Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 562
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramdas » 09 May 2016 09:28

@vera_k: here, it is the PM refusing the green signal for the A-5 test. Nothing else.

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3383
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby vera_k » 09 May 2016 09:31

But is a green signal required for a test? That is very much North Korea like.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_22539 » 09 May 2016 09:31

^Maybe, so will there be funding advances. Even scientists have to play bureaucratic politics for their (personals as well as organizational) goals. It may be more so in India, but it exists everywhere.

Reason why Kalam was so revered was not just because he was an excellent scientist, it was because he was an excellent leader of scientists.

As for those who see the world in black and white, I fee sorry for your childish notions. Please grow up.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 09 May 2016 09:34

Hypersonic Brahmos -2/Tsikron program NPO Mashinostroyeniya Patent ( via secretprojects )

NPO Mashinostroyeniya patent for a two-stage hypersonic (Mach 6) scramjet-powered missile design which basically flies very high at high speed then separates when approaching the target, dropping the engine section and flying unpowered down to the target. This simplifies the scramjet design as it doesn't have to work in the dense air at low altitudes.

http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/257/2579409.html

Image
Image
Image

The invention relates to a hypersonic cruise missiles (CMP), equipped with scramjet (scramjet). CMP contains marching step with design, built on the basis of two modules. The first module is a battle and is designed as a glider sustainer stage CMP. The second - unit sustainer propulsion system combines air intake, combustion chamber, the nozzle, the fluid system and devices that run the scramjet. The second module is mounted under the fuselage of the combat module packet (parallel) scheme, with the possibility of separating in flight by BASS team. After detection and target coordinates in the point of the trajectory, calculated onboard equipment control system (BASS) for BASS team produced the separation of the power plant (SU) CMP and defeat the purpose of planning is carried out combat unit. The technical result of the invention is to expand the scope of rockets from scramjet. 2N. 1 ZP f ly-4-yl.



The invention relates to the field of missile technology, and more particularly to a hypersonic cruise missiles equipped with scramjet (scramjet). The invention describes a method of using the device and hypersonic cruise missile (CMP), solves the problem of the combat mission for the defeat of ground and surface targets such missile.

Known hypersonic aircraft X-51, equipped with scramjet ventral air intake, which is a technology demonstrator. X-51 flight tests took place in order to develop technologies used in the creation of CMP. During the tests, the unit was separated from the aircraft carrier at a speed corresponding to 0.8M, and a height of 15.2 km, then he accelerated detachable solid-starter-boost stage to the speed corresponding to M = 4.5-4.8. Then launch the scramjet was carried out, after which the device scored a height of about 30 km and was flying, maintaining a speed of about 5M. After completion of the flight at a given altitude test plan provided off of the power plant and the fall of the unit (based on the 17th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference).

This method is the use of the aircraft and its equipment to the technical nature the most similar to the subject matter of the invention, despite the fact that the X-51 makers were hesitant tasks directly hitting the ground or sea targets, as the entrance into the dense layers of the atmosphere of the overclocked to an altitude of Mach number = 5 and a vehicle with a scramjet is associated with the probability of sequential destruction of its powerplant and airframe before reaching the destruction of the object.

The described invention is designed to maximize the combat potential of the CMP with the scramjet and aircraft, discussed above, is accepted as the closest analogue.

To solve the problem of the use of missile weapons in the promising samples scramjet propulsion system requires (SU), which will fully meet all the demands placed upon it.

A feature of the cruise trajectory missiles scramjet is the presence of the main high-altitude flight section, for example, at a height of H = 30 km at a constant speed corresponding to Mach 6. Before hitting surface or ground object CMP must be reduced to the height of the location of the target (for surface targets 10 m, and for the land at altitudes from 0 to 4000 m) and at the same time produce a decrease of flight speed to reduce aerodynamic loads and provide acceptable handling characteristics.

It should be noted that the calculation mode for the scramjet propulsion are flight conditions at high altitude with the maintenance of the settlement cruise velocity, and the need to reduce the height and speed creates intractable technical problems related to the fact that:

- The engine is designed to perform hypersonic cruise flight at high altitude, is not able to continue to work on the low-altitude areas of the trajectory, coupled with a decrease in flight Mach number, it follows that to the ground or surface target missile must be approached with engine inoperative;

- Stability and controllability characteristics CMP inoperative scramjet significantly deteriorate, it becomes possible loss of stability;

- There is also the danger of the destruction of the scramjet designs due to increased pressure in the running of the engine while reducing the CMP with the cruise altitude before hitting the target.

Availability of off-design conditions for the scramjet high altitude causes that enable flight CMP requires regulated power unit (SU), in which the air intake flow of the engine and nozzle are configured to change their shape in a wide range of geometric parameters. Such decisions need to be implemented to create a scramjet performance in a wide range of parameters of the incoming flow. Changing the shape of the air intake, combustion chamber and engine nozzle is only possible with the use of sophisticated control devices.

The above device should provide a work SU wide range of speeds and altitudes by continuously adaptive adjustment to the conditions of flight gas path geometrical parameters and supply fuel substantially from SU transforming scramjet supersonic flow in SC conventional subsonic flow from the ramjet.

The solution of such a complex technical and technological tasks under tight weight and size restrictions placed on weapons systems, it seems inappropriate.

The object of the invention to provide a method for applying CMP to combat scramjet to destroy ground and surface targets within the constraints imposed on the flight propulsion rocket.

This object is achieved by the fact that in contrast to the known method defeats the purpose of the capital master plan, which consists in removing the missile at a given altitude and flight speed starter-boost stage (CPC), the CPC office, launching cruise scramjet, active flight at the design height in the direction of the goal, search , seizure and destruction of the target, in the claimed invention, after detection and target coordinates in the point of the trajectory, calculated onboard equipment control system (BASS) for BASS team is made off scramjet followed by separation of the power plant by marching step by tripping piroustroystv and defeat the purpose carried out planning combat unit, correcting its trajectory according to the homing system.

The proposed method makes it possible to realize the combat capabilities of the missiles by firing at a target while minimizing approach to it due to the high speed of the march CMP flight.

Branch power plant will reduce the drag and hence to increase the duration of the planning area and combat unit will be able to withstand high overload permissible, and hence have better controllability. Also SU compartment lead to a significant decrease in firing module effective surface scattering and hence to reduce its visibility, which is especially important at the approach to the target.

For carrying out the process of hitting the target in the known device of hypersonic aircraft, comprising solid-starter-booster stage (CPC) and the marching step with ventral air intake scramjet liquid hydrocarbon fuel, comprising SU containing air intake, combustion chamber, nozzle, the fluid system and devices that run the scramjet, the claimed invention there is provided marching step by CMP to build on the basis of two modules, the first of which is to combat and is designed as a glider sustainer stage CMP and the second - in the form of unit sustainer propulsion system, combining the all of the above device SU and fixed under the fuselage of the combat module packet (parallel) scheme, with the possibility of separating in flight by BASS team. This module propulsion system (IAS) mounted under the fuselage of the combat module piroustroystvami, and to ensure supply to the power plant unit propulsion fuel and control commands it is connected with the combat unit discontinuous hydraulic and electrical connectors.

The proposed CMP device allows to solve the problems associated with the creation of hypersonic combat unit through a specially designed rocket, allowing it to separate from the marching power plant, thereby avoiding the need to make a flight with a scramjet to deliberately off-design conditions. In addition, the union into a single unit air intake, combustion chamber, nozzles, heat exchanger and the fluid system will significantly reduce launch weight of CMP, as its design will be perceived only loads acting on the dispersal areas and active (working with scramjet) flight.

The modular design will allow SU to make it an autonomous ground tests and increase the reliability of the whole installation.

The essence of the apparatus illustrated in FIG. 1 ÷ 3. FIG. 1 is a perspective view of the starting step CMP, Fig. 2 - layout sustainer stage CMP. FIG. 3 shows a general view of the combat unit. FIG. 4 illustrates the division of the combat unit and MSU after powered flight portion where a section A-A shows the location piroustroystv fuselage (19).

Start CMP step (1) is made by the normal aerodynamic scheme with plyusoobraznym plumage starter-booster stage.

The stage contains the starting kickoff-booster stage and marching gear (2) with a two-keel empennage and wings mounted on the fuselage having a longitudinal plane of symmetry. Under the fuselage of the combat unit sustainer stage mounted in parallel module power unit (3) with an air inlet (4), the pylon assembly (5), combustion chamber (6) and the nozzle (7). Securing local government by means of piroustroystv (8 and 9), giving a control command to the power plant by means of a discontinuous electrical connector (10) and power is marching fuel through the bursting gidrorazem (11).

The forward fuselage of the combat module (12) located onboard equipment control system. On average, the fuselage compartment (13) has a fuel tank and the payload bay. By the tail section (14) is mounted starter-booster stage (15).

Said device operates as follows.

After separation from the launch vehicle produced CDS and CMP concluded on march speed and altitude. Further downstream from the CDS, and simultaneously starts the supply pilot fuel into the combustion chamber of the power plant from the tank, located in its housing (16). Coming from this fuel tank, igniting using pyro (17), runs the power plant and prepare it for operation on the main fuel, placed in the middle section of the fuselage. Next, the scramjet launch and the rocket begins to cruise flight.

After the end of the active portion of the flight propulsion system is separated from the combat unit. Plot trajectories associated with the planning and the defeat of targets, overcoming a combat unit (18).

Thus, the present invention makes it possible to extend the scope of rockets from scramjet.

1. A method for hitting surface and land targets hypersonic cruise missile (CMP), which consists in removing the missile at a given altitude and flight speed starter-boost stage (CPC), the CPC office, launching cruise scramjet (scramjet), active flight at the design height towards the target, search, capture and destruction of the target, characterized in that, after detection and target coordinates at a point of the trajectory, computed onboard equipment control system (BASS) at BASU command produced off scramjet followed by separation of the power plant from the march stage through operation piroustroystv and defeat the purpose of planning is carried out combat unit, correcting its trajectory according to the homing system.

2. The apparatus for performing the method hitting surface and land targets hypersonic cruise missile, comprising a solid-starter-booster stage (CPC) and the marching step with ventral air intake scramjet liquid hydrocarbon fuel, comprising a power unit (SU) comprising an air inlet, a combustor, a nozzle, a fluid system and devices that support the operation scramjet, characterized in that the sustainer stage CMP is based on two modules, the first of which is to combat and is designed as a glider sustainer stage CMP, and the second - as a module sustainer propulsion system that combines all of the above device SU and fixed under the fuselage of the combat module packet (parallel) scheme, with the possibility of separating in flight by BASS team.

3. The apparatus of claim. 2, characterized in that the propulsion unit (ISU) mounted under the fuselage piroustroystvami combat unit and connected thereto discontinuous hydro and electrical connectors.

http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/257/2579409.html

Image

Hitesh
BRFite
Posts: 793
Joined: 04 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Hitesh » 09 May 2016 09:49

Do you honestly believe this article by Hemant Rout? Ever heard of pressitutes?

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 562
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramdas » 09 May 2016 09:52

@hitesh: Touching faith in Namo. When did you last get news of a A-5 test ? No smoke without fire.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10117
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby sum » 09 May 2016 10:01

Hitesh wrote:Do you honestly believe this article by Hemant Rout? Ever heard of pressitutes?

Actually, he was dead right even the last time he reported the A-5 test being recalled back at last minute ( though many on BRF abused him and said that it would happen soon but IIRC, it never happened)

Also, he has top level sources in ITR it seems like and the part about waiting for PMO nod seems a direct quote from the "source". Wonder if it is that official's opinion or a fact based on his knowlegde

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 09 May 2016 10:15

thanks Austin - this is it boys...makes sense that nothing aerodynamic of a practical weight and cost can go at Mach6 close to the ground and still remain in one piece. so brahmos2 is about a long range, fast transit and ceiling in upper atmosphere using scramjet, then perhaps a Mach3 terminal stage. if they pull the MTCR stunt of 300k again, this project makes no sense for us.

it has to be 600-1000km to be considered a practical weapon for us.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 09 May 2016 10:23

Singha wrote:thanks Austin - this is it boys...makes sense that nothing aerodynamic of a practical weight and cost can go at Mach6 close to the ground and still remain in one piece. so brahmos2 is about a long range, fast transit and ceiling in upper atmosphere using scramjet, then perhaps a Mach3 terminal stage. if they pull the MTCR stunt of 300k again, this project makes no sense for us.

it has to be 600-1000km to be considered a practical weapon for us.


The Range would be a vague for sure much like vague range for Brahmos , They would just offically say as 290 Km for MTCR reason else it would invite Cat 1 sanctions on Brahmos Corp or even DRDO/NPO Mash by Ayotholas , the real range is certainly above 500 km . Even the true range of Brahmos in hi hi profile is 600 km when flown at 18 km is something DRDO has officially suggested in some presentation but officially they keep the range to under 300 km

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19956
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 09 May 2016 13:17

ramdas wrote:@karanM: Our conventional forces are not going to be deterrent to PRC in the foreseeable future. Nuclear deterrence along with a discrete jettisoning of NFU will alone cover up for our conventional weakness.


Completely disagree here. Our conventional forces are the single biggest deterrent to PRC. Nuclear deterrence alone is pyrrhic and somewhat defeating as it limits India's options. If India has a robust nuclear force able to take out most PRC top tier targets and a very robust economy and international support plus conventional force (backed by a strong MIC which is an essential part of the economy). PRC will think 3-4 times before a conflict. Make a 1000 Agnis and have a weak conventional force, there are still chances of a local conflict. What will you do, launch Agnis if you lose a NE city and lose the entire country in the progress? Everyone knows it won't happen. The answer then is to never lose the NE in conventional war.

Where I disagree is in the priority given to nuclear deterrence: you say it comes after the economy, conventional forces etc. Given our situation, credible nuke deterrence should be priority one. It is worth far more than any sovereignty eroding alliance with unkil. GDP growth etc come later. Even Deng had the luxury of going slow on military projects and focussing on the economy thanks to the thermonuclear arsenal and the DF-4/5 which were being tested in Mao's time and became operational in the early Deng years.


No, you misunderstood my post. Nuclear deterrence is an option of last resort and cannot be used in warfighting to the point it becomes nearly useless (but has its need). However, it needs to be held as one aspect of overall power, not "the" factor.

What you need to do is make everything so strong, that your opponent is forced to consider that at every point of the ladder he chooses to fight with you, you hurt the opponent very badly to the point that his victory is nigh impossible. India is a rational player. It cannot be taken as a "mad dog" which will let "all fly" like TSP does in terms of saber rattling. Deng had the luxury of going slow and focusing on teh economy due to his investments in the conventional military not the nuclear one, please see what happened with Vietnam. During Deng's time, funding for the J-10 etc ramped up.

What you are completely ignoring is the fact that a mere 2-3 Agni-5/yr directed at PRC will not deter it.
A well funded Indian economy, with the latest armaments in IA/IAF/IN plus a local MIC able to replenish them, will.

Moreover with PRC bulding up even on missile defences etc in the not too distant future, the old Agnis would not make the cut. Eventually, MIRVed ICBMs (operational in a 5-7 year timeframe from now) is what we would require. The Agni-V is a first step to that. The alternative is to be a U.S protectorate.


I am sorry, but these are rhetorical arguments. How are we sure PRC defenses can intercept the MaRVs in the old Agnis? Plus where is the evidence that Agni-V has been cancelled?
And how is Modi making India a US protectorate - when was the last time as US protectorate cracked down on Unkils NGOs, put them on assorted lists, scrutinized their antics.

Again, please hark back to PV Narasimha's policy viz TSP. Talk, talk, hit, hit.

In short, when applied to real politik, engage where you must, do your national aims elsewhere.

To be turned into a bali ka bakra at the convenience of the U.S. If ``nationalist" (feeling let down to have to add such quotation marks) NaMo delays A-5 testing and induction for appeasing unkil not by a few weeks but by months (at least 6 at worst who knows ? with the monson being a ready excuse to postpone the test by some more months), where is the hope of getting a credibledeterrent vis a vis PRC ? All this strengthens the hand of the traitorous lobby out to turn us into a U.S ``ally". At this rate the A-5 will be inducted when it is obsolete, not because of DRDO's or the services' fault, but because ``nationalist NaMo" valued the west's goodwill and some FDI more than a credible deterrent. Someone more rooted in our past would never have let the nation down this way.


How does A-5 get obsolete in 6 months time? Why will DRDO sit for 6 months and not use the time to do more in its test? In 6 months will PRC develop and deploy an ABM system?

All this report suggests is the test may be delayed by a few weeks. Its itself unclear whether its because PMO cannot commit to having NaMo visit (which DRDO wants) or whether its because of foreign trips.

As regards valuing the west's goodwill, NaMo will value anyone's goodwill if they can get enough benefit for India. Lets not even talk of others "rooted in India's past" who were mostly champagne socialists and have no idea of what it means to lack benefits.

If this is the effect of Namo, it is just the UPA govt minus the scams.


This is just political hand waving. UPA without the scams, and without the EJ subversion and constant appeasement of some sections over others.
UPA was completely subverted body and soul.
This is the current Govt and the efforts its making.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/busi ... 027832.cms

If you think operational improvement of this level of magnitude, and effective decisions are not related to national security as versus a handful of nukes, then you are completely mistaken.

Even regarding the NGOs, he has slowly backtracked on the initial tough stance against Ford foundation.


No, the point has been made. All NGOs of that level now need to clear their funding with MHA.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/t ... 544417.ece

Now, if there is a dependence for security on the west rather than on our deterrent, it is but a matter of timebefore the NGOs get a free hand


Hardly. You are conflating the need to occasionally throw a bone to the west with a feeling that all is lost.

again. All this for some extra FDI...With MMS, it was clear that a corrupt extraconstitutional power called the shots. In this case, there is no spine or the priorities are simply wrong: a good business friendly chief minister may not have it in him to protect national interest at the prime ministerial level.


This is quite frankly completely mistaken. "Business friendly chief minister" used as some sort of epithet and considered as antithetical to "national interest". NaMo is "business friendly" to the degree that he is focused on improving processes so that everyone benefits. Big, small, all. Not focused on one group. Crony capitalism is down in his watch. Even the India baiting Economist which loathes bleddy Indians making their electoral choices, admits: http://www.firstpost.com/business/modi- ... 71340.html

Not being business friendly has reduced this nation to a literal basket case in some areas, with living standards in many states equivalent to those of sub saharan Africa. Our first world cities are more 2nd world. We have a few engines of innovation, ISRO/DRDO/some PSUs/Pvt firms, some world class services capabilities.. but overall, as a nation, we have to do far far more.

We cannot ignore the sheer human and even security cost of having a huge section of our populace so behind that PRC can merely sponsor an insurgency to knock India down, and which is how most our opponents are managing India, while we count our nukes on our fingers.

As of now, Namo's nationalist credentials are beginning to look like a joke.


Au contraire. He is playing a tough balancing game, but it speaks very poorly of us nationalists if we are unable or unwilling to understand the pressures he is working under and what his priorities need to be.

If NaMo delays an Agni test or two and reduces the depth of insecurity and fear in the west regarding the "eebil Hindoo nationalists" whilst keeping the Indian economy at high growth rates & reducing the disaffection of the average Indian citizen towards GOI, he would have automatically moved a huge section of the people to the mainstream and reduced PRC/TSPs leverage over India.

In turn by making that broadbased, he then moves us into PRC territory which they are aghast at us attempting. People go to India because they have to, since everyone is there. And then play nice with GOI because they must.

PRC did this.

With a surplus of funds, India then funds its military correspondingly. PRC did this.

This is way more powerful than a handful of Agnis - which too will occur but with minimal fuss.

To compare NaMo to a spineless, corrupt MMS - no nationalist should ever do this.
MMS was a toady, a man who watched India consumed from within and without and for the sake of power sat and did nothing.

He cared two hoots for India and praised colonialists. Claimed x have first claim on resources. Every odious act that could be done, was. Where is the comparison, even.
Last edited by Karan M on 09 May 2016 15:02, edited 3 times in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19956
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 09 May 2016 13:27

sum wrote:
Hitesh wrote:Do you honestly believe this article by Hemant Rout? Ever heard of pressitutes?

Actually, he was dead right even the last time he reported the A-5 test being recalled back at last minute ( though many on BRF abused him and said that it would happen soon but IIRC, it never happened)

Also, he has top level sources in ITR it seems like and the part about waiting for PMO nod seems a direct quote from the "source". Wonder if it is that official's opinion or a fact based on his knowlegde


And did you notice how wrong he was about the Akash and other claims?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19956
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 09 May 2016 14:54

BTW Ramdas ji, before you dismiss NaMo as being fake, in being attuned to big business, not a true nationalist, read this.
http://www.foundingfuel.com/article/a-d ... -of-india/
Ctrl+F for Arun Maira if you wish to skip the whole article.

Very easy to overlook all of this on a military forum with an eye on nukes etc. But at the end of the day, this is as important as Agnis. These desperate souls will be the ones who are used by vested interests since they have no choice. When NaMo fixes crony capitalism and wants business to thrive, it is they whom he is giving a second chance, and perhaps, even a third or a fourth as India advances. Otherwise, our country will remain weak and divided.

In short don't assume he is an idiot, or a traitor. He has a keen pulse of what makes a people strong as versus a few reports in the media and what not.
UPA, Kejri - all these dharna types - none of them ever will work as hard as somebody who has come up the hard way and understands that strength has multiple components to it.

srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2086
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srin » 09 May 2016 17:39

sum wrote:
Hitesh wrote:Do you honestly believe this article by Hemant Rout? Ever heard of pressitutes?

Actually, he was dead right even the last time he reported the A-5 test being recalled back at last minute ( though many on BRF abused him and said that it would happen soon but IIRC, it never happened)

Also, he has top level sources in ITR it seems like and the part about waiting for PMO nod seems a direct quote from the "source". Wonder if it is that official's opinion or a fact based on his knowlegde


You've hit upon the crux of the issue. If HKR's source is an official in ITR, then the real reason might be distorted. But if it is someone very high in MoD or DRDO, then it might just be accurate. Or it may be disinformation who knows (though I can't fathom a reason for it).

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19956
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 09 May 2016 18:49

HKR has a source in ITR, not DRDO but somebody civilian/contractor related involved with the testing etc. He then taps some rtd. folks to add more masala on top of it. Then his own spin to make it sound very salacious.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_29190 » 09 May 2016 19:24

Singha wrote:thanks Austin - this is it boys...makes sense that nothing aerodynamic of a practical weight and cost can go at Mach6 close to the ground and still remain in one piece. so brahmos2 is about a long range, fast transit and ceiling in upper atmosphere using scramjet, then perhaps a Mach3 terminal stage. if they pull the MTCR stunt of 300k again, this project makes no sense for us.

it has to be 600-1000km to be considered a practical weapon for us.


May be I am missing something, just going for a different line of thinking. What kind of target would I require a hypersonic solution? The easiest one is ship, may be nuke storage sites etc. Fundamentally time constraint targets. What are the chances of hitting a ship 1K away?

Can it be served with a much simpler solution? Like a ballistic missile having datalink ? Or a glide weapon on top of a missile,released from exo, instead of using a scramjet?

I am thinking of the cost v/s benefit as well.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9720
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 09 May 2016 19:27

The benefits would be the same as you would find for a cruise missile strike vs a short range ballistic missile strike. You aren't going to get a lot more economical if you are going to be lobbing tactical hypersonic gliders from exo using a ballistic missile.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 09 May 2016 19:50

As they say speed has its own stealth , all time critical targets and once launched stealthily from lo aircraft or subs , hypersonic will be game changer

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 562
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramdas » 09 May 2016 20:16

How does A-5 get obsolete in 6 months time? Why will DRDO sit for 6 months and not use the time to do more in its test? In 6 months will PRC develop and deploy an ABM system?


A-5 itself doesn't get obsolete in 6 months time. In order to deploy A-5 we need one more developmental trial and 2-3 user trials at the very least. If each trial is delayed by at least 6 months, you see the overall delay in deploying the system. The latest A-5 trial is delayed by at least 6 months. After Namo's pilgrimage to DC, the monsoon begins. That rules out testing till September (given that clear conditions are required for the best telemetry etc). Who knows what foreign pilgrimage/ UN meeting comes next ? The delay in deployment of A-5 could be upto 9 months per test * 4 tests = three years. Plus 2 years for the time the undelayed schedule would require for getting 4 A-5 tests done. All in all, deployment would be around 2021 for a system first tested in 2012. Worse, if the anti-national political forces make it that thanks to our democracy, the whole program could be scrapped altogether. By 2021, PRC would likelyhave begun deploying ABM capabilities. This is the slowdown that needs to be avoided at all cost. By 2018-19 GI should begin testing MIRVed long range missiles (to be deployed in the 2021-22 time frame) to ensure continued deterrent credibility.

If there is so much fear of a negative western reaction, they should continue its testing as a canisterized SLV for small satellites in the league of the Chinese LM/CZ-11 (which is a DF-31 variant). An NIAS study recommends the production of 7 A-5 a year for small satellite launches alone. This would help developing A-5 and its successors.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_29190 » 09 May 2016 21:05

Austin wrote:As they say speed has its own stealth , all time critical targets and once launched stealthily from lo aircraft or subs , hypersonic will be game changer


This is where I have my doubts, about the requirement of time critical targets. If I am stalking a target and it is time critical, would I ask for a hypersonic missile to be launched from 1000k away? If it is during war, there could be better & cheaper options available. During peace time what target would require a Mach 7 missile?

At this moment land targets dont even have a counter for a Mach 3 missile like Brahmos, nor I expect every land target been defended against Mach 3 in future either.
Last edited by member_29190 on 09 May 2016 21:12, edited 2 times in total.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_29190 » 09 May 2016 21:11

brar_w wrote:The benefits would be the same as you would find for a cruise missile strike vs a short range ballistic missile strike. You aren't going to get a lot more economical if you are going to be lobbing tactical hypersonic gliders from exo using a ballistic missile.


I am describing about the technological challenge and cost associated with it. I am sure a ballistic misille launched glide weapon( or even a high altitude aircraft with rocket power weapon ) would be technologically easier solution & cheaper than a scramjet to achieve speed on a solution.

The cruise v/s ballistic is ofcourse BM are bulkier for the range they provide compared to cruise. A Mach 7 missile is not going to be light as a CM.

Other than tactical requirements, I really dont see the advantage of using Mach 7+ vehicles in stragetic roles. A BM is much cheaper.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9720
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 09 May 2016 21:20

I am sure a ballistic misille launched glide weapon( or even a high altitude aircraft) would be technologically easier solution & cheaper than a scramjet to achieve speed on a solution.


There is really no precident on cost of an operational reentry glider able to navigate, and be networked to attack a moving target while there is obviously data on cost to get an RV to space. Then there is the greater SA afforded thanks to SSA systems since we're talking about altitudes well above 100km. A CRUISE missile puts an enormous SA burden on a target.

As far as size is concerned that is not a problem if you design. It right with a time critical target mind. The. US intends on developing 500nm scramjet missiles for its tactical fighters. If you want a weapon only for strategic targets such as launch silos etc you would need a larger system but the brahmos 2 would naturally overlap the brahmos target list.

. The cruise v/s ballistic is ofcourse BM are bulkier for the range they provide compared to cruise. A Mach 7 missile is not going to be light as a CM.

Other than tactical requirements, I really dont see the advantage of using Mach 7+ vehicles in stragetic roles. A BM is much cheaper.


Could be depending on the mission and how well a target is defended..

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby tsarkar » 10 May 2016 15:00

How is the scramjet powered missile flying at Mach 6-7 with terminal ballistic / glide trajectory better than rocket powered Shourya also flying at Mach 6-7 with terminal ballistic / glide trajectory?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 10 May 2016 15:43

tsarkar wrote:How is the scramjet powered missile flying at Mach 6-7 with terminal ballistic / glide trajectory better than rocket powered Shourya also flying at Mach 6-7 with terminal ballistic / glide trajectory?


For the least Higher energy efficiency and specific impulse of scram-jet means you end up with packaging density that makes it flexible to carry it on any platforms air,land or sea. Rocket be it liquid fuel or solid fuel will be far more bulkier limiting it to ground based vehicle and larger footprint.

Thats like similar to asking why do we need Brahmos when Prithvi-250/350 can do the same job with similar range ,speed and payload.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_29190 » 10 May 2016 16:55

If weight is one of the concern, you could have rocket power missile launched from a aircaft( sort of Brahmos Mini). The rocket will provide the terminal hypersonic aided by the gravity. If range is a concern, have the capability for the missile to glide for a distance, before kicking off the rocket.

I can see the need for a hypersonic BVR kind of weapon( again it is tactical ), but for ground & water targets there are cheaper options.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_29190 » 10 May 2016 17:03

brar_w wrote:
Could be depending on the mission and how well a target is defended..


A well defended target (specially ground based) will be a sitting duck in a sort of way.. It is not mobile.

So you just overwhelm it's defences. It will still be cheaper. It is not guranted that the wonder weapon will hit bulls eye.

On the other hand for example... 50 Prithvi's 1 ton raining on PA nuke base would let the world know why we Indians do Diwali.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 10 May 2016 18:25

the boxy and irregular shape of these next gen scramjet weapons will be a challenge to package vs the smooth round shape of todays missile

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby tsarkar » 10 May 2016 19:28

Austin wrote:
tsarkar wrote:How is the scramjet powered missile flying at Mach 6-7 with terminal ballistic / glide trajectory better than rocket powered Shourya also flying at Mach 6-7 with terminal ballistic / glide trajectory?


For the least Higher energy efficiency and specific impulse of scram-jet means you end up with packaging density that makes it flexible to carry it on any platforms air,land or sea. Rocket be it liquid fuel or solid fuel will be far more bulkier limiting it to ground based vehicle and larger footprint.

Thats like similar to asking why do we need Brahmos when Prithvi-250/350 can do the same job with similar range ,speed and payload.

Actually a better comparison to Brahmos would be 3M-54E rather than SA-2 engined Prithvi. And 3M-54E is more compact than Brahmos and does the same job cheaper than BrahMos. Which is why Russian ships & submarines carry 3M-54E. The only advantage Brahmos has that its powered all the way and can perform terminal manoeuvers that the rocket dart of 3M-54E cant. Ditching the engine takes away that advantage.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9720
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 10 May 2016 20:04

Singha wrote:the boxy and irregular shape of these next gen scramjet weapons will be a challenge to package vs the smooth round shape of todays missile


Most of the earlier and even current scram jet work has been done to develop and validate propulsion and hence none of those vehicles were ever expected to transition to a weapon. That will change soon. The next decade will see many weapons. System transitionable designs tested.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/produc ... -hssw.html

Image
Last edited by brar_w on 10 May 2016 22:32, edited 2 times in total.

tushar_m

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby tushar_m » 10 May 2016 20:50

http://sputniknews.com/asia/20160510/10 ... riumf.html


S400 coming to India in 2017-2022: Parrikar


NEW DELHI (Sputnik) — The Indian Air Force plans to introduce Russian S-400 Triumf Missile System to its military arsenal next year. The cost of the deal has not been divulged by India but according to other sources, India is likely to pay approximately USD 6 billion for five S400 units.

Expressing enthusiasm over the performance of the S-400 Triumf Missile System, Parrikar said in Parliament today that the S-400 has better performance parameters compared to the S-300 in many respects, such as maximum and minimum target engagement range, minimum target engagement altitude, and maximum speed of target engaged. Parrikar also said that the S-400 is better in terms of the number of targets and maximum radar cross-section of targets engaged simultaneously as compared to the S-300. It also takes less deployment time as compared to the S-300.

India’s Defense Acquisition Council approved the purchase of the S-400 Triumf Missile Systems along with associated equipment and missiles from Russia. According to the Defense Minister, a separate contract has been signed for the supply of five Full Mission Simulators for SU-30 MKI aircraft with a Russian firm during 2015-16.

Air Marshal Anil Chopra (Retd.) tells Sputnik:

“The S-400 has many qualities. It has a very high range. Our 40-year-old existing air defense system has a range of only 20-25 kilometers. With S-300 and S-400 [systems], we can target enemy aircraft from a range of 250 kilometers. If we are to protect big cities like Delhi, Mumbai and Bangalore, this system will help us destroy enemy planes and missiles from quite a far range. Secondly, the S-400 is quite precise. The old system lacks precision. The S-400 has 95% precision hitting the target. The precision of our existing system is only about 80%.”

The S-400 is the most advanced air defense system in the world and many countries are vying to purchase the units including China. However, Russia has made it clear to prospective buyers that it will only sell the system to foreign countries after its own military requirements are fulfilled.


member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_23370 » 10 May 2016 22:15

Why does IAF need this? A stop gap till Indigenous system comes online? the LRSAM and AAD should be the priority.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4874
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 11 May 2016 04:29

^^^

USD 6 billion is quite a lot. During that time frame 2017-2022, Akash Mk.1, Akash Mk.2, MRSAM, ABM (Phase-1) and possibly ABM (Phase-2) would be all coming online. Along with QRSAM/LLQRSAM. Indigenous LRSAM project is also underway. Will there be enough money to purchase all these?

Seems like wrong priority.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_22539 » 11 May 2016 07:12

Karan M wrote:BTW Ramdas ji, before you dismiss NaMo as being fake, in being attuned to big business, not a true nationalist, read this.
http://www.foundingfuel.com/article/a-d ... -of-india/
Ctrl+F for Arun Maira if you wish to skip the whole article.

Very easy to overlook all of this on a military forum with an eye on nukes etc. But at the end of the day, this is as important as Agnis. These desperate souls will be the ones who are used by vested interests since they have no choice. When NaMo fixes crony capitalism and wants business to thrive, it is they whom he is giving a second chance, and perhaps, even a third or a fourth as India advances. Otherwise, our country will remain weak and divided.

In short don't assume he is an idiot, or a traitor. He has a keen pulse of what makes a people strong as versus a few reports in the media and what not.
UPA, Kejri - all these dharna types - none of them ever will work as hard as somebody who has come up the hard way and understands that strength has multiple components to it.


Thanks for the article. It is truly an eye-opener. One knows that there is job stress (I being from kerala, perhaps the most job stressed state, have heard of this from my parent's era), but to read of it in a concrete example is truly sobering.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3671
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Kashi » 11 May 2016 07:16

srai wrote:^^^

USD 6 billion is quite a lot. During that time frame 2017-2022, Akash Mk.1, Akash Mk.2, MRSAM, ABM (Phase-1) and possibly ABM (Phase-2) would be all coming online. Along with QRSAM/LLQRSAM. Indigenous LRSAM project is also underway. Will there be enough money to purchase all these?

Seems like wrong priority.


That it would be if all the systems were mutually exclusive. If we'll get ALL these systems and the acquisition of S400 DOES NOT compromise or delay our indigenous efforts, it would be a good stop gap till our indigenous systems are ready to rumble.

ABMs are still some way away from deployment, though.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4874
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby srai » 11 May 2016 07:53

^^^

If money was no issue, then no problem. But given how tight the budget is for acquisitions, modernization, R&D and salaries, something gotta give. Most likely it will result in a lot less order for indigenous products like Akash.

Fund crunch delays IAF’s purchase plan

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 11 May 2016 08:10

MOD PRESS

Purchase of Russian S-400 Triumf Missile


The Defence Acquisition Council has in its meeting held on 17th December, 2015, accorded approval for purchase of S-400 LRSAM system (Triumf Missile System) along with associated equipment and missiles from Russia. A contract has been signed for supply of five Full Mission Simulators for SU-30 MKI aircraft with a Russian firm during 2015-16.

S-400 has better performance parameters compared to S-300 on account of (i) maximum and minimum target engagement range, (ii) minimum target engagement altitude, (iii) maximum speed of target engaged, (iv) number of targets engaged simultaneously, (v) maximum radar cross-section of targets engaged, and (vi) deployment time.

The five firing units of S-400 LRSAM system are planned for induction in Indian Air Force in 13th plan period (2017-2022).


This information was given by Defence Minister Shri Manohar Parrikar in a written reply to Shri N Gokula – Krishnan in Rajya Sabha today.

DM/NAMPI/RAJ  
(Release ID :145137)

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10117
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby sum » 11 May 2016 08:30

^^ So, all the news about S-400 was indeed correct and not Lifafa as had been decired when it first burst out!

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 11 May 2016 08:41

sum wrote:^^ So, all the news about S-400 was indeed correct and not Lifafa as had been decired when it first burst out!

Lifafa was the news that the deal would be signed when Namo met Putin. And if by lousy luck Namo isn't elected again - even this may fall through (2017-2022 dates for S-400)... No point celebrating anything until it is actually in hand.

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Kersi D » 11 May 2016 08:50

Where will the S 400 be based in India ?
My suggestion,
2 in NE - Assam & Arunachal Pradesh
1 in north - J&K and Punjab
1 in Rajasthan - for Rajasthan and Haryana
1 in Gujarat - For Gujarat and Maharashtra i.e. Mumbai

I would suggest one system for Andaman Islands and another of Visakhapatnam

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 11 May 2016 09:19

More likely these 5 systems will be placed at Delhi , Mumbai and other key cities

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby member_23370 » 11 May 2016 09:27

May 11th would be ideal day to test A-5 and K-4 to full range.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests