Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 02 Aug 2018 12:18

Karan M wrote:Though of course they do develop specific systems for specific needs.

That is the actual reason. For example, use Iron Dome to take out air dropped bombs rather than use a more expensive Barak-8 or Derby/Python.

Despite brochure claims, there is no omnipotent system. Which is why in an Indian Army platoon you find Carl Gustaf, MGL-40, RPO Sheml, Shipon and Spanish C90. Which is why surgeons use multiple scalpels. If a sangar needs to be taken out, an LCA makes more sense than a Su-30. If a missile boat needs to be taken out, one uses a Uran missile instead of Brahmos.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Aug 2018 12:37

https://twitter.com/Hemant_TNIE/status/ ... 69889?s=19

AAD test fired.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 02 Aug 2018 12:40

Karan M wrote:
tsarkar wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David%27s_Sling

Israeli SAM systems from low to high -
1. Iron Beam
2. Iron Dome with Tamir missile
3. Spyder
4. Patriot
5. Hawk
6. Barak-8
7. David's Sling (Stunner missile)
8. Arrow 2
9. Arrow 3

You can see Israelis have standardized on 9 missile/systems
Israelis get a huge amount of money from the US to prop up their defence budget and can hence maintain a menagerie. Though of course they do develop specific systems for specific needs.

If you look at the Israeli missile systems, it looks like they have a diverse set of missiles for specific roles. But a deeper look will reveal that in their system patriot is paid by Americans and the Stunner was designed to replace the hwak.

That leaves the Barak 8. Which is a co-development with India. I am not sure how many Barak 8 systems is owned by isreal. And the Arrow which is paid for by the American government.

Let's talk spyder, the munitions are it uses are standard python and derby missiles that are designed and made in Israel. The production of the system's is controlled by them.

In Indian case we are thinking of not being blackmailed by vendor. By having missiles with different similar capacity but from different vendors. A defensive mind-set is ever there was one.

Tsarkar, the having 3 tanks light, medium and heavy to fill 3 roles is standardization. It is having 3 tanks for a single role that is diversification.

nam · Post by **nam** » 02 Aug 2018 13:23

We will be having Akash,Akash NG, Qrsam filling up almost similar roles.

Sypder might have bought to fill two roles. Srsam and a backup loadout for derby bvr, in case Israel acts funny.

If there is an impression that money is wasted, I think it is better aim-120 is bought with it. Much cheaper than getting f18/f16 for bvr.

Most important, we can use it to create counter measure for the bvr. We will be catching PAF pants down when our ECM forms a shield against their f-16.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 02 Aug 2018 13:57

On that note, AAD was tested today from a cannister against multiple simulated targets.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 02 Aug 2018 15:34

https://twitter.com/Hemant_TNIE/status/ ... 2700069889

#BREAKING @DRDO_India test fires an interceptor #missile which is capable of killing incoming enemy missiles in endo atmospheric region. The missile was fired from Abdul Kalam Island off #Odisha coast.

https://twitter.com/Hemant_TNIE/status/ ... 6080758784

#BREAKING In a major milestone for @DRDO_India, made in #India AAD interceptor test fired from a canister against multiple simulated targets for the first time. The #missile shoots down one after choosing from a number of targets.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 02 Aug 2018 15:48

Wow a huge development and a remarkable one.

From this point in the test program how many more test points that need to be met before the weapon can enter service?

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 02 Aug 2018 19:16

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1025012656745406464

Photos just in of today’s Advanced Air Defence (AAD) interceptor test on India’s east coast.

Chinmay · Post by **Chinmay** » 02 Aug 2018 19:35

Noob question, but can the AAD be used as a long range SAM?

nam · Post by **nam** » 02 Aug 2018 20:13

Pratyush wrote: From this point in the test program how many more test points that need to be met before the weapon can enter service?

So far all these are are development trials. The missiles are still in white.

It will go towards deployment, only when we read the services are involved.

I really don't know why they are not involved so far.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Aug 2018 20:44

tsarkar wrote:
Karan M wrote:Though of course they do develop specific systems for specific needs.
That is the actual reason. For example, use Iron Dome to take out air dropped bombs rather than use a more expensive Barak-8 or Derby/Python.

Despite brochure claims, there is no omnipotent system. Which is why in an Indian Army platoon you find Carl Gustaf, MGL-40, RPO Sheml, Shipon and Spanish C90. Which is why surgeons use multiple scalpels. If a sangar needs to be taken out, an LCA makes more sense than a Su-30. If a missile boat needs to be taken out, one uses a Uran missile instead of Brahmos.

In business, there is something called a trade off analysis. What is the point at which max benefits are accrued from multiple parameters.

What you have here is a point at which diversity (too much) starts affecting spares stockpiling and deployment (can't easily relocate fighters/systems to different AFB which don't have the specialized infra) and the other point wherein over standardization affects combat capability (e.g. using A-4s for air defense).

Clearly, you are looking at the topic from one side, and the others from another side. There is actually the issue, both of you may well be right.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Aug 2018 23:06

Chinmay wrote:Noob question, but can the AAD be used as a long range SAM?

Sure. But would be a misuse of a valuble resource.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 03 Aug 2018 00:38

This is not the first time that AAD was fired from a canister. This is at least the third.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Aug 2018 03:46

Chinmay wrote:Noob question, but can the AAD be used as a long range SAM?

No it can't.

AAD has skid to turn manoeuvering using thrust vectoring effective against missiles but not effective against aircraft for which one needs a bank to turn missile with actuated control surfaces like LRSAM.

AAD will quickly lose energy if the aircraft jinks.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Aug 2018 03:50

Indranil wrote:This is not the first time that AAD was fired from a canister. This is at least the third.

And probably the second flight trial of the missile redesigned with strakes

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Aug 2018 04:00

Karan M wrote:In business, there is something called a trade off analysis. What is the point at which max benefits are accrued from multiple parameters.

I'll re-ask my Maruti Alto question - at how many production units will the cost of Maruti Alto become zero?

For IAF, the benefits of economies of scale by standardisation plateau at two squadrons. Which is why Jaguar, Mirage 2000, MiG-29, Su-30 and Rafale initial orders were two squadrons.

For IN, it is 3 ships. Which is why Godavari, Delhi, Shivalik, Talwar, Kolkata all came in batches of 3.

The spares problem has been due to lack of complete ToT, OEMs in home countries shutting production and OEM commercial perfidy. Our ministers and bureaucrats have suffered enough from these issues to learn from them and actively promote indigenisation.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Aug 2018 05:15

tsarkar wrote:
Chinmay wrote:Noob question, but can the AAD be used as a long range SAM?
No it can't.

AAD has skid to turn manoeuvering using thrust vectoring effective against missiles but not effective against aircraft for which one needs a bank to turn missile with actuated control surfaces like LRSAM.

AAD will quickly lose energy if the aircraft jinks.

Neither can the propulsion be reused. For a long range SAM, you don't need as fast of an acceleration as the AAD, and you are better off with a coasting phase to increase range.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 04 Aug 2018 08:31

https://t.co/lWySpLY8pi

The AAD interceptor was initially guided by its on-board inertial navigation system (INS) which received continuous updates about the incoming target’s trajectory from ground-based radars through a secure data link. After that, a radio frequency (RF) seeker in AAD’s nose cone section tracked the target while an intercept course was plotted by its on-board computer (OBC)

How does a simulated target get tracked by radio frequency (RF) seeker in AAD’s nose cone section. Ground radars could simulate the signal. But RF seeker would need a physical target, or not?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 Aug 2018 15:46

tsarkar wrote:
Karan M wrote:In business, there is something called a trade off analysis. What is the point at which max benefits are accrued from multiple parameters.
I'll re-ask my Maruti Alto question - at how many production units will the cost of Maruti Alto become zero?

For IAF, the benefits of economies of scale by standardisation plateau at two squadrons. Which is why Jaguar, Mirage 2000, MiG-29, Su-30 and Rafale initial orders were two squadrons.

For IN, it is 3 ships. Which is why Godavari, Delhi, Shivalik, Talwar, Kolkata all came in batches of 3.

The spares problem has been due to lack of complete ToT, OEMs in home countries shutting production and OEM commercial perfidy. Our ministers and bureaucrats have suffered enough from these issues to learn from them and actively promote indigenisation.

The objective of any production run is to bring the development costs as close to zero as possible. So regarding the alto, the better question is, what is the r&d cost for per unit of alto. That is produced by Maruti today.

Rest of the points are it for the thread. So will not comment on them.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Aug 2018 22:19

Development costs are done when Production articles are certified.
After that there will be low rate funding to cover production problems and deployment related issues.
Only minor nits found during production run.

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 05 Aug 2018 07:28

Tsarkar, excellent posts. Like many others, I use to view standardisation as a sine qua non for military effectiveness. But I'm coming around to your view now.

kurup · Post by **kurup** » 05 Aug 2018 16:49

650 km range missile test off coast of Vizag from 9 to 11 ...... could be either ship or sub launched ,

https://twitter.com/kurup89/status/1026059548568604674

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 05 Aug 2018 17:14

Could this is Nirbhay?

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 05 Aug 2018 17:20

^^^Looks like Brahmas or a derivative, nirbhay won't be tested from ship/sub just yet. The range is too low for nirbhay test.

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 05 Aug 2018 17:48

^More likely to be K-15

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 05 Aug 2018 22:10

I wonder if a Brahmos can be used as an ultra long range SAM against tankers and awacs. If one fires a spread of Brahmos like a spread of torpedos, conceivably, the no escape zone can be reduced to nothing. The huge warhead means even a miss by 100 meters would end up peppering the target with holes.

Haridas · Post by **Haridas** » 05 Aug 2018 22:50

^^^ the Brahmos has a specific payload to total mass ratio. The payload of ~200 kg is too heavy while only as effective as heavy 35 kg SAM payload. Unlike BM scaling down the payload weight doesn't give significant range benifit.

So yes the large brahmos can after modification do the job of small , lighter n cheaper sam missile, but at what cost effectiveness? Not to mention trucking the big monster to be of sufficient qty.

BTW long range interception also requires supporting detection and cuing sensors.

UP saying: Jiska kaam, usikoo saajhey.

Take down tanker with air superiorty fighters. What for iaf has SU30?

prasannasimha · Post by **prasannasimha** » 05 Aug 2018 22:51

^ cost

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 05 Aug 2018 22:59

Not just cost, a SAM is usually slower and more maneuverable than a missile like brahmos. Brahmos will bleed too much energy in trying to strike a nimble fighter jet(dunno how nimble tankers or awacs are) which means not as effective as a SAM.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 05 Aug 2018 23:39

There seem to be some short control surfaces/fins near the nose of the Missile
Are they new edition?

John · Post by **John** » 06 Aug 2018 03:04

Trikaal wrote:Not just cost, a SAM is usually slower and more maneuverable than a missile like brahmos. Brahmos will bleed too much energy in trying to strike a nimble fighter jet(dunno how nimble tankers or awacs are) which means not as effective as a SAM.

SAM have much higher terminal speed than Brahmos is Mach2-2.5 where Barak-8 was close to Mach4-5 during tests. Brahmos can’t pull high Gs but it’s more than maneuverable to take out Tankers and larger ACs.

However I am afraid it’s not designed for that purpose because it would need datalink and mid course guidance to successfully intercept fast moving targets; long range SAM utilize this FYI.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 06 Aug 2018 03:44

Brahmos is not the right tool for the job. Harris’s ji has captured is best in “jiska kaaj usi ko saadhe”.

But an air breathing LRSAM (enlarged SFDR) is an interesting proposition. Interesting pros and cons.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 06 Aug 2018 09:33

sudeepj wrote:I wonder if a Brahmos can be used as an ultra long range SAM against tankers and awacs. If one fires a spread of Brahmos like a spread of torpedos, conceivably, the no escape zone can be reduced to nothing. The huge warhead means even a miss by 100 meters would end up peppering the target with holes.

I too wondered about this but I think the s400 is more suitable and has missiles for exactly this

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 06 Aug 2018 12:23

John wrote: SAM have much higher terminal speed than Brahmos is Mach2-2.5 where Barak-8 was close to Mach4-5 during tests. Brahmos can’t pull high Gs but it’s more than maneuverable to take out Tankers and larger ACs.

However I am afraid it’s not designed for that purpose because it would need datalink and mid course guidance to successfully intercept fast moving targets; long range SAM utilize this FYI.

Google says Barak 8 speed is Mach 2. The tests you mention could be for Barak 8-NG though.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 06 Aug 2018 12:38

Indranil wrote:Brahmos is not the right tool for the job. Harris’s ji has captured is best in “jiska kaaj usi ko saadhe”.

But an air breathing LRSAM (enlarged SFDR) is an interesting proposition. Interesting pros and cons.

Can't really think of any con except when it comes to absolute kinetic performance (not sustained) and initial development costs maybe.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Aug 2018 13:01

question is how efficient is brahmos at high alt like 40,000ft that AWACS/EW/tankers fly at? brahmos is kerosene fueled ramjet, while meteor is some kinda solid fuel grain but both need O2, so if meteor must work at such ceiling - which it does - so can brahmos.
it might actually be more range-y than a pure solid fuel as o2 is free.

but the obese chassis is not ideal for chasing a/c . a ramjet powered SAM in the barak8 chassis using a brahmos type booster for 1st stage speedup till mach1 to ignite ramjet will be needed.

the value add imo for this use case is not much and best handled with some big solid fuel msisiles of Agni1 size which are fully developed barring a wide aperture seeker. it will mostly be faster around mach7-10 and be immune to running out air if a climb and dive profile be used.

souravB · Post by **souravB** » 06 Aug 2018 14:34

One futuristic use case I can think of for Bramhos is Buddy Bomber role. A Stealth plane can go into the enemy territory, guide a Bramhos missile which was loitering well inside friendly territory before and hit a valuable target.
In this case Bramhos will act like a suicide drone and also the a/c need not carry a big missile sacrificing it's stealth.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 06 Aug 2018 14:52

souravB wrote:One futuristic use case I can think of for Bramhos is Buddy Bomber role. A Stealth plane can go into the enemy territory, guide a Bramhos missile which was loitering well inside friendly territory before and hit a valuable target.
In this case Bramhos will act like a suicide drone and also the a/c need not carry a big missile sacrificing it's stealth.

loitering at mach 3? An 800KM Bmo's will be more than enough for porkistan!

souravB · Post by **souravB** » 06 Aug 2018 15:35

ArjunPandit wrote:
souravB wrote:One futuristic use case I can think of for Bramhos is Buddy Bomber role. A Stealth plane can go into the enemy territory, guide a Bramhos missile which was loitering well inside friendly territory before and hit a valuable target.
In this case Bramhos will act like a suicide drone and also the a/c need not carry a big missile sacrificing it's stealth.
loitering at mach 3? An 800KM Bmo's will be more than enough for porkistan!

loitering doesn't need to happen at mach3. and we must think beyond TSP. To clarify, below advantages can be had
There are some targets for which you need A2S missiles, and this way reduces the load on the a/c. This way enables you to fire even the 800KM BMos which will be quite difficult to carry for Medium weight Stealth fighters.
The way I imagine, it will be akin to 6th gen fighter concept of buddy drones but with cruise missiles. One can even use Nirbhay instead of BMos.
The underlying principle will be getting target data after launch via datalink and till then lurk in a place difficult to detect.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 06 Aug 2018 15:41

We have the Nirbhay for that.