India's missile defence - Arrow vs. S-300

P Chupunkar · Post by **P Chupunkar** » 08 Oct 2002 18:39

Originally posted by geeth:
UAE ready to buy $4-bn Russian air defence system: Report

Moscow would be barred from exporting it to any other country within five to seven years of its deployment in the Emirates.

Wonder how this will impact Indian missile/air defense plans...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Oct 2002 19:15

Wonder how this will impact Indian missile/air defense plans...

UAE seems to purchasing a system that does not exist today, which measn that India has no access to such a system anyway - it does not exist.

Also, the knock on the Ru tech is the radar is it not - their radars are not up to par with say a Green Pine - the very reason India bought the Pine and speculations are that India is trying to mate it with Ru missiles. So the path india has selected is rather different.

Remember that India has every intention of being self sufficient. With that in mindthis UAE effort should not have any impact. Infact it may in a round about way have a +ve impact if at all - India may be able to cofund some aspects of teh project - my speculation. I cannot see a -ve impact unless UAE tries to share the new Ru tech with TSP. Hopefully TSP will not exist by then.

P Chupunkar · Post by **P Chupunkar** » 09 Oct 2002 12:30

Originally posted by Niranjan Rao:
Infact it may in a round about way have a +ve impact if at all - India may be able to cofund some aspects of teh project - my speculation. I cannot see a -ve impact unless UAE tries to share the new Ru tech with TSP. Hopefully TSP will not exist by then.

I don't think its that straight forward. UAE has existing boundary issues with iran, its borders with Saudi and Oman are not clearly demarcated. It does feel some threat from iran, and considering its relationship with the US, its very likely that they could have got a decent (probably state of art) system from the US itself. Inspite of this, the iranian threat is not that eminent for it act in such haste.
Then why would it want to get the russians to develop such a system? I may be stretching my imagination a little bit, but its possible that there is a hidden player behind this move to tie up the russians from playing in the ATBM field. Its another issue whether the russians will live upto this proposed agreement.

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Oct 2002 12:47

In the latest issue (Sept/Oct) Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, it mentions that even if a missile (nuclear) is shot down it's debris will still cause substantial damage depending on where it was shot down at. One example mentioned was that if a missile was launched from Middle East tragetting US was shot down within certain amount of time (see the graph) its debris would fall somewhere in Europe. The new laser defenses are even worse since they're designed to target the boosters (and not the warhead); so the warhead will likely destroy another area wherever it falls.

This important issue is often forgotten.

<img src="http://www.thebulletin.org/images/fordengraph.gif" alt="" />

For the articles, go to:
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 09 Oct 2002 18:42

Someone may have mentioned this earlier...

The graphic on page 2 of this thread shows the steps the Arrow system goes through in order to intercept. One of the critical steps is for US satelites to detect the launch. Even if India gets the missile, how will it detect the launch of an enemy missile? US sats can detect a missile launch as soon as the engines are fired. Since India does not have that capability, India will only detect the missile after missile has gained some altitude thereby losing a good chunk of time between detection and launch of interceptor missile.

Getting the US to say "yes" to the Arrow missile is only part of the battle. It would appear that if India wants to get a true ATBM system up in place in 5 years, then dependence on the US sats is also a necessity. Maybe a few years down the line India can adapt one of the earth observation sats into a missile launch early warning system, till then, the US holds all the keys and guards all the gates.

Harry Van · Post by **Harry Van** » 09 Oct 2002 20:13

We will need 12 satellites with IR detection capabilities in an 12,000 km high orbit to detect launches anywhere in the world.It is not clear to me if we possess the tech for detecting a rocket launch from 36,000 km GSO.But we have the means to orbit any kind of satellite now , all we need to do is get the satellite technology , may be from Israel.

The Green Pine Radar itself can provide EW if its left permanently turned on.

One thing we can do is use airships high in the sky , just like we are using aerostats now.Tech exists now to carry 6 metric tons to stratosphere(20+ km) were air is still , and the blimp can stay in a Geo Stationary position with the help of a few propellers.Solar panels make electricity out of sunlight and such a spy ship was used in Kosovo.Staying put in the sky for 24/7 for 3-6 months and to be replaced by others , when it needs repairs , it can provide continuous warning about enemy rocket launches and easily can detect even SRBMs and MBRLs and even artillery position. with an onboard IR package.If stationed some 100 km away from the border , it can function as an IR version of JSTARS and can provide continous IR picture of the battlespace.At a height of 20 km plus it can't be shot down by pakistan SAM and any a/c that tries to climb high to deploy an AAM risks getting shot down by our SAMs.

It can also be made to carry a RADAR and act as an AEW platform , downlinking data to a control room.

We can take the argument further and place the anti-missile projectiles of the S-300s on the airship itself.The projectiles then need to weigh only one fourth or one fifth of their usual weight and it would provide very early interception as well.

I mean I asked this earlier but is it possible to place satellites on an E-W orbit flying over the latitudes or the equator in an 90 mins per revolution orbit (not GSO)?

advitya · Post by **advitya** » 09 Oct 2002 20:24

Originally posted by harryvandeusan:
all we need to do is get the satellite technology , may be from Israel.

The technology exists in-country. We don't need to detect worldwide launches..just a focus on the subcontinent and China is all we need. The question is not technology..but money.

Harry Van · Post by **Harry Van** » 09 Oct 2002 20:34

If tech to detect rocket plumes from 36,000 km exists in this country i dont see whats preventing us from deploying it.One single satellite will do the job.You mean to say we cannot launch one single satellite ?

Plus if detection is possible only from 12,000 km we still need 12 of them to keep an eye on teh subcontinenet and China , so that as one passes over , another takes its place.Its just a side effect that you will get full global coverage.

advitya · Post by **advitya** » 09 Oct 2002 20:42

Originally posted by harryvandeusan:
If tech to detect rocket plumes from 36,000 km exists in this country i dont see whats preventing us from deploying it.

Someone has to formulate the requirement and someone has to sign-off on it.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 09 Oct 2002 23:49

Originally posted by srai:
The new laser defenses are even worse since they're designed to target the boosters (and not the warhead); so the warhead will likely destroy another area wherever it falls.

The new laser defenses target incoming missiles in boost phase, not the booster. The size of the booster is huge and in one piece (i.e., MIRVs have not separated) so easier to detect. If the booster engines are destroyed then it is very unlikely that much of the warhead will survive. Only risk here being constrained by the design of the warhead. Big five powers have secure warhead design, so less likely to (nuclear) detonate if nearby rocket fuel or even surrounding plastic explosive detonates. The nuclear actuator has software/hardware failsafes. Same cannot be said of crude designs on our western border though.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Oct 2002 02:05

The new laser defenses target incoming missiles in boost phase, not the booster. The size of the booster is huge and in one piece (i.e., MIRVs have not separated) so easier to detect. If the booster engines are destroyed then it is very unlikely that much of the warhead will survive. Only risk here being constrained by the design of the warhead. Big five powers have secure warhead design, so less likely to (nuclear) detonate if nearby rocket fuel or even surrounding plastic explosive detonates. The nuclear actuator has software/hardware failsafes. Same cannot be said of crude designs on our western border though.

True for a nuke. If the warhead is bio/gas, then, it may be another story. In fact the country that sends a missile itself may be the victim of the warhead if missile is destroyed during boost phase.

As an aside, can we assume that all nations that posses a nuke warhead have designs that are safe from explositions/whatever any time prior to expected impact? NK?

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 10 Oct 2002 05:19

Winds could be reasonably high at intercept altitutes, so bio/chemical agents may be carried long distances.

Bir Bikram · Post by **Bir Bikram** » 12 Oct 2002 19:31

Hi,
I have been reading some of the postings in this thread, in some of the previous postings some members of this forum have been debating about the superiority of American technology over Russian technology. I thought that I might add some of my opinion regarding this topic –
1. First of all the so called Superior American technology is mostly stolen technology

many of which are stolen from the Germans. After WW2 America got the biggest share of loot from Germany (I am talking about technical loot). Examples are the German V2 missile (which is very well known), and the German engineer Wernher von Braun.
2. About the Russian missile technology I don’t see any point in them being inferior to American missile technology. In fact the Russian missile technology (of course guidance included) was quite useful in the past and is still useful (If anybody wants I can quote lines praising Russian missile technology from websites).
3. Someone was also writing about Patriot missile. This missile was tested only once and that also didn’t prove the system to be totally effective. Beside other reasons the biggest thing I think (although I am not an expert like others this is just my guess may be I am wrong) the system was tested against Scud which is an unguided missile and as good as a cannon shell (i.e. stupid).

Although my topic may be irrelevant and moreover most of the points that I said are known to most of the members (because most of them seem to know in depth about the security matters of the two cold war enemies, like some of them know whether the defense satellites of these countries works or not) and compared to their knowledge I am nothing but still I could not stop myself from posting this letter. (Errors in this letter are inevitable, especially regarding the 3 points because I am a layperson I don’t work in any defense related department and all the informations that I get are from the internet or books).

harryparmar · Post by **harryparmar** » 13 Oct 2002 01:21

Originally posted by Bir Bikram:
[QB]Hi,
I have been reading some of the postings in this thread, in some of the previous postings some members of this forum have been debating about the superiority of American technology over Russian technology. I thought that I might add some of my opinion regarding this topic –
.....QB]

FYI
lot of german tech( early german jet planes etc) also went to russia, including scientists but imo it was less compared to USA

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Oct 2002 01:56

Bir,

Welcome.

You are right that the tech was stolen from teh germans, in afct, if one were to read some books they state that the US made an extraordinary attempt to get to such techs that were in the Russian zones, before the Russians could get to them. However, the issue is which of the technologies is better TODAY, not stolen 50+ years ago.

Under the circumstances India just may be much better off trying to marry much of the off-the-shelf techs she can get her hands on, instead of relying on A given tech from A given source. Needless to state, software plays a very important role in much of the tech achievements of today, and, that just happens to be India's strength. If software is marketed, by India, as a stretegic asset, India should be able to get much in return - barter.

Harry Van · Post by **Harry Van** » 15 Oct 2002 16:51

Americans got 90 % of technical loot and Russian 10 % .Also the scientists invariably preferred to surrender to the Americans than the Russians as they regarded communism to be a dangerous ideology plus better pay packets and freedom etc.

Thus 90 % of Amerian space tech is german tech.Whereas 90 % of space tech in Russia was indigenous.

Americans do hold the advantage in electronics today , but Russian AD and ATBM systems have enough accuracy to suit our purpose.Green Pine is only for Early Warning.I am not sure whether
it is also used for guidance.

I think it should be possible o knock down the TSP missiles with AAM. I think that option is also available and studied.Given that the re-entry velocities are as low as Mach 2.5 as posted in the previous L&M thread , interception using BVR missiles should be possible.May be we have to tip it with nukes or make a new missle with a heavy conventional warhead.

If the whole missile is going to re-enter I think there should be no problem in destroying it using nukes , if the warhead alone enters then we can even try conventional warhead AAM.Even in the former case , we can use ordinary AAMs , as the explosion might cause the warhead to fall away from the target outside the city.

Div · Post by **Div** » 15 Oct 2002 23:44

Israel's Arrow Defense

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 16 Oct 2002 00:00

Yes, yes, American missile tech is just stolen German stuff while the true innovators are the Russians.

Midway through the Cold War it was pretty clear who was following whom.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 18 Oct 2002 08:13

From JED (The Journal of Electornic Defense)

India Upgrading Air Defenses

The Indian government finalized a plan to replace the aging Russian-made air-defense assets of the Indian defense forces. The program, worth $3 billion over the next three to five years, will provide a major boost to the country's air defenses, which are seriously affected due to lack of spares, said a senior official of the Indian Ministry of Defense (MoD). The plan is based on a MoD study that determined that many of the country's anti-missile defense systems are inoperable due to a lack of spares.

According to the MoD official, 30 squadrons of SA-3B Pechora and eight squadrons of SA-8B Osa-AKM surface-to-air missile systems in service with the Indian army are being upgraded. The range of the Pechoras is being increased to enable them work as effective anti-missile defense systems. India is also considering the integration of Russian S-300 air-defense systems with the indigenously developed Rajendra radar for the Akash and Trishul missiles.

In a July 26 interview with JED , outgoing Defense Secretary Yogendra Narain confirmed that the Indian government had already finalized the purchase of two Green Pine radar systems from Israel. - Pulkit Singh

Manohar · Post by **Manohar** » 20 Oct 2002 05:46

harryvandeusan wrote:
-------------------------------------------------
Americans got 90 % of technical loot and Russian 10 % .Also the scientists invariably preferred to surrender to the Americans than the Russians as they regarded communism to be a dangerous ideology plus better pay packets and freedom etc.

Thus 90 % of Amerian space tech is german tech.Whereas 90 % of space tech in Russia was indigenous.
-------------------------------------------------

While it's true that America got the best known names from the Nazi rocket program when compared with the Soviets, assigning an arbitrary percentage like 90/10 is moot without some data to back it up.

Incidentally, the 'father of the rocket' is not Werner von Braun, but Robert Goddard.

--Manohar.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 20 Oct 2002 10:21

Originally posted by Manohar:
Incidentally, the 'father of the rocket' is not Werner von Braun, but Robert Goddard.

--Manohar.

Sorry but Bob Goddard was only the invetor of liquid engine (one whose design secret went to grave with him), and that certainly does not confer him the title of father of rocket, since prior to Goddard the father of rocketary was Tipu Sultan (of Vijaynagar), before his rockets were captured and reverse engineered by British William Congreve in 1799 and before Tipu it was Haider Ali who first crafted rockets for military use.

The following is from some material that I am writing for BR Space pages.

History of Indian in Rocketry and Space

Rockets were invented in ancient East Asia but it’s first practical use for serious purpose other then entertainment took place in India. ~1750 AD –1799 Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan perfected rocket’s use for military purposes, very effectively using it in war against British colonial armies. Tipu had 27 brigades called Kushoons) and each brigade had a company of rocket men called Jourks).After the defeat of Tipu Sultan, the British took his rocket sand technology home to reverse engineer it (it captured more then 700 rockets and sub systems of 900 rockets in th battle of Turukhanahally in 1799. taken to England by William Congreve to be reverse engineered)and use it successfully in its war against Copenhagen, and also against US George Washington. After the defeat of Tipu-Sultan and major parts of India falling to British colonialist and kingdoms under British protection, India independence was largely compromised and fell into systematic exploitation and suppression by the colonialism. Lack of political and economic independence stymied Indian science and military technology for 150 years till it finally threw away the yoke of occupation to transition back as an independent sovereign state.

US media managers would like the world to belive as if rocket did not exist before Goddard. All serious rocket man knows that the fatherfigure of modern rocketeary was indeed Werner von Braun, the inventor of V2 and Saturn motor of moon faring Apollo rockets.

Here is from some more material that I am writing for BR Space pages.(this is drawn fron the book "Wings Of Fire").

Wernher von Braun during his visit to ISRO mentioned the US complex of NIH (Not Invented Here) and said “If you have to do anything in rocketry do it yourself”, he commented “SLV-3 is a genuine Indian design and you may be having your own troubles. But you should always remember that we do not just build on success, we also build on failure”.

wasu · Post by **wasu** » 20 Oct 2002 11:31

Arun,

If you haven't seen this yet, you can use the info. from this article. This is from Vigyan Prasar . I can't find the link on the website. So, here it is.

The story of Indian Rockets

From Shrirangapattana to Shriharikota

The British consider the Duke of Wellington, Colonel Arthur Wellesley (1769-1852), who defeated Napoleon at the famous battle of Waterloo (1815), one of their greatest national heroes. However, not many people know that this hero of Waterloo had to run away from the battlefield when attacked by the rockets and musket-fire of Tipu Sultan's army.

It happened at the time of the Fourth Anglo-Mysore war (April 1799). General Harris led the British forces on the siege of Shrirangapattana, the capital of Tipu. The British forces had reached quite close to the fort of Shrirangapattana, but there was a formidable obstruction. To the south-west of the fort, near the village of Sultanpet, there was a large tope, where Tipu had stationed his rocketmen. Obviously, they had to be cleared out before the siege could be pressed closer to Shrirangapattana island. The commander chosen for this operation was Col. Wellesley.

Col. Wellesley was not an ordinary Englishman. He was the younger brother of Lord Wellesley, the then Governor-General of India (1798-1805). Col.Wellesley, advancing towards the tope after dark on the 5th April, was attacked by a tremendous fire of musketry and rockets. The men gave way and retreated in disorder. In the midst of chaos that followed, Col. Wellesley lost his way, hid himself somewhere in the night and could report to Harris late only on the next day.

The 'Sultanpet incident' had a profound and traumatic effect on Arthur Wellesley.
His biographer Guedalla tells us that, even late in his life, after Waterloo, the unpleasing night lived vividly in Arthur's memory.

After some days Gen. Harris planned another attack on Shringapattana. Help also came from Mumbai in the form of Gen. Stuart's forces. On the afternoon of 4th May when the final attack on the fort was led by Baird, he was again met by "furious musket and rocket fire". But this did not help much; the fort was taken. Tipu still refused to beg for peace on humiliating terms. He met a hero's end on 4th May while defending his capital. The taking over of Shrirangapattana was described by Arthur Wellesley, the future Duke of Wellington, in the following words:

Nothing therefore can have exceeded what was done on the night of the 4th. Scarcely a house in the town was left unplundered, and I understand that in camp jewels of the greatest value, bars of gold, etc., etc., have been offered for sale in the bazars of the army by our soldiers, sepoys, and followers....

Along with the enormous loot another precious gift from India arrived in England. It was the Mysorean rocket, two specimens of which can still be seen in the Royal Artillery Museum,Woolwich Arsenal, London.

European rockets of the time had combustion chambers made of wood or some kind of paste board. The metal cylinder (casing) used for the Indian rocket was hammered soft iron; it represented an advance over earlier technology. At that time iron made in India was of a high quality, even though Indian furnaces were small and inefficient compared with those of Europe. Indian iron was sent to Sheffield, because it was 'excellently adapted to for the purpose of fine cutlery'.

The use of iron cylinder for the Mysore rockets increased bursting pressures, which allowed the propellant (gunpowder) to be packed to greater densities. This gave the Mysore rocket greater thrust and range. The metal cylinder was tied to a long bamboo pole or sword to provide stability to the rocket missile.

From different accounts we come to know that the Mysore rocket weighed from 2.2 to 5.5 kgs. The metal casing was 4 cms in diameter and 10 cms long. The range is often quoted as about 1.5 kms. In exceptional cases it was upto 2.5 kms.

There was a regular Rocket Corps of about 1200 men in Hyder Ali's army. Hyder's son Tipu raised it to about 5000 men. Furthermore, three or more rockets could be fired rapidly using a wheeled cart as a launch-pad. Though not very accurate, their flash and noise had much moral effect on men and beast when mass-fired.

Rockets were in use in Karnataka long before the Anglo-Mysore wars. Hyder Ali's father was already commanding 50 rocketmen for the Nawab of Arcot. In the Second Anglo-Mysore war, at the Battle of Pollilur (10 September 1780), Hyder and Tipu achieved a grand victory, the contributory cause being that one of the British ammunition tambrils was set on fire by Mysorean rockets. The scene is depicted in a famous mural at the Darya Daulat Bagh in Shrirangapattana.

An innovator in many ways, Tipu was greatly interested in rocket development. He showed great interest in such European inventions as barometers and thermometers and several other novel devices. Tipu had sent some of his rockets to the Sultan of Constantinople as presents.

Rockets were known in India much before the Anglo-Mysore wars. Their early references are mostly from south India. The Mysore rulers might have got information about gunpowder and rockets from Malabar, where the Chinese used to come for trading. For fire-crackers words like 'china-bedi' and 'china-padakkam' are still in use in the Malayalam language.
* Gunpowder was discovered in China in the ninth century A.D., when the first reference to the mixing of charcoal, saltpetre and sulphur is found. About the early eleventh century the Chinese developed a kind of incendiary arrow, in fact the rocket. We have descriptions of their use against the Mongols at the siege of Kai-Feng-Fue in 1232 A.D. It was through the Mongols or the Arabs that the know-how of gunpowder and rockets reached Europe in the thirteenth century.

India also acquired the know-how of gunpowder about the same time, either through Chinese alchemists or through Chinese traders coming to Indian ports. Anyway, it is certain that by about 1400 A.D. the Chinese fireworks techniques were well-known in India. There is a treatise on fireworks in Persian written about 1450 A.D. by Zain-ul-Abidin, the Muslim ruler of Kashmir. In the fifteenth century A.D. various kinds of fireworks were displayed at Vijayanagar during festivals. Ain-e-Akbari gives a list of 77 weapons in the arsenal of Akbar, bana (rocket) being mentioned at the end. In fact, the word bana or agnibana in the sense of a rocket finds a place in several Sanskrit works of the mediaeval period. In China the tube of a rocket was made of bamboo. The use of iron tube for rocket is probably an Indian innovation.

The British were greatly impressed by the Mysorean rockets using iron tubes. Several of them were sent to England, and from 1801, William Congreve (1772-1828), son of the Comptroller of the Royal Woolwich Arsenal, London, after thoroughly examining the Indian specimens, set on a vigorous research and development programme at the Arsenal's laboratory. Congreve prepared a new propellant mixture, and developed a rocket motor with a strong iron tube with conical nose, weighing about 14.5 kg. He also published three books on rocketry.

It is important to note that Congreve, on the basis of Newton' third law, recognised one of the chief advantages of the rocket -- the absence of recoil force, making it suitable for sea-borne assault. In the first quarter of the nineteenth century the British used Congreve's rockets in several sea-wars, e.g., in a trial attack on Boulogne in 1806, in the siege of Copenhagen in 1807, etc. The rockets that Congreve ultimately developed weighed 20 kg with a range up to 2.7 km.

Thus, from the above description it is amply clear that better rockets came to be developed in England only after experiencing and examining the Indian rockets. It was a time when in England the first wave of the Industrial Revolution and technical innovations had begun. Till the end of 18th century several products of Indian technology were much superior to that of the British, but there was no proper environment for their scientific development in our country. However, we should not forget that the plunder of Shrirangapattana and Tipu's rockets had also made a small but significant contribution to the Industrial Revolution that took place in England.

A new era of rocket development was initiated in the early 20th century. In 1903, Russian scientist Konstantin Tsiolkovasky (1857-1935) published his theory of rocket propulsion. He was the first scientist to establish that only a rocket can travel in interplanetary space. Then the American professor Robert Goddard (1882-1945) worked on the development of liquid-fuelled rockets, the first one being launched in 1929. During the Second World War a powerful V-2 rocket was developed in Germany and was used in large numbers against Britain and other European countries. At the end of the World War several V-2 rockets were shifted to America, and Wernher von Braun (1912-77), a German rocker expert, also took shelter there. After that there was vigorous development of modern rockets and missiles in the USA. However, the first artificial satellite Sputnik-1 was put into orbit in 1957 by the USSR. Also, it was a Soviet rocket that put the first man, Yuri Gagarin, into orbit in 1961.

Till then India had no modern rocket of its own. First time sounding rockets for atmospheric research were launched from Thumba in November 1963. They were acquired from foreign countries. The first indigenous rocket, Rohini-75, weigning 10 kgs, was successfully launched from Thumba in November 1967.

After that India went on building bigger and more powerful rockets. Right in the beginning, ISRO planned a rocket capable of sending a small satellite into orbit. Work also started on a rocket launching centre at the Shriharikota island.

There is not much difference between a rocket and a missile.Therefore, in the area of rocket technology one can not expect any help from foreign countries. India developed its powerful SLV-3 rocket with its own efforts within a short span of ten years. During the years 1880-83, SLV-3 rockets were successfuly launched from Shriharikota. It also successfuly placed a home-made 40 kg satellite in a near-earth orbit. With this India became the seventh country in the world to launch its satellite with its own rocket.

After SLV-3, Indian scientists developed a more powerful rocket -- the ASLV, which was tested for the first time in 1987. Then in May 1992, this ASLV rocket, launched from Shriharikota, placed the ISRO-made SrosS satellite into a near-earth orbit. Also, a more powerful rocket -- the PSLV (Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle) -- was in the making. Its second developmental flight in October 1994 was a great success. PSLV is capable of putting a 1000 kg remote sensing satellite into a 1000 km high polar orbit. This was proved when the PSLV rocket, launched from Shriharikaota on 26 May 1999, successfuly put into high orbits three satellites -- one Indian and two foreign made.

Now, in our country another rocket, more powerful than the PSLV, is almost ready for its maiden launching. Named GSLV (Geo-stationary Satellite Launch Vehicle), the rocket is capable of placing an Insat-like satellite into the 36,000 km high sun-synchronous circular orbit. According to ISRO, its first flight will take place some time in the first quarter of 2000 A.D. Thus, with the beginning of the new century and the new millennium (2001) India will step into a new era of rocket technology -- India will be capable of launching all its satellites with its own rockets.

In the field of rocket techology India is again attaining a leading position in the world. Modern rockets are based on a very high and advanced technology. But we should also remember that about two hundred years ago Indian rockets were the best in the world. The story of the development of Indian rockets from Shrirangapattan to Shriharikota has been quite topsy-turvy. The rockets of Shrirangapattan were used against an imperial power. The rockets being launched from Shriharikota are for space exploration and scientific benefits.

- Gunakar Muley

Milestones in Rocket Development

A.D.

1044 : The Chinese work Wu-ching tsung-yao gives the earliest gunpowder formula in any civilization.

1232 : Rockets were used by the Chinese against the Mongols at the seige of
Kai-Feng-fue.

circa1250 : Gunpowder became known in Europe.
1280 : An Arabic work refers to gunpowder and 'arrows from China'.

circa1400 : Gunpowder became known in India. After that we find many references to agnichurna (gunpowder), agnibana (rocket) and agnikrida (fireworks) in several literary sources.

1780-99 : Hyder Ali and his son Tipu Sultan used rockets against British forces.
1801-02 : Englishman William Congreve examined Indian rockets.
1806-14 : Britain used rockets developed by Congreve in several sea-battles.

1903 : Russian scientist Tsiolkovsky published his work on rocket propulsion and space voyage.

1909 : American professor Robert Goddard completed his first studies on liquid-fuelled rocket.

1926 : Goddard launched his first liquid-fuelled rocket.

1929 : German scientist Hermann Oberth experimented with liquid-fuelled rocket-engines and later helped in the development of German military rockets.

1939-45 : Research on military rockets in Germany. Production and use of powerful V-2 rockets. After World War II several V-2 rockets were taken to USA, and rocket experts like Wernher von Braun also reached there.

1957 : USSR's first artificial satellite Sputnik-1 launched into orbit.
1961 : First manned spacecraft, Vostok-1, piloted by Yuri Gagarin, launched into orbit.
1963 : First time foreign-made sounding rockets launched from Thumba.
1967 : Indian made Rohini-75 rocket successfully launched from Thumba.

1969 : American spacecraft Apollo 11, launched by a powerful Saturn V rocket, softlanded on the moon, and Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin became the first men to set foot
on its surface.

1969 : (15 August) Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) formed under DAE.
1979-83 : SLV-3 rockets launched from Shriharikota.
1987-92 : ASLV rockets launched from Shriharikota.
1993-99 : PSLV rockets launched from Shriharikota.

1999 : (26 May) Launched from Shriharikota, the PSLV-C2 rocket placed into orbits three
satellites -- one Indian and two foreign.

2000 : Proposed first flight of GSLV rocket.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 20 Oct 2002 12:09

Thanks Wasu for providing this useful information.

wasu · Post by **wasu** » 21 Oct 2002 07:46

Sure, Arun. Check this photo. http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/rocketry/11.html They got guntur wrong. Lot more interesting photos at this site. Also, read the first few paragraphs in ch. 4 in wings of fire. Tracking the usage of rockets in battles would be interesting: Chinese -> Tipu -> Congreve -> US Army ...

Michael · Post by **Michael** » 21 Oct 2002 09:28

During the years 1880-83, SLV-3 rockets were successfuly launched from Shriharikota. It also successfuly placed a home-made 40 kg satellite in a near-earth orbit.

Wow! Talk about being ahead of their time!

Great article btw.

shiva · Post by **shiva** » 21 Oct 2002 09:58

http://www.saag.org/papers6/paper536.html
Pakistan - North Korea axis of evil by B. Raman.

Michael · Post by **Michael** » 26 Oct 2002 10:59

Now that India has demobilised, this topic can be revisited. Shouldn't India's stand-down now finally clear the way for the Arrow and Phalcon to go through?

Curious if there has been any positive movement in this direction since India's decision to pull back.

Roop · Post by **Roop** » 26 Oct 2002 11:50

Curious if there has been any positive movement in this direction since India's decision to pull back.

I am not aware of any movement of any kind, positive or negative. The deals (Arrow and Phalcon) are still waiting for approval from Washington, and I still estimate that each has a 50-50 chance of being approved.

George Fernandes said recently that he expects India to have the Phalcon in 3 years, but that doesn't mean he's getting positive vibes from Washington or anything. He may simply be whistling in the dark, for all we know.

Div · Post by **Div** » 08 Nov 2002 04:13

Israel Bares Arrow Missile in Warning to Iraq

Aside from a steering defect since corrected, the 23-foot-long Arrow has passed seven tests showing it can detect, track and destroy a missile in under three minutes at altitudes of more than 30 miles, a senior military briefer said.

He said the Arrow's Green Pine radar -- a 50-by-17-foot dish at Palmachim -- had enabled Israel to slash the time between the launch and detection of a hostile missile by 70 percent since 1991.
....
Military sources said Israel could answer with more than 200 Arrows -- costing $3 million apiece -- based at Palmachim and at a recently established second base in central Israel.

SureshP · Post by **SureshP** » 08 Nov 2002 05:28

Just saw that on BBC TV. Looks impressive much more so than Patriot. Also showed the greenpine Radar

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 12 Dec 2002 00:48

UPI Hears

After long delays in the testing program, the world's best anti-missile system is about to go into production. Russia's S-400 "Triomf" anti-missile and anti-aircraft system is going through its final trials at Kapustin Yar, and Air Force officials have promised the first customers in the United Arab Emirates that they can take delivery next year. Reckoned to be twice as effective as the U.S. Patriot PAC-3 system, the S-400 has an over-the-horizon range of up to 250 miles. The Almaz Central Design Bureau claims the missile is effective against medium-range ballistic missiles with an incoming speed of over 3 miles per second, which means a missile with a 2,000-mile range. Thanks to advance payments by export customers, funding problems have been overcome, says Air Force chief of staff Gen. Boris Cheltsov, and it will be integrated into Moscow's own air defense system over the coming year. Designed for easy export sales, the Triomf missiles can be fitted to the popular S-300 air defense system. It comes in two versions, a 'heavy' anti-missile missile, and a lighter anti-aircraft missile based on the SAM-12 'Gladiator.'

Rudra · Post by **Rudra** » 12 Dec 2002 01:38

unusual photo of S-400 TEL with 3 big SAMs and 3 small SAMs.

http://pvo.guns.ru/images/sa10/20-005_S-400.JPG

Vicky · Post by **Vicky** » 12 Dec 2002 06:47

US okays Phalcon sale

TEL AVIV : The United States has given a green light for the sale of Israel's airborne early-warning Phalcon system to India.

The move by Washington clears the way for a proposed sale of up to three Phalcon systems to India. The sale could amount to nearly $1 billion.

Israeli industry sources said India was concerned that Washington would stop the Israeli Phalcon sale in a repeat of that which took place in July 2001, when U.S. pressure halted the sale of the system to China.

The Phalcon is manufactured by the state-owned Israel Aircraft Industries. An IAI spokesman said the company would not comment. Industry sources said India wants the Phalcon system installed on an Il-76 cargo plane. They said the prospect of India agreeing to the purchase of a U.S. air platform is virtually nil.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 12 Dec 2002 07:06

Originally posted by Vicky:
US okays Phalcon sale

Source?

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 12 Dec 2002 08:08

US okays Phalcon sale an old news in Times of India.

Another similar one today at

U.S. okays Phalcons sale to India

Prateek · Post by **Prateek** » 12 Dec 2002 08:12

errr.... Gupta got it early by a few mins ...

This should be great news for Indian defense experts...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/xml/comp/articleshow?art_id=1085939400

WASHINGTON: The White House on Tuesday clarified that it supported the sale by Israel to India of the Phalcon Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) and Arrow anti-missile systems.

Seemingly overriding objections from the State Department, White House officials told their Indian counterparts that Washington did not oppose the transaction. If anything they were a little concerned about the timing of the sale.

Unnamed State Department officials had expressed opposition to the sales on Monday, queering the pitch ahead of Defence Minister George Fernandes’ visit to Washington starting Wednesday. Indian officials sought clarifications from the administration and were told that the US had in principle no objections to Israel fulfilling its contractual obligations.

Vicky · Post by **Vicky** » 12 Dec 2002 10:42

Whooo !

God bless Israel & US.

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 12 Dec 2002 13:13

Before we indulge in Euphoria - the article referring to the Arrow sale was dated in January - the current article only refers to the Phalcon sale - I don't see anything about the Arrow in this article in Haaretz.

Manne · Post by **Manne** » 12 Dec 2002 13:31

Originally posted by m n kumar:
There was a news snippet on Aaj Tak yesterday night. A statement by Prime Minister Vajpayee:
India and Russia will jointly develop an Intercontinental Missile Brahmos .
I repeat it read "Intercontinental Missile Brahmos". Can anyone clarify this? Aaj Tak is not a typical DDM to get such type errors.

mnk, I, too, saw AajTak goof-up last night. However, I believe the word they used was "ballistic" and not "intercontinental". To be precise, I do not know whether they used "intercontinental" but they sure did use "ballistic". I was shocked to read that because I have always regarded BrahMos as an anti-ship cruise missile.

Could this be a conspiracy for something new or just typical DDM stuff? Don't know....but this is a serious mistake indeed.

MN Kumar · Post by **MN Kumar** » 12 Dec 2002 14:33

Manne,

I am dead sure that it read Intercontinental in english. First i read it in Hindi as "Antar Mahadweepiy" later i confirmed it in english.

It was shown this morning too.

Added Later:

I think the New Missile must be this one. Posted by Rangudu that appeared in Intelligence online:

New fighter, nuclear missile in Putin discussions

2 December 2002: India and Russia will negotiate three defence projects during Russian president Vladmir Putin’s visits to New Delhi and the Russian side is keen to increase the frequency of meetings of the inter-governmental commission on military cooperation.

The two top-priority projects coming up for discussion are development of a joint strike fighter jet superior to the US F-22 and a long-range supersonic cruise missile that can carry a miniature nuclear warhead.

The joint strike fighter project has picked steam after Indian and Russian scientists successfully incorporated Western avionics and electronic warfare systems into Sukhoi-30 to make it the advanced multi-role Su-30 MKi jointly produced now by India and Russia.

"We want to do the same thing with the joint-strike fighter to make it superior to F-22," said a Russian defence expert.

Both sides have discussed project costs but certain features of the fighter will be discussed during Putin's visit although India and Russia are chary of releasing details.

The 900-1,400-kilometre-range supersonic cruise missile project is also built on the success of the shorter-range Brahmos missile that was proven in test-flight in April 2002.

Discussion on the supersonic nuclear-capable cruise missile was initiated during defence minister George Fernandes's visit to Russia in June 2000 but remained inconclusive because of indecision on its parameters which will be taken up during Putin's visit.

The third project to be discussed will be joint development and production of a 100-seater commercial aircraft which will be marketed by India because of its high demand in Europe and Southeast Asia.