Indian Missile Technology Discussion

[Kailash]

US technical co-operation, though highly appreciated, is not necessary for our indigenous ABMs. But the news has deep strategic value - clearly sending a message to the rest of the world that we have a strong ally in US.

The indigenous ABM to be fully tested and made operational would take time, till which point US umbrella over our heads.

[vivek_ahuja]

First of all that report is from Bennett&Coleman group where one can get news-pitches by paying them money. Secondly that report's headline does not correlate with the content. It says we will sign MoU with US, it does not mean that US has helped us in any of our preparations. Still if we were to believe that report, it shows incoherency in US policy. If US claims it is assisting (or going to assist) India with Missile Defence tech, its commerce dept. is lynching people for trading in obsolete i960 processors. So before US starts marketing itself in India, it should confirm from its commerce dept whether it is a legitimate thing to do or not.

Had attended a conference given by a Major-General of the US Army who is about to take over the MDA where he confirmed the collaboration with India. He said, and I quote: "We are collaborating with a lot of countries including Israel to help expand our BMD bubble. We are specially collaborating with the Indians who have a very advanced BMD system of their own."

At no point did he say that they were helping us. He inferred it was more of a mutual learning thing.

-Vivek

[George J]

Photo: BrahMos vertically launched from INS Ranvir - Shiv Aroor

I am having trouble opening this image now but when I did open it. The EXIF said the following:

Nikon D80, f/6.3 & 1/640sec, 90mm @ ISO 100
So you mean to tell me that Heron's are equipped with Nikon D80 with some cheap @ss Nikkor lens as part of its electro-optics package? Or maybe this pic was actually taken by a human in a chopper?

Edit:
Here is the pic:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 743541.jpg

[kit]

First of all that report is from Bennett&Coleman group where one can get news-pitches by paying them money. Secondly that report's headline does not correlate with the content. It says we will sign MoU with US, it does not mean that US has helped us in any of our preparations. Still if we were to believe that report, it shows incoherency in US policy. If US claims it is assisting (or going to assist) India with Missile Defence tech, its commerce dept. is lynching people for trading in obsolete i960 processors. So before US starts marketing itself in India, it should confirm from its commerce dept whether it is a legitimate thing to do or not.

Had attended a conference given by a Major-General of the US Army who is about to take over the MDA where he confirmed the collaboration with India. He said, and I quote: "We are collaborating with a lot of countries including Israel to help expand our BMD bubble. We are specially collaborating with the Indians who have a very advanced BMD system of their own."

At no point did he say that they were helping us. He inferred it was more of a mutual learning thing.

-Vivek

Thats precisely the point i want to make.American collaborations usually lure the talented people to massa kingdom who live there in 'comfort'.It s not just indians .. they have and continue to leech brains from everywhere., and by time they realise whats happening, its too late for them to rebuild their lives.

I just hope DRDO successes dont die a premature death !

[kit]

Had attended a conference given by a Major-General of the US Army who is about to take over the MDA where he confirmed the collaboration with India. He said, and I quote: "We are collaborating with a lot of countries including Israel to help expand our BMD bubble. We are specially collaborating with the Indians who have a very advanced BMD system of their own."

At no point did he say that they were helping us. He inferred it was more of a mutual learning thing.

-Vivek

Thats precisely the point i want to make.American collaborations usually lure the talented people to massa kingdom who live there in 'comfort'.It s not just indians .. they have and continue to leech brains from everywhere., and by time they realise whats happening, its too late for them to rebuild their lives.

I just hope DRDO successes dont die a premature death !

And seriously how much collaboration do use expect with a country that insists on end user verification for even decades old ships and imprison people for shipping some old tech chips ? Collaboration means just a way of identifying the real brains here.

[Arun_S]

Shaurya with 70cm diameter and 10 meter length, 6.2 tonne weight is key piece of data to estimate its performance envelope.

The launch photos clearly indicate the fins unfold after clearing the launch tube.

Clearly it is a missile that can do more than a typical ballistic missile and the ability to fly the full course in atmosphere make it a tough nut for any ABM system of the world. the atmospheric flight makes space based early warning missile satellite's job more challenging, in that the craft does not leave the atmosphere to provide a clean cold background for the satellite seeker.

600-700 km range for hypersonic flight profile hides an untold tale of its classical ballistic range. people with ROCKSIM can explore that now.

[Arun_S]

Just realized that the small solid fuelled Shaurya/Sagarika missile launched from Indian submarine, cruising to target at 30km altitude and 700Km range is a nightmare for any fleet defense system.

If BrahMos is leading knife edge striking a navel fleet, the Sagarika is a death knell.

BTW Shaurya/Sagarika with a small 17kT F.Boosted payload on a ballistic trajectory can take down chosen target at 2,600 Km range.

[Singha]

well GJman I think its man in chopper! herons flying at 30,000ft with a
D80 and 90mm prime lens is a

[Austin]

Thanks Arun , have been waiting for your comment on Shourya , so 2600 km should be good enough to cover many of coastal installation of China.

When you say 30 Km ~ 700 km range hypersonic flight is a challenge to fleet defense system , are you trying to say that Sagarika can actually attack a CBG or will be a challenge for SM-3 type ABM system

[vavinash]

Sagarika will probably be used in ATV for second strike rather than Anti Ship or CV. I guess till A-3 SL comes along. The good thing being sagarika can probably be launched from surface ships too.

[p_saggu]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the diameter of the missile and its size means that the payload size will be so small that the Shourya / K-15 is destined to be nothing other than a nuclear weapon delivery vehicle.

We could put in conventional weaponery here for precision strike, but somehow it seems to be too little for technology like this. Oh well if the target is high value enough then in that one exception. But this thing is probably much more expensive than a Brahmos to be used indiscriminately if you know what I mean.

[Arun_S]

Thanks Arun , have been waiting for your comment on Shourya , so 2600 km should be good enough to cover many of coastal installation of China.

When you say 30 Km ~ 700 km range hypersonic flight is a challenge to fleet defense system , are you trying to say that Sagarika can actually attack a CBG or will be a challenge for SM-3 type ABM system

An interceptor an be fired provided in the first place someone can first detect there is a missile coming their way before he can press the fire button. The extremely small cross section, no fins or winglets and flying at 100,000 ft the missile is very hard to detect. I expect the RCS in frontal 90 degree cone sector to be <0.02 square meter. What is the best AESA radars of unkill do for that RCS?

[ramana]

Shaurya trajectory is what is called depressed trajectory which gives less chances tot eh opposing radar. It will be quite energy inefficiant as it has to fly in upper atmosphere which is what heats it up and th eneed for the rolling manouver. So most likely the targets are a very high value like c&c or radars etc. and might even be storage depots. There is a change in doctrine that this tool addresses.

[Yogi_G]

hi Gurus... the difference in capabilities between Shourya a "tactical" missile and a cruise missile seems to be very blurred....Whay isnt Shourya categorised as a cruise missile? ok given that it can be launched from a silo, but what other feature distinguishes it from a cruise missile? If Shourya can be used to take out radar installations and enemy HQs, then the CEP is very very high....hence a cruise missile....

Gurus, please advice on what then necessitates Nirbhay as Shourya can pretty much achieve all that is intended of a cruise missile???

[Vikram_S]

shaurya uses solid propulsion so it is a ballistic missile even though it may not follow typical ballistic trajectory

cruise missile are considered to be missile with turbojet / turbofan propulsion

[Vikram_S]

there was report india had raised production of prithvi missile to 20 per year and brahmos to 50 /year

india should now also raise shaurya production to 50-100 per year and replace prithvi in production
making 50-100 missile a year is possible with investment

[Austin]

hi Gurus... the difference in capabilities between Shourya a "tactical" missile and a cruise missile seems to be very blurred....Whay isnt Shourya categorised as a cruise missile? ok given that it can be launched from a silo, but what other feature distinguishes it from a cruise missile? If Shourya can be used to take out radar installations and enemy HQs, then the CEP is very very high....hence a cruise missile....

Gurus, please advice on what then necessitates Nirbhay as Shourya can pretty much achieve all that is intended of a cruise missile???

Dont confuse the flight of Shourya on a Depressed Trajectory ( ~ 50 Km) and then try to equal it to cruise missile , Cruise missile can use any kind of propulsion ( solid fuel , turbojet/fan ) but it will always fly in the atmosphere ( from 3 m to 15 Km ) , it can *never* fly a Ballistic Trajectory which means no need for Rentry vehical (RV) or a quasi-ballistic trajectory.

A Depressed Trajectory is highly energy inefficient and the missile itself can go through tremendous stress/heat etc , though on the positive side it makes it difficult to track , can have short flight time to target and can be accurate.

Nirbhay is a cruise missile proper and can exploit the features of any modern cruise missile like Tomahawk , KH-101 etc.

[Austin]

An interceptor an be fired provided in the first place someone can first detect there is a missile coming their way before he can press the fire button. The extremely small cross section, no fins or winglets and flying at 100,000 ft the missile is very hard to detect. I expect the RCS in frontal 90 degree cone sector to be <0.02 square meter. What is the best AESA radars of unkill do for that RCS?

Well my understanding is Arun that a ballistic missile can still be detected in first few seconds of flight due to the heat generated during launch by satellites , so the initial detection/missile launch will not go unnoticed.

Though the small RCS and Short Flight to Target will make interception difficult. If my memory serves me right the LRTR was suppose to detect a .01 RCS at ~ 300 Km

One more question , what if some one gives us the taste of our own medicine , how capable will our two tier ABM system be capable of dealing with Shourya type missile ?

[rakall]

Just realized that the small solid fuelled Shaurya/Sagarika missile launched from Indian submarine, cruising to target at 30km altitude and 700Km range is a nightmare for any fleet defense system.

If BrahMos is leading knife edge striking a navel fleet, the Sagarika is a death knell.

BTW Shaurya/Sagarika with a small 17kT F.Boosted payload on a ballistic trajectory can take down chosen target at 2,600 Km range.

But in a pure ballisitc trajectory - the missile will be subjected to signigicantly higher temp.. is it capable of handling that high temp -- it dint look like a re-entry nosecone design capable of handling such high temp !!!

In the tested trajectory - the missile handled Mach6 and 700deg... in a pure ballistic flight for 2600km, it would see anywhere close to Mach15-20 with the temp going as high as (atleas) 1800-2000decC.. the concern is whether the Shaurya nosecone/HeatShied is designed for that kind of temperature... from the pics it dint look like the nosecone was typical RV-design.. so that is what may stop Shaurya being used for long-range ballistic flights.. it's role may be high mobility, transportability, reliability & manuevrability to defeat ABM defenses..

Me thinks - Shaurya is designed to be a compact, highly maneuvarable, highly transportable, ultra low maintainence missile that can be fired from transportable canisters, Silos and submarines.. For long ranges we might need a heatshield capable of handling re-entry temperatures... and preferabley MIRVed... So that role (>3000-5000Km range with MIRV) might probably be reserved for A-3/A-5 sub versions..

[krishnan]

But in a pure ballisitc trajectory - the missile will be subjected to signigicantly higher temp.. is it capable of handling that high temp -- it dint look like a re-entry nosecone design capable of handling such high temp !!!

“We flew our own navigation system in this missile. It worked very well. This is an important step forward for the country in the navigation of missiles, aircraft and spacecraft,” he said. No country would provide India this navigation system.

After the Shourya was fired from its canister, it rose to a height of 50 km and then flew horizontally to reach its targeted site. As it reached its maximum speed, it led to the missile heating up to 700 degrees Celsius. To cool the missile, it was rolled.

“We did a rolling manoeuvre which gives uniform heat to the missile,” said Mr. Natarajan, who is also Director-General, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

http://www.hindu.com/2008/11/14/stories ... 151500.htm

[SSridhar]

DRDO to develop long-endurance UAV

India's premier defence research agency, DRDO, will develop a medium-range and long- endurance (MALE) unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) in association with an Indian industry partner.

"To reduce the time for design, development and subsequent transfer of technology to an industry for bulk production of a MALE UAV, DRDO has been authorised to associate with a production and development partner (PADP) from eligible industries on a competitive basis," Defence Minister A K Antony said in a written reply in the Lok Sabha on Monday.

To select the development partner, the DRDO has released a request for proposal (RFP), he said.

"DRDO has shortlisted four industries consortia through a transparent process and released a RFP for PADP," Antony said.

The selected PADP will work with DRDO during the design and development of the UAV and absorb the technologies.

"The PADP would become the system integrator and provide product support after induction," he said.

[Rahul M]

hi Gurus... the difference in capabilities between Shourya a "tactical" missile and a cruise missile seems to be very blurred....Whay isnt Shourya categorised as a cruise missile? ok given that it can be launched from a silo, but what other feature distinguishes it from a cruise missile? If Shourya can be used to take out radar installations and enemy HQs, then the CEP is very very high....hence a cruise missile....

Gurus, please advice on what then necessitates Nirbhay as Shourya can pretty much achieve all that is intended of a cruise missile???

other than what Austin has said, two words :

size and weight. nirhay or a smaller version would be air-capable. there is no way you can design the shourya similarly.
in a nutshell, nirbhay would be much more flexible in operational use while the shourya, albeit less flexible would be much more devastating.

[Kailash]

any idea on Nirbhay's power plant? is it being imported from Russia/France?

[kuldipchager]

I am sure if is't indian made then it will be russian.I don't think that it will be french.

[Raj Malhotra]

Now my understanding of shaurya is as follows:-


For nuclear role range depressed trajectory 700km while max range would be 2500km. Interestingly, in its depressed trajectory it has skin temperature of "only" 700 degrees which means that a radar can work in its nose, which it can be used with conventional payload to as Anti ship/anti land missile.

Even with Brahmos, fired in Ballistic trajectory, my (guess mate) of range is 600-1000km.

[Arun_S]

Well my understanding is Arun that a ballistic missile can still be detected in first few seconds of flight due to the heat generated during launch by satellites , so the initial detection/missile launch will not go unnoticed.

The ground launch signature is very difficult in best of situation and pretty much useless in adverse weather condition (high or low level cloud). These satellite sensors look at missile engine heat against cold background once the missile raises above 20 km altitude, more preferably once it clears the atmosphere at 100km altitude. Recall that solid fuelled missiles are problematic in detection due to short burn time (i.e. less time outside 100km altitude).

Once in flight, and flying at shallow angle in atmosphere the missile heat signature IMO remains problematic because the upper stage thrust (thus engine power) is lower than booster (recall that Shaurya booster takes it to only 5Km altitude in thick atmosphere where long range IR sensors of satellites don't work). Classic rocketry uses large fraction of rocket for first stage. Shaurya uses a counter intutive (and some will say less efficient) configuration with small booster to clear the missile from dense atmosphere and allow the main stage to operate at more efficient low atmospheric pressure environment (that is the trade off with small booster stage). So there is more in Shaurya than meets the eyes.

The depressed trajectory is big problem for any ballistic missile sensor network due to unpredictable final trajectory of the missile.

Though the small RCS and Short Flight to Target will make interception difficult. If my memory serves me right the LRTR was suppose to detect a .01 RCS at ~ 300 Km

One more question , what if some one gives us the taste of our own medicine , how capable will our two tier ABM system be capable of dealing with Shourya type missile ?

Small RCS detection is more feasible when there is interlocking network of large survillance radars. A naval fleet has much smaller space diversity and fewer radars, not to mention smaller radar aperture than ground based radars. That is the reason I think naval adversary will be hard pressed against this type of missile. The US has some of the best naval radars based on Aegis. I will appreciate if you can find Aegis based surveillance range for such small RCS.

As regarding taste of our own medicine, we already have the threat posed by Islamic Barber cruise missile. Incidentally the same anti-dote will also work here; viz an interlocking network of surveillance radars (mono static as well as bi-static types).

BTW as the LRTR's name spells it out it is a Long Range Tracking Radar, that means this radar can only track a target by searching a small volume of space, once it has been give approximate location of the target by a surveillance radar. So having a 300Km LRTR without a even longer range Surveillance radar is a useless exercise. Now LRTR can be used in surveillance mode but then its surveillance range is not the same as its tracking range.

[Vikram_S]

aruns

Lrtr has also got surveillance function and it should be quite large in term of range
being fully populated aesa it switches between surveillance, tracking and missile guidance (high tracking mode)
indian plan is to use combination of aerostat + awacs (for low fliers) and also LRTR + mfcr for BMD detection purpose
we know plan call for > 10 aerostat, >10 AWAC and each BMD battery will have own lrtr and mfcr

[Arun_S]

aruns

Lrtr has also got surveillance function and it should be quite large in term of range being fully populated aesa it switches between surveillance, tracking and missile guidance (high tracking mode)
indian plan is to use combination of aerostat + awacs (for low fliers) and also LRTR + mfcr for BMD detection purpose
we know plan call for > 10 aerostat, >10 AWAC and each BMD battery will have own lrtr and mfcr

Yes I mentioned if the LRTR is used in surveillance range, the laws of physics will generally force surveillance range to be shorter than tracking range because antenna gain in search mode is much lower than tracking mode. Even if surveillance mode employs a different waveform the processing gain is unlikely to cover the EIRP loss while keeping other parameters constant (like detecting targets of certain maximum speed).

I would love to be corrected.

[vavinash]

I thought LRTR has a range of 600 km greater than 500 km of green pine? The MFCR has 300-400 odd range. When is the planned BMD test supposed to take place.

[neerajb]

Yes I mentioned if the LRTR is used in surveillance range, the laws of physics will generally force surveillance range to be shorter than tracking range because antenna gain in search mode is much lower than tracking mode. Even if surveillance mode employs a different waveform the processing gain is unlikely to cover the EIRP loss while keeping other parameters constant (like detecting targets of certain maximum speed).

I would love to be corrected.

Arunji my very limited knowledge on radar theory suggests that though the antenna gain would be low in search mode than in track mode but isn't the PRF in search mode is way too less than track mode? I guess this difference should accomodate for the gain. In general there is not point in having a radar with more track range than search range.

Cheers....

[neerajb]

shaurya uses solid propulsion so it is a ballistic missile even though it may not follow typical ballistic trajectory

cruise missile are considered to be missile with turbojet / turbofan propulsion

Generally cruise missiles use turbojet/turbofan but solid propulsion V/s turbofan/turbojet cannot be used as a criteria for differentiating between cruise and ballistic missile. US had toyed with the idea of nuclear powered cruise missile with project pluto.

Differences:

1) Flight profile : Ballistic missile uses parabolic ballistic profile whereas cruise missiles follow flat trajectory.

2) Guidance : Cruise missiles are guided missiles which are guided till impact whereas ballistic missiles are unguided. Once ballistic missile is fired it's target cannot be changed. Terminal seekers and inertial guidance is there only to improve the accuracy of missile.

3) Maneuverability : Cruise missiles maneuver throughout their mission using wings to avoid detection whereas ballistic missiles don't maneuver much.

Cheers....

[kit]

Please correct me if i am wrong.. these LRTR s being AESA can be used in multiple modes .. Track,scan a wide area or search a smaller area with higher resolution ?
Also missile early warning systems are similarly sensor fused systems, radar,SAR,laser,UV.. .I dont think the new ones are purely radar or look at UV signatures of ballistic missiles alone
Now can EW radar systems with AESA can suitably be modified that they can fry up a incoming missiles electronics (and in some cases the missile itself) maybe at a bit smaller distance than their scanning ranges.DARPA is apparently looking at this 'frying' concept, bit more advanced missile interdiction than conventional interceptor missiles.(these systems seem to be already in the testing phase)

[Vikram_S]

arun,

yes you are correct that in distributed search over large volume, range can be lesser perhaps than in focused tracking over smaller area, but even then, if we take LRTr range as 600 km range for 0.1 sq mtr, and make it half it for large area surveillance that is respectable 300 km within pakistan which will cover vast majority of pak launch areas


and this if we also see AWACS and aerostat which can look even deeper in pakistan, it can give respectable early warning against pakistan.

against china because of terrain (mountains) and wider strategic depth and china having longer range missile available, india need to have satellite based surveillance inducted, and i think it is already planning/going for same. (news reports)

@ neerajbhandari, yes your points are mostly correct and disagreements with them are minor if any
i was just trying to make a simple distinction which apply to vast majority of cases by just looking at powerplant (Engine)

[Vikram_S]

kit

>>Please correct me if i am wrong.. these LRTR s being AESA can be used in multiple modes .. Track,scan a wide area or search a smaller area with higher resolution ?

you are correct

[Kanson]

while the discussion is going on in the direction whether it is ball-i-stick or ball without stick...2 important things that to be highlighted.

Although hypersonic missiles fly at high altitudes, what makes Shourya different is that it can fly at low altitudes. For instance, Agni variants flew at 100 km, 200 km or 500 km altitudes, reaching even Mach 15. “But Shourya flies at a relatively low altitude, even reaching Mach 6. This is the crux of the matter in terms of technology development,” Saraswat said.

Chakrabarti added: “Hypersonic missile is a new field of activity even in advanced countries. However, we have established our expertise in this field.”

Gaining proficiency in hypersonic regime translates mastery in so many fields...that tells that in missile field India comes of age.

2. glass composite canister: it gives ample proof the way the missile will be used.

Raj: AEW may not be a reliable platform for 24/7 vigil on BM launch. It can be used in layered force multiplier and solution has to come in the form of LEO or Airship based observation. at the same time, low cost options cant be ruled out.

[Arun_S]

Yes I mentioned if the LRTR is used in surveillance range, the laws of physics will generally force surveillance range to be shorter than tracking range because antenna gain in search mode is much lower than tracking mode. Even if surveillance mode employs a different waveform the processing gain is unlikely to cover the EIRP loss while keeping other parameters constant (like detecting targets of certain maximum speed).

I would love to be corrected.

Arunji my very limited knowledge on radar theory suggests that though the antenna gain would be low in search mode than in track mode but isn't the PRF in search mode is way too less than track mode? I guess this difference should accomodate for the gain. In general there is not point in having a radar with more track range than search range.

Cheers....

Due to peak power constrain of Tx/Rx modules AESA radars almost always use pulse compression. Thus if I understand your point that by PRF change you are suggesting that effective power can be increased by longer waveform to yield greater processing gain (because PRF for a set range in tracking or surveillance mode is limited by time of flight for the beam, and in some cases by the duty cycle of the high power RF source). The antenna gain drop in surveillance mode will be ~10-17 dB, to compensate for that with longer pulse compressed waveform will require 10 to 50 times longer transmission. I will be interested in knowing how much transmit time difference other AESA radars have in search versus tracking mode.

The only saving grace against Pakistani IRBM is that the RCS of their booster and main stages can be detected from much further away by Indian LRTR in surveillance mode, and the radars can then effectively switch to tracking mode to resolve the smaller upper stage/payload. For longer range IRBM or ICBM that will not be possible.

IMHO key to ABM is surveillance radar, and knowing how mono-static surveillance radars work I do not think they will be able to muster and grow performance beyond 300Km for small RCS targets. For a given target Bi static radars always see larger RCS and they hold the key.

Calling Dileep ..... for your expert opinion.

[Vikram_S]

arun_s

Due to peak power constrain of Tx/Rx modules AESA radars almost always use pulse compression. Thus if I understand your point that by PRF change you are suggesting that effective power can be increased by longer waveform to yield greater processing gain (because PRF for a set range in tracking or surveillance mode is limited by time of flight for the beam, and in some cases by the duty cycle of the high power RF source). The antenna gain drop in surveillance mode will be ~10-17 dB, to compensate for that with longer pulse compressed waveform will require 10 to 50 times longer transmission. I will be interested in knowing how much transmit time difference other AESA radars have in search versus tracking mode.

according to IEEE article - "detection of low observables"
AESA have fundamental advantage over conventional surveillance system and even with 50% tracking "load", there is only drop of 10% in surveillance function
this is because the usual surveillance radar use 3/4 scanning where target is "detected" if confirm in 3 out of 4 scan
in AESA, it is 1+1/2 scan - you detect in first and then have beam dwell (half scan on target) to confirm detection
so using this method substantial advantage is opened by decoupling surveillance and tracking
"billam" write in paper (1999) that AESA (of much lower power) than LRTR can detect VLO target at range of over 100 km.
in conventional radar the beam shaping & rotation speed is fixed to compromise between surveillance and tracking function but in AESA this disadvantage is removed

[SaiK]

http://sniperz11.blogspot.com/2008/02/d ... ility.html

[Arun_S]

according to IEEE article - "detection of low observables"
AESA have fundamental advantage over conventional surveillance system and even with 50% tracking "load", there is only drop of 10% in surveillance function
this is because the usual surveillance radar use 3/4 scanning where target is "detected" if confirm in 3 out of 4 scan
in AESA, it is 1+1/2 scan - you detect in first and then have beam dwell (half scan on target) to confirm detection
so using this method substantial advantage is opened by decoupling surveillance and tracking
"billam" write in paper (1999) that AESA (of much lower power) than LRTR can detect VLO target at range of over 100 km.
in conventional radar the beam shaping & rotation speed is fixed to compromise between surveillance and tracking function but in AESA this disadvantage is removed

From my perspective the problem is more fundamental. That of detection (much before confirmation). There has to be enough sensitivity to overcome the path loss. No matter if the beam shape is fixed or malleable, the surveillance mode requires a beam pattern that is much more fan shaped then the pencil shaped beam required for tracking. That translates to FSPL (free space path loss) increase of ~13dB (proportional to the number of vertical elements in the AESA arrey), the question is what can be thrown to compensate for this loss to maintain the same range as tracking mode? IMO the only option open is processign gain, and that is limited by how many times longer one can make the waveform compared to tracking mode. That IMO seals the maximum processing gain and thus the maximum range of the radar in surveillance mode.

[Vikram_S]

i think same range in surveillance,,as tracking mode for one target may not be possible but question is the reduced range enough? that is what i think is the case

if i remember these things, there are various mode of radar, initial detection in wide surveillance mode is followed by TWS (track while scan) at 3/4 of range of detection (radar has now had time to get track file developed), apart from this there are other modes of tracking and missile guidance

i think you are referring to high update missile tracking at long range >> wide array surveillance
as radar can concentrate its energy on limited target in small area
which is logical

but what radar literature suggest is that overall, the radar performance despite performing multiple such "breaks" (surveillance, TWS + search, missile guidance) is still respectable

so that is why i think it is possible
also lrtr radar is surely capable of overall long range performance while operating in multiple mode (time shared)
in india today article it say it has 1000 km range

from article on greenpine it says:

The main features of the radar are:
Full phase-phase 3D radar system
Multi-mode operation (early warning, fire control, up-down link and combined modes)
Long range acquisition capability (hundreds km)
Simultaneous tracking on tens of targets
Large sector angles
All weather operation (major advantage of L band)
Doppler processing in each beam
Full coverage of BIT and calibration functions
Transportability by trucks

The main requirements from the radar are to detect and simultaneously track ballistic missiles over large sector angles in azimuth and in elevation. In order t o achieve all these requirements, a large
aperture phase-phase active array seems to be the best solution. The radar incorporates three modes:

(1) search or early warning mode
(2) track or f i r e control mode
(3) combined mode

A flexible time-energy mangement scheme, controlled via software code, enables the operator to optimize the coverage of the antenna according to the scenario. The programmable signal processor (PSP) of the radar enables selecting waveforms in each beam according the environmental conditions (targets, weather, clutter, hostile signals) while keeping a very low level of false alarms.