Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

[neerajb]

Is this the uniform for a Mig25 pilot?

Looks like full body G-suit and high altitude pressure helmet. The helmet is GSh-6 which is used by MiG-25/31 pilots operationally or any experimental flight (soviet times) ( MiG-21/23/25/29/Su-27 etc) which required high altitude flying.

http://www.redpilot.com/museum/helmets/gsh/gsh6.html



Cheers....

[Shankar]

taking out a carrier battle group with ballistic missile - unique situation calling for yet to be developed unique set of solutions - this may be important to Indian navy also some day
China's DF-21 and DF-15 ballistic missiles use inertia plus gyroscope guidance at the middle course, and as a result the flight trajectories are quite inflexible. Even if new optical and radar image guidance technologies are applied at the terminal course, it is still extremely difficult to quickly adjust the direction when attacking a moving target.

Suppose a DF-21M middle-range ballistic missile were to attack a U.S. aircraft carrier from a distance of 1,000 kilometers at an average speed of 7 Mach, or flying at a speed of 2,380 meters per second -- the whole course would take approximately seven minutes. Of course, because the U.S. Navy has developed the naval theater missile defense, or TMD, system, about 10-90 seconds after the DF-21M was launched, the DSP-1 infrared detection satellite would catch the signal and transmit the data through the data link to the ground-based joint tactical centre, or JTAG. The JTAG would transfer the data to the naval-based Aegis TMD system.
Almost all the Aegis Class guided missile destroyers, or DDGs, are equipped with joint tactical terminal receivers specifically designed to receive JTAG and DSP-1 satellite data. Even if no action were taken to intercept the DF-21M, the aircraft carrier could still evade the attack at full navigation speed. All of the U.S. Navy's nuclear-powered aircraft carriers have a maximum speed of 32 knots. In other words, they can move 30.866 meters each minute and 216.06 meters within seven minutes.

In line with the latest trends of the Chinese military forces, the HF sky-wave over-the-horizon backscatter radar is currently under development. The China National Electronics Import and Export Corp. has unveiled some of the technical details of this type of radar system. Documents indicate that the construction of pole-shaped antennae has been completed, and therefore at least one experimental variant of the radar system is in operation.
The transmitting and receiving arrays of the radar are respectively 200 x 100 square meters and 1,100 x 60 square meters, at an elevation of 60 degrees. This transmitting radar array can track 100 different targets simultaneously, and has a detection range of 800-3,000 kilometers. The CEIEC also introduced an HF surface-wave over-the-horizon radar, which was specifically designed to detect stealthy targets and has an effective detection range of 300 kilometers. Of course, digital image reconnaissance satellites, oceanic surveillance satellites and a variety of signal surveillance systems could also determine the approximate position of the USN aircraft carrier.

Even if the Chinese missiles could not accurately hit the aircraft carriers, shooting them in their direction would allow the Chinese military forces to impose "coercive isolation" on the U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups, keeping them out of the Taiwan Strait combat theater.

China's military has invested heavily in developing blasting warheads, blasting cluster warheads for P12, sub-ammunition warheads, cloud blasting warheads and blasting-burn warheads for ballistic missiles and WS-1B and WS-2, all of which are capable of inflicting mass destruction upon designated targets.

Taking the sub-munitions fitted on the WS-1B as an example, the combat part of the warhead weighs only 152 kilograms; it has 475 munitions; the dispersing area of the sub-munitions is 28,000 square meters, and of course this dispersing area can be reset.

If a DF-15 ballistic missile were fitted with a 500-kilogram warhead, the total number of sub-munitions could be 3.2 times those fitted on the WS-1B. In other words, there would be 1,520 sub-munitions or even more depending on the different weights of the sub-munitions. If the dispersing areas of the sub-munitions were the same, that would mean a dramatic increase in unit strike intensity.

If the ballistic missiles used Russian satellite guidance at the middle course plus a certain kind of terminal guidance system, the threat that a DF-15 could pose to an aircraft carrier is very obvious. Psychologically, this would keep the U.S. aircraft carriers 600 kilometers away from the Taiwan Strait combat theater. And if China chose to launch attacks with DF-21M medium-range ballistic missiles, the so-called "coercive isolation" zone would be much broader. Even if these attacks did not seriously damage the aircraft carrier itself, the sub-munitions assault could destroy the radar, command and communications systems of the aircraft carrier battle group and force it to withdraw from the battle


well this is what china is planning - may be we can do it better ? just playing the devils advocate -

[Kersi D]

carriers usually sail near max speed when launching or recovering aircraft around 26-28 knots to generate the air flow over deck as well as sail into wind during take off /landing

The other thing is carriers are fast. 28 Knots is about 50 kmph. In order to actually hit a carrier with a missile you will need some pretty up-to-the minute information. A carrier killing ballistic missile will need some nifty terminal guidance based on accurate real time info of where the carrier is given that I expect a ballistic missile arrives on target at high mach numbers (maybe 4 or 5?). At 1500 meters per second the missile would have 10 seconds to travel the last 15 km. In that time the carrier would be 140 meters away from where it was 10 seconds earlier. So there would have to be some means of "locking" on to the carrier. Which ballistic missiles have terminal guidance?

What about an airburst with cluster bombs ? Even if a bomb weighing 1 kg explodes on the carrier deck, it may play havoc if you have got out of the wrong side of the bed !!

I have always found the concept of using a ballistic missile to hit a carrier (or any ship) rather far fetched. Not only will the missile travel 15000 m in the last 10 seconds but the ship may be maneuvering violently if it thinks it is under attack. It is like threading constantly moving needle !

K

[Shankar]

well the concept of anti ballistic missile was also ridiculed a decade back - now no one does - its a guidance problem onlee -faster on board processor ,incorporation micro terminal guidance capability and wham bye bye carrier - if u can hit a missile with another missile both traveling- at high mach why not a carrier - the relative velocity in case of anti missile is much much higher

[shiv]

China's military has invested heavily in developing blasting warheads, blasting cluster warheads for P12, sub-ammunition warheads, cloud blasting warheads and blasting-burn warheads for ballistic missiles and WS-1B and WS-2, all of which are capable of inflicting mass destruction upon designated targets.

Taking the sub-munitions fitted on the WS-1B as an example, the combat part of the warhead weighs only 152 kilograms; it has 475 munitions; the dispersing area of the sub-munitions is 28,000 square meters, and of course this dispersing area can be reset.

If a DF-15 ballistic missile were fitted with a 500-kilogram warhead, the total number of sub-munitions could be 3.2 times those fitted on the WS-1B. In other words, there would be 1,520 sub-munitions or even more depending on the different weights of the sub-munitions. If the dispersing areas of the sub-munitions were the same, that would mean a dramatic increase in unit strike intensity.

If the ballistic missiles used Russian satellite guidance at the middle course plus a certain kind of terminal guidance system, the threat that a DF-15 could pose to an aircraft carrier is very obvious. Psychologically, this would keep the U.S. aircraft carriers 600 kilometers away from the Taiwan Strait combat theater. And if China chose to launch attacks with DF-21M medium-range ballistic missiles, the so-called "coercive isolation" zone would be much broader. Even if these attacks did not seriously damage the aircraft carrier itself, the sub-munitions assault could destroy the radar, command and communications systems of the aircraft carrier battle group and force it to withdraw from the battle


well this is what china is planning - may be we can do it better ? just playing the devils advocate -

Interesting post Shankar, I will play advocate for the other side.

You know - even low kiloton nuclear warheads do not cause all that much damage at sea if they miss by 3-4 km.

28000 square meters is a circle that is just about 190 meters in diameter. In 15-20 seconds the carrier will be safe from the submunitions which will explode harmlessly over the sea. That ballistic missile warhead will need up to the second information about where the carrier is. A 500 kg warhead with 1500 subminitions will be 300 gram bomblets which will be like 30 mm shells hitting the ship. They will niot cause significant damage.

But most important: Which ballistic missile has terminal guidance that can be updated up t6o the last 15 seconds of flight? A carrier sailing at 50 kmph will need to be hit by a missile that has up to the second information. Targeting info that is 30 seconds old is too old. 15 minutes old is a joke.

[Carl_T]

Good posts. Why couldn't they use the same guidance system that is used on A2A missiles guided by a large land based or AEW radar?

[shiv]

Good posts. Why couldn't they use the same guidance system that is used on A2A missiles guided by a large land based or AEW radar?

1) How does the land based radar see a ship 500 or more Km away sitting beyond the curvature of the earth?
2) How does the radar pinpoint the exact coordinates of a randomly moving ship from second to second with less than 25 -50 meter accuracy?
3) How can this information be transmitted to the missile without the info being jammed by a bubble of ECM around the ship extending out 100 km when the missile needs info right up to the last 10-15 km?
4) Again I would like to be told about which ballistic missiles have terminal active semi-active guidance.

[Kersi D]

well the concept of anti ballistic missile was also ridiculed a decade back - now no one does - its a guidance problem onlee -faster on board processor ,incorporation micro terminal guidance capability and wham bye bye carrier - if u can hit a missile with another missile both traveling- at high mach why not a carrier - the relative velocity in case of anti missile is much much higher

Your analogy is good. But a fatser on-board processor does not solve the problem. You may be having the "exact" coordinates of the ship. But how would you make the missile turn as the ship is moving ? The missile is moving at 1000++m/s

K

[Carl_T]

Good posts. Why couldn't they use the same guidance system that is used on A2A missiles guided by a large land based or AEW radar?

1) How does the land based radar see a ship 500 or more Km away sitting beyond the curvature of the earth?
2) How does the radar pinpoint the exact coordinates of a randomly moving ship from second to second with less than 25 -50 meter accuracy?
3) How can this information be transmitted to the missile without the info being jammed by a bubble of ECM around the ship extending out 100 km when the missile needs info right up to the last 10-15 km?
4) Again I would like to be told about which ballistic missiles have terminal active semi-active guidance.

Can't radars like the USBMD Sea based radar, or an AEW radar like the one on the E-3 see that far?

If by terminal active semi active guidance you mean first using a land based radar to guide it to a point where it is close enough for the active guidance to work, I was wondering that too.

[Shankar]

1) How does the land based radar see a ship 500 or more Km away sitting beyond the curvature of the earth?
2) How does the radar pinpoint the exact coordinates of a randomly moving ship from second to second with less than 25 -50 meter accuracy?
3) How can this information be transmitted to the missile without the info being jammed by a bubble of ECM around the ship extending out 100 km when the missile needs info right up to the last 10-15 km?
4) Again I would like to be told about which ballistic missiles have terminal active semi-active guidance.

!) phalcon awac can spot a carrier 500+km from coast when flying at 20000ft altitude and u can add a couple of hundred km easily to that range if she moves out to sea - so detection is not a problem .When a carrier group is moving there is simply too many communication radar signals etc to allow pin pointing general co ordinates

2)the information can be transmitted to missile on board computer after laucnh by high speed burst transmission - the type used by submarines to communicate with shore via communication satellites on Geo synchronous orbit and can the target data can be updated also like this

3) The high speed burst transmission s are to great extent jam proof simply becasue they use different transmission frequency every time and the duration of transmission is very very small - so the carrier jamming gear dont have enough time to detect and generate jamming signal in the same frequency

now guessing onlee
terminal detection can be
infrared based
magnetic anamoly based
RF based

terminal guidance can be by vernier motors arranged around the reentry capsule on gimbals mounts to give vectored thrust for final intercept
just like our ABM work . The on board computer can be programmed to vector into the largest mass of metal or largest source of RF and ignite the vernier motors (liquid fueled) individually or in combination to reach the designated pre programed altitude over the carrier group

sure the sub munitions will not sink the carrier -they are too large for that -but will cause extensive damage to the collective electromagnetic protection system like the search and track radars the radars which guide the close in weapon systems etc etc

and that will open up a strike window for the conventional aircraft to laucnh more serious attack with air launched missiles like brahmos
from 300 + km sukhois can laucnh a salvo of Brahmos to take down the entire carrier group

[Shankar]

Report: Chinese Develop Special "Kill Weapon" to Destroy U.S. Aircraft Carriers

Advanced missile poses substantial new threat for U.S. Navy

U. S. Naval Institute
March 31, 2009



With tensions already rising due to the Chinese navy becoming more aggressive in asserting its territorial claims in the South China Sea, the U.S. Navy seems to have yet another reason to be deeply concerned.

After years of conjecture, details have begun to emerge of a "kill weapon" developed by the Chinese to target and destroy U.S. aircraft carriers.

First posted on a Chinese blog viewed as credible by military analysts and then translated by the naval affairs blog Information Dissemination, a recent report provides a description of an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) that can strike carriers and other U.S. vessels at a range of 2000km.

The range of the modified Dong Feng 21 missile is significant in that it covers the areas that are likely hot zones for future confrontations between U.S. and Chinese surface forces.

The size of the missile enables it to carry a warhead big enough to inflict significant damage on a large vessel, providing the Chinese the capability of destroying a U.S. supercarrier in one strike.

Because the missile employs a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable, the odds that it can evade tracking systems to reach its target are increased. It is estimated that the missile can travel at mach 10 and reach its maximum range of 2000km in less than 12 minutes.

Supporting the missile is a network of satellites, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles that can locate U.S. ships and then guide the weapon, enabling it to hit moving targets.
he generic summary of the article is that the blog post describes an anti-ship ballistic missile weapon system China has developed built around the DF-21 solid propellant ballistic missile. With a range of 2000km, the ballistic missile is intended to cover the radius out to the second island chain and sink US Navy aircraft carriers and other surface vessels. The weapon system has been given a maneuverable warhead, a complex guidance system, and adds a third stage to the ballistic missile system to add penetration capability and maneuverability.

To support this weapon system, China has also developed a series of reconnaissance capabilities ranging from satellites to signals intelligence to UAVs intended to locate US Navy surface forces and engage any ships moving into an attack zone, suggested to be inside the second island chain.

While elements of the program, including the DF-21 ballistic missile system itself, is thought to be IOC with published information now coming out in Chinese military journals, what is very clear is that the weapon system, and the supporting tracking and reconnaissance networks, are all in a steady state evolutionary development. This suggests that just as the US Navy is in an evolutionary process with ballistic missile defense, China is engaged in a similar evolutionary process for ballistic missile offense against major vessels at sea.

While not said specifically, previous news media reports have suggested that this capability that China has developed is the specific reason the US Navy changed directions so suddenly in the July 31, 2008 hearing in the House regarding the DDG-1000 Zumwalt class. As Vice Admiral Bernard J. “Barry” McCullough put it in his testimony that day :

Rapidly evolving traditional and asymmetric threats continue to pose increasing challenges to Combatant Commanders. State actors and non-state actors who, in the past, have only posed limited threats in the littoral are expanding their reach beyond their own shores with improved capabilities in blue water submarine operations, advanced anti-ship cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. A number of countries who historically have only possessed regional military capabilities are investing in their Navy to extend their reach and influence as they compete in global markets. Our Navy will need to out pace other Navies in the blue water ocean environment as they extend their reach. This will require us to continue to improve our blue water anti-submarine and anti-ballistic missile capabilities in order to counter improving anti-access strategies.

and possible counter measures being thought about by USN
This missile is a game changer, but there are possible counters. On the exotic beamed energy and/ or lasers. Our current AEGIS/SM-3 is not designed for this threat. We have to go back to 1965. That year we flew HIBEX a highly maneuverable 300 g interceptor to catch anything that got through SPRINT. In 1970 the Air Force designed Falcon Defender a unique defense to protect Minuteman from a massive attack of SS-18 MIRVS. I was its architect. It had an X-Band Radar upgraded from the AWG-9 used on the F-14 radar at the Minuteman sites along with 3 HIBEX class interceptors. Because the threat was Nuclear and Massive as well as a relatively primitive computers and electronics, the warhead design called for a small enhanced warhead. Today, we could use hit to kill systems. A high power x-band radar on the Carrier integrated into AEGIS and other warning system allows the radar to only search a small sector of sky increasing the efficacy of the X Band Radar. Using the SM-3 along with this fast reacting ABM could have the ability to destroy the incoming missile in space or lower in the atmosphere as it slowed to allow terminal guidance.. There is a synergy between this and AEGIS. The AEGIS and other ships could also be armed with this system providing mutual support.

http://www.usni.org/news-and-features/c ... ill-weapon

[Avinash Rav]

Hi,

I am new to this forum and I would like to introduce myself. Can any of you please let me know where to do it.

/Avinash

[Dmurphy]

You can do it right here, Avinash

[Avinash Rav]

Thanks Murphy.

Anyways, My name is Avinash and I have been a visitor to Bharat-Rakshak for the past 2 years. Last week I became a member and I look forward to learn from the Gurus and contribute in a positive way.

/Avinash

[shiv]

cross post

India to develop its own futuristic computer operating system
http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/n ... 96216.html


Long way to go in very short time...
Keep it up...dont give up DRDO..

You are the IT man so maybe you can tell us. Wouldn't it be possible to customise some version of Linux for use without reinventing the wheel?

[Pratyush]

Shiv,

No knowing nay thing about Linux. I am sure that the DRDO must have done security studies regarding various OS in circulation and decided that it will be better to design an OS from the ground up.

JMT

[Austin]

Developing an OS is not a trivial task and it takes good amount of extertise, time and money needless to mention if you develop it in house with proprietary stuff you may just end up with thousand of bugs that you cant figure it out , unless some one exploits it.

If DRDO is so parnoid about having a secure OS , they can just pick up OpenBSD and customise it and make sure its maintained and patched on regular basis , thats perhaps the best way to get most secure OS as possible with least possible development and cost.

For a more flexible and long term approach in terms of better device driver support and OS functionality with a good compromise on security and flexibility they can stick with Linux/Debian type and maintain it in house.

[Virupaksha]

cross post


You are the IT man so maybe you can tell us. Wouldn't it be possible to customise some version of Linux for use without reinventing the wheel?

licensing issues.

Linux license says any version of it has to be publicly released along with the modified source code.

[vishnu.nv]

Taking the Linux Kernal and customizing it our specific needs will be the best thing rather than reinventing the wheel.

The general govt users can use any popular distributions which is far more secure than their windows counter parts. The data storage could be based on linux/unix based servers. With very huge data centric projects like social security number coming in the future it very important to have a secure national level infrastructure first.

World wide the consciousness on the security is increasing. London stock exchange recently migrated to Linux. Google gives the option of linux and Apple OS for its employees After mass attack from china.

[ArmenT]

licensing issues.

Linux license says any version of it has to be publicly released along with the modified source code.

Only if you release products with your modified version. If you modify it and use internally, then there is no need to release your modifications.

If OpenBSD is used instead, then this condition doesn't even apply as OpenBSD's license is a bit more liberal than GPL. All they ask for is acknowledgment that you used some BSD licensed code. You can modify BSD-licensed code all you want and incorporate into your own proprietary product as well, without giving away your modifications.

[vivekmehta]

OpenBSD is the way to go if you want a secure , reliable & cost effective environment.

but it may be any system linux/unix/OpenBSD if not administered and maintained properly they all end up easy targets for hackers same as windows .
problem which i see in India is people who are managing these system. some may be exceptionally bright ,but 80-90% have very poor technical knowledge and level of understanding of system security & architectures. they spend more time in paperwork , tendering and monitoring there civil suppliers. there are very few expertise which have been built into our defense services for effective & secure management of Information systems.

first we should evolve a framework to cover around things like

basic system security.( for general users)
advance users (for users who may be connected to secure networks)
T1 system admins ( who manages local lan wan , which connect into main secure systems)
T2 Admins ( admins managing secure data servers)
T3 admins (admins managing access controls )

finally a strong Audit & compliance system to check and report violations on realtime bases.

[chiru]

\

gurus i had this photo in my collection from a long time ago but i noticed it just now so even if we go for the A-330 MRTT we can refuel 3 AC at a time

[nikhil_p]

\

gurus i had this photo in my collection from a long time ago but i noticed it just now so even if we go for the A-330 MRTT we can refuel 3 AC at a time

And how did you reach this conclusion based on THIS picture?????

[chiru]

its a boom with a hose - end so i reached that conclusion the MRTT comes with two pods and a boom

[A Sharma]

Any idea what happened to SATHI (Hand help computer for army)?

[VinayG]

need help from gurus is there any need to redesign the exhaust of a fighter jet if we redesign the air intakes please help

[neerajb]

I have three VCDs including "Hunters at Dawn" which I bought from IAF museum. I want to upload the videos to youtube. I am asking this because these videos contain valuable history that needs to be told but at the same time I don't want to stem this revenue source of IAF. Is it appropriate to do that? VCDs mention no copyright.

Cheers....

[shiv]

I have three VCDs including "Hunters at Dawn" which I bought from IAF museum. I want to upload the videos to youtube. I am asking this because these videos contain valuable history that needs to be told but at the same time I don't want to stem this revenue source of IAF. Is it appropriate to do that? VCDs mention no copyright.

Cheers....

Even if every forum member gives you approval or permission, that will still not make you legally or morally correct. You have to decide what is right knowing that one complaint will ensure that the videos are taken of YouTube - but not before the damage is done.

Note that Jagan has reviewed "Hunter at Dawn" on BR and that has references to some ownership IIRC. You really must ask the makers of the video for permission.

[neerajb]

Even if every forum member gives you approval or permission, that will still not make you legally or morally correct.
.
.
Note that Jagan has reviewed "Hunter at Dawn" on BR and that has references to some ownership IIRC. You really must ask the makers of the video for permission.

Thanks for the suggestion Shiv. The content of the documentary is so good that I really wish that it comes to limelight and not rust in anonymity at IAF museum souvenir shop. Any pointers how to contact the maker of the documentary Rohan Cowasjee?

Cheers....

[Bala Vignesh]

Noob doubt...
Do the Jaguars go on the Air Defense ORP's????
Was using google earth when i spotted a few Jaguars at ORP in an Air Field..

[Gaur]

^^
As I am sure you know, Jaguar is mainly a strike platform. However, Jaguar IM's role is Maritime patrol and attack. Although I have never read anywhere that Jaguars are expected to perform Air defence (nor would it make any sense), I have read in some dubious forums that one of its designated role is interception (but take this as FWIW).

[Bala Vignesh]

Thanks gaur sir,
That's pretty much what i had thought... So could someone identify the birds sitting in the ORP of the maharajpur AFS in google maps?? I am a bit confused...

[Prasad]

In this picture the intakes seem closed. Is it or am I just seeing things?

[shiv]

In this picture the intakes seem closed. Is it or am I just seeing things?

Good catch. They are closed to prevent the ingestion of stones and debris at ground level by the engines. The louvres above the intake are open.

[Prasad]

Yes. This picture from side-on gives a clearer picture of the intakes used when the primary intakes are closed during taxiing.

[andy B]

Something interesting came up on my google kaka search:
http://www.tailhook.org/AVSLANG.htm

Its got USN aviatior slang that is used by fighter jocks in day to day ops during the Tomcat era...I like the term "Stick-Throttle Interconnect"

[ramana]

In a California museum near USC in los Angles, there is console where one can put together differnt a/c frame components and fly it against other aerodynamic vehicles.

[Viv S]

Umm... folks, could somebody tell me what happened to the Jaguar re-engining contract, the one that had Honeywell and Rolls Royce competing. IIRC it was around before the Tejas MkII (EJ-200/GE-414) competition.

Was there a result to the competition that I missed or is it still in limbo?

[JVKrishnan]

Umm... folks, could somebody tell me what happened to the Jaguar re-engining contract, the one that had Honeywell and Rolls Royce competing. IIRC it was around before the Tejas MkII (EJ-200/GE-414) competition.

Was there a result to the competition that I missed or is it still in limbo?

in limbo!

[Venkarl]

Gurus...I have a question....in conflict zones when soldiers and police forces use rifles, pistols etc...empty mags and clips will be reused or just dispose it as scrap? will the person in action put back the empty mags and clips in his backpack or leave it?

sorry for the really lame insignificant noob question