Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 31 Aug 2011 20:02

PratikDas wrote:While I recognise this is an Indian missile thread, I'd like to suggest that while China had no qualms with demonstrating their anti-satellite rocket and creating a massive amount of space junk for the rest of the world to endure, they have not demonstrated a much more environmentally conservative task of downing a moving tanker, let alone a massive aircraft carrier. Let's not hand them the trophy before they've run the race.

Very well said. If they can enact a live demonstration of ASAT weapon why their are shying away from such demonstration of the so called Aircraft Carrier killer? Fear of failure? Till that time, it is good for them to stop bragging about this.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 31 Aug 2011 20:07

K_Rohit wrote:A2 test postponed. Chinese spy ship in the vicinity of the test zone tracked and driven away. Linked?

you got it right... methinks, this is the real reason for postponing the Agni tests.. Chaiwaala news is, SDRE ships tailed this Chinki ship but did not engage it as they were outside Indian Territorial water, the ship had to hightail all the way to Sri Lanka. Why not Myanmar? maybe this is related to Admiral Verma's visit to Myanmar?
Whatever is the reason, it is far from "technical glitch of controls"

Rahul.ka · Post by **Rahul.ka** » 01 Sep 2011 21:49

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/2247/b ... rsonic.jpg

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Sep 2011 22:15

Rahul.ka wrote:Cruise Control :: Design freeze for hypersonic Brahmos II missile nears

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 03 Sep 2011 23:30

Saw saraswat interview on Zee on agni 5. Said it will have MIRV.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 04 Sep 2011 00:00

^^

Interesting. They plan to achieve double the range and increased speed while reducing the length of the missile. Very happy if they can bring entire Tibet region into Brahmos range

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 04 Sep 2011 00:55

How is it possible without designing an entirely new propulsion system ?

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 04 Sep 2011 05:33

The article didn't specify range did it? It only says magically the 300 I'm artificial limit didn't apply. Since Russia abides by MTCR as does( slavishly ) India. So how does the 300 km limit not apply for Brahmos 2 but it does for Brahmos 1?

sourab_c · Post by **sourab_c** » 04 Sep 2011 07:03

tejas wrote:The article didn't specify range did it? It only says magically the 300 I'm artificial limit didn't apply. Since Russia abides by MTCR as does( slavishly ) India. So how does the 300 km limit not apply for Brahmos 2 but it does for Brahmos 1?

Because there is no transfer of technology involved and full R&D will need to be done by both the countries from scratch. In short, it will be a totally new missile.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 04 Sep 2011 07:20

Grasshopper is still confused. If this is a new missile and no tech. transfer from Ivan is involved than why don't we do it ourselves? Believe me i am the first one to wish Brahmos had longer legs. I think the 300 km range is pathetic for a missile of it's size/ weight. Hopefully the 300 km range is a sham to not tick off the powers that be.

Also we should be exporting a $hit load of Brahmos to Vietnam.

sourab_c · Post by **sourab_c** » 04 Sep 2011 07:56

We are doing it in the form of Nirbhay.

As far as Brahmos is concerned, I personally believe that Brahmos as a corporation may be legally bound to include both India and Russia in any future development of newer missiles since it was established jointly by both countries, but I could be wrong in this regard.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 04 Sep 2011 09:43

Nirbhay and Brahmos don't have much in common in terms of payload and speed. BTW, is there any particular advantage in having a missile with even higher speed than current Brahmos ? Prevailing air defence measures can barely detect and only hopefully intercept supersonic missiles. Newer Brahmos should have higher range to enable it's use as a land attack weapon from naval vessels.
We wouldn't be exporting Nirbhay to anyone due to MTCR.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 04 Sep 2011 10:56

Questions to all guruloks here , will Brahmos -2 will be again limited by Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) restriction of range and payload ?? since i have heard that hypersonic missiles are not considered in MTCR . if Brahmos-2 is not restricted by MTCR then why DRDO wants to develop 600km Supersonic cruise missile (LRCM) when we can have 600+
hypersonic Brahmos -2 ??

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Sep 2011 10:59

I think from a political angle, yes. The mere fact of Russkies involvement means we have to make sure it some other astra rather the one ends with *mos. Unless, we can prove there is no russian involvement at all.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 04 Sep 2011 11:01

@jamwal , we are not signatory of MTCR , so we can sell them to any country we want

MTCR Members (to be frank half the countries don't have resources to build missiles of that caliber )

Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and United States.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 04 Sep 2011 12:27

Nato offers missile defence cooperation to India
TOI

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 04 Sep 2011 12:46

karan_mc wrote:@jamwal , we are not signatory of MTCR , so we can sell them to any country we want

MTCR Members (to be frank half the countries don't have resources to build missiles of that caliber )

Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and United States.

Most of these countries do not need an ABM system though they would have / procure a good SAM systems
K

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Sep 2011 13:58

karan_mc wrote:. . . we are not signatory of MTCR . . .

Not yet, I would say.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 04 Sep 2011 15:11

Why talk of as if MTCR is some serious treaty

1) It has not been applied to Chinese sale of various Ballistic missiles and Babur to Pakis.

2) It has been applied to Sales of Trident , Tomohawk by US to UK

3) It has not been applied to US sales to of Tomohawk to other allies.

Seems to me MTCR applies only to Russian Sales to India.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 04 Sep 2011 16:39

^^^
How can anybody be so sure that our missiles have the 300km cap? Who is checking?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Sep 2011 18:35

Aditya_V wrote:Why talk of as if MTCR is some serious treaty
. . .
Seems to me MTCR applies only to Russian Sales to India.

Aditya, the NSG (or the "London Club" as it was popularly known) which is an outgrowth of the Zangger Committee agreement of August 1974 and the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) which have all been made even more comprehensive through "Energy" and "Wassenaar" protocols (which in circa 1992 banned dual-use technologies even when these were not meant for non-nuclear applications), were specifically meant for India and have affected India's civilian nuclear and space programmes significantly.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 04 Sep 2011 19:15

tejas wrote:Grasshopper is still confused. If this is a new missile and no tech. transfer from Ivan is involved than why don't we do it ourselves? Believe me i am the first one to wish Brahmos had longer legs. I think the 300 km range is pathetic for a missile of it's size/ weight. Hopefully the 300 km range is a sham to not tick off the powers that be.

Also we should be exporting a $hit load of Brahmos to Vietnam.

MTCR is a voluntary regime where every member accepts to prohibited lists based on consensus and implement them based on how they interpret them from their national point of view. Since it is voluntary regime and NOT a binding treaty, there is no punishment or penalties to members who violates. But countries like US tries to impose sanctions unilaterally on members and entities if it is against their interest. You get the drift?

1) If India tries to appease US and US sees India's rise in their interest then nothing of that sort going to happen.
2) If the entities involved in such transfer can isolates themselves from US sanctions, then there is nothing US can do.
3) These technologies come under Category II which allows some leeway.

Indian military planners disagreed with the notion of 300 Km range for hypersonic Brahmos noting it is too small.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 04 Sep 2011 19:27

shukla wrote:Nato offers missile defence cooperation to India
TOI

Such a discussion also happened earlier. Not sure what was the agenda. Very well it could be just a bait to understand how much progress we made. Or it could be another way to broach global net against BMD threat.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Sep 2011 23:11

Placing radar in Central India. IOW use India's geographical location for themselves.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 Sep 2011 05:25

Kanson wrote:
shukla wrote:Nato offers missile defence cooperation to India
TOI
Such a discussion also happened earlier. Not sure what was the agenda. Very well it could be just a bait to understand how much progress we made. Or it could be another way to broach global net against BMD threat.

Astute!!

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Sep 2011 15:37

Hasn't a weapon system/platform offer come our way every time we made some progress on our own ? The intentions are clear. It is to scuttle the project and ensure we are dependent on them forever.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 08 Sep 2011 14:12

SSridhar wrote:Hasn't a weapon system/platform offer come our way every time we made some progress on our own ? The intentions are clear. It is to scuttle the project and ensure we are dependent on them forever.

Manufacturers worldwide offer free demos of their systems in the hope possible customers will share cost of development. Just like soap companies offer free samples. Both soap users and military users use these demos as an opportunity to understand what new developments are happening other than what they're already using. Its only our DDM that scream "India buying Patriot" every time a demo/offer is made like a free soap sample.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Sep 2011 15:24

SS/Tsarkar,too true.If we reallywanted to buy from abroad,the Russian S-400 series with a 500 series being developed too are cheaper.The last US SM-3 naval ABM test was supposed to have failed.It is beign actively examined by the Japanese and SoKos.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 09 Sep 2011 21:37

Philip wrote:SS/Tsarkar,too true.If we reallywanted to buy from abroad,the Russian S-400 series with a 500 series being developed too are cheaper.The last US SM-3 naval ABM test was supposed to have failed.It is beign actively examined by the Japanese and SoKos.

Philip, Buying a S400 from the bear would not help India to improve its self reliance on ABM defense, but our babus and netas might end up buying it to protect Nai Dilli and offer some freebies to the bear. This is only a question on when rather than "will", it is bound to happen. Hopefully it doesn't eat into the funding for ABM deployment around the country. A combination of Spyder, Akash I/II, PAD, AAD and others like MRSAM, LRSAM, QRSAM should give us a layered defence. But then what do I know!!!

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 09 Sep 2011 21:38

^^^S400 might look cheaper on paper, but desi maal would be cheaper in the long run if we order in adequate numbers.

Boreas · Post by **Boreas** » 09 Sep 2011 23:12

Kanson wrote:
shukla wrote:Nato offers missile defence cooperation to India
TOI
Such a discussion also happened earlier. Not sure what was the agenda. Very well it could be just a bait to understand how much progress we made. Or it could be another way to broach global net against BMD threat.

Well to me it appears nothing more than an air bubble. He neither represents a company which possess a ballistic missile defence system nor a government who can ensure the sale. I doubt he has any power to materialize anything of this scale.

Shrinivasan wrote:^^^S400 might look cheaper on paper, but desi maal would be cheaper in the long run if we order in adequate numbers.

Sri I don't think it is necessarily going to be cheaper, however the thing which is more important is that we will possess the technology, and will be free to use it in any way.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 10 Sep 2011 01:10

^ what is the restriction on local maal, it will be self develop and free to create variation of the product .... no one is thinking the benefit of know how

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 15 Sep 2011 20:11

shukla wrote:Nato offers missile defence cooperation to India
TOI

Boreas wrote:
Kanson wrote: Such a discussion also happened earlier. Not sure what was the agenda. Very well it could be just a bait to understand how much progress we made. Or it could be another way to broach global net against BMD threat.
Well to me it appears nothing more than an air bubble. He neither represents a company which possess a ballistic missile defence system nor a government who can ensure the sale. I doubt he has any power to materialize anything of this scale.

From the report he is not here to sell.

He said,

"The fact is it is more Indo-US than Nato-Indian relationship. But we are getting into ballistic missile defence in a pretty big way. As a result, there is a repository of knowledge that we can share and we can train together. There are experiences that we can talk about," the official said.

Nato is conducting three missile defence-related activities -- theatre ballistic missile defence capability for short- and medium-range ballistic missile threats, missile defence for the entire Nato territory, and missile defence cooperation with Russia.

He is here to seek cooperation similar to Nato-Russian missile defence cooperation or to find out what we Indians could offer.

Some insights into Nato-Russian BMD Cooperation:

NATO and Russia have committed to resume joint exercises of their theater BMD systems, which were suspended following the August 2008 Georgia War. And their experts are currently engaged in a joint analysis of the modalities of NATO-Russia collaboration for common territorial missile defense. Their analysis will address such questions as a common architecture could look like, how costs and technologies might be shared, how to apply the knowledge gained from the joint exercises to a more permanent joint NATO-Russia BMD system, and how to cooperate in defense of European territory rather than NATO and Russian military forces on deployment. The experts will report their initial findings to the defense ministers on June 9, 2011.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 18 Sep 2011 06:39

A pooch to Gurus... Mr. CG claims

deliveries of the (Prithvi SRBM) SS-150s got underway from 1993 and lasted till early 2009, with about 180 being built by the MoD-owned, Hyderabad-based Bharat Dynamics Ltd. These missiles presently equip the 333 (raised in June 1993 in Panchmarhi and commissioned in October 1995 under the Ambala-based 40 Artillery Division of the Mathura-based I Corps), 444 (raised in October 2001 under the Pune-based 41 Artillery Division of the Jodhpur-based XII Corps) and 555 Missile Groups (operational by January 2005 under the 42 Artillery Division of the Ambala-based II Corps), with each Group being equipped with 60 liquid-fuelled SS-150s.

My questions:
1) 333rd Missile regiment was raised in Kamtee in Maharashtra, isn't it?
2) Div-Corps correspondence seems to be iffy?
3) Do we have only 180 Prithvi missiles?

Appreciate a response.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Sep 2011 11:27

Kanson wrote:Some insights into Nato-Russian BMD Cooperation:

Apparently those co-operation did not make any headway and NATO and Russia are exactly on the opposite side of pole as far as missile defence co-operation goes , if any thing else Missile Defence has just escalated war of words between two parties.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 Sep 2011 11:34

^^^I read that article on CG's blog and the moment I saw those Arty Division and Corps numbers, I knew someone will ask the question on BRF

The Orbat should read - 40/II Corps, 41/Soutern Command - probably XXI Corps, 42/South-Western Command - probably I Corps. (well, everything cannot be copied from brochures

)

On the Prithvi holding thing - here is an interesting observation - has anyone come across a pic of Prithvi TEL in RD Parade or any other open source, which carries the formation sign of any of the Artillery Divisions? At least I have not been able to see one. The one that you will see on Prithvi (and Agni TEL) is that Integrated HQ of MOD. My assertion is that none of the Prithvi Missile Groups is with any of the Artillery Divisions - they are being held by the IA component of SFC. If my assertion is true then, Prithvi's are not going out any time soon.

Also, that article on his blog is the one which appeared in the Force magazine. And if you compare the contents of the same with all the bluster he wrote in his earlier plagiarised article on Prahaar - where he said he will give details of the true origin of Prahaar, true configuration and all the BS, there is nothing of that sort. It confrms to what DRDO has said all along....so much for indepth coverage!!!

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 Sep 2011 14:56

Evil mercantilists "hindus" develop relations with Kyrgyz for defence of India.
India to develop torpedo testing centre in Kyrgyzstan

PTI
Share · print · T+

India is planning to develop a facility in Kyrgyzstan to produce state of the art torpedoes in order to strengthen its under water attack capabilities.

The Torpedo Testing Centre located at Issyk Kul lake in Karakul province, 250 km away from the capital Bishkek, is considered one of the best locations to launch and recover torpedoes fired during test trials.

“The facility was visited by Defence Minister A.K. Antony a few months ago. An Indian delegation would be visiting Kyrgyzstan soon to make an assessment of investment needed for the project and the terms and conditions for co-developing it,” DRDO Chief Controller William Selvamurthy told PTI.

To develop existing infrastructure at the centre, India has proposed to engage local companies with available know how in torpedo technology to co-develop the facility.

“India is willing to develop the Centre to test all kinds of torpedoes such as heavy weight torpedoes and those having thermal navigation system,” Mr. Selvamurthy said.

The centre has a network of sensors which can monitor the speed, velocity, homing in and direction of the torpedo once it is fired. This enables scientists to make necessary modifications in the navigation system to make the missiles more accurate and fool proof.

The torpedoes fired in the lake are also recoverable enabling the scientists to make physical verification of its structure for further study.

A torpedo is a self-propelled explosive projectile weapons, launched above or below the water surface, propelled under water towards a target.

India is also planning to use the facility to test the Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Developed by Naval Scientific and Technological Laboratory (NSTL).

Developed during the Soviet era, the facility was used by the Russian military as a testing site for torpedo propulsion and guidance systems, and Karakol was home to a sizable population of military personnel and their families.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 18 Sep 2011 16:36

Rohitvats, I agree with your assessment in the main. The real question for me is - what are the Agni missile Groups ? Numbers etc ? Nobody is coming up with much beyond -334 and 335.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 Sep 2011 18:39

Sanjay wrote:Rohitvats, I agree with your assessment in the main. The real question for me is - what are the Agni missile Groups ? Numbers etc ? Nobody is coming up with much beyond -334 and 335.

SBM sahab,

Good to have you again on BRF.

From what ever I've researched and come across, there seem to be two groups. But then, there has been lot of activity in past couple of years and so, it is difficult to comment on the topic. As it is, this (missiles) is one topic that IA comments very little about.

However, while researching on the 3rd Arty Division in IA, I came across the following with respect to Prithvi and Agni missiles:

There are two sets of tactical numbers - one is a 4 digit number and starts with 18**. The other is a 3 digit number and starts with 3**.

The tac numbers for Prithvi are:
- 1870 (http://im.rediff.com/news/2011/mar/28sld3.jpg),
- 1875 (http://pib.nic.in/archieve/phtgalry/pgy ... 120012.jpg)

The tac numbers for Agni-2 are:
- 368 (http://dilipkumar.in/images/defence_display.jpg)
- 1848 (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 2004).jpeg)

So, unless, IA is deliberately painting missile contingents with random numbers to confuse the holoi-poloi, we sure have two missile groups each of Prithvi and Agni-2.

In fact, if you see the pic here:
http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/s ... my_001.jpg

there seems to be a Brahmos regiment under the SFC as well.

saadhak · Post by **saadhak** » 18 Sep 2011 19:54

India plans to test-fire 3,000 km range 'Agni-2 Prime' by next month

India is planning to test fire by next month 'Agni-2 Prime', an advanced nuclear-capable ballistic missile with a strike range of around 3,000 km.

The 'Agni-2 Prime' has been developed by making some changes in the Agni 2 missile and will have the same size of boosters which are there in the existing missile but will have an extended range of 1,000 km, they said.

Powered by solid fuel propellants, the 'Prime' will also have a better navigational system and greater accuracy in comparison to the Agni-2 missile.

Newer technologies have also been incorporated in the missile to make it lighter and the weapon system has also been provided with greater thrust.