Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 19 Oct 2013 16:36

Looks like it.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 19 Oct 2013 18:31

Arjun uses hydro-penumatic suspension helping its gun pointing ability while on the move, so the TELs being in the same weight category can leverage the same feature to reduce terrain impact in addition to the articulated wheels

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 19 Oct 2013 18:33

Kanson wrote:
Prem Kumar wrote:Not just a question of interested, but investing considerable resources to sabotage a test (of a proven missile).

Possible? Yes
Probable? No

IMO & all that

P.S. Thanks for the NOTAM info
FYI, the test range in POK is always watched. We may not know whether it was purposely turned off or mere accidental.

we don't want to be in such a state if we can help it, the recent sub accident cause analysis is exactly in such a state - unless its all a diplomatic charade

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 19 Oct 2013 19:41

Garg wrote:
There is always a risk of solid rocket developing cracks. It is easier to transport a liquid fuel rocket.

India has been developing and operating various types of solid rockets / missiles / launch vehicles for years. It is quite aware of the problem of solid motors developing cracks due to aging. It has solutions for it and it is been developed, tested and also used

And yes liquid fuel rockets can be transported easily but without fuel (Due to sloshing, rocket and fuel have to be separated for travel). Who will fuel at the launch site? Again the fuel has to be transported separately. This is the precise reason why Prithvi missile has several support trucks and Agni doesn't have much. For a nuke war, solid missiles are better. But for a Iran - Iraq attrition type war of missiles, Prithvi might be a better option

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 20 Oct 2013 21:42

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 191824.ece

this article quotes Ms Thomas stating
[quote]Ms. Thomas said that while the two-stage Agni-III missile capable of hitting targets up to 3,000 km away
weighed 50 tonnes, the team was able to bring down the weight of the missile to 22 tonnes.[\quote]

so what should i interpret:
1. that the weight of future Agni 3 missile is now 22 tonne
2. can it be inferred that this upgrade in Agni 3 will have proportional benefits for agni V
3. if she was talking this advancement for agni 4 then wiki states agni 4's weight at 17 tonne and not 22 tonne.
4. i get a feeling that this advancement is actually going into the K4 SLBM , 10 metre, ~22 tonne, 3500-4000 km

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 20 Oct 2013 22:52

The second testing of our c.m. is also pending. Hope some good news will be around.

sivab · Post by **sivab** » 21 Oct 2013 03:23

Tessy Thomas ... The latest in the series Agni IV and V was totally a technical challenge but however, having successfully developed it, the country has been established as a technologically advanced nation now. This progress was evident, she said, as no other country has achieved the single digit pin point accuracy that India has achieved.

http://newindianexpress.com/cities/koch ... 812412.ece

Ms. Thomas, Project Director of the 4,000-km-range Agni-IV and Project Director (Mission) of Agni-V, said both missiles saw the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) attain great breakthroughs in missile technology. Agni-V, test-fired with “pinpoint, single-digit accuracy,” was important in the global scenario, obliquely referring to the ICBM range of the nuclear-capable missile.

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 191824.ece

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Oct 2013 03:43

point for our mil folks to note, is get exact pin point targets for MARVs, perhaps integrated and updated with real-time satellite monitoring system for mission v&v.

we can focus on the efficacy of miniaturized higher tonnage weapons.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Oct 2013 05:03

Good weight reduction. And great confirmation of the accuracy.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 21 Oct 2013 10:48

The accuracy figures quoted by the project director, also ought to settle the fizzile vs Sizzile debate. WRT, the payload. As a single digit accuracy removes the need for a big bang.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Oct 2013 11:02

sivab wrote:Agni-V, test-fired with “pinpoint, single-digit accuracy,” was important in the global scenario, obliquely referring to the ICBM range of the nuclear-capable missile.

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 191824.ece

Truly Amazing , We can practically use Agni-5 and 4 to hit out long range high value target with 2 T conventional payload with Single Digit Accuracy....India's version of Prompt Global Strike Capability

vishal · Post by **vishal** » 21 Oct 2013 18:07

DRDO missile exports: http://ajaishukla.blogspot.sg/2013/10/f ... -arms.html

What is the Pragati SSM? Is it really a lower range version of Prahaar as answered in one of the comments?

koti · Post by **koti** » 21 Oct 2013 18:56

I think its a typo. Pragati does not sound like an apt name for a SSM

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Oct 2013 19:23

Considering our meager eventual number of land and sub based missiles, i consider a well tested 250kt thermo weapon to be absolute necessity for counter value targets, which are the only targets we can hope to address with our low inventory.

Only usa and russia can play a game of chicken with counterforce attacks because of their huge reserve inventory of well tested missiles and mirvs.

So cancel the party folks..we still need to test the new generation of weapons.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 21 Oct 2013 19:24

ramana wrote:Good weight reduction. And great confirmation of the accuracy.

Waithing for Pokhran 3 now

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Oct 2013 19:26

It is a must to cement the credibility of our n weapons. Missiles without proven warheads will not even deter tsp let alone a seasoned miscreant like cheen.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 21 Oct 2013 19:55

NaMo and Pokhran 3 goes hand in hand.

pushkar.bhat · Post by **pushkar.bhat** » 21 Oct 2013 20:15

Pokhran 3 will make no sound, will not leave a hole in the ground and will definitely not shake the earth. In all likelihood it will be simulated in some lab one of these days without we realizing it.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Oct 2013 20:22

Pratyush wrote:The accuracy figures quoted by the project director, also ought to settle the fizzile vs Sizzile debate. WRT, the payload. As a single digit accuracy removes the need for a big bang.

Not really as it depends on the target. A modern mega city needs quite a few even if they are precise.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 21 Oct 2013 20:49

Singha wrote:Considering our meager eventual number of land and sub based missiles.

I don't know whether there is any public reference to the number of missiles we'll field - land and sub based combined. I'd hesitate before dubbing it meager.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Oct 2013 21:03

well by 2025 we should have 3 arihants all in service with some 4 x K4 each. let us assume K4 or K4+ is a new mirv design with 3 warheads each. thats only 12 missiles and 36 warheads on paper and probably 8,24 if one sub is in dock.
nobody knows if a successor class with 12-16 tubes is under construction already or when we can see it.

about the A4 and A5 we are yet to see any statements but my best guess is 60 of each - eventually - I am scared we build out quite slowly rather than a war footing.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 21 Oct 2013 21:10

Thing is we have the A1,A2 - and then presumably A4, A5 (assuming A3 was only TD). Even if we have overall numbers of a few hundred (say 300), I would still say thats a robust number when armed with n-warheads. We have to factor in the additional numbers that will go on missiles like the Nirbhay and ALA (Air Launched Article) etc. If we have to move away from these numbers to (say) a force in the thousands, then we have to drop the charade of fielding a minimum nuclear deterrent and be overt about our capabilities, plus be serious about n-warfighting.. and that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Oct 2013 08:00

We need at least 300 N-warheads to deter China alone.The Chinese are investing very heavily in their ABM R&D,apart from begging,borrowing or stealing whatever it can get from both east and west.Pak too is on a huge N-weapons production spree,one suspects part for the Saudis,and its number is said to be over 200.Therefore,a min. figure of 500N-warheads plus at least 50 5000KM+ missiles with MIRVs is essential to deter the dragon.In addition we need another 25+ full-fledged ICBMs for deterring any mishcief from further afar.

Vinit · Post by **Vinit** » 22 Oct 2013 10:15

Philip wrote:We need at least 300 N-warheads to deter China alone.

IMO, deterrence would be based on the loss-gain equation - how much an adversary is willing to suffer, and what it expects to gain for that loss. A nation led by extremist-jihadist types who are willing to gain paradise through mutual nuclear annhilation will not be deterred by any number of nukes. On the other hand, a western democracy would be reasonably deterred by the probability of a couple of nukes slipping through defensive screens.

I think China is somewhere in the middle; the probability of a dozen nukes hitting key targets should be deterrence enough for a "normal" war (if such a thing exists). Their ABM systems, within the next decade, could not stop more than a fraction of Indian missiles.

Therefore, my guestimate (as bad as any other uninformed one) is for required Indian nuclear strength is around 80 - 120 warheads. The greater the number, the more the costs.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 22 Oct 2013 10:51

According to Shukla in comments, Pragati is a lower ranged version of Prahaar.
Strange name for a missile

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 22 Oct 2013 10:57

Is the DRDO so confident of the Prahar that they have designed a shorter ranged version of the missile. That too after just 1 test firing.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 22 Oct 2013 11:10

No tests of the new missile and they are displaying it an international expo too. What missile could be more short ranged than Prahaar ? Why not just use Smerch or Pinaka ?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 Oct 2013 11:42

jamwal wrote:According to Shukla in comments, Pragati is a lower ranged version of Prahaar.
Strange name for a missile

sounds like the name of a magazine from ministry of agriculture.

it might simply be range limited by SW.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Oct 2013 15:10

No jihadi sentiment! Pak is investing heavily in TNWs. Plus,we cannot rule out a first strike from either China or Pak,both can never be trusted. Until our SSBN subs are commissioned in strength,we will have to depend upon land and airborne N-warheads. 5-6 subs with 12X3 warheads per missile would give us a max. of 180 warheads. The numbers of land and air-delivered warheads could then be reduced approproately.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 24 Oct 2013 17:05

cross posting from PAK thread -

Singha wrote:more than raw nos, its our lack of proper tools to target and take out their airbases and electronic network that emboldens them about tech parity. my list includes.

(a) the R77 is long in tooth and the replacement is years away - will coincide with pakfa IOC
(b) limited nos of old KH31P in the ARM role
(c) very limited nos of popeye as the standoff air launched weapon
(d) no growlers for escort jamming
(e) no GLCMs to launch day1 attacks on IADS infra
(f) only 3 phalcons , desi aew nowhere close to IOC
(g) no status on IAF fleetwide data link pgm
(h) long in tooth Mig27 and Bisons that will surely suffer failures under heavy usage pattern
(i) no gliding long range munitions like SDB to cheaply shut their bases every few hours
(j) LCA nowhere close to FOC and full production
(k) onlee 6 tankers
(l) ELINT a/c on biz jets is at tender stage only
(m) Akash orders will take years to complete and provide cover for outdated sa3 / sa6 systems to our vital targets
(n) no sign of the LRSAM

without all the above we simply cannot crush them in a 10:1 exchange ratio. they would be happy to fight on a 1:1 or 2:1 ratio because denial of quick victory is also a major victory in their game plan and this prospect keeps india at bay.

due to our lack of SAMs and partial IADS/AEW they are also confident of using the latest F-16 and the 500+ JDAMs being given to land some smashing high profile blows on tier-1 indian targets like oil refiners, power plants , POL farms and railway junctions in the north and west. this again is a deterrent to india.

(b) DRDO has taken up ARM development on a priority basis to address the issue which is supposed take 3-5 years. hence IMO limited numbers but 'enough' to take care of immediate needs.

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 334265.ece

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 327616.ece

(e) Nirbhay again is expected to complete trials and get ready for prod in 2 years. the glitch in the navigation system (probably SW) that happened in the first Nirbhay test should not be a big problem.

(f) IAF is in the process of adding 2 additional Phalcons which is as per ACM in 'advanced stage'. besides DRDO AEW&CS should start coming online in 1/2 years.

(g) with AFNET Grid up and IACCS progressing at good pace that issue should again resolve itself in 2/3 years.

(h) they need to be given a hearty farewell. IAF needs to go on a war footing to induct LCA 1s in larger number than envisaged than wait for the gold standard to arrive in Mark 2. they can be replaced when Mark 2 arrives and can be sold of to friendly third countries or even be used in pure AD role.

(j) slated for IOC 2 by the year end. i have said it before but will say again. there are instances where aircrafts have been inducted without IOC and the AFs and designers have sorted out issues along the way. this is peacetime and IAF can very well do the same instead of waiting for ever till everything is sorted out to their satisfaction. IAF is the biggest stakeholder in the project and if they want they can guide the other stake holders and in the process help India to be 'partly' independant in strategic terms. this they can do without compromisisng on their war preparedness.

(k) A330 would be happening as it won the tender.

The officially estimated value of the project is Rs INR 8,500 crore (about US $1.55 billion at current conversion rate). Negotiations for a formal contract should begin within this financial year, that is by March 2013, and hopefully end within 2013.

http://indiastrategic.in/topstories1874 ... tanker.htm

ofc it may take more time than end of 2013 but certainly not beyond 2014 i guess.

(m) BDL had some issues with prod of Akash couple of years back which led to some delay but they were addressed. IAF has ordered 8 sq of which 1 is in place, 2nd is being implemented. 6 will be in the NE/N. IA ordered 2 sq.

yes it may take longer than thought.

all in all a 5 year timeframe should address all your points i hope.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 25 Oct 2013 08:05

Rahul M wrote:
jamwal wrote:According to Shukla in comments, Pragati is a lower ranged version of Prahaar.
Strange name for a missile
sounds like the name of a magazine from ministry of agriculture.

it might simply be range limited by SW.

Although I and perhaps others were tempted to think that the name was captured in error, it certainly looks like the name is right. If so, it might indeed be a range limited version of a desi missile, since we've never heard of it before.

Seoul ADEX 2013

DRDO, MoD, India
- Truck-Pragati Missile System
- Truck-Akash Airforce Launcher

Look for the orange rectangles.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 25 Oct 2013 10:07

Waiting to see how many they put on a truck. It would be nice if they get 4 missiles with 1000 pounds all the way to 150 KMS. Nice tactical missile. With multiple types of payloads we have, a cheap & high precision missile like this will end up as the mainstay, call on demand artillery. That is pragati for sure!

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 25 Oct 2013 10:42

Cybaru wrote:Nice tactical missile. With multiple types of payloads we have, a cheap & high precision missile like this will end up as the mainstay, call on demand artillery. That is pragati for sure!

Going a bit OT, but it is necessary to "nip in the bud" this highly mistaken PoV that refuses to go away on BR that missile artillery will replace tube artillery as the mainstay.

Re-posting something from the artillery thread...from the chaps who do this for a living.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a494044.pdf

"While the field artillery was developing new variants of ATACMS and the tactics, techniques, and procedures to employ them, many in the Army thought this new deep focus came at the cost of support to maneuver forces engaged in the close battle. Indicative of this suspicion was an article written in 2001 by a retired infantry officer. LTC(Retired) Robert Leonhard’s article on artillery support summed up many in the maneuver community’s misgivings regarding the field artillery’s dedication to the closefight. LTC Leonhard wrote that the artillery could no longer integrate fires with infantry and armor units because of a parallel fire support system that only supports the attack of an artillery-devised High Payoff Target List (HPTL)"

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Oct 2013 14:04

do we still retain the nissan jonga mounted 75mm RCL as a direct infantry support weapon vs thin skin vehicles and bunkers? if not, how about a slightly bigger but equally agile concept like this one?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26auRqvbHck

105mm, non automated, capable of low depression but also high elevation....could be airlifted inside a An32 or atleast the C130J, runs on truck diesel, needs no special tools or footprint ...could be direct fire or replace the 120mm mortars for high angle mountain work. a C17 could probably carry 8 of these in one shot nearly half a regiment!

our parachute and marcos troops who deploy by air could use this as a door kicker and road blocker type weapon where LAWs or CGs would not work.

mody · Post by **mody** » 25 Oct 2013 15:30

Singha, the OFB truck mounted 105 mm gun, is fairly similar.

http://www.forceindia.net/gallery/large ... 012/21.jpg

The truck on which the gun is mounted can be improved.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Oct 2013 15:51

the 155mm mafia here will say nothing short of 155mm will do. predictable! we won a fast moving leap frogging war in 1971 with only light arty...the only war we have comprehensively won since 1947 barring Op Cactus

mobility will create its own non-linear effects and shock...a fact the soviet army well understood when it emphasized mobility over firepower over protection.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 25 Oct 2013 17:36

India creates 60 - 170 km Pragati - Surface to Surface Tactical Missile System

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 25 Oct 2013 17:43

The Pic looks Photoshopped to me. As no recorded tests have taken place of the new missile system.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 25 Oct 2013 17:45

Pic is from leaflet.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Oct 2013 18:06

distance from amritsar to sargodha is 250km.
bhuj to karachi is 320km.

for the first time we have a cheap missile to strike enemy corps HQ, supply dumps and POL in some real depth.