India tests Prithvi based ABM-3

Locked
SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2243
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Post by SriKumar »

Victor wrote:From the above article, for the benefit of lazy lurkers:
In the light of the successful Prithvi Air Defence Exercise this week, it would now appear that a lot of DRDO technological birds, including unsighted ones such as the Trishul and the Akash, have now come home to roost .
So all this time they were only technology demonstrators flying under the radar to reach the main target? :twisted: 8)
The sentence 'come home to roost' threw me off, for a bit. Seems like Rajiv Singh (author) meant it in a postive sense (it is used only in a negative sense, from what I've seen, as in 'you pay for your mistakes/actions'.).

Added later: http://english1010.com/chickens_come_home_to_roost.htm
Last edited by SriKumar on 03 Dec 2006 09:44, edited 2 times in total.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

Hardly! They were and are meant to develop operational systems, but for once someone in DDM understands whats going on.

But his command of English ijj a phunny language leaves something to be desired. :P

I have said this before - watch the spinoffs!

Look at www.akashsam.com and see all the stuff that can be reused for something like this-

* Sensor fusion, for multiple batteries of radars
*C3I software
*Sensor development
*Missile integration
*Design and development process (ie you need to do this, and then this, and then that- plan accordingly)

etc etc

..or just see this pic for a quick view

Image

..........

Remember the Prithvi/ Agni spinoffs on the Brahmos.= FCS, SINS, TEL design ability etc
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Post by Austin »

Ok question to the Knowledgeble ones.

The first stage of the interceptor is a liquid fuel ones , which means its not always in a ready to fire mode and it would have to be refuelled thus making it cumbersome.

The Interceptor took off at a very slower speed , Compare that to the Interceptor like NMD,THAAD,Arrow which takes off at a much higher speed.

So isnt replacing it with a Solid Fuel first stage make sense , Thus making it a all solid fuel misssile.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

So there are two ABM systems- Exo and endo. The former is based on a Prithvi airframe and the latter is a classic solid rocket motor. I wish the cameraman had more technical trg or been a BRF lurker. Hazar details got chopped off. The slides have awesome info and bet the chefs are very busy enhancing the images.

DRDO and thats Saraswat is very open about the design. Amazing that they achieved this with cold gas thrusters.

I don't know why those DDM keep harping on Israeli Green Pine so much. Its only the radar baba, the missile still has to do the job.


Hindu report

India developing new missiles Towards destroying hostile missiles

Sandeep Dikshit

`India developing complete suite of air defence missiles'

# Missiles to destroy incoming missiles closer to earth's surface on the cards
# First test will take place in first half of 2007, says DRDO

NEW DELHI: "India is developing a complete suite of air defence missiles to destroy all types of hostile missiles," a top Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) scientist said here on Saturday. After successfully conducting a test aimed at intercepting intermediate range ballistic missiles (IRBM) in the exosphere (uppermost layer of atmosphere) last month, India is now working on missiles capable of destroying incoming missiles closer to the earth's surface.

The first test would take place in the first half of 2007. DRDO would then undertake development of missiles with both capabilities.

"The entire project is likely to take three years to complete," said V. K. Saraswat, Chief Controller of DRDO's Missiles and Strategic Systems Division. The shorter-range interceptor missile would have double the range of the American Patriot missiles, he added.

Dwelling on interception by the liquid-fuelled Prithvi missile, Dr. Saraswat said the decision to destroy a missile at a distance of 50 km was undertaken in view of the likely threat perception from IRBMs. Defence scientists were looking at a pack of six missiles to decisively intercept the enemy missile with a kill probability of 99 per cent. They felt two missile batteries would be enough to defend a large city like Delhi or Chennai. The project for developing missile interception capability began three years ago. After several simulations and changes in guidance and control software, the target missile was launched on November 19 this year and intercepted electronically.

This gave DRDO the confidence to conduct a live test a week later. However, the planned launch could not take place because the software to check the health of the subsystems diagnosed the seeker as faulty. "We therefore decided to delay by a day to conduct reconfirmation tests,'' said Dr. Saraswat.

Except for the long-range tracking radar, all other elements were "totally home-grown'' by 35 private and public sector companies. Three million lines of code were written in India for the Mission Control Centre, the hub of software and hardware systems.

A shadow centre was set up to take over if the original centre got destroyed or inactivated.

Transmission links to the interceptor missile were based on jam-proof CDMA technology and multiple data transmission links were set up so that if one was jammed the others could function. In this trial, various data transmission and control centres were spread over a distance of 1,000 km. The DRDO modified the Israeli Greenpine radar to enable it detect IRBM missiles with a velocity of 5 km per second from a distance of 600 km.
OK last bolded part says PRC threat from Tibet is over. It has to be their new ICBMs that have to be assigned. Uncle should be grateful to India.
rocky
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 22:52

Post by rocky »

ramana wrote:It has to be their new ICBMs that have to be assigned. Uncle should be grateful to India.
Bingo. Now it's a pure contest of international confidence building measures.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

Victor wrote:So all this time they were only technology demonstrators flying under the radar to reach the main target? :twisted: 8)
:) :) :)

Watch out! More in the pipeline. Let me see whether i can hear a change in your opinions about DRDO. Willing to see journs/others who harped on DRDO's failure in eating their own words

This technological demonstrations will used as a bargaining chip in putting India as more of a partner with US BMD program in getting foot into tech access/transfer for adv space based assets. Watch Out!
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

Rocky one more

[url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_ ... }Hindustan Times take[/url]

Looks like each guy picked up something different. And SLIME shows thru.

[quote]
DRDO to test new interceptor missile
Rahul Singh

New Delhi, December 2, 2006

Buoyed by the success of its new missile tentatively dubbed 'PAD' which successfully intercepted a modified Prithvi missile off the Orissa coast on November 27, DRDO (Defence Research and Development Organisation) scientists are busy setting the stage for the launch of yet another interceptor missile. This one’s called `AAD.’

The 'PAD,' with a speed of 1,600 metres per second, had intercepted the short-range Prithvi ballistic missile and blown it into smithereens at an altitude of 50 km, signalling that India had the basic building blocks for an exo-atmospheric intercept system.

{I heard 80kms from the CBN video. Could be range}

The 'AAD', an endo-atmospheric interceptor missile will engage a Prithvi, simulating a hostile missile but within the atmospheric limits, at an altitude of 30 km.
{Should have video of this one}

Dr VK Saraswat, chief controller, R&D and programme director (air defence), DRDO, said on Saturday the `AAD’ would be tested within four months. "The intent is to develop exo and endo-atmospheric intercept systems for achieving hit-to-kill probability of 99.8 per cent," said Saraswat, the high-flying DRDO scientist steering India’s ballistic missile defence (BMD) programme.

While the two-stage `PAD’ uses the propulsion system of the Prithvi, the newest missile is not "Prithvi-derived and is an altogether new interceptor missile."

Making a presentation on the November 27 test, Saraswat said the country had developed the technology required to configure a BMD system and "a very good beginningâ€
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

Kanson wrote:
Victor wrote:So all this time they were only technology demonstrators flying under the radar to reach the main target? :twisted: 8)
:) :) :)

Watch out! More in the pipeline. Let me see whether i can hear a change in your opinions about DRDO. Willing to see journs/others who harped on DRDO's failure in eating their own words

This technological demonstrations will used as a bargaining chip in putting India as more of a partner with US BMD program in getting foot into tech access/transfer for adv space based assets. Watch Out!
kanson bhai head to the nearest IIT library to find out the meaning of the words on the slides. OTH I think uncle will come to India. Space se lena dena khaya hai for India? The threat is regional and doesnt need any US input.
Last edited by ramana on 03 Dec 2006 07:15, edited 1 time in total.
Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Post by Victor »

So EXO and ENDO are meant to be used together in single-system one-two punch leading to 99.8% kill ratio. That's new. And brilliant. Perhaps in a few years we will add an intercontinental dimension to make it a 3-fer? That should be called Trishul!

Also the fact that ENDO is a totally new missile should put doubting Thomases in shut-up mode. This really was kept secret for five years during which DRDO quietly endured abuse and ridicule from our own people. My regard for them has increased 400%.
sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6088
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Post by sanjaykumar »

What is '3 million lines of code'?

A current video game may have 500,000-1 million lines of code.


98.8 % kill p, really? 2 Ghauris get in for 1000 fired- let's get real-life. the global lauch failure rate is higher and that is not even the rate-limiting step for a ballistic missile intercept.
sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6088
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Post by sanjaykumar »

oops that should read 99.8%
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Post by Kanson »

ramana wrote:
Kanson wrote:Ramana Sir...regional means only Pak ? Dont we have to think threats emanting from western borders of Pak to eastern borders of China and also from Indian Ocean in future.
Can i request you to use google to see what advantage space based assets can help in this.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Post by Gerard »

Tilak wrote:
CNN-IBN Video of Prithvi [AXO]
Site : FileFront
Size : 2.53 Mb
Format : Zip
Instructions : Unzip and open the HTML file [Requires Flash Player installed.]
You can also grab the file from your browser cache.
Rename it .FLV and play with the freeware FLV player
http://www.martijndevisser.com/blog/art ... 3-released
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

sanjaykumar wrote:What is '3 million lines of code'?

A current video game may have 500,000-1 million lines of code.
Comparing a mission planning plus C3I software to a video game- are you even serious? We are talking of highly optimized code here, which takes far more programming effort, not to mention coordination with specialists from multiple fields- eg radar specialists, aerodynamics inputs etc. IOW, this is done to far higher standards than most commercial applications. In this case, the size of the code basically indicates the effort that was put in by all concerned, including the private partners who worked on the project, and was pointed to give the media some sense of perspective.


98.8 % kill p, really? 2 Ghauris get in for 1000 fired- let's get real-life. the global lauch failure rate is higher and that is not even the rate-limiting step for a ballistic missile intercept.
Every system defines a "theoretical Pk" based on simulation analysis. Obviously real world conditions will vary. But the basic design has to be for high Pk, otherwise its chasing a very difficult target.

If folks do have to comment, please come up with some serious analysis, not flippant one-two liners.
Last edited by JCage on 03 Dec 2006 06:27, edited 1 time in total.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

[quote="ramana"]Rocky one more

[url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_ ... }Hindustan Times take[/url]

Looks like each guy picked up something different. And SLIME shows thru.

[quote]
DRDO to test new interceptor missile
Rahul Singh

New Delhi, December 2, 2006

Buoyed by the success of its new missile tentatively dubbed 'PAD' which successfully intercepted a modified Prithvi missile off the Orissa coast on November 27, DRDO (Defence Research and Development Organisation) scientists are busy setting the stage for the launch of yet another interceptor missile. This one’s called `AAD.’

The 'PAD,' with a speed of 1,600 metres per second, had intercepted the short-range Prithvi ballistic missile and blown it into smithereens at an altitude of 50 km, signalling that India had the basic building blocks for an exo-atmospheric intercept system.

{I heard 80kms from the CBN video. Could be range}

The 'AAD', an endo-atmospheric interceptor missile will engage a Prithvi, simulating a hostile missile but within the atmospheric limits, at an altitude of 30 km.
{Should have video of this one}

Dr VK Saraswat, chief controller, R&D and programme director (air defence), DRDO, said on Saturday the `AAD’ would be tested within four months. "The intent is to develop exo and endo-atmospheric intercept systems for achieving hit-to-kill probability of 99.8 per cent," said Saraswat, the high-flying DRDO scientist steering India’s ballistic missile defence (BMD) programme.

While the two-stage `PAD’ uses the propulsion system of the Prithvi, the newest missile is not "Prithvi-derived and is an altogether new interceptor missile."

Making a presentation on the November 27 test, Saraswat said the country had developed the technology required to configure a BMD system and "a very good beginningâ€
sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6088
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Post by sanjaykumar »

I would thin
-the reference to lines of code is from DRDO not me, it is essentially meaningless so why would they feel the need to reveal that nugget.

Pk in simulations is wonderful but it's presumably realworld Pk that you want to know when firing the drdo assault rifle in a firefight. Again so meaningless has to be laughable.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

sanjaykumar wrote:I would thin
-the reference to lines of code is from DRDO not me, it is essentially meaningless so why would they feel the need to reveal that nugget.
Its hardly meaningless if one understands the context. If you cannot, mores the pity and the Earth wont come to an end.
Pk in simulations is wonderful but it's presumably realworld Pk that you want to know when firing the drdo assault rifle in a firefight. Again so meaningless has to be laughable.
Kindly use your common sense and reread what was written, and then debate please. You are speaking utter bilge. The issue is of designing something which has as high a theoretical Pk as possible, its obvous that it has to be backed up by realworld tests to proof that capability.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Post by Gerard »

All DDM liafa flunkies must recite the following before their next anti-DRDO piece...

BMD Focus: India's giant leap forward
By MARTIN SIEFF
UPI Senior News Analyst
At the end of the day, when all the cautions, caveats and qualifiers have been made, a crucial underlying fact remains: India has now shown its capability to home produce an effective anti-ballistic missile prototype. France, Britain, Germany, China and Japan have not yet developed the capability to make one of these by themselves, though Japan will certainly is on a crash program to do so with extensive U.S. cooperation and China is already lavishly supplied with S-300 systems, and possibly others, bought from Russia.

The strategic balance of the world therefore shifted on Monday. India took a very large step indeed and served notice that it has much to give, as well as to receive, in its strategic weapons and BMD cooperation with the United States.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

It will take another decade for all these media jerks, Indian or otherwise, to understand the effect of the IGMDP, LCA and other programs on India's overall technological ability. I had written a piece once, but was told not to go ahead with it. That was that. Perhaps it indeed is best that the result stare them in the face even whilst they heap scorn throughout the time.
Nalla Baalu
BRFite
Posts: 153
Joined: 24 Aug 2006 07:16
Location: Yerramandi, Dhoolpeta

Post by Nalla Baalu »

My bad onlee! Techfocus refers to the vehicle as 'Mobile Launcher for AAD'. Guess 'mobile launcher' part of its name got dropped inadvertantly in multiple exchanges we have had on the forum on it and the load it was to carry.
JCage wrote:The AAD is the UM Launcher I posted on BR and Nalla Baalu also pointed out in the previous page.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

NB are you the erstwhile Manku T?

DRDO is being honest and coy at the same time. The AAD was for the endo-atmospheric launcher. AXO being based on the Prithvi, can presumably use the same launcher/ TEL or a modified variant of the same.

I am most interested in the radar, hope more news emerges on that.

Folks, the ~175 Million mentioned for the Barak-2 is also a formidable sum (IAI is investing a similar amount). I daresay a level of access to the MF-STAR tech is also part of that package.
sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6088
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Post by sanjaykumar »

I am sorry but you are making as much sense defending your remarks as a first term grad student but there is always the potential.


The issue is of designing something which has as high a theoretical Pk as possible, its obvous that it has to be backed up by realworld tests to proof that capability.

I suggest you look up Petitio Principii, begging the question


You are speaking utter bilge

I have found intelligent men tend not to resort to vulgar and irrelevant attacks.
Nalla Baalu
BRFite
Posts: 153
Joined: 24 Aug 2006 07:16
Location: Yerramandi, Dhoolpeta

Post by Nalla Baalu »

No sir, this is my first appearance.
JCage wrote:NB are you the erstwhile Manku T?
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

sanjaykumar wrote:I am sorry but you are making as much sense defending your remarks as a first term grad student but there is always the potential.
Thanks, but try your d!ck measuring contest elsewhere.


The issue is of designing something which has as high a theoretical Pk as possible, its obvous that it has to be backed up by realworld tests to proof that capability.

I suggest you look up Petitio Principii, begging the question
I suggest you examine what you wrote, and see the context in terms of what the Pk has been spoken of. If you cant understand the basic things being spoken of here, there is no point in telling you the obvious.

You are speaking utter bilge
I have found intelligent men tend not to resort to vulgar and irrelevant attacks.
If you speak bilge, somebody will call it bilge. A few flippant one liners dont any sense make. Kindly stick to the humor thread or the IROT one on the other forum if thats your wont.
Last edited by JCage on 03 Dec 2006 07:02, edited 1 time in total.
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

JCage wrote:It will take another decade for all these media jerks, Indian or otherwise, to understand the effect of the IGMDP, LCA and other programs on India's overall technological ability. I had written a piece once, but was told not to go ahead with it. That was that. Perhaps it indeed is best that the result stare them in the face even whilst they heap scorn throughout the time.
JCage,

you have done a lot to educate many in this respect. After the IE witchhunt series, I detected some tiny fatigue in you, regarding the fruitlessness of mud wrestling with pigs. But good to see you have bounced back. Every informed bit counts.

Sanjay,

As Jcage said, please keep the context in mind. While designing one may specify a certain desired success probability(should be 100% in case of nuclear attack on country's capital). While in simulations one may validate the software etc to demonstrate a theoretical success probability. Actual tests will provide another success probaility based on actual tests.

I don't see anything circular (Petitio principii) here. It seems perfectly linear to me. All these success-probability numbers are important to keep in mind. And given that only one actual test has been conducted, DRDO currenly can be talking only of the simulated success probabilities.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

Kumar, thanks.

The other point is that they have established a baseline upon which any procurement (internal or external) will be established.

It is in this respect that the stated Pk *they are looking for* assumes significance.

VijayJ also noted likewise in another thread.

Any system design has to provide as high a capability as possible - in this case, DRDO believes that its system (if all goes well, it indeed performs as expected etc) will provide a very high Pk% against current threats fielded by Pak/ China (TBM-IRBM in specific).

Please remember that apart from just Open source and intell analysis, DRDO scientists also observed the missile in the impounded North Korean ship a few years back.

Based upon that data (of presumed threat) and their own analysis of its performance parameters, their calculations show that a perfectly working Endo+AXO system can get a very high Pk against such a threat.

If you read Dr Saraswats comments, he quite clearly states that its early days yet, and foreign cooperation will not be denied if necessary.

IOW if IAI or Raytheon want to collab. with us to achieve what we want to field for *our threats* then we are willing.

India, in other words, cannot and wont just buy an off the shelf system that does not meet its needs.

I believe we went this path (of local development) after we evaluated Russian systems a few years back, and found them to be paper tigers in the stated ATBM/ABM role. The newer S-300 PMU2, Antey-2500 and S-400's may be a different kettle of fish though- but paper specs apart, even they have to be proven in tests.
Last edited by JCage on 03 Dec 2006 07:39, edited 2 times in total.
Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Post by Sumeet »

JCage wrote: Folks, the ~175 Million mentioned for the Barak-2 is also a formidable sum (IAI is investing a similar amount). I daresay a level of access to the MF-STAR tech is also part of that package.
There is a good chance that your guess is true. Reason being MF-STAR can also be used in Land based air defence roles. That is why its also being touted as replacement of current Elta radar in Spyder system for Sypder-MR. Our long range SAM program can definately benefit from technologies we get from this system. Now that it is confirmed that DRDO made a smart move with modifying existing tech in form of Green Pine to produce our inidgenous BMD radar, it seems very likely that either they may modify MF-STAR to suit our requirements or atleast incorporate crucial technologies from it into our own system.

Plus thanks to israel for its contribution to our BMD success.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by ramana »

kanson, Boss the threat is regional from PRC and TSP. The AXO/Radar can take care of targets coming in 5km/sec at 600km range. That is IRBMs for you. No need for space based info from US. That will only tie up India from using its own info. The point is in strategic arms cannot have inter linkages.
Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Post by Arun_S »

ramana wrote:Rocky one more

Hindustan Times take

So read the Hindu and HT together. Ghauri is now a gauri (Bison) or Nodon is No-Dong or Al Dung.
Am back in base now. Very Cool.

The EndoAtm Interceptor video indicates it has been though initial flight test. That is clearly the solid fueled booster DRDO motor that I predicted earlier. Jcage provided some public document that indicates that the EndoAtmospheric Interceptor's proper name is IS-2A. (Thanks Jcage)

KV's diverter thruster (ground test) video is impressive. Hot thruster for second stage and Cold gas RCS thruster for later fine adjustment.

Look at the mass of PAD-1 a shade less than 4,958 Kg.

Holy molly, this is not just 2 types of missile End/Ex Atmospheric, but add a small 1 meter diameter maraging/composite case motor and it becomes a Mid-course BM interceptor. The ABM bubble expands
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

Arun, thanks, also here:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v673/ ... erny/3.jpg

Posted by Rishi.

The seeker in specific- "seeker- ARS IS-1"

ARS= Active radar seeker
IS-1 could be the project name.
Lkawamoto
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 49
Joined: 26 Oct 2006 09:56
Location: zz_ota-ku

Post by Lkawamoto »

Kanson wrote:Watch out! More in the pipeline. Let me see whether i can hear a change in your opinions about DRDO. Willing to see journs/others who harped on DRDO's failure in eating their own words

This technological demonstrations will used as a bargaining chip in putting India as more of a partner with US BMD program in getting foot into tech access/transfer for adv space based assets. Watch Out!
many of kanson's sentence structure tells me that he is chinese :twisted: (a bad english sentence from average indian jingo is better than a good english sentence from an educated chinese lurker :lol: )
JCage wrote: It will take another decade for all these media jerks, Indian or otherwise, to understand the effect of the IGMDP, LCA and other programs on India's overall technological ability. I had written a piece once, but was told not to go ahead with it. That was that. Perhaps it indeed is best that the result stare them in the face even whilst they heap scorn throughout the time.
ok hats off to JCage-san, he has known the following for many months (that a bunch of tests india carried out from the test-range were actually a pre-cursor for this surprise ABM test), his defense of DRDO must have been based on advanced knowledge of what is going on behind the door.

other major hint JCage-san is giving here is that LCA is similarly a technology front of another aircraft to be announced soon? (IF IT IS, then well done india)
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

Thanks, but I dont claim any knowledge, special or otherwise.

What I mean is that any program - whether LCA or IGMDP - in India is *not just* meant to field a weapon, but also to develop an industry that can sustain such programs for the future.

This is a point I have made a gazillion times before, but the lay media is too thick and too contemptuous of local R&D to understand.

Each and every such program develops hardware and software, variants of which can be then reused in other programs with product development time cut massively (since we are working from an established base), or have entirely new products developed by people who have done similar stuff before.

When the IGMDP was launched, or the LCA, there was no support industry to speak of, bar a few PSUs.

Now see the difference. Theres a whole structure of firms, plus experience which one cannot buy. That makes a huge difference for future programs.
akutcher
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 48
Joined: 31 Oct 2006 21:54

Post by akutcher »

In case the gurus havent caught this already, pause at 41 sec and it shows some very interesting specs for prithvi based AXO
from that low-res video it looks like the burn-time is 108.5 sec while the time to flight is 125 sec
eagerly waiting for an in-depth technical analysis :)
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

For comparison:

Take all the test data with a pinch of salt. The fall of the FSU means that export customers have to chip in to complete development, and thats its often not all that is claimed. Basically money issues.

http://www.missilethreat.com/systems/s-300v.html
From the beginning, the S-300V was designed as a dual-missile system, incorporating two missiles differing in dimension, range, and purpose. The smaller of the two, the Gladiator (NATO: SA-12A), is primarily an anti-aircraft missile. At 7.0 meters long, 0.72 meters wide, and weighing 2,500 kilograms, it flies at 1.7 kilometers per second and can destroy aircraft located 6-75 kilometers away at altitudes of 25-25,000 meters. Each Gladiator carries a 150-kilogram high explosive warhead

By contrast, the Giant (NATO: SA-12B) is designed to destroy tactical ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, although it can also shoot down aircraft. At 8.5 meters long, 0.9 meters wide, and weighing 4,600 kilograms, it approaches its targets at 2.4 kilometers per second. It can engage cruise missiles and aircraft at ranges of 13-100 kilometers and at altitudes of 1-30 kilometers (20-40 kilometers against ballistic missiles). Like the Gladiator, each Giant is equipped with a 150-kilogram high explosive warhead
Over the years, the Russians have tested the S-300V against a wide array of targets. Antey officials claim that, in a recent series of tests in early 1997, the Gladiator and Giant interceptors successfully destroyed more than 60 ballistic and cruise missiles. Among the target missiles were Scud Bs modified to simulate Iraq’s Al-Hussein short-range ballistic missile used in the Persian Gulf War. In a series of tests, S-300V had a single-shot kill probability of 0.4 to 0.7 against tactical ballistic missiles. An average of 1.5 to 1.75 interceptors are required to bring down a single target.(6)

In 1998, Antey unveiled a modification of the S-300V, nicknamed the “Antey-2500.â€
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Post by Singha »

there is a huge difference between video game code and defence code. the time & effort/LOC of defence and embedded code is far far more. and it obviously needs domain inputs from various experts.

the seawolf/virginia attack submarines combat suite also has around 3 mil lines of code.

if size were the only criteria, MS-Windows would be the bestest and complex system around.
:D
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Post by Singha »

what to make of the radar in the CNN video ? is it on a flatbed trailer...in the dark hard to observe. anyway its clearly styled after green pine and not the Tombstone.

lets give it a new name like Tri-Netra (The Third Eye)
Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5882
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Post by Dileep »

So, are we saying that the PAD will continue to use the liquid prop engine? That doesn't make sense at all.

ARS-IS-1 :twisted: nice nomencalture! Does it use those AESA modules attributed to RCI?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Post by Singha »

spread the FUD, sky is limit, you want AESA, spread the word it uses AESA ! 8)
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

The seeker might indeed be AESA. There appears to be no space for any seeker gimbal or it being shown.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v673/ ... erny/3.jpg
Singha wrote:what to make of the radar in the CNN video ? is it on a flatbed trailer...in the dark hard to observe. anyway its clearly styled after green pine and not the Tombstone.

lets give it a new name like Tri-Netra (The Third Eye)
You should write DRDO and suggest that name..

Interestingly, that could indeed be a new Indian made radar as opposed to one of the imports..

Note for instance, the lack of IAI-ELTA on the radome or the other ID'ing marks which are standard on the GreenPine..
The array appears to be greater in width, and shorter in length (though that could be perspective), and the wheel thingy at the right edge is missing..

We bought the GPs in 2001-02, we have had 4 years to get TOT, tinker around and make our own..this could be a prototype..please note all the work being done on L Band AESA, including high power Tx/Rx modules..there are several other things which we could have done on our own as well..

LRTR
Image

GREENPINE
http://www.isracast.com/images/tech_ima ... n-pine.jpg

Can any good soul try to make sense of that radar infoboard in the video?
Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Post by Raj Malhotra »

JCage wrote:NB are you the erstwhile Manku T?


Folks, the ~175 Million mentioned for the Barak-2 is also a formidable sum (IAI is investing a similar amount). I daresay a level of access to the MF-STAR tech is also part of that package.
MSTAR comment is knowledge or guess or hope?
Locked