Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 22 Jul 2011 10:51

bmallick wrote:We should have another spin-off from this Prahaar and using the same components/fuel etc, make a missile, which is around 25-30 cm in diameter and 4-5 m in length, carrying 70-100 kg warhead and 400-500 kg total weight. That would probably give us a range of 70-90 km when launched from air. Good stand-off missile for the airforce...

This will be really cool but Range would be more considering that it is air launched, at an altitude, and at a speed. We should quickly move on to develop a 100km ranged A2G missile with a bouquet of warheads.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Jul 2011 10:52

a "fat" prahaar - 3 instead of 6 in a truck based on shourya tech would be icing on cake. could be used to either carry a vast amt of submunitions over same 150km , a heavier unitary warhead for hard point-targets or prahaar warhead over a longer distance like 400-500km, overlapping the lower end of the Shourya system.

or maybe we already have it in the form of Shourya...just needs some finetuning.

would love to see a composite artillery division using the same Tatra vehicles for C3I and versions of the same 8x8 tatra for brahmos/prahaar/shourya/smerch and smaller tatra truck for pinaka. could dump a scary barrage from 20km upto 600km away lol. called it the "lungi shiver" division and logo of a cowering pakjabi trying to hide under a small rock.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 22 Jul 2011 11:30

so how many years before this joins the inventory of the forces?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 22 Jul 2011 11:58

AdityaM wrote:so how many years before this joins the inventory of the forces?

If we take Brahmos Army version as an example Block-I was inducted pretty quickly, IMHO 1-2 years max. I would think there would be multiple rounds of testing, configuring the 6-pack Prahaar TEL, user testing etc. I would presume they would build a regiment of Prahaar launchers and support vehicles before any induction happens. JMT.

nits · Post by **nits** » 22 Jul 2011 13:00

VinodTK wrote::
Further, the Prahaar’s range of warheads, which the DRDO has developed, gives the Indian Army multiple options. It could carry a cargo warhead containing bomblets that disperse over a wide area, killing any exposed troops. Alternatively, it could carry air-delivered mines, which spread across a piece of terrain, denying passage to enemy infantry or tanks. Or the Prahaar could carry a single, high-explosive warhead that can demolish even the best-protected target or critical infrastructure.

Silly Q - Can we pack some Nuclear Material in it...

sum · Post by **sum** » 22 Jul 2011 13:03

^^ The fact that they advertise 200 kg payload might be to show that it is a non-nuke mizzile onlee... ( IIRC, our bums start from ~300 Kg?)

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 22 Jul 2011 13:14

I don't know if its a valid question on this thread but how is Haft-9 different from Prahaar except the range.

jagbani · Post by **jagbani** » 22 Jul 2011 13:19

The Prahaar missile went to a height of 35 km before reaching the targets at a range of 150 km in about 250 seconds.
Having a strike range of 150 km, Prahaar is comparable to ATACMS missile of the US.

It fills the vital gap between multi-barrel rocket Pinaka and medium-range ballistic missile Prithvi. The missile, capable of carrying different types of warheads, will operate as battle field support system to the Army.

For more info:- http://www.punjabkesari.in/Punjab/fulls ... 60_131651-

sharma.abhinav · Post by **sharma.abhinav** » 22 Jul 2011 13:32

sum wrote:^^ The fact that they advertise 200 kg payload might be to show that it is a non-nuke mizzile onlee... ( IIRC, our bums start from ~300 Kg?)

Hmm what about sub-kilotons tactical nukes for battlefield use. Now I don't know whether or not we have them, but have read somewhere long ago that those can be carried in artillery shells. So I assume that Prahaar could carry some.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 22 Jul 2011 14:03

sharma.abhinav wrote:
sum wrote:^^ The fact that they advertise 200 kg payload might be to show that it is a non-nuke mizzile onlee... ( IIRC, our bums start from ~300 Kg?)
Hmm what about sub-kilotons tactical nukes for battlefield use. Now I don't know whether or not we have them, but have read somewhere long ago that those can be carried in artillery shells. So I assume that Prahaar could carry some.

Nothing confirmed as per open source info, Desh does not lTom-Tom nee clear detergent business

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 22 Jul 2011 15:38

nits wrote:Silly Q - Can we pack some Nuclear Material in it...

Desi product. Can pack anything. Depends on user requirement.

nits · Post by **nits** » 22 Jul 2011 15:39

chackojoseph wrote:
nits wrote:Silly Q - Can we pack some Nuclear Material in it...
Desi product. Can pack anything. Depends on user requirement.

Thanks got the answer...

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 22 Jul 2011 16:01

SagarAg wrote:I don't know if its a valid question on this thread but how is Haft-9 different from Prahaar except the range.

Prahaar exists in real life. Haft only as a jpeg file.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Jul 2011 16:09

gakakkad wrote:
SagarAg wrote:I don't know if its a valid question on this thread but how is Haft-9 different from Prahaar except the range.
Prahaar exists in real life. Haft only as a jpeg file.

LOL!

Thanks for making my day!!

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 22 Jul 2011 19:53

gakakkad wrote:
Prahaar exists in real life. Haft only as a jpeg file.

vic · Post by **vic** » 22 Jul 2011 20:36

Kanson wrote:Brahmos can be used for targets at ~300 km and Shourya can be for targets 400 km onwards. Unless you can find so many targets of interest in the vicinity of battlefield at that range which needs immediate attention, don't known what is the use of separate missile which can't be taken by other missiles. Going @ the rate, in few years time, IAF will only be tasked with Air to air role.

I would guess:-

Prahar at 250-300km with 200kg warhead

Brahmos in hi-hi-hi profile at 500-700km with 200kg warhead

Shourya at 750-1250km with 200kg warhead

John · Post by **John** » 22 Jul 2011 20:54

vic wrote:
Kanson wrote:Brahmos can be used for targets at ~300 km and Shourya can be for targets 400 km onwards. Unless you can find so many targets of interest in the vicinity of battlefield at that range which needs immediate attention, don't known what is the use of separate missile which can't be taken by other missiles. Going @ the rate, in few years time, IAF will only be tasked with Air to air role.
I would guess:-

Prahar at 250-300km with 200kg warhead

Brahmos in hi-hi-hi profile at 500-700km with 200kg warhead

Shourya at 750-1250km with 200kg warhead

Few corrections max range for Oniks was 500 km however Brahmos is capped at 300 km . And Shaurya carries 1 ton warhead.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 22 Jul 2011 21:08

And Shaurya carries 1 ton warhead.

actually, it carries a greater than 500 kg warhead.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 22 Jul 2011 21:43

vic wrote:
Kanson wrote:Brahmos can be used for targets at ~300 km and Shourya can be for targets 400 km onwards. Unless you can find so many targets of interest in the vicinity of battlefield at that range which needs immediate attention, don't known what is the use of separate missile which can't be taken by other missiles. Going @ the rate, in few years time, IAF will only be tasked with Air to air role.
I would guess:-

Prahar at 250-300km with 200kg warhead

Brahmos in hi-hi-hi profile at 500-700km with 200kg warhead

Shourya at 750-1250km with 200kg warhead

Dear Sir, Since you inquired, Prahaar tested on July 21st was at depressed trajectory. Let's take that published data are nominal values. Actual figures might be classified. As references to ATACMS were drawn, you must be knowing, there are ~150 km, 200+ km and 300 km range versions of that missile. Initially ATACMS was conceived as Tri Service missile just as Prahaar could be. Later AF and Navy opted out. ATAMCS developement was not for mere some tactical support but to increase the Nuclear threshold against SU/Warsaw pact countries. So reference to ATACMS is really striking.

In 90s the Brahmos we tested were restricted in range by software means. Later versions may have restricted the fuel tank capacity attune to the published range. In situations between life and dealth it will be last thing to worry about MTCR and contracts. During Kargil IAF tinkered with Mirage-2000 which is against the contract. So we wont be knowing for sure. Technically at hi - hi profile with enlarged tanks, yes, Brahmos can cover that range. If I remember right, Shipwreck missile has that range you mentioned.

Regarding Shourya, well i leave it at your imagination.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Jul 2011 21:59

Well said Kanson. Please note that not a single missile range that you see advertised by DRDO is the actual one. Everything is purposefully dumbed down to keep the enemy guessing, which leads to them allocating resources in a conflict which could be used elsewhere. Arun_S had proved that time and again with the Agni missile tests.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 22 Jul 2011 22:11

Later AF and Navy opted out.

In recent times the U.S Navy has wanted back in ...

The old submarine launched role (NATACMS) is being reconsidered. the chief driver could be the new T2KU.

similar in concept to what the Russians are trying out with a navalized iskander and possibly the B-90 Sarov submarine.

good way to beat BMD and hold coastal targets at risk.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 22 Jul 2011 22:35

bmallick wrote:I think the high acceleration of the missile truly shows its AAD ancestry. An anti-ballistic missile would have very low time to engage the target, hence high acceleration and speed. Its great that Prahaar has inherited this trait from its ancestor. The acceleration is truly phenomenal.

Now we should have another spin-off from this Prahaar and using the same components/fuel etc, make a missile, which is around 25-30 cm in diameter and 4-5 m in length, carrying 70-100 kg warhead and 400-500 kg total weight. That would probably give us a range of 70-90 km when launched from air. Good stand-off missile for the airforce. Provide all the warheads that are already there for Prahaar to this missile too. Also make ARM version. The missile is light enough to be carried in decent numbers by most of our fighters. Also maybe compact enough to be carrier internally by PAKFA & AMCA.

IAF already submitted thier ASQR for 2 different types of AGMs.AndDRDO has been working on them for the last 12-15 months. IF everything goes as planned,we might see initial testing by end 2012 or early 2013.

Thomas Kolarek · Post by **Thomas Kolarek** » 22 Jul 2011 22:48

Prahaar Success gave new breather to IA Doctrine. Would have been better if they had captured a nice video similar to M39 ATACM. In the Next test, they should include a nice video capture and fire all the 6 with different targets.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Jul 2011 23:32

Rakesh wrote:Arun_S had proved that time and again with the Agni missile tests.

we miss him here.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 23 Jul 2011 01:20

One point to note is the statement from DRDO clearly indicated, this missile will carry a conventional war head. It is important to clearly demarcate our strategic assets, especially for ballistic missile profiles. It will allow us the use of these tactical missiles, without risking escalation.

Tactical missiles such as Prahaar, Brahmos (in fact all cruise missiles) and even Prithvi should be clearly demarcated as for use by non nuclear warheads only. The last I checked, Prithvi still carried the burden of the strategic kind, at least in part. Does anyone have any updates on this?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 23 Jul 2011 09:38

ShauryaT wrote:Tactical missiles such as Prahaar, Brahmos (in fact all cruise missiles) and even Prithvi should be clearly demarcated as for use by non nuclear warheads only. The last I checked, Prithvi still carried the burden of the strategic kind, at least in part. Does anyone have any updates on this?

Prithvi missile is being treated as a division level asset in the Artillery divisions, so this has been clearly demarcated as a tactical weapon. The Agni missiles are placed under the Army HQ or with Strategic Force Command.
Rohit might be able to add more info on this!!!

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 23 Jul 2011 09:44

Indian Army and DRDO should go for something like the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) TELs developed and used by US Army and Marines. These are based on a 5T Truck Frame (we can use TATRA or even Tata Trucks), can carry Six missiles in ready to launch state, high mobile, C130 transportable.
Probably Shri Sarasvat thought the same when he hinted at a TEL carrying 6 missiles.
Auty Wiki says http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_mobil ... ket_system

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 23 Jul 2011 09:50

jaladipc wrote:
bmallick wrote:I think the high acceleration of the missile truly shows its AAD ancestry. An anti-ballistic missile would have very low time to engage the target, hence high acceleration and speed. Its great that Prahaar has inherited this trait from its ancestor. The acceleration is truly phenomenal.

Now we should have another spin-off from this Prahaar and using the same components/fuel etc, make a missile, which is around 25-30 cm in diameter and 4-5 m in length, carrying 70-100 kg warhead and 400-500 kg total weight. That would probably give us a range of 70-90 km when launched from air. Good stand-off missile for the airforce. Provide all the warheads that are already there for Prahaar to this missile too. Also make ARM version. The missile is light enough to be carried in decent numbers by most of our fighters. Also maybe compact enough to be carrier internally by PAKFA & AMCA.
IAF already submitted thier ASQR for 2 different types of AGMs.AndDRDO has been working on them for the last 12-15 months. IF everything goes as planned,we might see initial testing by end 2012 or early 2013.

Thats great news

. Can you please provide me some references so that I can go though the requirements.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 23 Jul 2011 12:11

jaladipc wrote:IAF already submitted thier ASQR for 2 different types of AGMs.AndDRDO has been working on them for the last 12-15 months. IF everything goes as planned,we might see initial testing by end 2012 or early 2013.

This is the first I am hearing about this ASQR, I searched but couldn't find any mention of this... could you please list some sources?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 23 Jul 2011 12:20

this is the first time I am hearing the acronym ASQR, it's usually ASR per media.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 23 Jul 2011 13:03

Why is India not using a Maz type TEL and use a Ashok Leyland TEL for Agni-III?

Is it because of not yet deploying it with the Armed forces?
Even Agni-II's TEL looks very much like this... another Ashok Leyland truck (Hippo I presume)

And Agni-II is deployed in the Armed forces (IA HQ Command in this example shown).

on the contrary, MAZ-543 type Trucks has phenomenal mobility!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAZ-543

What do you guys think?

SKrishna · Post by **SKrishna** » 23 Jul 2011 13:29

Shrinivasan wrote:Why is India not using a Maz type TEL and use a Ashok Leyland TEL for Agni-III?

Is it because of not yet deploying it with the Armed forces?
Even Agni-II's TEL looks very much like this... another Ashok Leyland truck (Hippo I presume)

And Agni-II is deployed in the Armed forces (IA HQ Command in this example shown).

on the contrary, MAZ-543 type Trucks has phenomenal mobility!!!

What do you guys think?

AFAIK Both Agni II and Agni III are Rail Mobile Missiles. They are mounted on specially converted Rail bogies along with their erector and launcher assembly. You can clearly see that in Agni III pic, its basically a rail bogie with road wheels fitted pulled by a Volvo Tractor for R Day parade purpose only.

(Gurus please confirm)

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 23 Jul 2011 13:43

SKrishna wrote:
Shrinivasan wrote:Why is India not using a Maz type TEL and use a Ashok Leyland TEL for Agni-III?

Is it because of not yet deploying it with the Armed forces?
Even Agni-II's TEL looks very much like this... another Ashok Leyland truck (Hippo I presume)

And Agni-II is deployed in the Armed forces (IA HQ Command in this example shown).

on the contrary, MAZ-543 type Trucks has phenomenal mobility!!!

What do you guys think?
AFAIK Both Agni II and Agni III are Rail Mobile Missiles. They are mounted on specially converted Rail bogies along with their erector and launcher assembly. You can clearly see that in Agni III pic, its basically a rail bogie with road wheels fitted pulled by a Volvo Tractor for R Day parade purpose only.
(Gurus please confirm)

Krishna, Agni-II is Road mobile, there is also be a Rail mobile variant but IA has a variant of Agni-II which is Road Mobile.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 23 Jul 2011 13:52

An Interesting picture from BDL about Agni-I manufacturing & assembly.

The picture in the top-left corner suggests that Agni-I is cannisterized. if this is true, a great development. I thought cannisters are only for Agni-IIP and Agni-V?!?

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 23 Jul 2011 14:01

^^^ they look like brahmos missile

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Jul 2011 14:27

that last pic imo clearly shows the triple tubed layout of the Arihant....ie it can fit three smaller missiles like brahmos. pixel gurus can measure the inner dimensions from the head measurement of the people.

about the MAZ TEL I dont think we use/intend to use the truck version of the A2 and A3 at all, given the limitations of our road infra and no area like siberian taiga to disappear into. Rail TEL is it. so not surprising no effort is being spent on acquiring the MAZ tels used for Rus ICBMs. for smaller missiles upto Agni-I and Shaurya the Tatra vehicles assembled in BEML are adequate.

Amitabh · Post by **Amitabh** » 23 Jul 2011 14:39

MN Kumar wrote:Not an accurate one but a quick job to compare AAD and Prahaar. Anyone got a good Hires image for Shaurya. Google isnt helping:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 745188.JPG

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 23 Jul 2011 15:00

Singha wrote:that last pic imo clearly shows the triple tubed layout of the Arihant....ie it can fit three smaller missiles like brahmos. pixel gurus can measure the inner dimensions from the head measurement of the people.

So it is an Agni variant or the K5 type.

Singha wrote: about the MAZ TEL I dont think we use/intend to use the truck version of the A2 and A3 at all, given the limitations of our road infra and no area like siberian taiga to disappear into. Rail TEL is it. so not surprising no effort is being spent on acquiring the MAZ tels used for Rus ICBMs.

Desh has developed a rail mobile launcher in a Bogie years back. There was a picture in the old Agni page on BR... with our rail network we should be able to deploy our missile across the hinterland. The Maz might have been in Desh for some tests/eval.
Thanks Singha.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 23 Jul 2011 15:34

Amitabh wrote:
MN Kumar wrote:Not an accurate one but a quick job to compare AAD and Prahaar. Anyone got a good Hires image for Shaurya. Google isnt helping:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 745188.JPG

More
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2008/11/sh ... fired.html
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2008/12/ex ... ssile.html
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2008/12/ex ... le_19.html

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 23 Jul 2011 15:37

Shrinivasan wrote:
Singha wrote:that last pic imo clearly shows the triple tubed layout of the Arihant....ie it can fit three smaller missiles like brahmos. pixel gurus can measure the inner dimensions from the head measurement of the people.
So it is an Agni variant or the K5 type.

Its brahmos, The big container could be the autoclave for composites