Bharat Rakshak

Russia tested such a weapon in 1981, to replace IRBMs but cancelled in 1989 under INF treaty. their eventual goal was to make it hypersonic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-90

Russia truly has been the pioneer in long range CMs, in 1954 they worked out this vast beast known as the Burya, a 96 tons, 20m long ICCM powered by a solid rocket and ramjet for a range of 6000+ km @ mach3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burya
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/burya.jpg

it can be called an ancestor of yakhont.

^^Awesome.Burya is some crazy shit though.

However KH-90 type weapon seems more feasible to me.And should be attempted by India.There is a need for this type of weapon.

That seeker might be for Brahmos.

For such a range you need relatively large missile which will greatly increase the cost and size. A missile like that flying over china will easily get shot down due to its size and high altitude. It also raises the question what is advantage of that it is much more cheaper and effective to have a shorter range delivered by an airborne platform.

That seeker is not the Brahmos one (which uses another antenna) but that developed by RCI for the ABM program.

http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2011/12/te ... ekers.html

>> The turbojet-powered missile would cruise at Mach 2.5 to 3.0 at 20 km altitude over its 3000 km range. It was equipped with a 1 MT thermonuclear warhead and used inertial
>> navigation with data link updates.

we already have a better product Shourya for this. Mach6 @ 40km altitude and a potential range of 1500km with a 300kg payload. its mobile on land and ready for sea duty also.

S300/400 systems can intercept Mach3 @ 20km if their placement is right - ie tough in a tail chase but doable in a head-on or side intercept with enough warning from big radars to rise up ahead of the approach.

mashallah the close to american ICBMs indicates a low CEP of <= 100m and mostly composite incl the holy grail of 3 stage composite I dare hope.

GD, Lets see. We know its 3+stages. The last one is a powered re-entry vehicle that can be operated in following modes: make up any velocity errors i.e. error correction, or added range, or BGRV stage.

The last one would be like Falcon vehicle.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/tod ... ef=archive

big boss in 2008 said 2 out of 3 stages will be composite in A5 for a start. so 1st stage will be metal now. but the same article says they have a goal to make all composite in 6-7 yrs...

Singha ji, I think we would need the all-composite version for SLBM use. I'd think the weight savings would be invaluable.

BrahMos Considers All-New AShM For MiG-29K & MMRCA


IMO, in order for Rafale and MiG-29K to be able to carry it in multiples (2 to 4 missiles), BrahMos-3 would need to be the following:

• 4.5m/5m -> about 50% to 60% the length of BrahMos-1
• 800kg/1,000kg -> about 30% to 40% the weight of BrahMos-1
• 150kg/80kg (ASM/ARM) -> about 1/2 the warhead weight (or less for ARM variant) of BrahMos-1
• 100-150km -> about 1/2 the range (or less) of BrahMos-1

Variants & Quantities (IAF/IN):

• AShM -> 500
• ASM -> 2000+
• ARM -> 2000+

Brahmos-3 has the potential to become the standard ASM for the IAF and IN if the length/weight are kept to the above limits.

For future, it would be wise for the DRDO to R&D a ASM that fits in the internal bays of FGFA and AMCA. These more compact ASMs would be able to be used by Medium-sized ASW helicopters and the LCA as well. Take a look at NSM - Joint Strike Missile as an example with a length of 3.70m, range of 277km, and weight of 407 Kg (including warhead weight of 120kg).

X Post Nuclear submarine INS Arihant in advanced stage of integration : DRDO Chief

K-15 near successful tests, near induction,

Agni 5 in mid April.

eggcellent - the micro-brahmos has been a demand for a long time among the nuts here. it will make a potent ARM also.

also instead of 1 full sized brahmos-A, the MKI would be able to carry 4 of these if the mission dictates.
likewise the P8I would be able to carry, as well as naval helicopters.

it could even replace the Uran in our ships.

Would it be a good stand-in for the AASM that the french seem to ask an arm and a leg for?

No I think AASM is a much smaller, less ranged and surely cheaper weapon - compare AASM vs SLAM-ER.

longest known hit with a AASM is 55km in libya, 5km outside its design limit.

SLAM-ER types range out to 250km and pack a bigger warhead, no doubt also fly faster, have waypoints and pack ECCM/EW to evade defences...

that being said, personally I think we'd be better of skipping AASM and going for SLAM/micro-brahmos at higher end and wing range extention kits / SDB from Khan at the low end - would be cheaper than AASM probably. we will need to armtwist the french, because apparently they have pinned hopes on selling rafale at rock bottom price but charging us heavily for the weapons, whose fat profits will be cross subsidized back to dassault by the french govt at the back end.

Fundamentally, there does not seem to be any advantage that ramjet or scramjet enjoys over conventional missiles with modern solid propellants. Compare for example the size, weight, payload and speed of Brahmos and Prahaar. The latter technology seems to give better performance.

I was thinking liquid fuel in ramjet permits a more compact airframe for the same range and speed vs solid fuel rocket? missiles like SLAM or JASSM that fly >= brahmos range tend to fly at 3X slower speed.

the akash and meteor being solid fuel ramjet I dont understand how it works - maybe there is no 'oxidizer grain' and oxygen provides the oxidizer?

I think going the solid fuel ramjet route like meteor could be on the plan vs kerosene in brahmos

Liquid fuel Ramjet offer higher isp over solid fuel ramjet making liquid fuel ramjet more energetic.

Do not forget the payload a missile carries over that range that affects the over all dimension of the missile to carry the payload to a given range , Brahmos carry 300 kg warhead ,versus Akash 55 kg and Meteor much less , plus the trajectory that Brahmos goes through which burns more fuel

If they need a small supersonic missile that can be carried by aircraft like Rafale or Tejas , they are better of integrating a modernised variant of Kh-31 i.e. Kh-31AD , it offers decent range with payload.

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/512/564/

rather than just adopt KH31P airframe, we can generate more work and knowledge internally by downsizing the brahmos and shifting it to a solid or gel based ramjet. might take 1-2 yrs more but well worth it - as it will be a standard airframe for lots of things.

the KH family in general has no attention to RCS reduction unlike the western systems that came after it .... we can address that aspect also.
the KH59 for instance has the engine hanging out at the bottom. even to talk to it need a dedicated pylon mounted datalink pod on launch aircraft. these are weapons from a earlier era.

Currently which Anti-Ship missile is the MiG-29K and the NLCA supposed to carry?
The P-8I will be armed with the Harpoon Block-II. Is the Harpoon Block-II also carried by the Jaguar-IMs?
Also what about the Seakings? They used to carry the Sea Eagle AShM. Now with the retirement of the Sea Eagle, do they carry any other missiles or are we just waiting for a new Medium weight ASW heli to come in.

Do the Tu-142 or the Il-38s carry any AShMs?

Thanks.

Tu142 & IL38 carries the sea eagle or uran as needed - pix below

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Gall ... e.jpg.html
http://vayu-sena.indianmilitaryhistory. ... 5_Uran.jpg
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_431.shtml

Except for maybe Porkistan launched missiles, this has got to be a Space based device. Is it proper to be publicly talking about this?

Solar cells of a typical size do not produce that much power. Even a 100 KW laser must be sustained for some time for an effective boost phase intercept, so capacitor banks won't do the trick.

This will surely be land based.

can such a kit be fitted onto a couple of 40ft container trucks? what are the main components?

Wasn't the great khan working on a 747 mounted airborne laser ABM sytem? Don't know if that system got cancelled.

The Air-Borne Laser has been mothballed

http://www.airteamimages.com/pics/145/145031_800.jpg

However, we might be developing something more along the lines of the solid-state, terrestrial, JHPSSL. According to this link, a 100 KW laser could require a 1 MW power supply.

^^^ LASERS are very inefficient

We?

Chuck Yeager we?

Shiv ji, I was referring to Austin's quote of the DRDO article above. So yes, we are developing a solid state laser.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-04-02/india/31275075_1_agni-v-ballistic-missile-missile-defence-system

good BDL video. hope this was not posted before.

deleted by moderator

Is that supposed to be funny, Dharma? You took Boeing press release content and changed it to suit your sense of humour. If this is piskology then congratulations.

Solid State Laser Developments at LASTEC Old article.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3291547.ece



Note how UQ was correctly left off that list

^^^ Thanks tejas for the post. From the above Hindu link, some important things :

^^ from above post



It's one or the other, can't be both unless the yindoos have goofed up! Of course, we are immensely capable of doing so

[/quote]

So anyone snooping on us won't know if it's A3 or A5 till about midway of boost phase when the ballistic trajectory will become apparent? What if we launch the A5 with a trajectory similar to A3 with some extra flowers & mithai to our near and dear ones?

the dummy payload is meant as a penetration aid. will deploy one or more rcs inducing things to mimic real warheads and confuse interceptor missiles. it will need a certain weight and volume allowance which is there.

the A5 trajectory will obviously need to be higher than A3 to reach the range. so beyond the point where the A3 reaches its highest point it will become apparent. in either case , A3 or A5 launch means a full scale nuclear war is on....so its not as if anyone will be holding back just because we mislead it as "only" a A3.

the advantages will be in common parts and logistical chain, plus common training and mixed units if A5 is also put on rails.

the Topol-M which is BRFs previously favourite ICBM is 22.7m x 1.9m x 47.2 tons...its payload of warhead + decoys is said as 1.2tons. it is 3 stage and solid fuel.

so how on earth is its range 11,000km while A5 is quoted as only 5500km with the same dimensions and payload . Rus cant be using a super duper solid fuel powder.

or does the 2.7m extra length if used in the 3rd stage have a huge impact on the range?

some clues as to why topol-M pulls ahead. looks like all its 3 stages are composites and its 1st stage has some uber powerful 3xrockets.
--
Body of the rocket is made by winding carbon fiber.
The first stage has three rocket motors developed by the Soyuz Federal Center for Dual-Use Technologies. This gives the missile a much higher acceleration than other ICBM types. It enables the missile to accelerate to the speed of 7,320 m/s and to travel a flatter trajectory to distances of up to 10,000 km
--
at present only the 3rd stage of A5 is composite. no doubt they will attempt to make it all-composite by 2020 while just talking of making it lighter and faster and not speaking of the enhanced range.