Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Jun 2012 14:02

Pantsir-S1 seems to be pretty good as its available on Tracked Chassis and Wheeled Platform , Has a range of 20 Km and has Tunguska type Gun/Missile combination. Plus UAE , Syria and RuArmy operates it in service.

Considering IA is an operator of Tunguska , it would know better how the Gun/Missile combo works.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 21 Jun 2012 14:09

We already have Tunguska M-1 in our inventory.

Pantsir-S1 would be ideal for this role as well since it can fire on the move and has a smooth dual 30mm autocannon to ensure kills incase the enemy gets too close. For a QR-SAM Pantsir-S1 would be a better option than Tunguska, Cortal and even the spyder-ADs. The Sypder-AD would be great to handle threats over between 30 to 50km and together with Akash this should make the security net a very tight one.

Pantsir with it's missiles can engage targets upto 20 km away and carry 12 missiles while the others carry 8.

Pantsir is overall a better system which allows us to have dual redundancy in a single system. The auto cannon should ensure a smooth secondline of defence.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 21 Jun 2012 14:13

Singha wrote:<SNIP>if the IA wants a high mobile tracked system with integral EO/Radar then spyder does not fit the bill and neither does VL mica. both the SA8 and SA13 have all sensors on same vehicle and are hence self contained with no dependency other than reload vehicle.<SNIP>

All the SP AD units are invariably part of (I) AD Brigades of Corps with offensive responsibilities.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Jun 2012 14:50

the crotale NG mk3 should be seriously trialled even if we go for pantsyr in the end. the Pakis are very likely to buy some going fwd as they operate this system for a long time now.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Jun 2012 15:07

The old Crotale Mk1 was it , seems to have performed well in Gulf War 1 brought down few allied aircraft is what i had read.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 21 Jun 2012 19:06

Nah Crotale mk-3 can easily trailled but in the competitive bidding, the Pantsir would easily emerge as the better and cheaper option, we can have more Pantsir for the same buck with indeed more firepower.

http://www.kbptula.ru/eng/zencom/panz.htm

Pantsir 57E6-E missile has a range upto 20 km and cieling of 10km while the crotale is around 15 km and 9 km. The Russian missile clearly has better specs. I would also put my money on the Pantsir being a far more rugged system as compared to the Crotale.

I think all of our major air, land, sea and other critical bases should have the Pantsir as last line of defence, 150 battalions of these would be ideal, each battalion with 5 launchers, thats 750 launchers or 9000 missiles, would be good enough to take on any incoming threat.

The Russian's will gladly give full-tot

John · Post by **John** » 21 Jun 2012 19:34

Austin wrote:Pantsir-S1 seems to be pretty good as its available on Tracked Chassis and Wheeled Platform , Has a range of 20 Km and has Tunguska type Gun/Missile combination. Plus UAE , Syria and RuArmy operates it in service.

Problem is Pantsyr is very expensive system IIRC some where around 20+ million per unit. Other back drawback is integration and support, Tunguska have run into many maintenance issues' where as Israel which has offered license production of Derby/Python and integration of Spyder with existing indigenous radar systems. Spyder even allows use of Astra in the near future.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 21 Jun 2012 20:15

the crotale has a healthy respect from our low flying pilots

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Jun 2012 21:50

crotale's in kahuta have been the elite turk janissaries around the sultan's palace since early 1980s.
though they have older crotale, mostly they will go for this newer model for sure soon.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Jun 2012 22:09

Always wondered how Pak did not go for Chinese copy of S-300 clones the HQ-9 .. i am sure pindi must be having that on top of their wish list.

John · Post by **John** » 21 Jun 2012 22:44

Singha wrote:the three which would fit the 15km bill are Tungushka-M1, TOR-M2 and the CrotaleNG mk3

Singha the requirements for QRSAM require it to be "(e)Guidance. Suitable guidance system (with active and/orpassive seekers)." So all three are out of the picture. IIRC SLAMRAAM was on offer perhaps one of the contenders.

Austin,
Anything China supplies to Pakistan ends up in hands of unkil or any other nation for that matter (for example wiki leaks indicate Israel got it hands on very detailed specs on slew of chinese/korean Ballistic missiles), that will answer your question on Chinese hesitation on supplying more advanced weapons.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 21 Jun 2012 23:09

vic wrote:Seems like create a requirement which can be only fulfilled by imports when we have Astra, LRSAM and Akash in our kitty.

AbhiJ · Post by **AbhiJ** » 22 Jun 2012 16:20

Many new technologies
developed indigenously
worked successfully in
Agni 5. The redundant
navigation systems,
very high accuracy ring
laser gyro-based inertial
navigation system (RINS),
and the most modern and
accurate micro navigation
system (MINS) ensured
that the missile reaches the target point within
few meters of accuracy. The high-speed onboard
computer and fault tolerant software along
with robust and reliable bus guided the missile
flawlessly.

http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/nl/2012 ... 12_web.pdf

prabhug · Post by **prabhug** » 22 Jun 2012 16:28

I have few questions

1.Has the time come for getting rid of AD guns leaving the job to missiles.
2.Looks like the Croatle has IR seeker with midcourse guidance ,Can we not do it with trishul which we was entirely dependent on RF guidance
3.why an Igla track mounted on a tracked wheel or a laser designated missile not better to this task ?

mody · Post by **mody** » 22 Jun 2012 18:16

Question for the guru's, how is the French ASMA/ASMP-A air launched cruise missile different from Brahmos missile.

Wiki-aunty says the following about the french missile:

Length: 5.38 m
Missile Weight: 860 Kgs.
Dia: 300 mm or 0.3 m
Range: 80 to 300 Kms. (upto 500 Kms for ASMP-A)
Speed: mach 2 to mach 3.
Propulsion: Liquid Ramjet
Warhead: Nuclear 150 to 300 Kt. (For ASMP-A 300 Kt Thermonuclear)

The missile seems similar to Brahmos, though 1/4th the weight, half the diameter and 2/3rd the length. Yet has comparable speed and range.

Can the Brahmos also be used as a Tactical/Strategic (Short Range) nuclear missile?
How is it that the French missile in terms of dimensions and in terms of weight so much smaller then the Brahmos and yet packs an equally good punch?

The French have just tested the missile from Rafale. Given its weight and dimensions, a Su-30 MKI, would easily be able to carry upto three such missiles, packing an awesome punch.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 Jun 2012 19:49

ASMP is part of french nuke deterrence force as an warning shot and is not used for conventional strikes to avoid confusion. chances of them selling that weapon to anyone else is about zero.

I doubt it is supersonic for the whole duration of flight. like the klub missiles.

p.s. about weight and range, keep in mind that it is air launched and max range is obtained from hi-alt launch. the brahmos is a SSM.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 Jun 2012 19:59

Rahul M wrote:ASMP is part of french nuke deterrence force as an warning shot and is not used for conventional strikes to avoid confusion. chances of them selling that weapon to anyone else is about zero.

I doubt it is supersonic for the whole duration of flight. like the klub missiles.

p.s. about weight and range, keep in mind that it is air launched and max range is obtained from hi-alt launch. the brahmos is a SSM.

What we should consider doing is make the air launched Nirbhay to be exclusively with nuclear payloads. The triad force against PRC would be more complete this way.

SandeepS · Post by **SandeepS** » 22 Jun 2012 20:03

rohitvats wrote: All the SP AD units are invariably part of (I) AD Brigades of Corps with offensive responsibilities.

(I) AD Bde have AD Regt, Light AD Regt/Light AD (Composite) Regt. SP (both SP AD i.e. Schilka & SP Missile Grp i.e. SAMs) are not (I) AD Bde formation units, they are generally part of Div/Corps formation. SP Msl Grp command was considered to be at par with (I) AD Bde in terms of command seniority.

John · Post by **John** » 22 Jun 2012 22:20

Rahul M wrote:ASMP is part of french nuke deterrence force as an warning shot and is not used for conventional strikes to avoid confusion. chances of them selling that weapon to anyone else is about zero.

I doubt it is supersonic for the whole duration of flight. like the klub missiles.

ASMP is supersonic thru flight but it doesn't have seeker, no terminal maneuvering, smaller warhead and air launched (smaller booster) hence it can achieve those speeds with smaller weight. Also the ramjet engine is little more advanced than one conceived for Brahmos/Oniks (which is based of ramjet engine used by Moskit), iirc the new ramjet engine for Oniks ran into a issues and had to resort to an existing design.

mody · Post by **mody** » 23 Jun 2012 12:34

As per FAS, the new ASMP-A has terminal maneuvering. Also the French are also supposed to be working on a Naval Anti-Ship missile based on the ASMP-A missile. The warhead and the final guidance for the anti-ship missile would be different.

The ASMP-A missile is all supersonic, using Liquid fueled Ramjet engine. The specifications of the missile are really impressive.

The Brahmos air launched version is supposed to have a weight of about 2,500 Kgs against the surface and ship based variants weight of 3,000 Kgs. As opposed to this the ASMP-A has a weight of only 860 Kgs for the air launched version, with same speed and same or higher range. Also the diameter is only half that of Brahmos.
The warhead weight is not known, but a 300 Kt Thermo nuke cannot weight less then 100-200 Kgs.

How is the french missile so much smaller and lighter then the Brahmos and still packs a comparable punch?? Only a better/more efficient or a more advanced Ramjet engine alone cannot account for so much difference.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jun 2012 12:59

SandeepS wrote:
rohitvats wrote: All the SP AD units are invariably part of (I) AD Brigades of Corps with offensive responsibilities.
(I) AD Bde have AD Regt, Light AD Regt/Light AD (Composite) Regt. SP (both SP AD i.e. Schilka & SP Missile Grp i.e. SAMs) are not (I) AD Bde formation units, they are generally part of Div/Corps formation. SP Msl Grp command was considered to be at par with (I) AD Bde in terms of command seniority.

I beg to differ...apart from Missile Groups (SP), the AD Missile Regiments (SP) are part of (I) AD Brigades. 612 (I) Mech AD Brigade is such an example. As for being part of a Corps, well, the fact they are Independent Brigades, means that they report directly to Corps HQ or sometimes, Command HQ. And invariably, the SP AD Missile assets are with Strike Corps. I'm yet to come across TOE of an armored division or any other division with integral/organic AD Assets. They are always assigned from senior HQ - Corps HQ in most cases.

vic · Post by **vic** » 23 Jun 2012 14:32

rohitvats wrote:
vic wrote:Seems like create a requirement which can be only fulfilled by imports when we have Astra, LRSAM and Akash in our kitty.
Well, can you apply your mind before posting drivel on the IA?

Inspite of your logical rebuttal it seems true! Another unnecessary import even though indigenous products are available

John · Post by **John** » 23 Jun 2012 21:01

Mody,
Yes ASMP does have some terminal maneuvering but it doesn't have hi-lo flight like Brahmos, where the latter flies at low attitude for over 30 km and performs far more complicated terminal maneuver. The seeker and onboard computer Brahmos takes' up considerable volume and is much larger than other Ashm. Also keep in mind Yakhont was originally advertised has having max range of over 500 km (hi flight path?) but to MTCR that is not likely to happen with Brahmos.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 23 Jun 2012 21:08

As a newbie, any idea if fuel components of missiles - in particular defending missile(A-to-A, ones hitting ships etc) ones if it is any varied at all from any other - are made in India?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 25 Jun 2012 17:42

^ Yes, you can check various DRDO publications which mention fuels used in different missiles. Eg. One of JV SAM in development uses a fuel mixture which includes RDX as one of the component.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 25 Jun 2012 18:48

mody wrote:As per FAS, the new ASMP-A has terminal maneuvering. Also the French are also supposed to be working on a Naval Anti-Ship missile based on the ASMP-A missile. The warhead and the final guidance for the anti-ship missile would be different.

The ASMP-A missile is all supersonic, using Liquid fueled Ramjet engine. The specifications of the missile are really impressive.

The Brahmos air launched version is supposed to have a weight of about 2,500 Kgs against the surface and ship based variants weight of 3,000 Kgs. As opposed to this the ASMP-A has a weight of only 860 Kgs for the air launched version, with same speed and same or higher range. Also the diameter is only half that of Brahmos.
The warhead weight is not known, but a 300 Kt Thermo nuke cannot weight less then 100-200 Kgs.

How is the french missile so much smaller and lighter then the Brahmos and still packs a comparable punch?? Only a better/more efficient or a more advanced Ramjet engine alone cannot account for so much difference.

I guess some of your questions are answered. As for the rest...

1. ASMP/ASMP-A from the start is an air-launched missile. But Brahmos is ship based. So the approach to the design for the both will be different.
2. Brahmos is more rugged compared to ASMP. Brahmos is supposed to survive after the hit, penetrate and then to explode. ASMP being a nuclear tactical missile, don't have that kind of requirements.
3. In lo-lo-lo profile ASMP range is only 60 km, half that of Brahmos.
4. In case of Brahmos, missile is built around the engine, ie from air entry to outlet, like the jet fighter aircraft in 50s, so the missile appears bigger in diameter and length compared to ASMP. Whereas ASMP is built like modern fighters.
5. It should be noted that, certain operational criteria required the missile to be built in certain way. There is very less information on ASMP/ASMP-A. So hard to comment on its restriction compared to Brahmos. But, Brahmos I, II, III in Indian hands proved that it is capable of doing any type of mission.

AbhiJ · Post by **AbhiJ** » 26 Jun 2012 12:47

From a Sister Forum by an Israeli Supposedly Working in IAI on Barak 8:

we tested a live bramos( without warhead ) form India
with Indian cooperation in acceptance trails 3 months ago(Feb 2012)
2 tests done 4 to go

it hit both times but second hit was partial with small part off shrapnel damaging the second missile

after 2 tests we have a 90% hit to kill with 1 missile per aggressor and 99% with two
bramos is a great missile i wish we could buy a few
but Gabriel 5 will have to do

officially Barack 8 is slower then bramos but only officially
rule off thumb Russia always exaggerate by 10% and Israel always hide 10% off real capability
mf star (my baby) can track bramos for frigate mast from 50 km away
and from destroyer mast 80 km away
the dual pulse motor made in India is your first world class truly indigence military product well done

Barack 8 has a parabolic look down self guide mode that is unique tech
sea skimmers are very easy pray from this position
if the ship radar can detect an approximate position before hand

MF STAR is a solid state electronically scanning aesa radar with 4 panels
similar to the American spy 1f radar
there are two versions a small one for frigate and a big one for destroyer
ship detection 500 km
warplane detection 200-300 km
tracking up to 3000 targets simultaneously
attacking 16 targets simultaneously
has hive capability to lead other fire units (from other vessels )

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Jun 2012 13:12

^^^ Likely some kid from israel wrote that stuff

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 26 Jun 2012 14:04

Brahmos can pull off many sets of terminal maneuvers, it can cruise up high and down low, Brahmos's range is capped at 300km in a HI-LO config, in reality it can easily fly 500 km in a HI-HI config and steep dive down on it's target from high altitude.

The range mentioned in almost all Indian missiles is usually the minimum range. All our missiles have ranges higher than those mentioned in media.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Jun 2012 15:00

its either a genuine guy(college fresher not a key senior player) or "Denil" is back on the grid.

the details looks realistic enough.

Indrajit · Post by **Indrajit** » 26 Jun 2012 18:26

Where's the link,plz post.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 26 Jun 2012 20:55

AbhiJ wrote:Many new technologies
developed indigenously
worked successfully in
Agni 5. The redundant
navigation systems,
very high accuracy ring
laser gyro-based inertial
navigation system (RINS),
and the most modern and
accurate micro navigation
system (MINS) ensured
that the missile reaches the target point within
few meters of accuracy. The high-speed onboard
computer and fault tolerant software along
with robust and reliable bus guided the missile
flawlessly.

http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/nl/2012 ... 12_web.pdf

Accuracy is consistent with other Strategic missiles. I said in the same thread years back, if we achieve similar accuracy even for long range missile in the league of ICBM, we are indeed arrived as Missile power. Today this is official.

More efforts are needed to get recognized as prime power, I guess we are approaching that hall mark.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 26 Jun 2012 20:59

AbhiJ wrote:
Barack 8 has a parabolic look down self guide mode that is unique tech
sea skimmers are very easy pray from this position
if the ship radar can detect an approximate position before hand

Is it not Aster too do that?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 26 Jun 2012 21:02

prabhug wrote:I have few questions

1.Has the time come for getting rid of AD guns leaving the job to missiles.
2.Looks like the Croatle has IR seeker with midcourse guidance ,Can we not do it with trishul which we was entirely dependent on RF guidance
3.why an Igla track mounted on a tracked wheel or a laser designated missile not better to this task ?

Is there any other sector where missiles completely replaced guns? Fighter aircraft still retain guns nor naval crafts removed their gun mounts.

John · Post by **John** » 26 Jun 2012 21:25

Kanson wrote:Is there any other sector where missiles completely replaced guns? Fighter aircraft still retain guns nor naval crafts removed their gun mounts.

For artillery bombardment or engaging smaller vessels naval gun mounts are still useful . But USN is phasing out phalanx in favor of RAM and there is very few new AAA only tracked or wheeled systems procured these days (even china and russia have been moving towards gun/missile based systems). But AAA guns have been converted into quite capable infantry fighting vehicles (as we saw during the Libyan conflict), which raises a question why not develop artillery/AAA system like Otomatic?

AbhiJ · Post by **AbhiJ** » 26 Jun 2012 22:00

Well here is the Link

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 27 Jun 2012 00:20

Kanson wrote:
prabhug wrote:I have few questions

1.Has the time come for getting rid of AD guns leaving the job to missiles.
2.Looks like the Croatle has IR seeker with midcourse guidance ,Can we not do it with trishul which we was entirely dependent on RF guidance
3.why an Igla track mounted on a tracked wheel or a laser designated missile not better to this task ?
Is there any other sector where missiles completely replaced guns? Fighter aircraft still retain guns nor naval crafts removed their gun mounts.

Actually, there is a very good reason never to give up on guns for AD -- once a gun is fired, the projectile is virtually impervious to ECM -- unlike any guided missile fired in an AD engagement. Susceptibility ECM is the major inherent weakness with guided missiles.

Moreover, before anyone considers giving up on AD guns, I think they should know what they're turning their backs on...

Keep in mind, the system depicted in the above video has been on the market for 10-12 years already, and there have certainly been improvements in RADAR and optical fire control technologies since this video was produced.

The video below is from a recent news report on Israeli TV...

The fact that Israel is considering full-scale deployment of this system should tell you that it's worthy of consideration by anyone interested in AD.

What makes this system special is the "AHEAD 35mm" air defense ammunition, explained in the latter half of the first video.

When India selected the Rafale for the MMRCA, I was delighted, in part because the canon on board is a 30mm gun; and it should be possible to make "AHEAD 30mm" ammunition to pair with an upgraded gun for an upgraded Rafale (when such a system is qualified for deployment on fighter aircraft, and you know someone is working on it, or they should be).

Such a gun, with such ammo as this AHEAD stuff, paired to the flight controls on the Rafale, would make the Rafale a *SUPER STAR* cruise missile killer, if it were kitted-out just for this purpose (without too much heavy ordinance on board, but lots and lots of AHEAD ammo).

In my LEGO-inspired imagination, there would be a few of these special 'cruise missile killer configuration' Rafales kept at the ready in the Western sector (where the cruise missile threat is greatest). These special planes should have 'hooks' for a catapult launch, but none of the heavy landing gear needed for a carrier landing, since they could land on a regular runway. In times of heightened tensions, the IAF could keep pilots in the cockpits around the clock, and if an attack was detected, it would be a matter of closing the canopy, charging the catapult and launching -- no quicker response!

[I'm gonna put my LEGO away now, and get back to work.

]

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 27 Jun 2012 01:01

I believe Rheinmetall was blacklisted by the MoD and will have to live off the scraps they make in the 40+ other countries in which they do business. Do not worry we have OFB on our side they will surely prepare us for all contingencies.

John · Post by **John** » 27 Jun 2012 03:49

Yes Skyshield is unlikely but if IIRC there was some interest in the Greek Artemis system.

Link Translated from Greek

SandeepS · Post by **SandeepS** » 27 Jun 2012 04:42

rohitvats wrote: I beg to differ...apart from Missile Groups (SP), the AD Missile Regiments (SP) are part of (I) AD Brigades. 612 (I) Mech AD Brigade is such an example. As for being part of a Corps, well, the fact they are Independent Brigades, means that they report directly to Corps HQ or sometimes, Command HQ. And invariably, the SP AD Missile assets are with Strike Corps. I'm yet to come across TOE of an armored division or any other division with integral/organic AD Assets. They are always assigned from senior HQ - Corps HQ in most cases.

I am not familiar with the formation units of Mech (I) AD Bde so I am happy to be updated. If I can confirm this info, then I will drop a line here to indicate. But (I) AD Bde have AD Regt, Light AD Regt or Light AD (Comp) Regt only. I do not have any open source reference at hand on this to share and I realise it might be difficult for you too, but in case you have any that show SP AD/SP Msl Grp as part of (I) AD Bde then please do share.

On SP AD being part of Armd Div, I am very sure that I have seen their eqpt sporting the Armd Div's div sign but I can't for the life of me remember the details though I do know they were part of one of the original Strike Corps. I will like to point out my info could be dated, so it could have changed now.