Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6944
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Anujan » 01 May 2012 04:03

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:Making a bomb thermonuclear is simply a matter of including fusable materials in close proximity to the fission blast, inside a neutron reflector. India tested a bomb with a very small amount of tritium, knowing that more is easily added; just to be able to confirm the nuclear chemistry post-blast



This is BS. You are confusing Fusion boosted fission with a true thermonuclear bum.

Look at the development of nuclear bums to find out how much difficulty they had to make a true two stage thermonuclear bum as opposed to fusion boosting. Just keeping "fusable materials in close proximity to fission blast" will do nothing. They will be blown to smithereens by the fission blast.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby SaiK » 01 May 2012 04:10

See.. unless proven not-guilty, the suspect is not left free. The same way, unless we have proven it was not a fizzle, the quality attributes for deterrence suffers. This is vividly said by many, and it coherently fits all possible logical thinking even for aam minds.

The only thing is left, is go for the deep deep deep testing, but well contained.. scalable, like 1 - x KT walas [configurable- strategic], that we can build and test such a way that a single vibration is not sensed. The test data must yield scaled 200KT thermos design... possible?
Last edited by SaiK on 01 May 2012 04:12, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby member_20067 » 01 May 2012 04:12

SaiK wrote:See.. unless proven not-guilty, the suspect is not left free. The same way, unless we have proven it was not a fizzle, the quality attributes for deterrence suffers. This is vividly said by many, and it coherently fits all possible logical thinking even for aam minds.

The only thing is left, is go for the deep deep deep testing, but well contained.. scalable, like 1 - x KT walas [configurable- strategic], that we can build and test such a way that a single vibration is not sensed. The test data must yield 200KT thermos... possible?


You will still have traces of radioactive materials that can be sniffed...

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby SaiK » 01 May 2012 04:13

nope .. the requirement must be met: "contained". totally sealed. or sent to space or wherever we can do this. do whatever, smother it with soap or foam... NBC material,, do whatever research it takes to get this done.

Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Ravi Karumanchiri » 01 May 2012 04:31

^^^^

At the time of India's second round of nuke tests (post 1974); the doubts that were cast on the success of those tests was based wholly on a partial set of seismic data concerning blast force and propagation (through un-studied ground).

IN BRIEF: The doubters took their readings of the blast waves, and declared that the causative explosions were so small, that they constituted a 'fizzle'. They jumped to this conclusion, without the benefit of understanding the geology of the test sites, and without any baseline data that would concern simultaneous nuclear tests, which could conceivably generate interference patterns and unusual readings of the blast waves.

For their part, Indian scientists declared that the tests worked as expected, and doubts in this matter are based on a skeptical reading of that seismic data.

To set the doubters right; India had invited others to visit the site and draw their own samples, which would indicate the nuclear chemistry of a fusion reaction (lighter radio-isotopes). As to who took them up on this offer, I don't remember that, or even if it ever made mention in the press.

HOWEVER, this is all missing the point: India has tested 'smaller' devices, at least some of which have worked. As to what percentage of the fissile material was converted, and to that degree, how much of it was a 'fizzle', are basically immaterial from a strategic standpoint.

QUESTION: Has anyone doubted that India has achieved warhead miniaturization?
ANSWER: NO.

QUESTION: Is a small nuclear warhead (atop a very accurate, high speed missile), less of a deterrant than a much bigger warhead on a less accurate, slower missile?
ANSWER: NO (quite the opposite, really, since conceivably, smaller weapons are 'more useable' in that they have inherently less potential for collateral damage -- yeah, I do hate that euphemism, but you understand what I mean, I hope).

QUESTION: What if a large column of PLA tanks crosses the border -- What kind of nuclear weapon could be the best option, if nuclear arms are all that are available?
ANSWER: NOT a large weapon, but a small one, obviously, since it would be exploded over Indian territory. If this small weapon could be thermonuclear, the fallout hazzard would also be lessened, since the half lives of these expolsion byproducts is much less than with fusion weapons.

DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE: India's nuclear deterent is taken seriously by everyone, except (it would seem), by large sections of the Indian 'chatterati'.

JMT.


What's all this 'fizzle' fuss about? SELLING NEWSPAPERS!!!!! That's it.

BTW: Testing nuclear weapons in space is prohibted by international law, and it's a very bad idea for environmental reasons (damage to the ozone layer and ionosphere).

AND...... Splitting hairs is ridiculous, when it comes to nuclear warheads. Just for laughs, someone please explain to me the strategic (never mind, technical) difference between a 'fission-boosted fusion device' and a 'two-stage fusion device'. :rotfl:

What matters is miniaturization and accuracy in targetting. India has demonstrated this. These things are particularly important as techonological advances in ABM systems are foreseen, since it will always be a more devastating strategy to send multiple warheads to a single target, rather than one large warhead to that target. This should be obvious, on the face of it.


LASTLY, for further reading.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_yield

Fidel Guevara
BRFite
Posts: 348
Joined: 21 Jan 2010 19:24
Location: Pandora

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Fidel Guevara » 01 May 2012 04:49

ramana wrote:Fidel, Right now the A5 Tessy third stage is the most impressive motor in the world. It lights after re-entry!!!
The conical shape gives it inherent stability like the feathers on an arrow. With its blending with the RV it becomes integral to it. I was the first to refer to the Sprint shape.


Ramana garu, your arrow & feathers analogy is great!

It would be wonderful to see a video of the Tessy RV doing an all-out re-entry manoeuvre. I couldn't find any info about the g-force it can pull, and suspect that is the most classified detail about this entire program.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby ramana » 01 May 2012 04:55

If you know the radius of the turn you can estimate the g-forces.

Fidel Guevara
BRFite
Posts: 348
Joined: 21 Jan 2010 19:24
Location: Pandora

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Fidel Guevara » 01 May 2012 05:09

ramana wrote:If you know the radius of the turn you can estimate the g-forces.


Of course, and the velocity as well. Though for avoiding ABMs, even a relatively gentle change a few hundred km away will change the target point by 10s of km. And given that an incoming RV moves much faster than an exo-atm ABM, a few carefully-planned changes in direction would cause multiple ABM launches from each extrapolated target-point. Might be a good way to deplete the enemy ABM stocks...send the first Tessy in the wave without an active RV, and just let it draw down the ABM inventory, followed by the real ones following close behind. The possibilities are endless!

Fidel Guevara
BRFite
Posts: 348
Joined: 21 Jan 2010 19:24
Location: Pandora

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Fidel Guevara » 01 May 2012 05:21

Agni-V to be test-fired from a canister by end of the year

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 943081.cms

HYDERABAD: Imagine an Agni-V that can be fired from your neighbourhood! The armed forces will soon have an inter-continental ballistic missile ( ICMB) that can be fired from anywhere. No, it is not necessary to do it from the Wheeler Island off the Orissa coast. The long-range 5,000-km missile with a nuclear warhead can be fired from any open place and the enemy will not even be able to guess from where the deadly weapon will be fired.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), which is savouring the successful test-firing of the Agni-V, is now preparing for another test launch of the missile. This test will not be from Wheeler Island where the Integrated Test Range ( ITR) is located.

"The missile will be put in a canister and launched. After the lid of the canister is opened, the missile takes off as a result of the high pressure generation of gas inside it," Avinash Chander, distinguished scientist and chief controller, R&D (missiles and strategic systems), DRDO, told TOI.

As a result of the hot gas ejecting the missile out of the canister, the missile ignites in mid-air and glides away. This launch of the missile will be quite different from what one had seen at Wheeler Island where the missile left a huge trail of flame while lifting off the ground.

When the missile takes off from the canister, the flames will be seen only about 30 metres from above the ground in the Agni-V that will be tested fired sometime towards the end of the year :( . "We are getting ready with two different types of canisters in which the missile can be placed and test fired. The armed forces will be able to fire the missile from anywhere," Avinash Chander said. A canister is a metal enclosure for the missile. The missile will fit comfortably in the canister and will have a facility for an opening on the top. The armed forces have been closely associated with the development of the Agni missiles and have already inducted Agni-1, Agni-II and Agni-III into the army. The induction of Agni-1V and Agni-V is also planned.

Only after two or three test-firing trials of the Agni-V are conducted from canisters will the long range inter-continental ballistic missile be inducted into the armed forces. It will be possible to move the ICBM anywhere by road at a short notice and fire it in any direction.


I understand it's a lot of work to canisterize Tessy, but end of year? Oh well...

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7226
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby nachiket » 01 May 2012 05:32

Well, I for one wasn't expecting a canisterized firing until next year. This is very good news.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby svinayak » 01 May 2012 05:44

nachiket wrote:Well, I for one wasn't expecting a canisterized firing until next year. This is very good news.

Or the threat situation has changed quickly and the deterrence is in need now.


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby NRao » 01 May 2012 06:12

Acharya wrote:
nachiket wrote:Well, I for one wasn't expecting a canisterized firing until next year. This is very good news.

Or the threat situation has changed quickly and the deterrence is in need now.


That would be a neat trick, where technologies accelerate because of politicians!!!

I think what we are witnessing the very high level of confidence that the scientists have in key technologies, that allow for such acceleration.

IF this is true, we should witness a rapid all around growth, in multiple missile systems, here on out.

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3001
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby vera_k » 01 May 2012 07:42

From available evidence, it appears that India will deploy boosted fission warheads on missiles like Agni-5.


This would be quite a leap of faith given a warhead has never been tested. Most likely it is only a matter of time before N-testing resumes in full earnest.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby SaiK » 01 May 2012 07:56

The problem is not all of the testing people agree shakti1 is DAY design. So, when you certain scientific community not accepting it, and other set of people accepting it, then there is obviously conflict. One can argue either way, but the truth will be known only to a few.

Another aspect to all these, is if by any chance DAY is not confirmed, and when people think of designs, and counter strategies, and emphatic definitions of NFU, then they expect the maal guarantee. Testing in space is not prohibitory, and there is nothing wrong in testing in deep space. No country will object it as long as the delivery vehicle to deep space can guarantee no fall out [this in itself the riskiest part of the option], so politically ruled out [considering our babu-dom].. the khaans have flown many nuclear powered space flights into deep space, many times.. with no protest whatsoever from the world.

No one doubts India's capability.. all those DDM walas and questioners are left with black boxes, about the yields and the design.. and they have every right to question it, and they have an opinion to make as well. This does not make them dork... because, they wrote that article in stereotypical dork media.

See.. the answer to this can't come by emphatic rejoinders, but from technical whitepaper.. but that will never see public eyes, I suppose.

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6721
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Amber G. » 01 May 2012 08:18

Raviji - Some of the issues you raised have been discussed in BRF before (actually many many times before), if you have not, you may like to take a look in the archives..

Check this out: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewforum.php?f=8

You may find some posts not only from me, but quite a few other people both pro-fizzle and pro-sizzle and every thing in between.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12435
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby pankajs » 01 May 2012 09:29

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:HOWEVER, this is all missing the point: India has tested 'smaller' devices, at least some of which have worked. As to what percentage of the fissile material was converted, and to that degree, how much of it was a 'fizzle', are basically immaterial from a strategic standpoint.
So much for strategic analysis..Sigh...

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:QUESTION: Is a small nuclear warhead (atop a very accurate, high speed missile), less of a deterrant than a much bigger warhead on a less accurate, slower missile?
ANSWER: NO (quite the opposite, really, since conceivably, smaller weapons are 'more useable' in that they have inherently less potential for collateral damage -- yeah, I do hate that euphemism, but you understand what I mean, I hope).
Sigh...If only you had read the stated position of India and the other nuclear weapon states.

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:AND...... Splitting hairs is ridiculous, when it comes to nuclear warheads. Just for laughs, someone please explain to me the strategic (never mind, technical) difference between a 'fission-boosted fusion device' and a 'two-stage fusion device'. :rotfl:
Here is another gem from a strategic mind....
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Sorry I couldn't help myself...


Disclaimer : I am not going into the Fizzle debate. My point is that the bums need to be tested irrespective of what happened in the last round.

For humans to have designed anything and claiming for it to work without the need of testing is pure BS. If such were not the case, then with the success of Agni-TD (Hope people know what Agni TD is/was), we should have claimed success for Agni 1,2,3,4,5 and for all future ballistic missile to follow including Agni 6 and the SLBM. After all, they are more of the same rocket science, with a little extra fuel here, a stronger RV there or a high pressure ejection system. Infact, every time any subsystem or component is modified, I would expect the missiles to be re-tested and not just the component. Looking at the number of Prithvi tests and the upcoming A1,2,3,4&5 test, we can be sure that it is happening.

That is what Scientific temper and prudence dictates and that is what should dictate the testing schedule of the Nuclear weapons.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6944
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Anujan » 01 May 2012 09:30

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:QUESTION: What if a large column of PLA tanks crosses the border -- What kind of nuclear weapon could be the best option, if nuclear arms are all that are available?
ANSWER: NOT a large weapon, but a small one, obviously, since it would be exploded over Indian territory. If this small weapon could be thermonuclear, the fallout hazzard would also be lessened, since the half lives of these expolsion byproducts is much less than with fusion weapons.


This is the paki-first strike strategy. Do you know that credible deterrence and NFU form the two pillars of Indian nuke posture?

1. In what sector can "a large column" of PLA tanks cross the border, unless tanks grew wings?
2. Which idiot will nuke India's own territory?
3. If we nuke "a large column" of PLA tanks crossing the border in our own territory and cause massive causalities, what prevents PLA from nuking our cities in retaliation?
4. Read (3) in light of our stated doctrine that if Pakis nuke our forces in their territory, we will glass their entire country with nukes.
5. Why are we building subs if our stated objective is to nuke PLA tanks in our territory?

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4474
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby gakakkad » 01 May 2012 09:33

wait for 10 more years..opportunity to test will present itself..

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby SaiK » 01 May 2012 09:50

^the window would be really short, and it is a requirement to prepare ourselves for testing.. not one, but many single, multiple and distributed tests. ;)

all it takes is the khaans feels that their designs are outdated, and some power from east is outpaced them in designs.. 108 PSI will be applied for testing by the n-mullahs.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby ramana » 01 May 2012 09:54

fidel and nachiket if you read the articles after the Tessy test, the first one after it was the canister launch, next is likley to be lofted trajectory and on to deployment. MIRV is after that.

Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Yogi_G » 01 May 2012 10:10

Maybe a n00b question. We are anyhow going to be coming up with a separate version of the agni-V as a SLBM with a length definitely less than 15 metres and a width greater than 2 metres to fit into a sub. What is wrong in developing a missile from day 1 with these specifications so that the same missile can be launched from ground and SLBM with the only difference being the ejection mechanism in the TEL and the Sub?

Was it a hurry to develop a deterrent against China in quick time which made us avoid this approach and concentrate on a SLBM launched one at a later point?

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

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Gurneesh » 01 May 2012 10:41

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:QUESTION: What if a large column of PLA tanks crosses the border -- What kind of nuclear weapon could be the best option, if nuclear arms are all that are available?
ANSWER: NOT a large weapon, but a small one, obviously, since it would be exploded over Indian territory. If this small weapon could be thermonuclear, the fallout hazzard would also be lessened, since the half lives of these expolsion byproducts is much less than with fusion weapons.


Thermonuclear = fusion.

Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Altair » 01 May 2012 11:04

I have a feeling that after the serious reverses in bypolls in several key states, Congress led UPA might have actually given a go ahead for testing. A boosted national ego will auger well for Sonia's minions in elections. We saw that in the aftermath of Budha smiling. It is as if we won the cricket world cup.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1919
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby PratikDas » 01 May 2012 12:16

Yogi_G wrote:Maybe a n00b question. We are anyhow going to be coming up with a separate version of the agni-V as a SLBM with a length definitely less than 15 metres and a width greater than 2 metres to fit into a sub. What is wrong in developing a missile from day 1 with these specifications so that the same missile can be launched from ground and SLBM with the only difference being the ejection mechanism in the TEL and the Sub?

Was it a hurry to develop a deterrent against China in quick time which made us avoid this approach and concentrate on a SLBM launched one at a later point?

India Today: India has all the building blocks for an anti-satellite capability
Sandeep Unnithan: The DRDO has made breakthroughs in the K-series missiles for the nuclear submarine project. Why didn't you use a land-based variant of this [underwater launched] missile?

Dr. V. K. Saraswat: The technologies involved in both missiles are different. An underwater missile has to deal with the pressure of a 10 metre column of water above it. Hence the configuration of the missile is different. It is heavier, the structure is different. Unlike the Agni missile, this missile carries a lot of dead weight.

Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Yogi_G » 01 May 2012 13:12

PratikDas wrote:
Yogi_G wrote:Maybe a n00b question. We are anyhow going to be coming up with a separate version of the agni-V as a SLBM with a length definitely less than 15 metres and a width greater than 2 metres to fit into a sub. What is wrong in developing a missile from day 1 with these specifications so that the same missile can be launched from ground and SLBM with the only difference being the ejection mechanism in the TEL and the Sub?

Was it a hurry to develop a deterrent against China in quick time which made us avoid this approach and concentrate on a SLBM launched one at a later point?

India Today: India has all the building blocks for an anti-satellite capability
Sandeep Unnithan: The DRDO has made breakthroughs in the K-series missiles for the nuclear submarine project. Why didn't you use a land-based variant of this [underwater launched] missile?

Dr. V. K. Saraswat: The technologies involved in both missiles are different. An underwater missile has to deal with the pressure of a 10 metre column of water above it. Hence the configuration of the missile is different. It is heavier, the structure is different. Unlike the Agni missile, this missile carries a lot of dead weight.


Thanks Pratik, and I simply love your location :lol:

Varoon Shekhar
BRFite
Posts: 1887
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Varoon Shekhar » 01 May 2012 17:11

"Concerning Praful Bidwai: I think Bidwai mainly writes for foreigners (and of course the treasonous/deracinated Indians). It's very simple: Bidwai writes the sort of negative articles to undermine Indian self-esteem that his white masters/sponsors in Europe and elsewhere can not write themself, as they (the gora's) would then show their true ugly racist/supremacist/imperialist mugs...etc"

Multatuli, excellent- I have copied and pasted this posting to my friends and relatives!

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4474
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby gakakkad » 01 May 2012 17:26

SaiK wrote:^the window would be really short, and it is a requirement to prepare ourselves for testing.. not one, but many single, multiple and distributed tests. ;)

all it takes is the khaans feels that their designs are outdated, and some power from east is outpaced them in designs.. 108 PSI will be applied for testing by the n-mullahs.



we are more than well prepared... A lot of work has been going on even in the nuclear segment . Only thing is that level of secrecy exceeds even the Missile program.. Missile program itself has had so many surprises .. How many new of Agni 4 or prahaar before they were testfired ? Prahaar was announced a week or two before being tested.. BRFITES were scratching their heads.. "err..where did this come from.. "

By 2020 we ll have a pu reproc .capacity , exceeded only by SU and US . (Check the bharat karnad dhaga for articles). In 1998 we had precious little Pu ..

We ll have extremely reliable delivery systems covering the whole world.. SLBMs /ICBMS/ MIRV/ nirbhay / Brahmos 2 /Hypersonic cruise missile..We had nothing in 98.

Fairly credible ABM ..

various indigenous designs of civilian reactors in various stages of development.

A GDP 15 times bigger than 98..


much weaker unkil and oirope..In 98 UNKIL was maha dada.. it was 7 years after cold war..

Varoon Shekhar
BRFite
Posts: 1887
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Varoon Shekhar » 01 May 2012 18:23

gakakkad: "How many (k)new of Agni 4 or prahaar before they were testfired ? Prahaar was announced a week or two before being tested.."

That's right. And really the same for Brahmos. When it was first tested in June/2001, there was no big lead-up to it, or any great anticipation. It was just launched. The same for Shaurya in Nov/2008. No pre-launch build up worth mentioning.

It would be nice to see some real movement in the nuclear reactor field, and in space, with the cryogenic engine, semi-cryogenic, RLV, Scramjet et al. I suppose these are all coming.

jaladipc
BRFite
Posts: 456
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 20:51
Location: i CAN ADA

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby jaladipc » 01 May 2012 19:01

being a noob in nuewclear :D what are the implications of testing the trigger for Fusion in controlled conditions?
Say a highly designed reactor core for the purpose some 100mts underground in the name of testing a new reactor design?

Or say testing of a fusion reactor :D

All nuclear states from big daddys to the little orphans knew that we yindoos are sitting on a huge pile of tritium which is the core of any TN bum and also an A1 component for a fusion based nuclear reactor.

Along side our participation in the ITAR,why not initiate a similar research at home with dual nature? :D Helpfull in testing all the fission triggers for the fortunate bum.

Only the reports in the media that yindoo are starting a parallel line of fusion reactors can be as horrendous to the pandas and unkil. This also shuts the mouths of all the critics of phokran


nash
BRFite
Posts: 842
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby nash » 01 May 2012 19:57

i think nuclear test is currently out of the question ... but may in by the start of next decade we might be self reliance on both military and economic front and by that our delivery system Agni-VI with the range of 6K(including MIRV and MARV) would be operational ..so that only thing left to test the TN device, validate it and put it on Agni.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby SaiK » 01 May 2012 20:57

We can't be in the "out of question" mode.. our babooze needs to budget some money for the day maals.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby ramana » 01 May 2012 21:04

YogiG, Pratik has answered your question. The SLBM would be different pedigree as it has to be more robust to survive underwater launch(UWL).
gkakkad, Arun S has predicted each of the DRDO products with fair accuracy.

A BGRV or MARV type payload is necessarily heavy and thus limits the range. So VKSji is right that Tessy range was not limited. Its design is to deliver the A3/A5 special payload with accuracy. If its inaccurate delivery is desired, then it can deliver longer range.

But khya fiada? For we don't have big boomers.

Lets wait for Arihant to be operationalised with K15s. VKSji was saying it will be in a year or so time.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Kanson » 01 May 2012 21:21

It is becoming like a disease & hobby (what you call that?) to cast doubts on our Nuclear weapons by so called 'experts' and 'analysts'. No, I'm not even remotely mentioning forum members here. I'm all talking about all those so called professional 'analysts', 'security experts' and so those famous irrelevant title those guys hold who harp on various media platforms their own mental problems on what Indian Nuclear posture and what weapon India should have.

This is my statement. India is perfectly OK and doesn't need testing. All the 'maal' is ready and raring to go on top our latest and finest missiles.

Lately, It is kind of funny to hear from such analysts that even boosted fission device that was tested didn't function all that well. On what basis they come to such conclusions? If some serious guys (not Indians) who have expertise, come to know these reasons, they are going to laugh at them.

This was addressed quite a few times in this forum. Only doctor who actually worked on a very particular disease knows thoroughly what is needed and what to do. So called analysts and experts who bouts inanities are similar to this real patient who became expert by reading through Internet and questioned the methodologies followed by the Doctor.

PS: Pls read both the article to the end.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby SaiK » 01 May 2012 21:37

Kanson wrote:No, I'm not even remotely mentioning forum members here.

:twisted: I am reading it like a "local" warning... sometimes local quacks come out with mindbenders that one can't realize they are quacks or real dakus. nice fun reading your post.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby negi » 01 May 2012 21:41

^ Well there is bound to be skepticism and doubt with regards to India's nuclear capability from both inside and outside the establishment, this has nothing to do with competence of those who are into bomb design the doubts stem from fundamental fact that we have just tested the fusion based device call it FBF or TN just ONCE. That is a data point which no one can deny or obfuscate . Now how much faith or confidence can one claim to have gained after one test is different topic.

There is a reason why we need so many tests for any of the missiles under the IGMDP before they are deemed fit for induction.
Last edited by negi on 01 May 2012 22:11, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby SaiK » 01 May 2012 21:45

^Agree. Verification and Validation are different aspects of any testing quality measures. The former asks for are we building the right maal, and the later for building the maal right. This is not subtle difference, and but huge. core QC agenda is all about this.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Kanson » 01 May 2012 22:02

Being so much years blogging in this forum, it is kind of shame to say, I couldn't understand this forum. During initial months I often hear from members here that why our LCA been named as Tejas; Instead of naming an apt name to be fit for a fighter, why such soft sounding name? I myself said, of course with smirk and sometimes even believing those, instead of naming kaveri engine after Cauvery river, if it got some other name, probably it could have been trouble free.

But then we often heard that what is in the name, a Rose is a rose ...Ok...Will we all accept if we call Agni missile as Bikini missile? we are already mentioning it sometimes as Agonyy, to rhyme, will then balcony missile sounds not good? Point is, even if it could be named as such, of course in some sense it will be fun but naming Agni after Tessy Thomas...it is like calling Agni missile as koel or Hamsa. Will it sounds good? Tessy is such a person, sweet talking, soft natured, definitely not ferocious and motherly figure.

Will it be good to name Kaal Bhairav as Kanchana?

How could Agni be named after such person? Agni missile is a 50 ton ferocious beast meant to do what its name implies. Even by this forum yardstick, what kind of messg such a name conveys? Even if we relax our reasons just as we do while watching our Indian movies, Agni IV could be the choice if anyone is affectionate to name her after missile becoz, she is project director of Agni IV and lead the project.

Agni V is lead by someone else. She is just mission director for Agni V. Some media reports and Wiki entries are all wrong to name her as Project director of Agni V. Why she is named after Agni V? becoz she could be as fat as Agni V missile? Pls for Heavens sake don't give such reasons.

If people want to name a foreign product with Indian sounding name like Vajra for Mirage-2000 and Ramba for Su-30 it is very much understandable. May I politely ask, why we need another Indian name for an Indian product with Indian name?

Often this forum takes pride in quoting 'Wings of Fire'. If we are so much affectionate with Kalam and WoF, we must be knowing very well that Agni is the name given by Kalam. The name not only aptly emphasize the action of the missile, that is to cleanse off the impurity and further meaning what Agni is meant to do in Indian context, it is also sounds ferocious. Why tinker with such name? It is totally different thing if you call her as Agni putri or something else. But by naming Agni as Tessy, considering what Agni missile is meant to be, we are denigrating not only Agni missile, the name invoked by Kalam but Tessy Thomas as well.

JMT.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

Postby Kanson » 01 May 2012 22:08

SaiK wrote:
Kanson wrote:No, I'm not even remotely mentioning forum members here.

:twisted: I am reading it like a "local" warning... sometimes local quacks come out with mindbenders that one can't realize they are quacks or real dakus. nice fun reading your post.

Pls....I meant what i said.


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests