Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

vic · Post by **vic** » 23 Jun 2014 20:21

Nobody noticed Astra target was 65km away?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Jun 2014 20:34

abhik wrote:AFAIK this 'Maitri' SAM deal hasn't been signed for years now. Best we start looking for local alternatives.

$$$

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Jun 2014 20:36

http://www.janes.com/article/39857/akas ... tion-tests

Akash SAM completes final Indian Army validation tests
Rahul Udoshi, Bangalore - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
22 June 2014
The Indian Army completed final validation trials of the Akash medium-range surface-to-air missile (SAM) on 18 June, paving the way for its induction into army service.

The test-firing took place at the Integrated Test Range (ITR), Balasore, Odissa, and proved system capability against a subsonic cruise missile by intercepting a Banshee target drone at 30 m above sea level, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) said in a statement.

The statement added that the missile had "worked perfectly" and overcome "multiple target reflections coming from the sea" during the mission.

The Akash has completed all development flight tests and user trials and is in production for the army and air force. Production orders by both services total INR230 billion (USD3.819 billion) and missile systems worth INR35 billion (USD581 million) have already been delivered, said the DRDO.

The Indian Army was the launch customer for Akash, placing an order for hardware to equip two regiments. The Indian Air Force (IAF) has ordered enough to equip eight squadrons, with two squadrons already in IAF service.

The DRDO began developing the 30 km-range Akash as an all-weather mobile SAM in the same class as the Russian Buk, Raytheon MIM-104 Patriot, and Chinese Kai Shan-1 (KS-1) missiles. Its first developmental test was in 1990.

The Akash launcher for the army is based on a Russian T-72 MBT chassis manufactured under licence at the Medak Ordnance Factory, while the IAF version uses trailers or Tata trucks.

The army systems are being produced at Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL) in Hyderabad, while the IAF order is the responsibility of Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) in Bangalore. The radars and radar-related equipment for both services are produced by BEL.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Jun 2014 21:05

^^ Good News , Its time for mass induction and quick work for follow on Akash Mk1/Mk2

dinesh_kimar · Post by **dinesh_kimar** » 23 Jun 2014 21:58

Vic, where is 65 km mentioned? Its not on the video.....

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 23 Jun 2014 23:32

The Akash has completed all development flight tests and user trials and is in production for the army and air force. Production orders by both services total INR230 billion (USD3.819 billion) and missile systems worth INR35 billion (USD581 million) have already been delivered, said the DRDO.

Who says a really competitive Indian product does not have a buyer

.
Just a suggestion though : it would have been great if there was a possibility of dividing these delivery into multiple groups which each successive group having more advancement. May be a Public-Pvt partnership could have been there with the ultimate aim being that this entity is ready with a much more advanced SAM (with help of DRDO) till the time this delivery is complete.

dinesh_kimar · Post by **dinesh_kimar** » 24 Jun 2014 19:55

INS Kamorata ASW Warship has the RB 6000 Anti submarine rocket launcher. Maybe now is a good time to make a US ASROC style anti-sub missile............this uses the Mk 54 Torpedo as a warhead, and a booster to fire it up into the air, after which it deploys by parachute. Since we already make torps like Advanced Light Torpedo and Shenya, this looks like a "can do" project. Advantage is in obtaining a platform with higher range (12km for ASROC) , and more accuracy with the seeker head on the torpedo, compared to the unguided RB 6000.

titash · Post by **titash** » 24 Jun 2014 22:52

dinesh_kumar wrote:INS Kamorata ASW Warship has the RB 6000 Anti submarine rocket launcher. Maybe now is a good time to make a US ASROC style anti-sub missile............this uses the Mk 54 Torpedo as a warhead, and a booster to fire it up into the air, after which it deploys by parachute. Since we already make torps like Advanced Light Torpedo and Shenya, this looks like a "can do" project. Advantage is in obtaining a platform with higher range (12km for ASROC) , and more accuracy with the seeker head on the torpedo, compared to the unguided RB 6000.

The IN standardized on the RBU-6000 only in recent years (until the Delhi class came online in 1997, the Kashins were the only IN ships to mount the RBU-6000). Since then, all new build ships have the RBU-6000 (3x Delhi, 3x Kolkata, 3x Shivalik, 6x Talwar, 4x Kamorta). The Brahmaputras are exempt: they are simply derivatives of the older Godavari class and construction was probably started at GRSE *before* the Delhi class at MDL

The RBU-6000 is a multipurpose rocket launcher that can be used for (1) unguided ASW, (2) guided ASW using the new RPK-8 rocket, (3) ship to shore bombardment in support of amphibious landings, and (4) last ditch anti-torpedo defence

While I agree in principle that an ASROC type weapon can easily be developed, the IN appears to have gone the Canadian route and chosen the large independent ASW helicopter as its stand off ASW weapon. It is more flexible and longer ranged than ASROC. Whereas most western navies used the smaller Lynx, the IN and Canadian Navy used the larger and more capable Sea King.

Also, clear weather is more or less prevalant in the IOR and should not prohibit helo ops unlike the north atlantic swell and fog. Hence a convoy commander could more or less count on helicopter support 100% of the time

subhamoy.das · Post by **subhamoy.das** » 25 Jun 2014 14:47

we will see spurt of indic products being inducted into the service after having been always in development mode on not meeting the "GSRQ"... Lest we forget. We have a new PM in the chair who cares only about the country!

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 27 Jun 2014 07:52

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... 134417.ece
Dr. Venugopal said the next firing from a Su-30MKI would be against a real target (a Lakshya pilotless target aircraft) after the monsoon.

Why after the monsoon when there is drought in India and no rains. Is this kind of an approach that we'll not test during monsoon season a major source of delay? Is there any workaround? Do feel that even in monsoon season, we can go ahead with tests and the test firing can be done when there is a sunny day. Also it will help to develop and test weapon systems in realistic scenarios of rain and cold weather.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 27 Jun 2014 08:40

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... 134417.ece

In Friday’s trial, the missile was fired from an altitude of 6.8 km against a simulated long-range target 65 km away in a controlled and guided flight.

Atlast some range estimates for astra

From wiki

The maximum range of Astra is 110 km in head-on chase and 20 km in tail chase. The missile could be launched from different altitudes - it can cover 110 km when launched from an altitude of 15 km, 44 km when fired from an altitude of eight km and 21 km when the altitude is sea-level .

Is there a way to calculate the actual(precise) range of Astra based on Test figures (65km at altitude of 6.8 km) .

srin · Post by **srin** » 27 Jun 2014 09:21

Wiki seems off. If it can cover only 44 km at 8 km altitude, at 6.8km altitude, it should cover even less. But the Hindu report shows it covered almost double the wiki-projected distance (65km).

In any case, I'm not sure there will enough information released to the public domain about the range vs altitude - or even the minimum datapoints that would help compute it.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Jun 2014 10:52

44km at 8 km at the same altitude.
If this target was located below the firing aircraft, range would increase.
My previous post/s have the details about Astra MK1s "claimed" range/altitude profile.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Jun 2014 11:17

these live AAM tests are carried out over the sea (off chandipur/goa) or over some land range?

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 27 Jun 2014 12:10

While the missile was launched at subsonic speed in the trials conducted so far, future tests would be in supersonic to expand the launch envelope.

That may be the reason for higher range.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 27 Jun 2014 12:33

Singha wrote:these live AAM tests are carried out over the sea (off chandipur/goa) or over some land range?

both i guess

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Jun 2014 12:46

uddu wrote:
While the missile was launched at subsonic speed in the trials conducted so far, future tests would be in supersonic to expand the launch envelope.
That may be the reason for higher range.

Actually range in subsonic<< range in supersonic (speed of launch platform)
So either:
1. DRDO understated range so far & actual tests have revealed the truth
2. Or this was against a target at higher alt (I made a typo in previous post) and range would increase then- again, not sure by such a margin.

srai · Post by **srai** » 27 Jun 2014 13:31

uddu wrote:http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... 134417.ece
Dr. Venugopal said the next firing from a Su-30MKI would be against a real target (a Lakshya pilotless target aircraft) after the monsoon.

Why after the monsoon when there is drought in India and no rains. Is this kind of an approach that we'll not test during monsoon season a major source of delay? Is there any workaround? Do feel that even in monsoon season, we can go ahead with tests and the test firing can be done when there is a sunny day. Also it will help to develop and test weapon systems in realistic scenarios of rain and cold weather.

Typically, all weather trials are held at later stages. It is too early to try "realistic" scenarios.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 27 Jun 2014 13:42

i heard i some forum that long ranged A2A missiles like k172/k37 etc gain height first to increase there range .
but not sure of the source !!!

Any inputs on how range of astra could be increased by a simple protocol of gaining height after firing (max height is listed as 20km or so).

The problem is that even if the missile gains height for range increase there is a possibility that it may loose speed in the process (motor not during whole run of the missile ?). So it seems to be a trade-off between range & speed of missile .

Again if someone has info. on altitude of the target please share. we can try to deduce a approximate range based on that (leaving few independent variables off course )

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Jun 2014 15:59

Its called a lofted profile.
Will be there for MK2, though you never know, might have been implemented for MK1 itself.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 27 Jun 2014 16:48

good going ASTRA. 3rd firing in abt less than 2 months.

Karan M,

as i understand all these are separation, repeatability and endurance trials. my question is do these carry the seeker heads at this stage?? are those carried only when the stage comes for target firing in future??

also when is the mark 2 is expected to arrive?? TIA.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Jun 2014 17:58

The Mk II version is to be flight tested by end of 2014 and a production version is expected to be available in c. 2016.

srin · Post by **srin** » 27 Jun 2014 22:46

Don't know if this was posted before, but this is really fundamental R&D
http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/ind ... /4124/2391

Technological issues and processes for fabrication of mercury cadmium telluride detector arrays, charge coupled device readout arrays and integration of these into a focal plane array sensor have been discussed. Mini arrays of 16 x 16 size have been realised and tested to prove the technology and process schedule with a view to scaling up this for larger arrays to be used in the antitank guided missile.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 30 Jun 2014 16:45

srin wrote:Don't know if this was posted before, but this is really fundamental R&D
http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/ind ... /4124/2391
Technological issues and processes for fabrication of mercury cadmium telluride detector arrays, charge coupled device readout arrays and integration of these into a focal plane array sensor have been discussed. Mini arrays of 16 x 16 size have been realised and tested to prove the technology and process schedule with a view to scaling up this for larger arrays to be used in the antitank guided missile.

Excellent paper explaining the physics behind the development of sensors in seekers. Esp the LWIR part - this is what will be used in Anti-tank missiles.
To give an idea as to where others are, see here: http://www.sofradir-ec.com/products-cooled.asp

Basically, paper says target tanks will have LWIR signatures ( approx 10um wavelength) . The passive sensors in seeker picks this up, image processing is done to filter our background noise i,e target contrast is increased and this is eventually coupled to the missile's navigation system for homing.

The problem, as explained in the paper, is
a) cooling the sensor to -196 C for the photosensitive diodes to work in the nominal range
b) Manufacturing the HgCdTe photodiodes

The first seems to be a "relatively" easier problem to solve. The second involved ChemicalVaporDeposition ( a technique all semifabs use but the materials in commercial semi manufacturing are easier to handle than HgCdTe)

And it appears that we were denied the technology.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009SPIE.7298E.106S

In the present paper, we describe the development of Long Wave Infrared (8-12 mum) linear and 2-D IR FPA detectors using HgCdTe for use in thermal imagers and IIR seekers. In this direction, Solid State Physics Laboratory(SSPL) (DRDO) tried to concentrate initially in the bulk growth and characterization of HgCdTe during the early eighties. Some efforts were then made to develop a LWIR photoconductive type MCT array in linear configuration with the IRFPA processed on bulk MCT crystals grown in the laboratory. Non availability of quality epilayers with the required specification followed by the denial of supply of CdTe, CdZnTe and even high purity Te by advanced countries, forced us to shift our efforts during early nineties towards development of 60 element PC IR detectors. High performance linear PC arrays were developed. A novel horizontal casting procedure was evolved for growing high quality bulk material using solid state recrystallization technique. Efforts for ultra purification of Te to 7N purity with the help of a sister concern has made it possible to have this material indigenously. Having succeded in the technology for growing single crystalline CdZnTe with (111) orientation and LPE growth of HgCdTe epilayers on CdZnTe substrates an attempt was made to establish the fabrication of 2D short PV arrays showing significant IR response. Thus a detailed technological knowhow for passivation, metallization, ion implanted junction formation, etc. was generated. Parallel work on the development of a matching CCD Mux readout in silicon by Semiconductor Complex Limited was also completed which was tested first in stand-alone mode followed by integration with IRFPAs through indigenously-developed indium bumps. These devices were integrated into an indigenously fabricated glass dewar cooled by a self-developed JT minicooler. In recent years, the LPE (Liquid Phase Epitaxy) growth from Terich route has been standardized for producing epitaxial layers with high compositional and thickness uniformity leading to a respectable stage of maturity in FPA technology

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 01 Jul 2014 21:25

X-posting from the Rafale thread

France concerned over joint venture project delay

"The French delegation headed by their foreign minister raised concern over the delay of critical SR-SAM deal, which has been in limbo for years. France is considering SR-SAM deal as a booster to have greater partnership between the two nations," a senior official privy to discussions said on condition of anonymity.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 03 Jul 2014 19:01

Pentagon notifies Harpoon missile sale to India

The $200-milion package includes more than a 20 missiles and two Harpoon certification training vehicles, the U.S. Department of Defence said.

The Pentagon has notified the U.S. Congress about its decision to sell anti-ship Harpoon missiles to India at an estimated cost of $200 million arguing that it will strengthen India-U.S. strategic relationship and improve security of an important partner.

The entire package under the foreign military sale route includes more than a dozen UGM-84L Harpoon Block II Encapsulated Missiles, 10 UTM-84L Harpoon Encapsulated Training missiles, and two Encapsulated Harpoon certification training vehicles, the U.S. Department of Defence’s Defence Security Cooperation Agency said.

Its order of around 24 missiles and still the paper writes more than 20 as if they are dealing in thousands.
By the way, why do we need Harpoons for Shishumar ?

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 03 Jul 2014 19:05

Better anti-ship capabilities. Longer range, probably harder to defeat than torpedos. Even if torpedos are superior, it is nice to have options. Could possibly use it for land attack as well. The question is, how are they planning to cue it? By operating in concert with ASW helicopters and P-8Is?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Jul 2014 19:15

So for only 12 real missiles we end up paying 200 million fr fms deal.

this is nearly twice the cost of the brahmos per unit even after rus charges heavy for the engine.

at this rate we are better off buying c803 from china. It is criminal we have not tried to build a bulk subsonic asm fr by copying the uran.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 03 Jul 2014 19:17

I thin k it would be difficult to incorporate Russsian or French missiles in the HDW-209's, probably Harpoons have aldready been intregrated with other countries HDW's, so seemed a logical choice. So alteast we should build nos. for having a common missile for HDW and the P-8I's and Jaguar IM's.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 03 Jul 2014 19:33

Indeed expensive but majority of the cost would be to integrate the missile launcher capsules, firecontrol system etc. It would require some serious work on the Subs and if all 4 subs will need them we are looking atleast 6-8 missiles per sub . The number is not clear either. we can safely assume 24-32 missiles. I think with all the delays in buying new subs, makes sense in adding more teeth to the existing ones.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 03 Jul 2014 19:56

Singha, we are also paying for tsp buy of harpoon, which will come to them free. It is in fact not free, this is how it gets paid!!

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 03 Jul 2014 21:12

The article says missiles are encapsulated ? Is it another word for canisterised ? The average cost of one live missile considering training round and peripherals exceeds US $ 8 million. That's a lot of money for something Pakis are getting for free.

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 03 Jul 2014 21:54

Not sure if this has been posted before. Dummy Agni missile canister test...

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 03 Jul 2014 22:36

Anurag wrote:Not sure if this has been posted before. Dummy Agni missile canister test...

Yes it was posted before .It was tested in an undisclosed location near Hyderabad

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2014 06:46

Awesome pic. true power.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 04 Jul 2014 08:15

jamwal wrote:The article says missiles are encapsulated ? Is it another word for canisterised ? The average cost of one live missile considering training round and peripherals exceeds US $ 8 million. That's a lot of money for something Pakis are getting for free.

I think these missiles will be fired in capsule from the torpedo tubes and ignite once on the surface. I support this deal, given we have have flog shishukumar class for sometime, this was the only viable alternative to give them a good anti ship cruise missiles.

[youtube]watch?v=1FEDvvZQPJQ[/youtube]

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Jul 2014 08:23

^^^^^

From wiki:

the UGM-84, fitted with a solid-fuel rocket booster and encapsulated in a container to enable submerged launch through a torpedo tube

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2014 08:59

4 U209 means each sub will have 3 real missiles.
scary.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Jul 2014 09:06

Harpoon Anti-Ship Capability for U-209 is better than having nothing at all , Should come in handy for the sub officer. Hopefully they do a comprehensive upgrade on U-209 which has suffered due to scam/blacklisting.

vic · Post by **vic** » 04 Jul 2014 15:10

Total budget for Developing Nirbhay cruise missiles is USD 8 Million dollars. Investment in Harpoon purchases is USD 400 Million for two batches and in Brahmos it is USD 9000 million. Jai Ho Import baba.