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.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 30 Jan 2017 19:43

siddhu wrote:The scenario you propose is out numbering the Chinese missiles

Please point me to where I have said that? I did not say anything of the sort.

The question was plain and simple and has now been answered by many people. Costly or not, less in number or not there can be some limited defence against concentrated MBRL attacks using Akash missiles

That is all the information we have. The only conclusion that can be reached is that any response or preparation for such an attack must have multiple approaches and not merely Akash missiles. But it also means that Akash missiles cannot be ruled out as part of the response, costly or not, less in number or not.

Someone in the tanks and armour thread had posted a great article describing a large number of proposed defences against incoming anti tank munitions - designed and made by a large number of countries including Israel, USA, Sweden, Germany, Czechoslovakia and even Turkey. (I do not recall even one cost argument in that technically informative article). It only means that if quick reaction defences against targets from short ranges are possible - it may be worth looking at types of defences possible against MBRLs. This is all OT for this thread. Maybe I will shift it to the dhoti shivering thread.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby nam » 30 Jan 2017 19:44

shiv wrote:The Chinese will be treated to equal firepower as a compliment. But this is all theoretical. But at last count I heard that several thousand Akash missiles are being inducted and in addition there is a requirement for even more SAMs of various types. Surely we are not reserving all this for PLAAF aircraft only?


Akash is a perfect tool against CMs. Read somewhere the missile rounds are actually quite cheap.

Probably something similar to AESA WLR, able to que Akash, with fragmentation warhead in to the path of incoming rockets would be ideal.

AESA obviously to manage large number of targets.

siddhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 60
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 16:02

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby siddhu » 30 Jan 2017 19:58

shiv wrote:
siddhu wrote:The scenario you propose is out numbering the Chinese missiles

Please point me to where I have said that? I did not say anything of the sort.

The question was plain and simple and has now been answered by many people. Costly or not, less in number or not there can be some limited defence against concentrated MBRL attacks using Akash missiles

That is all the information we have. The only conclusion that can be reached is that any response or preparation for such an attack must have multiple approaches and not merely Akash missiles. But it also means that Akash missiles cannot be ruled out as part of the response, costly or not, less in number or not.

Someone in the tanks and armour thread had posted a great article describing a large number of proposed defences against incoming anti tank munitions - designed and made by a large number of countries including Israel, USA, Sweden, Germany, Czechoslovakia and even Turkey. (I do not recall even one cost argument in that technically informative article). It only means that if quick reaction defences against targets from short ranges are possible - it may be worth looking at types of defences possible against MBRLs. This is all OT for this thread. Maybe I will shift it to the dhoti shivering thread.


hmmm ... Well I assume when you want to protect the airbase, you need to kill all the missiles. You dont know which one will fall where.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1634
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Sid » 30 Jan 2017 20:01

Some good use case from Israel, specially against countering saturation attacks.

There were instances where US troops were using Javelin ATGM to hit Talibunnies (sometimes single combatants venturing alone in dark). They used it because they can irrespective of the cost. But they also have endless money to go with.

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/12/14/bo ... tem-video/

While Iron Dome more than proved its abilities in knocking hundreds of Hamas-fired rockets out of the sky during the summer’s Operation Protective Edge and previously, government and Defense Ministry officials are concerned that even its close-to-90 percent success rate against smaller Grads and Qassam munitions could be child’s play compared to what may lie ahead in future conflicts


Additionally, at upwards of $70,000 to even $100,000 per Tamir interceptor, it’s a costly response, and – even while the missiles are GPS-synced to only fire when the incoming munition is headed for pre-defined populated areas – may still be overwhelmed by dozens of incoming salvos of rockets, fired at once to overcome Iron Dome’s ability to track divergent targets simultaneously.


Ivry noted that, “In ’96 we began developing the Nautilus as a prototype. We deployed a system in Kiryat Shmona (Israel’s northernmost city, and alongside the Lebanese border)


“It was a collection of components from different systems and its achievement was the fact that is succeeded in keeping the beam for two continuous seconds on the same point. The radar was the prototype of the radar used in the Arrow system (Green Pine). This system was not operational, but it succeeded in proving that it was feasible. That was the goal. But then they decided to put this project on hold. They thought it would be less costly to stop the rocket fire by two [IDF] divisions. In reality, the rocket fire never stopped,” Ivry said.

siddhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 60
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 16:02

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby siddhu » 30 Jan 2017 20:04

nam wrote:
shiv wrote:The Chinese will be treated to equal firepower as a compliment. But this is all theoretical. But at last count I heard that several thousand Akash missiles are being inducted and in addition there is a requirement for even more SAMs of various types. Surely we are not reserving all this for PLAAF aircraft only?


Akash is a perfect tool against CMs. Read somewhere the missile rounds are actually quite cheap.

Probably something similar to AESA WLR, able to que Akash, with fragmentation warhead in to the path of incoming rockets would be ideal.

AESA obviously to manage large number of targets.


Cheaper than CRAM bullets ??

From wiki .... Each missile is expected to have starting costs below US$500,000, i.e. under ₹20 million (₹ 2 Template:Crores). Is this cheap??

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby deejay » 30 Jan 2017 20:09

siddhu wrote:
nam wrote:
Akash is a perfect tool against CMs. Read somewhere the missile rounds are actually quite cheap.

Probably something similar to AESA WLR, able to que Akash, with fragmentation warhead in to the path of incoming rockets would be ideal.

AESA obviously to manage large number of targets.


Cheaper than CRAM bullets ??

From wiki .... Each missile is expected to have starting costs below US$500,000, i.e. under ₹20 million (₹ 2 Template:Crores). Is this cheap??


What is the cost of single MLRS round capable of doing 200/400 kms with guidance kit?

siddhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 60
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 16:02

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby siddhu » 30 Jan 2017 20:12

Sid wrote:Some good use case from Israel, specially against countering saturation attacks.

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/12/14/bo ... tem-video/



Hmmm ... this looks like viable option .. we have KALI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KALI_(electron_accelerator)

I hope they weaponize it soon.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7477
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 30 Jan 2017 20:16

siddhu wrote:
nam wrote:
Akash is a perfect tool against CMs. Read somewhere the missile rounds are actually quite cheap.

Probably something similar to AESA WLR, able to que Akash, with fragmentation warhead in to the path of incoming rockets would be ideal.

AESA obviously to manage large number of targets.


Cheaper than CRAM bullets ??

From wiki .... Each missile is expected to have starting costs below US$500,000, i.e. under ₹20 million (₹ 2 Template:Crores). Is this cheap??


CRAM is not only restricted to a gun although that is by far the cheapest. The Tamir is an affordable interceptor for such missions but even it is quite expensive when confronting high saturation attacks and salvos. On the IFPC for example the TAMIR is the high end interceptor integrated into the MRL and get's 15 interceptors for launcher. The riskier bet they are taking is with the MHTK which they have only recently begun test firing. You can cram 60 of those into the same launcher. For protecting fixed installations you can potentially have 100's of such interceptors. The targeting isn't tought, existing radars can do that..its getting cost effective interceptors that can keep your defenses up amidst salvos of strike from rockets, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and even PGM's.

http://www.janes.com/article/62811/lock ... nterceptor

Hmmm ... this looks like viable option .. we have KALI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KALI_(ele ... ccelerator)

I hope they weaponize it soon.


DEW's are being looked very seriously by all. There are programs of record for this but they too are limited against saturation attacks since unlike missiles, they work one target at a time so aren't stand alone systems.

siddhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 60
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 16:02

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby siddhu » 30 Jan 2017 20:17

deejay wrote:
siddhu wrote:
Cheaper than CRAM bullets ??

From wiki .... Each missile is expected to have starting costs below US$500,000, i.e. under ₹20 million (₹ 2 Template:Crores). Is this cheap??


What is the cost of single MLRS round capable of doing 200/400 kms with guidance kit?


I don't have exact figure, but i read it on some fourm that its around US$20,000. I am not sure of it though.

siddhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 60
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 16:02

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby siddhu » 30 Jan 2017 20:21

brar_w wrote:
DEW's are being looked very seriously by all. There are programs of record for this but they too are limited against saturation attacks since unlike missiles, they work one target at a time so aren't stand alone systems.


Yeh .. thats true but we have to see how fast it can fry an in coming missile and at what distance. Also how fast they can move to next target.
I guess multiple beams will do :roll: :rotfl: .

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby deejay » 30 Jan 2017 20:28

siddhu wrote:
deejay wrote:
What is the cost of single MLRS round capable of doing 200/400 kms with guidance kit?


I don't have exact figure, but i read it on some fourm that its around US$20,000. I am not sure of it though.


Wow! 200 Kms with guidance works out to US$100/km - that is cheap. What sort of warheads would come in this kind of cost range?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7477
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 30 Jan 2017 20:32

The GMLRS/GMLRS-AW has a 2016 fly-away cost of roughly $142K. IF you're aiming for guided targeting at triple digit KM distances you aren't going to get it down to thousands or even tens of thousands.

siddhu wrote:
brar_w wrote:
DEW's are being looked very seriously by all. There are programs of record for this but they too are limited against saturation attacks since unlike missiles, they work one target at a time so aren't stand alone systems.


Yeh .. thats true but we have to see how fast it can fry an in coming missile and at what distance. Also how fast they can move to next target.
I guess multiple beams will do :roll: :rotfl: .


Multiple beams are still impacted by SWaP-C as is the entire system. Directed energy prototypes have been frying mortars and UAV's for quite a while now, and with SSL's you finally have them down to a pragmatic weight/KW, and cost/KW even down to them being mobile and on platforms that can keep up with other battle elements. However, they are only an added layer and help reverse the cost dynamics significantly when confronted with salvos and saturation attacks. But they must work hand in hand with kinetic systems.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby deejay » 30 Jan 2017 20:40

brar_w wrote:The GMLRS/GMLRS-AW has a 2016 fly-away cost of roughly $142K. IF you're aiming for guided targeting at triple digit KM distances you aren't going to get it down to thousands or even tens of thousands.


What is the range and warhead type and any idea how much the price will vary with increase/decrease in range to say 200 kms and 400 kms.

I'm sorry if the question is repetitive but the price of incoming vs. defending missile comparison is interesting. If the enemy is launching a USD$ 150, 000 munition at you, what would be a good/ acceptable cost of defence?

Don't get me wrong because personally, I have a totally different matrix of what is acceptable cost.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7477
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 30 Jan 2017 20:45

deejay wrote:
brar_w wrote:The GMLRS/GMLRS-AW has a 2016 fly-away cost of roughly $142K. IF you're aiming for guided targeting at triple digit KM distances you aren't going to get it down to thousands or even tens of thousands.


What is the range and warhead type and any idea how much the price will vary with increase/decrease in range to say 200 kms and 400 kms


This one is actually sub-100 km (Officially 70+ km) range with GPS aided INS. The longer range guided sub-200km rounds are the ATACMS which will run you $600,000+. I would assume that the 400 KM LRPF will probably cost around a $1 Million.

I'm sorry if the question is repetitive but the price of incoming vs. defending missile comparison is interesting. If the enemy is launching a USD$ 150, 000 munition at you, what would be a good/ acceptable cost of defence?

Don't get me wrong because personally, I have a totally different matrix of what is acceptable cost.


If the enemy is launching one at you, you will use the system that is going to get you the absolute best shot of getting a kill. That's what you would do at the tactical level. However planners will plan for layers to the AD that try to compensate for the adversaries offensive capability. You're air defenses are a reflection of the offensive capability you are trying to deter or thwart so if your opponent is going to be building a vast aresenal of cheap, relatively cheap, medium-cost, and high end systems you will naturally respond by developing something that negates this.

This is the classic salvo competition where you not only have to defend the incoming salvo, but respond with you're own offensive capability to prevent future salvos. This has offensive and defensive elements and you must mix defensive capability (ability to defend against different types of threats) with offensive capability - i.e. What you bring to bear once the battle starts and what you can do to defeat prior to the salvo. The latter is what is now loosely termed as "Left of Launch capability". It could be something to the effect of taking out a satellite and making the incoming salvo less precise or a cyber attack that degrades command and control. A classic Let of Launch is the pre-emptive TEL hunt against ballistic missiles.

A lot of this depends on the threat. The Israelis for example defend fixed installations and have a defined threat around their border. The Tamir, its size and cost works for them. When the US Army looked at it and at the threat it wanted something that had higher magazine capacity and lower cost to the Tamir. Hence they inserted a competing interceptor that was tiny, and a fraction of Tamir's cost. In the Indian context the IA and IAF would naturally have to do their own analysis to see what the capability of the threat is, what a saturation attack looks like and which systems to procure to defend against it but ideally from a planning and procurement process you wan't to provide a cost-effective and survivable air defense system against the conventional threat. The larger interceptors are designed around defeating challenging targets and given some of the payload it requires defeating them at a particular altitude and at a particular stand off range. That essentially dictates their size, weight, warhead, speed and guidance and through it - COST. Those aren't necessarily the attributes you look for on a CRAM hence if the threat is large enough you layer up. Same reason you don't use the S400 as a point defense system.
Last edited by brar_w on 30 Jan 2017 20:59, edited 5 times in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 30 Jan 2017 20:47

siddhu wrote:
hmmm ... Well I assume when you want to protect the airbase, you need to kill all the missiles. You dont know which one will fall where.

Obviously that may be the intention but one cannot rely on one method to work 100%. Other methods, including decoys, camouflage, dispersal and marking launch pads and attacking them pre emptively will have to be part of the plan but all this is OT for this thread.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby deejay » 30 Jan 2017 20:48

brar_w wrote:
deejay wrote:
What is the range and warhead type and any idea how much the price will vary with increase/decrease in range to say 200 kms and 400 kms


This one is actually sub-100 km (Officially 70+ km) range with GPS aided INS. The longer range guided sub-200km rounds are the ATACMS which will run you $600,000+. I would assume that the 400 KM LRPF will probably cost around a $1 Million.


Thank You Brar Ji. You are an encyclopedia.

Assuming that Chinese will make it cheaper, a 400 Km LRPF would still be around USD 750K. I'd say use the Akash in blocking those Chinese MLRS. They'll back off. We win rocket to rocket.

Shiv Ji, please continue. You are bursting many Chinese myths here.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 30 Jan 2017 21:04

:D deejay! Will definitely continue - but some of it will go onto the shivering thread. I am scouring Google earth with a fine comb and Tibet is a big place.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7477
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 30 Jan 2017 21:05

deejay wrote:
brar_w wrote:
This one is actually sub-100 km (Officially 70+ km) range with GPS aided INS. The longer range guided sub-200km rounds are the ATACMS which will run you $600,000+. I would assume that the 400 KM LRPF will probably cost around a $1 Million.


Thank You Brar Ji. You are an encyclopedia.

Assuming that Chinese will make it cheaper, a 400 Km LRPF would still be around USD 750K. I'd say use the Akash in blocking those Chinese MLRS. They'll back off. We win rocket to rocket.

Shiv Ji, please continue. You are bursting many Chinese myths here.


Just Brar please :)

China doesn't have the same constraints that the US or Russia does when it comes to how it does LRPF so I'm not sure what path they'll take. I've been trying to get a assessment on what their Ballistic Missile programs cost but haven't yet come across a half decent analysis. MITRE had a really good study that seems to have disappeared. I think their saturation strategy at the 400-500+ ranges is probably one of using Ballistic Missiles. Certainly that is their strategy in the Western Pacific vis-a-vis the US, Japan and others

https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs ... es_AHC.pdf

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby deejay » 30 Jan 2017 21:17

brar_w wrote:...
Just Brar please :)

China doesn't have the same constraints that the US or Russia does when it comes to how it does LRPF so I'm not sure what path they'll take. I've been trying to get a assessment on what their Ballistic Missile programs cost but haven't yet come across a half decent analysis. MITRE had a really good study that seems to have disappeared. I think their saturation strategy at the 400-500+ ranges is probably one of using Ballistic Missiles. Certainly that is their strategy in the Western Pacific vis-a-vis the US, Japan and others

https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs ... es_AHC.pdf


Sure, will stick to Brar.

With data and link posted by Shiv ji on the "...die laughing" thread, methinks, the Chinese are MLRS and other arty oriented on the Indian front and not too heavily dependent on BMs. That maybe for posturing only but the threat is presently long range MLRS.

And that pdf linked above is excellent.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17947
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 30 Jan 2017 21:42

Chinese MBRL saturation attacks are why I have been so insistent on Akash follow on and Astra derivatives, plus enthused by AESA developments. Latter brings higher radar capabilities to guide cheaper rounds out further, while Astra variants offer response time advantages plus mobility at higher cost.

sas
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 37
Joined: 08 Dec 2016 11:53

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby sas » 30 Jan 2017 23:23

disha wrote:
I do have an ask., I think the USN submarines use a separate gas generator and I do not think DRDO/IN went that route. I believe that K-15 and K-4 are ignited right in the tubes and the launch covers open up and the rocket propels itself through the water. It appears that there is a "launch booster" at the tip that acts as an underwater rocket pulling the rocket through the water. Any thoughts?


K-15's fiber glass epoxy canister has a gas generator.

http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/techfocus/oct2001/propulsion.htm

Image

Bheeshma
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 22:01

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Bheeshma » 31 Jan 2017 00:29

Waiting for K-4 mk2 test. Hopefully no more postponement.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby nam » 31 Jan 2017 00:38

I can understand Chinese rockets & MBRL being a threat for airbase. But how can they even accurately target land forces in Himalayan mountains?

If PLA fires from Tibet, they have to consider rarefied atmosphere, targets on reverse slopes, etc. If the rockets miss even by few meters they would fall down more the valley more than 1000 feet below!

On the other hand, we would be targeting at a flat plateau!

The mountains are a asset for our land forces. And with the rarefied atmosphere, our missiles will even longer range!

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2350
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby nam » 31 Jan 2017 00:46

During my reading about Barak8 one of the most interesting aspect I found was it's weight. It is around 250-300KG. That is almost equivalent to a BVR. It gives us more than 75 km in range with that weight from a ground based launcher.

Imagine if we rig it to carry and datalinked to SU30? It can used for boost phase intercepts of Paki paintjobs.

I can think of other uses as well. It is a true asset.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17947
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 31 Jan 2017 03:41

Astra Mk2 was to use a similar propulsion as the Barak-8

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7532
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Gerard » 31 Jan 2017 04:48

disha wrote:
I do have an ask., I think the USN submarines use a separate gas generator and I do not think DRDO/IN went that route. I believe that K-15 and K-4 are ignited right in the tubes and the launch covers open up and the rocket propels itself through the water. It appears that there is a "launch booster" at the tip that acts as an underwater rocket pulling the rocket through the water. Any thoughts?



Cavitator.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TSn6_p8DTww

The k15 and k4 also have gas generator systems that propel them out of their tubes. Missile ignites above water surface.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7404
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Indranil » 31 Jan 2017 06:04

In conventional war, taking out artillery rockets using SAMs is not a viable solution:
1. Cost difference. If you don't take the source out, if the first wave doesn't overwhelm the defense system, the second will, or the thread will.
2. Cartridge depth (what hakeem is calling reload time). Deeper the cartridge, the lower the reload time. Reload time of SAMs is typically higher as the guidance system is much more involved. MLRS systems just have to identify the rocket type placed in the universal barrel.

Current viable defense against artillery rockets are though:

1. CIWS (basically a wall of lead). Pros: cheap and effective. Cons: extremely short range: roughly around 500 mtrs
2. Short range missiles. Pros: longer range. Cons: expensive, effectiveness in conventional battles yet to be ascertained.
3. MLRS: take out the launch site with a longer range artillery rocket. Pros: most cost effective.

We don't have 1 (land based) or 2.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23570
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby SSridhar » 31 Jan 2017 07:11

The K-4 & K-15 use Combo Gas Generators, a combination of gas generator and underwater booster. K-15 uses 150 Kg of solid propellant based on ultrafine ammonium perchlorate, with spherical aluminum powder as catalysts. See this DRDO Newsletter of 2012

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66602
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 31 Jan 2017 07:40

this is the CRAM - phalanx on a truck

Image

we need to look into using the AK630 which is already locally made with a suitable radar & EO system that can track low supersonic inbounds and do some closed loop guidance. perhaps the barak1 "STGR" can do it. russians have numerous such systems too

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66602
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 31 Jan 2017 07:42

note that at 200km the dispersion factor of a unguided round will make it useless..even at 100k thats a real problem.
so these "MLRS" are infact costly missiles. remains to be seen how much cheen can afford of this bucket of SRBM types.
they are costly, fat, slower than BMs and predictable.....well worth a SRSAM or akash to take them out.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66602
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 31 Jan 2017 07:47

apart from airbases, the other important tier1 targets would be (a) army cantonments (b) railway junctions (c) POL storages at refineries or offsite (d) strategic infra like large bridges.

the 2nd bridge at GHY was opened this week
Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66602
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 31 Jan 2017 07:51

in spate the brahmaputra reaches almost to the level of the railway deck below the road bridge. have seen it myself. and this is a narrow point about 1.5km wide....a bit downstream it spreads out around vast sandbars. same upstream.

so we have to game the chance of a cheen naval invasion too via the yonggyap ravines - that area was so mysterious none could figure out for a long time the course of the river where it entered A.P and later emerged into the assam valley where many rivers emerge out of the hills but which one?. after many a failed expedition, a britisher managed to tag the river where it reached assam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bailey%E2 ... ngpo_Gorge

the river dropped from 9,000 feet (2,700 m) to 1,000 feet (300 m) in a distance of perhaps 100 miles (160 km) which is extremely steep for a river of this size

^^ I will get the torpedo launchers ready on the river banks and alert the frogmen with limpet mines :evil:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 31 Jan 2017 07:55

Now that people claim that an Akash can, in theory shoot down an MBRL rocket, I shift to Wiki for costs

One Akash missile = USD 500,000 - "expected to go down" (acc to Wiki)
One Pinaka unit cost : USD 580,000 -
One M270 rocket unit cost USD 2.3 million
One Chinese rocket - unit cost?

Why would Akash be "too expensive?" Is there any data in terms of trials versus cost? I think the cost argument is being pushed as a rhetorical hedge to shore up the impression that that Akash should not be used for something that it CAN applied.

But then again is China attacks airfields with MBRLs and the missile unit controllers sit with thumbs in their musharrafs waiting for planes to show up saying "Heck these are rockets and I am not going to waste my expensive mijjile on them" then I am not at all surprised at the need to shiver violently in our respective secular costumes

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 31 Jan 2017 07:56

Singha wrote:note that at 200km the dispersion factor of a unguided round will make it useless..even at 100k thats a real problem.
so these "MLRS" are infact costly missiles. remains to be seen how much cheen can afford of this bucket of SRBM types.
they are costly, fat, slower than BMs and predictable.....well worth a SRSAM or akash to take them out.
Kookal sources claim Chinese MBRL missiles are guided

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 31 Jan 2017 08:01

Singha wrote:apart from airbases, the other important tier1 targets would be (a) army cantonments (b) railway junctions (c) POL storages at refineries or offsite (d) strategic infra like large bridges.

Plenty of Railway bridges in Tibet also - for us to return the compliment. I have just started marking them on Gokul Earth

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7477
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 31 Jan 2017 08:03

shiv wrote:Now that people claim that an Akash can, in theory shoot down an MBRL rocket, I shift to Wiki for costs

One Akash missile = USD 500,000 - "expected to go down" (acc to Wiki)
One Pinaka unit cost : USD 580,000 -
One M270 rocket unit cost USD 2.3 million
One Chinese rocket - unit cost?

Why would Akash be "too expensive?" Is there any data in terms of trials versus cost? I think the cost argument is being pushed as a rhetorical hedge to shore up the impression that that Akash should not be used for something that it CAN applied.

But then again is China attacks airfields with MBRLs and the missile unit controllers sit with thumbs in their musharrafs waiting for planes to show up saying "Heck these are rockets and I am not going to waste my expensive mijjile on them" then I am not at all surprised at the need to shiver violently in our respective secular costumes


GMLRS and ATACMS URF's are below that. GMLRS/AW is in the $100-200K range while ATACMS is in the 600-700K range. Not cheap by any standard. Next Gen LRPF is likely to be close to $1 Million a round.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5225
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ShauryaT » 31 Jan 2017 08:54

Cost is one of the reasons, I just love good old artillery shells. On land, ships and from the air. In an Indian context, we can use 100,000 of them in a day and still not alarm the MoF babu :)

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 31 Jan 2017 08:57

Singha wrote:this is the CRAM - phalanx on a truck

we need to look into using the AK630 which is already locally made with a suitable radar & EO system that can track low supersonic inbounds and do some closed loop guidance. perhaps the barak1 "STGR" can do it. russians have numerous such systems too

Someone else had also suggested a CIWS. I find the idea fascinating but wonder if it is really feasible. I have no technical inputs to give here - but looking back at that great article on anti-ATGM systems - IIRC none of them features a CIWS .

Here is the article
http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.i ... rview.html

Part of the problem may be time lag in slewing the entire gun towards the target. Not sure.

But all these systems have a very short reaction time and shoot a projectile at an incoming round and disrupt it in some way.

bmallick
BRFite
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby bmallick » 31 Jan 2017 10:23

With regards to the cost proposition of using a SAM to shoot an incoming rocket, I think the correct metrics is not the cost of the rocket but the value of the SAM vs the value of the target it is protecting, everything else is of much lesser importance. Would we be providing such kind of protection to a field gun placement/bunker or to a bridge/railhead/supply depot/ airfield. After all nobody has an inexhaustible supply of SAM system. Moreover SAM missiles at war consumables, just like arty shell, hence the cost of the consumable would be justified against what it is being used this case for defending the high value target.

In a general sense, I believe, defense is always more costly as the defense as the offense has the advantage of choosing the time and location for concentration of resources. But the defense has to spread its resources and still be strong enough everywhere so that it can halt such a concentrated attack till, other resources can be pulled in. This is the very reason, why offense is the best form of defense.

As Indranil said, yes an Akash system can intercept a rocket. But it should be the fallback. The best investement for us would be more expendable/cheaper UAV for better recon and more longer ranged rockets/missiles and attack aircrafts/helicopters.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66602
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Singha » 31 Jan 2017 10:47

since everyone is loading up on long range artillery, SAAW and SRBM type weapons we are going to need both CIWS and david sling type small interceptors.

our lowest end right now the Spyder=derby + python both feature active seekers and are very costly.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests