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.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14701
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby pankajs » 07 Oct 2020 18:05

pankajs wrote:Just noticed that a launcher placed on NH 6 as it skirts the western Gujarat will just miss Gwadar or perhaps not. May be the declared range of 650 km is conservative.

Should have been NH41. From Gauhar Nani/Moti on NH 41 on the western coast of Gujarat, Gwadar Cranes are exactly 650 km straight.

Raghunathgb
BRFite
Posts: 139
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Raghunathgb » 07 Oct 2020 18:20

tsarkar wrote:
The OFAB 250 bombs have been replaced with more modern HSLD bombs
https://photos.app.goo.gl/rGjvGQdfwPNQi9oG8


Has the HSLD bombs been inducted into service? I had seen a article which quoted that there is a requirement of 1000 bombs every year.

Btw there was a cumulative requirement of 500 Saaw bombs for IAF and IA. So I presume recent 900 crore order for saaw for 500 bombs. So presumably each saaw bomb cost less than 2 crores per piece.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19683
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 07 Oct 2020 18:37

Trapeze launcher is a good way for clean separation, esp. for a large missile like NGARM and reduce the risk of a pitch up movement at launch. If the missile is primarily guided by onboard seeker and not a dedicated HTS like assembly interfaced with the RWR, it might also provide a good benefit for a wider FOV.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19683
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 07 Oct 2020 18:37

Raghunathgb wrote:
tsarkar wrote:
The OFAB 250 bombs have been replaced with more modern HSLD bombs
https://photos.app.goo.gl/rGjvGQdfwPNQi9oG8


Has the HSLD bombs been inducted into service? I had seen a article which quoted that there is a requirement of 1000 bombs every year.

Btw there was a cumulative requirement of 500 Saaw bombs for IAF and IA. So I presume recent 900 crore order for saaw for 500 bombs. So presumably each saaw bomb cost less than 2 crores per piece.


Source?

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2765
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby JTull » 07 Oct 2020 18:45

Imagine a mix of Brahmos (surface), SMART (sub-surface), Nirbhay (land-attack) on every IN frontline ship with Universal launcher. Nothing on high-seas, in harbour or on land is going to be safe now.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Prem Kumar » 07 Oct 2020 19:28

Dimensions

Nirbhay: length 6m, dia 0.5m
Brahmos: length 8.4m, dia 0.6m
Shaurya/K15/B05: length 10m, dia 0.74m

So, I am not sure if a Universal VLS is possible to accommodate all of the above. Unless you build one to accommodate Shaurya and there is a provision for sleeves to snugly hold the smaller diameter missiles.

Shaurya itself will have 3 variants IMO:
a) Land-attack: Strategic or long-range conventional: 750 - 1500 Kms depending on payload and ballistic path
b) Anti-sub: SMART
c) Anti-ship: an ASBM variant with seeker

So, having just a Shaurya VLS that can accommodate the 3 variants above in a destroyer, will itself have a lot of value. One VLS that can be used against surface, sub-surface and land targets

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nachiket » 07 Oct 2020 20:22

Karan M wrote:Trapeze launcher is a good way for clean separation, esp. for a large missile like NGARM and reduce the risk of a pitch up movement at launch. If the missile is primarily guided by onboard seeker and not a dedicated HTS like assembly interfaced with the RWR, it might also provide a good benefit for a wider FOV.

Question. Why can't the NGARM be drop launched like the Brahmos or the R-27/77's from the MKI's fuselage HP's? Why does it need this special trapeze launcher? I had assumed they would develop a drop-launcher for the Astra as well to be used on the MKI's fuselage HP's. Now I am thinking the Astra might also use this trapeze launcher eventually.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2765
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby JTull » 07 Oct 2020 21:49

nachiket wrote:
Karan M wrote:Trapeze launcher is a good way for clean separation, esp. for a large missile like NGARM and reduce the risk of a pitch up movement at launch. If the missile is primarily guided by onboard seeker and not a dedicated HTS like assembly interfaced with the RWR, it might also provide a good benefit for a wider FOV.

Question. Why can't the NGARM be drop launched like the Brahmos or the R-27/77's from the MKI's fuselage HP's? Why does it need this special trapeze launcher? I had assumed they would develop a drop-launcher for the Astra as well to be used on the MKI's fuselage HP's. Now I am thinking the Astra might also use this trapeze launcher eventually.


AAMs (Astra et al) will need to be cleared for much wider profiles while standoff munitions generally are expected to be released in much more stable flight regimes. We don't know which flight profiles NGARM is cleared for launch from this trapeze launcher. Maybe IAF requirements were different for NGARM compared to Brahmos. Does NGARM also have anti-AEW role?

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby abhik » 07 Oct 2020 21:53

Raghunathgb wrote:
tsarkar wrote:Has the HSLD bombs been inducted into service? I had seen a article which quoted that there is a requirement of 1000 bombs every year.

Btw there was a cumulative requirement of 500 Saaw bombs for IAF and IA. So I presume recent 900 crore order for saaw for 500 bombs. So presumably each saaw bomb cost less than 2 crores per piece.

That is a pitiful number if true, one gets the impression that we might run our of even iron bombs in case of a full scale conflict (Ex Gaganshakti had 5000 fighter sorties in first 3 days).

Hope the SAAW numbers are also much larger, 500 is enough for only ~25-30 MKI fighter loads. For an airforce of our size we should be stocking something like 10K smart munitions a year.

bharathp
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 69
Joined: 24 Jul 2017 03:44

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby bharathp » 07 Oct 2020 21:58

abhik wrote:
Raghunathgb wrote:

That is a pitiful number if true, one gets the impression that we might run our of even iron bombs in case of a full scale conflict (Ex Gaganshakti had 5000 fighter sorties in first 3 days).

Hope the SAAW numbers are also much larger, 500 is enough for only ~25-30 MKI fighter loads. For an airforce of our size we should be stocking something like 10K smart munitions a year.

shouldn't number of bombs be based on number of min(potential targets, platforms that can carry it) ?

if we have many aircraft they are for N different roles for N different identified targets -so munitions should be based on number of targets?

basant
BRFite
Posts: 320
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby basant » 07 Oct 2020 22:55

hnair wrote:...
Anyways, if it is indeed the Shaurya airframe, SMART missile seem to have been repurposed from anti-CV to anti-SSN/BN/GN role. But it is one expensive missile to be build by dozens and so will be more of a mission-complicator for cheen sub-force, by its very existence than for shore defense kind of roles discussed above.

Sir, wouldn't it be more economical and effective to have ariel torpedoes assisted by guided kits? Jets can deliver them and in number as well.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3954
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby hnair » 07 Oct 2020 22:56

Prem Kumar wrote:Dimensions

Nirbhay: length 6m, dia 0.5m
Brahmos: length 8.4m, dia 0.6m
Shaurya/K15/B05: length 10m, dia 0.74m

So, I am not sure if a Universal VLS is possible to accommodate all of the above. Unless you build one to accommodate Shaurya and there is a provision for sleeves to snugly hold the smaller diameter missiles.


A UVLS at its basic, seem to be a square cross-section tube with wirings for various diagnostic/weapon programming/launch connectors, as well as venting mechanisms if it supports a hot launch. Probably has some shock and spall-proof armour to prevent ammo-cookoff during a missle strike nearby. If the square cross-section is same as the launch canister that the missile comes, in then it can be plugged in. If it is smaller, you can quad-pack it or less. So any UVLS that can take a Shaurya can easily hold a slightly smaller brahmos (but with same wooden round canister size ) or a quad of QRSAM etc



In IN, the only open source pic of a circular UVLS with an adapter for smaller diameter motors is the test plug pontoon ones used for underwater testing (could not find the photos when searching!)

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3954
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby hnair » 07 Oct 2020 23:01

basant wrote:Sir, wouldn't it be more economical and effective to have ariel torpedoes assisted by guided kits? Jets can deliver them and in number as well.


Economically, the P8Is are the best bet, but no jets can reach anywhere close to the speed of a Shourya on a sprint and reach the spot designated by the sensor/s which called the strike in. This is in a sense, a terror weapon for the Chinese submarine commanders. Hence my conjecture that this wont be loaded onto brown-water corvettes and other surface combatants in oodles for shore defense - way too expensive.

But if we think from chinese POV on economic planning, this missile is way cheaper than the hulls that China churns out by dozens and moor for photographs

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 939
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby ParGha » 07 Oct 2020 23:06

hnair wrote:But if we think from chinese POV on economic planning, this missile is way cheaper than the hulls that China churns out by dozens and moor for photographs


Nice! That said, it shouldn't only be from the Chinese POV. This kind of asymmetric thinking, planning and preparation is crucial to economic sustainability for Indians and should also be Indian POV.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Igorr » 07 Oct 2020 23:53

John wrote:
pankajs wrote:People's desire to immediately see SMART on all Indian frontline Warships as option that could just be dropped into the installed Brahmos launcher is what is driving this Brahmoization of SMART.

Shaurya derived missile would mean modification, testing, cost & delay.

There is no such thing Brahmos launcher in ships there is the L&T UVLS which is used for Brahmos. It is Universal VLS, which can fire any canisterized missile that can fit in it. Shaurya is too big to fit in it hence the hope that it is more similar in dimension to Nirbhay or Brahmos.

I don’t think they’re dumb, so I don’t believe they made SHAURYA any bigger than the BRAHMOS and SMART for a slightly longer range. I think that all these new missiles were made from the start for the same universal VLS with common reconnaissance and guidance hard\software. It all can be seen as one multipurpose weapon system. They obviously learned from good teachers (hint: CLUB and ISKANDER-M developers).

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby abhik » 07 Oct 2020 23:58

bharathp wrote:
abhik wrote:That is a pitiful number if true, one gets the impression that we might run our of even iron bombs in case of a full scale conflict (Ex Gaganshakti had 5000 fighter sorties in first 3 days).

Hope the SAAW numbers are also much larger, 500 is enough for only ~25-30 MKI fighter loads. For an airforce of our size we should be stocking something like 10K smart munitions a year.

shouldn't number of bombs be based on number of min(potential targets, platforms that can carry it) ?

if we have many aircraft they are for N different roles for N different identified targets -so munitions should be based on number of targets?

Our 2 front scenario is probably the most target rich environment imaginable, I think the IAF had talked about 5000 pre identified targets in Pakistan a few years ago. US manages to expend 10's of thousands of JDAMS in what are essentially bush wars, having moved to using near employing 100% guided bombs (with price of guided coming down over they years to make it possible). However we don't appear to be acquiring anywhere near the number required, most of the open source news seems to revolve around high end weapons like spice and AASM that we are buying in dozens or low 3 digits at most.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9088
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 08 Oct 2020 00:55

abhik wrote: However we don't appear to be acquiring anywhere near the number required, most of the open source news seems to revolve around high end weapons like spice and AASM that we are buying in dozens or low 3 digits at most.


Multiple private sector partners need to be brought on board and spool up to produce in concurrent production lines. That creates both rapid capacity and some competition which gets them ready for future work. Boeing produced 50,000+ JDAM family kits (JDAM and LJDAM) a year and it isn't the only PGM shop producing weapons for USAF/N. Cost will come down, but as more advanced aircraft are fielded, PGM's actually come out cheaper because you need to dedicate fewer sorties per those large target sets in the initial phases of war. Comparing munition costs is immaterial because in war you don't toss munitions but have to deliver them to target (thus cost per delivered effect is a better metric). Fewer sorties means a lot for safety, and saves money because generating sorties is expensive (anywhere from $10,000 to $30,000 per hour) which then frees up resources for other tasks and missions.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1836
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby sudeepj » 08 Oct 2020 01:25

tsarkar wrote:Historically the Su-30MKI were armed with Russian OFAB 250 bombs
https://photos.app.goo.gl/2KHJgXR8bUt2u3a4A

The OFAB 250 bombs have been replaced with more modern HSLD bombs
https://photos.app.goo.gl/rGjvGQdfwPNQi9oG8


OFAB 250 looks like a beer keg.. Or a gas cylinder. Very appropriately russi to drop beer kegs and gas cylinders on the enemy. :rotfl:

HSLD looks like a proper high tech bumb.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19683
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 08 Oct 2020 01:30

nachiket wrote:
Karan M wrote:Trapeze launcher is a good way for clean separation, esp. for a large missile like NGARM and reduce the risk of a pitch up movement at launch. If the missile is primarily guided by onboard seeker and not a dedicated HTS like assembly interfaced with the RWR, it might also provide a good benefit for a wider FOV.

Question. Why can't the NGARM be drop launched like the Brahmos or the R-27/77's from the MKI's fuselage HP's? Why does it need this special trapeze launcher? I had assumed they would develop a drop-launcher for the Astra as well to be used on the MKI's fuselage HP's. Now I am thinking the Astra might also use this trapeze launcher eventually.


There are multiple reasons that could be responsible 1. Separation challenges - pitch up movement (missile impacts wing or aircraft frame), Plume challenges (if missile fires early and plume is strong enough to impact the aircraft negatively), it needs to be launched out of the way out of the aircraft path 2. Missile positioning (you want missile to be in the general direction its meant for so it can be locked on esp. if a NGARM style missile is lock-on-before launch for its radar seeker), this is usually the case for stealth fighters which need to extend the missile beyond the internal launch bay, but could be faced for missiles like the NGARM too if you want maximal seeker coverage without any possible masking or interference from the wing or simulations show that seeker coverage is not optimal if its at its wing position (remember, its a passive + active system).

Net if any of these factors presents a risk, they could choose to develop such a system.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19683
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Karan M » 08 Oct 2020 01:32

abhik wrote:
Raghunathgb wrote:

That is a pitiful number if true, one gets the impression that we might run our of even iron bombs in case of a full scale conflict (Ex Gaganshakti had 5000 fighter sorties in first 3 days).

Hope the SAAW numbers are also much larger, 500 is enough for only ~25-30 MKI fighter loads. For an airforce of our size we should be stocking something like 10K smart munitions a year.


The issue is as always budgetary. IAFs needs are immense. Also, the SAAW order is merely the 1st batch.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 01:34

Raghunathgb wrote:Has the HSLD bombs been inducted into service?

Yes. Page 79 I have posted photos of Vayushakti 2019 where all aircraft are using HSLD bombs. Also a MiG-21 at Defexpo 2020 with HSLD bombs. Page 80 has Jaguar at Aero India 2019 with HSLD bombs. Last page have posted photos of Su-30MKI loaded with HSLD bombs under the fuselage, inlets and mid wing hard points.

So it’s good the newer bombs have replaced WW2 or similar vintage Russian and British bombs manufactured by OFB.

The new bombs have better flight characteristics and terminal effects.

The only old bomb I saw at Vayushakti 2019 is the MiG29 UPG dropping FAB500 M62 that is a 1962 weapon. Other than that only newer HSLD bombs were dropped

Given the large number of photos were HSLD bombs appear it’s a safe bet it’s being manufactured and inducted in good numbers

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 01:47

SMART uses Shaurya technologies but isn’t the same dimension as Shaurya. I’ll defer to Indranil or Arun_S for a more accurate analysis between the two.

K-15, K-4 & K-5 are designed for 10 meter VLS of INS Arihant

SMART, LRLACM, BrahMos, 3M-54E and 3M-14E will use the L&T Universal Vertical Launcher Modules on ships of Talwar, Shivalik, Teg, Kolkata, Vishakhapatnam and Nilgiri classes

The name is self explanatory - Universal Vertical Launcher

Secondly SMART will leverage ship based low frequency towed array sonar that detects submarines at far greater ranges that current 533mm HWT can engage. Hence the development of a weapon like ASROC to match the capabilities of the sensor

The land launch was only the initial testing. Let’s see how correct the 650 km number is. Until Development is complete and deployment begins, let’s hold the thought of a land based anti submarine missile even though the idea sounds appealing and novel.

Thirdly SMART is smaller to accommodate in L&T UVLM, flies at relatively lower altitudes (where air is denser), carries parachutes and decelerating devices to cushion the impact of the torpedo hitting the water, then it won’t have the range of the Shaurya that is a highly optimised missile unlike a payload carrier SMART

Fourthly an aircraft launched torpedo needs deceleration to avoid breaking up on impact with water. Check this photo of now retired Tu-142M dropping a torpedo
Image

https://mobile.twitter.com/airnewsalert ... 44/photo/1

A helicopter flies at ~200-300 kmph speeds and even torpedoes dropped by them require deceleration
Image

https://mobile.twitter.com/SpadeX95/sta ... 60/photo/1

Imagine the amount of deceleration the supersonic missile carried torpedo will require and the need to stow that equipment in the missile reducing propellant carried and hence range
Last edited by tsarkar on 08 Oct 2020 02:08, edited 1 time in total.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3966
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nam » 08 Oct 2020 02:05

A land launch version can be linked up with UAV or P8I sub hunters. Specially SSK. You don't need to lug around the torpedoes during the search, where most of the time you will never drop one.

The advantage is the passive air search. If the sub's use radar to detect air activity, it will provide another detection point.

You call in a missile launch, as soon as the UAV detects a contact. In future it could be a missile launched unmanned submersible, which can search for hours and home in on a target.

All these allows a cheap massive area coverage, which an expensive and slower moving asset like the ship cannot compete with.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20958
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Philip » 08 Oct 2020 02:23

Old dumb bombs with wing kits is the cheapest and most
commonly used munition amongst our aircraft types.Production must be enhanced incl. the pvt. sect too.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 02:24

nam wrote:A land launch version can be linked up with UAV or P8I sub hunters. Specially SSK. You don't need to lug around the torpedoes during the search, where most of the time you will never drop one.

The advantage is the passive air search. If the sub's use radar to detect air activity, it will provide another detection point.

You call in a missile launch, as soon as the UAV detects a contact. In future it could be a missile launched unmanned submersible, which can search for hours and home in on a target.

All these allows a cheap massive area coverage, which an expensive and slower moving asset like the ship cannot compete with.


Nam - Do UAV carry dipping sonars? What is the quantity of sonobuoys UAV can carry? Do UAV’s have the payload capacity to carry sonobuoy signal processing equipment onboard? If not, how will UAV detect submarines?

There were experiments with Magnetic Anomaly Detector but that is a very inaccurate sensor with seabed iron deposits triggering it as well as old sunken ships. US Navy P-8A dumped the MAD but IN P-8I kept it

Why won’t a P-8I or Seaking/Seahawk wait for SMART instead of using its own store of 5/2 torpedoes?

Do you understand the concept of “weapons free” zone? A missile or any weapons cannot be fired unless it’s certain no own asset is in the zone. This is to avoid the possibility of the missile accidentally hitting own asset - aircraft, helicopter, ship, UAV.

How will the SMART missile avoid the aircraft/helicopter/UAV in its flight path? It has no aircraft detecting sensors

That is the reason we issue NOTAM before missile tests. To ensure the area is clear of civilian ships or fishing boats to ensure there are no accidents

So those suggesting land based missile launch with aircraft, helicopter, UAV detecting the submarine, how will the missile be fired with own assets in the zone?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_(missile)

In December 1988, a Harpoon launched by an F/A-18 Hornet fighter from the aircraft carrier USS Constellation killed one sailor when it struck the merchant ship Jagvivek, a 250 ft (76 m) long Indian-owned ship, during an exercise at the Pacific Missile Range near Kauai, Hawaii. A Notice to Mariners had been issued warning of the danger, but Jagvivek left port before receiving the communication and subsequently strayed into the test range area, and the Harpoon missile, loaded just with an inert dummy warhead, locked onto it instead of its intended target.


I am sure the aircraft & helicopter crew will be thrilled to know that a SMART missile is plummeting on top of them :rotfl:

Even more wonderful would be SMART hitting the UAV and the submarine going Scot free :rotfl:

We shot down a Mi-17 in Srinagar because the AD didn’t verify that airspace was clear of own assets. Those chaps are court martialled with career terminated and possibly a jail term. The Mi-17 pilots and crew’s family have to bear the pain of their loved ones dying without reason for someone’s carelessness.

Can one apply atleast basic common sense before writing silly ideas?
Last edited by tsarkar on 08 Oct 2020 02:40, edited 1 time in total.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3966
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nam » 08 Oct 2020 02:38

Well actually the questions should be towards IN, which asked DRDO to design a 600KM ASW missile. I can only speculate, that if the missile has been created, IN would have thought about the detection as well. Unless the services happy to do a wild goose chase, all paid by tax payer!

P8I do carry their own torpedoes, so the obvious candidate would be a UAV searching at those distances. If IN plans to apply such a missile, it has to be based on land, with net centric capability. They would have thought how a UAV is going to dodge an incoming missile...

All of these do sound like a silly idea, but we have to agree, IN knows more about this than me.
Last edited by nam on 08 Oct 2020 02:39, edited 1 time in total.

titash
BRFite
Posts: 389
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby titash » 08 Oct 2020 02:39

tsarkar wrote:
nam wrote:A land launch version can be linked up with UAV or P8I sub hunters. Specially SSK. You don't need to lug around the torpedoes during the search, where most of the time you will never drop one.

The advantage is the passive air search. If the sub's use radar to detect air activity, it will provide another detection point.

You call in a missile launch, as soon as the UAV detects a contact. In future it could be a missile launched unmanned submersible, which can search for hours and home in on a target.

All these allows a cheap massive area coverage, which an expensive and slower moving asset like the ship cannot compete with.


Nam - Do UAV carry dipping sonars? What is the quantity of sonobuoys UAV can carry? Do UAV’s have the payload capacity to carry sonobuoy signal processing equipment onboard? If not, how will UAV detect submarines?

There were experiments with Magnetic Anomaly Detector but that is a very inaccurate sensor with seabed iron deposits triggering it as well as old sunken ships. US Navy P-8A dumped the MAD but IN P-8I kept it

Why won’t a P-8I or Seaking/Seahawk wait for SMART instead of using its own store of 5/2 torpedoes?

Do you understand the concept of “weapons free” zone? A missile or any weapons cannot be fired unless it’s certain no own asset is in the zone. This is to avoid the possibility of the missile accidentally hitting own asset - aircraft, helicopter, ship, UAV.

How will the SMART missile avoid the aircraft/helicopter/UAV in its flight path? It has no aircraft detecting sensors

That is the reason we issue NOTAM before missile tests. To ensure the area is clear of civilian ships or fishing boats to ensure there are no accidents

So those suggesting land based missile launch with aircraft, helicopter, UAV detecting the submarine, how will the missile be fired with own assets in the zone?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_(missile)

In December 1988, a Harpoon launched by an F/A-18 Hornet fighter from the aircraft carrier USS Constellation killed one sailor when it struck the merchant ship Jagvivek, a 250 ft (76 m) long Indian-owned ship, during an exercise at the Pacific Missile Range near Kauai, Hawaii. A Notice to Mariners had been issued warning of the danger, but Jagvivek left port before receiving the communication and subsequently strayed into the test range area, and the Harpoon missile, loaded just with an inert dummy warhead, locked onto it instead of its intended target.


Can one apply atleast basic common sense before writing silly ideas?


+1

The Russian SS-N-14 had the same problems. The Ka-25/27 helicopter detecting the submarine was always considered in serious danger of being shot down by the SS-N-14 missile launched by the Kresta-II & Kara Cruisers. Helicopters are the preferred ASW weapon system. ASROC and similar rocket powered weapons are the next best alternative available to the convoy commander when shipborne helicopters are not available due to bad weather or maintenance issues etc.

The MoD report verbiage is crystal clear. SMART exceeds "typical HWT ranges" of 50-65 Km. The 650 Km is a typo. This is an ASROC class weapon that will compensate for the lack of ASW helicopters on our ships; a telling clue on the IN's lack of helicopters is the P-17A Nilgiri class being designed around 1 SeaKing/SeaHawk rather than 2 empty hangers that the Godavari/Brahmaputra/Shivalik/Delhi classes sported over the last decade.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 02:43

nam wrote:Well actually the questions should be towards IN, which asked DRDO to design a 600KM ASW missile.

On what basis do you so confidently state IN asked DRDO to design a 600 km missile? Kindly post evidence that IN asked for 600 km range before you make such a (false) statement. Please desist from making false allegations against the services based on your personal delusions.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3966
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby nam » 08 Oct 2020 02:51

Alright buddy, IN didn't ask DRDO for the range. It just accidentally happened to be similar in size to Shaurya, with the same sized container. Nobody in DRDO thought of designing a smaller missile.

We all know DRDO designs missiles in a vacuum, without a GSQR.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20958
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Philip » 08 Oct 2020 03:10

Old dumb bombs with wing kits is the cheapest and most
commonly used munition amongst our aircraft types.Production must be enhanced incl. the pvt. sect too.

UUVs and USVs are what is on the cusp of operations with the USN,some probably have been in use with SSN mother ships of the Seawolf and Virginia classes.The RuN probably have their own
classified equivalents. Size however matters for endurance and the oceans are vast,these unmanned hunters are slow and have their limitations too. Heavylift transports are better platforms for delivery by chutes like AVs,also planned for drone swarm delivery.LRMPs will have weapons bay restrictions,but once a contact has been made continue to track the target using sonobuoys until a "shooter" is chosen,usually by the aircraft itself.
SMART appears to be aimed at SSBN/ SSNs in particular,to hit them at long ranges at speed, before they can launch their salvoes of BMs and cruise missiles, unless the 650km is a typo,or is it? Why a supersonic delivery for a 45 to 60km ASROC type system? The KLUB series is already with us,why reinvent the wheel? But back again,a typo error?
Last edited by Philip on 08 Oct 2020 05:59, edited 1 time in total.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 03:12

nam wrote:It just accidentally happened to be similar in size to Shaurya

How are you so confident that missile "happened to be similar in size to Shaurya"? Please state the dimensions of SMART before you make that statement.

nam wrote:with the same sized container

"same sized container" is not an indicator of same amount of propellant carried. The container may carry things other than propellant, like torpedo, parachutes and other decelerating devices

The Shaurya has a compact warhead. The SMART has to accommodate a proper LWT with its own sonar, control system, battery & drivetrain. So the torpedo on SMART occupies more space than a compact warhead on Shaurya.

nam wrote:Nobody in DRDO thought of designing a smaller missile.

Do you have the common sense to comprehend that 2.5 meter long torpedo needs to be accommodated in the SMART missile length? Along with decelerating devices? So propellant carried will be less even if the size is same as Shaurya.

I went through the MOD report again. Following are the exact words
https://www.mod.gov.in/sites/default/fi ... AR2018.pdf
Supersonic Missile Assisted Release of Torpedo (SMART): DRDO has taken up a project to develop and demonstrate a missile assisted release of light weight anti-submarine torpedo system for ASW operations far beyond torpedo range (50-650 km).

Since "0" and ")" are the same button on a computer/laptop keyboard, this is most likely a typo associated with placement of ")" that was incorrectly corrected after "km"

Anyways, in a few years when the weapon enters service we'll know the truth. I will either correct myself or those getting orgasms of 650 km at that point of time.
Last edited by tsarkar on 08 Oct 2020 10:55, edited 2 times in total.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9088
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby brar_w » 08 Oct 2020 03:14

tsarkar wrote:
nam wrote:A land launch version can be linked up with UAV or P8I sub hunters. Specially SSK. You don't need to lug around the torpedoes during the search, where most of the time you will never drop one.

The advantage is the passive air search. If the sub's use radar to detect air activity, it will provide another detection point.

You call in a missile launch, as soon as the UAV detects a contact. In future it could be a missile launched unmanned submersible, which can search for hours and home in on a target.

All these allows a cheap massive area coverage, which an expensive and slower moving asset like the ship cannot compete with.


Nam - Do UAV carry dipping sonars? What is the quantity of sonobuoys UAV can carry? Do UAV’s have the payload capacity to carry sonobuoy signal processing equipment onboard? If not, how will UAV detect submarines?

There were experiments with Magnetic Anomaly Detector but that is a very inaccurate sensor with seabed iron deposits triggering it as well as old sunken ships. US Navy P-8A dumped the MAD but IN P-8I kept it

Why won’t a P-8I or Seaking/Seahawk wait for SMART instead of using its own store of 5/2 torpedoes?

Do you understand the concept of “weapons free” zone? A missile or any weapons cannot be fired unless it’s certain no own asset is in the zone. This is to avoid the possibility of the missile accidentally hitting own asset - aircraft, helicopter, ship, UAV.

How will the SMART missile avoid the aircraft/helicopter/UAV in its flight path? It has no aircraft detecting sensors

That is the reason we issue NOTAM before missile tests. To ensure the area is clear of civilian ships or fishing boats to ensure there are no accidents

So those suggesting land based missile launch with aircraft, helicopter, UAV detecting the submarine, how will the missile be fired with own assets in the zone?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_(missile)

In December 1988, a Harpoon launched by an F/A-18 Hornet fighter from the aircraft carrier USS Constellation killed one sailor when it struck the merchant ship Jagvivek, a 250 ft (76 m) long Indian-owned ship, during an exercise at the Pacific Missile Range near Kauai, Hawaii. A Notice to Mariners had been issued warning of the danger, but Jagvivek left port before receiving the communication and subsequently strayed into the test range area, and the Harpoon missile, loaded just with an inert dummy warhead, locked onto it instead of its intended target.


I am sure the aircraft & helicopter crew will be thrilled to know that a SMART missile is plummeting on top of them :rotfl:

Even more wonderful would be SMART hitting the UAV and the submarine going Scot free :rotfl:

We shot down a Mi-17 in Srinagar because the AD didn’t verify that airspace was clear of own assets. Those chaps are court martialled with career terminated and possibly a jail term. The Mi-17 pilots and crew’s family have to bear the pain of their loved ones dying without reason for someone’s carelessness.

Can one apply atleast basic common sense before writing silly ideas?


This is a great post. CONOPS, networks, and de-confliction is very important. In the gulf-war, an ATACMS launch (a sub 200 km quasi ballistic missile) could need up to 1.5 hours to properly de-conflict and be cleared (in a war where inadequate de-confliction was ID'd as the reason for 1/3 of all coalition blue-blue casualties). The number was still in the minute 7-10 range in OIF (for the same weapon). And that is in the best-case scenario with networks intact, NLOS communications uninterrupted and no fog of war. Future technology is being developed to shrink it to seconds but it is difficult to develop and probably a decade or more out. Long to very long range kill chains are very difficult to close and execute even at the highest technology levels.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20958
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Philip » 08 Oct 2020 09:56

One website has the LWT as the Shyena,which reportedly has a top speed of 33kts, a 6 min. endurance ,approximating a 10km range within which to find its target. If accurate, an SSN can outrun the LWT as most current attack subs have burst speeds in excess of 30kts. A conventional AIP sub ,German U-boats havf declared speeds of around 25 kts.A tactical N- warhead option should be developed for prosecuting PLAN SSBNs.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 10:50

nachiket wrote:
Karan M wrote:Trapeze launcher is a good way for clean separation, esp. for a large missile like NGARM and reduce the risk of a pitch up movement at launch. If the missile is primarily guided by onboard seeker and not a dedicated HTS like assembly interfaced with the RWR, it might also provide a good benefit for a wider FOV.

Question. Why can't the NGARM be drop launched like the Brahmos or the R-27/77's from the MKI's fuselage HP's? Why does it need this special trapeze launcher? I had assumed they would develop a drop-launcher for the Astra as well to be used on the MKI's fuselage HP's. Now I am thinking the Astra might also use this trapeze launcher eventually.

Why NGARM uses a trapeze launcher instead of rail or drop launch is a good question to ask at next Aero India / Defexpo.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Prem Kumar » 08 Oct 2020 11:22

hnair wrote:
A UVLS at its basic, seem to be a square cross-section tube with wirings for various diagnostic/weapon programming/launch connectors, as well as venting mechanisms if it supports a hot launch. Probably has some shock and spall-proof armour to prevent ammo-cookoff during a missle strike nearby. If the square cross-section is same as the launch canister that the missile comes, in then it can be plugged in. If it is smaller, you can quad-pack it or less. So any UVLS that can take a Shaurya can easily hold a slightly smaller brahmos (but with same wooden round canister size ) or a quad of QRSAM etc

In IN, the only open source pic of a circular UVLS with an adapter for smaller diameter motors is the test plug pontoon ones used for underwater testing (could not find the photos when searching!)


Thanks hnair.

A plug/sleeve would be required to hold smaller missiles snugly during the pitching/rolling motion of a ship. If L&T can achieve that, a UVLS will provide a quantum jump in deployment due to its standardization. We seem to have settled on the Brahmos+Nirbhay+Shaurya combo. That's a potent mix. We just need to size our ships (at least the destroyers) & subs to accommodate the UVLS.

I don't know about retrofitting existing destroyers, but hope this is taken into account for the P-15Bs & P-75Is !

Since the VLS for K15 exists already in the Arihant, it would be a good base to build a UVLS that could be "dropped-in" to both subs and ships

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 12:04

Philip wrote:One website has the LWT as the Shyena,which reportedly has a top speed of 33kts, a 6 min. endurance ,approximating a 10km range within which to find its target. If accurate, an SSN can outrun the LWT as most current attack subs have burst speeds in excess of 30kts. A conventional AIP sub ,German U-boats havf declared speeds of around 25 kts.A tactical N- warhead option should be developed for prosecuting PLAN SSBNs.

Philip, with speed noise increases exponentially. So even if a sub tries to outrun/outdive one torpedo, other torpedoes can be dropped on top of the noisy submarine. Hence the idea of outrun/outdive was dropped and more focus given on more silencing to avoid detection in the first place.

In a shikar (hunt), whenever a tiger is detected, all hunters converge. Combat is an extension of hunting. Additional helicopters and fast ASW frigates & destroyers converge. How much can a sub outrun/outdive?

Aircraft can outrun or outmaneuver missiles as they have high power to weight ratios. A big fat submarine even with nuclear power cant outrun aircraft and ships chasing it

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9847
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Yagnasri » 08 Oct 2020 16:01

If we have have long endurance Drones ( we are trying to buy them) or large number of cheaper aircrafts liek Dornier 228s which are equipped with sub detection equipment then they can call for a fire from a distant ground based battery or a distant ship with SMARTs. This will make sub hunting quite an cheaper as the weapon need not be carried on a costly and bigger platforms.

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby Manish_P » 08 Oct 2020 16:26

+1.

Also since the heavy weapon not being carried on the tracking platform might help the endurance (TOS, Loitering time, tracking time) of the tracking platform itself. Especially if it is a comparatively light weight platform like a Helicopter or a UAV.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 17:04

Yagnasri wrote:If we have have long endurance Drones ( we are trying to buy them) or large number of cheaper aircrafts liek Dornier 228s which are equipped with sub detection equipment then they can call for a fire from a distant ground based battery or a distant ship with SMARTs. This will make sub hunting quite an cheaper as the weapon need not be carried on a costly and bigger platforms.


Manish_P wrote:+1.

Also since the heavy weapon not being carried on the tracking platform might help the endurance (TOS, Loitering time, tracking time) of the tracking platform itself. Especially if it is a comparatively light weight platform like a Helicopter or a UAV.


Still doesnt solve the friendly fire issue as I and brar_w highlighted. We dont launch any missiles when drones or other friendly assets like aircraft and helicopter are in vicinity to prevent the missiles from inadvertently hitting our own assets.

SMART will be ship launched.

The only detection sensors that will be used with SMART will be Ship Hull Mounted Sonar, Ship Low Frequency Towed Array Sonar or seabed SOSUS arrays. The last one is very expensive to build, operate and maintain.

The land fired SMART will work only with seabed SOSUS arrays.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3222
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - 17 Dec 2018

Postby tsarkar » 08 Oct 2020 17:30

Here's a rundown on Indian Light Weight Torpedo development history.

The first ships with 324 mm LWT were Nilgiri class frigates Taragiri & Vindhyagiri with 2x3 324mm TT in the 80's. Thereafter Godavari and Brahmaputra classes also had those tubes.

They carried the Italian A244S torpedoes. Given that a replacement would be needed by year 2000, an indigenous program was started.

The Italians gave us ToT and that was the starting point NSTL Vizag, a DRDO Lab started Project Shenya to develop torpedo core technologies like sonar, warhead, batteries, control system.

The correct Project name is Shenya. Not Shyena or S appended to Hyena :D

The whole corruption started with a Hindu newspaper article in the 90's that incorrectly referred to the 324 mm LWT as Shenya. Thereafter internet picked up and propagated the nonsense. Someone on Bharat Rakshak twisted the Shenya to S Hyena and it propagated thereafter.

A Pakistani tried to get into Bharat Rakshak but he was caught when he referred to Bangalore as capital of Kerala. Thereafter Bangalore, Kerala became a BR check word to validate a person.

Similarly S Hyena is a validation I use to assess whether a person really knows what he's speaking or picked up something on the internet.

The other serious error people make NAGIN. DRDO NPOL has a project for developing towed array sonar technologies called NAGAN. However, one BR member, probably a Sridevi fan, referred to the sonar as NAGIN. And NAGIN again propagated all over the internet.

The only and authentic NAGIN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txOeZmLBUDg

Meanwhile NAGAN was a technology development program and not a sonar.

So S Hyena and NAGIN are check words people in the know use to assess those who boast information picked up from the internet.

Anyways, as a result of R&D in the 80's & 90's, a 324 mm Light Weight torpedo named TAL (Torpedo Advanced Lightweight) entered production at BDL. BDL Annual Report Page 153 lists 2001 as the year TAL production started.

https://bdl-india.in/sites/default/file ... 019-20.pdf

As a replacement for TAL after 20 years, another project was started. Its called ALWT (Advanced Light Weight Torpedo).

So, 1980-2000 - Italian A244S
2000-2020 - TAL
2020's onwards hopefully ALWT

A TAL version called LWT-XP was exported to Myanmar.

How to differentiate between TAL and ALWT?

TAL is blunt nosed
Image

ALWT has slightly more ogival nose
Image

TAL has contra rotating propellers. The circle is just a rudder & propeller guard
Image

ALWT has a pumpjet. In this photo you can see the pumpjet, actuating rear fins instead of rudder and also a TAL torpedo in the background that one of the girls is touching
Image

ALWT is the first Indian underwater system with a pumpjet Hopefully the system can be extended to HWT and thereafter actual submarines.

This page has more details of both torpedoes https://www.strategicfront.org/forums/t ... 782/page-3

In every image, the names are TAL and ALWT. No Shenya or S Hyena.

So gentlemen, you will lose credibility in any serious discussion if you say Shenya, S Hyena are torpedoes and NAGIN is a towed array sonar.

Just like you will become a laughing stock if you say Bangalore is the capital of Kerala.

Also on the internet & twitter, TAL and ALWT are mixed and mashed up like Bhelpuri.

Hopefully now you would understand the Shenya project, TAL, LWT-XP and ALWT torpedoes clearly.

And Ninjamonkey/AryanWarload/BengalRaider/Soumen - please dont copy the information here to your blog.

BTW what is Shenya? Its a black winged kite found on the East Coast of India. Shenya is its local name. In Sanskrit and Sanskrit derived Bengali, "Shen Drishti" refers to sharp vision. Hence the bird is named Shenya after its sharp vision.

The DRDO Lab NSTL is also based in the East Coast where the Shenya is prevalent.

Its a beautiful white bird with red eyes

Image

Image

Given that Navy and DRDO folks work in remote coastal areas and high seas, their constant companions are beautiful marine wildlife. Hence they name their projects, weapons and sensors after these magnificent creatures.
Last edited by tsarkar on 08 Oct 2020 18:51, edited 6 times in total.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests