Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 22 Jan 2009 12:15

The range of Brahmos may well exceed 290Km by a longshot and its payload may exceed 500kg. But for MTCR reasons the convienient payload of 300Kg and 290Km is adopted. the true range will come out only in the case of a war.

Neilz · Post by **Neilz** » 22 Jan 2009 12:23

^^^^
That is why I said we must start it now....... if we keep waiting for TOT for every crucial tech then we will go no where. We must start research to develop a missile engine of this type. And again TOT will not give us full capability to design a new system from scratch. Only if we go through the pain of new r&d we get to know lot of pros & cons of the tech which will give us very crucial knowledge. In r&D failure too gives some knowledge. And some time failure results in a path breaking "spinoff" technology.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 22 Jan 2009 19:23

Nihat wrote:Quote:
And its high time now we must consider to enhance the range of the Brahmos.

for that we'll need full Tot as there is no way we can go at it with Russia , the max. is 300 Km.

Can't we change the metallic body and whatever parts possible with composites? With some flight control changes, a weight reduction should transform to increased range or capacity. We still pay Russians the royalty for their designs, just that we select different materials...

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 22 Jan 2009 20:00

Arun_S wrote:
ajay_ijn wrote:Sir, is land attack brahmos also having terminal RF Seeker?
Yes terminal RF Seeker hardware of BrahMos remain unchanged for land attack version too.
almost every land attack missile has electro-optical guidance. will it be possible to detect and identify structures with Radar seekers in a better way compared to electro-optical?
Every other land attack missile is also subsonic, thus electro-optical guidance (that are almost all of them IR based) is not a big challange. The high skin temperature of Mach 3 flight makes EO sensor a challange and cost issue.

How would Radar seeker exactly work for land based targets? would it be SAR Mode?. with IIR, it would try match images of target with the ones taken previously. But how to collect targeting information for Radar seekers?

also are we planning something like GPS/GLONASS receivers for mid-course navigation or INS is good enough.

Neilz · Post by **Neilz** » 22 Jan 2009 22:33

Kailash wrote: Can't we change the metallic body and whatever parts possible with composites? With some flight control changes, a weight reduction should transform to increased range or capacity. We still pay Russians the royalty for their designs, just that we select different materials...

Things are not so simple my dear friend. And we dont pay Russian just for design, the rocket engine(as complete product) too from them.

I think we are trying to get composite casing rather all composite missiles. There was a news few months back that DRDO already on the move. But its really high tech and time consuming process. First it is a part of pure science field and second we have to make the technology viable and third we have to find a way i.e. developing tools, precision engineering tool etc to make it easy production. So there is lot at stake. Have patience. We can safely say that we are on right track and already walked a bit.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Jan 2009 22:35

Arun_S, doesnt the vehicle need more radius to turn at very high speed? Was that the challenge to seek out the target from a group of decoys?

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 23 Jan 2009 04:01

Yes for higher accuracy the missile has to do a top attack manoeuvr, but for a Mach-3 supersonic missile it is a huge challenge. TS Subramaium reports problem with terminal stage manoeuvres. That is technology corner point where one is pushing physical aerodynamic and control limits with high Angle of Attack (AoA) manoeuvres and the high AoA also imposes challenges on Radar sensors because now the target is at higher angle away from the bore sight (where radars accuracy tends to be poorer). I think it was challenge combination of both extremes.

T.S. Subramanian.
.... The flight involved a lot of terminal-stage manoeuvres, which were difficult to perform at a supersonic speed of nearly three times the speed of sound. The issue, which was identified and analysed, was “not serious.”

“The new algorithm has to be re-validated through many simulation runs and we will get foolproof software so that such complicated mission requirements are met …We are confident that we will do another launch within a month.”

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Jan 2009 04:56

So does it have divert engines for extreme manouveres at high speed?

And why would one want to do that?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 23 Jan 2009 04:58

so, why do we want brahmos to be having extended range? why not drdo develop all new cm for that, may be after nirbhay and brahmos?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 23 Jan 2009 05:14

India's 'nuke' cruise missile test fails

Official sources have told Asia Times Online on the condition of anonymity that the latest test of the BrahMos was carried out under a new guidance system configured to carry a nuclear warhead instead of a conventional one, which is perhaps the likely cause for the test parameters not being met.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 23 Jan 2009 05:20

missing a target by a building [CEP of about 10 - 20 meters] is awesome for a nuke, lets say its a thermo nuke..weighing 100/200kgs.

are these du nukes for bunker busters, that there was a recent ddming about it that drdo is capable off?.. perhaps it is.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Jan 2009 05:56

The story is plain worng as the DRDO guy explained. What happened was a new guidance to take out specific target among a cluster of decoys was attempted. At Mach3 the radius to turn is very high. Do the math. So they have to work the engines in on-off mode to act as divert engines. May be it over corrected. And as the guy said it can be fixed and will run the test in a month.

once it is ready they can take out specific huts containing maal without going nuke.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 23 Jan 2009 06:27

SaiK wrote:so, why do we want brahmos to be having extended range? why not drdo develop all new cm for that, may be after nirbhay and brahmos?

Precisely.

And isn't Shaurya, a canistered 'semi-' cruise missile anyway (at least in terms of non-conventional trajectory and reported maneuver ability)?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Jan 2009 08:07

There must be need. its not like DRDO has ample budget to pursue 'science' projects. I think this model is a tipping point due to its high speed and accuracy.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 23 Jan 2009 08:28

Arun_S wrote:Yes for higher accuracy the missile has to do a top attack manoeuvr, but for a Mach-3 supersonic missile it is a huge challenge. TS Subramaium reports problem with terminal stage manoeuvres. That is technology corner point where one is pushing physical aerodynamic and control limits with high Angle of Attack (AoA) manoeuvres and the high AoA also imposes challenges on Radar sensors because now the target is at higher angle away from the bore sight (where radars accuracy tends to be poorer). I think it was challenge combination of both extremes.
[....

the navy version(?) did display the s-maneuver in an earlier test. so DRDO has already shown that they do have the capability to do drastic terminal maneuvering.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Jan 2009 08:41

the S is in the horizontal plane.

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 23 Jan 2009 09:05

SaiK wrote:so, why do we want brahmos to be having extended range? why not drdo develop all new cm for that, may be after nirbhay and brahmos?

I guess they wouldn't want to reinvent the wheel, unless of course BrahMos as a platform has some serious constraints. They can enhance the BrahMos and say it's a new missile, that shouldn't be a problem given the ToT we have purchased, is that correct?

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 23 Jan 2009 09:10

ramana wrote:The story is plain worng as the DRDO guy explained. What happened was a new guidance to take out specific target among a cluster of decoys was attempted. At Mach3 the radius to turn is very high. Do the math. So they have to work the engines in on-off mode to act as divert engines. May be it over corrected. And as the guy said it can be fixed and will run the test in a month.

Add to that in a realistic scenario, a cluster of missiles will be fired at the target. So their decoys plus the eventual target will be kaboom. But there's work to be done on the accuracy part, flaws have come out, been identified and are being worked upon. I think this is positive news.

Of course all the Paki/Chini defense "journals" will be celebrating. Here's to them..

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 23 Jan 2009 09:34

Singha wrote:the S is in the horizontal plane.

IIRC it wasn't completely in the horizontal plane. even if it were so, it does show the ability to use terminal maneuvering in a supersonic missile.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 23 Jan 2009 10:48

The "G" required for 'S' is much lower than Cobra strike terminal manuver; as the missile cruises at low altitude and for final homing has to rise to get a better elevation perspective to reduce spread in longitudinal axis, so as to hit target at highest possible elevation (IMHO ~30-60 deg). That demands much tighter "G". The final dip of 30-60 deg in shortest possible time is the difficult part when done at supersonic speed, much more at high supersonic speed of 2.8 Mach.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 23 Jan 2009 10:53

arun ji, what would be a ballpark g figure for the top attack maneuver ?

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 23 Jan 2009 13:30

Add to that in a realistic scenario, a cluster of missiles will be fired at the target. So their decoys plus the eventual target will be kaboom. But there's work to be done on the accuracy part, flaws have come out, been identified and are being worked upon. I think this is positive news.

Of course all the Paki/Chini defense "journals" will be celebrating. Here's to them..

there is nothing for them to celebrate -the new avatar of brahmos will even more deadly and effective with almost 100% kill rate

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 23 Jan 2009 22:49

Cruise Missile launch detection is very difficult. Given that India will soon have air launched BrahMos, in actual use when a technicalian flips a switch to make this missile fly to a range of 301 km, who is there to arbiter that the missile that hit Peshawar was land launched or Rambha delivered?

Yindu Nay Kiya Kush.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 23 Jan 2009 22:55

ramana wrote:There must be need. its not like DRDO has ample budget to pursue 'science' projects. I think this model is a tipping point due to its high speed and accuracy.

indeed.. we could use existing platforms to pursue technology for the next version/a new product.. in fact a chosen model of r&d world over (first steps). but in our case here, there is a russian angle to it.. as long as we are covered on the agreements, it should be ok. two thumbs up!

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 24 Jan 2009 09:08

DRDO schedules another missile defence test next month

Aiming to get a shield against missile over its skies, India will conduct another test of its Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) next month.
"Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) will conduct the test of its interceptor missile and missile tracking radars next month for validating the advancements made in the Air Defence programme," Defence Ministry sources told PTI here today.

Though the interceptor missiles, namely Prithvi Air Defence (PAD) and Advanced Air Defence (AAD), have been tested earlier, the main aim of the next month's test would be to validate the capabilities of the indigenously developed 'Swordfish' Long Range Tracking Radar (LRTR).

Swordfish is a target acquisition and fire control radar for the BMD system.

"The missile to be hit will be fired from a longer distance than it was in the earlier test. DRDO will test whether the radar can track the incoming missile from that distance or not," they said.

In next month's test, the exo-atmospheric interceptor missile PAD will hit its target in space at an altitude over 80 km from earth, sources said.

They said the premier defence research agency will carry out another test around the year end to enhance the capabilities of AAD endo-atmospheric missile, which is used for intercepting missiles at altitudes up to 15 km.

Sources said if the tests prove successful, the DRDO will go ahead with the deployment of the BMD by 2015.

http://www.idrw.org/2009/01/23/drdo_sch ... month.html

is Swordfish aka green pine radar from Israel ?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 24 Jan 2009 09:16

DRDO schedules another missile defence test next month

Aiming to get a shield against missile over its skies, India will conduct another test of its Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) next month.

another test of its Ballistic Missile Defence

"Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) will conduct the test of its interceptor missile and missile tracking radars next month for validating the advancements made in the Air Defence programme," Defence Ministry sources told PTI here today.

Though the interceptor missiles, namely Prithvi Air Defence (PAD) and Advanced Air Defence (AAD), have been tested earlier, the main aim of the next month's test would be to validate the capabilities of the indigenously developed 'Swordfish' Long Range Tracking Radar (LRTR).

Swordfish is a target acquisition and fire control radar for the BMD system.

"The missile to be hit will be fired from a longer distance than it was in the earlier test. DRDO will test whether the radar can track the incoming missile from that distance or not," they said.

I think we had a discussion here on increased range of LRTR sometime back.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Jan 2009 11:02

is Swordfish aka green pine radar from Israel ?

the article clearly states :

test would be to validate the capabilities of the indigenously developed 'Swordfish'

since israel is not a province of India, I think a lesson in comprehension is in order.

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 24 Jan 2009 11:04

Swordfish to be tested Feb; another AAD interceptor test later in the year; tentative deployment date 2015.

Missile Defense: Swordfish Long Range Tracking RADAR (LRTR) to be Tested in February 2009

The Indian missile defense programme has been steadily progressing over the last 24 months with two Interceptor missiles Prithvi Air Defence (PAD) and Advanced Air Defence (AAD) already tested successfully.

Press Trust of India now reports that the Long Range Tracking Radar 'Swordfish' will also be tested in the coming weeks by DRDO. Below mentioned are the main points from that report and other references:

-- Interceptor missiles Prithvi Air Defence (PAD) and Advanced Air Defence (AAD) have been tested successfully

-- Main aim of the February 2009 test is to validate the capabilities of the indigenously developed 'Swordfish' Long Range Tracking Radar (LRTR). "The missile to be hit will be fired from a longer distance than it was in the earlier test. DRDO will test whether the radar can track the incoming missile from that distance or not" sources told the news agency.

-- Swordfish is a target acquisition and fire control radar for the BMD system

-- Exo-atmospheric interceptor missile PAD will hit its target in space at an altitude over 80 km from earth

-- More tests by year end to enhance the capabilities of AAD endo-atmospheric missile to intercept missiles at altitudes up to 15 km

-- If all tests are successful and no issues crop up, then the tentative date for deployment is 2015

URL: http://www.india-defence.com/reports-4182

sum · Post by **sum** » 24 Jan 2009 11:49

Finally, a decent sounding name like "Swordfish" instead of "peace loving names" like Maitri, Tejas etc....

All the best to DRDO for the upcoming test.

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 24 Jan 2009 13:11

swordfish was known for some time now.... it isn't a new name

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Jan 2009 13:25

is it feasible for ground surveillance radars in north india to use some "ionospheric bounce" to detect and track ground vehicle movements in tibet at some good granularity ?

this would be a good early warning and cue more fine grained airborne systems
and missile/AF counterstrike forces.

can the Anglo-Aus Jindalee OTH just track ships in clear water.

MN Kumar · Post by **MN Kumar** » 24 Jan 2009 13:32

tentative date for deployment is 2015

Nice to see the developers quoting a realistic date. Just shows how difficult the task is and how far we have reached in these two years. Strategic systems like these are painfully slow in development as there is a steep learning curve involved. I would wish for an early deployment but also hope we do it on our own. No one will share this kind of tech with us.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 24 Jan 2009 14:44

Ionospheric reflections are not reliable enough to detect slow moving ground targets. OTH detection is possible with fast moving objects because the doppler shift will be appreciable. Also, you can't really "track" them. You can only get a bearing to them.

Shishir P · Post by **Shishir P** » 24 Jan 2009 16:36

This is my first post, though I have been following BR forums for years......

Today @Techfest IITB DRDO had kept some of there exibits...there was Brahmose too
I had a long talk with a senior(atleast in looks) DRDO sceintist @Brahmose display. I asked him about the recent pokharan test, acc. to him the test was a Army trail with the army setting all the test parameters like nature , distance etc. The target actually was a 12mtr high wall inside a gorge of twice the height with metallic reflectors at 56Kms distance, there were also lots of similar dummy targets to confuse the missile from actual target. Normally the seeker of missile in normal long range test gets activated when the missile reaches a distance of 50-60 Kms but for this short range test it was just 20-25kms and the complete duration of test was 37secs exactly.
The missile missed the target by just 1-2 mtrs and hit few tens of mtr away, he also said that though the missile missed the target the Army was very happy with missile as the warhead can be fitted with proximity fuse to overcome this miss easily but the brahmose guys want to even overcome this miss and will do some changes in algorithm, thats all is required. This test was to test the missile to its envelop...and should not be seen as a failure. Also there was only a dummy warhead n nothing nuclear in it as in its nothing different if there was nuclar warhead, if you have a compact nuke device then even pinaka can be a nuclear missile.
Need some expert opinion on this description......atleast I was amazed to hear that first time the Army is happy with product nut the developer still is not satisfied......really see this as a positive sign

username changed to Shishir P.see user guidelines for details.
welcome to BR.
Rahul.

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 24 Jan 2009 18:12

Extremely interesting info Slayer.... proves just how good our baby is!!!

p_saggu · Post by **p_saggu** » 24 Jan 2009 19:29

Shishir P,
Welcome to BR. Good info. Keep the public informed with vetted 'leaks' such as this.

Now wrt the Brahmos and Nuclear warheads,
I think some Brahmos team member is on record that the space constraints on the missile meant that no current Indian weapon could be accommodated. This of course does not mean that BARC will not come up with a solution to this.
The point is that given the accuracy of this system, the use of a Nuke can perhaps only be justified if the missile is used as a bunker buster - then perhaps a low yield tactical nuclear weapon purely for providing more bang for the weight of the warhead might be considered.

However as it stands, the sheer kinetic energy transferred onto the target by 3 tons of steel traveling at mach 3 is horribly devastating, might provide the energy required for penetration of a hardened structure. The warhead can provide the aftereffects 'inside' the hardened target.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 24 Jan 2009 19:45

Shishir P wrote:This is my first post, though I have been following BR forums for years......

Today @Techfest IITB DRDO had kept some of there exibits...there was Brahmose too
I had a long talk with a senior(atleast in looks) DRDO sceintist @Brahmose display. I asked him about the recent pokharan test, acc. to him the test was a Army trail with the army setting all the test parameters like nature , distance etc. The target actually was a 12mtr high wall inside a gorge of twice the height with metallic reflectors at 56Kms distance, there were also lots of similar dummy targets to confuse the missile from actual target. Normally the seeker of missile in normal long range test gets activated when the missile reaches a distance of 50-60 Kms but for this short range test it was just 20-25kms and the complete duration of test was 37secs exactly.
The missile missed the target by just 1-2 mtrs and hit few tens of mtr away, he also said that though the missile missed the target the Army was very happy with missile as the warhead can be fitted with proximity fuse to overcome this miss easily but the brahmose guys want to even overcome this miss and will do some changes in algorithm, thats all is required. This test was to test the missile to its envelop...and should not be seen as a failure. Also there was only a dummy warhead n nothing nuclear in it as in its nothing different if there was nuclar warhead, if you have a compact nuke device then even pinaka can be a nuclear missile.
Need some expert opinion on this description......atleast I was amazed to hear that first time the Army is happy with product nut the developer still is not satisfied......really see this as a positive sign

It is good you see it that as a positive sign. There are still many people who cant shed the image of derelict org imposed on drdo. Contrary to reports, the test was not a failure. It could be a failure it the target was not indentified. But here, the target was acquired. And it is not hard to guess where the problem lies. It will be corrected the way the missile reaches the target. So it is a small hitch. JMT.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 24 Jan 2009 19:51

Singha wrote:is it feasible for ground surveillance radars in north india to use some "ionospheric bounce" to detect and track ground vehicle movements in tibet at some good granularity ?

this would be a good early warning and cue more fine grained airborne systems
and missile/AF counterstrike forces.

can the Anglo-Aus Jindalee OTH just track ships in clear water.

Sir, day by day, i'm getting the sense that Chinese are fast moving ahead of us while we are looking at solving the jehadi problem. We must invest in every possible tech otherwise Chinese going to beat us hands down in NE.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 25 Jan 2009 02:05

India showcases its military prowess in R-Day parade rehearsal

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 25 Jan 2009 12:36

Shishir P wrote:This is my first post, though I have been following BR forums for years......

Today @Techfest IITB DRDO had kept some of there exibits...there was Brahmose too
I had a long talk with a senior(atleast in looks) DRDO sceintist @Brahmose display. I asked him about the recent pokharan test, acc. to him the test was a Army trail with the army setting all the test parameters like nature , distance etc. The target actually was a 12mtr high wall inside a gorge of twice the height with metallic reflectors at 56Kms distance, there were also lots of similar dummy targets to confuse the missile from actual target. Normally the seeker of missile in normal long range test gets activated when the missile reaches a distance of 50-60 Kms but for this short range test it was just 20-25kms and the complete duration of test was 37secs exactly.
The missile missed the target by just 1-2 mtrs and hit few tens of mtr away, he also said that though the missile missed the target the Army was very happy with missile as the warhead can be fitted with proximity fuse to overcome this miss easily but the brahmose guys want to even overcome this miss and will do some changes in algorithm, thats all is required. This test was to test the missile to its envelop...and should not be seen as a failure. Also there was only a dummy warhead n nothing nuclear in it as in its nothing different if there was nuclar warhead, if you have a compact nuke device then even pinaka can be a nuclear missile.
Need some expert opinion on this description......atleast I was amazed to hear that first time the Army is happy with product nut the developer still is not satisfied......really see this as a positive sign

username changed to Shishir P.see user guidelines for details.
welcome to BR.
Rahul.

By jove, this is exactly as some of us thought. This missile is to take enemy nukes hidden in tunnel/silos.
I love it with gorge wall height twice the height of 12 m wall the purpose was to penetrate the tunnel (at the precise weak point) and explode the few kT yield warhead, the burial strongly couples the yield into solid earth that will destroy enemy warheads and missile.

With Paki residual warheads seeking refuge first from Kandahar, then from Baluchistan (thank-you RAW) (mountains are not safe from jihadi adventure so that precludes Northern Areas), Porkieas are left with nothing but put their vital assets in Pak-jab, albeit in dug up locations. But the BrahMos is made ready to "Kaam Tamam" even the hijaab hidden vital assets and pillage it by entering weak orifices and small N-bum.

Allah be praised for small mercies on his Momins.