Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

[ArjunPandit]

From the above article:

Given the stand-off posture an air-launched BrahMos will have with its 300 km range (to be extended progressively to over 900 km), a three-weapon loadout option is an sharp leg up for mission flexibility and planning.

Current BrhaMos is capable of 900km range? Or only air version will be capable of this? Or it is a typo

What are they planning...sink a chinese aircraft carrier?

[SSridhar]

Current BrhaMos is capable of 900km range? Or only air version will be capable of this? Or it is a typo

It is not a typo. The current version, with Extended Range, is capable of only ~ 450 Kms. The 900 Km BrahMos is being designed and the first test expected in c. 2019.

[sarang]

OMG! 900 kms on mach3. hell leave the pakis, even the chinis will be in trouble with this range.

[Singha]

i think in hi-hi-lo mode the current one is 600kms.

[SSridhar]

Of course, the range varies with the type of mission, hi-hi-hi or hi-lo-hi or hi-hi-lo etc. For example, in a hi-lo-hi profile, the range could be as low as 120 Kms.

[Singha]

i think for a one way missile there are only two variables hi-lo and lo-lo.
for a/c they speak of hi-hi-hi CAPs and hi-lo-hi / lo-lo-lo strike missions.

[Austin]

Brahmos can fly as low as 5-10 m , How are they going to fly say even 400 km lo-lo at Mach 2+ on a ground terrain even if they have accurate digital map that would be tough ask neither Tomahawk or Kalbir would fly that low.

So practically they would use Hi-Lo trajectory where flying over land it wont fly below 50-100 m , Only in Anti-Ship role they would fly a lo-lo trajectory.

In any case Pakistan does not have any thing to intercept brahmos even if it flies Hi-Hi trajectory where the missile would fly at maximum speed reaching ~ Mach 2.8+ , All their radar scope would see a target about the size of average rcs not exceeding more than 0.1-0.4 m2 flying at extremely high speed , the entire full flight range not exceeding more than 10 -12 mins

[rohiths]

I am not sure any country including US can intercept Brahmos in the Hi-Hi trajectory. High speed coupled with low RCS will make it really difficult to intercept. They may have a 10-20% chance at the best.

[brar_w]

I am not sure any country including US can intercept Brahmos in the Hi-Hi trajectory. High speed coupled with low RCS will make it really difficult to intercept. They may have a 10-20% chance at the best.

Intercepting supersonic cruise missiles particularly in the Mach 2.5 - Mach 4 cruise speed range is a top priority for both the US Army, and the US Navy. Testing is conducted via dedicated test targets that cover cruise speeds in the Mach 2.5 to Mach 4 range, including air launched, and land launched target systems that can get above 45,000 ft in the high altitude profile, and as low as 15 feet in the terminal attack supersonic profile coupled with a 12G maneuvering capability at 15 feet.. This is a major Chinese and Russian threat to them so they test their missiles and fire control systems against it and field and maintain a capacity to produce targets that provide the ability to generate the sort of challenges that these weapons are likely to produce.

You need fast interceptors to provide both stand off and point defense and the ones that the US Army and Navy currently fields are capable of intercepting even faster targets since they are designed to defeat much faster traveling ballistic missile warheads and therefore must have the speed and acceleration to get to a PIP to hold them off at a desired range. Unless you have access to classified level test data there is absolutely no way to accurately predict the probability of intercepting a Mach 2.5-3 cruise missile target at X or XX nautical miles for these systems but AEGIS is designed to use the SM2 and SM6 to intercept these in the cruise phase, and ESSM and SEARAM in the terminal phase. They routinely test these systems both in the operational sense (using a fleet vessel with a fleet crew) and while fielding new configurations in the dev. test sense. France, Japan and iirc Australia have also successfully intercepted these systems using their own Air Defense systems borrowing the target from the US.

[vasu raya]

^^^

so how does the Amraam fare against the Brahmos?

[brar_w]

^^^

so how does the Amraam fare against the Brahmos?

SLAMRAAM is not something that the US would use against such a threat. This would be something for a Pac-2, 3, MSE or SM6 and ESSM. SLAAMRAAM would be a point defense weapon against such a threat if you want the ability to defeat an incoming target at say 10 km.

[Prasad]

Supersonic cruise missile threat to USN isn't new. But due to their course ballistic and cruise missile early detection time will be different? Lesser time (albeit anticipated if enemy aircraft are spotted before launch) to detect and launch defensive missiles against cruise missiles one would guess. You would have a 10 min time to target in case of a mach 2+ missile average speed launched from 450km out.

[brar_w]

Supersonic cruise missile threat to USN isn't new. But due to their course ballistic and cruise missile early detection time will be different? Lesser time (albeit anticipated if enemy aircraft are spotted before launch) to detect and launch defensive missiles against cruise missiles one would guess. You would have a 10 min time to target in case of a mach 2+ missile average speed launched from 450km out.

TBM's stress the interceptor capability, cruise missile stress radar/fire control capability and hypersonic weapons and particularly hypersonic gliders stress both (hence the headache for air-defense systems).

Yes cruise missiles give less reaction time and therefore you need an interceptor that can accelerate quickly and get to altitude in order to intercept them if you want to intercept them from stand off ranges. However they stress your radar and fire-control and command and control more because you are horizon limited and these things can fly at tree top levels over land and even lower at sea. As a result some of the concepts have evolved to any-sensor/best shooter/any shooter concepts where you have networked intercept missiles and shared command and control where you don't rely on your horizon limited primary fire-control radar for cues but can work with a distributed net of sensors that can all produce a fire control level quality composite track for your command and control system to pass along to the interceptor.

You would have a 10 min time to target in case of a mach 2+ missile average speed launched from 450km out.

As a general rule you want to extend the stand off range of the weapon as much as possible as the defender i.e. force the launcher to launch from extended ranges. This influences weapon design, weight, cost and complexity essentially limiting the number that you will ultimately have to contend with. For AEGIS this means laving a long to very long range AAW capability that can be augmented by beyond horizon enhancements through support. This goes after the archer and forces it to stand off.. At that range most of these weapons will be launched at high-lo or high-high profiles which gives you a larger horizon and brings medium to long range intercept capabilities to play. Finally, you need close in 50-60 km interceptors, and lots of them to provide an additional layer and for the USN ESSM plays that role. The last resort is the SeaRam system and the Electronic Attack option that goes after the active seeker missiles. Later Directed energy will come to play here as well.

Here is what the USN uses (and land variants too have been used by US Army and Japan to develop their interceptors) to simulate Chinese and Russian supersonic sea skimmers during live testing. Capability has been enhanced and in the future they will be moving to a hypersonic target system as well as upgrading the air launched Mach 4 capable AQM-37 D Jayhawk.

viewtopic.php?t=4752&start=2480#p2063115

[abhijatT]

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/nirbha ... 195215.ece

Nirbhay failed due to use of recycled material

[nam]

Wouldn't a air launched Brahmos potentially be travelling at far greater than Mach 3, as it is flying down towards a target (gravity+ramjet)?

The Chinese have tested own Brahmos(YJ-12) from a bomber aircraft. It is definitely a threat to our ships.

if fired from the inner belly of a stealth bird, it will be a deadly combo. Pretty sure the Chinese will be building a YJ-12 mini for their J20 soon.

We need to get air lauched version asap, and push for Brahmos NG. And find a way to put Barak8/similar missile on a air platform networked with recon assest.

[ArjunPandit]

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/nirbha ... 195215.ece

Nirbhay failed due to use of recycled material

Cant tell the anguish we all are going to have tomorrow. Imagine losing precious time, manpower and direction just because somebody was too enviro friendly or cost conscious.
Question to gurus here, is it possible to put the current version in production, considering the missile still flies well at high heights. That should give enough pain to napakeez.

[ramana]

I wish the poster had quoted the relevant portion of news report and not just bland headline.

What recycled materials? Initially they said wing failed to deploy after fairure investigation board watched high speed video.
Now the vendor used recycled material and is going to make free of cost new component. SOB should pay for missile test cost.
Also who is going to shut up the 'Utter Failure senior scientist?

Also what credibility of the Failure Board that said some out of tolerance component malfunctioned?


AP, not so fast, the chief says two more issues: guidance and seeker for terminal.

[ramana]

I wish the poster had quoted the relevant portion of news report and not just bland headline.

The fourth test of Nirbhay, the long rage sub-sonic cruise missile that is designed and developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), failed on December 21 last year because of use of faulty material, said Chairman of the DRDO and Secretary of Department of Defence R&D S. Chirstopher here on Saturday.

Speaking to The Hindu after inaugurating a workshop on indigenous lithium-ion batteries for special applications, hosted by the Naval Science and Technological Laboratories (NSTL), the DRDO chief said, “The fourth test of the missile took place from the Launch Complex-III of Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Balasore in Odisha and after lift-off the missile developed snags over one of its wings, started to bank on one side and veered dangerously. We had to activate the ‘self-destruct’ mechanism to kill it mid-air. On investigation, it was found out that the vendor who manufactured it used recycled material for one of the key components that operates the wings of the missile and that was the reason why it failed. The strength of the recycled material was not sufficient to operate the parameters. Though the vendor followed all specifications, the use of re-cycle material was not disclosed.”

But, according to Dr. Christopher, the same vendor had been told to produce another one ‘free of cost’ under the same specifications but without any short-cuts. “Everything was right in the missile, only this faulty material caused the failure. But now it will be ready by July end or August and we shall go for the fifth test,” he said.

Nirbhay is an all-weather, low-cost, long-range sub-sonic cruise missile capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads and is considered to be a strategic weapon.

Roadmap


Pronouncing the roadmap, Dr. Christopher said once the test was successful they would identify the production partner whom they referred to as strategic partner and would go for further variations. [B“It is a guided missile and right now there is no problem with the path in the higher altitude. But there are some glitches in the lower altitude and we will be working on the seekers for pin-point accuracy. The missile should be ready by next two to three years,” he said.[/b]

According to him, the DRDO is working on the strategic partner model who would have stake in the production. “This will make the agency responsible and we will get rid of the tendering process for every small thing. There may be multiple indigenous strategic partners for each of our weapon and defence systems,” he pointed out.

On the naval variant of Tejas–Mark II (light combat aircraft), Dr. Christopher said the prototype was ready and had fullfilled the parameters of ski-jump on board aircraft carriers. But the Navy had been insisting on twin engines and they were working on the power of the engines. “We are also looking for strategic partners and the partner may be a foreign firm that would provide back-end support,” he said.

What recycled materials? Initially they said wing failed to deploy after failure investigation board watched high speed video.
Now the vendor used recycled material and is going to make free of cost new component. SOB should pay for missile test cost.
Also who is going to shut up the 'Utter Failure senior scientist?

Also what credibility of the Failure Board that said some out of tolerance component malfunctioned?


AP, not so fast, the chief says two more issues: height/guidance and seeker for terminal.

Also too much imprecision in timelines. What ready in two or three years?

[vasu raya]

SLAMRAAM is not something that the US would use against such a threat. This would be something for a Pac-2, 3, MSE or SM6 and ESSM. SLAAMRAAM would be a point defense weapon against such a threat if you want the ability to defeat an incoming target at say 10 km.

Thanks brar, I think the threat level in the neighborhood is Pak's F-16s with Amraams if they are doing CAP around a HVT

[brar_w]

SLAMRAAM is not something that the US would use against such a threat. This would be something for a Pac-2, 3, MSE or SM6 and ESSM. SLAAMRAAM would be a point defense weapon against such a threat if you want the ability to defeat an incoming target at say 10 km.

Thanks brar, I think the threat level in the neighborhood is Pak's F-16s with Amraams if they are doing CAP around a HVT

They can't. Not with the number of aircraft they have and not with that radar. For cruise missile defense you would need a lot of aircraft given the possible waypoints and you would need a better sensor. The USAF itself has invested in upgrading its ANG F-16's to an AESA radar and an IRST pod and these aircraft perform the homeland defense mission which has a cruise missile defense component. There is no way the PAF can maintain the sort of aerial orbits required to effectively utilize air power in the cruise missile defense mission. The range of an AMRAAM class 7" SRM would also be limited against a Mach 2+ which requires additional aircraft and denser coverage. Effective defense is to defend the intended targets or high value targets in general with point defense systems. Medium range defense against supersonic (or even Very Low RCS subsonic weapons like JASSM) cruise missiles (broad area defense) requires huge leaps in net centricity and networked sensors and interceptors. Even the US Army isn't there yet with fully active any sensor any shooter systems so don't expect the PAF to be anywhere close.

[Singha]

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/nirbha ... 195215.ece

The fourth test of Nirbhay, the long rage sub-sonic cruise missile that is designed and developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), failed on December 21 last year because of use of faulty material, said Chairman of the DRDO and Secretary of Department of Defence R&D S. Chirstopher here on Saturday.

Speaking to The Hindu after inaugurating a workshop on indigenous lithium-ion batteries for special applications, hosted by the Naval Science and Technological Laboratories (NSTL), the DRDO chief said, “The fourth test of the missile took place from the Launch Complex-III of Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Balasore in Odisha and after lift-off the missile developed snags over one of its wings, started to bank on one side and veered dangerously. We had to activate the ‘self-destruct’ mechanism to kill it mid-air. On investigation, it was found out that the vendor who manufactured it used recycled material for one of the key components that operates the wings of the missile and that was the reason why it failed. The strength of the recycled material was not sufficient to operate the parameters. Though the vendor followed all specifications, the use of re-cycle material was not disclosed.”


But, according to Dr. Christopher, the same vendor had been told to produce another one ‘free of cost’ under the same specifications but without any short-cuts. “Everything was right in the missile, only this faulty material caused the failure. But now it will be ready by July end or August and we shall go for the fifth test,” he said.

Nirbhay is an all-weather, low-cost, long-range sub-sonic cruise missile capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads and is considered to be a strategic weapon.

Pronouncing the roadmap, Dr. Christopher said once the test was successful they would identify the production partner whom they referred to as strategic partner and would go for further variations. “It is a guided missile and right now there is no problem with the path in the higher altitude. But there are some glitches in the lower altitude and we will be working on the seekers for pin-point accuracy. The missile should be ready by next two to three years,” he said.

[Singha]

probably it could be some hydraulically or electrically activated hinge , pin, rod etc thats supposed to get the wings out and lock them in place.

[ramana]

I wonder if DRDO has source inspection at the supplier. Substituting recycled material while charging full price is fraud in any country. How did the supplier do the substitution without informing design cognizant organization? I think ADD has too cozy relationship or worse passive supplier oversight.

I don't like usage of term which implies seller- buyer relationship. What the need is supplier partnership.which implies stake in success of the end product.

I think ADE needs reorganization for negligence.

[ArjunPandit]

Now this kind of cost cutting really can deplete the confidence of armed forces on the deterrent as well. This is during design/test phase where things will be under more scrutiny. Under normal production situation, not sure if the tests inspections will be as rigorous.

[ramana]

Wonder how that Manik is doing?
After the Nirbhay is proven, it needs more tests for engine integration.

[putnanja]

India successfully test-fires surface-to-air short range missile

India today successfully test-fired its indigenously developed quick reaction surface-to-air short range missile from a test range along the Odisha coast. The sophisticated missile was test fired at about 11.25 AM from a truck-mounted canister launcher from launch complex-3 at the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Chandipur near here, official sources said. It was the second developmental trial of the state-of-the-art missile with an aerial target. The missile has been developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and other establishments. The first test launch of the missile was conducted on June four, 2017 from the same base. The missile, which has a strike range of 25 to 30 km, is capable of engaging multiple targets. Designed to be a quick reaction missile, it involves an all-weather weapon system capable of tracking and firing.

[Aditya_V]

Hopefully with the Vendor base and the Radar /Launcher infrastructure Built up for Akash , QR Sam can be produced and inducted quickly by say 2020-21. This can go to front line AFB's while the command guided Akash can go interior AFB's.

[mody]

QRSAM tested twice in the first month of trials!! Wow!! Looks like most of the pieces of the puzzle would have been ready, as part of other projects and hence DRDO would have been fairly confident about the system as a whole.

Hopefully the system will be ready fro production within the next 2 years. IAF and IA will require huge quantity of these, to take on the cruise missile threat.
Is the QRSAM being considered for Navy's requirement as well? It can arm all the smaller corvette class vessels as standard SAM and for the larger ships can take on the role of Barak-1.

[Gyan]

Hoping for Akash 1S and Akash 2NG to be test fired soon.

[JayS]

I wonder if DRDO has source inspection at the supplier. Substituting recycled material while charging full price is fraud in any country. How did the supplier do the substitution without informing design cognizant organization? I think ADD has too cozy relationship or worse passive supplier oversight.

I don't like usage of term which implies seller- buyer relationship. What the need is supplier partnership.which implies stake in success of the end product.

I think ADE needs reorganization for negligence.

Ramana Saar, one cannot do full quality check on each and every part coming from all the suppliers. One its too costly, second it would defeat the whole purpose of getting parts done from suppliers. The system works partly on trust that is built by supplier with the OEM. In this case the supplier is a fraud and he should be tried as such for the same. I hope they slap charges against him and make him cough up money/blacklist him. But this may not necessarily be a negligence on part of ADE. We do not know what quality checks were in place to be undertaken by ADE (or whoever assembled the missile) and whether they were able to catch replacement of material. Generally supplier is delegated partial or complete quality assurance for given part and OEM goes by the reports the supplier submits to the OEM. Its not too difficult for a supplier to cheat but keeping reputation in market prevents them from doing so. But you can't stop all from cheating it seems.

Also supplier partnership cannot work with each and every supplier. It would become to complicated to do so for large number of components. The supplier's stake in the success of the project is ensured by the number of future orders. Stuff like this doesn't work necessarily in India though.

We can hold ADE accountable for not having a proper quality assurance plan in place for supplied components and proper auditing of the supplier. But then ADE itself wouldn't be much compliant on this one, now would it..? Agree on re-organization, but at much broader level, not just for this small issue.

[jayasimha]

Qr-SAM Q&A
https://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata ... 280110.pdf

[rakall]

QRSAM pictures from today"s test:

https://twitter.com/writetake/status/881858922784595968

https://twitter.com/writetake/status/881858301880803328

https://twitter.com/writetake/status/881859536625192962

[jayasimha]

Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
03-July-2017 18:29 IST
Successful Flight Test of QRSAM

DRDO developed QRSAM was successfully flight tested from ITR Chandipur,
All the technologies and subsystems incorporated in the missile have performed well, meeting all the mission requirements.
All the Radars, Electro Optical Systems, Telemetry Systems and other stations have tracked the Missile and monitored all the Parameters. The Missile test met all the objectives.

Director DRDL, Shri MSR Prasad,
Director RCI, Shri BHVS N Murthy and
Director ITR, Dr BK Das monitored the launch operation in the presence of,
Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri & DG (MSS) Dr G Satheesh Reddy.

Secretary, Department of Defence R&D Dr S Christopher congratulated scientists on the successful test fire.

The Defence Minister Shri Arun Jaitley congratulated DRDO on the successful trial of QRSAM and said it is an important milestone in the indigenous Surface to Air Missiles (SAM) development.

*****
NAo/Rajib

[Aditya_V]

QRSAM pictures from today"s test:

https://twitter.com/writetake/status/881858922784595968

https://twitter.com/writetake/status/881858301880803328

https://twitter.com/writetake/status/881859536625192962

IS the Launcher on a Tatra Truck, I hope we get some Ashok Leyland and TATA to munufacture these.

[Nitesh]

Origin of seeker? This news means we are close to developing seekers for Astra too.
One question why QRSAM is not vertical launch?

http://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/ind ... -1.2059244

During the next launch, DRDO plans to engage the missile against an unmanned aerial platform. A home-grown seeker would also get onboard the missile for the subsequent launches

[putnanja]

A naive question If the QR-SAM also has range of 25 kms similar to Akash, whats the difference b/w this and Akash? Is this the replacement for Trishul or built on top of trishul?

[Zynda]

I wonder if DRDO has source inspection at the supplier. Substituting recycled material while charging full price is fraud in any country. How did the supplier do the substitution without informing design cognizant organization? I think ADD has too cozy relationship or worse passive supplier oversight.

I don't like usage of term which implies seller- buyer relationship. What the need is supplier partnership.which implies stake in success of the end product.

I think ADE needs reorganization for negligence.

Agree with JayS. The supplier needs to pay a penalty for using non-certified material.

Actually, at least in commercial world, most suppliers have to show compliance with EASA/FAR...primarily pushed towards that direction from OEM side. This would shift the onus from OEM to supplier. Added benefit is increased awareness among suppliers/vendors about certification process and the importance of sticking to approved practices i.e. complying to DWG, BOM, QA/QC practices etc. Any discrepancies, the supplier has to deal with Govt/FAA and this can have far reaching consequences.

I think we may have to adopt similar practices in future if possible...ask the suppliers to conform to at least DGCA if not to MIL standards. Hopefully this will make the suppliers cognizant of the consequences of unintentional malpractices.

[srai]

QRSAM

[Singha]

Qrsam being seeker would be much more costly vs akash but flipside is much more independent for small sites ,mobile units and ships that cannot get the akash radar systems.. it can supplement the spyder role and replace sa8/13 in ia

So there is need for both types

[negi]

Wow looks pretty TFTA it brought back the memories of the Trishul missile