Agni-I/SR: Strategic Implications (Thread 1)

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 26 Jan 2002 04:25

OK my careful measurements indicate the following:
1. The RV-length is the same (i.e. + or - 3%)2. Agni-X motor is 10% shorter then Agni-2 first stage motor.Please note the following is humbly my personal opinion. I have no inside source or do not represent any govt opinion.Reason to believe the rocket motor is ~9 Ton. Which could be derived from either the Agni-2's first Stage or second stage. The second stage is of later genre and thus likely to deliver better ISP performance.Like Agni-2 the composite RV & PBV body will provide thrusters for in-flight correction for higher accuracy. There is though less incentive to use the PBV for range enhancement (the missile already has enough of it), thus has space for heavier conventional payload, the usual alibi to publicize a significantly derated performance.The above the Agni-X's simulated performance estimates are:

Payload: 1000 Kg: : Range: 1200 Km
Payload: 1500 Kg: : Range: 790 Km

Assumes: fired in Westerly direction

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 26 Jan 2002 04:33

ArunWhat if fired to a north easterly direction, from say a sub at about 10m depth?

Joeqp · Post by **Joeqp** » 26 Jan 2002 04:41

Originally posted by Desraj:
ArunWhat if fired to a north easterly direction, from say a sub at about 10m depth?Though my name isn't Arun (BTW: Arun, thanks for the fabulous analysis), let me hazard a guess and say that an undersea launch shouldn't have any appreciable effect on the range. IIRC, in undersea launches, the missile is just ejected from the tubes using pressure (like steam), and the actual motor ignites a few meters above the water.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jan 2002 05:13

Saw part of the blast-off on PBS, seemed like it was a missile without the fins!!!!

Div · Post by **Div** » 26 Jan 2002 05:24

<blockquote>quote:<hr> Also, the way the Brits are yelling, looks like India has already decided on the Russian Yak-130(Janes: Yak-130)

<hr></blockquote>Kill two birds with one stone...I like it!

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 26 Jan 2002 06:59

An Indian Bu*%_Orifice adds his voice to the Washington Compost:
<blockquote>quote:<hr>
"Why conduct the test now?" asked P.R. Chari, director of the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. "It is nothing but muscle flexing. And it is extremely dangerous at a time when both sides are so edgy."
<hr></blockquote>
India's Missile Test Irks Pakistan

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Jan 2002 07:00

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by paul:
this sort of yarn is spun everytime India defies the west.<hr></blockquote>Sorry to use this excuse to branch off into my one of my favourite subjects:"India defies the West" is a very interesting phrase because its meaning is completely different depending on who is saying it.If India or an Indian says this the implication is that there is a need for Indians to urge themselves on and give themselves more confidence. hence they do things (which may be healf hearted or incompetent) and say "We are defying the West" - to make themselves feel better - like jehadis working themselves up for a suicide attack. Such use of the phrase is meaningless and pitiable if the action is not seen as "defiance". It is an a little window on a secret Indian inferiority complex.Notice that the "West" rarely says that India is defying the west. Oh yes, there may be people who feel that way - they are certanly too sophisticated to say it openly. Saying it openly is an admission that India has actually done something that has cause heartburn.I personally feel that expressions like "defying the west" should not be used at all. India and Indians do things in their own interest. They are not doing things to "defy the west" or "impress China" or "scare Pakistan". We do not need external people or third parties to be scared, impressed or irritated for every action we take. Let us show that we can ourselves be satisfied with what we do without having to earn criticsim or praise from someone to serve as proof that they have noticed us.Does anyone understand what I'm trying to say?

Umrao · Post by **Umrao** » 26 Jan 2002 07:08

I concur with Shivji,
we neither defy nor edify the west.
we define our future, our interests, our Goals in our own democratic pluralistic way period.Only the West wants to contain India period.'Yeah dharity, yeah Ambar apana hai, o aajaa re'"Lagan"

Kaushal · Post by **Kaushal** » 26 Jan 2002 07:46

jr, forgive them(their trespasses) for they know not what they do. A thousand years of servitude takes its toll. PR Chari is a born again appeaser and has never been known to say anythng confrontational. Best to ignore the naysayers. Some guys mistake appeasement for adroitness. I liked Nirupamaji when she blandly said this was done for technical reasons. Which is of course true, India has never tested a Agni at this range - it is the old story of the lion practicing the short jumps (an old Jataka tale).Kaushal

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 26 Jan 2002 08:16

SuRa:"How are the Pakis going to fire a missile with all those USN ships in the Arabian Sea ? What if a stray Ghauri hit the Kitty Hawk ? "If a Gharui hit the Kitty Hawk, I think India should be afraid. Be VERY afraid. The KITTY HAWK is in Saesbo, Japan, at the moment. The carriers in the Indian Ocean are the Nimitz-class CARL VINSON and the THEODORE ROOSEVELT ("Speak softly and carry a big stick.")Of course, having lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the US reached DEFCON 2--just short of full-scale nuclear war-- and the 1973 Yom Kippur mobilization to DEFCON 3--and being next to the White House on 11 September 2001, I wouldn't dismiss world complaints about missile testing as rubbish. Diplomats and the press are all worried about two nuclear-armed states destroying each other's major cities. Pakistan might very well be destroyed, but don't winds blow eastward? What about the radioactive isotopes of strontium, cesium, and iodine created? Sarma: "Does China or USA do the same thing, i.e., inform India when they test something? I never heard of China informing India of any of their impending tests. Why are we so defensive of our actions? If we want to test we should go ahead and do it. Why do we have to go around telling everybody?" The US does announce testing. We fire our missiles from Vandenburg Air Force Base in California over the Pacific. When we do, we put out a NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) warning pilots and shipping to stay away from the impact area. Another reason why you tell people before you test a missile is they may not cover it in the press if you don't announce it beforehand. If they don't, then part of the deterrent factor of the missile test is wasted. Remember that in 1994 a Norwegian upper-atmospheric missile test alarmed the Russian Federation so much that the Strategic Rocket Forces alerted and almost fired off ICBMs at the United States and Europe. I don't know if the Russians received the notice from Norway or ignored it. They don't anymore. We think. John Umrao:"Just keep doing it and we want 8000 mile ICBM, that will foster even better understanding among the neighbors, distant Uncles and other near and dear relatives."That's okay, John. We probably have Ohio-class SSBNs in the Indian Ocean. Conclusion: The timing could have been more tactful. However, as the movie mogul Samuel Goldwyn said, "If you want to send a message, use Western Union." It's a magnificent test, and a good weapon system to have in your arsenal.

Umrao · Post by **Umrao** » 26 Jan 2002 08:30

"That's okay, John. We probably have Ohio-class SSBNs in the Indian Ocean. [/b]Hey what is there to be afraid of when the Greatest and the largest democracies are both equiped with some ICBMs.Dont you read "the congruency of thoughts between Commie China and the greatest democarcy"??Besides If France can have, Britain can have, China can have Russia can have, Why not India, I for one will even go the extent of saying 'Bomb in every backyard and a ICBM in front as totem pole is the best thing ever to happen for the world.

There is saying I am reminded ofJoe farmer said somebody stole pumpkins from my pumpkin patch on hearing this Harry his neighbor
was seen dusting his shoulders.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jan 2002 10:22

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Does China or USA do the same thing, i.e., inform India when they test something? I never heard of China informing India of any of their impending tests. Why are we so defensive of our actions? If we want to test we should go ahead and do it. Why do we have to go around telling everybody?<hr></blockquote>I am not sure what is the deal between India and China, however, the deal between TSP and India is two days. And, TSP was given this two day notice in this case (Source: Public TV)Check out this source:George Perkovitz from the Carnegie Endowment on WorldView at WBEZ Chicago (Audio). Click on "Listen to entire program" for Jan 25th. When the RealPlayer starts, slide the timer to 42 minutes. The interview is 12 minutes long. An interesting fellow. (BETTER than Cohen for sure.):WBEZ: Worldview

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 26 Jan 2002 13:20

I like this "headline" of a PTI news story..
May this version of Agni be reached and serialized quickly, Inshallah!

"Agni 11 steals show on R-Day"
http://in.news.yahoo.com/020126/20/1eqdw.html

Aniruddha N · Post by **Aniruddha N** » 26 Jan 2002 13:42

pre-launch pic:http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/020125/170/10ng3.html

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 26 Jan 2002 13:43

And on the same day that we got a mini-lecture from Powell about him "lamenting" the latest Agni test, we have this:U.S. successfully tests sea-based missile defense
<blockquote>quote:<hr>
U.S. plans for for a missile defense system have been opposed by China and Russia. Washington last year abandoned the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which prohibits deployment of missile defense, and critics expressed fears the move could spark an arms race..
<hr></blockquote>Bottom line, two democracies each took a step forward in their self-perceived national interest. Such understanding, Powell and cohorts need to accept..

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Jan 2002 16:50

There is an answer to the apparent confusion.There was some time ago a media item which said that experts felt the need for medium range missiles of range about 700km+.The absence of which left a hole in our strategic defence.Prithvi was too short ranged,liquid fueled and perhaps less accurate than the Agni series.Therefore,a new Agni variant has been hatched by our boffins.Agni being both road and rail mounted has the advantage of being less detectable than Prithvi,which has to be moved closer to the border (and detectable)befor elaunch at paki targets.This version of Agni is clearly pointed at Pak,though it may have some tactical use when aimed at targets in Tibet.the launch of this version of Agni is poke up the backside of Pak,a none too gentle reminder that our powder is dry and ready to fly.

Kaushal · Post by **Kaushal** » 26 Jan 2002 18:44

Drats ! I miss the pavlovian reactions of our western neighbor, kaushalhttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=914438473'Fear of exposing secret locations deterred Pak' 
PTI [ SATURDAY, JANUARY 26, 2002 8:25:11 PM ]

SLAMABAD: The presence of American troops in Pakistan's airbases and fear of exposing the secret locations of its missiles made it difficult for Islamabad to opt for tit-for-tat retaliatory action to counter Agni-II test firing by India. The immediate reason why Pakistan could not opt to conduct a similar test perhaps was the large scale presence of American forces who were put up in three Pakistani airbases and in neighbouring Afghanistan, media reports said. "The presence of US forces in the region and on Pakistan airbases has made it very difficult for Pakistan to come up with retaliatory action as Pakistan for the sheer sake of secrecy can not move its missiles and nuclear weapons," 'Pakistan Observer' daily said....

rajivg · Post by **rajivg** » 26 Jan 2002 19:08

Lets clear some things up. This may be obvious, but, before an 8000-mile range ICBM can be fielded the economies of scale comes into effect. I don't see it happening until India's GDP crosses the $1 trillion mark and that will take more than decade at present rates. And when that day comes, the US will gladly help India build its ICBMs, since the dragon will have hundereds pointed at North America. As far as TSP is concerned, they claim not to respond, at present, to the current test by India.
Pak Won't Respond NowAs far as I see it, the US will get prime real estate in Baluchistan for over a decade and Pak cannot even test nuclear weapons since Chagai will now be off-limits.The time has come for India to truly test its thermonuclear & boosted fission warhead designs.

AnantD · Post by **AnantD** » 26 Jan 2002 21:02

Posted by Gregory Baker:
"If a Gharui hit the Kitty Hawk, I think India should be afraid. Be VERY afraid"Please explain why? India is already under the threat of Paki and Chinese missles. Why the VERY. If you are implying that "if" a Paki missile could reach Japan, then its OK, but I hope your'e not implying something else.

As an American Citizen, I'm TOTALLY ****ed that we are buying Musharraf's lies, his chicanery and his two-timing ways. I understand that every one needs a second chance, but this guy has had several second chances. We are finally waking up to AraRAt, and as if we didn't know earlier that the guy was a terrorist.Our inability to tackle the Pakistan problem head on is rooting in cold-war think, and worse, its left the door open for the "core" of the enemy of this war to escape. It makes me SICK!!! The TRUTH SHALL ALWAYS WIN IN THE END, PERIOD. Ever heard of Karma!

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 26 Jan 2002 21:16

Now I am more inclined to believe that 2 missiles were fired that day. The other being sea launched missile for use in submarine. To me that is good progress and planning materuity.

Vanahan · Post by **Vanahan** » 26 Jan 2002 21:33

Let's not get carried away. I have had some opportunity to watch the footage, and it is my impression that only one missile was fired. That missile being the "Agni-variant" (A-II stage-1 + RV). The "mystery" configuration is ,shall we say, nothing but an "optical illusion".

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 26 Jan 2002 21:36

Greg was just being humourous.
If a ghauri(a ballistic missile) can "hit" a movin' target ,gadzillion km away...then we're facin' martians with death rays.

shiva · Post by **shiva** » 26 Jan 2002 21:39

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Arun_S:
Now I am more inclined to believe that 2 missiles were fired that day. The other being sea launched missile for use in submarine. To me that is good progress and planning materuity.<hr></blockquote>
Why is that ?

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 26 Jan 2002 22:27

IIRC there have been several statements in Indian articles (usually around the time of major IA exercises) that Prithvis role in the IA at least was entirely conventional. Agni I/II seemed like expensive overkill for Pakistan , but the DND demands a triad, so Agni-x is a logical development. I suppose production announcements and/or raising of new units will make it clearer. They might simply add new batteries to the existing regiment, but given the expected difference in role and C2 of conventional and deterrant missile btys. that would be surprising.Even if it is replacing Prithvi, reduction in the number of support vehicles should significantly reduce the vulnerability of detection from Pakistani UAVs and commercial imagery, given the launch prep time and how close to the forward edge of battle they need to launch from. Getting from point A to point B should now also be less time consuming to plan and execute - fewer vehicles and equipment to maintain and account for.Question about the lack of fins and the 'blunter nose' (which I dont see but I literally need glasses these days) perhaps there is a change in terminal guidance *requirements* and not just terminal guidance systems. Or am I wrong, and this is all about re-entry angle and velocity?Arun_S, if that first image was actually released by the GoI you may be right about two tests. Has anyone compared that image to the PJ-11 clip?

bored_desi · Post by **bored_desi** » 26 Jan 2002 23:12

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Johann:

something(s) was fired....yatta yatta yatta...

<hr></blockquote>yawn so was (were) the test(s) successfull ? yawn

Vanahan · Post by **Vanahan** » 26 Jan 2002 23:26

If one cares to look carefully, he/she will note that even the current Agni RV has a "blunt" nose. This is essentially a *requirement* for almost all re-entry bodies if they do not wish to burn up. The curved surface essentially creates a strong curved shockwave that is formed ahead of the nosecone rather than a sharp angled one attached to the nosecone. The detached shockwave essentially heats the air in the hypersonic flowfied ahead of the nosecone rather than the heating the body itself. This is one reason why I ventured a guess that the A-X missile could have a considerably greater range than 700km, if it requires the use of the A-II reentry body. This is also a reason why I believe that the A-X can be fired with a much higher apogee to achieve much shorter ranges, if required. I do think that missiles like the NoDong(Ghauri) with its pointed-tip do not possess reliable re-entry capability and thus the significantly high ranges quoted by the Paks are highly suspect. The problem of aerodynamic heating during re-entry is a rather complex issue and in India's case, took most of the Agni Technology Demonstrator testing in the late 80s and early 90s to overcome. However, it is prudent to note that this problem has become rather trivialized nowadays with the availability of much greater and cheaper computing power for CFD modelling. Coming back to the rounded nosecone on the "mystery" missile (a missile which I believe does not exist, btw), this looks more like a "shroud" for a post-boost vehicle (PBV) which is supposed to be ejected in space. The PBV is essentially an orbital cruiser that releases individual MIRVs into enemy land. The current A-X looks to have the same manouvering re-entry vehicle as the A-II. No scope for MRVs here.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 27 Jan 2002 00:09

I think the two pictures of agni-x tests floating around do not look the same. There are three possibilities:
i) The second picture is an 'optical illusion' caused by a blurred image.
ii) Wrong picture has been released by mistake or for disinformation.
iii) A second missile possibly under sea launched one was tested, too. IMHO, scenario i) is very unlikely. Pictures are too different.
scenario ii) is possible.
scenario iii) is also possible. There was an Indian Express report in April 2001 that India's undersea missile launcher was ready for testing. Testing was supposed to be done in Sept 2001. Thirdly, India has in the past employed tactics like these to divert attention. Examples, pretending to test Agni while intending to carry out Shakti. Testing of osa missile, while the real goal was to test the PJ-10.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Jan 2002 00:40

<blockquote>quote:<hr>)
i) The second picture is an 'optical illusion' caused by a blurred image.
ii) Wrong picture has been released by mistake or for disinformation.
iii) A second missile possibly under sea launched one was tested, too.<hr></blockquote>All are possible.However, the opill picture is too different. Secondly, if the opill took place during only certain phases of the flight one can understand. From what I have seen it appears to be an "opill" during the entire flight sequence on the TV. There is a very good posibility that I have not seen the entiure sequence either. I did see a still shot of the a finned missile during the initial phase of the flight. More than anything else, if it was a true opill, the govt/scientists would have said so - I doubt if they would have let teh controversy go on and on and on.It is for these reasons I discard the opill theory.I secodn your theory of disinfo to assist true testing/progress. It is more than likely a combination of ii) and iii). They conducted two so that they can hide the real one. Who knows, maybe they fired three and showed us only two. I hope so.

Michael · Post by **Michael** » 27 Jan 2002 00:49

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Div:
Kill two birds with one stone...I like it!<hr></blockquote>Interesting. It would certainly be smart for India to avoid buying any further military equipment from the lying, hypocritical, and backstabbing British.But this article you link to says nothing about India's need for an AJT. How do you come to the conclusion India is interested in the Yak-130?

krsai · Post by **krsai** » 27 Jan 2002 01:01

I think it is a file clip / photo of the brahmos launch test that we did quite sometime back.

Sahastra · Post by **Sahastra** » 27 Jan 2002 01:12

"I think it is a file clip / photo of the brahmos launch test that we did quite sometime back." K R Sai:Interesting observation, and quite correct at that. You beat me to it. I had this inkling that i have seen this clip before. Now i recall. While the initial launch sequence indeed shows Angi-X being launched, the onward clip changes to the photo-clip of Bramhos launch. It indeed strenghtens the theory of two-launches, or possibly more (a la Pokhran/Shakti style). We'll soon see something coming out.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 27 Jan 2002 01:31

I don't think it was an optical illusion. I watched it again. It looks like an edit job on the film. What u see in the beginning is definitely different from what appears towards the end. The rounding of the nose is too prominent to be optical. Don't think it was the Brahmos either. If memory serves me right, and it doesn't often enough, Brahmos took a short vertical trajectory and then sped off on a near horizontal one. This one just goes on and on on a vertical trajectory. But I'm perfectly prepared to be labelled as a nutcase on this. Just that from the clip it definitely seems to me that what is shown in the launch and what is shown at the end are not the same thing. I'm not even going to begin speculating on the probable reasons. GoI works in mysterious ways.

Sahastra · Post by **Sahastra** » 27 Jan 2002 01:42

If memory serves me right, and it doesn't often enough, Brahmos took a short vertical trajectory and then sped off on a near horizontal one. This one just goes on and on on a vertical trajectory.JEM:Exactly the reason for believing that the clip was from the "second test which no one wants to talk about".

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Jan 2002 01:47

JEM,U R right about the Brahmos trajectory. It did do a vertical-to-horizontak shift a few yds after blast-off. Mike,I introduced the topic of Yak-130. Pure speculation on my part. (It is my understanding that the RUAF has accepted this machine, so....)

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 27 Jan 2002 02:05

Mush talks tough and brave while standing in the protective shadow of Tommy Franks:
Pakistan will respond to Agni test: Musharraf

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 27 Jan 2002 02:17

Kargil compelled shorter-range Agni
<blockquote>quote:<hr>
Although test-fired over 700 km with a 1-tonne payload, this missile — christened the Agni-I — has a range of up to 900 km. It is a single-stage solid fuel propelled missile with a road mobile launcher, according to highly-placed Defence R&D sources. India wanted strategic depth for a credible nuclear posture; hence the proposal for an 800-900 km missile. This would give it the capability to fire a missile from deep inside its territory. The 2,500 km Agni-II, which was then under development, was considered too ‘long’, and expensive, for a Pakistani target. The single-stage Agni-I would cost half of what the Agni-II does. “With modifications in the air frame and the guidance system, the Agni-I basically comprises the first stage and re-entry vehicle of the Agni-II,” sources say. The DRDO has indicated that it does not require to flight test the Agni-I again. It has advised the Services to immediately commence the process of training to induct the Agni-I.
<hr></blockquote>

anilK · Post by **anilK** » 27 Jan 2002 02:23

jrjrao : Mush talks tough and brave while standing in the protective shadow of Tommy Franksjrj, all they have to do is to fire off a few of the same old chinese gifted missiles with some new medieval-murderous-marauders name, who by the way kicked their great-grandpops ass most probably. I am sure the pukes are capable of such stupidity.And how about suggesting that they name their response missile as "pervez musharraf". If the great AQK can have laboratories in his name while still alive, why not the conqueror of kargil, commando, strategist, president, COAS, CE .....

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 27 Jan 2002 03:09

Kargil compelled shorter-range Agni <blockquote>quote:<hr> Although test-fired over 700 km with a 1-tonne payload, this missile — christened the Agni-I — has a range of up to 900 km. It is a single-stage solid fuel propelled missile with a road mobile launcher, according to highly-placed Defence R&D sources <hr></blockquote>This corraborates my assertion that DDM got it wrong by taking the 700Km range test as the maximum range of this missile.I continue to standby yesterdays assertion of this missile's range of 1200 Km for 1-Ton payload & 790 Km for 2 Ton payload.

BTW for 1.5Ton payload it would 1000 Km.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 27 Jan 2002 04:19

Informed people will remember news report from MOD in parliament of raising/introducing Agni in defence forces in FY2001-2002. Middle of 2001 there were news report of IA raising Agni missile force. It was mentioned is that the current force consists of a mixture of Agni-I and Agni-II.I had always doubted viability of operationalizing the 1992 vintage Agni-I (that had liquid fuelled Prithvi for second stage). Reason to believe that the Agni-I referred in the 2001 news were these single stage Agni-I tested yeaterday? Frankly I do belive that the Agni-I is a subset of and simpler than Agni-2, that testing is really not required except a live fire with inner parametric data to take care of doubting thomases in the Army.Am I reading too much between the line?
I will let Gen.Mushy take the wager

krsai · Post by **krsai** » 27 Jan 2002 07:17

Advantages of the Agni variantBy N. Gopal Raj

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, JAN. 26. The short-range Agni missile tested on Friday appears to consist of just the first stage of the earlier Agni versions and has distinct technological advantages. The first Agni missiles, touted as ``technology demonstrators'', used solid propellant-based first stage of the SLV-3, India's first launch vehicle. These missiles, the first of which was launched in 1989, had a second stage with a liquid propellant engine which has also been used to propel the single- stage Prithvi missile. The all-solid two-stage Agni-II, where a new solid- propellant second stage replaced the old liquid propellant one, was first test-fired in April 1999 and then again last January. The short-range Agni seems to have done away with the second stage altogether and become a single-stage solid propellant missile. All-solid missiles such as the Agni-II and the new short-range Agni can be fired at short notice. Whereas, the liquid-fuelled Prithvi missile is transported empty and it takes time to fill its propellant tanks before its launch. Liquid engines, however, can be shut off when the requisite velocity is reached. For precise targeting, it is essential that a missile imparts just the right velocity to the warhead. The Agni-II carried a ``velocity-trimming package'' to compensate for the slight performance variations inherent in solid motors. The package in the Agni-II is said to have consisted of liquid-fuelled thrusters (which are small rocket engines). The new short-range Agni is likely to have retained this velocity trimming package. Since the principal difference between the Agni-II and the short-range Agni is the absence of the second stage in the latter, there would be many systems in common. This would greatly simplify production, maintenance, and ground handling.

From the time India successfully launched the SLV-3 - an all-solid four-stage rocket in 1980 - it has had the capability to build fully solid ballistic missiles such as the Agni-II and the short-range Agni. However, it is not clear why it chose to build liquid fuel-based missiles such as the Prithvi and the early Agni version, when the Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme was started in 1983 itself.