Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 21 Dec 2011 12:39

If the overall cost is taken into consideration for the next 20 years or so, Prithvi cost may be higher with higher maintenance etc and the difficult to use it when compared with Shourya. Even Agni-1 and Shourya's Rangve vs Payload capability seem to match, even though Shourya is a smaller missile than that of Agni-1. May be because it's a modern missile with lot of improvements and for being lighter in weight due to use of composite materials.
So i do prefer the Shourya over the Prithvi's and the Agni-1's. It's the right time to upgrade to this single missile system by replacing both Prithvi and Agni-1's.
A nice article from Arun_S
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/defe ... rrent.html

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 21 Dec 2011 13:07

Update given in Tarmak007

The SFC postponed the twin launch of Prithvi on Wednesday, after a last-minute tech snag. "In a twin-launch scenario, we don't go for the second one, if the first one fails," sources said. The missiles were produced at the BDL facility in Hyderabad.
Is there anything else happening off Orissa coast? Well watch this space for more!

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 21 Dec 2011 13:33

Prithvi missile test postponed due to a technical snag

It was practice test.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 21 Dec 2011 13:47

Its a good thing these kind of problems are identified during peacetime, I hope the SFC keeps continuously testing its missile aresenal so problems are identified and enough personal are there with experience working with live firing of missiles.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Dec 2011 23:52

Ripple fire.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Dec 2011 00:02

So, the problem in sequencing it quick? wow, that is a big real time glitch then.. if.. they might need to look at what did not happen in time or did not get triggered.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Dec 2011 02:17

No. The problem is the second test is follow-on to the first. And not a back up test. Maybe they are verfiying end results of one two punch.
Therefore scrubbed.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 22 Dec 2011 03:04

No one really knows what happened except DRDO

Hope they rectify it soon because the glitch occurred in the production lot not some further improvement test.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 22 Dec 2011 04:53

The articles seem to imply that it was a ripple fire test. When the first missile did not fire, the second launch was automatically aborted.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 22 Dec 2011 05:24

IMHO If the first missile failed or did not fire off due to technical snag. The SFC should have gone for the second missile fire along with a third Prithvi missile from the production lot (if they had it there at the ITR Complex).
After all it was a test for real time operational preparedness of SFC and it doesn't get any more real than this.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 22 Dec 2011 07:13

What is the meaning of "ripple fire" test?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 22 Dec 2011 07:22

Manish_Sharma wrote:What is the meaning of "ripple fire" test?

firing rockets in quick succession

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_pBbD_iXO8

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Dec 2011 07:42

SagarAg wrote:IMHO If the first missile failed or did not fire off due to technical snag. The SFC should have gone for the second missile fire along with a third Prithvi missile from the production lot (if they had it there at the ITR Complex).
After all it was a test for real time operational preparedness of SFC and it doesn't get any more real than this.

How do you know that the technical snag was not with the telemetry, monitoring and communications that would have made both tests useless?

Ignorance of all the facts is covered with assumptions. But why are those assumptions always negative and dhoti-shivering? Why do we Indians react in this way?

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 22 Dec 2011 07:58

TERMINAL GUIDANCE: Made in India seekers dressed up for fire play

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 22 Dec 2011 08:58

A Sharma wrote:TERMINAL GUIDANCE: Made in India seekers dressed up for fire play

From the article -

"The range of the seeker depends upon the diameter of the antenna. The seeker dimension largely depends upon the target, which is small for an aircraft and large for a missile."

Would it be possible to putting pods at the end of the aerodynamic fins, with additional seekers in them? All the seekers could be combined via synthetic aperture technology to get better resolution.

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 22 Dec 2011 09:11

[quote="Pranav"
Would it be possible to putting pods at the end of the aerodynamic fins, with additional seekers in them? All the seekers could be combined via synthetic aperture technology to get better resolution.[/quote]

Technically yes. But it would mean extra weight dangling at the fin ends, hence a fatter & more stronger structure. This would translate to more weight, hence performance penalty. To overcome it we would need more fuel, hence a fatter or longer missile. If we made the missile fatter to have more fuel, we would anyway have a bigger nose diameter, hence can have a bigger seeker in the nose itself. So then can actually do away with the pods on fins

.

VinayG · Post by **VinayG** » 22 Dec 2011 09:12

can we call this ripple firing

aniket · Post by **aniket** » 22 Dec 2011 09:41

In the video 2 types of missiles are shown.I can identify 1 as the SMERCH MBRL, can someone identify the other missile ?

VinayG · Post by **VinayG** » 22 Dec 2011 09:47

aniket wrote:In the video 2 types of missiles are shown.I can identify 1 as the SMERCH MBRL, can someone identify the other missile ?

9K720 Iskander missiles

Iskander

adityadange · Post by **adityadange** » 22 Dec 2011 11:09

A Sharma wrote:TERMINAL GUIDANCE: Made in India seekers dressed up for fire play

this is really very great achievement for India.

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 22 Dec 2011 15:27

aniket wrote:In the video 2 types of missiles are shown.I can identify 1 as the SMERCH MBRL, can someone identify the other missile ?

There are 3 actually.

Iskander, Smerch and Tochka.

You can see it at @0:45

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 24 Dec 2011 08:44

HELINA updates from Tarmak

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2011/12/h ... round.html

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2011 09:26

instead of a new 'interim' soln like PARS3 or Spike, why dont we integrate the existing Vikhr (from Mi17V) onto the Rudra as interim and let Helina run to completion in 2 yrs and then deploy it?

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 24 Dec 2011 09:41

Singha wrote:instead of a new 'interim' soln like PARS3 or Spike, why dont we integrate the existing Vikhr (from Mi17V) onto the Rudra as interim and let Helina run to completion in 2 yrs and then deploy it?

Maybe, Vikhr manufacturers are not that keen on its integration with Rudra.

I do not understand this interim thing though. Evalution & final decisions would take 1-2 years. Helina would be deployed in 2-3 years. That leave a gap of 1-2 years to bridge. In that gap how many Rudra's does the IA thinks it would get. What mean to say is that the Rudra's would be small in number. So a small number of PARS3 or Spike would be required for arming them. Does it make economic sense to acquire such small numbers & have the headache of their maintenance too. Why not wait for the 1-2 year period too.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2011 11:53

if at all we go Spike, we should go for the Spike-NLOS if it makes sense....Helina can fill the mainstream role and Spike-NLOS the "high end bideshi maal" segment. I am not sure how this weapon would get its initial target designation or how its terminal guidance works but maybe its the aerial version of the extinct copperhead to permit shots at moving / static targets from well beyond vShorad range.

otherwise why not the HELLFIRE-IIR (non mmw version)? we are going to get hellfire anyway with the Apaches that IAF is purchasing. its apparently not even being considered here.

Spike NLOS
"Non Line Of Sight" is an ultra long range version of the weapon with a claimed maximum range of up to 25 km (16 mi). As a newer, larger missile with an overall weight of around 70 kg (154 lb 5 oz), it can be fired from helicopters. The Spike NLOS is already operational with a military customer, which is most likely to be Israel Defense Forces.[11][12] In a deal concluded on 6 September 2011, the South Korean government has agreed to purchase an unknown number of Spike NLOS missiles.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 24 Dec 2011 12:54

When did India ever induct Vikhr?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Dec 2011 13:47

Looking at the way we are trying to look at intermediate alternative options for Air Launched F&F option and similar ground based types before Nag sees the light of the day 26 years after it was originally conceived , it just shows Nag from day 1 carried a very heavy burden on its shoulder to prove something that was a tall ask.

Nag was originally conceived as a 4 Km F&F ATGM with MMW seeker as part of IGMDP , since i have been following IGMDP almost from the time it was conceived , the target was then to induct Nag by 1995 and it considered at the most challenging missile to be built in the 5 types for IGMDP since DRDO scientist from day one have been saying that there will be NO missile like Nag once it gets inducted by mid-95 due to true F&F nature with Top Attack capability , sounds very very ambitious for the time when we did not develop any thing remotely like that.

The GSQR or goal for Nag never changed AFAIK it still was the 4 Km F&F missile with top attack capability with MMW seeker , how ever they got bogged down in testing and development on the challenge of developing such missile , MMW seeker was a tall order so we moved to IIR seeker which were imported type iirc and then the whole development time took like 15 more years from the time it was originally planned to be inducted which was 1995.

Some year back I read DRDO Tech Focus magazine where Kalam in address to scientist challenged the scientist to develop a Gun Launched Nag , at a time even ground launched type was far from induction !

I think a much lesser challange for DRDO would have been to develop a Laser Guided or Beam Rider Nag to start with and then gradually move on to develop a more challanging F&F Top attack with IIR seeker and then MMW seeker when the technology is available with DRDO. That would have given IA exposure to Nag even if it was to be beam rider and helped it continously improving it either in range or capability or both and most importantly would have stopped the import of some class of ATGM.

Choosing Top of Line technology for Nag which no one in the world had even thought of developing or had developed meant that it would take almost 25 plus year to see it inducted from the time it was conceived.

Similarly for Akash it was suppose to be similar to US CorpSam project and which was cancelled by US and having to develop PAR was most challenging of the development , Originally suppose to be inducted in 1992 it was inducted in 2010 with the goal by and large remaining the same , changing only in the nature of deployment and not in specs of Akash or PAR.

I really do not know who had conceived IGMDP with such ambitious goals and most importantly ambitious induction time lines when they could have been most practical with goals , Like doing simpler things well first before getting the complicated top of the chain things right.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 24 Dec 2011 13:48

My opinion is to go with the Helina itself, rather than go for interim solution etc. The reason for it is because we will be inducting about 5-10 Rudra's during the period of Helina testing. So it's better to start the integration work on the Rudra rather than scout for some missile that's inferior to Helina. Helina is the best stuff at the moment.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Dec 2011 18:10

My only fear is such temporary imported systems should not put development of Helina in the backburner or reduces its procurement to couple of hundred system , when Helina comes in and these imported systems are inducted and operational in armed forces , it would be inevitable that comparison would take place and in such comparison indiginous systems generally tend to take the hit.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Dec 2011 18:15

analysis done by Duncan Lennox from Janes shows the potential of Agni-2 and Agni-3 system.

The Agni-2's main strength is its relatively high accuracy, especially at close range, due to its combination of an INS/GPS guidance module and dual-frequency radar correlation. The third stage uses four moving control fins in order to maneuver independently during the terminal phase, though newer models may use side thrust motors instead. It has been reported to have an accuracy of 40 m CEP (circular error probability).

The missile is carried and launched by rail/road vehicles (TELs) which give the weapon certain advantages and disadvantages. Preparation for launch from a TEL only takes about 15 minutes and the launch location can be moved to meet tactical demands; however, it has less value as a counter force weapon due to its lack of a sustainable protected launch base.

With these new motors, the Agni-3 can outdistance its predecessor to a maximum distance of around 5000km. It may be able to reach as much as 6000km with a decreased payload and improved motors. A new chromium-based nose-coating technology, announced in September 2008, could additionally improve the missile’s range by minimizing atmospheric drag.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Dec 2011 18:22

tsarkar wrote:When did India ever induct Vikhr?

indeed. I don't think we have it. IAF hinds have the shtrum.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Dec 2011 19:22

Austin,I remember a huge article about the missile dev. and Nag in Frontline,over a decade ago.Nag then disappeared from view almost completely.This has been the DRDO's problem,to aim for cutting edge tech right from start,when we have to leapfrog tech developed over decades by other nations,that too when we lacked the tech foundation either in PSUs or private industry.The most successful approach has been JVs like Brahmos,which in the case of an ATGM like Nag,or SAMs,AAMs,etc.,which did no fall under MTCR purview,should've been pursued with a proven partner.It would've shortened the development time,costs, and also given us a missile that would have export potential being backed by two manufacturers/nations.It is a shame that we are still importing a whole host of sort ranged ATGMs,SAMs,AAMMs,etc.,when we've been importing them or licence assembling them for decades.Even the Namica CV when first unveiled looked as if it needed its rough edges smoothened out,when compared with designs of other tracked ATGM launchers.

A critical reason why we need to have JVs or master much tactical missile tech ourselves and increase indigenous manufacturing capability,is that during a conflict,as shown in recent ones,missiles and PGMs are used up so quickly,including war reserves, in the first few weeks of conflict,that inventories deplete very rapidly and put enormous pressure upon manufacturing replacements at short notice.From post-war reports,we have had to import in haste considerable war material before,during and after the various conflicts that we've had in the post-Independence period of our history.The latest news about the "smart soldier" revolutionary plans ,which involve a complete range of new eqpt.,uniforms,helmets,sensors,rifles,electronic aids,etc.,all costing upwards of 25,000 crores,is going to be staggered over a decade of imports and then local manufacture screwdriver/raw material. Shortages are going to be plenty as we modernise and the dear Lord forbid hat we are in conflict during critical phases of our modernisation.Anything can happen any day from across our border.We should keenly watch the visit and aftermath of the PRC's foreign minister to Islamabad in the v.near future for clues to future Paki-Sino Political/military JVs.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2011 19:41

Helina being fired from Dhruv is an amazing shot. Years ago the people next to Nag at Aero India were saying that afer the 4 km version was developed the army wanted 7 km. The MMR seeker saga seems to have finally come to a happy conclusion. We have no alternative other than to keep research and development parallel to purchases/imports.

Seeing a photo of the B-47 in the Misc pics thread I read this on the Wiki page which shows how armed forces of other nations have adopted systems that are indigenous but do not meet the specs they really want. We need to respect our own industry enough to give them the confidence to invest and keep developing.

Sorry its OT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-47_Stratojet

t took the Air Force until 1953 to turn the B-47 into an operational aircraft. The aircraft was sluggish on takeoff and too fast on landings, a very unpleasant combination. If the pilot landed at the wrong angle, the aircraft would "porpoise", bouncing fore-and-aft. If the pilot didn't lift off for another go-around, instability would quickly cause the bomber to skid onto one wing and cartwheel. Because the wings and surfaces were flexible and bent in flight, low altitude speed restrictions were necessary to ensure effective flight control.

Improved training led to a good safety record, and few crews felt the aircraft was unsafe or too demanding, but apparently there were some aircrews who had little affection for the B-47. Crew workload was high, with only three officer crew members to keep the B-47 flying right.
<snip>
In practice, even the enormous fuel capacity of the B-47 was still not enough to give it the range the Air Force wanted, and in fact there had been substantial prejudice against the type among the senior Air Force leadership because of the limited range of the initial design. Solution of this problem was a high priority,

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2011 20:05

south korea imo is a good case study of a country that developed some world class industrial muscle first before making a strong move in last decade into weapons tech.

but they had US troops and nuclear umbrella to shelter under.

we had no shelter and had to fight a lot of problems....so our arms industries in a total vacuum with little if any support from domestic industry until around 15 years ago. in 1985 when the Nag mmw spec was there, and 1500hp engine req for Arjun...the most revered co was dialing up client sites in US via 56k lines and coding in COBOL or such...even in 1996 a btech friend who joined the most revered veg oil co told me the remote terminal to client machine was dead slow, characters took seconds to echo on screen and often the session just broke due to line problems...that was the level of our domestic industry....M800 was cutting edge, Tata had a decades old Merc truck design, BATA was selling canvas keds (they still do unchanged!), duckback umbrellas with curved wooden sticks and huge canvas sail, "forhans" toothpaste in aluminium tubes...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Dec 2011 20:32

shiv wrote:Helina being fired from Dhruv is an amazing shot. Years ago the people next to Nag at Aero India were saying that afer the 4 km version was developed the army wanted 7 km. The MMR seeker saga seems to have finally come to a happy conclusion. We have no alternative other than to keep research and development parallel to purchases/imports.

Seeing a photo of the B-47 in the Misc pics thread I read this on the Wiki page which shows how armed forces of other nations have adopted systems that are indigenous but do not meet the specs they really want. We need to respect our own industry enough to give them the confidence to invest and keep developing.

To add to that, even today, with all these budget cuts in the Def sector, the US is not skimping on research. There are plenty of job opening on this front - top paying jobs. Even at entry levels.

India has turned the corner on quite a few fronts and with the economic status she holds she has a golden opp to make things happen. Failures being part of such efforts nothing should hold her back.

we had no shelter and had to fight a lot of problems....

Cirsumstances then were favorable to them. They are now there for India too. India could/needs to take advanctage of the situation (it may not be as favorable as it was to them).

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 26 Dec 2011 02:16

Singha wrote:t'll still be next to impossible to engage a moving target. Consider this, even if at the max RADAR range of 50 KM missile homes at a ship that has moved 6 KM away from the original location, now the missile has only 1.4 seconds left to detect, track, calculate trajectory corrections, correct for over corrections, winds, temps, weather, deploy control surfaces to hit the target and engage the target.

I think your calculation is a bit wrong. assuming mach10=10,000kmph (its lower at sea level), it is 2.77km/sec. so 50km still leaves 18 seconds not 1.4sec to reorient the missile using control vanes in the exhaust and gas thrusters in the side.
calculations and sensor readings are in microsecs range.

Sorry I missed your reply, should have used reply/quote button. I meant to say 14 second for 10 mach at high altitude. Anyhow the micro second sensing is one time thing for sure but a missile at those high speed would need very minute guidance, continuous tracking and prediction over entire time and 14-18 seconds may be not enough.

It is certainly doable but it would need bigger radar (not pencil beam that AAM have) means bigger power supply, cooling, manuvering would mean strengthened body, controll surface , more hardware for control. All this would reduce the advantage of big payload and high speed. Also a BM that is homing on a target equipped with a ABM would be much easier to take-out as compared to a missile that is coming on to a much larger target like a city?

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 27 Dec 2011 09:26

Tarmak Update on Akash
Beautiful pics of the Akash in action in the link

The system was put through an electronic warfare (EW) trials conducted to assess the weapon system's survivability in dense jamming environment expected in a battlefield. Multiple aerial jammers (both noise and deception) were flown simultaneously in attack from different directions on the Akash group deployed in combat pattern. Sources claim that the radars of Akash could hold track of all aerial targets despite the jammers, conclusively establishing the operation of built-in electronic counter-counter measures (ECCM) features.

While the DRDO officially refused to part with any information on a possible Mk-II version of Akash with a higher range (35-45 km), sources confirmed to Express that the Services have expressed interest. “We have the confidence, tech know-how, capabilities in design, development and production and capabilities of excellent validation and tests. We will have to get a firm written commitment from the Services so that we are sure about the road ahead,” sources said.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 27 Dec 2011 09:58

suryag wrote:Tarmak Update on Akash
Beautiful pics of the Akash in action in the link
The system was put through an electronic warfare (EW) trials conducted to assess the weapon system's survivability in dense jamming environment expected in a battlefield. Multiple aerial jammers (both noise and deception) were flown simultaneously in attack from different directions on the Akash group deployed in combat pattern. Sources claim that the radars of Akash could hold track of all aerial targets despite the jammers, conclusively establishing the operation of built-in electronic counter-counter measures (ECCM) features.

While the DRDO officially refused to part with any information on a possible Mk-II version of Akash with a higher range (35-45 km), sources confirmed to Express that the Services have expressed interest. “We have the confidence, tech know-how, capabilities in design, development and production and capabilities of excellent validation and tests. We will have to get a firm written commitment from the Services so that we are sure about the road ahead,” sources said.

What does DRDO mean by this statement??

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Dec 2011 10:41

Excellent news on Akash , Its good to see a ramjet SAM getting inducted with modern radars and C3I systems.

Akash Mk2 will end up getting a range of 50 km that was what Kalam mentioned in an interview to Janes with the addition of small booster and increasing ramjet burning hour , plus it would have some anti-BM capability.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 27 Dec 2011 11:45

Akash video on tarmak