Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Aug 2009 05:14

raghunath wrote:Nice close-up pics of Brahmos at MAKS 2009, Russia.

Looks like a air craft launch version. ?????????

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 18 Aug 2009 05:33

^^Yep. One of these pics was posted by Austin in international aerospace thread. Its the air launched version.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 18 Aug 2009 05:38

Parijat Gaur wrote:^^Yep. One of these pics was posted by Austin in international aerospace thread. Its the air launched version.

It hasn't been tested yet has it? Weren't the russkies strengthening the airframe of an MKI to be able to launch it?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 18 Aug 2009 05:42

Yes, AFAIK there have been no media reports of air launched bramhos been tested so far.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 18 Aug 2009 05:47

NRao wrote:
raghunath wrote:Nice close-up pics of Brahmos at MAKS 2009, Russia.
Looks like a air craft launch version. ?????????

+

Errr

Rao Saheb wasnt the air launched version without ze booster and that was supposed to save some weight. The pic has the booster at the end I think....or ist that part of the missile as well hmph I am conphused now....also the nose looks like its got the same jetssioning mechanism of blowing the cap off after a vl IIRC they had a simpler version of this as well for the air launched....hmph!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 18 Aug 2009 05:51

it needs the booster to get to sufficient velocity for the ramjet to kick in.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 18 Aug 2009 06:00

Rahul M wrote:it needs the booster to get to sufficient velocity for the ramjet to kick in.

What if the aircraft is flying at Mach 2 when the missile is launched. Will the booster be still required? Or will a missile launch at supersonic speeds put too much stress on the airframe?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 18 Aug 2009 06:04

Why does that matter? Surely no missile would be designed considering only a particular scenario (and that too an unlikely one).

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 18 Aug 2009 06:21

Parijat Gaur wrote:Why does that matter? Surely no missile would be designed considering only a particular scenario (and that too an unlikely one).

IIRC they were having trouble mating the air-launched Brahmos to the flanker because of its size and weight. Removing the booster would reduce both. That's why I was curious as to if what I was thinking was possible.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Aug 2009 06:34

andy B wrote: wasnt the air launched version without ze booster and that was supposed to save some weight. The pic has the booster at the end I think....or ist that part of the missile as well hmph I am conphused now....also the nose looks like its got the same jetssioning mechanism of blowing the cap off after a vl IIRC they had a simpler version of this as well for the air launched....hmph!

A smaller Booster is planned. Needs a booster, even at higher speeds.

"jetssioning mechanism" - do not know. However, guessing it may be useful to launch if the AC is not in the direction of the intended flight. Brahmos has to make a U-turn for instance?

The only way they could level the field is by nuclear attack submarines or Gwadar airfield. They are pursuing both.

China, JUST last week, stated that they are pulling out of the Gwadar refinery project. This is expected to impact the entire Sino-Pak whatever corridor - the one that was expected to host the pipeline from Gwadar. If that happens then the port project will sink. Besides the PN has refused to move out of some prime real estate to accommodate the port project.

So, it looks like that jewel is losing its luster.

(The main reason given for all to withdraw is insurgency in that area. Go figure. Insurgency in Pakistan. And, one that China has to be concerned enough to take such an action is telling on Paki state of affairs.)

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 18 Aug 2009 06:42

nachiket wrote: What if the aircraft is flying at Mach 2 when the missile is launched. Will the booster be still required? Or will a missile launch at supersonic speeds put too much stress on the airframe?

NRao wrote: "jetssioning mechanism" - do not know. However, guessing it may be useful to launch if the AC is not in the direction of the intended flight. Brahmos has to make a U-turn for instance?

Also fighters rarely ever travel at Mach 2 speeds except for a quick dash out of combat airspace. Think the amount of illumination for the IR missiles the afterburner and the a/c skin would provide at Mach 2.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 18 Aug 2009 07:44

Parijat Gaur wrote: Also fighters rarely ever travel at Mach 2 speeds except for a quick dash out of combat airspace. Think the amount of illumination for the IR missiles the afterburner and the a/c skin would provide at Mach 2.

I know that. I was thinking along the lines of a Supersonic dash just before firing the missile and going back to subsonic speeds immediately after, but I guess its just wishful thinking of a jingo.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 18 Aug 2009 09:00

An old report from the Hindu
India, Russia to develop air-launched BrahMos

The IAF version of BrahMos will be lighter than the Naval version which weighs three tonnes. But the range will be the same. The IAF version will have an improved booster and a modified nose cap.

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 18 Aug 2009 11:10

nachiket wrote:
Parijat Gaur wrote: Also fighters rarely ever travel at Mach 2 speeds except for a quick dash out of combat airspace. Think the amount of illumination for the IR missiles the afterburner and the a/c skin would provide at Mach 2.
I know that. I was thinking along the lines of a Supersonic dash just before firing the missile and going back to subsonic speeds immediately after, but I guess its just wishful thinking of a jingo.

MKI hauling a Brahmos and dashing at mach 2 is a moot point. Payload is too heavy to dash at that speed and have an appreciable range.

Regards,
Kiran

Added later: Not to forget the added stress/ strain on the airframe as a result.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Aug 2009 13:58

An unstable Baluchistan in Pak will put any such project in jeopardy.At this moment in time,China is putting its money on Hambantota in SL.It may have even made an offer to the GOSL to set up a refinery in Lanka,either on the south coast (Hambantota) or even at Trinco,using the WW2 oil tank farm there for storage.Watch this space.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 18 Aug 2009 15:57

To all fanboys of Brahmos, a point to ponder.

All Land/Ship launched version is 3000 kg in weight and achieves a range of 290 km. It was hoped that when Brahmos was deployed on a MKI, its range perhaps would get a little (or more than a little) lift. So what did the Ruskies do to keep their export(JV product) strictly in compliance with MTCR. The Air launched version of Brahmos is lighter and we are back to a max range of 290 km.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Aug 2009 16:59

All versions of Brahmos will be restricted to below 300 Km limit.

Which is why we have the proposed ManTech.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 18 Aug 2009 17:06

Army acquires anti-aircraft missiles

http://www.timesnow.tv/Army-acquires-an ... 325059.cms

The defence acquisition council, headed by Defence Minister AK Antony and comprising the 3 service chiefs, agreed to a multi-billion dollar contract for Israeli anti-aircraft missiles.........The Spyder is a low-level quick-reaction surface-to-air missile system capable of engaging aircraft, helicopters, unmanned air vehicles, drones and precision-guided munitions. The Spyder system has 360 degree engagement capability and the missiles can be launched from full-readiness state in less than five seconds after a target is acquired.........The Spyder's kill range is from less than 1km to more than 35 km and at altitudes from a minimum of 20 metres to a maximum of 9 kilometres.

Was in the pipeline for a long time.

kasthuri · Post by **kasthuri** » 18 Aug 2009 19:04

Was in the pipeline for a long time.

Yesterday there were reports that TSP was close in getting drones from Unkil and our defense establishment in Delhi was highly concerned about the development as almost all of them are directed towards us.

Link 1 : US drones sale a security risk
Link 2 : India concerned over possible drone sale to Pak

Moreover, couple of days back Holbrooke was telling the media that US is considering supplying weapons to the TSP. I don't know our purchase was in cards for a long time, but the timing of it suggests that India is ready for a bad news from the US.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 18 Aug 2009 22:43

I think Drones should be covered under MTCR regimes because it can actually launch a missile more than 300 km from the origin of its flight. I dont believe that US will ever sell drones to Pakis. It will simply be copied within a year by Chinese reverse engineers. Amirkhans should know it.

India should massively invest in R&D of anti-drone or drone killer or drone detector machines/technology.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 18 Aug 2009 22:52

ashish raval wrote:I think Drones should be covered under MTCR regimes because it can actually launch a missile more than 300 km from the origin of its flight. I dont believe that US will ever sell drones to Pakis. It will simply be copied within a year by Chinese reverse engineers. Amirkhans should know it.

India should massively invest in R&D of anti-drone or drone killer or drone detector machines/technology.

What's your opinion on fighter jets?

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 18 Aug 2009 22:56

^^ cant be in the air all the time. We need to deploy 10 Greenpines along the border.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 18 Aug 2009 23:01

ashish raval wrote:^^ cant be in the air all the time. We need to deploy 10 Greenpines along the border.

Sorry I should have framed my question better the 1st time. I was asking your opinion on fighter jets, by the same logic, not falling under MTCR? There goes all our current and future procurement plans.

US will do exactly as it desires, which is never an easy thing to guess. We should make our view known to them in clear terms but start planning assuming it will be made available sometime in the future.

AbhishekD · Post by **AbhishekD** » 19 Aug 2009 03:14

What is the technology to kill drones. Can drones be detected by a normal radar?

John · Post by **John** » 19 Aug 2009 03:49

pankajs wrote:To all fanboys of Brahmos, a point to ponder.

All Land/Ship launched version is 3000 kg in weight and achieves a range of 290 km. It was hoped that when Brahmos was deployed on a MKI, its range perhaps would get a little (or more than a little) lift. So what did the Ruskies do to keep their export(JV product) strictly in compliance with MTCR. The Air launched version of Brahmos is lighter and we are back to a max range of 290 km.

Fanboys?

, fyi Yakhont is listed at >500 km range in land attack.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 19 Aug 2009 04:22

AbhishekD wrote:What is the technology to kill drones. Can drones be detected by a normal radar?

RUSSIAN MIG-29 SHOOTING DOWN GEORGIAN DRONE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BypnhFI7HGY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcJWhNplseY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkeCvQ47bDY

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Aug 2009 04:43

John wrote:Fanboys? , fyi Yakhont is listed at >500 km range in land attack.

Saar I would like to see some kind of an official/semi-offical/reputed pub...you understand the kind of publication carrying the number. Sure if the Russian gov. says so then it is...there is no disputing it. I would stand corrected.

sourab_c · Post by **sourab_c** » 19 Aug 2009 05:00

Gerard wrote: RUSSIAN MIG-29 SHOOTING DOWN GEORGIAN DRONE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcJWhNplseY

Nice video sir.

I have a few doubts as far as the predators are concerned-

Aren't Predators harder to detect than those Georgian UAVs? I know that it is not hard to shoot them down once they are detected, but there must be something lacking in our air surveillance that has New Delhi concerned.

Also, if Pakistan does acquire the Predators, would it not mean more aircraft patrols for the IAF and put unnecessary strain on our fleet?

John · Post by **John** » 19 Aug 2009 05:08

pankajs wrote:
John wrote:Fanboys? , fyi Yakhont is listed at >500 km range in land attack.
Saar I would like to see some kind of an official/semi-offical/reputed pub...you understand the kind of publication carrying the number. Sure if the Russian gov. says so then it is...there is no disputing it. I would stand corrected.

I have seen the number quoted in a few russian brochures and sites prior to Brahmos, they are estimates since the russian never tested it. Besides it is common knowledge, Brahmos has hi-lo flight profile and flies at low altitude during its terminal phase (70 km) to reduce the engagement range for the ship based SAMs. Also some fuel is conserved for zig/zag or various manuveurs it may perform to evade defenses, it doesn't have to do that when engaging a land target which = more range. Your guess is good as mine on what its max range is besides as NRao mentioned it doesn't since there is MTCR.

Aren't Predators harder to detect than those Georgian UAVs? I know that it is not hard to shoot them down once they are detected, but there must be something lacking in our air surveillance that has New Delhi concerned.

Shouldn't be Predator has much larger frontal RCS with those wings unless they have RAM treatment, Israelite shot down a couple hizb. iranian drones and US shot down a iranian drone in Iraq.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/tag/mul ... ce/page/3/

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Aug 2009 06:18

NPO Mash modifies Yakhont cruise missile for air-to-surface use

NPO Machinostroyenia (NPO Mash) is extending the capabilities of Russia's anti-ship Yakhont supersonic cruise missile for use against ground targets.

The ground-attack Yakhont will have the same shape as the earlier missile, differing only in its onboard control and homing systems. It will have the same 300km (160nm) range on an "optimised trajectory" during which it climbs to 46,000ft (14,000m). At low altitude it has a 120km range.

Now here NPO Mash is trying to market an accessory i.e. the sat for getting better targeting co-ordinates though a casual read might lead many to believe that it will increase the range of the missile to 500 km. Try reading the below para casually without paying too much attention. If this has been translated back and forth between Russian and English a couple of times ......no wonder some folks have read 500km being mentioned as a possible range for LACM Yakhont.

NPO Mash says Yakhont is most effective when used in conjunction with the company's 800kg (1,760lb) low-orbit Kondor-E satellite. Kondor-E is equipped with a high-resolution radar with a phased-array antenna. It can detect targets within a 500km surveillance window and supply initial targeting for the missiles. Alternatively, targeting data can be supplied by the carrier aircraft or ship, or a specially-equipped helicopter.

The 2nd quote actually claims that straight low flight range is 120 km. It is the Hi-Lo (Also called the optimised trajectory by NPO) that delivers close to 300 km. Now will straighting of some zig-zag make much difference to 120 km or 300 km? The terminal low flight cannot be changed for it represents the basic Stealth characteristic of the missile trying to pass un-observed.
----------------
Take this for whatever it is worth.....I rest my case here.

John · Post by **John** » 19 Aug 2009 07:48

pankajs wrote:Now here NPO Mash is trying to market an accessory i.e. the sat for getting better targeting co-ordinates though a casual read might lead many to believe that it will increase the range of the missile to 500 km. Try reading the below para casually without paying too much attention. If this has been translated back and forth between Russian and English a couple of times ......no wonder some folks have read 500km being mentioned as a possible range for LACM Yakhont.

There was no mention of Kondor and etc to my knowledge on those article it simply said 500 km for land attack.

pankajs wrote:The 2nd quote actually claims that straight low flight range is 120 km. It is the Hi-Lo (Also called the optimised trajectory by NPO) that delivers close to 300 km. Now will straighting of some zig-zag make much difference to 120 km or 300 km? The terminal low flight cannot be changed for it represents the basic Stealth characteristic of the missile.

The terminal flight stealth characteristic? you mean flying low to exploit radar horizon of the enemy vessel. It's flight profile it can be modified besides i would guess high altitude descent to build KE would be better for land attack.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Aug 2009 07:49

good to hear Spyder will spread its net. absolute vital for airbases, logistical nodes, vital bridges and HQ sites.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Aug 2009 10:29

John wrote:
pankajs wrote:Now here NPO Mash is trying to market an accessory i.e. the sat for getting better targeting co-ordinates though a casual read might lead many to believe that it will increase the range of the missile to 500 km. Try reading the below para casually without paying too much attention. If this has been translated back and forth between Russian and English a couple of times ......no wonder some folks have read 500km being mentioned as a possible range for LACM Yakhont.
There was no mention of Kondor and etc to my knowledge on those article it simply said 500 km for land attack.

Sure, I thought it was a simple switch in numbers of related products being marketed in probably the same brochure. It is your claim about 500km range.

John wrote:
pankajs wrote:The 2nd quote actually claims that straight low flight range is 120 km. It is the Hi-Lo (Also called the optimised trajectory by NPO) that delivers close to 300 km. Now will straighting of some zig-zag make much difference to 120 km or 300 km? The terminal low flight cannot be changed for it represents the basic Stealth characteristic of the missile.
The terminal flight stealth characteristic? you mean flying low to exploit radar horizon of the enemy vessel. It's flight profile it can be modified besides i would guess high altitude descent to build KE would be better for land attack.

Yes I was talking about stealth flight / low flight. My bad, I know the users have a range of flight profiles to choose from (Limited for Yakhont; more for Brahmos. We have done enough jazz for the Army). All of these would be factored into the stated range, one being the best (max range) and others degrading till the most inefficient profile is reached (low range). Taking the best of the profiles and applying you suggested changes, how far can 300/290 be taken? I am no rocket guy or claim to have read anything more than basic but NPO, for the one they call ground-attack Yakhont and profile they claim as "optimised trajectory" have stated the range as 300km. It is something to remember.

NPO Mash modifies Yakhont cruise missile for air-to-surface use

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 19 Aug 2009 11:03

Pankaj, consider these developments,

Subsonic Nirbhay gets some stealth to survive air defenses, and hopefully advances in Kaveri would help its range further

Supersonic Brahmos with sophisticated terminal dives and under ManTech gets some extended range (after MTCR label is removed), anyways, were composites considered for Brahmos airframe?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Aug 2009 12:57

vasu_ray wrote:Pankaj, consider these developments,

Subsonic Nirbhay gets some stealth to survive air defenses, and hopefully advances in Kaveri would help its range further

Supersonic Brahmos with sophisticated terminal dives and under ManTech gets some extended range (after MTCR label is removed), anyways, were composites considered for Brahmos airframe?

Saar one thing I said in my last post on Brahmos

I am no rocket guy or claim to have read anything more than basic

I must emphasis I have very very basic knowledge as in a single page read up on rockets, no books or magazines on rockets or rocket science or for that matter on any other defense related topic.
Other than that news item are all that I normally read on subjects of my interest and perhaps read the discussions on this forum. Only if something makes me very curious, I do serious googling. I am just a little opinionated news junkie.

Why am I telling you this? Because offhand I have ek dam ZERO technical knowledge other than at a very high level. I do know that a lot of Composites has been used in LCA but not the exact figure and that Brahmos stated range is 290 km, a whole lot of such small high level things. There are Guru on this forum and you need to ask such technical questions to them or generally to the forum. I will jump into a discussion if I feel I have anything to contribute.
Apologies my friend that I am unable to help you .

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Aug 2009 13:05

And yes I have a lot of hopes in Nirbhay (My hope is based on news items only)

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 20 Aug 2009 10:31

considering the distances involved with China, all conventional missiles will be too big to be loaded onto fighter jets in reasonable numbers, so loading 5-6 of Nirbhay or Brahmos on a rotary launcher within the cargo cabin of a strategic bomber seems to be logical, these bombers have similar maneuverability of a Brahmos (worse with 3) loaded MKI

probably an MTA variant can play this role? why wouldn't a Sukhoi superjet or an Embraer which cost $25 million a piece be used in such a role?

chakkunny · Post by **chakkunny** » 20 Aug 2009 11:16

I have long wondered if WIGs are a good delivery platform for the Indian Navy.

What if we had 2 squadrons worth of long range WIGs with payloads of 12-16 Nirbhays each. With overwatch from a flight of MKIs loaded for AoA, these can hit launching points close to the South China sea to deliver salvos on a daily basis throughout the duration of any conflict, and get back to safer waters in the BoB. Their ideal home base would be well defended harbours + airfields in the Andamans.

In times of conflict, they will have to make it through choke points such as the Malacca straits. But this is problem faced by Subs as well as any maritime strike force.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Aug 2009 11:31

they'd be sitting ducks for PLAN ships armed with SAMs and waiting at the northern end
of the few choke points in international waters.

the idea of using a Embraer or MTA for such a role is more survivable. atleast it can
fly over the land and higher/faster too.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 20 Aug 2009 11:35

I think shooting a Nag carried atop Nirbhay that in turn is carried 2000 km on back of a camel could be a cheap and effective deterrent. Will be better to make that Nag a supersonic mijjile.

Oh yes it could carry a sub-kT warhead to be most effective to make the Piece-ful Commies brown their pants.

In my village my grand-maa used to tell me how to catch my left ear using my left hand wrapped around the head. Oh BTW pls do tell the unwashed Indians that Thermonuclear warhead is "Apavitrum" (not sanctioned by Indian ethos) and "Long Range Bellistic Mijjile" is not good for cultivating peaceful neighborhood.

The neighborhood "pagala" (lunatic) used to say the village is "Buddhi-chutya" {Sanskrit: Devoid of common-sense}.

I am bherry bherry confusion.