Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 04 Oct 2012 09:20

nakul wrote:We are developing Nirbhay with a range of 1000 km having loitering capabilities. Can anyone tell the datalink used to guide the missile to the target at such ranges? The Brahmos stores an image in its memory I presume before launching but this will not work for loitering targets.

Speaking of Nirbhay, when is the first test? no news on this? any news from paanwaalas?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 04 Oct 2012 09:21

arya wrote: good news! now we have 2 org. for defence R&D, 1- DRDO n 2-ISRO
wah re DDM masa-allah

TOIlet at its best... best to ignore these...
anyway, kudos to Tessy Maam.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 04 Oct 2012 10:17

There in an interesting news about Akash SAM SQ getting inducted in Pune to protect the Lohegaon AFB. Any news of this?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 04 Oct 2012 10:31

Prithvi-II tested to a range of 350KM... congrats DRDO and the SFC, I hope they are testing something uber cool in the guise of the P-II test... still waiting for Nirbhay?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Oct 2012 11:29

hopefully it was a 21" diameter prithvi-II fired from a cansister.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 04 Oct 2012 12:49

PratikDas wrote:Times of India: Isro’s missile woman gets Shastri award

I posted on errors in Defence reporting thread, Notice the Crappy Headline.

Surely a Media house is better formed

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 04 Oct 2012 12:53

Aditya_V wrote:
PratikDas wrote:Times of India: Isro’s missile woman gets Shastri award

I posted on errors in Defence reporting thread, Notice the Crappy Headline.

Surely a Media house is better formed

True. Sad that I didn't catch it myself.

sarabpal.s · Post by **sarabpal.s** » 04 Oct 2012 14:02

http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2012/10/in ... ssile.html

Nirbay Update
Missile test postponed till dec. due to change in launcher

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 04 Oct 2012 14:10

India's first 'made-in-Bangalore' missile Nirbhay set for Dec launch | DRDO makes changes to launcher

Nirbhay, the desi version of Tomahawk subsonic cruise missile will be ready for flight trials in December. Designed and developed at Bangalore-based Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE), a Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) unit, the two-stage missile has a range of about 1,000 km. It can travel at a speed of 0.7 Mach, performing multiple manoeuvers, before hitting the target.
Nirbhay (meaning fearless) will be India's first subsonic cruise missile, capable of being launched from different platforms. It is also India's first made-in-Bangalore missile, developed outside DRDO's Missile Complex in Hyderabad. Sources told Express that the launch, earlier planned for October, has now been shifted to December owing to the changes being made to the launcher. It is being built by R&D Engineers, Pune, a specialised arm of DRDO.
Other than one major imported component (a Russian-made turbofan engine), sources claim that the missile is completely indigenous. The cost of Nirbhay is expected to be around Rs 10 crore a piece with DRDO spending around Rs 70 crore so far. Though the project was sanctioned in 2004, the scientists ran into many critical challenges. “There were many unforeseen events we had to counter and overcome while developing Nirbhay. The project picked up momentum in 2010 onwards,” sources said.

Range = 1000 km
Speed = 0.7 Mach
Time = 1 hr 7 min (assuming Mach 1 = 1236 kmph)

Cost = Rs 10 crore (US$ 2 million)
37% Cheaper than Brahmos at US$ 2.73 million

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Oct 2012 14:14

Nirbhay would be a true game changer for us when it gets installed on all capital ships , submarine and land based launcher good for precise saturation strikes from multiple directions.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 04 Oct 2012 17:04

I hope we get Hiroshima & Nagasaki level nukes in those Nirbhays. 3 Arihants will be a tiny fleet to base our sea based deterrent on. The Nirbhay with a nuke device will do some good work in th East China sea within striking range of Beijing. I bet the Russians wouldn't mind conventional Nirbhays on Akula. Will India play goody goody or export them to Vietnam?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Oct 2012 17:23

So, nirbhay once launched can fire {that would be asking for too much} at few baburs and hatafs on the way to shower at least one petal.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 04 Oct 2012 19:04

They will features 24 types of warheads so i think they will the IA, INs and IAF's long range bread and butter. I hope they test quickly and induct in large numbers, we will need atleast 3000+ of these missiles deployed

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 04 Oct 2012 19:06

Septimus P. wrote:They will features 24 types of warheads so i think they will the IA, INs and IAF's long range bread and butter. I hope they test quickly and induct in large numbers, we will need atleast 3000+ of these missiles deployed

First time I 100% agree with Septimus

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 04 Oct 2012 19:28

According to Tarmak, Nirbhay is "approximately 6 metres long and 550 mm in diameter".

550mm = 21.625 inch. 21 inch = 533.4 mm.

Thus the approximate specs are tantalizingly close to that of a 21 inch TT. Hope it is designed with 21 inch TT in mind.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Oct 2012 20:06

I would go for 100s of UCAV rather 3000s of Nirbhay. [of course costly, and has a different multi-role]
If nirbhay is not built for stealth, then it is vulnerable being countered in air. not good.

UCAVs can do what Nirbhay can do and more.

drop heavy bombs (N!)
can be fitted with guns to fire at other cruise missiles/a/cs -
fire missiles
and do CAS support too, with ground control and especially suitable for IA.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 04 Oct 2012 20:28

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=19676

Glad to see that the Akash systems are earmarked for big key bases such as Gwalior and Pune.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Oct 2012 20:30

the $2 mil cost if true compares well with Thawk comes in @ $1.45mil after a long production run.
I am pasting some highlights...all of Septimus saar's favourite toys are here. looking at program costs, Qa Khan seems to hold a inventory of several hundred billion dollars worth of PGMs alone. no wonder the bhookha nanga RoN (rest of NATO) go crawling to the khans ger to get their ration of yak butter and PGMs in winter.

http://costofwar.com/publications/2011/ ... g-request/

Trident II D-5 Missile
$1,398.0 million requested for 24 missiles
$70.5 million -- per unit cost
$39,546.0 million -- total program cost

Tactical Tomahawk Cruise Missile
$312.1 million requested for 196 missiles
$1.45 -- per unit cost
$6,885.4 million -- total program cost

Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)
$110.7 million requested for 4,588 units
$0.026 million -- per unit cost
$5,752.4 million -- total program cost

Joint Stand-off Weapon (JSOW)
$145.4 million requested for 266 units
$0.49 million -- per unit cost
$5,076.7 million -- total program cost

Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM)
$242.0 million requested for 142 units
$1.54 million -- per unit cost
$7,711.3 million -- total program cost

Small Diameter Bomb
$200.3 million requested for 100 units
$N/A -- per unit cost
$5,076.7 million -- total program co

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 04 Oct 2012 20:33

Until UCAVs start flying together in semi-autonomous coordinated attacks, missiles are the only way to achieve saturation attacks. It is lot more difficult to send an aircraft (even it's UCAV) and then bring it back than the one way mission of a missile. And, before you say that UCAV does not have a pilot so is dispensable, a UCAV that doesn't return is no better than a missile but one that requires a static airfield (which cannot relocate if the enemy comes looking for it's place of launch).

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Oct 2012 20:37

a reaper costs $30 mil which is not cheap. and this for a slow vehicle needing remote piloting. a global hawk must be north of $100mil with his endurance, waypoint navigation and auto takeoff and landing.
throw in UCAV like internal bays, AI, better stealth and speed and surely its not cheaper than a 4++ gen bird.

UCAVs are imo the C++ of the aerospace industry. supposed to be cleaner, better, modular, polymorphic but C still rules

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 04 Oct 2012 20:42

Septimus P. wrote:They will features 24 types of warheads so i think they will the IA, INs and IAF's long range bread and butter. I hope they test quickly and induct in large numbers, we will need atleast 3000+ of these missiles deployed

That number is a pipe dream considering that it uses a Russian-made turbofan engine and that is a major imported component. Also if we make 120 of these per year it will take us 25 years to reach the 3000 number. Be reasonable in what you desire sirjee.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 04 Oct 2012 20:45

AURA is a few years away from being available. Till it comes online, we have to rely on cheaper missiles to do the dirty work for us. I don't even now how good our planes / UCAVs are going to be in comparison to S 300 & their chini clones. For well defended airspace, nothing beats missiles & stand off munitions. The other types (PGMs, dumb bombs) require a modicum of air superiority. Whatever be their quality, China will throw all their planes in order to prevent us from gaining air superiority. Our best bet is to rely on unmanned systems to take care of ground based targets while leaving the airborne targets to planes. Let's not forget that a lot of their air power will be concentrated on providing air cover for their troops just like we will do for ours. Numbers could well make the difference between holding enemy terrritory or fending off attacks on our own.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Oct 2012 20:49

Yes. UCAVs should be built for stealth, and dodge musharrafs among the musharrafs of trees and building. should not be visible in BVR mode, and can only be locked via optics/tv guided missiles. So, we can narrow down the mission profile where we could say, there is less likely chance that it would not return back to base... besides other normal failures

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 04 Oct 2012 21:32

India has purchased 45 Harpoon missiles for US$ 370 missiles for arming Jaguars & P8Is. At almost $8.3 million per missile, we would be probably better off spending such amount of money on desi hardware. A Brahmos costs only $2.7 m while a Nirbhay $2 m. To add to that, Pakis reportedly paisd only half that amount per missile. We should set up multiple production lines and start accepting early bird orders for Tejas. First 100 orders will get a Nirbhay free

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Oct 2012 04:50

Septimus P. wrote:They will features 24 types of warheads so i think they will the IA, INs and IAF's long range bread and butter. I hope they test quickly and induct in large numbers, we will need atleast 3000+ of these missiles deployed

I remember seeing models of Warheads developed for Prithvi SRBMs in Defexpo, DRDO and BDL would have built on these and developed these 24 types of warheads... God bless Prithvi missile, it allowed us to test so many bells and whistles for its longer legged cousins without attracting too much attention to Desh...
Arun S's missile page on Prithvi had pictures and sketches of these...

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Oct 2012 04:57

nakul wrote:India has purchased 45 Harpoon missiles for US$ 370 missiles for arming Jaguars & P8Is. At almost $8.3 million per missile, we would be probably better off spending such amount of money on desi hardware. A Brahmos costs only $2.7 m while a Nirbhay $2 m. To add to that, Pakis reportedly paisd only half that amount per missile. We should set up multiple production lines and start accepting early bird orders for Tejas. First 100 orders will get a Nirbhay free

this $8.3 Mil per missile includes a whole boat load of bells and whistles along with the missiles... being the first time purchase of these... Paki price also includes generous amount of GUBO which Desh is not ready to perform/allow. anyway FMS deals have a generous markup built in...

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 05 Oct 2012 05:19

^ actually India paid for both Indian and Paki order of the same missile.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 05 Oct 2012 07:04

the recent test of Prithvi using real time targeting information and its accuracy of 10m suggests that it could be used to target enemy missile TELs under the the counter-force concept? with Prithvi eventually making way for Prahaar

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Oct 2012 07:21

vasu raya wrote:the recent test of Prithvi using real time targeting information and its accuracy of 10m suggests that it could be used to target enemy missile TELs under the the counter-force concept? with Prithvi eventually making way for Prahaar

Both Prithvi and Prahaar have very short legs... their range imposes a limitation on them to be close to the theater of operation and hence potential targets in a first strike scenario. This is where a Brahmos or a Shaurya or an Agni-I comes into play... they can easily target enemy TELs as well as bases.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 05 Oct 2012 07:56

In the context of targeting conventional BMs on TELs, Shaurya and Agni-1 may not be suitable, Prithvi in addition to serving as a technology demonstrator has 350km range which is good for surprise since enemy TELs have little reaction time to be able to scoot, longer range missiles give enough warning time for movable targets even if CEP is low

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Oct 2012 08:02

vasu raya wrote:In the context of targeting conventional BMs on TELs, Shaurya and Agni-1 may not be suitable, Prithvi in addition to serving as a technology demonstrator has 350km range which is good for surprise since enemy TELs have little reaction time to be able to scoot, longer range missiles give enough warning time for movable targets even if CEP is low

TELs have little reaction time but then it cuts both ways, forward based Prithvi/Prahaar TELs can also be targeted by the Enemy. Prithvi also suffers from a reasonably long prep time ( I know it is not hours as reported by our DDM but it is indeed in minutes).
Methinks, all this 150k-250K-350K range of Prithvi is humbug and is atleast 2x-3x of this... atleast I hope so, else why would they still be under the purview of the SFC than under the Artillery div (similar to Brahmos TELs)

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Oct 2012 10:09

TSS of "The Hindu" reports

The SFC is slated to fire a Dhanush, a naval variant of Prithvi, on Friday off the eastern coast.

All the best for the test. This Dhanush test closely follows the Prithvi-II test on Wednesday.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Oct 2012 10:09

^^^Link to the original article in The Hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/p ... 964130.ece

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 05 Oct 2012 12:41

Shrinivasan wrote:TSS of "The Hindu" reports
The SFC is slated to fire a Dhanush, a naval variant of Prithvi, on Friday off the eastern coast.
All the best for the test. This Dhanush test closely follows the Prithvi-II test on Wednesday.

Dhanush successfully test fired

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 05 Oct 2012 15:22

Having 3000 Nirbhay is not too ambitious, this i believe is a minimum requirement, we have ordered thousands of brahmos, no reason why much more Nirbhays shouldn't be order. It's capability to carry 24 types of warheads would be very useful in all kinds of scenarios. It's engine might be imported for now but i don't expect to remain that way forever, we will most liekly have local manufacture under tot to begin with and later blocks will certainly have an Indian variant.

Looking at the vast number of warhead types, we will most certaily have the following types; Regular HE (ideally ICL-20), Nuke, Chemical, Bio, Bunker busting, Fragmentation, KE (Kinetic Energy) warhead for short range high speed level burst runs on unsuspecting ships, Thermobaric warhead for caves and tunnels, Pre-Frag, Incendiary, Thermite, Bomblets, Cluster, Sensor Fused warheads, Blast Cum Earth Shock warhead, Burst warhead etc

I think they should also have a mini Nirbhay with a shorter range of around 500 km to be used from all IAF, IN aircraft.

Furthermore, producing such numbers is not an issue, all one needs is a couple of large facilities and automated lines and it is possible to have 300 to 500 produced every year. They can perhaps borrow seeker tech from Brahmos. I think a production run of 6 to 10 is adequate to have good numbers.

Besides large orders will reduce prices. I think Brahmos 1/2/ Mini, Nirbhay/Mini, Shaurya/Sagarika are our most useful weapons medium to long range tactical weapons. I hope they come to their senses and order around a 1000 to 2000 Shaurya/ Sagarika as well. We also need thousands of rockets to be made for the Pinaka, Prahaar as well.

We also need to boost the order of Arihant class subs, a minimum of 15 are needed to guarantee any form of serious offensive capablity.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 05 Oct 2012 15:36

The current price of Brahmos / Nirbhay at 10 crore is very high. To make missiles cost effective, Abdul Kalam had proposed reusable missiles. IMHO, for targets less than 500 km, the missile should be able to jettison the payload and return to base. Here is a scene where a missile jettisons its payload. Unlike the one shown below, ours could return to base for reuse.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 05 Oct 2012 15:51

nakul wrote:The current price of Brahmos / Nirbhay at 10 crore is very high. To make missiles cost effective, Abdul Kalam had proposed reusable missiles. IMHO, for targets less than 500 km, the missile should be able to jettison the payload and return to base. Here is a scene where a missile jettisons its payload. Unlike the one shown below, ours could return to base for reuse.

The sheer stresses and the G forces a missile goes through in the few seconds will definitely have an impact on the reusability of the casing of the missile. Air to air missiles have to be retired just after a number of sorties as being exposed to the high velocity air while the aircraft is on the move impacts its airworthiness and other associated problems.

Maybe at the best the internal electronics and motors can be reused.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 05 Oct 2012 16:15

^^^

Lakshya is a reusable system. Perhaps a similar system could be developed. But them that enters the territory of the UCAV.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 05 Oct 2012 16:39

Of all Indian Missiles, Dhanush Still Intrugues, why a Ballistic missile on a Surface ship with short legs.

And looking at our OPV's, Only 1 missile can be carried, even it reloads are stored on the ship, moving the missile in the ship to the launcher will be cumbersome.

does anybody have any idea for what role IN plans to use these ships?

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 05 Oct 2012 16:44

It was our first aircraft carrier / ship killer / sea based nuke deterrent. I think it would have helped us learn launching missiles in a non stationery situation which helped in the SLBM programs. In the olden days, SLBMs were launched from surface like Dhanush. Today, Brahmos can do the same from a variety of platforms. I hope Dhanush could form the platform for our own version of DF 21 AC killer. Launched from anywhere, it could receive mid course guidance and home in to the AC using an onboard seeker.