Talk:Astra (missile)

Article history
Dump for Astra Missile article, which is now a redirect.

Astra (Sanskrit: Arrow) is a Beyond the Visual Range Air-to-air missile in development under the IGMDP by India. Until now, only ground tests have been conducted.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by TomCerul (talk • contribs) 18:22, 3 August 2005 (UTC)


 * This statement is wrong: Preliminary work on Astra had begun by 1990 with the completion of a pre-feasibility study.
 * The preliminary work on Astra had begun by 1984, along with the then LCA and a preliminary report was first presented in Aug 1988 by none other than Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, from DRDO. I ATTENDED THIS PRESENTATION IN BANGALORE. The presentation was for Air Hq, represented by then Air Cmde S Krishnaswamy from the Plans Branch. Dr Kalam went on to become President, while Krishnaswamy went on to become CAS, IAF.Moitraanak (talk) 19:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

indian technology increases missile range by over 40%!!!
these are the links:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/News_By_Industry/ET_Cetera/New_tech_to_boost_missile_range_by_40/articleshow/3464620.cms

http://www.knolindia.com/science/indian-technology-to-increase-missile-range


 * --samar60 (talk) 17:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Astra means throwing weapons like spears and throwing knives (as opposed to shastra that means fighting weapons like swords) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 15.195.201.88 (talk) 10:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Missile test table
I think putting each and every test is uncalled for. No other missile page has such elaborate test table.

Moreover, it doesn't add to any important quantifiable information. Each and every system goes through a test and there is no need to pick and choose every facets of it nor necessary to tabulate it. Its not a CAG report which has to detail every minuscule detail.

I urge you to remove the table as its only taking unnecessary details which adding little to valuable information.


 * cc:

Shashpant (talk) 06:41, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I instead don't deem it as an unquantifiable and quite useful in a section where paragraph is too brief. Enlengthening that will bring a cumbersome TLDR para, while the tabulsied summary gives an easy insight of timeline of missile objectively which isn't available anywhere else in the article either.
 * As for other missile articles, you may browse a bit. There are certain articles which were written after development of system mostly are quite brief and just give an idea. Articles meanwhile being updated throughout development or well sourced are long and have all this kind of information included. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 07:01, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Tables are useful when they deliver discernible information like in the case of rocket launch. When the missile failed and on what date doesn't serve any purpose anymore because the missile is now in active service. It simply adds up more space and looks gaudy at best. None of the missile page I have seen has such detailed chart.
 * I will reiterate my position once again to remove the chart and add a brief detail as to when it failed in the text rather than creating a burgeoning space which doesn't serve any purpose. Shashpant (talk) 07:04, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay agreed, just keep some notable once as paragraph and remove table. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 04:53, 7 June 2020 (UTC)