Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 12 Jun 2017 21:01

This video should ideally belong to the BENIS thread, but look at the Pakis browning their pants on Indian missiles.
Brahmos is 700 km, the pakis finally know

Pakistan Media Indian Agni 6 Missile Will Be The Best In World, Pak Is Worst State In Tech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOnX_MyMEUQ

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 12 Jun 2017 21:37

Princeton U, Karachi...

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 12 Jun 2017 22:00

the buffoon can't pronounce.. It's probably Preston Univ..

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 13 Jun 2017 00:03

Rohitvats bhai: before you go bust your blood vessel, note that both Spike & Javelin are families of missiles. Getting their foot in (especially given the step-motherly treatment meted out to Nag), might well be the death of Nag, Helina & the in-development homegrown MANPATGM. Basically, an entire indigenous family of missiles will be killed off.

Yes, many "uber-patriots" here know the difference between between the weight class of NAG & how its different from a man-portable ATGM, thank you very much.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Jun 2017 01:49

Also guys why be on a high horse?

Some are asking for they don't know.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 13 Jun 2017 04:36

I still don't get why you want to create a thermal scan of target in bright and hot mid day in a desert. My civilian brain says use an optical picture instead. Now i know there must be a good reason why they are stuck on IR which is mostly used for night fighting.

It can't be same as heat seeking AAMs? Those missiles are looking at 1500f hot inferno from behind the target with cool sky as back ground.

From basic science perspective their are two factors that come into play when dealing with IR radiation in civilian world like window films or thermal blankets, greenhouses or roofing granuals to name a few.

One is the absolute temprature of emmiting bodies and difference betwwen them and the back ground. The temprature alone determines what wavelength of IR would emit out of concerned hot bodies.

The second is the E value (emissivity) of the body/surface and this is determined by the material alone indpendent of the body/material temperature. This value indicates how much of the IR radiation will be emitted at that wavelength/temprature.

Metals have very low e-value while glass, ceramic and sand have high E values. Silver has E value of 0.02 and anything flat black would have E factor of 100. Glass/silica/sand would be 90 to 40 and armor plates (uncoated) should be >0.02 and <1.

So if we have a tank parked in broad sunlight in thaar desert in June, metals parts would heat up fast and to a higher tempratures than the rocks and sand around them. For an uncoated metal part this difference could be as large as several 10s of degrees F. This means the hotter surfaces would emit at significantly lower wavelengths which a seeker would pick-up easily in contrast to higher wavelengths emitted by lower temprature sand background.

If the air temp is at 55C than sand would be significantly hotter (say at 70C) and metal parts of tank would be even hotter (say 100C). All these surfaces would emit different wavelengths and a decent seeker should pick them up easy peezy.

But second parts now kicks in - sand would emit 100 to 1000x more radiation at certain wavelength than metal parts. If the metal surface is coated with a low e-coating like very thin metalic silica/particles it would start to look a lot like sand. Or coating it with silver particle would cut down its radiation by another factor of 10 or more. Even simple white and dark patches would modify the signature and throw scanner calibration out of range.

That 1000x higher radiation from the sand than metalic tank may overwhelm the seeker scanner. Air would create scattering and shift which would increase with difference. Sand dune and tank shape and particles in the air would all cause extream complexity. Are they barking ip the wrong tree? Does anyone have a working IIR seeker that would work at these distances in Thaar?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 13 Jun 2017 04:54

rohitvats wrote:
So, where does NAG come into picture? Well, it is in a class of its own. No comparable missile in IA inventory. But what about them Yahoodi or Amrikhan missiles? The ones which work only in brochures? Well, these are for replacing the Milan/Milan-2T....And tomorrow, will be used against Pakees on LOC as well. So, what does NAG do? Naagin dance in general sahab's son's wedding? No, no...it will be used to take out Pakee Khalids and Zaraars in the plain.

Rohit, sorry but for layfolk like me could you please spell it out a bit more? Thanks

pandyan · Post by **pandyan** » 13 Jun 2017 06:08

Is Nag/Namica/derivatives primarily meant for the deserts? What about NE border? How is the sensor performance at high altitude/cooler climates?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Jun 2017 06:20

Cosmo_R, RV is saying Nag role is against the Paki tanks like Khalid and Zarrar in the plains. Not for bunker busting etc.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 13 Jun 2017 07:06

ramana wrote:Cosmo_R, RV is saying Nag role is against the Paki tanks like Khalid and Zarrar in the plains. Not for bunker busting etc.

I have always been amused by some of the rationalisation used in context of indian military. As if a clear cut distinction will remain on the battlefield that a heavy or light weapon can be specifically be used in specific situation.

It will be that the weapon exist, use it to kill the enemy. Don't expect that the men will wait for a specific weapon to be brought up in order to kill the target.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 13 Jun 2017 07:43

Some where it sounds similar , " Arjun is meant for desert and plains !!. Maybe we need an equivalent of CAG , looking just into the defense matters but with people drawn from our tech and military faternity. DRDO statements when compared with real scenarios and with right mix from our DDM , are confusing . Endless cycle of DRDO's claimed success but continued testing on NAG is something to worry upon . Those spikes and jevlins though of different class , are costly and bleeding our miniscule budget for military procurement. I feel if imports were restricted , we would have seen NAG and it's different variant in service by now .

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 13 Jun 2017 07:49

The thing which is most baffling about NAG program is, HELINA has been tested for long ranges in LOAL mode, why hasn't LOAL mode replicated in ground based system which, I infer, is using only LOBL mode.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Jun 2017 08:07

i believe LOAL is tougher in Nag which climbs up and hence has no continuous view of the target, unlike helina which just dives down from a perch.
that being said I think javelin does it.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 13 Jun 2017 12:06

PRALAY: India’s New Under Development Conventional Strike Surface-to-Surface Missile

Saurav Jha piece on the Pralay.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 13 Jun 2017 12:16

What India's QRSAM launcher platform looks like. - @livefist

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 13 Jun 2017 12:48

Dil mange pictures of pralay.

prabhug · Post by **prabhug** » 13 Jun 2017 12:56

I think IR seeker would defeat the smoke screens created by tanks in the day.I somehow had a feeling that NAG missile is costly in terms of missile and support and hence army wants to keep it to be best and use it minimal.Scientists or production agencies should find ways to reduce costs(They have to find a way to reduce the seeker cost)

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 13 Jun 2017 18:25

PRALAY: India’s New Under Development Conventional Strike Surface-to-Surface Missile

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 13 Jun 2017 20:03

Here's my take on the Nag.

There are battles that armies want to fight and there are battles armies end up fighting.

Consequently, there is equipment armies want to have and there is equipment armies end up having.

Tanks like Leopard 2AZillion with kinetic penetrators have a limitation - they're effective line of sight. While this may work in plains and deserts without too many undulating dunes, they dont work as well elsewhere.

A good comparison would be medieval heavily armoured European knights charging at each others with lances with even the winner sustaining incapacitating injuries. And the Turks and English played asymmetrically by employing massed archers, like Battle of Crecy, Battle of Poitiers and Battle of Agincourt. The knights claimed unfair but war is seldom fair.

The Indian Army realized long back this limitation of tanks, so in current mechanized formations of T-72 & BMP-2, its the Konkurs-M missile armed BMP that does the long range work at 4 km range with T-72s providing short ranged protection at 2 km range.

However, wire guided missiles like Konkurs and TOW and laser guided missiles like Hellfire have a limitation - they're one to one, meaning operator has to continuously focus on target to guide the missile. That makes operator vulnerable, and if outnumbered, then those enemy not targeted can take out the operator.

Hence the requirement for Nag having IIR seeker, that once locked by operator will fly to its target and enable the operator to engage another target.

The requirement is extremely ambitious - other than Spike and Javelin - no other missile has IIR seekers. Not the French, British or Germans.

Most BRF members get dazzled on seeing the hardware, not realizing its the software that makes it work. And software is heavily guarded secret and very difficult to develop.

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/9194/I ... elin_Talks

The U.S. would also transfer Javelin technology, including the manufacture of the warhead, rocket motor, propellant, guidance and seeker, but no algorithms for guidance.

Which is why when Indranil posted on Uttam AESA hardware being developed, I asked on the status of software development. Even for original LCA MMR, while the hardware was up to the mark, the software development was torturous, with only a few modes developed (AFAIK track while scan, single target track). Testing was never completed and certification was never contemplated. It was not the hardware but the software that made us use Elta 2032 radar. Which is why many of us had cognitive dissonance since we saw the entire radar hardware not realizing the code inside did not exist.

Trishul too didnt make the cut because of the failure of three beam guidance. Not the guidance mechanism but the algorithms.

The only missile with complete algorithms developed and tested in India is Akash - and that has no seeker. We use the Rajendra radar and its brute signal strength allows leeway in signal processing. Hopefully Astra and QRSAM will take development further.

The challenges in PAD/AAD too is development of algorithms to enable seeker to engage targets across the full spectrum of the engagement envelope.

Some members may say, lets do indigenous algorithm development, but its easier said than done. Nag uses Sofradir IIR seekers, that too not state of the art. Following is the investment and effort expended by France in IIR seekers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sofradir

The company’s shareholders are Thales, Sagem and Areva....Sofradir was established in 1986 by Thales, Sagem and CEA-LETI. The goal of establishing Sofradir was to create an organization that developed and produced IR detectors based on the focal plane array (FPA) technology developed at CEA/LETI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CEA-Leti: ... nformation

CEA-Leti, a Grenoble, France-based research institute for electronics and information technologies, is one of the world’s largest organizations for applied research in microelectronics and nanotechnology.

A subsidiary of the Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives (CEA) France’s nuclear and renewable energy commission, Leti was established in 1967 in Grenoble, a university town in the French Alps that has now become an internationally recognized scientific hub. Today, the CEA-Leti is granted over 286 patents a year and handles a portfolio of more than 2,200 patented inventions.

The institute employs 1,700 people, while training more than 162 graduate students (38% foreigners), 36 PostDoc and hosting 200 collaborators from its research and industrial partners. It has extensive facilities for micro- and nanotechnology research, including 200mm and 300mm fabrication lines, 11,000m² of cleanroom space, and laboratories and equipment that provide first-class nanoscale characterization, chemistry and biology, photonics, design and upstream research capabilities.

There are administrative/cultural issues as well. Those developing algorithms are not engineers but mathematicians. And people with such skills are exceptionally talented and rare.

Paulraj's APSOH sonar was not about hardware but the algorithms that extracted information.

Sadly, Indian GoI rules have time scale based salary norms. And those doing fabrication and other commodity work will demand parity in pay to those developing algorithms.

I've seen & met Indians work at Israeli missile developers - people who would be trampled in the crowd in India.

So the 2 degree referred to by Dr. Christopher requires further refining of algorithms.

Now we already have a 4 km range missile - the Konkurs M

http://bdl-india.com/?q=our-products

It is designed to destroy moving and stationary armored targets with Explosives Reactive Armours at a range of 75 to 4000 meters.

Now, Nag costs 2x to 3x that of Konkurs whose operator sight is able to differentiate a tank at long range.

Nag is 90% there - once the algorithms are improved, then it makes sense to produce another 4 km range more expensive missile that is fire & forget.

Some may argue, why go for complex IIR technology? Why not use same wire guided technology as Konkurs? The answer is all the optimization that could be done with a wire guided missile has already been done for Konkurs.

Please also note that the primary weapon of T-90 is not Line of Sight limited rod penetrators but INVAR Missile for long range non line of sight engagements.

http://bdl-india.com/?q=our-products

http://aviationweek.com/defense/indian- ... k-missiles

India’s Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL) has signed a contract worth 30 billion rupees ($475 million) with the country’s defense ministry to supply Invar anti-tank guided missiles to the Indian army. “The deliveries are expected to be completed over the next five years,” a defense ministry spokesman says. In 2011, India approved the purchase of 25,000 Invar missiles to be carried on the army’s T-90 tanks. Under the decision, the country decided to procure 10,000 Invar missiles from Russia and another 15,000 rounds to be assembled under license in India by Bharat Dynamics Limited.

And why did India select Spike missile?

http://aviationweek.com/paris-air-show- ... es-1639741

Missiles are growing more and more sophisticated, and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems’ redesigned Spike missile is packing in new features, including a smart target tracker that has artificial intelligence features. The new Spike LR II is a multipurpose weapon that can be fired from vehicles, helicopters, ships and ground launchers. Not only does the Israeli company’s missile increase the range to up to 10 km (6.2 mi.) when fired from a helicopter, the missile was designed to counter targets with low-signature, time-sensitive characteristics using an embedded inertial measurement unit to target ground coordinates. And it has two warhead configurations: one that blasts through armor 30% more effectively and another that allows the gunner to control the fusing.

I personally fervently want the algorithm is developed to detect the two degree difference. Because its critical to National Science & Technology and the knowledge base will enable development of other missiles.

And Hyenas like Pakistanis will stay motionless like Kasab & his partner in Bombay - his partner attracted the cops and the silent Kasab stayed motionless and killed Karkhare, Kamte and Salaskar at point blank range.

That is classic & basic military flanking and enfilading technique - of staying still and letting the enemy pass by you.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 13 Jun 2017 20:44

^^ You missed out PARS 3 and ~~Mokopa~~. Unkill went ahead and developed JAGM with tri mode SAL, IIR & MMW seeker, which will now be used for sdb variants.

Edit: The french are coming up with mmp, similar to javelin and spike.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Jun 2017 20:51

JAGM (Current funded increment) is a Dual Mode weapon, combining MMW and SAL. A tri-mode weapon is not currently funded for this increment. SDB seekers are different.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 13 Jun 2017 21:17

@livefist

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Jun 2017 21:24

Nag is a SSSK weapon in heavy 152 mm class , It is also an expensive system that designed to take any tank with guranteed kill due to its top attack capability even against moving target , so its use will be limited to heavy anti- armour role , The explosive too are of anti-armour tandem heat type which are very optimised in the type of target it can defeat and to do that task extremely well. Using Nag against say bunker or generic hardened target will give a sub-optimum result as the warhead is not designed for that purpose.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 13 Jun 2017 22:33

Tsarkar: thanks for the detailed write-up.

The question is not whether Nag can be improved further (yes, it can), but whether its induction ready as-is. And the answer to that question is an emphatic yes. Its been ready for a while now. An IIR seeker that can detect targets at 3.2 Km in Thar desert summer is nothing to sneeze at. IIRC, the Spike missile failed this test in IA trials!

The frustrating part about IA's attitude towards Nag is their complete inability/unwillingness to go through the iterative develop-deploy-improve cycle. Induct Nag 1.0 in numbers, get it field tested, provide feedback, induct Nag 1.1 & keep going.

If you recall the history, IA sent Nag back to the drawing board a few years back, stating that its "minimum range" was 700m, while they wanted 500m. Seriously? IA had a world class ATGM that could practically kill any known tank and they chose to nitpick. A Nag 1.0 with 700m minimum range is far better than no-Nag.

Nag seems to go the Arjun way, rather than the Akash way - as far as IA is concerned. That's the tragedy.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Jun 2017 23:20

tsarkar, Thanks for the detailed write up and clarity of thought.
Yes the 0.2 degree C differentiator would get the sit still 'Kasabs in Khalids" and I also noted in my first post.

the Livefist report posted by Kakarat indicates the PROSPINA test is successful today.

Thakur_B, Is India getting the Spike LRII?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Jun 2017 23:23

Prem Kumar, Sorry it doesn't work like that. In effect all those trials were to work out the gaps in Nag and fix them before production commitment is made.
The recent test shows they have made headway there.

The PROSPINA is the best out there now.

If we read Wings of Fire, Nag is a DRDL development form the mid 1970s and now is in its final development form having overcome many requirements/hurdles.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Jun 2017 23:24

Oh BTW I expect some defense journalists to rewrite tsarkar's post as a breaking news or 10 things you need to know about the NAG!!!

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 13 Jun 2017 23:30

Successful Flight Test of ATGM Nag - PIB

Baikul · Post by **Baikul** » 13 Jun 2017 23:48

tsarkar's post about algorithms is dead on. My form has done some work in various areas of military communication, and often enough, limitations of metallurgy aside, the hardware can be broken down and replicated. But it's the algorithm inside that is the true IP and very difficult to develop.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 14 Jun 2017 11:43

Any info regarding Range and time of testing, temperature of day etc for this recent NAG test..??

srai · Post by **srai** » 14 Jun 2017 11:56

JayS wrote:Any info regarding Range and time of testing, temperature of day etc for this recent NAG test..??

We can assume it would be something close to below statement: around 3.2Km in the middle of the day (hottest 45C+) with the target tank at similar temperature. Last year in May, the temperatures were soaring above 45C in much of Rajasthan (Phalodi sizzled at 51°C).

SSridhar wrote:In June 2016, the Director General of DRDO, S. Christopher said that “ if the environment is cool and even if the differential temperature is just two degree, it can identify the target. But if the tank is left for hours in summer (sun), that is what we did during the recent trial, the temperature difference between the tank and the environment is negligible and that is the time we cannot meet the targeted four km range. So we have requested the defence minister that as a first phase the missile's range be slightly reduced, that too only when used in the middle of the day i.e., between 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. So in phase one, we will work on a slightly reduced range [only 3.2 Kms instead of 4 Kms] and in the next phase we will improve the product so as to meet all the targets”.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Jun 2017 16:55

Jaisalmer June temperatures
http://www.accuweather.com/en/in/jaisal ... her/190278

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 14 Jun 2017 17:29

tsarkar's post referred to algorithms and I remember reading a paper on this. This is how a IIR image looks like for the seeker if my understanding is correct.

So for LOBL , an image is "locked on" or stored before launch. The missile is fired and the seeker continually takes such pictures , calculates its position relative to the target, feeds backs to the guidance system which navigates the missile closer to the tank & then does the final maneuvers ( like top attack).

What I cannot understand is that temperature difference not being high enough resulting in lost range ( 3.2km vs 4km). How does the range reduce when temperature difference would create problems at target acquisition stage itself( "lock on" image)

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 14 Jun 2017 18:20

Baikul wrote:tsarkar's post about algorithms is dead on. My form has done some work in various areas of military communication, and often enough, limitations of metallurgy aside, the hardware can be broken down and replicated. But it's the algorithm inside that is the true IP and very difficult to develop.

This is due to a myriad of operating scenarios envisioned, emulated, verified; iteratively; over a significant period of time. Honestly, algorithm development is not ONLY magical brainpower, it is also a lot of hard experience. Those who have a long legacy of work in this area have certain advantages but also sometimes blindsided by certain scenarios.

Great post Tsarkarji.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 14 Jun 2017 19:01

Neela wrote: What I cannot understand is that temperature difference not being high enough resulting in lost range ( 3.2km vs 4km). How does the range reduce when temperature difference would create problems at target acquisition stage itself( "lock on" image)

My guess is that the seeker resolution is limited. It's like a digital camera. While zooming, once you run out of optical zoom, the digital zoom will show pixelation. Obviously, there are algorithms (incl. machine learning ones) that are used to reduce this pixelation. tsarkar seems to the alluding to these algorithms.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Jun 2017 20:14

iirc the sofradir seeker we purchased has more X x Y pixels.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Jun 2017 20:28

Neela wrote:What I cannot understand is that temperature difference not being high enough resulting in lost range ( 3.2km vs 4km). How does the range reduce when temperature difference would create problems at target acquisition stage itself( "lock on" image)

I suspect that the "haze" - the hot rising desert gases that are also giving off some IR emissions start interfering more and more as you get further - and eventually all contrast is lost

srai · Post by **srai** » 14 Jun 2017 20:42

We are seeing similar mounted 8x8 layout with a slew-able mechanism between various DRDO systems for the IA.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Jun 2017 21:20

J. Tull,
However as the missile approaches the target wont the resolution/picture get better?

Maybe the resolution at 3.2 km is bare maximum to identify the target before launch.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 14 Jun 2017 22:46

^^ That's what I think as well. At ranges beyond 3.2 Km in peak summer, there is no "lock on" before launch