Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 06 Mar 2012 14:13

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:Could it be that this pic is of the cannister for a large SLBM?

Why will a Missile Launch Canister have a Nose Cone ?
The width actually seems closer to 5m, which is the diameter of Payload fairing of gslv mk3

http://www.isro.gov.in/Launchvehicles/G ... mark3.aspx

The large payload fairing measures 5 m in diameter and can accommodate a payload volume of 100 cu m.

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 06 Mar 2012 14:26

Initially, I thought it would be the stout version of RS-24 or the Indian MaRV but Narad's illustration clears it up.

I would like to think that a stout MaRV is being made to spread disinformation.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 06 Mar 2012 14:33

Ravi, if you haven't burned ISRO images to heart, this one ought to be the first. The floors move.

Any more doubt?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Mar 2012 22:37

Its not a Space Capsule, Recovery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Caps ... Experiment

Look at the lack of fasteners along the meridian. I didnt know that GSLV fairing/shroud was G/E.

Wasnt a GSLV flight schedled for March 2012?

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Mar 2012 00:08

^^^ Very

sukhish · Post by **sukhish** » 07 Mar 2012 03:39

how can it be GSLV-MK-3, I mean even the cryogenic stage is not even ground tested. I don't even think the GSLV-MK-III cryegenic stage is even manufactured.

sukhish · Post by **sukhish** » 07 Mar 2012 05:35

at best it would be GSLV MK-II or the PSLV payload

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Mar 2012 07:42

The GSLV fairing was transformed to composites about 4 years ago per Arun.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Mar 2012 09:03

So we are having a GSLV launch soon ? Will it test Indian or Russia cryo stage ?

mayankdr · Post by **mayankdr** » 07 Mar 2012 11:22

Guys,

Any validation about latest Brahmos Test news??
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels ... d-path-606

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 07 Mar 2012 11:26

The article is speculative, apart from fire, in such tests missile does not carry a warhead, so missile parts would have been all over the place. No cause for unnecessary alarm.

SivaVijay · Post by **SivaVijay** » 07 Mar 2012 11:42

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 968219.ece

Nirbhay Test in April .

Nirbhay is a two-stage, surface-to-surface missile. While a booster engine would “kick the first stage” from the ground, the second stage has a turbo-prop engine, akin to an aircraft's. It can carry multiple payloads and engage several targets. “Even if there are multiple targets, it can pick out a target and attack it. It is a loitering missile; it can go round and round a target, perform several manoeuvres and take it apart. It has precision, endurance and accuracy. It is an important missile,” DRDO officials said.

With a range of more than 750 km, Nirbhay can remain in the air for a long time. Capable of flying at the height of a tree (so, it is known as “tree-top missile), it can soar to a minimum of 10 km and a maximum of 50 km.

Why do we need a loitering missile? My understanding of loitering missile is:
a. It is for area denial
b. It works best in a degraded AD environment
c. The loitering feature comes with a cost.

Now if the Nirbhay was for area denial, what is our initial strike platform for C&C disruption? If the roles can be switched then isnt the loitering feature a waste of money on a missile which has to go from A and Strike B while avoiding counter measures? It may still cost less than western systems but is it the best cost soln. in a defence budget that is already prone to cuts in the coming year(s)?

Or let me rephrase, Why do we have this obsession to cramp everything on every platform, say a light fighter that should handle the same threats as a heavy one already in the service, or a tank that should stop everything thrown at it both actively and passively and still remain under 50T?

Are we driving the capability based approach at the theater/Battlespace level or are we overdoing it by stressing the approach on every (Homemade) platform?

Can the Gurus please clarify?

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 07 Mar 2012 12:00

Aditya_V wrote:The article is speculative, apart from fire, in such tests missile does not carry a warhead, so missile parts would have been all over the place. No cause for unnecessary alarm.

I thought Cruise missile remains intact till the moment of impact ..time to educate myself maybe

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 07 Mar 2012 12:30

Prithwiraj, exactly, so with no warhead at huge knietic energy apart from a few grass burning the disintegrated cruise missile parts would have been all over the place.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 07 Mar 2012 12:33

SivaVijay wrote:http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 968219.ece

Why do we need a loitering missile? My understanding of loitering missile is:
a. It is for area denial
b. It works best in a degraded AD environment
c. The loitering feature comes with a cost.

I guess this capability would be very useful to take out Paki Missile launchers. I guess the persons who make decisions feel this should be an important feature and our cruise missiles would be used in such a role

member_22905 · Post by **member_22905** » 07 Mar 2012 12:49

"Why do we have this obsession to cramp everything on every platform, say a light fighter that should handle the same threats as a heavy one already in the service, or a tank that should stop everything thrown at it both actively and passively and still remain under 50T?"

First of all the Hindu news and is not official confirmation regarding the capability of Nirbhay, so I will take all this multiple target and loitering with a grain of salt. Loitering might mean that missile has time to loiter over the target so as to place itself at right place and right orientation to attack a difficult target. A very important capability in my opinion as we have seen Tomahawk doing this in Gulfwar I( although not exactly in the same way Hindu discribes ). To speculate over multiple target thingy will be possible only when we know the payload of Nirbhay. If it has decent payload capacity in excess of 500kg then it makes sense to bundle also multiple targeting capability.

Lets not forget that we are waiting for a subsonic cruise missile, not for want of sensors, warhead design and miniaturization(CL-20), aerodynamic design, software AI for target discrimination and terrain following, electronic miniaturization(MEMS) but because of want of decent propulsion unit and SFC of that.

The technology has come a long way since gulf war I days and so our capabilities too. So Hindu news might make some sense too if we filter out DDM part.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 07 Mar 2012 13:23

Sounds more like DDM speak. Two staged? Turbo-prop engines? A tree-top-missile which has a minimum soaring height of 10 kms and max of 50 km? how much more that 750 ?

Exactly what powerplants the two stages use? Just ran through the BR archives and livefist and found that DRDO was working with Saturn on a mini gas turbine engine for UAVs/missiles (may be a derivative of 36MT turbofan) in 2010. We had details of the Laghu Shakti class engines around Feb 2011.

Will be excited when I see some clarity emerging on the powerplant, payload and the official range figures.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Mar 2012 13:26

a lot of cruise missiles these days use submunitions - jassm, kepd350, ... but first lets get the unitary hard target thing going.

member_22905 · Post by **member_22905** » 07 Mar 2012 13:58

The min soaring hight must be 10m around 30ft ...standard one for cruise missiles

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 07 Mar 2012 15:17

First they need to credibly fly Mk2. Talk of Mk3 only after that. Or is ISRO planning to bypass Mk2 and go directly to Mk3? Not happening in my view.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 07 Mar 2012 15:53

Loiter missiles unlike ordinary Cruise missile has the ability to acquire new targets, gives more flexibility to plan the mission and increase the mission success rate. If Cruise missile is Version 1.0, Loiter missile is Cruise missile Ver 2.0. Unlike Tomahawk which failed to take OBL, this can wait for the target to emerge and then engage the target or can be used to strike secondary target if the primary target is not in the vicinity.

It is not a multi target capability. It can choose a target from multiple targets.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 07 Mar 2012 16:22

X Post for Mijjle lobers.

MBDA to stress on industrial partnership during Defexpo 12

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 07 Mar 2012 17:10

OBL got away because the launch time to strike time was very much and during that time he was able to escape. The solution to that is Hypersonic missile and not loitering.
Loitering comes in handy when waiting for the target to appear over an area or watch whether the first missile strike was successful. If so then this one can be diverted to take out a second target, there by saving a lot of missiles being wasted on a single target.
Only the block IV variant of the Tomahawk has this capability

Look at this video of the Delilah Missile. Another missile with loitering capability.

750-1000 km is not a bad range. It's really good. But i'm surprised how it will take on multiple targets. If that's correct, this missile is a

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 07 Mar 2012 17:24

KARACHI: The Thursday on August 20, 1998 must have been the luckiest day in the life of Osama Bin Laden when at the last minute, he dropped the idea of visiting and having dinner at his Harkatul Jihad Al-Islami military training camp in Khost, Afghanistan. If Osama hadn't postponed the last item in his schedule for Thursday, the American Tomahawk missiles would have gotten him and some other key commanders during their post dinner Kahwa (Arabic coffee) in the open skies of Khost, 94 miles southeast of Kabul.

This was gathered by senior Pakistani intelligence officials in debriefing sessions with their Afghan agents and eyewitnesses who had arrived in the Pakistani border town of Miranshah on Friday morning after being wounded in US-missile attacks on their bases in Afghanistan.

Loiter missile can linger at the scene till the target emerges or it can be re-directed to different location without alerting the enemies there by increasing the chance at the next attempt or in this case it can be re-directed to other place where he can be found.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 07 Mar 2012 17:37

That's true, but here they are taking a risk. Missiles will only be employed during war time or if the intelligence is precise. In this case, the intelligence was correct but the missile failed to reach there on time. So the solution U.S found was to use armed predator drones. It's easier to abort mission in this case.
About Nirbhay, the range was said to be 1000km. Now if they are mentioning a 750 km range with loitering capability, May be the missile can loiter for about 15 minutes over an area. Not beyond that.
This will come in handy during wartime. But not during peacetime. One will need armed drones during peacetime.
Now that's from a U.S perspective.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Mar 2012 21:28

Re Nirbhay. ~750km range implies it s turbo-fan engine. The two stages refer to a solid booster to launch it from surface or sub-surface. After gaining speed the turbofan kicks in for sustained long range cruise. A turbo jet would be fuel consumption intensive and hence wouldnt make the range.
The loiter allows it to pick target of opportunity from a set of multiple ones.

This doesnt mean it will loiter all the time like our BRF members!

Re; The tarmak picture. Marten's posts shows that the GSLV fairing was made from composite. The scaled dimensions using the height of the worker show they are simialr to the GSLV fairing. So most likely its a GSLV fairing. The clinching evidence would be if Tarmak stated where he got the picture from:ISRO or DRDO!

sukhish · Post by **sukhish** » 08 Mar 2012 02:40

question is wether it is GSLV MK-II or GSLV MK-III. for GSLV MK-III even the cryogenic is not ready, so not point in having a fairing.
it could very well be GSLV MK-II.

vishnu.nv · Post by **vishnu.nv** » 08 Mar 2012 13:14

If DRDO Says they will test Nirbhay in April we can expect the test by around December this year.

But again most of the systems are perfected on Lashya, hence there wont be much delay. We need to have a mk2 version of nirbhay with 1500KM range once mk1 goes to production. Produce Nirbhay in huge quantities and put it on every silo, ship and aircraft.

Something like a 1000 Nirbhays for day 1's use against Pakistan would be awesome.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Mar 2012 13:54

there is no point making a huge KH55 CM for which we dont have bombers to carry. better make it small enough for even rafale/MKI to carry.
a ground launched CM can made large upto brahmos size if needed for a 5000km lo-lo-lo subsonic range

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 08 Mar 2012 14:03

^^^ The reason why those American Tomahawks failed to get OBL back in '93 (?) was not inherent to the missile itself. Rather, the reason why those Tomahawks failed to scalp bin Laden, was because they had to fly over Pakistan on the way to Afghanistan, and the Pakistanis picked-up the telephone and warned bin Laden to duck.

Also, I think the expectation that a loitering missile is going to be able to fly a pattern overhead without being detected by the target -- I think that's a tall order -- and I don't think that loitering missiles are going to help with targetted assassinations, the way some have suggested above.

These munitions are meant for a hot battlefield, not some kind of surprise attack.
As uddu suggests above, for surprise attacks, fast (supersonic) missiles are required. Loitering missiles are too noisy and slow for surprise.

JMT

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 08 Mar 2012 15:53

Paanwallah who supplies paan to the chaiwallah who serves tea to the peon of the babu who approves has made a little clarifications on the Nirbhay.

1- TJet or TFan - Tfan with variable pitch propeller (ducted?).
2 - Twin engine - Booster + Tfan - Booster based on Lakshya.
3 - Loiter - Yes. But this is not a true loiter missile. It is supposed to stay in area to do a positive ID of moving target before final top/side attack profile. Uses twin seeker system.
4 - Sub Mach profile.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Mar 2012 17:24

thanks. all tallies perfectly with thawk.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 08 Mar 2012 18:09

One more interesting thing about this missile is the change of its range from 1000 km to 750 km+. If it's really 750km, then i will make some comments about it.
First being the distance from Indian border to cover the whole of Pakistan is in the range of 600-700. Also To cover most of Tibet can be covered by this range. Another interesting point is that the whole neighborhood is within the reach of this missile.
Now reduction of range from 1000 to 750 will have a lot of advantage. One is reduction in weight. Another is reduction in size. So this two can be of great significance in reducing cost as well as ease of deployment.
Now if the missile is of lesser length and weight, it can be fitted onto Su-30 MKI's. Also fired from Ships and subs.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 08 Mar 2012 18:24

nikhil_p wrote:Paanwallah who supplies paan to the chaiwallah who serves tea to the peon of the babu who approves has made a little clarifications on the Nirbhay.

1- TJet or TFan - Tfan with variable pitch propeller (ducted?).
2 - Twin engine - Booster + Tfan - Booster based on Lakshya.
3 - Loiter - Yes. But this is not a true loiter missile. It is supposed to stay in area to do a positive ID of moving target before final top/side attack profile. Uses twin seeker system.
4 - Sub Mach profile.

Seems plausible. by the way, which turbofan is not ducted?

keshavchandra · Post by **keshavchandra** » 08 Mar 2012 20:26

As per available sources the first possible test flight of Nirbhay missile is likely be in April month.
Nirbhay likely to be test-fired in April

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Mar 2012 21:00

imo ships (VL/inclined tubes amidships) & trucks have less of a problem with big missiles than submarines and aircraft.
so perhaps a mk1 version of 750km that can be fired by all is best
mk2 can be a longer round for truck-GLCM and ship based role with bigger size and range.

eg the thawk SLCM is 1500km. but the air launched boeing BGM was 2500km with a fixed air intake(not scoop).

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Mar 2012 21:17

nikhil_p, Got all that but for the variable pitch turbo fan. It will be ducted as its turbo-fan, but variable pitch is additional complications.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 08 Mar 2012 21:43

indranilroy wrote:
nikhil_p wrote:Paanwallah who supplies paan to the chaiwallah who serves tea to the peon of the babu who approves has made a little clarifications on the Nirbhay.

1- TJet or TFan - Tfan with variable pitch propeller (ducted?).
2 - Twin engine - Booster + Tfan - Booster based on Lakshya.
3 - Loiter - Yes. But this is not a true loiter missile. It is supposed to stay in area to do a positive ID of moving target before final top/side attack profile. Uses twin seeker system.
4 - Sub Mach profile.
Seems plausible. by the way, which turbofan is not ducted?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 08 Mar 2012 21:46

ramana wrote:nikhil_p, Got all that but for the variable pitch turbo fan. It will be ducted as its turbo-fan, but variable pitch is additional complications.

Variable pitch is common in UAV, so the moniker loiter, probably....

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 08 Mar 2012 22:21

SanthoshS wrote:To speculate over multiple target thingy will be possible only when we know the payload of Nirbhay. If it has decent payload capacity in excess of 500kg then it makes sense to bundle also multiple targeting capability.

Multi-Target capability could be one of the following or something else all together.

[1] Launch complex can control attacks on multiple targets simultaneously.
If so our response would be 'duh'.

[2]The warhead has submunitions. For example a SFW package that can attack a set of closely spaced targets.
Interesting, but hardly revolutionary.

[3]The targeting system has a primary, secondary and fall back targets. If it is unable to find or discriminate the primary target or decides it has already been neutralized then the missile it will seek out the secondary target and so on till fuel permits.
If this is what is implied by target capability, then it is quite interesting.

[4]The missile can navigate to waypoints, find and attack a target there and then carry on to the next target till fuel/munitions are exhausted.
This is quite cool as it would be first baby steps to a UCAV subsystems. It will probably be cheaper and more effective to have simpler multiple missiles do the equivalent job, but does fit the pattern of DRDO technical overreach.