Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 00:41

Austin wrote:
chetak wrote:
If the french didn't then the pakis did, no?? :mrgreen:


Any one can speculate but donating a missile wont make some one build it unless some one has real MIC capability to do it and Chinese has long passed that stage , they were making C-802 like stuff in early 80's


remember the chinese stealing russian MiGs which were vietnam bound from russia via china. They copied the entire aircraft after they stole many of them but they just did not have the metallurgy to match the russians.

These were the shenyang series of MiGs that the chinese made and flew and also mass produced and also exported to the pakis and a few other countries, IIRC.

We do not, even now, have the kind of MIC that the hans had back then in that stone age time of aviation. Best not to mention the quality of their MIC today vis-a-vis the MIC of India :wink:

China already had a tradition of producing domestic copies of Soviet tanks and aircraft dating back to the late fifties, when a falling out with the Soviet Union cut it off from foreign arms supplier.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1436
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby srin » 24 Nov 2017 01:05

I wonder if we can put Brahmos on P8's instead of the very expensive Harpoons.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6268
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 24 Nov 2017 01:41

John wrote:Mainly because of the seeker. Brahmos is still far cheaper than Exocet and Harpoon; we paid 200 million for 22 Harpoon missile incl spares.


FMS announcements try to estimate costs of potential deals and have to inform Congress with a $ amount that shouldn't be exceeded. However, it often helps to follow how the contract develops and shapes up once the deal further develops (not all FMS announcements actually lead to a contract award as it is only a notification of a potential sale usually prior to the terms and requirements for a deal having been fully hammered out). The definitive price and terms of any foreign purchase when the contracting authority is a US service or DOD agency via an FMS case is the award for the said systems by the appropriate concerned US agency.

In this case, once the deal matured the US-Navy awarded Boeing a contract for the said missiles as a exercise of option to a previously negotiated contract that included funding for US systems, work for Saudi Arabia's systems and exercised options for the Indian missiles -

The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is being awarded $81,271,024 for firm-fixed-price modification P00009 to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-16-C-0006) to exercise an option for the procurement of 22 Lot 89 Harpoon missiles and associated containers and components for the government of India under the Foreign Military Sales program. Work will be performed in St. Charles, Missouri (55.87 percent); Burnley, United Kingdom (13.68 percent); McKinney, Texas (10.16 percent); Elkton, Maryland (3.29 percent); St. Louis, Missouri (3.27 percent); Toledo, Ohio (2.62 percent); Grove, Oklahoma (1.47 percent); Ridgecrest, California (1.39 percent); Lititz, Pennsylvania (1.16 percent); Middletown, Connecticut (1.09 percent); and various locations with the U.S. (6 percent), and is expected to be completed in June 2018. Foreign military sales funds in the amount of $81,271,024 are being obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. LINK



The original contract was for a joint FMS purchase / LOT that included Saudi Arabia, Australia, Japan, Korea, India, Turkey, Belgium, Brazil, Egypt, Kuwait, Canada, and Taiwan under the Foreign Military Sales program. At the time of the initial award, the US DOD on behalf of India made a down-payment of $2.3 Million to Boeing. Then finally, once the overall fixed price contract was definitized (all options, modifications factored in) a UCA was achieved and the US Navy made the $81 Million payment to Boeing.

You can see the original contract from November, 2015 HERE. Each and every contract activity on this contract can be seen HERE, including the award in support of the Indian purchase on 9/23/16. As the last link states, 100% of the award in support of this contract has been made already.

srin wrote:I wonder if we can put Brahmos on P8's instead of the very expensive Harpoons.


Unlikely. Size and performance penalty on the aircraft aside, the Brahmos is around 3.5 times the weight of a Harpoon. I don't think the P-8s will carry anything beyond the LRASM in terms of weight. LRASM would still be less than half the weight of the Brahmos.

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ashish raval » 24 Nov 2017 03:24

chetak wrote:
disha wrote:
Check out how Exocet brought down HMS Sheffield.

Lets assume that Brahmos is detected 300 Kms out., at 3 Kms/sec., in <1.5 mins the target will be hit. Assuming the target is travelling at 30 nautical mph., it will have displaced @1 km.

So what evasive action they can take? They cannot shoot it down. All they can do is create a wall of lead & between themslves & the missile & pray!


Both radar technology as well as CIWS systems have improved tremendously since the days of the unfortunate HMS sheffield.

Rapid Blooming Offboard Chaff, is the generally first line of defence followed immediately by the ciws.


Agreed, what about rail guns and likes of it or they are at least a decade away from becoming mainstream?

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1514
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Sid » 24 Nov 2017 03:51

I think the question is how many salvos we have to fire to either overwhelm, or exhaust, enemy defenses before they are hit.

All warships have limited magazines onboard, and will be defenseless unless they are replenished. Not sure if SAMs can be reloaded by ship itself.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3929
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby srai » 24 Nov 2017 05:23

ArjunPandit wrote:1. What kind of ship would be used as a target, 2.5 ton of projectile with mach 2 (at least) would be like vajra. Guessing it would be static for the first test
2. The ET report says over 200 missiles will be on order
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/iaf-first-in-world-to-fire-brahmos-missile-from-air/articleshow/61757675.cms
The proposal for fitting the Su-30MKIs was approved by the Cabinet Committee on Security in October 2012, with the decision that the IAF will get over 200 air-launched versions of the BrahMos missiles.

Assuming 20-30 will go for testing in practice or testing over a long horizon. The number seems to be of premium targets. Remind me how many ships are in PLA :twisted: ?


Indigenous Missiles/PGMs being acquired need to be in continuous low-rate production beyond the 200 (or whatever initial projected requirements are). And some additional unused capacity in case of war and more units are required in short order.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 61160
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 24 Nov 2017 07:24

A lot of ddg out there pack 64 sam going up to 128 in case of kdx3 sejong, type55 etc

Trying to overload their sam magazines with a hailstorm
Of asm is a useless exercise unless you have 100s of fighters onsite like combined cvn air wings can do

Best is find a hypersonic weapon that can penetrate
The best shipborne sam and radar

Or launch torpedos and brahmos from submarines which negates the active defence systems on ships atleast the torpedoes do

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6247
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 24 Nov 2017 07:40

It's not easy to defeat a maneuvering missile traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3. I don't think anybody but the Israelis have demonstrably shown a counter with MRSAM.

I don't think our P-8s should carry Brahmos instead of Harpoons. But being able to carry the brahmos or the 1.5 ton brahmos mini (NG) will greatly add to the teeth. The P-8s can hang more than 120 kms away from their targets. I am sure IN would want it. But will this India specific modifications be made remains to be seen. Will work in favor of F-18s for IN.

In terms of land attack, this is a serious capability. You are speaking of a 2.5 Mach 800 km range cruise missile.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6268
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 24 Nov 2017 07:45

Indranil wrote:It's not easy to defeat a maneuvering missile traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3.


Correct. It requires highly capable radars, networking, electronic attack capability, interceptors and crew. The idea with layering is to have long range OTH AAW so that you can go after the shooters and the missile during its higher altitude cruise phase and then take multiple within horizon shots with different types of weapons (medium ranged and point defense).

Indranil wrote:I don't think anybody but the Israelis have demonstrably shown a counter with MRSAM.


The USN routinely utilizes, and successfully intercepts the GQM-163A during testing utilizing its interceptors (ESSM, SM2, SM6 etc) and the same has been used by the French, Australian and the Japanese (publicly available records point to 5 targets used by Japan to validate performance of its interceptors) armed forces to test their own systems and crews. Same with the AQM-37C which is slightly faster than the 163A but flies and simulates a different trajectory (and is air-launched).

Below is a picture of the GQM-163A being launched from the Direction générale de l'armement Essais de missiles range in France, the only non US test site/range that it has been integrated with till date (Japan used the White Sands MR facility). The French successfully intercepted the target with an Aster 30.

Image

The only missile onboard AEGIS vessels that had not been validated for Supersonic sea-skimming targets has been upgraded and validated against the threat :-

Rolling Airframe Missile Passes Fire Control Test -The Block 2 missile successfully engaged and destroyed a pair of supersonic, maneuvering, sea-skimming targets designed to represent current anti-ship missile threats, [Navsea] says. The test was the second successful integrated combat systems firing event against this surrogate threat accomplished by the shipboard air search radars and surface-to-air missiles found on U.S. Navy amphibious ships, Navsea says. Aerospace Daily & Defense Report May/2016

--

The Block 2 IOC declaration follows an extensive maritime co-operative developmental and operational testing [DT/OT] programme at the Pacific Missile Range Center at Point Mugu, California, between May 2013 and March 2015, during which the missile completed a number of live fire events achieving successful intercepts against stressing target sets.

This included a number of tests from the navy's Self-Defense Test Ship (EDD-964) in which dual salvos of Block 2 missiles defeated 'stream raid' scenarios representative of supersonic, high-maneuvering, and low-level threats. Block 2 earlier completed two successful over-water guided test vehicle flights in December 2011 to demonstrate the systems upgraded kinematic performance guidance systems. IHS Jane's Missiles and Rockets July,2015



SSST intercepts are staple development and operational test parameters for the USN AEGIS or non-AEGIS interceptors and have been for decades. They take this seriously as their adversaries have used supersonic sea skimming missiles for many years now, and are constantly evolving their SSST capability to keep up with technology. The 163A itself is now even getting chaff/Flare dispensers in the coming years and already has the near vertical top-attack capability fielded for testing. A new air-launched higher supersonic program is now being launched to replace the AQM-37C and another program to develop a Mach 5+ Hypersonic Target Missile is going to start development soon as well.

I'm not sure what target/surrogate missile the Israelis have used over the years or use now to simulate a high supersonic sea-skimming and maneuvering missile (to the best of my knowledge the GQM-163A is the only known Mach 3+ target system that can execute terminal maneuvers) but it is possible they have something.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ArjunPandit » 24 Nov 2017 09:21

A noob pooch, but can a direct hit from CIWS protect or minimize the effect of a supersonic missile?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3929
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby srai » 24 Nov 2017 09:37

ArjunPandit wrote:A noob pooch, but can a direct hit from CIWS protect or minimize the effect of a supersonic missile?

In your scenario, the missile warhead would be destroyed. However, pieces of the missile would still have Mach 2 momentum to cause great deal of shrapnel damage to the ship at those close ranges.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18377
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Philip » 24 Nov 2017 09:41

The fragments will follow through and may strike the ship causing some damage ,esp. topside affecting the superstructure,some sensors and mountings,but nothing like being rent asunder by the missile.A moot point is whether the fragments too if large enough are also hit by other CIWS weaponry if the distance and time available is sufficient for a hard kill.

Interesting debate going on reg.ICBMs.US analysts - quite rightly want land based ICBMs abandoned.One alt. (Ru) is first increasing the reaction time for alerts.Right now there's only a 7 min. window to assess if it is incoming ICBMs or a false alarm.Removing land- based ICBMs would put pressure upon "rogue" states like NoKo, etc. from possessing them, but strat. bombers and SSBNs would remain.Huge savings in def . budgets too.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ArjunPandit » 24 Nov 2017 09:47

Philip wrote:Interesting debate going on reg.ICBMs.US analysts - quite rightly want land based ICBMs abandoned.One alt. (Ru) is first increasing the reaction time for alerts.Right now there's only a 7 min. window to assess if it is incoming ICBMs or a false alarm.Removing land- based ICBMs would put pressure upon "rogue" states like NoKo, etc. from possessing them, but strat. bombers and SSBNs would remain.Huge savings in def . budgets too.

Thanks phillip and Sri,
regarding the ICBM, there was similar debate during CW as well. The argument that won the day was ICBMs (440, i think that was the recent number) also offer a target to the opponent, which otherwise would have been used for attack on the civil military centers.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18377
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Philip » 24 Nov 2017 09:52

The astronomical cost of modernisation of these legacy missiles is why the debate/ gambit is being opened.With the advent of LR PGMs like Tomahawk and Kalibir ,precision guided conv. missiles will be the pro-active means of deterrent ,delivered by a variety of platforms manned and unmanned.Less collateral damage too!

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6247
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 24 Nov 2017 11:35

brar_w wrote:The USN routinely utilizes, and successfully intercepts the GQM-163A during testing utilizing its interceptors (ESSM, SM2, SM6 etc) and the same has been used by the French, Australian and the Japanese (publicly available records point to 5 targets used by Japan to validate performance of its interceptors) armed forces to test their own systems and crews. Same with the AQM-37C which is slightly faster than the 163A but flies and simulates a different trajectory (and is air-launched).

I don't think the 37C would simulate a Brahmos, unless the latter is being used at its near maximum range of 800+ km. But the 163A is a real test. I had heard of this missile before, but never read up much on it. Nice information. Thank you.
brar_w wrote:I'm not sure what target/surrogate missile the Israelis have used over the years or use now to simulate a high supersonic sea-skimming and maneuvering missile (to the best of my knowledge the GQM-163A is the only known Mach 3+ target system that can execute terminal maneuvers) but it is possible they have something.

They electronically simulated an Yakhont. That became a prioirty after the Yakhonts were passed on to Syria. At the time of these tests, they publicly admitted that they had nothing in their inventory which could manage the Yakhont energy wise. It also became a point of consternation between Russia and India. Russia was uncomfortable about what India was sharing regarding the terminal maneuvers of the Brahmos/Yakhont.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 11:38

Indranil wrote:It's not easy to defeat a maneuvering missile traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3. I don't think anybody but the Israelis have demonstrably shown a counter with MRSAM.

I don't think our P-8s should carry Brahmos instead of Harpoons. But being able to carry the brahmos or the 1.5 ton brahmos mini (NG) will greatly add to the teeth. The P-8s can hang more than 120 kms away from their targets. I am sure IN would want it. But will this India specific modifications be made remains to be seen. Will work in favor of F-18s for IN.

In terms of land attack, this is a serious capability. You are speaking of a 2.5 Mach 800 km range cruise missile.


How much maneuverability would a "maneuvering missile" traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3 actually have when caught square in the radar sights of a CIWS?? Also, the missile would possibly be taking fire from multiple CIWS mounts on the same ship or even from multiple ships.

That much kinetic energy of a "maneuvering missile" traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3, wouldn't it be extremely difficult to control and in the terminal phase it would anyway have to straighten up and head for the target, no??

Would it be able to agilely jink left and right like an attacking football player?? or would its maneuverability be restricted by its very speed. just asking onlee :)

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20246
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 24 Nov 2017 12:01

Brahmos has low RCS due to its size and it would certainly be RAM coated , they have internal jammers and ability to work in groups via data link the latter capability is not publicly admitted but exists.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 628352.cms

The equivalent of BrahMos is yet to built. And, in the next 20 years, it cannot be intercepted by an enemy," says A Sivathanu Pillai, scientist, and CEO and MD of BrahMos Aerospace

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20246
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 24 Nov 2017 12:04

chetak wrote:How much maneuverability would a "maneuvering missile" traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3 actually have when caught square in the radar sights of a CIWS?? Also, the missile would possibly be taking fire from multiple CIWS mounts on the same ship or even from multiple ships.

That much kinetic energy of a "maneuvering missile" traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3, wouldn't it be extremely difficult to control and in the terminal phase it would anyway have to straighten up and head for the target, no??

Would it be able to agilely jink left and right like an attacking football player?? or would its maneuverability be restricted by its very speed. just asking onlee :)


even if BRahmos manouveres for 1 sec the interception fire control will have to compute a miss distance of 600 m and the G overload on any interception will be huge.

The existing Ramjet engine is getting upgraded to achieve a speed close to mach 5 and this is different from pure scramjet that they are working on
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/ind ... 7LU2N.html


“We have a two-pronged approach to exploit the hypersonic realm – upgrading the existing BrahMos engine to achieve Mach 5+ speed in three to five years and simultaneously working on a pure hypersonic engine to breach Mach 7 in five-seven years,” Mishra said.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 12:18

Austin wrote:
chetak wrote:How much maneuverability would a "maneuvering missile" traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3 actually have when caught square in the radar sights of a CIWS?? Also, the missile would possibly be taking fire from multiple CIWS mounts on the same ship or even from multiple ships.

That much kinetic energy of a "maneuvering missile" traveling at Mach 2.5 to Mach 3, wouldn't it be extremely difficult to control and in the terminal phase it would anyway have to straighten up and head for the target, no??

Would it be able to agilely jink left and right like an attacking football player?? or would its maneuverability be restricted by its very speed. just asking onlee :)


even if BRahmos manouveres for 1 sec the interception fire control will have to compute a miss distance of 600 m and the G overload on any interception will be huge.


and that begs the question: can the brahmos, for instance, perform such one second evasive maneuvers and still stay on track?? Can any missile do it and still ensure a 100% kill rate??

at that speed and energy level, the turn radius will be huge, even if vectored thrust is used. So, if there is a tradeoff, the CIWS will automatically benefit by default.

a CIWS basically puts up a wall of lead/steel/DU(?) for the missile to fly into.

As always, the measures/countermeasures game is basically one of cat and mouse. One or the other is always ahead temporarily until it is over taken and the game continues.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3511
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Neela » 24 Nov 2017 12:24

I thought Brahmos can do low altitude attacks (5 metres). At those altitudes, radars have difficulty due to sea clutter.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 12:31

Austin wrote:Brahmos has low RCS due to its size and it would certainly be RAM coated , they have internal jammers and ability to work in groups via data link the latter capability is not publicly admitted but exists.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 628352.cms

The equivalent of BrahMos is yet to built. And, in the next 20 years, it cannot be intercepted by an enemy," says A Sivathanu Pillai, scientist, and CEO and MD of BrahMos Aerospace


Don't forget that the ships also have very powerful jammers because unlike the missile and aircraft jammers, they are not power constrained. If there is a datalink, it can and will be disrupted. To assume otherwise is foolish and also fatal.

such talk should, at best, be restricted only to glossy paper brochures.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 12:39

Neela wrote:I thought Brahmos can do low altitude attacks (5 metres). At those altitudes, radars have difficulty due to sea clutter.


It used to be a big problem once upon a time but many solutions have been found now.

If the sea state is high, meaning that the sea is rough, the missile would have to fly at a greater height because its radalt performance would be degraded as it depends on reflection from the sea surface to hold height reliably.

Depends on what exactly do you mean by sea clutter??

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34441
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby shiv » 24 Nov 2017 13:01

A CIWS probably has an effective range of 1000 meters The approaching Brahmos will come head on, smallest cross section possible at 800 plus meters pers sec. That gives the CIWS about 1 second to do something. But the approaching missile has a mass of about 500 kg at least and even 10 to 12 hits from a 30 mm CIWS @ 300 grams per shell may not do much to arrest the KE .

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6670
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Prasad » 24 Nov 2017 13:02

If terminal sprint is at Mach 3.5, that thing covers 100km in 1.5 minutes. If it does s swerves at that speed, can a ciws keep up?
Wiki data but hypothetical anyway. Phalanx has a max range of 3.5km. assume it is effective at that range. at Mach 3.5, the missile will cover the distance to target in les than 3s. Ciws is said to traverse 100 degrees in elevation and sideways per sec. But if it's tracking the missile and serving, how much lead can it realistically put in the path of the missile. Will the missile jink that close to target.
Let's not discuss that please.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6670
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Prasad » 24 Nov 2017 13:04

Mach 1 at sea level is 330-340/s. So Mach 3 is approx 1000m/s.

Best would be to target the incoming missile before it starts it's sprint. 100km out is max time you have. At Mach 1 cruise, it'll cover the 300km in just over 15 minutes. QR type SAMs would be best if you can detect early (500km to detect launch platform) and react quickly enough to get to that 100km mark before the incoming missile sprint.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3890
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karthik S » 24 Nov 2017 13:25

In steep dive, the CIWS will not be very effective, from what I saw, the barrel of the CIWS guns can't point to near 90 degree angle.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 13:27

Prasad wrote:If terminal sprint is at Mach 3.5, that thing covers 100km in 1.5 minutes. If it does s swerves at that speed, can a ciws keep up?
Wiki data but hypothetical anyway. Phalanx has a max range of 3.5km. assume it is effective at that range. at Mach 3.5, the missile will cover the distance to target in les than 3s. Ciws is said to traverse 100 degrees in elevation and sideways per sec. But if it's tracking the missile and serving, how much lead can it realistically put in the path of the missile. Will the missile jink that close to target.
Let's not discuss that please.


the question is can the missile actually "swerve" at mach 3.5.?? and still regain the track to the ship?? How far out would it get displaced on each "swerve"??

the israelis actually experimented using a helicopter that placed itself between the ship and the missile and when the missile locked on to the helo, the pilot would pull up rapidly causing the missile to break lock. Of course this was done in the era of much older and slower missiles but nevertheless the thought process was there. I read this somewhere a really long time ago.

what if some Navy is now capable of deploying a shipborne drone which acts like a decoy mimicking the radar signature of the target ship?? and presenting itself as a juicy target.??

Such technology is surely is not impossible in today's era of technological capabilities??

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 13:31

Prasad wrote:Mach 1 at sea level is 330-340/s. So Mach 3 is approx 1000m/s.

Best would be to target the incoming missile before it starts it's sprint. 100km out is max time you have. At Mach 1 cruise, it'll cover the 300km in just over 15 minutes. QR type SAMs would be best if you can detect early (500km to detect launch platform) and react quickly enough to get to that 100km mark before the incoming missile sprint.


That is why a layered defence is best. All it needs is an AWACS or radar carrying aircraft or helo sitting at a safe distance to pass on targeting information via datalink.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 13:33

Karthik S wrote:In steep dive, the CIWS will not be very effective, from what I saw, the barrel of the CIWS guns can't point to near 90 degree angle.


If the missile has passed/evaded all defences and reached the steep dive stage, Stop firing and run for the lifeboats.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6247
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 24 Nov 2017 14:07

If it has come down to CIWs, your chances are quite bleak. The missile is about 2.5-3 kms out and It is about 3 seconds to impact. You cannot acquire and keep it in the hairs. If you have not been tracking the missile and know exactly where the missile is, you will be hit.

The advantage of Brahmos class of missile is really its range allows for wide variety of flight profiles. When it dives beneath the horizon is programmable. In the recent test, it was launched 400 kms away and still the terminal maneuvers were sea skimming, meaning it must have dived to sea level about 30 kms away from the target.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6247
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 24 Nov 2017 14:10

chetak wrote:
Karthik S wrote:In steep dive, the CIWS will not be very effective, from what I saw, the barrel of the CIWS guns can't point to near 90 degree angle.


If the missile has passed/evaded all defences and reached the steep dive stage, Stop firing and run for the lifeboats.

The steep dive will be before that. In brahmos, you can program the distance from the target before the missile dives. Typically, that will be based on the radar horizon of the ship.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20246
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 24 Nov 2017 14:28

:P
chetak wrote:
Austin wrote:Brahmos has low RCS due to its size and it would certainly be RAM coated , they have internal jammers and ability to work in groups via data link the latter capability is not publicly admitted but exists.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 628352.cms

The equivalent of BrahMos is yet to built. And, in the next 20 years, it cannot be intercepted by an enemy," says A Sivathanu Pillai, scientist, and CEO and MD of BrahMos Aerospace


Don't forget that the ships also have very powerful jammers because unlike the missile and aircraft jammers, they are not power constrained. If there is a datalink, it can and will be disrupted. To assume otherwise is foolish and also fatal.

such talk should, at best, be restricted only to glossy paper brochures.


Doesn't matter really , all ships aircraft carry more power and jammer that any missile can or its data link , that does not make missile obsolete or can't over come those.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 61160
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 24 Nov 2017 14:33

a long slim profile mach6 hypersonic weapon with 1000+km range and a hardened fuselage to withstand a few 10s of inert CIWS rounds or SRSAM shrapnel without breaking apart will be the next ASM.

actually the DF21D ASBM may in a way be the first herald of the gathering hypersonic dawn.

target acquisition and a few midcourse updates will have to be via a AWACS/OTH/space sensors of vast range from standoff distance or passive SIGINT ELO UAVs closer in.

the shooters will be anyone who can login to the network. from truck units to ships to planes.

eventually everyone incl somali pirates in 20 foot skiffs will be packing brahmos type weapons, but those who have the strong and survivable C4ISR assets will make it count. houthis have been scoring some solid hits on saudi warships with silkworm type missiles and 'sensor' being a lowslung fishing boat with a satellite phone stalking the target.

sometimes the missile is low subsonic ELO platform like a suicide boat or unmanned cigar boat packed with explosives
the billion dollar USS cole packed with high end weapons had no defence against that.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5126
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Viv S » 24 Nov 2017 14:36

Indranil wrote:The steep dive will be before that. In brahmos, you can program the distance from the target before the missile dives. Typically, that will be based on the radar horizon of the ship.

Problem is that if the missile is following a high altitude course for a terminal stage 'dive' (as opposed to a sea-skimming profile for a hit at waterline) its vulnerable to detection at fairly long ranges. For a target at 15,000 ft, radar horizon for a 30 m mast-mounted radar would be about 300 km. 250 km for a 10,000 ft target. That's plenty of lead time to launch interceptors to hit the missile before it can begin to dive.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2929
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby JayS » 24 Nov 2017 15:11

What happened to Shourya BTW..? Wasn't it suppose to be hypersonic glide missile with even low altitude capability..?

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 15:19

Viv S wrote:
Indranil wrote:The steep dive will be before that. In brahmos, you can program the distance from the target before the missile dives. Typically, that will be based on the radar horizon of the ship.

Problem is that if the missile is following a high altitude course for a terminal stage 'dive' (as opposed to a sea-skimming profile for a hit at waterline) its vulnerable to detection at fairly long ranges. For a target at 15,000 ft, radar horizon for a 30 m mast-mounted radar would be about 300 km. 250 km for a 10,000 ft target. That's plenty of lead time to launch interceptors to hit the missile before it can begin to dive.


In theory, its right but a low RCS target can be very difficult to detect at range.

In the dive phase, the missile should accelerate to deliver the maximum KE as well as penetrate the target deeper. The remaining unburnt fuel, the mass and speed dependant KE of the missile itself, as well as the warhead, will all combine to form a composite warhead to take out the target.

If the ship is alone, it may not survive but if in company of other CIWS ships, the other CIWS will still be able to track and engage the missile. If there are a number of missiles attacking at the same time then it is a very tricky situation.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 15:43

Indranil wrote:If it has come down to CIWs, your chances are quite bleak. The missile is about 2.5-3 kms out and It is about 3 seconds to impact. You cannot acquire and keep it in the hairs. If you have not been tracking the missile and know exactly where the missile is, you will be hit.

The advantage of Brahmos class of missile is really its range allows for wide variety of flight profiles. When it dives beneath the horizon is programmable. In the recent test, it was launched 400 kms away and still the terminal maneuvers were sea skimming, meaning it must have dived to sea level about 30 kms away from the target.


I do not know the specific target details in the case of the brahmos firing. Usually when the IN fires, the target is sometimes an IN decommissioned russian origin vessel.

There are no jammers or any other defensive systems mounted on the target vessel. So the performance of the missile is at this stage generally limited to proof of concept and systems test with data transmitted via telemetry. A number of foreign owned "innocent" "fishing vessels" and submarines are loitering in the area, in international waters, with many countries being represented, including the pakis and the hans.

All these guys are desperately recording the transmitted telemetry data for later decoding and analysis.

There are some places in India, far away from the shore, where live jamming signals can be transmitted and the effects of such jamming can be seen in real time on the missile sensors.

It is at that stage we may be able to gauge the acual performance of the missile in local conditions. Of course, the ruskis already own such facilities on a much grander scale but they may not actually share all the data with you.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6247
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017tgey

Postby Indranil » 24 Nov 2017 17:00

They don't measure counter-counter measures that way.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 61160
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 24 Nov 2017 17:05

JayS wrote:What happened to Shourya BTW..? Wasn't it suppose to be hypersonic glide missile with even low altitude capability..?


scrapped under pressure from massa is my suspicion as a 'destabilizing' weapon due to its non ballistic trajectory and dual payload capacity.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16303
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017tgey

Postby chetak » 24 Nov 2017 17:13

Indranil wrote:They don't measure counter-counter measures that way.


Sirji, this is an open forum and I am not getting into any slanging match.

I will not detail as to how these things are done but suffice it to say that we have done it and on many systems, both Indian and foreign.

People who know, like yourself perhaps, will know the full details. Let's leave it at that.

It is not for me to expand on such matters.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aakashrj, ashthor, brar_w, jjambunathan, milindc, rahulm and 61 guests