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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49786
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 17 Apr 2018 08:45

Ok I got it now. It a transportation container/canister for rocket motors weigh up to 70 tons.
One can manually rotate the cannister for inspections etc.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6801
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Prasad » 17 Apr 2018 09:12

ramana wrote:
Kakarat wrote:
The brochure for both guided shell and rocket displayed at kalyani stall were Israeli IAI there was no mentioning of kalyani in them

Now we understand the angst of the DRDO gent about how private industry is thinking, #MII is screwdrivergiri of imported components.

It isn't so simple. We're going OT but wth.
MO of private companies is 2-fold. There are the manufacturers and the bigger houses which mfg and are ready to do r&d at a major subs-system/system level. First ones usually get ToT from some lab and get going at mfg and just need orders to keep them in the green. These are usually Rs sub-10 Cr bracket. Second is the bigger companies ranging anywhere from Anant to the Kalyanis and L&Ts. These guys mfg and put money into R&D. Being private, they don't have the treasury of india backing them. So they need to see the $$ to continue investing to come up with new products or indian products to substitute imported components in existing and products being developed by the drdo. Seekers are a good example. How is a co supposed to fund and stay in the green if they don't mfg enough while waiting for 7-8 years for a program to come to fruition and then orders get sanctioned? They have to make money. That is the chink in our armour.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby abhik » 17 Apr 2018 10:51

There is an official policy called 'Make and Build' (or something like that) where by the government pays for the R&D for developing new systems, somewhat like the American MIC. But for some inexplicable reason AFAIK not even one project has been funded under this scheme, instead the focus has been on strategic partnership which is a purely screwdrivergiri.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby JayS » 17 Apr 2018 11:14

ramana wrote:Ok I got it now. It a transportation container/canister for rocket motors weigh up to 70 tons.
One can manually rotate the cannister for inspections etc.


Or perhaps manual mechanical system is backup in case hydraulic powered system fails..?

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby JayS » 17 Apr 2018 11:17

Some noob questions.
Came some good soul summarize what all we know about SANT..? Is SANT supposed to replace HELINA? If not how both are relevent at the same time..? How SANT is different from HELINA..? Is seeker different..? Apart from higher range of coarse.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6801
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Prasad » 17 Apr 2018 11:28

SANT is fighter delivered?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62445
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 17 Apr 2018 11:47

>> But 3.2 mtrs still perplexes me. Generally the canister and the missile fit like a glove.

there will probably be a inner launch tube with the missile inside...with shock absorbing systems surrounding it. that way the real missile ready to go cansister is well protected and also hidden because none can guess if the outer carrier tube is empty. this thing could be used for transport and storage applications.

china has the "photographer hiding behind bushes" method of leaking news...we have our patented open tendering system for the same.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1215
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Thakur_B » 17 Apr 2018 11:57

Prasad wrote:SANT is fighter delivered?


Most likely. There were always plans for aircraft delivered nag.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1283
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Kakarat » 17 Apr 2018 12:23

JayS wrote:Some noob questions.
Came some good soul summarize what all we know about SANT..? Is SANT supposed to replace HELINA? If not how both are relevent at the same time..? How SANT is different from HELINA..? Is seeker different..? Apart from higher range of coarse.


I tried to speak with the official responsible for the display bit unfortunately he was a software guy and didnt know much but confirmed that it has MMW seeker.

HELINA is a optical IIR seeker missile and SANT is said to be extended range version of HELINA with a MMW seeker with a range of about 12KM & yet to be tested

sahay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 11 Apr 2017 19:45

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby sahay » 17 Apr 2018 13:03

Prasad wrote:SANT is fighter delivered?

According to to Shiv Aroor, it is a longer ranged HELINA for helicopters and UAVs.

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/985413886915555328

@livefist wrote:India’s StandOff Anti-Tank Missile (SANT) made an appearance at #DefExpo18. A 12-km range version of the HELINA air to surface munition, the weapon is undergoing carriage trials on IAF Mi-35s. First launch likely next year. For the Rudra/LCH/Rustom-II UAS.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby JayS » 17 Apr 2018 13:15

Kakarat wrote:
JayS wrote:Some noob questions.
Came some good soul summarize what all we know about SANT..? Is SANT supposed to replace HELINA? If not how both are relevent at the same time..? How SANT is different from HELINA..? Is seeker different..? Apart from higher range of coarse.


I tried to speak with the official responsible for the display bit unfortunately he was a software guy and didnt know much but confirmed that it has MMW seeker.

HELINA is a optical IIR seeker missile and SANT is said to be extended range version of HELINA with a MMW seeker with a range of about 12KM & yet to be tested


My knowledge of seekers is rather limited. So another noob query. Which one of the two, IIR or MMW would be better for Heli based AAM missile to supplant the mistral based ATAM we are using on Rudra/LCH..? I think is a low hanging fruit to develop a ATAM for our forces and we have all the building blocks. May be the efforts also can be connected to desi WVR AAM for fighter since a lot of algorithm work would be same/similar.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1215
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Thakur_B » 17 Apr 2018 13:18

^^ IR based only.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 516
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramdas » 17 Apr 2018 18:49

@Indranil:

The 3.2m appears to be the width of the platform. That is reasonable if it is a trailer. The canister diameter will be much less than that. I am guessing 2-2.5m, going by the image given. Indeed, if the payload within the canister is upto 70T, that appears to be for a MIRVed missile. Question is whether GoI will go forth on that. Especially, if God forbid, a UPA3 comes to power in 2019 after all the subversion of public opinion we are seeing around us. Hoping for the best, but sceptical.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49786
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 17 Apr 2018 19:05

JayS wrote:My knowledge of seekers is rather limited. So another noob query. Which one of the two, IIR or MMW would be better for Heli based AAM missile to supplant the mistral based ATAM we are using on Rudra/LCH..? I think is a low hanging fruit to develop a ATAM for our forces and we have all the building blocks. May be the efforts also can be connected to desi WVR AAM for fighter since a lot of algorithm work would be same/similar.


IR seeker has priority. There was a new facility making those IIR chips for the seekers.

MMW seeker has been a long standing goal for DRDO. Will help power other types of sub-munitions..

As to IIR chip being common for ATGM and WVR there is the matter of response time.
WVR needs faster/quicker response. ATGM can make do with slower response as the tanks wont be moving as fast as aircraft.
Next comes discrimination. Recall the DRDO gent talking about Indian made flares.
The WVR has to distinguish between flares and jet exhaust.
Agree software also is needed.


indranil was saying an easy low hanging fruit for DRDO would be a WVR missile.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49786
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 17 Apr 2018 19:07

ramdas, You could be right. There is no dia symbol in front of 3.2m.

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1025
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby dinesha » 17 Apr 2018 19:25

Thakur_B wrote:
Image


To put it in proper prespective from DRDO June 2014 newsletter at
http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/newsletter/2014/june_14.pdf

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49786
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 17 Apr 2018 20:37

There are nice pictures of poster boards for Parlay and other missiles on twitter.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby srai » 17 Apr 2018 21:11

Kakarat wrote:
JayS wrote:Some noob questions.
Came some good soul summarize what all we know about SANT..? Is SANT supposed to replace HELINA? If not how both are relevent at the same time..? How SANT is different from HELINA..? Is seeker different..? Apart from higher range of coarse.


I tried to speak with the official responsible for the display bit unfortunately he was a software guy and didnt know much but confirmed that it has MMW seeker.

HELINA is a optical IIR seeker missile and SANT is said to be extended range version of HELINA with a MMW seeker with a range of about 12KM & yet to be tested

Vaguely remember a quote by DRDO/RCI chief regarding NAG/HELINA as being too small for MMW seeker. SANT would be a bigger missile for it to be able to accommodate a MMW seeker.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 516
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramdas » 17 Apr 2018 21:27

So the 70T payload includes canister. Probably for A-5 or a variant of that system.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4079
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karthik S » 17 Apr 2018 21:37

ramdas wrote:So the 70T payload includes canister. Probably for A-5 or a variant of that system.


No, it clearly says "payload capacity" and "storage of 70 T canisterised articles". It can't mean payload + canister weight = 70 T.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby JayS » 17 Apr 2018 21:48

ramana wrote:
JayS wrote:My knowledge of seekers is rather limited. So another noob query. Which one of the two, IIR or MMW would be better for Heli based AAM missile to supplant the mistral based ATAM we are using on Rudra/LCH..? I think is a low hanging fruit to develop a ATAM for our forces and we have all the building blocks. May be the efforts also can be connected to desi WVR AAM for fighter since a lot of algorithm work would be same/similar.


IR seeker has priority. There was a new facility making those IIR chips for the seekers.

MMW seeker has been a long standing goal for DRDO. Will help power other types of sub-munitions..

As to IIR chip being common for ATGM and WVR there is the matter of response time.
WVR needs faster/quicker response. ATGM can make do with slower response as the tanks wont be moving as fast as aircraft.
Next comes discrimination. Recall the DRDO gent talking about Indian made flares.
The WVR has to distinguish between flares and jet exhaust.
Agree software also is needed.


indranil was saying an easy low hanging fruit for DRDO would be a WVR missile.


ATAM ramana sir not ATGM.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6137
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby nachiket » 17 Apr 2018 23:09

How thick are those vulcanized rubber rings holding the canister in place? The 3.2m diameter might include the width of the canister plus the rings.

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 296
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby sohamn » 17 Apr 2018 23:23

dinesha wrote:
Thakur_B wrote:
Image


To put it in proper prespective from DRDO June 2014 newsletter at
http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/newsletter/2014/june_14.pdf

Image


So even the length of this new canister is less than the earlier TCT-5 version. i.e. 20m vs 30m. So, while the length has decreased the payload has increased. Does it mean it has now been specifically designed for A5, instead of A6 or some future ICBM? As A6 probably won't fit the 20 m length.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6647
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 17 Apr 2018 23:55

1. Pralay seems like a single staged Shaurya. I can't figure out where the 2 stage Agni 1P (as reported by Ajai Shukla) fits in.
2. Is NGARM a two stage missile?

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 736
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby prasannasimha » 18 Apr 2018 00:09

^^30 meteres includes the engine and driver module of the TCT whereas the Canister is much shorter

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 516
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramdas » 18 Apr 2018 03:46

@Karthik S: even the item about the Agni-5 ejection test in the DRDO newsletter talks of Agni-5 and `65 ton canisterized missile'. Given that Agni-5 is 50 tons in mass, the 65 tons can only refer to mass including the canister. Here, the item is a rotation-cum-resting fixture with a payload of 70 tons. It is a trailer with some additional equipment to hold the canister and missile. So, upto 70T is the mass of the missile together with the canister. This indicates A-5 or a variant of that system.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby abhik » 18 Apr 2018 17:50

Indranil wrote:1. Pralay seems like a single staged Shaurya. I can't figure out where the 2 stage Agni 1P (as reported by Ajai Shukla) fits in.
2. Is NGARM a two stage missile?

NGARM has dual pulse motor no?
viewtopic.php?p=2266216#p2266216

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6647
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 19 Apr 2018 07:55

I based my question by seeing that drawing only. Can't remember reading that NGARM was dual pulsed before this.

Ramdas ji, IIRC Vk Sarawat said that Agni 6 is going to way 56 Tons. So missile+canister at 70 tons would make sense.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49786
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 19 Apr 2018 20:19

That passive radar seeker should have a INS lock along with it to ensure anti-radiation missile still locks on the emitter in case it is switched off.

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1025
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby dinesha » 19 Apr 2018 21:10

A Closer Look At DRDO’s New Generation Anti-Radiation
http://www.delhidefencereview.com/2018/ ... n-missile/

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21535
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Austin » 19 Apr 2018 22:19

India Displays Big Missiles at Defense Show
Two significant long-range missile programs were showcased at India’s DefExpo2018 event held in Chennai from April 11 to 14. India’s defense ministry and its Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) displayed a full-scale mockup of the ground-launched Nirbhay cruise missile. The Indo-Russian BrahMos Aerospace joint venture showed the “Next Generation” version of its supersonic missile.

The Nirbhay is similar in size and performance to the U.S. Tomahawk and Russia’s Caliber 3M54/3M14 cruise missiles. It is six meters (19.7 feet) long and has a cylindrical body with diameter of 0.52 m (67 inches). According to local sources, the Nirbhay can carry a conventional or nuclear warhead over a distance of 1,500 km/808 nm. Its production should have commenced last year. Separately, the DRDO put on display an indigenously developed “Small Turbofan Engine” that might power the Nirbhay.

Clearly, this missile is a strategic weapon that will supplement ballistic missiles already in the Indian service. These include the K-15/B-05 series with a range of 750 km/405 nm developed for the S73 Arihant nuclear-powered submarine that was commissioned in 2016. The follow-on K-4, now in the testing, has a range boosted to 3,500 km/1,890 nm. According to local sources, this missile is larger, at 12 m (39.4 ft) long and 1.3 m (51 in) in diameter, and weighs 17 tons. Between these two naval systems there is the Dhanush intended for launch from a mobile land platform. Weighing 5,600 kg (12,346 lb), this missile has a length of 8.56 m (28 ft) and a body diameter of 1 m (39.4 in).

The Dhanush’s reported maximum range is 300 km/162 nm, which is similar to the original cruise missile from the BrahMos joint venture, which is designated PJ-10. The BrahMos-NG that is now in development is smaller in diameter and length than the PJ-10, and can therefore fit the standard 533mm torpedo tubes in widespread use on submarines and surface warships. It is primarily intended for submarines, although an air-launched version is also planned. The Brahmos-NG seems to have replaced the hypersonic Brahmos-II that was previously a focus of development by the joint venture.

Brahmos-NG missile

The Brahmos-NG is considerably smaller than earlier versions of the Indo-Russian missile. (Photo: Vladimir Karnozov)

However, the Brahmos-NG is still faster than the PJ-10 (Mach 3.5 versus Mach 2.8) and has a longer range (more than 300 km/162 nm versus a maximum 290/157 nm km).

Moreover, the BrahMos-NG will have a newly developed AESA radar seeker in place of the mechanically scanned one on the PJ-10.

The Indian air force would benefit from adopting the Brahmos-NG, since three of them could be carried by its Su-30MKI multirole fighters, instead of one PJ-10. Besides, the aircraft would be able to land with one or two missiles on wing pylons, whereas landing safely with a standard missile attached to the center fuselage pylon is not possible.

Meanwhile, flight-testing of the air-launched Brahmos is being conducted using a pair of specially modified Su-30MKI. The first midair firing was successfully accomplished in November 2017.

BrahMos Aerospace believes it can develop, test and put the Brahmos-NG into production as a follow-on to the PJ-10. By that time, the number of surface warships in service with the Indian navy and armed with these missiles would rise from the current 11 to 20. Production for the Indian army, of the version that fits in mobile transporter-erector-launchers, would also have been completed by that time.

Also at the test-firing stage is the BrahMos-ER, suffix for “Extended Range,” which is reportedly increased to 450 km/243 nm. The first launch was in March of last year. Development of this version for ground, ship and submarine launch, became lawful following India joining over 30 other nations that signed the Missile Technology Control Regime.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49786
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 19 Apr 2018 22:23

ramana wrote:That passive radar seeker should have a INS lock along with it to ensure anti-radiation missile still locks on the emitter in case it is switched off.



From dinesha post above:

...It was only with the advent of on-board inertial navigation system (INS) that could use updates from a global positioning system (GPS) to remove accumulated errors, that the success rate of ARMs showed significant improvement. NGARM, of course, has an on-board INS that can receive multi-constellation updates.


...
Though it is primarily meant for carriage by the IAF’s Su-30 MKI, the missile will also be compatible with the Mirage 2000 TI and Jaguar. As far as the missile itself is concerned, laboratory test trials with NGARM’s radome for selected frequencies have been completed and the static firing of its rocket motors at sea-level conditions has also been done. As such, NGARM is headed for powered flight trials later this year once all residual CFTs and DFTs are complete.


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49786
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 20 Apr 2018 00:13

India Displays Big Missiles at Defense Show
Two significant long-range missile programs were showcased at India’s DefExpo2018 event held in Chennai from April 11 to 14. India’s defense ministry and its Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) displayed a full-scale mockup of the ground-launched Nirbhay cruise missile. The Indo-Russian BrahMos Aerospace joint venture showed the “Next Generation” version of its supersonic missile.

The Nirbhay is similar in size and performance to the U.S. Tomahawk and Russia’s Caliber 3M54/3M14 cruise missiles. It is six meters (19.7 feet) long and has a cylindrical body with diameter of 0.52 m (67 inches). According to local sources, the Nirbhay can carry a conventional or nuclear warhead over a distance of 1,500 km/808 nm. Its production should have commenced last year. Separately, the DRDO put on display an indigenously developed “Small Turbofan Engine” that might power the Nirbhay.

Clearly, this missile is a strategic weapon that will supplement ballistic missiles already in the Indian service. These include the K-15/B-05 series with a range of 750 km/405 nm developed for the S73 Arihant nuclear-powered submarine that was commissioned in 2016. The follow-on K-4, now in the testing, has a range boosted to 3,500 km/1,890 nm. According to local sources, this missile is larger, at 12 m (39.4 ft) long and 1.3 m (51 in) in diameter, and weighs 17 tons. Between these two naval systems there is the Dhanush intended for launch from a mobile land platform. Weighing 5,600 kg (12,346 lb), this missile has a length of 8.56 m (28 ft) and a body diameter of 1 m (39.4 in).

The Dhanush’s reported maximum range is 300 km/162 nm, which is similar to the original cruise missile from the BrahMos joint venture, which is designated PJ-10. The BrahMos-NG that is now in development is smaller in diameter and length than the PJ-10, and can therefore fit the standard 533mm torpedo tubes in widespread use on submarines and surface warships. It is primarily intended for submarines, although an air-launched version is also planned. The Brahmos-NG seems to have replaced the hypersonic Brahmos-II that was previously a focus of development by the joint venture.

Brahmos-NG missile

The Brahmos-NG is considerably smaller than earlier versions of the Indo-Russian missile. (Photo: Vladimir Karnozov)

However, the Brahmos-NG is still faster than the PJ-10 (Mach 3.5 versus Mach 2.8) and has a longer range (more than 300 km/162 nm versus a maximum 290/157 nm km).

Moreover, the BrahMos-NG will have a newly developed AESA radar seeker in place of the mechanically scanned one on the PJ-10.

The Indian air force would benefit from adopting the Brahmos-NG, since three of them could be carried by its Su-30MKI multirole fighters, instead of one PJ-10. Besides, the aircraft would be able to land with one or two missiles on wing pylons, whereas landing safely with a standard missile attached to the center fuselage pylon is not possible.

Meanwhile, flight-testing of the air-launched Brahmos is being conducted using a pair of specially modified Su-30MKI. The first midair firing was successfully accomplished in November 2017.

BrahMos Aerospace believes it can develop, test and put the Brahmos-NG into production as a follow-on to the PJ-10. By that time, the number of surface warships in service with the Indian navy and armed with these missiles would rise from the current 11 to 20. Production for the Indian army, of the version that fits in mobile transporter-erector-launchers, would also have been completed by that time.

Also at the test-firing stage is the BrahMos-ER, suffix for “Extended Range,” which is reportedly increased to 450 km/243 nm. The first launch was in March of last year. Development of this version for ground, ship and submarine launch, became lawful following India joining over 30 other nations that signed the Missile Technology Control Regime.


So as USAF starts developing the HCSW, one can see the move to airborne hypersonic weapons that will get fielded in ten years.

Brahmos NG should be the goal for IAF. For flexibility and more importantly safety in case of unexpended round.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5199
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Rakesh » 20 Apr 2018 00:41

ramana wrote:India Displays Big Missiles at Defense ShowThe Indian air force would benefit from adopting the Brahmos-NG, since three of them could be carried by its Su-30MKI multirole fighters, instead of one PJ-10. Besides, the aircraft would be able to land with one or two missiles on wing pylons, whereas landing safely with a standard missile attached to the center fuselage pylon is not possible.

Ramana-ji, how are they planning to land a Rambha if a PJ-10 - mounted on the center fuselage pylon - has not been fired? As per the above article, a safe landing is not possible.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5151
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby RoyG » 20 Apr 2018 00:49

Rakesh wrote:
ramana wrote:India Displays Big Missiles at Defense ShowThe Indian air force would benefit from adopting the Brahmos-NG, since three of them could be carried by its Su-30MKI multirole fighters, instead of one PJ-10. Besides, the aircraft would be able to land with one or two missiles on wing pylons, whereas landing safely with a standard missile attached to the center fuselage pylon is not possible.

Ramana-ji, how are they planning to land a Rambha if a PJ-10 - mounted on the center fuselage pylon - has not been fired? As per the above article, a safe landing is not possible.


It has to be jettisoned if not fired. Pakis/Reds should think twice before doing anything stupid. Being strapped means they have a high probability of getting kicked in the teeth.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2276
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby JTull » 20 Apr 2018 00:53

Guys, this last page has seen tons of posts with long quotes and 1 or 2 lines of comments. Please use more discretion.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5199
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Rakesh » 20 Apr 2018 01:04

RoyG wrote:It has to be jettisoned if not fired. Pakis/Reds should think twice before doing anything stupid. Being strapped means they have a high probability of getting kicked in the teeth.

Saar, now that lends a good scenario. Each time, the IAF sends a Rambha up in the air (with a BrahMos missile in the center fuselage pylon)...we should notify the PAF and the PLAAF.

"Hey guys, we have a Rambha up in the air...armed with a BrahMos missile. Because we are unable to safely land the plane back, we may either jettison the missile or we just might strike you.....up your Musharraf...just because we can. Do you have your Brown Shalwars ready?"

And then the PAF sings...."Tum Hi Sai Aai Mujahido...."

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1283
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Kakarat » 20 Apr 2018 01:09

Rakesh wrote:
ramana wrote:India Displays Big Missiles at Defense ShowThe Indian air force would benefit from adopting the Brahmos-NG, since three of them could be carried by its Su-30MKI multirole fighters, instead of one PJ-10. Besides, the aircraft would be able to land with one or two missiles on wing pylons, whereas landing safely with a standard missile attached to the center fuselage pylon is not possible.

Ramana-ji, how are they planning to land a Rambha if a PJ-10 - mounted on the center fuselage pylon - has not been fired? As per the above article, a safe landing is not possible.


I think the Su-30MKI landed back with the missile during captive flight trials and then drop tests were conducted separately. So it would be inaccurate to say that Su-30MKI cannot land back safely with the missile

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6647
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 20 Apr 2018 03:44

Correct. It can safely land. There are other inaccuracies in that report too.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6647
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News and Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 20 Apr 2018 03:56

Thakur_B wrote:
Indranil wrote:Fascinating thread. Please keep educating us on this topic.

By the way, on Tratec’s website there is a mention of a 70 tin missile carrier( with no picture). So, an yet to be disclosed 70 ton missile. The plot thickens.


Image

x-posting from vehicles thread. Something is happening.

I think, I understand what this thing is. As the name suggests. this will be an inspection cum limited mobility platform. The platform will serve inspection, storage and loading. When mobility is required the hydraulic legs will be used to higher platform. Universal mobility platforms like the ones designed by Tratec will be moved underneath the platform. The platform will be lowered and locked in place. Now it can be moved around. We saw something similar for Agni 3 in an earlier RD parade preparation.

This one is for Agni-6, more flexible and usable for canisterized missile.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests