Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 24 Oct 2014 16:02

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 325 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 19:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
rakall wrote:
Arun_S wrote:

This DRDO's Large Size Solid Booster
when used as a single stage ABM will be approximately:

Fuel: 2,250Kg
Mass: 2,700 Kg (2.5tonne booster mass + 200Kg interceptor including terminal cross thrusters)
Length: 9-10 meter
Powered Flight time:38 sec
Final velocity: Mach 11.5 (3.5Km/sec)
Minimum intercept altitude: 45Km (that is how long the booster burns before it can release the kill vehicle)


A 2-stage ABM that has 500Kg second stage will be approximately:

Fuel: 2,250Kg+400Kg
Mass: 2,700 Kg (2.5tonne booster + 500Kg second stage + 200Kg interceptor including terminal cross thrusters)
Length: 10.5-11.5 meter
Powered Flight time:58 sec
Final velocity: Mach 15(4.5Km/sec)
Minimum intercept altitude: 70Km (that is how long the booster burns before it can release the kill vehicle)


These numbers correspond to firing at an angle such that terminal velocity is at 45 degree elevation (this also allow reader to roughly estimate the ground imprint when payload becomes active ).

Bheri bheri different from any other missile in world.


Arun -- are you not beeing very cute/cheeky in your first sentence.. "this booster when used as".. so the numbers are (only) for the case if this booster is used as ABM. But you are not revealig if it "is used" or "if you think it is used".. :wink:

1. The flight time as 1stage ABM is 38sec from the motor specs per DRDO release.. However per some reports the interception time is 110/117 seconds.. i think it is not too comfortable for the interceptor to be un-powered for so long (~70secs).. and with 200Kg total mass it may have very less powered flight of its own..

given that prithvi liq-fuelled Prithvi has a flight time of 300sec to reach a 150km target.. we can assume about the same or more for a solid-fuelled Prithvi (going longer range)6m long 1m dia motor..

total powered flight of it can be as low as 38sec? is that enough? (assuming 0.8m dia motor burn time will also be same as 1m dia counterpart)

2. please look at the 2-stage ABM mass calculations.. they dont add up..
You missed adding the 2nd stage mass to the total

You are right Rakall on Mass calculation.

On powered flight and non-powered one..it depends upon the situation. And for the terminal phase interceptor 70 secs unpowered flight is high.

To add..there are two ranges reported normally. One if max. range. And, other is max. range of flight. Max. range is range covered by powered flight. and max. range of flight is one including the non-powered flight time.

With that information, if you see the spec of Arrow-2, max range is 70km and max. range of flight is 90 km. With this information, if we did gross comparison, 70s non-powered flight is too high.

There is one more angle too, to show there is discrepancy in the data provided above.

For stage 1. Max. velocity is given as 3.5 km/sec. Initial velocity is 0. If we assume, uniform acceleration. Then average velocity is 1.75 km/sec. With 38 sec. duration its range is 66.5 km.

For stage 2. Intial velocity is 3.5 km/sec(due to first stage terminal velocity) and final velocity is given as 4.5 km/sec. So average velocity is 4km/sec(assuming uniform acceleration). For a duration of 58 secs, range convered is 232 km.

Now we add the first stage range + second stage, Then total range of AXO is 298.5 km.

Even if we consider, drift and change in g, and other data, this is too high compared to what is reported in the media the range as 100km.

I cautioned him on using the data which appeared some 6 yrs ago. Anyway its all boils to individual opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 19:51 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 16 Aug 2006 15:46
Posts: 26
Location: Thiruvananthapuram
News item:

"Coordinated launch of Prithvi missiles".

Certainly, it is a giant first step towards development of an ABM. Salutations to the Team. Joyous celebrations are in order.

However, the Team is no doubt aware that an enemy will not allow such a coordination. Indeed, an effective ABM has to destroy a variety of non-cooperating targets. Further, a battery of ABMs has to ovrcome a hoard of decoys, before exhausting itself and killing the real intruder. So, the Team has to do a lot of target practice, before offering this ABM to the Services.

Perhaps, this ABM is intended to be a tactical ABM, so has fewer varieties of hostile targets to handle than an anti IRBM has to.

A study of the relevant links on Wiki brings out all the demands on an effective ABM.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 19:54 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Posts: 130
Location: India
Hello don't lose sight of the important point here.

How many nations have this kind of program? how many nations have a working demonstration forget about fielded systems? That is DRDO's achievement!

Why Prithvi? well Hello Boss, we already have at least two prithvi missile groups. Given the number of tests, I say without hesitation that prithvi is the one system that our armed forces have most experience with. Prithvi is the most reliable missile in our stable and that is what this is all about reliability.

It is hundred percent homemade and yes it has corrosive fuel, but I want to ask that madarch*d in Pioneer which missile doesn't have a fuel that is nasty to handle. I expect a CSW on Lamington Road will have a better understanding of this than some high fi sounding Editoral person in a major Indian newspaper.

Look boys what DRDO is saying is simple, why pay so much for a foreign system that everyone knows will not work when push comes to shove?

Why not invest in a local system which you already know more about than any other imported piece of sh*t?

Arrow costs 3 Million a piece. We will supply you prithvi for a tenth of the price and no proximity fuzing nonsense. Hit to kill, that is what we will give you and we will make it so that your poor uneducated bullock cart driver from Haryana will be able operate it. You won't have to learn english or hebrew or russian to operate it. Can your foreign supplier give you that?

What happened to Iraqis with their vaunted KARI AD? didn't the french betray it?

So then what do you think is going to happen tomorrow to Green Pine? is it going to be any different? Are you all expecting the Americans to keep the secrets of the Green Pine from the Pakistanis when we are getting ready to smash the Pakistanis to bits?

What dream world are people living in?

Do you understand now why it can't be arrow or some other boeing toy?

We have worked on this missile for a long time now. Prithvi is the best bet. you can have your prithvi groups as many as you want, and we will make it AAD or Strategic you tell us and we will configure it.

Do you really expect us to leave such a crucial issue relating to our defense to the mercy of foreign suppliers? What do you think we are Pakistanis to simply repaint missiles and pass them off as national strategic investments?

Kanson,

Lage raho munna bhai


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 19:58 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
Kanson wrote:
You are right Rakall on Mass calculation.

On powered flight and non-powered one..it depends upon the situation. And for the terminal phase interceptor 70 secs unpowered flight is high.

To add..there are two ranges reported normally. One if max. range. And, other is max. range of flight. Max. range is range covered by powered flight. and max. range of flight is one including the non-powered flight time.

With that information, if you see the spec of Arrow-2, max range is 70km and max. range of flight is 90 km. With this information, if we did gross comparison, 70s non-powered flight is too high.

There is one more angle too, to show there is discrepancy in the data provided above.

For stage 1. Max. velocity is given as 3.5 km/sec. Initial velocity is 0. If we assume, uniform acceleration. Then average velocity is 1.75 km/sec. With 38 sec. duration its range is 66.5 km.

For stage 2. Intial velocity is 3.5 km/sec(due to first stage terminal velocity) and final velocity is given as 4.5 km/sec. So average velocity is 4km/sec. For a duration of 58 secs, range convered is 232 km.

Now we add the first stage range + second stage, Then total range of AXO is 298.5 km.

Even if we consider, drift and change in g, and other data, this is too high compared to what is reported in the media as 100km.

I cautioned him on using the data which appeared some 6 yrs ago. Anyway its all boils to individual opinion.


Arent you missing something
all your range and time calculations are based on the assumption that the missile travels in only one direction

The range as known to the common man is displancement of missile on surface but the time-distance calculations that you are using to estimate that is not displacement but total distance travelled by the missile (both in lenght and height directions neglecting the small error introduced by lateral movements out of the 2D plane)

If you want to calculate the actual distance travelled by a SSM you must find out the apogee, use that as the origin and assume a parabolic trajectory the euqation of motion would be

y = 4k*x^2

find K using apogee putting x=range/2 at y=-(apogee)
then do all the messy integration and stuff to find out the length of path from x=-(range/2) to +(range/2)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:03 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
akutcher wrote:
Arent you missing something
all your range and time calculations are based on the assumption that the missile travels in only one direction

The range as known to the common man is displancement of missile on surface but the time-distance calculations that you are using to estimate that is not displacement but total distance travelled by the missile (both in lenght and height directions neglecting the small error introduced by lateral movements out of the 2D plane)

If you want to calculate the actual distance travelled by a SSM you must find out the apogee, use that as the origin and assume a parabolic trajectory the euqation of motion would be

y = 4k*x^2

find K using apogee putting x=range/2 at y=-(apogee)
then do all the messy integration and stuff to find out the length of path from x=-(range/2) to +(range/2)


My dear friend. We are talking about terminal phase interceptor.

FYI...In which way you travel, parabolic, hyperbolic or circle, range remains same for the powered flight.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:22 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
Kanson wrote:

My dear friend. We are talking about terminal phase interceptor.

FYI...In which way you travel, parabolic, hyperbolic or circle, range remains same for the powered flight.


I am afraid i dont agree.....you are calculating range by this
range = speed*time

that isnt the range we talk about, we talk about the horizontal displacement


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
Pls check whether whatever you say applies to SAM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Posts: 130
Location: India
Kgoan,

I agree with them, this is Pokharan 1998 all over again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:39 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
Kanson wrote:
Pls check whether whatever you say applies to SAM


I think you get what i am trying to say but i am not able to understand you....
if i am wrong and the range is calculated based on you method then pls take the time and explain it to me.... i am not a fool u know i cleared JEE :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:44 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 38446
Vijay J wrote:
Kgoan,

I agree with them, this is Pokharan 1998 all over again.


The problem is the Western/Western inspired analysts hubris. Despite consistent reports of Indian interests they keep mispercieving the facts. Its due to group think about India and its image.

No one but a moron would think the answer to the Ghauri launch given persistent reports of Chinese proliferation would be a rocket launch test.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:44 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44
Posts: 1944
kgoan, Vijay>> Agree that as usual the yindo folks have shifted the Paradigm completely ober its head.

Now watch, How Garry Mole hole, David Halfwright, and some Drs. say with pouted l;ips, India not only proliferated vertically unilaterally but also destabilized the entire equilibrium of PRC TSP India theater!!!!



So the strategy of TSP PRC and NoKO from now onwards will be mass produce SRBMs and saturate the TMD area so that the system will be overwhelmed...

very very interesting, TSP with out sops from uncles and aunties is out of the strategic race.. Now we have entered the qurter finals with Unkil, PRC, Rusia India at the table.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:47 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
The way you interpret a range for Surface to Surface missile is different from range mentioned for SAM and ABM(which is similar to SAM)

For example, you are hearing someone in AWACS saying the Plane A is approaching at xx speed and has yy distance. What it means ? Horizontal distance ?

Good to know that you cleared JEE. Whether one learns from IIT or from other institution, Knowledge is always knowledge.

Dr. Kalam is a diploma holder. He reached this height without learning in IIT.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 20:58 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 05 Sep 2006 12:47
Posts: 19
Vijay J wrote:
How many nations have this kind of program? how many nations have a working demonstration forget about fielded systems? That is DRDO's achievement!

Look boys what DRDO is saying is simple, why pay so much for a foreign system that everyone knows will not work when push comes to shove?

Why not invest in a local system which you already know more about than any other imported piece ?

Arrow costs 3 Million a piece. We will supply you prithvi for a tenth of the price

Vijay J, I agree with your views. This ABM test is indeed a positive development, as indigenous ABM may be very cost-effective, as compared to foreign system like Arrow, Patriot and S-300.
Vijay J wrote:
Do you really expect us to leave such a crucial issue relating to our defense to the mercy of foreign suppliers? What do you think we are Pakistanis to simply repaint missiles and pass them off as national strategic investments?

I agree with this view.

If indigenous ABM system is procured then knowledge of its complete working, tactics and strategies of it shall be present with armed forces only, unlike in case of foriegn systems like Patriot and Arrow where private contractor shall also have knowledge of India's ABM systems.
Thanks.


Last edited by Abhiman on 29 Nov 2006 21:01, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:01 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
yeah... i was calculating the range of SSM only

anyways so you are basically saying a SAM reaches an altitude and then travels in an approximately flat trajectory thus we can do range= time*speed if we neglect the time missile took to climb that altitude

this maybe right for small to medium range SAMs, but from whatever videos i have seen most ABM system take a very significant amount of time climbing the altitude


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:10 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44
Posts: 1944
dont say anything other wise you will make a dent in the reputation of IITs

read here a refereshing view.

http://class.phys.psu.edu/p001projects/ ... 20Fire.doc


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:20 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
John Snow, this is the only thing i dont like about being an IITian, in India people praise IITs as if every student studying there is the next Einstein.... just to clear things up i am not that intellegent and just an average hard working student

yeah i know about the projectile motion, but what i cant understand is how you can guestimate the range by simply doing time and speed, if i am not missing something the parameters you are assuming to be negligible are far too significant to be neglected


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:27 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
akutcher,

Consider you ride a two wheeler. For a given amount of fuel and constant mileage, whichever way you go and whether you take a turn and go straight...You can travel only certain km with the available fuel and const mileage. Are you getting it ?

Now..This is normally called as range. And this is applied everywhere. Try to equate this with SAM. Whichever way it travel, range is same.

For SSM, we made the range to suit our needs in differentiating different types of SSM. Higher range called ICBM and lower range as SBRM.
Here range is interpreted as horizontal distance travelled.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:28 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Posts: 130
Location: India
Abhiman,

If indigenous ABM system is procured then knowledge of its complete working, tactics and strategies of it shall be present with armed forces only, unlike in case of foriegn systems like Patriot and Arrow where private contractor shall also have knowledge of India's ABM systems.
Thanks.


Your words should written in bold letters and put on the MOD door and nailed to every foreign supplier and arms agents head.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:31 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44
Posts: 1944
akutcher wrote:
John Snow, this is the only thing i dont like about being an IITian, in India people praise IITs as if every student studying there is the next Einstein.... just to clear things up i am not that intellegent and just an average hard working student

yeah i know about the projectile motion, but what i cant understand is how you can guestimate the range by simply doing time and speed, if i am not missing something the parameters you are assuming to be negligible are far too significant to be neglected


Boss light laye lo, or in Hyd we say dil pe math layo :wink:

Never take me seriously and I say that with all seriousness....

In (real) life there are very few things we can shoot straight, hence caution on curves!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:37 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
Kanson wrote:
akutcher,

Consider you ride a two wheeler. For a given amount of fuel and constant mileage, whichever way you go and whether you take a turn and go straight...You can travel only certain km with the available fuel and const mileage. Are you getting it ?

Now..This is normally called as range. And this is applied everywhere. Try to equate this with SAM. Whichever way it travel, range is same.

For SSM, we made the range to suit our needs in differentiating different types of SSM. Higher range called ICBM and lower range as SBRM.
Here range is interpreted as horizontal distance travelled.


Let me put it using your words only

suppose you got a scooter which has a 10ltr fuel tank..... now you start the damn thing and keep circling and burn the 10 ltrs of petrol but gues what..... you are still exactly where you were when you had 10 ltrs of fuel, the distance meter installed in your scooter will be saying that you travelled so many kilomterer but that isnt the range of interest


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:46 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
My dear akutcher,

I am running out of ideas. Why dont you talk to you professor abt this and get clarified or, someone who is working in this field? bye.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:47 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44
Posts: 1944
For a projectile range is the horizontal distance traveled.

If you go round and round , you go nowhere right?

to confuse you further think of the problem of a spool tape recorder

Imagine ( thats a good song by John Lenon) the take up spool at the begining, when the two spools are of eqaul dia and then the changes of dia in the two spools....


also imagine the stylus of the LP playing turn table the stylus arm travels horizontally from start to end ....

further more if you play stereo LP then the groves are at right angle one another...

hence caution on curves....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:51 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
John Snow wrote:
hence caution on curves....

Snow..you are too mischievous :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:54 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 38446
OK enough education. Kutcher get yourself a good book on rocketry. I know many exist in your library.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:55 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 996
This pretty high level of technical discussion for yours truly but I will also like to throw in my two pence.

First that the reference to Prithvi variant can mean lot of things. The AXO booster motor can also be a shorter one compared to 6m length of motor. Also on other note the reference to Prithvi variant may just be accounting jargon to justify the diversion of Prithvi funds for the AXO. So one has to be careful for taking the full length motor of 6m as basis of AXO.

On second note, I think that for logistical compatibility Drdo may look at length of 8-9m rather than 10-12 meter. Not to mention that it this missile is also supposed to be used by Navy in future as area SAM then it may need careful look at the dimensions.

I cannot comment on the burn time but if you look at AAMs then their burn time can be as low as 5-10 seconds and then they coast for another 20-40 seconds or even more.

On the other hand I think the speed of AXO will much greater than PAC-2/3 as Pranab had commented sometime back about their high reaction time and thus unsuitability for Indian scenario.

On other note if AAD vehicle is taken as basis then if we think that 3 missiles have to be mounted thereupon then the weight of whole missile may be as low as 1100-1200kg. Though in pictures it seems like only one missile on the launcher.

Even for kill stage I think we should factor in weight of explosive warhead, sensors, data links, electronics, batteries, lateral thrusters etc and take it to be atleast in the range of 500kg.

So my guess

Booster ~.70m can be 4-6 m length 1500-2500kg
Second stage ? dia can be 2-4m length 500kg
Kill stage ? dia can be 1-2m length 500kg




Kanson wrote:
rakall wrote:
Arun_S wrote:

This DRDO's Large Size Solid Booster
when used as a single stage ABM will be approximately:

Fuel: 2,250Kg
Mass: 2,700 Kg (2.5tonne booster mass + 200Kg interceptor including terminal cross thrusters)
Length: 9-10 meter
Powered Flight time:38 sec
Final velocity: Mach 11.5 (3.5Km/sec)
Minimum intercept altitude: 45Km (that is how long the booster burns before it can release the kill vehicle)


A 2-stage ABM that has 500Kg second stage will be approximately:

Fuel: 2,250Kg+400Kg
Mass: 2,700 Kg (2.5tonne booster + 500Kg second stage + 200Kg interceptor including terminal cross thrusters)
Length: 10.5-11.5 meter
Powered Flight time:58 sec
Final velocity: Mach 15(4.5Km/sec)
Minimum intercept altitude: 70Km (that is how long the booster burns before it can release the kill vehicle)


These numbers correspond to firing at an angle such that terminal velocity is at 45 degree elevation (this also allow reader to roughly estimate the ground imprint when payload becomes active ).

Bheri bheri different from any other missile in world.


Arun -- are you not beeing very cute/cheeky in your first sentence.. "this booster when used as".. so the numbers are (only) for the case if this booster is used as ABM. But you are not revealig if it "is used" or "if you think it is used".. :wink:

1. The flight time as 1stage ABM is 38sec from the motor specs per DRDO release.. However per some reports the interception time is 110/117 seconds.. i think it is not too comfortable for the interceptor to be un-powered for so long (~70secs).. and with 200Kg total mass it may have very less powered flight of its own..

given that prithvi liq-fuelled Prithvi has a flight time of 300sec to reach a 150km target.. we can assume about the same or more for a solid-fuelled Prithvi (going longer range)6m long 1m dia motor..

total powered flight of it can be as low as 38sec? is that enough? (assuming 0.8m dia motor burn time will also be same as 1m dia counterpart)

2. please look at the 2-stage ABM mass calculations.. they dont add up..
You missed adding the 2nd stage mass to the total

You are right Rakall on Mass calculation.

On powered flight and non-powered one..it depends upon the situation. And for the terminal phase interceptor 70 secs unpowered flight is high.

To add..there are two ranges reported normally. One if max. range. And, other is max. range of flight. Max. range is range covered by powered flight. and max. range of flight is one including the non-powered flight time.

With that information, if you see the spec of Arrow-2, max range is 70km and max. range of flight is 90 km. With this information, if we did gross comparison, 70s non-powered flight is too high.

There is one more angle too, to show there is discrepancy in the data provided above.

For stage 1. Max. velocity is given as 3.5 km/sec. Initial velocity is 0. If we assume, uniform acceleration. Then average velocity is 1.75 km/sec. With 38 sec. duration its range is 66.5 km.

For stage 2. Intial velocity is 3.5 km/sec(due to first stage terminal velocity) and final velocity is given as 4.5 km/sec. So average velocity is 4km/sec(assuming uniform acceleration). For a duration of 58 secs, range convered is 232 km.

Now we add the first stage range + second stage, Then total range of AXO is 298.5 km.

Even if we consider, drift and change in g, and other data, this is too high compared to what is reported in the media the range as 100km.

I cautioned him on using the data which appeared some 6 yrs ago. Anyway its all boils to individual opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:55 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 13 May 2005 01:07
Posts: 5
Location: Bharat
Quote:
Let me put it using your words only

suppose you got a scooter which has a 10ltr fuel tank..... now you start the damn thing and keep circling and burn the 10 ltrs of petrol but gues what..... you are still exactly where you were when you had 10 ltrs of fuel, the distance meter installed in your scooter will be saying that you travelled so many kilomterer but that isnt the range of interest


well why do you need a missile which circles round and round and falls on your head finally?

range is very basic anywhere. I understand what you are trying to tell.
When kanson is saying range is horizontal then you are asking that a missile has to climb certain height first and then go to the destination.
so if I am not mistaken your question is does range include the height the missile climbed and the distance it travelled horizontally or is it some thing else?

Well, I think range is just the distance travelled irrespective of height climed or direction taken. if a missile climbs x kms and then travels y kms then the range is ofcourse x + y. and if the missile turns around or climbs down or does what ever it wants to, still then gas in it is burning and missle will fall of before reaching the target.

Hope this helps


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 21:56 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
Kanson,
i dont feel the need to win an argument but believe me what you are saying is the distance travelled by missile not the the range....... my understanding of range is if we talk about a 100km SAM which intercepts at 50km altitude, we mean sort of a protective cylinder with radius 100km and a height 50km


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:04 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
Ravi wrote:
Quote:
Let me put it using your words only

suppose you got a scooter which has a 10ltr fuel tank..... now you start the damn thing and keep circling and burn the 10 ltrs of petrol but gues what..... you are still exactly where you were when you had 10 ltrs of fuel, the distance meter installed in your scooter will be saying that you travelled so many kilomterer but that isnt the range of interest


well why do you need a missile which circles round and round and falls on your head finally?

range is very basic anywhere. I understand what you are trying to tell.
When kanson is saying range is horizontal then you are asking that a missile has to climb certain height first and then go to the destination.
so if I am not mistaken your question is does range include the height the missile climbed and the distance it travelled horizontally or is it some thing else?

Well, I think range is just the distance travelled irrespective of height climed or direction taken. if a missile climbs x kms and then travels y kms then the range is ofcourse x + y. and if the missile turns around or climbs down or does what ever it wants to, still then gas in it is burning and missle will fall of before reaching the target.

Hope this helps

finally someone understood what i am trying to say

btw i am sorry for ruining the thread


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:05 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 28 Nov 2006 11:09
Posts: 10
Vijay J wrote:
Hello don't lose sight of the important point here.

How many nations have this kind of program? how many nations have a working demonstration forget about fielded systems? That is DRDO's achievement!

Why Prithvi? well Hello Boss, we already have at least two prithvi missile groups. Given the number of tests, I say without hesitation that prithvi is the one system that our armed forces have most experience with. Prithvi is the most reliable missile in our stable and that is what this is all about reliability.

It is hundred percent homemade and yes it has corrosive fuel, but I want to ask that madarch*d in Pioneer which missile doesn't have a fuel that is nasty to handle. I expect a CSW on Lamington Road will have a better understanding of this than some high fi sounding Editoral person in a major Indian newspaper.

Look boys what DRDO is saying is simple, why pay so much for a foreign system that everyone knows will not work when push comes to shove?

Why not invest in a local system which you already know more about than any other imported piece of sh*t?

Arrow costs 3 Million a piece. We will supply you prithvi for a tenth of the price and no proximity fuzing nonsense. Hit to kill, that is what we will give you and we will make it so that your poor uneducated bullock cart driver from Haryana will be able operate it. You won't have to learn english or hebrew or russian to operate it. Can your foreign supplier give you that?

What happened to Iraqis with their vaunted KARI AD? didn't the french betray it?

So then what do you think is going to happen tomorrow to Green Pine? is it going to be any different? Are you all expecting the Americans to keep the secrets of the Green Pine from the Pakistanis when we are getting ready to smash the Pakistanis to bits?

What dream world are people living in?

Do you understand now why it can't be arrow or some other boeing toy?

We have worked on this missile for a long time now. Prithvi is the best bet. you can have your prithvi groups as many as you want, and we will make it AAD or Strategic you tell us and we will configure it.

Do you really expect us to leave such a crucial issue relating to our defense to the mercy of foreign suppliers? What do you think we are Pakistanis to simply repaint missiles and pass them off as national strategic investments?

Kanson,

Lage raho munna bhai







Thats a bit too harsh..the language...the wise thing would be to mail the concerned papers with correct information and complaint mails ..that should help them pull up their sock's...and its high time we did it...finding a pic of a mig 29 reffered to as a mig 21 sure sucks big time


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:07 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
Akutcher,

Well, all boils down to opinion. Opinion differs. But, science is same. It will not change with the opinion.

Anyway, have you opinion and think it as a clyinder.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Prithvi ABM test
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:07 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Posts: 12
Location: Iowa City, IA, USA
Abhiman wrote:
Vijay J wrote:
How many nations have this kind of program? how many nations have a working demonstration forget about fielded systems? That is DRDO's achievement!

Look boys what DRDO is saying is simple, why pay so much for a foreign system that everyone knows will not work when push comes to shove?

Why not invest in a local system which you already know more about than any other imported piece ?

Arrow costs 3 Million a piece. We will supply you prithvi for a tenth of the price

Vijay J, I agree with your views. This ABM test is indeed a positive development, as indigenous ABM may be very cost-effective, as compared to foreign system like Arrow, Patriot and S-300.
Vijay J wrote:
Do you really expect us to leave such a crucial issue relating to our defense to the mercy of foreign suppliers? What do you think we are Pakistanis to simply repaint missiles and pass them off as national strategic investments?

I agree with this view.

If indigenous ABM system is procured then knowledge of its complete working, tactics and strategies of it shall be present with armed forces only, unlike in case of foriegn systems like Patriot and Arrow where private contractor shall also have knowledge of India's ABM systems.
Thanks.


All:

It's been a while since I've posted, but have been following thsi discussion w/ great interest.

Let me say that I disagree w/ Abhiman first - in this era of real-time intelligence, I think it is naive to presume that other countries will not have a decent idea of a systems capabilities once they see it in action from pictures, satellite and other intel etc. In fact, the presence of missile defense is intended to be a deterrent, not a mystery, in any theater. For argument's sake, the more people know about HOW CAPABLE India's BMD is, the better as a strategic deterrent?

Second, I commend DRDO for the test. But, I also see several of the lead scientists acknowledging that this is only nascent capability. Building an intercept vehicle to hit a target you know is coming is a good step...heck the GBI still only does THAT 5/10 times. But, the second stage, early warning, battlspace management etc. is where India, IMO, could use and should welcome external support.

Regards,
Manohar.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:09 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 38446
You sure are ruining the thread. Wy dont you look up a good book and then come back?

Meantime for the others
This last test has much more implications than just a Patriot clone. I believe the paradigm has changed in Asia from SSM to NMD- sort of offensive to defensive weapons. The challengers have to press for a qualitative escalation sort of Star wars style. Qty no longer cuts it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:27 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31
Posts: 754
kgoan wrote:

But the degree of interest in this test in some places is astonishing - staggering in fact. ...........
.......Something of fundamental interest has just happened


Although India is playing its cards very close to its chest in terms of the technical specs of the test, there are distinct possibilities that this was in fact an interception either at the apogee or at the commencement of the terminal phase of the flight. Either option opens up surprising insights into the technical problems that DRDO appears to have mastered. Furthermore given the size of the interceptor and the possibility of it being two stage alongwith the comments from the MOD spokesperson that "this interceptor is in a different class compared to the Patriot PAC-3", means that there are distinct possibilities that this interceptor could provide at least sub-strategic defence of the country as a whole. It certainly appears to be beyond a threatre defence system like the Patriot. The only non theatre ABM which works is the Arrow 2 and the Indian interceptor could potentially have a longer range even compared to the Arrow. The only other experiment appear to be what the US is doing in the Pacific to provide a true strategic defence and that has been plagued by problems. So the possibility that India has tested a system which in range could rival what the US is testing is truly astonishing. Is this possibility far fetched? Not apparently if one looks at that news article datedlined in the year 2000 from Pune, where President Kalam as the then scientific advisor to the PM/GOI, stated that the objective was to build an ABM system similar to what the US was contemplating.

All of this means that the geopolitical game has changed in a major way. This has the potential to neutralize 90% and more of the Pakistani threat - whats left is the bullock cart delivered nuke. Free of the threat of Pakistani nukes, India's strategic space increases immeasurably. India could decide to conventionally punish Pakistan without fear of Pakistani nuclear retribution. If sponsors of Pakistan try to supply hundreds of missiles to Pakistan to overwhelm an Indian ABM system, that act will be surely seen by India as an openly hostile act by whichever sponsor does it. Whether it be China or Pakistan, a limited nuke strike on India is not going to suffice any longer, cause it will likely be intercepted. Only an overwhelming attack will do, and in that case, India will launch on warning.


Last edited by ldev on 29 Nov 2006 22:38, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:31 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
pls dont ban me for saying this but aint that a bit harsh..... i asked a simple question and everyone other than *Ravi* appears to have rebuked me rather than answering it..... as far as reading a book is concerned, i can assure you i have read more books than most people on this forum


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:37 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 06 Sep 2004 05:57
Posts: 44
One consideration if the intercept was done at the apogee or the decent of the Prithivi-II target missile is that the signature of the Prithivi-II would be larger since the warhead does not separate in the Prithivi or most other SRBMs (like the LORAS or US MLRS or the numerous ding dong pakee SCUD clones).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:39 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 996
While we are all looking at Arrow-2, one must not loose sight of S-300VM and their M83 missiles. India was supposedly interested in the missile and it was (perhaps??) tested in India. Some people in BR also speculate that India has deployed few batteries of S-300 and or S-300VM missiles/system,


So the design of the missile may have been inspired from S-300VM system. This programme may even be pretty old say as old as 1996 when ABM was being contemplated for import.

So is it an Indian design inspired by M83 missile with electronics inspired by Israel? or is it all completely indigenous?

Incidentally the 100km range, I suppose refers to slant range or in 2 dimensions? then with 50km max altitude, the slant range may be much more!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:47 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 38446
akutcher
Quote:
..as far as reading a book is concerned, i can assure you i have read more books than most people on this forum


Dont count on it. There are on this thread people who can take you up on this and they are from India and elsewhere. So it was advice and not a rebuke.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 22:54 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2690
Kanson wrote:
akutcher,

Consider you ride a two wheeler. For a given amount of fuel and constant mileage, whichever way you go and whether you take a turn and go straight...You can travel only certain km with the available fuel and const mileage. Are you getting it ?

Now..This is normally called as range. And this is applied everywhere. Try to equate this with SAM. Whichever way it travel, range is same.

For SSM, we made the range to suit our needs in differentiating different types of SSM. Higher range called ICBM and lower range as SBRM.
Here range is interpreted as horizontal distance travelled.


Mr. Akutcher, Do you think this is a rebuke?

Take it easy man. Dont talk abt this openly. Try to imagine/read books and talk abt this with your prof seperately.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 23:12 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 05 Sep 2006 12:47
Posts: 19
Raj Malhotra wrote:
So the design of the missile may have been inspired from S-300VM system.

So is it an Indian design inspired by M83 missile with electronics inspired by Israel? or is it all completely indigenous?

As per recent ststements of DRDO officials, the ABM is entirely indigenous and used a modified Prithvi missile as interceptor.
In my view, the project may have been under development since many years in secrecy and has utilized technology of other missiles like Prithvi, Akash and Agni (for modifying Prithvi.)

Manohar, visual intelligence of ABM may not yeild much information as reaction-time, range of radar, protocols of detection & tracking, and manoueverability.
Manohar wrote:
But, I also see several of the lead scientists acknowledging that this is only nascent capability. Building an intercept vehicle to hit a target you know is coming is a good step.But, the second stage, early warning, battlspace management etc. is where India, IMO, could use and should welcome external support.

In my view, space-based detection etc. may also have to be achieved indigenously as it is sensitive. Current goal may be to develop system similar to S-300, which may intercept Hatf-1, Hatf-2, Hatf-3 and Shaheen (700kms) missiles.

I quote from a Defence Analyst from JDW :
Quote:
"The technology is hard and you have to be working for years," said Robin Hughes, the deputy editor of Jane's Defence Weekly. "If they have done that in the first test, it is an exceptional advance in technology."

However, the true capabilities could only be known once India revealed further details about the system, he said.

Thus, it is likely that this ABM development is at advanced stage and shall be successful.
Anyway, entire Arrow-2 development cost only $2 billion compared to $390 million of IGMP (since 1984). Thus, even if $100 million are spent on this ABM since say 1995, it shall be completed and have capabilities of S-300 at least.
Thanks.

reference :
JDW statement


Last edited by Abhiman on 29 Nov 2006 23:14, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2006 23:14 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54
Posts: 48
I am a guy who joined this forum a couple of months ago, this is probably the best one running on internet and i love reading about the strategic and technical insights of many senior posters here... Raman pls clean the thread as i am in no mood to fight with someone who has been managing this forum for god knows how many years

getting back to it...... the ABM tested is by no means a small achievement but what do people think about the practicallity of such a sytem? I mean Israel started their Arrow program in early '90s and so did unkil, we know it took more than $2billion to cover the tiny Israel and unkil is nowhere close even after spending $50billion

Even if we develop an effective system, how long a bill are the babus willing to foot? What could be the possible objectives of this program.... does MOD want to cover only the metros and some other strategic locations, do they want to protect every state-capital or provide a complete missile shield?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 325 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group