Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 28 Oct 2013 17:11

Pragati

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Oct 2013 19:03

vasu raya wrote:Chander saab says all future missiles will be canistered, maybe he was setting the expectations

He meant A series and strat missiles.

RF camo clothing can survive heat or missile plume?

No.. which is why trusses = more RCS stuff is pointless unless you redesign entire vehicle/launcher for stealth

the TATRA chassis should have been reverse engineered by now by the 'IA folks' or by BEML, its compact

IIRC they were still importing SKD kits.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Oct 2013 19:04

Jamwal, L&T

chackojoseph wrote:
Karan M wrote:A total of 4.
They might be dummies.

Of course they are dummies.. its a model.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Oct 2013 19:05

A Sharma wrote:Pragati

Awesome. So canisters .. we can expect AAD to be similar.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Oct 2013 19:20

Kanson wrote:
PratikDas wrote:If the Nirbhay launcher combines both functions, which it does appear to, I suppose the compromise in manoeuvrability was considered by the designers to be acceptable.
Brahmos range is ~ 300 km, in many cases it is only 100+ km. So to reach the target, the launcher must be placed closer and needs to negotiate the terrain to do so. For that the launcher vehicle needs "manoeuverability" to negotiate the terrain ahead.

OTOH, Nirbhay is a ~ 1000 km missile. So the launcher doesn't need all such "manoeuverability" as that of Brahmos.

Unlike Brahmos Fire & Forget type, Nirbhay is a loitering subsonic missile with the ability to pick and chose targets. So the launcher and C&C comes with attendant tasks.

Unless it has terminal guidance dont see how it can pick and choose targets..

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Oct 2013 19:22

pragnya wrote:yes. this was reported in HT too. i speculated on the basis of it here -

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 2#p1522972

Thanks, so they may create more missile groups. Or inventory rises. Either ways a plus.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Oct 2013 19:41

A report on Russian hypersonic missile dev.,hinting that the hyper version of BMos is well under dev.

Russia’s hypersonic trump card edges closer to reality
Russia & India Report

Originally published at
http://indrus.in/economics/2013/10/23/r ... 30325.html
Posted on October 23, 2013 by editor

Russia’s newest ballistic missile the RS-26 Rubezh. Source: RIA Novosti

The RS-26 Rubezh will significantly expand the ability of Russian strategic nuclear forces to overcome missile defence systems

By the end of this year, Moscow will test its newest ballistic missile, the RS-26 Rubezh (which means frontier in Russian) equipped with hypersonic manoeuvring nuclear units. As Colonel General Vladimir Zarudnitsky, chief of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, said to Vladimir Putin, this system will significantly expand the ability of Russian strategic nuclear forces to overcome missile defence systems. The technical specifications of the new missile have not been disclosed. However, public recognition of the fact that it has “hypersonic manoeuvring nuclear units” indicates it is an ultimate weapon.

“Ballistic missiles have a certain trajectory and power supply capacity. It is rather difficult to reach beyond these parameters in the development of new models of this type,” says Vladimir Dvorkin, the former head of the 4th Central Research Institute of the Ministry of Defence (the institution that studies the effects of nuclear weapons). “So currently the only thing that can be upgraded is most likely the warhead of ballistic missiles.”

Back in 1997, then Chief of General Staff Yury Baluyevsky announced proudly that Russia had developed a hypersonic cruise vehicle (HCV). Its flight path is non-classical, meaning it doesn’t follow the classic parabola like a modern nuclear warhead, but can arbitrarily change directions. HCVs can enter outer space, and then re-enter the earth’s atmosphere. A conventional nuclear warhead enters the dense layers of the atmosphere at a speed of 5,000 metres per second. The speed of the HCV is twice as high. This makes it very hard to detect with radar missile defence systems. In addition, as military personnel note, the HCV can be retargeted throughout its entire flight, unlike conventional warheads.

Currently, the U.S. is working on several hypersonic missiles: the HySTR, Hyper-X, and X-34. Some of them are modelled on the strategic ballistic missiles that were removed from service. But there are other missiles. For example, at the MAKS-2013 air show a representative of the BrahMos Russian-Indian venture admitted that soon India will receive a hypersonic version of the anti-ship missile. According to him, a hypersonic engine for it has already been created and tested. The only ‘but’ delaying the finished product is the lack of materials that can protect its guidance system from overheating and subsequent failure. However, as can be seen from the work of the Russians, Moscow has already solved this problem. Not so long ago, Vladimir Popovkin, the former head of the Federal Space Agency, said that testing is being completed on the Zircon missile system. It includes a new hypersonic missile, created on the basis of the Onyx supersonic cruise missile (Russia’s equivalent of the Indian BrahMos).

In early 1997 engineers from the Raduga Design Bureau in Dubna (located just outside Moscow) displayed a new class of airborne vehicle — the Kh-90 hypersonic experimental cruise missile — at the International Aviation Aerospace Salon (MAKS) in Zhukovsky. In the West, it was called the AS-19 Koala.

This rocket was made to replace the Kh-55 strategic cruise missile that is carried by the Tu-160 bomber. Its flight range was 3,000 km. The missile could carry two warheads with individual guidance, each capable of hitting targets at a distance of 100 km from the point of separation. The carrier of the X-90 was to be a modernised version of the Tu-160M strategic bomber. However, according to official data, work on the missile was suspended in 1992.

There were also more exotic designs. For example, one of the missile design bureaus proposed placing several supersonic or hypersonic cruise missiles instead of a nuclear warhead in a heavy ballistic missile. The designers thought that with this weapon, the Soviet Union would have been able to engage U.S. aircraft carrier fleets anywhere in the world directly from Siberia. A ballistic missile would carry the warhead into the targeted area, and there the cruise missiles themselves would detect and strike the target. The idea was abandoned because of its exorbitant cost, and the Koala was left as the only tangible evidence of the scientists’ hypersonic research. All other development was kept top secret.

But after the United States stepped up its own work on hypersonic cruise vehicles, Moscow returned to its own hypersonic “trump cards,” including the RS-26 Rubezh “manoeuvring nuclear unit” ballistic missile.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 28 Oct 2013 19:55

Karan M wrote:
A Sharma wrote:Pragati

Awesome. So canisters .. we can expect AAD to be similar.

isn't it similar to Prahar??

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Oct 2013 21:37

The TBRL news is music to ears. Hope this reduces the IAF air plane fratricides.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 28 Oct 2013 23:19

A Sharma wrote:Pragati

I am generally a big critic of DRDO presentations. But this is good. They have made much more real looking TEL for Pragati than what they have been showcasing at the RD parade and DefExpo for Prahaar. May be that is because they are much further in the design phase now.

1. Pragati seems to have additional fins just behind the nose cone when compared to Prahaar.
2. How did they get the tractor trolley for Pragati and Aakash there? By air or by seas? And if by air, how?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Oct 2013 23:34

Indranil, you should be happy that they did not place flower pots around the exhibit. Thats the standard at all desi exhibits.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 29 Oct 2013 00:54

damn this looks awesome! So Akash 2 which may be slightly longer than 1 would end up in a canister exactly like this.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 01:17

Doubt that.. because they'd have to change the launcher ..

John · Post by **John** » 29 Oct 2013 04:07

It may not be possible with Akash, it has to be fired with a direct path to the target so it would requires the launcher to able to traverse 360 degrees. Having it enclosed in launcher adds weight and reaction time.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Oct 2013 04:21

indranilroy wrote:I am generally a big critic of DRDO presentations. But this is good. They have made much more real looking TEL for Pragati than what they have been showcasing at the RD parade and DefExpo for Prahaar. May be that is because they are much further in the design phase now.

Funds. You go to business meet with appropriate attire even it means purchasing new one. Logic is I can spend money if that in turn brings more money. DRDO is to certain extent financially OK but not wealthy. RD parades are just local affair.

Added later: TEL is just the usual one.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Oct 2013 04:28

Karan M wrote:Unless it has terminal guidance dont see how it can pick and choose targets..

You mean to say it won't have terminal guidance? Fearless is not blind.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 04:35

Don't see any indication yet. We are still working on our first LACM RF seekers and while it is possible they put a Nag derived IIR seeker, the test showed a nose cone which was completely opaque, though theoretically it could be a colored RF transparent radome. So only option (IMHO) is if they acquired LACM RF seekers from somewhere.. but it doesn't look like it.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 04:48

Only referencing indian reports which are either sourced from DRDO or from decent journos

No mention of seeker, only RLG-INS and mission planning to avoid radars
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-ni ... le-1111269

One mistake in this article by TSub, turboprop etc. So not sure whether can pick out one target and attack it is accurate either (in autonomous/terminal phase, as versus fixed targets with known locations)
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 968219.ece

Mentions only terrain hugging, i.e. radalt
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 321753.ece

Tarmak - usually reliable, mentions only terrain hugging capability (radaltimetre) and RLG-INS for guidance. No seeker
http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2012/10/in ... ssile.html

So while it could include a seeker one day (leveraging those being made for Brahmos)..its not there currently per my estimate

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 29 Oct 2013 04:55

what about brahmos LACM's seeker ?

John · Post by **John** » 29 Oct 2013 05:39

A Sharma wrote:Pragati

Compared to HIMARS it certainty seems to pack more punch granted it is 6x6 vs 12x12 platform but i don't think it loses much in terms of maneuverability.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Oct 2013 08:00

no cold launch cansister..looks like a simple hot launch patriot SAM type box launcher.
the nirbbay arrangement 4 tube is most similar to the now defunct tomahawk GLCM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BGM-1 ... 09185.JPEG

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 29 Oct 2013 08:13

Karan M wrote:A total of 4.

If you are talking about the number of missiles in a TEL then i think it is 3 not 4.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Oct 2013 09:20

Rahul M wrote:what about brahmos LACM's seeker ?

An earlier report on Nirbhay spoke of X-band monopulse SAR radar for terminal guidance similar to the one 'now being developed for both the BrahMos-1’s Blocks-2/3 and the Prahaar NLOS-BSM'.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 29 Oct 2013 10:41

thx SS.

vaibhav.n wrote:
Rahul M wrote:rohit how does an AD group compare to an arty regt. in terms of structure, i.e # of batteries and so on ?
They are both fairly similar,due to their shared heritage. Only at the Battery level do differences crop up, where while a Med Arty Bty will have 2 Gun Troops(each with 3 Med Guns) a AD Regt will have 3 Gun Troops(each with 2 AD Guns). AD units will also not have a FOO(Forward Observation Officer) Party.

Air Defence Regts can also be composite in nature, where their weapons differ battery to battery due to their role on the battlefield.

dhanyabad.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 29 Oct 2013 11:38

From the discussion above, it looks like these were already posted here; however, I can not see any images and am posting them (all taken from milphotos).

Must say, job well done to DRDO. Specially on the Pragti TEL. The first image is so bad ass. Though Prahar was a much better name.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Oct 2013 12:03

Karan M wrote:Only referencing indian reports which are either sourced from DRDO or from decent journos

No mention of seeker, only RLG-INS and mission planning to avoid radars
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-ni ... le-1111269

One mistake in this article by TSub, turboprop etc. So not sure whether can pick out one target and attack it is accurate either (in autonomous/terminal phase, as versus fixed targets with known locations)
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 968219.ece

Mentions only terrain hugging, i.e. radalt
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 321753.ece

Tarmak - usually reliable, mentions only terrain hugging capability (radaltimetre) and RLG-INS for guidance. No seeker
http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2012/10/in ... ssile.html

So while it could include a seeker one day (leveraging those being made for Brahmos)..its not there currently per my estimate

From the Hindu Tsub link you mentioned, a direct quote from DRDO official says,

“Even if there are multiple targets, it can pick out a target and attack it. It is a loitering missile; it can go round and round a target, perform several manoeuvres and take it apart. It has precision, endurance and accuracy. It is an important missile,” DRDO officials said.

To do this it must have terminal guidance. The ability to pick and choose targets is what matters.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 29 Oct 2013 12:42

SSridhar wrote:
Rahul M wrote:what about brahmos LACM's seeker ?
An earlier report on Nirbhay spoke of X-band monopulse SAR radar for terminal guidance similar to the one 'now being developed for both the BrahMos-1’s Blocks-2/3 and the Prahaar NLOS-BSM'.

in which case Datapatterns's SAR monopulse seeker which is on Brahmos should get on the Nirbhay too. sengupta had pics -

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-U4YQF-uwpJA/U ... erns-1.JPG

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OpzASRkI7GI/U ... erns-2.JPG

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ByoAOnFZpLE/U ... erns-3.JPG

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xTDR8m61HlU/U ... erns-4.JPG

Kanson, good catch.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 15:06

SSridhar wrote:
Rahul M wrote:what about brahmos LACM's seeker ?
An earlier report on Nirbhay spoke of X-band monopulse SAR radar for terminal guidance similar to the one 'now being developed for both the BrahMos-1’s Blocks-2/3 and the Prahaar NLOS-BSM'.

I hope the report was not by the (in)famous Sengupta as he has the habit of calling the Prahaar NLOS BSM..
The seeker for Brahmos is still in development with two partner firms-Alpha Design and Datapatterns.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 15:10

abhik wrote:
Karan M wrote:A total of 4.
If you are talking about the number of missiles in a TEL then i think it is 3 not 4.

It's 4.. there are other pics as well.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 29 Oct 2013 17:41

Karan M wrote:The seeker for Brahmos is still in development with two partner firms-Alpha Design and Datapatterns.

what seeker is being carried in the inducted Brahmos units??

nits · Post by **nits** » 29 Oct 2013 18:37

India develops new tactical missile 'Pragati'

NEW DELHI: India has developed a new tactical surface-to-surface missile 'Pragati' with a range between 60-170 km and will offer it to friendly countries.

The new missile, now on display at a defence exhibition in South Korea, is based on the Prahaar missile developed by the DRDO for the Army and can be termed as its export variant with minor differences, a DRDO official said today.

The government has approved that it may be offered to friendly countries if anyone shows interest in it, he said.

The missile is the main exhibit of the DRDO which is showcasing an array of indigenous weapons at the Seoul International Aerospace and Defense Exhibition (ADEX 2013).

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 29 Oct 2013 19:17

if its available for export , does it mean seeker is home made ????

koti · Post by **koti** » 29 Oct 2013 21:59

Janes Link
Why is it that an export version is looking more capable then a domestic one?
120km to 170km

And CEP of 10m.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 29 Oct 2013 22:07

R Prasannan writes on the separation of conventional and nuke missiles.

http://week.manoramaonline.com/cgi-bin/ ... 455&BV_ID=@@@

>> Not only the PM and the NCA, but our missiles and bombs also have to survive a first strike. They got to be kept in places beyond the range of enemy missiles, or kept hidden. So we are building missiles that can be stored in silos, are road-and-rail-mobile, can fly 5,000-plus km to hit enemy targets, and can be kept hidden in nuclear-powered submarines. We believe these will survive a first strike by the enemy and will be there to hit him back. The idea, experts say, is to have half of the bombs on submarine-based missiles, 40 per cent of them on land-launched missiles, and 10 per cent as plane-dropped bombs.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 22:11

pragnya wrote:
Karan M wrote:The seeker for Brahmos is still in development with two partner firms-Alpha Design and Datapatterns.
what seeker is being carried in the inducted Brahmos units??

The Russian one though some parts have been indigenised eg the transmitter.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 22:12

koti wrote:Janes Link
Why is it that an export version is looking more capable then a domestic one?
120km to 170km

And CEP of 10m.

Those figures are misleading and date from when prahaar was still in early days.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Oct 2013 22:30

Rahul M wrote:R Prasannan writes on the separation of conventional and nuke missiles.

http://week.manoramaonline.com/cgi-bin/ ... 455&BV_ID=@@@

>> Not only the PM and the NCA, but our missiles and bombs also have to survive a first strike. They got to be kept in places beyond the range of enemy missiles, or kept hidden. So we are building missiles that can be stored in silos, are road-and-rail-mobile, can fly 5,000-plus km to hit enemy targets, and can be kept hidden in nuclear-powered submarines. We believe these will survive a first strike by the enemy and will be there to hit him back. The idea, experts say, is to have half of the bombs on submarine-based missiles, 40 per cent of them on land-launched missiles, and 10 per cent as plane-dropped bombs.

Some of what I wrote in 1999 are getting implementd finally.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... amana.html

BTW I had in 2003 suggested making the Prithvi conventional as it gives more credibility to the Army strike formations.
But it was too early as the necessary alternate missiles were not yet ready.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 23:11

From what I understand, Prithvi will move to the 250km + role.. whether thats only conventional or strategic, I dont know.

On the conventional side 30-40 km (gun tube arty/Pinaka), 60 km (Pinaka-2), 70-90km (Smerch), 60-170 km (Prahaar), 290 km (Brahmos), 250-350 km (Prithvi), then there's Shourya (750 km) but Shaurya is probably strategic only..

We need to:
1. Get 155 mm up and running (yada yada)
2. Pinaka 2 in service asap.
3. Nirbhay (750-1000 km) + indian engine (so that we can mass produce the darn thing in thousand+)
4. Order Prahaar asap. Mass produce for lowered cost/unit. Raise new IA units as necessary.
5. Indian/indigenized Smerch (perhaps Prahaar can take up this role as well, but Smerch rounds are probably cheaper).

Anyways, its interesting to see the home grown maal steadily plugging holes in the firepower mix. Now only 155mm gun is left, if MOD gets its act together - any gun is better than no gun (that includes Bharat forge's austrian version or L&Ts Korean tieup and so forth).

Another plus is arty has the Shakti Arty C3I inducted.. Its probably one of the few IA big ticket C3I programs cleared for production.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 29 Oct 2013 23:44

Why do we need Prithvi-2/3 anymore? Brahmos fills the above mentioned role and Shaurya will be enough for anything above that. Prithvi is best used for exports and testing purposes.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2013 23:46

If you have a large stockpile of Prithvis, plus infra to maintain them why waste all of that? Plus its not like we can build enough missiles overnight to replace them either.