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: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby shiv » 01 May 2017 07:27

Let me make an opinion statement here. Just my view. if any nation inflicts upon our cities damage with conventional bombs alone of the sort that Germany did to Britain, and the US and Britain did to Germany, or what the US did to Japanese cities, or what the US did to Vietnam - our response has to be nuclear.

No nation must be allowed to say 'We have heavy bombers dropping conventional bombs and we will drop 25,000 tons of bombs and devastate your cities" and get away with it. The attacking country must lose a few cities with nuclear strikes.

Sooner or later the US will get hit by one of the nations it has bombed.. This bombing of cities with heavy bombers and conventional bombs is absurd in the era of nuclear weapons on missiles.

It is utter chicanery to say "We have nukes but we won't use them. However we will bust your butt with conventional weapons. It is only a matter of time before a suicidal entity nukes the US. It is even more absurd for us to try and copy this chicanery and say "We alsoo will do laik Amreeka. We bill hab our nukaliar bums alsoo but we bill hit onlee conbensunal bums bith bada heavy bomber"

Rubbish.
Last edited by shiv on 01 May 2017 09:06, edited 1 time in total.

SSSalvi
BRFite
Posts: 666
Joined: 23 Jan 2007 19:35
Location: Hyderabad
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby SSSalvi » 01 May 2017 08:00

ramana » 01 May 2017 03:35

What's the distance please?


about 1050 Kms in 174 deg direction wrt North
Last edited by SSSalvi on 01 May 2017 18:32, edited 1 time in total.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4547
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby JayS » 01 May 2017 13:02

shiv wrote:
Rubbish.


I simply don't see bombers dropping 100s of bombs on cities. Thats so WW2. Its not gonna happen. I also think that war will go nuclear if that happens. At least we *should* have our threshold to that level. Anyone trying to erase our cities will be nuked. If our nukes can't stop that then they are useless. We should do to Chinese what Pakis do to us. Have lower thresholds for escalation.

Frankly I don't see conventional wars extending beyond borders between any of the big countries, surely not the nuclear powers. Perhaps in WW3. But not in bilateral wars. Wars will be relatively short and limited. Killing lots of people wouldn't really give you as much as you might get in few well co-ordinated pin-point attacks on key installations, in short wars.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1282
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby RKumar » 01 May 2017 13:27

We do need bomber fleet, to decimate big army base or depot or port or to bust missile silos or infrastructure railway/roads or cave networks which both our neighbours have extensive network - These could be pre-emptive strikes or worth the risk during war.

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 May 2017 15:28

RKumar wrote:We do need bomber fleet, to decimate big army base or depot or port or to bust missile silos or infrastructure railway/roads or cave networks which both our neighbours have extensive network - These could be pre-emptive strikes or worth the risk during war.

Remember this is about heavy bombers not just 'bombers' which we already have.

I would be happy to hear from you how heavy large bombers would achieve the tasks you have suggested. Actually none of them requires a "heavy" bomber but sure, since you feel they are needed, please indicate what a heavy bomber fleet would actually have to do to take out the targets you have named. I am looking for something more detailed than "drop lots of bombs"

This is a serious question and I will definitely get back with counter arguments.

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 May 2017 16:18

Something to think about:

A single 155 mm artillery shell (for Bofors, made by OFB) has 8 kg of explosive

The Su-30 can carry 16 x 100 kg bombs - each with 42 kg of explosive
Watch from here for 30 sec

That means ONE Su 30 carries the explosive weight of 84 Bofors artillery shells. If one artillery piece can shoot 3 shells a minute 4 pieces would require 7 minutes to dump the same weight of explosive as one Su-30 does in a couple of seconds. Why would 4 MKIs not amount to a serious battering from artillery, the "God of war"?

An military base spread over hundreds of acres (say 4 km x 5 km) with buildings spread out will hardly be touched by a bomber dropping 80 bombs in a long line of explosive power 200 meters wide and 2 kilometers long. Each set of important buildings has to be pre-identified by recce and hit individually by missiles or repeated attacks by bomb carrying "fighters" like Su 30 or Jaguar. Or even MiG 21. "Fighter" and "bomber" are such archaic WW1 terms we need to grow out of that terminology

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3051
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby abhik » 01 May 2017 20:52

I don't think we can do a simplistic comparison of the wikipedia max payload figures of multirole fighters to heavy bombers and come up with 2-4 Su30 == 1 B1/B2/Tu160 type conclusion. The range and performance of multirole fighters will likely get derated carrying anywhere close to their max payload compared to (cold war) heavy bombers were purposed designed to carry significant payloads over extended ranges of 1000's of km. We have videos of MKIs dropping 6-7t of bombs but that doesn't mean that it can carry the same amount of payload for all or significant number of mission profiles expected of it. For example initial layouts of the Brahmos integration with the MKI showed 3 missiles being carried (probably feasible on paper), but the final configuration had only 1.
Similarly the Tejas in strike configuration is shown as 2*500kg bombs even though it can carry 3.5t. Another example is the Rafale with its much advertised capability to carry 9t of load (almost close to its empty weight), but in reality if you go through its "combat proven"/PR photos the max load it is actually carried is around 3t, rest of it is fuel 'bags'.
And besides any number of fighters will not be able to carry very large ordinance like the 14t Massive Ordnance Penetrator, only a bomber can (unless you consider transport aircraft).

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 May 2017 21:04

16x100 kg = 1600 kg. that is hardly the maximum payload of the Su-30. That is a load that it can comfortably carry on long range missions plus something extra like ASMs

14 MOAB is pure puuuure American Hawa infecting people. Far too much publicity for a 99.9 % useless inventory item meant mostly for show. Only one has been used. Compare that with 85,000 tons of bombs dropped on Iraq - most of them small dumb ordinary bombs - most of them NOT dropped by heavy bombers.

Countries make bombs to suit the aircraft they have. They make the aircraft first. OK. Do we have a transport aircraft?

Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Ravi Karumanchiri » 01 May 2017 22:30

abhik wrote:........ We have videos of MKIs dropping 6-7t of bombs but that doesn't mean that it can carry the same amount of payload for all or significant number of mission profiles expected of it. For example initial layouts of the Brahmos integration with the MKI showed 3 missiles being carried (probably feasible on paper), but the final configuration had only 1.
Similarly the Tejas in strike configuration is shown as 2*500kg bombs even though it can carry 3.5t. Another example is the Rafale with its much advertised capability to carry 9t of load (almost close to its empty weight), but in reality if you go through its "combat proven"/PR photos the max load it is actually carried is around 3t, rest of it is fuel 'bags'................


I think many would be shocked to know how much of a plane's fuel load is used within the first few moments of taxing on runway, getting airborne and then attaining a 'cruising' altitude. For short hop commercial flights, it can top 35% of fuel load being used during these initial moments (for very brief flights it can be 60% or more); and I can only imagine it being very high for aircraft flying with high order war loads. This is why on combat missions, it is quite common to refuel soon after getting airborne; but this presents the problem of ringing a few alarm bells, thereby alerting the enemy that something is on the wing.

To deal with this, I wonder if it's possible to approach aircraft launches the same way rockets and missiles are launched: By aid of expendable booster rockets. I wonder if such rockets could be affixed to existing (or modified?) "hard-points", and fired on the runway, at the start of "the roll", to get off the ground with a heavier load than otherwise; and perhaps skip that whole airborne refueling operation (and the alerts they raise). Once expended, the rockets could be released and fall to the ground (perhaps for recycling?).

Additional to this whole discussion, I think it's also important to factor-in what a business person might call "opportunity cost". This is all about time, or "tempo of operations" as the military planners call it: Because striking the enemy at pinch-points and concentration points is always going to be more possible with quicker aircraft, than with slower aircraft. With relevance here: The quicker SU-30 is able to bomb a target in prompt fashion, unlike a slower, lumbering bomber. It is a general rule of combat, that speed is a definite force multiplier, as is timely intelligence. Consider: India has powerful surveillance satellites in orbit, and there is an accumulated data set of all targets of interest, you can be sure. I remember reading articles about the space-based radar that can detect minuscule changes in elevation, as might occur when underground bunkers are built, and the dirt overhead settles because of the machinery vibrations during excavation.

I agree that India has no need for "carpet bombing" (say, to destroy tunnels under the jungles of Vietnam, like the Khans did).

Smarter, faster munitions delivered more quickly to precise targets -- including targets of opportunity -- is always going to be better for India's warfighting strategy, than doing what Khan did and blindly bombing jungles because one cannot find tunnels. Remember, the Americans dropped more bombs on Vietnam than did *all sides* during the entirety of WWII -- onto tiny Vietnam -- and they still lost to the Vietnamese.

The tunnels worth bombing by India, will require precise and quick bombing while overflying hostile airspace -- not the kind of thing suited to a "heavy bomber".

I've gotta side with shiv here.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3051
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby abhik » 01 May 2017 22:35

^^^
There is another video with the MKI dropping something like 24 * 250kg bombs, not sure if it is part of your collection.

BTW I was referring to the MOP (not the the MOAB). And in GW1 the B52s dropped around 30% of those 85K tons of bombs, nothing to be scoffed at.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8962
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby brar_w » 01 May 2017 22:41

The accuracy of PGMs has altered these dynamics but they still very much exist. In the first few weeks of Allied force the B-2 which flew less than 5% of the sorties delivered a third of the munitions but again in the Indian context you first have to figure out a doctrine, concept of operations and then see whether a parallel investment helps compared to alternatives.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3517
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ArjunPandit » 01 May 2017 22:45

Shiv sir, plz correct me if i am wrong, but your war is a 15 day short-sharp and crisp war, mine is a month long or probably ww3 kind of war only, where India takes the same position as Russia/Britain took in WW2 against the arc of devil: chinese, pakis and possibly bangladeshis.

You're right in saying that I am influenced by NatGeo etc( i guess i lost all interest of readers by claiming this). It will take me some time to give point by point response due to multiple reasons.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Bheeshma » 01 May 2017 23:33

The Su-30 can carry a lot more than 16 100 kg bombs. It can carry 28 FAB-250-270 or 32 OFAB-100-120. That's a lot of firepower for porkis. That said I would love to see MKI carrying 4 Nirbhays on patrol to scare the crap out of the lizard over Indo china sea.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker.html

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 02 May 2017 00:36

S^3, Thanks for the range information in the NOTAM.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1282
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby RKumar » 02 May 2017 01:57

shiv wrote:
RKumar wrote:We do need bomber fleet, to decimate big army base or depot or port or to bust missile silos or infrastructure railway/roads or cave networks which both our neighbours have extensive network - These could be pre-emptive strikes or worth the risk during war.

Remember this is about heavy bombers not just 'bombers' which we already have.

I would be happy to hear from you how heavy large bombers would achieve the tasks you have suggested. Actually none of them requires a "heavy" bomber but sure, since you feel they are needed, please indicate what a heavy bomber fleet would actually have to do to take out the targets you have named. I am looking for something more detailed than "drop lots of bombs"

This is a serious question and I will definitely get back with counter arguments.


you want to bomb a place without being hit in reverse, you don't take another round to check if bombs hit the target. That can be done via satellites or drones or other means. You want to drop bombs - as many as possible - near or on top of target hoping they will hit the target with correct angle and position. And run for your life to fight for another day.

On top ideally you want to flat the large area for good. Damaging water tank is equally good as damaging arms depots or vehicles. Destroying long stretches of roads or railways line or bridges help is delaying their operational readiness or recovery time.

Last option ... If nothing works for us. Can truck simple gravity no-clear bombs deep in enemy territory for saying hi n bye.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 02 May 2017 03:39

Folks, A gentle reminder this is the missiles thread.

What you are all discussing is the doctrine which should go into the IAF thread.

Thanks, ramana

Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Ravi Karumanchiri » 02 May 2017 05:38

^^^^^^
Sorry, I didn't mean to change the subject.

I should have written above, that while SU-30s are better (i.e. quicker and more efficacious, more defensible, multi-role and numerous so therefore also less prone to attrition) than "heavy bombers"..... along the same lines of thought is the reality that missiles are potentially quicker yet than SU-30s, and can precisely hit targets of opportunity at almost any angle one might want, with potentially greater kinetic energy than any free-falling bomb, no risk of force attrition, etc....

There is yet another factor in advantage of missiles over aircraft
for hitting such targets (perhaps selected with very detailed satellite reconnaissance); there is the political dimension.

In a true democracy like India, where the trigger is ultimately pulled by civilian authorities in control of a nation's armed forces; the politician will always calculate the costs if things go wrong, and take this into consideration before proceeding.

There is no political leader of a democracy who would entirely look past the possibility of losing a pilot over enemy territory;
who can then be paraded on TV and perhaps much, much worse.

Missiles, set aloft from stand-off distances, completely avoid this political dimension.

In a very important way, missiles offer democratic decision makers a quicker, less costly, less risky and certainly politically safer "strike option" than would an incursion of enemy airspace using manned aircraft, however stealthy or low-flying.

From what I gather of the Brahmos III program, the idea is something akin to "the best of both worlds". That is, heavier lift and deeper penetration with a reusable yet unmanned platform that can fly hyper-sonic to target, and deliver a warhead before returning for refueling and rearming.

Rather than investing in heavy bombers, the way you might want to if you had cause to drop a big bomb to hit a deeply buried target; it instead makes better sense to invest in bigger, faster, more powerful missile forces, along with satellites, etc.

:idea:

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 » 02 May 2017 05:45

Ramana this is the missiles and munitions thread hence bombs and missiles.

RKumar single pass attacks are only timepass theory. Multiple visits and multiple passes are essential. No risk no reward. And importing bombers to drop bombs in a 2km long line expecting that they will do that is an idea that needs to be shown up as useless as it really is.

Even worse than the claim that thngs can get done in a single pass is the cruel joke of single pass single bomb.

That single "devastating" LOL MOAB attack was such a ridiculous sham. It was hyped so much everyone wants one in his kitchen.

5 days later the Taliban killed 100plus Afghan army men in a raid on an Afghan army base.

And how many Taliban died in that Mother of all lemons attack? 36

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 02 May 2017 06:06

Right, But not bombers which are planes thread.

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 » 02 May 2017 06:37

The same munitions can have different effects depending on the launch platform, and you are asking that the launch platform parameters be ignored. That is unfair. I normally take as much care as possible to stay on topic but in this case I disagree. The munition cannot be divorced from the launch platform

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 » 02 May 2017 07:00

RKumar wrote:
you want to bomb a place without being hit in reverse, you don't take another round to check if bombs hit the target. That can be done via satellites or drones or other means. You want to drop bombs - as many as possible - near or on top of target hoping they will hit the target with correct angle and position. And run for your life to fight for another day.

On top ideally you want to flat the large area for good. Damaging water tank is equally good as damaging arms depots or vehicles. Destroying long stretches of roads or railways line or bridges help is delaying their operational readiness or recovery time.

Last option ... If nothing works for us. Can truck simple gravity no-clear bombs deep in enemy territory for saying hi n bye.

RKumar I believe you have ignored the elephant in the room. Repair. Everything can be repaired, Runways are repaired, Roads are repaired. Tracks are re laid. The wrong buildings or decoys are hit making the attack a failure. There have to be repeat visits from recce aircraft as well as attack aircraft. Satellite images may not work in areas that are designed to stay stealthy under sat observation.

The idea of single attacks doing the job after which one can wash his hands off is too unusual and too unrealistic to be the norm. And to get back to a clichéd and well discussed issue, but in deference to ramana's request - I will mention for the last time on this thread that the history of "heavy bombers" is a history of failing to achieve what they were meant to do.

Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Ravi Karumanchiri » 02 May 2017 07:35

^^^^^^^
Why not a hypersonic missile purpose-built for reconnaissance?

A hyper-sonic missile equipped with SAR and both a direct, LoS signal as well as satellite-linkup; to relay SAR imagery from deep behind enemy lines.

Such a capability could not be denied in wartime by ASAT missiles (anti-satellite), and would enable warfighters to expend only the necessary ordinance. This is any day preferable to the Khan's style of warfare, which always involves lots of firepower.

One day, artificial intelligence will help detect and destroy targets on-the-move. A swarm of loitering hyper-sonic missiles will relay images in real time, and when fuel is low on one of the loitering hyper-sonic munitions, a target of priority is struck at high angle and high mach, while the others relay the video in real time.

One key technology in this endeavour is called "Thermionics". Thermionic devices convert heat energy directly into electricity, with no moving parts. Thermionic surfaces on the missile collect heat from the air friction, and others draw heat from parts of the engine. The electricity is used to power very strong, high resolution radar imagery, which is beamed back/up with a suitably strong radio signal.

https://www.britannica.com/technology/t ... -converter

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1282
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby RKumar » 02 May 2017 15:10

Shiv saar, lets move discussion on Bombers to new thread ... viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7336

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20898
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Philip » 02 May 2017 18:19

We conveniently forget the huge cost of missiles and PGMs. Even the US found that it ran out of Tomahawks v.fast in the GWars.When that happens its back to dropping "dumb bombs".Kits for dumb bombs may have saved the day-to an extent, but given the very high cost of modern aircraft ,flying into harm's way and letting go of a small payload requires more aircraft,more sorties and risk of more casualties too. Heavier "bombers" escorted by air dominance fighters/stealth birds, will ensure that they complete their mission.

The two most powerful mil powers on the planet still use B-52s and TU-142s,now carrying both conventional munitions but also stand-off missiles and in abundance! The only aircraft the Viet Cong feared in the Vietnam War were the B-52s,because of their enormous ability to flatten whole villages with just one strike. Imagine if we had sent over a couple of heavyweights to flatten and incinerate Muzaffarabad after the diabolic and barbaric behaviour of the Paki scum?

Shiv is right about the MKI.There was a pic in a mag of an MKI dropping 16 250KG bombs during an exercise/demo. We are still a bit in the dark about the planned upgrade of all MKIs to Super Sukhoi std. where all will carry BMos in current and future BMos-L versions,the latter supposedly not sacrificing anything in range.One SS will be able to carry 3 BMos-L missiles. If the MKI can do the biz as well as an SU-34 or nearabouts,then we need to merely increase the number of MKI/SS sqds. for the tactical role,but still will be without a strat. bomber.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ShauryaT » 02 May 2017 18:54

JayS wrote:I simply don't see bombers dropping 100s of bombs on cities. Thats so WW2. Its not gonna happen. I also think that war will go nuclear if that happens. At least we *should* have our threshold to that level. Anyone trying to erase our cities will be nuked. If our nukes can't stop that then they are useless. We should do to Chinese what Pakis do to us. Have lower thresholds for escalation.

Frankly I don't see conventional wars extending beyond borders between any of the big countries, surely not the nuclear powers. Perhaps in WW3. But not in bilateral wars. Wars will be relatively short and limited. Killing lots of people wouldn't really give you as much as you might get in few well co-ordinated pin-point attacks on key installations, in short wars.
Presumes a very low threshold for nuclear war which equals mass destruction not matched by conventional weapons. Also presumes, nuclear weapons in the hands of India for escalation dominance. Both of these are very unlikely aspects of use of nuclear weapons by India. Goes against every known paradigm of thinking on use of nuclear weapons between India and a threatening power.

We have bombers, nuclear, missiles, munitions, ORBAT, all being discussed in this thread now :)

Added: I think people who do not buy into "a role" for a strategic bomber underestimate the capacity to pursue conventional war. Sustained campaigns are what is needed to achieve meaningful objectives, of even 50 cruise missiles on an airfield is like a slap on the wrist. Ever factored the cost of these cruise missiles.

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 » 02 May 2017 19:58

About "Strategic Bombing Campaigns" using bomb truck. My views:
viewtopic.php?p=2150822#p2150822

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 » 02 May 2017 20:03

ShauryaT wrote:
JayS wrote:I simply don't see bombers dropping 100s of bombs on cities. Thats so WW2. Its not gonna happen. I also think that war will go nuclear if that happens. At least we *should* have our threshold to that level. Anyone trying to erase our cities will be nuked. If our nukes can't stop that then they are useless. We should do to Chinese what Pakis do to us. Have lower thresholds for escalation.


If any country attacks India with a conventional bombing campaign of the ferocity shown by the US (and allies) on Vietnam and Iraq, India must use nuclear weapons.

By saying this - I am suggesting that if we Indians are stupid enough to try and mount an idiotic prolonged "strategic conventional bombing campaign" against any nuclear armed nation that nation would be fully justified in nuking us. The topic is about the use of heavy bombers with conventional weapons to devastate nations - all of whom have so far never had nukes to retaliate. Let us see if Trump shits in his pants or shoots off in his pants to make history, But that is OT

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 » 02 May 2017 20:07

RKumar wrote:Shiv saar, lets move discussion on Bombers to new thread ... viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7336

Wrong forum. I don't like it. But I put my post there, It should be ON HERE

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2744
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby JTull » 02 May 2017 20:21

Brahmos Block III test fired between two A&N islands in top-attack config by Indian Army

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karthik S » 02 May 2017 20:23

Seems ER version, quite a few test in a short span. Wonder if it's testing or some target practice.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 02 May 2017 21:13

So the Brahmos test on May 2 is not the same as the NOTAM for May 4 and 5 for experimental flight vehicle.

Stay out zone is ~1050 km per S^3

Could be the Nirbhay which was due around this time?

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Karthik S » 02 May 2017 21:18

Could be:

BENGALURU: The glitches in indigenous subsonic cruise missile 'Nirbhay' have been identified and the missile is likely to be test-fired again in May or June after incorporating changes suggested by a committee that probed the earlier test failures, the DRDO said on Wednesday.


http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/ ... 70908.html

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 02 May 2017 21:24

Wow. I can get hurt patting myself on the back!!!!

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Bheeshma » 02 May 2017 23:41

Hmmm. I wonder if IA would like to try the Brahmos in top attack mode in the next surgical strike. Taking out a few pakjabi generals would be awesome. But I doubt they would do anything so bluntly. :rotfl:

SSSalvi
BRFite
Posts: 666
Joined: 23 Jan 2007 19:35
Location: Hyderabad
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby SSSalvi » 03 May 2017 02:16

ramana wrote:So the Brahmos test on May 2 is not the same as the NOTAM for May 4 and 5 for experimental flight vehicle.

Stay out zone is ~1050 km per S^3

Could be the Nirbhay which was due around this time?


I replied wrt the NOTAM provided by the arun .. in fact I could not find that particular NOTAM.

I had seen following NOTAM which has been plotted here. As I don't follow missile launches I don't know whether you people are talking of this:

30/17 - EXPERIMENTAL FLT VEHICLE LAUNCH WILL TAKE PLACE WITH THE FLW DETAILS:
THE COORD OF THE DANGER ZONES POLYGON ARE AS FOLLOWS:
POINT A: 091806N 0930500E
POINT B: 085442N 0941912E
POINT C: 083500N 0942024E
POINT D: 073600N 0940100E
POINT E: 071606N 0931930E
POINT F: 081030N 0934130E
POINT G: 083500N 0933700E
POINT H: 090130N 0923212E
POINT A: 091806N 0930500E
NO OVERFLYING ACT IS PERMISSIBLE WI THE ABOVE MENTIONED AREA.


Image

BLUE dot is point A and subsequent points are in a clockwise manner.

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

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby Gagan » 03 May 2017 02:36

^^^
Corresponds to:

Weapons testing range:
1.Trak Island
2. Trinkat Island
3. Isle of Man
4. Tillanchong Island

All lie within the designated area.
Navy tests: Brahmos, Klub, Kaliber missiles, and fires its guns on these islands.

malushahi
BRFite
Posts: 351
Joined: 16 Jul 2008 03:08
Location: South of Berkshires

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby malushahi » 03 May 2017 03:42

i got this. closer view.

Image

Image

seems like a maneuver test extending about 260kms (with 2 equidistant arms at 120deg, appx), unlike the first one that seemed more like a straight shot test extending about 1,000kms.

malushahi
BRFite
Posts: 351
Joined: 16 Jul 2008 03:08
Location: South of Berkshires

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby malushahi » 03 May 2017 04:10

on a related note, seems like things have recovered for good after the jayanti era.

the notam that i have mapped above bears proof of that.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54707
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby ramana » 03 May 2017 04:44

We still need to wait for May 3/ May4 test which is different NOTAM area.

SSSalvi
BRFite
Posts: 666
Joined: 23 Jan 2007 19:35
Location: Hyderabad
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

Postby SSSalvi » 03 May 2017 05:08

^
^
^
The ' First One ' is clearly Chandipur Range and different than the current that is under discussion.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 77 guests