Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

nikhil_p
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 378
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 19:59
Location: Sukhoi/Sukhoi (Jaguars gone :( )Gali, pune

Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby nikhil_p » 09 Jan 2013 19:41

Starting New Thread as old one is more than 100 pages.

Last Post from old thread is here -
Last Page

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36386
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 09 Jan 2013 21:09

Austin wrote:Likely post S-manouver during terminal phase the missile drops to 1 m above waterline and goes in straight at the hull. Thats very low for any CIWS/GUNS to defend against.
abhik wrote:^^^
It may have hit at 1m above the waterline, but I don't think it actually flies in at that level. At 1m alt it can easily crash into a wave before hitting the target. 5-10m is altitude is probably the least required margin.

It is doing the S, that means at 1 meter just before the proximity time, it should have travelled at 1m above the waterline.

Why should it crash above 1 meter water line.. cm level precision altimeter sensors are available to avoid crash. it just shows the level of controls, and btw, it does not take that much to blow the target as I assume the S shapes trajectory takes only at homing. The delta time is way too small a window that any flight path change would only take away the CEP precision rather altimeter corrections... the target would be so close!.

Nevertheless, the 1m above skimming means it has fantastic controls for flight corrections and fast response to avoid slamming into the water, for whatever the delta time is available. At that speed, it would not take much deviations to crash.. but the fact remains that S flight must have a delta time at 1m above sea level traverse.

sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 341
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby sarabpal.s » 09 Jan 2013 21:53

Can we use Brahmos for anti aircraft version in case of emergency by putting proximity sensor on board mating with-ever sensor it carry.

Just a question :?:

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36386
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 09 Jan 2013 22:10

Wouldn't be a different class altogether, and a different mission profile as well. You meant SAM or AAM?
Most AM targets are fast moving at mach levels (depending on the mission profile), so corresponding sensors, radars, needs integration in addition to any structural changes needed, cause to blow away an air target does not require a 1/2 a ton weapon delivery package on the shroud. Just a 20kg one would do, and depending on the explosive.

So, you are not talking fuji apple vs. honey crisp apples. It would be banana vs. pineapple analysis.

sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 341
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby sarabpal.s » 09 Jan 2013 23:13

<can we do it>^ ??? did anyone notice how many sensor is now on board to confirm kill, is there any other missile having luxury of such fail safe measure?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36386
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 10 Jan 2013 02:01

was this posted here earlier?

But in the first half of 2013, perhaps in June, Agni-V will soar into the sky from a canister mounted on a launch platform integrated with a truck, which is called a road-mobile launcher. A gas generator placed at the bottom of the canister will erupt into life and push the missile out of the tube. After the missile comes out of the tube, its ignition will take place in the air. In firing such an intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM) from a canister, a complex technology comes into play. In missile parlance, a canisterised launch is called a “cold launch”.

“We are vigorously working on the canisterised launch,”


A5: 50-tonne class from a tube. Besides, the missile is 17.5 metres long.
whereas Shourya weighs about six tonnes and is 10 m long.

ASL is working on the “theory of decoys”, which means India’s strategic missiles will be able to confuse the enemy’s radar systems, penetrate its air defence system and deliver the warhead. “We are working on this vigorously as an extension of the overall systems’ deployment to ensure that the missile survives in its journey,”


two sweet data from flonnet.
http://flonnet.com/stories/20130125300112200.htm

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23729
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SSridhar » 10 Jan 2013 07:47

More Info on the latest BrahMos test - The Hindu
Supersonic cruise missile BrahMos scored once again in its 34{+t}{+h}launch on Wednesday off Visakhapatnam, hitting a decommissioned vessel with accuracy.

As it took off vertically from a naval warship, reached an altitude of 14 km, levelled out and started cruising at three times the speed of sound, it performed “a double manoeuvre in S-form” and hit the decommissioned ship, about 290 km away.

“The sheer velocity and power of the hit made the missile rip through the ship’s hull,” said a release from BrahMos Aerospace Private Limited.

The missile has a fast reaction time — it can be launched within a few minutes. Once information about the target is received, it is transmitted to the missile’s computer and the fire control system provides it with the most optimal trajectory. The missile travels in the designated path, which is constantly updated by the satellite navigation system.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby jamwal » 10 Jan 2013 10:36

Dumb question:
How do they make sure that the warhead explodes inside the ship. At these velocities, it's likely that the missile will exit from other side before explosion takes place.

SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SivaVijay » 10 Jan 2013 11:42

^^ Exactly the question I have.

On the Brahmos test, did it do a double S manoeuvre and still hit the target at 290 KMS ? :twisted:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23380
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Jan 2013 11:54

S Manoeuvre is done during terminal stage says few Km away from target to complicate CIWS ( Guns/Missiles ) ability to hit a high G manouvering target , post S manouvering the Missile drops low and hits the target , what they are saying is post S manouering the missile is now capable of dropping as low a 1 m above the waterline to hit the target

SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SivaVijay » 10 Jan 2013 12:05

^^ I got that Austin. What I was wondering was if the missile did a high G S manoeuvre and still managed to reach 290kms( which is official range), then the missiles full range is >290 kms, isn't it?

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ArmenT » 10 Jan 2013 12:06

jamwal wrote:Dumb question:
How do they make sure that the warhead explodes inside the ship. At these velocities, it's likely that the missile will exit from other side before explosion takes place.

The only dumb questions are the ones that are not asked.

The answer has to do with the type of explosives in the warhead. Briefly, they can be classified into two types: low explosive and high explosive. So what do these terms mean?

A low explosive is that which burns at a speed below the speed of sound, say between few cm./sec to 300 meters/sec or so. Examples of these would be black powder, cordite etc.

On the other hand, a high explosive is that which detonates faster than the speed of sound. Typically, these detonate at around 3000 to 9000 meters/sec or so. (e.g.) dynamite, nitroglycerine etc. For example, wikipedia lists nitroglycerine detonating at 7700 meters/sec., which is something like Mach 23.33! Other high explosives detonate even faster.

Two guesses as to what type of explosive is packed into warheads :). So even if your missile moves at, say Mach 10, it is slow compared to Mach 23! That's plenty of time to ensure that the warhead explodes inside the ship.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby rajanb » 10 Jan 2013 12:08

SivaVijay wrote:^^ I got that Austin. What I was wondering was if the missile did a high G S manoeuvre and still managed to reach 290kms( which is official range), then the missiles full range is >290 kms, isn't it?


Shhhhh. It is 290kms. If it goes beyond that, it is divine intervention. E.g. Hanumanji giving it a push.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2761
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 10 Jan 2013 12:12

^^ Delayed action fuse programmable in micro/nano seconds. As missile speeds increase, our ability to count fractions of time is also increased.

Added later from internet -

http://docfoualier.free.fr/exocet.pdf
the warhead which is common to all versions. It is a 165-kg shaped charge with fragmentation and incendiary effects. The explosive employed is Hexolite. It is initiated by a delay fuse which allow the missile to penetrate the outer hull of the ship before blowing up. A proximity fused is fitted as a back-up fuse if the missile overfly its target, then causing extensive damage to the bridge, antennas and potentially aircrafts on deck


http://www.naval-technology.com/project ... ssile-nsm/
A programmable fuse is used to detonate the missile's warhead.
Last edited by tsarkar on 10 Jan 2013 12:17, edited 1 time in total.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6930
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Anujan » 10 Jan 2013 12:13

Even if the warhead does not explode, if the missile rips a hole from the side to the bottom, the job is done.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23380
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Austin » 10 Jan 2013 12:24

SivaVijay wrote:^^ I got that Austin. What I was wondering was if the missile did a high G S manoeuvre and still managed to reach 290kms( which is official range), then the missiles full range is >290 kms, isn't it?


Range is a function of its flight profile i.e. the trajectory it takes and manouvering the missile makes , Brahmos Hi-Lo trajectory is advertised at 290 km , S manouvering is one of the manouvering that a missile makes to defeat CIWS , So doing a twin S manouver wont make drastic difference in range considering we know for most of its time it was doing a 14 km cruise which is effecient for range.

Most certainly Brahmos has a range of more than 300 km but its restricted due to MTCR , The Bastion missile which is a land based version of Oniks was stated recently by Russians as having a range of more than 400 km.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2761
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 10 Jan 2013 12:27

During some tests, warheads are often not used to check the missile impact pattern.

Simply creating a hole might seriously retard but not completely disable a ship. It might leave some weapon systems intact. An exploding warhead also creates secondary explosions via 1. unspent missile fuel 2. the ship's own weapon warheads (though these are becoming more & more insensetive) 3. Helicopter aviation fuel 4. Ship fuel.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2974
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Kanson » 10 Jan 2013 12:46

SivaVijay wrote:^^ Exactly the question I have.

On the Brahmos test, did it do a double S manoeuvre and still hit the target at 290 KMS ? :twisted:


It is not double S manoeuvre, but double manoeuvre to form S like pattern as the missile hits the ship, i,e it make two turns, so double manoeuvre.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20317 » 10 Jan 2013 13:02

Austin wrote:
SivaVijay wrote:^^ I got that Austin. What I was wondering was if the missile did a high G S manoeuvre and still managed to reach 290kms( which is official range), then the missiles full range is >290 kms, isn't it?


Range is a function of its flight profile i.e. the trajectory it takes and manouvering the missile makes , Brahmos Hi-Lo trajectory is advertised at 290 km , S manouvering is one of the manouvering that a missile makes to defeat CIWS , So doing a twin S manouver wont make drastic difference in range considering we know for most of its time it was doing a 14 km cruise which is effecient for range.

Most certainly Brahmos has a range of more than 300 km but its restricted due to MTCR , The Bastion missile which is a land based version of Oniks was stated recently by Russians as having a range of more than 400 km.



Also Austin ji, the missile would be moving at ~750 mtr. per sec. and at that speed while there would be time for a single S manouver a double S would imply one of the S manouver is in Vertical plane probably even both. One bigger S curve ~150-250 km and one very small one ~40 km for CIWS countering or fake target avoidance.

http://defense-update.com/wp-content/up ... _chart.png
Image

Also I was relying on a few scattered examples and trajectories to understand higher ranges eg. Iskander M being stated to be upto even 500 km with a 1/6th increase in missile mass (added later: probably) with a full ballastic trajectory.

Could you provide the link you are refering to for 400 km. Thanks in advance.

Added later : One second thought the Missile would be doing around 500 mtr per sec in the final stage. That gives 80 secs for the final 40 km stretch. I wonder if both S curves can also be cramed into last 80 sec. Engineers ke layak question?

Oh and 290 km is after the manouvers. So a slam dunk balastic is another thing for you engineers.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23729
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SSridhar » 10 Jan 2013 16:24

Anujan wrote:Even if the warhead does not explode, if the missile rips a hole from the side to the bottom, the job is done.

The lower the hole, at 1m now, the higher the sink rate of the ship. We should be even able to programme BrahMos to where exactly the ship must be hit so as to cause maximum damage depending on the recognition of the ship.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36386
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 10 Jan 2013 22:21

The explosion slightly after penetration is the key even for bunker busters.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions DiscussionAemenT, tsarkar

Postby jamwal » 10 Jan 2013 22:35

ArmenT, tsarkar
Thanks

Just getting a hole in ship is not enough. The first guided bombs used in WW-II by Germany were used against Allied ships. Although the accuracy was good, they usually penetrated through all the decks of ships before exploding. British ships were lucky in Falklands wars in a similar way. At least 2 of their ships escaped to fight another day even after direct hits with bombs. So getting the warhead to explode is as important as hitting the target.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9511
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Yagnasri » 11 Jan 2013 09:28

but hitting something with 2/3 mach is quite powerful hit but impact alone. If the hit take place at or near vital area the Ship may not service or even out of the war. But you are correct the explosion inside the ship is vital and I am sure it takes place like that only. It is difficult to imagine that people have not provided for that.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby krishnan » 11 Jan 2013 09:50

also depend son where it hits, hitting those engine rooms will cause more damage even if it doesnt explode

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20317 » 11 Jan 2013 10:58

ArmenT ji has done some work researching on cartridges and seems like a cogent arguement he made. After all a 23 Mach propagation in a small area probably less then a meter of two is basically too fast to miss for a missile at 1.5 machs moving through a space several meters.

Ref : http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com

Jamwal ji, the direct hits on RN ships, they did explode or did they not?

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby jamwal » 11 Jan 2013 11:21

From a post by srai

http://www.hmsbroadsword.co.uk/falkland ... th_day.htm
They were flying extremely low and close together and our Sea Wolf tracker was unable to form a clear track for the missile to engage so we were unable to fire. "Take Cover", came the cry. Everyone dived for the deck, except the gun crews who kept on firing for all they were worth, and hearts in mouths we awaited our fate. Seconds seemed like hours and then there was a loud CLANG from aft.

Nobody moved and the explosion was awaited. The seconds passed and still nothing happened. We were still alive and afloat! However the raid was not over because the other two aircraft were attacking from ahead. This time Sea Wolf had locked on to the aircraft. They were still outside range so we waited for the right moment to fire. Then without explanation COVENTRY moved across our bows, probably to open her weapon arcs, preventing us from firing. The Skyhawks dropped their bombs and at least one and maybe two hit COVENTRY midships. Five seconds later there was an almighty explosion and she took on a severe list. It was apparent that she was capsizing and the ship's company were already abandoning ship.

We had also been hit by a bomb which fortunately entered the starboard side of the ship and bounced out via the flight deck, demolishing the Lynx enroute, but passing through without exploding. Realising we were safe for the time being, we set about the task of recovering the COVENTRY survivors and prayed that no more aircraft would attack us while we were attempting this rescue. Harriers provide us with a protective umbrella as we fought to get everyone onboard by nightfall. Men were leaping into liferafts and others were just jumping into the icy water, so it was imperative that the survivors were rescued as quickly as possible. Fortunately we had an already developed, but as yet untested, survivor handling plan which swung into action. All available boats were lowered and helicopters streamed out from San Carlos to assist. Men suffering from the effects of the blast were brought onboard and everyone was examined, given medical treatment if required, reclothed, fed and the more seriously injured were flown straight to the hospital ship, UGANDA. The helicopters proved to be invaluable. Time and again aircrewmen were winched down to pluck men from the icy sea and at one stage a Wessex landed on the hull of the strickened COVENTRY to pick up survivors. One extremely brave piece of flying occurred when one pilot hovered above the Sea Dart magazine, and his winchman recovered 17 men from a group of life rafts which were trapped alongside the ship's hull. At any moment the magazine could have exploded. With all the survivors rescued we returned to San Carlos where they were put into a landing craft and transferred to the CANBERRA.


I think I was wrong with 2 ships, it was only 1. Apologies.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20317 » 11 Jan 2013 11:58

Wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Coventry_(D118)#25_May_1982

wiki says 4 bombs (1*1000lb then 3*250 lb all dumb) released of which first and fourth failed to explode. The first one 1000lb was the one that bounced off the sea (probably damaging the proximity fuze etc.) then hit Broadsword without exploding even when it did hit the lynx, unless the bomb hit something which in turn damaged the helo. Fourth one could have been some QC problem.

2 bombs not exploding out of 4 shows why Persues CVS401, like multiple warheads even if of smaller sizes could be the best way forward.

Exciting time ahead for rocketry. Poor pilots are going to loose all the charisma to a bunch of bespectacled engineers working on off all things something as unknown and unglamourous as tracking and guidance systems. Truely the meek shall inherit the earth :)

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20317 » 11 Jan 2013 12:06

Shrinivasan wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:Is it just my wishful thinking or can we guess that our n' warhead number could be around 500 now.

If we go by 50 Agnis each, series Agni 1 to Agni 5 we will have 250 Agni missiles for nuke delivery , then 100 Shaurya missiles comes to 350 warheads. Suppose we have 250 Prithvis and 100 Prithvis are nuke-warhead-fitted, while rest have non-nuclear warheads. The warhead numbers comes to 450. Another 40 warheads for Sukhois , would mean 490 warheads?

We do not have 50 Agni Vs, let alone IIIs and IVs, total # of Agnis should be between 150-170. Methinks currently all Prithvis are part of our No-Clear Detergent... again I am a Mango Abdul of the street.



Heard some years back (probably when George Fernandez was Defence Minister) that the establishment was looking for a production rate of 20 Agnis per annum. I would be conservative and say that they canabalised the production capacity for early version Agnis and today we can produce 20 Agnis an year for all the version of it to arm new raisings and replacements of early versions. There is now enough time for line slippages also.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36386
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 11 Jan 2013 19:51


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53253
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 11 Jan 2013 20:02

The Argentines had mainly time delay fuzed dumb bombs to enable the attacking aircraft to escape the debris. However a) the time delay was too much and hence the bombs went through harmlessly through b) the aluminium superstructure. Had it been steel the delay was adequate. Nowadays the fuzes have counting mechanism to ensure proper depth and layers.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vasu raya » 11 Jan 2013 21:47

Was out of action last week, anyways, the recent Brahmos test would make it more effective against stealth warships? or once the low RCS is locked on by the seeker, it doesn't make a difference and its just about defeating damage control design of ships.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36386
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 11 Jan 2013 21:50

krishnan wrote:also depend son where it hits, hitting those engine rooms will cause more damage even if it doesnt explode

mostly below waterline for A/C[a torpedo would do a better job for that]. how do you get there from an air launched platform?

surface target vulnerability imho, destroying the deck say for A/Cs, or launch systems or other weapon system/radars.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Yogi_G » 14 Jan 2013 07:16

Recently for the missile defence shield, Satheesh Reddy and team developed a mechanism for explosion within a very short amount of time, this is required for the speeds at which the interceptor and the incoming missile close in on each other. I think some of that tech will make its way into the current Brahmos and the upcoming hypersonic Brahmos.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53253
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 14 Jan 2013 07:29

Thats called directed warhead and uses laser range finding to provide microsecond response to preclude target evasion.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vasu raya » 14 Jan 2013 08:18

regards the counter-force capabilities of Agni-1 & 4, would their CEP's be even more accurate if directional warheads are used? especially aganist enemy TELs and other small footprint targets

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4259
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby srai » 14 Jan 2013 10:30

jamwal wrote:... British ships were lucky in Falklands wars in a similar way. At least 2 of their ships escaped to fight another day even after direct hits with bombs. So getting the warhead to explode is as important as hitting the target.


ravi_g wrote:...

Jamwal ji, the direct hits on RN ships, they did explode or did they not?


jamwal wrote:...

I think I was wrong with 2 ships, it was only 1. Apologies.


During the 1982 Falklands War, there were in fact 18 RN ships hit with air-dropped bombs/missiles. Few more were hit by cannon fire. Out of these only 5 were fatally damaged and sunk; 1 was sunk due to unsuccessful defusing attempt of unexploded bomb; and 12 suffered minor to major damages from unexploded or close proximity explosion of bombs/missiles. There is a possibility that the British forces could have lost the war had more of the bombs exploded.

Check out the more details here: British naval forces in the Falklands War

Code: Select all

Damaged (but not sunk) by unexploded/exploded bombs/missiles:

1. HMS Glasgow (Type 42 destroyer) - hit by unexploded bomb from a Douglas A-4B Skyhawk May 12, withdrawn from war - Moderate Damage
2. HMS Glamorgan (County class destroyer) - hit by an Aérospatiale MM38 Exocet (Surface-to-Surface) Anti-ship missile on June 11 - Major Damage
3. HMS Antrim (County class destroyer) - hit by unexploded bomb from an IAI Dagger - Major Damage
4. HMS Broadsword (Type 22 frigate) - hit by IAI Dagger cannon fire, later damaged by bomb from Douglas A-4B Skyhawk - Moderate Damage
5. HMS Alacrity (Type 21 frigate) - sank Argentine transport ship ARA Isla de Los Estados. Slightly damaged by bomb.
6. HMS Antelope (Type 21 frigate) - sank May 24 due to unsuccessful defusing attempt of unexploded bombs from Douglas A-4B Skyhawks - Fatal Damage
7. HMS Argonaut (Leander class frigate) - hit by Aermacchi MB.339A cannon/rocket and unexploded bombs from Douglas A-4B Skyhawks - Major Damage
8. HMS Plymouth (Rothesay class frigate) - unexploded bombs from IAI Daggers - Major Damage
9. HMS Valiant (Valiant class submarine) - Argentine fighters returning from an aborted mission jettisoned bombs nearby - Minor Damage
10. RFA Sir Bedivere (L3004) (Landing Ship Logistic) - bombed by Douglas A-4B Skyhawk - Minor Damage
11. RFA Sir Lancelot (L3029)  (Landing Ship Logistic) - damaged by unexploded bombs from Douglas A-4B Skyhawks
12. RFA Sir Tristram (L3505) (Landing Ship Logistic) - bombed June 8 by Douglas A-4B Skyhawks - Major Damage
13. British Wye 15,649 t (25,197 DWT) (Tanker) — used as auxiliary support tanker from 25 April - hit by bomb from Lockheed C-130 Hercules - Minor Damage


Sunk by bombs/missiles:

1. LCU Foxtrot Four, bombed and sunk in the Choiseul Sound by A-4B Skyhawks
2. HMS Sheffield (Type 42 destroyer) - set on fire by a Aérospatiale AM39 Exocet (Air-to-Surface) Anti-ship missile launched from a Dassault Super Étendard May 4 - Fatal Damage (sank on May 10)
3. HMS Coventry (Type 42 destroyer) - sunk on May 25 by three bombs from a Douglas A-4B Skyhawk - Fatal Damage
4. RFA Sir Galahad (L3005) (Landing Ship Logistic) - bombed on May 24 and June 8 by Douglas A-4B Skyhawks (sunk by torpedo on June 21 and declared a war grave) - Fatal Damage
5. Atlantic Conveyor 14,496 GRT (Container / Cargo ship) - hit 25 May by one or two Aérospatiale AM39 Exocet Air-to-Surface Anti-ship missile(s) launched from a Dassault Super Étendard - Fatal Damage: Sank in tow 28 May


Hit by Cannon fire:

1. HMS Brilliant (Type 22 frigate) - hit by IAI Dagger cannon fire - Minor Damage
2. HMS Arrow (Type 21 frigate) - hit by IAI Dagger cannon fire - Minor Damage
3. RFA Stromness (A344) 16,792 t (Supply ship) - attacked by A-4C on May 24 - Minor Damage

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Vipul » 15 Jan 2013 08:51

Multiple-target missiles to redefine warfare.

•First flight trial of the 200-km tactical missile to launch PGMs will be carried out in 2 years.

•Surface-to-surface missile or an air-to-surface missile can be equipped with PGMs.

The technology demonstration of an ambitious project to fire hi-tech precision-guided munitions (PGMs) from a mother missile at various targets simultaneously will be completed in a year by scientists of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). After technology demonstration, the first flight trial of a 200-km tactical missile to launch the PGMs is proposed to be carried out in two years, according to S.K. Chaudhuri, Director of Research Centre Imarat, a premier avionics systems hub of the DRDO’s missile complex.

PGMs are miniaturised missiles with small seekers, actuators and on-board computers and will be integrated with tactical missiles having a range of 100-200 km. The major advantage of PGMs is that collateral damage could be avoided while attacking multiple targets in a war scenario with sub-metre accuracy.

Observing that the technology of a mother missile launching PGMs was a frontier area, Dr. Chaudhuri said a surface-to-surface missile or an air-to-surface missile could be equipped with PGMs.

A series of trials using a Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV) to simulate the speed of the mother missile while ejecting the PGMs will be conducted at Balasore, Orissa, from March this year. Initially, the RPV will be tested using two seekers—IIR (Imaging Infra-Red) and mmW ( millimetric wave) to track the target. Subsequently, the tests would be conducted with RPV for separation of munitions. The technology demonstration of the launch of a single PGM with multiple seekers from the RPV will be completed in a year.

Dr. Chaudhuri said that one of the main reasons for using an RPV was to reduce costs as it could be re-used.

He added that the RCI was also likely to collaborate with another country for developing sensor-fused munitions. In this type, they sense the target and fuse the warhead when the mother missile is in close proximity to the target. He said work had already begun in that direction.
Last edited by SSridhar on 15 Jan 2013 09:24, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Vipul, kindly use Quote tags

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby RamaY » 15 Jan 2013 08:52

Which BRF member suggested Shaurya to carry multiple smaller missiles?

KBDagha
BRFite
Posts: 160
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 21:47
Location: Mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby KBDagha » 15 Jan 2013 17:48

Albit small, there are some good pics of Agni missile rail and road launchers in the following link:

http://www.walchand.com/DIVISION/defense/3.html

nash
BRFite
Posts: 838
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby nash » 15 Jan 2013 18:00

RamaY wrote:Which BRF member suggested Shaurya to carry multiple smaller missiles?


Yes there was one post regarding mother missile carrying multiple missile.But if i remember correctly, then we were more on SAM.
And since it will have IIR, we can't deny that possibility. Also with 200Km range it will put full stop of any air strike before it get started.

Shourya or even PDV can be a good carrier in SAM verison


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests