Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Dec 2016 20:23

Well the Astra missile exploded - which is what it is supposed to do. It just didn't fly far which it was supposed to do. It also did not explode on the aircraft - which is also exactly as planned

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 08 Dec 2016 21:11

Proximity fuze malfunction or emergency destruction?
These tests use an electronic target right? So possibility of a software malfunction too

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 08 Dec 2016 21:12

What about treetop nirbhay flight test?
Notam didn't suggest this

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 08 Dec 2016 21:48

Only thing good about it was that it exploded far away from the launch vehicle.

But there are parts of story which does not add up. How can people, as far away as 15km, could hear and feel the blast from a 15KG HE fragmented warhead in sea. One explanation can be since its motor failed, it's the remaining proponent that exploded along with the missile.

But since there are not official statements, it's hard to understand what really happened.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Dec 2016 06:47

DRDL is developing a X-Band Imaging and Monopulse RF (IMR) Seeker for Brahmos. Currently, the fabrication of the seeker is taken up in parallel by M/s ECIL and M/S Data Pattern Ltd. The Data Pattern configuration is ready for captive flight testing onboard a SIVAPOD on Su-30s. HAL Nashik is undertaking the modifications in the Su-30 aircraft.

kurup · Post by **kurup** » 09 Dec 2016 16:41

New NAVAREA Warning

INDIA EAST COAST – OFF BALASORE (.) CHARTS 31 352 INT 71 (.)

EXPERIMENTAL FLIGHT TRIAL SCHEDULED DAILY FROM 12-17 DEC 16 BETWEEN 0430 – 0630 AND 0900 – 1100 UTC IN DANGER ZONE BOUNDED BY 21-12.59N 086-46.15E, 20-05.32N 087-20.85E, 21-02.54N 088-22.30E, 21-45.60N 087-57.21E, 21-35.59N 087-10.70E

2. CANCEL THIS MSG 171200 UTC DEC 16

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 09 Dec 2016 18:45

AAD or PAD test!

sum · Post by **sum** » 12 Dec 2016 05:42

^^ Where is the Nirbhay onlee?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2016 00:28

IAF lines up series of sleek ‘Astra’ trials from Monday
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/ ... 47910.html

any latest news?

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 13 Dec 2016 09:10

.
.
‘Near-hit’ Astra test successful

BHUBANESWAR: Indian Air Force (IAF) on Monday test fired beyond visual range (BVR) air-to-air missile Astra against an actual target in full operational configuration for the first time over Bay of Bengal paving way for its early induction in the armed forces.
Defence sources said two rounds of the missile from Sukhoi-30 MKI aircraft were targeting pilot-less target aircraft (PTA) Banshee. The mission was termed ‘successful’ considering the missed-distance calculation, though the missile failed to achieve a direct hit.

‘’The missiles were fired both at high and medium altitude. They passed very close to the target and it can be termed near-hit. The mission was conducted in a war-like scenario and the missile was fired on actual targets. Data collected during the tests are being examined,’’ the sources said.

DRDO officials, however, claimed that the mission was excellent. The tests were conducted to demonstrate the aerodynamic characteristics of the missile. It has demonstrated the repeatability, robustness and endurance capability of Astra weapon system, said a senior official.

Indigenously designed and developed by DRDO, Astra possesses high Single Shot Kill Probability (SSKP), making it highly reliable. It is an all-aspect, all-weather missile with active radar terminal guidance, excellent electronic counter-counter measure (ECCM) features, smokeless propulsion and process improved effectiveness in multi-target scenario.

Sources informed that this trial will be followed by two more tests in coming days. Apart from Sukhoi-30 MKI, scientists have started integrating the weapon with homegrown ‘Tejas’ Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).

Astra is designed for an 80-km range in head-on mode and 20 km-range in tail-chase mode. The 3.8 metre long missile, which has launch weight of about 154 kg, uses solid-fuel propellant and a 15 kg high-explosive warhead activated by a proximity fuse.
Fitted with a terminal active radar-seeker and an updated mid-course internal guidance system, the missile can locate and track targets. It is difficult to track this missile as its on-board electronic counter-measures jam signals from the enemy radars.
As an anti-aircraft missile, it can be fired after receiving a signal from the far away target through its on-board manoeuvres based on radio frequency.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 13 Dec 2016 09:34

Doesn't the missile have proximity fuses? And do we try to blow up the PTA in every test or near-miss == success?

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 13 Dec 2016 10:14

Near miss on a slow moving less maneuvering target airplane cannot be considered an unqualified success by any means. DRDO officials should be reprimanded for twisting reality. Does not inspire confidence.

sum · Post by **sum** » 13 Dec 2016 10:15

Vivek K wrote:Doesn't the missile have proximity fuses?

Was wondering the same

If the missile was "so close and near miss" and the fuse didnt light up, how is this a "unqualified success"?

rohiths · Post by **rohiths** » 13 Dec 2016 10:50

Looks like a DDM report. It is not very clear with what happened.

kit · Post by **kit** » 13 Dec 2016 10:53

The test was to validate the aerodynamics and control systems from different altitudes. They don't need to blow up through pta. RF seekers once activated will blow up the warhead that has a kill radius no need for direct hit .PTA has cameras and electronics for validation.

disha · Post by **disha** » 13 Dec 2016 11:09

In fact I would argue that Astra was a qualified success. That is both the missile approached the target and put the target within the kill box. For the proximity sensors., it should just be able to "fire" the fuse without actually setting off the explosives - what is the point in blowing up your test target when it is evident that the sensors detected, armed and fired.

It might even be that the HTK option is disabled that is as the missiles enter the kill box successfully AND the proximity sensors detect and 'fire' the fuse - the engine is shredded so that the PTA is saved. It is like a B-Grade Bollywood movie where the villain points the gun at the hero and the voice over calls out "dhickiyon" ...

To the part where the comment on PTA Banshee is slow etc., well it is in service as a standard target aircraft. This are not cheap target aircrafts that can be blown away as in movies. Again for the PTA it is not the speed but the endurance and maneuverability that matters - particularly if it is a small target that is highly maneuverable., it is more difficult to target.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 13 Dec 2016 11:16

By the standard of this test being a failure, all effort spent in exercises like Red Flag is total and epic fail because no missiles are fired and getting into kill zone is a "victory/shootdown"

It is astounding yet again that I have never seen even a word of criticism of the fake shootdowns of Red Flag, in fact great jingoistic celebrations of successes and kill ratios, while we have one test described as a success but we insist that it is a failure. Speaks more about our attitudes depending on where the information is coming from

disha · Post by **disha** » 13 Dec 2016 11:26

The same Hemant Kumar Rout reports it as successful now: http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/ ... 48501.html and has been posted by Tushar'ji above.

The first failure report was based on some civilian life coach hearing a big boom which was bigger than what he was used to. And assumed that the bada boom came from near the beach - ergo the missile exploded near the beach. Interestingly., a bada boom near the beach is immediately taken as a missile failure when the bada boom could as well be a Su-MKI making a low level super sonic pass and the boom from that pass was big.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 13 Dec 2016 11:29

PTA usually tow a dummy target behind them. PTA itself is rarely a direct target.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Dec 2016 11:37

schinnas wrote:Near miss on a slow moving less maneuvering target airplane cannot be considered an unqualified success by any means. DRDO officials should be reprimanded for twisting reality. Does not inspire confidence.

Look up how AAMs work sometime before making such absurd claims.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Dec 2016 11:39

sum wrote:
Vivek K wrote:Doesn't the missile have proximity fuses?
Was wondering the same
If the missile was "so close and near miss" and the fuse didnt light up, how is this a "unqualified success"?

Many tests are done without the actual warhead to guage the missile performance. The final user trials will be done by the IAF with actual warhead. These are not cheap. Missile round expense apart, there is the target cost.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Dec 2016 11:47

disha wrote:In fact I would argue that Astra was a qualified success. That is both the missile approached the target and put the target within the kill box. For the proximity sensors., it should just be able to "fire" the fuse without actually setting off the explosives - what is the point in blowing up your test target when it is evident that the sensors detected, armed and fired.

It might even be that the HTK option is disabled that is as the missiles enter the kill box successfully AND the proximity sensors detect and 'fire' the fuse - the engine is shredded so that the PTA is saved. It is like a B-Grade Bollywood movie where the villain points the gun at the hero and the voice over calls out "dhickiyon" ...

To the part where the comment on PTA Banshee is slow etc., well it is in service as a standard target aircraft. This are not cheap target aircrafts that can be blown away as in movies. Again for the PTA it is not the speed but the endurance and maneuverability that matters - particularly if it is a small target that is highly maneuverable., it is more difficult to target.

yes, correct. thebmain aim is to actually guage the miss distance and to see whether it passed within the range of the proximity fuse activation and consequently, the warhead detonation zone. these two are linked. there is a whole set of things that will be checked. whether radar handoff from sukhoi worked, whether INS steers missile to the right place, next whether datalink corrects the missile and it is agile enough to course correct for a target in another direction, finally whether the kill chain worked - RPF and miss distance. The missile would either have telemetry or be tracked by the high rez radars to note some of these aspects.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Dec 2016 12:17

^^ The purpose of testing is to collect telemetry data, not blow things up.

Missile testing tries to capture as much telemetry data as possible.

Even warhead proximity fuses can be tested without blowing up by just testing its triggering.

In maybe 1-5% of tests would missile be exploded when doing end to end user acceptance testing.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 13 Dec 2016 14:52

India wants to know when the summer trials and high altitude trials and desert trials will take place and for how many years the trials will continue. Before the missile can be declared operational.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 13 Dec 2016 22:46

Thank you Hemant Rout for the news. As the analysis of failure or success, leave that to DRDO. We don't know how far the missile was from the target. We don't know what was the goal of mission, either. If it was to simulate a real world scenario, the getting inside the kill zone is unqualified success. If the goal was hit-to-kill, then it was a qualified success. DRDO and IAF are there to qualify success. Leave it to them. However, there are a few things that I would like to add:

1. I disagree with many posters here that the preservation of the target was a criterion. I am quite sure DRDO/IAF would have been ecstatic to hit the target.
2. I am a little worried about how Banshee is creeping up so often in the tests instead of Lakshya. Lakshya is a more capable drone (in Mirach 100/5 class), but its availability is coming into question. And what is the news with Abhyas HEAT which is basically as capable as the Banshee jet.
3. Astra's propulsion and aerodynamics seem to be pretty sound. They probably still have a little work left with the guidance.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Dec 2016 23:25

Hemant Rout in New Indian Express linked above

BHUBANESWAR: Indian Air Force (IAF) on Monday test fired beyond visual range (BVR) air-to-air missile Astra against an actual target in full operational configuration for the first time over Bay of Bengal paving way for its early induction in the armed forces.

Defence sources said two rounds of the missile from Sukhoi-30 MKI aircraft were targeting pilot-less target aircraft (PTA) Banshee. The mission was termed ‘successful’ considering the missed-distance calculation, though the missile failed to achieve a direct hit.

‘’The missiles were fired both at high and medium altitude. They passed very close to the target and it can be termed near-hit. The mission was conducted in a war-like scenario and the missile was fired on actual targets. Data collected during the tests are being examined,’’ the sources said.

DRDO officials, however, claimed that the mission was excellent. The tests were conducted to demonstrate the aerodynamic characteristics of the missile. It has demonstrated the repeatability, robustness and endurance capability of Astra weapon system, said a senior official.

Indigenously designed and developed by DRDO, Astra possesses high Single Shot Kill Probability (SSKP), making it highly reliable. It is an all-aspect, all-weather missile with active radar terminal guidance, excellent electronic counter-counter measure (ECCM) features, smokeless propulsion and process improved effectiveness in multi-target scenario.
Sources informed that this trial will be followed by two more tests in coming days. Apart from Sukhoi-30 MKI, scientists have started integrating the weapon with homegrown ‘Tejas’ Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).

Astra is designed for an 80-km range in head-on mode and 20 km-range in tail-chase mode. The 3.8 metre long missile, which has launch weight of about 154 kg, uses solid-fuel propellant and a 15 kg high-explosive warhead activated by a proximity fuse.
Fitted with a terminal active radar-seeker and an updated mid-course internal guidance system, the missile can locate and track targets. It is difficult to track this missile as its on-board electronic counter-measures jam signals from the enemy radars.
As an anti-aircraft missile, it can be fired after receiving a signal from the far away target through its on-board manoeuvres based on radio frequency.

Lots of details in the report.

Thanks H.K Rout.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Dec 2016 23:32

Indian long range AAM is developed.
We should see this in multiple platforms.

I guess next trials will be at low altitude and multiple targets.

In air combat the plane that gets off the first sure shot and hits the opposing plane wins.

Astra with its 80km range, 15 kg proximity fuzed warhead, active radar seeker, ECM to prevent being defeated, smokeless propellant to avoid visual identification, and maneuvering to follow the target has features that achieve this.

Hope the rest of the trials are completed and on to user trials.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 14 Dec 2016 00:31

ramana wrote:Hemant Rout in New Indian Express linked above

.... As an anti-aircraft missile, it can be fired after receiving a signal from the far away target through its on-board ~~manoeuvres~~ computers based on radio frequency.

I think this last part is referring to anti-radiation role of missile. "If" true it can theoretically allow MKI to fly in silent mode, with least EMCOM, and rely solely to launch based on IRST and its ARM mode.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Dec 2016 01:04

Indranil wrote:Thank you Hemant Rout for the news. As the analysis of failure or success, leave that to DRDO. We don't know how far the missile was from the target. We don't know what was the goal of mission, either. If it was to simulate a real world scenario, the getting inside the kill zone is unqualified success. If the goal was hit-to-kill, then it was a qualified success. DRDO and IAF are there to qualify success. Leave it to them. However, there are a few things that I would like to add:

1. I disagree with many posters here that the preservation of the target was a criterion. I am quite sure DRDO/IAF would have been ecstatic to hit the target.
2. I am a little worried about how Banshee is creeping up so often in the tests instead of Lakshya. Lakshya is a more capable drone (in Mirach 100/5 class), but its availability is coming into question. And what is the news with Abhyas HEAT which is basically as capable as the Banshee jet.
3. Astra's propulsion and aerodynamics seem to be pretty sound. They probably still have a little work left with the guidance.

Indranil, a few points.

1. The DRDO assigns points to every phase of the test. The Astra is a RPF based system not a hittile, hence its aim is to get close enough to destroy tge target with a cone of fragments. Not hit. If it hits its a whole diff ball game since it then has to hit at an area where the hit causes max damage. Its simpler and more effective to have a cone of fragments that wreak havoc across the aircraft in lieue of an expensive system that has to have a seeker that visually guides the missile to a specific zone. So to worry that it didnt hit the target is not a concern, because the RPF and Seeker work in conjunction to get the missile close enough for the warhead zone of damafe to do its job. If the miss distance is greater than above, then DRDO would be concerned.

2. At this point, given how many reports mention its on cusp of induction, guidance etc are mostly near finalization. User trials are likely next year. Also manufacturability and component availability will be the key thoughts. Ironically, it was the aero stuff which held up the program.

3.Banshee would be used, if thats the standard target available for some flight profiles. Cost effectiveness is a key issue. Mirach is used for high speed profiles.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Dec 2016 01:08

Also astra may even have a LPF not a RPF. Dont remember which was finally used

Rishi Verma · Post by **Rishi Verma** » 14 Dec 2016 01:16

Banshee PTA is a much smaller A/C than a real paki or chini maal. So Astra getting close to it can be extrapolated as a direct hit on a larger plane. Thus the claim of a success.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Dec 2016 07:18

I think the Banshee is a high speed drone - Lakshya is low mach numbers - at least guessing from what I have read earlier. Will google

If hitting a target was so important a warhead or a proximity fuse are not necessary. The US is designing a "hit to kill" missile that makes direct contact by collision with an incoming missile. Most missiles are NOT hit to kill. They explode close by and cripple by shrapnel or blast. A direct hit is a bonus.

The Meteor, and the Python have proximity fuzes and blast/fragmentation warhead

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Dec 2016 07:30

About Banshee
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meggitt_Banshee

The Banshee is designed to float for overwater operations recovery. Installable options include, radar enhancement devices, flare or chaff dispenser, and target sleeves. It can simulate a sea-skimming missile or serve as a reconnaissance UAV with a camera.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 14 Dec 2016 08:10

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... utm_source
India gets ready to test nuclear-capable Agni-V that can hit northern China

NEW DELHI: India is getting ready to test its Agni-V intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in its final operational configuration from Wheeler Island off Odisha after two years.Defence sources said preparations were on in full swing to launch the nuclear-capable Agni-V from its canister on a launcher truck towards December-end or early January . "There were some minor technical snags in Agni-V, which required tweaking of its internal battery and electronic configurations after its last test in January 2015," a source said.But India also conceivably wanted to exercise some strategic restraint while making a bid to join the 48-country Nuclear Suppliers Group, which China thwarted earlier this year. India, however, did manage to join the 34-nation Missile Technology Control Regime, as also ink a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with Japan recently .The impending fourth test of Agni-V , capable of striking even the northernmost parts of China, is in itself significant. "This will be the final test of the three-stage Agni-V , which will be tested for its full range, before the Strategic Forces Command (SFC) begins its user trials," the source said. The tri-Service SFC, established in 2003 to manage India's nuclear arsenal, will conduct at least two tests before the missile is produced in adequate numbers for induction.While Agni-V was tested in an "open configuration" in April 2012 and September 2013, the third test, in January 2015, saw it being fired from a hermetically sealed canister mounted on a Tatra launcher truck. The missile's canister-launch version makes it even deadlier since it gives the armed forces requisite flexibility to swiftly transport and fire the 50-tonne missile from anywhere they want.
Once the Agni-V is inducted, India will join the superexclusive club of countries with ICBMs (missiles with a range of over 5,000-5,500km) alongside the US, Russia, China, France and the UK.But the Indian defence establishment believes the Ag ni-V is sufficient to take care of existing threat perceptions. As earlier reported by TOI, DRDO has also done some work on developing "manoeuvring warheads or intelligent re-entry vehicles" to defeat enemy ballistic missile defence systems, as well as MIRVs (multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles) for the Agni missiles. An MIRV payload basically means a single missile is capable of carrying several nuclear warheads, each programmed to hit different targets.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 14 Dec 2016 09:10

shiv wrote:If hitting a target was so important a warhead or a proximity fuse are not necessary. The US is designing a "hit to kill" missile that makes direct contact by collision with an incoming missile. Most missiles are NOT hit to kill. They explode close by and cripple by shrapnel or blast. A direct hit is a bonus.

Actually the THAAD & PAC-3 are both in service. You may be thinking of the new LM MHTK missile designed to intercept rocket, artillery & mortar (RAM) fire.

Ref: Lockheed Miniature Hit-to-Kill Missile

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Dec 2016 11:42

Viv,Is this similar to the Israeli "Iron Dome" or does it have an extended range capability.Is there any thinking in the IA about similar systems for use on the bordre esp. as arty duels appear to be the choice of responding to Paki cross-border terror attacks?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Dec 2016 12:04

Regarding "near miss", a lot of research has gone into the best way to down an aircraft.

It was discovered that a fragmentation warhead just peppers the aircraft with holes, but unless it hits pilot or vitals like hydraulics or engine (buried inside the body), it will not bring the plane down.

So a new type of warhead was invented - called expanding rod or continuous rod - that had ductile metal rods joined at alternate ends to the adjacent rods covering the warhead. The rods can with stand high temperature and pressure.

When the warhead exploded, the ductile metal rods expand like shown here

The final effect of continuous rod is this

The high speed metal ring slices through aircraft structure, hydraulics, etc like a Hollywood katana and brings down the aircraft.

So, coming to the original point, AAMs & SAMs need to fly in proximity to the target aircraft with reasonable spacing to enable the continuous road to fully deploy to properly slice the target aircraft.

The proximity fuse is in the side of the missile.

Note the rectangular windows on the side here. That is where the laser or radio frequency fuse emits & receives.

Given the low warhead weight of AAMs (22.5 kg for R-77, 22.7 kg for AMRAAM), a direct hit wont bring down a Su-30 or F-15. The purpose of the warhead is only to create and deploy the continuous rod.

Its actually a malfunction if a continuous rod equipped AAM scores a direct hit.

Hence AAMs are deliberately designed to "near miss" using proximity fuses rather than hit to kill.

Requesting Mods to make a FAQ of this post to avoid future lament on "near miss"

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Dec 2016 13:50

Great discussion. Astra IIRC has a directional warhead.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PWEL5q8-oOY/U ... Poster.jpg

A similar khanland example.

http://www.google.co.in/patents/US5359934

A directional ordnance for a missile. The missile contains circuitry to determine the direction of a target relative to the missile and to selectively detonate directing charges to force the blast from the warhead towards the target. The circuitry for determining the direction of the target includes two transmit antennas, each transmitting a different pseudo noise sequence, and two receive antennas; each coupled to a receiver which can determine the level of each pseudo noise sequence at each receive antenna. The relative strengths of the different pseudo noise sequences tell the direction of the target relative to the transmit and receive antennas.

the desi design research
https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&sourc ... fZAnsYw_JA

basically the explosion is used to shape the fragment cone.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Dec 2016 13:51

reason bars were likely not chosen is because of weight volume challenges for a small missile plus directional warhead does the trick. used for AAD too IIRC.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Dec 2016 13:53

what if jamming is done? reason why in dec 15
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 030156.ece