Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

[tsarkar]

and a total payload weight of 2490 kg.

Only one reporter so far got the throw weight right.Many technos criticized the mammoth design of A-III and its mere payload.No, its has a respectable payload which on a payload Vs range graph put its exact range at over 5000kms for a 1500kg.

One needs 2490 kg payload for MIRVs, and A-3 was clearly designed as a stepping stone for MIRV carrying missile. Infact, I am sure the warhead bus developed for A-5 can be retrofitted to A-3.

[rohitvats]

<SNIP>

Is seeker tech the limiting factor or something else - like the IP with Russians?

Propulsion design is the limiting factor. All our missiles are surface launched missiles, and those propulsion designs cannot be used for A2G. Once we master turbofan tech with Nirbhay, we may see tech spinoffs. Similarly the Astra propulsion pack can be suitably modified.

Many thanx for the inputs. I had simply overlooked the ramjet angle and need-for-speed.

So, Nirbhay might lead to other high-subsonic A2G missiles. Astra motor development might also assits in subsequent development of similar weapons - may be in supersonic regime.

[Anujan]

^^ not sure if this is a good idea. A key reason for Brahmos's destructive power is its momentum, once you make it reusable, a big chunk of the mass is removed thereby reducing its momentum. Unless one can increase the payload capacity to compensate, making it reusable will reduce its effectives. my 2 naya paise.

I disagree! It is a fantastic idea and APJ is a visionary. He is talking of fast, terrain hugging, difficult to detect crafts -- not for conventional role -- but for our new-clear detergent!! They wouldnt have tell-tale launch signatures, will be immune to boost phase interception and because of low altitudes will not be detectable at far off ranges for effective mid-course interception.

Let me go on a limb and predict that in a decade and a half, this will form the core of the detergent delivery vehicles of many nations and hopefully India would have leapfrogged them.

Thinking about it, a fighter jet is a re-usable supersonic delivery craft. Think of re-usable hypersonic unmanned delivery craft.

[chackojoseph]

^^^^ Laghu Shakti Engine is for same purpose.

[Shrinivasan]

Nirbhay might lead to other high-subsonic A2G missiles. Astra motor development might also assits in subsequent development of similar weapons - may be in supersonic regime.

Nirbhay will lead to long range Stand-off A2G missiles, but this is not the best part... Imagine a long range Supersonic (Mach3+) medium Range (40-50KM) A2G missile which is a derivative of A2A Astra... Can hit command and control centers / missile silos etc if armed with CL20 type explosives

[Juggi G]

Indian Official Touts Work On Nuclear Deterrent

Indian Official Touts Work On Nuclear Deterrent
Jun 17, 2011
By Jay Menon
NEW DELHI

India is well on its way to creating a minimum credible nuclear deterrent, a senior defense official says.

“There is a huge amount of work going on toward creating a credible minimal deterrence to ensure our adversaries don’t take us by surprise. We are way up and ahead of what we need to do in protecting the country,” says Air Vice Marshal K.J. Mathews, commander-in-chief of Strategic Forces Command.

SFC, established in 2003, operates independently and is responsible for India’s nuclear arsenal from preparation to delivery to the armed forces.

The Command also is tasked with the use of nuclear weapons under the eight-point nuclear doctrine,
which is committed to No-First Strike or Use of Nuclear Weapons against Non-Nuclear Nations.

[dinesha]

10,000-km ICBM on cards
Rahul Datta | New Delhi
http://www.dailypioneer.com/347062/1000 ... cards.html

India is seriously contemplating to enhance the reach of its strategic missiles. The Defence Ministry is considering a proposal to develop intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of hitting targets 10,000 km away.

At present, there is a voluntary cap on developing missiles beyond 5,000-km range and the ICBM capabilities will propel India into the elite league of nations possessing the deterrent with nuclear warheads — China, the US, Russia and the UK.

The proposal for developing ICBM capabilities was moved by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) last month and currently being examined by the Defence Ministry. Since it is a major policy decision as ICBM has international ramifications and India is a nuclear weapon State, sources said here on Saturday that the ultimate decision to go for it would be taken by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).

Air Chief Marshal PV Naik had recently pitched for developing ICBMs with a strike capability of 10,000 km and beyond, given India’s growing influence globally. While he had called for breaking out of the regional context, he also questioned the need for capping the missile programme, especially, if India had the technical capability to build it.

Explaining the significance of the proposal, sources said the Government had put a voluntary moratorium on developing a missile beyond a range of 5,000 km. This cap came about after India successfully test-fired Agni-III missile with a range of more than 3,000 km in 2006.

The Agni-III test enabled the DRDO to develop capabilities for an ICBM but a political nod is needed to go ahead. The Agni series of missiles fall into the category of intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM) which can hit a target at 5,000 km. The DRDO will carry out preliminary tests of Agni-V in December this year or early next year. This missile will have a range of 5,000 km.

India embarked on the indigenously designed and produced integrated missile development programme in the late 1980s and successfully developed Prithvi, Akash and Agni series of missiles. With the successful launch of Agni-3, the Government announced that the integrated missile programme had concluded.

As regards the ICBM, sources said the main objective of the proposed programme is to develop capabilities and have a deterrent in place to counter the growing military might of China. The neighbour has a very robust and the state-of-the-art missile programme, including ICBMs, and the capability to shoot down a missile in space.

Keeping this factor in view and the growing economic and strategic stature of India in international community, the security establishment has urged the political leadership to go ahead with the ICBM programme, sources said.

The security establishment wants India to develop ICBM as New Delhi is not part of Missile Technology Control (MTCR). Moreover, though a declared nuclear weapon State, India has resisted international pressure to ink Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as it has a ‘no first use’ of nuclear weapons doctrine in place. This policy was announced after India conducted the Shakti series of nuclear tests in 1999.

All the UN Security Council countries having ICBMs can fire these long-range missiles from land or underwater from submarines known as submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM). The first ICBM was reportedly developed by the erstwhile Soviet Union during Cold War with the US, and China quickly followed.

While short range and medium-range ballistic missiles known as theatre ballistic missile carry conventional warheads, ICBMs which can travel across oceans and hit targets across continents are strategic weapons with one or more nuclear warheads.

[ranjithnath]

10000 km ICBM wont be getting CCS nod anytime soon imho.development of such a missile will make amirkhan shit in their pants and GOI wont take such a chance now that it is vying for security council permanent seat ,NSG membership etc.ofcoz we can develop agni X, 3 stage missile, 3m dia with 5 ton payload and just 6000 km range

[vishnu.nv]

This kinds of projects needs to be kept in super secrecy and should be announced only after the project is completed. The DRDO certainly has this kind of capability but all depends on the Political will.

The proposal itself is leaked in to press.

[PratikDas]

This kinds of projects needs to be kept in super secrecy and should be announced only after the project is completed. The DRDO certainly has this kind of capability but all depends on the Political will.

The proposal itself is leaked in to press.

I think they're releasing this through the media just to see what the global reaction is. Easy way to know who is a friend and who isn't.

[Shrinivasan]

The proposal itself is leaked in to press.

Premature leaks can kill the project in its infancy... also once AV test is successful, increasing the range is a factor of reduced payload. extensive simulation based on test results with different payloads would help us tweak the range X payload continuum.

[Boreas]

The proposal itself is leaked in to press.

Premature leaks can kill the project in its infancy... also once AV test is successful, increasing the range is a factor of reduced payload. extensive simulation based on test results with different payloads would help us tweak the range X payload continuum.

or can revive a almost hopeless project!

[John]

multi post...

[John]

Can we reduce the top speed to, say Mach 1.0-1.5, or even high sub-sonic, and thereby reduce the amount of propellant required and cut down on the weight?

No, we cant. That is why I put emphasis on reusable earlier. A ramjet design inherently requires a 700 kg design like Akash for 25 km or 3000 kg design like Brahmos. A lot of propellant is burnt to boost speed from zero to Mach 2.5-3 and sustain it at that level. So we cannot reduce propellant and lower speed in a ramjet design. The best weight optimization possible for a ramjet design is seen on Brahmos Air version. Using launch aircraft speed to dispense solid booster and reducing warhead weight.

There are smaller ramjet engines that can be designed (Meteor), the ramjet is most efficient at around Mach 2-2.5 and at around ceiling of around 10-15 km. Reducing speed will how no impact or even be detrimental to its range (since the burn time will still be around 5-6min for Brahmos for example).Brahmos air launch variant still retains its sold booster (smaller one), but also keep in mind unlike the land based variant it is not canisterized so it more expensive to maintain (liquid fueled).

[skher]

10000 km ICBM wont be getting CCS nod anytime soon imho.development of such a missile will make amirkhan shit in their pants and GOI wont take such a chance now that it is vying for security council permanent seat ,NSG membership etc.ofcoz we can develop agni X, 3 stage missile, 3m dia with 5 ton payload and just 6000 km range

Is a intercontinental single stage cruise missile plausible? We are signatories to Outer Space Treaty which restricts the use of space for military purposes. Also, An ICBM means effectively making the "no First Use" policy sound incredulous....for it is primarily offensive and a second strike usually employs SLBMs.

Perhaps off-topic but Pakistan is likely to get foreign supplied ICBMs (yes, in spite of terrorism) as well in case we develop ones ourselves such that M.A.D. is maintained via proxy.

[Manish_Sharma]

This kinds of projects needs to be kept in super secrecy and should be announced only after the project is completed. The DRDO certainly has this kind of capability but all depends on the Political will.

The proposal itself is leaked in to press.

I think they're releasing this through the media just to see what the global reaction is. Easy way to know who is a friend and who isn't.

Also most of the nations supposed to oppose are in queue to sell us stuff worth 50 - 60 billion dollars, UK, Germany, Italy, US. So this would be the right time to announce it, they dare not oppose risking to lose part of the GREAT INDIAN DEFENCE SHOPPING.

[PratikDas]

...
I think they're releasing this through the media just to see what the global reaction is. Easy way to know who is a friend and who isn't.

Also most of the nations supposed to oppose are in queue to sell us stuff worth 50 - 60 billion dollars, UK, Germany, Italy, US. So this would be the right time to announce it, they dare not oppose risking to lose part of the GREAT INDIAN DEFENCE SHOPPING.

Yes, exactly. Need to strike while the iron is hot.

[Dmurphy]

Also, An ICBM means effectively making the "no First Use" policy sound incredulous....for it is primarily offensive and a second strike usually employs SLBMs.

But skher, technically an ICBM can also be an SLBM.

[koti]

Is a intercontinental single stage cruise missile plausible? We are signatories to Outer Space Treaty which restricts the use of space for military purposes. Also, An ICBM means effectively making the "no First Use" policy sound incredulous....for it is primarily offensive and a second strike usually employs SLBMs.

Perhaps off-topic but Pakistan is likely to get foreign supplied ICBMs (yes, in spite of terrorism) as well in case we develop ones ourselves such that M.A.D. is maintained via proxy.

ICBM does not make "No First Use" incredulous. Canisterized(Silo based) ICBM's are extremely efficient in being Second Strike weapons. They provide a cheaper and far safer platforms to deploy the second strike capability. You cannot always arm your SLBM's with mighty Mega ton war heads and also in numbers.
Also, basing the second strike on 3-4 subs alone is not such a safe idea. It is said that during the height of the cold war, all of USSR's Typhoon Class Subs were always under track by the USN(even tailed).
SLBM's are a good weapon to have but possessing them should not deter us from having ICBM's.

[Shrinivasan]

Koti, I agree with your point but some minor nit-picks..
1) Canisterized road mobile launcher based ICBM are better than Silo based launchers as they can better hide in the hinterland.
2) Canisterized rail mobile launcher based ICBM are better than raod based ones as the rail coach can be designed to be visually indistinguishable from regular coaches and with India's vast rail network can be pre-positioned for optimal impact
3) In the Indian context, an Indian boomer does not face an opponent similar to the USN Vs FSU Typhoons

Silos are fixed, and hence the most vulnerable for a first strike.

[Shrinivasan]

A Pooch to the Gurus? Does Cannisterized mean that Desh would mate the warhead to the missile PERMANENTLY or is there a way to mate the warhead during times of need? If it is the former, then it seems to be major change in India's nuclear posture as we have been keeping the missiles and warheads separated (as per Public Domain Info)... any info appreciated.

[nachiket]

skher, you seem confused about the acronyms ICBM and SLBM. ICBM denotes intercontinental range i.e. >10000km. SLBM specifies that the missile is launched from a sub. It can be of any range. So a 10000km range ICBM capable of being launched from a sub is an SLBM. They are not mutually exclusive.

[nachiket]

cheenum, once the Arihant is ready to go on deterrent patrol, they pretty much have to mate the warheads to the K-15 missiles don't they? So the policy has to change one way or the other.

[rajanb]

A Pooch to the Gurus? Does Cannisterized mean that Desh would mate the warhead to the missile PERMANENTLY or is there a way to mate the warhead during times of need? If it is the former, then it seems to be major change in India's nuclear posture as we have been keeping the missiles and warheads separated (as per Public Domain Info)... any info appreciated.

Cheenumji am not a guru but,

Silo based and SLBM's are missiles ready to launch. Normally the rail car or road car missiles can be mated later, but will be too late.

As soon as the pakis boasted about their "tactical Nasr missiles" we should have changed our policy to say: "we will adhere to our no first use policy, except in the case of Pakistan"

Wonder how that would have panned out?

[koti]

Koti, I agree with your point but some minor nit-picks..
1) Canisterized road mobile launcher based ICBM are better than Silo based launchers as they can better hide in the hinterland.
2) Canisterized rail mobile launcher based ICBM are better than road based ones as the rail coach can be designed to be visually indistinguishable from regular coaches and with India's vast rail network can be pre-positioned for optimal impact
3) In the Indian context, an Indian boomer does not face an opponent similar to the USN Vs FSU Typhoons

Silos are fixed, and hence the most vulnerable for a first strike.

ref-1>A mutilating first strike is when the enemy massively strikes first and by surprise taking out(nuking) most of the missile storage locations. Though it could be possible that an intact missile is left in one piece and be fired in retaliation, it will be virtually impossible to do it as the supporting elements like roads, communication equipment, etc. would be wiped out already. I am not undermining the advantage of a mobile platform here, but reiterating that a land based-(silo or mobile) ICBM should never be completely substituted by an SLBM.(Prev post)

ref-2>Canisterized Missiles are not necessarily only rail mobile or vice versa.
That said, road mobile is any-day better then rail mobile. But IRBM's and SRBM's might benefit as rail is a far faster platform then road for some longer range transport.

ref-3>If things get messy, the very USN can try to take out(paranoia) or inform Pukes about the Indian sub details so as to prevent nuclear Armageddon. Even the Chinese are improving in their space based assets, they can to some extent keep a check to our SSBN's atleast as much as we can to theirs.

[raajneesh]

Is a intercontinental single stage cruise missile plausible? We are signatories to Outer Space Treaty which restricts the use of space for military purposes. Also, An ICBM means effectively making the "no First Use" policy sound incredulous....for it is primarily offensive and a second strike usually employs SLBMs.

A policeman uses bullets in his pistol and he keeps that in his house. This should not be allowed as its offensive, as that bullet can harm the kids in his neighbours, if fired accidently by someone in his house or neighbour.

Now, if you look at cannisterised ICBM's, they are more safe than naked SLBM's. Since ICBM's are locked down in cannisters, one can't fire them easily without proper codes. Same can't be said about naked SLBM's which can even be stolen by some miscreant element and fired on Karachi in anger. Its far easier to hijack a submarine and run away, than stealing a cannisterised ICBM system.

Also, if you think little deeper, space based weapons are far more safe as they can't be stolen by angry elements.

[Sagar G]

As soon as the pakis boasted about their "tactical Nasr missiles" we should have changed our policy to say: "we will adhere to our no first use policy, except in the case of Pakistan"

Wonder how that would have panned out?

Don't worry our nuclear policy has always been that only

No-First Strike or Use of Nuclear Weapons against Non-Nuclear Nations.

[Boreas]

Now, if you look at cannisterised ICBM's, they are more safe than naked SLBM's. Since ICBM's are locked down in cannisters, one can't fire them easily without proper codes. Same can't be said about naked SLBM's which can even be stolen by some miscreant element and fired on Karachi in anger. Its far easier to hijack a submarine and run away, than stealing a cannisterised ICBM system.

Pretty intresting statement you made there! I am eager to hear how you think that can be done!!

[raajneesh]

^^ It is possible but lets not discuss it here.

[UBanerjee]

Perhaps off-topic but Pakistan is likely to get foreign supplied ICBMs (yes, in spite of terrorism) as well in case we develop ones ourselves such that M.A.D. is maintained via proxy.

That makes no sense. Giving Pakistan ICBMs would do absolutely nothing vs India but would put the fear of God in the handlers themselves. In fact India should give Pakistan ICBMs.

"India can now punch us? Well then we must give Pakistan ability to punch us also"

[Boreas]

^^ It is possible but lets not discuss it here.

Well if your answer is not inspired by this -




Then I am still very interested to know "how can one hijack a sub and "run away"!!
Lets take it to the appropriate thread -> Indian Naval Discussion [Reply There as it is OT here. @Admin If it is OT there as well, plz point us to appropriate thread.]

[Rahul M]

please take it to the newbie and misc thread. pretty please.

[Shrinivasan]

Don't worry our nuclear policy has always been that only

No-First Strike or Use of Nuclear Weapons against Non-Nuclear Nations.

Our Nuclear policy at present is "No First Use", this is against anybody. The part Non "Use of Nuclear Weapons against Non-Nuclear Nations" is again a no first use. This does not apply to Pak as it is a declared Nuclear State.
This is for a state like say "Inca Land" which is not a Nuclear state attacking India... Tough luck for "Inca Land"

[rajanb]

Here is the nuclear policy

A posture of no-first-use: nuclear weapons will only be used in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian Territory or on Indian forces elsewhere.


Nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage.


Nuclear retaliatory attack can be authorized by a certain political leadership only through NCA.


No-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon state.


In the event of a major attack against India or Indian forces anywhere by biological or chemical weapons. India will retain the option of retaliating with nuclear weapons.


Continuance of strict control on export of nuclear and missile related materials and technology, participation in the fissile material cut off treaty negotiations and continued observance of the moratorium on nuclear tests.


Continued commitment to the goal of a nuclear-free world through global verifiable and no discriminatory nuclear disarmament.

So it is no first use.

[Sagar G]

Our Nuclear policy at present is "No First Use", this is against anybody. The part Non "Use of Nuclear Weapons against Non-Nuclear Nations" is again a no first use. This does not apply to Pak as it is a declared Nuclear State.
This is for a state like say "Inca Land" which is not a Nuclear state attacking India... Tough luck for "Inca Land"

Yes our stated policy is no first use but I think that particular statement was a warning to Bakistan after it tested it's so called "tactical nuclear capable missile" and claimed that it is a death blow to India's cold start doctrine. India has very tactfully give a clear message to Bakistan that any nuclear mischief will mean an all out nuclear retaliation from India. Also that statement leaves a clear doubt in our adversaries(particularly Bakistan) mind about our no first use policy which I think serves our deterrence posture.

[Shrinivasan]

Also that statement leaves a clear doubt in our adversaries(particularly Bakistan) mind about our no first use policy which I think serves our deterrence posture.

which Statement of the "New-Clear" policy is this?

[Sagar G]

Also that statement leaves a clear doubt in our adversaries(particularly Bakistan) mind about our no first use policy which I think serves our deterrence posture.

which Statement of the "New-Clear" policy is this?

The one that I quoted before. It was given by NSA Shivshankar Menon at NDC,clicky and scroll down to the "India as a NWS" section.

[JANMEJAY]

i posted a message here why was it removed....hello mods/admins??

[ramana]

You posted non-public possibly privileged information. So instead of banning you I deleted your posts and three more by others cautioning you.

Thanks, ramana

[Raghavendra]

i posted a message here why was it removed....hello mods/admins??

Welcome to BR, due to the sensitive nature of your previous post it was magically erased by our resident jinn

Ask for permission from higher-ups in your office and only if allowed post such info on the internet

I guess you would understand publishing such info without proper authorisation would have repercussions in your professional life