selective transparency casts doubt on the true progress of the hypersonic program, raising concerns about its technical viability.
Lack of Independent Verification and Global Recognition
Lastly, unlike China and Russia, which have subjected their hypersonic systems to independent verification, India has not provided such validation. This lack of external confirmation further weakens the credibility of India’s hypersonic claims, especially when compared to the global recognition that Chinese and Russian systems have received.
India’s hypersonic missile program faces significant challenges, from its reliance on foreign technology and test failures to delays in development and a lack of precision data. Without substantial breakthroughs in material science, testing, and strategy, India’s hypersonic ambitions are likely to remain on the drawing board for some time. Until these gaps are addressed, India’s hypersonic claims are more likely to be premature aspirations than technological achievements.
SAT Commentaries’ are social media threads by various authors, reproduced here for website use. Views are their own.
India’s Hypersonic Missile Claims: A Reality Check
India’s hypersonic missile ambitions have garnered significant attention, but a closer look suggests that the country’s claims might be more aspirational than actual. While hypersonic technology is often seen as a key strategic advantage, several factors—from reliance on foreign technology to untested capabilities—indicate that India’s progress in this field may be overstated.
Also See: Indian Defence Ministry Claims 2025 will be ‘Year of Reforms’
Reliance on Foreign Technology and Delayed Timelines
India’s BrahMos-2 missile, often highlighted as a flagship hypersonic project, relies heavily on Russian technology, particularly for its propulsion system. While India contributes to the missile’s airframe, over 70% of its core components come from Russia. This dependency undercuts India’s claims of developing a fully indigenous hypersonic system, making it clear that the country has a long way to go before achieving full self-reliance.
Moreover, despite frequent announcements, India has yet to field any operational hypersonic weapons. Unlike China and Russia, which have already deployed combat-ready systems like the DF-17 and Avangard, India’s missile program has not resulted in any operational hypersonic weaponry. This delay raises questions about the maturity of India’s technology and its ability to match the operational readiness of its global competitors.
India has conducted several tests of its hypersonic technologies, including the Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle (HSTDV), but these tests have largely taken place in controlled environments, far from the unpredictability of real-world scenarios. Without tests under more complex, real-world conditions, the reliability of these systems remains uncertain. Further complicating matters, there is no publicly available data on the precision of India’s hypersonic missiles—critical information when it comes to high-speed weaponry. This lack of precision testing only deepens doubts about the effectiveness of India’s missiles in actual combat.
Limited Resources and Technological Gaps
The timeline for India’s hypersonic missile development has been inconsistent, with multiple delays and vague updates. The BrahMos-2, initially expected to be operational by 2020, remains in development. In contrast, China’s DF-17 was deployed in 2019, and Russia’s Avangard became operational in 2018. These delays and shifting deadlines further undermine the credibility of India’s claims regarding the state of its missile program.
Another major hurdle is the development of materials capable of withstanding the extreme conditions required for hypersonic flight. Heat-resistant materials are crucial for protecting missiles as they travel at speeds greater than Mach 5. India has made limited progress in this area, while both China and Russia have already developed the necessary materials to protect their hypersonic systems during flight.
Furthermore, India allocates a smaller proportion of its GDP to defense R&D compared to China and Russia, limiting its ability to catch up with these technological powerhouses. For example, India spends about 2.4% of its GDP on defense, but much of this budget is directed toward conventional forces rather than cutting-edge technologies like hypersonic weapons. In comparison, China and Russia have prioritized defense R&D, enabling them to stay ahead in developing advanced weaponry.
India has also downplayed several test failures, particularly with its HSTDV program. These failed attempts have not been fully disclosed, with only the successful tests highlighted in public reports. This selective transparency casts doubt on the true progress of the hypersonic program, raising concerns about its technical viability.
Lack of Independent Verification and Global Recognition
Lastly, unlike China and Russia, which have subjected their hypersonic systems to independent verification, India has not provided such validation. This lack of external confirmation further weakens the credibility of India’s hypersonic claims, especially when compared to the global recognition that Chinese and Russian systems have received.
India’s hypersonic missile program faces significant challenges, from its reliance on foreign technology and test failures to delays in development and a lack of precision data. Without substantial breakthroughs in material science, testing, and strategy, India’s hypersonic ambitions are likely to remain on the drawing board for some time. Until these gaps are addressed, India’s hypersonic claims are more likely to be premature aspirations than technological achievements.
SAT Commentaries’ are social media threads by various authors, reproduced here for website use. Views are their own.
News Desk
News Desk
Your trusted source for insightful journalism. Stay informed with our compelling coverage of global affairs, business, technology, and more.
Recent
Debunking the Gaza Deployment Narrative
False claims of a Pakistani troop deployment to Gaza, amplified by disinformation networks, were firmly rejected by the Foreign Office, reaffirming that Pakistan’s military operates only under UN mandates and constitutional limits.
The End of the 1971 Consensus
Sharif Osman Hadi’s death has become the symbolic burial of the 1971 Consensus that long structured India–Bangladesh relations. For a generation with no lived memory of the Liberation War, Hadi embodies a Second Independence, reframing 1971 as the start of Indian dominance rather than true sovereignty. His killing has accelerated Bangladesh’s rupture with India and exposed a deep strategic crisis across South Asia.
Afghan Taliban’s Biopolitics
The Taliban’s health diplomacy is reshaping Afghanistan’s geopolitical landscape. By phasing out Pakistani pharmaceuticals and inviting Indian partnerships, Kabul securitizes its healthcare infrastructure as a tool of strategic realignment. The shift highlights the intersection of sovereignty, economic statecraft, and regional influence, with Afghan patients bearing the immediate consequences.
Who Benefits from Islamophobia?
In the wake of global violence, political actors often replace evidence-based analysis with collective blame. Islamophobia, when elevated from fringe rhetoric to state discourse, fractures society and weakens security.
The Growing Taliban Madrassa System: An Ideological Weapon Threatening Regional Stability
The Taliban’s rapid madrassa expansion is transforming Afghanistan’s education system into a tool for extremist indoctrination, fostering a new generation aligned with global jihadist ideology and threatening regional stability.