Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Locked
Sonugn
BRFite
Posts: 446
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 12:03
Location: DeceptyKon Workshop

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Sonugn »

Vicky wrote:
Sonugn wrote:A new version of the Akash Missile – ‘Akash Prime’- successfully flight-tested from Integrated Test Range at Chandipur. The missile intercepted and destroyed an unmanned aerial target mimicking an enemy aircraft in its maiden flight test after improvements.

via RajatPTOI (Times Of India)
Is this DDMitis?. Both TOIlet and ANI reported the same. Do they mean Akash-1S? The word "prime" was used in the context of 1S eons ago.

Edit: Even Livefist is calling it Prime. The released DRDO video also has AKP-01 code on it.
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1442490250987720710

How is this different from the 1S then?

Edit: Upon further evaluation of the DRDO press release, I think this is just the final/further improved version of the 1S with more improvements in high alt/cold performance and simplified launchers. So, 1S will continue in this new avatar.
Akash - Original version
Akash 1S - Seeker;18-30Km
Akash Prime - new RF seeker, "mountain friendly"
Akash NG - more range, from 30 to 80Km (?), better reaction time

Explained: What are the two advanced versions of Akash missile?
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2508
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by srin »

^^^ Akash NG looks to be a dual pulse, solid rocket (instead of the ramjet).

I still don't know the difference between 1S and Prime. Looks to be a name difference onlee
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

srin wrote:^^^ Akash NG looks to be a dual pulse, solid rocket (instead of the ramjet).

I still don't know the difference between 1S and Prime. Looks to be a name difference onlee
Its the same, but 1S was the TD. Prime is the actual operational configuration.

NG is dual pulse. MRSAM replacement.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Indranil »

This is what I had posted a few months back. I expect the Brahmos long (800 km) range missile to look like.
1. Nose cap on canister and not missile: Lowers cost and complexity
2. No sudden pitch right after launch: Conserves energy, lowers cost and complexity.
3. hi-hi-low trajectory
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by John »

^ Two completely different launch mechanism that looks like hot launch we’re as Brahmos is cold launch and canisterized during manufacturing. This does add costs during manufacturing but greatly simplifies and reduces maintenance and launcher costs.
jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5727
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by jamwal »

Brahmos is essentially a ship launched AshM which need to fly at low trajectories. I always wondered why even the ground launched versions did that 90 degrees turn instead of gaining altitude for maximum range. One reason could be the need to avoid radar detection, but extra range has its own advantages
Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Y I Patel »

Regarding the missile being called “Veda” - the correct name is probably “Vedha”, roughly translated as hitting with an arrow. Arjun performed Matsya Vedha to win Draupadi’s hand.

The name likely means it is an ABM or a satellite interceptor
morem
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 15:52

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by morem »

That is an astute deduction, well done sir
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Indranil »

Nice deduction. But it is VEDA only. It is under ASL. The Project director's name is Dr. N Kishore Nath. Seems like it is a "defense satellite launch vehicle".
http://vbithyd.ac.in/wp-content/uploads ... OUCHER.pdf
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Pratyush »

WRT, Akash prime. Will the existing orders for base model of akash be modified to the Akash prime?

Or this will be a seperate procurement contract.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Aditya_V »

The latest 10000 cr CCS approval is for Akash-1S a.k.a Akash Prime. I think at some point older Akash regiments missiles will get upgraded with a seeker, meanwhile Akash-NG and MR SAM(Barak-8) will be developed and inducted respectively.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Indranil »

IMHO too expensive to upgrade or throw away. Most probably older missiles will be reallocated to less sensitive locations just like what they are doing with the Pechoras, etc.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Indranil »

If a big tree fell in a forest and nobody heard ....
basant
BRFite
Posts: 889
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by basant »

^^^
That's evil, IR :rotfl:
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 878
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Haridas »

Indranil wrote:If a big tree fell in a forest and nobody heard ....
And the earth shakes so emotions overtake human. Paraphrasing an ex Prime Minister.
AdityaM
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2025
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by AdityaM »

Indranil wrote:If a big tree fell in a forest and nobody heard ....
A big splash would be heard. Wouldn't it?
Ankit Desai
BRFite
Posts: 634
Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
Location: Gujarat

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Ankit Desai »

Y I Patel wrote:Regarding the missile being called “Veda” - the correct name is probably “Vedha”, roughly translated as hitting with an arrow. Arjun performed Matsya Vedha to win Draupadi’s hand.

The name likely means it is an ABM or a satellite interceptor


-Ankit
Ashokk
BRFite
Posts: 1116
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Ashokk »

Fresh NOTAM, possibly Nibhay test
#Areawarning #India issues a notification for the launch of an experimental flight vehicle over the #Bayofbengal

Launch Window | 06 - 08 Oct 2021
Image
jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5727
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by jamwal »

Image
Brahmos replenishment vehicle
ShivS
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 19 Apr 2019 23:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by ShivS »

Karan M wrote:
ShivS wrote:
Another weapon system being put into production without optimisation
Please don't make glib statements without evidence. This is not a forum for making random comments about design choices without evidence.
My good friend Karan :)

Am not commenting on the design capability of even the choices

What we are see with multiple weapon systems is that the optimisation - iteration cycle is being frozen and systems are being moved into production.

This is a user decision - current specs in production have higher relevance than achievable specs that will take time etc.

We seem to be getting ready for something.

On manpads weight has issues with range and portability (carriage as well as bringing the weapon to bear and stabilising it) but the biggest impact is due to the energy that the missile needs and the G forces that these missiles need and bear.

When the main motor kicks in the missile will go thru 20-25 g forces - if it’s got to turn to engage, the turn can result in extreme Gs too - can go up to higher levels depending on relative speeds of the target and the missile.

A higher weight means initially the speed is lower for the same quantity of propellant and it bleeds energy rapidly during turns. This is compounded by the higher stress on the body of the missile and the missile may deform in tighter turns.

So fast, manouverable targets have lower vulnerability - perhaps that too says something.
Vicky
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 23 Aug 2021 19:33

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Vicky »

Tenders indicate that QRSAM is moving to a Laser Proximity fuze. They seem to be ditching the Astra derived radio proximity fuze.

Why are they changing at this stage of the design?

Is ECCM such a big problem to force them to ditch RPF even before induction? or the Army taking DRDO on the usual runaround?
basant
BRFite
Posts: 889
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by basant »

Apparently the push for laser proximity fuse came from DRDO Chairman himself. It was in development for a few years and has been demonstrated. I would not read conspiracy into it.
Vicky
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 23 Aug 2021 19:33

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Vicky »

Tender issued to manufacture 4 prototypes of of the RCI designed MANPADS launcher - MPDMS project. The launcher is identified as V-666. Not much other info.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

ShivS wrote:
Karan M wrote:
Please don't make glib statements without evidence. This is not a forum for making random comments about design choices without evidence.
My good friend Karan :)

Am not commenting on the design capability of even the choices

What we are see with multiple weapon systems is that the optimisation - iteration cycle is being frozen and systems are being moved into production.

This is a user decision - current specs in production have higher relevance than achievable specs that will take time etc.

We seem to be getting ready for something.

On manpads weight has issues with range and portability (carriage as well as bringing the weapon to bear and stabilising it) but the biggest impact is due to the energy that the missile needs and the G forces that these missiles need and bear.

When the main motor kicks in the missile will go thru 20-25 g forces - if it’s got to turn to engage, the turn can result in extreme Gs too - can go up to higher levels depending on relative speeds of the target and the missile.

A higher weight means initially the speed is lower for the same quantity of propellant and it bleeds energy rapidly during turns. This is compounded by the higher stress on the body of the missile and the missile may deform in tighter turns.

So fast, manouverable targets have lower vulnerability - perhaps that too says something.
Again, you initially made a categorical assertion of lower performance without providing any evidence. That was the point. This forum is used as an authoritative source by many folks. You post speculation, someone else takes it as fact, runs with it. Next thing Internets full of "desi MANPADS too heavy boo hoo". Kindly understand the consequences. Rumors spread faster because of vested interests who took even well meaning speculation and run with it.

There are many aspects that come into play for design choices including structural strength and field availability. You've come up with one theory but it is one of many. As long as the material choice is tailored to the propulsion and allows for within spec G performance, acceleration and matches the envelope expected of the missile, what's the issue? It has to meet user specs for the overall integrated unit as well. Weight will automatically be taken into account.

"Missile may deform on tighter turns " - again pure speculation.

The missile performance isn't simulated and actually tested against live targets. They test for material failure at multiple high stress points. The tests add empirical knowledge to back up the simulations.

"Fast maneuverable targets may have lower vulnerability" - would sure like to see a fast target pulling high Gs to outrun a missile fired within its NEZ.

You are quoting what would be obvious to designers. As if they wouldn't have taken even these basics into account.

Maraging steel is used in propulsion for a variety of reasons. It can even be a prototyping choice. Second guessing those choices and extrapolating from that is fraught with issues.

I doubt conflict or no conflict, services will accept anything subpar. Meantime, they're ordering Igla S for short term needs.

Indranil already addressed your comment on Astra in the other thread. So yes, please stop making categorical assertions on design choices till results come in.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

Vicky wrote:Tenders indicate that QRSAM is moving to a Laser Proximity fuze. They seem to be ditching the Astra derived radio proximity fuze.

Why are they changing at this stage of the design?

Is ECCM such a big problem to force them to ditch RPF even before induction? or the Army taking DRDO on the usual runaround?
Astra was intended to have a laser proximity fuse too. If they're moving to a LPF solution for QRSAM, it means it's matured. LPF assists with ECCM and will provide very accurate ranging, as a backup to the main seeker, based on a different mode of working.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

Vicky wrote:Tender issued to manufacture 4 prototypes of of the RCI designed MANPADS launcher - MPDMS project. The launcher is identified as V-666. Not much other info.
Likely VEM.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

basant wrote:Apparently the push for laser proximity fuse came from DRDO Chairman himself. It was in development for a few years and has been demonstrated. I would not read conspiracy into it.
Good memory. A LPF was developed for Astra too.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thehin ... 6.ece/amp/

"The DRDO carried out two successful test firings in November after which it said the missile precisely hit a Banshee target and destroyed it completely. “This was achieved with a new indigenously developed technology of Laser Proximity Fuse (LPF) for pin-pointed accuracy of hit. Till date, all missiles used Radio Proximity Fuzes,” said another official. “The LPF was developed by Instruments Research and Development Establishment (IRDE) in the last two years with a specific push by [DRDO] Chairman Satheesh Reddy,” he added."
jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5727
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by jamwal »

Image

Image

Image

Image

Brahmos manufacturing at a Godrej plant. 2015-16
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by kit »

jamwal wrote:Image

Brahmos manufacturing at a Godrej plant. 2015-16
Would be cool to see a completely automated missile factory just like that for automobiles !!..churn them out by the thousands

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Indranil »

Vicky wrote:Tender issued to manufacture 4 prototypes of of the RCI designed MANPADS launcher - MPDMS project. The launcher is identified as V-666. Not much other info.
You missed out the details:
1. This launcher will be used for firing MANPADS weapon (missile) of diameter 90+3 mm, length 2000±50 mm and 20±1 kg weight.
2. Missile with launch Tube (25 kg±1 kg)
3. Ground battery (2 kg±1 kg)
4. Electro Optical System Suite with FCS (10kg±1kg)
5. Seat for operator to sustain 80±15 kg operator weight.
6. Joysticks (2 nos.)
7. MultiFunction display (1 nos.) of tot
8. The assembly of the launcher should be modular so that two operators should be able to integrate launcher in firing position in < 5 minutes and similarly packing to move condition of launcher can be done in
9. Attachment scheme of launch tube on launcher should be such that it can be assembled in launcher in < 1 min
10. Round should be locked in any position in elevation plane, where elevation angle can have a range from -5deg to 80deg.
11. Round should be locked in any position in azimuth plane, where azimuth angle can have a range from 0deg to 360deg
12. Launcher Must be capable of being transported in man- packed form in vehicle, ship, train and aircraft

This is the first time, I have seen the specs of the missile. So, clearly they have settled for a Mistral/RBS70 class weapon which provides space for larger seeker and warhead. Also, these will soon go onto LCHs and Rudras.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

Superb details Indranil. Looks exactly like a Mistral/RBS-70 type stand setup and with a longer range/more powerful MANPADS than is usually the norm. Suggests an expanded capability against various classes of targets with high lethality. Layered defence tally ho!
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by John »

Indranil wrote:So, clearly they have settled for a Mistral/RBS70 class weapon which provides space for larger seeker and warhead.
Looks to be in similar to Mistral an IR guided missile but not RBS70 which is beam riding missile and requires a heavier launch and cannot be shoulder fired requires a tripod.
Vicky
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 23 Aug 2021 19:33

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Vicky »

Karan M wrote:Superb details Indranil. Looks exactly like a Mistral/RBS-70 type stand setup and with a longer range/more powerful MANPADS than is usually the norm. Suggests an expanded capability against various classes of targets with high lethality. Layered defence tally ho!
What does Army actually prefer? A capable but large Mistral or a slim and light Igla type with limited capability?

By the way the earlier VSHORADS tender turned out, it's clear that Igla was the favourite and they were given exceptions and retrials till they won.

Just hoping that V-666 is being built with full agreement from AAD based on final GSQR's and not PSQR that they can change at their whim to throw a fit.

Not just VEM, this seems to be a dual L1/L2 shared tender - so two manufacturers are likely. BEL is possible too.

The tender for ZnS dome seen two years ago clearly showed a tentative Igla style diagram. The design has changed and matured significantly in the last two years.

If this is the Mistral type as the document clearly shows, the Biho tender is also likely to be shelved too. A tracked chassis with V-666 mounts and a anti air cannon is also likely imminent. Anti drone soft kill is also likely. BMP, T-90 or Arjun chassis?
Indranil wrote: 4. Electro Optical System Suite with FCS (10kg±1kg)
5. Seat for operator to sustain 80±15 kg operator weight.
6. Joysticks (2 nos.)
7. MultiFunction display (1 nos.) of tot
Is this a cost thing to keep individual missile cost low by not a having a high resolution FPA that the operator can use directly to act as an FCS and rely on external EOFCS?
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Paul »

IIRC Pakistan had deployed the RBS-70 during the Atlantique shootdown stand off in Kutch over 20 years ago.
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by arvin »

John wrote:
Indranil wrote:So, clearly they have settled for a Mistral/RBS70 class weapon which provides space for larger seeker and warhead.
Looks to be in similar to Mistral an IR guided missile but not RBS70 which is beam riding missile and requires a heavier launch and cannot be shoulder fired requires a tripod.
The prescence of Joysticks and seating requirement means it may be a pure laser guided missile like RBS70 and not Mistral type IR homing. Also total weight of missile appears to be higher than Stinger and Igla.
If my above assumption is true of it being laser guided, Igla \ Mistral will continue to be used and will not be replaced.
Last year Thales and BDL, signed an agreement for STARStreak manufacture which is also laser guided.
Hope this is not effort duplication.
Dont understand why they are shying away from developing IR homing sensors. Its 1950s technology.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Pratyush »

I am conflicted about the utility of such a MANPAD.

Because, the user has to guid it to the target. In the heat and stress of the battlefield. It is not necessary that the operator's will be able to guide this missile against a low flying aircraft. Whose exposure is measured in fraction of seconds.

Expecting that the crew will be able to acquire the target and launch the missile and also guide it to the target. When the aircraft is using terrain features to mask itself from the launch position.

Don't think that it will happen.

Having said that, the regions where such a weapon might be useful would be flat featureless terrain in Kutch. Leh and Tibetan plateau. Or regions where it can be deployed at an altitude overlooking a valley.

But the weak link of manual guidance would remain.

Now an infrared guided missile has no such limitations. It can be freely deployed and launched against an aircraft that is exposed for a fraction of a second to few seconds.
Vicky
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 23 Aug 2021 19:33

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Vicky »

Arvin wrote:
Pratyush wrote:
This isn't a laser beam rider. It's a fire and forget with onboard IR seeker. We have already seen tenders for the seeker. No manual guidance required.

They are probably trying to keep the seeker size small and range and altitude ceiling high by going with approach. Operator will use the launcher EOFCS to lock the target and the missile will use the smaller onboard seeker to seek the target. The Igla approach of letting the seeker itself locking is extremely unreliable in many envelopes and is susceptible to flares, decoys due to it's analog seeker. Even if Igla had a FPA seeker it will need to be a large seeker with gimballing and will remain susceptible to decoys.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4215
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Prem Kumar »

Not sure I understand the rationale for this design.

Is there a design/performance deficiency of the Igla/Verba/Stinger class of missiles that made them opt for this design? Doesn't seem likely, given that we continue to prefer Iglas, have used them in Siachen & also deployed them recently in Ladakh during the standoff

Hope its not a wild goose chase to keep DRDO busy with a design that'll never get inducted & keep it non-overlapping with Igla
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by arvin »

Would like to be proven wrong, but this doesnt look like a MANPADS at all. They are supposed to be easy to operate and proliferate. Look, identify, say AoA, fire.
Joysticks and electro optic suite would require skilled hands. Looks more suitable for anti armour role.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/DefenceDecode/statu ... 51684?s=20 ---> Godrej Aerospace delivers 200th set of BrahMos airframe assemblies for use in its missile systems. Each airframe of the BrahMos missile consists of 138 complicated subassemblies that are manufactured from more than 1,500 parts.

Image

Image

Image
Locked