Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

[nits]

^^^^ That's the conceptual rendition by NDTV..

Yes... i believe real one will me much longer...

[koti]

^^And looking more serious. It looks very not serious like this.

[Kersi D]

@Pratik - its not about effectiveness but efficiency. Fins offer more efficient manoeuverability than TVC. That is why Python 5 has the most number of fins ever seen in a missile. TVC enables missiles to dispense drag associated with fins. Since AAD needs to accelerate rapidly to touch & sustain peak speed, TVC based controls made better sense than fin based.

For the 150 km range, a dedicated small missile can be easily built, though I believe a guidance corrected rocket would be more appropriate.

Also, in the 150 km range, most targets, including command centers would be mobile & truck mounted.

I'm quite sure BrahMos will see service on Arihant.

I think IAF has teh Israeli Delilah
K

[member_26965]

I read tsarkar post nearly 2-3 times that Brahmos will equip Arihant. I wanted to bring to notice

http://frontierindia.net/indian-navy-p- ... z2VLx2E2BA

The third para mentions that future versions of Arihant can have Brahmos.

[Indranil]

Ramana, I am clear in the distinction between Prahaar & AAD. The airframe is the same.

Only the radar seeker has been removed and replaced with a larger warhead. However, the airframe remains the same.

The airframe is optimized for interception. As the earlier image shows, it uses jet vane controls & both the wings & fins are fixed. So the missile essentially skids to turn. While its perfect for an interceptor missile, for a tactical ballistic missile, movable fins like those at the rear of Brahmos enables better turning capabilities http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... s_imds.jpg

On that note, Dr. Saraswat had said that AAD can be used to target aircraft. I hope they work towards that goal of changing it to a LRSAM.
India’s interceptor missile test yields new surface-to-surface missile as a spin off

“The AAD could be used to target aircraft,” Dr. Saraswat said, adding that its successful launch has opened up a ‘new era’ with the development of supersonic interceptor missiles that can be used for defence against Cruise missiles.

[John]

The third para mentions that future versions of Arihant can have Brahmos.

You can fit it but unless you using them in conflict against Libya or Iraq and want to showcase your weapons it would quite risky to use against any competent adversaries, especially when an air launched platform could accomplish the same feat.

[krishnan]

Surface2Surface or Surface2Air ???

[Indranil]

Prahaar is Surface to Surface version of AAD. He was speaking of a surface to air version.

[Indranil]

From the recent HAL Connect (Issue 73).

Captive Flight Test of ASTRA Missile on Su-30 MKI Aircraft

ASTRA missile integration scheme was sucessfully designed and developed by Design Electrical Department of AURDC, HAL(ND). It was a major modification on Su-30 MKI aircraft carried out by AURDC for enhancing its operational capabilities. This includes electrical integration, avionics integration and also Flight Test Instrumentation (FTI) activities.

Captive Flight Test (CFT) for Astra missile on Su-30 MKI aircraft was planned in three phases. Phase-1, to carry out aero-structural and mechanical integrity for carriage of ASTRAunder steady and maneuvering conditions, phase-2, to carry out validation of weapon control system and its electrical and avionic interfaces with ASTRA missile and in phase-3, to check the performance of missile system in transmitting and receiving mode of missile seeker with designated target under different flight conditions and the live firing of the ASTRAmissile from Su-30 MKI aircraft. Significant contributions, exceptional professionalism and support provided by the team of HAL Nasik Division for Integration of India's first indigenous (Air-to-Air) ASTRA missile on Su-30 MKI aircraft was appreciated by Project Director ASTRA, Shri. PVenugopal, Sc-G, DRDL, Hyderabad.

Has a picture too, which does not look recent. Also does not say up to which Phase has been completed.

[vasu raya]

^^^

The mention of electrical integration by AURDC suggests its currently in Phase-2, weapon trials might happen closer to the end of the year. Astra program is definitely out of the woods is what DRDO was saying recently.

Article from Tarmak,

agni-v-warms-up-for-canister-launch

Giving an update on various ongoing missile projects, Sekaran said that the Astra has completely undergone a design change following issues it had in the past. “We have had good flights, post new-design and also conducted some captive trials. It is in a good shape now and it should gear up for firing from an aircraft soon. The project is definitely out of woods,” he said.

bolded part suggests Phase-1

some articles say the BARS radar can pickup cruise as well as ballistic missiles perhaps the latter in its terminal phase with the long range BMD radar cueing it, hopefully Astra can be used to target them as well.

[Karan M]

That HAL Connect is mentioning this right now, and also ties in what Sekaran says about captive tests having been completed just ties into the fact that its probably Phase 1 which has been completed for the new design. The previous Astra design also went through captive trials and in fact was ahead into Phase 2. There were several reports at the time about an Astra development rig having been developed and used for integration tests (electronics, not mechanical). But what put paid to the original 3 phase plans were the fact that the missile itself had issues (a DRDO TF article mentioned it had stability issues). The redesigned missile will also clearly be put through the same 3 phases, and as the seeker doesn't seem to have been changed, they should be able to use the same HAL/SDI/DRDL effort as earlier. What the 3 phases don't mention is that these relate purely to the air integration aspect, and not the ground testing before it gets to that point, which they completed last year.

[Karan M]

some articles say the BARS radar can pickup cruise as well as ballistic missiles perhaps the latter in its terminal phase with the long range BMD radar cueing it, hopefully Astra can be used to target them as well.

Bars is a radar optimized for air intercept work, with a secondary A2G role. Basically the quintessential multifunction radar in use today, albeit with a PESA 1 mtr dia antenna (high gain & fast switching between air to air, and a2g). So as part of its designated role, it should be able to pick up cruise missiles. Ballistic missiles are a different matter, because depending on which kind of ballistic missile, their speed can vary significantly. If the radar processor is not designed to specifically look for and classify those targets, then the radar is not going to be suitable for that sort of role. Which is why ABM systems too depend on purpose designed signal processing for high speed targets, with specific trajectories, and conventional AD radars can't just be jury rigged into the role.

[vasu raya]

agupta, there could be hidden chase men not letting the AURDC slip, its not a real tech challenge either. we do have air-launched Brahmos coming up letting them to learn from it if at all.

Karan M, if the raw signal parallely gets routed through signal processors purpose built for tracking ballistic missiles (call it the BMD mode or the air to space mode), you know after they are originally classified by the early warning BMD radar which then cues the CAP over the target area, the cue switches the BMD mode on BARS radar and enables either an air launched AAD or the Astra to intercept the BM below 25km altitude.

Primary motivation for air borne BMD defense is the density of value targets in India vis-a-vis the inventory of BMs held by TSP and China, after 26/11 it was felt that any punitive missile/air strikes on TSP would invite conventional counter BM strikes yet their accuracy is such that they could cause unintended damage to population centers killing more people than those killed in the terrorist strike. while Mumbai and Delhi (and some more) are high risk high value targets needing permanent basing of BMD resources, rest of the country may have to bear the collateral damage. The BM profile of TSP is capped at 2500kms at the moment.

China on the other hand is more about counter force with TBMs coming into play in massive nos in a pre-emtive manner at a conventional level, not sure if the BMD doctrine addresses this since its mostly for protecting high value targets. Their TBM profile is also in the 3000kms range. For the rest of their inventory our own Deterrence comes into force at the moment.

So for the less than 3000km BM profile, AAD is purpose designed, even if Astra can cover a significant percent of AAD's role given that its air launched we have a viable solution for this spread target problem.

Now the tech challenges,

The currently ground based fire control radar for BMD, the MFCR is huge and perhaps cannot be reduced to a bunch of LRUs to be able to track a BM and guide an air launched AAD or Astra

The RF seeker on Astra will be smaller than the one the AAD, requiring distributed aperture patches on the Astra airframe, a tech useful even in locking onto LO to VLO targets.

Some discussion about airframe optimization differences between AAD and Astra is coming into the fore but not comprehensive

[Singha]

we are better off having the airborne BMD radar function in the phalcons. atleast not so many constraints on space and power. IL476 airframes with huge side looking radar panels like E8 might be used in future to work only in BMD mode because of the need to scan high angles which normal awacs radars are not optimized for.

we will need LR version of astra that has a ability to reach up to 100,000ft to have some impact.....

[Karan M]

Vasu raya, the point I was making is that there is nothing to suggest the IAF asked for a BMD mode on the Bars.

[vasu raya]

^^^

The GoI never asked for Agni-6 either, yet the technology part is being covered by DRDO, and the way IAF loans the Su-30 for Astra and Brahmos programs, can they not loan a Bars radar? I know IAF involvement would be a tremendous boost, perhaps SFC is the real stakeholder of the BMD program

Singha, the dedicated airframes could be MTAs or the Boeing 737s even for the DRDO AWACS in future.

[Karan M]

The Bars radar is owned by NIIP, it's basic tech is mostly NIIP. If such a radar is to be developed, it will have to be our own. It can be done, but we are still yet to mature our own AI fighter radar in the form of our MMR.


Your idea of a fighter having a BMD role is not that far fetched, since the US also explored F15s armed with dedicated ABM interceptors. But if you do so, it's easier to do so in the boost phase with the missile trajectory being more easy to plot than versus terminal. The speeds during the terminal phase are immense. Add MaRv capabilities or different trajectory shapes for depressed trajectory missiles and you are left with dependence on cueing by large FOV radars whether airborne or ground based.

IMHO, the best way to take out TBMs is during the boost phase, which means air superiority over the nation of launch or launching dedicated fighter raids with long endurance loitering around to hit any TELs. The Rafale can be useful in such a scenario. Ultimately though, even the US with its overwhelming dominance against the directionless Iraqi AF could not prevent Scud launches, so even we need a BMD system. Another good way to take out all of these targets is in space before the decoy, manoeuvre issue becomes a challenge.

[vasu raya]

Karan M, the 2 tier BMD that Mumbai and NCR are getting is for terminal interception. if its not deemed reliable, the Delhi based political class will never have the nerve. Anyways, if its evolving along with the capabilities of the adversaries then ok. Air launch of AAD or Astra will only increase the coverage area

With Boost Phase intercept either the TEL is hit and if a launch happens a small intercept window exists, however we run the same issue of having a fighter radar track the climbing missile and given the reaction time from detection to interceptor launch, the target would quickly clear the 25km altitude which implies only an air launched PDV can hope to catch up with the target. A precedence, a US F-15 air launched a single ASAT weapon which perhaps is in the PDV class going by the altitude spec of roughly 150km, no guarantee that the F-15 employed its own radar and the ASAT weapon was mostly pre-programmed knowing the trajectory of the target sat.

For space based intercept, we may need micro sat sized KKVs put in low sun synchronous orbit at short notice. That orbit roughly aligns with the launch trajectories of our east and west neighbors. Hopefully the PDV employs a KKV and a Agni 5 class vehicle puts a cluster of them in low earth orbit at a later date.

The long endurance loitering that is attributed to Rafale can be done by Su-30 as well? what about the precision munition for TEL busting? an air launched Prahaar seems heavy for such a role.

[Singha]

^ AASM. 55km confirmed hit on tank in benghazi grid day1.

SDB with wing extention kits and JDAM-ER works too. we could get a few 1000 for the price of a few 100 AASM maybe

later the desi weapons being worked on and nirbhay-ALCM for distant strikes.

[vasu raya]

Given that most of the DPSA will do terrain hugging flight, launch of glide bombs would need altitude which would necessitate the use of booster rockets. if they can get the guided bombs ready by the end of 2014, they could attach rocket boosters later on.

Guess SDB and JDAM-ER are all uncles goodies

[Singha]

these goodies have been sold to others...we have no restrictions known in getting them.
AASM has rocket booster.

[vasu raya]

Going by the timeline, the first Rafale squadron will come around 2017, thats 2014 + 3 years, thats a breather for DRDO developing guided munition kits for 100, 250kg bombs and also port it to the rest of the IAF fleet

Wiki says AASM has a range of 15km for low altitude release and 50km for high altitude, for the former thought there would be a pop-up maneuver using the rocket booster and then the usual glide range of 50km, but a 15km range means a low level terminal flight as well perhaps avoiding CIWS and other point defence.

[Karan M]

Vasu, that terminal interception is enabled by radars the size of a house pumping out rf power which dwarfs that of a fighter radar and completed by missiles which will never fit on a fighter, that's the point I was making. Even if a boost phase intercept has challenges, terminal interception is always harder for an airborne platform which has limitations on the kind of munitions it can carry and the acquisition and engagement sensors it can field.

[abhik]

^ AASM. 55km confirmed hit on tank in benghazi grid day1.

Could you give a little background on this, I've always found stories of Rafale and the AASM in Libya like these a little phony. AFAIK most(all?) AASM used in Libya were of the GPS version. It isn't a seek-and-destroy missile.

[Singha]

The wiki entry of aasm lists it.

[ramana]

Can be x-posted in many threads but this is more relevant here.

Saurav Jha: Transition at DRDO bodes well

Unable to post the text.

Watch the video at the end.

[Karan M]

Was this posted here? Nirbhay test in November - air launched/ship launched versions tests too thereafter, all to be done by 2017

http://www.spsaviation.net/exclusive/?i ... y-November

[dinesha]

^^^^ Ramana thanks a lot for the link... the video gives glimpses of pontoon launch system and sliding rail carriage..
I am tempted to post screen grabs.

[dinesha]

Pontoon Launch System ..video grab from above link

[dinesha]

^^Video Grab

[dinesha]

[sum]

^^ Are the SFC folk still going with the old camo?

Very impressive sliding wagon though...cant distinguish from normal goods carriage!

[ramana]

Good job disnesha. I have to commend you for it.
If you can video grab the Agni reentry splashdown fuze functioning would appreciate that.

[dinesha]

^^^Please post the time co-ordinates..

[ramana]

Its not in this video. It was in some other page. Will have to look for it.

[Philip]

I do not think that there has been any meaningful debate/analysis on the number of missiles,strategic and tactical that we need for quite some time.It would be interesting to see members viewpoints on the subject.Here is what we are against from the dragon.

Firstly,China has for a very long time,deployed its missiles in virtual invulnerable underground facilities.The US's forces in the pacific on the other,rely upon ports,bases and facilities that are extremely vulnerable to missile attack and require extensive and expensive BMD and anti-missile forces.The Chinese are believed to have around "17-18 short and medium-range ballistic missile brigades" with approx. 1,300 and 1,800 ballistic and cruise missiles. A new IRBM was spotted last year and it has around 300-350 launchers most of which are mobile.These missile forces give it the ability in any spat with Taiwan to "sanitise" Taiwan and the Taiwan Straits and prevent the US from using Japanese bases to counter any invasion.It is also developing/inducted the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile,with a longer range version in the works.US analysts believe that a Chinese missile strength defensive posture against such Chinese missile strength will result in defeat and recommend a "forward-leaning strategy",using its own and the facilities of US's allies in the region with more offensive capabilities.This must convince China that it "cannot fight and win a quick regional war".

With China believed to have at least 500+ N-warheads,and the total lack of transparency of Chinese strategic and tactical missile forces,the US and Asian powers might be taken by surprise in any spat with the dragon,especially if China launches a pre-emptive strike,following the example of Japan in WW2 ,when Japan was strategically forced into a corner by the US and therefore decided that with war inevitable it would be better getting off the first shot-which they did at Pearl Harbour,but had the misfortune not to have been able to destroy the USN's carriers which were elsewhere,which were then used to turn the tide against the Japanese at the Battle of the Coral Sea and the pivotal Battle of Midway.

Indian strategic and tactical missile forces though coming under a single command,could be listed separately under control of each of the 3 services for a better idea of their deployment.

[PratikDas]

Good job disnesha. I have to commend you for it.
If you can video grab the Agni reentry splashdown fuze functioning would appreciate that.

Forward to 1:20.
Detonation at 1:27.

[Edit: corrected the video]

[ramana]

Thats the one and can we estimate the height at which it functions? Based on time delta between it and spalshdown and notional velocity?

[Singha]

>> The US's forces in the pacific on the other,rely upon ports,bases and facilities that are extremely vulnerable to missile attack and require extensive and expensive BMD and anti-missile forces.

if the chinese launch IRBMs on these bases, the US would wipe the chinese navy off the map , pound their military bases on the coast and set fire to their main commercial ports. remember the khan has some 60 SSNs most of which are armed with tomahawks with 1500km range. plus they have bombers can that stage from far out with ALCMs of the jassm and slam-er types.

since we have none of the above, its we who should be worried about the chinese SRBM, IRBM and GLCM numbers and deployment.

[rohitvats]

Thats the one and can we estimate the height at which it functions? Based on time delta between it and spalshdown and notional velocity?

ramana, you've mail.

Regards,