Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

member_28932 · Post by **member_28932** » 03 Feb 2015 16:16

pankajs wrote:MIRV could be spread over a longer range say about 1000-1500 km on a 10K range.

MaRV or MRV *ALL release at the same time* can all do a little wriggle to spread over a target area.

MIRV *CAN be released ONE at a time* can be spread over a larger area and thus can be used to target different areas spread over a longer distance.

Edit: Deleted the 1st sentence. A spread of 400 km would be MIRV.

I remember a conversation with Avinash chander where he said that studies have shown that MIRV warhead could travel 1000 KM after the release from mother missile.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Feb 2015 17:30

1000-1.5k would be very strategic.. i can have couple of a5/6 targetting 5-10 important targets in one go

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 03 Feb 2015 18:19

The RV can be made to bounce (aka lifting re-entry) 2 or 3 times with each bounce increasing the range by 500 Kms before hitting the target.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 03 Feb 2015 22:44

Centre Decides on 20,000-cr Makeover for Army Air Arm By Pradip R Sagar
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 647035.ece
Akash can target an aerial object or aircraft up to 30 km at an altitude of 18,000 m. Though the IAF version of this missile system has already been inducted, the Army’s version of Akash supersonic missile will be capable of flying at more than twice the speed of sound, according to defence officials. The heart of the Akash is the ‘Rohini’ radar that can detect an aircraft located 120 km away. This mobile missile system will be mounted on Tatra vehicles to provide a high degree of speed and mobility.

“Akash air defence system is fully autonomous with the capability to handle multiple aerial targets including very low- flying ones,” said an official. Though the DRDO says Akash, developed jointly by the DRDO and Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL), has a 98 per cent hit probability, the project has gone through a lot of hiccups, say defence analysts.

Akash was primarily developed for the Army to replace its vintage Kvadrat system, bought 40 years ago, and was intended to provide air defence cover to the fast-paced manoeuvres of mechanised forces on the move like tanks or heavy artillery. But during trials, the missile system failed miserably to hit the target accurately while mobile. Officials said it led to delays but to avoid embarrassment, the MoD had decided to induct the surface-to-air missile into the IAF to replace its vintage Russian Pechora missiles as static version in 2012. The IAF did not require mobility and only needed to further beef up the layered air defence of static vulnerable areas such as its airfields and hangers from enemy aircraft

DDM at its best , According to him unlike the akash missile of IAF , the IA version will be capable of flying at more than twice the speed of sound ..!!!

For him , SAM systems like the above examples can fire missiles while in actual movement !! He don't know about shoot and scoot philosophy of such "mobile" systems.According to him Akash was developed only for IA and that it could not fire while in the move so got modified to IAF version and replaced pechoras which are static going by his logic because he haven't seen or heard about truck mounted pechoras !!!

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 03 Feb 2015 23:13

^^ Something is really wrong in Indian Express and its not DDM. They are being fed stories by people, who obviously don't have India's interest in mind

They have managed to come up with one after another absurd articles on defence and national security.

Frm coup attempts to bogus story on porki boat sunk by CG.

They need to be investigated. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it's a duck.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 03 Feb 2015 23:27

^^^^
Yes you are right ,comments are moderated , apart from reporting it over here what can we do ???

Jayram · Post by **Jayram** » 04 Feb 2015 00:30

Definite Agenda.. Why not be objective and factual rather than personal and condescending.. "the system failed miserably" .. Who decided this? Shouldn't it be enough to say the system failed?
Chutiaz. Sold out self hating DDM..

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Feb 2015 00:34

Akash 8 squadrons for IAF + 2 regiments for the IAF/IA have orders of Rs 23,300 Crore. Thats $ 4BILLION that has not gone to arms vendors.

Its not that hard to figure out why they'd try to damage its rep. by bringing up stuff its not designed for and overplaying it. Akash can't be transported by an ordinary soldier! Failed miserably when soldier tried to pick it up etc etc.

Gullible self loathing journalists are useful tools.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Feb 2015 00:36

Meanwhile, their propaganda efforts apart, Akash has come as a huge shot in the arm for IAF/IA and per DRDO Chiefs recent remarks IA has committed to a Mk2 and will drop its SRSAM import.

No wonder some folks are upset.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Feb 2015 08:18

Shaun wrote:^^^^
Yes you are right ,comments are moderated , apart from reporting it over here what can we do ???

lot can be done.. first collect the reports that are against national interests. file a complaint with the following procedure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Coun ... ure.5B2.5D

John · Post by **John** » 04 Feb 2015 09:08

You need to read between the lines to get any valuable information of any sort. What the article indicates is IA decision to move towards Tatra mounted variant rather than a tracked variant.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 04 Feb 2015 10:28

My guess IA have requirement for both tracked and wheeled versions , tatra mounted version have been shown on republic day.

Some reports are misleading about actual number of batteries in squadron and regimental strength of Akash SAM with IAF and IA respectively

In IAF, a squadron of Akash SAM consist of 2 batteries , 2 batteries can neutralize 8 threats simultaneously with 2 missiles earmarked for each threat fired from 8 launchers . Ready to fire round 32 missiles with another 93 missiles as reserve.Total 125 missiles.

In IA ,a regiment of Akash SAM consist of 6 batteries , it means 24 launchers and thus 72 ready to fire missiles but there is order of 1000 missiles for each regiments as reported . Either the number of batteries with each regiment is more or 928 missiles kept as reserve .

Gurus please rectify if found wrong.

srin · Post by **srin** » 04 Feb 2015 10:30

I thought that DRDO had to struggle really hard to cram components into the T-72 chassis for the Army version of Akash. Why is Tatra being used ? Were there issues with T-72 chassis ? Googled for it but couldn't find anything specific on the T-72.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Feb 2015 10:43

Shaun wrote:IA have requirement for both tracked and wheeled versions , tatra mounted version have been shown on republic day.

And how do you know this?

From Saurav Jha's blog dated November 2014:

http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... tures.html

A typical Akash battery consists of four launchers carrying three missiles each with a range of 30 km and maximum interception altitude of 18 kms. The launchers built by Tata Power SED are now mounted on 8x8 Tatra trucks supplied by BEML. After years of experimenting with tracked launcher vehicles based on BMP and T-72 chassis, the IA has settled for a wheeled configuration now

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Feb 2015 11:32

I've been saying for aeons,why hasn't the DRDO proposed a naval version of Akash? Is the Barak-8 the "blindspot"? Worldwide nations have used ground based SAMs also aboard naval vessels,the Soviets/Russia have the RIF LR naval SAMs aboard Slava CGs and the Chinese the same aboard their DDGs.We still use the SA-N-1 Goa missiles aboard our Rajput/Kashin-2s. Currently,all our naval SAMs are firang,while we've made significant progress with anti-ship missiles like BMos,Nirbhay.The "blind spot" needs to be rectified.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 04 Feb 2015 11:39

A good point Philip Saar, one reason could be weight of the missile, another could be the reload issue associated with the higher weight needing more powerful cranes as well as the reduced load out (again related to weight), lack of a seeker could also be a reason... Navy was pining for the Trishul, once it was successfully scraped, they bet big time on the Barak. My 2 cents...

If Akash's weight is reduced, a seeker added, then couple of dozen Akash in VLS silos can be deployed by IN on select warships,

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 04 Feb 2015 11:41

A noob Pooch, how many launchers / TEL are there in each Brahmos Missile regiment?during the acceptance ceremony of Brahmost Block III missiles to the Army, I read that there were 12 launchers, command TEL, reload vehicles, couple of RADARs etc... Today I read that there are 4 TELs, gurus please clarify

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 04 Feb 2015 11:44

@Rohit saab , i was about to edit , got posted anyway
My guess IA have requirement for both tracked and wheeled versions , tatra mounted version have been shown on republic day.

Some reports are misleading about actual number of batteries in squadron and regimental strength of Akash SAM with IAF and IA respectively

In IAF, a squadron of Akash SAM consist of 2 batteries , 2 batteries can neutralize 8 threats simultaneously with 2 missiles earmarked for each threat fired from 8 launchers . Ready to fire round 32 missiles with another 93 missiles as reserve.Total 125 missiles.

In IA ,a regiment of Akash SAM consist of 6 batteries , it means 24 launchers and thus 72 ready to fire missiles but there is order of 1000 missiles for each regiments as reported . Either the number of batteries with each regiment is more or 928 missiles kept as reserve .

Gurus please rectify if found wrong.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 04 Feb 2015 11:50

Philip wrote:I've been saying for aeons,why hasn't the DRDO proposed a naval version of Akash? Is the Barak-8 the "blindspot"? Worldwide nations have used ground based SAMs also aboard naval vessels,the Soviets/Russia have the RIF LR naval SAMs aboard Slava CGs and the Chinese the same aboard their DDGs.We still use the SA-N-1 Goa missiles aboard our Rajput/Kashin-2s. Currently,all our naval SAMs are firang,while we've made significant progress with anti-ship missiles like BMos,Nirbhay.The "blind spot" needs to be rectified.

The Akash is no substitute for the LR-SAM. Its a short range system which is already more or less covered by the in-service Barak 1.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Feb 2015 12:08

other than MBTs/IFV doing direct fire is there any vehicle that can fire on the move?
SP guns stop and anchor themselves
same for any form of ground to ground missile.

can stuff like tunguska, tor or buk launchers keep moving on tracks and fire their SAMs on the move?

or does the article mean the kind of datalinks needed between the launch vehicle and the radars in other vehicles does not work on the move unlike a more self contained system like tunguska,buk,tor which mount the radar on the same vehicle.

afaik even in OIF and ODS the patriot units kept moving with the armour and mech units but would halt and take up protective bubble position while another unit located fwd for the next bubble and so on....only smaller things like stingers on humvees would be constantly on the move for anti-helicopter protection and last ditch ciws work. the patriot trucks apparently had some difficulty in moving through soft sand areas.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 04 Feb 2015 12:20

Singha wrote:other than MBTs/IFV doing direct fire is there any vehicle that can fire on the move?
SP guns stop and anchor themselves
same for any form of ground to ground missile.

can stuff like tunguska, tor or buk launchers keep moving on tracks and fire their SAMs on the move?

or does the article mean the kind of datalinks needed between the launch vehicle and the radars in other vehicles does not work on the move unlike a more self contained system like tunguska,buk,tor which mount the radar on the same vehicle.

afaik even in OIF and ODS the patriot units kept moving with the armour and mech units but would halt and take up protective bubble position while another unit located fwd for the next bubble and so on....only smaller things like stingers on humvees would be constantly on the move for anti-helicopter protection and last ditch ciws work. the patriot trucks apparently had some difficulty in moving through soft sand areas.

Exactly SAM systems moving along with armored column actually follow the shoot and scoot principal . Medium SAM system have to stop from 5 to 15 mins for a firing solution.

John · Post by **John** » 04 Feb 2015 19:20

Shaun wrote:@Rohit saab , i was about to edit , got posted anyway
My guess IA have requirement for both tracked and wheeled versions , tatra mounted version have been shown on republic day.

There is no such requirements from day one it arose due to concerns with tracked variant, the tatra variant was developed recently and made its appearance in recent shows. It IMO serves as transition to Mk 2 variant for example the wheeled launcher has plenty of room to easily house a canister based akash missiles in future.

Philip wrote:I've been saying for aeons,why hasn't the DRDO proposed a naval version of Akash? Is the Barak-8 the "blindspot"? Worldwide nations have used ground based SAMs also aboard naval vessels,the Soviets/Russia have the RIF LR naval SAMs aboard Slava CGs and the Chinese the same aboard their DDGs.We still use the SA-N-1 Goa missiles aboard our Rajput/Kashin-2s. Currently,all our naval SAMs are firang,while we've made significant progress with anti-ship missiles like BMos,Nirbhay.The "blind spot" needs to be rectified.

Too many challenges with developing a naval Akash (launcher, command guidance cannot handle saturation attacks, only 25 km range etc) it would much better alternative modifying AAD for naval purpose and launching them from Brahmos U-VLS to long range threats.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Feb 2015 19:27

KaranM,
Is there a table of A-I thru A-V payload weights? Could be interesting.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Feb 2015 21:03

I am purely speculating here.

I think we will see both the tracked and wheeled variants with army. The wheeled variants have more legs. You don't have to put them on top of a truck to transport from one place to another. Besides, what about the hills.

On the other hand the tracks allow it traverse the deserts.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 04 Feb 2015 22:04

ramana wrote:KaranM,
Is there a table of A-I thru A-V payload weights? Could be interesting.

Just from wiki
A1- 1 ton
A2- 1 ton
A3-1.8 ton
A4-1 ton
A5- 1.5 ton

Not sure if these are real or just A5 is 5000 km range type data.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Feb 2015 23:07

Bheeshma, Thanks a tonne!!!
What it means is A-1, A-2 & A-4 have same payload.
A3 and A5 are heavy maal.

Most likely K15/BO5 will have same as A1
K4 will have same as A5

All for commonality.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Feb 2015 23:52

ramana wrote:KaranM,
Is there a table of A-I thru A-V payload weights? Could be interesting.

Sure thing. Let me look up a reliable source and post it.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Feb 2015 23:57

Singha wrote:other than MBTs/IFV doing direct fire is there any vehicle that can fire on the move?
SP guns stop and anchor themselves
same for any form of ground to ground missile.

can stuff like tunguska, tor or buk launchers keep moving on tracks and fire their SAMs on the move?

or does the article mean the kind of datalinks needed between the launch vehicle and the radars in other vehicles does not work on the move unlike a more self contained system like tunguska,buk,tor which mount the radar on the same vehicle.

afaik even in OIF and ODS the patriot units kept moving with the armour and mech units but would halt and take up protective bubble position while another unit located fwd for the next bubble and so on....only smaller things like stingers on humvees would be constantly on the move for anti-helicopter protection and last ditch ciws work. the patriot trucks apparently had some difficulty in moving through soft sand areas.

IIRC they can fire on the move but when moving slowly. The SOP would be to stop and fire to raise Pk. The key issue here is not of firing on the move but whether the system is self contained (eg Tunguska w/Radar, Gun, Missile altogether) or distributed, which means after stopping the systems have to be networked together. The former will be faster.

The advantage of the Akash style unit is lower cost (one radar system for a battery) plus better performance (one large radar versus the limited small sets on a Tunguska or TELAR) plus survivability (you dont lose the radar crew + missile crew to an ARM strike). From combat performance perspective, if you can set up and afford a grid of grides with larger EW systems behind feeding data forward, you can then invest in smaller sensor/shooter combinations.

IMO we need to think of cost effectiveness. Even the relatively straightforward Akash setup cost us $4Bn (though for a huge number of SAMs, battery and radars). But if we go the distributed FCR+ Missile route, best is to rely on Astra + Aslesha + EOFCS combos on LMVs.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 05 Feb 2015 02:47

From DRDO @dpidrdo on Twitter, Akash on a TATA launcher

:

Click for hi-res

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 05 Feb 2015 03:01

They really ought to increase the number to 4 per launcher.

John · Post by **John** » 05 Feb 2015 03:03

Yes that is Air force variant on a trailer.

Bheeshma wrote:They really ought to increase the number to 4 per launcher.

Interestingly the Russians made that switch for the Buk missile.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Feb 2015 03:18

A more compact missile could mean more missiles/launcher. Lets see how Mk2 shapes up. Looks like the IA is interested in the program.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Feb 2015 04:38

On the TSP thread the Paks are browning their shalwars bigtime over the Agni test. They think its a mix of alien-yahood-amreeka technology and are gnashing their teeth on how Indoos can get so far ahead. Idiots.
I wonder how much more the shalwars will get browned when all the work of the past decade starts entering production. The PGMs, the Mk2s (Pinaka, Akash, Helina, Prahaar etc etc).

srai · Post by **srai** » 05 Feb 2015 05:54

Shaun wrote:
Singha wrote:other than MBTs/IFV doing direct fire is there any vehicle that can fire on the move?
SP guns stop and anchor themselves
same for any form of ground to ground missile.

can stuff like tunguska, tor or buk launchers keep moving on tracks and fire their SAMs on the move?

or does the article mean the kind of datalinks needed between the launch vehicle and the radars in other vehicles does not work on the move unlike a more self contained system like tunguska,buk,tor which mount the radar on the same vehicle.

afaik even in OIF and ODS the patriot units kept moving with the armour and mech units but would halt and take up protective bubble position while another unit located fwd for the next bubble and so on....only smaller things like stingers on humvees would be constantly on the move for anti-helicopter protection and last ditch ciws work. the patriot trucks apparently had some difficulty in moving through soft sand areas.
Exactly SAM systems moving along with armored column actually follow the shoot and scoot principal . Medium SAM system have to stop from 5 to 15 mins for a firing solution.

That's where a Akash Group (w/ 4 or more batteries) comes in handy. You can have some batteries on station while others move forward and re-setup.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Feb 2015 06:51

Loyalists strike back.

So, Dr RK Gupta had issues with Tessy Chanders promotion & had made a complaint about the same etc. This was widely touted by BJP Spokies as the reason on TV as the reason why Dr Chander was dropped. Guptas info went to an ex DRDO guy with a grudge against VKS and AC to fire a salvo. Unlikely latter would have got info without Dr Gupta.

So basically, Dr Gupta felt shortchanged, Dr Chander got dropped by GOI (with this as one of the key reasons; Tessy Thomas promoted out of turn etc etc) & now it seems Gupta has been dropped as well by DRDO.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 653147.ece

A mess. GOI also dropped the ball squarely. By taking out AC but not putting in leadership in place but also with a lot of simmering angst/anger at ACs removal amongst other folks, they ensured that Gupta too would be squarely the target of ire. This clash of personalities should have been addressed.

Better way to handle the whole situation should have been sought. But it wasn't. In the process, we lose two missile scientists. One an expert in navigation, another an expert in composite systems. Pathetic handling overall. Hope they manage to retain Drs Gupta and Chander in some other programs.

srai · Post by **srai** » 05 Feb 2015 07:50

^^^

What a mess! Shouldn't they have found a replacement for AC before terminating his contract?

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 05 Feb 2015 08:16

Seriously... GOI should keep internal conflicts internal. IMHO he got booted because they went ahead with A5 ( to show solidarity with AC ) with no NaMo there. A wild guess.

Whatever they are doing its not good.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Feb 2015 08:18

Its a big mess to be sure. These sort of things definitely happen from time to time and GOI should actually play the role of a savvy peacemaker, herding these cats and making sure they dont end up in fratricidal wars. In this case, GOI stepped in & took sides & then sat out the (predictable) results.

In a way, these are all the chickens of the dysfunctional UPA coming home to roost. Perhaps let go because of incompetence or a deliberate ploy to land the novice BJP in the soup which BJP enthusiastically jumped into.

Mirror of Bikram Singh vs VK Singh etc & TSD getting the stick because of formers fight.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Feb 2015 08:26

Also Dr Gupta is not letting things go and is taking aim at Dr VG Shekharan. Who is a propulsion and motors expert. So things are not bad enough that we lost an old INS hand in Chander. And a composite structures guy who designed reentry vehicles in Gupta. Now we have to lose a motors guy in Shekharan. A mess to be sure. Hope GOI doesn't mess things up more by trying to use this as a mark against Dr Shekharan. Because that's all three gents who'll walk.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 05 Feb 2015 08:39

These scientists are domain experts, and their departure at leadership level like this may scuttle the missile program itself.

Maybe some common sense gets to GOI. Sooner the better.