Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Locked
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Haridas »

NachiketM wrote:This question is for the seniors here;

How does the Home-on-Jammer (HOJ) mode of modern missiles actually work?
Why didn't the our aircraft use it on 27th Feb?
Does Astra come with this mode too?
Reminds me of talks I gave to my final year classmates in 1983 on Electronic-warfare , all of them were amazed of possibilities! So were the electronics engineering lecturers
NachiketM
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 15
Joined: 28 Dec 2018 03:52

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by NachiketM »

Haridas wrote:
NachiketM wrote:This question is for the seniors here;

How does the Home-on-Jammer (HOJ) mode of modern missiles actually work?
Why didn't the our aircraft use it on 27th Feb?
Does Astra come with this mode too?
Reminds me of talks I gave to my final year classmates in 1983 on Electronic-warfare , all of them were amazed of possibilities! So were the electronics engineering lecturers
Please do elaborate and enlighten us for the benefit of this community... :D
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Haridas »

NachiketM wrote:This question is for the seniors here;

How does the Home-on-Jammer (HOJ) mode of modern missiles actually work? ....
Missiles with active seeker typically uses X or K band antenna array at launch or after launch. When enemy counter measure uses Jammer to degrade the seeker SNR (Signal to noise ratio), since the typical jammer is co-located with the target, the missile counter-counter measure could use the jammer as a beacon, so the seeker array could use the beam steering to accurately determine the angular direction of the jammer to continue to move towards jammer. Eventually when the distance to target becomes less than burn-through range of the active seeker radar, the radar is back in action with additional ranging information (in addition to angular position).
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by nachiket »

NachiketM wrote: The second question was in context of our communications being jammed by the enemy. Not sure if it was ground station or airborne.
Communications jamming and Radar jamming are not the same thing although they work on a similar principle.

HOJ mode is only useful AFAIK for a specific case - where the missile's target is itself jamming the missile's radar seeker (and launching aircraft's radar) using a self-protection jammer. Even here there are limitations as I've noted above.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Rakesh »

BrahMos-NG to be ready in 4 years: Tarmak Talking with Dr S K Mishra

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by chetak »

Deleted. Please do not post unattributed material.
Last edited by Rahul M on 10 Apr 2020 11:09, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: OT
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Manish_Sharma »

TWITTER

Saurav Jha wrote:
Interestingly, @DRDO_India recently conducted sea-level tests of the Agni-V ICBM's third stage to qualify the propellant. DRDO says that the 'pressure-time and thrust-time plots of the rocket motor matched exactly with
the prediction'. Image Courtesy: DRDO https://t.co/5jhPsMM8Vw
https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/124 ... 16001?s=19
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by nachiket »

From DEFEXPO thread:
Karan M wrote:Alpha Design Technologies, now a part of the Adani group, confirms it is the L1 for the Pechora upgrade, indicating they have been awarded the contract or will be. Work has to be completed in 3 years.
The IAF wants to "digitize" its S-125 Pechoras. Basically upgrade all the radars, control cabins with updated electronics and link them to the IACCS.
16 Firing units are planned to be digitized.
Around 8 squadrons.
Karan, why are they sticking with the old SA-3's? Looks like everything but the missiles themselves are being changed. Wouldn't it make more sense to just replace them with with Akash or QRSAM?
MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by MeshaVishwas »

Budget constraints?
Sharang vs. ATAGS type deal I think(Low risk and low cost)
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by nachiket »

MeshaVishwas wrote:Budget constraints?
Sharang vs. ATAGS type deal I think(Low risk and low cost)
Not a comparable situation IMHO. Our artillery situation was dire because of zero new inductions for a long time and IA could not afford to get rid of the 300 M-46 guns in service. ATAGS is still in testing phase right now. Besides the M-46 guns are not completely obsolete. They just needed an upgrade to 155mm from 130mm for additional range.

Akash has been in production for quite a while with the Mk2 also available now. QRSAM has also finished testing. Both systems are leagues superior to the SA-3.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

nachiket wrote:From DEFEXPO thread:
Karan M wrote:Alpha Design Technologies, now a part of the Adani group, confirms it is the L1 for the Pechora upgrade, indicating they have been awarded the contract or will be. Work has to be completed in 3 years.
The IAF wants to "digitize" its S-125 Pechoras. Basically upgrade all the radars, control cabins with updated electronics and link them to the IACCS.
16 Firing units are planned to be digitized.
Around 8 squadrons.
Karan, why are they sticking with the old SA-3's? Looks like everything but the missiles themselves are being changed. Wouldn't it make more sense to just replace them with with Akash or QRSAM?
To be honest, they could be waiting for the MRSAM deliveries to pick up. Note we have 8 squadrons of Pechoras left. And we have 9 MRSAM squadrons on order, with the first battery/s in delivery.

But I fully support the move to keep the SA-3 viable. Some of its radars will be useful against stealth aircraft as well which are optimized for the S/X band.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5247
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by srai »

Looks like everything but the missiles themselves are being changed.
Even the missiles have undergone multiple refurbishments every 5-to-9-years or so. Only the external shape retains ;)
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by nachiket »

Karan M wrote: To be honest, they could be waiting for the MRSAM deliveries to pick up. Note we have 8 squadrons of Pechoras left. And we have 9 MRSAM squadrons on order, with the first battery/s in delivery.
Has the Air Force ordered MRSAM? I thought only the IA had.
But I fully support the move to keep the SA-3 viable. Some of its radars will be useful against stealth aircraft as well which are optimized for the S/X band.
But aren't these radars getting changed in the upgrade? Frequency bands aside, those old radars will be more susceptible to ECM and lack multi-target engagement capability.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

nachiket wrote:
Karan M wrote: To be honest, they could be waiting for the MRSAM deliveries to pick up. Note we have 8 squadrons of Pechoras left. And we have 9 MRSAM squadrons on order, with the first battery/s in delivery.
Has the Air Force ordered MRSAM? I thought only the IA had.
IAF ordered 9 squadrons first, IA ordered 2 regiments later, while the name is the same the systems will differ somewhat.
But I fully support the move to keep the SA-3 viable. Some of its radars will be useful against stealth aircraft as well which are optimized for the S/X band.
But aren't these radars getting changed in the upgrade? Frequency bands aside, those old radars will be more susceptible to ECM and lack multi-target engagement capability.
https://www.aeromag.in/articlesingle.php?article=21
Could you explain to us the latest projects Alpha Design Technologies Ltd (ADTL) is carrying out jointly with DRDO for the Indian Army and paramilitary forces?
Col. H.S. Shankar: ADTL has been declared as L1 for the prestigious Pichora Radar / Missile Upgrade Project. The project is to be completed in next three years.
They are being digitized in the upgrade, some systems and components will changed to enable better ECCM. This is likely the upgrade selected with Alpha as the local industry partner. The Pechora 2M.

http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/air-defence-s ... echora-2m/
http://www.fsvts.gov.ru/materials_eng.n ... enDocument
https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Legacy- ... des-A.html
https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Legacy- ... ocId538918
shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1385
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by shaun »

nachiket wrote:
NachiketM wrote: The second question was in context of our communications being jammed by the enemy. Not sure if it was ground station or airborne.
Communications jamming and Radar jamming are not the same thing although they work on a similar principle.

HOJ mode is only useful AFAIK for a specific case - where the missile's target is itself jamming the missile's radar seeker (and launching aircraft's radar) using a self-protection jammer. Even here there are limitations as I've noted above.
Using DFRM jamming technique on a missile having active seeker and HOJ mode , the DFRM needs to know the target missile seeker characteristics . How it is achieved ??To jam a missile it needs to be detected first What is the range of IR Based like DARE Dual Colour MAWS system ??A missile seeker get activated at its terminal phase , so very less time to identify and jam . so my question is how the whole system works , from missile lunch , detection to jamming ??

Disadvantage of HOJ " When in the home-on-jam mode the missiles interlace the active pulses of the radar with passive guidance from the home-on-jam equipment.The HOJ mode does not provide as good a Pk the normal active guidance however because missiles cannot determine target velocity or distance from target ,they are unable to perform lead intercept ( missiles range in this mode is limited too because missiles cannot follow a ballistics arcs to conserve energy )."
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by nachiket »

shaun wrote: Using DFRM jamming technique on a missile having active seeker and HOJ mode , the DFRM needs to know the target missile seeker characteristics . How it is achieved ??To jam a missile it needs to be detected first What is the range of IR Based like DARE Dual Colour MAWS system ??A missile seeker get activated at its terminal phase , so very less time to identify and jam . so my question is how the whole system works , from missile lunch , detection to jamming ??
Jammers work against any radar which is painting the aircraft. This means the hostile aircrafts own radar will get jammed as well, not just the missile's own seeker. This will reduce the distance at which the hostile aircraft's radar can get accurate range information to the target, although the azimuth will still be available based on direction of jamming signal. DRFM jammers have more tricks up their sleeve. The DRFM jammer analyses and stores the characteristics of the incoming radar signal and sends back a calculated return that should confuse the hostile radar into detecting phantom targets at different ranges which do not exist. There are a lot of details which I am not aware of and others which are classified. Someone a lot more knowledgeable about Radars like Karan M can provide more info.
Disadvantage of HOJ " When in the home-on-jam mode the missiles interlace the active pulses of the radar with passive guidance from the home-on-jam equipment.The HOJ mode does not provide as good a Pk the normal active guidance however because missiles cannot determine target velocity or distance from target ,they are unable to perform lead intercept ( missiles range in this mode is limited too because missiles cannot follow a ballistics arcs to conserve energy )."
Yes this is correct from what I know. HOJ mode is definitely limited in many ways. It is definitely better to have the incoming missile be using HOJ mode than an active radar lock.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by brar_w »

HOJ modes on RF-BVRAAM's used to be a primary means of jamming defeat when they were first introduced. They no longer are. ECCM capabilities and techniques have significantly evolved since the 1990's when these missiles first began popping up in combat.
dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by dinesha »

Image
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5247
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by srai »

Image
SAAW
Twin racks —> Jaguar
Quad racks —> Su-30MKI

Looks like Su-30MKI can carry up to 20 SAAWs.

For LCA, I would imagine the following load out possibility:
* mid-wing stations —> twin racks (x 2)
* inner-wing stations —> quad racks (x 2)
* centerline stations —> twin/quad racks (x 1)

So total of 4 + 8 + 2/4 = 14 or 16 SAAWs (Max)

Typical would probably be something like this:
2 x CCMs outer wing
2 x 800 ltr tanks mid wing
8 x SAAW inner wing
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

Karan M wrote:Thakur,

No, per DRDO a glimpse ebook NGARM is for A2G targets. It is likely Rudra M1. Rudra M2, M2A, M3 etc are NGARM missile variants (missile design wise) with different seekers for different A2G functions (check AVM Nambiars interview in Salute).
Rudram2 is a stealthy cruise missile like scalp with range upto 330 km.rudram 3 is a dual pulse motor multistage warhead bunker buster missile with range is upto 550 km
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

Rudram2 has weight about 700 kg,rudram 3 has weight of 1.6 ton.but i don't know warhead weight of rudram2,3
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

Nilanjan wrote:Rudram2 has weight about 700 kg,rudram 3 has weight of 1.6 ton.but i don't know warhead weight of rudram2,3
. Also igla-s contract not going to be signed,because govt. already santioned a project to devolop manpad by drdo,i have seen it in a drdo document
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

In that document i also seen a missile named nasm-mr,next to nasm-sr
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

Nilanjan wrote:
Karan M wrote:Thakur,

No, per DRDO a glimpse ebook NGARM is for A2G targets. It is likely Rudra M1. Rudra M2, M2A, M3 etc are NGARM missile variants (missile design wise) with different seekers for different A2G functions (check AVM Nambiars interview in Salute).
Rudram2 is a stealthy cruise missile like scalp with range upto 330 km.rudram 3 is a dual pulse motor multistage warhead bunker buster missile with range is upto 550 km
Thanks for the details - do you remember the source? Plus for the MANPADS and other items? Excellent news if confirmed.
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1596
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Gyan »

My guess has been :-

Rudra 1 = NGRAM weight 500-800kg
Rudra 2 & 2A = NGRAM with IR seeker and RF seeker
Rudra 3 = AAD missile variant in Air to Ground role

But glad to hear new info if its confirmed
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Indranil »

Srai sahab, thanks for that image. This is the first time I have seen the quadpack!

Nilanjan,

1. Are you sure about Rudra M2 being a cruise missile? There are some indicators that it is rocket-powered. I am sure of its warheads. There was a tender to develop 100 of those, 50 each of PF and PCB variants. The warheads weigh 200kgs each. I also vaguely remember something on the guidance. IIRC, terminal guidance is IIR based.

2. As per a previous DRDO tender, M3 is a hypersonic ballistic missile. Why would it require a second pulse. The first pulse will take the missile from launch to hypersonic. What will the second pulse do?

3. The news on the MANPAD is really heartening if true. I will wait for some corroboration. It will take away one of my pet peeves on DRDO's missile development.
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

Google search. "Nit meghalaya convocation 2019 satish reddy rudram missile"
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

Are you sure you seen in drdo tender that rudram 3 hypersonic ballistic missile? But my point is that how can a 1.6 ton ballistic missile have a range of 550 km.when pralay missile having a range of 400-500 km weight 5 ton,prahar missile range 200 km warhead 200 kg weight1.3 ton? Also if you notice the diagram of rudram3 i think the section 6 is the second stage motor and section 7 is the first stage motor
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

Indranil wrote:Srai sahab, thanks for that image. This is the first time I have seen the quadpack!

Nilanjan,

1. Are you sure about Rudra M2 being a cruise missile? There are some indicators that it is rocket-powered. I am sure of its warheads. There was a tender to develop 100 of those, 50 each of PF and PCB variants. The warheads weigh 200kgs each. I also vaguely remember something on the guidance. IIRC, terminal guidance is IIR based.

2. As per a previous DRDO tender, M3 is a hypersonic ballistic missile. Why would it require a second pulse. The first pulse will take the missile from launch to hypersonic. What will the second pulse do?

3. The news on the MANPAD is really heartening if true. I will wait for some corroboration. It will take away one of my pet peeves on DRDO's missile development.
About rudram2 my prediction based on some point.1/ rudram2 has a range upto 330 km.now nasm-sr which is rocket powerd having a range of 50 km weight 350 kg.so how can a 700 kg rocket powerd missile have a range of 330 km, this range will be attainable only for a cruise missle.2/rci and nal devoloping 2.5 kn turbojet engine,which will be perfect fit for a 700 kg missile and on tender document of this engine it is cleary said that it will be for a air lunched missile or uav.3/ there were some rumour that air force want a smaller cruise missile than nirbhay which will be a smart one. Anyway for seeker rudram2 has two version ,one will get mmw seeker which i knew from a drdo documents about astra missile radom,another type of seeker i don't know
titash
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by titash »

<Fromhttp://nitmeghalaya.in/convo2019/profile_cg.html>

Dr G. Satheesh Reddy, presently Secretary, Department of Defence R&D, Chairman, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and Director General, Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) is well known for his significant contributions towards indigenous design, development, deployment of diversified Missiles & Strategic Systems, Guided Weapons, Avionics technologies and for sustained efforts in advancement of Aerospace technologies & Industries in India.
...
...
...
Development of New Weapon systems: Analysed the current and futuristic requirements of Missiles & Guided Weapon Systems with all stake holders, new projects have been taken up and being executed to further strengthen the arsenal of Armed Forces:

QRSAM ‐ Quick Reaction Surface to Air Missile flight tests are being conducted
Akash1S ‐ Surface to Air Missile with indigenous seeker has been successfully flight tested
Rudram II ‐ Air to Surface Missile with a range of upto 330km
Rudram III ‐ Air to Surface Missile with a range of upto 550km
SLCM ‐ Submarine launched Cruise Missile
Pralay ‐ Surface to Surface tactical Missile
High Power Electromagnetic Weapon for tactical applications
Liquid Fuel Ramjet (LFRJ) based supersonic target
Solid Fuel Ducted Ramjet (SFDR) based Missile for long range Air to Air application
MRSAM (Army) ‐ Medium Range Surface to Air Missile for Indian Army
Akash NG ‐ New Generation Surface to Air Missile with state‐of‐the‐art Seeker system
NGARM ‐ New Generation Air to Surface Anti Radiation Missile
Short and Medium range Naval Anti Ship Missiles
SANT ‐ Stand‐off Anti Tank Missile with MMW Seeker
VSHORAD ‐ Very Short Range Air Defence System
MPATGM ‐ Man Portable Anti Tank Guided Missile
LRSAM IAC ‐ Long Range Surface to Air Missile for Indigenous Aircraft Carrier


Interesting...the Barak 8 for the INS Vikrant appears to be of a different configuration than the vanilla Barak-8. I wonder why that is

One thing is sure - there is a strong weapons program in place. The wisdom of IGMDP (scorned by all and sundry during the 80s and 90s) has borne fruit. Moral of the story...whatever you choose to do w.r.t. national capabilities, make a decision and hold the course for 30 years
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1596
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Gyan »

Look at latest Variant of HARM missile called AARSM or something, it has a range of 250km
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Indranil »

Nilanjan,

Rudra M1 is basically an adaptation of NGARM.

Rudra M2, both JayS and I have reported here about the warheads. I will be very surprised if the missile has a 200 kg warhead and weighs 350 kg. Where did you get the 350 kg figure from? Also, I don't know about the propulsion system and overall weight of Rudram II. I don't think that you should compare it with NASM-SR. NASM-SR's 50 km range is in sea skimming mode when launched from a heli. Rudram II maximum range must be when launched at high altitude from near transonic speed and following a near ballistic trajectory. You shouldn't compare it with Prahaar either which is ground launched.

Rudra M3. Here is a series of posts that I had made long time back: Click here
Indranil wrote:Another set of missiles on which there has been a huge shroud of secrecy has been the Rudra II, Rudra IIA and Rudra III ASMs. They have been acknowledged:
1. air2surface missile to be tested from Su-30 with
2. 200 kg payload (for Rudra II)
3. Has IIR seeker
DFI had scooped a picture of a Rudra M2 variant from somewhere. I don't know of any other Indian missile which looks like this. The picture seems to be taken while WT testing. This does have a booster and folded wings which can signify a land or ship-launched canisterized variant.
Image
Based on the fin structure this airframe belongs to the high supersonic region. I seriously doubt, you are looking at a missile which is 350 kgs in weight. Closer to 700-900 kgs would be my guess.

Rudra M3. Here is an old post: Click here
Indranil wrote: P.S. Line drawing of the Rudra MIII from some DRDO tender.
Image
Apparently 1.6 tons and hypersonic ballastic ASM missile
Rudra M3: I had speculated that the propulsion and airframe may be derived out of the second stage of the AD1 missile: Click here
Indranil wrote:Additionally,another wild theory is that Rudra MIII is an offshoot of the upper stage of AD1.
1. Looks the same. See image below.
2. We know that AD-1 has to be capable of hypersonic flight.
3. Needs an IIR seeker
4. The dimensions make sense
5. The warhead choices make sense
6. The secrecy makes sense

Image
The image from the tender also shows folding fins. Aero ballistic missiles have found new favour recently. At hypersonic speeds they can beat some of the modern air defense systems. You are looking at modern version of a KH-15/AGM-69 series of missiles. Russia and China are developing larger hypersonic ALBMs in their Kinzhal and CH-AS-X-13 programs. India doesn't have bombers which carrying something much larger, although in theory we could go up to 2.5 tons with the modified Su-30s. But you can see why Rudra M2 and M3 are shrouded in mystery. In conventional warheads, they canwork as ASM or AShMs. But, they can potentially be the air launched version of our triad.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by brar_w »

Gyan wrote:Look at latest Variant of HARM missile called AARSM or something, it has a range of 250km
AARGM has the same range as the HARM (65 nm/ 120 km). The propulsion stack is the same only the communication and guidance has been altered. The Extended Range AARGM is essentially a new missile with a different communication and propulsion stack (and a larger diameter). It has a range of roughly double the HARM/AARGM so about 240 km. The limiting factor is the time to target and not overall range. ER-AARGM gets twice as far as the AARGM/HARM in the same amount of time. Time to target (similar or better than HARM/AARGM) was one of the key performance requirements. For DEAD you have to generate a solution, launch the weapon, and do damage assessment, and re-target (if required) before you are targeted or before you run out fuel in a given mission (that may involve other things). Time to target is very high priority in terms of design/perf. considerations.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5247
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by srai »

srai wrote:Image
SAAW
Twin racks —> Jaguar
Quad racks —> Su-30MKI

Looks like Su-30MKI can carry up to 20 SAAWs.

For LCA, I would imagine the following load out possibility:
* mid-wing stations —> twin racks (x 2)
* inner-wing stations —> quad racks (x 2)
* centerline stations —> twin/quad racks (x 1)

So total of 4 + 8 + 2/4 = 14 or 16 SAAWs (Max)

Typical would probably be something like this:
2 x CCMs outer wing
2 x 800 ltr tanks mid wing
8 x SAAW inner wing
Looks like Jaguar can carry quad-racks as well.
Image

16 SAAWs max load out. Probably something similar for LCA.
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by srin »

Indranil wrote:
Rudra M3. Here is an old post: Click here
Indranil wrote: P.S. Line drawing of the Rudra MIII from some DRDO tender.
Image
Apparently 1.6 tons and hypersonic ballastic ASM missile
That looks (esp the fin shape) more like PDV missile (not the PAD with its Prithvi-like wings).
Indranil wrote: Rudra M3: I had speculated that the propulsion and airframe may be derived out of the second stage of the AD1 missile: Click here
Indranil wrote:Additionally,another wild theory is that Rudra MIII is an offshoot of the upper stage of AD1.
1. Looks the same. See image below.
2. We know that AD-1 has to be capable of hypersonic flight.
3. Needs an IIR seeker
4. The dimensions make sense
5. The warhead choices make sense
6. The secrecy makes sense
PDV has IIR seeker and is hypersonic. Not sure about the dimensions though.
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

Indranil wrote:Nilanjan,

Rudra M1 is basically an adaptation of NGARM.

Rudra M2, both JayS and I have reported here about the warheads. I will be very surprised if the missile has a 200 kg warhead and weighs 350 kg. Where did you get the 350 kg figure from? Also, I don't know about the propulsion system and overall weight of Rudram II. I don't think that you should compare it with NASM-SR. NASM-SR's 50 km range is in sea skimming mode when launched from a heli. Rudram II maximum range must be when launched at high altitude from near transonic speed and following a near ballistic trajectory. You shouldn't compare it with Prahaar either which is ground launched.

Rudra M3. Here is a series of posts that I had made long time back: Click here
Indranil wrote:Another set of missiles on which there has been a huge shroud of secrecy has been the Rudra II, Rudra IIA and Rudra III ASMs. They have been acknowledged:
1. air2surface missile to be tested from Su-30 with
2. 200 kg payload (for Rudra II)
3. Has IIR seeker
DFI had scooped a picture of a Rudra M2 variant from somewhere. I don't know of any other Indian missile which looks like this. The picture seems to be taken while WT testing. This does have a booster and folded wings which can signify a land or ship-launched canisterized variant.
Image
Based on the fin structure this airframe belongs to the high supersonic region. I seriously doubt, you are looking at a missile which is 350 kgs in weight. Closer to 700-900 kgs would be my guess.

Rudra M3. Here is an old post: Click here
Indranil wrote: P.S. Line drawing of the Rudra MIII from some DRDO tender.
Image
Apparently 1.6 tons and hypersonic ballastic ASM missile
Rudra M3: I had speculated that the propulsion and airframe may be derived out of the second stage of the AD1 missile: Click here
Indranil wrote:Additionally,another wild theory is that Rudra MIII is an offshoot of the upper stage of AD1.
1. Looks the same. See image below.
2. We know that AD-1 has to be capable of hypersonic flight.
3. Needs an IIR seeker
4. The dimensions make sense
5. The warhead choices make sense
6. The secrecy makes sense

Image
The image from the tender also shows folding fins. Aero ballistic missiles have found new favour recently. At hypersonic speeds they can beat some of the modern air defense systems. You are looking at modern version of a KH-15/AGM-69 series of missiles. Russia and China are developing larger hypersonic ALBMs in their Kinzhal and CH-AS-X-13 programs. India doesn't have bombers which carrying something much larger, although in theory we could go up to 2.5 tons with the modified Su-30s. But you can see why Rudra M2 and M3 are shrouded in mystery. In conventional warheads, they canwork as ASM or AShMs. But, they can potentially be the air launched version of our triad.
I havn't said that rudram2 is 350 kg.i said nasm-sr is 350 kg and rudram2 is about 700 kg secondly rudram1 and ngarm is same missile not any type of adaption third , the rudram3 maybe a ballistic missile but it's range is quite long compared to it's weight also the section 5 and 6 looking like dual pulse motor quite like barak-8 .
Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Nilanjan »

There has been report all over the defence news circle that astra mk2 will be a dual pulse motor and sfdr is a parallal program.But in "rstv security watch bvraam" generel saxena clearly stating that although drdo gave an an option for dp motor for mk2, air force choose sfdr for mk2.And for me it make sense because with single pulse,dual pulse,sfdr it will be too much option available for iaf
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Indranil »

Srin sir.

The airframe is different from PDV for sure.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

Nilanjan wrote:There has been report all over the defence news circle that astra mk2 will be a dual pulse motor and sfdr is a parallal program.But in "rstv security watch bvraam" generel saxena clearly stating that although drdo gave an an option for dp motor for mk2, air force choose sfdr for mk2.And for me it make sense because with single pulse,dual pulse,sfdr it will be too much option available for iaf
He was mistaken, the Astra Mk2 is a DP motor. SFDR is still some time away, the immediate need is for a Astra Mk2 which outranges the adversary missiles and matches advanced ones likely to be introduced.
sankum
BRFite
Posts: 1150
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by sankum »

Anyone can correct me if I am wrong.

While marketing I derby ER the maker is saying that you are getting 80% of Meteor performance for one third the price. Now Meteor for $3m /missile gives NEZ of 60km. That means I derby ER for $1m/missile gives NEZ of 48km.

Astra mk2 with dual pulse will give a range of 150km as compared to 100km of I derby ER.
Locked