Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 21 Sep 2014 16:54

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1464 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 37  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2005 22:39 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 30 Jan 2005 12:56
Posts: 28
Location: Cardiff, UK
looks like GOI is still looking for a US based missile defence...

----------------------------------------------------------------

Pranab to review US LMD systems
[NewsInsight, 21 April 2005]


http://www.newsinsight.net/nati2.asp?recno=3267&ctg=

21 April 2005: India is not impressed with the PAC-3 missile unit offered with the two-tier US anti-missile defence system, on the grounds that it is slow for the very low reaction period in the sub-continent, and therefore, the Pentagon will demonstrate more advanced technologies when defence minister Pranab Mukherjee visits the country.

The visit is planned ahead of prime minister Manmohan Singh’s own meeting with US president George W.Bush, and Pranab could be taken for live demonstration of advanced anti-missile defence systems to the Pacific Command in Hawaii, beside which he would discuss US-India joint strategies planned for Asia with American defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Officials said that Pranab would be accompanied by defence secretary Ajai Vikram Singh, the deputy chiefs of the three services, DRDO scientists, and the top defence PSU management, with the idea to gauge technology transfer possibilities with the offered US anti-missile defence systems.

Besides more advanced units than PAC-3, the US is offering mid-air jamming systems.

Diplomatic sources said that apart from discussing and demonstrating anti-missile defence systems, the key US aim would be to remove mistrust in US-India strategic relations, and America is keen to get Pranab Mukherjee on its side.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2005 23:26 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24947
Location: NowHere
missile defence for USA has a totally different doctrine when compared to indian NFU. furthermore, we and our surroundings of high fi mad jihadic society, and the quick time reactions to any such adventure by the only active terrorist counry in the world needs a neighbourhood missile defence [nMD] .

it would be best to involve DRDO to integrate russian and american anti-missile defence systems with home grown [rajendra extended or israeli green pines extended], to satisfy the needs.

an open architecture to integrate existing systems like akash and other future systems based on satellite intelligence - [new aerospace command] radar satellite, IR, etc and other systems., the open-ness should include to integrate arrow systems or S-400 systems into one neighbourhood missile defence.

and what would america get in return for these tech sharing.. keeping f-16 production line active. they can sell 200 f-16s to pakistan, and we can have 400 missiles ready, activated by their signature that would have been already integrated into the target acquistion modules of our nMD.

hey, its business.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2005 23:45 
Offline
Webmaster BR

Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Posts: 1246
Location: Planet Earth
I have renamed this thread. Correct me I am wrong, but I thought only the PAC-2 was offered and not the PAC-3.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2005 23:56 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 38151
Yes PAC-2 was offerred. No PAC-3. Looks like MOD was not impressed and so might demo PAC-3.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Apr 2005 23:57 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Apr 2005 19:13
Posts: 417
now that's a novel idea. wondering whether the great US of A would play ball.

Quote:
they can sell 200 f-16s to pakistan, and we can have 400 missiles ready, activated by their signature that would have been already integrated into the target acquistion modules of our nMD.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2005 00:18 
Offline
Webmaster BR

Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Posts: 1246
Location: Planet Earth
Interesting indeed Ramana. PAC-3 would be nice, very nice 8)

http://www.raytheon.com/products/static/node3832.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2005 00:27 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 38151
Folks, In view of the small numbers to support the MND I had long ago suggested some sort of ABM is needed by India to ensure that the challengers would need more to traget India. I firmly believe some sort of effective ABM is needed. The fact that its the PAC-2/3 being suggested means the threat is from short range BMs (1~2Km/sec). Its not destabilizing vis a vis China which has IRBMs(~ 4km/sec) as delivery vehicles wrt to India. Arrow or THAAD type thing is needed for that.

Also need some thing to take care of the G(h)auris and Shines.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2005 00:28 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 19 Apr 2003 11:31
Posts: 18
Location: USA
US offers high-tech weapons to India

Quote:
New Delhi, April 8: The United States has offered India advanced weapons like Patriot PAC II anti-missile systems, network-centric early warning and battlefield control and command systems as a follow up of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's announcement of plans to engage New Delhi in closer strategic partnership.


The following is an older story...

Congressman Crowley Urges Sale of PAC-3 to India
Quote:
May 25, 2004 :: Analysis
New York Congressman Joseph Crowley has urged Secretary of State Colin Powell support India’s request to buy the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missile defense system.



IMO, we have been requesting a PAC-3 and there are some in the US Congress and USG who are willing to do that. They have made a counter offer of a PAC-2.

http://missilethreat.com/overview/chronology.html

Quote:
August 20, 1996 The Israelis completed a successful test of the Arrow II (Hetz-2) anti-ballistic missile. During this test the Arrow II missile destroyed a target missile that was an Arrow I, modified so that its radar cross section and warhead matched that of a Scud missile. The target missile was launched from a barge in the Mediterranean Sea about four minutes before the launching of the Arrow II missile from an Israeli air force base on the coast of Israel about ten kilometers away. Israel’s Green Pine fire control radar participated in this test and was apparently able to track the target missile.


This is the exact kind of MD we need, very short reaction times comparable to flight times in the subcontinent.

The Arrow-2 & the Green Pine

Btw, the arrow-2 has a max speed of Mach 9. Any info on the speed of the PAC-3? and the S-300/400?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2005 00:41 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24947
Location: NowHere
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/airdef/s-400.htm ABM Treaty demarcation agreements -- it can intercept targets with velocities of up to 4.8 km/sec, corresponding to a ballistic missile range of 3,500 km.

may wanna integrate: S-500s

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world ... /s-500.htm


Last edited by SaiK on 23 Apr 2005 00:46, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2005 00:46 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31
Posts: 1075
[url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/antey-2500-specs.htm]Comparison of Antey-S-300-PAC-3
[/url]
Armade's pdf file on air defense systenms


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2005 18:49 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 10878
Location: Illini Nation
April 18, 2005 AWST:

Russia relaeses a pic of the 3M25 Meteorit - porb designated Kh-80. This long range missile is supposed to have the "Marabu plasma-field generating system to reduce the rcs.[/b] (Wonder what that means to ABM systems


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Apr 2005 22:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24947
Location: NowHere
NRao wrote:
April 18, 2005 AWST: (Wonder what that means to ABM systems
man! you killed the topic in one stroke!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2005 12:45 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 996
XXXXX posting


There does not seem to be any discussion on BR regarding report of India developing indigenous ABM – long range SAM missile. So I am posting this from another forum




xanadu
India Is The Best Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 995

India's New Anti-Ballastic Missile SAM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Probabaly one of India's most hush hush projects. This one came out of the blue. Now we know what the Green pine radars were acquired for. There have been stories of a three tired ABM system with the PAC-3 , the Indian system and the Arrow.

Guess we should expect some suprises on the success of the Indian system. Are the Israeli's and the Russians helping out?

Trials of long-range SAMs by year-end

Special Correspondent




HYDERABAD: Indian defence scientists have embarked on developing long-range (100 km) surface to air missiles (SAMs), the flight trials of which are expected to begin by the year-end.

The missiles with multi-platform systems can be launched from ship and ground. The propulsion, control guidance and other systems for the "hit-to-kill" missiles were being built, according to V.K.Saraswat, Director, Research Centre Imarat, a DRDO institution.

He told reporters here on Wednesday that the development phase of long- range SAMs was expected to be over in two to three years. Feasibility studies were also on for developing short-range helicopter-launch anti-ship missiles.

At present in the SAM class of missile, India has medium range Akash, which has a range of about 27 km.

Apart from SAMs, a long-range Air Defence System was also being developed. Once deployed, the radars of such a system would have multiple target tracking capacity and could simultaneously track 200 aircraft up to a distance of 400 km.

Predicting that future wars would be network-centric and not platform-centric, he said the coordination of all platforms in a network would be required. India had an excellent command, control and communication network which was totally encrypted and secure.

xanadu
View Public Profile
Find all posts by xanadu
Add xanadu to Your Buddy List

#2 17th April 2005, 20:43
Curious
Rank 4 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11

I think that this missile may be a lighter version of SA-12 giant, something in the range of 1200-1600kg.

Curious
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Curious
Find all posts by Curious
Add Curious to Your Buddy List

#3 18th April 2005, 07:22
Victor
You're next, Kim Jong'Il Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Capital of the World
Posts: 1,160

Not totally out of the blue...

Exerpt from Defense News Feb 28 05

Indians Divided on Air Defense
Weigh Domestic, U.S. Solutions

By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI, NEW DELHI
More capable air defense has been a top government
priority here for several years. To meet the Army’s
future requirements, the DRDO diverted some funds from
its missile program in January 2003 to begin
developing its own air defense system capable of
tracking ballistic missiles.

The Research Centre Imarat (RCI) in Hyderabad, a
premier defense laboratory that produces the Agni and
Prithvi missile systems and is under the
administrative control of DRDO, has been developing a
system since early 2003 that would have a range of 100
kilometers.


A DRDO scientist said the previous National Democratic
Alliance government was so impressed with the RCI
proposal that $444.4 million was allotted in June 2003
to complete the indigenous air defense system by 2008.


Vijay Kumar Saraswat, RCI director, said Feb 10 that
the system RCI is working on will be superior to the
Patriot-2 and Russia’s S-300 PMU, and will be ready to
enter service by 2008. Saraswat claimed the system
will have a mobile launcher carrying three
surface-to-air, solid-fuel missiles, equipped with
directional warheads.

He said the unnamed system will begin flight trials in
mid-2006. RCI will carry out about 10 flights before
deploying it with the Indian defense forces.

The DRDO scientist said the indigenous air defense
system will have a mission control system that will
conduct target acquisition, classification and track
estimation, among other functions.

He said another major element is the active
phased-array radar system purchased from Israel.
Called Sword Fish, the system was purchased in early
2004 for $50 million and is undergoing trials at Hasan
in Karnataka state.

Once the air defense system is operational, the DRDO
scientist said, RCI will integrate it with other
defense systems via satellite links and a secure
digital data link that will enable it to track and
transmit data up to a range of 1,000 kilometers.
__________________
But I am a warmonger. It is what I do. I seasaw between building and conquering, expanding from the center of my empire to overrun the lands that surround it. I cherish the uniformity of occupying a single land mass, be it island, archipelago, or continent. Whatever land touches mine, I must have it. It must be mine, from coast to coast.

-diablovision-
Apolyton Forums

Victor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Victor
Find all posts by Victor
Add Victor to Your Buddy List

#4 18th April 2005, 10:42
Indian1973
Rank 4 Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,611

India isnt going to get the Arrow and isnt going to buy the PAC-3 imo, so this third project will have to deliver.

Indian1973
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Indian1973
Find all posts by Indian1973
Add Indian1973 to Your Buddy List

#5 18th April 2005, 11:15
Hyperwarp
Rank 4 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Homeworld of Anubis
Posts: 1,798



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indian1973
India isnt going to get the Arrow and isnt going to buy the PAC-3 imo, so this third project will have to deliver.


What about the S-400???
__________________

"The following statement is False;
The previous statement is True"

"Welcome To My World" – Hyper

Hyperwarp
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Hyperwarp
Find all posts by Hyperwarp
Add Hyperwarp to Your Buddy List

#6 18th April 2005, 11:37
hallo84
Rank 2 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 308

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperwarp
What about the S-400???


Maybe the S-300PMU2
The RFAF is just acquiring S-400 and the russians arn't really motivated to sell their best SAM right away...

hallo84
View Public Profile
Send a private message to hallo84
Find all posts by hallo84
Add hallo84 to Your Buddy List

#7 18th April 2005, 12:30
Curious
Rank 4 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11

I think this project may have had much earlier begining as far back as in 1996.

I think one of first references to this project was made in a pakistani journal almost 3-4 years ago, but i forgot the name and the link. It also named the project and the missile.

Curious
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Curious
Find all posts by Curious
Add Curious to Your Buddy List

#8 18th April 2005, 18:43
BruteGorilla
Rank 5 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: pi::
Posts: 212


2003

``Keeping our nation's threat perception in mind, we are developing our own defence umbrella against oncoming ballistic and cruise missiles. Such an ambitious anti-missile programme calls for development and realisation of long-range, high-resolution radars. We also need to make rapid advancements in developing a missile defence scheme capable of both endo and exo atmospheric interception capabilities. The engineering efforts in all these sectors should stem from the resolve to improve the overall quality of life of the common man'', Mr. Kalam said.

2003

'India developing ballistic missiles defence to counter threats'
BANGALORE FEB. 9.2003: India is developing ballistic missile defence technologies to counter "threats from its adversaries" and has no Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) programme, a key official of a DRDO laboratory involved in weapon system programmes, said today.
"We are now trying to develop ballistic missile defence system like hypersonic class of missiles and long-range detection and tracking radars'', Director of Hyderabad-based Research Centre Imarat (RCI), V.K. Saraswat, told PTI here. "We are going to concentrate on that," he said.
"In offensive weapons (missiles), we have almost come to whatever needed by the country. Now we are looking at defensive weapons," said Mr. Sarswat, who spoke last evening at an international seminar, organised as part of Aero India 2003, an international aerospace exposition here.
According to him, with the defensive weapons under development, the nation would be able to counter "incoming missile threats". "You know, we have threats. Because our adversaries have (such missiles), we have to develop that," he said and also indicated that India was working on a layered defence system.
DRDO officials said such a system included many technologies, including using satellites for communications and a unique two-layer defensive line using surface-to-air missile for any incoming ballistic missile attack. But he categorically said that New Delhi had no ICBM programme and asserted that the country faced no ICBM threat.(HINDU)(AEROINDIA)

2003

Plans for missile interceptors unveiled
V.K. Saraswat, Director, RCI, DRDO, said missile defence would be given impetus: programmes included developing missile interceptors.

Dr. Swarswat

Another initiative is the Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD). We are at the technology development stage and a target missile has been launched with success. It requires a network of command, computer, control, communication and intelligence network. It is a bit way off, but we are firmly on route and hope to convert it into a deployable system in four-five years.
__________________
Protonriver.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: MEADS
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2005 15:39 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Posts: 2184
Location: JPEG-jingostan
MEADS International (MI) announced that Germany has approved entry into the Design and Development (D&D) phase for the tri-national Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS)

Quote:

MEADS, under development by Germany, Italy and the United States, includes a lightweight launcher, 360-degree fire control and surveillance radars and plug-and-fight battle management command and control abilities not found in current systems. With its enhanced mobility and advanced technologies, MEADS will offer warfighters significant improvements over existing systems.

MEADS is a mobile air defense system designed to replace Patriot systems in the United States and Germany and Nike Hercules systems in Italy. It also meets the requirements of Germany’s “capabilities oriented” air defense concept. MEADS incorporates the battle-proven hit-to-kill PAC-3 missile in a system that includes 360-degree surveillance and fire control sensors, netted-distributed battle management/communication centers and high-firepower launchers. The system combines superior battlefield protection with unprecedented flexibility, allowing it to protect maneuver forces and to provide homeland defense against tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles and aircraft.

When completed, MEADS will be the only air defense system able to roll off tactical transports with the troops and very quickly begin operations. More importantly, its open architecture will provide for 21st century air defense system-of-system integration capabilities that allow operational mission-tailoring for homeland defense or defense of maneuver forces. MEADS will also provide greater firepower with less manpower than current systems, producing dramatic operation and support cost savings.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 May 2005 20:14 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24947
Location: NowHere
http://www.missilethreat.com/missiles/s ... ussia.html
However, there is the possibility for the technology to be stolen by China, the only other nation that might have the capability and need to integrate it.

http://www.hindu.com/2005/05/10/stories ... 441500.htm


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 12 May 2005 16:07 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Posts: 2184
Location: JPEG-jingostan
PATRIOT MISSILE

Quote:

A team from the US department of Defence visited India in February this year to make a classified presentation on the Patriot Missile Defence System. The presentation was not a commercial offer, but only a brief on technical aspects of the system. Similar presentations were given on other missile systems by manufacturers from Israel and Russia earlier in 2003.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Sep 2005 18:28 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03
Posts: 1154
Hey everyone...

Wakey Wakey

PAC 3 just got demonstrated. Offered????


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Sep 2005 18:39 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32934
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
from the PDF file downloaded, time on station at 1000km radius for

B737 - wedgetail = 6
B767 - AWACS-E3 = 11
IL76 A50 = 4 :roll:

they had better be coming up with a solution to this, or are the israeli
phalcon avionics significantly lighter than Shmel ?

realistically I suppose the distance to depoyment stations for india is 500km
so that means 6 hrs. Still too small imo, it needs to be 12 hrs .

I still think we ought to have chosen A330 chassis (IA and AI both have A300/A310 logisitcs chain) and these planes regularly fly 16 hrs everyday for hundreds of days in a year. Quite the uptime u need for a low-airframe inventory. and would match the B767 endurance.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Sep 2005 19:20 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31
Posts: 753
This is Japan's next generation ABM defense radar, FPS-XX. This will be coupled with the Aegis and SM-3 aboard their Kongou class DDGs for their short and medium range ABM needs.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Sep 2005 20:33 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Posts: 127
Location: Pune
I am not able to understand why at all India is looking for PAC - 3.
There is enough evidence that Arrow(both 1 and 2 versions) and Antey 2500 are much more better than the Patriot. Moreover India already has small number of S- 300 as well as Green Pine Radar(which could be readily be employed with Arrow).

So it is a waste to buy the PAC - 3 :evil: :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Sep 2005 21:38 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11313
PAC-3 is proven in Gulf war 2 :evil: and highly integrated with other asset and worked well in Full Auto Mode.

I would take the PAC-3 any time over the S-300x. :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Sep 2005 22:13 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 19 Sep 2005 21:32
Posts: 27
Location: INDIA
Guys I have a question ,S-400 or AKASH may be useful to hunt down incoming ballistic missile ,but can they hunt down incoming cruise missiles?I know the claims of pak army that babur aka HN-1 is a terrain hugging missile is probably trash,but we should be prepare for everything.PATRIOT is crap,it couldnt even shot down scuds in iraq war.So i dont think it will be anything to a terrain hugging cruise missile.So what can be done to hunt down cruise missile.May be by deploying relatively large number of AWACS.With that on ground a combination of GREEN PINE and ARROWS and some AKASH to go with it.also for close in defence we should also deploy short range SAMs with low reaction time.Also some AA guns.what u guys think?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 20 Sep 2005 02:56 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03
Posts: 1154
Quote:
from the PDF file downloaded, time on station at 1000km radius for

B737 - wedgetail = 6
B767 - AWACS-E3 = 11
IL76 A50 = 4


Dear Singha,
Could you please direct me to this PDF ?

The IL 76 chasis looks awfuly crowded to me. I mean there seems to be not enough space in front of the engines on the fuselage to house the massive Pines. Also the Engines would seem to get in the way of the radar beam


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 20 Sep 2005 08:11 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 12 Aug 2004 01:28
Posts: 49
joy_roy wrote:
Guys I have a question ,S-400 or AKASH may be useful to hunt down incoming ballistic missile ,but can they hunt down incoming cruise missiles?


I would it's much harder to down ICBMs than subsonic cruise missiles, I suggest you refer to earlier posts in General Missiles Discussion about shooting down "Babur".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 20 Sep 2005 14:19 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 19 Sep 2005 21:32
Posts: 27
Location: INDIA
Shwetank wrote:
joy_roy wrote:
Guys I have a question ,S-400 or AKASH may be useful to hunt down incoming ballistic missile ,but can they hunt down incoming cruise missiles?


I would it's much harder to down ICBMs than subsonic cruise missiles, I suggest you refer to earlier posts in General Missiles Discussion about shooting down "Babur".


Thanks......will do.

But cruise missiles are not anyway less harder to hunt down than ICBMs.The subsonic speed is not the thing ,it`s the terrain hugging capability that gives cruise missile its teeth.Such low flying small object is very hard to track and thus hard to shoot down.ICBM`s re-entry vehicle approaches its target at a very high speed.But its much easier to track down than cruise missiles.If one can fire a large number of SAMs then there is a good probablity of shooting it down.The trick is to track what is coming first then one can target it.But if one can`t track it then... well better be prepared to be fried :twisted: .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2005 18:01 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Posts: 1905
Location: wai -maharastra
Dont agree - a cruise missile is difficult to detect but onec detected it can be shot down like any other subsonic low flying aircraft . I believe USAF is prepared to use The AMRAAM for this role . There is no reason why our Su-30 s cannot do the same with R-73 . While its radar signatite is small its thermal signature is considerable and that is its weak point . The chance of a cruise missle survivinf an aam intercept goes up exponentially when it is supersonic like out Brahmos and then you simply do not have the time to detect ,calculate an intercept vector and then launch an intercept missile and do the actual intercept .Just see how much time you have for a brahmos launched at 150 kms for all these operations and you will get the answer. It is true icbms are easier to detect but it is much much faster and so the advantage of early detection gets negated by the increased complexity of finding an intercept solution and then having an interceptor missile which is fast enough to do the interception in one go since you will never get a second chance with an icbm with a cruise missile that is possible .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2005 19:20 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 19 Sep 2005 21:32
Posts: 27
Location: INDIA
Shankar wrote:
Dont agree - a cruise missile is difficult to detect but onec detected it can be shot down like any other subsonic low flying aircraft . I believe USAF is prepared to use The AMRAAM for this role . There is no reason why our Su-30 s cannot do the same with R-73 . While its radar signatite is small its thermal signature is considerable and that is its weak point . The chance of a cruise missle survivinf an aam intercept goes up exponentially when it is supersonic like out Brahmos and then you simply do not have the time to detect ,calculate an intercept vector and then launch an intercept missile and do the actual intercept .Just see how much time you have for a brahmos launched at 150 kms for all these operations and you will get the answer. It is true icbms are easier to detect but it is much much faster and so the advantage of early detection gets negated by the increased complexity of finding an intercept solution and then having an interceptor missile which is fast enough to do the interception in one go since you will never get a second chance with an icbm with a cruise missile that is possible .



"Once detected"....exactly....but thats the problem.How to detect it in the first place?
The thermal signature of cruise missiles are not at all very considerable.After the initial booster stage when the missile is in cruise its thermal signature is very low.And also employing of improved designed exhaust makes it even lower.

Brahmos is not really what i call terrain hugging.The naval Brahmos goes into a sea skimming mode only in the last stages of its flight.Its actually very hard to make a missile flying over mach 2 to go such low for such a long time.I think thats one reason why tomahawk is not supersonic.


The speed of cruise missiles may be slow but its not that slow as some may think.Tomahawk flies at around 0.9 mach.Now i dont know about the speed of babur aka HN-1 ,but with the possibility that it may be a incomplete reverse engineered Tomahawk ,it may have the same speed too.

And in the end its true that such high speed of ICBMs gives very little time to react and its hard to intercept by a missile but thats exactly why i suggested to use large number of SAMs.We sure will get a high rate of success if we can do that.

btw Shankar ji i m eagerly waiting for some more indian military scenarios.Your scenarios are really awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2005 05:52 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Posts: 762
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)
'Arrow' Scud buster test a success
Dec. 2, 2005

Quote:
The Air Force held the 14th test of the Israeli-designed Arrow 2 anti-ballistic missile on Friday, successfully intercepting an incoming rocket at a higher altitude than ever before.

A day after Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared that Israel would not tolerate Iranian efforts to get nuclear arms, the test demonstrated Israel's robust interception capability against incoming missiles that may be armed with nuclear or chemical warheads.

The Defense Ministry said the routine test, which was scheduled over a year ago, tested improvements made to the Arrow 2 system.

The test took place at 10:28 a.m., when the Arrow 2 interceptor was launched from the Palmachim Air Force base south of Tel Aviv.

An F-15 fighter jet flying over the Mediterranean dropped a Black Sparrow test missile specially designed to simulate an incoming Iranian Shihab 3 missile headed toward the Israeli shore.

The radar detected the Black Sparrow missile and relayed its data to a battle management center, which issued the command to launch the Arrow 2 interceptor.

"The interceptor performed successfully and intercepted the target," a Defense Ministry statement said. "The test's success is a major step in the system's operational improvements to deal with future ballistic missile threats.'

Air Force officers carried out the test, but officials from the companies which manufacture the system as well as US officials were also on hand.

Air Force Patriot batteries also participated passively in the test, following the incoming missile with their radars and simulating interceptions. This tested the entire missile defense screen of the country, the only nation in the world to have a national missile defense shield.

"The defense establishment, the Ministry of Defense, the defense industries and the IDF have proven once again their technological contribution to Israel's national defense," said Jacob Toren, director general of the Defense Ministry.

"The success of the test will improve the existing operational capabilities of the Arrow system that will be able to cope successfully with future threats."

The Arrow 2 was delivered to the Air Force in 1998 and has been declared operational for over five years.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2005 10:49 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 24947
Location: NowHere
I don't get it.. how high f15 could have travell and dropped a black sparrow? 50,000 feet?.. thats enough distance to kill a NBC weapon? radiations, worms and contaminations or okay..

Israel is sized so small that it cant take chance of killing sometihng over the air. they would be extinct if iran launches a nuclear weapon., or say even a biological weapon that carries say human infectable H5N1 (example) or something.

something more arrows need to do.. if its ICBM, then it has to kill them out of atmosphere.. hopefully the germs dont survive the outer space.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2005 12:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 2803
Location: KhyberDurra
SaiK: Interceptiing missile in atmosphere is not failure. it all depends on how big the protective ABM bubble must be (that depends on the hardness of asset being protected).

So for nuclear tipped ICBM, to defend a city the interception must has be above 10Km. Now interception means the missile payload is so disabled that the weaposn does not generate usable yield. For that just some damage to the implosion explosives or electronics is enough. The damage due to physical impact of rocket is not as bad (much like a 2000 Kg bomb). OTOH interception at 10Km or higher that even punchures the skin of RV will cause it to disintegrate, resulting in heat generation of about 200 MW(MegaWatt) and temprature reaching 5000 degree C to virtully destroy any biological payload (may be trace amount will reach surface, but that is again inconsequential). It is worthwhile to recall that ICBM RV re-entering the atmosphere normally generates many megawatt of heat and its payload is delicately saved from the inferno outside. Release of biological or chemical weapons from such speed is much greatly more challanging than exploding a conventional or un-conventional bomb.

Think about it: Israel is blessed to be a small land for it is perhaps the only country that can protect itself with a ABM shield !!!:twisted:

Determination to self preservation and win makes virtue out of a handicap. If only India can learn a fraction of that Israel's practicality.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2005 16:36 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 27 Jan 2002 12:31
Posts: 345
No defence missile arrangement with US: Pranab


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2005 15:40 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 02 Sep 2005 15:44
Posts: 14
I am not sure if this thing has already been discussed here... however i was greately surprised to see what Amreeka aims to do in BMD

http://www.missilethreat.com/systems/sbl_usa.html

Space-Based Laser (SBL)
"The Space-Based Laser (SBL) is one of the United States’s most daring and sophisticated anti-missile projects. As envisioned, it would consist of a 20-satellite constellation orbiting the globe at altitudes of 1,300 kilometers, each satellite equipped with a high-energy chemical laser that would detect, track, target, and destroy hostile ballistic missiles at the speed of light
...
..
It is estimated that a 20-satellite constellation would destroy almost all threats, while a 12-satellite constellation would eliminate 94 percent.

...
..
SBL’s potential to instantaneously destroy almost all missiles launched against the United States would force terrorists and aggressive nations to abandon their ballistic missile programs—since SBL would render them essentially useless."



Uncle's dosti is veri importent to us.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2005 16:16 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 09 Dec 2005 15:10
Posts: 68
America's ballistic missile defense systems can't actually hit anything, so they're really just a drain on America's budget and an addition to their current account deficit. As for the laser shield, it's nowhere near implementation, again because of targeting. Atleast with guided missiles there is some value in being "close enough", whereas with lasers unless you score a direct hit, the systems is worhless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2005 16:47 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 02 Sep 2005 15:44
Posts: 14
neel wrote:
America's ballistic missile defense systems can't actually hit anything, so they're really just a drain on America's budget and an addition to their current account deficit. As for the laser shield, it's nowhere near implementation, again because of targeting. Atleast with guided missiles there is some value in being "close enough", whereas with lasers unless you score a direct hit, the systems is worhless.

Same was said for Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) developed by Israel with US help.

http://www.missilethreat.com/systems/thel_usa.html

Quote:
.
..
To date, THEL has destroyed 28 Katyusha test rockets and five test artillery shells. On May 4, 2004, THEL’s new transportable version, known as the Mobile Tactical High Energy Laser (MTHEL), tracked and destroyed a large-caliber test rocket at the U.S. Army’s White Sands Missile Ranch in New Mexico. The rocket flew faster and higher than the Katyushas, and carried a live warhead. The U.S. and Israel expect MTHEL to be operational and ready for deployment by 2007.
...


i understand that it is quite difficult to make... but if we participate it in in future... it will be ultimate shield for us...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2005 17:22 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 27 May 2003 11:31
Posts: 55
The Katyusha rockets dont fly at anywhere near the speed of a ballistic missile. A manoevering ballistic missile with decoys will be almost impossible to hit. Like finding a needle in a haystack.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2005 17:31 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 02 Sep 2005 15:44
Posts: 14
abrahavt wrote:
The Katyusha rockets dont fly at anywhere near the speed of a ballistic missile. A manoevering ballistic missile with decoys will be almost impossible to hit. Like finding a needle in a haystack.

THEL costs about 3k $ per hit... cheapest of all Missile Defense.
if improved, it still can destroy craps like Babur etc. We should get involved in something like it. It will give us good expertise.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2005 21:55 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 2803
Location: KhyberDurra
abrahavt wrote:
The Katyusha rockets dont fly at anywhere near the speed of a ballistic missile. A manoevering ballistic missile with decoys will be almost impossible to hit. Like finding a needle in a haystack.


Beg to differ.

The key challange to ABM interception using missile is the reaction time and time it take to get the interceptor to hit the Missile outside the protective bubble. The latter is the limiting factor.

Laser or HPM based interception does not suffer from that and if the bubble hight is >15Km altitude then decoys do not play a role because they would by then be retarted by drag. Also future Lasers abelity to take down multiple targets in rapid fire will make decoys less useful. IMHO Lasers and HPM are the onlt way to get ICBM (compared to the other solution of using missile interceptor, that would only work if there is a space based network of sats detecting launch and tracking the flight to accuratly determine the trajectory so that interceptor can be cued with required accuracy (for ICBM type velocities cueing accuracy requirement is very stringent)

US is slowly encrouching wepaonization of spcae which is otherwise banned by international treaties. As an when US does deploy space based ABM interceptors, the closly linked ASAT treaty (of not deploying Anti-Satellite weapons) will also collaps, making space based ABM weapons legal target for ground based lasers or space based ASAT system. Its a escalatory ladder the primemover of that is however money and technology. US is the king there as of now. :twisted:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2005 22:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 2803
Location: KhyberDurra
vikas_pandey wrote:
abrahavt wrote:
The Katyusha rockets dont fly at anywhere near the speed of a ballistic missile. A manoevering ballistic missile with decoys will be almost impossible to hit. Like finding a needle in a haystack.

THEL costs about 3k $ per hit... cheapest of all Missile Defense.
if improved, it still can destroy craps like Babur etc. We should get involved in something like it. It will give us good expertise.


That I think will be a overkill for Bubur. Babur needs only a good detection system, once detected hitting it is easy with Akash/Trishul or with other current IAF/IA assets. Detection is the key, irrespective of what takes it down. This where I belive investment in a grid of low power multipupose comunication grids that also linked to passive passive arrey radar/reciver is of utmost importance (and itI belive is very affordable both price wise and technology wise) to make out borders impregnable to enemy aircraft or cruise missiles.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2005 22:17 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21
Posts: 146
Arun_S wrote:
vikas_pandey wrote:
abrahavt wrote:
.... THEL costs about 3k $ per hit... cheapest of all Missile Defense.
if improved, it still can destroy craps like Babur etc. We should get involved in something like it. It will give us good expertise.

That I think will be a overkill for Bubur. Babur needs only a good detection system, once detected hitting it is easy with Akash/Trishul or with other current IAF/IA assets....

Is THEL only $3K/ hit? What is the hit probability? Sounds pretty good. Hope, this can be improvised for ABM/ ACM capabilities. Also, are we not already working on similar areas? If I remember correctly, KALI supposedly has similar applications.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 15 Dec 2005 15:48 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Posts: 333
Arun_S wrote:
vikas_pandey wrote:
abrahavt wrote:
The Katyusha rockets dont fly at anywhere near the speed of a ballistic missile. A manoevering ballistic missile with decoys will be almost impossible to hit. Like finding a needle in a haystack.

THEL costs about 3k $ per hit... cheapest of all Missile Defense.
if improved, it still can destroy craps like Babur etc. We should get involved in something like it. It will give us good expertise.


That I think will be a overkill for Bubur. Babur needs only a good detection system, once detected hitting it is easy with Akash/Trishul or with other current IAF/IA assets. Detection is the key, irrespective of what takes it down. This where I belive investment in a grid of low power multipupose comunication grids that also linked to passive passive arrey radar/reciver is of utmost importance (and itI belive is very affordable both price wise and technology wise) to make out borders impregnable to enemy aircraft or cruise missiles.


The proposed laser system will be a good ABM shield and is the best way to defeat ballistic missiles compared to space based weapons or SAMs. Interceptor missiles will be having problem coping with the high velocity of ballistic missiles but it is not a problem for laser based system..
I remember seeing a program in Discovery/History channel that showed a proposed plan to mount a laser on a Boeing plane to intercept ballistic missiles.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1464 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 37  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Harshad, hecky, koti, muttukur, RaviKR and 19 guests


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