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

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Raj Malhotra » 16 Sep 2008 23:19

IIRC Aster missiles have very prominent mid body fins

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3511
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby fanne » 17 Sep 2008 02:22

Though I do not follow the logic, I guess MTCR does limit export of missile greater than 300 km range (500 kg payload), it does not restrict development. Though I find this unilateral declaration unnecessary and suspicious.


http://www.dailypioneer.com/indexn12.as ... nter_img=1

PTI | New Delhi

Taking the BJP's charge against the UPA Government over India-US civil nuclear deal a step forward, senior BJP leader Jaswant Singh on Tuesday alleged that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has crippled India's missile development programme by committing to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) in two letters to US President Bush early last week.




Singh also sought the PM's explanation claiming he owed one to Parliament.



"President Bush has recently informed the US Congress of India's formal commitment to the MTCR. This was done by the (Indian) Ministry of External Affairs in separate letters on September 8 and 9, 2008.



"This, to say the least, is an alarming announcement. When was the decision made by the UPA Government of virtually abandoning the country's decades-old indigenous programme of missile development?" Singh, who is also the Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha said here.



"In formally committing in writing its adherence to the MTCR, Manmohan Singh has crippled, forever, the country's missile development programme. This is a step that follows the already revealed crippling of the nation's nuclear programme by this Government," he said in a statement here.



Jaswant claimed that the MTCR made it mandatory upon its adherents to restrict the development of missiles, complete rocket systems, unmanned air vehicles and related technologies and that the regime limits payloads to 500 kg and range to just 300 km.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby NRao » 17 Sep 2008 02:46

US SD :: Sept 11, 2008 :: India’s Adherence to the NSG and MTCR Guidelines


Taken Question
Office of the Spokesman
Washington, DC
September 11, 2008
Question Taken at September 10, 2008 Daily Press Briefing

India’s Adherence to the NSG and MTCR Guidelines

Question: What can we say about India’s adherence to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) guidelines?

Answer: In a statement issued on September 5, 2008, India’s Minister of External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee reinforced India’s July 2005 Joint Statement commitments, underscoring that “India has taken the necessary steps to secure nuclear materials and technology through comprehensive export control legislation and through harmonization and committing to adhere to MTCR and NSG guidelines.”

We also understand that India has sent letters to the International Atomic Energy Agency Director General and to the MTCR Point of Contact in Paris stating that it has adhered to the NSG and MTCR. We welcome these steps.

India committed under the July 18, 2005 Joint Statement, which launched the Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative, to harmonize its export controls with, and unilaterally adhere to the NSG and MTCR guidelines. The President has notified Congress, as required under the Hyde Actof 2006, that India has harmonized and has adhered “in accordance with the procedures of those regimes for unilateral adherence.”
2008/713

Released on September 11, 2008


No change.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3511
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby fanne » 17 Sep 2008 02:55

But then what is it suppose to mean that we adhere to MTCR. Does that mean, we need a mizile from Russia that is say 5 tons and 5000 km long, Russia is willing to break its commitment to MTCR and give it to us, does accepting that mizile we also voilate MTCR?
Anyone?
Thanks,
fanne

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby srai » 17 Sep 2008 04:35

rad wrote:15 km is too low a range for a mraam , obviously it is not right because if the missile travelled for 60 secs and covered 15 km then the average speed would be approx 250 meters per sec . I think the nag missile travels faster!. The r-73 travels further I think.



If you look at comparable MR-AAMs such as the MICA and Derby missiles used in LLQRM SAM systems, you'll also see that their ranges are 15km.

Here are Astra's ranges at various altitudes as reported recently:
* At an altitude of 15 km -> 90 to 110 km range
* At an altitude up to 30,000 ft -> 44km range
* At sea level altitude -> 30km range

And then for ground-launched -> 15km range

If you do some research, you'll also notice similar types of parameters for all the AAMs out there.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby NRao » 17 Sep 2008 05:07

fanne,

Don't know too much about such things, but, I suspect it means that India does not export anything that breaks either of two acronyms. With India building missiles that are truly potent and exporting one with a smaller radius than 300 Kms could still kick up dust - clients could extend range by themselves, or whatever.

WRT NSG, I am not sure if there is a need for a NSG anymore. As I have posted before, GNEP is the way going forward, so IMHO, NSG really does not matter. I think GNEP will bind India - that I feel is the game plan.

.............................

tejas
BRFite
Posts: 768
Joined: 31 Mar 2008 04:47

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby tejas » 17 Sep 2008 05:13

Hi Fanne, The statement by Jaswant Singh that adhering to the MTCR would cripple India's indigenous missile program, if accurately quoted, is laughable (I am a BJP supporter by the way). MTCR adherents promise to not transfer ballistic missiles with payloads exceeding 300 kg and range exceeding 500 km. to other countries. It says NOTHING about developing indigenous missiles with greater payload and range. It also does not cover cruise missiles.

However, Russia and India nonetheless claim the Brahmos cruise missile has a 290 km range to avoid Uncle's wrath ( a figure very likely purposely underestimated ). As always these rules apply to everyone but the US as Uncle transfers Trident SLBM's to the United Queendom with nary a question raised by anyone. Now that adhering to the MTCR is a quid pro quo for the nukes deal, I am fine with it. Before the deal, I always thought India should have violated it as a bargaining chip with Uncle. Former Pres. APJ Kalam had also suggested blasting apart the MTCR as it was ridiculous for India to support a technology denial regime while simultaneouly being victimised by the same.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24152
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby SSridhar » 17 Sep 2008 06:01

fanne wrote:But then what is it suppose to mean that we adhere to MTCR. Does that mean, we need a mizile from Russia that is say 5 tons and 5000 km long, Russia is willing to break its commitment to MTCR and give it to us, does accepting that mizile we also voilate MTCR?
Anyone?
Thanks,
fanne


fanne, whether India abides by MTCR or not, Russia would be penalized by the MTCR countries because Russia is a signatory to that. We will not violate MTCR because we are not a signatory. I do not see much issue in India agreeing to follow MTCR guidelines. How this will impede India's missile development can only be explained by the BJP. This is very similar to India not signing the NPT but scrupulously following its provisions in its deals with other countries. India has already been subjected to MTCR penalties.

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

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby sunilUpa » 17 Sep 2008 06:05

tejas wrote:Hi Fanne, The statement by Jaswant Singh that adhering to the MTCR would cripple India's indigenous missile program, if accurately quoted, is laughable (I am a BJP supporter by the way). MTCR adherents promise to not transfer ballistic missiles with payloads exceeding 300 kg and range exceeding 500 km. to other countries. It says NOTHING about developing indigenous missiles with greater payload and range. It also does not cover cruise missiles.

.


Err.. it does cover Cruise missiles and UAV's, both are Category I items.

tejas
BRFite
Posts: 768
Joined: 31 Mar 2008 04:47

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby tejas » 17 Sep 2008 06:14

Hi sunilUpa. I stand corrected sir. The MTCR was originally initiated in 1987. It was amended in 1992 to include cruise missiles and UAV's. Again this applies to exports not indigenous development.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby ramana » 17 Sep 2008 09:28

Have you all read the entire text of MTCR and the amendment or just guessing? I thinkits a case similar to NPT of West thinking of horizontal and vertical proliferation and India only of horizontal proliferation.

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby rakall » 17 Sep 2008 11:01

sunilUpa wrote:
tejas wrote:Hi Fanne, The statement by Jaswant Singh that adhering to the MTCR would cripple India's indigenous missile program, if accurately quoted, is laughable (I am a BJP supporter by the way). MTCR adherents promise to not transfer ballistic missiles with payloads exceeding 300 kg and range exceeding 500 km. to other countries. It says NOTHING about developing indigenous missiles with greater payload and range. It also does not cover cruise missiles.

.


Err.. it does cover Cruise missiles and UAV's, both are Category I items.


Yes it does cover cruise missiles & UAV's..

And reg MTCR : I had a chat with a very senoir person in Brahmos during AI07 and this is what I understood thereof:

1. MTCR guidelines require the countries developing the missiles exceeding 300km & 500kg payloads 'not to export to other countries'.

2. If India & Russia together develop a missile with 1000kg payload and 2000km range -- Nothing stops India & Russia from using it for thier own armed forces usage.

3. The reason why Brahmos cruise missile range was limited to 300km was because - Brahmos Aerospace wants to be able to export to other countries interested in the missile.

4. That is why we often hear of Brahmos2 or Hypersonic-version of Brahmos without any MTCR concerns attached... As long as it is developed and used for our own purposes - No problem.
Ofcourse, if India develops the missile on its own by assimilating the tech transfer from Brahmos (or underhand tech support from Russia) and use it for our own forces - no problem

5. So the point of stopping missile development does not arise.. Are we not developing A3 now? PM's note reg "adherence to MTCR guidelines" is nothing to worry about -- it only states that we have so far adhered to MTCR guidelines.. Yes. We did. Even if we export Brahmos -we are still adhering to MTCR guidelines.

The statement at no point says we will sign it or anything like that...

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby rakall » 17 Sep 2008 11:09




Kakarat - for some reason I cant view the 2 new pics.. can you upload it elsewhere and provide link plz..

Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2113
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Kakarat » 17 Sep 2008 11:17

rakall wrote:



Kakarat - for some reason I cant view the 2 new pics.. can you upload it elsewhere and provide link plz..


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 703426.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 706753.jpg

try these links

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby rakall » 17 Sep 2008 11:21

Kakarat wrote:
rakall wrote:



Kakarat - for some reason I cant view the 2 new pics.. can you upload it elsewhere and provide link plz..


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 703426.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 706753.jpg

try these links



firts link doesnt open for me.. will be very helpful if you can upload all the three pics in imageavenue or tinyurl or something like that..

Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2113
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Kakarat » 17 Sep 2008 11:24

rakall wrote:firts link doesnt open for me.. will be very helpful if you can upload all the three pics in imageavenue or tinyurl or something like that..


Image

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5850
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Dileep » 17 Sep 2008 14:16

About the two simulated targets: I think the tests are in the very early stage to talk about actual targets. The recent tests are obviously to verify the initial INS guided portion of the flight. Choices of telemetry from a small missile like Astra is very limited. They programmed two imaginary points into the flight controller, and verified that (by radar vector) the missile flew to them. This verifies the propulsion and maneuvering controls of the missile.

Most of the flight envelope could be verified this way, so that when you come with seeker guidance, you KNOW that the missile would fly an instructed path, so all you need to work on is translating the seeker input to the required path.

Too early to worry about multiple targets IMO.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20952
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Philip » 18 Sep 2008 18:38

Is this report accurate?

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html

Novator RVV-L / R-172 / K-100
The R-172, previously designated the KS-172, is a departure from the established focus of Novator, designers of the S-300V (SA-12) system's long range SAMs. Like the R-37, the R-172 was developed as an 'AWACS killer'. The missile employs an active radar seeker and inertial midcourse guidance. Two configurations are known, with and without a booster pack. With the booster the missile is claimed to achieve a range of 215 NMI, without 160 NMI. Cited seeker performance is similar to the R-37.

While the R-172 is less mature than the R-37, India has recently negotiated an arrangement to fund final development and licence produce the weapon, not unlike the extant deal to licence the Yakhont as the BrahMos.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Austin » 18 Sep 2008 19:07

If you mean we are jointly developing the KS-172 with Russia , that is correct , there was this interview in F mag from DRDO last year or so who said it was the case.

But suddenly things have gone silent and no one talks about it , its a DRDO Black Project :)

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Rahul M » 18 Sep 2008 19:12

austin, did anybody confirm Indian participation in 172 or k-100 during the russian defexpos i.e MAKS and whatisitsname ?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Austin » 18 Sep 2008 19:16

Yes there was lots of talk in the F magazine last year or before that detailing even individual details and even in an interview some one from DRDO confirmed that.

Didnt we had discussion on this last year when this was hot news ? or am i getting old

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Rahul M » 18 Sep 2008 19:28

austin, don't remember any such thing. not meaning you are old ! :P
anyway, did novator/any russi sources confirm it independent of f mag ?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Austin » 18 Sep 2008 20:49

Rahul M wrote:austin, don't remember any such thing. not meaning you are old ! :P
anyway, did novator/any russi sources confirm it independent of f mag ?


Nahi I dont recollect Novtar or Russi doing it , but I do remember we were doing a discussion on it when the good old gold JC sahab was here.

And IIRC the conclusion was the range of 300 km was something of optimum situaton , and practically it would be ~ 150 Km much like the R-37 , I also recollect we discussed on the use of KS-172 in ABM role with the phenomenal range of BARS and with range and load capability.

I am pretty sure ( and just my opinion ) we are developing the KS-172 with the russi , its just that we are not being cocky about it.

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

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Avid » 19 Sep 2008 18:16

Arun_S and other RocketSim enthusiasts

Found a GNU project called GNU Rocket on Sourceforge - wondered if it might be something of interest (???)

http://sourceforge.net/projects/rocket/

(p.s. clearly I am no aerospace engineer, so i am only disseminating information that I think might be of interest)

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby abhijitm » 20 Sep 2008 02:34

does anyone know whether russian s-400 was/being sold to India?

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

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Arun_S » 20 Sep 2008 04:46

Avid wrote:Arun_S and other RocketSim enthusiasts

Found a GNU project called GNU Rocket on Sourceforge - wondered if it might be something of interest (???)

http://sourceforge.net/projects/rocket/

(p.s. clearly I am no aerospace engineer, so i am only disseminating information that I think might be of interest)

Interesing, but I don't deal with RockSim development anymore, some obscure engg collage OTOH is owning and maintaining it 8)

BTW the GNU Rocket project IMHO is not kosher.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Austin » 20 Sep 2008 09:18

abhijitm wrote:does anyone know whether russian s-400 was/being sold to India?


Thats the most easiest to answer , NO :)

We are investing in AAD and PAD and developing it further.

Nmistry
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 14
Joined: 16 Jul 2008 14:53

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Nmistry » 22 Sep 2008 05:00

ISREAL PROPOSES JV WITH DRDO FOR STANDOFF PGM

In yet another power-pitch for collaborative weapons development, Israel has proposed a joint venture with India to develop and manufacture a fire-and-forget precision guided standoff weapon for the Indian and Israeli air forces. The proposal was formally made by an Israeli defence delegation, led by senior officials from Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, to the DRDO's Armament Research & Development Establishment (ARDE) in Pune on July 7, and carried forward with two more meetings at the DRDO Headquarters level in August and this month.

As a recent news report by DNA's Josy Joseph suggested, the Israelis are having an "unprecedented run" in the Indian defence market. The same news report tells of how the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) has completely broken with tradition and put its stamp of approval on the Rs 10,400 crore medium range surface-to-air missile (MRSAM) joint venture between the two countries, currently pending final approval by the Cabinet, but expected shortly. This despite the fact that the companies involved are the same that remain officially charged by the CBI and are being investigated for paying kickbacks in the original Barak naval point defence system deal. The same duo of IAI/Rafael is already involved with the co-development of the Barak-2 surface-to-air missile with DRDL.
[url]
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2008/09/ex ... -drdo.html[/url]

sarang
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 16 Jun 2007 11:23
Location: India

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby sarang » 23 Sep 2008 06:07


sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10087
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby sum » 23 Sep 2008 08:33

0.

Asked about the development of 1,000 km plus subsonic cruise missile, ‘Nirbhay,’ Mr. Avinash said that work was going on well.

:twisted:

Hope that BRs slogan of "no news is good news" is coming true...

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Austin » 23 Sep 2008 08:51



I remember to my question ramana had stated that a bare minimum 3 test is needed for the system to be technically proven and to draw the V gama graph , why are we satisfied with just two test ?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Singha » 23 Sep 2008 09:06

its a technicality - its not the final weapon that will be deployed in numbers.
next years A-5 test will be the really desirable point payload x range matrix
for land based.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Katare » 23 Sep 2008 09:12

Austin wrote:


I remember to my question ramana had stated that a bare minimum 3 test is needed for the system to be technically proven and to draw the V gama graph , why are we satisfied with just two test ?


It's a upgraded derivative of an already proven platform so it may be OK. But I think DRDO works on shoe-string budgets and tries to do as little testing as possible, which is not a good practice for several reasons.

Hope they'll conduct enough user trials to ensure a robust system is being operationalized.

Good news indeed!

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Venkarl » 23 Sep 2008 09:56

I agree with Austin's reasoning..why inducting A3s just after 2 tests?? do you guys get any hint why Indian forces are inducting indigenous stuff so quickly which is kinda strange? China monitoring BRFites---any news??

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

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Arun_S » 23 Sep 2008 10:07

Katare wrote:It's a upgraded derivative of an already proven platform so it may be OK.

Please help me understand which already proven platform is Agni-III an upgraded derivative of? and if there is any basis for such assertions w.r.t any similar missile anywhere in the world?

But I think DRDO works on shoe-string budgets and tries to do as little testing as possible,

I do not think DRDO will embark on a missile program with a budget not enough for minimum number of test required for credible weapon.
IIRC after last test Saraswat said A-3 is ready for induction. Also that one more test by Army may be conducted before induction. The accuracy of the last 2 tests was gratifying, and the crucial first stage was basically sound on the first launch.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5850
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Dileep » 23 Sep 2008 10:31

We have the habit of cramming a lot of tests into a single run. This is true not only in missiles, planes and other defense stuff. It is true even for a small software company making a test plan for an embedded system. SDRE Yindoo mindset onlee. We tend to do the analysis of interdependency beforehand and plan multiple tests at the same time. Gora goes and test each thing, and then later do the interdependence co-relation.

I Know because I make a living partially by doing that. The tendency to do that is very strong in us SDREs.

We also have the tendency to be satisfied with the end result. It takes a delebrate effort and discipline to counter act and ensure verification of the intermediate stuff as well. The good thing there is that an independent verifier tend to do that effectively.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Singha » 23 Sep 2008 14:42

report in print edition of Indian Express today says:-

- prithvi-I missiles will be made solid fuel
- liquid fuel has shelf life of few months once the fuel is stored inside rocket
- solid fuel - 10-15 yrs
- ground tests already been done
- full flight test with warhead by end of this year
- once P1 proven they are planning for Dhanush

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17033
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Rahul M » 23 Sep 2008 14:47

liquid fuel has shelf life of few months once the fuel is stored inside rocket

:-? don't think that's quite correct.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20952
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby Philip » 23 Sep 2008 15:00

As with the SLBM for the ATV,earlier tests were supposedly disguised as Prithvis.Therefore,it is possible that some of the AGNI series of tests were Agni-3s not tested to its full range,but to qualify other performance parameters until the last two tests.Even these appear to have the prospect for greater range depending upon the weight of the warhead/MIRVs.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10087
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Missile Technology Discussion - 27 March 2008

Postby sum » 23 Sep 2008 15:21

- once P1 proven they are planning for Dhanush

wasnt dhanush just a TD till the Sagarika etc came along?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests