Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

[chackojoseph]

An inclined launch towards the flow of the water can be a solution for launch on move.

[Aditya_V]

Well, it might be also practically not possible to bring a submarine to a complete halt when submerged, further the sub might be bobbing around if brought to complete stop along with ocean currents, hence it might be better launch when the sub is moving slowly so as to control subs direction and movement.

[Kanson]

^ IIRC, 5 knots is the speed maintained to launch missile from underwater.

its their JSF project.

[Singha]

is the bulava FOC'ed now or still in test status ? i read they had to hand over the project from moscow instt of heat (topol guys) to makayev (sineva & sturgeon SLBM) to bring in the people with right expertise. they specialize in SLBM and have a long history in this black art
http://makeyev.ru/roccomp/

but moscow instt is well fed with land based topols and new 'yars' project ...the topol-M and the Yars will be their mainstay for next 2 decades as silo based are retired and they go entirely road/rail mobile.

[Kanson]

Not FOC-ed. Indeed it is their JSF project - perennially plagued with issues.

Infact, it was bungling by makayev in earlier proj that led moscow inst. to handle Bulava.

[negi]

GD I posted this yesterday in International Aerospace dhaga.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 9#p1537349

Basically covers Ru Ballistic missile programs including the Bulava.

"Eventually, after five successful consecutive Bulava launches, statements about its ―de
facto‖ entering service as well as about the completion of related paperwork appeared.
However, this information that was given by the Navy chief Vice Admiral Viktor Chirkov on
June 25, 2012, was denied three days later by the First Deputy Defense Minister of Russia,
Aleksandr Sukhorukov. Sukhorukov said that legal documents regarding the missile‘s
entering into service had not been signed yet. Completion was planned for autumn 2012.126

No official statement clarifying this issue has appeared yet.
"

Latest news from Ria Novosti

http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20131028/184399345.html

"MOSCOW, October 28 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s new nuclear-powered submarine, the Alexander Nevsky, has completed sea trials, a shipbuilder said Monday.Work on the Borey-class project is “on schedule,” the Sevmash shipyard said, without providing any indication of when the submarine would join the navy.

In early September, Russia put on hold the trials of two Borey-class submarines following an unsuccessful launch of a Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM). Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu also ordered that the Alexander Nevsky and the Vladimir Monomakh submarines, designed to carry the Bulava, hold five additional launches of the troubled SLBM.
The Alexander Nevsky was expected to be handed over to the Navy on November 15, while the other Borey-class sub was due to be commissioned in mid-December, Sevmash chief Mikhail Budnichenko said in July. However, the adoption of both of those submarines depends on the success of the Bulava test launches.Including that latest failure, eight out of 19 or 20 test launches of the troubled Bulava have been officially declared unsuccessful. The Russian military has repeatedly stated that there is no alternative to the Bulava.
"

[negi]

What special benefit would launching a SLBM from a moving submarine offer to Russians.

It is NOT benefit but a pre-requisite because there is no such thing as a stationary submarine . There will always be some movement specially because the submarine cannot launch the missile from say 100-200 meters under the water level it will have to surface till the missile firing depth usually ~20-30 meters under the water level.

[vishvak]

[OT here.
Any idea if Sindhurakshak submarin's role can be enforced in part by missiles. This could be very important for western coast. It doesn't look like government is going to quickly fill up requirements for subs and in case we have to take care of certain missions real time.
OT off.]

[Singha]

They built the entire borey class chassis for the smaller bulava. The sineva is much bigger and will not fit. They are in between a rock and hard place on this just like we on the p15a lrsam front.

[nikhil_p]

Dont know what I have been drinking, but my brain has come up with a bloody weird solution to the SLBM issue.

What if the missile is housed in a tube, like a pontoon. The Entire pontoon is then floated from the Sub, with the Sub being at 200 depth. The pontoon should have small air jets (fed by a compressed air tank) to keep it steady using a system of gyros. When the pontoon reaches 20-30 depth, the air jets hold steady while the mijjile launches.

In my brain, it seemed like a crazy idea, dont know if it is possible to achieve. But hell, an idea is an idea!

[negi]

^ A pontoon which will surface from 200 mtrs depth to 20mtr depth will be a small submersible in itself as it will have to withstand huge amount of pressure when deployed from a submarine at that depth , even if it is re-usable it will be highly complex and expensive.

[Singha]

And what happens if a hostile sub is detected while this complex tethered op is in progress? Will it leave the pontoon to its own fate, cut the wires and run ..abandoning the payload and killing the deterrence mission right there?

[Pratyush]

A basing study for the MX suggested that the missile be fitted to small DE boats and they deploy within 1000 to 1500 knots from the navel boundaries of the continental US and launched from that location, in the event times of war.

The russians could follow the same approach withe the SSNX 30.

[shan]

What special benefit would launching a SLBM from a moving submarine offer to Russians.

It is NOT benefit but a pre-requisite because there is no such thing as a stationary submarine . There will always be some movement specially because the submarine cannot launch the missile from say 100-200 meters under the water level it will have to surface till the missile firing depth usually ~20-30 meters under the water level.

Thanks negi. I was curious since there was an emphasis on the movement thingy in the report. Quoting from GlobalSecurity.

"On 21 December 2005 Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said the Bulava ballistic missile had successfully completed its test launch. "The launch has been conducted successfully," Sergei Ivanov said in a report to the Russian President. "The separation of all stages, combat and simulation blocks occurred according to pre-set parameters."

The missile was launched from the submerged Dmitry Donskoy, a Typhoon-class ballistic missile submarine, and successfully hit its dummy target at the Kura test site on the Kamchatka Peninsula in Russia's Far East. "What is important is that the submarine was moving [underwater], it was not stationary," the minister said. It is the first test launch of the Bulava missile from a submerged position and the second overall under the trial program. "

[Kersi D]

Dont know what I have been drinking, but my brain has come up with a bloody weird solution to the SLBM issue.

What if the missile is housed in a tube, like a pontoon. The Entire pontoon is then floated from the Sub, with the Sub being at 200 depth. The pontoon should have small air jets (fed by a compressed air tank) to keep it steady using a system of gyros. When the pontoon reaches 20-30 depth, the air jets hold steady while the mijjile launches.

In my brain, it seemed like a crazy idea, dont know if it is possible to achieve. But hell, an idea is an idea!

Please share your drink with the DRDO, the armed forces and MOD defence officials. At times we need weird ideas. Today's weird ideas may become tomorrows force multipliers

[Pratyush]

Or you can share this link with the DRDO.

ota-cdn.fas.org/reports/8116.pdf‎

[nikhil_p]

^ A pontoon which will surface from 200 mtrs depth to 20mtr depth will be a small submersible in itself as it will have to withstand huge amount of pressure when deployed from a submarine at that depth , even if it is re-usable it will be highly complex and expensive.

Don't need that to be reusable. After launch it might as well disintegrate or sink to the bottom of the sea. Yes, it will be a small (rather large) submersible. Like I said just a thought. I need to change my coffee brand!

And what happens if a hostile sub is detected while this complex tethered op is in progress? Will it leave the pontoon to its own fate, cut the wires and run ..abandoning the payload and killing the deterrence mission right there?

Why will it be tethered? I am talking about the pontoon just carrying the missile to the surface - automated process.

[Pratyush]

^^^

Nikhil Ji,

I request you to study the MX basing study conducted by the Khans. You will find some thing close to what you are suggesting. Which may be worth a look in the Indian context.

[Anand K]

^^
This one I guess.

BTW I think I saw something like this pontoon ballistic missile thingy in a Johnny Quest cartoon aeons ago.

[Kersi D]

^ A pontoon which will surface from 200 mtrs depth to 20mtr depth will be a small submersible in itself as it will have to withstand huge amount of pressure when deployed from a submarine at that depth , even if it is re-usable it will be highly complex and expensive.

Don't need that to be reusable. After launch it might as well disintegrate or sink to the bottom of the sea. Yes, it will be a small (rather large) submersible. Like I said just a thought. I need to change my coffee brand!

And what happens if a hostile sub is detected while this complex tethered op is in progress? Will it leave the pontoon to its own fate, cut the wires and run ..abandoning the payload and killing the deterrence mission right there?

Why will it be tethered? I am talking about the pontoon just carrying the missile to the surface - automated process.

Mr Nikhil. Yo had this idea after a glass of coffee ??
What fantastic ideas would you get after a few (large) pegs of a good whisky / rum / vodka ???
Let us meet somewhere

K

[pankajs]

Ah .. more Diwali news

Agni missiles set for flight tests in next one month

In a step forward to build an active credible nuclear deterrence, India has planned a series of missile tests in next one month. Four missiles of the country’s most ambitious Agni series have been slated for flight tests. The missiles include Agni-I, Agni-II, Agni-III and Agni-IV.

Defence sources said while Strategic Forces Command (SFC) of the Indian Army would carry out the user trials of Agni-I, Agni-II and Agni-III, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) would conduct the third developmental trial of Agni-IV.

The tests have been scheduled in the wake of second successful experimental trial of India’s longest 5000-km range Agni-V missile on September 15. All the four missiles will be test-fired from the Wheeler Island test facility of Integrated Test Range (ITR) off the Odisha coast.

While preparation is on in full swing for the user trial of Agni-I missile, which is likely to be conducted on November 8 (earlier scheduled for November 7), tests of rest three missiles will be carried out in a gap of one week each.

The 12-tonne Agni-I has a strike range of 700-900 km. Its length is 15 metres and it is powered by both solid and liquid propellants which impart it a speed of 2.5 km per second. The missile was first test-fired on January 25, 2002.

The 2000-km range Agni-II missile is designed to be launched from a rail-mobile launcher, but it is also available in road-mobile configuration. The missile has a length of 20 metres, diameter of one metre and weight of 16 tonnes. It can carry a payload of around 1000 kg and has appropriate on-board thrusters fitted on the second stage. The missile was cleared for production after its induction in 2004.

On the other hand, Agni-III, capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads weighing up to 1.5 tonnes, is 17 metres tall and has a diameter of two metre with weight of around 50 tonnes. It is expected to be the mainstay of India’s nuclear deterrence programme when fully operational. The 3000-km range missile was inducted in the armed forces in June 2011 and next test will be its second user trial.

Having a strike range of around 4000 km, the two-stage solid propelled Agni-IV missile is 20 metre tall and weighs around 17 tonne. Compared to the Pershing missile of the US in terms of technology, the indigenously built Agni-IV missile has many cutting edge technologies, which can meet global standards.

[ramana]

I am surprised HK Rout has this inaccuracy in his report:

The 12-tonne Agni-I has a strike range of 700-900 km. Its length is 15 metres and it is powered by both solid and liquid propellants which impart it a speed of 2.5 km per second. The missile was first test-fired on January 25, 2002.

Agni-I is a solid fuelled vehicle.


The good thing is the first three tests are user trials. Shows A-III is with SFC already with its 1.5 tonne payload..

[nikhil_p]

Mr Nikhil. Yo had this idea after a glass of coffee ??
What fantastic ideas would you get after a few (large) pegs of a good whisky / rum / vodka ???
Let us meet somewhere

K

I don't drink hard or soft liquor anymore. Just coffee. But hey Pilane mein hum vishwaas rakhte hai. We can surely meet. I am based in Pune. Kauntact me on he male nikhilzmail hat ghee mel daat kaam

sorry for the OT people.

[prahaar]

I am surprised HK Rout has this inaccuracy in his report:

The 12-tonne Agni-I has a strike range of 700-900 km. Its length is 15 metres and it is powered by both solid and liquid propellants which impart it a speed of 2.5 km per second. The missile was first test-fired on January 25, 2002.

Agni-I is a solid fuelled vehicle.


The good thing is the first three tests are user trials. Shows A-III is with SFC already with its 1.5 tonne payload..

Could the liquid fuel be referring to a high altitude motor for maneuverable re-entry?

[ramana]

The AI doesn't look like it has one.

[prahaar]

Ok, so the fins on the re-entry vehicle (in black) is only for gliding?
-----------------------------
Added later: my bad, while doing google image search, checked an AGNI-II image.

[negi]

^ Agni I RV does not have fins Agni II RV has.

[Kanson]

Dont know what I have been drinking, but my brain has come up with a bloody weird solution to the SLBM issue.

What if the missile is housed in a tube, like a pontoon. The Entire pontoon is then floated from the Sub, with the Sub being at 200 depth. The pontoon should have small air jets (fed by a compressed air tank) to keep it steady using a system of gyros. When the pontoon reaches 20-30 depth, the air jets hold steady while the mijjile launches.

In my brain, it seemed like a crazy idea, dont know if it is possible to achieve. But hell, an idea is an idea!

Well you see....

The first practical design of a submarine-based launch platform was developed by the Germans near the end of World War II involving a launch tube which contained a ballistic missile and was towed behind a submarine. The war ended before it could be tested, but the engineers who had worked on it went on to work for the USA and USSR on their SLBM programs. These and other early SLBM systems required vessels to be surfaced when they fired missiles, but launch systems eventually were adapted to allow underwater launching in the 1950-1960s. The United States made the first successful underwater launch of a Polaris A1 on 20 July 1960.[1]

Three containers were proposed to be towed across the Atlantic by a Type XXI U-boat. Each container displaced about 500 tons and would be kept submerged by the forward motion of the boat. In addition to the V-2 rocket, each container also held a reserve of diesel fuel intended to supply the U-boat in the course of its journey. In order to launch the missile, the ballast tanks in the container would be flooded, thus bringing it to a vertical position. After the guidance system was set, it was remotely launched from within the U-boat, where the missile would leave its container and head towards its target.

[nikhil_p]

Dont know what I have been drinking, but my brain has come up with a bloody weird solution to the SLBM issue.

What if the missile is housed in a tube, like a pontoon. The Entire pontoon is then floated from the Sub, with the Sub being at 200 depth. The pontoon should have small air jets (fed by a compressed air tank) to keep it steady using a system of gyros. When the pontoon reaches 20-30 depth, the air jets hold steady while the mijjile launches.

In my brain, it seemed like a crazy idea, dont know if it is possible to achieve. But hell, an idea is an idea!

Well you see....

The first practical design of a submarine-based launch platform was developed by the Germans near the end of World War II involving a launch tube which contained a ballistic missile and was towed behind a submarine. The war ended before it could be tested, but the engineers who had worked on it went on to work for the USA and USSR on their SLBM programs. These and other early SLBM systems required vessels to be surfaced when they fired missiles, but launch systems eventually were adapted to allow underwater launching in the 1950-1960s. The United States made the first successful underwater launch of a Polaris A1 on 20 July 1960.[1]

Three containers were proposed to be towed across the Atlantic by a Type XXI U-boat. Each container displaced about 500 tons and would be kept submerged by the forward motion of the boat. In addition to the V-2 rocket, each container also held a reserve of diesel fuel intended to supply the U-boat in the course of its journey. In order to launch the missile, the ballast tanks in the container would be flooded, thus bringing it to a vertical position. After the guidance system was set, it was remotely launched from within the U-boat, where the missile would leave its container and head towards its target.

I feel vindicated!! Wow. This was actually attempted? Why can't this be done now with far more advanced technologies including lighter and yet stronger cases made of composites.

[sum]

^^ Damn Germans seemed to have thought up of everything!!!

All hail ze Germans for their technological genius!

[Austin]

Such an idea is really a non-starter in real world of strategic detterence.

Towing even a Sonar impacts submarine speed and maneuverability , Towing a huge launch tube with an SLBM will greatly reduce submarine speed to few knows , will have impact on depth and maneuverability critical to maintain subs covertness worse the towed body will create its own drag and affect the hydrodynamic quality of sub making it vulnerable to early detection.

SLBM needs to to constantly monitored for health status and passing on launch codes/commands etc , this would means they need to have communication with the Missile which is tethered to subs , what if the tethered body breaks up what if there is communication failure with the missile due to breaking up of cables etc.

[Pratyush]

^^
This one I guess.

BTW I think I saw something like this pontoon ballistic missile thingy in a Johnny Quest cartoon aeons ago.

Yes that's the one.

[nikhil_p]

Such an idea is really a non-starter in real world of strategic detterence.

Towing even a Sonar impacts submarine speed and maneuverability , Towing a huge launch tube with an SLBM will greatly reduce submarine speed to few knows , will have impact on depth and maneuverability critical to maintain subs covertness worse the towed body will create its own drag and affect the hydrodynamic quality of sub making it vulnerable to early detection.

SLBM needs to to constantly monitored for health status and passing on launch codes/commands etc , this would means they need to have communication with the Missile which is tethered to subs , what if the tethered body breaks up what if there is communication failure with the missile due to breaking up of cables etc.

That is if it was towed. What if it is kept on the body of the sub like a parasite? Or npbetter still have it in a breakaway chamber on the outside hull? The pontoon can easily straighten itself after release and be controlled by bursts from air vents on the outside of the pontoon. It could also be a part of the existing sub missile launch tubes. ( the tube being a pontoon and being released by the sub) while the pontoon rises to the surface the sub would move out of the area.

Anyways it is open to speculation. Like I said just a thought.

[Austin]

Any thing kept outside the sub like a chamber or pantoon etc would make the submarine hydronamically less effecient and affect the flow increasing its broadband noise and impacting its speed specially tactical speed.

That even applies to sub that have integrated design like a hump on Delta 4 , reason why submarine designer go the extra mile to make submarine hydrodynamical effecient design since it impacts the speed and flow noise making it vulnerable to early detection and impact its own sensor performance.

You see even for those Seal chamber that attached on the hull of the sub like LA class even those have its penalty in terms of tactical speed they operate before it can get detected , a SLBM pantoon or chamber by order of magnitude will be far larger.

Keep it simple just put those SLBM inside the subs hull solves lot of problem and creates less headache.

[dinesha]

Agni-I successfully test-fired
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 48619.aspx

[Kanson]

I feel vindicated!! Wow. This was actually attempted? Why can't this be done now with far more advanced technologies including lighter and yet stronger cases made of composites.

Well as you said, as we are into more advanced tech which allow us the carry the missile why it has to be dragged?
To put it colloq. if you can carry and run why to do the hardship of dragging the luggage through the mud?

That is if it was towed. What if it is kept on the body of the sub like a parasite?

As you mentioned, there are are few examples like USS Virginia. But you haven't mentioned the purpose why you want to carry a missile as parasite? What are you trying to achieve?

PIC of USS Virginia carrying 'parasite' sister sub:

[Kanson]

^^ Damn Germans seemed to have thought up of everything!!!

All hail ze Germans for their technological genius!

Seriously, they are the genius. All the present day concepts were indeed first thought out, conceived, and even achieved success in that by them.

With all help of the captured German Sc & Engr, first underwater missile launch success happened in 1960 by US and little latter by USSR but Germans achieved that in 40s.

[Singha]

there is a old sub called the Growler in uss intrepid museum @ hudson river of nyc. it launched 2 nike missiles from a garage infront of the sail..the missile came out on sliding rail, elevated to an angle and fired.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/us ... ines_1.gif

[Vipul]

India successfully fires Agni I.

The launch was carried out from the test base at Wheeler Island off the Odisha coast under the aegis of the Strategic Forces Command (SFC).

The single stage, solid-fuelled missile was fired from a road mobile launcher at 9.34 am by SFC personnel as part of its regular user training.

After a 10-minute flight, the missile with a one-tonne dummy payload splashed down near the pre-designated target in the Bay of Bengal with double-digit accuracy, a senior Defence Research & Development Organisation official said. The DRDO is instrumental in developing such missiles.

Aided by an onboard computer, the inertial navigation system (INS) steered the missile to its target.

All the radars along the east coast, telemetry stations, electro-optical tracking systems, monitored the performance of the missile in real-time during the entire mission, while a down-range ship positioned near the target recorded the terminal event.

[Austin]

AW&ST on India Missile Program ( pg 58 )

http://in.zinio.com/reader.jsp?issue=416284824