Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby ramana » 02 Nov 2015 20:56

Turn on radar its like a siren going off.
Also read the article linked above. They are getting JDAM accuracy with the ranging method. The pod needs to be turned on momentarily to get a visual. Not continuous like laser guided PGM.


Need to think it terms of threats to India.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19835
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby Karan M » 02 Nov 2015 21:35

>>They are getting JDAM accuracy with the ranging method.

One correction. They claim they are getting JDAM accuracy.
But if they were, why the need for KAB-500S or KAB-250S?
Why is the IAF integrating Griffin LGBs on its Su-30 MKIs?

IMO, the academic paper is not from the frontline or actual extended tests and is hence overly optimistic.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8224
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby Indranil » 02 Nov 2015 21:46

I just saw a tender for Vane type Parachute system Type A as per spec. no. ARDE/Pinaka/Parachute/01/2015 as per list 3. It is supposed to be used on Pinaka Mk2 to deliver "remotely delivered munitions". So, I started to look up for "remotely delivered munitions, and chanced onthis paper.

Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby Austin » 02 Nov 2015 21:49

Karan M wrote:>>They are getting JDAM accuracy with the ranging method.

One correction. They claim they are getting JDAM accuracy.
But if they were, why the need for KAB-500S or KAB-250S?
Why is the IAF integrating Griffin LGBs on its Su-30 MKIs?

IMO, the academic paper is not from the frontline or actual extended tests and is hence overly optimistic.


Check the Su-24 Dumb Bomb video on Syriat thread , it may be not JDAM but its pretty accurate bombing of dumb bomb.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8224
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby Indranil » 02 Nov 2015 21:55

RCI is seeking collaboration from Thales to develop 384X288 MWIR FPA based refractive system. They have issued a single-vendor tender.

RCI has developed 1st version of IIR seeker based on 128X128 LWIR FPA with a gear drive gimbal system. To improve the resolution, the following developments have been taken up.
a) 384X288 MWIR FPA based refractive system
b) Direct drive servo system
c) A catadioptric optical system

During the development the following issues have been observed.
I. Sun light from well outside the FOV causing image disturbance
II. Direct drive performance limitation during forward acceleration
Thales to take up the study and analysis of these systems and issues.

RCI will provide relevant information as follows.
a) Electro – Optical Subsystem
 Optics Specification
 Optics design and optics unit realization
 EO Testing
b) Seeker Servo System
 System performance specifications, Gimbal configuration, Specifications of servo components used, Mechanical drawings including masses & Moment of Inertias and Transfer functions .
 Test results of frequency response, time response of servo loops ( Stabilization, Position and Track loop), measurement of Field of regard, Isolation and decoupling values.
 Vibration levels , carrier body and trajectory motions expected etc.
 Documentation on design and test evaluation of Seeker servo system.

Thales Study will address the following aspects
a) Electro Optical System
 Stray light computation using CODEV
 Opto-mechanical analysis
 Test methodology for optical systems
 Control of stray light in the present optical systems
 Integration and alignment of optical systems including a refractive system and catadioptric systems
b) Seeker Servo System
 Define design inputs and loop configurations for better servo performance.
 Thales may define additional test procedures ( friction , un balanced mass measurements, resonance curve and LOS stabilization error etc) to be conducted so that RCI will carry out those tests and report the measurements .
 Study on improvement performance in terms of enhancement of stabilization bandwidth and Disturbance rejection i.e. Isolation ( by compensating non linearities like friction , body couplings, cross coupling , Gimbal resonance, flex lead torque due to cooling tube & cables and feed forward path).
 Enhancement of Distrubance rejection at 21Hz sine wave coming from the Helicopter body disturbance.
 Suggestion on hardware issues related to mechanical , electrical, cables & coolant tube routing, test evaluation procedures , tuning of controller to match with hardware results and stabilization requirement with respect to integration time etc. RCI will implement design modifications and carry out the measurements.
 Nonlinear Simulink model for servo loops (Stabilization, Position and Track loops). Simulation on isolation, decoupling, LOS stabilization accuracy plots, imbalance torque due to boost phase accelerations etc. and comparison with hardware results.


Interestingly,
Justification for single tender
Choice of going on single tender to M/S Thales is due to the following reasons.

USA does not respond to requests for selling FPAs also. Hence approaching USA may not yield any useful outcome.

Israeli defence firm are generally interested in selling their product than carrying out such analysis and help.

M/S Thales has completed such study for Programme AD for the front end Optronic seeker. M/S Thales has the expertise in designing and developing IIR seekers. They have provided technology base for developing IIR seekers in Air Defence mode. M/S Thales is ready to take up such study and analyse the issues as given in the scope of workand suggest remedial measures.

Hence single tender procurement is being pursued.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby ramana » 02 Nov 2015 22:55

KaranM, Flexibility.

The KAB 500 etc. were being used against buildings.
They even fired the KshLs.

IAF is serious now. They want the Griffin to the HSLD for concrete targets etc.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1739
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Nov 2015 23:35

indranilroy wrote:RCI is seeking collaboration from Thales to develop 384X288 MWIR FPA based refractive system. They have issued a single-vendor tender.

RCI has developed 1st version of IIR seeker based on 128X128 LWIR FPA with a gear drive gimbal system. To improve the resolution, the following developments have been taken up.
a) 384X288 MWIR FPA based refractive system
b) Direct drive servo system
c) A catadioptric optical system

During the development the following issues have been observed.
I. Sun light from well outside the FOV causing image disturbance
II. Direct drive performance limitation during forward acceleration
Thales to take up the study and analysis of these systems and issues.

RCI will provide relevant information as follows.
a) Electro – Optical Subsystem
 Optics Specification
 Optics design and optics unit realization
 EO Testing
b) Seeker Servo System
 System performance specifications, Gimbal configuration, Specifications of servo components used, Mechanical drawings including masses & Moment of Inertias and Transfer functions .
 Test results of frequency response, time response of servo loops ( Stabilization, Position and Track loop), measurement of Field of regard, Isolation and decoupling values.
 Vibration levels , carrier body and trajectory motions expected etc.
 Documentation on design and test evaluation of Seeker servo system.

Thales Study will address the following aspects
a) Electro Optical System
 Stray light computation using CODEV
 Opto-mechanical analysis
 Test methodology for optical systems
 Control of stray light in the present optical systems
 Integration and alignment of optical systems including a refractive system and catadioptric systems
b) Seeker Servo System
 Define design inputs and loop configurations for better servo performance.
 Thales may define additional test procedures ( friction , un balanced mass measurements, resonance curve and LOS stabilization error etc) to be conducted so that RCI will carry out those tests and report the measurements .
 Study on improvement performance in terms of enhancement of stabilization bandwidth and Disturbance rejection i.e. Isolation ( by compensating non linearities like friction , body couplings, cross coupling , Gimbal resonance, flex lead torque due to cooling tube & cables and feed forward path).
 Enhancement of Distrubance rejection at 21Hz sine wave coming from the Helicopter body disturbance.
 Suggestion on hardware issues related to mechanical , electrical, cables & coolant tube routing, test evaluation procedures , tuning of controller to match with hardware results and stabilization requirement with respect to integration time etc. RCI will implement design modifications and carry out the measurements.
 Nonlinear Simulink model for servo loops (Stabilization, Position and Track loops). Simulation on isolation, decoupling, LOS stabilization accuracy plots, imbalance torque due to boost phase accelerations etc. and comparison with hardware results.


Interestingly,
Justification for single tender
Choice of going on single tender to M/S Thales is due to the following reasons.

USA does not respond to requests for selling FPAs also. Hence approaching USA may not yield any useful outcome.

Israeli defence firm are generally interested in selling their product than carrying out such analysis and help.

M/S Thales has completed such study for Programme AD for the front end Optronic seeker. M/S Thales has the expertise in designing and developing IIR seekers. They have provided technology base for developing IIR seekers in Air Defence mode. M/S Thales is ready to take up such study and analyse the issues as given in the scope of workand suggest remedial measures.

Hence single tender procurement is being pursued.



MWIR seeker. Sounds like an air to air or a surface to air missile :)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2016 22:40

A few x-posts which really belong here....

1)
Austin wrote:I think IAF/DRDO will have to work to gather to figure out what is the average warhead needed to take out most targets in our environment i.e Pakistan/China , taking into account factor like Hardened/Semi-Hardened base , most common military targets like airfield , C&C infra , Ammo Depo , Transport Infra etc , they need to take into account factors like CEP available for such weapon both in external aided guidance like GPS/GLONASS/GAGAN denied environment and factoring in average warhead size needed to take these out.

Now these might just be good for 60 % of the targets which might says 150 Kg warhead for guranteed destruction of target based on says INS Plus Some cheap Terminal homing system like EO/IR/TV/Semi-Active laser with CEP of 5-10 m then they can work on those types of weapons which meets our needs and within our ability to develop.

The remaining 15-20 % Target might just need 20-30 Kg type SDB warhead while the rest 20-25 might really need hard hitting 500/1000 Kg Weapon assuming similar CEP and indiginious guidance option available with India, of-course there would be the usual dumb bomb of 250/500/1000 Kg warhead relying on Aircraft INS/Radar guidance for delivery say with CEP of 15-20 m


These needs to be worked out between DRDO and IAF on what works best in Indian subcontinent based on type of targets we will encounter and based on available guidance method available during war to deliver these to the type of targets they need to be delivered too


2)
srai wrote:^^^
If Vayu Shakti are anything to go by, the IAF typically uses 1000lb in dive mode or CCIP for individual targets, like aircraft shelters. 250kg and 100kg are carried in multi-carriage and used for attacking an area, such as railway yards. PGMs (typically 1000lb LGB while other AGMs hardly seen) are few and so are used judiciously for high value targets.


3)
abhik wrote:Compensating for lack of precision for warhead weight is a prohibitively expensive proposition because of the non linear relationship between the explosive yield and the radius of destruction. The blast wave would dissipate by a factor of ^3 of distance(or so). One can see this in action in this charthttp://s1116.photobucket.com/user/bennedose/media/nuke-yield-damage-radius-table.jpg.html?sort=3&o=60 (showing the relationship between yields of nuclear weapons and their destructive power) which was linked earlier elsewhere. So a doubling of explosive power will result in an increase in destructive radius of only 20-25% and 10x increase will result in the destructive radius by a little more than 2x.


4)
Austin wrote:
srai wrote:^^^
If Vayu Shakti are anything to go by, the IAF typically uses 1000lb in dive mode or CCIP for individual targets, like aircraft shelters. 250kg and 100kg are carried in multi-carriage and used for attacking an area, such as railway yards. PGMs (typically 1000lb LGB while other AGMs hardly seen) are few and so are used judiciously for high value targets.


So a 150-200 kg warhead would suffice for say 60 % target, while we need guidance that gives CEP of 5-10m without relying on external sensors need cheap INS plus EO guidance for terminal homing , if the aircraft navigation and sar are good it would boost accuracy of Indian 150-200 kg glide bomb

DRDO has multiple sensor/guidance hardware but many are for high end missile relying on cheap reliability of satellite aided navigation is not good as they can be denied or jammed


A few comments.

During the early 1970s India wanted to make the AS20 from France at Bharat Dynamics Limited. US objected to the AS-20 mfg. technology transfer as they thought it would give India an advantage. However later I read India makes the next version AS-30 at BDL. So go figure.
Second British found their 500 lb. or 250 kg dumb bomb were puny and useless. They then developed the 1000 lb. MC and 4000 lb. MC bombs for area targets. All this was with old bomber aircraft.

It was in the mid 70s that US started looking at ways to defeat hard targets and launched twin initiatives: hard target penetration bombs and guidance methods.
What was found is hard target defeat requires actual hitting the target and not a near miss.
This means its own challenges: bomb case integrity: should not shatter or pancake!, fuzes have to withstand the shock and vibration of the impact etc.

Guidance is well known after Desert Storm, Desert Fox. Tora Bora caves and later Iraq war.

I note that IAF had DRDO develop a 1000kg bomb which shows they mean business.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby ramana » 05 Feb 2016 09:43


vanand
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 61
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 13:19

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby vanand » 05 Feb 2016 22:14

On SEAD we forget these
Harop and Harpy, which are already in our procession. But these can used only against radar installtions

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby ramana » 30 Aug 2017 03:28

Also here is the link to an old 4000 lb MC bomb.

LINK to 4000 MC bomb

During the raid on Peshawar a few were dropped and became duds as fuzes didn't not work. British technology at best.

IAF Museum at Hindon has a replica painted blue.

Also link to the entire site that has history of WWII British Weapons

http://www.wwiiequipment.com/

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby ramana » 31 Aug 2017 20:54

Also

Have you seen this? It may be of some use.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/25042019/Brit ... nance-1946

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7533
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby Prasad » 09 Oct 2017 22:54

Nothing new for folks here. A short piece on ARDE's new gen munitions for the IAF -
New Generation ARDE Munitions Boost Indian Airforce Firepower

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby ramana » 10 Oct 2017 02:06

Prasad wrote:Nothing new for folks here. A short piece on ARDE's new gen munitions for the IAF -
New Generation ARDE Munitions Boost Indian Airforce Firepower


Looks like rehash of our Missiles thread.
No new insight.
Cut and paste.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8224
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby Indranil » 28 Feb 2018 05:54

ARDE is licensing out the manufacture of the 500kg GP bomb (under development) and the 250 kg prefragmented bomb in production at OFB. The ToT cost is an upfront fee and 2% royalty.

The design qualification trials of the 500 kg bomb are complete. Flight trials be completed by April 2018. The demand will be 1000 pieces upfront and then 200 pieces a year. Bomb is similar to Mk 83 bomb.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby ramana » 04 Mar 2018 09:25

Can you post the offer here?

Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2120
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Munitions/sub-munitions: accuracy, power and utility

Postby Kakarat » 29 Aug 2020 20:25




Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BALAR025, Neela, shobhits, srin, TKiran and 50 guests