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
Afghanistan Beyond the Headlines – Post-2021 Trajectory | SAT Study
Behind the claims of stability lies a fragmented Emirate. SAT traces the patterns linking militancy, governance failures and the pressures driving instability and regional fallout far beyond Kabul’s headlines.
Mirage of Indigenization
The crash of a Tejas fighter at the Dubai Air Show has exposed deep structural flaws in India’s flagship indigenous aircraft program. With two airframes lost in under two years and only a few hundred verifiable flying hours, the incident raises fresh questions about the LCA’s safety, its decades-long delays, and the strategic vulnerability created by India’s dependence on aging fleets. This piece explores how the Dubai crash fits into the broader struggle of a project that was meant to symbolize self-reliance but now risks becoming a cautionary tale.
A Disinformation Partnership: How Indo–Taliban Propaganda Tries to Rewrite Pakistan’s Pain
A deeply humanised analysis uncovering how Afghan intelligence and Indian media coordinate disinformation to deflect attention from ISKP and TTP bases inside Afghanistan. The piece contrasts propaganda with Pakistan’s lived experiences, counterterror gains, and the global data that exposes this narrative manipulation.
The US Report on Pakistan’s May Win
The USCC’s 2025 report delivered a rare moment of clarity in South Asian geopolitics. By openly describing Pakistan’s military success over India, the Commission broke with years of cautious Western language and confirmed a shift many analysts had only hinted at. The report’s wording, and the global reactions that followed, mark a turning point in how the 2025 clash is being understood.
Sharia Absolutism at Home, Realpolitik Abroad
The Taliban govern through a stark duality: rigid Sharia enforcement at home paired with flexible, interest-driven diplomacy abroad. Domestically, religion is used to silence women, suppress dissent, and mask governance failures. Yet the same regime that polices Afghan society with severity adopts a pragmatic tone toward India, Russia, and the TTP. This selective morality reflects political survival rather than theology, with lasting implications for Afghanistan and the wider region.