ABM/Missile Defense Discussion

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 28 Mar 2011 21:56

India’s ABM test: a validated ASAT capability or a paper tiger

The March 7 edition of The Hindu reported that India performed a test of the interceptor missile portion of its ballistic missile defense system on March 6, 2011. The test, the sixth of the series, was reportedly a success and a validation of the technology to be integrated into India’s defense system.1

The target missile, a modified Prithvi, was launched at 9:32 a.m. from Launch Complex III of the Integrated Test Range at Chandipur, Orissa. The modified Prithvi mimicked the trajectory of a ballistic missile with a 600-kilometer (324-nautical-mile) range. Radars at different locations tracked the modified Prithvi, determined its trajectory, and passed the information in real time to Mission Control Centre (MCC) to launch the interceptor. The interceptor used a directional warhead to maneuver the interceptor to the modified Prithvi before exploding. As part the announcement, V.K. Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister and the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) Director-General, stated this latest success demonstrated India’s capability to effectively neutralize satellites belonging to an adversary.2

While not the primary purpose of the test of India’s ABM program, Sarawat’s statement reflects India’s interest in anti-satellite (ASAT) technology, and it has reportedly put together the necessary components to acquire such a capacity (see “India’s missile defense/anti-satellite nexus”, The Space Review, May 10, 2010). The question remains that, even with the necessary technology to acquire an ASAT capacity, does India now have a proven capability?

ABMs and ASATs

The history of India’s quest for an ASAT capability dovetails with the development of its ABM program. Unlike the ABM capability sought by India, its endeavor towards an ASAT capability is fairly new. India’s indigenously built ABM system has been in development for several decades and only began to bear fruit in November 2006 when an intercept was performed outside the atmosphere. India followed up this success with others in an effort to deploy an operational ABM capability sometime in 2012.

According to Sarawat, there are two phases in India’s ABM program. Phase 1, which the March 6, 2011 test was a part, will develop a capability to intercept missiles with a range of 2,000 kilometers (1,080 nautical miles) coming from an altitude of 150 kilometers (81 nautical miles). The next test planned later this year is supposed to validate this capability3. Phase 2 of the program is intended to develop a capability to intercept missiles with a range up to 5,000 kilometers (2,700 nautical miles), which theoretically would give India the capability to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

Chinese ASAT test and seeds of India’s ASAT interest

The Chinese government surprised the international community with the intentional destruction of its weather satellite Fengyun 1C on January 11, 2007, using its SC-19 ballistic missile to carry a kinetic kill vehicle4. The test was the first successful test of China’s ASAT, and it was performed without warning to the international community and likely constituted a technical violation of China’s obligations under the Outer Space Treaty5. Aside from international criticism, China suffered no sanctions for the test and the resulting debris cloud.

The United States took particular notice that the test represented the demonstration of a potential threat against its robust outer space systems, which it has become increasingly reliant upon. What didn’t garner immediate attention was India’s concern that China’s ASAT test represented a similar threat to its growing investment in outer space systems. It wasn’t until 2009 that India started making public gestures that it was interested in finding a way to secure it space assets.

If there were any doubts about India’s intentions they were cleared when Saraswat publically acknowledged that India was developing and bringing together the basic technologies to create a system that could be used against satellites belonging to an adversary. Saraswat made a similar statement after the March 6 test6. The decision to adapt India’s existing ABM technologies to the ASAT role was doubtless encouraged by the ancillary capability demonstrated by the United States when it adapted its ABM system to deorbit USA 193 in 2008.

Dedicated weapon or capability?

It is unclear whether India’s purported ASAT capacity is intended to be a dedicated weapons program or a simply a capability ancillary to missile defense. To illustrate, the test against Fengyun 1C in 2007 not only that demonstrated that China had the capability to deorbit a satellite, but that it also had a weapons program dedicated towards the creation of that capability.

When the United States planned to de-orbit the crippled USA 193, critics argued that the United States was planning on testing an ASAT7. The United States did not have a specific program dedicated to develop and deploy an ASAT; however, it did demonstrate that it had an ancillary capability to its ABM program that could be used in the ASAT role.

The distinction between China’s ASAT test and the de-orbit of USA 193 is important because China’s test was the result of an active effort to develop and deploy a dedicated weapon system, which was designed to deny an adversary the use of its space assets. Conversely, the United States demonstrated it had an ASAT capability ancillary to missile defense that was used to de-orbit a crippled satellite before it could cause harm.

India’s public statements about its purported ASAT capability seem to fit neither an active program to develop an ASAT or an ancillary capability to ballistic missile defense. On one hand, public statements made by India’s officials indicate that their goal is to protect its space assets and deny the use of space to an adversary.

In the same vein India’s officials claim their ASAT ambitions are strictly a deterrent and not meant to be used and that “India’s policy is that it will not weaponise space, and we are committed to the peaceful uses of outer space.”8 The conflicting statements give the impression that India intends to deploy dedicated ASAT capability along with the deployment of its ABM system, but at the same time considers the ASAT role an ancillary capability that it does not intend to use.

It is perhaps this ambiguity and uncertainty where India’s ABM program ends and its ASAT ambitions begin that India is relying upon to make China wary of interfering with its outer space assets.

Proven capability or semantics?
Whether India’s ASAT is “proven” as postured by India’s officials is a matter of semantics and given the geopolitical realities that India exists within it may be all that it can rely upon.

On March 9, 2011, the Secure World Foundation held a panel discussion concerning the militarization of India’s space program. Victoria Samson, the Director of the Washington office of the Secure World Foundation noted, “A missile defense program can very easily be used as a technology demonstrator program for an ASAT capability.”9

As noted above, the United States demonstrated this when it modified components of its ABM system to intercept and de-orbit the crippled USA 193. The effort was successful on its first attempt, but the plan for the intercept did allow for multiple attempts if necessary.

India has publically acknowledged that it brought together the basic technologies needed to create an ASAT capability; however, integrating the necessary technologies may give India an ASAT capacity, but does not necessarily give India a proven ASAT capability. The only way for India to demonstrate that it has a proven ASAT capability is to perform a test on a target satellite.

Addressing the audience at the Secure World Foundation panel discussion, Bharath Gopalaswamy stated that the scientific and military community of India was open to a test, if it is performed with careful consideration of where and how it was performed and that such a test might occur within the next 5 to 10 years.10

A prospect such as the one presented with USA 193 may not manifest itself for India to test its ASAT, unless it intentionally places a satellite in orbit in order to manufacture a situation similar to the one that the United States faced with USA 193. Otherwise, India would have to utilize one of its own existing satellites already in stable orbit. When questioned about which satellite India would likely choose for a test, Gopalaswamy identified India’s RITSAT-2, which orbits at an altitude of 551 kilometers (298 nautical miles), as a likely candidate.11

Even if India fulfills its obligations under the Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty, it is questionable whether such a test would be looked upon favorably. The altitude of the satellite is such that its destruction could produce a debris field, which could linger in orbit for a considerable time and represent a hazard to other spacecraft.12 Furthermore, the test of an ASAT could be considered an aggressive military action and would be inconsistent with India’s stance that it aligns itself with the Outer Space Treaty’s precept of the peaceful use of outer space.13

An attempt to perform such a test unilaterally without consulting the international community could result in serious international repercussions and could even affect its burgeoning relations with the United States in terms of space cooperation.14 Although China avoided serious international repercussions from its ASAT test in 2007, it is unlikely that India would enjoy similar immunity and could find itself at the center of a serious political and diplomatic tempest, a fact that India’s officials are likely aware of.15

India would also have to consider what a unilateral test could do to its credibility in the international circle with relation to orbital debris mitigation. India is a member of the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC), and it contributed significantly to crafting that organizations mitigation guidelines. A successful test of an ASAT by India and the resulting debris field could seriously erode it credibility in that arena.

There is also a possibility that an ASAT test could inadvertently spark an international crisis with China. The resulting debris from an ASAT test could contaminate a large orbital area and potentially create a hazard to Chinese satellites. Regardless of the debris produced by an ASAT test, China might consider such a test as a provocative action.

India also has to consider the possibility that a test could fail, and such a failure might not go unnoticed. Even though India may have the technology to produce an ASAT capacity it does not guarantee that it will work the first time out. The deorbit of USA 193 performed by the United States was planned with multiple attempts to take down the satellite to ensure the satellite was safely deorbited. The stakes of an ASAT test for India are far greater.

The uncertainty of India’s ASAT capability works to its benefit, and that uncertainty can be a powerful tool for deterrence. India could effectively squander that uncertainty if it decides to perform a test of its ASAT and it does not perform as touted first time out. A failure would not only be a blow to the technical and scientific community of India, but it could also affect India’s national security as it would provide China a level of certainty that India does not have an effective ASAT capability.

It is uncertainty surrounding India’s ASAT ambitions that may be its best weapon to protect its space assets, and it may be what India is ultimately seeking. The combined statements of Saraswat after the March 6th test concerning India’s “proven” ASAT capability and the statements made by Bharath Gopalaswamy at the Secure World Foundation panel discussion touting a test of India’s ASAT capacity in five to ten years may be orchestrated posturing from within India’s government designed to stoke the flames of uncertainty with China as the intended audience.

Conclusion
The question of whether India has a proven ASAT will not be answered until India performs a full-up test. Technical realities, international politics, and geographical concerns make such a test chancy.

Unless a situation arises where India feels that it needs to employ its ASAT, India’s best weapon of choice is uncertainty, and if uncertainty is India’s strategy then its ASAT capability will likely remain a paper tiger for the arms control community and the intelligence community to ponder and for its neighbor China to consider.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Mar 2011 22:45

It is a psy ops article.

This kind of article was not there before 2007 for PRC. There was no question to ask if China had that technology. They may have given the tech to PRC to perform their test.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 29 Mar 2011 00:20

Acharya wrote:This kind of article was not there before 2007 for PRC. There was no question to ask if China had that technology.

may thats because the Hans developed their asat tech in secrecy and conducted the test in secret, unlike Indians who are giving announcments even before having a proven capability, there by attracting all kinds of attention ?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 31 Mar 2011 02:57

Rony wrote:
Acharya wrote:This kind of article was not there before 2007 for PRC. There was no question to ask if China had that technology.
may thats because the Hans developed their asat tech in secrecy and conducted the test in secret, unlike Indians who are giving announcments even before having a proven capability, there by attracting all kinds of attention ?

Check your info again. See how PRC is under cross hair for the last 20 years regarding space tech and other such things. They even asked to be included in the weaponization of space talk. How do you explain this

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Apr 2011 20:27

Sea-based Missile Defense Flight Test Results in Successful Intercept

Following target launch, a forward-based AN/TPY-2 X-band transportable radar, located on Wake Island, detected and tracked the threat missile. The radar sent trajectory information to the Command, Control, Battle Management, and Communications (C2BMC) system, which processed and transmitted remote target data to the USS O’KANE.

The destroyer, located to the west of Hawaii, used the data to develop a fire control solution and launch the SM-3 Block IA missile approximately 11 minutes after the target was launched.

As the IRBM target continued along its trajectory, the firing ship’s AN/SPY-1 radar detected and acquired the ballistic missile target. The firing ship’s Aegis BMD weapon system uplinked target track information to the SM-3 Block IA missile. The SM-3 maneuvered to a point in space as designated by the fire control solution and released its kinetic warhead. The kinetic warhead acquired the target, diverted into its path, and, using only force of a direct impact, destroyed the threat in a “hit-to-kill” intercept.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 19 Apr 2011 05:31

S.Korea to Get Its Own Missile Defense System

The government decided to establish the defense system "in view of the growing North Korean missile threat, including its 800 to 1,000 medium to long-range ballistic missiles," a government official said Friday. The project will cost W2-3 trillion (US$1=W1,091).$1.8-2.7 Billion

It represents Seoul's response to Washington's persistent demands that it join the U.S. missile defense system.

There are serious doubts over the effectiveness of the U.S. system, on which the equivalent of some W100 trillion has already been spent, and it has incurred strong protest from China. The South Korean government believes joining it will do more harm than good, but it is necessary to prepare for the North Korean missile threat. As a result, it decided to push its own system instead.

The South Korean system will be much smaller than the U.S.' It aims to intercept medium to long-range Scud or Rodong missiles with a range of less than 1,000 to 1,300 km, while the U.S. system aims at defending the U.S. mainland against intercontinental ballistic missiles with a range of longer than 5,500 km from North Korea, China, Russia or Iran.

In terms of altitude and means of interception, the U.S. system consists of various kinds of weapons covering a range of altitudes between 10 and 1,000 km. They include ground-based interceptors, Aegis-launched SM-3 missiles, and the Airborne-Based Laser mounted on a converted Boeing 747 aircraft, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missiles and Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC)-3 missiles for low altitude defense.

The South Korean system will intercept incoming missiles with PAC-3 missiles and improved PAC-2 missiles at a low altitude ranging from 10 to 30 km, considering that it will take North Korean missiles a mere three to four minutes to reach South Korea at a low altitude.

The question is whether the South Korean system will be capable of effectively intercepting North Korean ballistic missiles, and whether it will be incorporated into the U.S. system.

The South Korean military has 48 improved PAC-2 missiles that are designed to attack aircraft, not missiles. It does not yet have PAC-3 missiles with full-scale missile interceptor capabilities, but plans to buy them after 2015.

Navy Aegis ships are capable of launching SM-3 interceptor missiles, but the military cannot afford them at the moment. The U.S. and Japan already have the SM-3. The military is also considering purchasing other interceptor missiles such as the SM-6, but its development is being delayed.

By around 2012, military authorities will set up a W280 billion-worth Israeli-made ballistic missile early warning system, and a W21 billion ballistic missile defense operations control center. That means the best the military can hope for is to lay the basic framework for missile defense by 2015.

Experts point out that South Korea will in a way or another come to depend on the U.S. missile defense system because it needs to receive information from the U.S. satellites for North Korean missile movements, and they are part of the U.S. missile defense system.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 20 Apr 2011 04:29

A race to oblivion?

To address this strategic dilemma, Indian decision-makers have decided that they need to develop the requisite capabilities to significantly degrade the prospects of a Pakistani nuclear attack through the use of BMD. A robust BMD capability would put feckless Pakistani military commanders on notice that they could not indefinitely continue to pursue their asymmetric war strategy against India without the fear of a conventional response.
:
:
Despite their own provocative behaviour, India’s military and strategic choices can have a significant bearing on Pakistan’s decisions. For example, it is clear that India’s policymakers have chosen to invest much treasure in the pursuit of BMD primarily for the purpose of undermining Pakistan’s asymmetric war strategy. However, given the Pakistani military establishment’s preoccupation with India, their propensity to believe in any number of conspiracy theories involving India and their fears of a second vivisection of their country, the Indian search for BMD may well have the effect of provoking their worst fears.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 20 Apr 2011 07:44

VinodTK wrote:A race to oblivion?
To address this strategic dilemma, Indian decision-makers have decided that they need to develop the requisite capabilities to significantly degrade the prospects of a Pakistani nuclear attack through the use of BMD. A robust BMD capability would put feckless Pakistani military commanders on notice that they could not indefinitely continue to pursue their asymmetric war strategy against India without the fear of a conventional response.
:
:
Despite their own provocative behaviour, India’s military and strategic choices can have a significant bearing on Pakistan’s decisions. For example, it is clear that India’s policymakers have chosen to invest much treasure in the pursuit of BMD primarily for the purpose of undermining Pakistan’s asymmetric war strategy. However, given the Pakistani military establishment’s preoccupation with India, their propensity to believe in any number of conspiracy theories involving India and their fears of a second vivisection of their country, the Indian search for BMD may well have the effect of provoking their worst fears.

Sumit Ganguly writes from Western POV.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 20 Apr 2011 09:57

However, given the Pakistani military establishment’s preoccupation with India, their propensity to believe in any number of conspiracy theories involving India and their fears of a second vivisection of their country, the Indian search for BMD may well have the effect of provoking their worst fears.

it doesn't matter what CT's pakis believe in. we do what we do b/c we must do it. our surrounding environment beyond Pak requires that we develop these capabilities. so we do it. pakis can believe in a few thousands of more CT's. it won't matter. to link India's ABM developments with paki CT's is a comical and laughable farce.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 22 Apr 2011 05:41

Russia to double ballistic missiles production from 2013 - Putin

I don't think ANY head of state WORLDWIDE looks as TFTA as Putin. Look at the intensity in those eyes.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 22 Apr 2011 06:59

@$4billionh Akash project is twice as big as Putin's doublinbg the capacity hyperbol $2.6.....

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 22 Apr 2011 07:10

^^^^ strongly agree ... in our times, I have not seen a more vibrant, strong, confident leader.

Certainly nobody who exudes business right from the looks of it. I would have easily believed that he was an assassin had I not known who he was and I respect him for that.

Sorry for the OT.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Apr 2011 08:59

indranilroy wrote:I would have easily believed that he was an assassin had I not known who he was and I respect him for that.

He may have been one for all we know he had a long KGB career

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 15 May 2011 15:33

India developing interceptor missile with 5,000 km range

NEW DELHI: India has started working on a network of air-defence systems which would be able to shoot down any enemy missile even at a distance of 5,000 kms, before it can enter the Indian air space.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has already developed a missile that can intercept an incoming aerial threat 2,000 kms away under the Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) System and is now working on the second phase.

Under the second phase, missiles are being designed and developed in a manner that would enable them to shoot down any incoming missile at a distance of 5,000 kms, DRDO chief V K Saraswat said here.

The 5,000 kms interceptor missile is targeted to be ready by 2016, he said.

"It is well on schedule and we are already on initial design and testing stage," Saraswat said.

"Presently, our missiles are designed to engage targets within 2,000 km range. Later on, we will be making 5,000 km range class of interceptor missiles. That will be Phase-II of the BMD system," he added.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 338225.cms

We're developing Air defence for/ against those range of missiles, not that the Air defense missile will intercept 5000 km away! Some basic understanding would go a long way in educating aam aadmi on these issues..

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 May 2011 21:11

There is a plan to network all AD assets as well, with DRDO involvement. While this news in specific only refers to the BMD program, there is a larger intent (thankfully) as well. Some details were released at Aero India in 2009.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 May 2011 23:22

when we say 5000km wala ABM, we should be careful in announcing our maturity in launch detection and tracking systems. So, much importance to airborne, satellite and other ground based radar installation setup that should happen along with this project.

all the best!

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 16 May 2011 00:15

FWIW Our BMD program might do the TSP what SDI did to the USSR

sawant · Post by **sawant** » 16 May 2011 00:21

VikramS wrote:FWIW Our BMD program might do the TSP what SDI did to the USSR

I guess just our conventional spending has been effective enough... unfortunately the Chinese and unkils might continue to bankroll the army as they have done before

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jun 2011 15:23

APA on S-500

Almaz-Antey S-500 Triumfator M Self Propelled Air / Missile Defence System / SA-X-NN

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jun 2011 19:11

interesting pix of the Thaad radar system there. more khanified and iphone apped green pineish looking kit.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 17 Jun 2011 09:21

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69uXXiJa ... re=related

Thaad missle manover.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Jul 2011 18:37

Israel Tests Arrow 3 Defense System

Israel has field-tested the Arrow 3 interceptor, its new anti-ballistic, long-range air defense system, UPI.com reported on Wednesday.

According to the report, the Arrow 3 shot down a mock enemy ballistic missile in a trial flight.

The Arrow 3 is expected to be able to intercept ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction at more than 100 kilometers above the earth’s surface – beyond the boundary between earth's atmosphere and outer space.

Israel’s Defense Ministry and the United States Department of Defense signed a deal last July to develop the Arrow 3 missile system together. The U.S. has supported Israel’s development of the Arrow system for more than two decades.

Arrow 3’s program head Yoav Turgeman was quoted by UPI.com as having said that the system is to be deployed in 2015. He added that it is intended to provide the topmost level of protection in a planned framework for countering various rocket and missile threats to Israel from any direction.

The Arrow 3’s predecessor, the Arrow 2, has been deployed over the past decade in multiple defense units under the operational command of the Israeli air force at a military facility north of Tel Aviv.

Israel and the U.S. conducted a successful joint test of the Arrow system off of the U.S.’s west coast in February.

During the test, the Arrow was launched from an American test site on the West Coast, and the target - which simulates a threat that Israel may have to face in battle - was launched toward the shore from a platform in the heart of the Pacific Ocean.

The new Arrow 3 system will participate in another joint U.S.-Israeli exercise scheduled for January, UPI.com said. The “Juniper Cobra” exercise, which is held every two years, will incorporate every element of Israel’s missile and air defenses, including the Arrow 2 and 3, but also Iron Dome and Magic Wand.

According to the report, Iran factored high in Israel’s decision to develop the Arrow 3 system as an answer to threats of aerial assaults.

Last month, Iran tested a new radar system in hopes of warning Israel and the United States against any military attack.

The test of the Ghadir radar system was conducted on the third day of Iran’s annual “Great Prophet” 10-day military exercise. Iran claimed the system can “detect airborne targets, radar-evading planes, cruise and ballistic missiles and low-orbit satellites.”

The Islamic Republic also test-fired surface-to-surface missiles with a maximum range of 2,000 km (1,250 miles), emphasizing it could hit Israel or U.S. targets in the region in the event of attack.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 29 Jul 2011 21:53

looking forward to the day where Desh deploys in ABM/BMD systems in adequate numbers. We are on the way there but need to get there quickly and then continue to improve like Israel.

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 02 Aug 2011 11:31

This may be of use in our ABM projects.

Monday, August 1, 2011

Ultrafine Location Fixes

Small ground-based transmitters that mimic GPS satellites help receivers find their position with high accuracy.

By Tom Simonite

The GPS technology that allows cell phones and other devices to pinpoint their location to within a few meters has made possible new services ranging from location-aware social networks to self-driving cars. A new location technology accurate to a few centimeters will refine those services and unlock another wave of novel ideas, claims Australian company Locata. The company's technology can work alongside GPS to provide superaccurate positioning or fill in the gaps in places where GPS signals are blocked.

Locata's technology involves installing a network of "LocataLites"--devices about the size of a hardback book--in several known locations across an area. These devices function like grounded versions of GPS satellites, sending out signals that receivers use to get a location fix. LocataLites transmit signals using the same frequency as Wi-Fi, and they can each cover several kilometers. "We introduce a local constellation that works like the one in space," says Nunzio Gambale, one of Locata's two cofounders. "It's just much cheaper and more accurate."

The technology will be used to track aircraft on the U.S. Air Force's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, where an upgraded system will soon cover an area of 6,474 square kilometers. The Boddington gold mine in Western Australia is using Locata's technology to position digging and drilling equipment with high accuracy. It is a convenient alternative to manually surveying the insides of the deep opencast mine, the walls of which block GPS signals. The same effect often weakens or blocks GPS signals in urban environments. Locata's technology is also attractive for any city wanting to offer its own "location hotspot" to fix that, says Gambale.

Next month, Locata will release information that will allow other companies to manufacture receivers, a move intended to see the technology added to devices that already use GPS signals. "It's like the early days of GPS," says Gambale. "The real explosion will happen when there are chip-scale receivers that can fit into your pocket."

Ultimately, this could mean smart phones that know their location with remarkable accuracy, enabling apps such as augmented reality to be much more powerful. Before that, however, construction sites, warehouses, and factories will likely benefit. Tracking goods and machines with high accuracy can enable greater use of robotics and automation, says Gambale.

Locata's technology was enabled by a cheaper alternative to the atomic clock found inside every GPS satellite. Each satellite uses its clock to timestamp the signal it sends back to Earth. A receiver can use that timestamp to calculate its distance from a satellite, based on the time it took for the signal to travel. Repeating this trick with several satellites reveals a gadget's position through triangulation.

Locata's satellite mimics are built with timing chips much less accurate than an atomic clock. That's possible because they only keep in sync with one another, not to an external standard, says Gambale. LocataLites do this by listening to each other's signals. Each LocataLite adjusts the timing of its outgoing signal based on the timing of the signals it picks up from other LocataLites, creating a feedback loop that ensures all the signals are in sync. "All the clocks drift together," says Gambale, and all the signals are synchronized to within two nanoseconds.

"Synchronizing this kind of device is a big research task," says Per Enge, professor and leader of the GPS research lab at Stanford University. His group is working on similar devices known as pseudolites that will be deployed across the U.S. by the Federal Aviation Authority to boost the reliability of GPS and to protect signals against jamming or natural interference. The goal is to make it possible for civilian aircraft to rely on GPS more heavily so they can use more sophisticated autopilots that help cut fuel use.

Enge says it is likely that these pseudolites will rely on time signals sent over the Internet, using a new protocol that enables high accuracy. Some may tune in to time signals broadcast by Iridium communications satellites, which are in lower orbits than GPS satellites and so yield stronger signals back on Earth.

Locata's approach of using feedback among its devices sounds "valid," Enge says, although those at the edge of a network might be more likely to lose their timing if they cannot correlate with as many of their fellows as those nearer the center.

Gambale hopes Locata's technology could also aid aviation, and he says he has conducted test flights in Australia using the technology. However, civil aviation adopts new technology very cautiously due to the need for absolute safety. "Locata will make their money from construction and agriculture," says Enge.

Copyright Technology Review 2011.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Sep 2011 19:04

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=15177

“You have a missile threat that confronts you. We have a missile threat that confronts us. It’s a different one, but our ability to defend against it could be the same. We have cooperation on those kind of issues,” said a top NATO official.

He added, “even though the threats of missiles come from different directions, we don’t necessarily see the threat that you see, because your strategic situation is different from ours. But, the technology of discovering and intercepting missiles is similar”.

nice.... I like it in a way that is announcing maturity of our ABM defence system that is DRDO plans to deliver soon.

now the firangs have to feel the pressure of technology sharing.. and all these years we were pariah!

I would like to nod with a small smile thank you, and proceed and focus on the threats confronting us, which is totally different.

The intercepting and discovering can't be the same if threat situations are different.. what a load bull crap! technology here is systems, and software on the whole.. it is a solutions' technology that we should be after.

If they are interested in selling parts.. that is a different relationship on a buyer-seller contract.

multi pronged launches and detection system is where we have to concentrate.. that is the future of ABM.. low - 25 missile launches to high 100+ missile launches concurrently against us in 50 years from now is the threat.

The devices for such does not exists in NATO.

keshavchandra · Post by **keshavchandra** » 05 Sep 2011 22:14

But guys I have a query on ABM. Till new US has a dedicated gps system to guide and track incomming as well as interceptor missiles. Recent china and russia also expend there gps program, but the point is do we have any independent program on gps which will reduce our dependency on us......

chiru · Post by **chiru** » 05 Sep 2011 22:23

keshavchandra wrote:But guys I have a query on ABM. Till new US has a dedicated gps system to guide and track incomming as well as interceptor missiles. Recent china and russia also expend there gps program, but the point is do we have any independent program on gps which will reduce our dependency on us......

INRSS - Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 05 Sep 2011 22:45

harbans wrote:
India developing interceptor missile with 5,000 km range

NEW DELHI: India has started working on a network of air-defence systems which would be able to shoot down any enemy missile even at a distance of 5,000 kms, before it can enter the Indian air space.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has already developed a missile that can intercept an incoming aerial threat 2,000 kms away under the Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) System and is now working on the second phase.

Under the second phase, missiles are being designed and developed in a manner that would enable them to shoot down any incoming missile at a distance of 5,000 kms, DRDO chief V K Saraswat said here.

The 5,000 kms interceptor missile is targeted to be ready by 2016, he said.

"It is well on schedule and we are already on initial design and testing stage," Saraswat said.

"Presently, our missiles are designed to engage targets within 2,000 km range. Later on, we will be making 5,000 km range class of interceptor missiles. That will be Phase-II of the BMD system," he added.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 338225.cms

We're developing Air defence for/ against those range of missiles, not that the Air defense missile will intercept 5000 km away! Some basic understanding would go a long way in educating aam aadmi on these issues..

Try educating the DDMs.

Kersi

PS On second thoughts, it is not worth the effort

Leo.Davidson · Post by **Leo.Davidson** » 06 Sep 2011 05:04

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 338225.cms

India developing interceptor missile with 5,000 km range

NEW DELHI: India has started working on a network of air-defence systems which would be able to shoot down any enemy missile even at a distance of 5,000 kms, before it can enter the Indian air space.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has already developed a missile that can intercept an incoming aerial threat 2,000 kms away under the Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) System and is now working on the second phase.

Under the second phase, missiles are being designed and developed in a manner that would enable them to shoot down any incoming missile at a distance of 5,000 kms, DRDO chief V K Saraswat said here.

The 5,000 kms interceptor missile is targeted to be ready by 2016, he said.

"It is well on schedule and we are already on initial design and testing stage," Saraswat said.

"Presently, our missiles are designed to engage targets within 2,000 km range. Later on, we will be making 5,000 km range class of interceptor missiles. That will be Phase-II of the BMD system," he added.

Question: Do we have operational radars (not the ones that are collecting dust by not being switched ON, with the fear that the enemy will classify/sample and interpret the signal) that has 5000 km range? I believe INDIA has a 2000 km range radar, but I haven't heard of it in any BMD integration dialogue.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 Sep 2011 05:50

My Lord!!!!!

Welcome to BR Leo.

Heard of DDM?

Shubham · Post by **Shubham** » 29 Sep 2011 16:24

I believe this has not been posted yet

Russian ICBM missile fails test
http://www.thenewstribe.com/2011/09/29/ ... oRWXlmGbwc

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Sep 2011 17:31

Except masans, no body in the world has within seconds launch detection capability.

This is where DRDO should focus on... all those mil satellites must be focused on launch detection sensors and algos, and not necessarily constrained with that. A live feed from satellite is very important for ABM.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Oct 2011 17:11

Missile defense system hits 2 targets over Hawaii

A missile defense system successfully intercepted two different targets at the same time during a test in Hawaii, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency said Wednesday.

It was the first time the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System intercepted two ballistic missile targets simultaneously, the agency said. It was designed to shoot down ballistic missiles in their last stage of flight.

The test took place at the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai just before 8 p.m. local time Tuesday. It involved dropping one target from an airplane over the ocean and launching a second target from a decommissioned helicopter carrier on the ocean.

The successful test, which was conducted under simulated combat conditions, brings the system a step closer to actual deployment, said Richard Lehner, an agency spokesman in Washington, D.C.

"Since we can expect missile attacks to include more than one missile, it's important that we are able to conduct tests against what we call 'raids,' and that we can exercise the radars and command and control system necessary to thwart such raids under realistic conditions," he said.

It was the first time soldiers participated in a test of the system under those conditions — with limitations for safety — including not knowing what time the exercise would occur, said Cammy Montoya, spokeswoman for the Army Test and Evaluation Command. Previous tests have been conducted during planned times.

The missile defense system is one of two tested at the facility on Kauai's west coast. The other is the sea-based Aegis system.

"THAAD is the only missile defense system that can intercept missile both inside the atmosphere and outside the atmosphere," Lehner said. "Other missile defense technologies do either one or the other."

The Missile Defense Agency coordinates U.S. missile tests in cooperation with the Army, Navy and Air Force.

Officials will review data gathered from the test to evaluate the effectiveness of the system.

Prabu · Post by **Prabu** » 01 Dec 2011 13:54

This looks interesting !
Russia launches radar system to counter US missile shield

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 01 Dec 2011 14:04

its interesting only in the sense of exposing that we are swimming naked. no early warning sats of any hue, no land based early warning radars of the above kind ...

I dont think we have any AD radars of >1000km range and these are never switched on to full power...one hopes when the need arises they wont suddenly crash or blow a fuse

its been stated we are working on AD-1 and AD-2 missiles to shoot IRBM & ICBM down. but no public sentiments on radars or satellites to cue and guide these missiles....I dont see how a 1000km LRTR can help with a intercept 5000km away....so we will need such radars for sure.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Dec 2011 15:20

Prabu wrote:This looks interesting !
Russia launches radar system to counter US missile shield

The man has a strange sense of humour

When they tell us 'this is not meant against you,' I would like to say the following today - dear friends, this radar station that started its work today is also not meant against you. But it is meant for us and for the tasks that we set before us," Medvedev said.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 01 Dec 2011 21:35

^^ Typical russian humour - dry caustic sarcasm!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Dec 2011 00:31

ASTER-30 SAMP/T

Video http://www.mbda-systems.com/e-catalogue ... nd/3/video

French army intercept ballistic missile with Aster during test
http://www.marianne2.fr/blogsecretdefen ... _a442.html

For the first time in France, the Air Force has successfully tested its new Mamba missile intercepting a missile-like "theater ballistic missiles." The successful test took place on November 14, announced the Ministry of Defence, the Test Center of the DGA Biscarosse (Landes).

The missile intercepted is a "Black Sparrow" Israeli-made, which is used by the IDF to test its missile shield. The missile was destroyed in flight - in conditions kept secret - is one of the Aster 30 SAMP / T, the system Sol Medium Range Air / Land, called Mamba. The first squadron of air defense with the Mamba is the "Servance" at Luxeuil. Eventually, ten systems will be delivered. Read our previous post on the subject.

The SAMP / T is a Franco-Italian air defense (against aircraft) equipped with anti-missile capabilities. They can intercept theater ballistic missiles, that is to say devices with a range less than 3000 km. The threat they represent, read the report of the Senate.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 03 Dec 2011 06:22

Austin wrote:ASTER-30 SAMP/T

Video http://www.mbda-systems.com/e-catalogue ... nd/3/video

There is a lesson in camera-tracking technology of fast missiles in this video from 0:27 onward. The fast missile stays exactly in the middle of the video frame at all times.

The camera actuation mechanism and integration with radar should make for a great university project.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 03 Dec 2011 21:53

Austin wrote:ASTER-30 SAMP/T

Video http://www.mbda-systems.com/e-catalogue ... nd/3/video

French army intercept ballistic missile with Aster during test
http://www.marianne2.fr/blogsecretdefen ... _a442.html

For the first time in France, the Air Force has successfully tested its new Mamba missile intercepting a missile-like "theater ballistic missiles." The successful test took place on November 14, announced the Ministry of Defence, the Test Center of the DGA Biscarosse (Landes).

The missile intercepted is a "Black Sparrow" Israeli-made, which is used by the IDF to test its missile shield. The missile was destroyed in flight - in conditions kept secret - is one of the Aster 30 SAMP / T, the system Sol Medium Range Air / Land, called Mamba. The first squadron of air defense with the Mamba is the "Servance" at Luxeuil. Eventually, ten systems will be delivered. Read our previous post on the subject.

The SAMP / T is a Franco-Italian air defense (against aircraft) equipped with anti-missile capabilities. They can intercept theater ballistic missiles, that is to say devices with a range less than 3000 km. The threat they represent, read the report of the Senate.

Aster 30 block 2 == Indian AAD missile

30 Aster Land Program Moyenne-Portée/Terrestre Sol-Air (SAMP / T), the object is to expand the area of land defense with the ability to fight against all modern missiles. The Aster 30 has been designed from the outset to consider the threat of tactical ballistic missiles .

In his capacity called block 1 ', the SAMP / T has high-performance against air targets: aircraft and cruise missiles operations (sub and supersonic). But it is also expected to address the range ballistic missiles less than 600 km. But for this, the system must receive target designation radar Ground Smarter in 1000 (GS1000 at S-band with a range of 1 000 km ., whose acquisition is not expected before 2022 .

The second step would be the ability known as a block NT. This would be the same capacity with the ability block 1 against air targets, with a capacity "consolidated" against the missile range up to 600 km, and finally against the capacity range missiles from 600 km and 1000 km with the GS1000 as radar fire control radar.

The third and final step would be the ability to block 2 include the ability block a NT, but also that against ballistic missiles to 3,000 km, including maneuvers, dedicated ballistic missiles with (Aster Block 2) and a new fire control radar (GS1500, GS1000 Change) .