Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 May 2008 07:00

sivab wrote:We are looking forward to developing Agni-5 missiles with multiple warheads.
The present missile system carries only one warhead. The advanced stage of Agni-5 will be capable of carrying three warheadsthat could hit the given target or the set of different targets with precision,"

So three warheads it is. Exactly as predicted by the chanakyan SDRE Arun_S saar in this forum. A question for Arun_S saar. So going by the dimensions and weight it is FBF ?

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 29 May 2008 11:51

I did not find the weight part. Could you point point out what wt is stated?
3 Payloads confign on A-3/5 will IMHO be a boosted fission variety.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 29 May 2008 14:43

KSubramanian wrote: Agni propels India in big league
Agni propels India in big league
The Agni-V would derive most of its sub-systems from Agni-II{???}.

Should have been Agni-3. roman numerals are confusing onlee.

But they would need sufficient scaling. Also on the anvil is a plan to develop Agni-IV as an intermediate step between Agni-III and Agni-V{according to other articles there is not going to be an Agni IV but we are directly skipping to Agni V, Is this a case of chankian indian scientists or a well intentioned but inadequately informed journo? }

Agni IV ready to take off

BALASORE: If everything goes according to defence scientistsâ€™ plans, nuke-capable and most powerful longest range missile Agni-IV will in Indiaâ€™s arsenal soon.
-----------
â€œThis 5,000-km range missile has already been developed. The missile will be tested from the Wheeler Island only after scientists get the government nod, which could be anytime this year,â€

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 29 May 2008 14:52

http://in.rediff.com/news/2008/may/29ber.htm

Its missile related...

But why is EADS involved if everything is indigenous? Why cant we market it ourselves? Or is it the case that it comes from SDRE so it has to be bad, so lets get EADS for respectability?

ranganathan · Post by **ranganathan** » 29 May 2008 15:05

Is this Missile Launch detection system same as RWR? I thought India had indigenous RWR's.

mandrake · Post by **mandrake** » 29 May 2008 15:13

ranganathan wrote:Is this Missile Launch detection system same as RWR? I thought India had indigenous RWR's.

These are the MAWS sensors, previously we used to have ones IIRC imported from Sweden with our own complete passive detection suit which comprises of Tarang 2 etc.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 29 May 2008 21:09

Actually EADs is providing with UV based sensor and we are using it to build a full fledged system [MAWS] for purpose of detecting missile launch etc..

Its a JV between EADS DE and DRDO DARE. System will be manufactured by Alpha Design Technologies in Bangalore.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 May 2008 22:57

Someone had an interesting question regarding DRDO's missiles. For the same dimensions, weights there is quite a difference in performance as measured by range and payloads.

So what are the factors?

The biggest would be the structural technology used as indicated by the mass fraction.
Next would be the Isp of the fuel used.
Off course DRDO might be testing to be below the true range.

Then there are the SDRE factors which we wont go into.

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 29 May 2008 23:46

FWIW
A caller asked the same question to Mr Avinash Chander, R.N.Agarwal on a program on Lok Sabha channel (saw it couple of weeks back) something like "For the same weight and dimension american missile have longer range". Mr R.N.Agarwal replied that missiles are made for one's needs and Agni-3 gives perfectly what we need.

Also when Maj Gen Mehta who was part of panel said something about "we are still years away from deployment of Agni-3", Mr Avinash Chander said that the last test of Agni-3 involved the whole strategic command and the missile is ready for induction.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 30 May 2008 07:35

Missile warning system: India to start production

Amazing IE condescended to report +ve stiff abt DRDO. Times are a changin'.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 May 2008 08:45

A Sharma wrote:FWIW
A caller asked the same question to Mr Avinash Chander, R.N.Agarwal on a program on Lok Sabha channel (saw it couple of weeks back) something like "For the same weight and dimension american missile have longer range". Mr R.N.Agarwal replied that missiles are made for one's needs and Agni-3 gives perfectly what we need.

Also when Maj Gen Mehta who was part of panel said something about "we are still years away from deployment of Agni-3", Mr Avinash Chander said that the last test of Agni-3 involved the whole strategic command and the missile is ready for induction.

See the caller asked a perfectly legitimate question and got a typical RC type response. No one is saying that Agony is not what India needs. The days of technological ignorance is going away.

To the other factors I would add Indian payloads have growth margin.

Abhisham · Post by **Abhisham** » 30 May 2008 09:20

vsudhir wrote:Missile warning system: India to start production

Amazing IE condescended to report +ve stiff abt DRDO. Times are a changin'.

The above is mainly for rotary and wide bodies aircrafts, whatever happened to integrating MAWS to our fighter fleet.

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 30 May 2008 12:36

Abhisham wrote:
vsudhir wrote:Missile warning system: India to start production

Amazing IE condescended to report +ve stiff abt DRDO. Times are a changin'.
The above is mainly for rotary and wide bodies aircrafts, whatever happened to integrating MAWS to our fighter fleet.

Some details that are not present in the express india report posted here.

Deccan Herald
Fri, May 30,2008
Page No.9

EADS has so far supplied 24 out of a total of 36 sensors for integration with the Indian Air Force helicopters and wide-bodied aircraft.

A version for fighter aircraft is currently under development. Under the pact signed last year, EADS and the Defence Avionics Research Establishment(DARE) of DRDO agreed to jointly develop the missile warning system based on EADS sensor called MILDS AN/AAR-60.

The system is a passive imaging sensor device for helicopters and bigger transport aircraft to detect the radiation signature that is emitted from an approaching hostile missile exhaust plume. It's key features include high angular accuracy, fast reaction and high warning time.

jinishans · Post by **jinishans** » 31 May 2008 01:18

Tanaji wrote:http://in.rediff.com/news/2008/may/29ber.htm

Its missile related...

But why is EADS involved if everything is indigenous? Why cant we market it ourselves? Or is it the case that it comes from SDRE so it has to be bad, so lets get EADS for respectability?

Dear, whether you got it thru Tech transfer / you steal it / bought it, if it's designed & produced in a particular country, then they call it indigenous. Even US or Russia for that matter is no exception to this. US got all materials from UK for their Manhattan project, Russia got Fighter Jet engines from Germ. after WW2. Now, it's going around in net that China got J10 thru Israel. Pak. got all missiles from China. All these guys got these technology from other countries and call it as indigenous only. Nothing wrong in it.

How you got it is immaterial, what you got it and whatever you got it is superior or not is the most important in Today's world.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 May 2008 17:38

I was wondering instead of building A2AT with a new high beta RV of RV-MK4 type , will it be a smart idea to actually MIRV A2AT with 3-6 MIRV of 15kt each ?

what is the point of going for an optimum RV with a single 150 Kt boosted fission device when we can mirv it ?

Considering Agni are moving towards that direction , wouldn't MIRVing A2-AT will be a natural progression

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 01 Jun 2008 00:16

Austin ji, that is an interesting thought. the 1.2m dia does lend itself to small diameter weapons.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 01 Jun 2008 09:20

One thing is sure that A2AT will be much cheaper compared to its fat cousins, and lighter weight is a definite asset. Mass production will make it a very versatile weapon.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Jun 2008 10:02

Arun , I was thinking of RV mk5 for counter force target on A2AT , do you think it makes sense to MIRV A2AT with RV MK5 ?

ranganathan · Post by **ranganathan** » 01 Jun 2008 10:03

Arun_S wrote:One thing is sure that A2AT will be much cheaper compared to its fat cousins, and lighter weight is a definite asset. Mass production will make it a very versatile weapon.

The weight is alright but isn't the length a matter of concern? At nearly 21m it cannot be carried on road like A-3 or Topol-M. Indian railway coaches are 23 m long (about) which barely leaves any space for other accessories.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 01 Jun 2008 10:57

ranganathan wrote:The weight is alright but isn't the length a matter of concern? At nearly 21m it cannot be carried on road like A-3 or Topol-M. Indian railway coaches are 23 m long (about) which barely leaves any space for other accessories.

One bogie has the missile and the C&C is in another bogie. So for the bogie which contains only the missile, 2M is a lot of clearance space for the TEL.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 01 Jun 2008 19:43

As we saw in the video of the Agni-2 rail mobility trial, covert transport of the Agni-2 by the rail network is not a problem.

ranganathan · Post by **ranganathan** » 01 Jun 2008 19:55

The video showed an open carriage. Has anyone seen videos of agni-2 being fired from a closed carriage? Like these
http://youtube.com/watch?v=i8hVbKtgNZI&feature=related

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Jun 2008 00:29

Open carriage?
You are confusing the missile tests with the rail mobility tests.

ranganathan · Post by **ranganathan** » 02 Jun 2008 03:47

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SxQtJ6eu4c

I have only seen agni on open flat beds like in this video. Do you have any pics which shows an operational agni-2 which is not open and exposed to naked eye?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Jun 2008 04:03

Because of concerns expressed here about their content, kashsoldier pulled the youtube video of the Agni-2 rail mobility tests (the disguised missile TEL and command bogies moving as part of a goods train).

ranganathan · Post by **ranganathan** » 02 Jun 2008 04:22

I see. must have missed it somehow. Thanks.

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 02 Jun 2008 05:38

Gerard wrote:Because of concerns expressed here about their content, kashsoldier pulled the youtube video of the Agni-2 rail mobility tests (the disguised missile TEL and command bogies moving as part of a goods train).

I would recommend that you check YouTube again. I can't access YouTube from my current location, but the last time I checked, it was there. (And this was after BRF members said the video had been pulled.) Kashsoldier took it off and then put it back on. I recommend the video: the technology displayed is extremely impressive.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 02 Jun 2008 14:20

Austin wrote:Arun , I was thinking of RV mk5 for counter force target on A2AT , do you think it makes sense to MIRV A2AT with RV MK5 ?

Given the long range of the A2-AT, I think counter force engagement deep into enemy heartland are plausible, specially against target that are gross overkill to be peppered by A3's crate that delivers by dozen.

One should however not overlook A2AT's conventional warhead role, to kick out Chinese from Tibet. Ability to take out the far flunged mil airfields, transportation pinch/nodes and depots is an important function.

sauravjha · Post by **sauravjha** » 02 Jun 2008 15:02

I am more concerned about the A2-At's deployment than its capability. the Chinese continue to have a superior BM capability than us and they might try to shut us out in the event of a conflict. the A2-At is rail mobile and for it to truly serve as a conventional weapon (flying = response time) , it needs to be closer to the conflict zone then at present. basically, insufficient development of railways in certain obvious areas has curtailed the effectiveness of our conventional BM capability.

ranganathan · Post by **ranganathan** » 02 Jun 2008 15:34

The A2(AT) as per Arun has a range of more than 4000 km for 1500 kg. Its safe to assume with 1000 kg payload it can do 5000 kg. Now distance from
mumbai to Beijing 4875 km and to shanghai 5046 Km. What makes you thing the Agni-2 (AT) has to be in tawang to target these cities? A2 essentially covers the whole of china. Heck from calcutta an ordinary A2 should be able to hit beijing. India just needs to ensure we have enough numbers on ready to fire mode.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Jun 2008 15:37

Arun_S wrote:One should however not overlook A2AT's conventional warhead role, to kick out Chinese from Tibet. Ability to take out the far flunged mil airfields, transportation pinch/nodes and depots is an important function.

This conventional role for IRBM/ICBM class missile is something which has been talked about by many countries , but so far no one has gone that far.

May be its just not cost effective and secondly any such missile attack by a country , could result in wrongly getting misinterpreted as N missile strike , leading to counter stirke.

Such missile probably has greater value in hitting Terrorist targets or countries which have no N weapons , but are probably beyond the reach of aircraft or if the target is heavily defended .

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 02 Jun 2008 15:57

Austin wrote:This conventional role for IRBM/ICBM class missile is something which has been talked about by many countries , but so far no one has gone that far.

It is a question to how relevant it is to other countries, vs. India, I think it is of special value to Indian needs/effects.

May be its just not cost effective and secondly any such missile attack by a country , could result in wrongly getting misinterpreted as N missile strike , leading to counter stirke.

Such missile probably has greater value in hitting Terrorist targets or countries which have no N weapons , but are probably beyond the reach of aircraft or if the target is heavily defended .

Think about China and Tibet. IMHO the next war will be over Tibet.

Misinterpreted missile attack as N missile strike; Hair trigger alert is only relevant for rich trigger happy goons that were cowards inside, IMHO.

Hair trigger ready environment is destabilizing and will very unlikely be the case of India v.s. its likely challenger. A rapid escalation of conventionally armed Prithvies, Agni-I and Agni-2AT will IMHO will not be misunderstood.

sauravjha · Post by **sauravjha** » 02 Jun 2008 16:04

The A2(AT) as per Arun has a range of more than 4000 km for 1500 kg. Its safe to assume with 1000 kg payload it can do 5000 kg. Now distance from
mumbai to Beijing 4875 km and to shanghai 5046 Km. What makes you thing the Agni-2 (AT) has to be in tawang to target these cities? A2 essentially covers the whole of china. Heck from calcutta an ordinary A2 should be able to hit beijing. India just needs to ensure we have enough numbers on ready to fire mode.

It's not the range capability but the flying time = response time that i am concerned about . Read

I am more concerned about the A2-At's deployment than its capability. the Chinese continue to have a superior BM capability than us and they might try to shut us out in the event of a conflict. the A2-At is rail mobile and for it to truly serve as a conventional weapon (flying = response time) , it needs to be closer to the conflict zone then at present. basically, insufficient development of railways in certain obvious areas has curtailed the effectiveness of our conventional BM capability.

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 02 Jun 2008 16:10

IF anyone can put in a link to the rail mobile Agni video, I would be most grateful.

TIA

sauravjha · Post by **sauravjha** » 02 Jun 2008 16:16

hink about China and Tibet. IMHO the next war will be over Tibet.

Misinterpreted missile attack as N missile strike; that is only relevant for rich trigger happy goons that were cowards inside.

Hair trigger ready environment is destabilizing and will very unlikely be the case of India v.s. its likely challenger. A rapid escalation of conventionally armed Prithvies, Agni-I and Agni-2AT will IMHO will not be misunderstood

.

see the simple answer to the "conventional is too dangerous " is another question. what makes us so sure that a nuclear capable cruise missile will not be deemed as the first shot in nuclear conflict?
Strategic warfighting can happen in waves. The refusal to accept this is also behind the repeated questioning of the need to have the capability to take down hardened targets , which was in evidence in the "casting ... etc etc thread.

Massed use of either BMs/CMs may or may not trigger off a nuclear conflict . this is precisely why the two superpowers used to have their nuclear capability delineated to each other. Any hide and seek was seen as highly destabilizing and a source of constant acrimony during SALT etc etc.

Fortunately for all of us, really clean pure fusion weapons are on the anvil and these will certainly be used for warfighting thereby making life a lot simpler for all of us.

Unfortunately, when used on us , we will either have to use FAE

or reply with much dirtier weapons, precisely because many did not believe that developing new generation nuclear weapons was essential.

Rampy · Post by **Rampy** » 02 Jun 2008 19:32

Avarachan wrote:
Gerard wrote:Because of concerns expressed here about their content, kashsoldier pulled the youtube video of the Agni-2 rail mobility tests (the disguised missile TEL and command bogies moving as part of a goods train).
I would recommend that you check YouTube again. I can't access YouTube from my current location, but the last time I checked, it was there. (And this was after BRF members said the video had been pulled.) Kashsoldier took it off and then put it back on. I recommend the video: the technology displayed is extremely impressive.

I have a doubt

With most of the Indian railways electicfied and polls handing on the rail tracks, how will Agni or any rail mobile missle be launched? Will they choose a track with no electric poles or will they stop and then launch?

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 02 Jun 2008 23:26

BrahMos Aerospace absent at Berlin Air Show
http://www.hindu.com/2008/06/02/stories ... 291300.htm

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 02 Jun 2008 23:34

Rampy wrote:I have a doubt

With most of the Indian railways electicfied and polls handing on the rail tracks, how will Agni or any rail mobile missle be launched? Will they choose a track with no electric poles or will they stop and then launch?

Almost all small rly stn/yards have sections/turnouts that are not electrified. Next time around on long train journey check that out.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 03 Jun 2008 02:59

will they stop and then launch?

AFAIK the train has to stop for launch. The various Russian rail mobile ICBMs did this. I would think firing would be from pre-surveyed spur line positions.

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 03 Jun 2008 09:57

New DRDO: An engagement with the military

Ajai Shukla in New Delhi

June 02, 2008

This communication gap was glaringly evident in the Akash missile programme; after the DRDO developed all the Akash launchers, radars, and command systems, the army demanded higher mobility by fitting them into T-72 tanks.

The DRDO, having framed the Akash requirements unilaterally, was taken by surprise. Dr Prahlada, the DRDO's chief controller (R&D) explains, "It's not a joke to put the missile radar on a tank. It was a double challenge: having developed a cutting-edge radar, we then had to squeeze it into a tank, with all the problems of space, ruggedness, and high temperatures. You can't even put an air conditioner in a wheeled vehicleï¿½ So instead of 12-15 years (to develop the Akash), we took 20 years; just to make sure the army gets it on a tank."

But now, there's a joint process. The DRDO and the IDS have divided 100 of the most important technologies they need into three different categories:

Now, however, there will be transparency and accountability, and regular reviews of how long-gestation projects are progressing. Says Dr V K Saraswat, chief controller of missiles and strategic systems, "This is a consultative process and it doesn't stop. It is a continuous process. Every year we update it."

Next in the series: Technology first, weapons later

Bharat Rakshak

Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Indigenous