Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

yantra · Post by **yantra** » 07 Aug 2010 23:10

How would Agni II- fit in to the tactically and strategically, within such a short band (range)? It may be more than that meets the eye - gurus please throw some light.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 08 Aug 2010 01:19

Probably the Agni-II AT.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Aug 2010 10:03

Couple of things to discuss.

-Impacts of declaring the Prithvi as conventional only now that there are alternate nuke delivery platforms.

- The meaning and impact of the realization that the Agni and Shourya series are hypersonic boos glide vehicles on deterrent posture. While considering this take into account that modern urban structures are multi-storied concrete structures as opposed to Hiroshima structures and more densely located than in earlier times.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Aug 2010 10:48

sum wrote:<SNIP>Wow, as damning as it gets. Wonder where was the IA's famous "will not induct if not perfect else people die" attitude when it came to this ( not so cheap) Russkie maal?

And where is the common sense which posters are expected to display before coming up with expert comments? how about spending some time on the CAG Report and then coming to conclusions?

This is what the CAG Report says:

The first consignment of MBRLS supplied was inducted in July 2007 in three Rocket regiments. The equipment was exploited to its limit in the annual practice- cum- firing conducted by one regiment in October/November 2008. The exploitation revealed critical defects in the sub systems SOCRIG3 (of ALFCS)4 and DTE5

The defects were found in systems after their induction and not during the trials. And the defect were reported by the IA.

And here is another twist to the story - why did not the buyer inspect the system before taking delivery as in case of JRI? here is the answer:

It was further noticed in audit that defective clause in contract and shortcomings in Pre-Despatch Inspection (PDI)/improper inspection as enumerated in succeeding paragraphs had resulted in import of defective SMERCH MBRLS.

The contract provided for PDI by the DGQA and sixteen personnel were trained in Russia to carry out inspection. The PDI could not be carried out properly as the team members were not exposed to the weapon system in the
short training.

The clauses governing the PDI in the contract, with M/s Rosoboronexport (Russia) envisaged acceptance of Quality Certificates issued by the manufacturer, a third party. This rendered the outcome of the PDI as a
foregone conclusion necessitating acceptance of the equipments offered. Reliance on third party inspection without enabling clauses in the contract defining the vendor’s responsibility had increased risks in importing a defect
prone system and the buyer’s interest unprotected.

The PDI team involved in inspection of the LVs etc was not permitted by the vendor to carry out live firing from the LV (9A – 52 – 2T) supplied owing to defective wording of the contract. The scope of PDI under Article 12.1.3 of the contract stipulates ‘check up of the major aggregates and assemblies of the equipment for serviceability and functioning in compliance with the chapter Acceptance Trials from technical conditions of the manufacturing plant.’

The PDI of the RPs were conducted by the DGQA team by firing from the Launch Vehicle 9A-52-2 (of 1993 year of production) in the proof range at Russia and not from the Launch Vehicle 9A-52-2T covered under the scope of contract of December 2005 resulting in non validation of the LV by firing before acceptance. Later several critical defects in subsystems of the LV were reported by the Rocket Regiment during its exploitation /firing.

I really hope we care to read up a bit more before throwing mud at the IA.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Aug 2010 10:59

And since people were crying hoarse on the bad-bad IA and good-good DRDO and Indian Mil-Ind Complex - here is a glimpse of how the procurement of critical weapon systems is done:

The Anti Tank Guided Missile (ATGM) Milan-2 held by the Army is a second generation missile of late seventies vintage. It was produced by M/s Bharat Dynamics Ltd. (BDL) since early eighties under Transfer of Technology (TOT) arrangement with a foreign firm and supplied to the Indian Army. The missile with single warhead has limited capability to defeat modern tanks but its upgrade version i.e. Milan-2T fitted with Tandem6 warhead can defeat modern tanks. Army HQ formulated a General Staff Qualitative Requirement (GSQR) in 2003 for the upgrade version, with tandem warhead. The tandem warhead was to be obtained under TOT from the OEM.

The GSQR of inservice missile Milan-2 provided for essential range as 1850 metres and desirable range of 2000 metres. The GSQR of 2003 for Milan 2T indicated the range as 2000 metres to meet the need of modernisation of forces. Based on GSQR of 2003, RFP for procurement of 4100 Milan 2T was issued to BDL in January 2007. The Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) did not find the product offered by BDL compliant with the GSQR as the range of 2000 metres offered had only 1850 metres under guidance phase while the last 150 metres was left unguided. The case for procurement was therefore closed in May 2007.

Subsequently, the BDL confirmed that the range of Milan 2T would be 2000 metres. The case was reopened and trials of Milan 2T were conducted in February 2008. Based on trial results, the General Staff did not recommend its introduction into service in view of difficulties in engaging moving targets during last 150 metres. Besides, requirement was not met as regards flight time and weight. Further, third generation missiles were already available in the global market

Based on the representation of Staff union of the BDL to the then Raksha Up Rajya Mantri as non-placement of order for Milan-2T, would result in redeployment of work force of BDL and wastage of already procured material common to Milan-2/2T, it was decided to procure minimum required quantity of Milan-2T in May 2008 by amending the GSQR for Milan 2T with 1850 meters range and with waiver of trials, considering the time required for procurement of the 3rd generation missile and that the shelf life of existing stock of Milan-2 would expire by 2013. In August 2008, the GSQR of 2003 was amended in favour of BDL to suit the trial results of February 2008. The revised RFP was issued to BDL in September 2008 as per amended GSQR seeking commercial offer.

The Ministry concluded a contract with BDL, Hyderabad in December 2008 for supply of 4100 Milan ATGM equipped with Tandem warhead (Milan 2T) at a cost of Rs 587.02 crore with a staggered delivery schedule to be completed within 36 months from the effective date of contract. Audit scrutiny revealed that even before issue of the first RFP to BDL in January 2007, Army was aware that an adversary was having ATGM of range longer than the Milan-2T and as such reducing the standards of GSQR of 2003 was not desirable. The Army in fact wanted ATGM of even longer range so as to avoid risk of exposure. It was also known to Army (June 2006) that third generation missiles were available in the global market. The Army had not even formulated GSQR for third generation missile for over two years when GSQR for Milan-2T was amended (August 2008). Thus, due to reduction in standards of Milan-2T to suit the offer Thus, due to reduction in standards of Milan-2T to suit the offer of BDL and to avoid wastage of material already procured, Milan-2T missiles of lower
capability were contracted at the cost of Rs 587.02 crore by compromising the Army’s actual requirements. This is when the missile was being phased out in the country of origin and better systems were available in global market.

In their reply, the Ministry stated in November 2009 that the holding of Milan missiles in May 2008 was below the operational requirements of Army. In view of the critical void in the holdings of missiles, procurement of quantity 4100 Milan 2T had been made as a stopgap – interim measure pending the selection and induction of the 3rd generation ATGM. The fact remains that low capability missiles were procured by compromising the Army’s requirements in spite of availability of better missiles in the global market as BDL could not produce them. Further, Army has failed to formulate GSQR for third generation missiles for over three years.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 09 Aug 2010 20:44

HELINA - It is the Helicopter Version of 3rd Generation Anti-Tank Guided Missile with a range of more than 7 km. Launchers have been cleared for captive carriage trials and handed over to Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) for carriage trials.

PIB

JimmyJ · Post by **JimmyJ** » 09 Aug 2010 22:59

Agni-III ready for induction: Antony

"700 km range Agni-I and 2000 km range Agni-II have been developed and inducted into service. Agni-III with a range of 3000 km is ready for induction," Defence minister A K Antony said in reply to a question.

He said the third generation Nag anti-tank missile's user trials have been successfully conducted and the system is ready for induction into the production phase.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Aug 2010 03:15

is there a Shourya next phase in works?

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 10 Aug 2010 07:47

^^^

I guess Shaurya with a strike range of more than 1000 K.M would be out because of the laws of friction, but a shaurya lite with a lesser range is definitely something to be looked at. There is talk of 'ashwin' doing the rounds(Most probably incorporating technologies from Shaurya).

http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source ... eQtzaYECPg

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 10 Aug 2010 11:11

Missile Development Programmes

HELINA - It is the Helicopter Version of 3rd Generation Anti-Tank Guided Missile with a range of more than 7 km. Launchers have been cleared for captive carriage trials and handed over to Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) for carriage trials.

LR-SAM – It is a Long Range Surface-to-Air Missile (LR-SAM) jointly developed / produced by DRDO and IAI, Israel. Its Ballistic flight trials was undertaken in May 2010.

MR-SAM – It is a Medium Range Surface-to-Air Missile (MR-SAM) jointly developed/produced by DRDO and IAI, Israel. Its preliminary design has been carried out. Pre-tender briefing to all prospective vendors has also been carried out.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 10 Aug 2010 21:33

I think, Shourya will be used to hit anything above 300 km away. Below 300km will be handled by Prithvi and other such missiles.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Aug 2010 21:55

a smaller shourya can replace the prithvi if funded. being cansister launched and solid fuel, it does have a lot going for it.

but may not be a high priority item at the moment. A5 is the top priority , followed by Nirbhay.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 10 Aug 2010 22:01

what is the use of having of Brahmos LACM of range 300km then?

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 10 Aug 2010 22:35

Kanson wrote:what is the use of having of Brahmos LACM of range 300km then?

the advantage is that it can hit any target in a 300Km radius within 10 minutes of launch with pin point accuracy, its not terrain huggin but it is a low flying missile with a reduced size and signature compared to BM's.

It's of immense value, especially when it comes ot hitting terror camps, strategic airfields close to the border and infrastructure.

OTOH , its really bugging to see that absolutly no update on nirbhay has been given , we know for sure that the project is underway so why is it so hush-hush.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Aug 2010 22:46

Rohitvats,
Re: MilanT procurement, skills retention is a major factor in defence industries and its sad that the union had to make th representation to the RM. The CAAG report is looking only at the monetary aspect. In factif total pciture is considered it will cost even more if the people are let go and the mfg capability turned to dust.

Based on the representation of Staff union of the BDL to the then Raksha Up Rajya Mantri as non-placement of order for Milan-2T, would result in redeployment of work force of BDL and wastage of already procured material common to Milan-2/2T, it was decided to procure minimum required quantity of Milan-2T in May 2008 by amending the GSQR for Milan 2T with 1850 meters range and with waiver of trials, considering the time required for procurement of the 3rd generation missile and that the shelf life of existing stock of Milan-2 would expire by 2013. In August 2008, the GSQR of 2003 was amended in favour of BDL to suit the trial results of February 2008. The revised RFP was issued to BDL in September 2008 as per amended GSQR seeking commercial offer.

and

In view of the critical void in the holdings of missiles, procurement of quantity 4100 Milan 2T had been made as a stopgap – interim measure pending the selection and induction of the 3rd generation ATGM. The fact remains that low capability missiles were procured by compromising the Army’s requirements in spite of availability of better missiles in the global market as BDL could not produce them. Further, Army has failed to formulate GSQR for third generation missiles for over three years.

Procuring globally would also decimate the Indian mfg capability built up so assidously. So all in all it was a balanced decision and not crazy as made out to be by the CAG.

Also what are the odds that the global procurement would deliver the goods in time? Another chance for scam and more CAG reports!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Aug 2010 23:37

ramana wrote:
Rohitvats,

Re: MilanT procurement, skills retention is a major factor in defence industries and its sad that the union had to make th representation to the RM. The CAAG report is looking only at the monetary aspect. In factif total pciture is considered it will cost even more if the people are let go and the mfg capability turned to dust.

<SNIP>

Procuring globally would also decimate the Indian mfg capability built up so assidously. So all in all it was a balanced decision and not crazy as made out to be by the CAG.

Also what are the odds that the global procurement would deliver the goods in time? Another chance for scam and more CAG reports!

ramana,

I find this argument as non-tenable. It is quite obvious that Milan-2T itself is the last of the Milan series of ATGM to be procured and developed in Indian. Even the host nation is looking to phase out the Milan with next generation ATGM (and has procured Javelin for troops in Afganistan). And

Please consider couple of points:

(a) This development licence from France for Milan-2T is till 2012. Once, this development terminates, BDL will have to manufacture new ATGM for the IA. Javelin has already been OKayed as interim 3rd Gen import - numbers are not yet in open and we don't know the local development versus outright import. Maybe, some of them will be made in India.

(b) BDL also manufactures Konkur-M ATGM for use on BMP-II. IA has placed order for 15,000 of these.

(b) Hopefully, the Manportable version of Nag will also mature in some time. Sooner than later, the BDL will end up manufacturing new ATGM (may be more than one model) for IA.

So, the manufacturing capability is not going to get lost any time soon.

However, as for the IA, it is burdened with ATGM it did not want. Tomorrow, if IA asks for X number of ATGM, will not the bean counters at GOI/MOD say that IA can get X-4,100 ATGMs?

Also, there is a more fundamental question - what happens to the safety and security of ATGM crew? I spoke at length to someonew in IA on this ATGM issue (who would be in thick of action with ATGM in case of shooting match) - those 150meters do make hell lot of difference - along with the flight time of the Milan series of missiles - which is becoming a concern as MBT and another armored vehicles become equipped with ability to detect them being laced.

IMO, this is a case of misplaced priorities and tail wagging the Dog.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 11 Aug 2010 04:53

the three sucessfull tests of the hypersonic cruise missile,we validated different parameters including thermal stability at different hypersonic speeds,manueverability with different warhead configerations and types with high accuracy in what your call as CEP(circular error probablity).The confidental team which planned for a unique testing of an unique missile discovered an distint potential of the missile.Tested with an entirely different guidance and seeker,the missile offers an unique advantage in its surgical strike role with a speed of over Mach 5 at over 2100km range.Its intelligent flight control and guidance system plans its own flight path to evade air defences of enemies.This established the missiles extreme manueverability at extreme speeds.The buyoant team is exploring the possibilities of integrating the missile onboard a naval ship.Recently the navy envinced its interest in the missile as a possible option for its P-15B destroyers for long range strike role.After the navy`s interest plans are underway to accomodate a 4 number missiles into a quad canister.Depending on the availability of space,the number of quad packs that go onto the ships will be determined.

Yes the team was so proud of...............
developing such an unique system which can now be put into production for strategic nuclear command and navy on the same lines of Brahmos except the fact that this one is nuclear capable.We are currently exploring the possibility of putting it into serial production from 2013 after few more tests of both nuclear warhead carrying varriants and surgical strike role ones.

Masha-llah

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 11 Aug 2010 04:58

jaladipc wrote:
Tested with an entirely different guidance and seeker,the missile offers an unique advantage in its surgical strike role with a speed of over Mach 5 at over 2100km range.Its intelligent flight control and guidance system plans its own flight path to evade air defences of enemies.This established the missiles extreme manueverability at extreme speeds......Recently the navy envinced its interest in the missile as a possible option for its P-15B destroyers for long range strike role.After the navy`s interest plans are underway to accomodate a 4 number missiles into a quad canister.

Masha-llah

What is this new mijjile!!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Aug 2010 07:07

Shourya from the description. BTW Arun had postulated all these characteristics being described in the above post. Its BGRV(Boost Glide RV) and gives a lot of flexibility. Hence I asked if its range was being increased a few posts above.

Jaladipc, Please post in India Forum too?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Aug 2010 07:48

jaladipc wrote:
Masha-llah

source please?

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Aug 2010 08:45

ramana wrote:Shourya from the description. BTW Arun had postulated all these characteristics being described in the above post. Its BGRV(Boost Glide RV) and gives a lot of flexibility. Hence I asked if its range was being increased a few posts above.

Jaladipc, Please post in India Forum too?

Shourya is a cruise missile ( thats what the description mentions)?

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 11 Aug 2010 08:47

Why can't it be Nirbhay?

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Aug 2010 08:53

Dmurphy-ji,
Nirbhay is sub-sonic whereas the para mentions supersonic cruise missile...

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 11 Aug 2010 09:01

Brahmos main purpose on lad is to sanitize AAM groups IMHO

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Aug 2010 09:17

sum wrote:Shourya is a cruise missile ( thats what the description mentions)?

I think it has been mentioned many times , it is a Boost Glide Reentry Vehical and not a Cruise Missile
BGRV

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Aug 2010 09:47

Austin wrote:
sum wrote:Shourya is a cruise missile ( thats what the description mentions)?
I think it has been mentioned many times , it is a Boost Glide Reentry Vehical and not a Cruise Missile
BGRV

Exactly..thats why was asking Ramana-garu as to why he was thinking that the missile described is Shourya? ( when the para clearly mentions supersonic CM)...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Aug 2010 09:56

sum wrote:Exactly..thats why was asking Ramana-garu as to why he was thinking that the missile described is Shourya? ( when the para clearly mentions supersonic CM)...

Sum can you point out which para mentions supersonic CM ?

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 11 Aug 2010 09:56

sum wrote:
Austin wrote:Shourya is a cruise missile ( thats what the description mentions)?
I think it has been mentioned many times , it is a Boost Glide Reentry Vehical and not a Cruise Missile
BGRV
Exactly..thats why was asking Ramana-garu as to why he was thinking that the missile described is Shourya? ( when the para clearly mentions supersonic CM)...

saar ji looking at lightning bolts by Mr. Yengst it is most probable that Shourya is a BGRV.

What it means is the BGRV will be the warhead itself and its carrier module.

Ze flight path characteristics of ze shourya resemble very very closely to a mijjile that employs ze BGRV. This also explains why joo would need a rolling manouver onlee in order to dissipate the extra heat that would be encountered while phlying at a depressed trajectory onlee.

IIRC one of ze main characteristics of the BGRV is it never leaves the atmosphere completely..

Thinking a bit about this concept I think the next phase of evolution would be to mate a independent manouvering warhead/s to the BGRV making it into BGMRV by doing so we would be able to use the energy that the bgrv would already have and increase it exponentially combined with independent motor of its own I imagine 4 shouryas releasing their BGMRVs in different directions all in the end headed towards a location in the tibetian plateau....AOA

Srivastav · Post by **Srivastav** » 11 Aug 2010 13:16

jaladipc wrote:
the three sucessfull tests of the hypersonic cruise missile,we validated different parameters including thermal stability at................................

any source or is this panwala info

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Aug 2010 13:22

Austin wrote:Sum can you point out which para mentions supersonic CM ?

My bad...meant hypersonic CM.

the three sucessfull tests of the hypersonic cruise missile,we validated different parameters including thermal stability at different hypersonic speeds,manueverability with different warhead configerations and types with high accuracy in what your call as CEP(circular error probablity).The confidental team which planned for a unique testing of an unique missile discovered an distint potential of the missile.Tested with an entirely different guidance and seeker,the missile offers an unique advantage in its surgical strike role with a speed of over Mach 5 at over 2100km range.Its intelligent flight control and guidance system plans its own flight path to evade air defences of enemies

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Aug 2010 13:34

sum they probably coined the long hypersonic powered glide phase of BGRV as cruise phase , Shourya power glides hypersonically at ~ 50 km altitude during most phase of its flight , it must be using a slow burning solid rocket 2nd stage during that phase.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Aug 2010 15:22

If the missile can be accomodated on a P-15 class DDG in "quad packs",then it would be a fantastic achievement.It would then give us a "poor man's" strategic deterrent at sea,in the on-going attempt and until we can build and commission our own SSBNs with their compatible IRBMs/ICBMs.With a "2000km" range,it gives the IN a unique multi-ocean capability in the Asia-Pacific theatre,as our warships equipped with the missile,could attack enemy targets in the S.China Sea from the Bay of Bengal.In fact a larger warship of "cruiser' class,say 10-12,000t,could carry a whopping arsenal of Brahmos and the new missile along with LR SAMs that could also have ABM capability like the USN's SM-3.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 11 Aug 2010 15:39

Shaurya already could carry a 180 kg warhead at mach 4 over 1900 Km. Any increase in the load for a range of 2100 km ?

Like a lot of others, want to see a source for the posted info.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 11 Aug 2010 18:00

the three sucessfull tests of the hypersonic cruise missile,we validated different parameters including thermal stability at different hypersonic speeds,manueverability with different warhead configerations and types with high accuracy in what your call as CEP

Lakshya PTA and Prithvi tests

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 11 Aug 2010 18:30

Austin wrote:sum they probably coined the long hypersonic powered glide phase of BGRV as cruise phase , Shourya power glides hypersonically at ~ 50 km altitude during most phase of its flight , it must be using a slow burning solid rocket 2nd stage during that phase.

Austin, there is no BGV that glides at supersonic or subsonic speed. To boost-glide it has to be hypersonic only. And there is no such thing like only Ballistic missile can do boost-glide. By the way you can also say Prithvi can do boost-glide.

And it is getting curious & curious..the gentleman all long using his tool presented Shourya as ballistic missile is now saying it is Hypersonic cruise missile in another forum. What a world of uncertainties!

negi · Post by **negi** » 11 Aug 2010 18:37

Well Shaurya for that matter never leaves the atmosphere (~max height 40km ?) so don't know if BGRV applies, it might very well be powered for a far greater duration of its flight than a regulation ballistic missile to achieve that depressed trajectory.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 11 Aug 2010 21:33

Kanson wrote: And it is getting curious & curious..the gentleman all long using his tool presented Shourya as ballistic missile is now saying it is Hypersonic cruise missile in another forum. What a world of uncertainties!

er, IIRC he always mentioned it as the first "true multi-purpose strategic missile platform" in the world (or some such thing). Meaning it can be used for a lot of purposes, including I assumed at that time, as a post-PAD first stage too.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Aug 2010 21:35

kanson, You can contact him there if you wish. Are you trying to take post shots here?

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 12 Aug 2010 05:56

India, Russia Likely To Export BrahMos Missiles

...................
Though the export of the missile has been discussed for many years, nothing concrete has happened. It is still too early to know which nations would be identified first, according to one Indian official. “It will be a decision taken after a lot of deliberations,” the official said.

“The missile will be exported to friendly countries after taking into account the security needs of both [Indian and Russia],” Indian defense minister A.K. Antony said. “Many countries have shown interest to buy these missiles, but no decision has been taken as to whom the missile can be sold.”
.........................
AVIATION WEEK reported in May this year, following a facility visit to the BrahMos Aerospace Thiruvananthapuram (BATL), that an air version of the missile is currently under development and will be fitted on to the Su-30MKI fighter (Aerospace DAILY, May 27). “The prototype of the missile launcher is ready from our side and we are awaiting a critical system from HAL Nasik to be fitted on to it,” an official said Aug. 11. “The trials would then begin on the Su-30MKI platform.”

A hypersonic version of the missile is also in the works and the design aspects are likely to be finalized very soon. The new missile will be ready for testing by 2015, Indian sources said.

Thomas Kolarek · Post by **Thomas Kolarek** » 12 Aug 2010 06:35

India is not a signatory of MTCR, why cant India acquire or clandestinely alter Brahmos - Cruise to have more than 300 Kms ? What is stopping them ? No country plays by rules why should India ?