Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 16 Jan 2013 02:19

KBDagha wrote:Albit small, there are some good pics of Agni missile rail and road launchers in the following link:
http://www.walchand.com/DIVISION/defense/3.html
These pics are pretty old... have been posted before.. there is a 4th picture of an Aluminium bridge named Karthik... that seems new!!!

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2204
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 16 Jan 2013 08:08

That's a pretty awesome goal that the RCI has set for itself. The target for such a missile looks like a static cluster or a slow-moving formation. Imagine Astor style GMTI platform passing target coordinates of a tank column and within a few minutes, a smart sub-munition shower takes them all out - all from 200KM away!

This shows that the sub-components like propulsion, seeker, controls/guidance have all matured. Like Lego blocks. Now, they are being put together in myriad different ways. Imagination is the limit!

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66591
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 16 Jan 2013 08:26

same sensor fused tech can be used to create the SFW type unpowered munitions we are buying from textron. a desi alternative in bulk would be a good thing.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1916
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 16 Jan 2013 09:02

Exactly, Singha ji. I would love to see the article India Buys GPS-Guided “Cans of Whup-Ass” evolve into India manufactures GPS, GLONASS and GAGAN-guided "Dandas for Musharraf"

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 225
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby pravula » 16 Jan 2013 09:04

nash wrote:
RamaY wrote:Which BRF member suggested Shaurya to carry multiple smaller missiles?


Yes there was one post regarding mother missile carrying multiple missile.But if i remember correctly, then we were more on SAM.
And since it will have IIR, we can't deny that possibility. Also with 200Km range it will put full stop of any air strike before it get started.

Shourya or even PDV can be a good carrier in SAM verison


bmallick/Moi...?

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1318746#p1318617
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1318746#p1318660

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby RamaY » 16 Jan 2013 10:04

More recently Saar. Someone even said missile separation at Mac 3/4/5/6/7/8? It is holy grail or something like that.

bmallick
BRFite
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby bmallick » 16 Jan 2013 14:20

This news from RCI is really very exiting. As someone mentioned above, that what has infact has happened that the sub-system techs have matured and now its upto us to imagine the myriads of ways that these sub-systems can be made to work together to deliver capabilities.

Also, what this news shows that we have a reached a level where we have attained sufficient miniaturization in seeker technology, where by we are able to put the seekers in the sub-munitions. Basically if you think about it, this missile is going to deliver sub-munitions at a standoff distance. This is something we anyway do in Pinaka system, albeit at far lesser distance. But the ace up the sleeve is the small seekers which would go inside the sub-munitions and also software for autonomous target acquisition.

Interesting times ahead. Just imagine if a similar missile is used in naval scenario. Let's say we are able to put in 8 submunitions of 100Kg each inside Shaurya. A naval destroyer carries 8 such missile. So a SAG of 3 destroyers can unleash 24 such missiles from a distance of 600-700 km onto a CBG. The high speed missile would release its sub-munitions from a distance of 15-30 km away, at altitudes of 5-10 km. So total no. of 24 * 8 = 192 sub-munitions would be heading towards the Carrier. Even if only half of the Shaurya's survive to launch the sub-munitions, thats still 96 sub-munitions heading for the carrier. try to shoot out as many you can, even it 10-16 make through and hit the flight deck, the carrier is a mission kill and is out of equation. Also to shoot down so many sub-munitions, the CBG would have expended, very expensive and limited in number SAM's, making them vulnerable to a second wave. Now,imagine our Arihant class SSN with 12 Shaurya's. Now that's truly a carrier killer.

bmallick
BRFite
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby bmallick » 16 Jan 2013 14:23

Adding to what I said above. 1 destroyer launching 8 missile, means that a total of 8*8 = 64 sub-munitions in the air. That would wipe out one entire convoy in one go.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 900
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby symontk » 16 Jan 2013 14:35

should be able to carry Anti sub rockets too

Also what about a mega torpedo to destroy dams?

mody
BRFite
Posts: 514
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby mody » 16 Jan 2013 15:37

As Bmallick said, the most important part is that they are confidant about the miniaturization of the seekers for the sub munition.
The seekers to be used are mentioned as IIR and mMW. The IIR seeker is known to be have been developed for the NAG program. The MMW seeker is the key. There were reports that an indigenous MMW seeker for the NAG had been developed but no reports about its performance, or whether it had entered production. If the indigenous seeker tech for IIR and MMW seekers has matured, then it really opens up a lot of doors for development of future missile systems.
Perhaps testing of these seekers on the Astra would provide some clues, whether the tech is mature enough or not.
Any idea whether Astra is being tested with Indian seeker or French or Agat seekers?

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1652
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Zynda » 16 Jan 2013 16:21

mody wrote:Any idea whether Astra is being tested with Indian seeker or French or Agat seekers?


Currently Astra uses the same (or upgraded?) Agat seeker found on R-77. Does Astra has Home-On Jam (HOJ) capability? There is no reliable info about R-77 having HOJ capability and thus we can presume that Astra too may not come with that feature!

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36284
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 16 Jan 2013 20:13

Astra should be test fired anytime now from MKI platform. I think this is going to be another feather in the cap for our AAM front.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2204
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 16 Jan 2013 22:27

BMallick: submunitions may not pack a punch big enough to take out a carrier. You need a 200KG+ warhead to cause some serious damage. Check out the IN's recent RFP for an AShM

For anti-carrier, you will need a solitary Shourya with a seeker and mid-course guidance. Only Massa can "possibly" take out a Shourya with SM3. No one else is remotely close to having that capability

The submunition focus of this new missile makes me think its for land targets. Armored columns, airbases (where you can program individual muntions to target the ATC, individual parked airplanes) etc

The submunition technology may also find itself getting into Nirbhay, so that it can loiter around and take out multiple targets in one pass

The advantage of this missile over the Techtron sensor-fuzed munition is that it separates the sensor and the shooter, because its a powered vehicle.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1648
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vasu raya » 17 Jan 2013 00:02

These submunitions can cover a larger foot print like targets in a sprawling airbase, widely spaced MBRLs, artillery pieces, cratering the full length of a runway, all spans of a bridge, even specific number of dam gates to modulate flooding, avalanche triggering by synchronous bombing, single pass bombing on multiple high altitude targets ala Kargil

And then depending on the height of the release, the sub-munitions with seekers can be made to accelerate at terminal engagement for higher KE impact on hardened targets and still be maneuverable like a SAM in coasting phase, recent high-g tests of Astra give hope.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21049
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Prem » 17 Jan 2013 00:06

Send one secretly on Murdike when they gather for Anual ritual. It will take care of 1/2 of terrorist problem in one go.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1648
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vasu raya » 17 Jan 2013 00:10

^^^
that was on mind too, with the standoff range of 200kms would the Pakis even know that a missile has crossed into their airspace and since it breaks into smaller munitions each with little impact which can easily be camouflaged as a IED blast on their terrorist camps

bmallick
BRFite
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby bmallick » 17 Jan 2013 13:00

Prem Kumar wrote:BMallick: submunitions may not pack a punch big enough to take out a carrier. You need a 200KG+ warhead to cause some serious damage. Check out the IN's recent RFP for an AShM


Sir, in my post I had specifically mentioned that the idea is a mission kill of the Carrier, not sink the carrier. 4-8 holes on the flight deck means, that the carrier is pretty much unusable. A 100kg bomb would definitely make a good hole on the deck. Once the carrier's flight operations are out of the equation, the CBG's central fire-power is taken out of equation.

Now pick your time and method to sink it.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 828
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby nash » 17 Jan 2013 13:07

A 100Kg bomb, with CL-20, i think enough to knock out AC or may be sink it.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66591
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 17 Jan 2013 13:40

no a 100kg bomb or even 10 such bombs will not sink a carrier, it has too much size and structural separations. but even 5 well placed 50kg bombs packed with steel balls exploding near the deck will destroy all parked ac, radars, radios, navigation eqpt and mission kill it. to protect it the accompanying ships will also need to to withdraw back.

carriers need to be hit below or near the waterline for significant impact. ideally 3 heavy torps under the keel might cause enough spinal damage and flooding to slowly sink it.

even if engine room is smashed up and the props, carriers can and will be taken in tow first by DDG/FFG and then by ocean going tugs sent to rescue it. unless the attack sub gets a salvo of good hits, the ship can still be used after a couple yrs in drydock.

warcraft are strongly made beasts
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... Q-4QaaIniQ

a boatload of explosives barely made one room of damage inside the USS cole. they must have studied the plans and hit the area housing the crew wardroom so 17 people died.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6Z8L7nEytRQ/T ... Cole+3.jpg
Last edited by Singha on 17 Jan 2013 14:20, edited 2 times in total.

Misraji
BRFite
Posts: 401
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 11:53
Location: USA

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Misraji » 17 Jan 2013 13:49

^^^
Type 65 wake-homing torpedo.

--Ashish

bmallick
BRFite
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby bmallick » 17 Jan 2013 16:19

Guys, please note that at no point did I say that a few 100kg bombs would sink the carrier.

The idea is to hit the flight deck and make a few holes on the flight deck. Which means that flight operations are out of question. Hence a mission kill.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2627
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby JTull » 17 Jan 2013 17:24

Sinking is better than mission kill. Rest of the taskforce will be busy helping the survivors. Otherwise they'll be hunting for you.

saje
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 89
Joined: 08 Oct 2010 16:28
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby saje » 17 Jan 2013 18:33

JTull wrote:Sinking is better than mission kill. Rest of the taskforce will be busy helping the survivors. Otherwise they'll be hunting for you.


But as per the below post he's 600-700 kms away

bmallick wrote:So a SAG of 3 destroyers can unleash 24 such missiles from a distance of 600-700 km onto a CBG.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2627
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby JTull » 17 Jan 2013 20:59

You'll need forward recon assets and satellites to target a CBG. If you can track them then they can track you, 600km away or nearer. (Of course, I'm assuming we're all salivating here about targeting a USN CBG).

We've discussed umpteen times on this forum the folly of engaging someone as US. Although the element of surprise will be with you, but not for long. And if you're not the first aggressor then less said the better. It is better to engage such foes diplomatically.

Now if it were any other country's naval assets (and I really mean any other) and around Indian Ocean/Bay of Bengal/Arabian Sea, then I too could see the positives of this strike. You can cripple any task force because no other country (except US) can bring as many assets to bear on the conflict zone as India. Then, I'd prefer the mission kill to sinking. It will be a good warning shot and any escalation in conflict will be at the choice of and risk to the adversary.

Just my 2 cents.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby jamwal » 17 Jan 2013 21:22

The top attack feature of new Brahmos is really useful against aircraft carriers. It's not just the army which will appreciate this.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36284
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 17 Jan 2013 21:47

Actually, we need dual strategy to incapacitate an A/C.. we don't want the deck in shape for the enemy naval air targets take off and escape, and at the same time the torpedo mission need to sink it faster. so, for an A/C, it would not be one missile.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52788
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 17 Jan 2013 22:32

Why are you talking about sinking A/C? leave that to the PLAN guys and their turds Pakis.

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20067 » 18 Jan 2013 03:40

deleted

yantra
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 03:46

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby yantra » 18 Jan 2013 04:12

JTull wrote:You'll need forward recon assets and satellites to target a CBG. If you can track them then they can track you, 600km away or nearer. (Of course, I'm assuming we're all salivating here about targeting a USN CBG).

We've discussed umpteen times on this forum the folly of engaging someone as US. Although the element of surprise will be with you, but not for long. And if you're not the first aggressor then less said the better. It is better to engage such foes diplomatically.

Now if it were any other country's naval assets (and I really mean any other) and around Indian Ocean/Bay of Bengal/Arabian Sea, then I too could see the positives of this strike. You can cripple any task force because no other country (except US) can bring as many assets to bear on the conflict zone as India. Then, I'd prefer the mission kill to sinking. It will be a good warning shot and any escalation in conflict will be at the choice of and risk to the adversary.

Just my 2 cents.


I do not think that India would be at such odds with the US as to launch a military attack in any medium term scenario (at least 15 yrs). US has so many options to squeeze India, without launching a single missile. I do not think it is a fair comparison to put those two forces at odds with each other - everyone knows that US forces are currently technologically superior, and US can bring so many assets to bear. I do not think that the relations between them can sour so much, ever (I hope not!).

The only country with a possible CBG that could be offensive to India is China - that too, it is 10 years away, at best. I do not foresee a time, again, in medium term, when India will go offensive against Russia, UK or France. Under current circumstances, they can squeeze India's supply chain and that would be that. Until India indigenizes ALL her defense hardware, builds a robust MIC, and matches it qualitatively with the rest, it is hard to see how she can deter these countries effectively, if/when challenged.

bmallick
BRFite
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby bmallick » 18 Jan 2013 08:46

The A/C scenario was portrayed just to give an idea about the potential and destructive power of such a missile.

Let's work again on the numbers.

1 SAG of 3 Destroyers with 8 missiles each. Each missile with 8 100kg guided sub-munition. That's 3*8*8 = 192 sub-munitions.

Such huge number of munitions in the air, heading towards you is going to overwhelm any AAW system. So what all can be destroyed by 3 of such destroyers.

1. As mentioned earlier, can mission kill an A/C. Let's challenge the PLAN in the South China Sea :-)
2. Enemy SAG of 4-12 Naval ships, just the like the ones mentioned in Vivek_Ahuja's excellent scenario.
3. Convoy of enemy ship. Maybe 20-30 strong convoy.
4. Enemy naval base. Will not be completely destroyed, but lot of damage and sink 3-4 ships in harbor. Gwadar, Karachi, Hainan etc.
5. Enemy land bases, supply depo's, airbases.
6. let your imagination fly.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 828
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby nash » 18 Jan 2013 09:24

This concept of mother missile carrying multiple missile can change the whole scenario of war, can give us decisive edge to us in war. If we able to universalize this concept among IA, IAF and IN, then IMO following would be the possibilities:

1.S2S - Shourya,Nirbhay,Prahaar,etc
2.A2S - Nirbhay,Prahaar(IAF version),etc
3.S2A - PDV,Akash,future BDM,etc
4.A2A - K-1000,AAD(IAF version),etc

Very much like this: :twisted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6GvIu02cew

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6GvIu02cew[/youtube]

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66591
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Jan 2013 09:41

as you all know, MBDA has this perseus concept using 2 sub-missiles and the main missile also carries a bigger warhead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJ9YKsNfkQ8

seems to be a ramjet or scramjet, but nothing says it cannot be done on a solid fuel rocket or liquid fuel turbofan powered missile as well. propulsion is a separate problem.

we do need to focus on how a single cruise missile or shourya can drop a bunch of sensor fused munitions on large targets like supply depots or airfields. does not look flashy those small 5kg stuff but against exposed high value targets like TELARs, radars, a/c, fuel, vehicles they are effective.

atleast for a start, cluster munitions (unguided) can be tried out...and perhaps prithvi already does that.

we cannot expect all our missiles to work or leak through their SAM screens, whatever gets through must be smart and deadly.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1648
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vasu raya » 18 Jan 2013 10:42

small problem, separation of unpowered sub munitions at supersonic speeds is an issue, the same at hypersonic speeds is out of bounds at the moment

anyways, to be able to target the Chinese east coast with conventional weapons Akula with SLCM's is an option. The rings of S-300 and HQ-9 batteries will have to be disabled, one thinks if SLCM's can carry these sub munitions and each submuniton is fitted with anti-radiation seeker, the radars which are usually in short supply can be targeted, each of these SAM batteries have a protection bubble of certain radii, which is where the large footprint cluster munitions can make a difference. lets assume that each submunition has the form factor and range of a BVRAAM. if Shaurya is said to have ECCM capabilities, a much slower SLCM relying on stealth will definitely have that feature and can be used to hand-off target information to the Anti radiation missiles that peel off from the SLCM at the right intervals

Once their SAM cover is pried open, they will be exposed to DPSA and missile strikes and that's good enough message for them

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10917
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 18 Jan 2013 10:44

jamwal wrote:The top attack feature of new Brahmos is really useful against aircraft carriers. It's not just the army which will appreciate this.


If it can beat the CBG defences and put a hole in the runway, then AC needs to go all the way to its home port to be useful.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20317 » 18 Jan 2013 11:13

Ok to take down a small AC (40K tons) you can perhaps work with the scenario of the German Battleship Bismark (41k tons).

Wiki :

Upon returning to Ark Royal, the Swordfish loaded torpedoes equipped with contact detonators. The second attack comprised fifteen aircraft and was launched at 19:10. At 20:47, the torpedo bombers began their attack descent through the clouds.[97] While the Swordfish approached, Bismarck fired her main battery at Sheffield, straddling the cruiser with her second salvo. Shell fragments rained down on Sheffield, killing three men and wounding several others.[98] Sheffield quickly retreated under cover of a smoke screen. The Swordfish then attacked; Bismarck began to turn violently while her anti-aircraft batteries attempted to destroy the incoming bombers. She evaded most of the torpedoes, though two found their mark.[99] One hit amidships on the port side, just below the bottom edge of the main armour belt. The force of the explosion was largely contained by the underwater protection system and the belt armour, but some structural damage was effected, which allowed minor flooding.[100]

The second torpedo struck Bismarck in her stern on the port side, near the port rudder shaft. The coupling on the port rudder assembly was badly damaged and the rudder could not be disengaged, locked in a 12° turn to port. The explosion also caused major shock damage.[101] The crew repeatedly attempted to regain steering control. They eventually managed to repair the starboard rudder, but the port rudder remained badly jammed. A suggestion to sever the port rudder with explosives was dismissed by Lütjens, as damage to the screws would have left the battleship helpless.[102][103] At 21:15, Lütjens reported that the ship was unmanoeuvrable.[104]

<sniped>

The four British ships fired more than 2,800 shells at Bismarck, and scored more than 400 hits, but were unable to sink Bismarck by gunfire. At around 10:20, running low on fuel, Tovey ordered the cruiser Dorsetshire to sink Bismarck with torpedoes, and sent his battleships back to port.[121] Dorsetshire fired a pair of torpedoes into Bismarck's starboard side, one of which hit. Dorsetshire then moved around to her port side and fired another torpedo, which also hit. By the time that these torpedo attacks took place, the ship was already listing so badly that the deck was partly awash.[119] It appears that the final torpedo may have detonated against Bismarck’s port side superstructure, which was by then already underwater.[122] Around 10:35, Bismarck capsized to port and slowly sank by the stern, disappearing from the surface at 10:40


Hope you guys enjoy reading it.

keshavchandra
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 22:23

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby keshavchandra » 18 Jan 2013 23:11

Is any update on prahaar missile? Its being a long after the initial trial test, there is not any info or update. Even the intentions of IA is yet not clear for its induction or role till now.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Viv S » 19 Jan 2013 05:31

jamwal wrote:The top attack feature of new Brahmos is really useful against aircraft carriers. It's not just the army which will appreciate this.


I have my doubts. Unlike targets on land, naval ships usually have formidable point defence systems. From the moment the missile emerges from the horizon to the time of impact, every second counts. A top attack profile (similar to a ATGM) requires it expend valuable KE while increasing the window for interception by SAMs and/or CIWS.

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20067 » 19 Jan 2013 05:47

keshavchandra wrote:Is any update on prahaar missile? Its being a long after the initial trial test, there is not any info or update. Even the intentions of IA is yet not clear for its induction or role till now.


I am wondering the same ...

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1916
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 19 Jan 2013 07:47

ToI: Nirbhay to be test-fired in February
TNN | Jan 19, 2013, 02.46 AM IST

HYDERABAD: Nirbhay, India's first subsonic cruise missile, will be test-fired by the end of February, said V K Saraswat, director general of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and scientific advisor to defence minister A K Antony. Saraswat was speaking to the media during a seminar on 'Nurturing, Managing and Institutionalising Innovation' organised by the Defence Research and Develoment Laboratory (DRDL) here on Friday.

While 2012 was an eventful year for the defence organisation with almost a dozen successful launches of various kinds of missiles, this year also promises to be big with many more plans underway. "Nirbhay will be a medium-range cruise missile with advantages like the ability of not being detected and high accuracy. It is also a cheaper option," Saraswat said.

Asked if there were any hitches in test-firing the missile as it was expected to have taken place sometime back, Saraswat said some processes had been developed and there were no hitches.

This year, a major plan of the DRDO is 'canisterisation' of Agni IV and Agni V, which will enable firing of the missile from any platform. Another plan was to integrate Astra-III with Sukhoi. He said four Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) would be produced this year and in 2014, the necessary operational clearances would be sought.

The DRDO has also carried out 50 of the 56 modifications sought for the Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun Mark-II variant by the user. The rest of the modifications will be carried out in the next few months. Saraswat said the Long Range Cruise Missile (LRCM) will have all futuristic features.

Saraswat informed that they had got permissions for the missile testing range proposed at Machilipatnam. "It is a barren piece of land and we will turn it into a green area. There will be no environmental issues," he said. Talking about the civilian applications of defence technology, he said that the bio-digesters (toilets) were much in demand and there was a proposal with the tourism ministry on using them in buses.

Another important application would be the kit for detection of dengue. The kits developed by DRDO will take just two hours to confirm a dengue case while the kits available elsewhere take 24 hours. Saraswat said that the technology has already been transferred to manufacturers of the anti-mosquito 'attracticide', which is available in the market.


  • Nirbhay: Nirbhay, India's first subsonic cruise missile, will be test-fired by the end of February. "Nirbhay will be a medium-range cruise missile with advantages like the ability of not being detected and high accuracy. It is also a cheaper option," Saraswat said. Asked if there were any hitches in test-firing the missile as it was expected to have taken place sometime back, Saraswat said some processes had been developed and there were no hitches.
  • Agni: This year, a major plan of the DRDO is 'canisterisation' of Agni IV and Agni V, which will enable firing of the missile from any platform.
  • Astra III: Another plan was to integrate Astra-III with Sukhoi.
  • LCA: He said four Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) would be produced this year and in 2014, the necessary operational clearances would be sought.
  • Arjun MkII: The DRDO has also carried out 50 of the 56 modifications sought for the Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun Mark-II variant by the user. The rest of the modifications will be carried out in the next few months.
  • LRCM: Saraswat said the Long Range Cruise Missile (LRCM) will have all futuristic features. :mrgreen:
  • Missile testing range: Saraswat informed that they had got permissions for the missile testing range proposed at Machilipatnam. "It is a barren piece of land and we will turn it into a green area. There will be no environmental issues.
  • Bio Toilets: bio-digesters (toilets) were much in demand and there was a proposal with the tourism ministry on using them in buses.
  • Dengue kits: The kits developed by DRDO will take just two hours to confirm a dengue case while the kits available elsewhere take 24 hours. Saraswat said that the technology has already been transferred to manufacturers of the anti-mosquito 'attracticide', which is available in the market.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby krishnan » 19 Jan 2013 08:59

Astra - III ??


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests