Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

[vishnu.nv]

IMHO the K-15 will be tested in both glide mode and normal mode, which is why two tests are scheduled.

[darshand]

I did a google search and could not locate a single pic of the K15 missile just drawings. defexpo pics of exposed shourya with pointy nose match drawings of k15.

I found this site with medium sized pic of K15.

That's Poseidon not a K15 pic.

[krishnan]

I did a google search and could not locate a single pic of the K15 missile just drawings. defexpo pics of exposed shourya with pointy nose match drawings of k15.

I found this site with medium sized pic of K15.

Above picture of a Poseidon submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM).

[Singha]

there is hence no photo of the K15 tests in public domain.

every other missile we have tested has test photos and videos even incl A2-AT , A3, Shourya...

[Badar]

What type of sub-launched missile is harder to detect: 1) A large missile launched from mid-ocean, far away, that follows a predictable ballistic trajectory or; 2) A small missile launched from litoral waters, close in, that follows an extremely evasive flightpath? (Consider, large missiles launched mid-ocean are easiest to detect, and because they are launched from great distance, they also allow for a greater warning period. Moreover, such missiles follow a predictable ballistic trajectory, which is exactly what an ABM interceptor needs.)

There is also the converse to consider: The small littoral launched missile is harder to detect - perhaps because its launcher submarine has been sunk in the higher threat littoral waters and the missile was never launched; hence never detected.

Submarines are an inefficient and costly way to nuke someone - too much expense for what can be done as well in terms of terminal effects by air or missile assets. The whole raison d'etre of a submarine missile force is that it is well protected and "safe" or "safer" from counter force attack, hence is worth the additional expense and operating headaches over bomber/ICBM solutions. If you dilute that very reason by forward deploying boomers off coasts then why bother with them at all? Just invest in more truck/train based ICBMs and be done with it.

It is always better to keep the enemy guessing about true full capability-to complicate his life.For example,if he believes that a specific sub-launched missile aboard our ATVs/SSGNs have "X" range,when in fact the range is "2X",his anti-sub doctrine will be based upon our subs operating at a closer distance to his coastline,which will fail in time of crisis.

This is true in general. But if you manage to convince the enemy that the missiles are worthless (700km) instead of marginally useful (1500km) then you weaken deterrence, which is counter productive. Rather a nuclear war not fought, than a well fought one.

Considering that I have no difficulty in accepting the fact that Arihant will be limited to 750km reach in practice. When greater range becomes practicable I am sure we and the whole world will be told so in no uncertain terms.

[Kanson]

I did a google search and could not locate a single pic of the K15 missile just drawings. defexpo pics of exposed shourya with pointy nose match drawings of k15.

imo the Shourya is the just the name of land based variant (lacks the gas generator) and otherwise K15 == Shourya?

btw why does shourya need a nosecone with puff thrusters like a angry bull? is is to swiftly turn the nose into a angled climb rather than depend on tailfin control(more drag) for that?

Shourya do have gas generator.

[Singha]

in that case I think its likely shourya==k15 and for pure ballistic launches from 1500km it will be in K15 mode and for 750km launches it will use depressed trajectory (40km alt) for more stealth

[Shrinivasan]

There is a write-up in a Vizag based blog describing a K-15 test in 2008. There is a picture of the missile which the author claims to be K-15.

http://kavalipeople.blogspot.com/2008/0 ... fully.html

Posting for what it is worth.

EOE

[Kailash]

Remember a concept from NLOS-LS where they put 15 small CMs in a box and drop the box somewhere in the war zone. Target is fed to the missiles remotely and launch can be triggered on a target not in direct line of sight.

Now for the noob question. How big are these missile "Pontoons" used in underwater tests? can we make a similar box of CMs tow it using a surface ship or sub and deploy them near enemy shores and trigger them from a safe distance?

[Singha]

very unreliable idea. nobody is going to be leaving nukes on the seabed where anyone can come and tamper/destroy and call it a deterrence.

[MN Kumar]

Indian Navy: Anti Missile Defence Systems - By Vice Adm (Retd) GM Hiranandani
Has some details about the Trishul project and why Navy selected the Barak.

[Singha]

it seems the largest weapon used by russian on SS18mk2 ICBM was 25MT. Khan also had some 15MT weapons stacked away.

the big boys sure had no intention other than scorched earth, no delicate collateral damage psyops there.

[chackojoseph]

Indian Navy: Anti Missile Defence Systems - By Vice Adm (Retd) GM Hiranandani
Has some details about the Trishul project and why Navy selected the Barak.

There is a conflict version here. Adm says that DRDO decide to roll the project into Barak II. DRDO says that, Dr Atre took it to TD phase and then 3 beam was demonstrated and project closed, as the user changed the spec.

[Yogi_G]

Has India ever gone down the path of neutron bombs? I know China did.

[PratikDas]

ToI: Air Force to get Akash missile -- India's 'Patriot'

NEW DELHI: In a significant achievement for India's indigenous weapon development programme, the first batch of the home-grown 'Akash' surface-to-air missile system will be handed over to the Air Force on Saturday by defence minister A K Antony.

The defence minister will also hand over a newly-developed Advanced Light Weight Torpedo (TAL) to the Navy in Hyderabad, defence ministry spokesperson said.

"Marking a major milestone in the development of indigenous technology in the defence sector, Antony will hand over the first batch of the indigenous Akash to the IAF. The weapon system is considered as the Indian 'Patriot', he said.

The 'Patriot' is an American missile system which was used successfully in neutralising the Iraqi 'Skud' missiles during the first Gulf War in the 90s.

The Akash missile was indigenously developed by DRDO as part of the Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP) and is an all-weather, medium-range, Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) system. The missile is expected to be the mainstay of the air defence batteries of the Indian armed forces in next few decades.

It can destroy manoeuvring targets such as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), fighter aircraft, cruise missiles and missiles launched from helicopters. The versatile missile system has been produced by Defence PSU Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL).

The Light Weight Torpedo has been indigenously developed by the National Science and Technology Laboratory (NSTL), Visakhapatnam.

It can be launched both from ships and helicopters and can hunt submarines sailing deep in the sea.

[ramana]

Has India ever gone down the path of neutron bombs? I know China did.

Not this thread. Please use the Strat forum.

Thanks, ramana

[Ravi Karumanchiri]

What type of sub-launched missile is harder to detect: 1) A large missile launched from mid-ocean, far away, that follows a predictable ballistic trajectory or; 2) A small missile launched from litoral waters, close in, that follows an extremely evasive flightpath? (Consider, large missiles launched mid-ocean are easiest to detect, and because they are launched from great distance, they also allow for a greater warning period. Moreover, such missiles follow a predictable ballistic trajectory, which is exactly what an ABM interceptor needs.)

There is also the converse to consider: The small littoral launched missile is harder to detect - perhaps because its launcher submarine has been sunk in the higher threat littoral waters and the missile was never launched; hence never detected.

Submarines are an inefficient and costly way to nuke someone - too much expense for what can be done as well in terms of terminal effects by air or missile assets. The whole raison d'etre of a submarine missile force is that it is well protected and "safe" or "safer" from counter force attack, hence is worth the additional expense and operating headaches over bomber/ICBM solutions. If you dilute that very reason by forward deploying boomers off coasts then why bother with them at all? Just invest in more truck/train based ICBMs and be done with it.

It is always better to keep the enemy guessing about true full capability-to complicate his life.For example,if he believes that a specific sub-launched missile aboard our ATVs/SSGNs have "X" range,when in fact the range is "2X",his anti-sub doctrine will be based upon our subs operating at a closer distance to his coastline,which will fail in time of crisis.

This is true in general. But if you manage to convince the enemy that the missiles are worthless (700km) instead of marginally useful (1500km) then you weaken deterrence, which is counter productive. Rather a nuclear war not fought, than a well fought one.

Considering that I have no difficulty in accepting the fact that Arihant will be limited to 750km reach in practice. When greater range becomes practicable I am sure we and the whole world will be told so in no uncertain terms.

Please forgive me for posting a few more rhetorical questions...................... (It's not my usual style.)

Where do you think it is easier and harder to hide a submarine? Where is it more practical from an actual warfighting standpoint, to deploy submarines, and with what purpose in mind? Even more specifically, let's consider the case of the IN's first indigenously developed and built class of subs, of which the Arihant is the first of three (currently on order).

A] Are you suggesting that the Arihant should have been a large "boomer" missile boat with many, large-diameter launch tubes that hold ICBM-class SLBMs; deployed in the depths of the open-ocean, far away from target areas, so as to *threaten* nuclear counter-strikes using the maximum range of very large SLBMs?..................... or........................

B] Can you not see the elegant logic of making the Arihant small, extremely stealthy and very versatile, with a sophisticated variety of conventional arms plus nuke-tipped K-15s with their outlandish flight profile?

True, as you've said (Badar) submarines are an expensive way to nuke someone. But that's my point -- you don't want to have to use them for that purpose. Instead of SSBNs (built for doom) the IN has gone for smaller submarines that have a warfighting purpose prior to doomsday. This is why I believe the Arihant-class of subs is the kind of submarine that can actually keep (and if necessary, enforce) the peace, rather than ensure destruction (which has no tangible benefit for anyone, on whatever "side").

Please also consider the following (in no particular order):

1. Coastal waters are noisy waters, and therefore easier to hide a submarine in, as hydrophones are less effective (underwater microphones). The open-ocean, far away from shipping chanels, where you might think would be easy to hide a submarine, is anything but; with thermal signatures from nuke reactors, sonar buoys (launched by the hundred during wartime), and hydrophones and magnetometers (deployed by the thousands, by all navies, virtually everywhere).

2. Coastal waters have mixed salinity, particularly near river outlets, and also mixed temperature waters, and perhaps silt and such, all churing together, which makes it harder to detect hidden submarines using sonar, as these effects all diminish the efficacy of sonar.

3. During an actual escalation of hostilities, prior to the breakdown of nuclear deterrance, the necessities of enforcing or defying a sea blockade are what defines the naval warspace (sub-surface and on the surface). Prior to the breakdown of nuclear deterrance, any navy would keep their SSBNs waaaay out of the fray (if they've got them). Those things are really only to be used the day after doomsday -- which means they are not truly practical platforms, they are considerably more theoretical than are smaller attack subs. As you've intimated (Badar), you wouldn't want to put "boomers" off the coast, close to shipping lines, because they're not survivable there. On the other hand, a smaller submarine, that was much stealthier than *any* "boomer"......

4. Large SSBNs with ICBM-class missiles are relatively easy to detect. As I've said, their movements displace so much water that a bulge is formed on the surface, and these subs can not maneuver at speed without giving away their position thus.

5. Essentially, the large SSBNs are not truly weapons of war, as their actual use is only intended for post-war conditions of utter doom. That shouldn't help anyone to sleep any better at night -- no matter where your bed is. Very literally (and obscenely ridiculously), the large SSBNs are a plan to be implemented after doomsday, to ensure that the doom is indeed, utter doom, to be shared mutually between combatants and non-combatants alike. This is why I was most pleased when I first learned of the design specs and the attendant technology development regime of the IGMDP that would forge the Arihant-class subs as practical weapons of actual defense and potent deterrance -- which is what is required if peace is to be maintained and the breakdown of nuclear deterrance is to be prevented even during a shooting war.

That's my long-view of the Arihant-class of subs to be mated with K-15s (as opposed to larger subs with bigger missiles). It fits the Indian threat environment and defense posture perfectly, IMHO; when much worry has been offered-up over Chinese expansionism, their "string of pearls" strategy and naval build-up, soon to include a CBG.

How much missile range is too much, for practical application during hot war prior to the breakdown of nuclear deterrance, I guess is the real question to consider.

If it's all about securing sea lines of trade, the Arihant-class is much better suited to the task than any SSBN of any navy.

[sudeepj]

For folks getting worried about the 750km range of Shourya.. Beijing and Shanghai are ~ 100 kms away from their coasts. So are the most of their 10 largest cities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:China ... Cities.png

with the exception of Wuhan and ChongQing, which are presumably within reach of Agni III or V, firing from Agra or even Rajasthan (in the case of Agni V).

Our boomer is China specific, it will do the job at a bargain basement price. Its an India specific solution, for our own needs, no need for Typhoon class mosters..

[sudeepj]

For folks getting worried about the 750km range of Shourya.. Beijing and Shanghai are ~ 100 kms away from their coasts. So are the most of their 10 largest cities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:China ... Cities.png

with the exception of Wuhan and ChongQing, which are presumably within reach of Agni III or V, firing from Agra or even Rajasthan (in the case of Agni V).

Our boomer is China specific, it will do the job at a bargain basement price. Its an India specific solution, for our own needs, no need for Typhoon class mosters..

What do you know, so are the next top 10-20 cities.. (close to the coast, I mean). China is uniquely vulnerable to sea borne threats.. even a sea borne Prithvi III will do, forget about a difficult, if not impossible to intercept Shourya.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ch ... inese_yuan

[Avid]

Ravi:

Pardon a dumb question. Whose coastal waters are you trying to hide Arihant in? India's own or those of the country IN aims to be able to strike?

If it is India's own -- 750KM missile has limited deterrence capability in terms to what or who you can threaten. Also, why would we need a N-sub to do that, why not make innovative use of the submersible pontoons which we are using for missile test.

If it is enemy's coastal waters -- how do you propose to sneak into the coastal waters undetected. Isn't it inherently exposing the sub to more risk by opening possibility of detection along the route trying to sneak into coastal waters?

Re the launch detection of ICBM. My question is what is the enemy capable of doing if they do detect the launch? Wouldn't an ICBM allow launch from fairly great distance where enemy has limited ability to do anything to the sub? Also, IMHO ICBM terminal speeds are too great for BMD to be effective. Add MIRV and some of the terminal "glide"/"maneuvering" capabilities that have been talked about for the AGNI-III/IV -- I would think your argument would expose strategic deterrence assets of last resort to great risk.

[uddu]

The three Arihant class armed with K-15 is for the Pakis only. It is an attempt to field the first deterrence against an immediate threat. Now against China, we have not even fielded the land based variant that can take out Chinese cities from launch sites far away from NE states. The nuclear deterrence against China is almost non-existent today. A stop gap measure exists in the form of A-III. Everyone is waiting for the Agni-V to arrive. That will ensure a credible land based nuclear deterrence against China. This is to be followed with the A-VI ICBM.

The sea based nuclear deterrence will move on to the longer range K-4 with the Arihant allowing it more flexibility to strike at Pakistan from far off distances from the sea. Even this is going to be a Paki killer rather than a deterrence against China.

The follow on subs to Arihant need to be watched. They may be the ones that will give India credible nuclear deterrence carrying missiles with a range of 10,000+ kilometers. So wait till 2020, the time which India may complete the triad for a complete nuclear deterrence.

[koti]

The three Arihant class armed with K-15 is for the Pakis only. It is an attempt to field the first deterrence against an immediate threat. Now against China, we have not even fielded the land based variant that can take out Chinese cities from launch sites far away from NE states. The nuclear deterrence against China is almost non-existent today.

Why should that be the case?
A Paki Agosta with its LACM Range or around 150KM poses a serious threat to cities like Mumbai or those in Gujarat.

The biggest advantage of a N-sub is its range and endurance. There is always a possibility that an N sub can loiter in the waters of the pacific and sneak in to attack. This causes immense pressure on the Enemy naval forces and is itself a deterrent.

And IMO it should be less then obvious that a missile can achieve greater ranges then what it does in depressed trajectories. And we are ignoring the weight of the warhead here.

IIRC Arihant should be capable of handling K-4. Can anyone provide any links to this.

[uddu]

^Nothing is impossible as such. Even patrol ship with Prithvi-III armed wtih a nuke is possible.
Now about realistic scenario and the threat that the sub will face while being that close to shore of an enemy country other than Pakistan. Even with Pakistan it's a big risk. They do have subs like Agostas along with their P-3's that pose serious risk to Arihant class subs. So it's better to be far off and deep. Yes the K-15 to be replaced by the K-4 over a period of time. Even this is going to be Pak specific from an operational point of view with option of fielding it against others as tension arises with anyone else. But will not be a deterrence against anyone else.
How can three subs with missiles capable of delivering nukes upto 750km be able to provide complete deterrence against all the nuclear armed nations of the world? No way. How many of them will be at sea at a time? Max 2. And that will be fielded against Pakistan.
So watch out for the follow on to the Arihant, that will carry good number of long ranged SLBMs with range of 10,000+. Only such a sub will be able to provide India with complete sea based nuclear deterrence capability.
About K-4
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/the- ... 20488.html

[VikB]

^^^ this article says an 'eventual' range of K4 as 3,500 km. fultoo confusion.

[koti]

How can three subs with missiles capable of delivering nukes upto 750km be able to provide complete deterrence against all the nuclear armed nations of the world?

There is no complete deterrence anywhere.
The capability Arihant offers is not what is ideal for IN. No questions on that. But it is still a leap for the capability of IN in terms of reach and delivery.

How many of them will be at sea at a time? Max 2. And that will be fielded against Pakistan.

Why Pakistan? Neither the range of 750KM nor the N-sub requirement is applicable here

So watch out for the follow on to the Arihant, that will carry good number of long ranged SLBMs with range of 10,000+. Only such a sub will be able to provide India with complete sea based nuclear deterrence capability.

.
Arihant IMO is always an SSKN. Once the true SSBN's start floating, I believe the Arihants will mod'd for complete cruise missile capability.

[Singha]

i believe our deterrence upto 2030 timeframe would be targeted only against the dynamic duo. beyond that we cannot predict.

against khan who has mastery of the seas, I would say mobile land based ICBM would be best *at present if there were a need*...but by 2030 we should be able to lockdown the IOR, so sea based in also an option *then*.

vs the dynamic duo, against robin we do not need sea based n-arms, a bunch of mobile and air delivered weapons is enough to end his miserable existence.

against batman we need a matrix of weapons ranging from A2-AT and A5 on railway and trucks and given the thick population and lack of opsec on land for a truly mobile deployment as well as geographic chokepoints, the K4 missile on any sub would be enough long term. we do not have the siberian forests for TELARs to disappear into millions of sq km of forest roads under tree cover. nor we have the vast deserts of the US.

the vastness of the southern IOR is a challenge for even khan to police should 5 SSBN be said as lurking there and "you go find it"...they'd have to station SSNs off our ports and tail from there , we can defeat PLAN searchers in the bay of bengal and ensure a safe getaway for our SSBNs into southern IOR.

I dont see why people are so agitated. robin is covered. and batman will soon be covered when A5 reaches deployment status. by 2020 we would have 3 subs with K4.

[keshavchandra]

In a formal ceremony in Hyderabad yesterday , Defence Minister A.K. Antony will ceremonially entrust to the IAF its first Akash medium-range surface to air missile units.
Entrust to the IAF its first Akash SAM Unit.
But for which base IAF will use it still not clear, may be for pune base. Anyone kindly put some light on the possible locations..

[Singha]

all Akash units are supposedly marked for eastern sector...where we are nook nanga^6 in terms of SAM units. tezpur , hashimara, bagdogra, chabua need them asap.

[koti]

@keshavchandra
Nope. I think it will be Kolkata.

[Nihat]

all Akash units are supposedly marked for eastern sector...where we are nook nanga^6 in terms of SAM units. tezpur , hashimara, bagdogra, chabua need them asap.

Thought I read somewhere that gwalior afb will be the first to be equipped with akash, our was that for lr-sam . Correct me if I'm mistaken

[Kersi D]

all Akash units are supposedly marked for eastern sector...where we are nook nanga^6 in terms of SAM units. tezpur , hashimara, bagdogra, chabua need them asap.

None of the IAF bases in NE have any SAM systems. So deploying Akash SAMs in NE makes sense.

Kersi

PS What is nook nanga^6 ????

[koti]

Thats news to me.
But why?
Not even MANPADS?

[Singha]

^^ What is nook nanga^6 ????

thats a abject form of nangapan, the kind where you cannot even shout your definance let alone throw anything back at the enemy.

^^ Thats news to me. But why? Not even MANPADS?

and what will manpads do against a marauding sqdn of SU30 or cruise missiles?
the sole high power radar of IAF in entire eastern sector seems to be in upper shillong peak.

IAF has been fixated on TSP for so long, all the tier1 bases of the IAF - jodhpur, chandigarh, pune, jamnagar, gwalior, ambala, halwara, hindon and more are in that sector. whatever money for infra and SAMs were available went there. only in last couple years have the moribund eastern bases started to be given some attention starting with kalaikunda.

one can argue that squadrons can move with spares and groundcrew on demand while being based in the west normally. I am not convinced of that argument - when push comes to shove the guy who lives and trains in the east will have the upper hand wrt to weather conditions, terrain features etc.

it will take some 10 yrs to redress this gross imbalance. one cannot build up bases and training familiarity just like that.

[koti]

Noted.
The IAF Akash can be delivered in 5-6 years I guess. This should form the backbone of our AAA in the NE front. The MR/LR SAM IMO can also be production ready by that time. The AAD based SAM should also be available by that point.
Being a little optimistic, I would believe 2015-16 as the time frame when the AAA of NE can be beefed up.
Just to add; by that time,the Indian counter Air will be more sophisticated the PLA Counter air.

[member_20617]

For folks getting worried about the 750km range of Shourya.. Beijing and Shanghai are ~ 100 kms away from their coasts. So are the most of their 10 largest cities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:China ... Cities.png

with the exception of Wuhan and ChongQing, which are presumably within reach of Agni III or V, firing from Agra or even Rajasthan (in the case of Agni V).

Our boomer is China specific, it will do the job at a bargain basement price. Its an India specific solution, for our own needs, no need for Typhoon class mosters..

Located in the Yangtze River Delta in eastern China, Shanghai sits at the mouth of the Yangtze River in the middle portion of the Chinese coast.

How can it be 100 kms from coast?

Shanghai is a coastal city.

[Singha]

the core of shanghai is some way up the river (the famous skyline of pudong and The Bund). but perhaps it has expanded to coast now. the new airport is near the coast I believe.

[Kersi D]

only in last couple years have the moribund eastern bases started to be given some attention starting with kalaikunda.

it will take some 10 yrs to redress this gross imbalance. one cannot build up bases and training familiarity just like that.

Me thinks the process has started since quite some time. Increasing number of bases in east now have HAS as compared to say 2 - 4 years ago.

Kalaikunda has been well developed as it has seen considerable action in 1965 and 1971.

K

[Aditya_V]

Torpedo, Akash missile to be handed over to Navy and IAF on Saturday

The TAL is about 2.75 metres long, weighs 220 kg and packs 50 kg of explosives. It is an anti-submarine torpedo and can travel upto a maximum distance of seven km before taking out an enemy submarine. It can be launched from ships, helicopters and aircraft. The Navy has placed an order for 25 TALs.

Is that the initial order or thats it?

The TAL is a totally indigenous missile except for a few integrated circuits and sensors. It has a speed of 33 knots an hour and can operate at a maximum depth of 540 metres.”

[Philip]

I mentioned earlier that the USN is achieving cost-efficiency in building SSBNs by adopting a modular system for missile siols.These come in "4-pack" modules,almost an exact version which we fnd on the Arihant.Therefore the basic design can be easilly modified in future subs of the class lengthening the hull by adding the "4-pack" modules which we also see on the Arihant.The silo which now carries 4X3 K-15s,can carry one K-clas ICBM per silo which will have a range of not less than 5000km,sufficient for China.8-10,000 km rangewould be preferable,but these would require a larger hull diameter and design and more powerful reactors.Adding two to three more modules would increase the hull by only 6-9m approx. given the estimated sizes.The sub has virtually no pronounced "hump",so it is also possible that a longer missile could be carried with a small hump added (not the huge hunchbacks ones ees on PLAN SSBNs!).

Land and rail mobile missiles do run the risk of being compromised and if detected are vulnerable to a massive pre-emptive strike.Having a greater part of the deterrent at sea spares requires the enemy to think twice,thrice, or even mre times before attempting any nuclear mischief.

PS:TAL must be evaluated against existing light-weight torpedoes in the inentory,I think of the Whitehead A-244 type.

[Kanson]

From available media reports similarities and differences between what we know as Shourya and K-15:

Similarities:

1. It is reported K-15 was tested with incremental range. Similarly, btw 1st and 3rd test, Shourya tested range was greater than 1st one.

2. It is mentioned in recent media report quoted here, K-15 was designed as sub launched missile from the beginning. Similarly, it is the case of Shourya too, pronounced by none other than Dr. Prahlada, DRDO.

3. Range quoted in the media for both the missile is around ~700 km. ( I could have missed it. what is the source for 1500 km range attributed to K-15 missile which is discussed here?)

Differences:

1. While Shourya was flown at 40, 50km alt during officially reported tests, Naval K-15 was reported to be tested at the alt of ~20 km (from media reports). But previous DRDO Chief, Dr. Natarajan, mentioned that the missile in question was flown at even lower attitudes.

2. While there is a news report which mentioned, K-15 is a different missile, at the same time, quoting DRDO source, another one claimed that Shourya is the land based cousin of K-15.

Practically I see more similarities btwn these two missiles from available media reports.