Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Oct 2014 21:30

arshyam wrote:... wouldn't the Army version be easier to induct first, given that today's tested version was ground launched and can be fitted on to a truck relatively easily? I would expect the Naval and Air Force versions to require more work, given space and weight constraints on-board ships/planes.

also, think about these too:
1. Canisters (they carry nukes!) - the program needs to be merged with other canister tests of A1. Why waste money? I am thinking the system size and weight profiles are different, but the launching factors, params, and technology is the same. There is a lot of similarities, and perhaps use the same launchers.

I think, it is all about program concurrency and reuse.
2. The naval version could feedback into Army version, but this shows that our Sagarika is now more matured. many of the sub systems and common components can be used for Canister launches.

3. Sub-surface launch is also matured, and all the more reason to look at satisfying Navy first, because the momentum gained is now unstoppable!

Jai Hind!

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 17 Oct 2014 21:36

Congrats DRDO and India, I hope we can get the naval version soon and order 6 to 9 destroyers armed with few dozen Nirbhays, in the lines of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 17 Oct 2014 21:44

Prithwiraj wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:They must be pretty confident. Look at the other missiles in launcher—assuming they are not dummy ones.

BTW, what are the guys sitting on ground doing? Catching a few rays from the exhaust plume?
They were offering puja--- you can spot a priest sitting and sounds of bells in the background

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 17 Oct 2014 21:56

^This is too Kommunal

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Oct 2014 22:00

kommunal has gone nirbhay (fearless!)

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 17 Oct 2014 22:14

Nikhil Wagle and Co. - Look at these Communal jokers. What are you doing for your country?

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 17 Oct 2014 22:16

Vishnu Som of ndtv had live interview with Mr. Avinash Chander at 9pm. He discussed about INS Arihant. One can guesstimate by his reply that arihant is yet to be powered to its full capacity and that is gonna happen only by the end of this year.

A noticeable factor in todays launch is the development of nirbhay missile was completely by new gen who were never part of any IMDP. These people are lesser known even in the DRDO. I think after AAD, nirbhay is the only second missile which was conceived after IMDP.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 17 Oct 2014 22:21

The submerged intake will reduce its RCS. It has some stealth incorporated into the design. I'm sure they are working on a cluster munition payload. Before the Jags and Su-30's punch through their aerospace we could send these in and decimate their air defense fighter line parked on the airway.

srin · Post by **srin** » 17 Oct 2014 22:30

Yeah - this gives a great option for deep penetration strike. You don't have to use the Jags for that - a Sukhoi (or Mig-29K) can launch these at standoff range without even being painted.

Anyway - fighters are so limited. What we need is a good old fashioned bomb-truck to carry a dozen of these babies on a rotary launcher in the belly ...

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 17 Oct 2014 22:33

Since this can return - can it probably be used like a sort of unmanned "bomber" drop its load and come back and be reused if retrievable ?

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 17 Oct 2014 22:36

ravip wrote:I think after AAD, nirbhay is the only second missile which was conceived after IMDP.

Astra is also not a part of IGMDP.

Edit: Add Prahaar to the list as well.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 17 Oct 2014 22:36

That's UCAV, not a missile.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 17 Oct 2014 22:38

Don't think it is designed for re-usability.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 17 Oct 2014 22:39

Shaurya / Sagarika was not part of IGMDP.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 17 Oct 2014 22:39

Reusable missile is Dr. Kalam's idea.

member_28722 · Post by **member_28722** » 17 Oct 2014 22:50

Desi long range missile steered by Desi GPS

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 17 Oct 2014 22:53

Cross post from the Kaveri thread:

udy wrote:Dr. Saraswat's talk at IITB (Future Challenges of Aerospace Research in India: A Perspective by Dr. Vijay K. Saraswat).

Extremely interesting talk with lots of very interesting tidbits which I have never heard in the public domain before.

Can somebody catalogue the various milestones that he earmarks for the different programs? We can probably track the development along those lines like avionics, propellants etc.

member_28722 · Post by **member_28722** » 17 Oct 2014 22:57

SaiK wrote:
arshyam wrote:... wouldn't the Army version be easier to induct first, given that today's tested version was ground launched and can be fitted on to a truck relatively easily? I would expect the Naval and Air Force versions to require more work, given space and weight constraints on-board ships/planes.
also, think about these too:
1. Canisters (they carry nukes!) - the program needs to be merged with other canister tests of A1. Why waste money? I am thinking the system size and weight profiles are different, but the launching factors, params, and technology is the same. There is a lot of similarities, and perhaps use the same launchers.

I think, it is all about program concurrency and reuse.
2. The naval version could feedback into Army version, but this shows that our Sagarika is now more matured. many of the sub systems and common components can be used for Canister launches.

3. Sub-surface launch is also matured, and all the more reason to look at satisfying Navy first, because the momentum gained is now unstoppable!

Jai Hind!

Question: By army version do you mean a land-based canister version (like Agni) or a version which will be used by the army (like Brahmos)?
If its the later Do we even need an army version of Nirbhay?
IMHO we don't need 300+ km weapon in Army.
If the strike range is min 700 km, then shouldn't we focus on developing an airforce version?

Question: Since this is a cruise missile, can having long range cruise missiles be a stepping stone for a Desi awacs killer?

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 17 Oct 2014 22:57

Sagar G wrote:
Astra is also not a part of IGMDP.

Edit: Add Prahaar to the list as well.

Astra was part of IMDP. Prahaar and AAD are the same with different targets.

I don't know whether Sagarika or shourya were part IMDP . But to guess, they might be and not revealed, because arihant was in the works for well over 30yrs.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 17 Oct 2014 22:59

How can a sub-sonic surface to surface (or air to surface) missile be used as a long range AAM or SAM ? Doesn't compute.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 17 Oct 2014 23:06

Prithwiraj wrote:
Prithwiraj wrote:
They were offering puja--- you can spot a priest sitting and sounds of bells in the background

Look at the folks with untuck shirts and chappals.. in the background.. we have an ultimate disregard for show off ---

and nonchalant attitude towards looking "smart" for the press.. .

disha · Post by **disha** » 17 Oct 2014 23:26

prasannasimha wrote:Since this can return - can it probably be used like a sort of unmanned "bomber" drop its load and come back and be reused if retrievable ?

The return is not for re-usability. Put it this way, it will be almost similar cost to reuse the missile vs. sending in a new one.

So why the return? Since it can go deep, loiter and come back - one can use it for a "spy mission" - that is scout for targets and potentially destroy a prioritized target. In that sense it is an UCAV albeit an unconventional one.

I think, that the entire nav/targetting/guidance package is being tested for a more formidable UCAV. A low flying single-shot high precision nav/guidance has already been demonstrated by Brahmos. What has not been demonstrated is loiter/return software. So tomorrow once the UCAV platform is ready, the nav/targetting/guidance package from Nirbhay will be re-used.

In a way, this test also demonstrated the sophisticated nav/targetting capabilities of a future UCAV. Something which the Chinese have not yet demonstrated.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 17 Oct 2014 23:55

ravip wrote:Astra was part of IMDP. Prahaar and AAD are the same with different targets.

I don't know whether Sagarika or shourya were part IMDP . But to guess, they might be and not revealed, because arihant was in the works for well over 30yrs.

No Astra wasn't, it was only sanctioned around 2004 and IGMDP is officially closed. You cannot continue a programme after it has been closed only iterative development or new projects. All the new Agni series are just that and B-05 is also not part of IGMDP since no DRDO scientist has ever mentioned it to be one AFAIK. Arihant is a separate programme it has nothing to do with IGMDP.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 18 Oct 2014 00:23

indranilroy wrote:Cross post from the Kaveri thread:
udy wrote:Dr. Saraswat's talk at IITB (Future Challenges of Aerospace Research in India: A Perspective by Dr. Vijay K. Saraswat).
Extremely interesting talk with lots of very interesting tidbits which I have never heard in the public domain before.

Brahmos can reach up to 600 km in optimal (no sea skimming) trajectory.
Agni-6: same range but 3 times the payload (3 MIRVs each of 1 Ton).
SLBM in the works with 6000+ km range and 2 Ton payload (4 MIRVs).
LFRJ (Liquid Fuel Ramjet) - supersonic cruise (3.2M), range: 600 to 1000 kms.
Explanation of what requires to be done for AD-1 and AD-2 interceptors.
ASAT1000: Agni booster+AAD
Helina will have a different nozzle system: I think the nozzles of the booster and the sustainer will both be common (at least coaxial using blast tubes).
E-Bomb: electromagnetic bomb

sivab · Post by **sivab** » 18 Oct 2014 02:55

^^^ To add to above

Agni 5: 50Ton, single payload 1050kg, range 5000Km, Caniterized
Agni 6: 56Ton, MIRV payload 3000Kg (doesn't say how many 3-6), range 5000Km, Caniterized, all 3 stages composite motor casings
SLBM: seems like a variant of A6, 4 MIRV payload 2000Kg, 6000+Km, all 3 stages composite

He says our missiles are heavy because our propellant and material technology not to par. He gives 240 ISP for our propellants vs 260-280 for US/Rus/Eur.

Brahmos ranges:

Lo-Lo profile ~140Km
Hi-Lo profile < 300Km
Hi-Hi profile 600km

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 18 Oct 2014 03:03

sivab wrote:^^^ To add to above

Agni 5: 50Ton, single payload 1050kg, range 5000Km, Caniterized
Agni 6: 56Ton, MIRV payload 3000Kg (doesn't say how many 3-6), range 5000Km, Caniterized, all 3 stages composite motor casings
SLBM: seems like a variant of A6, 4 MIRV payload 2000Kg, 6000+Km, all 3 stages composite

He says our missiles are heavy because our propellant and material technology not to par. He gives 240 ISP for our propellants vs 260-280 for US/Rus/Eur.

Brahmos ranges:

Lo-Lo profile ~140Km
Hi-Lo profile < 300Km
Hi-Hi profile 600km

We will need to either develop or steal propellant or composite technology if want to minimize boost phase intercept time by missile/laser. These is just no excuse for this now especially with the new government. Moreover, our Hbomb needs to be tested within the decade if we want to maintain parity with China or the West.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2014 03:29

Low Isp is also more affordable. Higher Isp has other issues.

rahulm · Post by **rahulm** » 18 Oct 2014 03:53

Congratulations to DRDO. Products and successes are becoming routine reflecting maturity.

- Zee Hindi news had the most comprehensive coverage and professional quality coverage. Good job by reporter Krishna Mohan Mishra and news host Aditi for not interrupting Krishna Mohan Mishra's coverage. Report also makes the distinction between a successful test fire and a successful test. 10/10

- the missile travelled about 500 kms and then looped to return to a point about 40 kms from the launch point to splash into the sea

- Mixed reports on whether this test was at an altitude of 4.5 kms or tree top. Furthers 5 tests in the next 3 years would see validation of tree top level flight, terminal guidance and seeker.

- missile travels at 0.7 mach - somebody also arrived at this calculation earlier in this thread.

- cost - Rs. 10 crore/missile

- Nice to see SDRE Pooja with people seated on the ground cross legged, tinkling bells and chants prior to the launch!!

- reporter understands the differences between a BM and CM and gives a good answer to Aditi's query to compare Tomahawk with Nirbhay and emphasises the MTCR backdrop.

- Delhi to Lahore is 489 Kms, Isloo is 881 kms, Peshavar 805 kms, Pindi 875 kms, Faislabad 593 kms (per report )

- missile dia 0.52 metres and length 6 metres

In another TV interview the reporter does himself a disfavour by asking the wonderful women scientists to justify their existence in a missile "mans world". Misogynist approach however well intended it may be.

Well done Krishna Mohan Mishra. Hindi channnel and SDRE reporter triumphs again. English as a link language has ensured thee alienation/marginalisation of a huge chunk of India's very talented people in the mainstream dominated by the Angreezi elite much to the country's net loss. A topic for the link language thread but that is laced with IED's everywhere.

- Use of Ruhkimi is a pleasant and happy surprise for real time tasking.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2014 04:04

The cannister launch is also important. Due to the closed tube nature of the cannister you get very high acoustic frequency vibrations which are difficult to manage.
Great job all in all. Am studying the picture all by itself to figure out the configuration on the outside. Looks like cable conduits running the length.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 04:33

Just because it's so handsome...

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 18 Oct 2014 04:41

^^Too much awesomness in that pikture onlee

Awaiting the Jag GoPro Cam bhideo

SaiK wrote:^nash's link:

A submerged air intake, which is just a hole in the belly of the missile and deployment of folded wing into the flight configuration are two critical technological challenged we overcame in this project

rahulm wrote: In another TV interview the reporter does himself a disfavour by asking the wonderful women scientists to justify their existence in a missile "mans world". Misogynist approach however well intended it may be.

That was Pallav Bawla from rrrNDeeTVeee.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 06:08

The location of the Nirbhay's wing slot is quite different when compared to the Tomahawk Block IV (UGM-109E) and the Novator 3M14E.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 18 Oct 2014 06:39

PratikDas wrote: The location of the Nirbhay's wing slot is quite different when compared to the Tomahawk Block IV (UGM-109E) and the Novator 3M14E.

You have Nirbhay upside down

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Oct 2014 06:41

the tomahawk needs to retain its circular x-section to permit TT launches....but it has moved to more stealthy nosecone shape.we can adopt this plan to reduce RCS. work can be done on lowering the thermal signature of the exhaust...this is a highly classified area by the big boys.

the air launched cruise missiles like KH101 and JASSM have moved to stealthy shape for whole airframe.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Oct 2014 06:44

Seems pretty close to the other two (US and Russian).

The wing is about mid-section and the exhaust is just ahead of the booster.

Hobbes · Post by **Hobbes** » 18 Oct 2014 06:44

Interesting that the TEL used for the test was powered by neither TATA or Tatra, but instead a MAN ( http://www.truck.man.eu/global/en/index.html) tractor. You can see it in Shiv Aroor's blog post at http://www.livefistdefence.com/2014/10/ ... Defence%29.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 06:45

Thakur_B wrote:
PratikDas wrote: The location of the Nirbhay's wing slot is quite different when compared to the Tomahawk Block IV (UGM-109E) and the Novator 3M14E.
You have Nirbhay upside down

Yes, I'm aware that it appears upside down, but that is the only picture available at the moment.

The missile was vertical and the image has been rotated for the comparison.

In any case, the point was to discuss the position of the wing slot.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 06:46

NRao wrote:

Seems pretty close to the other two (US and Russian).

The wing is about mid-section and the exhaust is just ahead of the booster.

No. Even in the picture you've shown, the wing slot is ahead of the wing's fulcrum. In the US and Russian missiles, the wing slot is behind the fulcrum.

Here's a picture of the 1st Nirbhay:

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 18 Oct 2014 06:48

mind-boggling , having a CEP of 5 to 6 Mtrs with only onboard INS. Which signals did it picked up ?? Now that the design , engine , INS , datalink and flight profile have been proven, when will Terrain matching and terrain avoidance profile , TV guided and seeker tech , features come on board ? Terrain following and avoidance tech can be incorporated in our LCA.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Oct 2014 06:52

Sorry, no idea what is a fulcrum in this case.

All I can see is that in the US/RU case the wing is at the top, while in IN case it is at the bottom (unless the missile is upside down). Other than that they all seem to be about the same distance from the nose. ?????