Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 24 Feb 2014 15:49

manjgu wrote:good point Sid !! what is used as the maneuvering target was my question?

An electronic target. Command signal can guide a missile against a simulated target.

Astra and Akash both have been tested against electronic targets.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 24 Feb 2014 16:45

Not quite.. the Akash was tested against the Mirach which is a maneuvering drone..

Press release
12:23 am - Wednesday
Galileo Avionica strengthens its ties in India
New Delhi, India - Leasing contract for Mirach 100/5
(WAPA) - The company acquires a leasing contract for Mirach 100/5 while the Precision Approach Radar is operating in the Indian Air Force

Galileo Avionica, a Finmeccanica company, has been conducing a successful commercial strategy in India, proven by two important results.

On one hand, Galileo Avionica has signed a service contract relating to the radiotarget Mirach 100/5 for the Integrated Test Range (ITR) of the Indian Ministry of Defence.

The order representing a logistic support for Mirach 100/5, requires about 20 flights to be performed within one year for the qualification of arms systems. The contract has been won after a tight contest between some of the most important companies in the Defence field.
The order has more than a pure economic value. In fact, Galileo Avionica produced a starting-point for developing a long collaboration with India, setting up assumptions for the introduction of Mirach 100/5.

......................
http://www.avionews.com/index.php?co...ante=index.php

http://www.selex-sas.com/datasheets_ga/MIRACH_100.pdf

(00019) 070327122301-1071572 (World Aeronautical Press Agency - 2007-03-27 12:23 pm)

In 2012, a couple of Akash tests against the Mirach failed... successful ones followed thereafter and the missile entered IAF service.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 24 Feb 2014 18:06

BTW:
http://www.selex-es.com/documents/73744 ... _drone.pdf

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 24 Feb 2014 18:22

First of Production Model Akash SAM system for Indian Army tested

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 24 Feb 2014 18:28

^^^TATRA mounted launcher? When did this happen...

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 24 Feb 2014 20:15

Whyare the tyres of the Tatra truck at such an odd angle?

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 24 Feb 2014 21:24

Its on struts for stability and safety reasons.

Patriot also has to do the firing from struted position. The ejected mass is big so you cannot do without struts.

http://www.military-today.com/trucks/ta ... 7mor89.htm

Vehicle has all-wheel drive chassis and employs unique Tatra's independent suspension with backbone tube frame and swinging half-axles. Each wheel moves up and down independently, which allows exceptional cross country mobility and higher speeds on rough roads. This unique chassis has been constantly developed and improved by Tatra for more than 80 years. A number of automotive components are interchangeable within the T815-7 range.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 24 Feb 2014 21:25

Aditya_V wrote:Whyare the tyres of the Tatra truck at such an odd angle?

It is because of Tatra's swing angle suspension system. That is the angle when the wheels are taking no load as is the case during firing missiles when the truck stands on hydraulic "legs".

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 24 Feb 2014 21:41

Rohit, I have constantly heard from IA associated sources that the IA wants a lighter MRSAM for the entire Cold Start stuff & that the Akash was to be used for a more conventional, "static" role, perhaps to secure existing HQ, C3I behind the faster moving formations. Because of that, perhaps the midway solution was to put Akash on lighter trucks, than the heavier T-72s. These are definitely not IAF ones because IAF Akash are fired from trailers towed by different trucks.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Feb 2014 21:44

Video via livefist

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 24 Feb 2014 22:07

IAF Akash too should be movable (normally static but capable of being lugged around) instead of being fully mounted and mobile like this Akash Tatra avatar.

Simply posted near the airbases like his, without the truck on standby, always attached to the trailer.

Following links show the deployment better:

http://www.airforce-technology.com/proj ... stem3.html
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zCbCzPq3ygQ/U ... +IAF-1.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7TtUxBL31n4/U ... +IAF-3.jpg

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 24 Feb 2014 22:25

Yes, the launcher is on the trailer, but its towed. The IA one is on the truck itself.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Feb 2014 22:28

Karan M wrote:ROTFL, so Rout digs himself deeper, first he claimed that it was the INS and now shamefacedly cant admit he was wrong and says "first it was learnt.." and now blames the hydraulic system. Accurate reporting indeed.

It might not be his fault all together. All reporters depend on sources and report what is fed to them. Most likely the early probable cause was the INS warmup and ruled out later. The more eggregious cause was the fin activation system. So its not the launcher as was stated earlier.
No it could be fretting/wear/corrosion of the actuator system that caused the non-deployment.
It takes ahwile to dig thru the telemetry data to pin point the true cause. As the launch is scrubbed for year it was a major deficiency that needs correction.

Good news as it could have led to flight mishap and lots of rhona dhona here.

vic · Post by **vic** » 24 Feb 2014 22:53

I think the hydraulic systems are only for missile raising to make it upright for launch. Probably there was a fluid leak in one of the cylinders.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 25 Feb 2014 02:26

ramana wrote:
Karan M wrote:ROTFL, so Rout digs himself deeper, first he claimed that it was the INS and now shamefacedly cant admit he was wrong and says "first it was learnt.." and now blames the hydraulic system. Accurate reporting indeed.

It might not be his fault all together. All reporters depend on sources and report what is fed to them. Most likely the early probable cause was the INS warmup and ruled out later. The more eggregious cause was the fin activation system. So its not the launcher as was stated earlier.
No it could be fretting/wear/corrosion of the actuator system that caused the non-deployment.
It takes ahwile to dig thru the telemetry data to pin point the true cause. As the launch is scrubbed for year it was a major deficiency that needs correction.

Good news as it could have led to flight mishap and lots of rhona dhona here.

Ramana, then he should have applied his own brains and been more critical before apportioning blame. Such irresponsible reportage calls the credibility of the Indian deterrent into question, and is then supported in his reports, by citing unnamed sources who do a lot of rhona dhona on how Agni is hence unproven, Indian xy gizmo doesnt work etc. The damage is done and the fixes are either not acknowledged by jokers like Rout or are used to pull down other programs.

In 1999, one of the ISI honchos claimed a big motivation for the Kargil War was that they monitored Indian media and their constant negative reportage on Indian military and development programs led them to believe India was a paper tiger and would fall apart.

I have been monitoring Routs articles for a while, and unfortunately he indulges in a lot of this sensationalist kite flying. He reports minor teething issues as insurmountable problems and invariably indulges in muck raking so as to appear as some hot shot investigative reporter. Perhaps to get the attention of some larger national paper.

Rare is it that his articles report the issue without his needless (and often faulty) editorializing.

partha · Post by **partha** » 25 Feb 2014 03:01

Karan M wrote:

In 1999, one of the ISI honchos claimed a big motivation for the Kargil War was that they monitored Indian media and their constant negative reportage on Indian military and development programs led them to believe India was a paper tiger and would fall apart.

Interesting. Source?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 Feb 2014 03:19

KaranM, Cloud be ture but lets dissect the above article and find the causes.
We know its a new payload from previous articles.
We know it was a night launch. gives good optics.
This launch was scrubbed due to glitches.

dinesha wrote:Now the culprit is metallurgy..

Hydraulic Snags Led to Night Trial Failure of Agni-I Missile
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/ ... 073033.ece

By Hemant Kumar Rout - BALASORE Published: 23rd February 2014
Even as the defence authorities are tight-lipped on the reasons of
the failure of surface-to-surface medium range ballistic missile
Agni-I night trial, sources attributed it to metallurgical malfunction
and snags in the hydraulic system.
Sources said after an abortive mission on February 18, the 700-
km range missile was to be test-fired from Wheeler Island off the
Odisha coast next evening. But the strategic forces command
(SFC) was forced to postpone the test for indefinite period due to
some technical glitches in the missile system.

Initially while it was learnt that the faults in ‘not-up-to-the-mark’
Indian inertial navigation system (INS) led to postponement of the
first night user trial of the nuclear capable missile, a scientist
associated with the mission pointed fingers at manufacturing
faults in the missile.
Talking to ‘The Express’, he said manufacturing and metallurgical
faults triggered hydraulics problems in the missile system thereby
forcing the armed forces authorities to put off the trial only 18
seconds prior to the test schedule.

Hydraulics help open the wings and fins in the missile system. The
wings and fins were not being opened that day. Sensing further
trouble, the mission was postponed.

However, the scientists have been asked to rectify the faults and
make the mission ready for trial within next one year.

“The armed forces would definitely not want to take further risk.
The body of the missile has to be changed as the metallurgical
malfunction could lead to another fiasco. Besides, the INS has also
to be checked properly,” he added.

From pictures of Agni I only the rocket stage has fins from the old Agni TDS system.
As far as we know those fins are not opened at time of flight. Most likely they are steered with hydraulics.

So something else is going on.

BTW Vivek_Ahuja's paper at AAME.in

Agni I range can be extended

http://mach-five.blogspot.com/2012/11/blog-post.html

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 25 Feb 2014 03:44

partha wrote:
Karan M wrote:

In 1999, one of the ISI honchos claimed a big motivation for the Kargil War was that they monitored Indian media and their constant negative reportage on Indian military and development programs led them to believe India was a paper tiger and would fall apart.
Interesting. Source?

Defence Journal - the (un)official spokesmag of the PA establishment during the 1990s and early-mid 2000s. An article appeared quoting (per memory) Javed Nasir.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javed_Nasir

Though nominally retired by then, he was clearly involved with the J&K militancy and he & several others were big supporters of the conflict and and he quoted Indian media as "proof" that Indian military was demoralized thanks to Kashmir, its equipment, local programs not fructifying etc.

partha · Post by **partha** » 25 Feb 2014 03:55

Thanks Karanji.

gnair · Post by **gnair** » 25 Feb 2014 07:29

A canistered Agni-1 with 1 tonne flowers ( either conventional or other wise) is beginning to emerge as an option not just on the Western border but the North East too. It's got the perfect range to severely disrupt, deny and permanently damage the adversaries logistics footprint for sustained combat operations. That includes garrisons, bridges, air bases, rail hubs. There shouldn't be any man-in-the-loop flying in this battle space till at least 30-40 of them are let go before the SEAD folks go in to tango.
Nothing like a single stage Ballist.Miss. stocked up and ready for action at quick notice on the border especially with the ever improving CEP's we are hearing off. Time to show them a lesson or two from their own play book (like what they've been doing to Taiwan in the last decade).
So Agni-1 in the emerging threat scenario is not Abdul specific any more like a few years ago.

srai · Post by **srai** » 25 Feb 2014 08:27

Karan M wrote:Rohit, I have constantly heard from IA associated sources that the IA wants a lighter MRSAM for the entire Cold Start stuff & that the Akash was to be used for a more conventional, "static" role, perhaps to secure existing HQ, C3I behind the faster moving formations. Because of that, perhaps the midway solution was to put Akash on lighter trucks, than the heavier T-72s. These are definitely not IAF ones because IAF Akash are fired from trailers towed by different trucks.

It is possible the IA wants both configurations for different use.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Feb 2014 09:21

^^^Possible. Tracked one could be for the Strike Corps while TATRA mounted ones would be for Pivot Corps. The wheeled ones can move on their on power from Point A to Point B while the tracked ones will have to be lugged around on trailers pulled by TATRA itself. Plus, if the Akash needs to be deployed in mountainous areas, wheeled version can move more easily than tracked version.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Feb 2014 14:34

gnair wrote:A canistered Agni-1 with 1 tonne flowers ( either conventional or other wise) is beginning to emerge as an option not just on the Western border but the North East too. It's got the perfect range to severely disrupt, deny and permanently damage the adversaries logistics footprint for sustained combat operations. That includes garrisons, bridges, air bases, rail hubs. There shouldn't be any man-in-the-loop flying in this battle space till at least 30-40 of them are let go before the SEAD folks go in to tango.
Nothing like a single stage Ballist.Miss. stocked up and ready for action at quick notice on the border especially with the ever improving CEP's we are hearing off. Time to show them a lesson or two from their own play book (like what they've been doing to Taiwan in the last decade).
So Agni-1 in the emerging threat scenario is not Abdul specific any more like a few years ago.

while I am all for any idea that involves pounding the enemy, wouldnt the Agni1 flight profile make it tough to disambiguate if a n-payload or not. if the PLA is using a mix of conventional and n- on their DF15 and DF21 I am all for it though.

I thought Shourya was the more desired conventional deep strike weapon for speedy response while nirbhay would handle the less tough targets.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 25 Feb 2014 15:49

The TOE for an Akash Air Force Squadron is fairly straight forward as shown.
Akash Air Force Squadron

Squadron Headquarters
Technical Flight
A Flight
B Flight

Where differences crop up are with the Akash SAM tracked variant and its wheeled cousin.

Here we have a Battery level configuration where each battery has 4 Self Propelled Launchers along with an Battery level Surveillance and Locating Radars being carried. With 4 Batteries to a Missile Group, a single SAM Group in the IA would be able to deploy 16 Akash Self Propelled Launchers (Tracked). I do not think they carry over the Troop concept prevalent over the rest of the AAD.
Akash Missile Battery Tracked

The IA Akash wheeled variant is however more powerful, presumably for loss of mobility or otherwise. Here a Missile Battery has 2 Troops each with its own Troop level radars and 4 Akash Army Launchers.

Thus a Akash Missile Regiment with the standard 3 Missile Batteries could deploy as many as 24 Akash Launchers. These could be a part of the Air Defence Brigades in the IA although IA Air Defence Brigades were with Flak and Composite Missile Regiments last i heard.

Akash Missile Battery Wheeled

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Feb 2014 17:55

^^^Is this just me or does the wheeled Akash launcher have 2 x missile arms? Which would mean that 16 x 3 launchers would have same number of ready to fire missiles as 24 x 2 launchers. And could this be because the tracked Akash Group is likely to provide AD cover to a more compact AOR while the wheeled Akash Group is going to be more spread out?

PS: Though, from the launch video it seems that it has 3 x arms with missile being fired from central arm.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Feb 2014 18:03

I have seen tatra truck akash near BEML factory with 3 missiles. that was in 2008.

vic · Post by **vic** » 25 Feb 2014 20:19

Just a small factoid, due to Ramjet motor Akash missile may have no escape kill zone greater than MRSAM for fighter type of target even though the theoretical maximum range of MRSAM is 50km while that of Akash is 25km.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 25 Feb 2014 20:27

Can an Akash Launcher be placed 35km in front of Rajendra and a missile be guided to a Target say 50Km away from the Rajendra?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Feb 2014 20:39

yes that is the very way it operates in, the launchers will be passive and have no emissions until the targets are quite near it. launchers will be placed in ambush positions along expected lines of ingress and egress.
one of them may protect the location of the radars ofcourse.

a single akash system can protect an area size of a medium city.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 25 Feb 2014 21:53

Singha ji, according to Wiki, a single Akash system has 12 missiles and can at best attack 12 targets unless multiple Akash missiles are used per target to increase probability of kill.

If the targets are CJ-10 cruise missiles at, say, $0.5 million per piece then when compared to the cost of a sacrificial JF-17 say at $20 million - which is nothing if it gets Panda a medium-sized Indian city, a barrage of 40 CJ-10 in a first-strike would be equivalent in cost and hugely successful because at best there would be 28 left, if not more. I've always had a problem with the typical Akash configuration of only 3 missiles per launcher and only 4 launchers per battery level radar (BLR). Reloading takes precious time.

Of course, I am suggesting that the CJ-10s would use a common waypoint or two to enter the city so as to deplete all the SAMs along that route.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 25 Feb 2014 21:56

Well Akash is a SAM and meant to be part of a layered air defence system, with SRSAMs and SHORAD/guns. And even LRSAM in the future. Its not meant to be the only SAM in the play. India procured SA-3/SA-8s to get around the artificial restriction on fighter squadrons. A more layered network is possible now, provided there is a proper MOD.

partha · Post by **partha** » 25 Feb 2014 22:00

Wiki says and I also remember reading many reports over the years about squadrons of Akash being inducted into the armed forces. What is then the new report about the latest test being pre induction test? Can anyone please clarify?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 25 Feb 2014 22:02

It is the preinduction test for the Army variant.

The IAF variant is already being delivered

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 25 Feb 2014 22:10

Karan ji, thanks for the quick response. For sure, a layered SAM is necessary for defending a city.

I guess what I had in mind was something a lot denser. I would really like to see an Indian SAM system with the same density as Iron Dome. Iron Dome has 20 missiles in a single launcher. This isn't to say that we should have bought Iron Dome yesterday. Rather, I would like to know if we even recognise the need for Indian layered-defence systems with such densities.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 25 Feb 2014 22:53

are sir no need for ji

times have changed, the sort of saturation attacks iron dome is meant to handle would stretch any other SAM system in the world. iron dome is basically a special system meant to intercept many short range ballistic targets at low cost, but is probably not sophisticated enough to be a true multirole system against air breathing targets. israel is now offering iron dome and davids sling to india and for drdo to customize to include in a national c3i grid.

what we need to do is invest in skyshield with AHEAD ammo to defend against PGMs and even cruise missile attacks. with iron dome types against other types. otherwise we will break the bank. as usual antony without any thought of what his decisions meant blacklisted rheinmetall as well.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Feb 2014 03:33

partha wrote:Wiki says and I also remember reading many reports over the years about squadrons of Akash being inducted into the armed forces. What is then the new report about the latest test being pre induction test? Can anyone please clarify?

partha, the IAF has already inducted two squadrons, one at Gwalior and the oher at Lohegaon. Six more are being inducted mainly along the borders. The current series of tests is for the army. IIRC, they were supposed to be inducted by end of 2012.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Feb 2014 04:10

the samyukta and sangraha ECM versions could be perhaps lead to an augmented systems for TAS, FCR etc to be integrated with wider area defence [already in the works? i have not read it]. where, which launcher node in the netcentric cluster fired on the target, tracking to destruction, mission report etc. could be all integrated. while ECM and such wide area defence can be integrated (big tasks!), where it should mainly include IFF, and jamming by default, and taking out the target on some IFF feed + situational awarenes system. our forces should jump their network use to higher spectrum or special spectrums, and utilize the complete bandwidth.

srai · Post by **srai** » 26 Feb 2014 06:49

Aditya_V wrote:Can an Akash Launcher be placed 35km in front of Rajendra and a missile be guided to a Target say 50Km away from the Rajendra?

Not that far!

It's more like launchers within 0.5km radius of Rajendra from what I remember. In a group mode from GCC, an Akash battery (BCC, Rajendra, launchers) could be situated at around 30km radius. Note: It used be on an official website (akashsam.com) but the site seems to have been shut down.

Group mode (4 x batteries) is where you'll get the best coverage. In a box formation, Akash group would cover 62kmx62km airspace and in linear formation it covers 98km x 44km. In a trapezoidal configuration, it covers the most area of around 5000 square km. All of these info was at the official site and luckily someone seems to have copied it on to Wiki.

So if we were to estimate Akash battery airspace coverage, it would be 31km x 31km. I guess formation wouldn't matter much as the launchers are restricted to around 0.5km from radar. Any increase in this distance would proportionally increase coverage.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Feb 2014 07:13

india has no plans or done any work for iron dome type "population defense" systems against conventional attacks. all our limited work has been to defend smaller military or infra targets. for these the Spyder systems will be the last line of defence though having some good radar+EO guided guns atop berms to tackle cruise missiles and PGMs is needed also.

afair, IAF had ordered 25 spyder batteries....have deliveries started?

srai · Post by **srai** » 26 Feb 2014 08:19

vaibhav.n wrote:The TOE for an Akash Air Force Squadron is fairly straight forward as shown.
Akash Air Force Squadron

Squadron Headquarters
Technical Flight
A Flight
B Flight

Where differences crop up are with the Akash SAM tracked variant and its wheeled cousin.

Here we have a Battery level configuration where each battery has 4 Self Propelled Launchers along with an Battery level Surveillance and Locating Radars being carried. With 4 Batteries to a Missile Group, a single SAM Group in the IA would be able to deploy 16 Akash Self Propelled Launchers (Tracked). I do not think they carry over the Troop concept prevalent over the rest of the AAD.
Akash Missile Battery Tracked

The IA Akash wheeled variant is however more powerful, presumably for loss of mobility or otherwise. Here a Missile Battery has 2 Troops each with its own Troop level radars and 4 Akash Army Launchers.

Thus a Akash Missile Regiment with the standard 3 Missile Batteries could deploy as many as 24 Akash Launchers. These could be a part of the Air Defence Brigades in the IA although IA Air Defence Brigades were with Flak and Composite Missile Regiments last i heard.

Akash Missile Battery Wheeled

It looks like the IA Akash wheeled variant is operationally setup like the Air Force variant. Both of these wheeled deployments seem to be in a group mode with 3D-CAR and two batteries to defend static/semi-static areas/formations. No BSR for battery.

Air Force Akash deployment

Army Akash Wheeled deployment

Army Akash Tracked deployment:
This seems to be able to operate both in an independent battery mode with its own BSR and BLR radars as well as in a group mode with 3D-CAR and 4 batteries. More designed for protecting mobile formations.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_44d3OT-xI3U/S ... hart-2.JPG