Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18864
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Karan M » 17 May 2013 08:11

Indranilroy,

For overall technologies achieved with the missile itself (note, not the radar packaging/C3I/guidance etc), here:

http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/labs/DRDL/Engli ... chieve.jsp

CONTROL GUIDANCE ALGORITHM FOR CLOS GUIDANCE

In order to achieve shortest possible range of a weapon system, it is essential to develop CLOS guidance scheme in which missile is guided to the LOS in the quickest possible time. This technology has been developed for the first time in the IGMDP. Trishul system has been developed using this technology and it was demonstrated through 80 flight tests using various kinds of platforms. Required miss-distance (» 10 mtr.) has been demonstrated repeatedly through live firings against targets.

HEIGHT LOCK LOOP GUIDANCE ALGORITHM:

Trishul is the first indigenous supersonic missile having capability of flying 5 meters above the sea-surface. This has been possible by design of a sophisticated height lock loop guidance algorithm using a precision Radio Altimeter as a height sensing device. The sea-skimming capability of Trishul missile has been demonstrated through a large number of live firings from Naval Trishul Shore Installation at INS Dronacharya.

LITHIUM THERMAL BATTERY

Lithium Thermal Batteries have high power density and very long shelf life (in excess of 20 years). Trishul missile borne lithium thermal batteries have been indigenously developed, qualified & produced in large numbers.

DUAL THRUST ROCKET MOTOR

Dual Thrust Rocket Motor has been designed and developed indigenously for Trishul missile. Smokeless composite propellant has been indigenously developed for this Rocket Motor. Rocket Motor has been flight tested several times without any flaw.

LAUNCH CONTAINER

Trishul missile is delivered as ammunition in a FRP canister. This launch container has been indigenously developed with various mechanisms like automatic umbilical retraction, transport-locking mechanism etc., along with its electrical interfaces.

FOLDING FIN TECHNOLOGY

In order to have minimum dimension of the launch container to accommodate more number of missiles on the launcher, folding fin mechanism has been developed for Trishul missile. All the four fins are folded when the missile is within the launch container. They automatically are deployed as soon as the missile moves out of the launch container. Design and implementation of the fin folding Mechanism has been a real challenge. Folding fin mechanism has been qualified through large number of flights tests without any failure.

FLOW FORMING TECHNOLOGY

Novel manufacturing technique called flow forming has been established for manufacturing of Trishul airframe structures. This technology has been successfully utilised for manufacturing of maraging steel rocket motor tubes, and other airframe structures of Trishul. This technology has played crucial role in reducing the hardware weight of Trishul missile.


Note, the dual thrust motor concept is now being implemented in Barak-8, albeit reportedly with a new design, which may be used for Astra-MK2 as well. MK1 benefits from the advances in propellant tech. developed for the trishul - have to check my notes for the exact ref., but trishul was our first breakthrough.

Coming to guidance being successful, its mentioned above, but for more details on how it was resolved, check here:
http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/ind ... /1993/1030

The last bunch of tests were flawless and saw the entire missile-radar combo work for the IAF version. Another similar variant was for the Army.
The IAF then changed its mind and said it wanted a fire and forget system for LLQRM. Its a different matter, that seven years later, the program is inching along thanks to the high costs projected, though the IAF purchased a bunch of SpyDers - which would be just starting delivery now.

BTW, the Trishul thanks to its unique FCS combo - the Flycatcher radar + missile combo - was noted to be very hard to jam, and the Flycatcher was regarded as very accurate & capable. The choice, driven in part by mass purchase of the system by the IA, also complicated design though...

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 17 May 2013 09:07

Imo a son of trishul ( vs costly barak1) and a ak630 gun combo is the realistic and only hope for a mass deployment system kind of how the russians and satellites had vast nums of zsu-23-2 in the field. It onlee needs to be 75% as good as the much more expensive and limited nos of spyder to be really useful.
Its the same eqn as chipanda products needing to be 50% at khan level to be really dangerous in south asian context.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby koti » 17 May 2013 09:10

Philip wrote:Trishul failed repeatedly in naval trials.One upright naval officer,now deceased, who recommended Barak instead for our warships was allegedly denied promotion by babudom because he spoke the truth about Trishul. If our warships today have a decent anti-missile defence,it is due to him.

Isn't the Spyder supposed to be on order or under serious consideration? Based upon Israeli Python and Derby AAMs it is supposed to replace our SAM-3/6s.The Pantsir seems an adequate replacement for the Tunguskas.


I am a little confused here. How can the Pantsir replace Tunguska? Tunguskas are most of the time assigned(?) to protect armored columns from aerial threats. Whereas the top heavy Pantsir does not have the mobility to do this.
Am I missing anything?

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20317 » 17 May 2013 14:48

ramana wrote:Its the "front end" steering mechanism. Singha calls it snorting bull nosecap.

Missiles can be steered from front end or aft end. Front end is by: jets or canards. Aft end is thrust vector control by:jets, flexible nozzle etc.



Thanks ramana ji,

I was under the wrong impression that vernier engines (and likewise the front attitude control) start after the main motor. An impression gathered from not being attentive and misinterpreting following types of pics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Convair_X-12_launch.JPG


However,

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1999/news_release_990128d.html
Delta II Launch Stopped Due to Engine Ignition Failure

Vernier engines are small rocket motors that allow the vehicle to be steered during flight. During the engine start sequence, the two vernier engines are required to ignite prior to ignition of the main engine.


But one more query. Why is the 'snort' circular? Why not a simple straight 'snort'?

OTOH since it is so, that implies the front end is particularly complex in A-3 at least.

vonkabra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 09 Oct 2003 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vonkabra » 17 May 2013 14:56

Is there any update on Prahaar? I haven't seen any news about it since the successful launches in Jul-2011. There wasn't any info available at the AI DRDO stall either. Rather surprising considering it's potential to be a game changer.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 17 May 2013 14:57

there is no RFP from IA for prahaar. so far no signs it even wants prahaar.

SKrishna
BRFite
Posts: 151
Joined: 21 Jan 2008 19:18
Location: Bombay
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SKrishna » 17 May 2013 15:23

^^^^ Dont recall any RFP for any of the Ballistic missiles.... (Agni series, Prithvi etc...) So not surprised. Weapon system capability of Prahaar has been demonstrated to Army officials who were present at the launch. They may just work in reverse create the requirement or usage doctrine based on capabilities.

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Pranav » 17 May 2013 18:12

x-post from west asia thread -

Austin wrote:The defense official's comments came as Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov confirmed Israel's fears on Thursday, when he officially announced that Russia will indeed complete the sale of the S-300 advanced anti-aircraft missile system to Syria.


IIRC Syria already has the Pantsir CIWS ... S-300 plus Pantsir is a good combination.

Israel can try to knock out the S-300 with their Delilah but the Delilah is neither very fast nor very stealthy so Pantsir should be able to defend against it.

The situation shows the need for good CIWS's for defenders, and from the attacker's POV, stealthy, fast missiles to attack well defended targets. If the missile can accelerate to Mach 6 (i.e. same speed as Prahaar) and then coast for the last say 60 seconds of flight, it may be possible to minimize infrared signature.
Last edited by Pranav on 17 May 2013 18:22, edited 1 time in total.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby John » 17 May 2013 18:15

Philip wrote:Trishul failed repeatedly in naval trials.One upright naval officer,now deceased, who recommended Barak instead for our warships was allegedly denied promotion by babudom because he spoke the truth about Trishul. If our warships today have a decent anti-missile defence,it is due to him.

Isn't the Spyder supposed to be on order or under serious consideration? Based upon Israeli Python and Derby AAMs it is supposed to replace our SAM-3/6s.The Pantsir seems an adequate replacement for the Tunguskas.

Pantsir is unlikely IMO partly because IA had negative experience with Tunguska (lack of spares, glitches and so on) and don't forget who funded its development..

Singha wrote:Imo a son of trishul ( vs costly barak1) and a ak630 gun combo is the realistic and only hope for a mass deployment system kind of how the russians and satellites had vast nums of zsu-23-2 in the field. It onlee needs to be 75% as good as the much more expensive and limited nos of spyder to be really useful.


Trishul/Barak are too big for AAA/SAM combo system ideally you are looking are at 20-50 kg sized missile which can easily be attached to AAA gun system. As for using AK-630 it is fine for anti missile but the gating gun is quite heavy around 2 tons, you are looking at a heavy mount plus you need the radar system...

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Austin » 17 May 2013 21:00

Interview with DRDO Chief

http://www.geopolitics.in/may2013.aspx

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Avarachan » 17 May 2013 21:14

vonkabra wrote:Is there any update on Prahaar? I haven't seen any news about it since the successful launches in Jul-2011. There wasn't any info available at the AI DRDO stall either. Rather surprising considering it's potential to be a game changer.


Several weeks ago, there was a report in "The Hindu" that the Prahaar (and several other missiles) will be tested later this year. The Prahaar was mentioned in passing, but I found the report credible. I've heard the same thing from other sources, too.

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 » 17 May 2013 21:46

Out of interest i searched about the missile

Prahaar was first tested by DRDO in July 2011. It features a range of 150 km and warhead capacity of 200 kg. This warhead capacity in and of itself is held by the agency to be proof of its purely conventional status, as DRDO has not yet developed a nuclear missile warhead smaller than around 500 kg.4 Prahaar is intended to complement the “Cold Start” Indian Army strategy of rapid cross-border strikes against Pakistan in the event of military conflict. This missile would have escalatory impacts within a conflict, while the strategy it ostensibly supports drove Pakistan to develop a tactical nuclear missile, the Nasr, as an anticipatory countermeasure to halt the Indian cross-border sweep. Prahaar, therefore, has a debatable strategic rationale.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby koti » 17 May 2013 23:01

Found another contender for the required system. The Danish BRAMS
Link-1
Link 2

It has no radar and uses Igla as SAMs.

PK Mudiliyar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 4
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby PK Mudiliyar » 17 May 2013 23:16

Must have two drivers based on two steering tyres
The big short come is the SAMs can't be fired below 0 degrees

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby John » 18 May 2013 01:06

koti wrote:Found another contender for the required system. The Danish BRAMS
Link-1
Link 2

It has no radar and uses Igla as SAMs.

I mentioned that earlier, that is Slovakian based on Dana's 152mm gun system.

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 465
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Gurneesh » 18 May 2013 01:24

Skyshield mounted on a Tata 8x8 is also an option.

http://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/de/rheinmetall_defence/public_relations/news/detail_1431.php
Image

Maybe they can also add a couple of Igla/stinger launchers for missile based SHORAD

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Pranav » 18 May 2013 10:21

Prahaar Missile: Which way a Head
Published May 18, 2013 | By admin

SOURCE: IDRW NEWS NETWORK

It was a early morning missile test close to two years ago when DRDO successfully test fired Prahaar, a single stage missile short-range surface-to-surface missile with a range of 150 km and fuelled by solid propellants, it was first and only test of the missile which was carried out by DRDO.

Indian army which was supposed to be its main operator has still not able to find role for it, in its missile arsenal, when idrw.org contacted multiple sources it was informed to us that missile development was not requested by Indian army and army is not able to make any decision about its role and possible induction time frame.

DRDO which was hoping that Prahaar will fill the gap between Pinaka, the multi-barrel rocket system, which has a range of 45 km and the Prithiv missile that can attack targets 250 km to 350 km away. Prahaar is categorised as a “battlefield tactical missile” by DRDO but Prahaar been a conventional missile cannot replace nuclear capable Prithiv missile and it will be expensive to use such an advance missile for the role of long range rocket system.

Indian army already possess long range Heavy rocket launchers Russian made BM-30 Smerch and plans are to go in for local manufacturing soon in India, DRDO itself reportedly is working on Pinaka-II which will exceed range of Smerch bringing it very close to Prahaar range. Satellite navigation and direction correction systems are already providing better accuracy to multi-barrel rocket system; it will be difficult for Indian army to find a role for Prahaar Missile in its arsenal.

http://idrw.org/?p=22234

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2597
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby abhik » 18 May 2013 11:22

John wrote:Trishul/Barak are too big for AAA/SAM combo system ideally you are looking are at 20-50 kg sized missile which can easily be attached to AAA gun system. As for using AK-630 it is fine for anti missile but the gating gun is quite heavy around 2 tons, you are looking at a heavy mount plus you need the radar system...

Is there really a need to have a missile system addition to the AAA system, over and above the Spyder(or an equivalent system)?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 May 2013 11:54

there are only around 20 batteries of spyder on order. each battery can cover 1 site.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2597
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby abhik » 18 May 2013 13:00

But why mix the two? There are quite a few advanced AAA systems and short range SAM systems but very few "Hybrid" systems. The requirements in the tender seems to favour the Tunguskas/Pantsir.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 May 2013 14:10

hybrid is so that rodina can get the order.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20317 » 18 May 2013 14:26

krishnan wrote:Out of interest i searched about the missile

Prahaar was first tested by DRDO in July 2011. It features a range of 150 km and warhead capacity of 200 kg. This warhead capacity in and of itself is held by the agency to be proof of its purely conventional status, as DRDO has not yet developed a nuclear missile warhead smaller than around 500 kg.4 Prahaar is intended to complement the “Cold Start” Indian Army strategy of rapid cross-border strikes against Pakistan in the event of military conflict. This missile would have escalatory impacts within a conflict, while the strategy it ostensibly supports drove Pakistan to develop a tactical nuclear missile, the Nasr, as an anticipatory countermeasure to halt the Indian cross-border sweep. Prahaar, therefore, has a debatable strategic rationale.


BARC or DRDO?

VV - it is by a foreigner "Frank O’Donnell is a doctoral candidate in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London." He could be mistaken. But then I do not expect Indian establishment to go the lighter way considering the second strike focus being propounded.
Last edited by member_20317 on 18 May 2013 15:41, edited 1 time in total.

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 » 18 May 2013 15:28


muttukur
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby muttukur » 18 May 2013 17:02

http://www.ausairpower.net/Analysis-Cru ... siles.html .
It is high time Nirbhay becomes successful. How much is the appox cost of producing Nirbhay ?

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Sagar G » 18 May 2013 22:35

indranilroy wrote:Sagar,

Trishul was not successful in terms of either guidance or propulsion. DRDO itself asked MoD to go ahead with imports. Maitri is the JV effort which was supposed to give us the missing parts in propulsion and guidance. It is ....

Akash does not give us either the guidance, nor the propulsion.


Karan M garu has already answered your questions so I don't have much left to say. Regarding your other worry about composite casing here is an article from 2007

DRDO achieves critical missile technology breakthrough with composite rocket motor casings

Our latest BM has composite stages.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54009
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 19 May 2013 03:35



Its a sad day when IDSA provides platform for FUD by foreigners in India itself. Earlier they had to publish aborad now they can publish in India itself and fool Indians.

For starters the DRDO packages the physics package in warheads. They don't develop warheads. Only shell, fuze and control systems if needed.

Having said that the Prahaar was a quick reaction battlefield missile with a useful payload similar to the ATACMs in US inventory. NATO-Warsaw pact confrontation in Europe saw the need to develop missiles with ranges ~150km under battlefield commanders. The Prithvi due to its association with nuke delivery systems would be confused with escalation and hence the need to develop a new and different vehicle
The Nasr is really a nasl (vasectomy) weapon for armed with a nuke warhead and its short range it would wreak more destruction on Pakistan then an Indian Cold Start drive!

So its moronic to compare both and draw equivalence.


Managing India’s Missile Aspirations
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email More Sharing Services
Frank O'Donnell

February 10, 2013

The Agni-VI, to be developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), joins the Prahaar missile as the new symbols of India’s powerful strategic complex. Both missiles, however, invite questions as to the validity of India’s “credible minimum deterrence” doctrine for its emerging nuclear force.

The Agni-VI is reported to have a range of 6,000 km, and is being designed as the first Indian ballistic missile to host multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV) warheads. It will hold four to six warheads, and will be India’s largest ballistic missile yet at 20 metres long and weighing 65-70 tonnes. To give a sense of the haste of DRDO missile projects, it is the successor missile to the Agni-V, a 5,000 km range missile first tested only last April.1

There was a certain strategic rationale for developing the Agni-V: its aegis brings Beijing, Shanghai and other Chinese east coast metropolises into Indian range for the first time, bringing a symmetry and perhaps stability to their bilateral nuclear deterrence. However, this same rationale made further-reaching and more destructive Indian missiles a weak proposition. With China in its entirety already in range, what further strategic targets exist that merit an Agni-VI? What are the geopolitical advantages to be gained by an Agni-VI that outweigh the tensions and uncertainty about the intentions of India’s nuclear force that the missile generates?

The Agni-VI emerges as a product of poor political management. As new missile projects elevate DRDO prestige and create new budgetary requirements, it has every interest in initiating new missile plans regardless of a related strategic requirement. The Agni-VI was, therefore, already being sketched out by DRDO as soon as the Agni-V was first tested.2

To curtail this tendency and relate the Indian nuclear force to wider national strategic objectives, the Indian government should establish clearer directive political control over the missile activities of DRDO. When asked to comment, in October 2012, on commissioning future missiles following the Agni-V, Defence Minister A.K. Antony suggested that DRDO perfect its current missiles before initiating new missile projects.3 The DRDO has thought differently.

As a responsible and credible agency for developing India’s missile portfolio, DRDO is permitted almost complete political discretion to select and build new missile projects. As India’s nuclear capabilities grow, this bureaucratic reality is creating a growing divergence between the restraint at the core of India’s official nuclear doctrine, and an ambitious and growing range of missile projects. It is essential for the Indian government to articulate limits to the eventual Indian nuclear force size and capabilities, and thus recover the initiative from DRDO, before its mushrooming missile portfolio threatens the health of relationships with Indian security partners and rivals.

While the Agni-VI will generate interest due to its unprecedented size, range and MIRV capability, the political governance issues surrounding Indian missiles have also been illuminated by a lesser-known project, Prahaar. Prahaar is labelled as a short-range conventional missile for now, but its development dovetails with the interest of DRDO in tactical nuclear weapons. Prahaar adds little to Indian security. It could also generate the technical understanding for a future Indian tactical nuclear missile, which would make little sense under an Indian nuclear doctrine of “credible minimum deterrence”.

Prahaar was first tested by DRDO in July 2011. It features a range of 150 km and warhead capacity of 200 kg. This warhead capacity in and of itself is held by the agency to be proof of its purely conventional status, as DRDO has not yet developed a nuclear missile warhead smaller than around 500 kg.4 Prahaar is intended to complement the “Cold Start” Indian Army strategy of rapid cross-border strikes against Pakistan in the event of military conflict. This missile would have escalatory impacts within a conflict, while the strategy it ostensibly supports drove Pakistan to develop a tactical nuclear missile, the Nasr, as an anticipatory countermeasure to halt the Indian cross-border sweep. Prahaar, therefore, has a debatable strategic rationale.

However, Prahaar could also serve toward a DRDO objective. The agency has long held an interest in tactical nuclear weapons, including the test of low-yield devices in the Pokhran-II series in 1998. If Prahaar is not presently nuclear-capable, it could at the least serve as a precursor to a tactical nuclear missile. DRDO is already miniaturising nuclear warheads for new projectiles such as the new MIRV warheads for the Agni-VI, and for the K-15 sea-launched ballistic missile. Without clear political direction from the Indian government against development of tactical nuclear warheads, there is little to stop DRDO announcing its commissioning of a tactical nuclear missile. This is an entirely avoidable development, which would have damaging consequences for Indo-Pakistani relations and fuel a needless nuclear arms race. Effective political control of Indian missile projects should, therefore, not overlook the strategic implications of short-range projectiles as well as the long-range marquee headline-grabbers such as the Agni-VI.

The Agni-VI and Prahaar both signify unnecessary missile projects, which have been developed in the interests of DRDO technical and bureaucratic ambitions rather than the stated interests of India’s nuclear doctrine. The Agni-VI extends India’s nuclear missile range past the entire landmass of both of its nuclear rivals, while Prahaar could open the road to a tactical nuclear weapons race with Pakistan.

Firmer political guidance from India’s policymakers is thus required to reassess these projects, and ensure that India’s nuclear policy is in line with India’s wider global interest in a stable security environment.

Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDSA or of the Government of India.

1. 1. The Agni-V has been described by DRDO as potentially having a future MIRV warhead capacity, but the Agni-VI is the first missile to be designed specifically with MIRV capabilities in mind. T.S. Subramanian, “Agni-VI All Set to Take Shape”, The Hindu, February 4, 2013, available at http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... e/artic..., accessed on February 4, 2013.
2. 2. IBNLive Staff, “Agni-VI with 10,000 km Range to be Ready by 2014”, IBNLive, May 24, 2012, available at http://ibnlive.in.com/news/agnivi-with- ... -by-201..., accessed on February 5, 2013.
3. 3. Press Trust of India, “India to ‘Stabilise’ Present Agni Missile Program, Says AK Antony”, Economic Times, October 1, 2012, available at http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... 8359_1_..., accessed on February 5, 2013.
4. 4. Surya Gangadharan, “Prahaar India’s Counter to Pak’s Nasr Missile?”, IBNLive, July 27, 2011, available at http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/suryagangad ... ias-cou..., accessed on February 5, 2013; see also Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen, “Indian Nuclear Forces, 2012”, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 65, No. 6 (July/August 2012), p. 100.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20447
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Philip » 19 May 2013 04:30

What rubbish! MIRV capability is essential for any Indian strategic missile aboard our future SSBNs.Each missile aboard future larger ATVs will have to have a range of at least 5000km to take care of China and NoKo to.Our toying with defence relationships with Japan and SoKo could very well bring us within the scope of NoKo,already the provider of some of Pak's missile capability.In the future who knows what rogue individual becomes US pres too and sends stealth drones all over the globe bumping off people whose face he dislikes!
Until then,it would be healthy for India to have a more capable BM than Agni-5.For one,our options against the Chinese become greater.The nation will also not have a wimp's wimp like the snake-oil mendicant in charge for ever too! A future Indian leadership may demand a deterrent like Agni-6 or even beyond!

Both Prahar and Agni-6 are excellent developments by the DRDO.Keeping our "powder dry"

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 19 May 2013 04:43

it is high time our 1 billion planet should know now who is actually stringing mr. mohan singh ji -- it is not sonia gandhi ji, but she is just a remote port for all communications.

it is sad indeed IDSA has no locus standi for the articles it professes to convey on line and direct.

keeping us divided has been successfully engaged, mission is always success for external forces. so, suppressing drdo or any org who can demonstrate to the world of our capabilities will be subdued somehow.. and avenues are always open direct from links originating from desh. that is sad as well.

we have more enemies within than external. we can only think forward only if we remove the gutless guts in the gov. vote them out friends.. and choose towards policy based governance. we have had enough of this democracy and gov type.

a slight OT indulgence to save our missile and indigenous programs onlee../>

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16509
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby NRao » 19 May 2013 05:17

The O'Donnell paradox.

I like it.

To me this is very good news for India, means that India is on track, in the right direction.

This has got to mean India has 1) Something that clearly is keeping someone sleepless - which is why they have to rely on falsehood to make a false point and 2) Since not all is open source I bet India has a lot more that is on the table - granted some are unknowns.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Cosmo_R » 19 May 2013 05:32

ravi_g wrote:..... it is by a foreigner "Frank O’Donnell is a doctoral candidate in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London." He could be mistaken. But then I do not expect Indian establishment to go the lighter way considering the second strike focus being propounded.


So who is his 'adviser' for the PhD (FUD) ? :) May turn up someone interesting. Just sayin'

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4216
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby sanjaykumar » 19 May 2013 07:01

According to my calculations and deep literature analysis, Prahaar can also be pointed north to occupied Tibet.

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1145
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby dinesha » 19 May 2013 12:29

India to use geo-stationery satellites for missile defence
Manoj K Das, TNN | May 19, 2013, 04.41 AM IST
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 130007.cms?
KOCHI: India has launched an ambitious programme to use its array of geo-stationary satellites (G-sats) to monitor missile activities in an area of 6,000 km. With this, the country's constellation of G-sats will become the first line of defence in its anti-missile shield. This programme is independent of the observation grid installed by defence and intelligence agencies. The advantage of using geo-stationary satellites is their fixed position at a height of 36,000 km and synchronised with the earth's movement.

Allaying fears that this deployment could compromise India's space policy, sources clarified that it is not meant as an offensive posture and data won't be shared with any other country. "We're using these satellites to warn us of an impending danger even as they continue with their primary tasks of transmission and meteorological observations," sources said.

A top source told TOI that special lens and processing electronics are being developed to significantly improve the power of G-sat cameras and telescope. "The Centre has given ISRO the go-ahead. The programme is into a crucial development phase,'' he said.

The project is aimed at installing sensitive surveillance equipment along with other payload on the G-sats. "They will capture the signature of any missile launch activities happening in a radius of 6,000 km.This signature will be transmitted to a central control unit which would initiate necessary counter-mechanism," sources said.

The Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) is developing the interceptor missile which has entered trial phase. "Given their strategic position, we can even have exclusive facility to monitor a country or a particular region. Given the G-sat's capability to map anything to a resolution of one metre, we will be able to capture the slightest of movements or even heat signatures,'' sources said.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 19 May 2013 14:49

a series of the photos of the american system...it has a big cylinder pointing to earth with a infra red sensor inside. can detect missile and space launches as well as large explosions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Support_Program

we might need israeli help on the main sensor from the likes of rafael and el-op given we havent even managed to make a desi thermal imager for MBT or a Litening type airborne pod yet. hopefully the big gorilla approves of it, else they can come down hard on israel and block it and hopefully the israeli product does not use some critical part from a big gorilla co.

And before the isro word comes up let me say isro being a civilian org is not under overt so many sanctions. There are covert sanctions in place but not as many like drdo...to some extent they can import whatever they need to for civilian gsats

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11566
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 19 May 2013 19:08

Philip wrote:Trishul failed repeatedly in naval trials.One upright naval officer,now deceased, who recommended Barak instead for our warships was allegedly denied promotion by babudom because he spoke the truth about Trishul. If our warships today have a decent anti-missile defence,it is due to him.



Are you hinting at a Vice Admiral who died in 2004?

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Pranav » 22 May 2013 06:11

ramana wrote:Having said that the Prahaar was a quick reaction battlefield missile with a useful payload similar to the ATACMs in US inventory.


It is really a failure of imagination if the IA cannot figure out a role for Prahaar.

It is a relatively economical missile that can be manufactured by the thousands.

Similar also to the Russian Iksander - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K720_Iskander

Imagine what a barrage of a couple of thousand missiles, flying at Mach 6, with shaped trajectories and pin-point accuracy, can do to an enemy in a ground war.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 22 May 2013 07:08

^ that will be left for post-mortems after the chinese MLRS & SRBMs pound us to a pulp in the next war similarly. some 30 iskander systems will be imported at inflated cost, drdo will be bad mouthed for failing to deliver anything useful and life will go on.

IA top brass is working hard to fight the last war with TSP better, not to fight the next war with Cheen.

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 » 22 May 2013 12:47

12:41 India successfully test fires BrahMos supersonic missile : India today successfully test-fired the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile off the Goa coast. On March 21, India carried out the maiden test firing of the over 290 km-range submarine-launched version of BrahMos supersonic cruise missile in the Bay of Bengal becoming the first country in the world to have this capability.
The submarine-launched version of BrahMos was successfully test fired from an underwater pontoon, BrahMos CEO A Sivathanu Pillai said.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1275
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Nikhil T » 22 May 2013 13:36

Brahmos annihilates target off Goa coast from frigate INS Tarkash

Image

NEW DELHI: The BRAHMOS supersonic cruise missile was successfully test fired from the Indian Navy's newest guided missile frigate INS Tarkash off the coast of Goa today.

The missile performed high-level "C" manoeuvre at pre-determined flight path and successfully hit the target. The surface-to-surface missile, having a range of 290-km, was test launched from the Russian-built Project 1135.6 class warship at 1100 hrs on the 22nd of May 2013.

The launch was carried out by Indian Navy as part of Acceptance Test Firing (ATF) of the ship.

Indian Navy commissioned INS Tarkash on 9 November, 2012. The warship along with two other frigates of the class - INS Teg and INS Trikand have been built as part of a $1.6 billion contract signed between India and Russia in July, 2006. INS Teg was commissioned on 27 April, 2012 and the commissioning of INS Trikand is expected soon.

The advanced warship has been fitted with an upgraded multi-role combat suite to make it one of the most potent platforms of the Indian Navy.

The weapons suite of INS Tarkash includes surface-to-air and surface-to-surface missile systems, 100 mm medium range gun, close-in weapon system, torpedo tubes and anti-submarine rockets. The BRAHMOS surface-to-surface missile system is capable of engaging targets at extended ranges at supersonic speed.

All the three ships will be equipped with 8 vertical launched BRAHMOS missile system as the prime strike weapon.

The new missile frigates are designed to accomplish a wide range of maritime missions, primarily hunting down and destroying large surface ships and submarines.

The vertical launch configuration of BRAHMOS enhances the stealth capabilities of the ship as the missiles are under the deck and not exposed. The Universal Vertical Launcher (UVLM) being used in these ships has a unique design, developed and patented by BrahMos Aerospace. The same also ensures manoeuvring of the missile in any direction after launch, independent of ship movement, thereby providing the surprise attack concepts to the ships.

Jointly developed by India and Russia, the BRAHMOS missile has a flight range of up to 290 km and is capable of carrying a conventional warhead of 300 kg. The missile can cruise at a maximum speed of 2.8 Mach.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7982
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Indranil » 22 May 2013 18:58

ADE is fulfilling orders for 55 Sudarshan kits. Meanwhile it is trying to address the problem of rolling. From tender for CFD analysis of air weapon configuration.
ADE is engaged with design & development of high precision laser guided bomb (LGB). It is an air dropped munition that by help of its seeker guides itself towards the target. The associated control law deflects the front canards to generate the desired trajectory. Figure 1 shows its overall configuration. During its free flight, Air Weapon generates a roll which may be arising from sources such as manufacturing asymmetry, small protrusions, separation dynamics or unsteady atmospheric conditions. Though the roll is unintentional, it is generally not harmful, as small amount of roll provides lateral stability to the flight. The control law is also such that it is able to incorporate some amount roll while guidance is given to munition. The problem arises when roll rate is more than 10 RPM which causes control law to be ineffective and it becomes difficult to
guide the munition.

In such instances, the canards are deflected so as to generate rolling moment for reducing the RPM. It is observed that canards are not very effective in producing desired rolling moment due to an “adverse roll” effect being generated from tail fin. It can be seen that the size of canards is relatively large and when deflected, creates a large wake. The interaction of this wake with tail fins is reason behind “adverse roll” effect. This phenomena leads to non linear rolling moment (w.r.t.
canard deflection). The non-linearity makes it very difficult to implement a roll control law in Air Weapon.

Therefore, ADE has decided to modify the munition to a Free Rolling Tail configuration, thereby, isolating the effect of tail roll on canard roll control effectiveness. However, whether the free rolling tail will affect the overall aerodynamics of Air Weapon, is dictated by the roll rate of tail, which is difficult to estimate.


P.S. I think ADE is calling for the development of Fiber optic gyroscope based inertial navigation system for Nirbhay.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54009
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 22 May 2013 19:49

Prahaar, There is no failure of imagination of the IA in seeing a role for the vehicle. Its adoption would mean Cold Start is full on and will raise alarm bells in dupleecity. Don't want to do that till its needed.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests