Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2123
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby John » 24 Jan 2019 18:43

Hoping it’s Barak-8 ER :D .

nash
BRFite
Posts: 840
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nash » 24 Jan 2019 20:59

is this Barak test is that 150 KM range test, would be awesome if it is 8)

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2123
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby John » 24 Jan 2019 21:04

NGARM and LR-SAM tested. Considering latter was test fired from INS Chennai (which has already been inducted) i am hoping these are tests for Barak-8 ER and 150 km range happens to range quoted for Barak-8 ER. Added: The article seems to be indicates that this is ER ("Extended interception range") :D but perhaps they are referring to the propulsion.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 676064.cms

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 433
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ashishvikas » 24 Jan 2019 22:24

.@DRDO_India claims to have conducted the maiden test of new generation anti-radiation missile (NGARM) from Sukhoi-30 MKI off #Odisha coast. The air-to-surface #missile is capable of destroying enemy radars, tracking systems and communication facilities. @NewIndianXpress

https://twitter.com/Hemant_TNIE/status/ ... 30208?s=19

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20107
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Philip » 25 Jan 2019 00:26

Even a 100km+ SAM would be a great capabklity.My concern is that our major surface combatants cannit carry large nos. of these LR SAMs.What is also needed is a short-to-med. range very effective anti- missile system for all classes of warships to replace Barak-1.These are needed to counter saturated missile attacks with larger nos. of more cost-effective capable SAMs.A triple- layered anti-air/ missile is essential for our capital ships.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2123
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby John » 25 Jan 2019 01:12

Philip wrote:Even a 100km+ SAM would be a great capabklity.My concern is that our major surface combatants cannit carry large nos. of these LR SAMs.What is also needed is a short-to-med. range very effective anti- missile system for all classes of warships to replace Barak-1.These are needed to counter saturated missile attacks with larger nos. of more cost-effective capable SAMs.A triple- layered anti-air/ missile is essential for our capital ships.

Technically Barak-8 is designed to provide full fledged air defense that can cover from point defense (it can engage targets at much shorter distances than even Aster 15) to long range engagements. We can fit large number of missiles but it seems navy seems to be content with 32 missiles per vessel.

However navy is still looking at SR SAM i am guessing this is due to former requiring MF-STAR which rules it being fitted on cheaper/smaller vessels and also not putting all the eggs in one basket.

Added: SR SAM not QR SAM.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3389
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby kit » 25 Jan 2019 03:56

John wrote:
Philip wrote:Even a 100km+ SAM would be a great capabklity.My concern is that our major surface combatants cannit carry large nos. of these LR SAMs.What is also needed is a short-to-med. range very effective anti- missile system for all classes of warships to replace Barak-1.These are needed to counter saturated missile attacks with larger nos. of more cost-effective capable SAMs.A triple- layered anti-air/ missile is essential for our capital ships.

Technically Barak-8 is designed to provide full fledged air defense that can cover from point defense (it can engage targets at much shorter distances than even Aster 15) to long range engagements. We can fit large number of missiles but it seems navy seems to be content with 32 missiles per vessel.

However navy is still looking at SR SAM i am guessing this is due to former requiring MF-STAR which rules it being fitted on cheaper/smaller vessels and also not putting all the eggs in one basket.

Added: SR SAM not QR SAM.


It would be rather ideal to outfit a destroyer with a 100+ missiles but it would be an exortibant cost.. now if we can take out the active seeker in the SR SAM missile ( i think the most costly item in the missile) and put in a jam proof passive less expensive one ..that could be deployed in 100's

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7135
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nachiket » 25 Jan 2019 04:18

kit wrote:It would be rather ideal to outfit a destroyer with a 100+ missiles but it would be an exortibant cost.. now if we can take out the active seeker in the SR SAM missile ( i think the most costly item in the missile) and put in a jam proof passive less expensive one ..that could be deployed in 100's

Well not a 100 missiles, we would need bigger ships for that. But the P-15A and B are big enough to have 64 VLS cells for SAMs rather than the 32 they have now. Even if it is too expensive to actually equip them with 64 missiles right now, it makes sense to prepare for the future and at least have the option of carrying more missiles once they are available. Both classes are underarmed for their size right now, especially considering they might be escorting a carrier which has only Barak-1 to defend itself.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7186
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby disha » 25 Jan 2019 05:38

List of 2018 missile launches:

http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2018/dec/31/2018-landmark-year-for-drdo-1918538.html., please read up the details in the article linked.

Flying high

Date Name of Missile Test facility Result

Jan 18 Agni-V Kalam Island/Odisha Successful
Feb 6 Agni-I Kalam Island Successful
Feb 7 Prithvi-II Chandipur/Odisha Successful
Feb 20 Agni-II Kalam Island Successful
Feb 21 Prithvi-II (night trial) Chandipur Successful
Feb 23 Dhanush Ship off Odisha coast Successful
March 22 BrahMos Pokharan/Rajasthan Successful
April 9 QRSAM Chandipur Partially Successful
May 10-18 Sant Chandan/Rajasthan Successful
May 21 BrahMos Chandipur Successful
May 30 SFDR Chandipur Successful
May-30-31 Pinaka (MK-II) Chandipur Successful
June 3 Agni-V Kalam Island Successful
July 16 BrahMos Chandipur Successful
Aug 2 AAD Kalam Island Successful
Aug 11-12 B-05 INS Arihant Successful
Aug 16-18 SAAW Chandan Successful
Aug 19 Helina Pokharan Successful
Sep 15-16 MPATGM Ahmednagar/Maharashtra Successful
Sep 20 Prahar Chandipur Successful
Sep 23 PDV (night trial) Kalam Island Successful
Sep 26 Astra Su-30MKI Successful
Oct 6 Prithvi-II (night trial) Chandipur Successful
Oct 8 QRSAM Chandipur Successful
Oct 30 Agni-I (night trial) Kalam Island Successful
Nov 9 Dhanush Ship off Odisha coast Successful
Nov 24 Sant Pokharan Successful
Dec 5 - 8 Akash, Spyder Suryalanka/AP Successful
Dec 10 Agni-V Kalam Island Successful
Dec 23 Agni-IV Kalam Island Successful

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3389
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby kit » 25 Jan 2019 05:40

nachiket wrote:
kit wrote:It would be rather ideal to outfit a destroyer with a 100+ missiles but it would be an exortibant cost.. now if we can take out the active seeker in the SR SAM missile ( i think the most costly item in the missile) and put in a jam proof passive less expensive one ..that could be deployed in 100's

Well not a 100 missiles, we would need bigger ships for that. But the P-15A and B are big enough to have 64 VLS cells for SAMs rather than the 32 they have now. Even if it is too expensive to actually equip them with 64 missiles right now, it makes sense to prepare for the future and at least have the option of carrying more missiles once they are available. Both classes are underarmed for their size right now, especially considering they might be escorting a carrier which has only Barak-1 to defend itself.


Good idea for such a universal launcher that can potentially launch SAMs and give a degree of ABM capability as well...judging by the silence of IN I suspect the Barak 2 might have an ABM capability as well .. ostensibly against Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 532
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby V_Raman » 25 Jan 2019 07:16

We need something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sejong_th ... _destroyer

Even the new Vishakapatnam class has very little missle load-out even though the tonnage is close to the Korean destroyer (8500t vs 7400t).

I thought we have moved to standardize on LM2500 modules for our ships. That is not the case with Vishakapatnam class.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21084
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Prem » 25 Jan 2019 11:19

http://delhidefencereview.com/2018/04/1 ... n-missile/
Passive Homing
NGARM was sanctioned for development in 2012 at a cost of Rs 317.20 crores with a project completion date (PDC) of December 2017. However, that PDC has been extended according to DRDO sources and developmental trials are still underway. Like most other anti-radiation missiles (ARMs), NGARM’s primary guidance system is an on-board passive homing head (PHH) with broadband capability, which allows it to discriminate and lock on to a target of interest among a number of emitters available in its field-of-view (FoV).This 2-D PHH has been developed by DRDO’s Defence Electronics Research Laboratory (DLRL) and can detect RF emissions from up to a 100 km away. DLRL’s PHH, according to the brochure/flyer, operates in the D-J frequency band and has a wider FoV than legacy PHH’s used on imported systems. It also has a compact front-end owing to the use of monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC) technology.But what promises to make NGARM a truly contemporary system, is the fact that it could possibly be equipped with a millimeter wave (MMW) seeker in the future, which one could speculate operates in the W- band for the endgame. This would very much be in tune with Western trends towards the use of terminal guidance on ARMs to counter emitter shutdowns. MMW-based terminal guidance means that by simply shutting down their radars quickly or by changing position and/or using decoys, enemy operators do not ensure the survivability of their systems. A good MMW seeker head should be able to discriminate between decoys and actual targets and also locate emitters that have packed up and are on the move within an arc of a few km.To make the fullest use of its terminal homing capability, NGARM is propelled by a dual-pulse solid rocket motor built by Premier Explosives Limited (PEL) under transfer of technology from DRDO’s High Energy Materials Research Laboratory (HEMRL), that allows it to strike targets between 15 to 100 kilometres (km) away and can be launched from a Su-30 MKI flying at altitudes of 0.1 to 15 km. The missile is capable of operating in both lock-on-before-launch (LOBL) and lock-on-after-launch (LOAL) modes.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 531
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby mody » 25 Jan 2019 15:22

Barak-8-ER is not meant for the navy. If it comes, it will only be for the airforce.
The Extended range version requires an additional solid booster. This increases the minimum range at which the missile can engage a target.
For the navy the missile is supposed to work from point defence mode, upto its max range of about 70 Kms. Adding a solid booster will mean that the missile cannot be used for point defence. In fact the minimum engagement range become 10-15 Kms.

For the Navy adding 16 QRSAM to the existing destroyers would help. Either our own development or a solution from MBDA. Offcourse getting our own system would be great. The QRSAM under development for the IAF and IA has a range of 15 Kms. This would suffice for the navy, for many of the smaller corvette/missile boats type vessels.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2651
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby JTull » 25 Jan 2019 15:54

Can a mix of ER and non-ER be carried by our ships? If there's no difference in FCR or other equipment, then this could be an effective two layered cover.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2123
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby John » 25 Jan 2019 17:35

mody wrote:Barak-8-ER is not meant for the navy. If it comes, it will only be for the airforce.
The Extended range version requires an additional solid booster. This increases the minimum range at which the missile can engage a target.
For the navy the missile is supposed to work from point defence mode, upto its max range of about 70 Kms. Adding a solid booster will mean that the missile cannot be used for point defence. In fact the minimum engagement range become 10-15 Kms.

For the Navy adding 16 QRSAM to the existing destroyers would help. Either our own development or a solution from MBDA. Offcourse getting our own system would be great. The QRSAM under development for the IAF and IA has a range of 15 Kms. This would suffice for the navy, for many of the smaller corvette/missile boats type vessels.


Do you have source for engagement range increasing for Barak-8 ER? Not sure why booster cannot be discarded for shorter range engagements. It was indicated that naval version of ER would reach operation first followed by land version.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jan 2019 01:07

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1088678611974930438 ---> Here's a clipping of the recently tested New Generation Anti-Radiation Missile (NGARM) developed by DRDO from the IAF's 85th Anniversary Video.

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jan 2019 01:16

https://twitter.com/ArpanSantra6/status ... 3501544448 ---> India successfully test fired NGARM from Su-30MKI. The missile is powered by Dual Pulse Motor & equipped with a PHH seeker. For the end game it use W Band MMW seeker. The seeker is highly capable to identify & skip the decoys!

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jan 2019 01:16

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 7919271936 ---> NEWS: India successfully test fired the BARAK 8 Long Range Surface to Air Missile (LRSAM) earlier today.

File Image

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jan 2019 01:36

India successfully tests ship-borne air defense system created with Israel
https://www.timesofisrael.com/india-suc ... th-israel/

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jan 2019 19:22

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1088415069904556035 ---> From the BrahMos 2019 calendar, great shot of a 2017 test-firing from P15A destroyer INS Chennai.

Image

Arun.prabhu
BRFite
Posts: 244
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Arun.prabhu » 26 Jan 2019 20:17

Is that rust I see in the aft? :(

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1088415069904556035 ---> From the BrahMos 2019 calendar, great shot of a 2017 test-firing from P15A destroyer INS Chennai.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jan 2019 21:17

If you are referring to the helo deck, then no.

The picture was taken either at early dawn or early evening, when the sun is rising or setting.

What looks like rust is actually the sun and you can see that similar color hue all across the ship.

Here is another picture of INS Chennai in no sun.

Image

Arun.prabhu
BRFite
Posts: 244
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Arun.prabhu » 26 Jan 2019 21:59

Rakesh wrote:If you are referring to the helo deck, then no.

The picture was taken either at early dawn or early evening, when the sun is rising or setting.

What looks like rust is actually the sun and you can see that similar color hue all across the ship.

Here is another picture of INS Chennai in no sun.

Good to hear. I was terrified at the thought that our navy had taken the Govt run transportation sector - local, statewide and national- approach to maintenance. Very happy to be proven wrong!

siddharth
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 53
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:22

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby siddharth » 27 Jan 2019 11:53

Rakesh wrote:If you are referring to the helo deck, then no.

The picture was taken either at early dawn or early evening, when the sun is rising or setting.

What looks like rust is actually the sun and you can see that similar color hue all across the ship.

Here is another picture of INS Chennai in no sun.


Teliaka adukutunnanu....
Why has so much space adjacent to the missile silos both in the front and aft of the ship left vacant instead of using it for more vertical launchers (and more missiles)?

Arun.prabhu
BRFite
Posts: 244
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Arun.prabhu » 27 Jan 2019 15:10

Probably because we don't want sympathetic detonations and fried equipments during an engagement.

siddharth wrote:
Rakesh wrote:If you are referring to the helo deck, then no.

The picture was taken either at early dawn or early evening, when the sun is rising or setting.

What looks like rust is actually the sun and you can see that similar color hue all across the ship.

Here is another picture of INS Chennai in no sun.


Teliaka adukutunnanu....
Why has so much space adjacent to the missile silos both in the front and aft of the ship left vacant instead of using it for more vertical launchers (and more missiles)?


John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2123
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby John » 28 Jan 2019 05:24

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1088678611974930438 ---> Here's a clipping of the recently tested New Generation Anti-Radiation Missile (NGARM) developed by DRDO from the IAF's 85th Anniversary Video.

Image

Su-30mki could easily carry 4-6 along with few AAM and can carried even by Mig-29k. Hopefully it can be updated for Asuw, Even if PN gets 054a it can easily get over saturated by few Mig-29 carrying NGARM.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Singha » 28 Jan 2019 06:14



Patronising tone. (Note that the warheads are usually stowed separately from the missiles per Indian doctrine.)

Georgetown university. Must be son of some indian elite

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8108
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Pratyush » 28 Jan 2019 12:25

Singha wrote:


Patronising tone. (Note that the warheads are usually stowed separately from the missiles per Indian doctrine.)

Georgetown university. Must be son of some indian elite



Can you keep warhead and missile seperate on a nuclear submarine?

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1840
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby uddu » 28 Jan 2019 17:57

The Chef carries it in his pocket. :D

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Singha » 28 Jan 2019 18:02

Our ssbns in deterrent patrol carry cement warheads

Once our nation is flattened by a first strike, barc scientists will transport warheads by bullock cart to a fishing port, then by trawler to high seas where with open hatch and a bamboo crane they will secretly mate the warheads onto the k-series and off the subs will go for second strike

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11194
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Gagan » 28 Jan 2019 18:14

^^^
Don't they have leaky hatches on these submarines?
Bleddy they should phollow TFTA Gora dejiners from Inglisstaan or Amreeka

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3631
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Neela » 28 Jan 2019 18:38

:D
No dearth of inspectors. You wake up the next day and another batch waiting to enroll in this job.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Rakesh » 28 Jan 2019 18:43

Pratyush wrote:Can you keep warhead and missile separate on a nuclear submarine?

No Saar, you cannot.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 359
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby dinesh_kimar » 28 Jan 2019 19:56

^ The first generation Chinese subs used the warheads as ballast, hence sub used to slowly surface when firing, to give time to weapons officer to mate warhead with missile. Use of old soviet one way valves, I understand.

The newer subs don't need to surface while firing, due to use of new 2 way valves ( some industrial espionage from Germany + indigenous Chinese efforts.)

Our submarines are supposedly similar.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20107
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Philip » 30 Jan 2019 11:54

It truly will be a deadly " farce" if the warheads are mates as per Singha's protocol! :rotfl:

However, I think that the good GT professori was referring to land- based missiles.But even here with canisterisation it would perhaps require only the codes to be inserted/activated. Imagine how long it would take if warhead and missile were to be mated.

If so,as a crisis deepens and a threshold level of danger is reached, the mating could take place so that a surprise pre-emptive strike could see a counter- launch before the incoming warheads land if not shot down by our ABM systems.During the CW, both sides used to fly their strat. bombers armed with N - warheads almost upto enemy airspace before turning back rehearsing for the apocalypse.Thankfully the two mil. superpowers rely upon their second strike SSBNs as insurance and have reduced the chances of a catastrophic accident.

dmun
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 31 Jan 2019 20:03

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby dmun » 01 Feb 2019 09:14

https://globaldefencewatch.com/with-pralay-prahar-s-400-in-kitty-how-indias-war-against-pakistan-will-play-out/?fbclid=IwAR1vN7UOrtu3nNcxUH8eD0078Qywf0aaXhnudWmqRFaY6C9UZGWVA0VkWpE

INTRODUCTION :

Pakistani establishment has the habit of staying in a fool’s paradise that it will always have its deterrence alive against numerically and weapons-wise superior Indian Military. Every few years it raises a new bogey from its closet that it has found a counter to India’s Cold Start Doctrine. And in the garb of this subterfuge it continues to stoke fires of separatism in Kashmir and other places uninterrupted by funding and fueling them from across the border. In fact this speciousness suits Pakistani military as it serves two purposes simultaneously. On the one hand, the Pakistani Army or so called Deep State can keep its relevance in Pakistan’s already tottering political-economic set-up, and on the other it serves to psychologically dissuade Indian Military from launching an all out offensive against Pakistan.

THREAT FROM PAKISTAN :

A cocksure, self-confident Pakistan hedges its bets mainly against three missiles that it believes would see it through in case hostilities start with India. First is Hatf IX or NASR which is a tactical ballistic missile with a range of 60km that can be armed with conventional or tactical nuclear warheads against advancing units of Indian Army. However it will take some time before Pakistan manages to manufacture in sufficiently large numbers. Primary threat therefore -both then and now-stems from 80 solid-fuelled single-stage Hatf III or Ghaznavi (M-11/CSS-7 Mod 1/DF-11) 280-km range Tactical Ballistic Missile (TBM) and 60 liquid-fuelled single-stage IRBM’s (Intermediate-range ballistic missiles) Hatf V or Ghauri-1 (Nodong-1 of North Korean origin). The Pakistan Army deploys two Missile Groups each of the Ghauri-1 and Ghaznavi (grouped under two separate Artillery Brigades).

During hostilities with India, all these missiles will be armed with conventional HE (High Explosive) or FAE-based (Fuel Air Explosives) warheads. Each such Missile Group comprises 18 Ghaznavi Transporter Erector Launchers (TELs) each with one ready-to-fire missile and two reloads, and 18 Ghauri-1 TELs each with two ready-to-fire missiles and two reloads. A Group can also be divided into three Batteries (with six Ghaznavi TELs and six missiles plus two reloads and six Ghauri-1 TELs with 12 missiles and 24 reloads).

INDIA’S THEATRE MISSILE DEFENCE :

Though the Indian Air Force had decided to acquire Theatre Missile Defence (TMD) assets way back in 1996, it was the Ministry of Defence-owned Defence Research and Development Organisation that first got into the act of proposing a homegrown solution, for which it initiated the development of the PAD/PDV family of exo-atmospheric interceptor missiles and AAD family of endo-atmospheric interceptor missiles. For target acquisition-cum-engagement, two EL/M-2080 ‘Green Pine’ active phased-array L-band long-range tracking radars (LRTR) were ordered in late 1998 from Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), along with two THALES-built Master-A MFCRs, and a TMD simulation testbed from Israel’s Tadiran Electronic Systems.

Unfortunately, despite 19 years of R & D effort, the DRDO was finding it difficult to offer a fully functional TMD system, leave alone a networked TMD network. The main problem had been the DRDO’s inability to develop hypersonic interceptor missiles and their internally-mounted Ka-band active phased-array radars for terminal guidance. Only homegrown X-band and Ku-band radar seekers have been designed and tested.

And that is precisely the reason why, in 2013, when a combined team from Israeli Aerospace Industries and Russia’s JSC Almaz-Antey MSDB made an unsolicited presentation to the IAF on an improved version of the S-400 ‘Triumph’ LR-SAM (a generation ahead of what has been sold to China) that would make use of IAI’s latest EL/M-2090U UHF-band active phased-array LRTR, the IAF began making hectic plans for procuring such a system for TMD within the foreseeable future.

Presently, the S-400 makes use of four different types of supersonic endo-atmospheric interceptor missiles (top speed of 4.8km/second): the 40N6E, the 9M96E2, the 48N6E3 and the 48N6E2, all of which are armed with HE-fragmentation warheads. What Russia has proposed for the IAF are two HYPERSONIC missiles, the exo-atmospheric 77N6-N and the endo-atmospheric 77N6-NI, having top speeds of 7km/second and also being the first SAMs of Russian origin to possess INERT warheads, i.e. warheads that do not contain any explosives and instead, are ‘hittile’, meaning they will destroy inbound TBMs, IRBMs or MRBMs (Medium Range Ballistic Missiles) by sheer force of impact.

The most revolutionary element of the 77N6-N and the 77N6-NI hypersonic LR-SAMs will be their on-board nose-mounted, Ka-band millimeter-wave active phased-array radar seekers and their real-time discrimination algorithms required for fire-control and guidance of hit-to-kill interceptors. To this end, the radar seekers have been designed with a rigid mount and narrow beam to provide precise angle metric accuracy. The combination of metric accuracy, wide bandwidth, and high Doppler-resolution capabilities makes them excellent sensors for real-time discrimination, for they can provide extremely accurate identification-processing estimates of motion differences caused by mass imbalances on real and threat-like targets.

The 300-tonne EL/M-2090U ULTRA C-22 LRTR features an array of 22 UHF-band transmit-receive modules (TRM) in a single clustered unit that has been designed so that modules can be easily swapped. Using UHF, rather than the higher frequency bands, has particular application at long ranges since it suffers from less signal loss in the atmosphere. A discriminating innovation of the ELM-2090U is the digitisation of the signals at the TRM-level, which allows more flexibility in beam-forming and shaping. For TMD along a sectoral footprint, IAI has developed the EL/M-2090U’s ULTRA C-6 version, which has six TRM clusters. Each cluster can electronically steer its beam through +/-60 degrees in azimuth and across a 40-degree sector in elevation. In all cases, the array can be mechanically tilted through 30 degrees in elevation to provide a total elevation coverage of 70 degrees. The larger C-22 version comes mounted on a rail assembly that can be mechanically slewed through +/100 degrees to give 320-degree coverage.

As per the IAF’s projections, there existed a requirement for 12 Batteries of the S-400 (each Battery using four TELs each housing four cannister-encased LR-SAMs), plus 12 C-6 LRTRs and two C-22 LRTRs. In other words, as per the IAF’s appreciation, a total of 11 strategic sectors are required to be protected against inbound TBMs, IRBMs and MRBMs.

INDIA’S STANCE VIS-A-VIS PAKISTAN :

Interestingly India had officially decided not to field a new generation of solid-fuelled tactical ballistic missiles—be they conventionally armed or nuclear-capable—for replacing the liquid-fuelled Prithvi-1 NLOS-BSMs of 1990s vintage. What this essentially meant, was that unlike Pakistan, India will not use ballistic missiles of any type that are conventionally armed, since such weapons have zero counter-force/counter-strike value. Pakistan, on the other hand, views conventionally armed ballistic missiles as weapons that can be employed as ‘terror weapons’ against civilian targets like large Indian cities as part of an effort to demoralise the civilian population residing in cities that are either India’s financial hubs, or technological hubs.

Therefore, if Pakistan wants to secure the deterrent value of its strategic Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD arsenals) against an Indian Theatre Missile Defence shield, it can only do so if it formally adopts a ‘no first-use’ doctrine with universal applicability, at least for its strategic WMD inventory, if not for the short-range Tactical Nuclear Warheads (TNWs) that are presently intended for use only in battlefields within Pakistan.

However despite coaxing by USA since the term of President Obama, Pakistan has refused to abide by the ‘No First Use of Nuclear Weapons.’ In this scenario only two options remained for India. One was to procure Hypersonic anti-missile systems and neutralise the threat of Pakistan’s WMDs and delivery systems. Other is to join forces with like-minded democracies like USA, UK, Afghanistan and possibly Iran and physically confiscate or destroy Pakistan’s entire arsenal of WMD’s.

HOW PRALAY, PRAHAR AND S-400 ARE SIGNIFICANT :
It was in response to China’s People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF) fielding a sizeable inventory of conventionally armed BMs in Tibet like Dongfeng 12 (DF-12), that Indian Army felt the need of an effective counter that could defeat the TMDs of the adversary and hit high value targets. Besides Pakistan had begun to flaunt series of short range missiles like Hatf 2 “Abdali”, Hatf 9 “Nasr”, Hatf 8 “Ra’ad”.

Earlier the only means for the IA to strike targets at distances of close to 500 km was the Brahmos supersonic cruise missile (CM), which though deadly accurate, can carry a payload of only about 200 kg or so, besides being somewhat expensive. Therefore DRDO in 2015 was tasked to develop a new mobile short-range ballistic missile dubbed “Pralay” which has the ability to carry several different conventional warheads.

Conventional warheads that can be equipped on the Pralay include cluster warheads, fuel-air explosives, bunker-busters, and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) warheads. Pralay can also carry nuclear warheads up to 800 kg and employs a maneuverable re-entry vehicle (MaRV) and decoys to defeat theater missile defense systems. Even with a payload of 1000kgs the missile will have a range of 350km. With a lighter payload of 500kg Pralay will be able to hit a target as far as 400km.

Pralay Missile system will also be getting a Canister Mobile Launcher based aboard an 8×8 truck chassis. This system uses on-board inertial navigation system (INS) and will carry a warhead weighing under 800kgs with a circular error probable (CEP) of less than 10 meters. Pralay will also have unconventional flight profile and will have the ability to change directions to make it more unpredictable and raise difficulty level for Air Defence Systems. Further, mobility of the launch platform also makes a launch difficult to prevent.

Prahaar is another solid-fuelled TBM (with a range of 150 km) developed by DRDO which is expected to replace the Prithvi-I short-range ballistic missile. It has superior hardware components and better accuracy than Prithvi series of missiles which were developed in 1990s.

DRDO is also developing Pakistan-centric nuclear missile called Agni-1P which will replace Prithvi and Agni-1 and will have a range of 300 to 700 kilometers. Agni-1P will be a two-stage, solid propellant missile with relatively latest technology which will vastly improve its accuracy but relatively will be reserved for High-value targets. Then to replace Prithvi-III missile Indian Navy is getting Dhanush surface-to-surface missile with a range of around 350km.

While these are some among many attacking options for Indian Army, Pakistan’s offensive if any would be thwarted by India’s TMD studded with S-400 launchers. For securing high value targets, India has put in place layered defence of indigenous systems like Akash Missiles and Barak air-defence systems developed in highly cherished collaboration with Israel.

HOW WAR AGAINST PAKISTAN WILL PLAY OUT :
When push comes to shove, India will order planned invasion of Pakistani territory in Rajasthan, Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir. Marching Indian Units will be protected by fully mobile Akash-2 and Barak-8 anti-missile systems. Pakistani Army vaingloriously claimed that Pakistan’s Nasr missile which is to be used on advancing Indian troops inside Pakistani territory has put paid to India’s Cold Start Doctrine. With that end in view, Pakistan has invested heavily in miniaturized tactical nuclear weapons. But it would be foolish to believe Indian troops are going to invade Pakistani territory unguarded. Nor is Indian Army wanting in answers to Pakistan’s 60km range NASR missile.

Indian MBRL PINAKA-II alone strikes 75km away and its range is being further augmented. Research in guided and possibly manouverable shells as in developed countries is at an advanced stage. That apart, use of TNWs inside Pakistani territory will also have a collateral damage. And in this case bearing the brunt will be Pakistan’s own innocent population which will further serve to demoralise already stressed Pakistani government machinery.

Bamboozled by the initial outcome Pakistan will resort to launching its Hatf series of missiles targetting Indian cities and key installations. With first few launches subsumed by S-400, the Pakistani Launchers will give itself away to Indian AEWACS (Airborne Early Warning and Control Systems). Foregone that immediate reprisal from 3 arms of Indian Military using PRALAYA, PRAHAR & naval DHANUSH TBMs will be huge. Already shoddy Pakistani Arsenal suffering from want of spares since decades will hold little water against India’s Brahmos and Nirbhay Cruise missiles.

There is going to be enormous loss of life on Indian side as well, that is given, but Pakistan as it is known today will simply cease to exist. Post-war there would be reorganisation of Pakistani territory under the overarching umbrella of United Nations. Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir will finally be united with the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

A country that is fomenting terrorism and holding not just India but whole world hostage to its nuclear arsenal since long, would eventually have been brought to book. And we shall get to breathe once more in a free and secure world.

Thoughts ?

Arun.prabhu
BRFite
Posts: 244
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Arun.prabhu » 01 Feb 2019 11:36

dmun,
The article is ignorant drivel. Wars aren’t RPG games where one guy flashes their card and other guy flashes another counter card. Men, training, leadership, morale, political support, economy, logistics, materiel, tactics, strategy, doctrine... there are so many things that matter and to talk about how Pakistan will deploy this missile and India will counter with that... no understanding of the art of war.

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 433
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ashishvikas » 01 Feb 2019 16:11

With such a huge requirements, we should have been developing our own ASRAAM. How difficult is Close combat missile to develop when we have Astra.

IAF Arming Su-30s With ASRAAMs, May Standardise Missile Across Fleet
Shiv AroorJan 31 2019

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2019/01 ... fleet.html

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1639
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Sid » 01 Feb 2019 21:58

ashishvikas wrote:With such a huge requirements, we should have been developing our own ASRAAM. How difficult is Close combat missile to develop when we have Astra.


Problem is that we will require our V 1.0 of SRAAM to be more advanced than R-73, or ASRAAM, or AIM-9x. And we will keep on chasing a ghost which will never appear, as by the time we will reach R-73 level performance, there will be R-100 available in the market.

PLAAF took a leap in their design process by using Python as a baseline, and make it into PL-8 variants, then introduced improved PL-9.

We must be the largest hoarder of R-73s, but why not use an existing weapon as baseline to build on top of it. Pay them whatever they want to purchase full IP, everything has a price. That will save us years of research, and help us leapfrog.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, Indranil, suryag, Yashu and 20 guests