Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 29 Sep 2015 07:11

Vipul wrote:3 day fishing restriction in Bay for missile tests.

Likely an ABM test .

srai · Post by **srai** » 29 Sep 2015 07:11

Well ... most of PGMs, like LGB and JDAM, are kits fitted onto dumb bombs. So the dumb bombs will be around so to speak

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Sep 2015 07:13

Singha wrote:only the US among all nations has enough PGMs to run a month long high intensity war using 90% PGM ratio.

This is true. In a real war we will run out of PGMs double quick unless we use a judicious mix.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 29 Sep 2015 10:07

@SJha1618: Nirbhay test likely within the next 48 hours.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Sep 2015 10:45

AOA. mashallah. hopefully from a submarine this time.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 29 Sep 2015 11:17

What is surprising is there are no tests done for Prahar since long. (2011?) Just one test and then we hear nothing other than there is some export version called Pragathi. Strange.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 29 Sep 2015 11:59

Got wild feeling but lets wait until it is done

srin · Post by **srin** » 29 Sep 2015 12:40

What can Prahaar do that a cruise missile (like Brahmos) can't ? And a cruise missile by virtue of its flight profile would be less vulnerable to radar detection and SAMs.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Sep 2015 12:46

it will likely be much cheaper and be usable in bulk.
nirbhay depends on imported turbofan engine - we are yet to IOC our domestic effort or license build that engine.
brahmos again is on expensive side.

there are a lot of target sets that need a cheap weapon like prahaar that can be given to all the artillery regiments not held in special artillery regiments like agnis or brahmos.

srai · Post by **srai** » 29 Sep 2015 12:47

Yagnasri wrote:What is surprising is there are no tests done for Prahar since long. (2011?) Just one test and then we hear nothing other than there is some export version called Pragathi. Strange.

Last thing I remember, the IA was still figuring out where it would fit into its structure.

From DRDO pov, Prahar is a replacement for 150km Prithvi-1 SSM. It was an initiative of DRDO "youngsters" adapting ABM AAD missile into a SSM.

After 17 years in service, the Prithvi I missile will give way to smaller and better Prahar

Jul 1, 2013

India plans to withdraw the Prithvi I tactical ballistic missile from active service, replacing it with the more advanced, solid-propelled Prahar. According to the Indian Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) chief Avinash Chander, “We are withdrawing the tactical 150 km-range Prithvi missiles and will replace them with the Prahar missiles, which are more capable and have more accuracy.” According to Chander, the Prithvi I missiles withdrawn from service would be upgraded to be used for longer ranges, he said. Defense-Update reports. Prithvi I (also known as SS150) was the first tactical ballistic missile inducted into service by the Indian military.

...
DRDO developed the Prahar missile over a period of two years, between 2009 and 2011. The missile and its systems will be built by Bharat Dynamics Ltd., (BDL), India’s largest missile producer. The missile fills the short-range tactical battlefield missile role as required by the Indian Army and the Indian Air Force, to take out strategic and tactical targets. The mobile launch platform will carry six missiles. Launch preparation takes 2-3 minutes, without any preparation, providing significantly better reaction time and higher survivability for the all-terrain missile carrying.
...

DRDO hopes to impress Army with Prahaar punch; demo launch of tactical missile on July 21

July 19, 2011
...
DRDO hopes to get a formal sanction for the programme subject to the successive launch of the first missile on July 21. “The programme is not yet sanctioned. What we are attempting is a demonstration launch for the user and only one missile will be tested. We will take the inputs from the user (Army) and make the necessary modifications needed. Then we will go for the final sanction,” sources said.
...
Close to 50 scientists and engineers, including many youngsters, have worked for the Prahaar project.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Sep 2015 13:09

probably due to funding issues and more critical priorities for the IA, the program has not yet got sanction for FOC and productionization. there is a prithvi-2 solid fuel that is basis of our PAD program now. IA might prefer that for reusing all the rest of the vehicles and stuff. plus its fat fuselage permits a huge payload of bomblets.

the shourya is also in similar limbo without a clear picture of where it fits.

I had proposed shourya could be used as a VLSAM to target slow moving large targets like tankers, cargo haulers and awacs upto 1500km away with a bunch of AAM released in final phase over the target . this would need some OTH radars to track flying objects deep over tibet, afpak and the sea. it could also be our entry at the ASBM table.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Sep 2015 13:57

IBN

New Delhi: In a big setback for India, Italy is becoming a major roadblock in the nation's entry into an elite missile technology group called Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Sources said Italy has stated marines issue as the reason behind blocking India's entry into MTCR.

Italian marines Latorre and Salvatore Girone are facing trial of killing two Indian fishermen off the Kerala coast in February 2012.
According to the sources, Italy expects India to go easy on the marines issue in lieu of support for MTCR.

MTCR is an important platform for India to have access to niche missile technology, space technology.

In an effort to strengthen global non-proliferation and export control regimes, India and the US had on January 25 committed to continue to work towards India's phased entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), the MTCR, the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group.

The decision to admit a new partner in the group is taken by consensus. There are high chances that India will become part of this elite group in annual plenary in October.

MTCR is an elite non-proliferation group of 34 countries that controls trade in missile and space technology. MTCR was created to curb spread of missile and unmanned delivery systems for nuclear weapons.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 29 Sep 2015 14:03

I guess it would be too much to expect CNN IBN to report the following "MTCR is an cartel of 34 countries that controls trade in missile and space technology. MTCR was created to curb India's missile and unmanned delivery systems for nuclear weapons."

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 29 Sep 2015 16:56

It's the only area in which we are fully independent. Thanks to MTCR. Let's continue this independent approach and build more powerful and longer mizziles.

China is not party to that and is selling all their missiles to regimes they like. Seems there was opposition for them joining. Dont end up with such useless group which is created for the west by the west to share technology among themselves and deny others the same. Thanks to Italy and the marines that we dont end up joining and sharing our technology with others.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 29 Sep 2015 17:08

If anything China would try to pre-empt India having any leverage of arming its adversaries in East and South East Asia (Vietnam, Phillipines, Malaysia etc). Just Imagine what would a Agni-II or Agni-II replica in Vietnamese hands would do to the Chinese.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 17:26

srai wrote:The IAF seems to prefer 450kg/1000lb/500kg bomb for LGB/PGM kit integration. I haven't heard anywhere of it using it for smaller bombs in the 250kg/100kg class. But there are new small munitions under R&D by RCI and other DRDO labs. We will have to wait and see what transpires.

Top one is the 250kg one - these are Sudarshan's not NG-LGBs
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TYbXtu6KWUg/U ... Family.jpg

http://www.inscoms.in/Images/sudershan2.png

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 29 Sep 2015 17:29

AFAIK the army has is supposed to(or at least authorised to) have 10,000s of ATGMs in their inventory. No reason why the IAF can't stock up on x0,000 PGMs.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Sep 2015 18:20

prahaar wrote:I guess it would be too much to expect CNN IBN to report the following "MTCR is an cartel of 34 countries that controls trade in missile and space technology. MTCR was created to curb India's missile and unmanned delivery systems for nuclear weapons."

Absolutely.

But I am a little intrigued and a little amused by India's wanting to enter this cartel. By entering this cartel India is agreeing not to export missiles and tech for missiles exceeding 300 km in range. India seems to be saying "We are there whether you like it or not. We should be in the club and we will help your cause"

I don't think it has anything to do with the cartel sharing tech - that cartel will not give us they they don't want to share whether we are in it or not. We are no entering as beggars.

But India will insert its fingers gradually and dilate up the asses of this group - because what will happen is that if India is left out - we will not suffer. but sooner rather than later, all the nations declared as "rogues" will themselves get the tech to make 300 plus km delivery systems and then the members of the cartels will not be able to get their thumbs back in their musharrafs as they have now. Italy is turning out to be a ch@@tya nation - when it sees that they and their allies can no longer "rule the waves"

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 18:25

>>I guess it would be too much to expect CNN IBN to report the following "MTCR is an cartel of 34 countries that controls trade in missile and space technology. MTCR was created to curb India's missile and unmanned delivery systems for nuclear weapons."

fakers pretend as if they are more gora than the goras themselves.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 29 Sep 2015 18:31

>>Italy is turning out to be a ch@@tya nation -

Indeed. Chooth-booth ki sarkar

srin · Post by **srin** » 29 Sep 2015 18:36

It is far more important to remain outside the MTCR and transfer missiles - starting with Prahaar/Pragati and going till Shaurya/Agni-1 - to countries like Vietnam, Mongolia, Phillipines, Malaysia on one hand, and to Argentina and Ireland on the other.

I don't understand the benefits we get by joining it. We get more benefits staying outside. Let the others invite us if they want us to control our exports.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Sep 2015 19:37

abhik wrote:AFAIK the army has is supposed to(or at least authorised to) have 10,000s of ATGMs in their inventory. No reason why the IAF can't stock up on x0,000 PGMs.

Lets quantify TSP targets suitable for PGM. And multiply by 2x for target kill probability. Then add spares 7 pipeline, non-availability (electric check-out test failures, actuators sticking etc.) to come up with the quantity desired.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 20:09

srin wrote:It is far more important to remain outside the MTCR and transfer missiles - starting with Prahaar/Pragati and going till Shaurya/Agni-1 - to countries like Vietnam, Mongolia, Phillipines, Malaysia on one hand, and to Argentina and Ireland on the other.

I don't understand the benefits we get by joining it. We get more benefits staying outside. Let the others invite us if they want us to control our exports.

Benefits are more easy licenses for a lot of industrial and mfg gear, JVs and other items..
Hope we don't get lazy in the process..

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 29 Sep 2015 20:32

IAF chief in aftermath of 26/11 had said they have identified 5000 targets in TSP.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Sep 2015 21:48

Not all need PGMs!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 22:15

Paul wrote:IAF chief in aftermath of 26/11 had said they have identified 5000 targets in TSP.

Barbora - 5000 targets

This was my post on that.

The most recent estimate of IAF target list was this in 2008.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1081225/j ... 299108.jsp

Air Marshal PK Barbora, chief of India’s western air command, said that the air force had identified 5,000 targets inside Pakistani territory.

In comparison the US before it went into the previous Iraq War had 3000 targets identified.
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB214/Tab%20I.pdf

The heaviest air attack the planning study included estimated 3,000 individual aiming points from 2,100 aircraft sorties, the difference being made up by mix of multiple-target missions and Tomahawk missiles.

In reality
http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-PGM-ODS-92.html

US alone..several thousand Paveway-2 LGBs and over 5000 Maverick missiles, 75 gliders, 300 cruise missiles...

Difference between merely the strategic campaign and an all out war.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 22:26

Above just shows how much PGM inventory we need to maintain to get things in place for a full blown strategic cum all out war with TSP (let alone keeping inventory for China). A strategic campaign will lead to all out war.

Not only do DRDO programs on PGMs need to be accelerated but multiple pvt groups should be asked to work on PGMs. For instance Accord is a GPS/Glonass expert. Why can't they work with L&T/Tata for a cheap Glonass/IRNSS guided bomb?

IAFs Rafale focus has IMHO deviated their and our focus on these essential items.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 29 Sep 2015 22:27

Desert Storm saw more than 17,000 PGM's being dropped, making 7.2% of the total munitions dropped. The last Iraq war saw 19,000+ PGM's used making up 65+% of the total munitions dropped.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 22:38

Thanks brar.

In short IAF needs a ~40K PGM inventory for just TSP and PRC to feel comfortable..

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 29 Sep 2015 22:55

CCIP would be good enough if you dont need pin point accuracy.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 23:07

http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-myth.htm

The sheer amount of explosive tonnage dropped over Iraq and Kuwai also, I think, tends to undermine any assumption of surgical strikes. Air Force General McPeak, Air Force commanding general, proudly proclaiming, "Probably the first time in history that a field army has been defeated by air power," estimated that some 88,500 tons of bombs have been dropped in over 109,000 sorties flown by a total of 2,800 fixed-wing aircraft. Of these flights somewhat over half were actual bombing raids while the remainder involved refueling, bomber escort, surveillance, and so forth. Of the actual bombing missions, about 20,000 sorties were flown against a select list of 300 strategic targets in Iraq and Kuwait; about 5,000 were flown against SCUD missile launchers, and some 30,000 to 50,000 against Iraqi forces in southern Iraq and Kuwait. In all, more than 3,000 bombs (including sea-launched cruise missiles) were dropped on metropolitan Baghdad. The total number of bombs dropped by allied forces in the war comes to about 250,000. Of these only 22,000 were the so-called "smart bombs" or guided bombs. About 10,000 of these guided bombs were laser-guided and about 10,000 were guided anti-tank bombs. The remaining 2,000 were radiation guided bombs directed at communication and radar installations.

The most complete survey of all the different bombs, missiles, shells, and weapons so far appears in Appendix A of On Impact: Modern Warfare and the Environment, a report prepared by William Arkin, Damian Durrant, and Marianne Cherni for Greenpeace. This report was prepared for the "Fifth Geneva Convention on the Protection of the Environment in the Time of Armed Conflict" (London, June 3, 1991). The authors infer the total weapons used from the 1991 fiscal year supplemental budget request to Congress which lists weapons required to replenish U.S. stockpiles. The numbers are revealing and staggering. In part, they include:

2,095 HARM missiles
217 Walleye missiles
5,276 guided anti-tank missiles
44,922 cluster bombs and rockets
136,755 conventional bombs
4,077 guided bombs[1]

The conventional unguided bomb (so-called "dumb bomb") was the most commonly used weapon in the massacre. These come in four types: the Mk 82 (500 lbs), Mk 83 (1,000 lbs), Mk 84 (2,000 lbs), and the M117 (750 lbs). In all some 150,000 to 170,000 of these bombs were dropped during the war.

The U.S. arsenal contains eight kinds of guided bombs:

AGM-130, an electro-optically or infrared-guided 2,000 pound powered bomb,
GBU-10 Paveway II, a 2,000 pound laser-guided bomb based on a Mk 84,
GBU-101 Paveway II, a 2,000 pound laser-guided bomb with I-2000 hard target munition, employed exclusively on the F117A and used in small numbers,
GBU-12 Paveway II, a 500 pound laser-guided bomb, used against tanks,
GBU-24 Paveway III, a 2,000 pound laser-guided, low-level weapon (with BLU-109 bomb and mid-course auto pilot) used against chemical and industrial facilities, bridges, nuclear storage areas, and aircraft shelters,
GBU-27 Paveway III, a 2,000 pound laser-guided bomb with I-2000 hard target munition on the BLU-109/B, a "black program" adapted version of the GBU-24, used exclusively by F- 117A fighters to attack aircraft shelters, bunkers, and other targets in Baghdad, and
GBU-28, a 5,000 pound "bunker busting" laser-guided bomb, fabricated especially for the war against Iraq "in an effort to destroy extremely hardened, deeply buried Iraqi command and control bunkers, kill senior military officials and possible kill Saddam Hussein."[2]

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Sep 2015 23:09

Rahul M wrote:CCIP would be good enough if you dont need pin point accuracy.

Good point. Useful against large factory sheds, rolling stock stored in open, air bases etc.

http://www.livefistdefence.com/2010/07/ ... ig-27.html

During upgrade trials, an upgraded MiG-27 conducted an HALR laser-pod assisted drop of a 500-kg dumb bomb from 7.5-km. Its missed distance was 15-metres. This was a dumb bomb, not a PGM.

This will work in areas where there is low probability of SAMs.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 29 Sep 2015 23:22

data source - http://csbaonline.org/publications/2015 ... advantage/

srai · Post by **srai** » 30 Sep 2015 03:44

Karan M wrote:
Rahul M wrote:CCIP would be good enough if you dont need pin point accuracy.
Good point. Useful against large factory sheds, rolling stock stored in open, air bases etc.

http://www.livefistdefence.com/2010/07/ ... ig-27.html

During upgrade trials, an upgraded MiG-27 conducted an HALR laser-pod assisted drop of a 500-kg dumb bomb from 7.5-km. Its missed distance was 15-metres. This was a dumb bomb, not a PGM.

This will work in areas where there is low probability of SAMs.

LCA was doing something similar with Litening pod and dumb bombs.

Breaking on Tarmak007: Tejas 'bombs' Chitradurga test range

...
Shri PS Subramanyam, Programme Director (CA) & Director, ADA said that on December 15, 2010, Tejas PV-2 aircraft piloted by Gp Capt (Retd) RR Tyagi dropped practice bombs on the target. Thus NFTC, ADA became the first to use the facility for weapon testing on Tejas. For this purpose, air-to-ground target and Range Safety Officer (RSO) bunkers were constructed at the range site. NFTC mobile telemetry with Test Director and critical system monitoring personnel were also positioned at the test range. The mobile telemetry was linked to the base station Bangalore, through BSNL fiber optic link to monitor the test aircraft data and video in real-time. Availability of the range at a reasonable distance from Bangalore is expected to have a beneficial effect on clearance to air-to-ground weapon, integrated with various sensors onboard Tejas.
...

Looks like a direct hit.

srin · Post by **srin** » 30 Sep 2015 08:21

This is what we did with Mig-27: http://www.livefistdefence.com/2010/07/ ... ig-27.html

Weapon accuracy was a real concern. During upgrade trials, an upgraded MiG-27 conducted an HALR laser-pod assisted drop of a 500-kg dumb bomb from 7.5-km. Its missed distance was 15-metres. This was a dumb bomb, not a PGM.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Oct 2015 02:46

srin, From pictures posted by srai, the LCA does better than 15m.

CCIP = Continuous Computed Impact Point
CCRP = Computer Controlled Release point

ramdas · Post by **ramdas** » 01 Oct 2015 08:06

No Agni series test since April. There has never been such a gap since 2012. Is the reorganization of DRDO taking a toll ? Removing Dr. Chander should not have been done in the first place...

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 02 Oct 2015 20:07

IAF's SU-30 fighter pilots gear up for installation of 'game changer' BrahMos missiles

IAF's Su-30 fighter plane pilots are focusing on beyond visual range combat and night flying capabilities even as they gear up for the installation of the 'game changer' BrahMos missiles, with a strike range of nearly 300 kms, in the aircraft.

They are also looking forward to the plane's next generation 'Super 30' version which will have advanced avionics.

Explaining the concept of the beyond visual range (BVR) fights, senior IAF officials at a forward base close to the border at a forward base close to the border with Pakistan explained that future wars are unlikely to have close combat fights like in wars in 1965 or 1971.

"Nowadays, the fighter jets are very modernised with state-of-the-art radar systems. What matters now is BVR which means that one can engage with the enemy in air without actually seeing him. Once the enemy is locked in, a BVR missile is fired," Wing Commander Sharad Sharma, who has clocked more than 1000 hours on the Sukhoi, said.

The BVR missiles carried by Sukhoi currently have a range of about 50-70 kms. But what will truly turn the tide is the integration of the supersonic missile BrahMos with the Sukhoi.

Fighter pilots at the base, one of the newest of the Sukhoi, say that the BrahMos will be game changer.

"Imagine, one can fire a missile nearly 300 kms away from the target. Installations across the border can be targeted by our fighter jets without even crossing the border," a senior pilot explained.

The first test, a dead weight one, of the BrahMos integrated Sukhoi is likely to take place early next month or even this month-end.

The second test will be by firing a dummy missile while the third and fourth stages of testing will be with actual missile, but without the 200 kg warhead to validate the guidance system and accuracy. Two Sukhois will be used for the tests which will be completed in the next one year.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 02 Oct 2015 23:49

SSridhar wrote:IAF's SU-30 fighter pilots gear up for installation of 'game changer' BrahMos missiles
IAF's Su-30 fighter plane pilots are focusing on beyond visual range combat and night flying capabilities even as they gear up for the installation of the 'game changer' BrahMos missiles, with a strike range of nearly 300 kms, in the aircraft.

They are also looking forward to the plane's next generation 'Super 30' version which will have advanced avionics.
...

Many thanks for the link. I think this is the first clear confirmation that Brahmos compatible Su-30 is the Super-30. And the modifications to the aircraft go beyond those required to mate the missile to the airframe.

Awesome stuff.

Added later. This may also be a confirmation that Brahmos-A will not be restricted to SFC attached squadrons.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 Oct 2015 00:00

IMHO, Aditya, you are reading it wrong. Nowhere does it mention Super-30 is Brahmos compatible Su-30.

All it says is the IAF is waiting for both.