Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

[SaiK]

^the reason we need good mid-course ABM smashers.. with a even better launch detection system. Space based longer range AESA radar is the need of this century, along with other optic, interferrometer and infra red sensors. we should be able launch multiple such mini radar sats that covers entire area of counter ops.

A5 can deliver those sats.. labs and universities can start working on them.. destroy the DFs in space must be the ideal way to do this., and that is where India will get the deemed respect in sci-tech community. the chippanda club can be destroyed in other fields.

[D Roy]

mobile TELARs for DF21 and DF31

taking these out is precisely one of the roles of the B-2. However unkil is also looking at SAR and SBIRs sats combined with Prompt global strike modules for taking these out.

And also of course for taking out Russki stuff.


Remember Serdyukov made a statement not so long ago that by 2015 Yamrika may have the capability to take out Russki detergent with purely conventional means.

[SaiK]

any idea if unkill has space based missile launchers secretely? like mil mission in the name of supporting intl. space station yadi yada..?

[D Roy]

no. but we can speculate about the capabilities of the X-37 and also the larger follow on which is in the works.

the X-37 is a USAF program so it is a mil mission anyway.

Oh and Unkil is looking to put PGS modules on US Subs as well under the DARPA ArcLight program.

[Bade]

HMCS Endeavour is generally considered the first oceanographic mission and that was over 200 years ago.

That might be the case, but still it is widely practiced to use "ships of opportunity" to take measurements. A dedicated mission ship like in survey ships, requires planning and logistics which is of little use in observing emergent phenomena. Using ships of opportunity increases the inputs for a larger database.

Anyways, OT for this thread.

[SaiK]

arclight et al sounds good plan, but for terrorists and chippanda stealers, it would be easy job to assimilate. furthermore, there is a question of invading the civilian space of mil missions. not bad, if done securely, with civilian facilities on ships have no access whatsoever.

[Suraj]

Kanson, my point isn't with accuracy and CEPs, which form the conventional basis for asserting counterforce doctrines; I know we have accurate missiles. That sort of logic applied because both US and USSR had a large missile force. We do not. At least not, in relation to the Chinese. As Singha said, they have a fleet of silo-based, tunnel-protected , road and rail mobile DF-xx missiles pointed at us.

We are not in that league yet. The survivability of our deterrent isn't as assured as theirs (in comparison to us, not to US or Russia). Until such a time as we have the Arihant class going, canistered (i.e. mated) Tata/MAZ TELARs and IR covered canistered launchers with 100+ missiles operational, we cannot really assert an effective counterforce doctrine. Until then our position will remain 'how many cities are you willing to lose if you want to flatten us ?' In Mao's time that might actually not have worked because that madman was willing to lose half his population, but the current leadership is a little less unhinged...

Finally, counterforce can be viewed as sharpening your aim. It requires knowledge of how much the enemy has, and where it is (roughly). The SALT/START/XYZ agreements enabled those two participants to hone a counterforce approach through mutual understanding. Countervalue is easier and has readymade terror value. The Chinese can't pack up and move Beijing overnight to near Kashgar, like they can do with a bunch of DF-21 TELARs. The fact that the Chinese retain a policy of deliberate opacity regarding their arsenal with everyone essentially means that countervalue is the sole effective response to them.

[Fidel Guevara]

regardless of all these counterforce arguments the fact remains there is no way anyone can track 100s of mobile TELARs for DF21 and DF31 over a vast landmess the size of china.

and to what end? we get all our cities smacked to the ground and in return under NFU, we take out a few chinese command posts and nuclear launchers? How dharmic and exactly what uncle ordered

Even Unkil during Desert Storm couldn't find most of the Iraqi Scuds, inspite of having full air superiority and flying over the country at will. If we spend money on counterforce, Panda will spend much less money to make hundreds of decoy TELARs running all over the country.

I think ABM and Counterforce doctrines are way too expensive for India's current priorities. If the objective is to be the top nuclear power in Asia, sure we need these elements. But if the intention is to deter enemy nuclear attack, and be immune to nuclear blackmail, then having the A5 and the ability to burn down 100 Panda cities will serve the purpose.

[Singha]

I have a basic question - to what end does the US propose attacking Russian or Chinese nuclear assets via conventional means?

supposing this attack were brilliantly and 100% successful does that mean that Rus/China cannot bring some more out of the basement and launch an attack? does that mean they are nook nood and permanent satellites of the US?

suppose it were 50% successful, wouldnt it be the start of WW2 when the rest 50% are launched under "use it or lose it" mode of thought.

in a pre-emptive attack on iran or noko it might have some use though, as they can destroy the smallish nuclear forces and "dare" noko/iran to get nuclear in response.

[Avarachan]

Remember Serdyukov made a statement not so long ago that by 2015 Yamrika may have the capability to take out Russki detergent with purely conventional means.

D Roy, can you provide a link for that? I did a quick Google search, but couldn't find anything. Thanks.

[SaiK]

bringing everyone on board to a common agreement is all about these treaties., and there is no guarantee for any force on land that they can 100% sure of cancelling a ballistic missile. So, even maasan setup is vulnerable.. and the reason, khaans and the ruskies are engaged.

the problem in our environemnt is chinese attrocities.. with chippand and paki clubbing to attack Indian democracy at the core, it is required to show the world that back off! or else, we have the capability too.

Now, they say, our capability is not matchable.. which is fine as of now, and the reason NFU stays.

Once we have equal capability, we become MAD, and sign up for treaties. logical end game.. but as we go ahead in to the future, capabilities will advance too.. so we need to leap frog under the NFU umbrella.

BTW, we don't need any treaties, weapons if everyone is SDRE.

[Fidel Guevara]

I have a basic question - to what end does the US propose attacking Russian or Chinese nuclear assets via conventional means?

supposing this attack were brilliantly and 100% successful does that mean that Rus/China cannot bring some more out of the basement and launch an attack? does that mean they are nook nood and permanent satellites of the US?

suppose it were 50% successful, wouldnt it be the start of WW2 when the rest 50% are launched under "use it or lose it" mode of thought.

in a pre-emptive attack on iran or noko it might have some use though, as they can destroy the smallish nuclear forces and "dare" noko/iran to get nuclear in response.

A 1984 book that delves into the whole MAD/counterforce/countervalue question:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=Zr2AhJT ... ey&f=false

Some takeaways:

1) Counterforce is of less use once the enemy can hide their missiles, or deploy SLBMs,. Depending on the population density, there is sometimes no difference between CF and CV. It made sense for the USA/USSR, with missile silos in isolated areas.

2) If a "clean" Counterforce first-strike succeeds with minimal civilian casualties, the rational thing for the struck side is to do nothing. The enemy needs to know that the response will NOT be rational. If the launch command responsibility is widely distributed, it is virtual certain that the response will not be rational. If only the top leader controls the nuclear button, there is more chance of a rational response.

3) Countervalue is true MAD, however it must be "Assured", in the mind of the enemy. Just having nukes is of no use, if the enemy has even the slightest hope of taking out most of your nukes. In fact, having vulnerable nukes is most destabilizing, worse than having no nukes.

4) NFU is purely for political consumption. No nation assumes that their NFU opponent will truly respect NFU.

[SaiK]

"No" does not become "Need", and hence I think NFU is valid, especially when we are in development phase, to detter. The word "Assured" has no meaning.. assurance to all citizens or for few survival boats. In true sense, even MAD is no use, unless there is an equal and opposite MAD available.

What is beauty of NFU is, that it can engage MAD.. and that is all we want now. Again, all in the perspective of "mutual" that would not make sense if there is nothing like that is going on between two or more parties.

[keshavchandra]

SOURCE: RIA Novosti

Ukraine is close to signing one of its biggest ever defense deals for air-to-air missiles with India, according to Russian media reports.

Nezavisimaya Gazeta says the deal for R-27 missiles, worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, is in the final stages and is waiting for approval from the Ukrainian leadership.

The Vympel R-27 (AA-10 Alamo) missile is a medium-to-long-range air-to-air missile developed by the Soviet Union. It is similar to U.S. AIM-7 Sparrow.

The missile comes in infrared-homing (R-27T), semi-active-radar-homing (R-27R), and active-radar-homing (R-27AE) versions. It would be fitted to India’s MiG-29, Su-27 and Su-30 fighter jets.

While the deal has not been confirmed officially, the paper quotes a source close to Ukraine’s national security and defense council, saying both nations are sensitive to Russian concerns over the deal and want to make sure that it would not irritate Moscow.

[SaiK]

gotta be careful with ukaraine.. they do go pally with pakis and chips.

[nachiket]

SOURCE: RIA Novosti

Ukraine is close to signing one of its biggest ever defense deals for air-to-air missiles with India, according to Russian media reports.

Nezavisimaya Gazeta says the deal for R-27 missiles, worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, is in the final stages and is waiting for approval from the Ukrainian leadership.

...

This makes no sense. The R-27 is a relic. We should be buying more R-77s, especially now that the Mig-29s will also be able to fire them.

[D Roy]

Russki fear might be:

PGS takes out 50-80 percent of deployment by conventional only means.

circumvents perimeter/dead hand in the process.

pgs weapons also make sure that "cave" entrances are blocked.

anything else is taken out by Yamrika's ABM interceptors.

Rus is responding with Bulava and Borei. and Layner. Rus may also put 5000 km range cruise missiles on Yasen.

On the defensive side - with Mig 31 armed with new LRAAM. Also some elements of S-500.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the case of Chicom- their numbers are far less than russki, so both PGS and Yamriki ABM become more menacing for them.

Chicom has responded with the underground nuclear great wall. May also be moving towards very long range cruise missiles.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

nevertheless i think PGS use is more likely in some conventional conflict with chicom. likely targets would be chicom OTH, IADS elements and DF-21D launchers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Avrachan,

It is a dated piece of news.

I think I read it of a Russian site. But rest assured the Russkis publicly express great worry about prompt global strike.

[D Roy]

R-27 is a relic

new seeker.

[VinodTK]

Fewer missiles make it tough for IAF to secure Indian Akash

[SaiK]

^^pressure build up, and this is all could be leading to buy firang maal.

create a short supply, build pressure
fail on delivery, and come up with interim plan
buy firang, and make the middle men happy
ddm writers get the cut

[ramana]

A5 RV flight at Mach 24 was quite challenging. Look at the failure report of massa's experiment. The heat shield stripped off either due to erosion or adhesive failure.

India needs low CEP to compensate for yields. Counterforce doctrine is a mirage and being promoted by MUTUs.

[NRao]

This makes no sense. The R-27 is a relic. We should be buying more R-77s, especially now that the Mig-29s will also be able to fire them.

R-27 to Ukraine, so they do not provide support to TSP and R-77 to Russia, so they do not provide support to China.

[Singha]

not sure how unkil plans to deliver prompt global strike, but in the days when people were floating ideas of conventionally armed Tridents being used, Putin put an end to that line of thought saying the moment his satellites or radars see inbound ICBMs he has no way to verify their payload and will immediately press the red button for a nuclear counterstrike.

[vina]

Counterforce doctrine is a mirage and being promoted by MUTUs.

The game theory behind that is this. IF you have an overwhelming size of your arsenal, and you are able to do a precise counter force, the rational response from the target will be to do nothing and you have dominance over them while escalating .

So, really the reason why the Former Soviet Union and the US stock piled that incredible number of warheads is this.. It was basically second strike deterrence .

In Inglees, it means..

We will launch a limited first strike against you, to take out your testimonials and leave you emasculated, but if you are logical, you will not retaliate because you are still alive and not going to be killed. However, if you do retaliate, we will return the fire with overwhelming force and make you glow green in the night forever without the need of any lamps

This works perfectly fine if you have an opponent with a small arsenal and he is rational. So the response from the opponent is not to be "rational" and threaten to escalate to inflict atleast an unacceptable damage so that you dont do first strike.

This kind of convoluted logic while fine in game theory models and deterrence to escalation like all math models rests on assumptions of "logical", "fairness" and all that rubbish. Just like the real world doesn't readily fit math models, this too might not fit real world. There is every incentive for any player not to act rationally , esp if you are the weaker power!

In fact, given the FSU's lead in missiles and warheads, the US intentionally acted "irrationally" for a long long time until they could get parity. The US were the Pakis in that game.

[Singha]

I so love the sound and sight of SS18's taking off over a strong morning cup of coffee. a true behemoth of PSLV size, tons of throw weight anywhere in the globe, black painted....kind of like a large dog running out of its kennel shouting "so you want a piece of me huh?"

whatever be their faults the soviets defined the rulebook in how to make big ugly intimidating stuff.

[Cain Marko]

This makes no sense. The R-27 is a relic. We should be buying more R-77s, especially now that the Mig-29s will also be able to fire them.

Not so fast, notice they mention the AE (active homer). The R27IR and AE has decent range (and can be used in excess of 100km). It is heavier and behind in terms of propulsion and seekers, however, if they have managed to stick a new seeker, both IR and AR, it could be a worthy purchase.

I don't know much about these things, but I am not sure if SARHs are entirely useless even today. Might be a good idea if you can paint and maintain lock over long distances with a hyper-powerful radar like the BARS. Enemy might not even know if an AAM is close since there won't be a warning in the terminal stage (unlike AR AAMs when their seekers acquire targets). As of now I think the issue is that missiles don't have the legs to match radar acquisition ranges, however, if you can fire even a couple of semi active missiles at around 100+ km, you might be able to keep the enemy on the defensive allowing your fighters (the ones not painting) to get on the offensive and position themselves for better chances.

Further, here is something interesting from Wiki:

The global positioning system allows a missile to reach the predicted intercept with no datalink, greatly increasing lethality by postponing illumination for most of the missile flight. The pilot is unaware that a launch has occurred, so flying techniques become almost irrelevant.

CM

[Cain Marko]

A5 RV flight at Mach 24 was quite challenging. Look at the failure report of massa's experiment. The heat shield stripped off either due to erosion or adhesive failure.

India needs low CEP to compensate for yields. Counterforce doctrine is a mirage and being promoted by MUTUs.

Guruji, what is mutu? But the counterforce doctrine is bakwas, didn't work then, won't now. India's stance should be overwhelming force. NFU is fine but only if it is backed up with MAD. Basic idea ought to be, "you use even a small phataka, we will blow you to smoke". I would think that for deterrence, at least such a posture is required, what happens in reality though is altogether another matter that none can really predict.

[Singha]

mutu - more uncley than uncle.

[ramana]

Cain Marko, Exactly. If India goes down no one else should get up.

The A5 Tessy with its accurate warhead and high yield does the job. Take into consideration the fact that modern urban areas are dense packed and are concrete jungles with potential to exceed WWII Japanese casualties.
Vina, India with the NFU and accurate precision strike nukes also has a similar logic to what you stated. IOW its de-facto post counterforce.

[ramana]

BrijeshB, There is a thing called V- gamma map for any RV. Its a plot of Velocity, angle of attack for different ranges. What it looks like is a stretched hand kerchief with two extreme conditions: maximum aerodynamic loads and maximum thermal loads. Both are not concurrent. In order to proof the system you need to repeat the flights a minimum of two times at each of these two points.Hence the four A4 flights.
While doing this one can make other changes that dont effect the prime goal of proofing the RV. These changes are secondary...

[Altair]

Cain Marko, Exactly. If India goes down no one else should get up.

The A5 Tessy with its accurate warhead and high yield does the job. Take into consideration the fact that modern urban areas are dense packed and are concrete jungles with potential to exceed WWII Japanese casualties.
Vina, India with the NFU and accurate precision strike nukes also has a similar logic to what you stated. IOW its de-facto post counterforce.

ramana garu
In order for the logic to work, India must deploy Hundreds of mobile TELS with A5's and her younger siblings all over India backed by a hardened network backbone for SFC CNC.
How long would it take for India to reach the stage where we have atleast 100 secretly deployed TELs meeting the min requirements?
6 months? 1 year? 2 years?
Altair

[Singha]

on another note how much do people think we need to absorb a 1st strike from Cheen, keep to the NFU and then destroy the top50 in Cheen in exchange?

my wild guess:
- 100 x A5 on road with 3xmirv head
- 100 x A4 on rail with 1 warhead (=> 40-50 such trains with 2 missile each)
- 24 x K4 with 3xmirv head (ie 3 on patrol subs with 8 SLBM each => need 6 such SSBN & 48 such missiles)
- 50 x A1 for TSP (1 warhead each)

warhead need comes to 150 big ones for A4 & A1, and ~450 small ones for A5 & K4

assuming Shourya will be conventional for anti-SAM/C3I strikes, as will Brahmos2 / Nirbhay and that K1 will be retired when K4 comes.

annual opex for this little troop of beasts will surely be in billions $$ range, forgetting about the capex for a moment.

this i would consider the MCD (min credible deterrent) though JNU lefties might want to divide by 10 probably

idea would be of the 600 warheads, launch 300 and wipe top50 in enemy nation off the map. while retaining 300 more for a follow up strike and to deter the vultures from other ends from swooping in to tear our flesh.

[D Roy]

For PGS type thingys

USAF - DARPA FALCON program, includes common aero vehicle, now cancelled HTV-3x etc

US Army - Advanced hypersonic weapon program

US NAVy - under Arclight (will also include a hypersonic long ranged cruise missile which is under development) . Work will build upon Boeing's Hyfly hypersonic cruise missile demonstration program from the 2000s. ( LM , ATK et al may also get involved.)


Also for the USAF - Waverider derivatives in the future.

[ramana]

Altair, Think more. First dispersal ensures the challenger will have to commit himself to employ large numbers for neutralizing Indian retaliation. And nuke game is not a two player game. Only the US has such numbers!

[vina]

on another note how much do people think we need to absorb a 1st strike from Cheen, keep to the NFU and then destroy the top50 in Cheen in exchange?

If it is Cheen and/or Pakiland, not much. The second strike is the SLBMs. That is why you have a triad. Or you can go totally like Phrance/UK-stan and put the detterent in some 4 boomers and be done. I sort of like the Phrance /UK-Stan kind of deal. Long term I think that is the best model for us to go to.

[Kanson]

Kanson, my point isn't with accuracy and CEPs, which form the conventional basis for asserting counterforce doctrines; I know we have accurate missiles. That sort of logic applied because both US and USSR had a large missile force. We do not. At least not, in relation to the Chinese. As Singha said, they have a fleet of silo-based, tunnel-protected , road and rail mobile DF-xx missiles pointed at us.

We are not in that league yet. The survivability of our deterrent isn't as assured as theirs (in comparison to us, not to US or Russia). Until such a time as we have the Arihant class going, canistered (i.e. mated) Tata/MAZ TELARs and IR covered canistered launchers with 100+ missiles operational, we cannot really assert an effective counterforce doctrine. Until then our position will remain 'how many cities are you willing to lose if you want to flatten us ?' In Mao's time that might actually not have worked because that madman was willing to lose half his population, but the current leadership is a little less unhinged...

You are welcome. The Crux of your passage as I read is that 1. we don't have enough missile to do CounterForce wrt China and 2. Even if we have, our CounterForce is not effective. Let put some numbers to see where we stand or can stand.

1. No. of missiles to do CounterForce:

China, as per open source, is considered to have, including MRBM to ICBM roughly between 1500 to 2000 missiles, further chances are that they could be adding more every year. It could be that real force China possesses could be higher by a factor of 2 or more. But lets work with available numbers, some rough calculation.

a. We know Agni V can take 3 to 10 MIRV as per official info. At 10 warhead per missile, it takes only 50 Agni V missile to destroy 500 missiles. Media speculated the cost of Agni V to be 60 to 80 Crores. For 50 missile it comes around by today exchange rates, ~750 million USD, not even a billion USD when you are purchasing ~100 aircraft for more than 10 billion USD. To take out 2000 missiles, you need ~ 3 billion USD; When we can start factories for producing thousands of Nag and Akash, can't we produce few hundred Agni V missiles? Just a thought to ponder.

b. By one account, China assigns a launcher for 5 missiles. So if we can take out a single launcher, we can render unusable more than one missile in Chinese arsenal for immediate use.

c. Leaving out Brahmos and Shourya, we have, from Prithvi to Agni 3, some 200 - 300 odd missiles totally as per open source. How difficult to add few hundred more just for CounterForce?

So, how many missiles are needed to do CounterForce. Don't you see, we have the wherewithal to do CounterForce in terms of number of missiles required, atleast if not now but in immediate future?

2. Effective CounterForce:

If you see from pure theoretical sense, effective CounterForce is one which can destroy 100% of your adversary missiles. CounterForce strategy couldn't fully succeed during Cold War becoz the initiator of N war can't guarantee such a high percentage close to 100% of destruction to avoid retaliation. Even to do that it requires such a large nuclear force that the after effects or the radiation fallout couldn't be confide to that locality and the Carnage going to be so huge & unacceptable to World polity defeating the purpose of CounterForce. By one account, to destroy Chinese missiles 100% by CounterForce, it need such a volume of N force that it amounts to destroying neighboring countries like Korea/Russia. You can see various writings from Western authors of Cold War era on how CounterForce is not a viable one, ie. you can't wage a N war and win without getting yourself destroyed typified by movies like The Hunt for Red October.

But now, accuracy of missiles has improved. Buker buster tech improved and improving. Pure conventional response is a possibility. Second, Anti ballistic missile defence is in our grasp. So, if you want you do CounterForce without fully aggravating your adversary, you can, by means of Conventional response. With ABM available, you don't need to target for 100% destruction, even a 10% destruction at initial stages of war will have huge impact on the course of War and amounts to that much less warhead that we need to tackle and further N war is indeed wage-able, you can scale back/ scale down N war against if it is a purely CounterValue response.

Let say, as Pak stated, it uses tactical N warhead on our force for a Cold Start like action. If there is no CounterForce capability with us, it leads to uncontrollable N war that leads to further more destruction. Indian Gov is by the people and for the people. Unlike autocrats like Mao who is willing to sacrifice half of their population just for the national pride and his ego, Indian Gov has the first priority to protect its people before going for punishing her adversary. So CounterForcce enables Indian Gov do its prime duty without losing face, economy and population.

NFU or any other doctrine is like 'Beware! Dogs Inside' sign board on the gate. Its utility ends once a intruder accepts the challenge and prepare to enter uninvited. After that it becomes usual game of waging a War. So there is no need to wrangle ourselves in the debate whether CouterForce means first strike or MAD or NFU. CounterForce can be part of Second Strike too. It take its own course once the War started.

Finally, counterforce can be viewed as sharpening your aim. It requires knowledge of how much the enemy has, and where it is (roughly). The SALT/START/XYZ agreements enabled those two participants to hone a counterforce approach through mutual understanding. Countervalue is easier and has readymade terror value. The Chinese can't pack up and move Beijing overnight to near Kashgar, like they can do with a bunch of DF-21 TELARs. The fact that the Chinese retain a policy of deliberate opacity regarding their arsenal with everyone essentially means that countervalue is the sole effective response to them.

You know, one of paradigms of winning in a N war is the ability to retain sizable warhead/missiles to do a second strike. By corollary, if you want to deny victory to your enemy in N war, you destroy considerable amount of N missiles she possess by doing CounterForce.

Edit: Corrected error.

[AbhiJ]

"Today, the production agency for Prithvi, Agni, Akash and Brahmos missiles has a total order valued at over Rs.93 lakh crore. Such is the power of vision of our political and bureaucratic leadership," he added.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/apj- ... 86052.html

[Austin]

India to Test Own Hypersonic Ramjet

India's Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) will hold trials of domestically-developed hypersonic combustion ramjet in 2013, reports PTI referring to DRDO director Vijay Kumar Saraswat. According to him, the propulsion system will be capable to work at speeds six times higher than sound speed. Saraswat declined to give any details of the prospective project.

Presently, India is developing a hypersonic missile capable to accelerate up to six Mach numbers. The project is developed by Russian-Indian joint venture BrahMos. The new ammunition will be based on supersonic cruise missile BrahMos already operated by Indian Army. In its turn, BrahMos missile is based on Russian cruise missile Onyx.

Today, active development works on hypersonic vehicles are held by the US, Russia, and Brazil. In particular, American planemaker Boeing jointly with US Air Force is developing hypersonic missile X-51A Waverider accelerating up to six Mach numbers. Besides, Lockheed Martin designs hypersonic vehicle Falcon HTV-2. In its turn, Brazil is developing missile 14-X also supposed to fly at speeds exceeding six Mach numbers.

As was reported late in Aug 2011, Russia's Tactical Missiles Corporation had started research works on a hypersonic missile project. According to the company's chief designer Boris Obnosov, Russian missile will be capable to fly at speeds 12-13 times as high as sound speed.

Besides, it is considered that the Baranov Aircraft Engine Building Institute is also engaged in development of hypersonic vehicle Igla under Project Holod-2. Its deputy director Valentin Solonin told AviaPORT on Apr 22, 2012 that the institute was researching integration of a ramjet and an airframe.

"We research effective compression, combustion, and expansion processes occurring in hypersonic vehicle's propulsion plant, and consider its integration with the airframe. Also, we actively study thermal states of ramjet and airframe. Since the inside temperature makes 2,600-2,700 degrees Celsius and the flight is quite continuous, there are some problems regarding thermal state", Solonin said.

[nirav]

"Today, the production agency for Prithvi, Agni, Akash and Brahmos missiles has a total order valued at over Rs.93 lakh crore. Such is the power of vision of our political and bureaucratic leadership," he added.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/apj- ... 86052.html

Its a Typo ..
Rs. 93 lakh crores translates to roughly USD 1.8 Trillion !

Should be about 93 thousand crores which is ~ USD 18 Billion.
Out of the 18, Akash has orders of ~ USD 6 Billion and Brahmos has orders of ~ USD 4 Billion ... Prthvi and Agni Series would account for the rest ...

[member_22872]

More pertains to china military watch thread, but since we are talking about counter force against China and extensive tunnel system, thought of posting here.
A nice YouTube video showing sort of development of Chinese tunnel system with glimpses of interiors made by Geogetown Univ if I m not mistaken.
Now if we are to take out such extensive tunnels, it is almost impossible, but perhaps we can block the entrances? Is that possible with BRahmos? if that is possible we can effectively render hundreds of missiles useless provided it is some sort of a well coordinated surprise strike. But the very big question is, is it even possible to close tunnel entrances effectively? Gurus kindly comment. And also take notice of mention of tunnels in TIbet around 14:05 mins into the video.