How would anyone massively pre-emptively strike, say, a 100 road mobile missiles running around India?Philip wrote: 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.
Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
because unlike say in some desert or taiga region, you cannot have 100s of such convoys on the move all over the country from the point of view of running cost, wear and tear etc. so they would be based at some mil cantonments here and there and move out only when our threat perception is high...returning back when all clear is sounded. each couple of missile TELAR unit would need other vehicles for C3I, physical security, earth moving eqpt to repair damaged launch sites or unblock roads, tankers for fuel, food trucks, medical trucks, mobile weapons test lab, radiation monitors...it has to be equipped to function totally autonomous without expecting any help from civil admin or other mil units for upto 2 weeks.
these bases would be easy to locate using satellite imagery and humint reports. so one fine day a surprise pre-emptive strike could wipe out all these limited number of places in theory or atleast take out a good part. this would immediately open the gate to surrender negotiations given our degraded retaliatory posture...the enemy daring us to strike back with 10 stones when he has 100.
these bases would be easy to locate using satellite imagery and humint reports. so one fine day a surprise pre-emptive strike could wipe out all these limited number of places in theory or atleast take out a good part. this would immediately open the gate to surrender negotiations given our degraded retaliatory posture...the enemy daring us to strike back with 10 stones when he has 100.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
As Singha mentioned, the core is a little bit farther from the coast, though as you point out, the city is very much a coastal city. Not only Shanghai, but 17 out of the biggest 20 Chinese cities by GDP and by population are coastal cities. Against these cities, the Shourya is an extremely potent missile. Can the Dragon sanitize the ocean 600kms from his coastline? With what? 20 odd modern frigates? and non existent LRMP craft?Shankaraa wrote: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.sudeepj wrote: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..
How can it be 100 kms from coast?
Shanghai is a coastal city.
Further, the unique trajectory of Shourya means its immune to BMD. Most BMDs rely on reducing the 'closing speed' of the two projectiles by lobbing up the interceptor, and then bringing it down in a parabolic trajectory, with a velocity thats in the same direction as the target. This reduces the relative velocity of the target and the interceptor considerably and allows a HTK or a directional warhead. The unique trajectory of Shourya means that BMD wont work against it, and a different, (currently non existent) solution will be needed to intercept it.
Arihant class can serve to deter the dragon for at least 10-15 years to come, after which the missiles they carry can be upgraded to the K4 class and they can still serve in a smaller deterrent role.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Ravi, This is what I think Arihants are, all IMHO: The Arihant is a BAe Hawk for the nuclear navy (Pilatus PC-7 role to be played by the Nerpa) - viz stepping stones to greater capability. They will validate technologies, designs, procedures, doctrines, and demonstrate operational capability via deterrence and denial patrols. Assuming the Arihants do prove to be viable in service then by 2030 or so we will see two offshoots in full bloom; one a full fledged SLBM carrier with ICBM range and the other a smaller conventionally armed SSN.
The small size is not motivated by doctrine as far as I can tell but by fiscal pragmatism. i.e. The small size and small numbers built will minimize costs of a capability development program that will not offer any tangible operational benefits in the near term. The Arihant as it stands (even with 1500km reach) is too much for Pakistan and too little for China.
Another thing I would like to mention is that it is a very bad idea to mix SSBN and SSN roles. If you send an Arihant to the Bohai just to sink the Varyag, the PRC will freak out assuming you want to nuke Shanghai. You know how the military mind works - capability, not intentions. To reinforce deterrence you will have to make a clear cut and well published distinction between your conventional and MAD assets to minimize misunderstanding. An Arihant SSBN/SSN hybrid you envisage blurs that distinction and reduces stability.
regarding SSBN security: I am not confident that we are technologically at a level where we can ensure boomer security purely through stealth. We might need an combined arms efforts ala the soviet bastion concept.
I am also unconvinced that there is a straight correlation between size and stealth of submarines for a given technological level. viz, within reason sheer size will not hugely impact your passive acoustic signature. But size will dramatically impact your carry, endurance and persistence - vital parameters for a deterrence patrol. I am positing that for a real SSBN the trade off of unit cost vs fleet cost, stealth vs endurance will be in favor of a larger boat.
The small size is not motivated by doctrine as far as I can tell but by fiscal pragmatism. i.e. The small size and small numbers built will minimize costs of a capability development program that will not offer any tangible operational benefits in the near term. The Arihant as it stands (even with 1500km reach) is too much for Pakistan and too little for China.
Another thing I would like to mention is that it is a very bad idea to mix SSBN and SSN roles. If you send an Arihant to the Bohai just to sink the Varyag, the PRC will freak out assuming you want to nuke Shanghai. You know how the military mind works - capability, not intentions. To reinforce deterrence you will have to make a clear cut and well published distinction between your conventional and MAD assets to minimize misunderstanding. An Arihant SSBN/SSN hybrid you envisage blurs that distinction and reduces stability.
regarding SSBN security: I am not confident that we are technologically at a level where we can ensure boomer security purely through stealth. We might need an combined arms efforts ala the soviet bastion concept.
I am also unconvinced that there is a straight correlation between size and stealth of submarines for a given technological level. viz, within reason sheer size will not hugely impact your passive acoustic signature. But size will dramatically impact your carry, endurance and persistence - vital parameters for a deterrence patrol. I am positing that for a real SSBN the trade off of unit cost vs fleet cost, stealth vs endurance will be in favor of a larger boat.
-
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 23 Sep 2009 23:01
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 134480.cms
The Army has so far placed orders for three regiments of the supersonic cruise missile and with today's test firing, two of them have been inducted operationally.
The Defence Ministry has also given a go ahead to the Army to induct a third regiment for being deployed in Arunachal Pradesh along the China border.
One regiment of the 290-km range BrahMos consists around 65 missiles, five mobile autonomous launchers on Tatra vehicles and two mobile command posts, among other equipment.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
- Location: From Frontier India
- Contact:
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Any news on the K-15 test which was scheduled for today?
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Makes me wonder what are the targets for these missile especially at a 300 km range, terror hideouts do not appear high value enough and the dyadic targets are out of range.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Brahmos missile from y'days launch
http://pib.nic.in/photo/2012/Mar/l2012030439571.jpg
Missile has no control surface. Land-launch variant with a nose cap.
http://pib.nic.in/photo/2012/Mar/l2012030439571.jpg
Missile has no control surface. Land-launch variant with a nose cap.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
^^^ It has. If you notice the picture more carefully you would see that they are folded. They unfold along with the blowing of the cap after the turn maneuver.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
- Location: From Frontier India
- Contact:
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Nihat wrote:Makes me wonder what are the targets for these missile especially at a 300 km range, terror hideouts do not appear high value enough and the dyadic targets are out of range.
290 km is an optimum profile. It can be 150 kms for terrain hugging flights. The 290 kms artillery raises the cost of deployment for the enemies.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
What are dyadic targets? Everything worth hitting in Pakistan is within 300 km of the Indian border.Nihat wrote:
Makes me wonder what are the targets for these missile especially at a 300 km range, terror hideouts do not appear high value enough and the dyadic targets are out of range.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
More over in a war, the missile does not need to be MTCR compliant unlike for peacetime reports. What will uncle do in case in a war/war like scenario the missile supposedly violated MTCR, both India and Russia will deny that 300km range was exceeded.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
^ Sell something similar to Pak??
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 723
- Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
- Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
- Contact:
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
^^^ Frankly, I think everyone, and I mean everyone, should take that 290 km range claim with a grain of salt.
Given the size of the BhraMos, and the primary importance of a key variable -- warhead weight -- I don't think 290 km is the true outer reach of BhraMos (which I think could be as high as 400+ km if tipped with a very small tactical nuke, which would certainly weigh less than 180 kg). This 290 km range claim is however, very relevent to the MTCR, as has been pointed out above; which prevents Russia from exporting cruise missiles with greater than 300 km range.
I don't doubt that the eventual export versions for sale outside of India and Russia will indeed have a 290 km range at sea level with the supplied warhead.
As for the BhraMos missiles in the Indian and Russian inventories (are the Russians inducting it?), I think anyone looking at the pointy end of the BhraMos would make a mistake to think they're beyond its reach at 291 km. There is certainly, a "war reserve" that is maintained with a simple lie; that 290 kms is the outer limit.
If there is a Rakshak with sufficient background in physics.... I would be very curious to see a data table that correlates missile specifications with range claims -- because I think given the on-board fuel, and the possibility of a smaller warhead, 290 kms is (very much) well-within strike range.
JMT
Given the size of the BhraMos, and the primary importance of a key variable -- warhead weight -- I don't think 290 km is the true outer reach of BhraMos (which I think could be as high as 400+ km if tipped with a very small tactical nuke, which would certainly weigh less than 180 kg). This 290 km range claim is however, very relevent to the MTCR, as has been pointed out above; which prevents Russia from exporting cruise missiles with greater than 300 km range.
I don't doubt that the eventual export versions for sale outside of India and Russia will indeed have a 290 km range at sea level with the supplied warhead.
As for the BhraMos missiles in the Indian and Russian inventories (are the Russians inducting it?), I think anyone looking at the pointy end of the BhraMos would make a mistake to think they're beyond its reach at 291 km. There is certainly, a "war reserve" that is maintained with a simple lie; that 290 kms is the outer limit.
If there is a Rakshak with sufficient background in physics.... I would be very curious to see a data table that correlates missile specifications with range claims -- because I think given the on-board fuel, and the possibility of a smaller warhead, 290 kms is (very much) well-within strike range.
JMT
-
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
^^^ Frankly, I think everyone, and I mean everyone, should take that 290 km range claim with a grain of salt.^^^
I absolutely second your opinion.
1.there could be a possiblility that our JV would have tweeked the missile for longer range which is unpublished
2. Any decrease in payload would eventually increase the range.
3. There is always a caveat when ever such range is published.
Cheers
I absolutely second your opinion.
1.there could be a possiblility that our JV would have tweeked the missile for longer range which is unpublished
2. Any decrease in payload would eventually increase the range.
3. There is always a caveat when ever such range is published.
Cheers
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
That missile is Huge, is A-5 That big?
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
to me it looks like top end of GSLV. the diameter seems to be in 3.5m-4m...way too big for A5.
on the +ve side, should we want to fit a 50MT tsar bomba atop a icbm this is it.
on the +ve side, should we want to fit a 50MT tsar bomba atop a icbm this is it.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
before some yahoo comes up let me put it he doesnt have a helmet and possibly no harness
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
koti wrote:OMG
Is it what I think it is?
Its a shroud or nose cone. See the ring of rivets around the diameter and the mid band. It separates around the band. So the shroud gives protection for launch and aero forces. It then separates and on and away.
They are using launch vehicle concepts for the shroud.
Most likely its the AV with MIRV or the K-4.
Wish the guy didnt put all the watermarks. It spoils the image.
--
No suryag, He has a lanyard to prevent any mishaps.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
No Sir.Singha wrote:to me it looks like top end of GSLV. the diameter seems to be in 3.5m-4m...way too big for A5.
on the +ve side, should we want to fit a 50MT tsar bomba atop a icbm this is it.
All our current SLV's have a head.
This has a cone.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Looks sneakily similar to how a SLBM looks like ( from pics of US, Russi SLBMs)?
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
^
A3 has a more pointed cone, OTOH SLBM's have a blunt cone. This has something that's in between. I wonder A5/K4 are similar to Shaurya/K15.
A3 has a more pointed cone, OTOH SLBM's have a blunt cone. This has something that's in between. I wonder A5/K4 are similar to Shaurya/K15.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
The diameter is huge. looks like one of the strap on rocket boosters for gslv.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GSLV_MkIII.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GSLV_MkIII.JPG
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
It must he the Last Phase with Payload of GSLV, look at the bottom, it shrinks in diameter therekoti wrote:OMG
Is it what I think it is?
RoyG, The boosters have conical shape at bottom which grows.
Certainly it looks too big to be Agni 5.
Last edited by pralay on 06 Mar 2012 10:06, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
its too big to be a ICBM. you want big here is the 3.05m SS-18 for comparison
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... b/Ss18.jpg
this thing is 3.5-4.0m range.
GSLV upto mk2 had inclined nosecones for the strap ons. so they are not strap ons.
it tallies exactly with the fatter but shorter GSLV mk3 with wiki diameter of 4m.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSLV_III
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... b/Ss18.jpg
this thing is 3.5-4.0m range.
GSLV upto mk2 had inclined nosecones for the strap ons. so they are not strap ons.
it tallies exactly with the fatter but shorter GSLV mk3 with wiki diameter of 4m.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSLV_III
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
GSLV has Aluminum Fairing. This one is either graphite epoxy clam shell or Fiberglass phenolic. Look at the color. Its black or dark tan.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Yes, it looks like graphite and about the same dia as the GSLV III. But the nosecone is pointier than the GSLV's and its boosters. Agni V has a composite 3rd stage so this could be it.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Cant this be a canister?
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
That thing is HUGE!!!!
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
interesting thought that. could be a cansister for A5, housing the smaller missile inside.
but the topol-M tube seems small in comparison and flush fits the missile snugly.
http://red-stars.org/IMG/jpg/Topol-M_SS-27_launcher.jpg
hopefully we have purchased some MAZ vehicles for high mobility A5 being road mobile.
another theory is the A5 could like space launchers have a huge fat nose for payload(RV+3rd stage). while being relatively slim further down (1st and 2nd stage).
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/r ... tion_1.jpg
but the topol-M tube seems small in comparison and flush fits the missile snugly.
http://red-stars.org/IMG/jpg/Topol-M_SS-27_launcher.jpg
hopefully we have purchased some MAZ vehicles for high mobility A5 being road mobile.
another theory is the A5 could like space launchers have a huge fat nose for payload(RV+3rd stage). while being relatively slim further down (1st and 2nd stage).
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/r ... tion_1.jpg
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
The angle of RV indicates its either nose cone of A-5 which gets jetisioned and can carry MIRV. So A-5 test could be the MIRV test.
The other possibility is its a strap on for GSLV MK3 but i would bet on the first.
It looks large because of the way the close up picture of it is taken and its a B/W pics.
The other possibility is its a strap on for GSLV MK3 but i would bet on the first.
It looks large because of the way the close up picture of it is taken and its a B/W pics.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
That is in no way any part of Agni-V. It is the payload fairing which would sit on the top of GSLV Mark III.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
^^^ I think so too.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Doesn't looks like a missile to me, If we take that man standing on the scaffolding to be ~5+ feet or ~2 meters, the dia of the thing comes close to 3.5-4 meters which is beyond the dia of AV/K-4.
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
It sure seems to be GSLV MK3.
The payload fairing will have a diameter of 5 metre and a payload volume of 100 cubic metre.[8]
-
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 38
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
Yes I agree with Narad its head of GSLV MK-III nearly 32 ft in height and having dia of around 4 meter.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 723
- Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
- Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
- Contact:
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
PratikDas, those two pics you've marked-up with red, above, do not match-up at all. On the right is the outer view, and you can see there are actually six sets of doors between the top frame and ground level. In the pic on the left, there is only one sliding door, from roof to floor.
On first impression, this thing looks too wide, given its (relatively short) length.
On second guess, the too-short-for-this-length missile, may not be designed exclusively for terrestrial deployment. It could be that this missile is supposed to be deployed on a submarine. Long range SLBMs are typically short and stubby, when compared to ground-based missiles.
Could it be that this pic is of the cannister for a large SLBM?
On first impression, this thing looks too wide, given its (relatively short) length.
On second guess, the too-short-for-this-length missile, may not be designed exclusively for terrestrial deployment. It could be that this missile is supposed to be deployed on a submarine. Long range SLBMs are typically short and stubby, when compared to ground-based missiles.
Could it be that this pic is of the cannister for a large SLBM?
Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion
if its a missle has to be a MIRV with the warheads arranged in a inclined circle around the 3rd stage. has to be the biggest and baddest and fattest ICBM given its diameter...like jabba the hut.
but 99% for me its GSLV mk3.
but 99% for me its GSLV mk3.