All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
This is where Shiv's anger on comparison must really be there. But it's not there. Usually he gets angry when someone compares Indians with Pakis on various matters.
Why I would suggest you to remove that image is because you have the statistics of Nasr which is no way comparable to Prahaar. So remove that and replace it with just the remaining two comparisons of Prahaar and U.S system.
But if you still you want comparison, go for Nasr and Pinaka.
ABM systems are controversial; strategists argue that they destabilise a nuclear balance, incentivising the production of more nuclear weapons to defeat an enemy’s ABM shield. Indeed, Pakistan now has the world’s fastest growing nuclear arsenal after it aggressively expanded its Khushab reactor complex to produce more plutonium for bombs.
Yes... ABMs can't be considered as a done deal.. The launch of ABMs will be in parallel to the second strike.. so, the aggressor must know this that a shower of petals is 400% likely. There may be only split second delta time between ABM and NFU second strikes.
I am concerned though at CnC now, 'cause they have shown weakness in the aging minds. Need to strengthen the decision making system with more sensors and software system, so that no aging minds is left with second thought.
ABM systems are controversial; strategists argue that they destabilise a nuclear balance, incentivising the production of more nuclear weapons to defeat an enemy’s ABM shield.
In fact, every weapon system is a de-stabilizer. A counter to that weapon will be produced and then the weapon would be enhanced to counter that and the escalation cycle would continue. Nuclear weapons, being far more destructive and powerful would naturally follow the same cycle. If India does not develop its offensive and defensive capabilities, it is not going to incentivize the others in the region not to go ahead with their plans. Just remember that Pakistan's quest for a nuclear weapon started in c. 1964 after PRC detonated its first device, a decade before the first Indian test. Similarly, it is Pakistan which has a deliberately ambiguous and low nuclear threshold and has plans to deploy TNWs in an Army that has become jihadic, thus endangering the stability of India. Obviously, the collusion between PRC and TSP and the emerging scenario of a two-front war demand defensive measures by India, which are being spoken of as de-stabilizers by our enemy to justify their own arsenal and plans.
We cannot view Indian plans in isolation of what is happening in the neighbourhood. PRC is trying to develop its own version of the Prevention of Placement of Weapons in Outer Space Treaty (PPWT). Its test of an Anti Satellite weapon in 2007 and then use that against a missile last year have greatly de-stabilized us. It is futile to talk therefore of the Indian ABM alone as a game changer.
The very fact an irresponsible P5 nation was and is targeting a non-P5 nation makes it more candidate requirement for a NFU nation like India, and their objectives and transactions are highly destabilizing with a strong and evil partnership with the most terror state on the planet. We have been destablized by a sandwich terror policy where the only option is to have both petal showers and ABMs in a multi prong approach.
More importantly, the neighborhood is more interested in clandestine programs and partnership solely to destabilize the region and peace seeking nations. India can't be a P5 nation, but definitely destabilized enough to be a S1 nation (Special power). We are poised to demonstrate our capabilities while enhancing our advancements towards safe and secure deployment of weaponized 200kt walas [shakti++/rc].
According to a new Pentagon report on China’s military, Beijing has paid India a sort of compliment. The People’s Liberation Army now targets India with its best and latest nuclear-tipped missiles, the solid-fuel Dongfeng-21 (NATO designation: CSS-5) medium range ballistic missile (IRBM), tipped with a 250-kiloton nuclear warhead that would flatten a large part of Delhi. Until now, India had been considered deserving only of China’s oldest and most decrepit missile, the primitive, liquid-fuelled Dongfeng-3 (NATO designation CSS-2).
India’s defence establishment is taking this new threat seriously, as also that posed by Pakistan’s nuclear-tipped MRBMs — like the Ghauri-2 and the Shaheen-2 — which can strike targets 2300 kilometres away. In an exclusive interview with Business Standard, the Defence R&D Organisation’s chief missile scientist has announced that, within three years, India will have a fully deployed missile-defence shield to safeguard a city like New Delhi from missile-borne nuclear attack.
...
But only now has the DRDO announced that a fully integrated ABM system is close to deployment. Says Dr Avinash Chander, the DRDO’s Chief Controller for Missiles and Strategic Systems; “We can deploy an effective ABM system for a single city within 3 years from now. We can definitely ensure the safety of one city in that time frame. After that, the [ABM shield for] other cities will follow.”
Chander will not confirm that Delhi will receive India’s first ABM shield but, given Delhi’s vulnerability to MRBMs from Pakistan and China, and its status as the capital city, experts predict that it will almost certainly be the first city to be safeguarded.
“We are planning more ABM trials in a month or two. Both exo and endo-atmospheric interceptors are doing well in development. We already have a demonstrated capability against enemy missiles that are fired from up to 2000 kilometres away. After some more trials we will be going into deployment mode. The ground systems and the missiles are going to be available… there is no issue,” says Chander.
The sophistication of an ABM system depends upon the range of the incoming enemy missile. The longer the range of the incoming missile, the faster it travels and the more difficult it is to it detect and shoot it down. The missiles that currently target India — the Shaheen; the Ghauri; and the Dongfeng-21 — can all be successfully intercepted, says the DRDO. {Is that what DRDO tries to simulate in their tests - various velocity profiles of missiles?}
“Pakistan can only target India with missiles that have ranges of less than 3000 kilometers, otherwise the missile will overshoot India. Our ABM system will be capable of detecting and shooting down incoming missiles from those ranges,” says Chander.{Is Pak being nuke-nooded? is that why PRC is moving more potent missiles to Indian borders?}
However China, with its arsenal of longer-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and the geographical space to launch missiles from thousands of kilometres away, is capable of defeating India’s ABM system in its current form. The DRDO says that it will gradually enhance the ABM system to enable the interception of longer-range missiles.
For now, deployment is on track, says the DRDO’s missile chief. The radar network that is needed to detect an incoming enemy missile is already being sited. This includes a Long Range Tracking Radar (LRTR), which Bangalore-based Electronics and Radar Development Establishment (LRDE) has developed in collaboration with Israeli company, ELTA. The LRTR picks up incoming missiles at ranges out to 300 kilometres.
The ABM system also has a “guidance radar”, which tracks the incoming missile in its terminal phase and guides the interceptor missile onto the target. The DRDO developed the guidance radar in collaboration with French company, Thales. In addition, ABM systems also use satellite-based detection systems to detect enemy missile launches.
... {Following is the necessary lifaafa disclaimers...}
ABM systems are controversial; strategists argue that they destabilise a nuclear balance, incentivising the production of more nuclear weapons to defeat an enemy’s ABM shield. Indeed, Pakistan now has the world’s fastest growing nuclear arsenal after it aggressively expanded its Khushab reactor complex to produce more plutonium for bombs.
Good quality information. Also if poor PRC is forced to use ICBMs to target India it eats into their quantity and adds cost to them. The game changer will be when Dr Saraswat reveals multiple kill vehicles (MKV) on a bus to take out ICBM level targets instead of this one to one ABMs.
Then PRC might give up Maoism and go back to Confusionism.
A scheduled launch of Agni-II missile on Monday was postponed by about a week following a technical snag.
“We did not want to go ahead with the launch because we made some observation of the control system of the vehicle's first stage,” a missile technologist of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) said.
Agni-II, with an intermediate range of 2,500 km, carries a one-tonne nuclear warhead. The missile was to have lifted off around 10 a.m. from the Wheeler Island, off Dhamra village on the Orissa coast. The Strategic Forces Command of the Army, which handles nuclear weapons-delivery systems, was to conduct the launch.
The DRDO had been facing problems related to the control system in its missile missions. Prithvi, which forms part of the interceptor missile system, veered off its path and did not reach its required altitude of 110 km on March 15, 2010. It reached a height of only 60 to 70 km and tumbled into the Bay of Bengal. The malfunctioning of a component in the control and guidance system was said to be the reason for the failure. On December 10, 2010, the maiden launch of Agni-II Prime missile failed, again owing to a problem in the control system in the first stage.
Reflects very, very poorly on the DRDO/RCI/BDL if the same control system error of first stage is recurring in system after system, esp of a supposedly "inducted" and "taken from SFC stock" A-II...
the possibility of sabotage in the production line needs to be looked at. That is one possible reason why the same type of "quality control" problem is surfacing so frequently...good they detected it this time. Hope the test is successful whenever they carry it out...
the possibility of sabotage in the production line needs to be looked at. That is one possible reason why the same type of "quality control" problem is surfacing so frequently...good they detected it this time. Hope the test is successful whenever they carry it out...
But what happens to our "inducted" A-IIs sitting on the borders in NE and near Pak ( maybe)?
Are they all going to be recalled since obviously the QC for these systems has failed big time else no way would a SFC stock A-II have a control system snag be detected at the stage of launch( and not during induction)?
Guess we are back to Prithvi/A-I ( if it doesnt have same issue) as our mainstay for some more time till this mess is cleaned up...
Don't worry, the test was for A2P. It is a new concept being tried by the DRDO. It is a positive development that the DRDO was able to detect the problem before the launch. Thereby preventing a failed test.
> The LRTR picks up incoming missiles at ranges out to 300 kilometres.
is that a typo. @300km a Mach10 IRBM is only is only 2 mins away from impact. I thought the big Norad-DEW line/ABM type radars look out to around 3000km and can detect and track football sized objects at that distance.
Pratyush wrote:Don't worry, the test was for A2P. It is a new concept being tried by the DRDO. It is a positive development that the DRDO was able to detect the problem before the launch. Thereby preventing a failed test.
So, the A2P design has failed 2 out of 2 times now ( once post launch, same error noticed pre-launch next time)?
RamaY wrote:
The sophistication of an ABM system depends upon the range of the incoming enemy missile. The longer the range of the incoming missile, the faster it travels and the more difficult it is to it detect and shoot it down. The missiles that currently target India — the Shaheen; the Ghauri; and the Dongfeng-21 — can all be successfully intercepted, says the DRDO. {Is that what DRDO tries to simulate in their tests - various velocity profiles of missiles?}
Yes.
RamaY wrote:“Pakistan can only target India with missiles that have ranges of less than 3000 kilometers, otherwise the missile will overshoot India. Our ABM system will be capable of detecting and shooting down incoming missiles from those ranges,” says Chander.{Is Pak being nuke-nooded? is that why PRC is moving more potent missiles to Indian borders?}
Earlier too there were reports of DF-21 placed closer, targeting India. Nothing new to the context of discussion. As mentioned, once deployed, the system can take care of this missile.
sum, testing is OK with depressed trajectories. But, why should a country build a longer range missile than what is needed and then depress the trajectory ? India has different requirements. Does TSP also want to target far corners of China & West Asia or South East Asia ?
SSridhar wrote:sum, testing is OK with depressed trajectories. But, why should a country build a longer range missile than what is needed and then depress the trajectory ? India has different requirements. Does TSP also want to target far corners of China & West Asia or South East Asia ?
If they can get Europe in Range thier blackmailing power increases.
A scheduled launch of Agni-II missile on Monday was postponed by about a week following a technical snag.
“We did not want to go ahead with the launch because we made some observation of the control system of the vehicle's first stage,” a missile technologist of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) said.
Agni-II, with an intermediate range of 2,500 km, carries a one-tonne nuclear warhead. The missile was to have lifted off around 10 a.m. from the Wheeler Island, off Dhamra village on the Orissa coast. The Strategic Forces Command of the Army, which handles nuclear weapons-delivery systems, was to conduct the launch.
The DRDO had been facing problems related to the control system in its missile missions. Prithvi, which forms part of the interceptor missile system, veered off its path and did not reach its required altitude of 110 km on March 15, 2010. It reached a height of only 60 to 70 km and tumbled into the Bay of Bengal. The malfunctioning of a component in the control and guidance system was said to be the reason for the failure. On December 10, 2010, the maiden launch of Agni-II Prime missile failed, again owing to a problem in the control system in the first stage.
Reflects very, very poorly on the DRDO/RCI/BDL if the same control system error of first stage is recurring in system after system, esp of a supposedly "inducted" and "taken from SFC stock" A-II...
Every system go obsolete over time and needs upgrade. That applies to inducted & stockpiled missile. One needs to be anxious if the problem persists and the authorities are non taking steps to rectify. There are many components if one means control and many things go wrong, even miswiring can render system dud. So mere mention of control failure doesn't qualify as recurring problem. If distinction to be made, Prithvi interceptor missile is not Prithvi-II missile; it is a modified Prithvi missile specifically for the test. Same way Agni-IIPrime is under development and test is development trial. So no need to compare these failures to inducted missile. Previous test of Agni-II was failure. People are taking precaution in this case. We will known about it in due time.
^^ That is true, SS-sir but DRDO has assumed that Pak will NEVER use any missile >3K K.M and so don't even seem to be designing the ABM for greater than that ranges?
( My understanding might be wrong but that's how i interpreted Chander-ji's words that Pak will never use high ranges because it will overshoot India )
There are many components if one means control and many things go wrong, even miswiring can render system dud. So mere mention of control failure doesn't qualify as recurring problem. If distinction to be made, Prithvi interceptor missile is not Prithvi-II missile; it is a modified Prithvi missile specifically for the test. Same way Agni-IIPrime is under development and test is development trial. So no need to compare these failures to inducted missile. Previous test of Agni-II was failure. People are taking precaution in this case. We will known about it in due time.
True words but my only concern was because this was taken from "working stockpile" of SFC and was meant for use if we were attacked ( nowhere was it mentioned that this missile was a modified one for newer technologies)!!
^ I appreciate your concern. These tests, as you probably knows, test the readiness of the system. So in other way to say, it is meant to find any faults appearing in the system apart from training the user in live firing exercise. Still we don't have a clear picture to comment on in this episode. If we take this as failure, this is not odd and these are bound to happen. And if we were attacked, there will be few failures from both sides. If interested, you may read about no. of Tomahawak failures during various Ops for the past two decades.
sum wrote:. . . but DRDO has assumed that Pak will NEVER use any missile >3K K.M and so don't even seem to be designing the ABM for greater than that ranges?
( My understanding might be wrong but that's how i interpreted Chander-ji's words that Pak will never use high ranges because it will overshoot India )
sum, the missile has to actually travel the distance to gain speed. In the case of Pakistan, because of physically shorter distances to reach for Indian targets, the missile will never have the time and the height (in the boost phase) to reach those speeds. Simple laws of physics. That is why they want the strategic depth
In the case of Pakistan, because of physically shorter distances to reach for Indian targets, the missile will never have the time and the height (in the boost phase) to reach those speeds. Simple laws of physics.
One thing wrong with some missile test and people are ready to chew onto flesh of DRDO. And we are ready to believe some cock and bull stars war sci-fi tale of Americans making a ramjet-scramjet reusable ICBM range cruise missile. American failure is a part of normal R&D process. SDRE failure on the other hand are sharam sharam.!@#@#!@@@@$$#$$%#%%.
"Don't worry, the test was for A2P. It is a new concept being tried by the DRDO. It is a positive development that the DRDO was able to detect the problem before the launch. Thereby preventing.."
Yes, that's what was first announced a few weeks ago, that this was going to be the Agni 2 prime. That makes the 'failure' a little less to be concerned about.
The missile technologists are leaving no stone unturned to make this trial of Agni-II missile successful as the fear of technological glitches haunts them. Agni-II, an already-proven missile, had developed snags twice consecutively during user training exercises in 2009, putting the entire DRDO fraternity in an embarrassing situation.
Doesnt seem to have been a new tech if we do go by DDM.
After the unsuccessful maiden test-firing of of Agni-II prime, a nuclear-capable surface-to-surface missile with a strike range of 2,500 km to 3,000 km in December last year, DRDO is planning to test the missile once again on August 29.
DRDO sources said the test-firing would be done from Wheeler's Island in Bay of Bengal.
On December 10, the maiden test-firing of the missile ended in a massive failure after the missile dropped off into the sea a few seconds after it was launched from Wheeler Island. The Agni-II prime, a modified version of Agni-II, is an intermediary between Agni-II and Agni-III. It has two stages and both are powered by solid propellants.
Let we look at the way ensuing tests are stacked. This month Agni-II test with min of one month gap followed by Agni-II Prime and then min. one month gap before Agni-V test.
If I have to test something new, I will test it first in already tried and tested missile like Agni-II before testing that in new & complex missile like Agni-II Prime. With two tests and enough time to validate and fine tune the new system, I can confidently go ahead with the testing of prestigious and ultimate Agni-V missile.
Is it true that BRAHMOS is an Aircraft carrier killer? ..............or just wishful thinking? If so then why was there so big hangama over Chinese AC killer missile?
.
rsingh wrote:Is it true that BRAHMOS is an Aircraft carrier killer? ..............or just wishful thinking? If so then why was there so big hangama over Chinese AC killer missile?
.
Brahmos falls under the category of traditional Anti-ship cruise missile. The new Chinese missile is a ballistic missile that can function as an anti-ship missile.
rsingh wrote:Is it true that BRAHMOS is an Aircraft carrier killer? ..............or just wishful thinking? If so then why was there so big hangama over Chinese AC killer missile?
.
Brahmos falls under the category of traditional Anti-ship cruise missile. The new Chinese missile is a ballistic missile that can function as an anti-ship missile.
While I recognise this is an Indian missile thread, I'd like to suggest that while China had no qualms with demonstrating their anti-satellite rocket and creating a massive amount of space junk for the rest of the world to endure, they have not demonstrated a much more environmentally conservative task of downing a moving tanker, let alone a massive aircraft carrier. Let's not hand them the trophy before they've run the race.
rsingh wrote:Is it true that BRAHMOS is an Aircraft carrier killer? ..............or just wishful thinking? If so then why was there so big hangama over Chinese AC killer missile?
.
That depends upon the warhead. For destroying an american supercarrier you need very large warheads. Maybe even sub kiloton nuclear ones.
"AC carrier" missile is all marketing designation.. . Their is nothing special about it.
)
