Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Locked
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3986
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by vera_k »

ldev wrote:And the hesitancy that was there for deploying such long range conventional strike platforms in that the enemy would mistake them for nuclear launches has been overcome as China which is the primary target of this command in any event has both conventional and nuclear short range and long range missiles.
Begs the question as to why is it that China is not similarly afraid that India will mistakenly retaliate with a nuclear strike after misidentifying a conventional launch for a nuclear launch.
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 »

Vips wrote:Leaving asides Missiles, what deterrence will this rocket force have in absence of really long range rockets with our forces? Our longest range rocket right now is just 90 Kms and the news report so far have shown future programs at max 120-140 Kms.

Forget China with its very longe range guided rockets, even Pakistan has MLRS with range of 140-150 Kms in service. So how 'effective' will this "rocket force" be?
Vips, in October 2020 (last year) the Govt of India inducted the Shaurya hypersonic SSM into the Strategic Forces Command (SFC). See this below.

Govt okays induction of nuke-capable Shaurya missile amid Ladakh standoff
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... NFQuO.html
06 Oct 2020

Depending on the warhead weight, the Shaurya has a published range of anywhere from 700 to 1,900+ km. The actual range will be longer. The missile can be armed with either a conventional or n-warhead, as the SFC is tasked with both. The missile is hypersonic and reportedly travels at a speed of Mach 7+. They can be placed in silos or can also be road mobile, which will make them challenging to destroy on ground. Any command & control center, airfield, depot or strategic communication node within the range of Shaurya can certainly be destroyed if required. There will be other missiles - like the Nirbhay and Agni Prime that Saurav Jha mentioned - that will complement the Shaurya. The Agni Prime and the subsonic Nirbhay have a published range of 2,000 km and 1,500 km respectively, but will be longer.

The goal of the IRF will not be able to meet the PLARF missile for missile, but rather to provide an effective deterrent or as Saurav Jha says, "...a credible IRF." That effective deterrent will take time to develop. Saurav Jha, I believe, said three to four years in his article. All of this is pursuant to budget availability, among a host of other priorities like fighter aircraft, submarines, capital ships, etc. If there is any military program that has been a tremendous success in India, it is the missile program. There will be little to no technical challenges that will be insurmountable.

The challenge will always be the budget. But it is good that General Rawat has started this process, as it was long overdue and will now require significant investment if it is to have any deterrence value. This investment in turn will likely take away from unobtanium projects like 114 MRFA, 57 carrier borne fighters and a 65,000 ton aircraft carrier. The money pot is always finite.

The key takeaways from Saurav Jha's excellent article are these;
The idea behind the IRF is to consolidate these capabilities under a single command and control structure for optimal exploitation in a joint force environment, rather than leaving them scattered across services and subject to individual service plans. Any IRF requires both mass and precision and aggregating existing assets from the three services would serve that purpose in the immediate.
Even though technology is not a constraint to building up a rocket force, debates about an eventual IRF’s composition in terms of the mix of vectors and the size of its inventory across categories are still active.
Rather, the emergence of the IRF’s own network, which would be connected with that of the three services, could serve as a lodestone for deeper jointness in the Indian military. Such jointness would also extend to the realm of procurement, since the IRF would seek to exploit economies of scale in terms of orders for both strike vectors as well as ISR assets such as satellites. Such views are echoed by former DRDO Chairman V.K Saraswat (currently a member of NITI Aayog) who observed to this writer that a separate IRF would “lead to economies of scale, evolution of a suitable doctrine of employment and aggregation necessary for massed fires.” An old proponent of an IRF-type entity, Saraswat believes that an IRF could truly catapult India into the era of non-contact warfare.
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 »

vera_k wrote:Begs the question as to why is it that China is not similarly afraid that India will mistakenly retaliate with a nuclear strike after misidentifying a conventional launch for a nuclear launch.
This has been answered here ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7844&p=2514777&hili ... i#p2514777
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Prem Kumar »

Rakesh: the Shaurya induction, while welcome, is insufficient

1) Its under SFC, which means that the launch decisions are not delegated down the chain, which is what is needed. Plus it adds to the ambiguity - if the SFC is for strategic weapons, why put a conventional BM under their ambit?

2) Its coming too late. The Shaurya/K-15/B01 has been tested ad-nauseum because its the backbone of the Arihant. It first flew 2 decades back. To not have inducted it, knowing the threat of the Chinese rocket-artillery threat, is egregious to say the least

3) What happened to the "Pra" series? Gathering dust. Heck, even the Pinaka orders have been downsized, as Lt Gen Palepu Ravi Shankar never fails to point out. We should have inducted the 90 Km Pinaka by now, but even orders haven't been placed. Once again, no thinking demonstrated by the IA leadership.

Gen Navarane says the right words, but repeated COAS have had the opportunity to fix this, but did nothing. So, when IA chiefs talk about futuristic warfare, it rings hollow.

The rocket-force concept thankfully addresses one of the doctrinal-blindness that I have mentioned here in the past. But even with the Chinese at the doors, we seem to be operating at a chai-biskoot pace.
Larry Walker
BRFite
Posts: 488
Joined: 26 Nov 2019 17:33

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Larry Walker »

I had posted this question in Border Conflict thread earlier too. What are our options if PLA does a missle attack on our forward military and strategic locations once the passes are frozen over and ground war is no longer possible ? how can we respond given that any target of economic value is atleast 1.5k KM far which is too much for even Su30MKI's ?? PLA is shrewd - they will take the initiative and then declare ceasefire and call for negotiations.
titash
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by titash »

Rakesh wrote:
vera_k wrote:Begs the question as to why is it that China is not similarly afraid that India will mistakenly retaliate with a nuclear strike after misidentifying a conventional launch for a nuclear launch.
This has been answered here ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7844&p=2514777&hili ... i#p2514777
The message should be conveyed to the Chinese that India's war goals will be to cause equivalent "takleef" to the average Chinese citizen. The choice of delivery vehicle - conventional or nuclear - is irrelevant.

If millions of Indians are lacking clean water, medical access, and electrical power due to PLA Rocket Force strikes on infrastructure, in the true spirit of secularism, racial equality, and eliminating caste...surely the correct decision is to ensure an equal number of Chinese citizens are enduring the same challenges.

This is how the Paxtanis deter us. I see no reason why it won't deter the Chinese too.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Karan M »

We need weapons to hold them at ransom and in number.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by brar_w »

vera_k wrote:
Begs the question as to why is it that China is not similarly afraid that India will mistakenly retaliate with a nuclear strike after misidentifying a conventional launch for a nuclear launch.
Because it has a vested interest to avoid climbing the escalatory ladder (can the CCP survive one of its urban centers being nuked?)? Conventional ballistic and cruise missiles have been used in many prior conflicts and are part of the doctrine of some of the leading militaries that prepare to use them as part of their conventional capability against a peer state threat. These are tactical systems, that will be used in theater against tactical targets. You aren't talking about pin point counter force capability against strategic targets which even though it is conventional may elicit a strategic response. You will only assume strategic payloads on a tactical conventional cruise or ballistic missile and consider launching your nukes if those are heading to severely decapitate your second strike (use it or lose it). But with a triad, road mobile nukes, and hardened silos there is no such need for China (same with India given that fields a credible second strike capability) to do this.

Russia, China and the US have plenty of conventional capability (for use against each other) that could very easily be confused with a strategic weapon in conflict if that was the intention (to treat it is a such) but won't. No one is going to escalate to a nuclear response if they see a 1000 km cruise missile or ballistic missile headed towards them in theater. Aim that at their second strike or EW capability then that response might be different, but that's not we are talking about here. Even the 'threat' that 'we will treat any ballistic or cruise missile as nuclear and respond accordingly' is not likely to be taken seriously (what's to stop this threat being extended to tactical strike platforms that are dual-capable? Can China credibly claim that if a nuclear capable aircraft engages them in conflict they will assume it is carrying a nuclear weapon and respond accordingly?) because the escalatory costs are the same (to you or your opponent).

Embedding these weapons in your tactical formations and having a doctrine on how to employ them is very different and distinct from maintaining a strategic force that has a different employment protocol and is not tied to the theater commander's kill chain. That's how you take out the ambiguity.
Last edited by brar_w on 08 Nov 2021 00:57, edited 3 times in total.
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 »

Prem Kumar wrote:Rakesh: the Shaurya induction, while welcome, is insufficient
The Shaurya can do the task effectively, but the numbers will be insufficient. Formal induction into SFC was only last year and will take time to build up in numbers. Again, the budget comes into play. Also the Govt has not, as it should be, revealed the numbers being inducted. But my guess would suggest not a very high number as of now. But it is very interesting to know what China has revealed via posturing, as it will greatly assist the IRF in the near future with force planning.
Prem Kumar wrote:1) Its under SFC, which means that the launch decisions are not delegated down the chain, which is what is needed. Plus it adds to the ambiguity - if the SFC is for strategic weapons, why put a conventional BM under their ambit?
As IRF gets more formalized and structured in the immediate years ahead, conventional missiles with the SFC will get transferred to the IRF. But till then, the SFC will undertake that role. Not an ideal situation, but that is where it sits at now. Also it appears that Shaurya will largely be used in the conventional role. Please see below. It would make sense, since the Agni series have been well proven for the n-strike role.

Exclusive: India Successfully Tested China Killer Shaurya Missile
https://guardingindia.com/exclusive/exc ... c-missile/
This missile is far different than any other Indian missile as most likely it will be given to forces in the non-nuclear roles and will provide them with a far-reaching strike option.
...
However, DRDO officials have repeatedly refused any connections between Sagarika K-15 and Shaurya missile programs.
The Shaurya missile is specifically designed for providing armed forces with a readily available, accurate, and faster strike option in critical scenarios.
....
Moreover, the Shaurya missile uses a composite canisters launcher mounted on Transporter Erector Launcher (TEL). Using canister TEL has two advantages, first, they can travel anywhere and are very difficult to track by enemy forces. The second advantage is that canister TEL can fire its missile within minutes of getting orders which makes the entire kill chain much shorter.
The estimated range of the Shaurya missile is in range of 700 to 1,900 km while its payload capability varies between 200 Kg to 1000 Kg for conventional warheads. While the Shaurya missile can also be armed with nuclear warheads however most likely it will be armed by conventional warheads only.
=================================
Prem Kumar wrote:2) Its coming too late. The Shaurya/K-15/B01 has been tested ad-nauseum because its the backbone of the Arihant. It first flew 2 decades back. To not have inducted it, knowing the threat of the Chinese rocket-artillery threat, is egregious to say the least
The Shaurya has been inducted, however we are playing a game of catch up and that will take time. But better late than never, as the saying goes. Coming too late would be to not do anything, despite knowing the asymmetric advantage that the PLARF currently has. So setting up the IRF is a welcome first step. The next steps would be to formalize the force & personnel structure and induct a large enough number that would serve as an effective deterrent.
Prem Kumar wrote:3) What happened to the "Pra" series? Gathering dust. Heck, even the Pinaka orders have been downsized, as Lt Gen Palepu Ravi Shankar never fails to point out. We should have inducted the 90 Km Pinaka by now, but even orders haven't been placed. Once again, no thinking demonstrated by the IA leadership.
I am not seeing anything longer than 500 km published range with the Pra-series. These missiles, while important for the IRF, are not going to give India the ability to strike deep into mainland China. It also depends on what India considers an acceptable response is, to a strike on her facilities. The 90 km Pinaka will not do much either. These will be inadequate if the idea is to strike beyond that limit of 500 km. However anything close to the border like command & control centers, airfields, depots or strategic communication nodes will come within their range. I have not heard anything recent on the development of the Pra series, perhaps KaranM can shed some light on that.

Only Shaurya, Nirbhay and Agni Prime or another missile of that capability fits the bill of 1,500+ to 2,000+ km or longer. But even here the numbers will likely be little as of today. In order to increase their numbers, the Govt will have to open up the purse strings. Now which service is willing to give up their shopping list for this much needed IRF to come into existence and serve as an effective deterrent?

Is 114 MRFA important to cement a strategic partnership with a phoren power or is setting up an IRF more important?

Is a 65,000 ton CATOBAR aircraft carrier important or is setting up an IRF more important?

These are questions that the Govt, in consultation, with the services and the CDS will have to answer.

Some hard choices will have to be made.
Prem Kumar wrote:Gen Navarane says the right words, but repeated COAS have had the opportunity to fix this, but did nothing. So, when IA chiefs talk about futuristic warfare, it rings hollow.
Decades of mismanagement and lack of planning have led to band aid solutions. You remember AK Antony? "No expense shall be spared in the defense of the nation!" :) He was famous for only guarding the furniture at the MoD offices.

Now all three services require major upgrades and force modernization, but with the limited budgets being doled out each year…the question remains where to start and what to modernize first. Then each service asks for unobtanium which further complicates modernization i.e. IAF wants 114 MRFA, Navy wants 35+ new generation carrier borne aircraft and a 65,000 ton aircraft carrier, six SSNs, six P-75Is and 111 NUHs, etc. The Army has it own shopping list.
Prem Kumar wrote:The rocket-force concept thankfully addresses one of the doctrinal-blindness that I have mentioned here in the past. But even with the Chinese at the doors, we seem to be operating at a chai-biskoot pace.
I am glad that General Rawat has started this conversation, because that should put a dent into the services’ unobtanium plans. My reading is that the CDS will prevail and a number of the services' wish lists will go out the window.

Setting up the IRF is a very good development and the CDS has proven more than capable to get the services behind the jointness concept. I am seeing all three service chiefs consistently emphasize that theme at every public opportunity they get.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by ramana »

I want people to stop bokwas second guessing the people in charge of the security of India.

Prem if you know so much why don't you apply for the Joint Secy post and do some good instead of posting here?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by ramana »

Rakesh you don't know what AKA did or did not do and he is out of the job for 7 years.
So lets not comment on him.
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 »

ramana wrote:Rakesh you don't know what AKA did or did not do and he is out of the job for 7 years.
So lets not comment on him.
Sorry Ramana-ji. No more.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Prem Kumar »

ramana wrote:I want people to stop bokwas second guessing the people in charge of the security of India.

Prem if you know so much why don't you apply for the Joint Secy post and do some good instead of posting here?
Ramana Ji: not sure what to say to this. Are the people or their thought-process in the nat-sec establishment above criticism? If you feel the gripe-levels are overshadowing other types of comments, then I'll tone it down.
Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 1718
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Lisa »

Related,

https://twitter.com/theragex/status/1457626032656224256

https://twitter.com/theragex/status/145 ... targets%2F

Satellite images show China has built mock-ups of a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier and destroyer in its northwestern desert, possibly as practice for a future naval clash as tensions rise between the nations.

Its on rails!
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Vivek K »

That’s really dumb! You forewarn your enemy who will watch your tactics from satellites. Shouldn’t you be doing this prep inside a building instead with other forms of mimicking the enemy’s capabilities?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by brar_w »

Vivek K wrote:That’s really dumb! You forewarn your enemy who will watch your tactics from satellites. Shouldn’t you be doing this prep inside a building instead with other forms of mimicking the enemy’s capabilities?
How do you conduct a dynamic ballistic missile test to test your MaRVs seeker performance against a moving representative target and do it all inside a building? There are some tests you have to do on land and sea test ranges. A mock-up on rails unveils very little about the weapon and a ballistic missile test in China is going to be tracked by the US to a great degree. So you have to work within those constraints.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by k prasad »

^^ also, often, the idea IS to forewarn an anticipated opponent. Defense by deterrence.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by brar_w »

That's right. Over classification takes away from deterrence so must be limited to a point where it preserves actual advantage. It is the same policy followed by most other competitors and FSU and US used it in the cold-war as well.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by chetak »

k prasad wrote:^^ also, often, the idea IS to forewarn an anticipated opponent. Defense by deterrence.
it's actually a cat and mouse game. Better missiles will result in better defensive capabilities which will again precipitate the development of a more lethal threat which will once again be countered and so on.

There is no endgame in such a scenario.

your best bet is the credible threat of a MAD, and the certainty of a triad based second strike capability.

which is why the cheeni are spooling up their nuke warheads production and rattling rusty sabres in India's face, hoping to spook India into military concessions on the border and not contesting the balance of trade in their favor

Also, one doesn't really believe that India is paying the russkis a bomb to lease toothless nuke platforms which will impotently cruise around aimlessly in times of need

There will be some deal with the russkis for additional augmentation of capabilities and numbers, to cater for eventualities in case of dire emergencies.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by k prasad »

chetak wrote: it's actually a cat and mouse game. Better missiles will result in better defensive capabilities which will again precipitate the development of a more lethal threat which will once again be countered and so on.
That happens anyway, and it sure as hell isn't going to be only because China suddenly shows some USN mock-ups as targets. It'll be based on Intel gathering, strategic threat planning and countermeasures, and technology planning for military parity.

This sort of mindgames are (a) to provide some semi-realistic adversary modelling and interactions... Much like the latest pics of red team adversary aircraft in US exercises being marked with PLAAF decals, and (b) to put the adversary on alert to say "we've got your number and were prepared". The latter is the reason for this to be done publicly. The former reason doesn't require disclosure.

The mind games here are to create FUD in the military planners in US, and to get them to secondguess their understanding of Chinese offensive abilities. If the potential risk-cost-reward calculations that the enemy does get skewed even a bit more in one's favour, then it increases the deterrence value and increases the threshold for conflict.

PRC right now is trying to increase the threshold for such a conflict, so the US will think a little bit longer and a little bit harder about whether it wants to go kinetic. PRC anticipates that the US doesn't have a great appetite for loss (not after Astan and Iraq), so even a 5% increased risk to the USN translates to thousands more lives at risk.

For Pentagon planners, that becomes a thin red line.... What's the acceptable casualty number to recommend military involvement? 200? 1000? 10000? 50,000? If that number is 4000, then, for Zhongnanhai, increasing the stakes just a little bit to push the true estimate from 3000 to 5000 can have big payoffs.
chetak wrote: There is no endgame in such a scenario.

your best bet is the credible threat of a MAD, and the certainty of a triad based second strike capability.

which is why the cheeni are spooling up their nuke warheads production and rattling rusty sabres in India's face, hoping to spook India into military concessions on the border and not contesting the balance of trade in their favor
At this point, China doesnt need nuclear threats against India. Their existing threat of being able to outlast, outsupply, and outspend us in any protracted armed conflict, while inflicting heavy economic pain by putting our hinterlands under conventional missile threat is sufficient. And make no mistake, we are playing EXACTLY the same game with China, in terms of being able to threaten and disrupt their soft spots in Tibet & Xinjiang.
chetak wrote: Also, one doesn't really believe that India is paying the russkis a bomb to lease toothless nuke platforms which will impotently cruise around aimlessly in times of need

There will be some deal with the russkis for additional augmentation of capabilities and numbers, to cater for eventualities in case of dire emergencies.
Chetakji, my comment was more about PRC openly using USN ship mockups for target practice. Not so much about India Russia.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by ramana »

Prem,Yes.
Tone it down.
There is war going on
If you need to this is not the forum.
Ramana
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 »

https://twitter.com/TejForTweet/status/ ... 28193?s=20 ---> The learning curve and the similarities.

https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 06893?s=20 ---> Let's list the missiles from DRDO which use this technology in just the last 5-10 years. AAD, MRSAM, QRSAM, VLRSAM, MPATGM, Dhruvastra, SANT, and most probably ASTRA-IR. That's 8 missiles for the price of 1.

https://twitter.com/vcs22/status/145612 ... 57543?s=20 ---> Is this the thrust vectoring nozzle, Or is it something else?

https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 21954?s=20 ---> Yes. More specifically, they are called Jet/Exhaust Vane Contol system.

Image
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5481
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Cyrano »

How are they moved? Using powerful actuators that are slim enough to fit into the missile body and can move the vanes quickly and precisely for manoeuvres as directed by the guidance system ?
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4635
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by hnair »

They seem to have simple link connection to the aft-vanes as per a tweet video below the above tweets:

https://mobile.twitter.com/deb_highfly/ ... 6248298501

So all the heavy duty effort might be done by just one chubbier servo per aft-vane/jet-vane located at the pivot of aft-vane

(Speculating, as the model in the video could just be a representative one)
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by brar_w »

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by ramana »

John wrote:
ramana wrote:The Pershing missile solved the target identification and guidance problem solved in the 1970s. So it's not like an impossible thing.
In 1990s itself retired USN officers used to worry about Agni as an anti-carrier weapon.
I never heard of any such USN officer worrying about Agni as anti carrier weapon, may be perhaps when it is fitted with nuclear warhead.

As for Pershing it uses radar to improve accuracy not sure it has resolution to pick up large vessels let alone strike a moving target.
Should look at back issues of Journal of Submarine and Anti-Submarine Warfare around 1992.
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 »

https://twitter.com/FranceinIndia/statu ... 20321?s=20 ---> A partnership made in India, for India. L&T MBDA Missile Systems in Coimbatore is a highly successful Indo-French joint venture bringing together the world’s leading technology to serve the missile system needs of the Indian Armed Forces.

Image

Image

Image
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by ramana »

nash
BRFite
Posts: 946
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by nash »

India successfully test-fired the Vertically Launched Short Range Surface to Air Missile (VL-SRSAM) from off the coast of Odisha. The air defence system can engage targets at around 15 km is being developed by DRDO for naval warships: DRDO officials

https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1468182616624885761
Varoon Shekhar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2178
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Varoon Shekhar »

^

Those are two very different missiles, Nirbhay and VL-SAM. Were there two separate tests, or were the initial reports of Nirbhay being launched, an error?
Ashokk
BRFite
Posts: 1118
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Ashokk »

#AreaWarning #India issues a notification for the launch of an experimental flight vehicle, interestingly the danger zone indicates a possible offshore/air launch
Launch Window | 07-09 December 2021
Image

#AreaWarning #India issues a notification for the launch of an experimental flight vehicle over the #BayOfBengal
Launch Window | 13-15 December 2021
Image
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Kakarat »

https://twitter.com/DefenceMinIndia/sta ... 3970819072
RM Shri @rajnathsingh has congratulated @DRDO_India , @indiannavy and the industry for the successful flight test of Vertical Launch Short Range Surface to Air Missile. He said that this system would further enhance defence capability of Indian Naval Ships against aerial threats.
Image
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Kakarat »

Video link
https://twitter.com/DRDO_India/status/1 ... 5133197312
Vertical Launch Short Range Surface to Air Missile for @IndianNavy was flight tested from ITR Chandipur. The missile was tested against an electronic target at a low altitude. The weapon is planned for integration onboard naval ships.
https://twitter.com/DRDO_India/status/1 ... 2811215874
Vertical Launch Short Range Surface to Air Missile launched to validate integrated operation of weapon system components including the vertical launcher with controller, canisterised flight vehicle and weapon control system
Image
Image
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Kakarat »

Successful Flight Test of Vertical Launch Short Range Surface to Air Missile-PIB
Vertical Launch Short Range Surface to Air Missile was successfully flight tested today by Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) from Integrated Test Range, Chandipur, off the coast of Odisha. The launch was conducted from a vertical launcher against an electronic target at a very low altitude. The flight path of the vehicle along with health parameters were monitored using a number of tracking instruments deployed by ITR, Chandipur. All sub-systems performed as per expectation.

Today’s launch of the system was conducted to validate integrated operation of all weapon system components including the vertical launcher unit with controller, canisterised flight vehicle, weapon control system etc. required for future launches of the missile from Indian Naval Ships. The test launch was monitored by senior officials from DRDO & Indian Navy. The first trial was conducted on 22 February 2021 and this is confirmatory trial to prove the consistent performance of the configuration and integrated operation.

Raksha Mantri, Shri Rajnath Singh has congratulated DRDO, Indian Navy and industry for the successful flight test and stated that this system will further enhance defence capability of Indian Naval Ships against aerial threats.

Secretary Department of Defence Research & Development & Chairman DRDO, Dr G Satheesh Reddy has complemented the teams involved in the successful flight test and said that this has paved the way for integration of weapon system onboard Indian Naval Ships.
https://static.pib.gov.in/WriteReadData ... 1)DXL0.jpg(3687x5008)

https://static.pib.gov.in/WriteReadData ... 1)KULA.jpg(2624x3942)
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Vips »

Varoon Shekhar wrote:^

Those are two very different missiles, Nirbhay and VL-SAM. Were there two separate tests, or were the initial reports of Nirbhay being launched, an error?
Twitter link now showing : Page does not exist.
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Kakarat »

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Aditya_V »

Looks like a ground launched Astra
titash
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by titash »

https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation ... 92850.html

The VL-SRSAM may be the most significant weapon produced by DRDO for the navy till date. The BrahMos & Barak-8 are essentially joint projects with core product ideas coming from overseas

I remember the days when the Trishul SAM was delayed and the ships that were supposed to replace the SA-N-4 with the Trishul were essentially naked in the face of sea skimmers. The Brahmaputra frigates were delayed and commissioned with a huge hole where the Trishul SAM was supposed to be. In service ships like the Godavari frigates were hurriedly given the Barak-1 after Kargil while the Durg class corvettes were decommissioned and all 8 Khukri/Kora corvettes went to sea with Igla handhelds in lieu of a formal SAM

With the VL-SRSAM whose aerodynamics should already have been proven with the Astra, the 4 Kamorta class will finally get SAMs. The 3 Brahmaputra class, the 3 Shivalik class, the 3 Delhi class...basically anything over 3000 tons that does not have the MF-STAR/Barak-8 area air defence system should be getting the VL-SRSAM system. That's at least 13 warships and 24-32 SAMs on each warship. Very significant numbers...

More than likely the 3 Kolkata class & 4 Vishakapatnam class...these ships have 4 AK-630s and no Barak-1...these will most likely get the VL-SRSAM as well

Only the non-desi principal combatants i.e. the 3 + 3 + 4 Talwars will be left out. But with GSL getting the design blueprints, I wager there will be an opportunity to replace Kashtan & AK-630 with VL-SRSAM as well.

If all goes to plan, no fewer than 30 warships will have VL-SRSAM. By far the single most impactful DRDO project for the navy
Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by Avinandan »

Gurus, is there any good reference to know about the VL-SRSAM ?How it compares with Barak 1 etc.

What do we do with Barak 1, or older (but not obsolete ) weapon system in general when they are replaced ? Can we retrofit them in CG ships ?
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Post by John »

Avinandan wrote:Gurus, is there any good reference to know about the VL-SRSAM ?How it compares with Barak 1 etc.

What do we do with Barak 1, or older (but not obsolete ) weapon system in general when they are replaced ? Can we retrofit them in CG ships ?
Barak-1 is heavily optimized for sub sonic missiles and being able to engage very close to the launch platform (has one of lowest minimum ranges). It’s guidance limits it to being able to one target at a time and need to maintain los with the guidance radar.

SRSAM will be able to engage multiple targets at a time and should be much higher engagement range and speed. Still we have a lot to learn not much details are known, does it offer cooperative engagements like Barak-8 and what type of VLS launchers will it use ( compatible with Barak-1 or 8 or get another new launcher).
Locked