Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 02 Sep 2014 16:22

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4377 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 ... 110  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 02:19 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58
Posts: 1970
Prem Kumar wrote:
Btw, 10000 ft is not exactly terrain-hugging.


It is when when the mean altitude of the region is 10,000 feet (ASL) as well. We are talking about ASL, not AGL when we measure these numbers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 02:27 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58
Posts: 1970
Kanson wrote:
As it is common to gauge against Tomahawk for any cruise missile, here is some snapshots to gauge performance of Nirbhay

~1300 kg Tomahawk has a maximum range of ~1600 km

And it is reported,

~1000 kg Nirbhay has a range of ~1000 km.


I was talking not of the strategic variant of the tomahawk, not the tactical one. These had ranges up to 2500 km.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 02:46 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10
Posts: 1560
vivek_ahuja wrote:
Prem Kumar wrote:
Btw, 10000 ft is not exactly terrain-hugging.


It is when when the mean altitude of the region is 10,000 feet (ASL) as well. We are talking about ASL, not AGL when we measure these numbers.


Good point. I was also going by the Tarmak report that said that Nirbhay has a cruising altitude of between 500m to 4 KM

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2012/10/indias-first-made-in-bangalore-missile.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 05:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22799
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
Prem Kumar wrote:
Btw, 10000 ft is not exactly terrain-hugging.

10.000 feet is terrain hugging in the Himalayan region.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 06:49 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
Are you referring to my mention of 10,000ft?

I meant in context of having to clear himalayas...you can terrain hug at 29000ft too as the missile crests the top of everest and starts the long descent in tfr more to the brown plains of tibet and the s300 radar post.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 08:05 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22799
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
Singha wrote:
Are you referring to my mention of 10,000ft?

I meant in context of having to clear himalayas...you can terrain hug at 29000ft too as the missile crests the top of everest and starts the long descent in tfr more to the brown plains of tibet and the s300 radar post.

No I was merely quoting from Prem Kumar's post.

Brahmos in the Himalayas is likely to have a higher range simply because 10,000 feet would be the minimum altitude to go anywhere. I am not at all sure that it would be necessary to snake around mountains to remain stealthy over the Himalayas, It would be difficult to detect or intercept even if the missile merely flew an almost straight line level with the highest peaks of a given region merely dodging the peaks.

An average altitude of 15.000 to 20,000 feet would clear all but the highest peaks and arrive just a few hundred meters above the Tibetan plateau so the descent would be a short one because Tibet itself is 15,000 feet up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 08:40 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58
Posts: 1970
shiv wrote:
Brahmos in the Himalayas is likely to have a higher range simply because 10,000 feet would be the minimum altitude to go anywhere. I am not at all sure that it would be necessary to snake around mountains to remain stealthy over the Himalayas, It would be difficult to detect or intercept even if the missile merely flew an almost straight line level with the highest peaks of a given region merely dodging the peaks.

An average altitude of 15.000 to 20,000 feet would clear all but the highest peaks and arrive just a few hundred meters above the Tibetan plateau so the descent would be a short one because Tibet itself is 15,000 feet up.


Exactly. The Brahmos would be easily reaching its theoretical ranges of around ~500 Km when launched from a carrier aircraft and thrown at targets on the Tibetan plateau.

Not so for sea-level, ground based launches (alternatively, if the launchers are deployed in Ladakh, the situation gets equalized). Which is why it is so very important to deploy larger number of Brahmos ALCMs and a larger carrier aircraft for the same other than the Su-30s.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 10:10 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58
Posts: 834
Testing of new set of short-range missiles reaches final stage

Quote:
After the disturbing fact tumbled out that 97 per cent of Indian air defence equipment is obsolete, the armed forces are now in the final stages of trying out a new set of missiles that will target airborne threats at a very short range.

This will prove crucial in protecting military bases, frontline airbases, tank regiments, warships and also strategic assets. The last set of trials is slated for February 2013, sources confirmed.

India aims to spend $5.4 billion (approx Rs 29,000 crore) to buy some 1,000 missile launchers and 6,000 missiles for its Very Short-Range Air-Defence System (VSHORADS). This is the initial order. Once the missile is approved for purchase, licence production in India will commence making it the key weapon of choice, sources said. Public sector giant Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL) will be the Indian production arm.

It was in March that the then Army Chief General VK Singh wrote a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh saying 97 per cent of the air defence systems were obsolete. India, at present, operates the Russian origin Igla-SA-18 weapon for very short range targets - between 6 to 8 km.

The new set of missiles will form the last ring of air defence and have to be very accurate and reliable in hitting targets. The prime aim is to tackle UAVs, helicopters and even low-flying fighter jets within immediate range.

The three contenders are the French missile maker MBDA with its weapon ‘Mistral’, Sweden’s Saab with its ‘RBS 70 NG’ and Russia’s new generation ‘Igla-SA-24’. Sources said the evaluation was done in extensive trials carried out during summer in Rajasthan in May.

A coastal environment trial was done near Visakhapatnam to check for firing capabilities in humid conditions. High-altitude trails have been conducted at Ladakh. The winter testing of the weapon will be done in early February in the northern part of the country.

Sources pointed out that India is looking at a system that can be deployed in multiple configurations and can be used by the Army, Air Force and Navy. One among the many configurations that the missile should have is that it should be man-portable that can easily lifted by troops in rugged mountain areas and carried to newer locations.

In the plains, the requirement is to fit it with a twin-launcher and base it on a high-mobility vehicle so that it can accompany the tank regiments to battle or be at airbases and other high-value targets like nuclear plants and large dams like the Bhakra
.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20121116/nation.htm#9


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 11:38 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 6670
Failure of Trishul is biting us. How come Stinger is not being evaluated. I thought it should rank right up there. RBS 70 original versions have a poor combat record(these were along with blowpipe first used in Afganistan before CIA deceided to realease Stingers)and even the latest versions requires 3 man crew and is line of sight weapon which will be useless in the mountains.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 11:45 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
imo trishul failure -> barak1, spyder, maitri (god knows its status)
lack of domestic manpad -> Igla getting obsolete -> this new deal


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 15:16 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2679
vivek_ahuja wrote:
Kanson wrote:
As it is common to gauge against Tomahawk for any cruise missile, here is some snapshots to gauge performance of Nirbhay

~1300 kg Tomahawk has a maximum range of ~1600 km

And it is reported,

~1000 kg Nirbhay has a range of ~1000 km.


I was talking not of the strategic variant of the tomahawk, not the tactical one. These had ranges up to 2500 km.


It will be more realistic to compare Nirbhay with conventional Tomahawk rather than Nuclear tipped Tomahawk which is not only discontinued but also obsolete in flight characteristics and thrust status to the latest block of conventional Tomahawk.

Won't the comparison looks good for Nirbhay if it is ~1600 km missile rather than 2500km missile? :D

SFC is the only reason which dissuades the potential use of PTAE-7 engine in Long Range Cruise missile. (Existing Lakshya PTA powered by PTAE-7 do have a endurance for covering 600 km range and it is again reported 600 km range Cruise missile in development based on Lakshya PTA sometime back.)

PS: Edited for clarification.


Last edited by Kanson on 16 Nov 2012 23:54, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 15:44 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 6670
Singha- still suprised why the line of sight RBS 70 is considered and not the lastest version of the stinger. Now that we have made more USD 12 billion worth of arms from the USA and probaly anther 1 Billion for M-777 and more if we go for Colt M-4's etc, why not evaluate the Stinger?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 18:18 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42
Posts: 1164
$5.4 billion for manpads! That's about what we are spending on the entire Akash SAM program.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 18:53 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
the stinger does have a incarnation mounted on a 4x4 vehicle. could be done on any vehicle of our choice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/TWQ-1_Avenger

the bradley linebacker system with stinger is also there for anyone who needs tracked mount

but I suspect the python5 part of spyder can better these systems at the short range role. and the real role would be man portable and shoulder fired missiles only


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 19:59 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Posts: 1840
Location: Learning Advanced Tactics in Hindoo Terrorism from Sh. Sushilkumar Shinde
Aditya_V wrote:
Failure of Trishul is biting us.


IIRC Trishul wasn't an abject failure but till the weapon system matured the requirements had changed making Trishul obsolete so that's why none was inducted. It's the seeker arena mostly in which we are still not up there though we have made progress as in Nag and ABM missile seekers but still it will take some more time to get there.

abhik wrote:
$5.4 billion for manpads!


That's the cost of not having a strong mil-ind base.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 22:44 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25
Posts: 5811
RBS-70 is being "evaluated".
Who says India is going to buy it?
:wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2012 11:31 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Posts: 6625
Location: Desh ke baarei mei sochna shuru karo. Soch badlo, desh badlega!
Quote:
08:06 India to invest Rs 6,000 crore in new BrahMos missile: The Financial Express reports:' New Delhi: India has inked a Rs 6,000-crore joint venture with Russia under which the latter will supply 200 high-precision supersonic cruise missile BrahMos to the IAF. In its wake, India has set up another manufacturing and system integration plant in Thiruvananthapuram to boost production of the missiles. The Cabinet Committee on Security recently approved the air version of the BrahMos. Both the Indian Army and Navy have already inducted BrahMos� land and sea versions in their respective inventory....'


http://www.financialexpress.com/news/in ... n/1032339/

This piece is interesting

Quote:
The Indo-Russian BrahMos integrated in Kerala will be retrofitted on the Russian-built Sukhoi Su-30 MKI fighter jets. The integration of the air version of the missile will be done by Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL), and the tests are scheduled for December. The air version of the missile, with a range of 290 km, is shorter than the other variants


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2012 15:01 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11206
Shorter than Land Variant as it carries smaller booster


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 08:03 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 10789
Location: Illini Nation
The original plan, for an air based Brahmos, was to have a smaller booster (as compared to a land launched one) because:
1) The MKI could not carry the weight of the land launched one,
2) The air launched one did not need a booster of the land launched one, because
a) The plane itself provided a "boost", and
b) The altitude at which the plane was at also provided a "boost"
At no point in time that I can recall was the plan to accept a lower range.

So, this lower range for the air launched missile is rather perplexing.

I suspect it is because of some limitation within the MKI itself that it could not host a larger missile- with the larger range. Or it could be because they wanted more than one missile per MKI and for that they needed a mush smaller missile.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 09:25 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 Apr 2010 11:27
Posts: 131
related to the BrahMos, can anyone share the liquid fuel used in the missile?
I wanted to know whether the fuel used by the missile is similar (or same) as ATF class fuels?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 09:29 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
it is aviation fuel of some unknown type - ie purified kerosene with some additives.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 10:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 30 Jun 2012 05:23
Posts: 318
NRao wrote:
The original plan, for an air based Brahmos, was to have a smaller booster (as compared to a land launched one) because:
1) The MKI could not carry the weight of the land launched one,
2) The air launched one did not need a booster of the land launched one, because
a) The plane itself provided a "boost", and
b) The altitude at which the plane was at also provided a "boost"
At no point in time that I can recall was the plan to accept a lower range.

So, this lower range for the air launched missile is rather perplexing.

I suspect it is because of some limitation within the MKI itself that it could not host a larger missile- with the larger range. Or it could be because they wanted more than one missile per MKI and for that they needed a mush smaller missile.

Lower range for air launched brahmos? As far as I remember it is same as the official range of land based Brahmos :P 8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 11:45 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 May 2012 22:34
Posts: 373
The range is same the missile is shorter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 14:19 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31
Posts: 1164
Singha wrote:
it is aviation fuel of some unknown type - ie purified kerosene with some additives.


Mr Singha. All aviation fuel, ATF, is purified kerosene.

K


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 15:10 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 Apr 2010 11:27
Posts: 131
Kersi D wrote:
All aviation fuel, ATF, is purified kerosene.


is it possible that the fuel used on the BrahMos is same/similar to the one used by the mother a/c?
in that case, is it feasible that the BrahMos is loaded on a wet pylon, but its fuel tank is empty.
the mother a/c then takes off with the empty BrahMos which fills up the missile in-flight using its own on-board fuel.
my point is that in such cases, AAR might help the mother a/c take-off with a lighter load and then tank-up the missile mid-flight prior to actual launch.
is this feasible considering that the a/c and missile use similar (or hopefully identical) fuels?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 16:00 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31
Posts: 1164
akimalik wrote:
Kersi D wrote:
All aviation fuel, ATF, is purified kerosene.


is it possible that the fuel used on the BrahMos is same/similar to the one used by the mother a/c?
in that case, is it feasible that the BrahMos is loaded on a wet pylon, but its fuel tank is empty.
the mother a/c then takes off with the empty BrahMos which fills up the missile in-flight using its own on-board fuel.
my point is that in such cases, AAR might help the mother a/c take-off with a lighter load and then tank-up the missile mid-flight prior to actual launch.
is this feasible considering that the a/c and missile use similar (or hopefully identical) fuels?


This was done by USAF with their B 52s armed with Hound Dog air-to-surface (N) missiles.

The B 52 pilots would even start Hound Dog's engines and it shortened the TO run of the B 52. The Hound Dog's tanks were then topped with the fuel from the mother B 52.

But....

The AGM 28 Hound Dog was a jet propelled missile, jet similar to the J75 engines. Does Brahmos have any jet engines ?

K


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 17:28 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58
Posts: 1970
Kersi D wrote:
Does Brahmos have any jet engines ?


The engine is different but the thermodynamics are still grounded in the same pot. The brahmos still depends on subsonic combustion of fuel despite the overall supersonic flight profile. The thing I am unaware of is whether the same grade of Kerosone is used or not.

More to the point, regardless of the fuel question, I feel the bigger question is whether this whole scheme is even needed. The SU-30 pylon being modified is from structural standpoint of having to bear 3000 kg mass of missile, whether at takeoff or otherwise. Even if the missile is empty, it still has the same wetted external surface and same geometry hence the same drag as before. Granted that the range of the aircraft can be extended by making it lighter initially, but can't that be done with Air-to-Air refuellers if required? So why to eat with hand around the head instead of the normal way to do so?

My two cents onlee...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 17:32 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58
Posts: 1970
First Part of a five part series of papers I am writing:

The Agni-I Ballistic Missile: Vivek Ahuja


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 21:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 10789
Location: Illini Nation
AnantS wrote:
Lower range for air launched brahmos? As far as I remember it is same as the official range of land based Brahmos :P 8)


Ouch. You are right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 00:22 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 19 Aug 2008 03:15
Posts: 69
@Vivek_ahuja ....jmt only
I don't think the Agni 1 is 'Pak Specific' anymore, although it may have been, while on the drawing board. Don't you think this is emerging as a weapon of choice in the Tibet theater, if the PLA decided to use their M-9/M-11 and TU-16 air launched cruise miss. at standoff range, just in case they get the shivers sending in their manned J-10's and J-11's. The counter strategy would start with Prahar, BM-30 Smerch-ER, Prithvi's and Agni-1's to take the juice out of the conscripts. I don't see the liquid Prithvi in inventory for much too long, maybe the solid fuel ones, once the inventory reaches optimal levels.
Keep up the good work!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 05:06 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 May 2012 22:34
Posts: 373
Agni-I has range >1000 km and ideal for Tibet. But it will hopefully be superseded by Shaurya missile. Why do you need it for pakis? Brahmos (500 km) along with Prahaar and Smerch will do. Though a lot of 155mm guns are required.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 05:37 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 19 Aug 2008 03:15
Posts: 69
Yes indeed, add Shaurya's and CBU-105 to the offensive weapons ORBAT.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 07:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58
Posts: 1970
gnair wrote:
I don't think the Agni 1 is 'Pak Specific' anymore, although it may have been, while on the drawing board. Don't you think this is emerging as a weapon of choice in the Tibet theater, if the PLA decided to use their M-9/M-11 and TU-16 air launched cruise miss. at standoff range, just in case they get the shivers sending in their manned J-10's and J-11's. The counter strategy would start with Prahar, BM-30 Smerch-ER, Prithvi's and Agni-1's to take the juice out of the conscripts. I don't see the liquid Prithvi in inventory for much too long, maybe the solid fuel ones, once the inventory reaches optimal levels.


From a technical standpoint, you are absolutely correct. And the range/payload chart in there suggested the same idea to me as well when I was writing the article.

In a few years, when the numbers of missiles available increases in the inventory, then Agni-I will take different roles and one of them will be a conventional role in Tibet. Same argument for the Shaurya as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 08:01 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 32638
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
does anyone know the plans and deployment status of the Shourya. so far no open source news when its trials period will be over, no news of user trials, which agency IA or SFC will own it, production order and how it fits the matrix alongside A-1.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 09:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25
Posts: 5811
These guys don't mention Shourya as deployed. They are outdated though.

Bulletin of Atomic Scientists: Indian Nuclear Forces 2012
pdf download link

Bulletin of Atomic Scientists: Pakistan Nuclear Forces 2012
pdf download link

Bulletin of Atomic Scientists: Chinese Nuclear Forces 2012
pdf download link


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 12:14 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 Nov 2011 22:31
Posts: 2747
Location: Jambudveepe Bharatvarshe, Bharatkhande, Sakabde, Mero Dakshine Parsve
http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=352789

A dated article. Sorry about that, except that I wanted to bring forth this thing mentioned in the article:

Quote:
Natarajan said defence scientist were also working on the profile to develop 1,000 KM range surface-to-surface supersonic cruise missile by enhancing capabilities of already deployed Indo-Russian Brahmos Missile.


All else mentioned in that article is already done or progressing well. So this supersonic cruise missile could only refer to Nirbhay. Perhaps in the endgame it goes supersonic (speculating off course). Anyways what for me is more important is a different speculation.That the Nirbhay is almost already tested in terms of its more crucial aspects, Guidance. Lately there was something about 500 km Brahmos. So the whole thing seems like an organic growth with our Sainsdaan working mainly to absorb the Guidance systems and having made progress to that extent.

That also carries implications for where the thanks is due.

Could that explain the khujli for Canisterized Testing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 15:54 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Posts: 14788
Location: Chennai
Singha wrote:
does anyone know the plans and deployment status of the Shourya. so far no open source news when its trials period will be over, no news of user trials, which agency IA or SFC will own it, production order and how it fits the matrix alongside A-1.

AFAIK, the missile is under production. A very successful user trial was conducted on Sep. 24, 2011 when the missile flew at Mach-7. I do not expect this missile to be under SFC control.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 16:00 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11206
NRao wrote:
2) The air launched one did not need a booster of the land launched one, because
a) The plane itself provided a "boost", and


The Air Launched Brahmos does need a booster but a smaller one compared to ground launched one since you need to boost the missile to supersonic speed before the ramjet takes over.

You can fly aircraft always at supersonic speed infact fighter aircraft rarely fly supersonic.

So eventually you get the advantage even in subsonic speed of 0.7M plus a smaller booster then is needed to make that into supersonic.


On another query you cant fill the fuel in the air for such missile , these are prefilled and sealed which can be used for 10 years


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 17:05 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 Nov 2011 22:31
Posts: 2747
Location: Jambudveepe Bharatvarshe, Bharatkhande, Sakabde, Mero Dakshine Parsve
vivek_ahuja wrote:
Exactly. The Brahmos would be easily reaching its theoretical ranges of around ~500 Km when launched from a carrier aircraft and thrown at targets on the Tibetan plateau.



While everything is somewhat speculative but YJ-12 and Perseus are two missiles that give reason to believe that even 500 km may be an understatement. Both these are featured on wiki.

Rangewise I have come round to the belief that Indian Establishment lies and intentionally lies unconvincingly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Nov 2012 17:11 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 08 Oct 2010 16:28
Posts: 79
Location: Bangalore
Is there a possibility of using a hypersonic vehicle as a booster to deliver a missile into it's target attack envelope, from where the missile can then engage it's intended target?

Image

The advantages would be:

1) We would not need to have multiple missiles of multiple ranges -- for eg, for air defence purposes we need not have QRSAM, MRSAM or LRSAM. We'll just need one missile type (eg SPYDER) of which one or more can be strapped onto the hypersonic booster depending on the flight profile needed.
2) Stationing of appropriate number of missile batteries in any threat location is redundant since using hypersonic booster, the missiles can be fired into the threat region from a faraway region as well.

Typical scenarios:

1) A red missile fired at Delhi from China can be engaged by a spyder missile battery based in Noida at multiple ranges -- over Arunachal, over U.P and finally over Delhi itself.
2) If the AA missile battery in any threat theater is out of missiles, missiles can be 'loaned to it' by an AA missile battery based in a non-threat theater.
3) An AWACS detecting a red missile threat (which is not yet detected by ground-based radars), can take control of any on-line missile battery anywhere in India and fire a missile towards the red missile.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4377 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 ... 110  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Austin, Google Feedfetcher, SPattath and 13 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