Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 11 Apr 2010 20:38

sum wrote:Snippet in THE WEEK says that reporter's chaiwallahs have told him about Surya-I and Surya-II being in development.

First time am hearing about a Surya-II ( seems its a 12K range missile). Surya-I is supposed to be a 9K range missile( 1.5 ton payload)

Surya 2 should be a submarine launched version (that's a real strategic key item) ,while land based Surya 1 would have 12000 km range

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Apr 2010 20:40

I doubt there is something called Surya project , A-5 will be last of land based ICBM.
Though there is SLBM project under development.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 11 Apr 2010 21:15

The problem is that the sun of the 'surya' system refuses to set. It keeps rising every few months.

Wouldn't a sub launched three stage Agni be the equivalent of a trident D5?

arya · Post by **arya** » 11 Apr 2010 22:24

flight-trial of air-to-air missile 'Astra', having a range of 45 to 100 km, is on the cards

i think Astra's range is 80 km head on, 25 km tail chase!
gurus plz expl. this

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Apr 2010 22:28

Jonathan Allen wrote:SUM,

Could you post a link or the excerpt from 'The Week' ?

Sadly, unable to locate any reference in the online version.

I read it in the print version. Was anyways a chaiwallah type snippet, so take it FWIW.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 11 Apr 2010 22:33

arya wrote:flight-trial of air-to-air missile 'Astra', having a range of 45 to 100 km, is on the cards

gurus plz expl. this

Range of AAM depends on the altitude and whether the target is head on (flying towards the firing platform) or tail chase (flying away from the firing platform). See this page http://www.x-plane.org/home/urf/aviatio ... s/aam.html

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 12 Apr 2010 07:42

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080109/j ... 760934.jsp

Asked if the IGMDP was going to be replaced by another programme, Prahlada said there would be a general move towards greater collaborative ventures but this would be decided on a case-by-case basis.

He said two possible models were the Brahmos supersonic cruise missile that is a joint venture between India and Russia run on commercial lines, and the Astra, a beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile for which the DRDO is tying up with institutions in at least four countries.

But this model, however, will not be adopted for strategic (read long-range nuclear-capable) missiles like the Surya (which is on the drawing board) and electronic warfare systems.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Apr 2010 08:01

But this model, however, will not be adopted for strategic (read long-range nuclear-capable) missiles like the Surya (which is on the drawing board) and electronic warfare systems.

this is the journalist's addition, not a comment by Dr Prahlada.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 12 Apr 2010 09:47

^^ may be or may not be we may not know...but there is smoke. Only the question is the fire is due to Agni or Surya.

The recent claim by Bachi Singh Rawat, minister of state for defence, in Almora that Surya will be test-fired soon is "much closer to reality than the ministry's later denial", an authoritative source associated with the Defence Research and Development Organisation told rediff.com

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 12 Apr 2010 09:57

http://frontierindia.net/liquid-propuls ... pment-drdo

UDMH Plant

In 1960’s Unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (UDMH) propellant developments in Germany attracted attention interest of Dr. B Venkatramani at DSL. At that point of time none of the LP engines used UDMH. After grand success of Valiant engine test firings, even Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) approached DRDL for the UDMH. Andhra Sugar Tanuku produces UDMH for DRDL and ISRO today.

All these achievements helped India to develop various missiles under Integrated Guided Missile Development Program (IGMDP).

SS-18 Satan, the monster, uses the same propellant.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Apr 2010 10:21

APJ Kalam had long back cleared the rumour that there is nothing like Surya project , this Surya name came from a Gora in early nineties as India's attempt to build ICBM.

I do not know why these jurnos are recycling the old shit from Gora , there is just Agni-5 and that *is* the ICBM , Business Standard confirmed previous interview with VKS that MIRV is underdevelopment for A-5

sunilpatel · Post by **sunilpatel** » 12 Apr 2010 12:40

Gurus,

There is some Panwala News: Sagrika & Brahmos (fired from Subs) are the same mizails with very small diff. ...

is it true?? Sagrika was suppose to have range of 1000 Km....but if its renamed brahmoz then range will be allllmost 300+... can someone throw some light on it...

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 12 Apr 2010 14:02

Sagarika = Brahmos MKI ?

Agni 5 should be in the same league as the Trident, Topol etc with the same ~ 2m dia and similar ranges per Kg weight.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 12 Apr 2010 19:44

Sagarika is sub launched Shaurya. Period!

Missile coming out from "Sagaraika Annexe"

Missile exhibited as "Shourya"

Spot similarities?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Apr 2010 19:50

the pedantic would argue that it is "garika" and there's no proof that there is "sa" before it.
I remember having this discussion on BR as a young mujahid many moons back, a discussion that was suddenly abandoned as some kotwal came running with his lathi !

negi · Post by **negi** » 12 Apr 2010 20:43

^ Ofcourse it is else why would one need a ballistic missile without any ram air inlet to have a cap on its tip ? must be for similar purpose as cavitator lid on RU SLBMs.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 13 Apr 2010 03:52

Kanson wrote:SS-18 Satan, the monster, uses the same propellant.

Occasionally there is criticism that the focus on the Vikas UDMH/N2O4 engine took away resources and killed the nascent semi-cryo engine programme. It is attributed to petty jealousy and it is claimed that India would today have a working semi cryo engine and heavy lift capability if other decisions were made. That is all possible but it is interesting that the focus on large diameter solid and UDMH/N2O4 engines gave India dual use capability that semi-cryo could not. I don't think that is accidental.

Tushar · Post by **Tushar** » 13 Apr 2010 05:42

I have a question for anyone who can answer me, the video in the multimedia section of the Brahmos being shiplaunched vertically does not have fins as showed in its still pictures. Any reason? are the fins supressed untill the missile stabilizes or gets on the rights trajectory. Sorry for my ignorance.

Also is it a Rajput Class ship that launched it?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 13 Apr 2010 06:23

Anujan sir,

that's very illustrative description but i find atleast one difference between the missile standing before "...garika" Annexe and the Shaurya missile.

The one standing before "...garika" Annexe is shorter in length compared to the Shaurya missile. The length of that missile/canister before the Annexe stop short before the truck chassis( You can see the white building at the back between the canister end and the truck chassis).

But in Shaurya case, the canister/missile extends further below as you can see in this youtube at 0.55 sec

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u09bbiK4M4Q

Further our old defence minister of this decade said...

Mr Fernandes said that India is also developing a cruise missile system called 'Sagarika'. The missile is designed to be launched from a submarine or warship. Correspondents say that the Indian minister's comments is the first official statement on the weapon system by India, which previously denied it planned tp build cruise missiles.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 13 Apr 2010 06:35

Gerard wrote:Occasionally there is criticism that the focus on the Vikas UDMH/N2O4 engine took away resources and killed the nascent semi-cryo engine programme. It is attributed to petty jealousy and it is claimed that India would today have a working semi cryo engine and heavy lift capability if other decisions were made. That is all possible but it is interesting that the focus on large diameter solid and UDMH/N2O4 engines gave India dual use capability that semi-cryo could not. I don't think that is accidental.

I think ( only my half-baked thinking) it is better to say open that we have arrived with all the capabilities that the tech denial regime tired to block access to us, so the power that be understands the reality and moves faster in recognizing the futility of the such programme. It is much faster way to remove the tech. block that was imposed on us.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 14 Apr 2010 01:05

{tarmAK007} Nirbhay missile taking good shape: DRDO

...
“Once operational, Nirbhay (fearless) will arm three Services as it can be launched from multiple platforms on land. You will get to see it from close quarters during the 2011 Aero India,”
...
“The sub-sonic Nirbhay weighs 1,000 kg with a 1,000 km range and a speed of 0.7 mach. It is six metres in length with a 520 mm diameter and would use gyros for inertial navigation system,”
...

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 14 Apr 2010 03:33

I was hoping it would have TERCOM as well - but given that RISAT2 has only been up there for a year & we wouldn't have made all the mappings, its understandable. Glad to see that this is slowly becoming reality.

David Siegel · Post by **David Siegel** » 14 Apr 2010 07:47

My First Post in this Forum..After remaining a daily visitor for last 4 years.

Indian Army toes IAF in Ordering unspecified number of AKASH Missiles

http://idrw.org/?p=1289

The Army has finally agreed to acquire the indigenous two-stage ramjet ‘Akash’ missile. The ‘in-principle’ agreement came at a meeting in the Defence Ministry last week. While the Army has given its nod, induction will depend on the delivery schedule Bharat Dynamics Limited, which makes the missile, is able to maintain. For, the public sector undertaking is already processing orders for six additional squadrons from the Indian Air Force.
Top sources in the Ministry said Army Chief General V.K. Singh gave his ‘in-principle’ agreement at a meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council. The meeting also gave its final clearance for acquisition of Ultra Light Howitzers (ULH) from the United States through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route.
In 2008, the IAF placed orders for two squadrons of the Akash Medium Range Surface-to-Air Missile (MR-SAM) for Rs. 1,222 crore. This was the first-ever contract from the defence services for an indigenous tactical weapon system of this class.
In February this year, Defence Minister A.K. Antony announced that the council had cleared an additional six squadrons of MR-SAM for the IAF at a cost of Rs. 5,000 crore.
As the order book is already full, a timeline for the Army inducting the missiles is yet to be determined, according to the sources. Public sector Bharat Electronics Limited is the nodal production agency along with Bharat Dynamics, with a large number of industries in the public and private sectors involved in the manufacturing process.
The ground-based air defence system has an interception range of 30 km at an altitude of 18,000 metres. It has both track and wheeled platforms, and multiple targets handling capacity with a digitally coded command guidance system.
Meanwhile, the move to purchase 140 M777 ULH for the Army from the U.S.-based entity of BAE Systems through the FMS, government-to-government route, was cleared after amendments in the Staff Qualitative Requirements.
The deal, estimated at around Rs. 2,900 crore, will have to go through the grind in Washington, with the U.S. administration seeking Congress permission to sell these howitzers to India.
The Army has been pressing for the ultra light field guns which can be flown across difficult terrain by helicopter. Last year, its quest for procuring these guns through an open tender resulted in a single-vendor, Singapore Technologies, remaining in the fray. However, procurement was put on hold by the Ministry following a CBI probe into allegations of wrongdoings by the company.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 15 Apr 2010 06:44

Apologies if posted already

Army agrees to acquire indigenous Akash missile

In 2008, the IAF placed orders for two squadrons of the Akash Medium Range Surface-to-Air Missile (MR-SAM) for Rs. 1,222 crore. This was the first-ever contract from the defence services for an indigenous tactical weapon system of this class.

In February this year, Defence Minister A.K. Antony announced that the council had cleared an additional six squadrons of MR-SAM for the IAF at a cost of Rs. 5,000 crore.

Each Akash battery consists of 4 self propelled Launchers (3 Akash SAMs each), a Battery Level Radar - the Rajendra, and a Command post (Battery Control Centre). 2 batteries are deployed as a Squadron (Air Force), while up to 4 form an Akash Group (Army configuration)

So total 8 squadrons for IAF = 8x2x12 = 192 missiles. Are they enough to protect all IAF assets? I think they should have at least 2 missiles for every bird in PRC+TSP inventory.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Apr 2010 08:59

BDL needs funding to scale up and produce fast. trickle rate of production only
provides ammo to import lobbies.

for that matter our production capacity of all missiles needs scaling up.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 15 Apr 2010 09:03

Surya may be a system and not a missile. We don't know and some day we will know. Just like K15 - > Sagarika -> Shourya emerged, some day Surya comes out

No names have "sun-set".

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 15 Apr 2010 11:02

hmmm I am a system onleeee

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 17 Apr 2010 19:33

S-300PMU-2 command post spotted moving over worli sea face ?

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attachmen ... ge_050.jpg

is the vehicle part of s-300 sam battery ?

http://idrw.org/?p=1321#more-1321

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 17 Apr 2010 19:42

OSA missile coastal battery

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Apr 2010 20:07

karan_mc wrote:
S-300PMU-2 command post spotted moving over worli sea face ?
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attachmen ... ge_050.jpg

is the vehicle part of s-300 sam battery ?

http://idrw.org/?p=1321#more-1321

Coastal Battery firing the P-15 Termit Anti-Ship Missile...same as used by Indian Navy OSA Class boats in their assault on Karachi Harbour.

Check this:

http://img140.imageshack.us/i/pp155ic.jpg/

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 17 Apr 2010 22:07

Total Akash missiles ordered are 250+750 around 1000 missiles

RamaY wrote:Apologies if posted already

Army agrees to acquire indigenous Akash missile

In 2008, the IAF placed orders for two squadrons of the Akash Medium Range Surface-to-Air Missile (MR-SAM) for Rs. 1,222 crore. This was the first-ever contract from the defence services for an indigenous tactical weapon system of this class.

In February this year, Defence Minister A.K. Antony announced that the council had cleared an additional six squadrons of MR-SAM for the IAF at a cost of Rs. 5,000 crore.

Each Akash battery consists of 4 self propelled Launchers (3 Akash SAMs each), a Battery Level Radar - the Rajendra, and a Command post (Battery Control Centre). 2 batteries are deployed as a Squadron (Air Force), while up to 4 form an Akash Group (Army configuration)
So total 8 squadrons for IAF = 8x2x12 = 192 missiles. Are they enough to protect all IAF assets? I think they should have at least 2 missiles for every bird in PRC+TSP inventory.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Apr 2010 22:21

why are we using this ancient looking missile as a coastal battery to defend mumbai from a dwarka style attack when better options are available?

infact what exactly is the need for this weapon, as I dont think PN/PLAN are sending a
fleet of ships to shell our west coast anytime soon.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 17 Apr 2010 23:09

Singha wrote:why are we using this ancient looking missile as a coastal battery to defend mumbai from a dwarka style attack when better options are available?

infact what exactly is the need for this weapon, as I dont think PN/PLAN are sending a
fleet of ships to shell our west coast anytime soon.

There have been P 15 Styx battereies, two launchers, since ages. I have seen them, just beyond US (United Services) Club. 25+ years ago. I was wondering if they have been replaced by something better like Urans or Klubs.

By the way IN even today perhaps has more ships with Styx than other ShShM

K

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Apr 2010 23:14

^^^ Not sure if IN still thinks about the concept of having coastal batteries is a sound one and if that needs to be replaced by better systems.

If they think the concept is still sound and valid they may be better off replacing Styx with mobile Brahmos at some point in the future.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 18 Apr 2010 02:17

Bheem wrote:Total Akash missiles ordered are 250+750 around 1000 missiles

Then what will use in our eastern borders

negi · Post by **negi** » 19 Apr 2010 23:29

X posted from LCA dhaga.

khukri wrote: It all depends what you want, all these designs are roughly equal technically but represent fairly different approaches to the same problems. A quick and dirty comparison; As far as range goes, the R-73 easily runs off with the prize with an *effective* reach of 40km in it's latest versions, the ASRAAM is next at 22km and the Sidewinder X around 16.

This is incorrect.

And what is the source for AIM-9X and ASRAAM range ?

The latest version of Archer in service and production has a range of 30Km .

Here from the horse's mouth

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/5 ... ad820c0b77

And as per FlightGlobal the successor R-74 too would have a max range of ~40Km (39 as per report )

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/19 ... siles.html

When it comes to initial agility, the AIM-9X can hit an astounding 80G and be launched as much as 180 degrees off-boresite, compared to around 50G and 60 degrees for the other weapons. However the AIM-9X uses the same motor as the 1970s 'L' model and it's agility drops off rapidly as it is relatively underpowered. The other two weapons would be more capable at distance.

Greatest lethality probably goes to the ASRAAM, which actually punches beneath an aircraft's skin before exploding inside, if that weren't enough it is also able to actually target the enemy's cockpit through the capabilities conveyed by it's advanced high resolution IIR seeker. The AIM-9X has the same seeker and the same pilot-kill ability but it is hobbled by it's anemic 1970s warhead design. The R-73 has a *very* effective warhead that will kill anything flying but it's IR seeker is a generation behind the other missles so I'd say it's a tie for second place.

If it were up to me I'd have a tough time choosing between them.

Where is this being pulled from ?

This talk about ASRAAM's mythical capability to see details like AC's cockpit are nothing earth shattering for the same seeker is used by AIM-9X BLK1 (the Block II which has already been test fired and is due to clear the IOC in 2010 uses an improved one) , Python 5 already employs a superior 320*240 element array for its IIR seeker (former use 128*128 array) .

The way I see it the only reason ASRAAM might be pushed along side M2K upgrade is , it is a MBDA product (Matra is now a part of MBDA) and it is UK's baby so India's Jaguars , Mirages and Hawks qualify as host platforms and this despite the fact that most of the European countries have married themselves to AIM-9 family or the IRIS-T which means ASRAAM will have a high unit price .

Btw from below

http://www.voodoo-world.cz/falcon/aa.html

In January 1995 British Aerospace Dynamics, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England, was awarded a letter contract with a ceiling amount of $10,933,154 for foreign comparative testing [FCT] of the ASRAAM Missile. The purpose of the testing is to gather data to determine if the missile meets AIM-9X operational requirements. Work was performed in Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England (50%), Eglin Air Force Base, Florida (25%), and China Lake, California (25%), and was completed by June 1996. The tests focused on the risk areas of the ASRAAM: focal plane array effectiveness, seeker signal processing, warhead effectiveness, rocket motor testing, and kinematic/guidance ability to support the lethality requirements of the AIM-9X. After several modifications to the scope of the FCT, the program assessed four ground-to-air sorties, 19 air-to-air captive carry sorties, four programmed missile launches, eight static warhead tests, and four rocket motor case tests. The resulting assessment was that the ASRAAM (as is) could not meet the AIM-9X operational requirements in high off-boresight angle performance, infrared counter-countermeasures robustness, lethality, and interoperability. Subsequently, Hughes and BAe proposed an improved "P3I ASRAAM" using thrust-vectoring to provide increased agility and to carry a heavier warhead.
In February 1998 the British-French Matra British Aerospace consortium [formed in 1996] won a multi-million dollar contract to supply the ASRAAM missile to the Australian Air Force to be used on the F/A-18 Hornet. marking the first export sale. The first missiles should be delivered between 1999 and the year 2000.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 20 Apr 2010 08:10

ASRAAM purchase seem like a T-90 purchase.

There are other newer ones that seem to be capable than the above oldie.
IRIS-T
http://www.diehl-bgt-defence.de/index.php?id=561&L=1

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2010 08:37

The latest version of R-73 is the RVV-MD

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/503/566/

negi · Post by **negi** » 20 Apr 2010 09:40

^ This along with the evolved adder family was long due and their development was dragging along since the 90's it is only after PAKFA programme gained traction these too got the much needed push , iirc this was only revealed last year and must be in testing stage , not relevant to discussion here otherwise AIM-9X block-II has already commenced flight tests and is due to clear IOC sometime this year followed by serial production in 2011.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2010 09:47

So essentially the whine here is we did not order some x system because x system was superior to ASRAAM that IAF/MOD approved off , is this the concern here ?

I always thought when you are in the market to buy a weapon system , its always the best deal that wins the day and not essentially the best weapon system , so if the over all package that ASRAAM offered including cost was better in the eyes of GOI then say x superior system , the overall package will win the day