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
Narrative Management and the ISKP–TTP Ecosystem
The assassination of Maulana Sultan reveals how ISKP and TTP deploy narrative coordination, delayed claims, and interchangeable branding to obscure accountability and sustain regional instability from Afghan soil.
Pakistan’s Defense Industrial Breakout
As the liberal international order fragments, Pakistan has executed a decisive shift from defense dependency to indigenous production. Through exports, combat validation, and joint industrialization, Islamabad is redefining sovereignty as an industrial and diplomatic asset.
Rethinking Afghan Repatriation from Pakistan
Amnesty International’s call to halt Afghan repatriation overlooks the limits of long-term hospitality. For Pakistan, the issue is less about abandoning rights than reasserting sovereign immigration control amid shifting realities in Afghanistan.
Iran’s Current Crisis: Structural Pressures and Political Trajectories
Iran’s 2025–26 unrest reflects simultaneous pressure on economic stability, political legitimacy, and state coercive capacity, marking a critical juncture for the Islamic Republic.
The New Architecture of US–Pakistan Relations
Andy Halus’s interview signals a strategic shift in US–Pakistan relations from security-centric ties to a multidimensional partnership centered on minerals, education, and soft power. Projects like Reko Diq now stand as the key test of this new architecture.