Agni 3 tested successfully

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 08 Feb 2010 00:05

DRDO raises the bar, sets its sights on 5,000-km Agni-V

It was the Army which conducted the successful flight. With this, the induction process of the missile has commenced. “This launch is a stepping stone to the DRDO realising its next intermediate range ballistic missile, Agni-V,” V.K. Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, said.

“The development of the Agni-III took place independent of the MTCR. About 80 to 85 per cent of the components were indigenous. The indigenisation has gone to such a level where we are independent of any embargo,” Dr. Saraswat said.

Both the stages of Agni-III are powered by solid propellants. It is 17 metres long, has a diameter of two metres and a launch weight of 50 tonnes. It can carry payloads weighing 1.5 tonnes.

The missile was tested for its full range and its integrated strategic command network was fully proved

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 08 Feb 2010 00:19

Jubilation in the control room

http://www.hindu.com/2010/02/08/stories ... 591000.htm

HYDERABAD: As the nuclear-capable Agni-III missile zeroed in on the pre-designated target in the Bay of Bengal with copybook precision, anxiety turned into an all-round jubilation in the control room at Wheeler Island off the Orissa coast on Sunday.

Later, the euphoric staff carried V.K. Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister; Avinash Chander, Agni Mission Director; and V.G. Sekaran, Project Director, on their shoulders.

disha · Post by **disha** » 08 Feb 2010 01:02

Great show. Looks like DRDO+Army scored a lofted boundary here!

ramdas wrote:By chemical explosives they mean conventional explosives. Not a chemical warhead. We are signatories to the CWC.

Neither. It *is* a nuclear "warhead" minus the plutonium pit. I do not think CWC bars us from testing that. This includes arming mechanism and the implosion explosive lenses. The pit is replaced with a sensor that indicates if the implosion lenses worked as expected or not.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Feb 2010 01:10

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... ?css=print
“The development of the Agni-III took place independent of the MTCR. About 80 to 85 per cent of the components were indigenous. The indigenisation has gone to such a level where we are independent of any embargo,”

Dr. Selvamurthy said that since India was wedded to the doctrine of “no-first-use” of its nuclear weapons, it needed to have a robust second-strike capability. If any country were to use nuclear weapons against India, the country should be able to retaliate in kind. “India should be able to deploy them [Agni-III missiles] in places where they cannot be detected,”

--against any country, would mean something to us go proud.

My proud will reach 100% soon. Anyone on the remaining 15-20% import?
Agni-V which will have a range of 5,000 km.. not IV .

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 08 Feb 2010 01:15

A-4 (SLBM) would require removal of the interstage and is a minor risk? then they would have to launch it from an underwater pontoon first

the processors they use in these missiles are based on local processor development roadmap or the Intel/Sun roadmap?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Feb 2010 01:22

I saw the natgeo /sci channel yesterday about underwater stealth sub launched missiles [many of the tech was not shown as classified]. But very educational in terms of how the missile is shot up to surface.. to get the under water thrusts via heater steam pressure was interesting to note.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Feb 2010 02:18

Now why in the world would India need a 1500 kg warhead? Up from 1000 Prithvi and Agni-I/II? Is 3,500 km is for that payload I suspect the actual range to be much longer assuming there is another rocket stage in the warhead.

On second thoughts 3.5k probably reflects on the "accurate" range?

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 08 Feb 2010 03:30

Gurulog:
It seems that even though it was a "user" trial, many DRDO scientists were involved in the launch. It might also have been a many days long procedure to launch it. If these assumptions are correct, a country with first use policy could finish off India in 4 days, at which point it is not clear to me if GOI will have the will to fight back ?. My naive view is that unless one can automatically launch missiles with the push of a red button...they are not going to be practical. What am I missing ?.

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 08 Feb 2010 04:14

Guddu wrote:Gurulog:
It seems that even though it was a "user" trial, many DRDO scientists were involved in the launch. It might also have been a many days long procedure to launch it. If these assumptions are correct, a country with first use policy could finish off India in 4 days, at which point it is not clear to me if GOI will have the will to fight back ?. My naive view is that unless one can automatically launch missiles with the push of a red button...they are not going to be practical. What am I missing ?.

Hement Kumar Rout..reporting before the test..

Agni-III is a new system and can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads. It will be propelled by solid fuels, facilitating swifter deployment compared to missiles using both solid and liquid fuels.

“The ballistic missile will require two or three more tests before it can go for limited series production (LSP) trials by the armed forces. However, two more years will be required for its operational deployment. Its successful test will propel India to go for the maiden test of 5,500 km range Agni-V missile, which is being developed now,’’ a scientist said.

link

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 08 Feb 2010 04:20

^^ From the above article a quote from COL. VERMA.. How true is his statement??

India has proven ICBM capability since 1992. The AGNI-3 is an old missile long deployed, this is no secret. India is now busy improving the accuracy of her ICBMs so that all of China (if necessary) can be hit with high level of accuracy.
By Col. Verma
2/2/2010 10:59:00 PM

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 08 Feb 2010 05:30

Am I missing something here? At 50 tons, isnt it a little over weight for a 3000 km rocket? I read somewhere in the forum that the French M51 weighs 54 tons and have a 10 000 KM range. Printing error?
AS

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Feb 2010 05:42

KrishG wrote:“The development of the Agni-III took place independent of the MTCR. About 80 to 85 per cent of the components were indigenous. The indigenisation has gone to such a level where we are independent of any embargo,” Dr. Saraswat said.

If 85 percent is what is indigenous what is the import content in the missile ?

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 08 Feb 2010 05:58

Its 50 tons alright but the range is greater than 3500 km

. Samachdar ko ishara kafi hai.....

kittoo · Post by **kittoo** » 08 Feb 2010 07:26

Craig Alpert wrote:^^ From the above article a quote from COL. VERMA.. How true is his statement??
India has proven ICBM capability since 1992. The AGNI-3 is an old missile long deployed, this is no secret. India is now busy improving the accuracy of her ICBMs so that all of China (if necessary) can be hit with high level of accuracy.
By Col. Verma
2/2/2010 10:59:00 PM

I am not sure how correct it is but I will answer this with a personal incident.
In my first year at Aerospace Dep at IITB (about 3 and half years ago) we had one reputed (I am sorry forgot the name) DRDO sceintist (who was presonally involved in our missile program) come and talk to a few students (he came on a friendly visit to one Professor and suddenly decided to talk to the nearby class, which was ours luckily). One student asked him that why were we lacking ICBM capabilities even when we had one of the best space program and did not lack the expertise. His reply, with a smile-'"ICBMs are decades old technology. Who said we don't have them? Its not necessary that we speak about it everywhere. Don't worry."
Now I wouldnt take that lightly, coming from such eminent scientist!

Shubham · Post by **Shubham** » 08 Feb 2010 07:44

vasu_ray wrote:the processors they use in these missiles are based on local processor development roadmap or the Intel/Sun roadmap?

Till recently they were using PowerPC as the processing brain in addition to DSP processors. Now with the flexibilty and advantages of IP cores, ARM core is being used to design the SoC for the missile computer.

In addition to that a program is currently running to develop an Indigenous Processor Architecture.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Feb 2010 07:58

Doesn't an ICBM need to reach exosphere for well defined NoFu BMD ?

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 08 Feb 2010 08:07

On second thoughts 3.5k probably reflects on the "accurate" range?

We can accurately shoot at the moon. Enuff said.

About processors, circa 1997, we already had a proven 16 bit core, and a 32bit core was 'almost done'. I don't think ARM can license their core, or PPC can sell their chips for use in AGNI because of all the four letter acros.

And you don't need the 64 bit Quad Core 3Ghz processors to guide a ballistic missile. What kind of processing power existed in the seventies and eighties for the TFTA missiles?

We have no lack of technology or capability. The 'the rocket science' is no longer Rocket Science. What we have are trifling implementation problems like any large project by anyone else. Look at the Toyota screwup!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Feb 2010 08:31

hey, even an elephant can slip.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 08 Feb 2010 08:52

SaiK wrote:hey, even an elephant can slip.

Sure, and it slips a lot less than the other animals like horses, donkeys or bears. Pigs gets transported, but claims no slip. Dragons crash, but never tell.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 08 Feb 2010 09:11

Congratulations and Special Thanks to everyone (DRDO and Defense Ministry) involved.

May their intellect bring increased security, prosperity to India.

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 08 Feb 2010 11:57

Shubham wrote:In addition to that a program is currently running to develop an Indigenous Processor Architecture.

Thank you, hopefully we see civilian versions too reducing electronics costs

Shubham · Post by **Shubham** » 08 Feb 2010 12:43

Dileep wrote:
About processors, circa 1997, we already had a proven 16 bit core, and a 32bit core was 'almost done'. I don't think ARM can license their core, or PPC can sell their chips for use in AGNI because of all the four letter across.

My info was not based on AGNI program but a different one. Well DRDO is a taboo word for US companies hence x86 was not preferred, though real reason being solely architecture wise PowerPC is more reliable for such critical applications.
How PPC was being used , I have no idea , but if a chip is required it could always be procured by a third party and used in missiles. ( on the other hand the processor used is of military grade, so it could be easy to detect and stop shipment to any organization not in line with US policies)
If US rules were strictly applied , then none in DRDO would be using EDA tools like Cadence, Synopsis etc, but they are using it.

As far as ARM is concerned it is a British company( so different rules ?), and my naive understanding says that if you have the licence of ARM core, you can put that core in any design you want, how exactly can an organization(particularly military) be prevented from using that is doubtful.

Rien · Post by **Rien** » 08 Feb 2010 13:31

The range is exactly accurate, because the stages are still made with heavy maraging steel, rather than like the Western/Russian missiles of the same weight, carbon composites. Carbon composites will not come until the Agni 5, which is still at least 5 years away.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/missile/icbm.htm

The outer case of a solid missile can be made from any conventional material, such as steel, but better propellants with higher burning temperatures often require the substitution of materials with higher strength-to- weight ratios, such as Kevlar and carbon or glass epoxy. Steel cases can be used with cross-linked, double-based solid fuels, but the need for additional liners and insulation to protect the case against the higher burning temperatures of these newer propellants compromises some of the range that can be achieved by using the better propellant in the first place.

There is nothing chanyakian going on here. A 5 000 km missile will revolutionize relations with Beijing, the DRDO and the Indian government have explicitly stated they will develop such a missile.

http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/oct/ ... adlier.htm

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 08 Feb 2010 14:26

You may not know it, but one need to sign end user statements saying that the product will not be used to make nukes, missiles etc. India is one country who takes such things seriously, so as far as possible, we would play by the rules.

yossarian · Post by **yossarian** » 08 Feb 2010 16:41

I am not sure how correct it is but I will answer this with a personal incident.
In my first year at Aerospace Dep at IITB (about 3 and half years ago) we had one reputed (I am sorry forgot the name) DRDO sceintist (who was presonally involved in our missile program) come and talk to a few students (he came on a friendly visit to one Professor and suddenly decided to talk to the nearby class, which was ours luckily). One student asked him that why were we lacking ICBM capabilities even when we had one of the best space program and did not lack the expertise. His reply, with a smile-'"ICBMs are decades old technology. Who said we don't have them? Its not necessary that we speak about it everywhere. Don't worry."
Now I wouldnt take that lightly, coming from such eminent scientist!

A question along the tangent - Is the capability to build an ICBM as effective a deterrent/foreign policy tool as having it? Hypothetically, if there was a war would we be able to produce 7K range ICBM (albeit not tested) say, within a week?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Feb 2010 17:24

If there is a war, we are talking about seconds and maximum 2 minutes for second strike. We can't wait for a week for assemblies. It may be a political tool, but definitely not a mil one.

IMHO, if A5 is dragon specific, then we should not announce the missile until its deployment time after x user trials. Keep everything under A3 enhancement to A5 or A4 test bed strategy.

The same strategy should hold good for S series .

kittoo · Post by **kittoo** » 08 Feb 2010 18:25

yossarian wrote: A question along the tangent - Is the capability to build an ICBM as effective a deterrent/foreign policy tool as having it? Hypothetically, if there was a war would we be able to produce 7K range ICBM (albeit not tested) say, within a week?

Now thats where things get interesting dont they?
Unfortunately, this is the type of question we all have discussed a thousand times and still dont know where we are at.

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 08 Feb 2010 18:34

What will be the output of the warhead that will be mated to this missile ? Will it be fission/fizzle-ya ? Somewhere i read , India has enough plutonium for 1000 warheads, any guess on how many warheads do we have?

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 08 Feb 2010 18:42

durgesh wrote:Somewhere i read , India has enough plutonium for 1000 warheads.

[Link Please...] :: Edit :: Got that.

durgesh wrote:any guess on how many warheads do we have?

I thought It is 60-80.

Anyhow...I am open to be educated.

babbupandey · Post by **babbupandey** » 08 Feb 2010 20:29

SaiK wrote:If there is a war, we are talking about seconds and maximum 2 minutes for second strike. We can't wait for a week for assemblies. It may be a political tool, but definitely not a mil one.

IMHO, if A5 is dragon specific, then we should not announce the missile until its deployment time after x user trials. Keep everything under A3 enhancement to A5 or A4 test bed strategy.

The same strategy should hold good for S series .

But I think there never is any unwarned attack, any war is preceded by definite signs - if there is an imminent war coming up then the government must ask the armed forces to be prepared, this includes assembling the missiles/weapons.
A classic case is when Gen. Manekshaw asked Indira Gandhi to defer Bangladesh liberation by a few months because of floods in former East Pakistan, so it is important to read the signs and prepare accordingly.
Albeit, there could be a case when WMD fall in hands of terrorists (read Taliban takes over Pak) - in that case, offence will be the best defence.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 08 Feb 2010 20:36

when WMD fall in hands of terrorists (read Taliban takes over Pak)

For the jihadi, the shining towers of Manhattan and Canary Wharf are a much more attractive target than anywhere in India

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 08 Feb 2010 21:05

babbupandey wrote: But I think there never is any unwarned attack, any war is preceded by definite signs - if there is an imminent war coming up then the government must ask the armed forces to be prepared, this includes assembling the missiles/weapons.
A classic case is when Gen. Manekshaw asked Indira Gandhi to defer Bangladesh liberation by a few months because of floods in former East Pakistan, so it is important to read the signs and prepare accordingly.

Thats an example of when India had the luxury to pick the time. Its an exception for India's defensive posture.

Earlier comment was on when other side picks the time of conflict, which is how next war will start. In case you forgot, there was no prior warning (that India caught) on Kargil.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Feb 2010 21:18

If politicians knows everything about mil preparedness, then we should be seeing an already super power India rather a great power in reckoning.

Since our democracy is entirely driven by people politics, it is better to have systems and policies in place for the worst.

mil speak, we better say only what we have right now in hand.

rachel · Post by **rachel** » 08 Feb 2010 21:25

Every nations maintains different missiles with different ranges. Even after a canisterized A5 is deployed with .. let's say a max range of 5000km .... A1, A2, A3 will not be phased out, but perhaps replaced by canisterized versions of these missiles. We need missiles with ranges of 300km, 700km, 1500km.. 3000km etc .. different tools for different jobs.

It'd be wasteful and unworkable to take a missile whioch can travel 5000km, and use it against a target which is only 1500 km away. Like using a machine gun to kill an ant.

L Ram · Post by **L Ram** » 08 Feb 2010 21:47

Its 50 tons alright but the range is greater than 3500 km . Samachdar ko ishara kafi hai.....

isharose e pata chalta hai ki SLV=> agni TD ASLV => Agni2 PSLV => Agni3

jaise PSLV is the reliable work horse of ISRO , Agni3 is the reliable work horse of DRDO

aaj kal ki milnewali isharonse is gavar ko intna hi samaj me aata hai. guru log is naa samaj ko maaf keejiye.

Jai Hind.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 08 Feb 2010 21:54

Gerard wrote:
when WMD fall in hands of terrorists (read Taliban takes over Pak)
For the jihadi, the shining towers of Manhattan and Canary Wharf are a much more attractive target than anywhere in India

Inshah Allah !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

babbupandey · Post by **babbupandey** » 08 Feb 2010 22:39

a_kumar wrote: Thats an example of when India had the luxury to pick the time. Its an exception for India's defensive posture.

Earlier comment was on when other side picks the time of conflict, which is how next war will start. In case you forgot, there was no prior warning (that India caught) on Kargil.

I agree, it was unprovoked and we were caught off-guard. But, it was a low-intensity conflict (as in, not a through-and-through war) - Pakistan was not "officially" involved. For the same reason, if I mentioned that if the Pak nuclear arsenal was to "accidentally" fall in hands of Taliban - in that case our best defence would be a dozen BrahMos landing on Chagai Hills and for that cases we should have a missile deterrant in place.
However, such could not be the case in case of China. Even with superior military, they cannot afford a war - it will be self-annihilation. So, in such circumstances is when we should be reading the signs.

SaiK wrote:If politicians knows everything about mil preparedness, then we should be seeing an already super power India rather a great power in reckoning.

Since our democracy is entirely driven by people politics, it is better to have systems and policies in place for the worst.

mil speak, we better say only what we have right now in hand.

Yes, I think it's best to be conservative in estimating our strengths. If the Brooks-Bhagat report were to be declassified, this will be loudest and clearest message of the report.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Feb 2010 22:57

The thread titile is "Agni 3 tested successfully". The reason is to gather all the new tech details and think it over. instead what we ahve is ianane comments and irrelevant details.
This thread at this time is not archivable.

babbupandey · Post by **babbupandey** » 08 Feb 2010 23:05

ramana wrote:The thread titile is "Agni 3 tested successfully". The reason is to gather all the new tech details and think it over. instead what we ahve is ianane comments and irrelevant details.
This thread at this time is not archivable.

Sorry Ramana ji,
I got carried away

So coming back to my previous question, for which I haven't got a response.
Does anybody have an idea of whether it was tested in MIRV config? Looking at warheads and comparing it with Arun_S's drawings (no longer available on BR) it looks it had a single warhead. Which I do not quite understand, because if the idea was to test it on multiple features, then at least 3 warheads should have been included to test whether all of them have the required CEP. Or is it that DRDO is yet to overcome the ghost of first testing in 2006?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Feb 2010 23:28

ramana wrote:The thread titile is "Agni 3 tested successfully". The reason is to gather all the new tech details and think it over. instead what we ahve is ianane comments and irrelevant details.
This thread at this time is not archivable.

And we miss Arun_S's leadership here.