India Tests Prithvi based ABM

Nalla Baalu · Post by **Nalla Baalu** » 28 Nov 2006 11:07

Deleted. Double post

Nalla Baalu · Post by **Nalla Baalu** » 28 Nov 2006 11:09

Can you/anybody please provide me the name of this group on Orkut.

Please to search for 'DRDO' in communities tab. It is the one which has about 1450-odd membership.

I believe some of the tests termed as solid-fuel Prithvi tests (from 2003 onwards, for which no pics were made available) may have been the flight tests of the new ABM.

If my memory serves me right, Prithvi in its last test-flight before current ABM round was referred to as a SAM in a PTI report. I had dismissed it as DDM manifesting itself as is their wont.

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 28 Nov 2006 11:11

Paging Arun S,

Remember these!

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/events/ae ... hviDDL.jpg

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/events/ae ... viRTSS.jpg

These in particular are very interesting.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/events/ae ... hviWSP.jpg

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/events/ae ... tviMCC.jpg

The info boards repeatedly speak of defending an area and launchers with radars, for the Prithvi. Note the representative GreenPine in the last.

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 28 Nov 2006 11:13

Nalla Baalu wrote: Please to search for 'DRDO' in communities tab. It is the one which has about 1450-odd membership.

Thanks, appreciate it.

vikas_pandey · Post by **vikas_pandey** » 28 Nov 2006 11:17

SaiK wrote: other than the ABM, we should also start off (or has it been?) an anti-cruise missile system. ACM, and use brahmos as the target missile that has high G maneuvers.

Barak-2???

maitya · Post by **maitya** » 28 Nov 2006 11:17

JCage wrote:Rajendra is partly limited by its platform, it shoehorns everything into a BMP sized unit, with another BMP handling the data processing and the like.

Maybe, the limiting factor is the high voltage power supplies for i/p power required by the transmitter vis-a-vis that can be provided in a BMP unit.

Wrong Thread ...

George J · Post by **George J** » 28 Nov 2006 11:19

Singha wrote:can this system in current incarnation deal with the Nodong & Hatf-xx families? I am assuming it needs to get better for dealing with newer chinese IRBMs like Shaheen ?

Exactly....and thats why the light years away remark is NOT totally out of the order. Unlike it usual style where DRDO tests a new widget and then say claims it the "lightest, cheapest, smartest" widget in the mkt, this one is purely claimed as an AOX experiment with some tech realized and lots more tech to be realized for it to be effective.

What is this thing going to be eventually? A theater ABM? If thats the case half of the jingos (oraclites) singing its praise today will be whining how its not going to be as good as Arrow-II or xyz system (accompanied by more shiny brouchure babbling).

If not going to be a comprehensive BMD system: against IRBM that "can" be launched from 500-1000's of KM away, then where exactly will the service find its utility? More whining will follow.

This experiment has shown some VERY impressive reaction times (if these are indeed times to detection, trajectory computation and launch). But no matter how much anyone gloats its still a controlled test wherein the "adversary" was well known and was launched on cue. The real world will be quite different.

While "light years" is not a term I would associate with a comprehensive BMD for India. Given DRDO timelines, I would'nt be holding my breath for a decade or so. There are way too many systems that we need to master for that and most of them are still not in place. But for an experiment this is very impressive indeed.

Also, I dont think I would be worried about DRDO bashing or lifafa giri affecting them at all. As long as there are no vendors for xyz system, it will be made by DRDO even if it takes light years. The scientist netas who WILL be technical advisors on any xyz system and that system has to be better than AOX experiment at least on paper before it even gets a hearing. Besides scientist netas* will talk to political netas and convince them with superlatives like "cheapest, lightest, smartest" desi BMD. And the soldier netas will just have to whine (unknown/retd sources from the services) or just give in. All the while jingos indulge in oraclized discussions while curbing the non-hindu growth rate.

_____________________________________
* Since I ve been self exiled from BRF, I ve been re-reading Wings of Fire, but this time skipping over that poetry crap and trying to read between the lines and understand the politics of running a mega science project. These scientist also have to be netas, and netas they are.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 11:20

IIRC there was some speculation that CAR, BSR & SV-2000 were all assembled - indigenized from Polish equipment. Per se I have nothing against imported technology till it is routed through DRDO so that they can absorb it.

I still think DRDO is fine as an organization and its BIGGEST problem is low funding. Its funds should be increased by around 5-10 times. Also all imports by Defence agency should face an import duty of 100% to make domestic production more attractive.

Now coming to ABM, it seems that for once DRDO may have worked on specifications that considered the size, weight and limitations of domestic components i.e. to say the used an amply sized interceptor design which could pack in all components.

It is reasonable to assume that booster was the ~.70m & 6m stage, it would be interesting to see what was the second stage?

Also unlike the Trishul and Akash tests, this is a very advanced test as it was conducted against a real live fast moving target.

This ABM missile is so far advanced compared to anything till date was Drdo has done that it almost unbelievable especially in view of the fact that Akash and Trishul not to speak of Nag is still limping around.

All in all, I want all of it to be true and I wonder even how many BRites realize as how big news this is, tech wise. This tech represents the pinnacle of SAM tech

negi · Post by **negi** » 28 Nov 2006 11:27

I share George J's take on the whole 'missile test' .Having said that If one examines the pics(4th from top) uploaded by Tilak one does actually see 'interception of a missile' ,unfortunately the AM was not visible (for I guess the first three pics are of target misisle (seems to be liquid fueled no smoke trail).

----Ducking under table fo cover

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 11:35

If compare it to Arrow programme which cost around US$ 1.30 the funding for Indian ABM seems somewhat OK.

The Arrow programme was launched in 1986 and conducted first intercepts between 1994-6, which means that Indian ABM has reached this stage.

The first arrow battery was deployed in 2000 which would mean that first Indian battery around 2010-2012 and should cost something like US$ 100-200 million dollars.

One Arrow long range intercept was reported at 97 seconds flight time of the interceptor which would mean that Indian ABM would be longer ranged and heavier, I would speculate a weight of 2500kg, first stage 6m and second stage 3-4m, dia ~.7m, max speed Mach 8-12 with range against Missiles of 100km, against fighters of 200km and against heavy low g platforms of around 300km and of tactical use (anti ship-ARM-PGM) ~400km and for ballistic use 600km.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 11:48

Raj Malhotra wrote:If compare it to Arrow programme which cost around US$ 1.30 the funding for Indian ABM seems somewhat OK.

The Arrow programme was launched in 1986 and conducted first intercepts between 1994-6, which means that Indian ABM has reached this stage.

The first arrow battery was deployed in 2000 which would mean that first Indian battery around 2010-2012 and should cost something like US$ 100-200 million dollars.

One Arrow long range intercept was reported at 97 seconds flight time of the interceptor which would mean that Indian ABM would be longer ranged and heavier, I would speculate a weight of 2500kg, first stage 6m and second stage 3-4m, dia ~.7m, max speed Mach 8-12 with range against Missiles of 100km, against fighters of 200km and against heavy low g platforms of around 300km and of tactical use (anti ship-ARM-PGM) ~400km and for ballistic use 600km.

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 28 Nov 2006 11:49

Raj Malhotra wrote:IIRC there was some speculation that CAR, BSR & SV-2000 were all assembled - indigenized from Polish equipment. Per se I have nothing against imported technology till it is routed through DRDO so that they can absorb it.

I have interacted with the scientists involved and comments like these are exactly what dogs any rational discussion of the topic, since it is a "given" that we have to seek some foreign source for the technology.

You say speculation, but then by mentioning the same speculation as an explanation you end up perpetuating a canard which was started by Prasun Sengupta in an inspired bit of copy and paste.

DRDO's LRDE supplies slotted array antena for a Polish MPA project, so does that mean that the Polish project is Indian?

The BFSR has nothing to do with Poland, nor does the SV-2000. The only "influence" in the former is actually from Israels similar system, whose rotational assembly was used as the template by a Bangalore firm for the BFSR-SR. Apart from that, to anyone familiar with RF systems- it should be clear from a comparison of the two products, that both have significantly different architecture to boot. The Israeli radar for instance uses a Slotted array, the Indian BFSR uses a microstrip patch array developed by ISRO and LRDE. The Polsih system is similarly quite different.

The CAR's antenna assembly (planar array) was codeveloped with Poland and associated technology, which I posted, three years back and both countries field similar systems- but the crucial signal processing etc were all developed locally, and the CAR is optimized for Indias needs and differs in some ways from the Polish version. Before the CAR, DRDO developed the Vajra protoype, which was basically a small phased array, and which finally led to the choice of a planar array for the CAR, and its development.

India is currently developing the LLLR based on Indra-IIPC and its newer programs. Would this 50km ranged, 3D system even be possible unless India had already mastered a certain level of proficiency in the systems?
For that matter, its also developing a long range radar for the ABM system.

India's radar development is homegrown, and comes against the backdrop of severe technology denial, and is supported by Indian firms. Speculation about it being technology just handed over is unwarranted and offensive.

Also unlike the Trishul and Akash tests, this is a very advanced test as it was conducted against a real live fast moving target.

This ABM missile is so far advanced compared to anything till date was Drdo has done that it almost unbelievable especially in view of the fact that Akash and Trishul not to speak of Nag is still limping around.

The IGMDP, from day1 has concentrated on the strategic programs as versus the bread and butter ones, since the former are the backbone of our deterrence, whereas the latter are available from elsewhere. If anything, Saraswat heading this program indicates that it is being treated as a strategic project with all the attendant Govt support.

Ramsey · Post by **Ramsey** » 28 Nov 2006 11:51

A portion of the interceptor was similar to the Prithvi missile but its second stage was a totally new segment

As the report says of a Two stage, kindly need help from the missile guru's.

1) Is it advisable to have the Thrust Diverters to the entire missile length.
2) Was there any stage seperation in this case.
3) Report suggest of a Hit To Kill and an AXO exp.

Does these all points to an "EKV".

Damn I had:

on the MMRCA From the US table..
They beat the Chineese Photoshoppers with excellentnt reports...

rocky · Post by **rocky** » 28 Nov 2006 11:52

Well, talking about Shiv Aroor, he's begging to current NPOL employees on Orkut to give him information like

shiv:
hi manoj, just wanted to know -- what makes NPOL a better lab than the other DRDO labs? how come it attracts more talent and has better retention than other labs? can you give me an idea?
1:57 AM 11/17/2006

fromhttp://www.orkut.com/Scrapbook.aspx?uid ... 6579860268

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 11:55

Cybaru wrote:http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/00 ... 130311.htm

First test of Sagarika cruise missile next year

New Delhi, Nov 13. (PTI): Sagarika, India's first submarine-launched nuclear-capable cruise missile, will be ready for flight trials by early next year, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) sources said.

The turbo-jet powered, vertically launched cruise missile with a range of 700 nautical miles and capable of delivering a 500-kg warhead, is being developed by DRDO with Israeli assistance. India is simultaneously seeking to rope in European missile firms for the project that is being kept under wraps.

The sources said the missile's first prototype, incorporating a solid fuel booster, should be ready for a test flight by early 2008.

At the same time, the DRDO is continuing the development of the submarine-launched version of the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile developed jointly with Russia.

The development of these two missiles, which will turn India into only the world's fifth power with such a capability, appears to be the silver lining in the country's missile programme that has been plagued by long delays and huge cost overruns.

Incidentally the operational range of cruise missiles is around half of max range so I think that the maz range of this missile would be 3000km and operational range of 1300km

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 11:56

The intercept range can be anything from 100-200km as we know the flight time of 110 seconds, max speed 9-12 Mach and say average speed of mach 4-8

ramana wrote:The details as we know are:
length : 10 ~ 12 m
Reaction time ~50 secs.
Intercept altitude ~ 40- 50 km.
Intercept range ~
Test program ~ 10 tests (2 already over)

The interceptor launch was ~ 60secs after target launch. Gives figure of merit of the whole detection, command and control system. Should be an indicator for the anti-SRBM type of mission. Should make the TSP feel quite worked up. All their Hatfs are khtam. Could also put some of the long range missiles also at risk of being intercepted. So they need more barbarian stuff. With Noko under US watch list due to prolif concerns it might be difficult for ding dongs.

Has divert thrusters in the 'kill' vehicle for terminal manouvers.
Must have stage separation. The use of Prithvi vehicle as a descriptor means the solid booster was derived from that program.

Intercept happened at 40 ~ 50 km altitude. So its a point intercept solution and not an area intercept system. That may be based on Agni I booster?

Has totally new system of sensors etc not derived from existing Akash vehicle...

Has lot of impact to TSP delivery program. They have to get back to the unwashed as the only reliable method. Some PRC vehicles also could be effected reducing their options.

Important to ensure RajaMohan type lifafa "Stratergy experts' dont prevent deployment by Indian forces.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 12:00

I am not talking about BFSR but BSR which you told me was N-22. Anyway will just differ here and move on. The topic on hand is more interesting to say the least and this circular discussion can take place some other time, i suppose

JCage wrote:
Raj Malhotra wrote:IIRC there was some speculation that CAR, BSR & SV-2000 were all assembled - indigenized from Polish equipment. Per se I have nothing against imported technology till it is routed through DRDO so that they can absorb it.
I have interacted with the scientists involved and comments like these are exactly what dogs any rational discussion of the topic, since it is a "given" that we have to seek some foreign source for the technology.

You say speculation, but then by mentioning the same speculation as an explanation you end up perpetuating a canard which was started by Prasun Sengupta in an inspired bit of copy and paste.

DRDO's LRDE supplies slotted array antena for a Polish MPA project, so does that mean that the Polish project is Indian?

The BFSR has nothing to do with Poland, nor does the SV-2000. The only "influence" in the former is actually from Israels similar system, whose rotational assembly was used as the template by a Bangalore firm for the BFSR-SR. Apart from that, to anyone familiar with RF systems- it should be clear from a comparison of the two products, that both have significantly different architecture to boot. The Israeli radar for instance uses a Slotted array, the Indian BFSR uses a microstrip patch array developed by ISRO and LRDE. The Polsih system is similarly quite different.

The CAR's antenna assembly (planar array) was codeveloped with Poland, which I posted, three years back and both countries field similar systems- but the signal processing etc were all developed locally, and the CAR is optimized for Indias needs. Before the CAR, DRDO developed the Vajra protoype, which was basically a small phased array, and which finally led to the choice of a planar array for the CAR, and its development.

India is currently developing the LLLR based on Indra-IIPC and its newer programs. Would this 50km ranged, 3D system even be possible unless India had already mastered a certain level of proficiency in the systems?
For that matter, its also developing a long range radar for the ABM system.

India's radar development is homegrown, and comes against the backdrop of severe technology denial, and is supported by Indian firms. Speculation about it being technology just handed over is unwarranted and offensive.

Also unlike the Trishul and Akash tests, this is a very advanced test as it was conducted against a real live fast moving target.

This ABM missile is so far advanced compared to anything till date was Drdo has done that it almost unbelievable especially in view of the fact that Akash and Trishul not to speak of Nag is still limping around.
The IGMDP, from day1 has concentrated on the strategic programs as versus the bread and butter ones, since the former are the backbone of our deterrence, whereas the latter are available from elsewhere. If anything, Saraswat heading this program indicates that it is being treated as a strategic project with all the attendant Govt support.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 12:06

There is lot of unknowns about ABM missile like

Whether it is VLS?

Whether it uses diving attack method of Arrow-2 & S-300VM or straight intercept of PAC-3?

What is the max speed of target which it can handle?

What is it max weight? Can it be ship launched to give Indian ships better Air defence system against Pak P-3s and other MPAs?

Is it also usable in other roles like anti-aircraft, ARM, tactical missile, Anti-ship missile etc?

and most of all its pic?

I think the max info of Indian missiles - DRDO projects was first released in 1988-90 by Rajiv Gandhi thereafter there has only be trickkle of info here and there

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 28 Nov 2006 12:09

Raj Malhotra wrote:I am not talking about BFSR but BSR which you told me was N-22.

Again, the BSR is not claimed as Indian anywhere, nor is it being assembled - indigenized from Polish equipment. Its a 2D stand alone import of a ready made system meant as a gapfiller in an Akash battery. It might be license manufactured if need be, or replaced by an Indra-IIPC derivative. But it does not have Indian content as the CAR does.

The CAR or for that matter the SV-2000, are not assembled-indigenized.

Such speculation is unwarranted, and offensive as Arun S previously mentioned since it perpetuates the myth that DRDO or the Indian MIC just imports its units when it has spent substantial time and energy on doing exactly the opposite. Then some stupid journalist picks it up, and it becomes another case of myth becoming "fact".

Anyway will just differ here and move on. The topic on hand is more interesting to say the least and this circular discussion can take place some other time, i suppose

There is nothing to differ, because you can contact the folks involved and get the data. This canard was started by Prasun Sengupta and deserves to die, instead of being alluded to as the source of technology for Indian sensor development.

The same idiot says that we are merely importing Israeli IDAS (a silly acronym which was invented by him) for the LCA PVs without even realizing that, bar the radar, and EW fit all the other systems are already flying on MiG-Jaguar upgrades and the like.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 12:16

But neither does Akash site say it is Polish. As far as offensive assumptions against Drdo goes, then they have given lot of cause for it.

JCage wrote:
Raj Malhotra wrote:I am not talking about BFSR but BSR which you told me was N-22.
Again, the BSR is not claimed as Indian anywhere, nor is it being assembled - indigenized from Polish equipment. Its a 2D stand alone import of a ready made system meant as a gapfiller in an Akash battery. It might be license manufactured if need be, or replaced by an Indra-IIPC derivative. But it does not have Indian content as the CAR does.

The CAR or for that matter the SV-2000, are not assembled-indigenized.

Such speculation is unwarranted, and offensive as Arun S previously mentioned since it perpetuates the myth that DRDO or the Indian MIC just imports its units when it has spent substantial time and energy on doing exactly the opposite. Then some stupid journalist picks it up, and it becomes another case of myth becoming "fact".

Anyway will just differ here and move on. The topic on hand is more interesting to say the least and this circular discussion can take place some other time, i suppose
There is nothing to differ, because you can contact the folks involved and get the data. This canard was started by Prasun Sengupta and deserves to die, instead of being alluded to as the source of technology for Indian sensor development.

The same idiot says that we are merely importing Israeli IDAS (a silly acronym which was invented by him) for the LCA PVs without even realizing that, bar the radar, and EW fit all the other systems are already flying on MiG-Jaguar upgrades and the like.

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 28 Nov 2006 12:16

To get back on topic:

Arun_S wrote:Cross posting from other thread:
Arun_S wrote: An Indian Akash and a long range derivative is very important for Indian defense. The requirement it fulfills are Medium/long range air defense against air breathing aircraft and cruise missiles.

An air breathing Akash is only useful against Badr-1 type very short range BM (range 90km-150Km).

Use of Akash for SRBM/MRBM is only possible if space based missile launch detectors and a grid of very powerful and accurate long range missile are realized, a capability that is far in excess of what US has today. So practically speaking in Indian context not possible/relevant.

Any serious ABM must necessarily be solid fueled rockets with 2 or 3 stage configuration with about 50-80Kg payload capability.

In an Indian context the cost of ABM shot (round) has to be an order or more cheaper than imported ABM rocket round. Thus an Indian rocket design is critical. In this scheme of things I think a maraging cased booster is very appropriate, the second and third stage we can afford to be filament wound composite case.

ABM stand on 3 pillars:
1. Space based launch detectors, and tracking system (optical and Radar)
2. Ground based long range surveillance and tracking radars
3. Interceptor rocket with precision optics and radar.

The first 2 items above require lot of international collaboration to realize a reliable/robust technology and affordable cost sharing. Item 3 with optics and radar that is affordable is also required

All this an expensive proposition, thus collaboration in select ABM parts/components is goodness.

OTOH all the above can change if particle or energy beam based interceptors can be realized. I bow at the alter/platform/pedestal of KALI or AESA, yes sadhana with one or two friends in this temple will be fruitful, if only my friend accepts pagan world view A very loaded proposition.

Just My 2 Cents

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 12:19

And this also makes my posts as 1010. Well I did join BRF in may 1998 rather than 2000 as it says in my profile and some of my post count got lost in software change over, but it has been very interesting time here.

I must start posting IB4TLs more to increase my post count

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Nov 2006 12:22

The AAD launcher demonsterated on tech focus says elevation payload of 3500kg, so can it the weight of Indian ABM missile? around ~1500-2500kg for booster and 500-1000kg for second stage and kill vehicle. But then it will be one of the heaviest ABM (longest ranged missiles?) for atmospheric interception

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 28 Nov 2006 12:25

Raj Malhotra wrote:But neither does Akash site say it is Polish.

DRDO Literature for the BSR, which they have released at several public events, explicitly states that it is a RADWAR unit, meant for Army requirements. Talk to any DRDO person associated with the AKASH project, and they will openly admit as to what is procured externally (the N-22) or what they codeveloped (CARs planar array tech.) and what they did on their own. They give credit where it is due, and dont fudge about the topic.

As far as offensive assumptions against Drdo goes, then they have given lot of cause for it.

Hardly cause for stating that key sensors DRDO develops or fields has to have some foreign hand to it. I do wish that we had some godfather who would hand us the same (Russian anti-stealth radars would be the first on the list!), but it is not so. Indian sensor development has gone via its own tortuous path and deserves to be regarded in its own light, the same as Indian BMs. This is not to say that there has been no foreign assistance- if not for Thales, there would be no BEL, but the vast majority of work on Indian systems has been done locally, which is what I was getting at and deserves to be acknowledged.

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 28 Nov 2006 12:31

Raj Malhotra wrote:The AAD launcher demonsterated on tech focus says elevation payload of 3500kg, so can it the weight of Indian ABM missile? around ~1500-2500kg for booster and 500-1000kg for second stage and kill vehicle. But then it will be one of the heaviest ABM (longest ranged missiles?) for atmospheric interception

http://www.drdo.org/pub/techfocus/aug04/missile15.htm

It says "system payload". It could be for three missiles, not just a single one.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 28 Nov 2006 13:13

Raj Malhotra wrote:The intercept range can be anything from 100-200km as we know the flight time of 110 seconds, max speed 9-12 Mach and say average speed of mach 4-8

Raj: Pls see my ABM presentaion I sent few hrs ago.

So the ABM range is determined by available time to hit AND destroy the attacking missile before it penetrates the defended bubble (determined By hardness of the asset).

And the ability to hit the target is also determined by launching it accurately to the expected kill box. That determination requires ability of the radar to determine target position and velocity with sufficient accurately to accurately determine the attacking missile's trajectory. This often requires radar receiving sufficient Signal to Noise Ratio; meaning when target gets close enough to the radar (that means cutting down available interception time). Longer observation (dwell) time often allows the radar to improve its accuracy. Thus cuing the radar to search the volume of space where missile is anticipated to arrive. Thus the importance of launch detection and tracking its trajectory to best of available accuracy to cue it to available sensors and fuse the available track data to help determine progressively more accurately the trajectory.

Bottom line is ABM effective range is not solely determined by ABM missiles kinetic range.

Just like shotting from a rifle on a foggy day, the bullet can intercept an incoming golf ball, as soon as one can accurately detect and track the golf ball trajectory. Sensitive ears that can cue the eyes to fast moving golf ball in the fog is the key, and then everything depends on a pair of steady hands and good rifle.

JCage · Post by **JCage** » 28 Nov 2006 13:18

Arun, some stuff sent to you as well viz. the topic.

Ramsey · Post by **Ramsey** » 28 Nov 2006 13:23

Arun Sir,
Educate the difference between The Thrust Diverturs,TVC on the Missile and the Gimballed Nozzles.

Kindly an Insight on my previous post.
Thanks

Ramsey · Post by **Ramsey** » 28 Nov 2006 13:34

That is to be expected. The interceptor flies for 38 second and the kill vehicle separates from the booster. But because of hypersonic speed, the missile's heat shield will however emit a thin vapor stream. And any thruster action will also generate a smoke trail. In fact in that video I saw the smoke trail that was helical (before the taget got blown apart); The classic helical exhaust plume is result of thruster firing pattern when missile is on the home(ing) run.
Rejoice for the Law'ed has spoken from the column of smoke.

Just Going through one of your Previous Post I got the clarification of my first one.
Treamoundous Achievement and the only laggards are the Sensors....

Ramsey · Post by **Ramsey** » 28 Nov 2006 13:41

Sensors..... + the BPI's for the layered defences.

Rishi · Post by **Rishi** » 28 Nov 2006 13:57

deleted

Ramsey · Post by **Ramsey** » 28 Nov 2006 14:00

Bahi sahib, I would be happy to see India buy Arrow or Patriot by the hundreds, BUT ONLY IF they are willing to part with the design and code, and for USA, IF THEY also agree to part with code for SM3 boost phase interceptor and Agies Radar

Sir,
I Accept your first part only from the Present Indian economic Point of View.
Where's the other is an technological.

Is.
Sadana=ABL.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 28 Nov 2006 14:09

Hmmm, Just wondering, how come Paki, BBC , CNN etc do not have a single report on this. Are they too shocked by this development or has India managed to create a smokescreen which makes them feel it is nothing significant???

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Nov 2006 14:50

Ingenious! Instead of reinventing the wheel,or rocket,as in this case,our boffins have delivered a very pleasant pre-Christmas gift!. Santa has come early this year and the innovative Prithvi-ABM prototype has opened up new opportunites for us to perfect our very own ABM system.This has perhaps been unavoidable as the cost of acquiring a foreign ABM system for many of the country's cities and metros isprohibitive. I suspect that some of the success has to do with the collaborative projects that we are involved with,Brahmos with Russia and other projects with Israel.

In the case of an ABM system,the key factors are early detection and the kill capability of the inteceptor missile,especially when faced with terminal "wiggly" warheads and dummy warheads too.In the test we are informed that a "Prithvi" hit another "Prithvi".Therefore,the target was another "large" missile that easily showd up on whatever early warning radar system was used.We are also not sure whether the missile (or are we?)was in the boost phase or post boost phase when intercepted. It will be far more difficult to destroy a "cold" warhead that jinks its way onto the target.Moreover,as the Russians have said many a time,even if the US develops a reliable ABM system,they will simply overwhelm it with hundreds of dummy warheads and TGWs.I'm not even talking about "stealthy" missiles here.

One relevant factor is the cost of such an ABM.In the case of our own Prithvi ABM,we can expect some significant savings,as the missile was already developed and commissioned and it is the seeker portion/stage of the missile that is new.The reason for spaking of costs is that even the world's richest country,the US,has been running out of missiles in its war in Iraq.The cost of ABM rounds will be massive.Even Israel could not stop the Hiz rockets fired from Lebanon despite possessing the Arrow ABM.A cunning enemy can always find a way arund a defence.nevertheless,it does represetn a milestone and the eneemy will know that h cannot once the ABM is fuly developed and enters service,it will lessen the sure-shot capability of the enemy's missiles and add to india's confidence in deefnding its own territory from a ballistic missile attack.The acquisition by Pak of Chinese cruise missiles and their technology is as dangerous a threat as much as their ballistic missiles.We need to develop the capability to shoot down BOTH cruise and BMs.There is much work ahead,but the all-important first test and breakthrough has been achieved.Congrats to all involved!

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 28 Nov 2006 15:23

^ Philip,

Qassam rockets are cheap, low-cost weapons. I doubt Israel would have found it economically feasible to employ multi-million dollars screen against Qassam, which are nothing but steel pipes with explosives.

I remember reading an article that Hezbollah, overwhelmed the area with multiple barrages of qassam.

Israel would employ Arrow and PAC batteries against Iran/Syria which threaten Israel with it's Scud derived missiles.

JMT.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 28 Nov 2006 15:50

Defence conference to focus on range technology

In keeping with the time and evolution of range technology, the conference will emphasise on range instrumentation systems, real time software, safety, communication, target presentation, mission planning and management and a host of features related to test ranges, an organiser said.

The 300 participants include top military scientists from India and some from abroad as well as vendors, said an official.

The National Conference on Range Technology (NACORT) - 2006 at the integrated test range (ITR) of Chandipur in Balasore, about 150 km from here, comes a day after India Monday successfully tested a new interceptor rocket - the first step in creating a defence system against incoming ballistic missiles.
'But we will not discuss anything about this interceptor,' ITR director and chairman of the organising committee A.K. Checker told IANS. 'However, if President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam (who inaugurates the conference) wants to speak on this, he may.'

sheer cruelty.. host a conference of missile men at the ITR, one day after a successful ABM test and have no mention of the interceptor.
Folk will be straining to hear every syllable of Kalam's speech...

sohamn · Post by **sohamn** » 28 Nov 2006 15:58

i have a big doubt. How can they use a ballistic missile to counter another ballistic missile and used as abm shield? Generally a ballistic missile has a very short and fast powered flight and then it has a longer ballistic flight which is not a powered flight. During this stage some maneuverations are done by On board actuators which control the RV. But this has limited capability and cannot move like a cruise missile. Generally all other ABM missiles like Arrow/Patriot are solid powered cruise missiles which are similar to SAMs. So can anyone explain to me what kind of interceptor misile is this. Is it a prithvi or a missile similar to Patriot?

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 28 Nov 2006 16:02

The interceptor had two stages

And is unlike the BM. So make your conclusions.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 28 Nov 2006 16:17

sohamn wrote:i have a big doubt. How can they use a ballistic missile to counter another ballistic missile and used as abm shield? Generally a ballistic missile has a very short and fast powered flight and then it has a longer ballistic flight which is not a powered flight. During this stage some maneuverations are done by On board actuators which control the RV. But this has limited capability and cannot move like a cruise missile. Generally all other ABM missiles like Arrow/Patriot are solid powered cruise missiles which are similar to SAMs. So can anyone explain to me what kind of interceptor misile is this. Is it a prithvi or a missile similar to Patriot?

Read the full thread.. you will find the answer..

Ajay K · Post by **Ajay K** » 28 Nov 2006 16:27

This photo can in no means be a Prithvi. Must be a new kind of missile with two stages.

http://www.drdo.org/pub/techfocus/aug04/aad_mobile.jpg