Indian Missile Technology Discussion

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 24 May 2009 22:22

ramdas wrote:There has to be some responsibility when commenting on this. Jay, are you making a general sarcastic comment or are you saying something that you heard from credible sources ? This is a serious matter on which loose statements/posts should never be made. I think the senior gurus should clearly state where they stand on this matter: do they believe Hemant Rout or the official spokesperson ?

That was not my opinion nor my comment, but verbatim from paanwaala who works in the markets of Dhakkan & Balasore. I also think thats its not the guru's prerogative to declare whom to believe and not, its for the individual to make that choice.

Sanjay, I'm not blaming anybody here and I realize that we are all trying to visualize a picture from various anagrams, what I was concerned was not only the misinformation campaing from MOD babus themselves, but the ineptude of the media in not following up on the matter. Guys are not pessimistic because of the same reason which you quoted "trouble-free development life". I' do not have all the technicial info about why they think this is an "anomoly of sorts"(verbatim), but everybody agrees that this was not a succesful test and nobody's happy about failure.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 24 May 2009 22:26

Jay, I simply say that this time the media did make inquiries about the failure and the answers were clear.

Ramdas, I edited my post. I appreciate the production/development difference and ultimately it is the production variant that is of concern to us.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 24 May 2009 22:27

ramdas wrote:Jay,

According to your source, was the failure due to lack of thrust in the second stage solid motor or due to some other problem in the stage separation mechanism itself ?

After all, A II uses a stage separation mechanism with open trusses. These are usualy reliable,with stage separation occuring once the second stage develops sufficient thrust.

From the talk I had, my understanding was it was immideatly after the stage saperation, "pressure was low in the stage eventhough the motor was working as expected", Can gurus extrapolate more on that.

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 24 May 2009 22:37

The implications of this test's results are far more serious than resular developmental trials. It is better to stop our discussion here.

ramdas · Post by **ramdas** » 24 May 2009 22:44

Indeed there is no point believing unnamed sources and such about the test failing when usually reliable sources have not said so. At this rate, vested interests who want to discredit the deterrent and the program in public opinion can plant "credible sounding" stories about it being unsuccessful. News about these event should be very tightly controlled. Dissident voices in these matters are not in the national interest.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 24 May 2009 22:48

If this was a user-trial, then the only thing that matters is if the target was hit (within CEP) or not? Did it?

I would be surprised if a production missile relayed back pressure or any such telemetry. Any such info is just speculation.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 24 May 2009 22:52

Ramdas, look at how well they've succeeded here.

ramdas · Post by **ramdas** » 24 May 2009 22:57

From the talk I had, my understanding was it was immideatly after the stage saperation, "pressure was low in the stage eventhough the motor was working as expected", Can gurus extrapolate more on that.

Then I would really suspect this story. A II uses a vented interstage. If the second stage develops enough thrust, stage separation will occur. If the motor functions as expeted, chamber pressure will be as expected. The only way this kind of story would be credible is if hydraulics of some kind were used for control (actualting a flex nozzle, etc). Open source info states PS3 uses electromechanical rather than hydraulic actuators. The same is likely to be true for A II. In that case, this story has no credibility whatsoever.

Maybe Arun_S could comment on this. I strongly feel that these unsubstantiated noises about things failing should be silenced ASAP. Otherwise, anti-national interests can discredit the program even whe it is well on the way to success

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 24 May 2009 23:38

JTull wrote:If this was a user-trial, then the only thing that matters is if the target was hit (within CEP) or not? Did it?

I would be surprised if a production missile relayed back pressure or any such telemetry. Any such info is just speculation.

JTull: Pressure/thrust is directly inferred from rocket's velocity/Accelaration as tracked by ground trackers.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 24 May 2009 23:45

Jay wrote:From the talk I had, my understanding was it was immideatly after the stage saperation, "pressure was low in the stage eventhough the motor was working as expected", Can gurus extrapolate more on that.

Solid motor burn will be extinguished below certain chamber pressure. The burn rate is a function of chamber pressure (the positive feedback aspect of the burn rate is thus carefully studied and controlled in solid fuel motor design). So if separation went clean, it's either chemistry or throat problem.

ramdas · Post by **ramdas** » 24 May 2009 23:49

Arun,

Well, if it is only information that can be gained by tracking, then the story of "low pressure but motor working normally" sounds even less credible. Maybe there could have been some kind of anomaly like less accuracy than expected, etc. Beyond that, unless some clear confirmation comes out saying that it was a failure like what happened in July 2006, I shall assume that it was by and large a success.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 24 May 2009 23:57

ramdas wrote:Maybe Arun_S could comment on this. I strongly feel that these unsubstantiated noises about things failing should be silenced ASAP. Otherwise, anti-national interests can discredit the program even whe it is well on the way to success

I would suggest an open factual assessment, and not seek to cover eyes under the sand of "since the Lord is silent, all is well".

It is for the sarkari spokesperson to earn their salary and make sure India has credible strategic deterrence. Openness in this matter is a virtue, in particular when there is systemic or statistical equipment variance beyond system specification; After all "Beauty (a.k.a deterrence) is in the eye of the beholder".

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 25 May 2009 00:00

Ramdas, that's where the Hindu's suggestion that a new guidance system being tested comes into play.

Where's the evidence of a catastrophic failure ?

Arun, right now all our doubts are being based on unsubstantiated reports and hearsay. If the spokesman says the report is wrong, then where do you go from there ?

As far as openess is concerned, we usually get the truth at some point - all the missile failures have been reported and documented.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 25 May 2009 00:03

Sanjay wrote:As far as openess is concerned, we usually get the truth at some point - all the missile failures have been reported and documented.

That is correct, and that gives me great confidence.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 25 May 2009 00:09

Glad to hear it - so if we keep asking and keep getting the answer that the test was successful will that suffice ?

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 25 May 2009 00:12

Sanjay wrote:Arun, right now all our doubts are being based on unsubstantiated reports and hearsay.

By the same yardstick, press reports have said nothing about successful test; only about successful launch. And it has been how many days since launch?

I am sure Monday (25 May 09) is not "Memorial Day Holiday" in India, and Indian citizens eagerly hope to hear of successful test by then.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 25 May 2009 00:26

Arun - you can't be serious to use that comparison.

Observe Exhibits 1-6 for the Defence:

1)Indian Express 20th May 2009:

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/agnii ... rio/462749

"Sources said that the trial was a success and the missile was fired with “clockwork precision” from a rail-based mobile launcher."

2) The Hindu 20th May 2009
http://www.hindu.com/2009/05/20/stories ... 331300.htm

"The missile, which was picked randomly from one of the production lots, was launched from a rail mobile system around 10.05 a.m and tracked by all the radars of the Integrated Test Range located along the coast at Balasore, Dhamra, Paradeep and Konark till its splashdown into the sea after a 10-minute flight."

3) Deccan Herald - IANS report from 19th May 2009:
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/333 ... -agni.html

"India on Tuesday successfully tested the nuclear capable Agni-II missile from a defence base in Orissa, official sources said."

4) Deccan Chronicle - PTI report 20th May 2009
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/national ... -fired-084

"The trial of the missile was successful and scientists would conduct a detailed analysis. The missile after three successful trials by DRDO, is ready for production."

5) The Pioneer - report 20th May 2009
http://www.dailypioneer.com/177314/Nucl ... fired.html

"Incidentally, this was the fourth user trial of the Agni-II missile by the Army and sources said it was successful"

6) The Pioneer - Editorial 21st May 2009
http://www.dailypioneer.com/177526/Fire-in-the-sky.html

"The missile’s test flight achieved the objectives intended"

That's 6 reports suggesting some not inconsiderable degree of success. Of the reports only The Hindu does not explicitly speak of success and the Pioneer does not seem to distinguish between development and user trials but to say no press report spoke of the test being successful is incorrect.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 25 May 2009 00:50

Sanjay: Like a good lawyer you pinned me down on this self goal.

Have you yet seen any press report of this "sucessful test flight", any mention of actual range chosen for this missile test?

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 25 May 2009 00:55

I appreciate what you are trying to find out but you made a statement and I rebutted it.

Regarding the range to which it was tested - not yet - and I doubt I will officially. Only that it flew for 10 minutes before splashdown.

Official sources have previously indicated 11 minutes to a range of 2200km

I have an inquiry out on that. What range/ trajectory were they aiming at etc.

I would let you know this the I only learnt of the actual ranges achieved in the 1999 and 2001 test flights (2300km and 2100km respectively) in 2003 and neither was reported in official sources.

Refer to the Aug 29 2004 test and in almost all the reports you never saw mention of the range to which the missile was tested. The reports spoke of a "contained test-fire" and that the missile had a range of 2000-2500km etc.

So to expect revelations as to what range the missile was tested would be somewhat unrealistic. Having said that, DRDO was more forthcoming with Agni-3 data than with Agni-2.

It wasn't known so widely in 1989 that the test of Agni-TD was to 1050km and the 3rd flight in 1994 was only 2 years later revealed to be 1450km.

Several reports say the test was successful, 2 say failure (one being a verbatim copy of the other), one says 10 minute flight and data being analysed and the other says data being analysed. The MoD spokesman was asked about the reports of failure and denied them. That's what we have to date.

May I suggest that we find common ground that the missile took off successfully and splashed down after a 10 minute flight ? Can we agree that that seems probable ?

As to whether it achieved its objectives - that is what I am trying to find out.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 25 May 2009 01:43

Sanjay wrote: May I suggest that we find common ground that the missile took off successfully and splashed down after a 10 minute flight ? Can we agree that that seems probable ?

Yes, that is reasonable.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 25 May 2009 01:49

Right, so we had a successful launch - some degree of stage separation (probably successful) and splashdown 10 minutes later ?

The 2nd Agni-TD test had a major stage separation issue and the missile broke up and exploded within 40 seconds of lift-off.

Therefore, if stage separation failed, it is unlikely the missile could have completed a flight anywhere near 10 minutes.

OK so far ?

Anything wrong would be reflected in the range achieved vs what was sought and the accuracy.

To my thinking, the accuracy is the issue. The army was none to happy with some of the terminal guidance options saying that testing them over water was not the best way to determine CEP. Determining this would require a great deal of analysis of the data - telemetry and otherwise - produced from the test to ascertain accuracy at various ranges.

It would also explain why there is such a delay in giving the final results of the test as evaluating accuracy in the water might not be such an easy task - reasonable ?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 May 2009 06:24

ramdas wrote: I strongly feel that these unsubstantiated noises about things failing should be silenced ASAP. Otherwise, anti-national interests can discredit the program even whe it is well on the way to success

On the other hand ramdas - maybe they are being deliberately planted

I actually personally know some people - both from DRDO and the forces (specifically AF) and one person who is ex AF and later DRDO deliberately agreeing to some ridiculous conclusion with a grin and saying "Let them think that way"

So nobody will know unless someone chooses to say something.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 25 May 2009 17:12

Update - Subramaniam and Mallikarjun have tried to follow up beyond the initial report. DRDO is telling them it is for the army to decide whether tests succeeded or failed on the parameters the army was testing and saying no more than their initial release of "success"

Impression I am getting is that there is a problem but not one relating to the stage separation but probably the guidance system or possibly an error on the part of the user - hence the army's silence.

Continuing to dig.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 May 2009 17:48

Sanjay wrote:Update - Subramaniam and Mallikarjun have tried to follow up beyond the initial report. DRDO is telling them it is for the army to decide whether tests succeeded or failed on the parameters the army was testing and saying no more than their initial release of "success"

Impression I am getting is that there is a problem but not one relating to the stage separation but probably the guidance system or possibly an error on the part of the user - hence the army's silence.

Continuing to dig.

Well a lot depends on what the Army programmed the missile to do. Obviously DRDO had no idea. And when the army decides to cock up, the info stays cocked up.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 25 May 2009 17:52

Very possible - as I say the impression I am getting is that the missile went up fine, splashed down after a 10 minute flight and things went wrong in terms of what the army wanted or expected. The feeling that I am getting is that the army made an error. Again - just a feeling so far.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 May 2009 19:27

Sanjay wrote:Very possible - as I say the impression I am getting is that the missile went up fine, splashed down after a 10 minute flight and things went wrong in terms of what the army wanted or expected. The feeling that I am getting is that the army made an error. Again - just a feeling so far.

Not necessarily.

What if the Army had programmed a short flight? That flight would have looked weird on the DRDO's radars.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 May 2009 21:10

10 min is too long for short flight. Any way lets see what they leak. Definitely there is a dichotomy on how strategic missiles are operated the world over and in India. The DRDO guys should be under gag order till everything is sorted out. Their half statements are doing more damage.

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 25 May 2009 21:30

Ramanaji
I agree. I am no Rocket scientist, but here are my questions.
Fact: As stated by DRDO, Army that missile flew for 10 minutes and then splash down.

Unknowns that can be filled to determine few facts about Agni
1. Altitude reached before splashdown
2. Trajectory, where was it headed. Was Army afraid that navigation system was so accurate it homed on something that may have caused an incident.
3. velocity.
4. What was new navigation system doing on this missile
5. if there was a technical problem, IA and Johlawalas will have their knives out calling DRDO as white elephant, Desi Rona Dhona Organization, etc.

My conclusion
Daal mein kooch kala hai, never mind, Bhen Ch*d saari daal hee kaali hai. Somebody is trying to cover up the real test results in the guise of successful failure and they are doing a piss poor job.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 25 May 2009 21:48

Only second stage of Agni-II has Flex nozzle, the booster does not. Given the speed and air density after first stage there is not much room for weird trajectory.
And no sane Armymen will try to fly the missile in a trajectory that is outside the envelop of what the Vishawakarma designed it for.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 25 May 2009 21:50

ramana wrote:10 min is too long for short flight. Any way lets see what they leak. Definitely there is a dichotomy on how strategic missiles are operated the world over and in India. The DRDO guys should be under gag order till everything is sorted out. Their half statements are doing more damage.

I spent few minutes on ROCKSIM yesterday to deduce the range envelop keeping in mind the 10 minute flight.
The range can't be less then 2,000 Km if the flight time was 10 minutes. 2,000 Km surely is not a short flight.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 May 2009 23:03

Knowing the sp impulse etc at what altitude does F/S burnout happen and by same token F/S sep for Agni II. Whats the air pressure etc at that altitude. F/S sep should be around 60~ 80 secs. That gives what are the aero forces in play.

Baljeet, its odd that IA will do a guidance swap by themselves and DRDO the design office is a mute spectator. My take is IA would chose the bird from their inventory and it gets converted with a limited telemetry kit (less than development kit) by their own people who are trained for this and goes thru a command and control exercise. The scientists take a secondary role as its user trial. In such cases there ae no hardware changes to ensure there are no unknowns introduced.

What if the 10 mins is to find out what happened? If the down range guys didnt see a spalshdown it wont be till 10 mins that one would know if alls well.

Meanwhile Noko tests a nuke(this time no one is saying tis flop) and Iran fires of a solid fuel vehicle(supposed to be based on Paki Shine or what not ie PRC's M9 & M11) and GOI plays keystone cops for no one wants to be in charge, while two arms of GOI play chor-police.

and people wonder why I am using the word credibility.

For heavens sake, clamp down on the "sources' for they are not doing anybody any good.

Sanjay · Post by **Sanjay** » 26 May 2009 01:06

Ramana, Y. Mallikarjun is standing by his report of a 10 minute flight before splashdown and that a new guidance system was being tried.

There is some precedent for this as different guidance packages were tried in user-cum-technical trials with the Prithvi. In fact I am led to understand even some of the range extension tests for turning the SS-250 to the SS-350 were done as part of user/technical trials.

This is not about 10 minute waiting time or whatever. It appears from the initial round of probing there really was a 10 minute flight of the missile which as Arun says would have given an approximate 2000km range.

This is about whether the test in the army's eyes succeeded or failed and that is where data is being analysed.

It does not take much analysis to say that with a crash and burn within 127s a test failed. It will take much more to say why, but the report of failure would have been very clear. It is not so clear as yet.

As far as the GOI etc is concerned, this time Indian Army is in part responsible. The initial reports from DRDO were clear enough to all the journalists who asked. It is the army that is saying nothing. DRDO isn't really leaking information. They are being asked and are responding. If they say "no comment" could you imagine the extent of the speculation ?

At least one thing - you can't say I'm not keeping you appraised of my findings.

The other point is that in India you eventually get the truth and any problems usually do get solved.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 26 May 2009 02:36

ramana wrote:Knowing the sp impulse etc at what altitude does F/S burnout happen and by same token F/S sep for Agni II. Whats the air pressure etc at that altitude. F/S sep should be around 60~ 80 secs. That gives what are the aero forces in play.

At 49 second F/S burnout at ~21 km altitude , Speed = Mach 5.6 (1.66 Km/Sec), air pressure of 2,250 kgf , corresponding to 3.7 MWatt power dissipation.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 26 May 2009 02:49

Tipu Sultan was father of latter day "Indian Rocketery"

But watch the revisionist history writers talking of Tipu Sultan the "Hindu butcher" glorified as protector of Hindus during his bloody reign.

Such is the psy-op played on unsuspecting Yindian mind.

Laughable to see the other psy-op of "Tipu Sultan is the only king who died on the same battlefield as his soldiers". I say "My foot" !!

Tipu remembered, artifacts put on display at summer palace

25 May 2009,
BANGALORE: Legend goes that Tipu Sultan is the only king who died on the same battlefield as his soldiers {Arun_S: revisionist legend of course}. In honour of his valour and
remembering his last day on May 4, 1799, citizens commemorated 210th year of his martyrdom on Sunday.

Tipu's summer palace in Chamrajpet, which is usually deserted, stood testimony to the splendour of a bygone era. On display were Tipu's belongings like his personal armoury and biography.

Traditionally Tipu's death anniversary is observed in Srirangapatna according to the Lunar calendar. "We wanted to do something in May, when his death anniversary falls as per the English calender. It is an attempt to remember him,'' said Azeezulla Baig, administrator of Tipu Sultan Wakf Estate.

Baig said Tipu's robe was preserved by family members of a minister in his court. Poornaiya's grand daughter submitted it to the treasury 20 years ago.

"This is a very rare occasion. We had to wait for 200 years to see Tipu's blood-stained robe that he wore as he breathed his last,'' said minority affairs minister Mumtaz Ali Khan, adding that his belongings are priceless. "There are thousands of bidders ready to put a price. People need to realise his place in history and that he did good for both Hindus and Muslims.''

The display attracted a good number of people that included few who had travelled from other states. On the occasion, it was also announced that the salaries of those taking care of Tipu's palace and belongings in Srirangapatna would be increased soon.

HE MADE SERICULTURE POPULAR

Tipu's interest and initiative to develop sericulture now provides employment to over 30 lakh people in Karnataka. He brought the idea of sericulture from Bengal.

The rulers respect for other religions, especially Hindus, is legendary. He built several temples during his reign.

The Wakf estate members ruled out auctioning any of Tipu's belongings and urged people to submit any royal possessions they come across.

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 26 May 2009 04:07

Ramanaji
Prah ji, no disrespect to you. I think there is some sort of disinformation going on. When two organizations are pointing figers at eachother, truth is the first casualty. At this point everything is conjecture. Some wise man once said, Don't believe anything government says until there is denial from gov't. I think missile test with new system was spectacular, some reporter or some mic was open whereas it was suppose to be turned off. Now as a damage control excercise two organizations are pointing fingers at eachother for the veracity of test. What I am curious about is, if it was a user trial why do they need defense scientist present, does that mean IA is not trained or ready to use these missiles--highly unlikely. These DRDO safed coat waley were not there for thumb sucking, they had a purpose, an objective that must be achieved.
Where I am standing it was a delibrate attempt to cause failure of missile just to appease unkil and pakis. Now they can gloat on this news and feel smug.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 26 May 2009 04:45

Baljeet wrote:Where I am standing it was a delibrate attempt to cause failure of missile just to appease unkil and pakis. Now they can gloat on this news and feel smug.

But it also sounds like a loser trying to explain his misfortune.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 May 2009 05:42

Baljeet wrote:Ramanaji
Now as a damage control excercise two organizations are pointing fingers at eachother for the veracity of test.

Which two organizations?

The army has said nothing.

Only BRF an DRDO are the "two organizations" involved and only BRF is questioning the veracity of the report, not DRDO.

The army is entirely silent.

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 26 May 2009 08:52

Shiv
That silence is deafening. If Army had said something it would help us with something.

babbupandey · Post by **babbupandey** » 26 May 2009 09:02

Arun sir,
Is it possible that IA wanted to try Agni II in a depressed Shaurya-like trajectory? And then trying to analyse the results. The missile may not have performed well in that case but can't be dubbed as failure because they were the ones who chose to alter with the missile's normal usage.
Apologies to everyone who find this question stupid.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 May 2009 09:26

Baljeet wrote:Shiv
That silence is deafening. If Army had said something it would help us with something.

Baljeet, I ask you and other forum members to pardon me for using a crude analogy

< begin story >

I and my friend Dardo once had a neighbor and his beautiful wife who briefly occupied an empty house in our locality. I was really really curious and passers by reported that husband and newlywed wife were up to <ahem ahem> all day long. Then one passerby came by and said "nothing is happening"

I ran to Dardo's house and asked him, "What's up with our new neighbor?"

Dardo said" Well you need to ask him, not me"

But that damn neighbor emerged and left the area and did not say a word to anyone.

< end of story >

This is what is happening. The Army did something. One report said something went wrong. We got curious and asked DRDO. They said "Ask Army". But army is silent.

What is the exact khujli we are suffering from - other than the sort of khujli that I suffered from watching my newlywed neighbor?