India Tests Prithvi based ABM

Locked
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Post by Gerard »

[quote]“Once we develop this we can incorporate it in country's surface to surface missiles of various ranges,â€
krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Post by krishnan »

Ajay K wrote:This photo can in no means be a Prithvi. Must be a new kind of on missile with two stages.

http://www.drdo.org/pub/techfocus/aug04/aad_mobile.jpg
Closely looking at this pic, makes me believe its not even real. look under the truck :wink: see those white patch :p

Look at those wheels , the lever

:roll:

Its a PS work. I dunno whether the mobile launcher is developed in india or not. but this pic is a fake one
Drevin
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 21 Sep 2006 12:27

Post by Drevin »

I have info saying the intercept was @ 50km elevation. Can the gurus confirm if the interception was in the ionosphere? :-?
Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Post by Shankar »

I am the devils advocate this time ans so many questions not answered yet on this thread

- why the dimensions of the missile particularly the dia identical to arrow 2
- why there was no photo of the interceptor missile published not even at the interception point
- if the intercept actually tookplace at 50000 mtrs how come it can be so clearly captured by a ground based cameras .In fact it does not even look like a high altitude aircraft .On the ground observers were watching the intercepy with naked eye and sound byte not video footage implied he interceptor missile also could be seen just before impact as one guy was telling other to look the other way .
-the intercept profile as indicated by the smoke trail was again identical to arrow 2 profile comming in high speed from altitude and intersecting the trajectory of the hostile missile at right angles at the time of intercept
-why was our own visnu overtly sensitive on copyright issue when some one suggested analysing the intercept video frame by frame

-why the actual intercept was not shown on tv when everyhting else was clearly shown that is the target missile prithvi

- why there was no video on the launch of interceptor missile .If it was indeed prithvi or its derivative or evn if a new one certainly a long ground shot or its launch or high altitude shot would have made the home grown abm more credible.DRDO had no compunction of showing agni and other missiles even before launch so why this secrecy in this case
- all the journalists were in chandipur including vishnu and the interceptor missile was on wheeler island where obviously no journalist were present .Even if you dont let them take photos for reasons i dont understand of such a historic acheivement at least they could have physically confirmed the missile is indeed an indian missile and some details would have come out .
-why there is no mention of the interceptor missile details in official press tv release
-why they have not even mentioned the green pine radar which we all know is opertaional and was obviously used to tarck the target missile .

This to my stupid mind points to just one nagging conclussion .It was an arrow 2 missile used to shoot down a prthvi target missile at an altitude far less than 50000 mtrs as claimed as can be expected when you onsider the distance between the launch point fo the interceptor and target missile is hardly 70 odd km .

if you guys would just use aruns rocksim just check the altitude and speed of prthvi after elapsed time and the one mentioned and then go back and check the orientation of target missile on tv shots during intercept the whole thing just dont match up unless the interceptor missile was fired much later than claimed and it came in fast at a diving intercept mode under active termianl guidance and destroyed the prithvi as it was still reaching for its normal cruise altitude
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Post by Lalmohan »

scenario: short to medium range pak missiles (shiny or otherwise) being lobbed over the front line in sub-strategic mode. Green Pine and Arrow2(MKI) intercepts and prevents Paks from sub-strategic and tactical deterrence

nothing wrong with that at all, nothing at all
mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Post by mandrake »

Shankar It WAS not Arrow 2 for sure.
dude they have developed all the things bit by bit for this, the dimension can be of arrow 2 check the solid rocket motor dia.

anyways have you checked one thing? when the missile was intercepted no ground peoples eye was shown.
then it was from ground and smoke trials could be seen only.
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Post by vina »

Shankar wrote:I am the devils advocate this time ans so many questions not answered yet on this thread

- why the dimensions of the missile particularly the dia identical to arrow 2
- why there was no photo of the interceptor missile published not even at the interception point


Let me banish the devil.. How do you know what the dia of the missile is ? No one has seen it.. It is just speculation at this point , based on the photo of a rocket motor published earlier.. If you can accept that speculation as the gospel truth, then you will also have to accept it when they say that was a 2 stage ABM with the first stage of the Prithvi type missile stage (maybe solid) and a new second stage..

No photo of the interceptor was published, no TV shot of the actual intercept happening /whatever was because they didnt want to you to see the new interceptor missile!! Isnt that simple ? I think what was released was carefully edited stuff which showed the "normal" prithvi taking off, and the after effects after the hit and kill..

Shankar wrote:- if the intercept actually tookplace at 50000 mtrs how come it can be so clearly captured by a ground based cameras .In fact it does not even look like a high altitude aircraft .On the ground observers were watching the intercepy with naked eye and sound byte not video footage implied he interceptor missile also could be seen just before impact as one guy was telling other to look the other way .
-the intercept profile as indicated by the smoke trail
Oh, you can see the contrails in the naked eye.. Ever seen contrails of high flying jets at 35000 ft on a clear sky ? Go back and look at footage of Challenger which exploded at what like 60 secs into it's flight ? That was clearly captured by ground based cameras and was visible to the naked eye..

I have seen launches of SLV-3 from SHAR in early 80s and you can see vehicle physically with your eyes for quite a while even after the 2nd stage separates.. .

All rocket engines will have a contrail.. so what ? Does that make the Proton 2nd stage the same as that of the Ariane ?
Shankar wrote: This to my stupid mind points to just one nagging conclussion .It was an arrow 2 missile used to shoot down a prthvi target missile at an altitude far less than 50000 mtrs as claimed as can be expected when you onsider the distance between the launch point fo the interceptor and target missile is hardly 70 odd km .
I think that the attacking Prithvi would have been programmed for a high angle lobbed trajectory for it to hit a target just 70km away, which is around half its designed range of 150km or so.. A flatter trajectory would have taken it it beyond Wheeler and the intercept would have had to happen at far lower altitudes .. I dont think that it was a boost phase intercept.. I think the the intercepter hit a desecending missile from nearly the same height after maneuvering to intercept..
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

[quote="Gerard"][quote]“Once we develop this we can incorporate it in country's surface to surface missiles of various ranges,â€
Nandan D
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 45
Joined: 19 Jul 2001 11:31
Location: Austin, Tx

Post by Nandan D »

krishnan wrote:
Ajay K wrote:This photo can in no means be a Prithvi. Must be a new kind of on missile with two stages.

http://www.drdo.org/pub/techfocus/aug04/aad_mobile.jpg
Closely looking at this pic, makes me believe its not even real. look under the truck :wink: see those white patch :p

Look at those wheels , the lever

:roll:

Its a PS work. I dunno whether the mobile launcher is developed in india or not. but this pic is a fake one
There is no question this is PSed. It looks like an "artists impression".
Most military books have them; you know the picture where someone will take a system, and show what it looks like in "X" location..

The system itself does not look PSed..but then what do i know ? :)

AADMobile = Area Air Defence Mobile ?
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

sohamn wrote:i have a big doubt. How can they use a ballistic missile to counter another ballistic missile and used as abm shield? Generally a ballistic missile has a very short and fast powered flight and then it has a longer ballistic flight which is not a powered flight. During this stage some maneuverations are done by On board actuators which control the RV. But this has limited capability and cannot move like a cruise missile. Generally all other ABM missiles like Arrow/Patriot are solid powered cruise missiles which are similar to SAMs. So can anyone explain to me what kind of interceptor misile is this. Is it a prithvi or a missile similar to Patriot?
You got a very genuine doubt.

With the information released, it is not crystal clear what is the exact proposition of the missile. DRDO head in the interview said "a portion of the missile is similar to Prithvi". Here too he didnt said like, "we used prithvi in first stage".

Even, if it uses Prithvi's some type of tech, it depends upon the designing team whether they want to use just powered fight of Prithvi or can incorporate sometype of ballistic profile in the total flight time.

Further, it is not a single stage. It uses 2 stages as per report.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

vina wrote: I dont think that it was a boost phase intercept.. I think the the intercepter hit a desecending missile from nearly the same height after maneuvering to intercept..
I have some problem in buying this theory..

Footage shows missile is in climbing stage and after the intercept, debris fall down. Is it not boot phase interception ?

Ok, if we believe that this is in descending phase. then, it has to be both the missile direction and debris falling direction to be same, right ? As per the footage, Is it so ?
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

Why you all want to equate Arrow-2 with our AXO missile.

Do we need a foreign brand name to accept our desi product ?

Think about this before equationg.
Arrow-2's max range of flight is 90km as per spec available in open lit. Ours as per report available is >100km
Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Post by Shankar »

that brings us to the basic question why is drdo not showing the photo graphs of the anti missile or its capabilities like they did in all previous cases from prithvi to agni to nag to akash and even the sensitive agni 3 much before the actual launch. This time there was no such release .If israel atleast as security concious as india if not many times more could publish arrow 2 launch photos or the american do that with patriot and photo of russian abm and topols are all over the net then why this undue secrecy and shyness about our very own most advanced missile technology demonstrator whatever be its name .

why there is no reaction from us/china/pakistan and even russia .Even brahmos test was shrouded in secrecy but after sucessful test it was all over the media .

This is as if the media were severely warned not to disclose even the minimum observation data on the anti missile which the might have seen interepting prthvi at an altitude of 5 km 70 kms away over the bay of bengal.

Vina do not compare the contrail size etc with challenger disaster .The shuttle is first of all many many times larger vehicle and the srb or solid rocket booster whose leaky o rings burnt thru the meatl sheel of the external fuel tank of shuttle igniting the liquid oxygen hydrogen within.We are talking of a many many times larger explossion than would be during destruction of a prthvi in flight .

So vina some specific questions

- what is the altitude of prthvi at 70 km distance from launch point
-what kind of acceleration will the interceptor missile need to intercept the "descending" target prthvi with a second handicap.
-which missile you can refer in todays known missile world which matches this kind of proven performance and which can operate in conjunction with green pine radar
- if green pine was not used which indian radar in indian inventory have that kind of detection and ranging capability .

Beccause it is just not a question of interceptor missile but also detection,launch co ordination ,mid course correction may be more than one,terminal guidance and the actual kill mechanism itself .

you really believe all this have been already developed and working and so on our first attempt we could do an active missile intercept sucessfully and then modest enough not to talk about it and behave as if it is just one of the series of missile tests that happen in chandipur once every month or so .

Of course my betting it was an arow 2 that did the intercept is pure speculation and maybe the military scenario thread will loose much popularity after that but then what the heck.All the discussions on this thread since yesterday is nothing but pure speculation.

Just a photo of a solid motor is no confirmation of a performing abm system.Once agin i hope i am terribly and fully wrong
rad
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 05 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: madras

conceptual outline of the prithvi interceptor missile

Post by rad »

I would tend to think that the interceptor missile would have the lower half of t he Prithvi 2 missile and the upper part of the Agni 2 missile. By using the liquid fueled gimballed thrust nozzle of the missile, the trajectory can be continuosly corrected, the velocity also controlled which would not be possible in a solid fueled missile .
The homing warhead has a radar and so could manouver using the fins, but the effective ness of the fins in the rarified upper atmosphere is still a question . All in all it is a temendous success unparalled elswhere . I think the configuration would resemble the arrow missile , of course with the prithvi`s wings
Could people show their concepts of how the missile would look on this forum .
The radar could only be a green pine with the associated c3.
any body agrees?
mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Post by mandrake »

Shankar why we just dont ask the DRDO community in orkut, if it was Arrow 2 or not.
just ask if it was arrow 2 or not.
by that noone is revaling anything, and we are making sure its not arrow 2.
Vijay J
BRFite
Posts: 130
Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: India

Post by Vijay J »

Thanks Ramana,

Conversations with friends suggest that within current technology, the problems of detection, discrimination and trajectory calculation in a short time are hard problems. The actual time to launch will vary from system to system and probably vary a lot from test conditions to field conditions.

Friends also suggest that BMD has been talked about for a long time but technology milestones have been hard to meet with any level of reliability. Presently there is some technology development which has enabled some progress towards the stated goals of a BMD shield but reliability is low everywhere. Claimed effectiveness is not a match for actual effectiveness. I don't blame the suppliers, this is a hard problem.

To actually make a difference where it counts in solving the hard problems, the logical next step would be Divya II, the Angel's Ken, all seeing, all knowing, multispectral, multisource, with embedded analysis and the necessary discrimination tools. I feel the problem of trajectory calculation could be solved relatively quickly using a distributed approach.

Again I am not saying this is easy, but atleast we are not falling on the first step anymore.

All the so called Pandits can't hide the fact that world has just changed. We have tested an ABM ahead of the Chinese or the Pakistanis, and we have done that with far less funding. They have to catch up.

The balance in Asia is shifting slowly but perceptably.

Fools see the antics of Asians as mere frivolity of despots. The wise mind sees deeper things.
akutcher
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 48
Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54

Post by akutcher »

This is the reaction of our very own desis

Agni-III in Bay of Bengal------> DRDO sucks booohoooo
"Prithvi-xx" intecepts Prithivi -----> DRDO bought/stole/copied the awesome Israeli tech :evil:
Abhiman
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 12:47

Post by Abhiman »

Hi. In my view, this successful ABM test must discourage any purchase of foreign systems like Patriot, Arrow-2 and S-300. This system may be developed further to field indigenous ABM system.

Pakistan's Hatf-1, Hatf-2 (280kms) and Hatf-3 missiles may be defended against by this ABM system.

In my view, delay in development of Trishul and Akash systems may be due to confidential development of this ABM system, which must have required substantial finance, manpower and other resources.
Thanks.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Post by Singha »

I bet next week PA will successfully launch its 1st ABM test and restore parity with India. cause for much celebration in some fora.
AshishN
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 88
Joined: 31 Jul 2002 11:31

Post by AshishN »

..the best of the best Kahuta and SUPARCO will do the video cut and paste, edit, mix and match work, and then name the ABM the Aurangzeb-Babur Missile.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

In interests of keeping the discussion focussed I split the thread from the first post that had the news report of the test.
Please discuss only the ABM aspects here.
Thanks, ramana
A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1205
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Post by A Sharma »

Which news report says interceptor was Prithvi based??
Some report says that the target was modified prithvi and the interceptor was a totally new missile. Some say the interceptor was not identified by DRDO .
So by the title of the thread it seems that the interceptor is prithvi based or I am missing something.
Laks
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 11 Jan 2005 20:47

Post by Laks »

Ahem!
http://www.stratfor.com/products/premiu ... ?id=281103
India, Pakistan: Another Aspect to the Military Race
November 27, 2006 23 42 GMT

Summary

India unveiled the ongoing development of an indigenous anti-missile system Nov. 27, following the Nov. 24 announcement by Pakistan and China that the two nations will collaborate on an airborne early warning surveillance system. While the development of such a system puts India ahead in the race for military superiority, Islamabad's continued defense collaboration with Beijing serves as a reminder that Pakistan is still in the fight.

Analysis

India tested an indigenous anti-missile system along the coast of the eastern state of Orissa, on the Bay of Bengal, on Nov. 27, and made a public announcement about the atmospheric intercept system (AXO) later the same day. Little is known about the AXO program; the intercept was within the known scope of India's Russian-built SA-10 and SA-12 surface-to-air missiles and patently beyond the scope of either of India's domestic missile programs -- the Akash and the failed Trishul. Lessons learned from the Trishul -- and successful subsystems of the program -- could figure into the AXO's development.

Pakistan is at a fundamental strategic disadvantage to India.
Not only has Islamabad been engaged in a game of catch-up since India detonated its first nuclear device in 1974, but the country lacks India's strategic depth. All three versions of India's short-range ballistic missile, the now two-decade-old Prithvi, could hit any target in Pakistan, and all three have been fielded in militarily significant numbers.

Pakistan, on the other hand, could probably only deploy fewer than 10 Ghauri missiles -- its most advanced medium-range ballistic missile -- against the Indian subcontinent. Only the Ghauri II could actually strike at all of India. Pakistan does field a nuclear arsenal, and its ability to deploy those weapons against India should not be understated. To help balance the military relationship on the subcontinent, Pakistan reinforces its defensive capabilities by supporting nonstate actors operating in the region, including Kashmiri militant groups, Bangladeshi Islamist militant groups and rebel movements in northeastern India. However, in terms of a nuclear exchange, Pakistan's comparatively narrow geography leaves it at a strategic disadvantage. Its weapons are functional, but less advanced and therefore probably less reliable than those of India.

Now India has further weakened Pakistan's position by unveiling the AXO anti-missile system, which is already in the test phase.


However, India historically has been quick to proclaim the success of its missile programs, even in the face of failure. India's Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) played up the July Agni III test, despite its failure. The unveiling of the AXO is symptomatic of the same tendency. For example, the DRDO made repeated use of the word "supersonic" as an adjective in its announcement about the AXO. This is like Airbus advertising a new "flying" jet; all anti-missile systems must be supersonic, or they would have trouble shooting down even turboprop aircraft. :x

Also, the Nov. 27 test was almost certainly highly orchestrated, much like early U.S. tests of the U.S. ground-based midcourse interceptor. The troubled U.S. program also serves as a reminder of the obstacles India has yet to overcome. Operational success of a layered missile shield is an enormously complex and expensive goal -- one the United States has yet to complete, even with investment now exceeding $100 billion. India is attempting to field a single missile design and has so far only demonstrated a comparatively basic but nonetheless noteworthy ability to put two missiles -- both of which are controlled by Indian scientists -- in the same chunk of three-dimensional space at the same time.

Thus, the DRDO's announcement of its new supersonic AXO is reminiscent of former U.S. President Ronald Reagan's Star Wars announcements. Years from maturity, and perhaps as much as a decade from meaningful operation, India's program nonetheless reminds the Pakistanis of what they are not doing. Plagued by the same game of catch-up that eventually bankrupted the former Soviet Union during the Cold War, Pakistan must now compete against India in yet another arena. Even a nascent Indian anti-missile system could be sufficient to challenge -- although not completely defend against -- Pakistan's numerically small medium-range arsenal.

However, Pakistan and China signed a memorandum of understanding Nov. 24 agreeing to cooperate on developing airborne early warning (AEW) surveillance systems. Pakistan and China have a long history of collaboration on matters of defense, most recently on the FC-1/JF-17 fighter aircraft, which will provide an important complement to Pakistan's F-16 fleet. The command-and-control that an AEW platform provides would be a great boon to Pakistan's ability to coordinate air superiority campaigns.

Developing Pakistan's ability to face India militarily is in China's interest. While China seeks collaboration with India in the economic realm, it maintains a strong defense relationship with Pakistan in order to keep New Delhi on its toes and prevent India from threatening Chinese interests in the region. Pakistan's upcoming $1 billion acquisition of a Saab/Ericsson AEW system also will be welcomed by the Chinese scientists working on an indigenous Chinese AEW and airborne warning and control system (AWACS) program; the United States has systematically attempted to block Chinese access to Western AEW/AWACS technology.

With its strong defense alignment with China and occasional but significant assistance from the United States, Pakistan is far from out of the game with India.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

I bet my ass that it wasn't a "Prithvi" that intercepted another one - but some other "Baan" that they have decided to call Prthvi for public consumption.
Bala_R
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 22
Joined: 24 Feb 2005 15:54
Location: Mumbai

Post by Bala_R »

IMVVVHO, This test is just a first step towards ABM. As per my guess, during this test, the interceptor 'AXO' or 'Modified Prithvi' or whatever you call knew the trajectory of the target missile in advance. DRDO was testing whether the ABM could destroy the target when the trajectory is known.
The interceptor missile, which was in anti-missile mode, was not not indentified by the DRDO officials who said "the interceptor missile had inertial guidance mid-course and active-seeker guidance in its terminal phase".
They have succeeded in this attempt, this is no mean process. Let us give full credit to DRDO for this success.

Now the main issue for credible ABM is detection of missile launch & predicting the trajectory 'accurately' under 'real conditions'. Once the trajectory is accurately determined, the ABM should be able to defeat the incoming missile.
mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Post by mandrake »

shiv wrote:I bet my ass that it wasn't a "Prithvi" that intercepted another one - but some other "Baan" that they have decided to call Prthvi for public consumption.
In some forum peoples are saying its Arrow 2 given by israel :( oh well.

Hopefully it wont be Arrow 2.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

A Sharma wrote:Which news report says interceptor was Prithvi based??
Some report says that the target was modified prithvi and the interceptor was a totally new missile. Some say the interceptor was not identified by DRDO .
So by the title of the thread it seems that the interceptor is prithvi based or I am missing something.
Read the article came in the newspaper THE HINDU. Or, search for one in previous pages. It got posted there
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

A Sharma wrote:Which news report says interceptor was Prithvi based??
Some report says that the target was modified prithvi and the interceptor was a totally new missile. Some say the interceptor was not identified by DRDO .
So by the title of the thread it seems that the interceptor is prithvi based or I am missing something.
The Hindu's TSR Subramaniam writes that it uses the Prithvi as a first stage. Most press reports quote DRDO sources say it is two Prithvis being tested. If that doesnt make it Prithvi based what does?

The fact is that it is the new Exo-Atmospheric Intercept System(EAIS) which uses a Prithvi as the first stage and is called Prithvi Air Defence Experiment(PADE). That is why the thread is titled as such.

A old Chinese saying goes "Calling things by the right name is the begining of wisdom"

My drafting book describing why nomenclature is important.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

joey wrote:
shiv wrote:I bet my ass that it wasn't a "Prithvi" that intercepted another one - but some other "Baan" that they have decided to call Prthvi for public consumption.
In some forum peoples are saying its Arrow 2 given by israel :( oh well.

Hopefully it wont be Arrow 2.
If someone saying it is Arrow-2, tell them.. Arrow-2 length is 7m whereas AXO length is more than 10m or ~12m. Max range of flight for arrow-2 is 90km and for AXO is more than 100km (I think it is classified). And it is speculated to use Kinetic warhead(Hit to kill) whereas arrow-2 uses explosive warhead.

LET GET IT STRAIGHT..AXO IS NOT ARROW-2.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

Ramana..Apart from TS article in THE Hindu, In interview by DRDO head, he mentioned the first stage of the interceptor has some portion of Prithvi...
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Post by Surya »

Can u blame people when folks like Shankar start of on th e arrow theory

Why the f!#!#!# the eagerness to go into details.


All these years in BR and still people do not change


As if anybody is going to give the tech for this- dream on

now the umentionables will start on it
fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4282
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by fanne »

Man,
What is going on. I was already confused by was it Prithvi 1,2,3,4, or 5 or was it 2 stage or 1, was it baan or Sangarika or Tirshul or Akash. Now even this thread is changing shapes. It was 9 pages long last I was reading it, now it is 7. It had many posts and now it has fewer. There is one another thread in the trash can (with page number screwed up). Are we sure this was a masala taste or some kind of computer virus that is effecting everyones computer. My head is already spinning. Let me contact my sources and update the forum.

rgfds,
fanne
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

Lets not throw the baby with the bathwater. Shankar has asked the right questions and has been provided the answers in the public domain. And others will be answered in time.
Unless you follow the DRDO programs with a keen interest separating the chaff from the wheat, this test will be a strategic surprise and that is what is coming up in the Press reports.

The idea that its some Arrow/Warrow being tested is one way of expressing their disbelief that India could do it.

Expect a lot of inquiry commissions and efforts at recruitment of DRDO typesas software coolies.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

I know...I will hitting my head against the brick if i started to say something like this...

I am doing it for someone, Atleast, who may think about it with the information available before jumping on the bandwagon of "It is Arrow, It is Arrow"

For naysayers, only foreigners have brain, Indians are less human as they dont have one. They should not develop anything of their own. If done, then they need some reason to discount that theory.
mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Post by mandrake »

Kanson wrote:
joey wrote: In some forum peoples are saying its Arrow 2 given by israel :( oh well.

Hopefully it wont be Arrow 2.
If someone saying it is Arrow-2, tell them.. Arrow-2 length is 7m whereas AXO length is more than 10m or ~12m. Max range of flight for arrow-2 is 90km and for AXO is more than 100km (I think it is classified). And it is speculated to use Kinetic warhead(Hit to kill) whereas arrow-2 uses explosive warhead.

LET GET IT STRAIGHT..AXO IS NOT ARROW-2.
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/showth ... post301791
someone come here and tell him, he worked planes and aviation.
Vijay J
BRFite
Posts: 130
Joined: 19 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: India

Post by Vijay J »

It is not an arrow. Stop calling it that. Pandit is suggesting that but he is, well, not someone who knows anything.

IGMDP set its sights high, on building missile technology in India, self reliance in propulsion and guidance and most importantly in mass production. IGMDP has largely met all its goals but now the search for something new has to begin. Actually it already started in something called Vision 2020.

The recent test has indicated that the target is now being moved. The successor to the IGMDP will aim for better accuracy and faster response times.

The test heralds the dawn of a new age in Indian missile design, the age of pinpoint accuracy and hair trigger responses.

Keep both those words in mind from now on, pinpoint accuracy and hair trigger responses. That is going to completely alter the escalation scenario in the region.
akutcher
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 48
Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54

Post by akutcher »

I got a question...... has India ever bought technology or for that matter any gadget that it did not acknowledge?

Every nut and bolt bought from outside requires $ something DRDO hasnt got.... DDM screams like hell about the $2billion used for LCA and thats about the same budget Israelis allocated for their Arrow which btw they aint gonna give for free...... we all know Israelis wont move a muscle without unkil's permission, so even if for a moment i assume that unkil secretly okayed the tech-transfer its impossible to believe that babus will provide the hundreds of million required to actually buy it

And why would India test Arrow and not acknowledge it when MOD has openly showed interest in the Israeli system??
mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Post by mandrake »

Kanson wrote:I know...I will hitting my head against the brick if i started to say something like this...

I am doing it for someone, Atleast, who may think about it with the information available before jumping on the bandwagon of "It is Arrow, It is Arrow"

For naysayers, only foreigners have brain, Indians are less human as they dont have one. They should not develop anything of their own. If done, then they need some reason to discount that theory.
Dude i'm just a teenager, and i cant really argue with technical persons there.
I just told him what you want to believe believe but he thinks its nothing but arrow 2 he worked in LM, anyways.

But the moment he said it i felt real bad, just as your saying hitting head on wall.
mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Post by mandrake »

akutcher wrote:I got a question...... has India ever bought technology or for that matter any gadget that it did not acknowledge?

Every nut and bolt bought from outside requires $ something DRDO hasnt got.... DDM screams like hell about the $2billion used for LCA and thats about the same budget Israelis allocated for their Arrow which btw they aint gonna give for free...... we all know Israelis wont move a muscle without unkil's permission, so even if for a moment i assume that unkil secretly okayed the tech-transfer its impossible to believe that babus will provide the hundreds of million required to actually buy it

And why would India test Arrow and not acknowledge it when MOD has openly showed interest in the Israeli system??
Joey, I don't have to underestimate anybody. I know what India's capabilities are. This just isn't there, no matter how hard people try to spin it.

This is a quid-pro-quo of the nuke deal. The Arrow is a MCTR Class 1 missile, so no one is going public about the exchange. Instead it is being sold as some "secret" missile developed by DRDO. A story only an Indian could believe.

I have worked on missiles. I know how long it takes to develop, the amount of testing involved, the steps that you have to take. It's an incremental process. No one comes out of the box and shoots down a missile on their first test, don't be an idiot.

His reply...you got your answer hopefully.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

The problem is even our people called it first as "baan" (hindi equivalent of Arrow). Eventhough it is could be for fun, it exacerbates indian mentality of relying on others products to sell their own.

This is called brand loyalty :wink: :lol:
Locked