Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby Calvin » 04 Oct 1999 21:43

This is taken from CDISS and the IPCS

What do the pictures tell us of the fuel?

Ghauri I
<img src="http://www.cdiss.org/images/ghauri3.gif" alt="" />

Ghauri II
<img src="http://www.cdiss.org/images/ghauri1.jpg" alt="" />

"According to Professor S.Chandrashekar, a former scientist at the Indian Space Research Organisation, if the missile was fired due east, the effect of the earth's rotation would give it a range of 1,240 km. Fired in a southerly direction (i.e. the likely direction of targets in India), it would reach a range of some 950 km - 1,120 km." -- CDISS


http://www.ipcs.org/issues/articles/090-sas-ashutosh.htm

Article No. 90
Ghauri Missile : What Variant Is It Anyway?
Ashutosh Misra,

Ever since the Pakistani government announced in April its having conducted a test of the "Ghauri" missile, 5th in the Hatf series, the debate is not so much on its lethality as its origins. In India, various theories have been floated in this regard. Pakistan claims it is indigenously developed but there are two schools of thought in India. One, attributing its lineage to China, and the other to North Korea.

According to Jasjit Singh of the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, "Ghauri is a CSS-5, a highly accurate weapon, which the Chinese themselves stopped producing some years ago but which has now made its appearance in Pakistan. Nobody had heard of Pakistan developing a missile with a 1500 km range. Its pedigree is not certain. It is not indigenous. That is certain." Singh's argument is strengthened by the fact that China supplied the M-11 (the so called, Hatf- 3) missile variant to Pakistan. It is well known that 50 km west of Islamabad a factory built with Chinese assistance at Fatehjung is said to have manufactured the guidance and control system and solid fuel for the M-11 (Hatf-3) missile variant.

The second school of thought is represented by the analysis conducted by S. Chandrasekhar, a former scientist at the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), and now a faculty member at the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore. Chandrasekhar attributes Ghauri's origin to North Korea. He claims that it is a version of the Nodong I missile. Chandrashekhar has gone into the technicalities of the missile and investigated Dawn's report that the missile weighed 16 tonnes, of which 13 tonnes was fuel. Dawn also reported that Ghauri had a one tonne warhead. Chandrasekhar argues that a solid propellant missile with these characteristics would not give Ghauri a 1500 km range. "If Ghauri, like Nodong, had a Scud lineage or four Scud engines clustered together, then it could be using a propellant combination of UDMH (unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine) and nitric acid, which would give around 235 seconds impulse", he adds. Therefore, the missile could not go beyond 950 km. For Chandrashekhar, Ghauri is a single-stage liquid fuel propelled vehicle.

Ballistic missiles can use solid or liquid fuel. They are capable of carrying payloads, including warheads, nuclear or conventional. There is a shielding mechanism which protects the missiles from catching fire due to friction, once it re-enters the atmosphere. To develop "rocket motor casing" is simple, but fuel technology is more difficult. A liquid fuel propelled missile is much easier to make than solid fuel propelled ones. Developing the guidance for "area" targets (cities, large facilities) does not require as much expertise as for "point" targets. Above all, missiles meant for mobile or relocatable targets are the most demanding in technological terms.

A comparison of the Ghauri missile with its Chinese and North Korean variants reveals that "considering the primary features such as their range, the L/D (Length to Diameter) ratio, lift-off and propellant ratio and propellants employed, it does not belong to the Chinese category of missiles", reports The Hindu.

A comparison with the Nodong I shows some close similarities. The Centre for Defence and International Security Studies (CDISS), UK, puts the propellant loading of Nodong I at 16 tonnes, more than that for Ghauri, since the Nodong I is said to use a cluster of four Scud engines. The Nodong's propellant loading appears to have been derived by multiplying the propellant loading for each Scud (4 tonnes) by four. Further analysis shows that "it would not be possible to load 16 tonnes of propellant into Nodong I and that its propellant loading is probably 13-14 tonnes, similar to that for Ghauri", according to Chandrasekhar.

CDISS observes that the export must have taken place last August when the United States had applied sanctions against two North Korean companies for missile technology proliferation activities. Though no recipient country was mentioned, yet logically speaking, if it were Iran, Libya or Syria (the other three suspected recipients) the US would have revealed their names publicly. It should be noted that since production and assimilation, even after receiving the technology, takes six to eight years or more, Pakistan must have asked for an entire missile manufacturing facility to be set up so that it could produce and deploy the missiles within a shorter period.

Whether the transfer constitutes an MTCR violation, and whether Ghauri has a 1500 km range with a 700 kg payload, and has been built indigenously, are matters that analysts want answers to. In the meantime, what is important is that India will have to compete with the missile technologies of China and North Korea. Sooner or later, the transfer of missiles to Pakistan would erode India's technological superiority vis-a-vis the former.

[This message has been edited by Calvin (edited 04-10-1999).]

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52570
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby ramana » 04 Oct 1999 22:22

Cant tell much from the pix. One thing is the G-II has more smoke but we dont know how many seconds after T0. The G-I picture is a frame grabbed from TV while the later is a photo.<BR>Any way new stuff is coming out on the NoDong/ G-I/II in Janes' IDR- July or Aug '99. (Salman can you help?) The gist of it is the engine is a single exhaust and not a clustered arrangement. It seems that NK has scaled one of the engines up and used it. IIRC the article was by Joe Bermudez who follows this field.<BR>Glad you started this thread so all info can be put in one place.<p>[This message has been edited by ramana (edited 04-10-1999).]

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52570
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby ramana » 05 Oct 1999 04:08

Why not! The more info even peripheral can have bearing on the subject.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby shiv » 05 Oct 1999 08:07

The reddish tint to the smoke in the 2nd photo suggests the Nitric acid containing liquid fuel. Any comments Sukumar/Salman/anyone?<P>The following is an interesting statement from an informed person<BR><B>Ballistic missiles can use solid or liquid fuel. They are capable of carrying payloads, including<BR> warheads, nuclear or conventional. There is a shielding mechanism which protects the missiles from catching fire due to friction, once it re-enters the atmosphere. To develop "rocket motor casing" is simple, but fuel technology is more difficult. A liquid fuel propelled missile is much easier to make than solid fuel propelled ones. Developing the guidance for "area" targets (cities, large facilities) does not require as much expertise as for "point" targets. Above all, missiles meant for mobile or relocatable targets are the most demanding in technological terms. <BR></B><P>I think our thrust should not lie in competeing with the terrorist state, but to develop ICBM and ABM capabilities.<P>Anyhow we're waiting Karna.<P>

neil
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 09 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: ca, usa

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby neil » 08 Oct 1999 00:12

Guys if you look closly at the exaust coming from the missile is different in both pics(the pattern in which its flowing and the turbulance its creating) any reason as to why thats happening?????different boosters??? <BR>

Sumant
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 18
Joined: 01 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby Sumant » 08 Oct 1999 00:53

...hell! I tried to look real close but still cant see any gantry support. Are these missiles stable enough to stand on their own? <BR>Dont they need systems checks/firing command cables? <BR>

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby Calvin » 09 Oct 1999 08:29

Image<P> NORTH KOREA RELEASES TAEPO DONG 1 PHOTO<P>Even while negotiations with the United States were underway aimed purportedly at halting North Korean missile flight tests, Pyongyang released a photograph of the Taepo Dong 1 Space Launch Vehicle (SLV), the missile provocatively launched in August 1998. (For related reporting, see North Korea Postpones Taepo Dong Test - For Now.) <BR> According to an article in Seoul's Korean Herald (Internet version) on 13 September 1999, the photo was aired on North Korean Central Television on 5 September to celebrate the first anniversary of Kim Jong Il as the North's official top leader. <BR> According to the Korean Herald report, Korean intelligence officials suggested that the missile might be a replica made in 1994 for display purposes. <BR> <A HREF="http://www.cdiss.com/99sept30_b.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.cdiss.com/99sept30_b.htm</A>

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby Calvin » 09 Oct 1999 08:31

<A HREF="http://www.cdiss.com/99sept29.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.cdiss.com/99sept29.htm</A> <P>UPDATE ON NORTH KOREAN SHIP SEIZED IN INDIA<P>On 17 September 1999, Indian authorities reportedly released the captain and chief officer of the Ku Wol San, a North Korean vessel seized in India on 25 June 1999, which is believed to have been carrying missile production blueprints, drawings and instruction manuals, in addition to a sizeable shipment of missile components and production materials bound for Pakistan. (For previous reporting, see More on Seized North Korean Ship and Possible Nuclear-Missile Exchange Between Islamabad and Pyongyang). <BR> According to an Agence France Presse report, both the captain and chief officer were allowed to return to the ship after an Indian magistrate said that no charges would be pressed. The report said no reason was given for the decision not to prosecute. The Ku Wol San apparently remains in the port of Kandla and no decision has yet been made to release it. <BR> An earlier report in The Indian Express (Internet version) on 5 September confirmed that the vessel was carrying missile components and indicated that criminal charges against the ship's officers would be forthcoming. The Indian Express, a national daily paper noted for its objectivity, reported that the two officers at first expressed ignorance over the destination of the ship and insisted it was sailing to Malta; later they confessed that their next port of call would have been Karachi, Pakistan.<P>Comment<P>All available evidence points to the fact that the Ku Wol San was carrying missile equipment and blueprints/production drawings. The release of the ship's officers does not prove their innocence, but rather suggests some form of political decision by the Indian government. We believe that some combination of the following motivations may have come into play: the Indian government may have concluded that it had achieved the necessary positive political "mileage" out of the event; and/or, there may have been some connection to the recently concluded US-North Korea missile talks; that is, one of the North Korean demands in the talks could have been a request for U.S. assistance in having the ship released by India. India would be favorably disposed toward this if the missile talks resulted in the lessening of North Korea-Pakistan missile cooperation.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19880
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby Philip » 09 Oct 1999 09:10

Did we work out some deal with N.Korea?After it was exposed as furnishing pak with it's weaponry,further exposes,show trials etc. would've made it impossible for it to work out a deal with the US-food,aid for missile restraint.

Kuttan
BRFite
Posts: 439
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby Kuttan » 09 Oct 1999 09:11

The Taepo-Dong picture appears to be of an empty set of pipes. Look at the diameter and thickness of the wheels, and the beams of the supporting carriage: do they look like they support a vehicle weighing what, 200 tons? <BR>

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby Calvin » 11 Oct 1999 10:06

Salman -- any chance you have a URL for the JB article?<P>p.s. Did you get a chance to read the article at IDSA-INDIA.org on the Air war?

Chandra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 11
Joined: 27 Oct 2001 11:31
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Ghauri II -- Liquid Fuelled -- Analysis

Postby Chandra » 11 Oct 1999 10:43

>>...hell! I tried to look real close but still cant see any gantry support. Are these missiles stable enough to stand on their own? <BR>Dont they need systems checks/firing command cables?<<<P>Is it possible that the missiles are launched from under-ground??? Image<P>Chandra


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests