Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Jul 2012 06:03

Ravi, Oerlikon 35mm ammo is the basic thing these guns would require, its not the same as AHEAD ammo.

While assuming their 60 guns upgrade is true, it would be far more interesting to see how they link these guns together. In India, the 40/70mm flak guns are networked to the Dutch Flycatcher radar (license manufactured in India at BEL, with some local assemblies and local upgrades - FLIR etc). The guns need to be manually loaded, but they are basically radar directed.

Check out 1:48 onwards. At 2:06, 3 flycatcher radars are behind the officer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKIICuFgeEo1

Now, they are to be upgraded.
Even the ZU-23Bs in IA are due for an upgrade. Punj Lloyds proposal gives an idea.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SosU2EINak4/T ... ackage.JPG

Basically, this is a risk Indian forces will run, but we will probably rely more on medium alt attacks as at Kargil. The upgrade proposal for the Jaguars with new engine/s also points to this. So our platforms will not be at as much risk from ack-ack guns. Re: PGMs for Pakistanis to be effective, they need radar directed guns. Manual direction won't cut it IMO - not enough to be consistently reliable.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 04 Jul 2012 07:55

^^^
I think it would be interesting for a group of like-minded countries to pool their resources and sponsor a live test (not risking lives, of course), that pitted the Skyshield with AHEAD, against the Textron "Sensor Fuzed Weapon" (alreadly in the Indian arsenal). The "smart skeet" submunitions fly an unpowered, "lofted" trajectory, and they are very, very small (each submunition not much bigger than a 50-pk of DVDs.

Of course, these smart skeets are not invisible, and they are certainly going to have a radar signature; but each SFW deploys 40 smart skeets, and if these fall across the area protected by Skyshield, I think it would draw a lot of fire (thereby depleting the loaded ammo).

No doubt, such a test would make for some very interesting fireworks.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2012 08:03

ammo is definitely a weak point of the L70 type systems. submunitions can overwhelm them easily.
the big mags of the Kashtan-M type system or the huge drum they use for GAU8 on A10 is a must for a stand up fight.
unfortunately makes the setup bulkier.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 04 Jul 2012 12:14

Has there been any mention of the OFB producing any kind of "case-less" ammunition?
Such ammo might help with reducing those aforementioned bulky setups for AD guns.

FYI: Case-less ammo has no "brass" and no "primer". Some systems, like "Metal Storm" use case less ammo that is electronically initiated. Essentially, behind the projectile is a small explosive charge that completely vaporizes, therefore nothing to eject, nothing to jam, less weight, less bulk, easier logistics, etc. With an "inline" system like "Metal Storm" (wherein a single barrel is loaded with multiple rounds "stacked" and fired in quick succession), the rate of fire is extraordinary. Altogether, such guns are a lot simpler, mechanically speaking, which also makes them quicker and more reliable.

Below is a video describing "Metal Storm" technologies, [QUOTE]"that can intercept supersonic incoming missiles"[UNQUOTE]. One of the company VPs mentions their work to "marry" different warloads to the "Metal Storm" firing system. I would imagine that an Air-Burst-Munition/Metal Storm mash-up would be in the works, probably over the next decade.

koti · Post by **koti** » 04 Jul 2012 16:30

What is a coded laser pulse?
Link

John · Post by **John** » 04 Jul 2012 19:46

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:This page discusses a naval variant of the Skyshield/AHEAD system known as the "Millenium Gun", developed jointly by Lockheed Martin and Oerlikon Contraves in 2002. In the second-to-last paragraph, it reads "Testing has shown it to be lethal against aircraft and helicopters at 3.5 km, against cruise missiles at 2 km, and against anti-ship sea-skimming missiles at 1.5 km."

Ravi that is the naval variant, anyway your link highlights why USN turned down the Millennium gun. Fom what i recall they found the range and rate of fire to ineffective against sea skimmers (Barak was considered for interim role but RAM was developed by then) and believe Mk 110 to be more effective defense against sea skimmers as part of layered defense used with RAM.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 04 Jul 2012 22:28

John,

Yeah, I know, I said "naval variant".

The naval variant is a more challenging application, not only for space constraints, sensor fusion and restricted motion; but because the platform itself is moving in three dimensions while operating (it's on a boat, after all). As a naval variant AD gun mounted low on the deck (unlike many PHALANX deployments which are positioned higher above the water line on a warship), not only would this naval variant of the Skyshield be less subject to sea-action motion; but it would also be in a better firing position against sea skimmers; which it DID defeat in those tests).

Not to mention; I thought we were talking guns against PGMs just now...... (Barak being another issue).

As for the decision making processes of the USN, don't expect all rationales to apply to combat effectiveness.

Rheinmetall is still a German company, and who knows what the precise terms are between them and LM on this JV. (Yes, I understand, the Mk 110 is a Bofors product, for whatever that's worth, just to be fair.) Perhaps LM got what they wanted from the partnership, and told their (employed/bought-and-paid-for, registered/unregistered lobby) power brokers that they didn't really need that contract after all.... perhaps there's another (more costly, more US-built) system that the USN might (be persuaded to) prefer?

How's about shooting missiles with missiles? (Very profitable business-wise; for the makers of Barak, for example.)

(Personally, I very much like the idea of defeating PGMs with projectiles. AHEAD/Skyshield is just one impressive example. For APCs and tanks, there's even the scalled-down "TROPHY" system (Google/Youtube it)..... But, that's a whole other topic.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 05 Jul 2012 01:18

koti wrote:What is a coded laser pulse?
Link

Koti ji, the laser Designator you see on the bottom left corner of the slide illuminates the target with a laser marker. The Seeker detects the reflected laser marker and identifies the point of reflection as the target.

If the laser marker was not coded, any laser beam of the right wavelength would be able to distract and mislead the seeker from the true target. Coding would be in the form of pulsing the laser marker on and off in a pattern recognised by the seeker.

One hopes such codes are not stored on a computer connected to the internet

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 05 Jul 2012 09:13

Austin wrote:
Kanson wrote:Why to invest in two different programs to do the same job?
Range limitation of MTCR under 300 km means that Russian MOD is reluctant to induct it , far too short of minimum 500 km range that Soviet Navy had specified in 80's to deal with NATO threats , export models are however promoted within mtcr restrictions.

Austin wrote:Zircon-S was reveled recently as a program for submarine launched hypersonic cruise missile for new 885M class of SSGN under construction. Brahmos-2 is a JV program with India different from their own strategic hypersonic program. this may replace the Shipwreck and P-1000 Vulkan in RuN on submarines and surface ship.

link

Are you trying to say, Brahmos-2 will replace Shipwreck and P-1000?

What happened to MTCR here if that may be the case?

A new missile solely for this new SSGN ? And why the same can't be used to replace others?

You know, some of technical details revealed for both the missiles are in same ball park figure. This may not be enough to call both as same, but definitely links both the missile in development.

It is the same design bureau that develops both Brahmos-2 and the new missile named as Zircon-S.

Initially it was reported that Yasen SSGN will carry Onyx/Oniks aka Brahmos-1.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Jul 2012 09:51

MTCR does not apply to JV co-developments I think. anyways Russia is gaining nothing by adhering to MTCR because the west is still after its friends like syria, iran and positioning ABM shield all around it.
they should tear it up and move on.

koti · Post by **koti** » 05 Jul 2012 09:56

PratikDas wrote: Koti ji, the laser Designator you see on the bottom left corner of the slide illuminates the target with a laser marker. The Seeker detects the reflected laser marker and identifies the point of reflection as the target.

If the laser marker was not coded, any laser beam of the right wavelength would be able to distract and mislead the seeker from the true target. Coding would be in the form of pulsing the laser marker on and off in a pattern recognised by the seeker.

One hopes such codes are not stored on a computer connected to the internet

OK. That is what I thought too.
Added, this can also enable more than one Guided projectile to be employed simultaneously.

koti · Post by **koti** » 05 Jul 2012 09:59

Singha wrote:MTCR does not apply to JV co-developments I think. anyways Russia is gaining nothing by adhering to MTCR because the west is still after its friends like syria, iran and positioning ABM shield all around it.
they should tear it up and move on.

Not so simple Singha saab.
It will be real pain in the neck for Russia when all these now hostile neighbors also get their hands on some longer ranged stuff from Uncle Sam.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 05 Jul 2012 10:01

I keep hearing this MTCR, MTCR, etc. but it is avery funny agreement, if enforced Britain would not be Nuclear power and much of the weaponary in Europe would be cut, it does not apply to Chinese Sales to Pakistan. It seems a very selectibly applied rule.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 05 Jul 2012 10:09

@koti, thats why it is mentioned Brahmos-2 will not be available for exports.

koti · Post by **koti** » 05 Jul 2012 10:20

MCTR is a voluntary agreement.

Whats NEWS for me is that India is not an MCTR partner.

MTCR Guidelines for those interested: Link

@Kanson Saab,
Maybe. But I think Uncle Sam actually will be behind us encouraging us to sell the same to Vietnam or Indonesia.
None the less, seeing Brahmos/BrahmosII painted different and named Hsiung Feng xx will only make PLA taste their own medicine.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Jul 2012 10:29

Kanson wrote:Are you trying to say, Brahmos-2 will replace Shipwreck and P-1000? What happened to MTCR here if that may be the case?

I mean Zircon-S since the range is good to replace the Shipwreck and P-1000 on cruisers and destroyers

A new missile solely for this new SSGN ? And why the same can't be used to replace others?

Right now it is the new submarine ( the S denotes submarine there ) but in later stage it will certainly replace the Shipwreck and other long range missile , like Shipwreck on Oscar-2 SSGN and Surface Cruisers.

It is the same design bureau that develops both Brahmos-2 and the new missile named as Zircon-S.

Cant say for sure since it was not disclosed which design bureau works on Zircon-S , Brahmos-2 certainly is NPO-Mash-DRDO , besides NPO-Mash , Tactical Missile Bureau , MITT and Makeyev Design Bureau have their own hypersonic program for Strategic and substrategic application .....could be any one of these or a joint collaboration between them.

Initially it was reported that Yasen SSGN will carry Onyx/Oniks aka Brahmos-1.

The first Yasen ( 885-1 ) will carry Oniks and Kalbir ...the remaining built are to 855M standard that will carry the hypersonic missile.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Jul 2012 10:32

MTCR is voluntary but Russia is signatory to it , US and most P-5 nations adhere to it very strictly and US and Russia work together on many Proliferation Initivative program in nuclear and missile field .

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 05 Jul 2012 11:32

Austin wrote:Right now it is the new submarine ( the S denotes submarine there ) but in later stage it will certainly replace the Shipwreck and other long range missile , like Shipwreck on Oscar-2 SSGN and Surface Cruisers.

Austin saab, Isn't Shipwreck missile in Oscar-2 SSGN was replaced by the same Oniks and Kalbir that you say is part of Yasen-1?

You see already Oniks and Kalbir are replacing Shipwreck/Granit missile in Service. If Oniks is capable enough to replace Shipwreck, will not the next in line be Oniks like with higher range or hypersonic Oniks?

The first Yasen ( 885-1 ) will carry Oniks and Kalbir ...the remaining built are to 855M standard that will carry the hypersonic missile.

As per you, what is difference between Yasen-1 and Yasen-M?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 05 Jul 2012 11:41

koti wrote:MCTR is a voluntary agreement.

Whats NEWS for me is that India is not an MCTR partner.

MTCR Guidelines for those interested: Link

@Kanson Saab,
Maybe. But I think Uncle Sam actually will be behind us encouraging us to sell the same to Vietnam or Indonesia.
None the less, seeing Brahmos/BrahmosII painted different and named Hsiung Feng xx will only make PLA taste their own medicine.

MTCR is a tool to play power games. By agreement any strategic exchanges/agreement between Russia & India is not for disclosure to anyone. So whatever happens remains between the two and can happen without notification to anyone.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 05 Jul 2012 13:28

Brahmos 2, just like brahmos 1 will be a air launched as well, hence makes no sense to have it with a range of over 300km, longer range will call for increased weight. I don't think we will have heavy bomber type aircraft in the future. Besides for longer range targets the LRCM is in the works, top speed of mach 3.2 and a range of around 600km, ideal for ground and ship based attacks. Mini brahmos or brahmos 3 should have a range of around 150 to 200 km in a Hi-Lo mission and around 60 to 80 km in a Lo-Lo mission, should be a near hypersonic weapon, with a max speed of around mach 5, a max payload of 100 kg packed ideally with ICL-20, max weight shouldn't cross 1200 kgs, LCAs, Mirages, Mki, Jaguar, mig-27s, Mig-29/K should be able to deploy it.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Jul 2012 13:47

would be a good tool to attack well defended sites like radars and airbases inshallah. but 300km is too short to take on the S-400 class systems safely....we need a hypersonic 600km range weapon. payload can be kept small but the speed and range need to be there.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 05 Jul 2012 14:19

True True, but i think the sagarika/k-15 or shaurya can easily take on the S-400. S-400 won't be able to shoot down the shaurya which is capable of hypersonic maneuvering at altitudes of 40 to 50 km going well over mach 7, plus not to forget the Shaurya can pull off a neat steep dive on its ass and hit it's target at a terminal velocity of well over mach 6. Shaurya is ready and can be configured with various warheads and can hit targets between 750 to 1500 km away depending on the payload. A lightly packed Shaurya with a Anti radar active homing head, 100 kgs of ICL 20, can be launched from over 1400 km from a stealthy sub while staying clearly away from enemy patrols of defences.

I think we need a large fleet of around 30 Arihant class subs, keep a 5 armed with nuke Sagarikas and K-4s i.e 6*5= 30 nuke sagarikas + 2*5 =10 K-4s. Arm another 5 with brahmos 1 for anti-ship/ carrier battle ground protection i.e considering Arihant can hold 12 Brahmos-1 in it's universal launcher, 12*5=60 for defending carrier battle groups, and 20 for conventional offensive capabilities using Sagarika thats roughly 240 missiles. Brahmos 1 and 2 should not be deployed on offensive operations close to enemy areas since their range puts them in risk of heavy enemy defences, stand off range is important, 300 km range is too risky for sub or ships for land attacks. I see Sagarika and Nirbhay as the primary weapons for ship based land attacks. With ranges over 1000, we should be safer. Brahmos 1 and 2 can be used for shore attacks though. Deeper strikes will need sagarika.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 05 Jul 2012 14:57

Austin wrote:MTCR is voluntary but Russia is signatory to it , US and most P-5 nations adhere to it very strictly and US and Russia work together on many Proliferation Initivative program in nuclear and missile field .

Paki Nukes and Missiles right under Munna nose

Trident Missiles of British subs

Isreali access Nukes, radars and Delivery systems.

Chinese transfer of Missiles to Saudi and US doing Billions of Business with them means

I totally diagree and this nothing but an Anti-India rule like NPT

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Jul 2012 16:13

British are NATO countries and Saudi are in military alliance with US , similarly US grantees Israel security.

So we can get benefits if we join similar Western led NATO alliance or Russian led CSTO.

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 05 Jul 2012 17:22

koti wrote: None the less, seeing Brahmos/BrahmosII painted different and named Hsiung Feng xx will only make PLA taste their own medicine.

Slightly OT,

Indonesia and Vietnam already have the Oniks.. I guess that's the next best thing for them right now...

http://www.armstrade.org/includes/perio ... tail.shtml (in Russian)

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 05 Jul 2012 18:42

Aditya_V wrote: Paki Nukes and Missiles right under Munna nose

China isn't a signatory to the MTCR. That said, the direct transfers were limited to the DF-11 which falls within the specified limits. While developmental assistance did come thereafter, the details remain vague and harder to enforce.

MTCR does not address nuclear issues.

Trident Missiles of British subs

The UK is a member of the export regime, which allows for transfers within (the Polaris Agreement predates the MTCR).

Isreali access Nukes, radars and Delivery systems.

The core of the Jericho program was created in the 60s with extensive French assistance. By the time embargos from France were imposed in the post-1967 period, the program had already gained critical mass.

Again, MTCR does not address nuclear issues.

Chinese transfer of Missiles to Saudi and US doing Billions of Business with them means

Again, China is not a member of the MTCR. Doing 'Billions of Business' is not addressed in terms of its legitimacy under the regime.

I totally diagree and this nothing but an Anti-India rule like NPT

Depends on your definition of anti-India. It wasn't pro-India to be sure. While were never going to purchase a foreign missile like the UK did, even for other components achieving strategic autonomy in both development and production of strategic missiles was always a core aim of the IGMDP. It did however hamper ballistic missile programs in Eastern Europe, Africa and elsewhere, which ended up working out to India's advantage.

John · Post by **John** » 07 Jul 2012 21:35

Kanson wrote:Austin saab, Isn't Shipwreck missile in Oscar-2 SSGN was replaced by the same Oniks and Kalbir that you say is part of Yasen-1?

You see already Oniks and Kalbir are replacing Shipwreck/Granit missile in Service. If Oniks is capable enough to replace Shipwreck, will not the next in line be Oniks like with higher range or hypersonic Oniks?

Shipwreck was large lumbering missile that was barely supersonic and flew at much lower altitude cruising altitude than Brahmos and much higher terminal altitude , SM-2 could easily shoot them down but the russian strategy was ripple fire dozens of these at the USN carrier fleet. The original Oniks missle was quoted to have range comparable to Shipwreck but IIRC the more advanced ramjet engine was never developed and a modified variant of the moskit's engine was used . Not sure if this hypersonic variant being discussed is reincarnation of the original engine conceived for Oniks?

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 08 Jul 2012 08:59

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Jul 2012 12:55

First Test Of Indian Cruise Missile Looms

koti · Post by **koti** » 09 Jul 2012 10:15

Very True.

LACM is one front IA is severely lagging when compared to the other military powers worldwide.
OTOH, PLAs massive stockpiles can cause Havoc in most of our prominent northern cities(read Delhi,Kolkata) destroying our morale and "teaching a lesson" accordingly. This will be the case despite IA/IAF doing well at the borders.

The only deterrent to this IMO will be an equal capability with LACMs of even higher range and numbers and a Strategic force(read Backfire) capable of launching equally devastating LACM strikes on its eastern cities.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jul 2012 10:19

>> PLAs massive stockpiles

are there any reliable estimates of PLAs GLCM/ALCM inventory and production rates? I have not seen any. photos of deployed field formations with GLCM is also quite rare vs those with SRBM/MRBM.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 09 Jul 2012 10:40

Gurus, any news of which is the next AGNI trial?

koti · Post by **koti** » 09 Jul 2012 10:52

This article I believe can be taken as a baseline estimate.

It suggests a presence of around 250-300 missiles(CJ-10) 3 years ago. It could easily have crossed 500 mark today and growing.
And these are just the numbers of one long range missile they have. Delhi, actually can be reached by Missiles with far shorter ranges that are tactical in nature. And will in be in thousands to begin counting with.

member_19648 · Post by **member_19648** » 09 Jul 2012 19:46

Army to Carry Out Nag, NAMICA Trials

The article says July 2 was the test date, any news on what was the outcome?

http://www.defencenow.com/news/772/army ... rials.html

The Army will carry out the last round of trials of the anti-tank Nag missile and specially designed carrier NAMICA on July 2 in the Mahajn desert firing range in Rajasthan.

The induction of the land-based 'top attack and fire and forget' Nag missiles was supposed to have been done in 2011 but it was delayed with the Army seeking modifications in NAMICA.

Each NAMICA can carry 12 missiles, eight of them in ready-to-fire mode.

"We are going to try the NAMICA and Nag for apparently for the last time before their induction into operational service," army sources said to defencenow.com.

The partially amphibious NAMICA had been totally modified and two separate systems produced by Larsen and Toubro and Bharat Electronics Limited would be tested in the trials.

Nag missile, which has a range of four km, would be tested for its full range, two km and a minimum of 500 metres. This time DRDO scientists would demonstrate the lock-on-before launch capability of the missile for a four-km range with an upgraded imaging infrared seeker.

In lock-on-before-launch mode, the missile keeps acquiring the image of the target every 30 milliseconds right from the launch till the impact on target.

The missile would be fired to destroy both moving and stationary targets during the trials.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jul 2012 20:59

deployed in some number to support infantry faced with a armour attack, this sounds like a powerful weapon.
twice the range of the javelin, and without the need to deploy N number of javelin shooters exposed to any form of fire and only able to relocate at jogging speed carrying the tubes and sights.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Jul 2012 22:03

Austin wrote:First Test Of Indian Cruise Missile Looms

Dont know why the word looms is chosen? Appears sinister connotation.

Asia-Pacific Staff New Delhi

In contrast to how India promoted its Agni-V ballistic missile, New Delhi is unlikely to draw a lot of international attention to upcoming testing of the Nirbhay cruise missile, even as it holds far more significance for the nation's weapons program than is widely appreciated.

In August, the country is scheduled to conduct the first test of its little known Nirbhay (“fearless”), a subsonic weapon with a maximum range of 1,000 km (620 mi.). Designated “secret,” the weapon's development has remained concealed since its existence was revealed in 2006.

Like the Agni-V, the Nirbhay will be tested from India's missile range over the Bay of Bengal. The missile has two stages, is understood to be powered by a Russian-built NPO Saturn engine, will cruise at Mach 0.7 and is being developed to demonstrate loitering capabilities. Sources at the Hyderabad-based Advanced Systems Laboratory (ASL), which built the missile prototype, say the weapon is ready for its first flight.

ASL Director V.G. Sekaran recently said the Nirbhay was slated for a July-August debut. While the agency has refused to comment on the Nirbhay's capabilities, there remains some ambiguity about whether the “Nirbhay” name pertains only to the primary weapon—the subsonic cruise missile—or to a family, including a yet-unnamed, long-range, scramjet-powered supersonic cruise missile.

The writer seems to be a desi Commie freak!}

The ambiguity is an inevitable part of the project's secret status. The agency has worked with intrigue before; last July, it tested the Prahaar quick-reaction, surface-to-surface missile after first revealing the existence of the system barely two weeks before.

The Indian armed forces are watching the Nirbhay with perhaps greater focus than they did the Agni. While the country's weapons program has matured in the ballistic missile arena, it has little or nothing to show in cruise missiles. In the Indo-Russian BrahMos, Russia still builds critical technologies such as the engine and seeker, while India contributes the inertial navigation and fire control systems. On the Nirbhay, while Russia is understood to have contributed the engine, sources say it will be replaced with an Indian turbojet or tubofan in a later phase.

“In many ways, the Nirbhay is a more crucial weapon system than the Agni family,” says an officer with one of the Indian army's BrahMos missile regiments. “The lack of a long-range cruise missile has long been felt by the armed forces. The BrahMos is an excellent border weapon, but we need a terrain-hugging missile with a range of 750-1,000 kilometers for more potent deterrent value. That's why we're waiting for the Nirbhay more than we've perhaps waited for anything in the last 20 years.” The BrahMos supersonic cruise missile has a stated range of 290 km.

{So what targets are there in 750-1000km range? And how does he think its a deterrent? Deterrent is for nukes only. No body gets deterred with conventional payloads. So looks like confusion about terminology.}

In 2007, India's Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) revealed that the Nirbhay would be capable of delivering 24 different warhead types. DRDO sources say that while the engine is Russian, the rest of Nirbhay is fully indigenous, including sensors, guidance and flight-control systems. In 2008, reports suggested the Nirbhay was a loose derivative of the indigenous Lakshya target drone, which is operational with the armed forces. A mockup of the Nirbhay was to have been displayed at Aero India in February 2011, but was pulled at the last moment after a change of heart at DRDO.

A former rear admiral from the Indian navy's gunnery says, “The Nirbhay is rightly a hushed-up program. It shouldn't draw too much attention until it has begun testing in earnest. Three years ago, there was a lot of confidence in the program and scientists were confident they could deliver such an ambitious weapon. It is a clean break from anything India has developed before.”

The Nirbhay has never been seen or photographed, and India wants to keep it that way until the actual debut test. DRDO sources say the missile is being built to be used from land, sea and air. The Center for Military Airworthiness and Certification has revealed that it has been asked to integrate the Nirbhay to an Indian air force Sukhoi Su-30 MKI airframe, while the land variant's mobile launcher was recently revealed to be an Indian-built Tata Prahaar vehicle unveiled at New Delhi's DefExpo trade event in March.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Jul 2012 10:53

Good news folks !

India prepares to install its Missile Defence Shield (Phase 1) for New Delhi and Mumbai

July 06, 2012

India is preparing to install a shield to protect against intermediate-range ballistic missiles and ICBMs in some of the country’s major cities.

“The final locations, which have adequate stealth features and protection against enemy sabotage, will soon be determined by the government to install the ballistic missile defense [BMD] system,” a defense ministry official says.

A detailed proposal is currently being prepared for approval by the Indian government.
....

link to Aviation Week

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 11 Jul 2012 08:16

Agni-I missile test likely this week in Odisha
WEDNESDAY, 11 JULY 2012 00:05 DEBDAS KUNDU | BALESWAR
http://dailypioneer.com/nation/79699-ag ... disha.html

A user trial of homegrown Agni-I missile is likely to be carried out from a launching complex of the Intergraded Test Range (ITR) at the Wheeler Island at Dhamra off the Odisha coast this week.

The test would be carried out most likely on July 12 or 13 depending on several factors, said sources. As the personnel of the user unit of the Indian Army have already arrived, the test would be carried out by the by the specially raised unit, the Strategic Forces Command (SFC), with the assistance of DRDO scientists and officers, the sources added.

The 15-metre-tall Agni-1 weighing about 12 tonnes is a single-stage, solid-fuel, road and rail mobile, medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM). Having a range of about 700 km. it has a highly-specialised navigation system, which ensures it to reach the target with a high degree of accuracy. It is capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads weighing 1 tonne.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 11 Jul 2012 11:48

^ Really Agni or Nirbhay in disguise, though i think it would be apparent to anyone who could track the missile trajectory.

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Jul 2012 12:06

^^ whatever happened to the planned salvo of A-II A-III, A-IV which were to be user-trails immediately after the A-V test?