India tests Prithvi based ABM-3

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 01 Dec 2006 20:30

IIRC, the DD video had shown the intercept, or at least the prithvi and the fireball. Tilak had screencaps in the prev avatar. Should have had a mighty tele lens

I guess the feed went to the mission ctrl too.

I am not disappointed on not being HTK. Guiding a missile to proximity itself is a big achievement.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 01 Dec 2006 20:31

Arrow-1 was precursor missile to test the technologies and it took Israel around 5-10 years to deploy the ABM system after first interception tests in 1994-96.

On similar scale the first system in India will be deployed in and around 2010-20.

Assuming the explosive warhead was 200kg then it means that Drdo had around 500-1000kg (counting extension of the length of the missile) to incorporate the second stage, kill vehicle, electronics etc

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Dec 2006 20:55

The article is posted in the other forum

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?t=2687

All strategic aspects should be discussed in that thread. Keep this for technical only.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 01 Dec 2006 22:19

AFAIK, it takes a half day preparation for loading the liquid fuel. Once loaded the fuel can stay for a few month before draining out but such loading/draining can be done only for a limited no for a particular missile. Also the no of supporting vehicle for the liquid fuel missile is huge comprimising the security of the ABM. IMVHO, such a booster is not ideal for ABM(inspite of vijay j counter to the nastiness of the rocket fuel) and the earliest it can be converted to solid fuel the better.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 01 Dec 2006 22:28

Raj Malhotra wrote:If the first stage is liquid fueled then it is equally possible that the radar is old THD-1955 3-D one or its variant (??)

what is the linkage?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Dec 2006 22:29

Picklu am sure they will do that But right now this is the way to validate the HTK technology and the radar and command system. It has to be new booster and thats probably being validated elsewhere.

akutcher · Post by **akutcher** » 01 Dec 2006 22:37

Why is everyone following this report in Guardian as the Gospel truth. There are a hundred different articles published by hundred different sources freely available on the internet which clearly indicate that DRDO does not want the interceptor specifications out..... so how did this reporter/journo manage to get so much information when no other news channel/paper could? Last time i read DRDO unlike Bragelina and Tomkat does not award publication rights for the picture of their babies, so how did Mr. Raj manage to obtain a rather professional looking picture but others could not

As far as i am concerned I dont believe a single word of this jassosi story first because it reveals far too many details about a very closely guarded project, and second had Mr. Raj actually wrote a truely investigative report he would surely have bragged about it

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 01 Dec 2006 22:44

Raj Malhotra wrote:The BRite who is lucky to be the first to get the first print edition may circulate the scanned article for our much needed drug dose.

Yup; you are not alone wanting to have a peek at the beauty unraveled (no I am not talking of Britney Spears).

I just ordered Musharaaf to deliver more morphine to the forum junkies.

rajesh · Post by **rajesh** » 01 Dec 2006 22:45

Finally got the full video fo the Missile Interception . Will post soon. The
interceptor is not Prithvi for sure . You can clearly see it in the video

akutcher · Post by **akutcher** » 01 Dec 2006 22:46

rajesh, pls hurry.... i have an exam tommorow

rajesh · Post by **rajesh** » 01 Dec 2006 22:51

Just joking

. Go and study man

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 01 Dec 2006 22:52

dude this is not the time for jokes. please don't play with jingo sentiments.
also i have access to latest india today and will post the graphic image for people here.

akutcher · Post by **akutcher** » 01 Dec 2006 23:01

rajesh wrote:Just joking . Go and study man

that aint funny man

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Dec 2006 23:03

Kutcher, Raj Chengappa has access. He is writing what he was told. There is no other agenda. If you can read his Weapons of Peace aka BR lingo WOP. As to others they might not have the access.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 01 Dec 2006 23:08

ramana wrote:The article is posted in the other forum

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?t=2687

All strategic aspects should be discussed in that thread. Keep this for technical only.

Cool from Raj Changappa's article :

The test was short but decisive. At 10.15 on a blustery winter morning off the east coast of Orissa, a conventional Prithvi missile posing as an enemy weapon was launched. Within seconds after its take-off, a sophisticated, long-range radar picked up the signals, analysed its flight path and sent an electronic command to an interceptor missile stationed at Wheeler Island. Almost immediately, the interceptor codenamed pad01 lifted off with a roar and plume of smoke. Travelling at five times the speed of sound, it rapidly closed in on the incoming Prithvi. Two minutes later and after some mid-course corrections, pad01 detonated its proximity fuse at a height of 50 km above the Earth. Both the missiles exploded in a ball of gas and the debris fell harmlessly into the Bay of Bengal.

... ... .. Several major quantum leaps in technology had to be achieved by India to do it. Anti-ballistic missile (ABM) systems require highly accurate radars capable of tracking incoming warheads from a greater distance. Before pad01 was developed, India had a radar detection capability of 100 km. For the air defence system, DRDO claims to have "jointly developed" a radar capable of tracking high-speed missiles at a distance of over 1,000 km. They are not as yet willing to reveal identities of the key agencies that collaborated with them for its development.

The interceptor missile, too, had to be designed and built from scratch. Its first stage is similar to that of the Prithvi and uses its liquid fuel engine. But for the second-stage 'kill vehicle', a powerful solid motor was developed apart from divert thrusters that gives it a high degree of manoeuvrability. It makes the missile a metre longer than the nine-m Prithvi. The interceptor is also equipped with terminal homing guidance system with an RF (radar frequency) seeker to detect targets at long range of low radar cross-section and travelling at high speeds. As important was the development of a communications network by Bharat Electronics to integrate the radars and the interceptors with the mission control centre.

So Mach 5 does mean it used the tried and tested Prithvi as a base (with associated lower kinetic performance), and not the solid booster that DRDO had earlier developed.

Later he also mentios that the booster not identical but derived (modified) from Prithvi.

It also says that the kill vehicle is the second stage (i.e. 2 separating body, as against plain Prithvi) has an integrated solid fuel motor, not sure if divert thruster is part of this solid motor or is a self contained thruster. I am inclined to believe it is latter.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 01 Dec 2006 23:19

Arun_S wrote:What makes you think I do not understand that?

I dont know why someone is attempting such a kind of questions.

If I have to reply to this politely then, Mr. Arun_S, I am not a magician or a card reader, to know what is your line of thinking to come with a reply accordingly.

If i have to bit more politely, then Mr. Arun_S, Are you saying you are Mr. Know-All ?

Arun_S wrote:I trying to understand, but sorry to say that, in a partial-integral calculus class, a pre-algebra kid comes in to say this 3'rd order curve should approximate as area of a traingle, and I am supposed to defend the partial-integral solution to someone who does not understand the framework, and has a primitve tool in his hand? Give me a break, if you can refine it, yes I will spend time try to understand, if you degrade it I ant going to teach you, you tell me why your method is better and it works. This is a collaborative learning forum not a class room. There is nothing left to discuss with you my friend.

This is going too far and getting treated in much twisted sense. Mr. Calculus-professor..Did i said i am asking your information or explanation ? I am too not interested in teaching/learning session here with you.

You said that your data should be not viewed in one particular way. I try to say once data is published openly you cannot complain that this has to be viewed only this way. How i am going to view the data availble in open is my choice and how you going to react to that is your choice.

Earlier i have shown thesis presentation as example.

If I have to apply the logic same way as you applied then,

Arun_S wrote:DRDO has mentioned the two numbers 640mm and 740mm without explaining
You said this first..After i came with a reply on how the data can be interpreted, you gave me reply
Arun_S wrote:What makes you think I do not understand that?

I have to say, your action and statement looks like a school kid, on getting advice from someone they will come back and say,"Oh! this i know previously" as a face saving attempt to hide what they didnt know previously!

George J · Post by **George J** » 01 Dec 2006 23:30

akutcher wrote:Why is everyone following this report in Guardian as the Gospel truth. .......... Last time i read DRDO unlike Bragelina and Tomkat does not award publication rights for the picture of their babies, so how did Mr. Raj manage to obtain a rather professional looking picture but others could not.........second had Mr. Raj actually wrote a truely investigative report he would surely have bragged about it

I told you BRF is getting Oraclized. Nobody believes me!!! Maybe I am the old fart holding onto the old virtues of "either frigging read up on what you have to say, or listen to those who know more than you". Now its have computer will fart on BRF. But then again waddya expect from folks who come up with such scintillating handles. Is that a personal attack? I donno what counts as personal/impersonal attacks on the Oraclized-non hindu growth rate curbing version of BRF.

In the good old days when BRF didnt aspire to be a think tank. Folks you used read up/lurk before they ventured to post. Now we have luminaries who not know know about WOP but WOF and yet have sagely idiotic opinions about things they know NOTHING about.

If I ever get like that I want you to ban me. Oh wait I will be cleansed anyway when curbing the non-hindu growth rate policy goes into effect.

Jingo Service Announcement

If you DONT KNOW what WOP (Weapons of Peace by Raj Chengappa) or WOF (Wings of Fire by APJ Abdul Kalam) mean then perhaps you SHOULDNT be posting on BRF. Before you fart your opinion on BRF you need to do yourself a favor and understand the background of whats going on. If posting without background/substance/knowledge is your style you are perfect for the Oracle forums.

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 01 Dec 2006 23:36

From the IT site - no other larger pic till we get a print edition

Caption : MYSTERY MISSILE: The interceptor lifting off from Orissa

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 01 Dec 2006 23:39

slowly it appears the indian abm perhaps was not an arrow or s-300 operating to intercept with s-300/400. Still some questions arise from rc s article

1) why use liquid fuelled lower accelaration capable liquid engine even if it gives better trajectory control . Since in this case noth the target and interceptor will fly more or less at same speed till second stage fires when the solid motor will create the additional acceleration required to overtake the target missile and intercept .

2) Divertor thrusters as mentioned must be seperate solid rocket motors attached with the second stage and once use type only .The second stage most likely has flexi nozzle incorporated to give basic course correction capability and uses the add on solid thrusters only for high g turns on the final interception turns .

This actually increases time to intercept significantly and consequently chances of a miss . Why was not a solid motor booster used followed by solid /liquid second stage which would have ressulted in a quicker and more accurate intercept

The actual destruction was by proximity fuse triggered directional high explossive charge and not ke particles (one similarity to arrow2)

Mach 5 is some what slow for any ballistic missile interceptor where 9-11 mach is the norm . Which means th second stage is mach 11 plus achieving that speed from mach 5 stage seperation in a matter of few seconds .Now if we assume a 100 kg explossive warhead for target neutralisation the second stage dia to generate that kind of thrust maybe more than 1 mtrs and consequently that of first stage even more .While we are focussing on lenght of second stage in view of new information comming up from rc source the dia of second stage becomes critical .

Does this mean we are possibly using a scaled down version of s-129 hereand prthvi motor upgraded in first stage maybe then the figures match up - arun can you please clear the doubts

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 02 Dec 2006 00:03

Ramana,

I am not going to comment the way akutcher told. Yes, we respect Chengappa.

But, some of the statements appeared are bit shaky. One such is

Given its height-known in scientific parlance as exoatmospheric, or outside the Earth's atmosphere-there was no way scientists could either see or even hear the bang. Instead, they sat huddled inside the mission control room watching the entire sequence on a radar.

He was describing the scene during the test. He also said inteception happened at 50 km. But, to my knowledge or common belief, this is not exoatmospheric.
Arrow-2, with the max altitude of interception as 50km is not called as exoatmospheric.

akutcher · Post by **akutcher** » 02 Dec 2006 00:11

If you DONT KNOW what WOP (Weapons of Peace by Raj Chengappa) or WOF (Wings of Fire by APJ Abdul Kalam) mean then perhaps you SHOULDNT be posting on BRF. Before you fart your opinion on BRF you need to do yourself a favor and understand the background of whats going on. If posting without background/substance/knowledge is your style you are perfect for the Oracle forums.

You might be the oldest poster on BRF but the forum rules do not put any eligiblity criteria for membershp......if you think that it is mandatory for someone to read WOP and Kalam's WOF (which btw i have read) you should suggest that to the administrator and not use it as a tool to prove how much information you really have on DRDO's ongoing projects

As for me, i am only twenty and dont consider myself to be an intellectual but isnt you oraclized forum theory kind of screwed-up...... i for whatever reason (as you say lack of substance/knowledge/background) chose not to believe in anyone until god (DRDO) himself says so.... the sum-total of what i said is dont believe any rumors whatever may the source be until DRDO itself releases the specifications, and that for sure doesnt mesh with your oraclized poster or self-assumed think-tank comment

mandrake · Post by **mandrake** » 02 Dec 2006 00:18

akutcher wrote:

If you DONT KNOW what WOP (Weapons of Peace by Raj Chengappa) or WOF (Wings of Fire by APJ Abdul Kalam) mean then perhaps you SHOULDNT be posting on BRF. Before you fart your opinion on BRF you need to do yourself a favor and understand the background of whats going on. If posting without background/substance/knowledge is your style you are perfect for the Oracle forums.
You might be the oldest poster on BRF but the forum rules do not put any eligiblity criteria for membershp......if you think that it is mandatory for someone to read WOP and Kalam's WOF (which btw i have read) you should suggest that to the administrator and not use it as a tool to prove how much information you really have on DRDO's ongoing projects

As for me, i am only twenty and dont consider myself to be an intellectual but isnt you oraclized forum theory kind of screwed-up...... i for whatever reason (lack of background/knowledge/background) chose not to believe in anyone untile god (DRDO) himself says so.... the sum-total of what i said is dont believe any rumors whatever may the source be until DRDO itself releases the specifications, and that for sure doesnt mesh with your oraclized poster or think-tank theory

Please Cool it guys, Thanks

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Dec 2006 00:18

Well what I can say that not every stastics & facts provided by India Today is precise , They have their own reason not to put the whole detail for National Security Consideration.

And I believe it was a Kill Vehical and not a warhead

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Dec 2006 00:18

Kanson, 'Namo Namah'. There is power in the name. By calling it Exoatmosphere they are telling us the goal. Just because it was tested at 50km does not mean that is its altitude. The next tests might be at a different altitudes. For now they will work to find the envelope or the limits of the KV.

And get that Arrow out of your mind. This clearly a differetn classof vehcile.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 02 Dec 2006 00:24

Thats why i said bit shaky

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Dec 2006 00:24

I have scanned the copy of the India Today article on ABM if any one is interested , just give me your email id

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 02 Dec 2006 00:25

Austin wrote:I have scanned the copy of the India Today article on ABM if any one is interested , just give me your email id

druks@rediffmail.com

thanks in adv

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 02 Dec 2006 00:25

Thx Austin

marimuthu · Post by **marimuthu** » 02 Dec 2006 00:27

Thanks Austin

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 02 Dec 2006 00:28

asharmaATwabtec.com

TIA

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 02 Dec 2006 00:31

And then how do we xplain the three smoke pods quite large in fact in perfect vertical orientation as shown in the dd video . It was not a reentry smoke which would have been much more fragmented and dispersed (columbia video) .Clearly three distinct explosions took place more or less simultaneously and the camera caught the smoke trail. before it had time to disperse-possible if a kill vehicle of kinetic energy type is used but not in case of a directed high explossive warhead . More questions and contradictions than answers from RC s article

George J · Post by **George J** » 02 Dec 2006 00:32

I didnt say I think that BRF is a think tank. That's the problem with oraclized newbies...not only do they NOT understand the virtues of being well read/informed but they havent been around long enough to know what half the innuendos mean on BRF. Do you dont even know what Oraclized means? Or who the Oracle is?

Finally what you (and I) believe does not matter. If you spend more time reading BRF than trying to put your foot in your mouth. You would know that most jingos are sensitive to SOURCE of information. E.G if Sandeep Unnithan says something about the IN, we take it at face value coz we know who Unnithan is and know his background. If Prasun Sengupta say that PM told him x, y and z we dont touch it with a 10 foot pole. And as far as Raj Chengappa goes, well his book is considered the bible. So you do understand why some of use get offended when oraclite puts his foot in his mouth (hence an Oraclite)

That's what (used to) make the discussion on BRF so interesting. Understand the source and inherent biases. No one here can emphatically claim that know whats really going on with the IGMDP (well there are but you dont know to worry about it its beyond your comprehension). Its purely open source and our dicussion are only as good as the source (and background which you fail to comprehend). So your "uneducated/ill informed drivel" (copyright JCage) is as good as the next Oraclites.

Now what should be mandatory and whats not. Well I guess you missed the whole point of BRF. And what makes BRF unique (again its bound to happen if you suddenly discover BRF and think you can fart your opinion here without really lurking). We believe (used to believe) that BRF is different from other riff raff because it holds the poster to higher standard of posting (hence the request to summarize the post you are quoting, not using color/fonts etc providing a reliable source).

Its a private forum your ability to post (or put your foot in your mouth) is a privilege not YOUR RIGHT. If you wish to exercise the privilege you need to at least measure up to the tone and tenor of the discussion(s). Which you clearly have not (and you are not alone). But you have all the right to make a fool of yourself so go right ahead. Our rules for banning have become very relaxed now a days who knows you might find a receptive audience for your drivel even on BRF (after all there are lots of Oraclites on board now)

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 02 Dec 2006 00:39

Mounted on Prithvi-2 and One meter long missile means that it would fall in the category of S-300VE missiles which are 4600kg.

The benefit of using a heavy P-II missile:-

The warhead can be heavier. Russians reportedly increased the weight of warhead on S-400 missiles after the disappointing performance of Patriot in GFW-1. I would say 200kg on Indian ABM.

The missile would have adequate space and size for Indian RF sensors, INS, datalink. Indian platforms have usually suffered from overoptimistic specifications for their components.

Adequate throw weight to carry a heavy second stage equiped with lateral thrusters, as India tech for lateral thrusters is would still be in infancy.

This missile would have good range and ceiling capacity, and would allow Drdo to validate all sub-systems for the operational missile.

I think this liquid stage would soon be replaced by solid fueled motor.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 02 Dec 2006 00:39

Shankar wrote:And then how do we xplain the three smoke pods quite large in fact in perfect vertical orientation as shown in the dd video . It was not a reentry smoke which would have been much more fragmented and dispersed (columbia video) .Clearly three distinct explosions took place more or less simultaneously and the camera caught the smoke trail. before it had time to disperse-possible if a kill vehicle of kinetic energy type is used but not in case of a directed high explossive warhead . More questions and contradictions than answers from RC s article

I am just saying it could be like this...

When i high speed object stops accelerating and started to loose control, it can go down in helical motion downwards. You can see this in helis/aeros...

In that the case..then the first explosion is due to interceptor warhead explosion. Possibly, second and third explosions are due to explosion in liquid tanks and combustion chamber..

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Dec 2006 00:40

Kanson I am sorry I replied to you.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 02 Dec 2006 00:44

George J, need clarifications: broadly speaking there are two types of BR users, imho. The "seekers" and "dhronas" (gurus). If you say BR, then it means it includes gurus,in your oraclizations. of course, it entirely depends on your wishes since you enjoy the BR platfrom from the non-seekers' club.

Of course there are only subtle differences, in the sense, e.g a seeker like me, would have little time to keep tabs of latest info.. and has little memory or inlined the subject into my brains.

What is yet to be known of course, is open to all to seek for. bottomlines don't change., its all in your wordings, and doosras.

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 02 Dec 2006 00:55

Thanks.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 02 Dec 2006 00:58

Shankar wrote:And then how do we xplain the three smoke pods quite large in fact in perfect vertical orientation as shown in the dd video .

Doesn't mean a thing, that smoke trail as observed from the camera's pov - it could well have been at a angle away from the camera and still descending at what would look like a vertical orientation. You simply don't have all the multi-angle views to draw such conclusions.

BTW please define "re-entry smoke". Since you are certain it was not, you must know its characteristics. We would be glad to learn. The Columbia tragedy has should not be compared to this at all, it occured at much higher altitude (66km not 50 km) - different behaviour.

Further the fuel fraction of the Columbia at the time of re-entry was nil. You have no idea how much fuel was still present in the missiles when the collision occured. They could as well be the remaining fuel burning up - especially if the 2nd stage was solid fuelled, you would have a block of unspent fuel burning up.

The suppossed contradictions exist only when you don't, won't or can't apply yourself fully to evaluate all available and non-available data.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 02 Dec 2006 00:58

Previous discussion on ABM on BRF [April 05 to Oct 06].

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?t=1238

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 02 Dec 2006 01:07

Austin,

cy_baru at Yahoo dot com..

Thx dude..