Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 24 Jan 2010 12:32

I think that Rs. 8352 crores should read as Rs. 835(.)2 crores otherwise the cost is too high or off course it can be Rs. 8352 crores for two regiments i.e. around 400 missiles, which is a massive order or it can be 8352 crores for 167 missiles. I think some figure is definitely wrong. i think I will go with two regiments of 15x2 launchers with 167x2 =334 missiles for Rs. 8352 crores i.e. average cost (including all equipment etc) is around Rs. 25 crores but the bare missile cost may be lesser at say around Rs. 10-12 crores.

This will also match the navy order of Rs. 711 crores with 49 missiles which gives a cost of around Rs. 15 crores per missile in which the bare missile may be for Rs. 10-12 crores

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Jan 2010 12:59

rohitvats wrote:So, are we talking about 15 TEL/Regiment which would translate into 15*3-->45 ready to fire missiles? Is there any confirmation as such on composition of a Brahmos-I/II Regiment? And @67 missiles per battery, this means at least 201 missiles per regiment.....impressive firepower...

rohit, nitpicking. brahmos block II != brahmos-2

brahmos block II -- 300km range brahmos variant with improved seeker characteristics.
brahmos-2 1000km range missile in development.

as for the regiment, if you remember the prithvi, 1 regiment had 15 TELs and 100 missiles in all. a more tactical system like brahmos should have same no of TELs and higher overall firepower I guess.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 24 Jan 2010 20:00

Each missile costs 25 crores!

Groan!

Even the ISI hq must not be that expensive. Brahmos is wasted on the pakistanis. They don't have Anti missile capability.

We need a maneuvering 1000-1500Km Nirbhay. All those lakshya tests I hope are Nirbhay tests.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 24 Jan 2010 20:10

^Actually, I would imagine the Prithvi missile system to be adequate for bombing most of Pakistan's cities as they are actually pretty close to the Indian border. India should instead concentrate on building more Shourya systems and equipping the Army with them.

The Bramhos would be ideal for use against Naval vessels where one target costs a couple of hundred million each!

John · Post by **John** » 24 Jan 2010 20:26

Rahul M wrote:as for the regiment, if you remember the prithvi, 1 regiment had 15 TELs and 100 missiles in all. a more tactical system like brahmos should have same no of TELs and higher overall firepower I guess.

Not surprising since Prithvi TEL can carry only one missile where as brahmos is 3 missile per launcher so total no of missile per regiment should be more. IIRC IA's 2 Prithvi (I,II) regiments cost around 1500 crore.

Bheem wrote:This will also match the navy order of Rs. 711 crores with 49 missiles which gives a cost of around Rs. 15 crores per missile in which the bare missile may be for Rs. 10-12 crores

Isn't that the basic variant where as 5 million price tag is quoted for the improved blk 2 variant?

yossarian · Post by **yossarian** » 24 Jan 2010 22:02

brahmos block II -- 300km range brahmos variant with improved seeker characteristics.
brahmos-2 1000km range missile in development.

Ok... if 1000 KM Brahmos is under development, does it eliminate the need for Nirbhay with the same range (being subsonic)? Someone please explain...

Aditya_M · Post by **Aditya_M** » 24 Jan 2010 22:16

Gagan wrote:Each missile costs 25 crores!

Groan!

Even the ISI hq must not be that expensive. Brahmos is wasted on the pakistanis. They don't have Anti missile capability.

We need a maneuvering 1000-1500Km Nirbhay. All those lakshya tests I hope are Nirbhay tests.

I wouldn't go that far as saying "wasted". It allows our ships to be one and a half times as far away as the Uran while ensuring that the job is done with a lesser number of missiles. A force multiplier, for sure. Cruise missiles are anyway harder to shoot down than ballistic, so on land they could do jobs that the Prithvi would find hard. Or things that otherwise you'd normally need an air strike to destroy. Why risk pilots/aircraft?

yossarian wrote:Ok... if 1000 KM Brahmos is under development, does it eliminate the need for Nirbhay with the same range (being subsonic)? Someone please explain...

If it is as cheap as the Nirbhay? Yes. If it costs n times as much, we will probably induct them in high-end/low-end mix depending on whether we need speed AND precision or just precision.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 24 Jan 2010 22:20

Is the 1000+km range for brahmos confirmed?
I dont recall seeing it on any official source.MTCR guidelines will sure restrict the missile range since Russia is a signatory.
If et all India wants to start a similar program simultaneous for an extra ranged version(be it a 1000+ or 2000 km) since we are developing the scramjet part, it will make sense

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 24 Jan 2010 22:30

Missile cost analysis:

Brahmos is stated to cost ~ 25 crore a peice

Prithvi is stated to cost ~ 10 crore a piece (IIRC)

US's Tomahawk crusie missile ~ 3 crore a piece (from wiki $ 569,000)

Nirbhay should cost in the region of the US's tomahawk, but definitely cheaper. The shaurya is a bleeding edge technology. I would expect it to be any cheaper than a Prithvi - more like between a Prithvi and a Brahmos per piece. I wonder if the seeker and the mission computers and software is itself worth 5-6 crores.

For a nation as ill equipped as Pakistan, a supersonic missile is over kill. They don't even have the means to track and successfully target a subsonic cruise missile. It doesn't appear that they will even with chinese help be able to deploy a capability to handle a salvo attack.

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 25 Jan 2010 00:19

while cost is an issue in asymmetric warfare, the reciprocity problem, where the moment we lob missiles aganist terror elements in TSP, the Pakis will try to reply with their own for H&D sake

probably we can shoot down their cruise missiles not sure about the ballistic missiles as of today

the way spy drones are used unless shot down their role can be denied, so should be our attacks, today we are trying hard to convince Pakis and the world that the terrorists are theirs by keeping them alive, the Pakis should have a hard time on the proof of origin of the attack

a missile attack leaves proof, a dumb bomb or IED will not if it can be delivered over long ranges giving the armed forces an option

in that respect even if Nirbhay crosses dev. milestones, it should never be inducted officially

anyways, if we don't have an alternative then an open attack is warranted

John · Post by **John** » 25 Jan 2010 01:53

Gagan wrote: For a nation as ill equipped as Pakistan, a supersonic missile is over kill. They don't even have the means to track and successfully target a subsonic cruise missile. It doesn't appear that they will even with chinese help be able to deploy a capability to handle a salvo attack.

Brahmos speed mainly gives it superior penetration of fortified targets compared with sub sonic missile. There was one incident in invasion of iraq where close to dozen tomahawks were fired against one of saddam's palace's, while they damage to the facade they were not able to bring the place down. 10 million dollars down the drain, they had to send a lone F-18 with some LGB to get the job done. DARP was working on HyFly with mach 4+ speed due to the lessons learned from GW.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Jan 2010 07:44

jalad, you are correct I couldn't find any official confirmation of the 1000 km blurb.
so brahmos-2 == hypersonic onlee (range not mentioned by anyone in authority)

btw, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090405/j ... 776641.jsp says :

The army has raised one regiment (numbered 861) of the BrahMos Mark I that has an inferior quality of seeker or homing device. Now two separate missile regiments of the BrahMos Mark II, which has a seeker that can discriminate and zero in on a small target in an urban clutter, will be raised and are likely to be numbered 862 and 863.

The BrahMos cruise missile regiments follow the raisings of the 333, 444 and 555 Prithvi and Agni II ballistic missile regiments. Each of the two new BrahMos cruise missile regiments would have between four and six batteries of three to four Mobile Autonomous Launchers that can be connected to a general mobile command post.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 Jan 2010 07:51

I think a 1000 km Brahmos would be useless. Pakiland is already covered. It is tarrel and deepel rizald that needs better coverage. For that a minimum of 3000 km is a must.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Jan 2010 07:53

no saar ji, it will be very very useful in anti-ship role. if an air launched version is possible (weight considerations) that would be a game changer.

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Jan 2010 08:02

Yep specially a missile in that range would pose a serious challenge to regulation air defense systems for every navy out there does not field Aegis/EMPAR class air defense systems , at that stand off range there won't be any early warning and the CIWS or other short range SAMs will find it hard to engage a target traveling at hypersonic speed.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jan 2010 08:17

there are plenty of good targets in PRC & Tibet reachable with 1000km range from india.

if we get this in a submarine launched form later, could even be used to target coastal
areas from deep sea.

the tomahawk SLCM has a 1500km range btw while the retired boeing ALCM had a 2500km.
JASSM (so far a failure and still under tests iirc) in its ER version only 1000km.

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 25 Jan 2010 10:57

Recent purchase of Exocet and harpoon by India was for around US$ 6 million each

sum · Post by **sum** » 25 Jan 2010 10:59

Bheem wrote:Recent purchase of Exocet and harpoon by India was for around US$ 6 million each

India purchased Harpoons?

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 25 Jan 2010 11:10

Further Spain also ordered 20 Tomahawks for around US$ 160 million that is around US$ 8 million each. Small purchases have large components of integration costs, R&D add ons, launcher costs, comms, repair & maintenance costs & equipment, testing equipment, ground support equipment, training, bribes etc

Rupesh · Post by **Rupesh** » 25 Jan 2010 11:16

sum wrote:
Bheem wrote:Recent purchase of Exocet and harpoon by India was for around US$ 6 million each
India purchased Harpoons?

India – HARPOON Block II Missiles

WASHINGTON, September 9, 2008 –

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to India of HARPOON Block II Missiles as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $170 million.
The Government of India has requested a possible sale of 20 AGM-84L HARPOON Block II missiles; 4 ATM-84L HARPOON Block II Exercise missiles; containers; training devices; spare and repair parts; supply/technical support; support equipment; personnel training and training equipment; technical data and publications; U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistics support The estimated cost is $170 million.
This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of an important partner and to strengthen the U.S.-India strategic relationship, which continues to be an important force for political stability, peace, and economic progress in South Asia.
India intends to use the HARPOON missiles to modernize its Air Force Anti-Surface Warfare mission capabilities and improve its naval operational flexibility. The missiles will assist the Indian Navy to develop and enhance standardization and operational ability with the United States. India will have no difficulty absorbing these missiles into its armed forces.

sum · Post by **sum** » 25 Jan 2010 11:55

Thanks for the info...

Was this for the P-8Is which would mean they are for the future? Cant imagine which of our current crafts will use the harpoon.

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 25 Jan 2010 15:59

Does anyone have information about the possible successor for the R-73? There are some mentions of a 'K-30', as the eventual successor for the R-73?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 25 Jan 2010 16:15

Bheem wrote:Further Spain also ordered 20 Tomahawks for around US$ 160 million that is around US$ 8 million each. Small purchases have large components of integration costs, R&D add ons, launcher costs, comms, repair & maintenance costs & equipment, testing equipment, ground support equipment, training, bribes etc

How can spain buy Tomahawks?? Don't the MTCR regulations apply to them?

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 25 Jan 2010 16:21

From eons ago

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... &sk=t&sd=a

Gerard wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:Any logical reason why MTCR does not apply, or is it a case one rule for the Great White Gods and 1 Rule for SDRE pagans
The MTCR does not prohibit missile transfer between the Great White God members.

An "aide memoire" attached to the MTCR states that the regime does not supersede any agreement that came into force prior to 1997. This, for example, allows the transfer of Category 1 systems between NATO members.
The SDRE non-pagan members of the MTCR can only join if they forgo ballistic missile (but not space launcher) development. Great White God members can have both space launchers and ballistic missiles. SDRE pagans are denied transfer of both and are not invited to join the MTCR unless they forswear their pagan missile launching ways.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 25 Jan 2010 16:25

Rahul M wrote:jalad, you are correct I couldn't find any official confirmation of the 1000 km blurb.
so brahmos-2 == hypersonic onlee (range not mentioned by anyone in authority)

As I understand it since the Brahmos is openly declared to be a Indo-Russian collaboration, no version of the Brahmos can officially have a >300KM range (courtesy the MTCR regulations). Regardless of whether any future hypothetical Indian cruise missile that has a 1000km range is an advanced version of the Brahmos or not they would at least have to name it something different and claim it to be completely indigenous and not related to the Brahmos project. No reason why this can't be done of course.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 25 Jan 2010 16:28

ravi_ku wrote:From eons ago

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... &sk=t&sd=a

Gerard wrote:
The MTCR does not prohibit missile transfer between the Great White God members.

Ah..I forgot that spain is in NATO. Thanks for the reminder.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 25 Jan 2010 17:04

^^^
Nop, u can sell/buy weapons with such ranges only if you are MTCR signatories. Shimply meaning, you must side with the Dark side of the force to get all power needed to save your loved ones

good read on MTCR
http://www.armscontrol.org/documents/mtcr

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 25 Jan 2010 17:09

http://frontierindia.net/iindian-tests- ... bomb-again

In continuation to the test of laser guided bomb kit on 21st January 2010, another trial of the bomb developed by ADE was conducted on 22nd Jan 2010. But this time, releasing it intentionally with 400 metres offset. Inspite of the initial offset, guidance system of the bomb ensured that it homes on accurately to the target. All the mission objectives were met in this trial also. LASTEC has developed the laser subsystem and CEMILAC has done certification of these air dropping trials.
Subscribe via Email

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 25 Jan 2010 17:15

What does that underlined sentence mean?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jan 2010 17:30

probably that if unguided the purely ballistic 'dumb' path of the bomb would land 400m away from the desired X, but the bomb in-flight detected the laser reflection and corrected its trajectory to hit the X.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 25 Jan 2010 17:43

krishnan wrote:What does that underlined sentence mean?

the ADE LGB coasted 400mts onleeeee. Since the mother aircraft dropped the bomb 400mts away :O

I have no idea about the true coasting distance by the PGB`s.
Are these from one of those mentioned by previous ACM regarding Air launched munitions with 1000km range and 1000lb payload?

to folks,
what is the maximum homing distance by paveways?

shiv wrote:I think a 1000 km Brahmos would be useless. Pakiland is already covered. It is tarrel and deepel rizald that needs better coverage. For that a minimum of 3000 km is a must.

sirji,
as a gods gifts we got couple of extra enemies trying to sneak into our land awaiting at the borders. We may have to save some of these valuable prasadams for those folks on the NE aswell.
they are often reminding :mai hu na mai huna".its better if we can bring the only deshi brahmos3/brahmastra1 with over 2500km.
field these new regiment near the china border on ladhak and sikkim and AP. I bet, PRC will peee and come to the negotiating table like a toned down dog.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Jan 2010 18:45

really_bored wrote:Does anyone have information about the possible successor for the R-73? There are some mentions of a 'K-30', as the eventual successor for the R-73?

username changed to 'sudhan'.
Rahul.

as to your question, the successor is called K-74 ( IIRC in russi parlance, k--> in development r-->in service) not much details are known. it hasn't been in news in the recent past.

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 25 Jan 2010 18:57

sum wrote:Thanks for the info...

Was this for the P-8Is which would mean they are for the future? Cant imagine which of our current crafts will use the harpoon.

If I a not mistaken they were meant for Jaguars

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 25 Jan 2010 19:08

sum wrote:Thanks for the info...

Was this for the P-8Is which would mean they are for the future? Cant imagine which of our current crafts will use the harpoon.

The harriers can if I'm not mistaken

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Jan 2010 19:12

nachiket wrote:
Rahul M wrote:jalad, you are correct I couldn't find any official confirmation of the 1000 km blurb.
so brahmos-2 == hypersonic onlee (range not mentioned by anyone in authority)

As I understand it since the Brahmos is openly declared to be a Indo-Russian collaboration, no version of the Brahmos can officially have a >300KM range (courtesy the MTCR regulations). Regardless of whether any future hypothetical Indian cruise missile that has a 1000km range is an advanced version of the Brahmos or not they would at least have to name it something different and claim it to be completely indigenous and not related to the Brahmos project. No reason why this can't be done of course.

nachiket, don't ask me for a source ATM but I seem to remember that a longer range variant, apparently independent of the russkies was on the cards too. that was the source of my initial confusion. incidentally, sivanthu pillai says in his interview 'longer range' for brahmos-2.

given that brahmos itself is at the limits of MTCR, that can hardly mean something <300km for brahmos-2.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 25 Jan 2010 19:20

http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2526/ ... 609400.htm

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

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 25 Jan 2010 19:35

Rahul M wrote:
really_bored wrote:Does anyone have information about the possible successor for the R-73? There are some mentions of a 'K-30', as the eventual successor for the R-73?

username changed to 'sudhan'.
Rahul.

as to your question, the successor is called K-74 ( IIRC in russi parlance, k--> in development r-->in service) not much details are known. it hasn't been in news in the recent past.

Hope it beats the Python-5 .. the Python-5 promo video has some fantastic claims...

and sorry to stray out of topic... but Why is my username changed? Was the old one against some rules?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 25 Jan 2010 19:43

sudhan wrote:
and sorry to stray out of topic... but Why is my username changed? Was the old one against some rules?

You need to have a human sounding username. Its there in the Forum rules.

sum · Post by **sum** » 25 Jan 2010 21:06

A Sharma wrote:
sum wrote:Thanks for the info...

Was this for the P-8Is which would mean they are for the future? Cant imagine which of our current crafts will use the harpoon.
If I a not mistaken they were meant for Jaguars

Thanks for the info.
Have to hand it to the Americans....make us buy the maal by paying top $$ and then donate same thing to Pak for free (like for the Harpoons)

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Jan 2010 23:26

I hope they forget all this RFI/RFP/tender business and get a license for the python-5 and produce it by the hundreds.