Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 24 Dec 2010 14:12

What is current status of Nag missile, Helina, NAMICA ? Haven't heard anytthing since a long time. Only BM tests going on for months now.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 24 Dec 2010 14:34

Guys I have a question regarding Brahmos and the S maneuver that it employs in its final phase of attack.Is this S maneuver along the vertical axis or horizontal axis ? Because if this maneuver is along vertical axis then it means that the missile is actually moving away from the target at some point of time before turning back which might add to the time to imapact(even if it is in seconds).I am no expert and I might be wrong on this.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 24 Dec 2010 16:55

darshhan wrote:Guys I have a question regarding Brahmos and the S maneuver that it employs in its final phase of attack.Is this S maneuver along the vertical axis or horizontal axis ? Because if this maneuver is along vertical axis then it means that the missile is actually moving away from the target at some point of time before turning back which might add to the time to imapact(even if it is in seconds).I am no expert and I might be wrong on this.

Its probably the same. In both cases the missile will move towards the target. The difference as I see it would be that a diving missile would have higher terminal speed and therefore greater kinetic energy but would pop up above the horizon a lot sooner. If the target is supported by an airborne radar giving it adequate early warning, it may be a better alternative. In actual use, the missile will probably be programmed to manoeuvre in both planes in the terminal stage.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 24 Dec 2010 19:25

disha wrote:
Isn't the "S" maneuver akin to two "C" maneuvers reflected and on top of each other?

The point is that the missile may not make a classic "S" maneuver, it can make two "C's or a small C followed by a large C (looking like a ballooned S) and it is in 3 dimensional plane.

This makes Brahmos missile very infernal. Imagine a dozen or so is launched against a CBG? The carrier knows that it is targetted, it can even see it, but the CIWS cannot engage till the last moments and neither the other vessels in the group can take the hit on behalf of the Carrier. To be out of reach of this infernal missile, the CBG will be away atleast 250 km from the nearest missile boat. And this reduces the legs the carrier can offer.

Now, if it is air launched and paired with Mig 29k, imagine the legs at 750k radius + 250k missile (giving 1000 km). So to take out this CBG out, one has to target the carrier from beyond 1000 kms. Truely an infernal offensive/defensive system.

Wonder why US is not looking into supersonic Anti-ship cruise missile.

On violent "S" maneuver:

Since late 2004, the missile has undergone several tests from variety of platforms including a land based test from the Pokhran range in the desert, in which the 'S' maneuver at Mach 2.8 was demonstrated for the Indian Army

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos#cite_note-6

On downing a CBG which has an onion skin layered defense, coupled with MAWS/CIWS and what not, let me quote some here:

A CSF operates over a very large hunk of ocean. The AB's and Tico's make a screen around the CVN of several hundred kilometers. The SSGN's are part of this screen, and hunt enemy subs and surface ships. The E2C Hawkeye AEW&C flies patrol and extends the radar coverage of the CSF, and provides early warning of approaching aircraft or missiles. The CVN has 80+ fleet defender and strike aircraft (F-14 and F-18), and they run constant patrols also. There are also ASW aircraft patrolling and dropping sonabouys and scanning with MAD's looking for enemy subs. The entire screen extends almost 1000 km from the CVN in all directions. All of these assets are electronically linked (NetForced), and the CVN sits in the center, protected from harm. You have a minimum of 2 SSGN's, 2-3 AB's and at least 1 Tico in the CSF, in addition to the aircraft.

To get inside a CVN Strike force is going to be exceptionally difficult. A USN CSF on wartime footing has a layered screen that goes out almost 1000km. Anything that hits the 800km perimeter is automatically scaled at a threat level. Not to mention the fact that there will also be 2-3 Aegis AB's in escort and a minimum of 1 Tico.

Brahmos has 300km range, so the enemy ship must come within that range to the Carrier and can be sunk before it launches the cruise missile. But let's just say somehow it gets one off before it sinks. E-2C hawkeye detects the missile and notifies the defensive systems to calculate and intercept.

CVN is now travelling at flank, running evasion and also (in current scenarios) NETFORCEd with every other ship in the fleet and any other platform within a 1000 k's, that means that in current scenarios, there will be another CSF adding its electronic capability to the response.

The Brahmos has to overcome the Electronic warfare systems and decoy systems, these include ESM and "Electronic Attack" chaff and flare dispenser systems. Next you have the close in missile defence systems. These currently comprise gun and missile systems, Mk 15 Phalanx 20mm gun, US Mk 43 Rolling airframe missile (RAM, 20 missiles) system or it's newer version SEA RAM, (11 missiles), Evolved Sea Sparrow missile system (ESSM), and longer range systems like SM-2 and soon to be SM-3 (though these are primarily anti-air role as opposed to the Anti-ASM role).

A carrier is citadeled. It's estimated that it would take 4 torps of the capability of the Mk48 ADCAP to sink one. One or two Brahmos's isn't going to do the job.

20 miles = 9 seconds means very little reaction time before the damage has been done. But for Brahmos to be that near against above odds is a million dollar question. And with what we know of Brahmos 120-140Km range in a lo-lo mode, it (Brahmos) is going to have a tough time kissing a carrier hull.

On pragamatic approach, let me ask you a simple question:

Can a 500 pound sumo wrestler walk a tight rope?
You can not say he cant.
But have you seen/ heard any such till now? is it practical?
Its all about odds against!

As for the US (why) not opting for supersonic missiles like Brahmos, well, they have more sinister program being worked out:

Prompt Global Strike: World Military Superiority Without Nuclear Weapons
Missile delivered anywhere on the planet within two hours - or your pizza is free!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2010 19:34

^^^ The above scene is fine for mid pacific ocean.

If a CBG comes within 300 km of the Indian coast the carrier will be vulnerable unless they take out every single Brahmos launcher before the carrier comes within 300 km of the coast.

If the carrier remains 500 km away its defences will have to prevent all Indian aircraft taking of from any base in peninsular India from penetrating the 300 km line. And those patrolling aircraft will be operating 500 km from their carrier. No point having too much Americanitis or Sinitis Let's have some Indianitis as well.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 24 Dec 2010 19:35

darshhan wrote:Guys I have a question regarding Brahmos and the S maneuver that it employs in its final phase of attack.Is this S maneuver along the vertical axis or horizontal axis ? Because if this maneuver is along vertical axis then it means that the missile is actually moving away from the target at some point of time before turning back which might add to the time to imapact(even if it is in seconds).I am no expert and I might be wrong on this.

If it is "S" maneuver, top attack, then it is vertical of course.

Here is a top attack act:

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 24 Dec 2010 19:40

shiv wrote:^^^ The above scene is fine for mid pacific ocean.

If a CBG comes within 300 km of the Indian coast the carrier will be vulnerable unless they take out every single Brahmos launcher before the carrier comes within 300 km of the coast.

If the carrier remains 500 km away its defences will have to prevent all Indian aircraft taking of from any base in peninsular India from penetrating the 300 km line. And those patrolling aircraft will be operating 500 km from their carrier. No point having too much Americanitis or Sinitis Let's have some Indianitis as well.

Why would a CBG come that close to Indian coastline knowing about deadly Brahmos? It has standoff advantage of 1000 KM, why not be safe than be sorry!

CBG does not have aa bel mujhe maar attitude

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2010 20:05

ashokpachori wrote:
Why would a CBG come that close to Indian coastline knowing about deadly Brahmos? It has standoff advantage of 1000 KM, why not be safe than be sorry!

CBG does not have aa bel mujhe maar attitude

Well allowing it to stay 1000 km away is fine as far as I am concerned. The real question is why you are bringing in details of a US GBG in this thread. Are you anticipating war? A US CBG 1000 km away will be relatively harmless. But the CBG can get harmed if it gets closer. As long as it shivers in its pyjamas and stays 1000 km away I am not bothered. The real problem is the US sitting in Pakistan. Americanitis is the characteristic of quoting internet and media sources of US strength and superiority and arguing with anyone who disagrees. On BRF it is a pain that is inflicted regularly by Indians infected with the Star Spangled banner.

I am talking about a possible Chinese aircraft carrier.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 24 Dec 2010 20:26

shiv wrote:
ashokpachori wrote:
Why would a CBG come that close to Indian coastline knowing about deadly Brahmos? It has standoff advantage of 1000 KM, why not be safe than be sorry!

CBG does not have aa bel mujhe maar attitude
Well allowing it to stay 1000 km away is fine as far as I am concerned. The real question is why you are bringing in details of a US GBG in this thread. Are you anticipating war? A US CBG 1000 km away will be relatively harmless. But the CBG can get harmed if it gets closer. As long as it shivers in its pyjamas and stays 1000 km away I am not bothered. The real problem is the US sitting in Pakistan. Americanitis is the characteristic of quoting internet and media sources of US strength and superiority and arguing with anyone who disagrees. On BRF it is a pain that is inflicted regularly by Indians infected with the Star Spangled banner.

I am talking about a possible Chinese aircraft carrier.

CBG thingy got started by Disha, to whom I replied on technicality quoting some quotes. If it comes to allegiance between tricolor and star and stripes, I would choose USD over Rupee, as I would choose Basmati over Uncle Bens in other case.

VikB · Post by **VikB** » 24 Dec 2010 23:04

Shiv

We have not forgotten 1971

disha · Post by **disha** » 25 Dec 2010 00:41

A little bit of Brahmos at Karaikal and a little bit of Brahmos on landfall
Several at Ganjam and some near Puri.,
And some presence at Minicoy ... And some scattered over the west coast
will take care of all adventurisms a la 1971s ....

Yes 1971 was on my mind when talking about CBG. I wanted to see how much minimum standoff range (at the knife's edge) a CBG has to be before it is completely vulnerable. It appears that an enemy CBG should be atleast 1500km away and is better off at 2000km. It basically denudes the purpose of the CBG for offensive purposes when crammed into "small areas" like Bay of Bengal, Andaman Sea and Arabian Sea. In effect, no more steamboat diplomacy by errant countries.

Shore based Brahmos batteries can be massed and Naval stations can provide additional legs. It is not one single Brahmos taking on an entire CBG. Taking out 1-2 layers from the outer defences can make any CBG vulnerable. Easy to do with massed attacks. And the sly thing about ameri-khans is that they only take a single Brahmos against an entire CBG scenario.

My point is that our missile developments should follow our philosophy., which is more of a defensive philosophy compared to others which is more of an offensive and leading to big open ended CBGs - more like coconuts, hard from outside/hollow inside (and some have me too offensive philosophy- which is useless).

disha · Post by **disha** » 25 Dec 2010 00:50

ashokpachori wrote: As for the US (why) not opting for supersonic missiles like Brahmos, well, they have more sinister program being worked out:

Prompt Global Strike: World Military Superiority Without Nuclear Weapons
Missile delivered anywhere on the planet within two hours - or your pizza is free!

Lot of Nandi Droppings. Let it get operational and we will see. Who are they going to terrorize with their advanced millitary weapons? Starting a new version of MAD?

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 25 Dec 2010 00:59

What do you believe the scramjet/HSTD is all about?

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 25 Dec 2010 02:32

ashokpachori wrote:Why would a CBG come that close to Indian coastline knowing about deadly Brahmos? It has standoff advantage of 1000 KM, why not be safe than be sorry!

CBG does not have aa bel mujhe maar attitude

That means a 2000 km round trip over the ocean for the CV's aircraft. A minimum of an hour and a half to make landfall and another hour and a half to return to the carrier, with half hour over target, thats a minimum of 3 1/2 to 4 hours of mission endurance. Even then they will be limited to coastal regions, and they will not have the fuel for inland attacks. No PLAN CV is going to do anything from a 1000 km away and be effective. And this is not even taking into account what such distance will do to their sortie rates.

Then you have the IFR'd and BRAHMOS equipped MKIs as well as IFR'd and Harpoon equipped Jags making life miserable for the CVBG. A single AAW ship loss to the air-launched BRAHMOS in the CVBG is a hole in its protection shell, it means more MKIs and Jags can make it thru the gaps left by sunk AAW hull(s). The PLAN CVBG will have a tough time allocating airframes to both CAP and Strike from its limited non-replaceable airframes to protect itself and launch strikes simultaneously. Eventually (2-3) days at the most it will loose the ability to conduct Strike sorties and will concentrate on protecting itself as MKI launched BRAHMOS' continue the attrition of the CV escorts and 4-5 days from the start of the first launch, The CV itself will be reduced to nothing.

If you are thinking of USN operations in Vietnam and Iraq, their carriers were stationed 150 - 200 km from the coast. That is what allowed them to do what they did. And they could do it because they had complete superiority on land, sea and air. Such will not be the case for any PLAN CVBG. Everything will be contested.

As it stands now we have pushed hostiles a minimum 300 km from the coast just by emplacing coastal batteries. Hostilities will mean BRAHMOS equipped IFR'd MKI's and harpoon equipped Jags and LRMP's patrolling and extending that 300 km bubble out to 700-1000 km, or maybe even more. Then you have the IN itself which can count on shore based air-support and has ships capable of 8-16 missile AShM salvos.

Any CV which stays out at 1000 or greater km may as well be on the far side of the World as far as mission effectiveness is concerned.

All in all I think almost 60 years after Independence we are now getting close to fulfilling the commitment of keeping invaders away from our shores.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 Dec 2010 06:10

disha wrote:
ashokpachori wrote: As for the US (why) not opting for supersonic missiles like Brahmos, well, they have more sinister program being worked out:

Prompt Global Strike: World Military Superiority Without Nuclear Weapons
Missile delivered anywhere on the planet within two hours - or your pizza is free!
Lot of Nandi Droppings. Let it get operational and we will see. Who are they going to terrorize with their advanced millitary weapons? Starting a new version of MAD?

Disha in fact this is OT for this thread. Why the Americans are trying this "superiority miuns nuke" should go in the deterrence thread. IMO

arun · Post by **arun** » 25 Dec 2010 08:17

US Congress notified of likely sale of Harpoon Block II to India.

21 AGM-84L HARPOON Block II Missiles and 5 ATM-84L HARPOON Block II for use on the Boeing P8-I’s:

India – AGM-84L HARPOON Block II Missiles

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Dec 2010 08:24

also even during surgex tests I think the us navy cvn's managed around 1.6 sorties/ac/day for a few days iirc. a CV with say 60 fighters has to choose carefully between CAP and strike with around 100 sorties a day available.....with the threat of lurking ASM shooters coming in from multiple directions , methinks a PLAN 60kt CV operating at 100% efficiency will probably put up around 30 strike sorties a day for a few days.

we can deal with that. a day of steady probing attacks from multiple widely separated points in the circle will quickly pull out and exhaust their CAP sorties while denying operational space for the task force to reach optimal position to launch strikes, by the evening they wont be in much position to mount a strong CAP anymore and night will be time to press in closer and go for the kill.

imo the chances are they will tie together two CV groups and attempt hit and run attacks on car nicobar or south india type places as in the IJN attack on Sri Lanka in WW2. thats a much more achievable thing than sea control off indic shores.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Dec 2010 09:51

What is the likely hood of Brahmos , Air Launched Klub and Kh-35/31 Exocet getting integrated with P-8I , we cannot afford to have dedicated missile like Harpoon getting integrated with P-8I while the rest of missile in IN possession is of no use on P-8I

srai · Post by **srai** » 25 Dec 2010 10:04

Shalav wrote:...

Then you have the IFR'd and BRAHMOS equipped MKIs as well as IFR'd and Harpoon equipped Jags making life miserable for the CVBG. A single AAW ship loss to the air-launched BRAHMOS in the CVBG is a hole in its protection shell, it means more MKIs and Jags can make it thru the gaps left by sunk AAW hull(s). The PLAN CVBG will have a tough time allocating airframes to both CAP and Strike from its limited non-replaceable airframes to protect itself and launch strikes simultaneously. Eventually (2-3) days at the most it will loose the ability to conduct Strike sorties and will concentrate on protecting itself as MKI launched BRAHMOS' continue the attrition of the CV escorts and 4-5 days from the start of the first launch, The CV itself will be reduced to nothing.

...

As far as the Harpoon equipped Jags, there are only 6 of them with 24 x AShMs. So the IAF cannot really sustain repeated strikes (over few days) with this small fleet.

Then regarding the Brahmos on MKI, there were news reports stating that the IAF had wanted land-strike version of the air-launched Brahmos.

Currently, the IAF does not have the AShM strike power at sea. It would seem that the IAF does not really plan on having this capability in the immediate future either. Maybe IN has the primary (and almost sole) responsibility for sea along with its anti-shipping duties?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Dec 2010 10:11

the 40 Tejas1 with harpoon and kh31p could close this big gap. each could likely carry 2 drop tanks, 2 harpoons and 2 r73

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 25 Dec 2010 10:40

The effective range of CIWS is around ~ 2 km. If i'm not wrong, for Phalanx it is 1.5 km and for the Ak-630 it is 1.8 km. That leaves only 2 sec to hit Brahmos missile. With S manoeuver, even those 2 secs is not available.

vic · Post by **vic** » 25 Dec 2010 11:34

There is some misconception about the effectiveness of hard kill methods versus high speed Brahmos type missile. A “ready ship” can take anything upto 30-60 seconds to launch a missile. We ignore things like radar needs to detect and then track the missile for some seconds to predict its path. A gun has to be aimed and stabilized to fire. A missile needs to be launched, oriented, gather speed towards the target etc. All these things take time and Brahmos will be in the belly of the enemy by then.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 25 Dec 2010 12:13

Apologise if posted earlier
Country Needs $8.8 Billion In Missiles, Systems In Five Years, DRDO Official Says
Excerpts from above

n the case of LR-SAMs (a project jointly being done by DRDO and Israel), barring the seeker and guidance, we are providing the rest. We had signed the JV (joint venture) in 2005. The missile has a range of 70 km. DRDO is developing the propulsion and actuation system for this ship-based system.

Interesting thing about hsdtv

What is the latest on DRDO’s hypersonic technology development vehicle (HSTDV)?HSTDV is getting ready for its first flight test. Ground tests on [the] Scramjet engine have been successful.(my comment when did this happen ?) DRDL has done excellent work in developing this technology. Several new materials, both composite and metallic, are being realized. We are establishing a hypersonic wind tunnel facility in Hyderabad at an investment of Rs 300-400 crore ($66.7 million – $88.9 million) to test various parameters of the HSTDV. We must be able to touch Mach 6-7 for 20 sec. in first flight, and the effort is on for longer duration. It will have to be commercially viable and many technologies will have to evolve. HSTDV is a scale-changer for us.

My appreciation for Ananth Narayan(tarmak owner), of the new lot of journalists he is one enthusiastic guy, a far cry from DRDO ridiculing journos

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 28 Dec 2010 10:04

Cluster munitions launched from SMERCH:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYnBmxjf ... re=related

How is this diff from CBU105 munitions other than being launched from aircraft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smt5QhOgT0Q

If IA have SMERCH already, the tech should be available for indeginization locally.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 28 Dec 2010 12:26

DRDO readies underwater missile test-fire
Hemant Kumar RoutExpress News Service
First Published : 28 Dec 2010 02:58:14 AM ISTLast Updated : 28 Dec 2010 09:40:33 AM IST
http://expressbuzz.com/nation/drdo-read ... 34790.html

BALASORE: AFTER the success of Prithvi-II, the DRDO is planning to test-fire a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) from an underwater platform off the Andhra Pradesh coast in January.

While no one would elaborate whether it would be K-4 or K-15 missile, sources at the Chandipur base said preparations were on for the test. The missile has been planned to be launched from a Pontoon (replica of a submarine) which is being readied.

Both the missiles are submarine launched and ready for a trial. While K-15 has a strike range of about 700 km, K-4 will hit the target 3,500 km away. Land version of the missile has been renamed as Shaurya which has already been tested once at Chandipur in 2008.

The Pontoon is, however, used to test the K missiles because India does not have an operational submarine capable to undertake firing of such missiles.

Though India has developed the advanced technology vehicle (ATV) INS Arihant, it is yet to begin sea trials or even fire up nuclear reactor.

Missile tests will follow after the submarine completes the sea trials. So far, K-15 missile has been tested successfully six times. The K-4, though, has been tested only once in January this year and it was a secret mission.

It will go under at least six more tests before being deployed. “The name of the missile has been kept ‘K’ in the honour of former President A P J Abdul Kalam, father of Indian missiles,” said a source.

Developed by DRDO, K-15 is about 10 metres in length and about one metre in diameter with a launch weight of about 10 tonnes.This missile uses solid propellant.

It can carry a conventional payload of about 500 kg and also be fitted with tactical nuclear warhead.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 28 Dec 2010 12:34

^^^

Could this be a test of the SUB launched Brahmos. Wasnt there a news repost some time ago which suggested that the Missile it self is ready but cannot be tested as the sub to carry it is not ready?

TIA

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 28 Dec 2010 12:41

Its definitely K-4.

Why would DRDO deny if its testing K-15 yet again?? The mystery surrounding this test speaks for itself.

Besides if anyone remember, in Sandeep Unnithans report, first test of K-4 was held few months back and the next test was planned "within 2 months".
So not a surprise for me.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 28 Dec 2010 12:51

^^^^^
Sandeep Unninathan specifically mentioned that K4 would be tested for second time in January 2011.
Some visual treat for jingoes I wish.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Dec 2010 12:56

so far no pix or video released of any K-series pontoon launch...it might be years before we see one.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 30 Dec 2010 11:35

2010 a mixed bag for Indian defence research

As per this the K 4 has already been tested at least once.

January 11 - India successfully tests its first beyond visual range air-to-air missile (BVRAM) Astra back-to-back from the integrated test range (ITR) off the Orissa coast
January 15 – DRDO tests submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM) K-4 from a Pontoon (replica of a submarine) off the Andhra Pradesh coast January 21 – India conducts flight trials of laser-guided bombs (LGBs) from the ITR
February 7 - India successfully tests its longest range ballistic missile Agni-III from Wheelers Island off the Orissa coast
March 14 - DRDO defers a test of Advanced Air Defence (AAD) interceptor missile due to technical snags occurred at the last minute
March 15 – AAD interceptor missile couldn't take off as the target missile Prithvi deviated from its pre-coordinated trajectory
March 21 - India successfully test-fires supersonic cruise missile BrahMos from a warship in the Bay of Bengal to become the first and only country in the world to have a 'maneuverable' supersonic cruise missile in its inventory
March 27 - India for the first time successfully test-fires nuke-capable Dhanush and Prithvi-II missiles from two separate locations of the Orissa coast during the dawn hour
March 28 - Indian Army test-fires surface-to-surface Agni-I missile from the Wheelers Island
May 17 - Indian army successfully launches the surface-to-surface nuke capable ballistic missile Agni-II from the Wheelers Island
June 18 - India successfully flight-tests nuke capable Prithvi-II missile from the ITR during the morning hour
July 7 - Astra missile fails to deliver desired results during two consecutive trials
July 26 - AAD interceptor fails to have a direct hit with the target missile
September 5 - India creates history by flight testing BrahMos cruise missile at a supersonic speed in a steep-dive mode from ITR
September 24 – Prithvi-II missile falls down immediately after taking off from ITR and caught fire
November 25 - India test-fires nuclear capable surface-to-surface ballistic missile Agni-I from Wheelers Island
December 2 - India successfully flight-tests block III version of BrahMos cruise missile from ITR
December 10 - The first experimental trial of the surface-to-surface
2750 km range ballistic missile (IRBM) Agni-II prime fails
December 22 – Indian armed forces successfully tests two nuclear capable Prithvi-II missiles from ITR capable Prithvi-II missiles from ITR

David Siegel · Post by **David Siegel** » 30 Dec 2010 12:04

Pratyush wrote:2010 a mixed bag for Indian defence research
July 26 - AAD interceptor fails to have a direct hit with the target missile

This is mostly DDM. There was no failure reported so far where a direct hit was not made. The only case of failure was on March 14/15 when the test was aborted due to some issue with target missile.

manish.rastogi · Post by **manish.rastogi** » 30 Dec 2010 13:27

i dont understand why AAD interceptor is considered a failure when the problem was with the modified target missile??

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 30 Dec 2010 17:58

Please see this more accurate story regarding the July 26 2010 test.

http://www.hindu.com/2010/07/27/stories ... 492000.htm

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Dec 2010 22:50

BrahMos Project – the Golden Standard of Russian-Indian Defense Cooperation
Ruslan Pukhov

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Dec 2010 22:54

Interview with V.K. Saraswat: ‘Imports depend on U.S. procedures'

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 31 Dec 2010 05:54

Any updates on A2P failure investigation?

abhay · Post by **abhay** » 03 Jan 2011 00:07

Rianovosti Article on Indo Russian Defence Cooperation

The Akash anti-aircraft missile system is a prime example. The system was developed over almost 25 years - from 1984 to 2009 - but its military-technological level is approximately the same as the Buk anti-aircraft missile system developed in the USSR in the early 1980s.

Question to experts:
Is there any truth to above statement or is thia another example of ill informed, opinionated, biased view from abroad?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 03 Jan 2011 02:03

That is in pretty bad taste! All they can think of is their own pockets!

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 03 Jan 2011 02:53

well what else to expect - they all scheme to kill our home products

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 03 Jan 2011 10:02

abhay wrote:Rianovosti Article on Indo Russian Defence Cooperation

The Akash anti-aircraft missile system is a prime example. The system was developed over almost 25 years - from 1984 to 2009 - but its military-technological level is approximately the same as the Buk anti-aircraft missile system developed in the USSR in the early 1980s.
Question to experts:
Is there any truth to above statement or is thia another example of ill informed, opinionated, biased view from abroad?

Based on teh launcher configuration I say that the author is being generous to compare the Akash with the Buk missile system.

Every buk launcher carries 4 weapons and has its own target illiminator. So the number of targets that can be engaged at one time will be equal to the number of launchers. Even Akasha has this capability. But has the following disadvantage. You take out the Battry level radar (Rajender), the launcher will not be able to much because it depends on the Rajender for target illumination as well. Buk does not have the same disadvantage because the launcher has its own target illuminator.

Take this with a ton of NaCl onlee.