Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 16 Apr 2012 17:58

Singha wrote:some data points. Minuteman3 has a 4th stage motor, that presumably stretches its max range. very low thrust liquid engine but as it only needs to push the MIRV section at light gravity, it does the job. this is likely the HAM (high alt motor) that Arun_S used to talk of.

As per wiki

Minuteman-III still being a missile with three solid-fuel stages, introduced in the post-boost stage (“bus”) an additional liquid-fuel propulsion system rocket engine (PSRE) that is used to slightly adjust the trajectory. This enables to dispense decoys or – in the past case of MIRV – dispense individual RVs to separate targets.

Singha wrote:its news to me that the RV speed is NOT the max ever speed of the missile. 4 km/s maps to Mach14 onlee.

It seems that the max speed is at the 3rd stage burnout. So at 3rd stage separation the RV would be subjected to the maximum speed but in the suborbital space.
As you have pointed out, in the reentry phase, the speeds encountered by the RV would be much less.

<Speculation Alert>
As per wiki, the apogee for Minuteman is 1,120 kilometers. Now lets assume Agni 5 is close to the range of Minuteman or any other modern ICBM of its the size and weight characteristics. However, the GOI in its infinite wisdom wants to stick to the myth of 'Near ICBM' capability of around 5000 km. How do we stress test the RV or the material that goes into the making of the RV to its limit without going for a full range test?
Remember, Agni4 was tested for a lofted trajectory with an apogee of 900+ km, perhaps sufficient to imitate the stress Agni5 RV would encounter at full range and on its descent from a 900+ km apogee.
</Speculation Alert>

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 16 Apr 2012 19:37

If A 5 has a range of 5000 km with a 1500 kg payload (explosive / bomb), what would be the range with a 500 kg or a 1000 kg payload ? Would we be having a a weapon within say 300 kg ? What would be A 5's range with a 300 kg payload

K

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Apr 2012 20:23

its best to assume a weapon of say 600kg to be on conservative side. thats what FBF we tested for the highest yield in the pok2 tests. lighter designs may exist, but without testing we will perhaps not risk them on the few strategic missiles we have.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Apr 2012 21:02

already feeling jingoism is kick-starting ... I have started feeling a new sense of pride... wednesday is nearing.

--

^testing:

There is only two remote ways to test:

1. On Earth, it has to be reduced KTonnage pro-rateable, and ensure it can be confined to multi-layered container based testing. [box in a box in box.. pattern]. can we build blast proof containers in a multiple containers to resist say 10-20KT? if we can have a box that smothers 1-5KT, then we can keep layering one inside the other. [how to stop the vibrations.. is the next q]

2. space based.. this is like baboodom opening a new species of worms into the sky.

--/I am skeptical on khan's initiatives for space.. how many explosions did not happen from mil launches is anybody's guess. everything can be classified under sun-flare [launch one to test, and then trail a probe missile to collect data chasing behind at distance].

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 17 Apr 2012 02:11

Me think ICBM testing deserves dedicated thread. There will be lot of hairsplitting on technical issues and mountains of jingoism

.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 17 Apr 2012 02:46

Singha wrote:its best to assume a weapon of say 600kg to be on conservative side. thats what FBF we tested for the highest yield in the pok2 tests. lighter designs may exist, but without testing we will perhaps not risk them on the few strategic missiles we have.

But 600kg is still a long way away from the 1500kg payload that is being talked about. Assuming a single warhead, is it possible to estimate the impact on the range a 900kg reduction in payload might have? It should be substantial.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 17 Apr 2012 07:47

Agni V, all set to be test-fired
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ind ... ef=wl_home

HYDERABAD, APRIL 16:
The stage is set for the maiden test flight of Agni V, India's long range missile, with capability to reach 5,000 km.

Powered by the flying success of Agni-IV (over 3,500 km range) in 2011, Indian missile scientists will face their toughest test, as the home-grown missile, will have to reach inter-continental distances, soar great heights and survive very high temperatures, as it re-enters the earth's atmosphere and seeks to destroy its target.

Agni V, will cover approximately 1/8th of the Earth's circumference (which is 40,000 km). It will be a three-stage, all solid fuel powered, 17-metre tall, with capability to carry nuclear payload, said Mr Avinash Chander, Chief Controller (Missiles & Strategic Systems), DRDO.

The Wheeler island, off the coast of Orissa, is bustling with preparations, that have reached the final stages.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), is targeting to launch its most ambitious, strategic, nuclear deterrent missile during the window of April 18-20.

“Elaborate preparations have been completed. The technological capability that we will achieve will be a game changer for Indian defence. The strategic options it provides are immense. The technological challenges we are trying to overcome are many. Only the US, Russia, France and China have the capability,” Mr Chander told Business Line, before going to the Wheeler Island for the big test.

The DRDO has proven most of the technological capability in Agni-IV. It has to be extended to higher temperatures in Agni-V. For example, the re-entry temperature for Agni-IV was from a high of 3,000 degree C to 50 degree C.

In the case of Agni-V it will be 5,000 degree C to a climb down of 50 degrees. This is very, very challenging in many ways, he said.

Unlike re-entry space vehicles, missiles re-enter at a much steeper angle of descent and in very few seconds. They face severe thermal effect. Both technology and material is needed to overcome this hurdle. Agni-V has its two upper stages completely built with composites (corrosion free and can withstand high temperatures).

Agni-V will see the test of several technologies and composites. It will see for the first time flying a large sized, composite rocket motor. It will have a very compact payload. New technologies to recover data will be deployed. An array of tracking stations, two ships in the high seas has been deployed, defence scientists explained.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 17 Apr 2012 09:59

Kersi D wrote:If A 5 has a range of 5000 km with a 1500 kg payload (explosive / bomb), what would be the range with a 500 kg or a 1000 kg payload ? Would we be having a a weapon within say 300 kg ? What would be A 5's range with a 300 kg payload

K

nachiket wrote:
Singha wrote:its best to assume a weapon of say 600kg to be on conservative side. thats what FBF we tested for the highest yield in the pok2 tests. lighter designs may exist, but without testing we will perhaps not risk them on the few strategic missiles we have.
But 600kg is still a long way away from the 1500kg payload that is being talked about. Assuming a single warhead, is it possible to estimate the impact on the range a 900kg reduction in payload might have? It should be substantial.

An IRMB with the range of about 3000 km on a standard (minimum energy) trajectory will have an apogee of about 650 km. If the tribune report about the apogee being 500 km is true, it would imply a range of 5000 km on a depressed trajectory. On the standard trajectory with an apogee of about 800-900 km, the missile would go a lot further with the same payload.

The payload capacity of about 1500 kg would be required when we are thinking about MIRV, maneuvering RV, countermeasures, etc.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Apr 2012 10:41

they should have gone for all out full-range shot to the shores of antarctica with this one. no more pussyfooting around.
but they love playing games, perhaps they hope to extract some mythical psyops value from constraining it to chinese range only, though everyone who is anyone knows the true range...yet the foreign media cannot officially criticise us unless we officially state and test the true range?

sombhat · Post by **sombhat** » 17 Apr 2012 11:17

Singha wrote:they should have gone for all out full-range shot to the shores of antarctica with this one. no more pussyfooting around.
but they love playing games, perhaps they hope to extract some mythical psyops value from constraining it to chinese range only, though everyone who is anyone knows the true range...yet the foreign media cannot officially criticise us unless we officially state and test the true range?

Foreign media will still criticize saying "more than x million Indians live for less than a dollar a day". Its time that we stop worrying about foreign media. The permanent security council seat will remain a dream until we test for 10,000 kms.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 17 Apr 2012 11:57

After thinking on this for a while, I realize that there is some logic to the GoI's stand. Unless we test A5 to its full ICBM range, our official claim allows both the Chinese and the American government to underplay our capacity to their public for their own reasons. Of course, the people at the top in both countries will know the reality.

The Chinese, by making an issue out of the test or the range, will end up validating and acknowledging our nuclear warhead delivery capacity as being equal to theirs. They may not want to do this to maintain the current internal as well as external image.

The Americans, while it suits them, will continue to ignore our progress just as they ignored the paki progress on the nuclear bum in the 80's and 90's. Acknowledging the reality may spark concerns at home and may force some kind of congressional action.

In the mean time, we will continue our steady progress, going on to field the '6000' km Agni 6 with MIRV/MaRV, etc.

adityadange · Post by **adityadange** » 17 Apr 2012 12:06

i remember reading some article long back in which Dr. saraswat mentioned that in indian missiles payload weight and range function is not significant. and drdo is constantly saying agni 5 range is restricted to 5000km only. again there are reports saying its apogee is 900km.
this is also not fitting to the apogee vs. range equation compared with minuteman missile. and thus we are discussing about depressed trajectory. if all above points are considered together can i say they are not utilizing capacity of fuel tank to the fullest? lets say missile design/dimensions allow to store 20 tons of fuel + 1.5 tons of payload. this might be giving range of 6000km. now consider the configuration is say 15 tons fuel + 1.5 tons payload. this means less burnout time (provided burn rate is constant to maintain velocity) and thus less apogee. here another thing to consider is to achieve accurate timing of stage separation depending upon weight of fuel. This issue i believe is overcome as the program is matured.
i know i am assuming few things but i am convinced i am not suggesting any lahori logic here. what say?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Apr 2012 12:36

what are the advantages if any of a depressed trajectory 500km highest point vs 1200km? will it significantly delay the detection by ground based early warning radars ? does it make more difficult for interceptor missiles?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 17 Apr 2012 13:29

1. Delayed detection by ground based radars/sensors and consequently reduced warning/reaction time.
2. Warheads streak towards their target at relatively flat reentry angles and relatively high reentry speeds.
3. Reduces the time of flight needed to strike at targets.

Overall complicates the task faced by missile defense.

BrijeshB · Post by **BrijeshB** » 17 Apr 2012 19:20

I JUST FOUND THIS OLD ARTICLE ABOUT A5...

http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/oct/ ... adlier.htm

The Advanced Systems Laboratory (ASL) in Hyderabad, which develops India's [ Images ] strategic (long-range, nuclear-tipped) missiles, has dramatically increased the options for its forthcoming Agni-5 missile by making it highly road-mobile, or easily transportable by road.

That enables the Agni-5 to reach targets far beyond its stated 5,000-km range by quickly moving closer to the target. In a hypothetical war against, say, Sweden,

an Agni-5 launcher, stationed near Bangalore, would be unable to strike Stockholm, 7,000 km away. But moving by road to Amritsar [ Images ] would bring Stockholm within range.

Similarly, moving the Agni-5 to northeast India would bring even Harbin, China's northernmost city, within striking range. From various places across India, the Agni-5 can reach every continent except North and South America.

The Agni-5 will be the first canisterised, road-mobile missile in India's arsenal, similar to the Dongfeng-31A that created ripples during China's National Day Military Parade in Beijing [ Images ] on October 1. India's current long-range missile, the Agni-3, a non-canisterised missile, can only be moved with difficulty from one place to another.

In many other respects, the Agni-5, which is scheduled to make its first flight in early-2011, carries forward the Agni-3 pedigree. With composites used extensively to reduce weight, and a third stage added on (the Agni-3 was a two-stage missile), the Agni-5 can fly 1,500 km further than the 3,500-km Agni-3.

"The Agni-5 is specially tailored for road-mobility," explains Avinash Chander, Director, ASL. "With the canister having been successfully developed, all India's future land-based strategic missiles will be canisterised as well".

Made of maraging steel, a canister must provide a hermitically sealed atmosphere that preserves the missile for years. During firing, the canister must absorb enormous stresses when a thrust of 300 to 400 tonnes is generated to eject the 50-tonne missile.

Canister technology was first developed in India for the Brahmos cruise missile. But it was the K-15 underwater-launched missile, developed here in Hyderabad for India's nuclear-powered submarine, INS Arihant [ Images ], which fully overcame the technological hurdles in canisterising ballistic missiles.

Another major technological breakthrough that will beef up the Agni-5 is ASL's success in developing and testing MIRVs (multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles). An MIRV, atop an Agni-5 missile, comprises three to 10 separate nuclear warheads. Each warhead can be assigned to a separate target, separated by hundreds of kilometres; alternatively, two or more warheads can be assigned to one target.

"We have made major progress on the MIRVs in the last two years," is all that Avinash Chander is willing to say on the subject.

Nevertheless, extensive testing still lies ahead for this highly complex technology. MIRVs will be deployed on the Agni-5 only after another 4-5 years.

While MIRV technology is similar to launching multiple satellites through a space rocket, a missile requires far greater accuracy. A satellite would be considered in correct orbit even it is a kilometre higher or lower than planned.

But each warhead in an MIRV must impact within 40 metres of its target. With such high accuracies, even small nuclear warheads are sufficient for the job.

Strategic planners consider MIRVs essential, given India's declared "no first use" nuclear policy. Even after an enemy has hit India with a full-fledged nuclear strike, destroying or incapacitating much of the strategic arsenal, a handful of surviving Indian missiles must be capable of retaliating with massive and unacceptable damage. Multiple warheads on a handful of Agni-5 missiles would constitute such a capability.

MIRVs also enable a single missile to overwhelm the enemy's missile defences.

Tracking and shooting down multiple warheads are far more difficult than intercepting a single warhead.

Providing each warhead with the capability to maneuver, and dodge enemy interceptor missiles, increases survivability further.

The MIRV warheads are also being given electronic packages for jamming enemy radars

SO IT'S BEEN CONFIRMED ABOUT THIS A5-01 WONT BE CARRYING A MIRV NOW..

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Apr 2012 19:31

Any photos of the RV stage? is it blunt canister to withstand the 5k*C? chrom* or whatever secret material plated for maintaining constant temperature?

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 17 Apr 2012 19:31

^^ The above article is from 2009.. A lot has happened in the past 2.5 years . (including the Agni 4 which was almost brought out of the hat..)

We ll have to wait for tomorrow ...I have a feeling that a lot of tallel/diltiel/ undies would be wet by tomorrow evening...

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Apr 2012 19:40

well, there was a student research (harvard?) the chippandas have canisters stored burried under the mountains, and huge launch facilities - like in star wars.

/Just pre-empting unnecessary jaddi shiver.

BrijeshB · Post by **BrijeshB** » 17 Apr 2012 20:05

gakakkad wrote:^^ The above article is from 2009.. A lot has happened in the past 2.5 years . (including the Agni 4 which was almost brought out of the hat..)

We ll have to wait for tomorrow ...I have a feeling that a lot of tallel/diltiel/ undies would be wet by tomorrow evening...

Yup!

seems it started already..

http://www.smh.com.au/world/indias-miss ... 1x5kx.html

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 17 Apr 2012 20:36

SaiK wrote:well, there was a student research (harvard?) the chippandas have canisters stored burried under the mountains, and huge launch facilities - like in star wars.

/Just pre-empting unnecessary jaddi shiver.

that particular researcher was a social science major..

There was another "student research" which claimed that panda had 3000 warheads. And the entire amreeki press shvered..later found to be rubbish..

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Apr 2012 20:46

^^

Hindu god of fire, but tagged ''the China Killer'' by the more sensationalist sections of the local press

China's nuclear arsenal still dwarfs India's by about 410 nuclear warheads to 70.

India's missile test has garnered neither the international attention nor the opprobrium of North Korea's failed test last week.

You see where the strategy is! it is all about china. we should keep it at that especially correcting DDM adventures.

If we develop a kill mission to fight a nuke war on moon, it should be against china. Then our strategy will succeed.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 17 Apr 2012 22:49

pankajs wrote:
The Americans, while it suits them, will continue to ignore our progress just as they ignored the paki progress on the nuclear bum in the 80's and 90's. Acknowledging the reality may spark concerns at home and may force some kind of congressional action.

In the mean time, we will continue our steady progress, going on to field the '6000' km Agni 6 with MIRV/MaRV, etc.

Americans want this psy ops against PRC. The only way the rogue PLA can be controlled is a fully reliable missile system from India and a proven solid BM defence form India.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 17 Apr 2012 23:16

pankajs wrote:1. Delayed detection by ground based radars/sensors and consequently reduced warning/reaction time.
2. Warheads streak towards their target at relatively flat reentry angles and relatively high reentry speeds.
3. Reduces the time of flight needed to strike at targets.

Overall complicates the task faced by missile defense.

Would it not reduce the range ? Would it consume more fuel for the same range ? Or a smaller payload for the same range ?

K

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 17 Apr 2012 23:18

Singha wrote:they should have gone for all out full-range shot to the shores of antarctica with this one. no more pussyfooting around.
but they love playing games, perhaps they hope to extract some mythical psyops value from constraining it to chinese range only, though everyone who is anyone knows the true range...yet the foreign media cannot officially criticise us unless we officially state and test the true range?

We might frighten the penquins. Then one Mrs Maneka Gandhi would object !

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 17 Apr 2012 23:19

How come CPI and all the allied lal chaddiwallahs are quiet ? Their Rodina may not be like it.

K

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 17 Apr 2012 23:46

Kersi D wrote:
pankajs wrote:1. Delayed detection by ground based radars/sensors and consequently reduced warning/reaction time.
2. Warheads streak towards their target at relatively flat reentry angles and relatively high reentry speeds.
3. Reduces the time of flight needed to strike at targets.

Overall complicates the task faced by missile defense.
Would it not reduce the range ? Would it consume more fuel for the same range ? Or a smaller payload for the same range ?

K

True! but in this case your objective is to defeat the missile defense and hit the target.

Let us say there is a target 350 km from the missile staging area and we have both PIII(350) and A1(700) available for the mission. Using A1 in a depressed trajectory will
1. Allow the missile to travel further towards the target before being picked up by the ground radars.
2. A1 will present more difficulties to the missile defense than PIII because of the flatter angle and higher speed of approach.
3. Lastly, because of late detection, flatter trajectory and the faster speed the window available to the missile defense will be much smaller.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Apr 2012 02:40

The old ReDiff article is very informative. It gives an idea of the thinking of the A5 designers and the planners.
- All countries except those in North and South America are covered
- Of the countries that are covered many types of payloads can be delivered:
-- Single heavy payload
- Multiple payloads three to ten
--- These can maneuver to defeat ABM if available.
---- Talk about guidance figure of merit for sats and missiles shows the obejctive is 40m for the latter ie 130 feet!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Apr 2012 03:18

For the ABM, it would be extremely difficult to intercept, cause of very high reentry velocity. What could be even more devastating is say, if we convert to MIRV, and each MIRV has flex nozzle.

It would be chaddi shiver to have a 3 petal system, with a cover radius of 1000km between the 3 targets, and each having a 200kt super maal.

If it is all pre-programmed on the co-ordinates, not sure how much precision we need for such maals?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Apr 2012 03:54

so it could well be true that flatter path makes the RV go more than the Mach14 prediction for a pure ballistic shot.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 18 Apr 2012 04:13

Aa gaya aa gaya picture wala article aa gaya.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a ... 325145.ece

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 18 Apr 2012 05:42

D Roy wrote:Aa gaya aa gaya picture wala article aa gaya.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a ... 325145.ece

mugambo kush hua... huuhahahahaha

More sleeker version of Agni 3.

Arav · Post by **Arav** » 18 Apr 2012 06:00

D Roy wrote:Aa gaya aa gaya picture wala article aa gaya.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a ... 325145.ece

Roy ji, good to post the article in full.....

It's a high five moment for the Agni by N. Gopal Raj

India will enhance its deterrent reach with the launch of its first intercontinental ballistic missile. However, China and Pakistan have powerful missiles of their own as well.

For India, Agni V is more than just its first intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). With a range of over 5,000 km, this road-and rail-mobile missile can be fired from deep within the country and still reach all parts of China, especially the latter's populous and economically important eastern seaboard.

The Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) created Agni V by adding a third stage to Agni III, a missile with a range of 3,500 km while carrying a 1.5 tonne payload that was first successfully tested five years ago.

Both Agni III and V have a diameter of two metres, making them capable of carrying several warheads known as Multiple Independently Targeted Re-entry Vehicles (MIRV). (Agni I and II have a diameter of one metre and the first stage of the Agni IV has a diameter of 1.2 metres.)

Firing MIRVs requires what is known as a “Post Boost Control Vehicle,” a manoeuvrable platform that sits atop the rocket and holds the warheads. After the missile has lofted it into a ballistic trajectory, the platform must be able to release each warhead with the orientation and velocity needed to reach its target.

As India's Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) has already demonstrated the ability to put multiple satellites into orbit in the course of a single launch, developing a Post Boost Control Vehicle should be technologically straightforward. However, developing compact nuclear warheads could be a significant hurdle in acquiring MIRV capability. Published information on U.S. systems suggests that each re-entry vehicle will need to weigh less than 500 kg. First generation missile-borne nuclear warheads typically weigh twice as much.

India now has a range of nuclear-capable Agni missiles in its arsenal, starting with Agni I that can strike targets 700 km away. These missiles use solid propellants and can therefore be launched at short notice. They are also carried on mobile launchers, making it more difficult for an enemy to locate and destroy them.

In China and Pakistan

But India's nuclear-armed neighbours, China and Pakistan, have powerful missiles of their own.

China's strategic forces still rely heavily on ballistic missiles using liquid propellants. Its first missile, the “Dong Feng 1” (DF-1), was a copy of the Soviet R-2 missile, and relied on technology and designs provided by the Soviet Union in the late 1950s. The next missile, DF-2, was designed to be capable of landing a nuclear warhead on Japan.

The country then went on to build more advanced ballistic missiles, still using liquid propulsion, which also became the basis for its Long March launch vehicles. These include the DF-3, the DF-4 and the DF-5.

China switched to solid propulsion when it developed its first submarine launched ballistic missile, the “Ju Lang 1” (JL-1). The land version of the missile was designed as the “DF-21.”

A more powerful, solid propellant missile, the DF-31, is now beginning to be deployed. The submarine version of the missile, the JL-2, will be carried aboard China's new Type 094 Jin-class nuclear-powered submarines, the first of which was launched in 2004.

“China is progressively replacing its older liquid-fuelled DF-3 and DF-4 missiles with the new solid-fuelled two-stage DF-21 missile,” according to a 2010 assessment prepared by the International Strategic and Security Studies Programme at the National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS) in Bangalore.

Although it was within China's capabilities to equip the DF-31 with MIRVs, there was no clarity on whether this had actually been done, the assessment noted. Official U.S. sources have maintained that as the country was developing this capability, its DF-31 and all variants of that missile were currently equipped with only a single warhead.

A 2007 report from the NIAS group pointed out that China has deployed the DF-3, the DF-4 and the DF-21 missiles in bases in the Qinghai and Yunnan provinces. From those locations, these missiles would be able to reach all of India.

Pakistan, for its part, has produced a range of missiles using a mix of imported technology and indigenous capability.

Improving on sounding rocket technology supplied by the French company, Sud Aviation, to the Pakistan Space & Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO), it developed the Abdali (also known as Hatf-1). But the missile is estimated to have a range of only about 100 km.

Its Ghaznavi missile, which can carry a nuclear warhead, is a shortened version of China's M11 solid propellant missile supplied by the latter in the 1990s.

Ghauri, which uses liquid propellants, is based on North Korea's No Dong missile. The technology for this missile was imported by the A.Q. Khan Laboratories, which provided uranium enrichment technology to the North Koreans. The range of this missile has been put at about 950 km with a 1,000 kg nuclear warhead.

China also appears to have supplied the technology for the solid propellant M9 missile, with the Pakistani version being called the Shaheen-1. The NIAS team believes that the Shaheen-2, which was first tested in March 2004, has involved a second stage being added.

The missile would then have a range of 1,200 km compared to 730 km for its predecessor. If so, large parts of India, including places as far south as Hyderabad, would be within its reach.

But the range estimated for the Shaheen-2 assumed that it has a diameter of one metre, notes Rajaram Nagappa, who heads the strategic studies group at NIAS. But it was difficult to accurately estimate the diameter from publicly available images of the missile. If, as some reports suggest, the missile has a diameter of 1.4 metres (the same as China's DF-21), then its range would be considerably greater.

“Though constrained by the availability and production of uranium, Pakistan has a credible deterrent structure in place that would be largely organised around the Shaheen-1 and -2 missiles,” according to the NIAS 2010 assessment.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Apr 2012 06:34

The RV is same as A3. So its already flight qualified.
All those rectangles are patch antennas for telemetry.
The conical Third Stage is the grey/white portion with flag.
The copper/rust colored section is the adapter section or payload interface section which has the mission computer etc

See the raised band above the flag from the white section running aft is the conduit cover that protects the cabling. Its also called the cable raceway.

The RV is quite compact. Some of you might want to scale it with the avg height of people in the background but adjust for camera angle etc. If the body weighs 1.5 tonne then it sure packs a lot of weight for error correction or to go a long way!

Amazing the RV has a patch antenna on the nose.
Most likely an ablation sensor?

Bet all the folks are running hot expert opinion on that picture!!!
India is serious in releasing the picture.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 Apr 2012 07:13

It is revealing too much!
The intention is clear.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 18 Apr 2012 07:18

A-V supposed to be a canister launched mizzileee.... isnt it?

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 18 Apr 2012 07:50

best of luck drdo for agni 5

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Apr 2012 07:54

Singha,depressed trajectory missiles aboard Soviet subs were of great concern to the US during the Cold War.,especially those from Soviet subs which had lesser ranges and were deployed closer to the US coastline.However,there was no accurate confirmation about this and later on the Soviets deployed their advanced LR ICBMs aboard Delta and Typhoon class subs safe and secure from their "bastions" in their Arctic bases.India having the capability of launching depressed trajectory BMs would complicate the task of BMD and be a real moodspolier to the enemy.

sum · Post by **sum** » 18 Apr 2012 08:12

Both Agni III and V have a diameter of two metres, making them capable of carrying several warheads known as Multiple Independently Targeted Re-entry Vehicles (MIRV). (Agni I and II have a diameter of one metre and the first stage of the Agni IV has a diameter of 1.2 metres.)

Firing MIRVs requires what is known as a “Post Boost Control Vehicle,” a manoeuvrable platform that sits atop the rocket and holds the warheads. After the missile has lofted it into a ballistic trajectory, the platform must be able to release each warhead with the orientation and velocity needed to reach its target.

As India's Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) has already demonstrated the ability to put multiple satellites into orbit in the course of a single launch, developing a Post Boost Control Vehicle should be technologically straightforward. However, developing compact nuclear warheads could be a significant hurdle in acquiring MIRV capability. Published information on U.S. systems suggests that each re-entry vehicle will need to weigh less than 500 kg. First generation missile-borne nuclear warheads typically weigh twice as much.

So, from the article, it seems we have the MIRV tech ready and waiting in the missiles but do not have the maal which would be used for MIRV??

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 18 Apr 2012 08:21

What sort of yield is the unitary warhead supposed to be packin? 150-200 kt fbf? Major political/security talks taking place with the US on the 19th.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Apr 2012 08:28

Thinking more about the patch antennas, it looks they are for monitoring the aero loads during ascent. All those patches will get burnt up during re-entry.

sum, They first want to proof the AIII payload. Next they will proof the other versions once the basic configuration is proofed. Ideally they need two flights at max Q and max heating for the RV for statistics purposes. ie four successful consecutive flights.

If you re-read the ReDiff article I think they want to go one beyond MIRV to MARVs whenever the A5 is proofed for that role. The MARVs or rather BGRVs will defeat/challenge ABM systems.