kobe wrote: - Mushi butt recognition will be used (if available)
which algorithm does this?
kobe wrote: - Mushi butt recognition will be used (if available)
Yeah but the news report from Hindu and other talks of GPS , and even the previous failures are attributed in some part to GPS going bad.kobe wrote: there is nothing contradictory,
"we don't depend on GPS" could very well mean:
- GPS will be used (if available)
- GLOSSNASS will be used (if available)
- IRNSS will be used (if available)
- Cellphone Triangulation will be used (if available)
- Mushi butt recognition will be used (if available)
This is what I got from 3 different people I talked to at Brhamos pavilion at AI09 - consistently they all mentioned..Austin wrote: Yeah but the news report from Hindu and other talks of GPS , and even the previous failures are attributed in some part to GPS going bad.
But in context of the current test , we need to be clear either GPS was used which means Dr Pillai statement was incorrect or it was not used , which means the previous failure of INS error or the current success has nothing to do with GPS signal.
Rakall , I believe in what those guys say.rakall wrote: Brahmos uses GPS/Glonass for INS correction.. But the first test failure had nothing to do with GPS.. The test was conducted at a 50km range - INS (which is is pretty accurate) at the 50km range would be very accurate... the error "if any" would be too small to require significant GPS correction..
The failure was with the new algorithm which had to find a target among a cluster of targets with similar RCS..
Have your pick of what to believe..
What if the target moves from position x to position y ? you can only do pre-programmed trajectory and- All the terminal manuering that the missile does is simply pre-programmed.. it does not make any decision anything on its own once fired..
Again good for stationary targets , if you want to take down a moving TEL or even smaller moving objects, you need to have a MMW seeker which can discriminate the target in the clutter and hit it.so the basic philosophy is that we always have the target & surroundings co-ordinates/picture from UAV or Recce flights or Satellite pics (remember Cartosat-2 can make 3D maps) ..
I did not mean it that way.. it was not meant at anyone..Austin wrote:Rakall , I believe in what those guys say.rakall wrote:
The failure was with the new algorithm which had to find a target among a cluster of targets with similar RCS..
Have your pick of what to believe..
..
The Brahmos guys specifically mentioned that GPS is used for correction of INS..Austin wrote:
1 ) Brahmos might be using GPS/GLONASS to get an initial fix of launcher position , this is for conditions where the launcher is always on the move ( could equally be ships and submarines ) , once the initial fix is obtained , for the rest of its flight it depends on INS based navigation with no GPS inflight updates , more ever the time of flight for the full range is so short that the INS error if at all if negligible , and the MMW radar can guide the missile to its target.
..
Austin wrote:
2 ) The failure of the algo is an acceptable answer , what is not acceptable is no new seeker , for all practical purpose it will be a MMW seeker which can discriminate a small insignificant target among a cluster of targets.
..
At 5-10km range and a flightspeed near Mach3 - does the missile have enough time to detect, change course and home-in?Austin wrote:
A MMW seeker though is limited on range i.e. ~ 5 to 10 km , but typical MMW seekers FMCW type with a bandwidth of 500 MHz and a range resolution of 30 cm , high range resolution is possible with MMW seeker , which will help in detection of small stationary or ground slow moving targets or even target based on known RF signatures , all in all perfect for what DRDO claims for Brahmos Block II
Austin wrote:What if the target moves from position x to position y ? you can only do pre-programmed trajectory and- All the terminal manuering that the missile does is simply pre-programmed.. it does not make any decision anything on its own once fired..
manouvering if the target is stationary and whose co-ordinates are known , some thing even a Brahmos Block 1 may do as well
Again good for stationary targets , if you want to take down a moving TEL or even smaller moving objects, you need to have a MMW seeker which can discriminate the target in the clutter and hit it.so the basic philosophy is that we always have the target & surroundings co-ordinates/picture from UAV or Recce flights or Satellite pics (remember Cartosat-2 can make 3D maps) ..
Well getting a real time information on such targets is again not easy , that would either make or break the block 2 true potential in real war , IMHO
Ofcourse not at all , nothing personal here , I must have put it in a wrong way , my bad , sorry.rakall wrote: I did not mean it that way.. it was not meant at anyone..
Dint direct it at you - just in case, you felt so.
So Brahmos Block 2 missile carries a GPS receiver ?rakall wrote:The Brahmos guys specifically mentioned that GPS is used for correction of INS..
Ok if Brahmos guys have mentioned that GPS is used for correction of INS inflight , then we *do* use GPS for sure , as opposed to what Dr Pillai has to say.The launcher is always in tandem with the command center which feeds the target and the path the missile should take.. if GPS is just to get initial co-ords of launcher -- why not have a GPS module in the control center which automatically feeds it along with the targets & flight path to the missile... Even a module attached to the launcher can pass the exact GPS fix to control center and control center can feed that along with the targets & flight path to the missile
Well a MMW seeker is small enough to fit into the nose of anti-tank missile , thats the USP of MMW seeker , small , high resolution ,high discrimination, all weather capability , making it ideal for Fire and Forget type and terminal homing scenario , even signature matching based on known RF signature of target is possible.I specifically asked if there was an mmw or SAR or ElOp seeker.. They said " it is not so simple to replace the seeker inside.. there is not much space in the nosecone which is fairly small "
I dont think it should be any larger than the current X band Antenna that Brahmos 1 has , in worst case as small as the current antenna.Which probably means the mmw or SAR seekers that can replace the existing RF seeker are probably over-sized compared to the exisiting one..
RLG is good as the navigation error will be minimal , all the more reason we dont need any external GPS type signal , if we get its good , if we dont its good as well.They also added that a new RF seeker is in JV development.. but did not mention any mmw or SAR - after repeated questions, the reply was only negative about the mmw/SAR. Further - the INS will also be upgraded to RLG's soon.
The flight speed should be ~ M 2 at 10 m and ~ M 2.8 if high altitude profile , well the idea is to take the missile as close to the target by means of INS and then the seeker do the final terminal homing based on the pre fed signature of the target , if one needs to attack a small target one needs high resolution image of the target under attack or a +ve way to discriminate it amongst clutters.At 5-10km range and a flightspeed near Mach3 - does the missile have enough time to detect, change course and home-in?
Much similar here , only the seeker may get activated at 10 Km , the target here is far cluttered and much smaller than a ship at sea and in cases will be moving slowly (TEL) , hence far more challenging and yes one can call it exotic feature.I dont know how it works out for the LACM version.. but atleast while discussing the anti-ship version (more specifically possibility of Anti-AWACS role), one guy mentioned that seeker opens out at distance of 40km (IIRC) which is less than 45secs before impact.. It has to be that far-out for seeker to open bcoz the ship would have been moving since the missile is fired - the seeker has to loacte the target, identify it, change direction and home-in within 45secs or less..
Well we are just here to share and learn from each other , and your Aero India coverage was quite commendable and excellentnot claiming what I say is "the truth".. But just sharing what I was told..
Well does it carry a GPS reciever or GLONASS reciever - I dont know.. but for INS correction it can take signals from GPS or GLONASS.. whether it is GPS and/or GLONASS - I am not sure.. so wheter it carried both recivers or one - if one, which one.. I dont know..Austin wrote: So Brahmos Block 2 missile carries a GPS receiver ?
Austin wrote: Well a MMW seeker is small enough to fit into the nose of anti-tank missile , thats the USP of MMW seeker , small , high resolution ,high discrimination, all weather capability , making it ideal for Fire and Forget type and terminal homing scenario , even signature matching based on known RF signature of target is possible.
[/quote]Austin wrote: I dont think one needs any complicated S shape manouver to attack a land target , because flying low at 10 m is itself a challenging target to detect at those speed , even a Top Attack while terminal hom
Austin, your conjecture is different from what the BrahMos guy told me and Shiv.... that is, the missile flies, and the SCAN algorithm correlates the radar image with the required target to identify it... then, the GPS/GLONASS signal is simultaneously used to locate the missile, by correcting the INS (which needs to be highly accurate for this role), and at the correct time, INS gives the signal to the missile for it to tip - this makes the FCS turn the missile so that it can attack the target right from the top to be accurate and powerful.Austin wrote:Rakall , I believe in what those guys say.rakall wrote: Brahmos uses GPS/Glonass for INS correction.. But the first test failure had nothing to do with GPS.. The test was conducted at a 50km range - INS (which is is pretty accurate) at the 50km range would be very accurate... the error "if any" would be too small to require significant GPS correction..
The failure was with the new algorithm which had to find a target among a cluster of targets with similar RCS..
Have your pick of what to believe..
1 ) Brahmos might be using GPS/GLONASS to get an initial fix of launcher position , this is for conditions where the launcher is always on the move ( could equally be ships and submarines ) , once the initial fix is obtained , for the rest of its flight it depends on INS based navigation with no GPS inflight updates , more ever the time of flight for the full range is so short that the INS error if at all if negligible , and the MMW radar can guide the missile to its target.
2 ) The failure of the algo is an acceptable answer , what is not acceptable is no new seeker , for all practical purpose it will be a MMW seeker which can discriminate a small insignificant target among a cluster of targets.
A MMW seeker though is limited on range i.e. ~ 5 to 10 km , but typical MMW seekers FMCW type with a bandwidth of 500 MHz and a range resolution of 30 cm , high range resolution is possible with MMW seeker , which will help in detection of small stationary or ground slow moving targets or even target based on known RF signatures , all in all perfect for what DRDO claims for Brahmos Block II
Does that mean there was a GPS failure in the last test?k prasad wrote:
@Rakall, the BrahMos guy told me that the last test had only GPS signal... today's test had both GPS and GLONASS receivers.
Yes rakall... that is what was the issue... the GPS signal was not received at the crucial last second, and INS held the data, which meant that the missile didn't tip - it ended up going a few meters over the target and hit the sands about 5-10 km behind (IIRC).rakall wrote:Does that mean there was a GPS failure in the last test?k prasad wrote: @Rakall, the BrahMos guy told me that the last test had only GPS signal... today's test had both GPS and GLONASS receivers.
because the way you have written the sentence, it is easy to conclude "last test failed bcoz of GPS failure.. todays test suceeded bcoz it had both".
I think I shud shut-up about the GPS bit now..k prasad wrote:Yes rakall... that is what was the issue... the GPS signal was not received at the crucial last second, and INS held the data, which meant that the missile didn't tip - it ended up going a few meters over the target and hit the sands about 5-10 km behind (IIRC).rakall wrote: Does that mean there was a GPS failure in the last test?
because the way you have written the sentence, it is easy to conclude "last test failed bcoz of GPS failure.. todays test suceeded bcoz it had both".
BrahMos aren't sure if the GPS deliberately blinked, or there was some genuine error... either way, it pointed out that a single source would not be reliable. I think GPS will be the first line, with GLONASS after that.
the only point is -- after the initial whispers about "cooperation on KS172", everything seems to have gone cold.. As of now KS172 was not even seen on Ru platforms..vavinash wrote:Does it make sense to use brahmos as awacs killer when far lighter KS-172 (750 kg)or R-37 is available? Even KS-172 will depend on the signals from Awacs or MKI to guide it to the vicinity. Its only at 50 km the missiles seeker goes active.
India to test Interceptor Missile on Friday
Thursday, March 05, 2009 18:37 [IST]
New Delhi: India will Friday test launch its indigenous interceptor missile that will destroy an incoming ballistic "enemy" missile at an altitude of 80 km and will provide defence against Pakistani and Chinese missiles, an official said.
"All the preparations have been made and all the scientists are working to make the test successful," a Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) official said. The test, to be conducted at Wheeler s Island off the coast of Orissa, will establish the credible missile defence against Paksitan s Hatf and Ghauri missiles. The first test of the interceptor missile was conducted in 2006.
"During the test an enemy missile which will be a modified version of the Dhanush surface-to-surface missile will will be fired from a naval ship in the Bay of Bengal and simulate the terminal phase of the flight of a ballistic missile with a range of 1,500 km, similar to Pakistan s Ghauri missile," the official said. "As the incoming missile nears Wheeler Island, a Prithvi air defence missile will be launched to intercept it at an altitude of about 80 km and kill it," the official added.
DRDO needs to carry out at least three to four trials with both versions before the missile shield is certified for operational use. "The test will mark the completion of the first phase of the programme and it will secure operational clearance by 2012-13," the official added. On Dec 6,2007,DRDO had for the second time successfully tested an endo-atmospheric - below 30 km altitude - version of the ballistic missile defence shield.
The missile aims to protect populated areas and vital installations like nuclear power stations and oil wells. The missile shield will have highly sensitive radars to track incoming missiles. The guidance system would ensure that the interceptor collides with the incoming missile within a matter of seconds, thereby saving vital targets from destruction. Baptised as the Prithvi Air Defence system, the agile interceptor has now been renamed Pradyumna.
DRDO says its missile system is comparable to the Israeli Arrow system and the American Patriot system, both of whose manufacturers are courting the Indian defence establishment for possible orders. DRDO expects ballistic missile shield to take care of threats from existing Chinese and Pakistani missiles. While Pakistan possesses missiles with ranges between 400 and 2,000 km, the Chinese arsenal varies from a range of 300 km to 2,800 km.
You have not missed, it is I who has not delivered. Did not get time to HTML'ise it to put on BR. There are not enough hours in day due to work. Bearly get enough time to browse some BRF pages, and no quality time to translate the article into html.SKrishna wrote:Arun Saar
I am still waiting for your promised article on Shaurya (or have I missed it?)
Singha saab, think of other ways. There is this thing called GAGAN that does something relevant here in terms of surveyed coordinates of launch site and target datum for BrahMos INS to do its magic.Singha wrote:we dont get the 1m accuracy mil grade signal on encrypted channel, just the civilian channel. so it can be depended on only to get into general area not for taking out precision targets.
unkil can also degrade the signal or shut down the sats in the periods of time they are in our range at will in a time of war to help the munna.
I wouldnt trust Rus too much either....
better to put out a little constellation of our own to cover asia.
Nose of goat loving Maqbool Butt from Azad Swat.Nitesh wrote:kobe wrote: - Mushi butt recognition will be used (if available)
which algorithm does this?
To me that does not make sense. No missile designer will wait for last few second (from the time missile needs to tip) to re-align its INS from GPS; one might as well throw the INS junk and instead get the INS used in first generation DARIN.k prasad wrote:Yes rakall... that is what was the issue... the GPS signal was not received at the crucial last second, and INS held the data, which meant that the missile didn't tip - it ended up going a few meters over the target and hit the sands about 5-10 km behind (IIRC).
"During the test an 'enemy' missile which will be a modified version of the Dhanush surface-to-surface missile will be fired from a naval ship in the Bay of Bengal and simulate the terminal phase of the flight of a ballistic missile with a range of 1,500 km, similar to Pakistan's Ghauri missile," the official said.
"As the incoming missile nears Wheeler Island, a Prithvi air defence missile will be launched to intercept it at an altitude of about 80 km and kill it," the official added.
DRDO needs to carry out at least three to four trials with both versions before the missile shield is certified for operational use.
"The test will mark the completion of the first phase of the programme and it will secure operational clearance by 2012-13," the official added.
Baptised as the Prithvi Air Defence system, the agile interceptor has now been renamed Pradyumna.
Both versions can be correct...the bug must have been in the SCAN algorithm, which waited for GPS signal before initializing its frame (in other words, GPS signal was pre-requisite for it to initialize). So in a way, not receiving GPS signal caused the failure.Arun_S wrote:...The root cause IMHO of previous test failure was SCAN correlator algorithm not locking to the target because either:k prasad wrote:..GPS signal was not received at the crucial last second...
- A. it was not able to initialize its frame from what INS told it
Pls read my post again. Aiming algorithms works with IMU/INS, there will be no connection between SCAN algorithm and GPS.ManuJ wrote:Both versions can be correct...the bug must have been in the SCAN algorithm, which waited for GPS signal before initializing its frame (in other words, GPS signal was pre-requisite for it to initialize). So in a way, not receiving GPS signal caused the failure.
How about Monica Lewinsky!SaiK wrote:Pradyumna!
GAGAN is GPS augmented signal. So if there is no GPS signal there is no GAGAN.Singha saab, think of other ways. There is this thing called GAGAN that does something relevant here in terms of surveyed coordinates of launch site and target datum for BrahMos INS to do its magic.
Kobe mate my reply to your post before was more on the lines of being reactive/negative and I apologise for that.kobe wrote:1) i had a yumble reguest only, heed - no heed, anyone can decide.
2) no one is implying that we should only post links to news articles
3) all the above overly simplistic calculations are FALSE, i know, but i can't tell you why
4) i can only request to focus on intent of the forum and you guys do / write whatever you want
5) yes, no one is a born guru and one way to become guru is to be humble, be quiet, and read a lot, memorize a lot, and if necessary ask questions, then contemplate, meditate, and then again read a lot, memorize a lot, all the while being humble and quiet.
Are they still consulting Vajpayee regarding names?SaiK wrote:Pradyumna!
Perhaps, his ability to break Chakravyuha prompted the nomenclature.Bharat wrote:Pradyumna is another name for Lord Krishna and in some writings is the son of Lord Krishna and Rukmini. He is also one of the few who knew how to break the Chakravyuha.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pradyumna
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_Hindu_Mythology
I don't get the signifigance of it, but is it all in a name ?
I think somebody made an observation Project Air Defence (Prad) and probably grew up near yamuna. There you go.NRao wrote:"Pradyumna" also ......... mean "Hero".
Arun_S wrote:How about Monica Lewinsky!SaiK wrote:Pradyumna!