Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Oct 2017 01:22

vasu raya wrote:Ah! good thanks, as another poster observed the sensor and airframe size is still smaller than contemporary ones

I dont know what he was seeing because most certainly the NGARM is one large missile. Just see it vis a vis the Su-30.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Oct 2017 01:28

SAS, I dont think the SAAW is just meant to be used against runways. Airfields have many structures. IMHO, its a multirole long range glide bomb.
Note mention of blast fragmentation and plate penetration. That is directed against parked aircraft. It also mentions penetration of RCC, again, to get through bunkers and hit assets.
The PCB could be used against hardened bunkers.
Basically India has its own SDB.
Version 1 was also sat-ins guided and had a penetration blast warhead. Sounds familiar?
Point being even without a seeker, this SAAW can be mighty useful when deployed en masse against airfields, say 40 SAAWS against a flightline from 100 km out.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Oct 2017 04:42

Couldn't the SAAW be the basis of a larger family of PGMs for stand-off strike? in the 250 and 500 kg class, similar to the Spice family of bombs? Will give us an affordable stand-off weapon that could be integrated with nearly all the IAF's multi-role jets. SAAW itself could even be integrated with the Hawks, to allow them to be used for massed strikes.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 07 Oct 2017 05:32

Already in the making. They are add on kits though, unlike SAAW which is an integrated airframe.

srai · Post by **srai** » 07 Oct 2017 06:22

^^^

500kg 100km glide bomb - Supposed to be winged-kit version of PG-HSLD:

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 07 Oct 2017 07:57

Karan M wrote:SAS, I dont think the SAAW is just meant to be used against runways. Airfields have many structures. IMHO, its a multirole long range glide bomb.
Note mention of blast fragmentation and plate penetration. That is directed against parked aircraft. It also mentions penetration of RCC, again, to get through bunkers and hit assets.
The PCB could be used against hardened bunkers.
Basically India has its own SDB.
Version 1 was also sat-ins guided and had a penetration blast warhead. Sounds familiar?
Point being even without a seeker, this SAAW can be mighty useful when deployed en masse against airfields, say 40 SAAWS against a flightline from 100 km out.

Smart Anti-Airfield Weapon (SAAW)
https://twitter.com/IDFIndianDef/status ... 1162630146

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 07 Oct 2017 08:49

sas wrote: SAAW's sequence of flight profile could be like
1) SAAW air dropped from launch platform
2) Deploys it's wings and glides close towards the target (air field runway)
3) Then after reaching certain minimum altitude over the target, parachute deploys
4) Parachute creates drag and drag in turn creates an impact angle for dispensing the warheads
5) Front portion of the fairing is separated
6) At certain angle warheads are dispensed with booster motor
7) Dispensed warhead with high terminal velocity impacts and creates craters.

On warheads...
As in infographics presented, warhead dia 130 mm, weapon frame dia 190 mm. In other words it is not a cluster weapon with several of them.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 07 Oct 2017 09:09

vasu raya wrote:
shiv wrote:It rolls 180 degrees and the wings come out
Nice control on the SAAW after the sudarshan issues, the boxy airframe stands out maybe increased internal space and the wing is not a single blade unlike the Nirbhay

A word of caution...may i...

On earlier discussion of SAAW, to my utter shock, someone try to bring the failuers of Sudarshan, Nirbhay & langushing UAV projects on SAAW.

It is well known that all these projects Sudarshan, Nirbhay & several UAVs like Nishant are either totally belong to are spearheaded by Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE).

SAAW entirely belongs to different labs. Four labs are involved in the development.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 07 Oct 2017 09:42

ramana wrote:Good that we know the demand forecast of the Nag type missile at 2000 initially and then 8000 eventually.
A production run of 500/year is great. For that means total 8000/500 run for 16 years. Something for planners to work on.

Thanks tsarkar for pointing this out.

From little i grapsed from various statements from DRDO officials, whatever these 500 or 600/year numbers are meant for initial lot. And that is for basic version of Nag. In my opinion, these DO NOT represent the entire production schedule.

Yes there will be more than one variant of Nag for the same role.

I dont think the authour (well you know who he is) entirely grasped the intricacies of Nag development & production.

On comparison with artillery, yes, nag type missile represents low end spectrum of artillery or battlefield support weapon.
Ex.
1. 25 km range Spike missile used in place of artillery. For more than a decade, adversary believed the missile strike as being hit by artillery.
2. On destruction of Pak bunkers across LoC, IA used both artillery & ATGM. There is atleast one vdieo showing missile strike.
3. There are missiles either deployed or in development that is meant to replace precision artillery strikes like Copperhead. They are of comparable price, equal weight & offer same range as rounds like Copperhead.

I dont think 8000 as final number for nag. Like artillery the no. is going to swell. On artillery it will go more than 8k. If we take into account of WWR & other things the final figure could be in 14k mark. So does Nag.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Oct 2017 10:55

I agree with the big picture and all that. However, Nag with its IIR sensor and top attack warhead is suited for antitank role especially.
I have seen videos of the wire-guided missiles used against bunkers across LOC.
It's more due to lack of precision artillery and costs.

Anyway lets see.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 07 Oct 2017 22:44

Kanson wrote: A word of caution...may i...

On earlier discussion of SAAW, to my utter shock, someone try to bring the failuers of Sudarshan, Nirbhay & langushing UAV projects on SAAW.

It is well known that all these projects Sudarshan, Nirbhay & several UAVs like Nishant are either totally belong to are spearheaded by Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE).

SAAW entirely belongs to different labs. Four labs are involved in the development.

Its the other way around, with SAAW being successful why the other projects are delayed? and you have answered it. On a positive note there is another set of labs that aren't backlogged like ADE...

Rishi_Tri · Post by **Rishi_Tri** » 09 Oct 2017 03:40

Akash shows its teeth in Tezpur.

https://twitter.com/DefenceMinIndia/sta ... 0787097600

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Oct 2017 05:42

Kartik wrote:Couldn't the SAAW be the basis of a larger family of PGMs for stand-off strike? in the 250 and 500 kg class, similar to the Spice family of bombs? Will give us an affordable stand-off weapon that could be integrated with nearly all the IAF's multi-role jets. SAAW itself could even be integrated with the Hawks, to allow them to be used for massed strikes.

An accurate 250 lb bomb can do wonders.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Oct 2017 06:46

Rare glimpse of the Akash SAM deployed on the eastern front against the Chinese build-up. Seen here in Tezpur --> https://twitter.com/livefist/status/917119990494502912

Three BAe Hawks from the Surya Kiran team fly past an IAF Akash missile launch vehicle at the Air Force Day parade today --> https://twitter.com/livefist/status/917097297342640128

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Oct 2017 19:24

Indo-Russian Joint Venture Anticipating $14Bln Deal for BhraMos Missiles
https://sputniknews.com/asia/2017101010 ... s-missile/

This one item is going to be a major game-changer in our current sec,threat scenarios and also increasing our credibility and capability in the Asian region in particular.With the extended range for us upto 600-some say even upto 900KM,BMos could carry both conv. and N-tipped warheads. When sold to friendly nations,it will give them a credible anti-ship/land attack capability against China too. Once hyper-BMos arrives ad Russia is supposed to induct its hyper Zircon missile next year, it would be even more deadly aboard our principal warships and subs. If we can fast-track Nirbhay,our desi LRCM the BMos way,we would've completed the task of having both LRCMs like Kalibir/Tomahawk and ell as LR supersonic/hyper ,multi-role missiles in our inventory.Nirbhay would be much cheaper than BMos,quite expensive,but gives fantastic unmatched capability.

sas · Post by **sas** » 11 Oct 2017 23:36

Karan M wrote:SAS, I dont think the SAAW is just meant to be used against runways. Airfields have many structures. IMHO, its a multirole long range glide bomb.
Note mention of blast fragmentation and plate penetration. That is directed against parked aircraft. It also mentions penetration of RCC, again, to get through bunkers and hit assets.
The PCB could be used against hardened bunkers.
Basically India has its own SDB.
Version 1 was also sat-ins guided and had a penetration blast warhead. Sounds familiar?
Point being even without a seeker, this SAAW can be mighty useful when deployed en masse against airfields, say 40 SAAWS against a flightline from 100 km out.

Karan M sir, your post on SAAW is an eye opener. Like you said airfield has many structures not just runways.
I had this very narrow assumption that SAAW is meant for only disabling the runways. I was always thinking of SAAW as a glide+clustered munition.
I was sloppy, I didn't properly go through the SAAW warhead info graphic as well as that 2D assembly drawing of SAAW.
Only after you mentioned about SDB-1 and PCB warhead from the info graphic, I realized SAAW is an Indian equivalent of SDB-1.
Comparing the dimensions of warheads vs SAAW's square air frame is the key to understanding.

From the assembly drawing, it is clear that SAAW can accommodate only 1 warhead either PCB or blast fragmentation.
It's definitely not clustered. Hence my earlier analogy about SAAW's sequence of flight profile is farce.

sas · Post by **sas** » 11 Oct 2017 23:46

Kanson wrote:
sas wrote: SAAW's sequence of flight profile could be like
1) SAAW air dropped from launch platform
2) Deploys it's wings and glides close towards the target (air field runway)
3) Then after reaching certain minimum altitude over the target, parachute deploys
4) Parachute creates drag and drag in turn creates an impact angle for dispensing the warheads
5) Front portion of the fairing is separated
6) At certain angle warheads are dispensed with booster motor
7) Dispensed warhead with high terminal velocity impacts and creates craters.
On warheads...
As in infographics presented, warhead dia 130 mm, weapon frame dia 190 mm. In other words it is not a cluster weapon with several of them.

Kanson sir, you are right on the money, SAAW is not a clustered weapon. As I said in my previous post, I was sloppy, I didn't compare the warhead dimesnion vs SAAW's air frame dimension.

Comparing the dimesnions of Warhead vs SAAW's square airframe is the key to understanding.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SAAW's air frame is a square having sides of 190mm.
Assuming that square air frame has a minimum internal thickness of 5mm, then the clearance (min distance) between centrally located blast fragmentation warhead (dia 130mm) and internal surface of the air frame should be 25mm.

If the maximum internal thickness is 10mm,
then clearance should be 20mm.

With a clearance of 25mm to 20mm, warheads cannot be clustered.

Hence one warhead per SAAW's square air frame.

nam · Post by **nam** » 12 Oct 2017 01:03

I hope they make a powered version to increase it's range to 200-250KM. Would be useful on the Chini border.

The Pakis have been investing on Raad as they dont have the confidence of coming close to 100KM from an IAF airbase.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Oct 2017 01:53

sas, What is the guidance for SAAW? It has 100 km range and must have INS/GPS with initial position fed by the aircraft.

Incidentally wiki page for SDB has link to SAAW!!!!

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 12 Oct 2017 05:33

New generation ARDE munitions boost IAF firepower

srai · Post by **srai** » 12 Oct 2017 09:36

Kartik wrote:New generation ARDE munitions boost IAF firepower

I would think 450kg HSLD might be on its way out with the 500kg HSLD GP now available. 500kg version is supposed to be designed for easier mating with LGB/PGM kits.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Oct 2017 09:56

srai wrote: I would think 450kg HSLD might be on its way out with the 500kg HSLD GP now available.

IMO unlikely - we probably have thousands in stock

srai · Post by **srai** » 12 Oct 2017 13:32

^^^
Meaning ... no new production ... or production phasing out in favor of the new 500kg one. Don't see advantages of producing both 450kg and 500kg in the long-term. They occupy the same space.

Yes, the IAF will have a huge stockpile of 450kg variant and it will continue to be in production for some time yet. It is the same as with the older 1000lb bomb stockpiles too. But once 500kg gets inducted and integrated across the fleet and production picks up, 450kg production will likely wind down.

sas · Post by **sas** » 12 Oct 2017 18:49

ramana wrote:sas, What is the guidance for SAAW? It has 100 km range and must have INS/GPS with initial position fed by the aircraft.

Incidentally wiki page for SDB has link to SAAW!!!!

SAAW is a precision guided glide bomb, it's most likely to be used against static targets and case hardened structures, hence guidance is most likely to be IRNSS/INS.

Current SAAW baseline version would just stick to IRNSS/INS for guidance. Further iterations of SAAW may use multiple seekers like MMW+IIR for terminal guidance along with IRNSS/INS.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Oct 2017 19:41

sas, Thanks. Can someone dig the specs for the MWIR seeker for Nag? Am interested in its slew rate of how fast it can image? Could be a key to combat a wide range of threats.

I have seen the Current Science article on the indigenous IR seeker chip 320x 256 seeker chip developed at IIT Bombay. It shows it image contrast capability but moving targets needs image refresh capability. How fast can the chip do this?

Also I think the 450 kg has hard target penetration capability if you look at its explosive fill ratio to total weight.
the 500 kg GP was developed to be more compatible with the Griffin kit and there is Russian origin fragmentation bomb of same weight. So a new class is being developed.

I am interested in the 1000 kg bomb still in development for IAF. This will kill the PAF hangers dead if its made from forged casing vs cast casing.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Oct 2017 19:55

ramana wrote: Also I think the 450 kg has hard target penetration capability if you look at its explosive fill ratio to total weight.
the 500 kg GP was developed to be more compatible with the Griffin kit and there is Russian origin fragmentation bomb of same weight. So a new class is being developed.

I am interested in the 1000 kg bomb still in development for IAF. This will kill the PAF hangers dead if its made from forged casing vs cast casing.

I recall reading that a standard dumb 1000 pounder (450 kg) will take out any hardened hangar, even runway simply by its kinetic energy and huge explosive power. I was basically trying to look for information on terminal velocities of dumb bombs and the nearest I could get was, if I recall - something nearing Mach 1 for dumb bombs dropped from height. If guided - so much the better

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Oct 2017 20:22

The old 1000MC is a cast steel bomb of WWII vintage. MC stands for Medium Capacity. The British used to have a 250 lb general purpose bomb which was quite puny in its blast effects. After studying German Luftwaffe bombs dropped on England, the RAF realized they need a bigger bomb. It is not easy to fit LGB kits as its also not aerodynamic. The control coefficients are different than the LGB kit was designed for which is the MK8x series in the US. The British had the US Paveway II kit adapted for their use. And as its a single customer requirement the kit costs are high. India imported some of these kits in the late 90s. As with British ordnance its an iffy bomb. Wont go off. In fact I have seen papers about the deterioration of the explosive due to aerodynamic heating of this bomb and recommendation to put a coating of insulation before explosive filling!!!

So am very glad that there are extensive stocks of the 450 kg HSLD.

If you go to the OFB page they say 1000MC makes a big crater when dropped on runways. For a direct hit on a hanger the airplane has to fly low and with modern air defences it needs stand off which makes it harder. However with the improved electronics and laser ranging pods it could be dropped on those runways within 10m and crater them close.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Oct 2017 21:43

At the prev. air show at the DRDO pav. we saw two new glidebombs (?) appeared to have composite material casings for stealth.Any further info on these bombs?

sas · Post by **sas** » 12 Oct 2017 23:56

^^^^^^^^^^
Once again look at the front section of the air frame in white colour it's a multi-section solid having circular bulkhead with truncated square section of the air frame.

It has a circular bulk head of radius 84mm, could this be for housing electro-optics package ?

Apparently front section of the air frame is not visible in any of the screen shots.

SAAW is stowed on a Jaguar, but is it a DARIN-III upgraded Jaguar ?

DARIN-III upgraded Jag got IOC some time last year.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Oct 2017 01:01

Is the stenciling upside down?

dkhare · Post by **dkhare** » 13 Oct 2017 01:20

ramana wrote:Is the stenciling upside down?

The SAAW rolls over after being released by the launch platform. That's why it looks like the stencil is upside down while on the pylon - but in flight the SAAW stenciling will be right side up. You can also see the slits for the wings are the bottom while on the pylon, but in flight it is at the top of the air frame.

Added later: I knew I had read this somewhere, turns out it was right here on BR and here is the post from shiv saab:
viewtopic.php?p=2221507#p2221507

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Oct 2017 01:28

dkhare, Interesting observation Very true.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 13 Oct 2017 07:43

ramana wrote: If you go to the OFB page they say 1000MC makes a big crater when dropped on runways. For a direct hit on a hanger the airplane has to fly low and with modern air defences it needs stand off which makes it harder. However with the improved electronics and laser ranging pods it could be dropped on those runways within 10m and crater them close.

It is always highly risky to fly along a runway to make sure it is hit - but that is exactly what was done using MiG 21s at Kurmitola, Bangladesh. Two 450 kg bombs per MiG 21
Thunder over Dacca

Cratered Kurmitola runway

IAF pilots in crater

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 13 Oct 2017 08:03

Philip wrote:At the prev. air show at the DRDO pav. we saw two new glidebombs (?) appeared to have composite material casings for stealth.Any further info on these bombs?

That was IAF internal designs, not DRDO.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 13 Oct 2017 11:14

shiv wrote:
ramana wrote: Also I think the 450 kg has hard target penetration capability if you look at its explosive fill ratio to total weight.
the 500 kg GP was developed to be more compatible with the Griffin kit and there is Russian origin fragmentation bomb of same weight. So a new class is being developed.

I am interested in the 1000 kg bomb still in development for IAF. This will kill the PAF hangers dead if its made from forged casing vs cast casing.
I recall reading that a standard dumb 1000 pounder (450 kg) will take out any hardened hangar, even runway simply by its kinetic energy and huge explosive power. I was basically trying to look for information on terminal velocities of dumb bombs and the nearest I could get was, if I recall - something nearing Mach 1 for dumb bombs dropped from height. If guided - so much the better

I also remember to have seen in one doc somewhere that the bombs could be supersonic before impact and can penetrate to a great depths before explosion if they have delayed explosion fuse. For some specially designed high quality Hardened targets such as Aircraft hangers which double concrete wall, the experience in Gulf war was that 500lbs PGM GBU-12 were not sufficient and barely scratched the inner layer. So US forces had to switch to 2000lbs PGM GBU-27. This is for missions by F117. I don't think they had 1000lbs PGM that time so its difficult to say if they would have been effective against such hardened shelters or not. Its also possible that F117 was not able to give as much launch KE as some other fighters might be able to.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 13 Oct 2017 12:29

Also IAF as part of the airbase modernization wants improved HAS which can resist an impact by 2000 lbs bombs.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 Oct 2017 23:09

Thakur_B wrote:
Philip wrote:At the prev. air show at the DRDO pav. we saw two new glidebombs (?) appeared to have composite material casings for stealth.Any further info on these bombs?
That was IAF internal designs, not DRDO.

And has there been any more news on those glide weapons?

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 14 Oct 2017 00:45

I think accuracy of GPS/INS guided weapons may have increased to a level that for most of static targets they may not need a seeker. Perhaps a mid flight update from Platform EO system may be adequate.

And anyhow coupling a IR or MMW or SAL seeker from Nag / CLGM programme may not be difficult.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 14 Oct 2017 01:48

Was reading through some back issues of Vayu magazine and came across this article by Sayan Majumdar, on the Astra BVRAAM. Article is dated late 2015, but it gives a lot of good information on the missile and on the seeker it states that it was sourced from Agat and was supposed to be produced in India under ToT. Perhaps that is what is being referred to as an indigenous seeker for the Astra?

Vayu magazine link- Issue Sep Oct 2015

Go to Page 56 to see the article.

It also raises a very interesting possibility- that of an IIR seeker for the Astra, due to its Agat linkage. an IIR seeker equipped Astra-IIR variant would make for a great mix with the ARH seeker variant. Passive engagement at long ranges, akin to the MICA-IR variant.

The BVRAAM will be capable of destroying manoeuvring 9-g enemy targets at high altitude in the head-on mode at a range of 80 km and in tail-chase
mode at 20 km, thanks to its low drag, low aspect ratio wings. Capability to pull lateral acceleration of 40-g in both yaw and pitch planes means it should be able to engage non-manoeuvring targets well in excess of 100-km and be capable of operating from sea level to 20 km. The all-important seeker is provided by Russian firm Morinformsystem Agat with an autonomous homing range of 25 km and is to be produced in India through a
total transfer-of-technology process. Prior ARH homing during terminal stage, Astra follows Fibre Optic Gyro (FOG)-based Inertial Navigation System (INS) during midcourse with high-g accelerometers along with a secure data link to allow midcourse re-tasking. While autopilot and guidance software uses Artificial Intelligence (AI) for accurate guidance and optimised trajectory, the on-board Electronic Counter Counter Measures (ECCM) capability allows it to stay on course in spite of enemy Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) procedures. At close ranges the missile can be fired in
Lock-On Before Launch (LOBL) mode. The 15 kg high explosive warhead is pre-fragmented and radar proximity fuse armed plus directional to enhance lethality and high Single Shot Kill Probability (SSKP). Additionally, the DRDO is currently working on a new laser fuse. The choice of an Agat seeker is interesting as the establishment is highly reputed for development of infra-red seekers and may point to the possibility of an Imaging Infra-Red (IIR) version of the Astra. As ARH is effective in one set of conditions and IIR in another, the open choice of different seeker heads complicates defences of the adversary.

And regarding Astra Mk2, here is what Sayan wrote

Projected to be a ‘game changer’ at tactical levels, Astra BVRAAMs are reportedly to be integrated with all frontline Indian Air Force fighter aircraft such as the Sukhoi Su-30MKI, MiG-29, Mirage 2000 and the indigenously developed Light Combat Aircraft. Its low weight and compact dimensions make it an obvious candidate for internal weapon bays of the Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) and the Indian Advanced
Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Reportedly, Mk2 version of the Astra will have a maximum range of 150-km and tail chase range of up to 35-km, propelled by a dual-pulse rocket motor. DRDO is also looking at rocket/ramjet propulsion for greater range and enhanced kinematics performance. However adopting a rocket/ramjet approach has certain limitations as the need for controlled airflow to the ramjet ducts means that the ‘skid-to-turn’ manoeuvring of a conventional rocket-powered missile is not acceptable (since it will risk disrupting air intake) and instead ‘bank-to-turn’ manoeuvring needs to be adopted resulting in a reduced instantaneous turn rate.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Oct 2017 02:27

Fairly estimate SAAW has an IIR seeker with preprogrammed image recognition.