Sagrika - Discussion

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Rudra » 09 Jul 2001 20:56

FAS is no more a relevant resource. Its out<BR>of date.<P>A SLCM similar size to a torpedo would be <BR>most versatile as all our subs could be<BR>modified to fire it. They would need some<BR>gear to program the CM but storage and firing<BR>would be same. This is used by LA and Trafalgar class boats with tomahawk CM. Some<BR>subs also have VLS tubes to free their torpedo room for mines , ASMs and torpedoes.<P>However the talk of L&T building a special<BR>undersea launcher for this baby suggests its<BR>a vertically launched config. <P>Problem is both CMs and BMs can be vertically<BR>lanuched. Both use a gas generator to eject<BR>out of water before firing engines. CMs have<BR>to keep their air-scoop retracted until they<BR>are out of water.<P>So its anyone's guess what sagarika is. based<BR>on 'russian' help and Ada involvement, I am<BR>leaning towards this being a VLS launched<BR>Yakhont version such as the Sverodovinsk class was supposed to have (first RuN class<BR>with VLS tubes).<P>perhaps the P75 subs will have a 10m midsection to house 10-16 of these babies...<p>[This message has been edited by Rudra Singha (edited 09-07-2001).]

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 09 Jul 2001 21:45

on the basis of educated conjucture Sagrika has to be a turbojet based cruise missile.<P>basis:-<BR>prithvi=liquid propellant<BR>dhanush=solid propellant<BR>brahmos=ramjet liq<BR>akash=ramjet solid<P>therefore sagarika has to be turbojet based CM considering there is an existing requirement of Navy for 15 years + what the h*ll is lakshya for?<P><p>[This message has been edited by Raj Malhotra (edited 09-07-2001).]

Sribabu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 21 Dec 2000 12:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Sribabu » 10 Jul 2001 14:53

From an old report which we discussed on BR(I can't find the thread at the moment), I recall that Sagarika is just the launcher. We discussed along the lines of using compressed air to push the missile out of water and then initiating the firing of the missile. This was done when there was a report from DRDO about it being ready and that the testing will be during Sept. 2001. Questions were also raised about the platform being used for the test.<P>PS: Looks like the timestamps on the forum have gone into Aug. Can the Admins pls correct it.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20739
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Philip » 11 Jul 2001 12:10

There is understandable confusion here.However,if Brahmos has a range of 300KM at supersonic speed,the given range of Sagarika,300km at subsonic speed makes little sense.Why develop an inferior missile,when we already have tested a superior supersonic one?<P>In my opinion,sagarika,or whatever it is actually called,is a programme/project to develop a cruise missile of Tomahawk standard.After the Gulf War,in particular,the ability to launch a cruise missile from a variety of naval platforms with pin point accuracy on target,impressed every nation.Countries with this class of weapon could therefore have a huge capability over their enemies.It is not for nothing that the RN now has Tomahawks in service with their nuclear sub fleet.<P>Therefore,the supposed range of "Sagarika" is a fudge.It must certainly be vastly greater than 300KM,this figure being handed out as we obviously are developing it with foreign assistance,most likely with Russia.Bound to MTCR terms,the fudge on range is understandable.Now Yakhont is larger in diameter than the standard torpedo tube on Indian subs,and on Russian Akulas,which have two sizes of tubes-the Brahmos/Yakhont can be tube launched s well as by VLS .On a sub,it would have to be by VLS,if two sizes are not available.Sagarika therefore is most likely to be tube launched,with Dhanush intended for VLS launch.<P>Dhanush (naval Prithvi) is obviously the test missile and forerunner for longer ranged sub launched ballistic missiles (ICBMs)range 5,000km+ at a future date.Sagarika will hopefully fill in the need for both conventional and nuclear strike upto 2-3000km and the other missiles,Brahmos,Klub,Uran ,etc.purely anti-shipping,and land attack versions of missiles aboard ships and subs.This shows that the IN intends to possess in the future the full range of missiles that a potential superpower must possess.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Arun_S » 13 Jul 2001 10:43

IMHO, Dhanush motor is derived from the second stage of Agni-II. IMHO the solid fuel stage is expected to make it a 500 to 600 Km range missile (with ~ 1000 Kg payload)much more the the offial claim. <P>The small size (diamter & length) is more easy to fit in submarines. When sub are eventually made in India, there may be an opportunity to build bigger diamter vertical launch tubes for the real stuff.

Div
BRFite
Posts: 327
Joined: 16 Aug 1999 11:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Div » 14 Jul 2001 10:41

I am hoping that when the dust settles, <I>one</I> of these missiles will end up looking like a morphed SS-N-21. A surface/sub/air (I wish) launched subsonic CM with ~2000km range.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 19 Jul 2001 01:48

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Arun_S:<BR><B>IMHO, Dhanush motor is derived from the second stage of Agni-II. IMHO the solid fuel stage is expected to make it a 500 to 600 Km range missile (with ~ 1000 Kg payload)much more the the offial claim. <BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>It is good to have a technocrat God of BR stating what I have been trying to point out for some time. If the payload is reduced to around 500kg then the range of ~750km(?) may be good band for the buck.<BR>IMHO (without any scientific knowledge) the Agni seems to almost an SLV now with flex nozzles, reentry cover and terminal maneuvering. The real IRBM-MRBM will arrive when the dia of the missile increases to around ~2m.<P><BR>

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Johann » 21 Jul 2001 01:13

Is all missile development in India within the IGMDP organisational framework?<P>

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54442
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby ramana » 21 Jul 2001 01:16

No. IGMDP has only the five + Dhanush + Brahmos. Sagarika seems out of scope.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Johann » 21 Jul 2001 02:14

Rahul Bedi has claimed in different JNI and JDW articles that Sagarika is being developed by ADE.<P>Ramana, do you have a source about the PJ-10 being part of the IGDMP? Reporting seemed to suggest that the BrahMos venture was it's own thing.<P>The separation between Sagarika and BrahMos seems logical given that the Russians would not like to been directly in contravention of the MTCR. Sagarika also it seems predates the BrahMos effort.<P>Why Dhanush and Sagarika? Ballistic delivery is assured against Pakistan, but cruise offers India flexibility in terms of platform, target and external perception. <P>The advantages of cruise missiles was discussed in a JIR article in February entitled "Going global: India aims for a credible nuclear doctrine". I pasted the relevant section below <P>"Prospects for cruise missiles <BR> <BR>Although there have been news reports on the existence of a cruise <BR>missile development programme within the DRDO, the Indian government <BR>denied its existence until conducting the May 1998 nuclear tests. <BR> <BR>Likewise, as late as April 1998 the Indian media lacked official <BR>confirmation when it quoted a report saying that Moscow had <BR>acknowledged providing technical assistance for a 320km range cruise <BR>missile development programme called Sagarika. The first official <BR>acknowledgement came from the country's minister of defence, George <BR>Fernandes, soon after the tests. <BR> <BR>India also arranged to buy 3M54E Klub-S cruise missiles from Russia <BR>as part of a $2 billion defence deal signed during Russian President <BR>Vladimir Putin's visit to Delhi last October (See JIR, December 2000 <BR>pp43-5 for details on Klub missile). These cruise missiles will be <BR>fitted in the Kilo-class diesel electric conventional patrol <BR>submarine (SSK). <BR> <BR>Against this background and for other political reasons, cruise <BR>missiles look to be the most cost-effective and feasible path for <BR>India's pursuit of nuclear weapons delivery systems capable of <BR>regional and global penetration. This may have already been <BR>acknowledged by some military planners, although cruise missile <BR>development took a lower priority after a visible success in <BR>ballistic missile development. <BR> <BR>India could, by choice or demand, eventually shift its focus to <BR>cruise missile development, for various reasons. First, the <BR>propulsion and housing technology for cruise missiles is relatively <BR>straightforward. With a regionally superior software industry and <BR>its satellite launch capability, India is already in a comfortable <BR>position to pursue such research and development. <BR> <BR>Because of their dual-use capabilities, cruise missiles can be <BR>developed without declaring a specific nuclear role. Also, dual-use <BR>capable cruise missile development lies outside the purview of <BR>international arms control agreements. In this context, Israel's <BR>tests of a potentially nuclear-capable longer-range cruise missile <BR>off Sri Lanka last year merits attention. <BR> <BR>Flexibility in the context of international and domestic politics, <BR>and in delivery is an advantage of concentrating on cruise missile <BR>rather than ballistic missile development. Furthermore, the <BR>possibility of basing cruise missiles on a sizeable number of dual- <BR>use aircraft and on surface naval vessels would neutralise any <BR>Pakistani attempt to develop a first strike capability even if India <BR>chooses to limit its nuclear arsenal to very small numbers. <BR> <BR>As part of an overall strategy of moving to SLCMs, this flexibility <BR>could give India some advantages with respect to China and others <BR>globally. The reason for imbedding this in such an overall strategy <BR>would largely be to minimise the possibility of provoking, or <BR>providing a pretext for, the expansion of Chinese naval <BR>capabilities. With respect to all countries, except perhaps the USA, <BR>even conventionally powered submarines capable of launching medium- <BR>range cruise missiles would look like a substantial threat that <BR>would be difficult to counter. <BR> <BR>To offset any aggressive anti-submarine warfare campaign by other <BR>powers, India has the capability to progress far and fast enough <BR>toward nuclear-powered submarines to convey the impression that such <BR>a campaign would ultimately be unsuccessful. <BR> <BR>Development of a modest-range cruise missile capability itself <BR>should be technically straightforward within the time frame <BR>indicated in figure 3. The main differences involve basing modes and <BR>follow on to the development of longer range and more sophisticated <BR>designs. "

H Vyas
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 17
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby H Vyas » 21 Jul 2001 04:00

Hello,<BR>I read the full article in Janes (JDW), and there's nothing much more to it then what's already quoted above.<P>I have some of my own guesses:<BR>--if u develop a SLCM from scratch then u might as well have the input of the US RMA and see that such a weapon should have land-attack capability. A ~300km range is just not enough for land-attack mission. Also, warhead weight would have to be 'substantial' for such a mission; an AShM-size can't be so useful. <P>--maybe this is only one is a series of increasing-range SLCMs...who knows, we might be able to have one topping above 1000km...that would be great!--we hardly have any stand-off attack missiles as of now.<P>--maybe we're doing the Chinese trick of renaming things bought from Russia and keeping everyone confused as to what the heck is the darn thing!--I mean, the Club is also 300km range missile; the Dhanush is also about that range; Alfa is that range;...what's so special about 300km?!--Or is that the 'safe' guess from everyone?!<P>--I have to see this one to believe it! Till then, everything else is just speculation, nothing much, while our scientist babus are chuckling at all us armchair admirals!! hehehe<BR>

H Vyas
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 17
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby H Vyas » 21 Jul 2001 06:18

yeah, but does that limit India from making its own missiles longer-ranged?! I don't think so.<BR>And whatever help we get from Russia is clandestine anyways, so all I am saying is, if we are going for a whole new technology, that too after the leading powers have had it for a while, then we might as well go at it the whole hog. Why just 300km...and that too for a 'strategic' weapon. If reports arer to go by, this thing would be armed by nukes.<BR>I can understand over-the-counter purchases to be limited by MTCR...case in point Klub; but if we are getting private help then we might as well build something more 'robust'.<P>SO I am guessing that at the end of the day, Sagarika will be a re-labeled missile...whichever one, Klub, Alfa, Brahmos, u name it...<P>

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 336
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Roop » 22 Jul 2001 13:46

Himanshu:<P>No matter how many times Indian scientists/engineers <B>say</B> that the range is limited to 300km, that doesn't make it true. Obviously, they are saying this to limit any negative diplomatic fallout w.r.t. the MTCR.<P>My opinion (entirely speculative) is that the missile's range is much greater than 300km (or could be quickly made so by suitable tweaking). The only ones who actually <B>know</B> this (my speculation goes) are a small group of Indian scientists, engineers and senior officials. Others probably suspect it, but lacking proof, can do nothing about it. So China and Pakistan sit and stew in angry silence, and America probably accepts it as a <I>fait accompli</I>, and is not entirely unhappy with it. Their attitude towards the GoI is to say, in effect with a nod and a wink, "Okay, you pretend to have only short-range cruise missiles, and we'll pretend we believe you". Why should they care? Indian cruise missiles don't threaten them, they only threaten China and Pakistan, and are probably a positive factor in regional stability.<P>

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Rudra » 02 Aug 2001 23:05

Both CM and BM are at the moment too expensive for India to use in conventional role except some very special roles against<BR>static targets like GCI radars, C&C complex etc.<P>Also unless you come up with a 9000t sub with<BR>80-100 weapons, the 8-10 CMs a typical sub<BR>can carry is meaningless. A kilo has room for<BR>14 weapons. probably it needs 6 torps atleast<BR>for self-defence, add 3 klubs and u are left with 5 slots.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby merlin » 03 Aug 2001 08:14

Just a small correction, ADA is quite different from ADE, although both are Bangalore based. ADE was involved in making the Lakshya.<BR>

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Kersi D » 20 Aug 2001 15:20

What is going to be the role of PJ-10 Brahamos.<P>Is it going to be IN's nuclear carrier to complement the sub launched Dhanush ? But the PJ-10 is also going to be capavle of being sub launched.<P>HELP HELP HELP HELP <P>I AM CONFUSED. TOTALLY CONFUSED<P>Regards<BR>Kersi

Saurabh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 32
Joined: 10 Dec 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Saurabh » 20 Aug 2001 17:37

PJ-10 Brahmos will be India's Anti-ship cruise missile for frontline combatants like P15, P15A and P17. It can follow a supersonic course for a much longer range than the Klub.<P>Klub will most probably be there on Talwar type ships and submarines [nuke attack boats may carry both Brahmos {VLS} and Klub {Tube}]<P>I think that Sagarika is either a [an advanced] version of the SS-N-21 Sampson or the Land-attack variant of the Brahmos. <P>------------------<BR>Adios<BR>Saurabh

Ajay K
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 04 Aug 2001 11:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Ajay K » 20 Aug 2001 21:42

Saurabh, please correct me if I am wrong :<BR>SS-N-21 Sampson (or 3K10 Granat) is launched from a 533 mm sub tube as in Akula Class subs<BR>(With range of 2700 KM). <BR>Are U saying that Sagarika is going to be a land attack version of the same ?<BR>Thought that the SS-X-N-27 Alpha (Club or 3M54E variant) was derived from the Sampson class and a ship launched version was beign developed for Krivak class frigates (With Range 250-300 KM).<BR>Now where does Brahmos fit in ?<BR>Is it a copy(Supersonic version) of SS-X-N-26 Yakhont (or 3K55 Onyx / Yakhont) launched from ship/sub based (Range of 250 to 300 KM) as a replacement for SS-N-22 Sunburn ?<BR>Dhanush think is naval version of Prithivi+Agni hybrid (Range 600-700KM)!!!<BR>Which of these can be a good ALCM from Tu-142 Bear<P>[This message has been edited by Ajay K (edited 20-08-2001).]<p>[This message has been edited by Ajay K (edited 21-08-2001).]

Div
BRFite
Posts: 327
Joined: 16 Aug 1999 11:31

Re: Sagrika - Discussion

Postby Div » 21 Aug 2001 07:51

Ajay,<P>You have the right pedigree for the Yakhont, Klub and Brahmos. IMO, we'll just have to wait and see how things stack up. The discussion of this topic (on BR) is only rivalled by those on the AJT.<p>[This message has been edited by Div (edited 20-08-2001).]


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest