Indian Missile Technology Discussion

namit k · Post by **namit k** » 01 Feb 2009 17:55

ajay_ijn wrote:
namit k wrote:now even brahmos which is a better made yakhont is not suitable to army which prefers t90 over arjun and any other european tank
what is the problem between drdo and the army
was drdo faking details about brahmos in media??
lets see, one single failure doesn't change the whole program. Navy has accepted the missile. LACM is definitely more challenging than Anti-Ship especially with the requirement of pin point accuracy in presence of decoys etc.

i am guessing this isn't the first test of Brahmos with terminal spectral seeker so that means previous development trials of Block II have been Successful.

yes the new brahmos had to perform more complex tasks, but what really is the issue between army and drdo?

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 01 Feb 2009 19:57

Austin wrote:Saumitra sir , welcome back ...... AR & RP seems well funded

Any idea about this SCAN or “multi-spectral seeker” being developed for this block II Brahmos ?

Sengupta says something in shiv aroors blog abt the seeker and its problem.

The SCAN optronic multi-spectral sensor and its airborne data links are the very same as those used on the Popeye Lite PGM. This sensor and the data link are activated only in the terminal stage of the missile's flight and the activation ques are obtained from the ring laser gyro-based navigation system. Based on the Indian Express report claiming that the BrahMos overshot the target by a kilometre, it means that the PROBABLE cause of the failure was the delayed activation of the SCAN sensor caused by a faulty (or erroneously calibrated) RLG-based INS which was fabricated by HAL. It is a minor problem but the important thing is that the problem has now been zeroed upon, so the cure is very much within reach.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 01 Feb 2009 20:17

sum wrote:They might even confide that the A-III range is not the stated 3500 but 3700 K.M while the BRFites have a idea of the ACTUAL figures.

Whatever one may claim the range is, how do the defense services get the confidence, unless the missile is fired for its full range? Has AII or AIII ever been test fired for their full official range?
I guess they might have simulators, but is that akin to real testing for having a proven system?

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 01 Feb 2009 20:31

AdityaM wrote:
sum wrote:They might even confide that the A-III range is not the stated 3500 but 3700 K.M while the BRFites have a idea of the ACTUAL figures.
Whatever one may claim the range is, how do the defense services get the confidence, unless the missile is fired for its full range? Has AII or AIII ever been test fired for their full official range?
I guess they might have simulators, but is that akin to real testing for having a proven system?

I agree with you on that I found a video on youtube about India's missile capabilities and it paints a disconcerting picture.
It may be BS but it is better to be aware than live in a smoke dream.

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 01 Feb 2009 20:33

AdityaM wrote:
sum wrote:They might even confide that the A-III range is not the stated 3500 but 3700 K.M while the BRFites have a idea of the ACTUAL figures.
Whatever one may claim the range is, how do the defense services get the confidence, unless the missile is fired for its full range? Has AII or AIII ever been test fired for their full official range?
I guess they might have simulators, but is that akin to real testing for having a proven system?

military would obviously want any weapon to be tested to its extremes to check the real capability, look at what Arjun had to go through and not to mention the unprecendented trials of Artillery.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 01 Feb 2009 20:52

uddu wrote:Failed test and rocketing costs: Army says no to Brahmos missile

The DRDO first claimed success but had to backtrack when General Kapoor insisted on visiting the target site and found that the missile had overshot by a kilometre.

What is the standard procedure- Does it take an army chiefs insistence for a physical verification. Wouldn't that be done as part of procedure anyways?

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 01 Feb 2009 20:56

ajay_ijn wrote: military would obviously want any weapon to be tested to its extremes to check the real capability, look at what Arjun had to go through and not to mention the unprecendented trials of Artillery.

In which case the 'actual' ranges of A2 and A3 would be public knowledge. After all, wouldn't US & others be monitoring our tests?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 01 Feb 2009 21:11

ajay_ijn wrote: Sengupta says something in shiv aroors blog abt the seeker and its problem.

The SCAN optronic multi-spectral sensor and its airborne data links are the very same as those used on the Popeye Lite PGM. ......

ajai, sengupta and his israeli fixation. by this time you should know better !!

trust him only when others (more than one) say so. till now we have had enough BS from prasun sengupta over the years that didn't materialise.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 01 Feb 2009 21:19

No point in reposting the same article twice on the same page.
Rahul.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Feb 2009 21:39

lets think and rewind for a sec.. why would army reject just with one test, that was done with some reconfiguration. brahmos being accepted by navy and air force means army is being only rude (its their right to not induct brahmos if it fails of course. note: this is a point rejection after spending crores) to drdo. they have an established behavior even with arjuns.. drdo knows this, and still they have to get into a live failure in front of them is sheer unlucky.. i am not seeing this as any spin at all. Indian Army is very hard on change.. especially to please the clout that chooses. its high time, IA teams sent to advanced wars by joining nato groups, so that they realize world is moving much faster in the advanced nations, and not just think about adversaries only emanating from our neighborhood.

only time will tell. btw, if it were yakhont, it would easily sailed past the test since there would double agents filtering the test news. its also high time, that drdo starts using an agency to deal with IA.

again, i am all for the failure fixes.. and not just bashing IA or DRDO. we need to grow up!

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 01 Feb 2009 21:55

SaiK wrote:lets think and rewind for a sec.. why would army reject just with one test, that was done with some reconfiguration. brahmos being accepted by navy and air force means army is being only rude (its their right to not induct brahmos if it fails of course. note: this is a point rejection after spending crores) to drdo. they have an established behavior even with arjuns.. drdo knows this, and still they have to get into a live failure in front of them is sheer unlucky.. i am not seeing this as any spin at all. Indian Army is very hard on change.. especially to please the clout that chooses. its high time, IA teams sent to advanced wars by joining nato groups, so that they realize world is moving much faster in the advanced nations, and not just think about adversaries only emanating from our neighborhood.

only time will tell. btw, if it were yakhont, it would easily sailed past the test since there would double agents filtering the test news. its also high time, that drdo starts using an agency to deal with IA.

again, i am all for the failure fixes.. and not just bashing IA or DRDO. we need to grow up!

I am not sure if Army is being tough or DRDO was being dishonet.
From the Indian Express report here are some shocking facts.

1) A demonstration to the Army of Brahmos hitting a specific target failed on January 20. The DRDO first claimed success but had to backtrack when General Kapoor insisted on visiting the target site and found that the missile had overshot by a kilometre.

2) Beyond the technology glitch, the DRDO would also have to explain the costs. The Indo-Russian joint venture is now quoting Rs 8,500 crore (October 2008 prices) for arming two regiments compared to Rs 3,000 crore in 2006.

3) The DRDO says that the cost escalation is due to the new price of Rs 27 crore being asked by the Russians for each missile compared to Rs 13 crore earlier.

4) But so far, 80 percent — mainly the liquid ramjet engine and the seeker — are imported in knock-down condition to be reassembled by the Russians.

I completely fail to understand the type of JV we have with Russians. Why are we paying so much for Brahmos. Is it that our only contribution to the entire project was limited to funding it. Did the Russians never share any of the critical seeker and propulsion technology with India? Are we again reduced to assemblers rather than developers.

saumitra_j · Post by **saumitra_j** » 01 Feb 2009 22:51

What is the terminal velocity of Pop Eye? I am not too sure the guidance systems would be the same as those for Brahmos 'cos IMHO Pop Eye does not do Mach 2.5... however Gurus may please correct me on that one....

saumitra_j · Post by **saumitra_j** » 01 Feb 2009 23:02

AmitR wrote:From the Indian Express report here are some shocking facts.

AmitR request you to please read the PTI report instead (I have posted the link on the previous page of this thread) to see how the author of the Idiot Express is giving his own spin.

1) A demonstration to the Army of Brahmos hitting a specific target failed on January 20. The DRDO first claimed success but had to backtrack when General Kapoor insisted on visiting the target site and found that the missile had overshot by a kilometre.

They backtracked once all the details of the test were known - success was claimed initially but it took them some time to analyse the data and they backtracked after they figured the issue (in exactly 24 hours BTW)

2) Beyond the technology glitch, the DRDO would also have to explain the costs. The Indo-Russian joint venture is now quoting Rs 8,500 crore (October 2008 prices) for arming two regiments compared to Rs 3,000 crore in 2006.
3) The DRDO says that the cost escalation is due to the new price of Rs 27 crore being asked by the Russians for each missile compared to Rs 13 crore earlier.

Please read the PTI report once again and do not believe DDM.

4) But so far, 80 percent — mainly the liquid ramjet engine and the seeker — are imported in knock-down condition to be reassembled by the Russians.I completely fail to understand the type of JV we have with Russians. Why are we paying so much for Brahmos. Is it that our only contribution to the entire project was limited to funding it. Did the Russians never share any of the critical seeker and propulsion technology with India? Are we again reduced to assemblers rather than developers.

I will strongly suggest that you read a little bit before asking such questions. Brahmo's guidance kit was developed by India and that includes lots of software, hardware, radar, and related infrastructure. There are some things which no body will share - no alternative but to do it the hard way. Remember countries will share only that which they know even India can develop - the only reason we still go ahead and take it is to save time. Nobody - I repeat nobody will share their cutting edge technology with you - so relax and take some time off to read about what it takes to build a Brahmos like missile system.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Feb 2009 23:13

AmitR wrote:
I completely fail to understand the type of JV we have with Russians. Why are we paying so much for Brahmos. Is it that our only contribution to the entire project was limited to funding it. Did the Russians never share any of the critical seeker and propulsion technology with India? Are we again reduced to assemblers rather than developers.

nope.. the agreement is that we would be developing the seeker and guidance technology part. lets not get into something we have no handle right now.. for the least, we can stop this ddm bashing of drdo., without wasting their content for corrections as well that drdo needs to fix the issues. hey, they are r&d shop.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 01 Feb 2009 23:19

guys, may I request you all to actually READ that idiot journalists report and point out where army has said anything about rejecting barhmos ?

kindly read this too.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 38#p606638

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 02 Feb 2009 01:03

Guys, a missile launch (or any kind of engineering experiment) while under development, in scientific terms is a failure only if no data could be collected from the test.

Its possible and indeed, probable, when testing new technologies that some of the goals of the test are not met. When this happens, from an engineering perspective, the test is successful, though it has failed to meet some/one of the goals.

On the other hand, if a missile is undergoing batch testing, and a round selected randomly from a batch fails to meet all of its launch objectives, that would be a test failure.

In this case, its clear that new sensors and guidance systems were being tested. The testers have enough data to ascertain what the problem is and conduct another experiment in a months time.

Only DDM with a BA in 'mass comm' would report this test the way they did.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 02 Feb 2009 01:26

Since the Brahmos test was a first time test of a new kind of tech, why did it have to be a user trial!

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 02 Feb 2009 01:44

AdityaM wrote:Since the Brahmos test was a first time test of a new kind of tech, why did it have to be a user trial!

Exactly!

I think 22 flawless tests made them over confident! A nice dose of reality for Pillai saar to spend more time with development team rather than with media and award functions.

nothing to worry our open system ensures only really worthy, throughly tested and offordable system gets inducted. This is good, no one's being allowed to lie.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 02 Feb 2009 01:59

At the risk of being off-topic, Do other countries also make a media spectacle of their missile tests?
Does the Junta need to be informed about tests & their results the way it is currently done? If yes, then how come we never get to know when the Chinese are testing their ding-dongs?

ss_roy · Post by **ss_roy** » 02 Feb 2009 02:12

Why are we making such a big deal of one failure? Why are indians obsessed with avoiding failures?

Innovation will always result in failures... as long as we learn something and avoid it the next time around, it is not a failure.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 02 Feb 2009 02:15

^diff between democracy and authoritarian leadership.. besides, its all up to our setup. don't you want to know the status of brahmos otherwise if everything is hush hush. regulation, and appropriate policies are important.

failures help you correct systems.. which is fine. ddm apart, its important drdo and IA has proper media channel. after all both entities need to play the proper psy ops correctly to aam junta.

Nash_M · Post by **Nash_M** » 02 Feb 2009 03:14

One more demoralizing article....

With active help from China and North Korea, Pakistan has surged well ahead of India in the missile arena. The only nuclear-capable ballistic missile in India's arsenal which can be said to be 100% operational as of now is the short-range Prithvi missile............

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 060400.cms

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Feb 2009 03:16

So, in effect, the missile report card is rather dismal at present. "Unlike Pakistan, our programme is indigenous. But a strategic missile needs to be tested 10 to 15 times, over a variety of flight envelopes and targets, before it can be said to be fully-operational. A missile cannot be dubbed ready just after three to four tests," said an expert.

Quick!
Somebody tell the Chinese. They've got to stop inducting DF-31s until they test it more. Tell the Russians. They haven't tested the Topol-M enough times. An Indian expert says so!

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 02 Feb 2009 03:19

Failure or success, it is distressing to see the amount of information being given out to media...now we know that Army has 66 missiles, plans to induct 240 more.

...oh...It wasn't the army who gave out the info..

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 02 Feb 2009 03:22

sunil, could you drop me a mail (in my profile signature) about the michael wood vids ?
regards.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 02 Feb 2009 03:40

It is well known that Pakistan didn't have any nuclear missile capability till kargil. Yet they now supposedly possess and edge over India. If it is so, there is cause for worry but certainly no shame. We did not buy missiles off the shelf like Pakistan. We, unlike them, had to develop and test them. Yet, the cause of worry for me is that how could media get hold of information of such tremendous national securuty?

This information, if true, can give Pakistan huge leverage against India.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 02 Feb 2009 03:49

Nash_M wrote:One more demoralizing article....

What is this baloney being paraded about in regular intervals about how "Pakis have better missiles than SDREs" and "Pakis are much more advanced in mating missiles to bums than Indians" ? There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of Pakis making any credible progress in missile technology, miniaturizing warheads or mating them to missiles. In desi opensource articles, if you keep your eyes and ears open, there are articles about RLGs, Carbon composite nosecones for re-entry, 2m dia rocket motors, rail mobility tests of the Agni series, cannisterized Shourya launch, and so on. All you get from Pakis, are articles like

Gauri/Hatf IIIIIIb mijjile which suspiciously looks like ding-dong capable of carrying "all types of warheads with pinpoint accuracy" 400% pindigenous onleee.

This gets caught in the desi DDM echo chamber, amplified to

"ZOMG !!!! Indian IGMDP (which was recently canned) which is 80 years old (started secretly by Gandhi before independence), after spending Rs 100 trillion, cannot build a missile that flies. Agni, is a missile is 1000 times heavier than Bofors shell, which is the state of the art in western countries. Pakis on the other hand have 10,000 Ghauris with dial a yield miniaturized thermonuclear warheads".

If anyone paid attention, they would have noticed the only 400% pindigenous product is Abdali. Which can be classified as a artillery rocket. Launched out of a bizzarre launch rail. Illegal SDRE child laborers in sivakasi produce a much better rocket. If anyone is paying attention pakis are falling head over heels to produce plutonium after declaring their tests to be 400% successful. Why ?

There is a method to the madness of IGMDP, there was first the Prithvi, liquid fueled nonetheless, but providing us with interim deterrence against Pakis, then the SDRE long range Agni, followed by Dhanush platform for launching Prithvi from the sea, followed by SDRE short range Agni, followed by mithai wallah mota Agni III, followed by PAD/AAD followed by cannisterized Shourya. Spot a pattern ?

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 02 Feb 2009 04:45

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Request for Newbies"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Most members know, Newbies who join this forum are expert in Missile Tech, Nuke Tech, Master Strategist, Chankian Tacticians etc. But please stop posting old recycled trash from Idiot Express, TOI, Hindustantimes, etc. These issues have been discussed before umpteenth times. As far as Brahmos "failure" is concerned, take it with grain of salt. Here is a break down for you...
Reflectors were used around target to confuse and blind the IIR seeker. Other counter measures were also used to throw missile of its designated trajectory, lead it away from target, etc.

Here is the good news about it. Missile didn't deviate from designated trajectory, flight path, target acquisition. This successful failure has validated 95% of new guidance system with a glitch that if reflective, or heat reflectors are used for counter measures it will not hit window of a building but the backyard of that building. Once this glitch is fixed this missile might even hit a "Chavvanni" . In grand scheme of things, 500kg or 1000kg warhead that will impact will demolish 1km perimeter in circumference.
Chill out and relax, some DDM & Journos have a habit of critcising anything Indian. Have you ever heard any thing good printed in DDM, have you ever seen any article or news about accomplishment. Its always about delays, how f**ked up our products are, how we are just sore losers etc?
I would agree there has been delays, we are still working through them sooner or later something will happen. Like the old saying goes, let the cookie crumble.
For India, all this development and failure is a learning curve, its a marathon not a sprint. For pakis and their media sypathizers who have sh**t for brains, let them gloat and do their chest thumping.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 02 Feb 2009 06:41

Baljeet wrote:"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Request for Newbies"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Most members know, Newbies who join this forum are expert in Missile Tech, Nuke Tech, Master Strategist, Chankian Tacticians etc. But please stop posting old recycled trash from Idiot Express, TOI, Hindustantimes, etc. These issues have been discussed before umpteenth times. As far as Brahmos "failure" is concerned, take it with grain of salt. Here is a break down for you...
Reflectors were used around target to confuse and blind the IIR seeker. Other counter measures were also used to throw missile of its designated trajectory, lead it away from target, etc.

Here is the good news about it. Missile didn't deviate from designated trajectory, flight path, target acquisition. This successful failure has validated 95% of new guidance system with a glitch that if reflective, or heat reflectors are used for counter measures it will not hit window of a building but the backyard of that building. Once this glitch is fixed this missile might even hit a "Chavvanni" . In grand scheme of things, 500kg or 1000kg warhead that will impact will demolish 1km perimeter in circumference.
Chill out and relax, some DDM & Journos have a habit of critcising anything Indian. Have you ever heard any thing good printed in DDM, have you ever seen any article or news about accomplishment. Its always about delays, how f**ked up our products are, how we are just sore losers etc?
I would agree there has been delays, we are still working through them sooner or later something will happen. Like the old saying goes, let the cookie crumble.
For India, all this development and failure is a learning curve, its a marathon not a sprint. For pakis and their media sypathizers who have sh**t for brains, let them gloat and do their chest thumping.

Even after 25 years ......i still dont get it , why only the indian media critisie the indian made and developed?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 02 Feb 2009 06:44

may be army is point blank at this:-

The DRDO says that the cost escalation is due to the new price of Rs 27 crore being asked by the Russians for each missile compared to Rs 13 crore earlier.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 02 Feb 2009 07:32

He didn't critisize missiles/DRDO per say but he has a point about proper induction and user trials. You can't rely on a system which is not tested numeous times by user in different conditions and for different envelops. I think the stingy babu nature has more to do here for not producing/testing enough missiles by user.

Pakistan doesn't need to test their missiles that many times since they have been validated by the oiginal developers. Still I think Pakistani armed forces have tested thei missiles as much as Indians.

We need to manufacture and test more missiles, no one can or should argue against it.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 02 Feb 2009 07:50

Katare, no he does not have a point - at least not one that is scientifically valid.

Pakistan has not tested its missiles as much as India and save for the M-9 & M-11 clones which are Chinese, Pakistan's North Korean missiles have been tested very little. NK had a habit of declaring a system operational after 1 test.

In 2002, Kasturangan from ISRO was appointed to head a committee to ascertain the optimum number of tests needed to satisfactorily and reliably verify the performance of a missile. The answer they came up with was 3 successive successful tests were necessary. Costs are a major consideration in each test.

For more information on how that was arrived at I'd suggest Karnad's latest book on India's Nuclear Policy. It is a remarkably balanced read with a good deal of useful information.

sarang · Post by **sarang** » 02 Feb 2009 09:09

Sanjay can you provide any more details about the book (name publication etc)

prabhug · Post by **prabhug** » 02 Feb 2009 11:09

Hi
I have a doubt.first Airforce(for Akash Sams) asked to reduce the costs.Now it's army's turn.I felt one thing ,Is this in any case a plan by the ndian government to increase defense expenditure ? For example when the manufacturers show loses , definitely it would not be added to the defense expenditure.Anyway government is going to pay for it.

Cheers

Prabhu.G

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 02 Feb 2009 11:26

In 2002, Kasturangan from ISRO was appointed to head a committee to ascertain the optimum number of tests needed to satisfactorily and reliably verify the performance of a missile. The answer they came up with was 3 successive successful tests were necessary. Costs are a major consideration in each test.

DRDO tests brahmos, prithvi so many times as compared A-II or A-III. A-II was tested two times and then after cleared for induction, unlike A-I or Prithvi, it hasn't been tested by Army missile groups. Its after all strategic system, should be given most important priority as far costs & funds are concerned. atleast after deployment, Army should test fire the missile regularly to make sure the production of the missiles is up to the mark and has no quality issues.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 02 Feb 2009 11:40

Sanjay,

I am talking about tests by user for operationalizing a missile system. You are talking about developmental tests by DRDO.

Do you have any stats on how many missile tests Pakistan has done as compared to Indian missile tests?

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 02 Feb 2009 11:52

Katare wrote:Sanjay,

I am talking about tests by user for operationalizing a missile system. You are talking about developmental tests by DRDO.

Do you have any stats on how many missile tests Pakistan has done as compared to Indian missile tests?

In IRBM category, they tested solid fuel Shaheen-II (range 2000km) for 5 times including the 2008 test.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Feb 2009 13:55

Sanjay,some media reports tracking Kimchi missile development quote US sources that say that N.Korea has extensively tested its short range solid fuelled tactical missiles with a range of upto 200km.The larger longer ranged missiles have been tested less,wiith Ding-Dong-2 yet to be a success.

What is the further news of the allegation that the last Brahmos test which failed in its terminal stage was because of US sat interference,making the missile's GPS system malfunction? I thought that our missiles used the Russian GLONASS system,where we are supposed ot be partcipating in the project.

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 02 Feb 2009 14:11

GPS can improve mid-course navigation but at terminal stage, its left for the Seeker only to acquire the target.

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 02 Feb 2009 15:10

It is very intresting to see all the news that is making the headlines that army has rejected the Brahmos and has resquested for more tests and then India behind Pakistan in missiles.

Please let me know,all in the forum are experts in various fields. But the point is No country in the world will give the exact range and accuracy of the missiles.
Taking this into the mind it is true that A-3 may be tested again but may be with improved engines/propellents and navigavtion systems and accuracy.So the range may also be increased.Most of us know the A-2AT can fly more than 3,500 Kms and hence forth A-3 is definately a missile which is meant to strike a site about 5,000km away.This is all a guess and that is the reason why we are not going for A-4.
Looking at the strategic concerns i can easily build a missile and paint it as A-3 but in fact it may be a missile to travel about 3,000-4,000Kms.

Brahmos also been tested so many times,it mite have failed but for defence purposes it may be purposely put on paper that it has failed the test where as it mite have hit the target on Dot.
And who i can easily put on paper that its range is 290KM but actual fact is known to any one.

All in all i just want to make a point that papers have no business especially TOI who just make a news every day about defence. These issues are not leaked into public but sometimes it may happen but not all times.

I hope every one agrees with me in this issue.