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.
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7483
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Prasad » 31 Jan 2017 11:28

The chinese roads north of AP all lie along the river valley of the Tsangpo. Except for one or two reroutes. Along with tiny bridges along the way. All the way from Shannan and branching out thereafter. Lhasa Airport is 240km from Tawang town. Nyingchi airport (2949m elev) is 210km from Dibrugarh (108m elev).

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby hnair » 31 Jan 2017 12:22

brar_w wrote: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




Phew, this MHTK looks nifty! Only the size of those a2g Hydras

Image

For size reference to a human hand:

The integrated tungsten penetrator and radar antenna of the Miniature Hit-to-Kill interceptor

Image

Looks like cheen's love for MBRLs is being observed pretty closely by khan's gunsmiths. Gun CIWS and DEW has issues with simultaneous saturation attacks, hence this cheap "chaar-ana" missile, that can be launched as a quick ripple like the MBRLS, as in "right back at you" approach :lol:

brar_w, says semi-active homing. How are they going to disseminate and track each target + interceptor, if virtually 10s of such MHTKs are in the air?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8766
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 31 Jan 2017 16:00

brar_w, says semi-active homing. How are they going to disseminate and track each target + interceptor, if virtually 10s of such MHTKs are in the air?


SARH was just for the first prototypes that Lockheed internally conducted intercept tests on back in 2014. Current seeker options being explored are -

Pending an army decision on an IFPC Inc 2-I Block 2 requirement, however, the company will continue investing in the development of the missile, with tests in the laboratory and flight tests to demonstrate the interceptor's maturity, he said. This includes determining and demonstrating the best guidance options to meet the army's requirement.

Murphy said that MHTK was designed to allow integration of different seekers, to complement the operational requirement. The company initially integrated a semi-active (RF) seeker, which was the main focus of the EAPS ID programme, although the army's Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center also funded a feasibility investigation for an active seeker in the same form factor. Lockheed is continuing to mature this on internal investment funding, while in parallel evaluating integration of a semi-active laser (SAL) for use with a third-party designator source, and an imaging infrared seeker in the same form factor.

"The SAL seeker has been matured up to the point that it is ready to be flight tested, but the imaging seeker is not quite as mature yet," Murphy said.

Murphy said the company has tested each of these seeker types but will focus on the semi-active RF seeker guidance for MHTK in the near term. "We had an intercept flight test with the semi-active RF seeker back in July 2014, and we learned a lot from that. We will conduct a second company-funded intercept flight test with the semi-active RF seeker in November against a RAM target, while we complete development of the active seeker."

And more from a year earlier to the article above -

The MHTK is understood to be approximately 70 cm (29 inches) in length and 4 cm in diameter, with a launch weight of about 2.5 kg. Lockheed said that "MHTK's effective range [for a single-shot kill] against RAM will be 3 km or more."

While there are no energetics in the missile - as the name suggests it is a body-to-body contact kill system - Lockheed Martin has integrated a 'lethality mechanism' or penetrator package in the MHTK to help penetrate the skin of the target. Murphy noted that "the precision and accuracy that go with hit to kill allow us, if required, to remove the penetrator package and integrate a small warhead, to achieve the effect desired without extensive collateral damage, and this is something that could be explored."

Lockheed Martin has integrated unique amorphous alloy canards, sourced from Liquidmetal Technologies, for the MHTK. To achieve the miniaturised electronics package for the interceptor, Lockheed Martin has sourced a range of technologies for components and packaging from outside of its customary supply chain.

"We've borrowed from the medical imaging industry, from the cell phone industry, and from 'large data farming' industries; we've also leveraged some unique packaging industries to fit the electronics, the batteries, to fit the controllers, the motor and to fit the elements of the seeker into the missile."

Murphy said that Lockheed Martin will offer three guidance options for MHTK: it initially integrated a semi-active RF seeker, which was the main focus of the EAPS programme; the US Army's Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center (AMRDEC) funded a feasibility investigation of an active seeker in the same form factor.

Lockheed Martin is continuing this work on internal investment and has had some success, although it is not as mature as the semi-active RF seeker development.

The company is also evaluating integration of a semi-active laser (SAL) for use with a third-party designator source. "We designed and built the missile so that we could interchange guidance options; if we wanted to integrate a miniaturised video camera in the front end, and it made sense to do so, we are also able to that."

The interceptor itself is powered by a compact new rocket motor developed by Nammo in the United States. Nammo said the MHTK's narrow 40 mm diameter interceptor body precluded the requirement for any active cooling or heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning devices; its solution focuses on mechanical design innovations combined with the development of a new propellant, and materials able to withstand sustained heat. Nammo declined to disclose the exact compositions used, but said that the kinematic requirements needed a very fast burning propellant that is required "to burn for seconds".

To meet the proposed IFPC Inc 2-I Block 2 architecture, Lockheed Martin will package multiple MHTKs in an all-up round (comprising the missiles and the canister they are launched from). The all-up round fits a single launch tube of the MML and can be shipped in the same canister assembly, thus delivering the missile loadout required by the army, but also minimising the missile's logistics footprint.




Still early days. This is the second phase of the product so they will require 4-6 years to take this from TRL-6 where is is now through to operational capability. Many design changes will likely come along the way.

Not sure how LM exactly envisioned utilization in a raid scenario, but when they pitched the entire program (EAPS - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26_QTDpBd3s ) they did show their TPQ-53 AESA illuminating multiple targets. Of course now the system is owned by the US Army and they are competing components. While the initial increment will integrate Aim-9X with Sentinel for cruise missile defense mission, there is an option for the next phase to have a dedicated radar. This could be the AN/TPQ-53 or it could simply be another AN/MPQ-64 since that radar is getting a GaN AESA antenna upgrade (it's currently a PESA) around early next decade.

They also have plans to scale this interceptor up for more challenging targets. Even air-launched form Helicopters and UAV's is being looked at.
Last edited by brar_w on 31 Jan 2017 16:36, edited 1 time in total.

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 » 31 Jan 2017 16:17

A truck based aesa has enough processing power to tws 10s of targets just like a e3 awacs. Even the isaeli el2052 claims 64..well beyond number of aam what a fighter can carry. The exact nos for tier1 khan fighter radars are hidden.

Perhaps idea is fire a meteor off and then redirect to other target inflight as the swarm attack is sorted out by mass counterstrikes...some targets could turn away as well

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8161
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Indranil » 31 Jan 2017 16:39

I like this MHTK solution. Brar, do you know why they need a homing head on the missile. The rocket is just on a ballistic course only moved about by the perturbations of the air. Against such a non maneuvering target, can't the missile be guided by the ground radar? May be along with a warhead, instead of a direct hit-to-kill mechanism.

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 » 31 Jan 2017 16:59

HTK allows it to be a thin dart and high packing density.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8766
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 31 Jan 2017 17:17

They do not rule out the possibility of replacing the penetrator package with a small warhead, however given the overall size, weight and dimensions of the interceptor you'll need to near H2K anyway even if you were to put a tiny warhead in there. Internally, H2K is what Lockheed Missiles have been working on across their missile defense portfolio so warhead or no warhead, they are most likely going to pursue and engineer that path. So far, the program itself (IFPC_Increment-2) leaves it to the industry to design solutions.

While Lockheed went for the more ambitious and harder to achieve miniature H2K, Raytheon chose a different, lower risk path for the CRAM mission, and the Army introduced yet another competing system into the mix with the Tamir. MHTK obviously has the advantages of quadrupling the load out. I see the Raytheon AI3 as an interim solution if the MHTK takes time to develop and mature or it could simply be set aside. Tamir would be interesting but probably more so for fixed installations since it cuts back on the magazine depth for mobile systems.



I don't see how you could bring the AI3's cost down to cost-effectively deal with both rockets and mortars. The approach of a gun coupled with MHTK and DEW is a more cost effective strategy for both mortars and short-medium ranged rockets.

udy
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 02 May 2005 21:53

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby udy » 31 Jan 2017 19:55

Abm missilies will have directional Multi EFP warheads from

TechFocus Jan-Feb 2017

parshuram
BRFite
Posts: 325
Joined: 28 Feb 2006 09:52

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby parshuram » 01 Feb 2017 00:09

Did we test fired K-4 today?

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1199
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby prasannasimha » 01 Feb 2017 00:19

Not today It was rescheduled for tomorrow

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramdas » 01 Feb 2017 05:35

The K-4 test is certainly not postponed just to Feb 1. It appears that there is a longer term postponement. Hope it is not due to ``strategic restraint".

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 » 01 Feb 2017 07:20

:(

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8217
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Pratyush » 01 Feb 2017 07:52

ramdas wrote:The K-4 test is certainly not postponed just to Feb 1. It appears that there is a longer term postponement. Hope it is not due to ``strategic restraint".



There might be some technical issues which resulted in postponement. No restraint from this government.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramdas » 01 Feb 2017 08:23

@Pratyush: you have too much faith in this govt. the rate of strategic missile testing is no better than the last UPA 2 years 2012-14. the focus on appeasing khan continues instead of an unrestrained buildup of a deterrent. extending the current foreign secretary seems to be part of this trend.

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 » 01 Feb 2017 08:47

About the K4 test - can anyone imagine a NOTAM and an announcement that it will be tested from the Arihant on 1 Feb 2017 and thereby broadcast to the entire world where the Arihant will be on a particular day? The only announcement you will ever hear is "To be tested from a submerged pontoon" - or else you will hear no announcement at all. I think we had all better stand down our mijjiles, zip our flies, have a Charminar and let the folks get on with the work they need to do.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramdas » 01 Feb 2017 09:05

Issue is not announcing ``launched from a submerged pontoon". NOTAMS have to be issued in any case. Issue is that a scheduled K-4 test is postponed (for political reasons, if Bharat Karnad is to be believed). If so, that is wrong.

When our neighbors are in an unrestrained buildup of their deterrents, ``strategic restraint" is suicidal, unless India is to become a SoKo like neutered ally of khan.

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 » 01 Feb 2017 09:20

ramdas wrote:Issue is not announcing ``launched from a submerged pontoon". NOTAMS have to be issued in any case. Issue is that a scheduled K-4 test is postponed (for political reasons, if Bharat Karnad is to be believed). If so, that is wrong.

What if that is not so and Bharat Karnad is simply having a rant? Is there any space for that possibility?

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1199
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

prasannasimha

Postby prasannasimha » 01 Feb 2017 09:39

Probably tested enough and this was announced tocsay "we can " and then withdrawn adfter back channel diplomacy

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54422
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 01 Feb 2017 09:45

Let's not go chunkian
We will know from Rout soon enough.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 04 Feb 2017 23:02

In interview to Force Magazine latest issue , DRDO Chief Christopher spoke of new missile under development to post some excerpts

In this new project, a booster will lift the missile up, and the turbofan will take the missile to the desired location within 1,000 km. In the final flight stage, we will ditch the turbofan, fly with another engine which will take the missile to the supersonic speed and hit the target. The DRDO HQ has cleared this project already. Two labs — Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) and Defence Research and Development Laboratory (DRDL) — are involved in this

Confirms the wing did not fully open and caused Nirbhai loss , New test of Nirbhai expected in next 3 month

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Austin » 04 Feb 2017 23:35

BTW I recollect eons back in one of our discussion Singhaji and Ramanaji had suggested such a missile which is subsonic long range and supersonic in final flight stage and we have such a missile under development now

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3622
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Kashi » 05 Feb 2017 08:11

Rout hasn't spoken anything yet as far as I know. He was quite quick off the mark after the Nirbhay test last month. So I wonder what is it?

Could it have something to do with the Trump-Iran missile saga?

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4529
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby JayS » 05 Feb 2017 13:04

Xp-posting from RnD thread
Neela wrote:http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=158007


Project Pralay got 330+Cr sanction.

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6435
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Supratik » 05 Feb 2017 15:12

Looks like a combo of Nirbhay and brahmos.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19531
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karan M » 05 Feb 2017 17:12

[quote="Austin"]BTW I recollect eons back in one of our discussion Singhaji and Ramanaji had suggested such a missile which is subsonic long range and supersonic in final flight stage and we have such a missile under development now[/quote

Indian sizzler

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Gagan » 06 Feb 2017 13:29

A laser based system needs to be developed to take out MLRS, Artillery, cheap massed projectiles.
Trying to take out each one of these projectiles with another projectile is a futile effort, because there will always be many leakers that will be enough to cause damage. So why try to spend big money on trying to stop only a few projectiles?

IMHO, in 10 years there should be a deployable energy weapon / Laser based weapon to tackle this threat.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Neela » 06 Feb 2017 17:42

Image

Livefist ‏@livefist 1h1 hour ago
You beauty. BrahMos fired from @IndianNavy P15A destroyer INS Chennai at #TropEx2017.
11:38 AM - 6 Feb 2017

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12040
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Aditya_V » 06 Feb 2017 17:59

Gagan wrote:A laser based system needs to be developed to take out MLRS, Artillery, cheap massed projectiles.
Trying to take out each one of these projectiles with another projectile is a futile effort, because there will always be many leakers that will be enough to cause damage. So why try to spend big money on trying to stop only a few projectiles?

IMHO, in 10 years there should be a deployable energy weapon / Laser based weapon to tackle this threat.


A more faster approach is to defend key targets with AK630 type fast machine guns which as a last resort shoot down targets. Laser guns will take time.

I think we should
1) Try and manufacture- Iron dome/ Barak-1 types Radar guided cheaper missiles in numbers
2) Secondary shield with Ak-630 type guns
3) Develop energy weapons like Kali-5000 to be deployed within 15 year time frame.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Cosmo_R » 06 Feb 2017 19:07

Singha wrote: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


Looks like R2D2's evil cousin

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 » 06 Feb 2017 19:29

Gagan wrote:Trying to take out each one of these projectiles with another projectile is a futile effort, because there will always be many leakers that will be enough to cause damage. So why try to spend big money on trying to stop only a few projectiles?


Please read this if you have not already done so. All are one-projectile for one missile in superquick reaction time (long article, but informative)
http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.i ... rview.html

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby hnair » 07 Feb 2017 11:46

Gagan, in the case of a single katyusha getting shot down, the lasers are a good choice. But for a raid or swamping of defenses situation that India faces, we are talking about multiple hostile projectiles that will reach the target to be defended, almost simultaneously. So ALL need to be tracked and engaged at same time. From artillery shells to cruise missiles to A2Gs othat range from freefall LGB/JDAM bombs to powered ones like french AASMs, these are non-maneuvering targets. A full fledged SAM is an overkill for the free fall ones.

The issue of a DEW is that it takes time to deposit a certain amount of energy on to the skin of the projectile that need to be shot down. Until that energy is absorbed, the weapon has to track the projectile and the entire system is sort of locked up on just one target, until the incoming projectile's structural integrity is gone. CIWS Rapid fire guns too have this issue of sequential targeting, but its lethal energy transfer mechanism is different and hence can slew the gun around much faster than a dew, once the shell has left the barrel. But accurate gun laying is problematic and hence the DART type shells, with smart fuses etc

However with the MHTK, you can get a large number of tracks, assign each target to a specific MTHK and fire them in a huge salvo and control them simultaneously via the SARH mode or mid-course updates with the planned active seekers. IIRC, Indian Navy went for the shorter range, but pricey Barak-1 for its simultaneous engagement capabilities. But Barak-1 is quite expensive a pop

But all these are PR video maal and will need a capable adversary to test for real against, than the nincompoops that NATO beats up frequently

siddhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 66
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 16:02

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby siddhu » 07 Feb 2017 12:31

shiv wrote:
Gagan wrote:Trying to take out each one of these projectiles with another projectile is a futile effort, because there will always be many leakers that will be enough to cause damage. So why try to spend big money on trying to stop only a few projectiles?


Please read this if you have not already done so. All are one-projectile for one missile in superquick reaction time (long article, but informative)
http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.i ... rview.html


There is a documentary on this.

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 » 07 Feb 2017 14:40

siddhu wrote:
shiv wrote:
Please read this if you have not already done so. All are one-projectile for one missile in superquick reaction time (long article, but informative)
http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.i ... rview.html


There is a documentary on this.

That is an informative post

siddhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 66
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 16:02

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby siddhu » 07 Feb 2017 15:08

shiv wrote:
siddhu wrote:
There is a documentary on this.

That is an informative post


forgot the original link

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3948
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby kit » 10 Feb 2017 13:55

the Shourya / Sagarika weapon system is described as a hypersonic hybrid weapon (HCM/HGV) according to Janes ..and apparently the only such type in the list.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karthik S » 11 Feb 2017 08:49

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618
A new @DRDO_India BMD interceptor sporting an indigenous IIR seeker intercepted a ballistic target at an altitude of 97 km earlier today.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 880
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby nash » 11 Feb 2017 09:44

Some more of his tweet

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 46m46 minutes ago
More
The interceptor is a variant of the PDV with a new IIR seeker, propulsion & avionics. It's interception window spans from 80-120 km.

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 45m45 minutes ago
More
Most importantly, this was a 'hit to kill' missions with @DRDO_India's new PDV smashing into the deviating & 'undefined' target.

sarang
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 16 Jun 2007 11:23
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby sarang » 11 Feb 2017 09:59

wow! speechless.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 880
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby nash » 11 Feb 2017 10:10

http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 68912.html

Defence sources said the test would be conducted to assess the weapon’s ‘killing' capability. The AAD interceptor, dubbed as Ashwin, will destroy the incoming missile in the endo-atmospheric region at a low altitude of less than 30 km.


Seems like Mr. Rout was bit off the mark here

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Bheeshma » 11 Feb 2017 10:12

Hmm I thought PDV could intercept at 150 Km height, but 120 km is not bad. What ever happened to the K-4 MkII test?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests