Indian Missile Technology Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 29 Mar 2008 06:39

p_saggu wrote:So does the 40% figure account for the range, given the dimensions of the K-15?

Yes. Smaller motor have other overheads so their mass fraction is not as high as bigger stages. So for Sagarika I assume a conservative 0.85 mass fraction (compared to 0.91 for Agni's booster) to take into account other inert parts.

So 1,000 Km with 1,000 Kg is chick feed for Sagarika. Range for 350kg or 170 kg throw weight for 200 Kt TN or 20 Kt kamal pushpa is 2,000 Km and 2,500 km respectively ;), so says this Yindu Chankian.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7876
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 29 Mar 2008 07:59

Not bad for a first SLBM - Polaris range, modern (200kt) warhead yield. Should cause significant takleef in certain quarters...

Imagine what the Agni-3 SL variant will cause....

:twisted:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 29 Mar 2008 08:13

ShibaPJ wrote:NR,
HTK was rumoured by DDM as one of the items offered; from US side press releases, it has been PAC-3, something which has been bettered by AAD/ PAD test specs.

Do we seriously believe, US will share HTK tech, when it sanctions obsolete chip exports to India?


I am not concerned when it comes to big missiles. Glad to see some techs under the wraps until they are ready for the show.

I for one would like to see it taken to the next step. US should not even think of offering any thing.

ShibaPJ
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21

Postby ShibaPJ » 29 Mar 2008 08:28

Arun_S wrote:.. So 1,000 Km with 1,000 Kg is chick feed for Sagarika. Range for 350kg or 170 kg throw weight for 200 Kt TN or 20 Kt kamal pushpa is 2,000 Km and 2,500 km respectively ;), so says this Yindu Chankian.

Wow... Yeh Jingo Khush Hua. :) Thanks, Arun.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 29 Mar 2008 10:53

Why is that we assume that US will give tech rather the product for chewing our pockets? Even the russians would not do so, that cheap., besides certain strategic technology will always be wanting to be controled only by the super powers.

No matter, what we may and what we buy, our ABM r&d should go on., and who in the world feels sick about hurting Unkil strategy or chinki-paki stunts.

None stopping us, on our path to achievement.. The only stoppers are our own baboos and their firangi dosts.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Postby Austin » 29 Mar 2008 12:06

Arun_S wrote:So 1,000 Km with 1,000 Kg is chick feed for Sagarika. Range for 350kg or 170 kg throw weight for 200 Kt TN or 20 Kt kamal pushpa is 2,000 Km and 2,500 km respectively ;), so says this Yindu Chankian.


Since ATV is for Nuclear Deterrent , 1000 kg conventional warhead doesnt make sense , it will be ~ 350Kg TN with ~ 2000 Km range . Not bad for our first attempt to have credible underwater deterrent

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Postby Shankar » 29 Mar 2008 15:11

So 1,000 Km with 1,000 Kg is chick feed for Sagarika. Range for 350kg or 170 kg throw weight for 200 Kt TN or 20 Kt kamal pushpa is 2,000 Km and 2,500 km respectively Wink, so says this Yindu Chankian.


makes sense -sagarika was i guess a tomahawk type with more advanced avionics and maybe range . even with 500 kg conventional it should touch 1500 km plus

ranganathan
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Postby ranganathan » 29 Mar 2008 15:15

tomahawk is cruise sagarika is supposedly ballistic.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 29 Mar 2008 17:36

SaiK wrote:Why is that we assume that US will give tech rather the product for chewing our pockets? Even the russians would not do so, that cheap., besides certain strategic technology will always be wanting to be controled only by the super powers.

No matter, what we may and what we buy, our ABM r&d should go on., and who in the world feels sick about hurting Unkil strategy or chinki-paki stunts.

None stopping us, on our path to achievement.. The only stoppers are our own baboos and their firangi dosts.


Spoken like a true BRiete.

BUT, one has to wonder what the Rahuls of today are fed. Looking at the funding in the nuclear field one has to be get up twice every night to check if the furnace is still OK. At times I think the techies should ask for funding for the wrong thing and route it to the right stuff.

Oh well.............

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Postby Shankar » 29 Mar 2008 18:19

tomahawk is cruise sagarika is supposedly ballistic.


Correct but i was referring to the concept behind the development or rather on which operating missile sagarika was modeled after

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7876
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 30 Mar 2008 07:01

Did Agni meet target?
Even though the test was a ‘success’ for the defence scientists as claimed by them, the missile reportedly couldn’t travel the pre-designated distance.

‘The target was set for 700 km, but the missile covered about 650 km within 480 seconds by travelling along the pre-determined trajectory,’ said a source quoting the post-mission analysis report.

While it happened only due to some lack in the fitment, three of the four tracking systems — which include electro optics tracking system (EOTS), CCTV, radars and telemetry — didn’t yield the desired result. Sources said it was the radar stations that could provide data for the post-mission analysis.

However, no authority from the Army or the local defence base confirmed the fault. Despite the minor hitches, the test was a ‘copy book’ launch. Contacted, ITR Director S.P. Dash denied the failure of the three tracking systems. ‘All the tracking systems provided data as expected and the mission was successful,’ he said.

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Postby sunilUpa » 30 Mar 2008 07:07

^^Gerard, that story has been posted earlier. express is the only one to report that, and no follow on stories either.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 31 Mar 2008 05:37

Austin wrote:
Arun_S wrote:So 1,000 Km with 1,000 Kg is chick feed for Sagarika. Range for 350kg or 170 kg throw weight for 200 Kt TN or 20 Kt kamal pushpa is 2,000 Km and 2,500 km respectively ;), so says this Yindu Chankian.


Since ATV is for Nuclear Deterrent , 1000 kg conventional warhead doesnt make sense , it will be ~ 350Kg TN with ~ 2000 Km range . Not bad for our first attempt to have credible underwater deterrent

Don't forget ~600Kg 150kt "pushp" for Spirituality-forsaken half-wits that doubt readiness of Indian TN.

OTOH it may be worthwhile to speculate the next growth milestone of Sagarika with a 1.7 ton upper stage if the sub has room for that length. The TN will be imparted 5.2km/sec velocity and reach of ~4,000 Km onlee. The Yindu mizzles are getting long legs.

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 31 Mar 2008 09:14

Surprising that CDI (Center for Defense Information) is taking Bharat-Rakshak so seriously, and trampling their brother in arms NP-Ayothulla Richard Speier [size=59](the author of
“[url=http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_03/MARCH-IndiaFeature.asp]U.S. Aid to India: On a “Glide Pathâ€

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Postby vivek_ahuja » 31 Mar 2008 10:32

Arun,

I have a question for you: What kind of internal grain design are you using for the Agni-I missile in your analysis?

I have been doing some rudimentary analysis of my own, and the downrange values, altitude and time of flight all check out to a reasonable degree of accuracy even with the simplified model I created. However, the analysis is highly dependent on the kind of internal grain design being utilized.

In my model, selecting one of the designs means that I have to play around with other parameters to get the values back to the required limits. At the moment I have fixed the program to calculate the trajectory with a non-realistic constant thrust design and moved beyond it to a simple CPG (Circular Perforated Grain) design, and have got the solutions with both. Working on the Internal Burning Star design at the moment. The end burn and tubular designs obviously wouldn't work based on flight times and the HTPB/AL/AP fuel, so those have been neglected.

Can you provide some enlightenment here?

-Vivek

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 31 Mar 2008 11:27

vivek_ahuja wrote:Arun,

I have a question for you: What kind of internal grain design are you using for the Agni-I missile in your analysis?

I have been doing some rudimentary analysis of my own, and the downrange values, altitude and time of flight all check out to a reasonable degree of accuracy even with the simplified model I created. However, the analysis is highly dependent on the kind of internal grain design being utilized.

In my model, selecting one of the designs means that I have to play around with other parameters to get the values back to the required limits. At the moment I have fixed the program to calculate the trajectory with a non-realistic constant thrust design and moved beyond it to a simple CPG (Circular Perforated Grain) design, and have got the solutions with both. Working on the Internal Burning Star design at the moment. The end burn and tubular designs obviously wouldn't work based on flight times and the HTPB/AL/AP fuel, so those have been neglected.

Can you provide some enlightenment here?

-Vivek

You can download the ROCKSIM simulator from BR's Space section and and tryout the simulation yourself, and of course read the user manual, and you would know the stage configuration model of ROCKSIM.

BTW ROCKSIM is now owned and maintained by Mechanical Engineering Department of a Madan Mohan Malaviya Engineering Collage, Gorakhpur, UP for educational and research use. I have their permission to host it on BR website.

In summary, ROCKSIM allows motor stage to specify overdrive thrust (as % of average thrust) and period of thrust overdrive(as % of total stage burntime). The thrust transition exponentially (to describe a "S" curve). So it allows quite faithful simulation of star grained motor, but it does not as faithfully describe thrust profile of circular core burn.

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Postby vivek_ahuja » 31 Mar 2008 12:45

Arun_S wrote:You can download the ROCKSIM simulator from BR's Space section and and tryout the simulation yourself, and of course read the user manual, and you would know the stage configuration model of ROCKSIM.

BTW ROCKSIM is now owned and maintained by Mechanical Engineering Department of a Madan Mohan Malaviya Engineering Collage, Gorakhpur, UP for educational and research use. I have their permission to host it on BR website.

In summary, ROCKSIM allows motor stage to specify overdrive thrust (as % of average thrust) and period of thrust overdrive(as % of total stage burntime). The thrust transition exponentially (to describe a "S" curve). So it allows quite faithful simulation of star grained motor, but it does not as faithfully describe thrust profile of circular core burn.


Noted.

I had considered using ROCKSIM beforehand, but the model I have created was in fact originally meant for use by the undergraduate students. So all that work was lying around idle and I decided to build up on it.

As such, what I am basically heading towards is the skeletal structure that I presume ROCKSIM is built up on.

Regarding the grain designs, I have the different Phases for the Star grain and short and long spoke wagon wheel designs already programmed into the code, and they seem to be working properly. The Thrust profiles are depicted properly, and the trajectory built up on it.

However, what I was asking was that since the first step of the Agni-I has a 1m Diameter, and the fuel used is HTPB/AL/AP, the rate of burn in a radial direction as a function of chamber pressure (in return a function of the burn area) for these different grain designs are giving a smaller burn time for step-1 than 49 seconds and yet a total flight time of around 9 minutes for the entire vehicle, assuming a limit on the value of the outer diameter of the cylinder.

It was on this note that I was attempting to figure out what kind of internal grain design could be present within that casing. With a CP grain I am ending up with a burn time of around 42 seconds and all other flight parameters matching.

Can you elaborate on what kind of grain design is being used in the Agni-I?

Thanks in advance.

-Vivek

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 31 Mar 2008 13:35

Let us converse offline.

raja_m
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 20
Joined: 22 Apr 2008 09:33
Location: Bhulok

Postby raja_m » 22 Apr 2008 10:14

Hi,

My first post here. I found an interesting link from cdi.org on indian MIRV and indian space programme.

http://www.cdi.org/PDFs/IndiaMIRV.pdf

Partial Posting

Despite some differences, integration of satellites and their orbital dispensation, and integration of multiple warheads and their delivery vehicles are often treated as though they are identical processes. This paper first briefly looks at the extent to which satellite integration and dispensing capabilities assisted in the development of Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) technology in the United States. It then will demonstrate that concerns about India-U.S. civilian space cooperation leading to India’s development of a MIRV capability are misguided. India already possesses incipient capabilities to MIRV its missiles, but this does not mean that it can immediately secure a full-fledged MIRV capability, because there are a range of conditions that would affect its development of MIRV technology. As a cautionary note, the detailed effort here is intended to outline what India is potentially capable of doing; therefore the following analysis should not be construed as meaning that India will or should do the things laid out.

raja_m
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 20
Joined: 22 Apr 2008 09:33
Location: Bhulok

Postby raja_m » 22 Apr 2008 11:17

More on MIRV :

Source - http://www.ciaonet.org/olj/sa/sa_sep00kag01.html

Admiral Menon has estimated that the modernised Chinese arsenal would comprise 596 warheads after 2010. Up to 2030, he suggests that an all-missile, land-based force should comprise five regiments of 12 missiles each (with survivability being ensured by concealment and rail-garrison mobility) and fifty percent of them should have up to four independently targetable warheads each. He feels that these would suffice to withstand a first strike by China with the maximum number of warheads that China may decide to launch and yet have enough missiles remaining to inflict unacceptable damage. He feels that some hardened silos may need to be provided "if the rate of degradation of the rail garrison missile force is judged to be too rapid." Against Pakistan, he proposes a force of 200 cruise missiles, 36 of them nuclear tipped, as cruise missiles are the least provocative. He visualises the "handing over of Indian deterrence from the land-based force to the sea-based force... over a ten year period... (to be) completed by 2030" and suggests a nuclear force of six SSBNs, each armed with 12 SLBMs. Each SSBN will carry at least 12 missiles and, in his view, as India has MIRV (multiple, independently targetable re-entry vehicles) ambitions, each missile could carry up to ten 250 to 400 Kt nuclear warheads. "Such a force would give India a warhead strength of 216 (6 x MIRV) in a pre-launch scenario and probably 380 warheads in a scenario with adequate strategic warning and with five boats deployed. This could be the entire Indian deterrence till the middle of the 21st century."

It is indeed intriguing that Admiral Menon does not visualise a need for air-delivered nuclear warheads for the Indian deterrent. He writes: 73 "With opposing airfields separated by barely 20 minutes flying time, it would be a case of use-them-or-lose-them for Pakistan, a fear reinforced by the threat of capture by armoured forces, in a country handicapped by lack of strategic depth. An airdropped bomb is perhaps the farthest from a second strike weapon on the Subcontinent. It contributes nothing to deterrence stability and, if at all the weapon is discussed in a worsening crisis, it can only be in reference to a first strike." Besides their dual-use capability and the "sunk costs" already incurred in the acquisition of nuclear capable bombers/fighter-bombers, it must be remembered that unlike ballistic missiles, aircraft are recallable even after they have taken off with nuclear weapons on board. They present a cost-effective solution to India's immediate deterrence requirements till the Agni-I and Agni-II series of ballistic missiles can be made fully operational. As for the proclivity to use-them-or-lose-them, the analogy is suggestive of flippant nuclear decision-making. There is no reason to believe that the Pakistani leadership, military or civilian, will act irrationally and set off nuclear exchanges merely because they would be worried about their forward airfields being put temporarily out of commission by the Indian Air Force. India will need air-delivered nuclear warheads in its arsenal not only against Pakistan, but also against China for a long time to come as they offer a here-and-now solution and are akin to a bird in hand.

To base the entire Indian nuclear force only on SSBNs would not be appropriate for the following reasons:

* Flexibility of targeting options for targeting individual targets with a variety of weapons platforms to achieve better strike assurance would not be available.

* The problems of communicating with submerged submarines are well known.

* It is becoming increasingly easier to locate and track submarines and by 2020-30 advanced navies such as the US Navy may be able to map and track the position of every submarine in any of the oceans.

* The Indian hinterland provides adequate depth and area to disperse widely India's ballistic missiles and the rail and road networks provide ample opportunity to keep moving the missiles at random, though with attendant problems of command and control and missile launch inaccuracies.

*The force structure would lack inter-Services balance, which in itself is not desirable.

Bharat Karnad follows what has been dubbed a 'maximalist' approach to nuclear deterrence and strongly advocates the need for megaton-class thermonuclear weapons in the Indian arsenal. He assumes that the primary and secondary target lists could contain about 60 locations that need to be hit. In order to ensure that each of these targets can be destroyed with an acceptable assurance level so that deterrence is credible, he recommends the targeting of each with four nuclear weapons, each of which has a two mile (approximately three km) CEP (circular error probable—a measure of the accuracy of delivery; it denotes the distance from the point of impact to the centre of the target as the radius of the circle within which, on average, 50 percent of the missiles aimed at the target will fall). Bharat Karnad suggests that India's nuclear arsenal be gradually built up over a period of three decades to a total of 328 nuclear warheads.

The breakdown of the final figure of 328 nuclear warheads and the proposed delivery systems suggested by Bharat Karnad is as under:

* 4 x SSBNs with 48 SLBMs (presumably with a single warhead each).
* 40 x SU-30s with 40 x NGBs and 40 x N-ASMs (maximally strategic) and 30 x SU-30s with 30 x NGBs and 30 x N-ASMs (minimally tactical).
* 25 x ICBMs.
* 40 x IRBMs.
* 25 x ADMs.
* 50 reserve warheads.

babbupandey
BRFite
Posts: 180
Joined: 15 Jan 2008 16:53

Postby babbupandey » 24 Apr 2008 21:01

Hi Everyone!
I was wondering if the test firing of Agni 3 is still on? There were reports that it will be test fired in end of April.
There were certain issues with turtles, but that should be the last reason to cause delay.
Forgive me for wondering aloud, whether our government is playing the good poodle role for Unkil... :roll:

Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Postby Tilak » 11 May 2008 22:32

X-Posted from India's R&D thread:

IAF inducts the Akash missile
Sunday, 11 May , 2008, 19:48

[quote]New Delhi: The Indian Air Force (IAF) has decided to induct two squadrons of the indigenous Akash Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM).

The all-weather, multi-target missile was accepted by the IAF recently after nine successful field trials, including a ripple fire in the electronic clutter, according to Dr Prahlada, Chief Controller in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

Prahlada is quoted in the coming issue of India Strategic defence magazine as saying that although the missile was declared ready for induction after a December 2007 test, some fine-tuning was required and the project is now being handed over to public and private sector industries for manufacturing the required numbers.

In all the tests, he said, accuracy of the system was established.

Besides the public sector Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL), Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL) and Electronics Corporation of India (ECIL), the private sector Larsen and Toubro and Tata Power could be involved in its manufacture.

The [b]army has also expressed willingness to accept the Akash, but some modification in the launch platform for better “mobility and gradeabilityâ€

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Postby arun » 12 May 2008 09:24


Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Postby Arun_S » 12 May 2008 12:57



Dr Tessy Thomas and all women in DRDO ---- Zindabad.

Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Postby Juggi G » 12 May 2008 14:23

There is a little Foto in today's IndianExpress Featuring Seven Indian Missile Women

Image

Some of the women DRDO scientists pose with their male counterparts moments before the successfull launch of Agni-III, the long range ballistic missile, from the Wheeler Island.
PTI Photo

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Postby Raj Malhotra » 12 May 2008 19:58

My understanding was that a squadron has 2 batteries for IAF and 4 batteries for Army. I hope that the reporter has not multiplied the order by factor of ten.


[quote="Tilak"]X-Posted from India's R&D thread:

IAF inducts the Akash missile
Sunday, 11 May , 2008, 19:48

[quote]New Delhi: The Indian Air Force (IAF) has decided to induct two squadrons of the indigenous Akash Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM).

The all-weather, multi-target missile was accepted by the IAF recently after nine successful field trials, including a ripple fire in the electronic clutter, according to Dr Prahlada, Chief Controller in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

Prahlada is quoted in the coming issue of India Strategic defence magazine as saying that although the missile was declared ready for induction after a December 2007 test, some fine-tuning was required and the project is now being handed over to public and private sector industries for manufacturing the required numbers.

In all the tests, he said, accuracy of the system was established.

Besides the public sector Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL), Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL) and Electronics Corporation of India (ECIL), the private sector Larsen and Toubro and Tata Power could be involved in its manufacture.

The [b]army has also expressed willingness to accept the Akash, but some modification in the launch platform for better “mobility and gradeabilityâ€

bala
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Postby bala » 12 May 2008 20:07

xPost

IISC develops technology for increasing range of missiles

Bangalore (PTI) A team from the Indian Institute of Science (IISC) here has developed a innovative technology for increasing the range of Agni type of missiles without additional cost.

The team headed by Prof K P J Reddy from the department of Aerospace Engineering, IISC, achieved the feat by reducing the drag of the missile encountered during its flight, an IISC release said here on Monday.

The drag is the main phenomenon which dictates the range of the missile for a given amount of fuel as the thrust generated by the rocket engine must compensate for the drag encountered by the missile in its path.

Existing techniques for reducing the drag force involve addition of an aerospike at the nose the missile or blowing a supersonic gas jet from the missile nose tip.

Implementation of these techniques involves major modification to the missile structure and hence cannot be applied to existing missiles which are in stockpile.

The new technology developed by Prof Reddy's group involves a radically different technique in the sense that no additional device or power was required for hypersonic flight.

The technique is to coat the nose portion of the missile with a thin layer of material such as chromium. This metal evaporates due to heating of the missile nose during its hypersonic flight and the evaporated metal particles in atomic form react exothermically with oxygen atoms surrounding the body to release additional heat into the air in front of the missile.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6823
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Postby shyamd » 12 May 2008 21:41

India can now fire missiles from under water

[quote]The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), the country's premier military research organisation, Monday said it had successfully acquired the technology to launch missiles from the ocean depths, becoming the world's fifth country to do so.

[b]The acknowledgement came when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gave away the performance excellence award 2007 to A.K Chakrabarti, under whose leadership a team of 86 scientists achieved the success under this project called K-15.

“The team has designed and developed a state-of-the-art missile system with the capability of being launched from sub-surface (underwater) environment,â€

sauravjha
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 14:11

Postby sauravjha » 12 May 2008 22:07

evaporates due to heating of the missile nose during its hypersonic flight and the evaporated metal particles in atomic form react exothermically with oxygen atoms surrounding the body to release additional heat into the air in front of the missile.



pardon my ignorance , but this sounds like some kind of super-cavitation.

satyarthi
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 08:50

Postby satyarthi » 12 May 2008 22:47

sauravjha wrote:
evaporates due to heating of the missile nose during its hypersonic flight and the evaporated metal particles in atomic form react exothermically with oxygen atoms surrounding the body to release additional heat into the air in front of the missile.



pardon my ignorance , but this sounds like some kind of super-cavitation.

super cavitation in air??

sauravjha
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 14:11

Postby sauravjha » 12 May 2008 23:30

all I am saying is that it sounds like it's analogue in air. that is the principles may be somewhat similar. again I am no fluid mechanist, jut a random thought.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7876
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 12 May 2008 23:38

Powered by a turbojet, it can carry a 500-kg payload. It is 8.5 metres long and about a metre in diameter.

satyarthi
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 08:50

Postby satyarthi » 12 May 2008 23:40

well, supercavitation surrounds the body with a bubble containing vapour, which is lower density than the surrounding fluid.

An exothermic reaction involving chromium and oxygen can reduce the density of air surrounding the body.

So in a way, there is some similarity.

Ananth
BRFite
Posts: 346
Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Ananth » 12 May 2008 23:55

Gerard wrote:
Powered by a turbojet, it can carry a 500-kg payload. It is 8.5 metres long and about a metre in diameter.


Confusing the matters further. Turbojet means K-15 is a CM not a BM.

Avid
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Location: Earth

Postby Avid » 13 May 2008 00:11

Ananth wrote:
Gerard wrote:
Powered by a turbojet, it can carry a 500-kg payload. It is 8.5 metres long and about a metre in diameter.


Confusing the matters further. Turbojet means K-15 is a CM not a BM.


The confusion continues because DDM is repeating copy-paste from earlier story about K-15 (from the time of testing)

Rahul Shukla
BRFite
Posts: 565
Joined: 20 Feb 2007 23:27
Location: On a roller-coaster.

Postby Rahul Shukla » 13 May 2008 00:16

sauravjha wrote:...pardon my ignorance , but this sounds like some kind of super-cavitation.

Click --> Ablation

sauravjha
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 14:11

Postby sauravjha » 13 May 2008 00:55

yeah , here you move from air to plasma

and for good measure

http://rclsgi.eng.ohio-state.edu/~adamo ... Plasma.pdf
those plasma stealth studies come in handy for speed enhancement as well

prao
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 75
Joined: 14 Feb 2005 00:20

K-15 photos?

Postby prao » 13 May 2008 06:37

Have any photos of the K-15 been released? Any reliable info whether it's a CM or a BM? Arun, do you have any (near future) plans to populate the Sagarika bit on the B-R pages?

Prao

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7876
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 13 May 2008 07:24

1.0m diameter is too large for a SLCM

Abhisham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 09 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Postby Abhisham » 13 May 2008 08:16

Raj Malhotra wrote:My understanding was that a squadron has 2 batteries for IAF and 4 batteries for Army. I hope that the reporter has not multiplied the order by factor of ten.


Well the reporter might have got confused batteries with number of launchers. As per the configurations on akashsam.com one squadron should have 3-4 batteries each with 4 launchers, 1 BCC, 1 BLR, 1 BSR.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests