Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion - June'14

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 07:05

I think it should be clear to anyone who has actually spent two minutes looking at the picture which painstakingly outlines for each of the 3 missiles the position of the wing slot that there should be something different about the shape and/or placement of the Nirbhay's warhead. Nirbhay's warhead either sits under the wing or behind the wing, but if it were ahead of the wing as in the case of the Tomahawk and Novator, it would be too small and so the latter option is unlikely.

And as you noted, the root of the wing is at approximately the same point for all missiles. This means the Nirbhay's wing tips swing from front to back as the wings deploy. The Tomahawk's and the Novator's wing tips would swing from back to front as their wings deploy.

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 18 Oct 2014 08:41

This is a major accomplishment. Congrats to everyone involved.

Because Nirbhay is recoverable, that means that it can carry out a targeted assassination and leave very little evidence behind. The fact that Nirbhay will be submarine-launch capable gives the Indian government tremendous reach.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Oct 2014 08:53

Some more information from The Hindu - Y.Mallikarjun

As the missile, carrying a dummy payload of 350 kg, dived near the impact point in the Bay of Bengal with a great degree of accuracy after performing three loops . . .

Dr. K. Tamilmani, Director-General (Aeronautical Systems), DRDO, said this would be the basis for improved cruise missiles. The technology evolved could be adapted for higher ranges.

srai · Post by **srai** » 18 Oct 2014 09:06

sivab wrote:
... "As I see it, ADE is currently on a well-chartered flight-path with a number of critical projects in their kitty. Our efforts will be now to have Nirbhay indicted into the Navy within three years followed by the Army an year after that. The air force version should be out in the next six years," the top missile scientist said. ...
http://news.oneindia.in/feature/how-ind ... 42399.html

Karthik S wrote: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.

3 x P-15A has enough room in the front section (between Brahmos and Barak-8) for a 8-cell Nirbhay VLS module. If more are required, one of the two 8-cell Brahmos VLS modules could be replaced with an additional Nirbhay module. The follow-on 4 x P-15B would have similar capacity.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Oct 2014 09:07

PD,

Am on my cell, so unable to type in detail.

in The picture you provided, the box for the wing is not where the wing is. Also the wing in the Nirbhay should swing forward.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 09:11

I disagree with you

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Oct 2014 09:24

the choice of jaguar for chase plane role is apt because airframe and pilots are capable of flying at 100mts elevation both over the sea and land. so it can follow the nirbhay even in a lo-lo-lo profile albeit not for 1000km....a relay of jags will have to take up the chase.

subhamoy.das · Post by **subhamoy.das** » 18 Oct 2014 09:27

If fired from an IN ship positioned in safe location in the Indian ocean, what Chinese high value targets can it reach?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Oct 2014 09:41

parts of yunnan from bay of bengal. but none on the eastern seaboard.
distance from singapore to hainan island is 2200km for eg. as crow flies even if we risk overflying vietnam enroute.

kolkata to eastern seaboard is 2500km over myanmar and cheen.

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 18 Oct 2014 10:26

A range of 1600 km makes all major bases, staging areas and bridges/rail nodes within the Urumqui-Lanzhou-Chongquing arc vulnerable. That is, if we have a good stock of Nirbhays for prompt and timely Indian Takeout. Seaborne Nirbhays pounding Qingdao would make a significant dent if we have like, a full strike fleet of dozen arsenal ship-ish vessels and destroyers in the South China Sea, right?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 18 Oct 2014 10:57

best 'arsenal ships' from our POV would be arihant and her sisters.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 11:26

NRao ji, we were both right. After some heavy post-processing for zooming in, slowing down and enhancing contrast, it turns out that Nirbhay has a one-piece swivel wing.

As the wing swivels from the stowed configuration to the deployed configuration, the top portion of the wing (Right wing) swings from front to back and the bottom portion of the wing (Left wing) swings from back to front.

srin · Post by **srin** » 18 Oct 2014 12:05

PratikDas wrote:NRao ji, we were both right. After some heavy post-processing for zooming in, slowing down and enhancing contrast, it turns out that Nirbhay has a one-piece swivel wing.

As the wing swivels from the stowed configuration to the deployed configuration, the top portion of the wing (Right wing) swings from front to back and the bottom portion of the wing (Left wing) swings from back to front.

You are right - it made me remember the NDTV video of the first trial and here it is: http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/i ... ils/268282. Go to around 1:06

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 18 Oct 2014 12:05

PratikDas wrote:NRao ji, we were both right. After some heavy post-processing for zooming in, slowing down and enhancing contrast, it turns out that Nirbhay has a one-piece swivel wing.

As the wing swivels from the stowed configuration to the deployed configuration, the top portion of the wing (Right wing) swings from front to back and the bottom portion of the wing (Left wing) swings from back to front.

If want to know how the wings operate you have find last years ndtv video about nirbhay launch where the scientist manually opens the wings and demonstrates it to palava bagla. He spoke also about its position and centre of gravity.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 13:31

Thank you, srin and ravip. You have incredible memories.

Nirbhay's designers then have to work a bit harder to achieve a good systems-integration job as the wing would be stowed under not just the electronics but the warhead as well. In the case of the Tomahawk, the warhead is completely compartmentalized.

Interesting!

member_28442 · Post by **member_28442** » 18 Oct 2014 13:45

the way the wing deploys, it seems like 1 piece to a layman like me.

even if it isnt, this single "innovation" just shows how us SDREs manage to do things differently even in established norms lol

no wonder our MOM/sats/rockets are much cheaper than their western counterparts

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 18 Oct 2014 13:53

Just 350 kg warhead for a range of 1000 km ?

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 18 Oct 2014 13:53

I don't know where to post it, but certainly this is not the correct thread...but how ever many people visit this thread so I am posting it here.

Mr. Rajeev Chandrasekhar has tweeted asking people to mail him questions so that he can ask in the parliament. So I think we should compile some very important questions and mail it to him. The email Id is RC@rajeev.in

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Oct 2014 14:09

there are not many targets that can absorb a 350kg warhead travelling at 800kmph. it will gut the belly of a very large ITvity style building. interesting application like submunitions for covering area targets like POL or weapons facility will be there.

south korea has already tested CM from ships and submarines
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TidsSmImJRU

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 18 Oct 2014 14:17

Is the naval version only for surface launch? 520 mm diameter suggests compatibility with HTT.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Oct 2014 14:28

the totally interior packed wing and 520mm diameter indicates it will go into 21'' TT also.

the kilo class operates russian torpedoes with length of 24 feet. so this should fit in both our kilos and scorpenes.

the western torpedoes like mk48, spearfish, seahake, blackshark are a tad shorter between 19-23ft.

Ashokk · Post by **Ashokk** » 18 Oct 2014 14:41

ravip wrote:If want to know how the wings operate you have find last years ndtv video about nirbhay launch where the scientist manually opens the wings and demonstrates it to palava bagla. He spoke also about its position and centre of gravity.

Watch the wing deployment demonstration at 2:59 min

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 Oct 2014 14:46

PratikDas wrote: Nirbhay's designers then have to work a bit harder to achieve a good systems-integration job as the wing would be stowed under not just the electronics but the warhead as well.

Why would that be a problem?

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 18 Oct 2014 15:16

Nirbhay external aesthetics are so modern that not even one member has any demand that it should have been like this or that. Great work by next gen scientists.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 15:31

shiv wrote:
PratikDas wrote: Nirbhay's designers then have to work a bit harder to achieve a good systems-integration job as the wing would be stowed under not just the electronics but the warhead as well.
Why would that be a problem?

I'm speculating based on the assumptions that follow. It is stated that Nirbhay has "24 different types of warheads". With the wing running over the warhead, the structural integrity of the missile minus the warhead section can be poor, making it difficult to transport. So I think the warhead is matched to the missile when the missile is manufactured, and I think the entire missile is constructed in one location, on a jig - pretty much on the equivalent of a surgery table with SDREs having to be more careful than their Raytheon counterparts.

Had the electronics and warhead been compartmentalised length-wise as with the Tomahawk Block IV, the entire missile aft of the warhead can be manufactured in a clean room with minimal threat to SDRE life, on the equivalent of a moving factory line, and then shipped out to another location where the riskier task of matching one of the 24 different warhead types can be performed by a handful of experts.

In short, I expect the latter approach to be more conducive to distributed manufacturing.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 18 Oct 2014 15:34

ravip wrote:Nirbhay external aesthetics are so modern that not even one member has any demand that it should have been like this or that. Great work by next gen scientists.

Completely agree.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Oct 2014 16:16

Some more details from Jane's.

http://www.janes.com/article/44688/indi ... se-missile

India successfully tests Nirbhay cruise missile
James Hardy, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
16 October 2014
India's Nirbhay cruise missile completed its first successful test-launch on 17 October, the Defence Research and Development Organisation said in a statement. Source: DRDO

India's Nirbhay (Fearless) long-range cruise missile successfully completed a test-flight for the first time on 14 October, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) said in a statement.

The 1,000 km-class cruise missile, which the DRDO describes as "India's first indigenously designed and developed long-range sub-sonic cruise missile", was launched from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Balasore in Odissa state at 10:05 h local time.

The flight lasted a little over 1 hour and 10 minutes and covered a distance of more than 1,000 km. "The entire mission, from lift-off until the final splash down, was a perfect flight achieving all the mission objectives," the DRDO statement said.

DRDO chief Avinash Chander said that the missile had achieved an accuracy of more than 10 m. "The successful indigenous development of the Nirbhay cruise missile will fill a vital gap in the warfighting capabilities of our armed forces," he added.

The Nirbhay's first flight on 12 November 2012 had to be cut short when a glitch in the cruise missile's inertial navigation system caused the missile to stray from the planned flightpath after it had flown a distance of 250 km at Mach 0.7: about a quarter of the planned distance.
COMMENT

The Nirbhay shares a similar physical profile with the US Tomahawk and Russian Kh-55 cruise missiles, featuring a slim cylindrical fuselage and a set of folding, pop-out wings for flight control. IHS Jane's notes that the missile is approximately 6 m long with a diameter of 520 mm and a wingspan of 3.2 m.

It is believed to have a payload of 450 kg, which would suggest a high explosive, submunitions or small nuclear warhead, possibly in the 12 kT range.

The cruise missile is powered by a small turbojet engine fed by an air intake scoop positioned under the main body. It is launched using a solid-propellant boost motor, which is jettisoned, and a turbojet motor that takes over for the subsonic cruise and terminal phases.

It is possible that the turbojet engine has been provided by a Russian company: in October 2006 it was announced that Russia had agreed to supply 200 NPO Saturn TRDD-50MT small turbojet engines to India, ostensibly for the Lakshya target drone programme.

According to the DRDO statement, the 14 October launch took place from a "mobile launcher specifically designed for Nirbhay". It is unclear whether this will be the first variant to enter service; officials previously said it was expected to be operational in all three armed forces by 2016, although this appears unlikely given delays to the test programme.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Oct 2014 17:23

From Mars Mission to navigation satellites to N-capable missiles: India scores big scientifically

sivab · Post by **sivab** » 18 Oct 2014 18:22

Old news on status of indigenous engine for nirbhay from horses mouth

http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... ister.html

Saurav Jha: Has the program for a domestic turbofan for the Nirbhay taken off? What is the rating of this engine?

Avinash Chander: We have taken up the development of this engine and it has come to the bench test level. It is currently undergoing tests and evaluation and we are confident that we can do it. It has 400 kg thrust engine. But once we have the capability we can achieve varied thrust ratings for engines of this class. Incidentally, Nirbhay is coming up in a big way.

kit · Post by **kit** » 18 Oct 2014 18:44

If launched from a submarine, the Nirbhay would not need the rocket motor i guess., that makes it the right size for a submarine launch like the brahmos ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Oct 2014 19:18

It will still need the solid fuel booster to attain a certain height and speed.

member_28788 · Post by **member_28788** » 18 Oct 2014 19:37

Austin wrote:From Mars Mission to navigation satellites to N-capable missiles: India scores big scientifically

Thanks for sharing but guys unless you're a great fan of nationalistic jingoism, you should take Rajeev Sharma's articles with more than a pinch of salt. He may be right but I will like to listen the same words from someone more critically acclaimed.

Ranjani Brow · Post by **Ranjani Brow** » 18 Oct 2014 19:54

Booster Rocket is a bit longer compared to other cruise missiles of similar class.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 Oct 2014 20:10

^^^The went just below the silver band on the booster seems to be the one which allows missile to turn into a particular direction post launch.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 18 Oct 2014 21:15

Watched the video. Stellar Nav is now being worked on. Good development. We can't rely on Satnav even if we decide to first strike at long range. The trick at this stage is to master: Employing more advanced and hardened composites, more energetic and lighter fuel, and thermonuclear payload. All of these developments will substantially increase the range of our missiles.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2014 21:20

So the truss frame is the launcher and not a container/cylinder? takes care of the acoustic noise I was talking about.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 18 Oct 2014 21:34

rohitvats wrote:^^^The went just below the silver band on the booster seems to be the one which allows missile to turn into a particular direction post launch.

The change of direction was smooth & gradual (unlike Brahmos)
- seems more like a aerodynamic control..
- no smoke or jets seen coming out of there during change of direction

May be use aerodynamic forces by using the cruciform fins just in front of the booster?? Possible!

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 18 Oct 2014 22:16

PratikDas wrote:Thank you, srin and ravip. You have incredible memories.

Nirbhay's designers then have to work a bit harder to achieve a good systems-integration job as the wing would be stowed under not just the electronics but the warhead as well. In the case of the Tomahawk, the warhead is completely compartmentalized.

Interesting!

In one of the photos the warhead indeed appears to be compartmentalized.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 18 Oct 2014 22:20

I have some noob questions:
1. Is booster rocket of Nirbhay salvageable, at least some parts like rocket motors, fin controllers, etc.
2. What is sanitation zone (in meters, is 500 m enough?) for Nirbhay, i.e. where rocket booster fells?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 18 Oct 2014 22:41

@Pratikdas,
Don't worry, everything is compartmentalized.
Seeker+avionics : warhead : fuel : avionics : engine.

@Rohitvats,
That vent is not in the right place (90 degrees off) for the maneuver. I tried to see if there is TVC for the booster. But most likely it is through the fins on the missile.

@Vivek Ahuja sahab,
Take a bow. I calculated (from the fuel tank section which about 2050 mm long) that the fuel on board is about 320 kgs. With the TRDD-50MT your graph about range is spot on.

vivek_ahuja wrote:

Wonder what your opinions are now on this post that you made some time back.