Another moronic article!! Full of twisted logic.
From the link http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/
Abandon the needless pursuit
Thursday, 26 September 2013 | Pravin Sawhney | in OpedAn Agni-6 or a new Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile will spur China to more openly support Pakistan with added strategic capabilities against India. The country should put Agni-5 to greater use, which will serve the purpose of yet another missile.
After the successful second test-firing of 5,000km range Agni-5 on September 15, Defence Research and Development Organisation chief Avinash Chander told the media that his organisation is capable of making a 10,000km range Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile in two years. Earlier, he spoke about the 6,000km Agni-6 design being ready even without Government clearance. According to him, Agni-6 would have a three-tonne payload (present Agni series missiles have one-tonne payload) with multiple warhead vehicles called Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles meant to hit different targets.[b]While it is not clear whether Mr Chander had Government clearance to make such claims, these have not gone down well with China and the US, two nations affected by these developments. The Chinese media has lashed out saying that their ballistic missiles are superior, and US Deputy Secretary of Defence Ashton Carter has said that India should not start an arms race in the Asia-Pacific region. The basic issue, however, is whether DRDO claims are justified.
All ballistic missiles have two critical technologies of propulsion and navigation; propulsion means the engine or rocket and navigation refers to accuracy. In ballistic missiles, the power of a rocket is determined by the potency of propellant it carries within. Besides propellant potency, rockets have multiple stages filled with propellant to provide enhanced thrust to long-range ballistic missiles. Since the rocket (single or multiple-stage) burns for only one-sixth of the duration of the ballistic missile’s flight, after which the payload (containing warhead) without power is left in space to find its way back into the atmosphere and on to the target, it is necessary that the rocket be extremely powerful to provide needed terminal velocity before getting discarded.
Fortunately, details of the recent three-stage Agni-5 test-firing are available as in a moment of euphoria, DRDO scientists shared them with a friendly media they had taken along to Wheeler Island. The first stage got discarded after 90 seconds, the second stage after another 75 seconds, and the final rocket stage fell off after another 75 seconds. The payload, according to this media, had the terminal speed of six kilometres per second for a 20 minutes flight. Thus, the Agni-5 rocket worked for four minutes out of a total of 20 minutes it took to deliver the payload at 5,000km range.
Compare this with an ICBM which travels 10,000km in 20 minutes and has its rocket burning for five minutes; the remaining 15 minutes flight of the ICBM payload is without power. The ICBM payload terminal speed, is greater (much more than double) than six kilometres per second.
The comparison explains that, if Agni-5 is to increase its range from 5,000km to become an ICBM with 10,000km, the way out is to have an extremely potent propellant than what the DRDO now has. This major limitation is also the reason why the DRDO is unable to make the needed exo (outside atmosphere) interceptor for the indigenous Anti-Ballistic Missile system. The present exo-interceptor has demonstrated an altitude of 80km only. The previous DRDO chief, Mr VK Saraswat, had claimed in 2009 to do an exo-interception of incoming hostile ballistic missile at 120km altitude, something that has not been possible. The problem with the DRDO propellant is its low burn rate of five to 10 millimetres per second. What is needed is a propellant with burn rate of minimum 70 millimetres per second for both 10,000km range missile and the exo-interceptor. Shouldn't the DRDO be concentrating on acquiring this rather than make claims about Agni-6, ICBM or ABM system? Also related with a weak propellant is DRDO’s inability to do an anti-satellite test, something China demonstrated in January, 2007, by hitting a satellite at the height 250km in low earth orbit.
The other issue refers to Agni-5 navigation system. All DRDO ballistic missiles (the Agni series, Prithvi variants, Shaurya, Prahar, ABM interceptors, K-15 and K-4) as well as the BrahMos joint-venture cruise missile (interestingly, the BrahMos’ propulsion or rocket is Russia’s contribution to the system) use a strap-down Inertial Navigation System. As the name implies, the navigation system is strapped to the body of the missile itself. Given the technology improvements, the world over, strap-down is the popular INS used in aeroplanes and short range ballistic missiles alike as it is both cheap and easy to fabricate.
The exception are long-range ballistic missiles starting with 3,000km onwards which prefer to use a gimballed INS, which is both expensive and extremely difficult to engineer with only a handful of countries including China having them. Especially in ICBMs, no country uses a strap-down INS. In an acclaimed book titled ‘Strap-down Inertial Navigation Technology’, US scientists David Titterton and John Weston explain in detail why strap-down INS will not deliver the needed accuracy to long-range ballistic missiles even when using a nuclear warhead. There are simply too many systemic and atmospheric inaccuracies which multiply over the flight path of a long-range ballistic missile. Shouldn’t the DRDO be developing a gimballed INS before desiring to develop an Agni-6 or an ICBM?
More to the point, why does India need an Agni-6 or an ICBM when it has no global power aspirations and its defined adversaries are Pakistan and China, both of which are within the Agni series ballistic missile range? Given India’s defensive outlook, an Agni-6 has no strategic or operational logic. It is simply be an ego-booster without basis, needed propellant and navigation system.
It could be argued (as DRDO has done through a select media) that India needs Agni-6 with a larger three-ton payload to accommodate MIRVs. This is a fallacy. If indeed the DRDO desires to develop MIRVs, it could and should be done using the Agni-5 missile. It could because a 1.2 tonne warhead of Agni-5 can accommodate three MIRVs each with 20kt yield and 400kg weight. It should because unless the DRDO develops gimballed INS, it must not increase the range of ballistic missile meant to deliver MIRVs. The accumulated inaccuracies of long range ballistic missile will get transmitted to the MIRVs as well. In the larger sense, an Agni-6 or an ICBM will spur China to more openly support Pakistan with more strategic capabilities against India.
(The writer is a former Indian Army officer and now Editor, FORCE, a newsmagazine on national security)
Does military really recruit such jokers?You think Army makes people write articles on Missile Development or Grand Strategy while undertaking the SSB process? You can thrash the articles using counter-points but making such unnecessary remarks is not one of them. Mind it next time - rohitvats