Indian Missile Technology Discussion

[Philip]

unrelated to thread title.

[K Mehta]

Take this into the debate on India's BMD development.

Philip,
What is there in the article to be taken into debate in the Indian development of BMD? Its a Japanese deployment of American missile which didnt succeed in one of its trials. I am at loss here, but you can surely help me understand.

[ramana]

Shankar, Think Su 30 and Lop Nor.

[SaiK]

The minimum numbers for silos and sub launches must be enough for both second and first strike (overwhelming) should our doctrine change, which I think it will over the maturity of systems advances into. Actually we got a great start from NFU perspective, and that gives us a solid support for moving over to MAD. We have at least 50 to 100 targets covered for both NE and NW directions, for the silos, and the strategic subs are going to be much lower in numbers but much heavier in terms of tonnage deliverable.

Hence, silos are important aspects that should have larger deployment than SLBM based.

[Arun_S]

Link

Reinventing a proven indigenous missile?

Ashok Parthasarathi and Raman Puri

IMHO People easily mistake ABM or AShM missile system to be just ABM or AShM missiles, with is totally erroneous. Unlike SAM system ABM system potency comes not from missile round but the radar network to be able to mount continuous surveillance to detect hostile missile at very long range, so that it can cue many other radars located far away from each other to determine it trajectory to accuracte enough precision by integrating the data stream over few tens of seconds, once enough precision is obtained (after integrating the data stream) the interceptor missile can be launched. The interception happens in LoS (Line of Sight) and while tracking radars keep monitoring the target and decoys, for sending commands to interceptor to discern from the cloud of decoys and real target.

Now AShM system is a very different beast compared to ABM.

• 1.) Unlike land based Radar network that mounts the surveillance job, sea based armada of say 6 or even 10 ships cruise is relatively close pack formation and not all the ship have long range surveillance radar, neither the ships want to continuously transmit their position via LR radars. To detect a missile launch 120 KM away IMHO has no option but to have an airborne radar. Either AWACS/AEW that is carrier based or shore based.
  
  2) Unlike ABM/SAM the ASh Missile are much smaller and tend to fly close sea surface hiding behind the wave clutter that is achilles heel for any surface radar, for that sake even aerial radar.
  
  3) Even if hostile missile launch platform is detected (I.e. enemies navel surveillance aircraft, submarine, or ship), detecting an airbourn missiles heading in the direction of friendly ships is a big problem statement.
  
  4) If missile is detected and its position can't be continuously and accurately determined as it winds its way forward. Also because enemy missile is flying rather than following a ballistic trajectory. Thus the Anti AShM missile has to carry a relatively powerful radar itself in terms of RF power as well as processing power to discern low flying missile).
  
  5) When people say AShM range is 120Km distance, it means the range at which the enemy missile is detected, meaning it will be intercepted at a range much closer than 120Km. Meaning the interceptor itself has to fly at relatively low altitude in dense air thus higher drag (unlike SAM or ABM).

All in all, this is a surveillance/sensor problem not an interceptor missile problem.

[NRao]

One thought that doesn't go away is why we have opted soley for an Israeli BMD,when as the article says,an indigenous option is readily available and equivalent French and Russian SAM/BMD systems are also on offer.Why have these ben discounted so easily.There is a lack of transparency in the Barak-2 deal also,as Aster and Russian equiv. missiles should've also have been considered for LR naval SAMs.

This, on my part, is a wild guess. I suspect the Indo-Israeli dynamics are more cast-in-stone than any others. No matter who comes to rule that dynamic does not (my guess) change. This theory will be put to test when Obama comes into play, where there are commonalities between India and Israel to pretty much oppose much of what Obama is thinking, on Iran and Kashmir.

On the flip side the Russians, IMHO, are shooting themselves in their foot - not just with India, but with everyone else too. So, I am not too sure that I would trust the Russians quite as much today as I did a few years ago.

France? Monies is all that counts. But, that applies to any other nation too.

But in ALL this India needs to climb out of its deep sleep and be counted as a player. India needs to take more risks if need be, have a live team that deals with strategies and develop publishable policies.

[Sanjay]

In which of his books did Mr. Karnad claim the 20KT warhead for Brahmos ?

[ramana]

His new one that got released last month.

[SaiK]

plausible.. check out the rough weights in terms of lbs for various low yield weapons:-
http://www.radiochemistry.org/history/n ... ts/teapot/

[Arun_S]

Indian low yield weapon for the purpose will be ~100Kg mass.

Of course just my personal opinion.

[Sanjay]

Ramana, that's the one entitled "India's Nuclear Policy" ?

Of the Agni's in the tunnels, I take it they were Agni-2s to which he referred ?

Did he say anything about the Agni warhead ?

Will be ordering the book of course

[sum]

His new one that got released last month.

Could some kind soul point me to where all of Shri Karnad's can be ordered from?

Google isnt helping much.

[Anabhaya]

There you go mate.

Lancer Publishers

You might as well order the Kaoboys of RAW and other such nice works on the same website.

[Raj Malhotra]

Interesting.

The LRTRs for a horiz flying missile would have to be looking 'top-down', so to say. And the high speed of the BCM (Ballistic cruise missile ) would give it away as a non-aeroplane.

A geo-synchronous orbit sat would be at quite a distance to do this kind of looking down monitoring on a 24x7 basis. LEO sats wouldn't provide 24x7 coverage except if planned and used in tandem. Of ocurse, during tense times, an AEW and bringing together of space based assets would be in order.

AEW assets prowl at 10 - 15 km and scan the space to the height of 20 - 25 km, mostly it will be in look-down mode. But the missile travels at the height of 50 km. Dont know AEW will be of any use in tracking these missiles. As this is said to be highly manoeuvrable and cruising at the speed of ~ 1.7 Km/sec horizontally, spoting the missile is going to be a nightmare.

S-300 reaches to the altitude of just around ~ 30 Km. Even if there is detection, it will be of no use. And at the terminal phase, God knows what manoeuvre it can pull. LACM like Tomahawk makes a vertical dip to clear the LOS in reaching the target. It gives zero margin of error. If a high speed missile pulls a sudden dip with a swril, that will be simply marvellous.

In Indian Context AEW/AWACS can see the take off/boost (exact term?) of the Ballistic missile from its base. With average speed of Mach 1 to 6 the Bm with range of 150-1000km will give good warning due to detection to our missile shield.

[Surya]

Don't waste your money on Kaoboys of RAW.

The book on RAW and IB have more information

[sum]

There you go mate.

Lancer Publishers

You might as well order the Kaoboys of RAW and other such nice works on the same website.

Thanks a lot...what about the older of Karnad's books namely, Nuclear Weapons and Indian Security:The Realist Foundations of Strategy(2005 edition) which is supposed to reveal a lot of juicy details...Lancer doesn't seem to have it!!?

[SaiK]

Indian low yield weapon for the purpose will be ~100Kg mass.

Of course just my personal opinion.

quite right saar!.

By accelerating the fission process a boosted fission bomb increase the yield 100% (an unboosted 20 kt bomb can thus become a 40 kt bomb).

On the contrary,

Although boosting can multiply the yield of fission bombs, it still has the same fundamental fission bomb design problems for high yield designs. The boosting technique is most valuable in small light-weight bombs that would otherwise have low efficiency. Tritium is a very expensive material to make, and it decays at a rate of 5.5% per year, but the small amounts required for boosting (a few grams) make its use economical.

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/sci ... ission.htm.

And:-

India is well known to manufacture tritium

Sope, BrahMos 20KT is highly possible!

[Gerard]

By accelerating the fission process a boosted fission bomb increase the yield 100% (an unboosted 20 kt bomb can thus become a 40 kt bomb).

This is actually not the purpose of boosting in a modern design.

Boosting allows a very small device, with a pit that can be compressed with a small amount of chemical explosives. If imploded, with the neutron generator firing at the time of maximum compression, the yield will be quite small (say 0.3kt) without the presence of the boost gas.

The neutrons produced by the DT boost gas fusion reaction are necessary to fission the pit and achieve an appreciable yield (say 10 kt). This is well above the threshold necessary to ignite a secondary (if present). The DT fusion reaction is actually complete before the fission reaction terminates.

Now, if there is an accident and the chemical explosives are set off and compress the pit (but without the neutron tube firing and initiating fission), the small pit size means that an accidental fission chain reaction by neutrons from the pit itself, at some point during the compression, will result in a negligible nuclear yield (ideally less than the equivalent of a few kg of conventional explosives).

This gives you
(a) a safe weapon - no nuclear yield if an accident occurs
(b) a secure weapon - the PNT and the DT boosting can be controlled by permissive action locks to prevent unauthorized use
(c) a small weapon (smaller pit and explosive lens shell), that is light (no thick heavy tamper) and thus is readily deliverable by missile
(d) a weapon of variable yield (dial-a-yield) from tactical to strategic

Boosting may also allow use of reactor grade Plutonium since preinitiation (and fizzle) is no longer a problem.

[Arun_S]

Indian low yield weapon for the purpose will be ~100Kg mass.

Of course just my personal opinion.

quite right saar!.

By accelerating the fission process a boosted fission bomb increase the yield 100% (an unboosted 20 kt bomb can thus become a 40 kt bomb).

In my post I did not say anything to mean the weapon I am talking is of pure fission variety and not boosted fission variety

The Shakti-I test proofed the boosted fission, that itself is very compact, lightweight and efficient, and of said yield range. Recall that Shakti-1 test was for a TN weapon meant for carrying atop BM in slender RV, one can imagine the diameter and size of its primary stage that was of boosted fission variety and yield of ~17kT, whose diameter was small enough, that after primary explosion it did not destroy the TN's radiation case during the time fusion stage was being lit.

[Arun_S]

In Aero India-05 the Brahmos person was explaining to me the design challenges due to the competing fundamental requirements of ramjet air flow, temperature and space for fuel. And last but not the least the weapons packaging constrain due to these choices.

[Kanson]

AEW assets prowl at 10 - 15 km and scan the space to the height of 20 - 25 km, mostly it will be in look-down mode. But the missile travels at the height of 50 km. Dont know AEW will be of any use in tracking these missiles. As this is said to be highly manoeuvrable and cruising at the speed of ~ 1.7 Km/sec horizontally, spoting the missile is going to be a nightmare.

S-300 reaches to the altitude of just around ~ 30 Km. Even if there is detection, it will be of no use. And at the terminal phase, God knows what manoeuvre it can pull. LACM like Tomahawk makes a vertical dip to clear the LOS in reaching the target. It gives zero margin of error. If a high speed missile pulls a sudden dip with a swril, that will be simply marvellous.

In Indian Context AEW/AWACS can see the take off/boost (exact term?) of the Ballistic missile from its base. With average speed of Mach 1 to 6 the Bm with range of 150-1000km will give good warning due to detection to our missile shield.

You are at Indian Missile shield ?
Various news emanated immediately after first PAD launch suggest ranges as 600, 800, 1000 km, though Dr. Saraswat interview mentioned it as 600 km. The system is still in developement, estimates are revisied and hope improvements are expected before fielding.

Added later: Effectiveness of AEW depends upon how strong your AF is against the adversary.

[Kanson]

Silos/tunnels:Winning strategies involve adapting warfighting capabilities to terrain. With limited road/rail densities in NE with bottleneck such as chicken neck and similar terrain disadvantages near kashmir, solution to be harnessed to protect strategic missiles through deception and protection that are deployed near border. On the other hand Rail/land mobile only employs deception to safegaurd itself from the first strike.

[Raj Malhotra]

Re Kanson

I think we are talking at cross purpose. What I am trying to say is that "in Indian context" the AWACS-AEW-Aerostat-Land radar which are within Indian territory can detect launch of Ballistic missiles (say) within a range of 1000km from Indian borders. The average speed of missile with a range upto 1000km can be from Mach 1 to Mach 6; this will give ABM reasonable time to react.

This is compared to US-USSR system in which radar systems within their own territory will give a very short time to react as they will detect missiles when the missile is in terminal or re-entry stage and very fast speed like Mach 10-15

[SaiK]

Q: For launch detections from our neighbourhood, what measures or installations we have now or being planned/installed. We need to detect within 3 seconds of the launch(I guess with an equal time to response). Do we have the capability? or it is still on the works?

[Arun_S]

Q: For launch detections from our neighbourhood, what measures or installations we have now or being planned/installed. We need to detect within 3 seconds of the launch(I guess with an equal time to response). Do we have the capability? or it is still on the works?

Where does the 3 second number come from?

Raj: For BM protection It will nice but not necessary to know/detect enemy missile launch at 600 km or more ground distance (ground radars wount do that due to earth curvature, and airborne radars will also not do that due to limited antenna gain x power product; IMO only space based optical sensors can do that if they happen to be in vicinity at that time).

Boost phase interception is the holy grail right now because it requires having eyes and ears all over the neighborhood extending 4,000Km.

OTOH one can protect high value real-estate with ABM systems and India and getting there. Expending the size of the protection bubble will be a continuous improvement. What the Indian systems can do is detect and track Ballistic Missiles using line of sight ground based sensor all incoming missiles some 200-400km from Indian borders. That common network watching Indian near space can be part of the other sensors deeper inside our borders that will allow ABM batteries (protecting vital real-estate) to shoot down the BM with relatively high certainty.

Indian BM Interceptor rounds can do a good job provided it has accurate BM vector fed to it and it has the crucial 40-90 seconds available from launch to intercept. Bottom line is radar sensors, communication mesh and software. And PAD and AAD give a peek to Indian capabilities there. The areas of development thus are ground based long range radars and a network of such radars.

[andy B]

Arun_S take these questions with a pinch of salt:

1). Is there any way to increase the warhead weight and size for the brahmos
(Better fuels for the ramjet, thus needing less of it?, Lighter metals for construction weighing less?)

2). Would a solid ramjet weigh less as compared to a liquid one?

3). When it comes to size, would a solid ramjet of similar perfomance be of similar dimensions to the liquid one or would it be more compact?

Apologies if these have already been discussed.

[neerajb]

In Aero India-05 the Brahmos person was explaining to me the design challenges due to the competing fundamental requirements of ramjet air flow, temperature and space for fuel. And last but not the least the weapons packaging constrain due to these choices.

Please share the info with us.

Cheers....

[Nayak]

Policy on arms purchases reversed

Sandeep Dikshit

http://www.hindu.com/2008/11/26/stories ... 971400.htm

NEW DELHI: With the approval of a procurement of three squadrons of low-level quick reaction missiles from two Israeli companies, the government has reversed its own policy of not dealing with arms companies involved in corruption cases.

Not only has the Cabinet Committee of Security (CCS) cleared this multi-million dollar purchase, it has specified that all other procurement cases of IAI and Rafael, both Israeli companies, could also be processed.

The only rider is that in each of the cases, the vigilance status of the two companies should be assessed while seeking CCS clearance. The clearance to dealing with Israeli companies, who figure in a Central Bureau of Investigation case for corruption, makes it possible for the companies to continue participation in several lucrative deals.

Highly placed sources said although the Ministry of Defence was reluctant to deal with the two companies, the writ of the higher authorities was invoked to make the bureaucracy fall in line. Officials were told that progress would be made in the procurement cases — where either IAI or Rafael have emerged or are likely to emerge as the vendor with whom commercial negotiations are to be undertaken or are under way — and their vigilance status assessed and brought out in each case while seeking approval.

This contrasts sharply with the manner in which the government banned Denel, a company from one of its close political allies, South Africa. Even as the investigating agencies began probing the charges, the then Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee promptly set up a committee which recommended the blacklisting of the company from each and every tender it was participating in.

Officials here argued that the reason Israeli companies have been allowed to continue is because they not only helped India during awkward moments during the Kargil War of 1999 with Pakistan but also assisted India actively in beefing up its counter-insurgency and defence-preparedness by providing “state-of-the-art equipment.”

The reluctance to blacklist Israeli companies was manifest two years ago when the scandal surfaced, allegedly involving the then Defence Minister and Chief of the Naval Staff. Denel had by then been blacklisted one year back but officials were confident that such a case would not befall Israeli companies even though the case against Denel has made little progress.

Following the Bofors scandal, a mandatory clause in defence procurement agreements states that a company can be blacklisted and all contracts cancelled if it uses middlemen in deals. Companies now must also sign an integrity clause in which they promise not to use unfair means to obtain orders, otherwise they would be barred from participating in future tenders. Officials may be right in stating that the blacklisting of companies from Israel, whose large proportion of defence production now finds its way to India, could hurt defence purchases. But the same is true in the case of Denel.

[sum]

If only such common sense had prevailed in the Denel case!!

[Arun_S]

Arun_S take these questions with a pinch of salt:

1). Is there any way to increase the warhead weight and size for the brahmos
(Better fuels for the ramjet, thus needing less of it?, Lighter metals for construction weighing less?)

2). Would a solid ramjet weigh less as compared to a liquid one?

3). When it comes to size, would a solid ramjet of similar perfomance be of similar dimensions to the liquid one or would it be more compact?

Apologies if these have already been discussed.

Brahmos is already very optimized missile. As for the 3 specific question you asked, as Yamrikhans will say: Good question. (meaning good questions but one that no will answer for that will spill the secrets.)

[Dileep]

Much before the Internet days, the names Prithvi, Agni and Surya was known to the public. Later, the general feeling was that it was scrapped in concept stage because of USA objection.

I distincly remember discussing them during the college days, ie pre 1991. So, the name doesn't come from anyones musharraff.

I am sure one can dig up newspaper articles from the (physical) archives of Hindu if one have the access.

[narayana]

I distincly remember discussing them during the college days, ie pre 1991. So, the name doesn't come from anyones musharraff.

I am sure one can dig up newspaper articles from the (physical) archives of Hindu if one have the access.

Yep i too remember,Testing of prithvi was put on hold before PM P.V. Narasimha rao's US visit,when a Journo Asked him,if there was any Arm twisting from US side on this,he Replied "My Arm is Intact".But credit should go to Mr.Narasimha rao For restarting the nuclear program

[Anujan]

Yep i too remember,Testing of prithvi was put on hold before PM P.V. Narasimha rao's US visit,when a Journo Asked him,if there was any Arm twisting from US side on this,he Replied "My Arm is Intact".But credit should go to Mr.Narasimha rao For restarting the nuclear program

IIRC Agni was also declared a "technology demonstrator". But dont underestimate the chanakya of modern times. ABV said at PVN's death that when ABV became the prime minister, PVN slipped him a paper with "it is ready, you should go ahead". There is also much speculation that the leak about our bum and missiles with subsequent unkil reaction (as expected) were deliberate to (a) take them underground (b) to strengthen the hands of nationalists against WKK (c) bide for time since the mega bum was not ready.

[SSridhar]

Agni V design completed; to be test-fired in 2010

When India test-fires the 5,000-km range Agni-V in 2010, it will be one of the most sophisticated, smart and intelligent missiles of its class, featuring a host of new technologies, including measures to counter a ballistic missile threat.

This surface-to-surface missile, which will have the longest rangeof all Indian missiles, will form a crucial element of the country’s nuclear deterrence programme. With scientists at the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) deciding to make it a canister-launch weapon system, Agni-V is expected to provide a major tactical advantage as it can be launched from anywhere in the country.

Talking to The Hindu here, Avinash Chander, director of the Agni programme and of the Advanced Systems Laboratory (ASL) Avinash Chander, who is also the director of the Agni programme, said the design was completed and the first development flight test will be conducted in 2010. Two of the three stages of the solid-propellant missile will be made of composites, making it lighter. While 60 per cent of the sub-systems will be similar to those of the 3,500-km-range Agni-III, the rest will comprise new and advanced technologies like the ring laser gyroscope and accelerometer, which provide navigation and guidance. The gyroscope was developed by Research Centre Imarat (RCI), sister laboratory of ASL, and is part of DRDO’s missile complex here. This advanced technology was proved successfully in Agni-III and in the recent test-firing of Shourya, the tactical missile. Referring to ring laser gyroscope, G. Satish Reddy, director, navigation, observed “this technology is developed by very few countries and we are on a par with them now.”

Underlining the importance of canister-launch, Mr. Chander said all future Agni missions will have canister launch. Canister had nothing to do with silo or non-silo. V.G. Sekaran, associate director (programmes), ASL, said the Agni-V programme was on schedule. “We are in the development mode and qualification trial will follow.” All the sub-systems will be ground-tested till 2010.

[ramana]

So he is making it a wooden round.

[narayana]

IIRC Agni was also declared a "technology demonstrator". But dont underestimate the chanakya of modern times. ABV said at PVN's death that when ABV became the prime minister, PVN slipped him a paper with "it is ready, you should go ahead". There is also much speculation that the leak about our bum and missiles with subsequent unkil reaction (as expected) were deliberate to (a) take them underground (b) to strengthen the hands of nationalists against WKK (c) bide for time since the mega bum was not ready.

Sorry for Off Topic,But former PM PV didnt get the respect he was due,after SitaRam kesari's Coup,no one cared about him,even after his death,his family was not allowed to cremate him at shakti sthal,in Hyderbad also,All party and Family men left before his body was completely burnt,his body was left half burnt,after it came in media every one hurried back and completed the last rites.

Thats not the respect for the guy who pulled back our country from mortgage ,he was a modern chanakya.

[sarabpal.s]

I think it was rao's years when US Pick the India preparation for nuclear test and force India to stop it and rao did stopped it.

[Austin]

sorry but cross posting it from IMD ........since its relevant to our MIRV development

Bulava the lightest SLBM of its Type

Mark that 10 Hypersonic , Individually Guided , maneuverable RV.............this is something we want to achieve with our MIRV on A-5

The problem with Bulava has been with this individually guided , maneuverable MIRV...... the Russian still have problems perfecting it.

[dinesha]

The short-range Prithvi I has been deployed since 1998; the shortrange Agni I and medium-range Agni II were declared operational, but reliability issues with both missiles have delayed their full operational service; and the longer-range Agni III is under development. The slow maturation of the land-based leg of India’s triad has prompted the government to reorganize missile production to deliver more missiles in a shorter time.

..

Defense officials say that after 2015 and before 2020, India’s nuclear missile force will consist primarily of Agni III and Agni IV missiles, all carrying enhanced warheads to theoretically overwhelm ballistic missile defenses. Some industry officials have said that both weapons will have multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs), but given the difficulties India has faced with the Agni I and Agni II—and the technological and financial challenges experienced by other nuclear weapon states developing MIRV technology—we remain skeptical of India’s ability to MIRV its missiles anytime soon.

..

One source said five ATVs are planned—an interesting number, given that the U.S. intelligence community has stated China might build five nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines

Bullet in of the Atomic Scientists
http://thebulletin.metapress.com/conten ... lltext.pdf

[Sanjay]

While the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists claims to be authoritative, given its past record of inaccuracies, I remain skeptical of its ability to analyze anything regarding India with any degree of accuracy and/or correctness (paraphrazing them).
Agni-2 is not a development of Agni-1. It is vice versa. If they can't get that right, what can they do ?