Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 30 Sep 2010 10:54

TSP's strategy is to survive a conventional first strike from many quarters and a larger number of nukes makes it difficult to eliminate, Indian ABM is atmost a secondary threat

if ABM is destabilizng it would have attracted the attention of China into considering a tripartate nuke treaty

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Sep 2010 11:35

Kersi D wrote:A 300 nuclear warhead enemy with a "democratic" government is LESS dangerous than a 30 nuclear warhead enemy with a mullah government

K

Democratic or Dictator does not matter , in a nuclear war you are better of loosing 15 cities then loosing 80 of them , a larger number of warhead and delivery vehical will ensure just that.

The reason China is not worried about Indian ABM development is because they have qualitatively and quantitatively better strike potential and Indian ABM in any form will not degrade that significantly they can probably live with Indian ABM system as much as we can live with their ABM system.

The only country that would be worried will be Pakistan because of the significant disadvantage it is in and the only way they would react will be to increase the warhead and offensive potential as they cant compete with India in ABM sphere both in technologically and expense.

Needless to mention the warhead that Pakistan holds and Delivery Vehical mainly IRBM is at best a guessing game.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 30 Sep 2010 12:04

Guruprasad director of Research and Development Establishment
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Gurup ... nt/690322/

He was a key member of the design team for Sarvatra, a military bridge and underwater Shourya launcher... ..
he also has to his credit three patents for his inventions in Sarvatra Project and has filed over 18 patents for his inventions during the recent BrahMoS Project.

JimmyJ · Post by **JimmyJ** » 30 Sep 2010 12:11

Austin wrote:
Kersi D wrote:A 300 nuclear warhead enemy with a "democratic" government is LESS dangerous than a 30 nuclear warhead enemy with a mullah government

K
Democratic or Dictator does not matter , in a nuclear war you are better of loosing 15 cities then loosing 80 of them , a larger number of warhead and delivery vehical will ensure just that.

I am still not convinced about this argument that Pakistan would have stopped producing nuke bums at 40 if India did not have an ABM. Simply look from Paksitan's perspective. If we say India can wipe out Pakistan using 40 nukes, then Pakistan would require a 100 to wipe out India. What they need is surety that India will not exist at the end. So whether we have an ABM or not will not be a question for them while considering to build an arsenal strength in the 100s at the present and that is exactly what we have seen.

Probably if they think a reason to build a 200 they may point at the Indian ABMs. But by then there wouldn't be any meaning for those numbers. A 100 without an ABM and a 200 with an ABM.

And why do we have to assume that ABM technologies won't mature, I mean why do we have to put forward a view that they will never mature and will always be incapable. After all the planes flew above the mach level, men landed on the moon and what more the CWG games in Delhi is gonna start too !!

So if we suggest that we shouldn't develop and deploy an ABM and one fine day when the west develops a better technology one day we would again be caught naked and would be running around for more ToTs.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 30 Sep 2010 12:18

the only way the TSP will change is if the partition was undone. The whoe purpose of the existence of that state is to justify it. whether it is democratic arrangement or a military regime. It will continue to be hostile to India if it continues to exist. Exxpecting it to stop producing nukes is foolish at our end.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 30 Sep 2010 12:43

>>>The reason China is not worried about Indian ABM development is because they have qualitatively and quantitatively better strike potential and Indian ABM in any form will not degrade that significantly they can probably live with Indian ABM system as much as we can live with their ABM system.

We cannot say for sure what is China's thinking is...When it comes to China, you say China is not worried. But between U.S and Russia, you say they are worried about each others' ABM development..Do you mean,U.S. and Russia are less confident about their Nukes?

Whether we like it or not, India and China will have to live with each other's ABM..If not, why did China demonstrate its ability to shoot down a satellite ( to me it is of no significance) and say they too have some ABms? They are indeed worried..or else they wouldn't try to show off. Not only China, anybody would be worried, when they realise that what what they fire may not reach the target and is likely to be shot down mid-air.

>>>The only country that would be worried will be Pakistan because of the significant disadvantage it is in and the only way they would react will be to increase the warhead and offensive potential as they cant compete with India in ABM sphere both in technologically and expense.

As I mentioned before, pakis can only make as many nukes as is possible with their limited bomb material. When India has ABM or not is immaterial. Even India doesn't have an ABM programmes, Pakis will make max no of nukes with available material. With our ABM, we can realistically hope to shoot down some of them. In future, as and when the technology matures, we can hope that most of their missiles may be shown with our ABM system.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Sep 2010 19:56

geeth wrote:We cannot say for sure what is China's thinking is...When it comes to China, you say China is not worried. But between U.S and Russia, you say they are worried about each others' ABM development..Do you mean,U.S. and Russia are less confident about their Nukes?

US and Russia are old and mature players of this game they have been through this game long before and understand the importance that any ABM defence should not in any way dilute offensive capabilities.

The new START clearly says that in as many words. Even during days when both parties did not get along they always maintained a dialog on strategic system and got into strategic limitations treaties due to persistent effort from both.

Not only China, anybody would be worried, when they realise that what what they fire may not reach the target and is likely to be shot down mid-air.

I think any one who follows the ABM game understands that as much as ABM grows qualitatively so have the offensive systems , eventually offensive system will overwhelm any ABM and the latter is also a very expensive proposition something any defence expenditure cannot sustain.

Its to a lesser extent much like a SAM versus Aircraft argument if SAM's have grown better so have the strike aircraft grew better qualitatively to challenge the sams.

As I mentioned before, pakis can only make as many nukes as is possible with their limited bomb material. When India has ABM or not is immaterial. Even India doesn't have an ABM programmes, Pakis will make max no of nukes with available material.

The problem is no body knows for sure how much that limited material is and means for Pakistan .With Pakistan its always a case of capability surprise. Unless we begin to talk to them on this and work on a dialog which brings some strategic stability and puts some numbers its just a guessing game for both sides and ABM does not make this any better.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Oct 2010 03:03

Guys may I remind you this is a technical disussion thread and nto for grand strategy or TSP.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 01 Oct 2010 13:32

How difficult will it be of for the DRDO to integrate the astra seeker with the Akash seeker to make it active homing weapon?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Oct 2010 00:49

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=won0A9ooTts

An Indian reporter speaking in Russian

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sAl6hUnPlA
bramos and Agni

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 06 Oct 2010 18:48

Wasn't Agni 2AT supposed to be launched at the end of September? Perhaps they are waiting for the CWG to end?

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 06 Oct 2010 21:27

"How difficult will it be of for the DRDO to integrate the astra seeker with the Akash seeker to make it active homing weapon?"
very difficult -they are based on different design philosophy and input signal characteristics

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 09 Oct 2010 08:21

DRDO to test fire Agni-2 + with next two months

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) will start test-firing a new variant of Agni missile named ‘Agni 2 plus’ in next two months, V K Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, said today. “The modified version of Agni 2 would have better accuracy and range,” he told reporters on the sidelines of a function here. On ‘Bramhos”, he said work on the aircraft version of the supersonic missile was in progress and it would be integrated with Sukhoi fighter jet of Indian Air Force. Saraswat said DRDO scientists were also engaged in development of Agni 5 which is expected to be tested next year.

http://idrw.org/?p=740

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 09 Oct 2010 09:15

Agni-II Plus to be tested in 2 months - The Times of India
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... z11paxHahg

Scientists at the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) are working on an upgraded version of the Agni-II missile which, they say, will be more accurate and powerful than its predecessor.

The first tests for the Agni-II Plus will be carried out in two months, said V K Saraswat, scientific advisor to the defence minister and secretary defence R&D of the defence ministry. Saraswat was interacting with the media on the sidelines of a function at the Defence Institute of Advanced Technology (DIAT), Khadakwasla.

"The new missile will be better than the Agni-II. It will perform better at various levels," Saraswat said. According to him, the newer version will be better in terms of accuracy, strength and distance covered.

Asked whether the Agni-II would be decommissioned after the introduction of the Agni-II Plus, Saraswat stated that both versions would be used. "We require missiles of various ranges. The older version will not be removed from the services," he said.

Highlighting other key initiatives of the DRDO, Saraswat said that work on an aircraft version of the Bramhos missile is currently underway and trials are being conducted on it.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 09 Oct 2010 09:24

^^^^I wonder what caused this delay in testing...
I hope it is nothing to do with semantics or technical problems but environmental (turtle nesting?) and weather issues..

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 09 Oct 2010 15:12

Akash Missile Users Give Feedback To DRDO
Aviation Week

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 10 Oct 2010 09:39

Hindu says next year

Agni-II Plus to be launched in 2011: DRDO
http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/oth ... 822125.ece

srai · Post by **srai** » 10 Oct 2010 10:19

Juggi G wrote:Akash Missile Users Give Feedback To DRDO
Aviation Week
...
The air force already has placed orders for two squadrons of these systems, and six more are in the final stages. The army also has placed orders for two regiments.

The missile system and radars are worth Rs 23,000 core ($4-5 billion) — the biggest orders in recent times for a DRDO product. “It is the first time a home-grown tactical missile system is being ordered in large numbers by Indian users,” the official says.

IAF - 8 squadrons (16 batteries) - 1,000 total missiles [125 missiles per squadron (~62 missiles per battery)]
IA - 2 regiments (2 groups - 8 batteries) - 500 total missiles
----------------------------------------------
24 batteries @ $5 billion = ~$200 million per battery

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 10 Oct 2010 10:34

and that is a big big vote of confidence for DRDO especially given that a comparable Russki system has been doing the rounds of the international market for quite sometime.

make Akash Mk 2 faster and add a secondary IR capability and we'll have a phucking export winner.

Export is important because just like hosting a CWG it makes your industries more professional and savvy.

Now what the IA needs to do is order another 1000 Nags and we'll have another winner there as well.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 10 Oct 2010 10:41

Dr. Saraswat said the DRDO was developing ballistic missiles with both short and long-range radars which were highly manoeuvrable.

Breaking news or DDM ??

srai · Post by **srai** » 10 Oct 2010 12:59

IAF strengthening its ground assets: Air chief

New Delhi, The Indian Air Force (IAF) is upgrading and modernizing its existing airfields and bases – rather than creating new ones – with the latest and ultra-modern communications, radar, aircraft landing systems and defensive shields, its top commander says.

A project, designated Modernisation of Airfield Infrastructure (MAFI), was already under way and airfields all over the country would be activated and upgraded, the IAF chief, Air Chief Marshal P.V. Naik, told India Strategic defence magazine (http://www.indiastrategic.in) in an interview.

India has a total of 428 airbases, airports and airfields, most of them decades old as they were built by the British during World War II from the Himalayan border regions to India’s island territories. Many of these airfields have been lying unused or disused.
...
Then, all the airbases or airfields would have to be made impenetrable by any enemy, which means all-round or 360 degrees surveillance and missile attack capability.

Air defence is admittedly very weak, and Naik said that due attention was being paid with the acquisition of short and medium range Israeli Spyder and indigenous Akash surface-to-air (SAM) missiles.

India’s state-run Bharat Electronics Ltd. has been contracted to deliver several squadrons of the all-weather 24×7 Akash missiles by 2012.

As per wiki List of Indian Air Force bases, IAF has around 60 major airbases currently (WAC - 16, SWAC - 12, CAC - 7, EAC - 15, and SAC - 11). IAF has ordered 18/16 batteries each of Sypder LLQRM and Akash MR-SAM. If all of these are put into protecting the airbases and 1 battery is assigned per airfield (BADZ), the current order will cover maximum of 34 airbases. This still leaves 26 airbases BADZ without SR/MR SAM coverage. And this is not counting the activation of more airfields (428 total) in the near future. Plus, there are other BADZ areas other than airfields that need SAM umbrella.

Maitri LLQRM (under JV development) is greatly needed for the SAM modernization and expansion efforts on the BADZ areas. At the minimum, 42 batteries of Maitri LLQRM (together with 18 Spyder LLQRM) would be needed to cover just the 60 airbases. This will free up the Akash batteries to be used more as an area SAM (in Group formations). At least, another 8 Akash SAM squadrons (16 batteries or 4 Groups) would be needed.

Now there is an order for 9 squadrons (18 batteries) of Barak-8 LR-SAM systems. But since these are more of an ADGES SAM, it's hard to tell how many individual airbases or other BADZ areas will come under its coverage. Even here at the minimum, 3 times the numbers (27 squadrons) are probably required to provided an effective coverage.

We are easily looking at around $20 billion dollar price tag.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 10 Oct 2010 15:29

without SR/MR SAM coverage

without modern SR/MR SAM coverage. They will be guarded by upgraded Pechora units for the time being.

Alongwith a new LLQRM , several airbases along the IBs will also require C-RAM defense and limited BMD. That's where Iron dome and Magic wand may be looked at.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 10 Oct 2010 19:09

srai wrote:
Juggi G wrote:Akash Missile Users Give Feedback To DRDO
Aviation Week
...
The air force already has placed orders for two squadrons of these systems, and six more are in the final stages. The army also has placed orders for two regiments.

The missile system and radars are worth Rs 23,000 core ($4-5 billion) — the biggest orders in recent times for a DRDO product. “It is the first time a home-grown tactical missile system is being ordered in large numbers by Indian users,” the official says.
IAF - 8 squadrons (16 batteries) - 1,000 total missiles [125 missiles per squadron (~62 missiles per battery)]
IA - 2 regiments (2 groups - 8 batteries) - 500 total missiles
----------------------------------------------
24 batteries @ $5 billion = ~$200 million per battery

Some questions.
What is the strength on 1 squadron in terms of number of launchers, number of surveillance radars, number of tracking radars, power generating units, reload units, support vehicles etc. ? How much area can be "controlled / sanitised" by one squadron ? How many squadrons are required to protect say one air base ? How many targets can be handle by one squadron.

For example all major IAF bases have two SA 3 "systems". Each system has three quadruple missile launchers with one tracking radar, along with other support vehicles. Each system can handle only one target.

Kersi

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 10 Oct 2010 19:21

[/quote]

As per wiki List of Indian Air Force bases, IAF has around 60 major airbases currently (WAC - 16, SWAC - 12, CAC - 7, EAC - 15, and SAC - 11). [/quote]

There area few more, not listed by Wiki Aunty.

K

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Oct 2010 21:14

Each IAF Missile Squadron is composed of 'Flights' - with each flight equivalent to a battery in IA AD Regiment.

Each Squadron of Pechora has 3 Flights - and I suppose should remain the same for Akash as well.

AFAIK, each major base will have one Squadron of Pechora Missiles.

srai · Post by **srai** » 11 Oct 2010 02:13

Kersi D wrote:...

Some questions.
What is the strength on 1 squadron in terms of number of launchers, number of surveillance radars, number of tracking radars, power generating units, reload units, support vehicles etc. ? How much area can be "controlled / sanitised" by one squadron ? How many squadrons are required to protect say one air base ? How many targets can be handle by one squadron.

For example all major IAF bases have two SA 3 "systems". Each system has three quadruple missile launchers with one tracking radar, along with other support vehicles. Each system can handle only one target.

Kersi

Let's look at the IAF Akash Operational Configuration diagram:

IA Operational Configuration

IAF Operational Configuration

Each IAF Akash Squadron is divided into the following:

Squadron Headquarters - (Diagram)
1 x 3D CAR (Rohini)
1 x DCV (Data Centre Vehicle)
1 x PSV (Power Source Vehicle)
1 x SCC (Squadron Command Centre)

Technical Flight
6 x TLV (Transport and Loading Vehicle)
4 x MHT (Missile Handling Trolley)
1 x MSMC (Mobile Station for Missile Checkout)
1 x DBV (Power Supply Vehicle)
1 x IACSV (Air Compressor Vehicle)

Combat Flight A
1 x FCC (Flight Control Centre)
1 x FLR (Flight Level Radar) (Rajendra)
4 x AAFL (Akash AirForce Launcher)
1 x FEM (Flight Engineering Support, Maintenance and Repair Vehicle)

Combat Flight B
1 x FCC (Flight Control Centre)
1 x FLR (Flight Level Radar) (Rajendra)
4 x AAFL (Akash AirForce Launcher)
1 x FEM (Flight Engineering Support, Maintenance and Repair Vehicle)

Total Squadron Missile Strength: 125 missiles

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
So now just multiply times 8 squadrons (on order):

8 x 3D CAR
8 x DCV
8 x PSV
8 x SCC

48 x TLV
32 x MHT
8 x MSMC
8 x DBV
8 x IACSV

16 x FCC
16 x FLR
64 x AAFL
16 x FEM

1,000 x Akash missiles
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Now on your question on how many targets can be engaged simultaneously:

Each Flight Level Radar (FLR) or Rajendra Radar can track 20 targets and engage 4 targets simultaneously with 8 missiles. An IAF Akash squadron has two Combat Flights (CF) each with a FLR. This means one squadron is capable of engaging 8 targets simultaneously and guiding 16 missiles at those targets. 3D CAR at the squadron HQ can track 200 targets.

Engagement times:
Akash missile travels at around 700m/s from 1.5km onwards. To engage a target at 30km (max range), it would mean roughly 45 seconds of flight time. To engage a target at 5km (min range), it would be roughly 8 seconds. I also read somewhere that it takes an Akash system around 15 seconds from tracking to preparing to firing. These times would apply for 3 rounds (as each AAFL carries 3 missiles) before needing to reload, which could take at the minimum 10 minutes (but likely more judging by the TLV handling mechanism). With 125 missiles per squadron, this translates to around 5 reloads per AAFL.

Typically, two missiles will be fired in ripple mode at one target to achieve near 100% kill probability. The third missile acts as a reserve and can be fired if the first two miss. With 125 missiles per squadron, an Akash squadron will have enough missiles for at least 62 targets (2 per target).

Operational Scenario

Akash has an advanced automated functioning capability. The 3D CAR automatically starts tracking targets at a distance of around 150 km providing early warning to the system and operators. The target track information is transferred to GCC. GCC automatically classifies the target. BSR starts tracking targets around a range of 100km. This data is transferred to GCC. The GCC performs multi-radar tracking and carries out track correlation and data fusion. Target position information is sent to the BLR which uses this information to acquire the targets.

The BCC which can engage a target(s) from the selected list at the earliest point of time is assigned the target in real time by the GCC. The availability of missiles and the health of the missiles are also taken into consideration during this process. Fresh targets are assigned as and when intercepts with assigned targets are completed. A single shot kill probability of 88% has been achieved by the system taking into consideration various parameters of the sensors, guidance command, missile capabilities and kill zone computations.

Since the FCC can be up to 30km from the SCC, it would mean an IAF Akash squadron can cover around 60km radius around the airbase.

Srivastav · Post by **Srivastav** » 11 Oct 2010 02:52

Srai....thanks for an awesome explanation.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Oct 2010 03:06

Some clarifications:

"Each Flight Level Radar (FLR) or Rajendra Radar can track 20 targets and engage 4 targets simultaneously with 8 missiles. An IAF Akash squadron has two Combat Flights (CF) each with a FLR. This means one squadron is capable of engaging 8 targets simultaneously and guide 16 missiles at those targets. 3D CAR at the squadron HQ can track 64 targets."

Each Flight Level Radar can track 64 targets. Rohini radar can track 150 targets. GCC - Group Control Center can track even more targets (it can receive feeds from other radars also).

"Engagement times: Akash missile travels at around 700m/s from 1.5km onwards. To engage a target at 30km (max range), it would mean roughly 45 seconds of flight time. To engage a target at 5km (min range), it would be roughly 8 seconds. I also read somewhere that it takes an Akash system around 15 seconds from tracking to preparing to firing. These times would apply for 3 rounds (as each AAFL carries 3 missiles) before needing to reload, which could take at the minimum 10 minutes (but likely more judging by the TLV handling mechanism)."

Since there are 4 launchers with 3 missiles each, 12 missiles overall, thats equal to six targets @ 2 Missiles each, before the Akash battery needs to reload. Missile would be fired automatically once the enemy aircraft is decided as a threat and keeping into account its velocity and when it would be within Akash envelope.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Oct 2010 03:49

Austin wrote:Karan-M no matter how you look at it an ABM development irrespective of the success it achieves , it will certainly prompt a reaction from Pakistan and the only reaction a country like Pakistan with no ability to develop an ABM is to increase the number of Warhead , Delivery System and Sophistication much cheaper than developing an ABM.

So let them. It will bankrupt them in the process. Is India meant to stand around and be nice to them while they arm themselves with conventional weapons and nuclear devices both? And who says its cheap to develop more advanced delivery systems. Its very expensive and challenging. They are heavily dependent on their big brother the lizard for non conventional weaponry, let the big brother feel the pinch in propping up its little donkey.

Ultimately this will lead to an arms race since the increase of warhead and delivery vehical will prompt an equal increase in Indian Offensive system. Its this kind of Arms race in Nuclear Domain that no body wants nor can we or them afford to have or should have it.

Here you are just going for the usual propaganda the so called non proliferation experts talk whenever they wish to deter India, whether it be the AWACS or some new fighter or a new missile. Stop thinking in their terms and start thinking from India's strategic point of view.

Who says nobody wants this arms race? India can sustain this arms race. Can Pakistan? Can you tell me how much their scientific capability is worth and whether they can even field a fraction of the items India is developing and fielding. It is in our best interest that Pakistan spend more and more on its military, while its economy suffers.

And what is this obsession with our ABM system being directed only against their nuclear weapons?

What will India do tomorrow without an ABM/advanced air defense if an Indian base is hit with a surge of Ballistic Missiles or Cruise Missiles? And they get lucky taking out a high value asset. So should we hand Pakistan a propaganda or even an actual victory on a plate for fear of escalation? Lets even disband the IAF and ask them to return the Sukhois to the Russians and agree to play by Pakistans rules. The Pakistanis were very upset about India acquiring the Sukhoi as well. Lets also return the AWACS, and anything that allows India an advantage over Pakistan.

The point I am making is lets not fear monger or fall prey to petty fears thinking of what the opponent will do, all the time. Think of your advantage and seize it, and sustain it. Nobody will be happier than Pakistan if India were to stop developing the ABM system. Their blackmail would work for them all over again.

A 300 Nuclear Warhead Pakistan with 300 IRBM is a far dangerous enemy to India then a Pakistan 60 Warhead and Missile irrespective of the status of Indian ABM development.

How do you know Pakistan would not go for 300 nuclear warheads even otherwise? This is an argument without a leg to stand upon. In fact, if India does not have an ABM system, Pakistan will pour its resources into nukes, because it can win a war even if it loses conventionally and even blackmail India into surrender.

You have not even thought about the alternatives to your scenario which is what is so amazing.

Deciding on a conclusion and fitting data to suit the pre-decided result is wrong, as matter of fact, even after Indias '74 test, who was it who decided to make nuclear weapons the lynchpin of their national effort and even blackmailed India with them, moment they acquired the capability? It was Pak.

Do you think they waited for India to play nice then or will wait today? Wake up - Pak will take every advantage it can against India, irrespective of what India does.

Since any ways in the continent there are no defined numbers to warhead or delivery vehical and at best its a guessing game on either side it and neither we are talking across this , this is a far dangerous game something best avoided.

What is this "best avoided" business. The manner in which you are speaking one would think you have a crystal ball to state that the Pakistanis would behave exactly as you hope they will behave and that you are thinking this but the actual folks who realized the need for the ABM did not take this into account.

Do you seriously think they did not think about this aspect and what Pakistan intended to do or would do if we developed an ABM system? If so, you are mistaken in this. In fact, the development of a NFU doctrine and the ABM program launch clearly shows that our decision makers shut an easy Pakistani route to strategic dominance.

What you don't seem to understand is that Pakistan long ago decided that it wanted to outstrip India in every military field provided it could, and it went about making its nukes ready while folks made arguments similar to yours about "dangerous game" and "best avoided". The Pakistanis have not avoided this game, they have embraced it.

India learned its lesson after being blackmailed each time after terror strikes that it could no nothing as it would lead to a nuclear war, and has gone about setting itself to puncture that balloon.

#It is in Indias best interest to field an ABM system, as it ensures Pakistan's dreams of destroying the whole of India's prosperity by ramping up its nuclear arsenal and attacking all key economic engines and cities are not going to happen.

#It also ensures the credibility of India's NFU doctrine by ensuring our own arsenal and vital areas are protected by ABM systems and will survive to retaliate.

#It also ensures conventional deterrence by making sure important military assets like AWACS and other items are not vulnerable to BM/CM attacks when on base.

#Most importantly, it ensures Pakistan cannot terrorize Indian leaders by holding the Indian public and civilization hostage.

Before you rush to counter, please read about the UK deterrent program to get gist of what I am saying.

Once the Russians started fielding ABM systems, the UK had to give up plans to attack multiple Soviet cities and focus on Moscow alone. They even went so far as to develop a special decoy system to allow at least one missile to get through, for the Polaris missile.

That is what the Indian ABM program will do.

It will force Pakistan to confront the fact that it can

#No longer destroy Indian economy and overall national morale by taking out all its major metros and even a few others

#India is no longer deterred by its nukes and is meanwhile growing its own arsenal and can destroy Pakistan if attacked first while coming out the better

#Pakistan's military preparedness will suffer as budget gets split more and more between conventional arms and nukes

#Pak Civil-military divide will worsen and economy will suffer as Pakistan keeps focusing on military expenditure

All of these are in the best interests of India.

Not to even mention the huge long term strategic advantage for India thanks to the technologies being developed from lasers to satellites to what not. This will again reflect back strongly on the Indian economy, as our imports of high end systems will reduce. We can already see the advantage just one decade into the effort, as we are no longer acquiring as many AWACs off the shelf and have own program.

Overall, the ABM program is one of the best things that has happened to India and a rare case where things worked out in terms of the political-bureaucratic-military establishment identifying a problem, analyzing it and then implementing a solution with the technological group. If India were to be so logical and clearheaded about its security, most even if not all the time, things would be far better.

srai · Post by **srai** » 11 Oct 2010 04:00

Karan M wrote:Some clarifications:

"Each Flight Level Radar (FLR) or Rajendra Radar can track 20 targets and engage 4 targets simultaneously with 8 missiles. An IAF Akash squadron has two Combat Flights (CF) each with a FLR. This means one squadron is capable of engaging 8 targets simultaneously and guide 16 missiles at those targets. 3D CAR at the squadron HQ can track 64 targets."
Each Flight Level Radar can track 64 targets. Rohini radar can track 150 targets. GCC - Group Control Center can track even more targets (it can receive feeds from other radars also).

...

According to AkashSAM.com, the 3D CAR Rohini (at the SCC/GCC) can actually track 200 targets at 150km range. Each Battery Surveillance Radar (BSR), which is not in IAF's combat flights, can track 40 targets at 100km range. Each Battery Level Radar (BLR/FLR) can track 20 targets at 60km.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Oct 2010 04:14

http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/English/bne ... h_test.htm

Battery Level Radar

The Battery Level Radar (BLR) is the heart of the weapon system as it tracks the targets and missiles and guides the missiles towards the targets. The multifunction phased array radar can simultaneously track upto 64 targets. In addition it can guide eight missiles towards four targets at the same time. Electronically steered beams enable agility in switching between various functions of the radar. It has a slewing antenna which enables 360o coverage in azimuth. It has been designed with advanced ECCM features.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Oct 2010 06:22

srai wrote:According to AkashSAM.com, the 3D CAR Rohini (at the SCC/GCC) can actually track 200 targets at 150km range. Each Battery Surveillance Radar (BSR), which is not in IAF's combat flights, can track 40 targets at 100km range. Each Battery Level Radar (BLR/FLR) can track 20 targets at 60km.

Previous reply to this disappeared. Forum glitch?

Anyways, the 3D CAR data is right, but the Akash BLR can actually track 64 targets, but displays 20 priority targets so as to not overload the operator, like

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/AWG-9

The AN/AWG-9 offers a variety of air-to-air modes including long-range continuous wave velocity search, range-while-search at shorter ranges, and the first use of an airborne track-while-scan mode with the ability to track up to 24 airborne targets, display 18 of them on the cockpit displays
....
Its a big change from the Pechora, which was limited to one or was it two targets per battery? I think one per radar. The inside of a Pechora control cabin (non upgraded) is really something out of the fifties, the guy engaging the aircraft, actually moves a small wheel manually to keep the tracking radar aligned onto the target for a lock on.

wilson_th · Post by **wilson_th** » 11 Oct 2010 09:28

Karan M Post subject: Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions DiscussionPosted: 11 Oct 2010 03:49

educative and clear

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 11 Oct 2010 09:33

Karan M wrote: <SNIP>

Its a big change from the Pechora, which was limited to one or was it two targets per battery? I think one per radar. The inside of a Pechora control cabin (non upgraded) is really something out of the fifties, the guy engaging the aircraft, actually moves a small wheel manually to keep the tracking radar aligned onto the target for a lock on.

It is one per Battery.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Oct 2010 18:27

Thanks guys.

@Rohit,

So that is per each fire control radar, as one will be allocated per battery. I think IAF should retire the Pechora's ASAP while retaining/modernising their long band radars (whichever have some life left) as they could still be of use.

So far per googling, IAF has ordered 8 Akash squadrons (16 Batteries) and 18 SpyDer systems, which should be batteries (9 Squadrons). Technically, if they order 2 surveillance radars per SpyDer, and additional support vehicles, infrastructure, that should be equal for ~16 airfields, one Akash and one SpyDer flight each.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 11 Oct 2010 19:15

Since there are 4 launchers with 3 missiles each, 12 missiles overall, thats equal to six targets @ 2 Missiles each, before the Akash battery needs to reload. Missile would be fired automatically once the enemy aircraft is decided as a threat and keeping into account its velocity and when it would be within Akash envelope.

Food for thought at the 2 missiles per target comment : (Cross posting from WAFF)

http://www.1tv.ru/news/other/160922
In exercises a single battery instantaneously engaged 5 targets with 5 missiles achieving a 100% kill rate. No more need to waste 2 missiles per target. The system is a huge improvement over the older Buk-M1 system. The M1 could only track 6 targets at one time, the new system can track 32 targets instantaneously. Range has been increased from 35 to 45km's.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 Oct 2010 20:57

^^ The talk of one being better than the above needs to be taken with a pinch of salt unless we know the exact context. For instance, what were the conditions for the exercise and what were those five targets doing - were they maneuvering etc.

The reason I posted 2 missiles for Akash per target, is because its the conservative scenario, where a commander opts to use 2 missiles. But in reality, the Akash SSPK is 88%. That's a very high number.

If we compare tests, the Akash has done equally well against targets whose criteria we know about, scoring five out of five with a single missile each.

http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/English/bne ... h_test.htm

IAF had evolved the user Trial Directive to verify the consistency in performance of the total weapon system against low flying near range target, long range high altitude target, crossing and approaching target and ripple firing of two missiles from the same launcher against a low altitude receding target.

The user trials of intercepting flying targets were conducted at ITR, Chandipur during 14-21 Dec 2007. Akash missile has successfully intercepted targets fifth time in a row in this campaign. Fifth and last trial successfully took place at 2.15 pm on 21st Dec at Chandipur on sea. The Akash missile destroyed an Unmanned Air Vehicle (Lakshya) which was flying a path simulating an air attack. The target vanished from the radar screen when the missile was guided precisely in close proximity and warhead blast occurred destroying the target instantaneously. This is the grand finale of the tend days users campaign meticulously planned by the Indian Air Force.

Also, before this, they took the Akash for mobility trials and EW trials, where they checked out the radars to make sure they could handle intense jamming, so the results would have been the same.

The immunity of Akash weapon system to electronic countermeasure environment was separately tested and proved at Gwalior Airforce base.

Another thing about the Akash, is that its missiles are all the way sustained ramjets. They can continue to maneuver, without losing energy throughout their envelope. That poses a big challenge for any fighter/bomber that gets into an Akash envelope. A few hard turns and jamming wont work on this missile, which is still a trick against other SAMs launched from far away, to kill their energy.

Plus add the cost factor and the local aspect, which means local spares and constant support, and no running to Russia for small gadgets unless you take expensive TOT, and the advantages are obvious.

The best "next thing" to an Akash would be a fire & forget SAM with multi-spectral seekers, with double to triple the range. None of these exist yet, though. While fire & forget SAMs like Avenger exist, their limited onboard seekers are going to find it hard against heavy jamming.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 13 Oct 2010 05:59

DRDO Research Center A Key Missile Player
Aviation Week

DRDO Research Center A Key Missile Player
Oct 12, 2010
By Anantha Krishnan M.
HYDERABAD, India

The Research Center Imarat (RCI), a sensitive and less-discussed wing of India’s Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO), is playing a key role in India’s next-generation missile programs.

RCI is currently involved in air defense systems (ADS) and the Agni-V long-range strategic missile. “The lab has successfully participated in successful demonstration of ADS with over five launches so far,” an RCI official says. “The Agni-V, capable of traveling a maximum range of 6,000 kilometers [3,700 mi.], is scheduled for a maiden launch in March 2011. This would further put India among a select group of nations with such advanced deterrent systems.”

The Exposition Hall at RCI provides a peek into various missile systems and other platforms that are currently being developed by the lab. DRDO chief V.K. Saraswat has laid down a mandate for RCI to become a leader in missile technologies.

RCI has been designing and developing state-of-the-art missile technologies for more than two decades. It is DRDO’s largest unit responsible for developing missile systems and avionics like inertial navigation systems (INS), control systems, real-time embedded computers, imaging infrared seekers, radio frequency seekers and power supply systems.

Telemetry and teleoperation systems also are developed by RCI to evaluate missile performance during the development phase. “Our focus has been developing world-class, state-of-the-art missile technologies that will produce precise and reliable, indigenous weapon systems to back the needs of the armed forces,” RCI Director S.K. Ray says. “We want to be a leader in development of guided missile systems by delivering frontier technologies, multi-disciplinary competence and avant-garde infrastructure leading to self-reliance,”

Located close to the new Hyderabad airport, RCI is spread across 2,100 acres. The lab has successfully produced missile technologies that were denied to India under the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) by Western countries, including fiber-optic gyros, ring laser gyros, electromechanical actuators, pressure sensors, rate gyros, lithium and thin film batteries, imaging infrared domes and IIR/RF seekers.

As the crucial unit of India’s Missile Complex, RCI has been pivotal in launching the Prithvi surface-to-surface missile, the Dhanush ship-launched missile, the Agni long-range missile, the Akash medium-range surface-to-air missile, the Nag anti-tank missile, the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, the Astra air-to-air missile and the submarine-launched K-15 missile. The lab works closely with the Defense Research and Development Laboratory and the Advanced Systems Laboratory, which are both based in Hyderabad.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 13 Oct 2010 06:03

PHOTO : Recent Pic of Agni-II MRBM Heading for Op-Deployment

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 13 Oct 2010 07:49

Is it?

That's just a picture from the Walchand site.

http://www.walchand.com/DIVISION/defense/3.html