Agni-V ICBM: New capabilities, technologies, strategies

[Austin]

^^^Singha, Actually if your intention is to wipe out cities or says industrial town then those huge bomb is needed , for the accuracy that Agni series offers literally in lower double digit , a 10 - 20 Kt fission bomb can get your job done for any military targets including deep hardened ones , you mirv it if you have more targets spread over some distance to make it cost effective.

It wouldnt be a lie if we can can confidently today that Agni-5 is the most accurate ICBM the world has today , including the P-5

Other than that its just psychology , you have 20 and i have 500 so mine is bigger types , humanity as we know has to change to use Nukes

Consider this fact US has many thousands of Nuclear weapons much before china had any ability to deter US with small nukes still US did not wiped out china , same goes for China and India where the former had potential to reach ever corner of India since decades before India developed similar capability , yet no one thought to wipe us out using Nukes , other than keeping your nerves calm and keeping you confident and deterring , nukes true use in War is almost non existent and hope it remains that way.

[Kanson]

One Noob question. What we have all seen is A-5 takeoff only. No one saw the travel path or the splash down. But when Dr.Avinash Chandar says it is a grand success, we joyfully agree. Also in Pok-2 we all the the ground tremble only. No body saw anything else. But why question AK if he claims the POk-2 a grand success.

Err, maybe because even the IN is a witness to the splash down? And SFC folks and other folks witnesses the launch. So if the launch was successful and the splash down and explosion were witnessed it may just, just, qualify as a grand success.

hmm....that may not be the case. When RV re-enters it started to look like a fireball. How we know that fireball looking RV is still intact and holding its internal package from such scorching heat. How we know RV doesn't tumbled, ie. nose up ? How to know, it is not a happenstance but RV followed exactly all the commands from guidance package executing all its mission in glitch free fashion. All these things you can't know by witnessing the splash down.

If it did all these then only you can say as grand success. And for that you have to believe whatever DRDO guys say just as we have to believe BARC/DAE guys.

[Aditya_V]

^^^Singha, Actually if your intention is to wipe out cities or says industrial town then those huge bomb is needed , for the accuracy that Agni series offers literally in lower double digit , a 10 - 20 Kt fission bomb can get your job done for any military targets including deep hardened ones , you mirv it if you have more targets spread over some distance to make it cost effective.

It wouldnt be a lie if we can can confidently today that Agni-5 is the most accurate ICBM the world has today , including the P-5

Other than that its just psychology , you have 20 and i have 500 so mine is bigger types , humanity as we know has to change to use Nukes

Consider this fact US has many thousands of Nuclear weapons much before china had any ability to deter US with small nukes still US did not wiped out china , same goes for China and India where the former had potential to reach ever corner of India since decades before India developed similar capability , yet no one thought to wipe us out using Nukes , other than keeping your nerves calm and keeping you confident and deterring , nukes true use in War is almost non existent and hope it remains that way.

The operative word here is "Humanity", unfortunately I doubt it applies to Pakis, and the genie is out of the bottle and is bound to be used one day unless Pak is denuked.

[Kanson]

in a recent write up in FORCE issue Admiral Arun Prakash mentioned the fact that the reactor were old 90 MW Soviet reactor and we have yet to design a reactor for ATV , most likely the bigger ATV will have indian designed reactor he alluded.

Can you give me the quote for such assertion? As far as i could remember, he said, he thinks, it is based on 1st or 2nd Russian reactor technology. I don't remember he mentioning that as Soviet reactor.

[Kanson]

Deterrence is not an issue because he still have Fission Device and even Boosted Fission assuming the 3rd stage of TN sizzled. No one ever says the entire series fizzled its just the TN device which is creating doubts.

hmm... Fission device is tested once or twice. Unlike other powers we haven't tested for several times. Even missiles to be inducted are getting tested for minimum 3 and further several tests. And then the same loose screw situation can happen in the case of fission device too. So even with fission device what is the basis it will work? And how that holds deterrence in case you couldn't demonstrate a bang even from fission device? What is the use of drdo developing so many missiles then?

[chackojoseph]

hmm....that may not be the case. When RV re-enters it started to look like a fireball. How we know that fireball looking RV is still intact and holding its internal package from such scorching heat. How we know RV doesn't tumbled, ie. nose up ? How to know, it is not a happenstance but RV followed exactly all the commands from guidance package executing all its mission in glitch free fashion. All these things you can't know by witnessing the splash down.

If it did all these then only you can say as grand success. And for that you have to believe whatever DRDO guys say just as we have to believe BARC/DAE guys.

Who knows. It could have been a splashdown with some instrumentation. It had dummy warheads. They are mum on instruments.

[Varoon Shekhar]

"read too much into what Dr. Kakodhar or BARC for that matter have said about the tests."

Would Dr. Kakodkar lie so brazenly. He is now on record on video for India( and the world) as saying the tests were a success, and that the device has been weaponised. The video is from Dec/2009. Isn't character, integrity and credibility at stake now, more than ever, after programmes/videos like the one with Karan Thapar?

[gakakkad]

Radionuclide data is anyday more accurate than seismic data ,or envelope calculations on crater diameter ..Yield can never be calculated with 100% precision ..Radionuclide data will never be public as it ends up revealing the design of the weapon..

So all the business about about calculating yield from the comfort of your office with the help of G-chacha is not going to give you info ,which all intelligence agencies in the world would kill to collect..So anything obtained is purely speculative..

So IMO the paucity of 'Strategic Materials' had nothing to do with S1. Perhaps it may have been important in the context of the whole test campaign, but even then S1 should not have gotten affected by this scarcity. 'Scarcity' may itself be another smoke and mirrors game. Who knows but God and RC.

Absence of wg-pu may not have anything to do with success or failure of P1 .. But it can have a lot to do with ,there not being a P-7 ,P-8 ,P-9 ,P10 ....P-N ....

Any case P1 was atleast mid 30 kt range as seismic data collected abroad ..considering a 15kt fission , the fusion could have had an yielded the remaining..no one claimed that P1 was less than 30 kt...so all the talk about p1 failing is bla..bla..onlee...because fusion surely took place..

The only question is that whether one can extrapolate 40kt to 200kt yield ... For this I trust AK more than any of the strategy gooroos ...

smokescreen or not , insufficient wg-pu is very plausible ..... but insufficient Pu will not be the reason today or in the future ..Which is why I made the original point about our reproc. capacity...Since we now have large stockpile of "strategic material ,the only variable that decides future tests is international politics..

If situation permits we should test. If situation demands ,then we will test..priority today is economics ..It does not seem that Chinese are going to attack next year or even in this decade..We have been vey good at avoiding wars..We should keep avoiding them , till we reach a point of invincibility ..

A-5 will surely help avoid wars...

Someday we ll test again.. Not yet..not just yet..

[pankajs]

But as other posters have rightly pointed out (I remember Tejas saar), deterrence is in the mind of your opponent and not in the minds of blind men of hindustan (wrt India's capabilities).

The blind men of Hindustan (All of us) will continue to grope about in the dark for none of us know what our adversaries are making or our demonstrated and claimed capabilities.

It is precisely because we can't read the mind of the enemy and the deterrence thresholds

You want speak for all Indians including strategic community(that includes various Intel communities) and wanted to say everyone in Strats community continue to grope in the dark?

I have added the first line highlighting the relevant part to provide the overall context to the middle statement. I stand by what I have said above i.e deterrence is in the mind of your opponent; we can't read the mind of the enemy; and on that we will continue to grope about in the dark.

Ok...any war whether conventional or nuclear needs intel. Even for conventional there is great effort spent on understanding the behaviour of opposite Generals and officers who occupy key position. In Nuclear warfare I don't have to specify it considering its importance. Recently, after mumbai 26/11, IA exactly touched that topic while considering various responses available to GoI. If you are interested check DRDO statements on this topic.

If BK is to be believed, only 70% of Pakistani nuclear warheads have been mapped by the US, Israel and India. The remainder, according to Pakistan, will never be found. The nuclear security is arguably better than India's.
While we may have considerable intelligence on Pakistan specifically its NW, it is troubling to note the gaps in a country were our intel guys could operate with relative ease compared to China. How do we fare wrt China then? (rhetorical question)

It is precisely because we can't read the mind of the enemy and the deterrence thresholds varies based on situation, prudent policy dictates that we put the best, the biggest and the baddest pataka on the table and leave the rest to god.

There is always step by step escalation. You don't always fire your biggest weapon first in any encounter. What is need of the hour will be decided at that time. Agni V testing once such thing. If situation is gone to that level, no one going to stop us from, what you like to call as, demonstrating the required capabilities.

Saar I am talking of peace time posture not when we are already on the escalatory ladder. It relates to the credibility of the capability that we have declared we possess. I would just like the government to take the next step i.e demonstrate the capability.

I think we understand each others POV pretty well. Unless one of us has further data to add to the discussion we will start going round in circles, in fact we already have. Let us agree to disagree and move on to the next next topic.

[Amitabh]

the lethality radius (immediate) of a 21KT fatman device is 3km per a online calculator of sorts I found. for a 15KT nearly the same.
for a 140KT is 5km. for a 340kt its around 10km.

so the "sweet spot" of weight vs bang seems to be around the 250-300KT mark where all the worlds advanced nuclear nations have converged on. four of these spaced apart will destroy a large city.

45KT cannot be our primary weapon. we need a 250KT proven weapon even if its used as single weapon payload.

So let me see if I get you and pankajs right: the Chinese are cool with our dropping 4-5 45kt warheads on Beijing and/or Shanghai (and a dozen or so of their top cities). They will only be deterred if we have the ability to drop a bunch of 200kt+ warheads on their main cities.

Seems unlikely.

[gakakkad]

If BK is to be believed, only 70% of Pakistani nuclear warheads have been mapped by the US, Israel and India. The remainder, according to Pakistan, will never be found. The nuclear security is arguably better than India's.
While we may have considerable intelligence on Pakistan specifically its NW, it is troubling to note the gaps in a country were our intel guys could operate with relative ease compared to China. How do we fare wrt China then? (rhetorical question)

Calculate the theoretical maximum capability of warhead making of poaqroaches...they just have a 0.3 GW reactor since 93...4 similar ones are under construction ...

There is plenty of evidence that PAK 98 tests were Pu based possibly fully assembled Panda device.. IMHO the talk about pakees having a gigantic arsenal is rubbish..I don't think panda will transfer 100 warheads to Poaq...

Its impossible that Paki has the fastest growing arsenal in the world..

Unless of course the Chinese are storing their fully assembled ones in Pk..

[pankajs]

So let me see if I get you and pankajs right: the Chinese are cool with our dropping 4-5 45kt warheads on Beijing and/or Shanghai (and a dozen or so of their top cities). They will only be deterred if we have the ability to drop a bunch of 200kt+ warheads on their main cities.

Seems unlikely.

The bet here is that a 200kt thing will make a rational Chinese government think x times more than a 45kt thing. A madman or a country on the verge of being wiped out will not be deterred by even a 10 mt warhead.

[SaiK]

the madmen country would be pakis and no other country best fits that.. for them, we do not need thermos at all. we only need neutron bombs for pakis. / : evil :

[ramana]

quote="marimuthu"

One Noob question. What we have all seen is A-5 takeoff only. No one saw the travel path or the splash down. But when Dr.Avinash Chandar says it is a grand success, we joyfully agree. Also in Pok-2 we all the the ground tremble only. No body saw anything else. But why question AK if he claims the POk-2 a grand success. /quote

Err, maybe because even the IN is a witness to the splash down? And SFC folks and other folks witnesses the launch. So if the launch was successful and the splash down and explosion were witnessed it may just, just, qualify as a grand success.

hmm....that may not be the case. When RV re-enters it started to look like a fireball. How we know that fireball looking RV is still intact and holding its internal package from such scorching heat. How we know RV doesn't tumbled, ie. nose up ? How to know, it is not a happenstance but RV followed exactly all the commands from guidance package executing all its mission in glitch free fashion. All these things you can't know by witnessing the splash down.

If it did all these then only you can say as grand success. And for that you have to believe whatever DRDO guys say just as we have to believe BARC/DAE guys.

When the RV re-enters it will look like a streak. The fireball is after the fuze is functioned.

The RV is a conical shape with inherent stability with center of pressure aft of the center of gravity. Also DRDO gave the weight, ref area and the pictures of the nose tip, from that you can calculate the beta. The RV is a stable body hence will not tumble.

If you read the TSS article Mr. Sekharan, the director of ASL, says it was a ballistic flight after the T/S separation.

So all in all it was a good flight. No tumble/vumble or even fumble.

Also one should not cast doubts on one section to defend another section.

I really would like to give you a warning but understand your zeal for defending the undefensible.


So please desist in slinging mud.

Same goes to marimuthu but then he said he is newbie.

[gakakkad]

the madmen country would be pakis and no other country best fits that.. for them, we do not need thermos at all. we only need neutron bombs for pakis. / : evil :

IMHO paki nukes are not even a threat to India..

what was the yield of pakinukes from various seismic reports ? 4 to 6 kt , right ? What is the CEP of their primitive scuds ?(is it in metres or kilometres ) is that even threatening ?

my only fear w.r.t pak is that panda might use there bums against us launching em from paki territory...

[SaiK]

see, even a sub kiloton is a threat to me. a launch of conventional weapon is a threat to me. showing a knife too., forget it.. if mullahs raise their flags, the very sight is a threat. [just seeing them as madmen onlee]

[gakakkad]

see, even a sub kiloton is a threat to me. a launch of conventional weapon is a threat to me. showing a knife too., forget it.. if mullahs raise their flags, the very sight is a threat. [just seeing them as madmen onlee]

anyway the point I wanted to make is that pakees have not demonstrated any usable nuke capability... they have 4-6 kton of demonstrated bums in an ancient missile system ..yet Indians are the ones dhoti shivering and doing all sorts of complicated calculations just to account for 10 kt lesser than expected yield..

[shyamoo]

A long time ago, I read a book ( don't remember the name ) that had something to do with the Manhattan project. In that, there was a recollection by a scientist about the TN bomb. The guy who came up with the initial design was really excited when he figured it out and started discussion with his team. He was then crest-fallen, a day or so later, as he realised that it was so easy that FSU could also easily create one.

There is ambiguity about our TN yield but no ambiguity about the basic fission nuke. I'm no expert but I feel confident about our overall ability ( see the above story ).

This is high stakes poker. If the India govt/DRDO etc are bluffing, will China/TSP call their bluff?

It's like having a gun pointed at one's head. You have no idea if holds any bullets. What would your reaction be? Will assume that there are no bullets and take action or will you comply to the wishes of one holding the gun?

Since, we have a stated NFU policy, anyone launching nukes at us, will not care if they survive retaliation or not. They have decided to call our bluff regardless of the final outcome. Let's just hope that we have sufficient retaliation power left ( TN and regular nukes ).

[SaiK]

^hope is different from "making sure". we can build on hope, but can't deliver on it.

The uncertainity is well scoped, however we need to bell the cat to be more "black-box precise" - meaning for aam minds, we all know we accept this black box, and the uncertain cat can remain insided it.

If everyone agrees the black box functionality, then it is a game-changer ++

[ramana]

US psychologists studying “trust” in corporations have found three factors are relevant: Communications, Character and Capability.
The components that roll up to Communications are
- Trust in “listening to learn”
- Trust in understanding (Purposes, concerns, and circumstances)
- Trust in judgment
- Are commitments accurate? (Clear, specific promises and requests)
- Are commitments authentic? (based on shared purpose)
The components that make up Character are
- Follow through on commitments?
- Honest about results?
- Reward integrity?
- Address poor performance quickly, accurately and authentically?
The components that make up Capability are:
- Are skills and experience trusted?
- Trust to involve others appropriately when personal capability is insufficient?
- Do you communicate breakdowns in your ability to perform ASAP?

One can use this template and see how DRDO has performed with respect to A5 Tessy flight.
Communications:
They got authorization in Dec 2008 and completed the first flight in slightly over three years. Before seeking authorization they completed component qualification at least a year before. They built on proven systems already qualified on earlier vehicles like A3 and A4. Their commitment on A5 range was on shared purpose of providing deterrence against the main challenger PRC which was sheltering TSP’s recalcitrant posture. They root caused the A3 first flight and learned from it and applied the lessons learned. They took no chances in getting clear telemetry and postponed the launch instead of accepting potentially corrupted data. They got flak from the press but the decision was taken.

Character:
These do not need elaboration. The DRDO flight team showed its competence and rewarded integrity and performance as it built/leveraged on prior success of A3 and A4 teams. The root cause analysis of the A3 first flight and sharing with public showed their honesty about results.

Capability:
Again needs no further elaboration. The skills and experience of the DRDO flight team are documented and demonstrated publicly in the series of Agni flights from A1 thru A5. They have leveraged their industry and educational institutional linkages to bring in experts in areas they needed as required. They showed excellent project management skills. They communicated immediately when they delayed the launch due to adverse weather conditions.

True other organizations function under severe political constraints due to myopic political leaders and the lack of economic and national power space which were not developed due to political factors. One appreciates that despite the political go ahead to conduct as many tests as required the immediate declaration of unilateral moratorium in hope of stalling G-7 sanctions was a big limiting factor. So the necessity to support the political decision is understandable.


However one has to work with the tools at hand and utilize the best available opportunities to deliver on the national missions.

One brilliant master stroke that DRDO executed was the range limitation with heavy payloads that allowed credible deterrent posture without triggering political pressures from internal and external actors. Far away countries cannot complain that A5 was tested with heavy payload to limit range as then they would have to withdraw their questioning attitude towards the POKII tests!

[SaiK]

May be we are holding the uncertainities for achieving the brilliance of BARC till the final configuration is established.. that way, we can keep faraway Lord Farquaads engaged in assumuning the babe is their Princess Fiona.

Of course, that is the other side of looking at positive sides.

[ramana]

Please post a decoder too!!!

[SaiK]

Lord Farquaads : NP mullahs from the faraway lands.
Princess Fiona: India under unipolar world - great power
/courtesy shrek movie

[Kanson]

One Noob question. What we have all seen is A-5 takeoff only. No one saw the travel path or the splash down. But when Dr.Avinash Chandar says it is a grand success, we joyfully agree. Also in Pok-2 we all the the ground tremble only. No body saw anything else. But why question AK if he claims the POk-2 a grand success.

Err, maybe because even the IN is a witness to the splash down? And SFC folks and other folks witnesses the launch. So if the launch was successful and the splash down and explosion were witnessed it may just, just, qualify as a grand success.

hmm....that may not be the case. When RV re-enters it started to look like a fireball. How we know that fireball looking RV is still intact and holding its internal package from such scorching heat. How we know RV doesn't tumbled, ie. nose up ? How to know, it is not a happenstance but RV followed exactly all the commands from guidance package executing all its mission in glitch free fashion. All these things you can't know by witnessing the splash down.

If it did all these then only you can say as grand success. And for that you have to believe whatever DRDO guys say just as we have to believe BARC/DAE guys.

When the RV re-enters it will look like a streak. The fireball is after the fuze is functioned.

The RV is a conical shape with inherent stability with center of pressure aft of the center of gravity. Also DRDO gave the weight, ref area and the pictures of the nose tip, from that you can calculate the beta. The RV is a stable body hence will not tumble.

If you read the TSS article Mr. Sekharan, the director of ASL, says it was a ballistic flight after the T/S separation.

So all in all it was a good flight. No tumble/vumble or even fumble.

Also one should not cast doubts on one section to defend another section.

I really would like to give you a warning but understand your zeal for defending the undefensible.


So please desist in slinging mud.

Same goes to marimuthu but then he said he is newbie.

Ramana Sir.... What is this? newbie can have comprehension problem but you a seasoned senior member, you too have problem in comprehension ?

Pls take back your statements....

[saumitra_j]

While we are busy going at each other on the fizzle v/s sizzle debate, nobody seems to have debated the treasure trove of information in the in the article that Austin posted. Let me give it a shot

The three stages ignited on time and their separation was clean and precise. The missile climbed to a height of about 600 km before starting to descend. The powered flight, with the three stages igniting and separating, lasted about 220 seconds. As each stage fired and decoupled, the MCC and the adjacent hall reverberated with applause. There was a long gap between the third stage separation and the re-entry vehicle knifing into the atmosphere at an altitude of 100 km. After the third stage separated and the re-entry vehicle was ejected at a velocity of about six km a second, the mood in the MCC was relaxed

I will try to work some calculations as I am years away from high school physics but if some gurus can make some sense of this data and share the gyaan, it will be great. Now is a good time for me to revise the basics, I will try to post my findings by the weekend

The re-entry vehicle itself is a technological marvel, housing the missile's avionics and the nuclear warhead. Indeed, it houses all the electronics systems for navigation, guidance and control and the on-board computers. The avionics are within the missile's nose cone, which is made of carbon-carbon composites. The re-entry vehicle is protected by a heat shield, which is made out of carbon composite fibre. In this mission, the Agni-V carried a warhead that mimicked a nuclear bomb but without the radioactive material

So this was as close they can get to test a bum as possible, except of course without the real maal in it. However, given that the explosions were photographed, I am sure they would get lots of information on the behavior of the warhead.

The re-entry itself is a critical manoeuvre for the vehicle should slice itself into the atmosphere at the correct angle. The levels of deceleration should be perfect although the loads acting on the re-entry vehicle are very high. Besides, the survival of the re-entry vehicle is important. Its carbon composite tiles, a couple of inches thick on its outer surface, should withstand scorching temperatures of more than 5,0000 Celsius as it slices into the atmosphere. But the temperature inside the re-entry vehicle should not be more than 500C so as not to harm the electronics equipment in the nose cone. “At that stage, the outer layer starts burning and the package inside should survive and be functional at 500C…. Over a few inches of thickness, the temperature drops from 5,0000C to 500C,” Chander explained.

Just imagine how useful this technology would be, when they decide to build what Dr Kalam called a reusable missile

After about 20 minutes of flight, when the dummy warhead carrying explosives erupted into a fireball and hit the waters of the Indian Ocean somewhere between Australia and Madagascar, another round of applause rang out in the MCC. The re-entry vehicle's impact point in the Indian Ocean was more than 5,000 km from Dhamra in the Bay of Bengal. The fireball was captured by cameras on three naval ships stationed downrange near the impact point. Agni-V was a spectacular success on its maiden flight itself.

This shows how accurate the missile is and how much confidence DRDO has in its accuracy... to be able to precisely place three ships in a vast ocean to "photograph" the impact! ( I would not have wanted to be on the ships though )

Chander was proud that all the new systems used in Agni-V, such as the composite casings for the second- and third-stage motors; the composite motors contoured to suit the missile's shape; and the high-performance navigation systems, including the ring-laser gyroscope systems and micro navigation systems; were fully validated in the flight.

Imagine, that apart from the hardware, DRDO would have developed fantastic software and algorithms to build such robust navigation systems. This IMHO is a huge achievement for any future missile or aircraft program.
This:

“the critical, deciding factor was the propulsion” system used in the three stages of the missiles. This was the first time that the DRDO was test-firing a three-stage missile, all powered by solid propellants.

and then this:

the composite motors of the size used in Agni-V has given the DRDO the confidence to go for missiles with larger motors and manoeuvring warheads because the motor casings, made out of composites, will be light in weight but provide a higher performance.

Another strength of the ASL lay in designing and developing motors propelled by solid fuel for Agni missions. For the Agni-V test flight also, the ASL designed and developed solid motors for its three stages. Besides, it developed the all-important light-weight composite for the second- and third-stage motors, which led to a reduction in their weight but far better performance. A crucial step towards developing Agni-V was taken when the ASL developed in 2007 a large rocket motor casing made entirely of carbon-filament wound composite. This casing, developed indigenously, formed the third upper stage of Agni-V. The casing went through full qualification trials in 2007.

“We never went out. The static testing of the motors was done in the same organisation [in various units of the ASL]. This is a formidable combination,” said Sekaran. The ASL also established its expertise in high-performance composites. It developed the composites for the missile motor casings and nose cone and established the process parameters for them. Then the technology was transferred to the industry for fabricating these composites. “The nose cone was fully made out of carbon composites developed by the ASL. It withstood a temperature of more than 5,0000C. You cannot make it out of metal. If you do so, the weight will shoot up,” he added.

Systems engineering is also one of the strengths of the ASL because it specialises in building up from what it already has. With the addition of a third upper stage and with minor modifications, the two-stage Agni-III metamorphosed into an awesome Agni-V. Yet the weight remained the same for both vehicles despite the addition of a third upper stage to Agni-V because the second- and third-stage motor casings were made out of light-weight composites.

The RCI developed the navigation system for Agni-V, and its architect was the young G. Satheesh Reddy, Associate Director, RCI. “Our navigation for Agni-V was different from the one used for Agni-IV. It was a redundant, reliable system with high-performance and accuracy,” he said. Agni-V had two navigation systems: ring-laser gyro-based system and a micro-navigation system with good accuracy. Fault-tolerant features were incorporated into the navigation system and on-board computers. “Our on-board computers have been developed in such a way that they can recover transient failures. Besides, the entire data computation in avionics is highly reliable and robust,” he said. The important technology of the inertial navigation system, guidance and control used in Agni-V was the brainchild of the RCI, said S.K. Chaudhury, its Director. All the systems were validated by advanced simulation at the RCI. The DRDL's role in the mission was to characterise the vehicle.

shows complete mastery in rocketry: You have to master navigation, master the actual propulsion as well as master the structural aspects of the rocket to make it robust yet light... this is clearly something that we have painstakingly earned over last 30 odd years. It is important to understand here how long it takes for a nation to develop technical capability, and as a society we must relish this success!

[Kanson]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_Transfer_Vehicle

ATV Jules Verne as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere in a controlled burn-up after undocking from ISS.

For RV, to those who is viewing from the position of point of impact it looks like a fireball trying to fall over them. AT ~3000 deg Celsius, it doesn't look anything other than fireball.

[SaiK]

well.. RVs will not appear like that, cause of the reentry skins. so, it might not flare up., rather appear red perhaps.

It would be dreadful should it view so, with the maal inside.

[PratikDas]

That ATV is actually burning up. With the RV, only the air around it is burning up with the skin being ablative to some extent, but I doubt there's enough material ablated there to make a fireball like the ATV.

[Kanson]

For RV, to those who is viewing from the position of point of impact it looks like a fireball trying to fall over them

RV (I mean ballistic missile RV) encounters much harsher environment than civilian counterparts. All this has to be compensated by ablative material which in turn burns ( as you may seen in NDTV video clip in the event of Agni V launch)

It is reported this Agni V RV is meant to withstand more than 5000 deg C. Temp of Sun outer layer is only few hundred deg more.

When viewed from impact point, RV which is spherical cone in shape, as it descends in high elevated angle, appears as burning sphere. becoz at distance, spherical cone appears as sphere.

To know the temp distribution on the RV surface check NAL/ISRO/NASA websites.

[ramana]

Kanson, What comprehension problem? As far as I can read you are implying/suggesting the A5 RV might have tumbled and all that? And we have to take their word for it. The bigger implication is that the guys might be not trust worthy.

hmm....that may not be the case. When RV re-enters it started to look like a fireball. How we know that fireball looking RV is still intact and holding its internal package from such scorching heat. How we know RV doesn't tumbled, ie. nose up ? How to know, it is not a happenstance but RV followed exactly all the commands from guidance package executing all its mission in glitch free fashion. All these things you can't know by witnessing the splash down.

If it did all these then only you can say as grand success. And for that you have to believe whatever DRDO guys say just as we have to believe BARC/DAE guys.

And the last line.

DRDO guys have give all the parameters for one to calculate what the RV's stability parameters are via the weight, diameter and picture of the nose tip. Its a high beta and the shape is stable. there is no tumble or fumble.
And the fireball was before it touched the waters as described by TSS and others.

[Kanson]

^ my reply was to merlin. you should first read what merlin said. and then have to read mine keeping merlin reply in mind. If you still can't get it, i suggest you consult with your Admin team.

[ramana]

Whatever you are true to form.

[Kanson]

DRDO guys have give all the parameters for one to calculate what the RV's stability parameters are via the weight, diameter and picture of the nose tip. Its a high beta and the shape is stable. there is no tumble or fumble.

Oh! with weight, diameter and a picture, you can crack up RV's stability parameters?

I will give an aircraft picture, dimensions and weight, can you tell me exactly where its CG and its stability margin?

[Suraj]

Oh! with weight, diameter and a picture, you can crack up RV's stability parameters?

I will give an aircraft picture, dimensions and weight, can you tell me exactly where its CG and its stability margin?

As a counterquestion, without being associated with the A-V test in any manner, and absolutely no data whatsoever, you can question the fidelity of the test ? And it is upto others to prove that the test was indeed successful ? What's the piskological description of this line of questioning again ? 'You farted' ? Why don't you start by providing reasoning to back up the thesis you postulate ?

I've never seen a comparable level of skepticism about the stated capabilities of any potential adversary. For example, the Chinese have an unquestionably credible blue-water SSBN deterrence platform despite one drydock queen, one at the bottom of the Bohai Sea, and a handful of new ones parked in Huludao and Sanya with their hatches open and zero deterrence patrols in 30 years.

[hnair]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_Transfer_Vehicle

ATV Jules Verne as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere in a controlled burn-up after undocking from ISS.

For RV, to those who is viewing from the position of point of impact it looks like a fireball trying to fall over them. AT ~3000 deg Celsius, it doesn't look anything other than fireball.

If this video is true, at 00:59 these RV's dont look anything like a fireball to the camera that seems rather close to the point of impact - more like a streak to me, saar.


I mean, a person who got knifed wont say "A point came towards my belly".

But my "comprehension compass" might be off today, (see? a twin MIRV warheads in one mijjile right there )

[Karan M]

Bade,

My point was that its very commonplace to have repeated failures in one-off tests or even repeated tests of even less complex systems and yet, India's first TNW could not have failed? Even when the sensors placed there said it did fail? Kakodkar, Chidambaram's defence is also relevant and somewhat reassuring, but usually for events of this nature, there is an audit done by those not involved in the event itself. Was this done and clearly proven, that things were fine - we don't need to know the details - but the bare facts. Here, it seems this was not done. Santhanam was clearly unhappy about the way the issue was brushed aside and hence raised it a public event. In response, he was attacked by the establishment. I remember a bunch of particularly nasty articles with ad hominems directed against him by GOI folks, thankfully now turfed out to other positions. Instead of addressing his statements. Quite like the treatment initially meted out to VKS when he raised uncomfortable questions. Point is a transparent redressal mechanism seemed absent.

Then there is the engineering side of things. For functional deterrence, we must be sure the device works, each time, each and every time. In contrast to India, other nations have conducted many tests for this specific part, not only would they have got critical data for further optimization, but would have ensured that their base design is good enough. We have not done this. We just tested, and then announced a moratorium. Santhanam's speaking up was clearly no coincidence at a time there were rumbles of India signing CTBT etc, as clearly the current IA folks speaking up about Siachen is not a coincidence either.

I think its not a BARC vs DRDO thing but more of a hard lessons learnt sort of thing. DRDO, ISRO have all learnt the hard way, that no matter which project, when it involves precision engineering plus a lot of "first time stuff" - whether that be esoteric theory or product development, that failures are common and reproducibility is essential. Again, with such controversy over the fusion part, that seems a bit dodgy. Theres so much about component sourcing, about integration at a larger batch level. There was an article praising India's nuke sector and BARC posted by a foreign visitor - he mentioned he was told that nukes are run like a cottage industry versus the commercial part. Per se, that's not re-assuring.

Finally, the people at BARC etc are human beings, demonstrating a working fission weapon, far more advanced than that in 1971, with limited funding, somewhat inconsistent political support and no overarching strategy, is in itself exceptional. I don't think we can fault them there. I just think that expecting them to be superhuman, and then making this into a "they can't have failed" issue is besides the point.

Its been a decade plus since the tests. In the meanwhile, we have advanced far ahead as a nation, we have deployed so many successful systems - weapons, civilian, economy has grown further. We have grown as a nation and can take the truth even if it is unpalatable. I think the bigger picture here is to dispassionately see if the fusion part had issues, or folks remain unconvinced and then go ahead and test. Where it becomes a question of when, and not why. Big deal.

Given the muted reaction to the A-5 test, for all we know, the reactions may remain considerably muted. We do need a good PR campaign though. Historically, we have really messed up in terms of a consistent message and as to why we do what we do.
Having the debate devolve to "x was guilty" for the prior tests being a partial success is besides the point. Bigger thing is to ensure we keep adequate safeguards in place so such a thing does not happen again (multi-level review from all stakeholders, sufficient back up and transparency in measurement methods and techniques so everyone is on the same page) and ensure all agencies play the right role. Media articles attacking BARC etc are not required.

There is the other point - do we need fusion weapons? If 20-50 kt weapons with fission can take out x cities and that is deterrence. I think we do, because basically more with less is better (throw weight of the missile can be less, it can carry more penetration decoys etc as well for the same payload). Plus, we are catching up with PRC fast in conventional systems, but we would be amiss to lag here. There is also the strategic aspect. After Agni-V the global perception of India has changed. After successful N-tests, it might also be a positive, not necessarily a negative. We just need to be hard hearted and clear headed. I mean, we are a critical emerging market, and if its one thing the west needs now, its a market to buy their stuff, especially when their home markets are stagnating. And our security needs this, not some image of being a very saintly nation. All that got us noplace but lectures on caste, cows, and curry. Better to be a mean injun than the obedient gungadin

I don't see why we should be so diffident about this. The PRC is brazen and gets accepted, despite proliferation. The UK pretty much runs with US tech for its nuclear deterrent.

We need to do a balanced analysis of what countries will do what (based on existing laws and what they might do based on perception, ego, peer pressure) also evaluate whom to lobby and start on it.

Just a few thoughts!

[ramana]

KaranM, I think the big problem was the political pressure to declare a moratarium before the G-7 meeting. This forced a rapid assessment without the detailed analysis needed. Besides even S-1 was stated to be a weaponisble configuration. So to simple minded politicans (NDA) and advisers (BM) they thought so what lets pre-empt/fore stall the G-7 sanctions and declared the moratarium. The G-7 went ahead and declared sanctions anyway.

In my post above I said there are three components to trust: Communications, Character and Capability. No one is doubting them for the latter two taking into account the constraints on them due to political pressures.

Even the latter is understandable in that after the first test day it was imperative to declare an end as soon as satisfactory results were there to declare as State with Nuke weapons. Recall it was 2 years after CTBT was signed by the powers. Again the right time would have been to test before that time and declare the moratarium. But then its all water under the bridge or if only type of thinking.

[SaiK]

Is 3000*F [1700* aprox] rentry temp? where did the 5000*C come from?

[ramana]

Aero-thermal heating as it travels further down. Also this happens in 40-50 secs so is more like thermal heating shock too. Recall Fourier heat conduction eqn with time.

As the re-entry vehicle comes down through the atmosphere from an altitude of 100 km to a lower altitude, the atmosphere's density keeps increasing. Once the density increases, the re-entry vehicle's deceleration breaks and the heat generated keeps shooting up. It is akin to speeding in a car when brakes are suddenly applied and people seated in the car lurch forward. “In this case, the systems are qualified for 100 G. The survivability of the re-entry vehicle is a critical area,” Sekaran said. (The re-entry phase lasts 40 seconds to 50 seconds.)

BTW

The re-entry vehicle itself is a technological marvel, housing the missile's avionics and the nuclear warhead. Indeed, it houses all the electronics systems for navigation, guidance and control and the on-board computers. The avionics are within the missile's nose cone, which is made of carbon-carbon composites.

When they MIRV the A5, they need to take these out and put it on the structure to control the structure and dop the other RVs. And that means a shroud or fairing to protect all these while flying. Its a big task and thats why they need time.

[SaiK]

cool beans.. surya ya namah!