Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

[Ravi Karumanchiri]

^^^^
The minimum flying speed of the missile is dictated by the aerodynamic lift and the stall speed, of the missile itself.
Getting the engines to breath is a separate matter.

To get a ramjet to 'breath' (run), what matters is the speed of the incoming airflow, not the speed of the vehicle (which could easily be kept aloft at a slower speed, by using larger wing surfaces).

So, conceivably, the missile itself can be travelling subsonic, but a specific air flow can be accelerated/pressurized by way of aerodynamic shaping/funneling, and this could conceivably be enough to compress air intake in a ramjet. Is this 'easier said than done'; I have no doubt of that.

From what I understand of this (largely secret) technology, the fuel is essentially made to smolder, releasing a dense cloud of atomized fuel, which is met by pressurized/hot airflow inside the ramjet causing it to ignite spontaneously. It works because of the shape of the shockwaves formed inside the ramjet, which keeps the flow going in the right direction.

Can this be made to run at a lower intake speed? (Which would probably be necessary for a workable subsonic ramjet.)
Those are probably more questions for chemists than for engineers. I'm sure they're already talking about it.

Ramjets have no moving parts, which means they are inherently more efficient and require less maintenance. I'm sure there are many who are keen to use them as widely as possible.

As for ramjet missiles of today, they all have a solid booster rocket for launch, in order to achieve that initial acceleration/pressurization.

PS: Maneuvering boost phase is a *BIG DEAL*. This is precisely when the missile is experiencing the most inertial stress, and the ability to do those fabulous corkscrews is a potent demonstration of a 'hard target' -- a very capable missile that is under total control. I suspect it will be some years before others are able to demonstrate a similar capability in missiles of similar weight class as those specific Agni birds.

[nakul]

There is a way around. Adopt the Klub method. Fly subsonic till you reach the target. This maximizes range. Then, pursue a supersonic burst while performing S turn maneuvres to avoid counter fire before hitting the target. We already have this missile in our Kilo subs for land attack.

[John]

The problem with that approach is engagement time for Klub is still relatively long since it is subsonic greatly reducing probability at long ranges since ship or vessel could move away from the targeted location (Brahmos/Granit fly at higher altitude so it is not hindered by sea clutter or radar horizon and allows it scan a large area and adjust their trajectory if needed). This was one of reasons USN scrapped TASM since it proved to be useless and dangerous (lets say a few TASM are launched over in gulf at Iranian ships can you imagine a unlucky oil tanker passing thru the area and missiles homing in on those instead.)

Also in the future if over the horizon target engagement capabilities are developed for air defense missiles', Klub supersonic terminal stage would do no good.

[SaiK]

are you saying the ramjet can be managed by varying the pressure using controlled fuel flow for the flame? why do we want to restrict ramjet for particular speed?

[nakul]

The problem with that approach is engagement time for Klub is still relatively long since it is subsonic greatly reducing probability at long ranges since ship or vessel could move away from the targeted location (Brahmos/Granit fly at higher altitude so it is not hindered by sea clutter or radar horizon and allows it scan a large area and adjust their trajectory if needed). This was one of reasons USN scrapped TASM since it proved to be useless and dangerous (lets say a few TASM are launched over in gulf at Iranian ships can you imagine a unlucky oil tanker passing thru the area and missiles homing in on those instead.)

We are going to introduce Nirbhay which will probably have a submarine launched variant. I guess the Indian scientists will have to work on the seeker to distinguish between targets. Brahmos Mk II already has this feature, so this should not be something new.

Tomahawk is an SLCM. It could face the same problem when launched from a distance. Does it overcome this problem by flying high? It may not be very high. 100 m should do, or whatever exceeds the height of the taller ships...

[Singha]

klub terminal stage ignites around 50km away from the targets given co-ordinate I think and its active radar then starts to scan ahead for targets. same for brahmos.

note that typically a klub will not be fired from max range of 300km...people seldom fire missiles in real life at max range...a crafty sub skipper will fire it from 50-100km away and then move along, giving minimal warning to the target. once it becomes a Mach3+ 'dart' klub is a harder target than brahmos...I assume it can do the same S-shaped moves.

our not taking up Klub further and moving to brahmos seems not to be based on a weakness of klub but the fact that Rus has sold a bunch of them and Kilo 636 subs to Cheen, so the chipanda is well aware of the strong and weak points of klub and will have the requisite countermeasures and strategies in place for it. yakhont wont fall in cheen hands unless they steal one.

if klub is non-grata another option is work with MBDA to develop a SM40 version of the subsonic ship launched MM40 300km range exocet++ missile they are planning. this being western will also be more politically acceptable to the germans and japanese.

[SaiK]

yakhont wont fall in cheen hands unless they steal one..

http://articles.janes.com/articles/Jane ... KHONT.html - 1998. So, must have stolen by now. [high probability]... and syrian relationship could help the chips.

[John]

@SaiK, China was offered Yakhont but turned it down since it was still in testing and Russian navy had no interest in procuring it. So the PLAN choose to go with Moskit.

Tomahawk is an SLCM. It could face the same problem when launched from a distance. Does it overcome this problem by flying high? It may not be very high. 100 m should do, or whatever exceeds the height of the taller ships...

Klub and most missile do this around around 40 km but it is often not enough s since even at 100 m the missiles' detection is still hampered by radar horizon, if a target where to move 10 Km+ from the original location.

@Singha, the terminal phase for Klub is at the final 20 km.

[nakul]

Klub and most missile do this around around 40 km but it is often not enough s since even at 100 m the missiles' detection is still hampered by radar horizon, if a target where to move 10 Km+ from the original location.

The Soviets used data sharing & networking in the 80s before buzz words like network centricity were invented. The Granit AshM (600 km) was launched in salvos. One of the missile would look over and fly high while the rest would fly low to avoid detection. The high flying missile would detect & track the target and pass on this information to the lower ones. If it was destroyed, on of the other ones would rise up and take its role. This way they could guide themselves without external guidance (from ships, satellites etc)

Of course, doing the same in 2012 would be child's play for a country like India

[ramana]

USI Digest

AgniV implications

STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS OF AGNI V

Dr Roshan Khaniejo*

Introduction

19 April 2012 is a red letter day in the history of India’s scientific research. Agni V the Intermediate-Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) with a range of 5000 + kilometer was successfully test fired from Wheeler Island.The17.5-meter long missile which has the capacity to carry1 to1.5 tons of conventional and nuclear warheads will be the most formidable missile in India’s strategic military arsenal. Scientists claim that there has been a ”giant leap” in the missile development programme from a single stage liquid propelled surface-to-surface Prithvi Missile (first launched in 1988) to the present three stage solid propelled Agni V(launched on 19 April, 2012). Eulogies from scientists, politicians and the media both print and electronic continue to pour in. After the initial hype and euphoria it is now time to analyse its strategic implications.

Reactions

Considering the fact that the world was vociferously criticizing North Korea for its failed missile launch, the timing of India’s launch of Agni V was a little inappropriate. Though the two countries could not be compared as North Korea is considered a rogue state and India with her nonproliferation record is a major developing country. China, however, was more vocal in their reactions claiming on one hand to be India’s “cooperative partner” and on the other hand releasing statements saying that India should not have any “missile delusion”, “China’s nuclear power is stronger and more reliable”. These contrasting statements depict a dichotomy in their approach towards India. Unlike previous occasions when the major nuclear countries went in for embargoes and financial cuts this time the response was generally muted. Although the United States urged for restraint, they still praised India for her solid nonproliferation track record .The dual reasoning behind this change in posture can be seen as economic and strategic. Economically the United States government recognizes India’s stable economic growth and it sees India as a potential market for its companies. The Indo-US Bilateral trade agreements are getting stronger. Strategically the emergence of an economically and militarily strong China is a cause of concern for the world community. Its aggressive posture in the South China Sea, Taiwan, Indian Ocean and its manipulation of International Organizations to its own interest is a cause of anxiety. Although the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) claim that Agni V “is not any country specific” the fact remains that the missile can reach most parts of China including Beijing and Shanghai. Once it is inducted it can not only target the western sector of China but also the economically and industrially strong eastern sector (hitting the enemy hard where it counts). Secondly Chinese media had projected the ranges of Agni V to be much higher than what has been claimed. It has the potential to hit even Europe .In the long run if India plays its card properly it can emerge as a security provider to a lot of countries in Asia /Africa especially the ASEAN countries. This subtle shift in the power nexus will go a long way in maintaining the multipolarity of power structure.

No First Use

India’s nuclear doctrine has a declared no-first-use policy, but it also states that it will respond with punitive retaliation should deterrence fail. In case of no first use ,Agni V may be a deterrent ,but for a punitive retaliation one not only requires accurate nuclear weapons to inflict damage, unacceptable to the aggressor, but also to survive the first kill sufficiently , a number of survivable and operationally prepared silos and well trained nuclear forces are essential. Agni V with its three stage solid propellant is claimed to be a “game changer” as it will be a great asset in developing ICBM with MIRV (Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicle). But Agni V is just a delivery system, its operational feasibility in India’s triad of aircraft, mobile land-based missiles and sea-based missiles from ships and other moving platforms, anywhere in India is still to be tested its terminal phase accuracy on land and air is yet to be assessed. Lastly the payload which it is going to carry is also debatable as after 1998, because of India’s self-imposed moratorium, no tests have been conducted in India, unlike in China and the United States with their advanced technology, they are constantly working on miniaturizing their nuclear warheads.

Indigenization

The question now arises is how indigenous is our space programme? DRDO has emphasized that 80 per cent of Agni V is indigenously built but what is the nature of the remaining 20 per cent? Does it comprise vital sub systems like solid propellant rocket motor, or high precision guidance system? It has taken India more than 24 years to advance from Prithvi to Agni V stage. The reasons for such a slow progress are multifarious. Firstly it is due to the expensive and time consuming import of key components like electronic devices such as computer processor chips, radio frequency devices, electro hydraulic components, composite fibers etc. Secondly the infrastructure is not conducive for indigenization for example there are no “ System Integrators” to integrate all the sub systems also the Public Sector Units(PSUs) face resource crunch due to lack of finances and delayed clearance of projects. These two reasons can be addressed by partially allowing the private sector to manufacture a few of the vital components which are feasible. Thirdly there is no synergy between the scientists, the assembly liners that is the PSUs, and the end users the defence forces. To rectify this, services of retired / serving vertical specialists should be used during the conceptualization of projects in defence service specific missions keeping security aspects paramount. There should be insistence of user trails (no waver) in the fields and not confining only to laboratories. The manufacture/design observations by the defence forces should be liquidated in order to yield optimum result in a focused manner rather than being disjointed with critical gaps. This would require systemic changes .The defence may require a special task force comprising specialists from all the three services, so that its representatives could be available at all the stages. Finally efforts should also be made to improve and drastically increase the financial budget for Research and Development wing of the government to keep abreast with the technology as it is changing at a very fast pace. This detailed assessment of our strengths and weaknesses along with strategic direction, increased financial budgets requires a political forethought both externally in terms of active diplomatic and economic collaborations with friendly nuclear power states and internally by creating various systemic changes which will enhance our indigenous missile and space development programme.

Space

Neutralizing enemy satellites and protecting our own is the key to space research. India has been doing endo and exoatmospheric missile defence intercept tests. Agni III had the capacity to hit a satellite. Agni V will enable us to intercept target missiles with a longer range thus giving India the ability to intercept ICBMs. India is already working on an Advanced Air Defense (AAD) system, however, a full multi layered defence against Ballistic missiles requires both terrestrial as well as space based surveillance and kill system which is very difficult to achieve due to its cost and advanced technology. India is trying to adapt existing Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) technologies to the ASAT role but there is ambiguity in declaring whether India’s ASAT capacity can be used either for weapons programme or simply a capability ancillary to missile defense. Though Agni V has been a milestone for our scientists but the operational aspect that is the actual induction in our armed forces and the ABM system is still far off.

Conclusion

Until India achieves a credible nuclear deterrence she should be cautious in her approach towards China. Overemphasizing the significance of Agni V is not desirable as history proves how an ill judged albeit, unintended provocation of China could spell disaster for the region. India should take advantage of the declaration made by China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin stating that India and China were not “competitors but partners”. A mature approach now would be to organize a series of dialogues with special reference to nuclear issues, to reassure each other about their intentions, along with CBM (Confidence Building Measures). This would be beneficial to both as a stable external environment is necessary for the economic growth of each country. India should also reassure the world about its peaceful intentions and its historical nonproliferation track record. As India’s erstwhile Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee had rightly said that India’s foreign policy would ”continue to reflect a commitment to the sensibilities and obligation of an ancient civilization, a sense of responsibility and restrain”.

* Dr Roshan Khaniejo is Associate Research Fellow at the Centre for Strategic Studies and Simulation, USI.

(Article uploaded on May 10, 2012).

Disclaimer : The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the organisation that he belongs to or of the USI.

[Ravi Karumanchiri]

^^^^
What is that?

Chicomm psyops?

Ample mixture of serious and ridiculous.
Is it some kind of fishing expedition?

I don't even know where to start.

But I don't care to comment.

[symontk]

80% indigenization doesnt mean there are 20% foregin components. 20% can easily comprise of the tools used to built the products. If you look closely at the tools used, most of them are imported from Japan and other western countries. India is not simply able to built these high technology / high precision tools as per the needs of ISRO or DRDO

[ramana]

Ravi, It was from USI Journal which is the premier services journal of India!

Looks like we have a lot of self-doubters in high places.

Could be johlawala brigade.

[Ravi Karumanchiri]

^^^^^^^
I have now read that “article” by Dr. Roshan Khaniejo three times. The second two times, I read it very, very carefully; leading me to change my opinion WRT the article.

It is probably not Chicomm psyops.

It was written by someone who was way out-of-her depth; someone who was writing like she makes bouillabaisse (a fish stew which is better the more different fish you use). She confidently (mis)handled all sorts of issues, topics, considerations, implications, ramifications, and SWOTs both long and short term (i.e. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats).

Incredibly for someone in her position, she seems unaware of the very successful ‘ring laser gyro’ guidance systems used on a number of IGMDP missiles, and doesn’t even mention the program itself, nor how any of the resulting missiles should not be considered in strategic isolation. For an article entitled “Strategic Implications of Agni V”, the author takes a decidedly un-strategic tack. She even advocates for silos, which are a relic of a bygone era that barely made sense for the Americans and Soviets, with their enormous land masses and copious 20+ minutes of incoming flight time to serve as a launch warning. India has no such luxury, and should expect a nuclear attack (if it ever comes to that) to be launched simultaneously from the full 360 degrees surrounding India, with much less reaction time than is available in central North America or Eurasia; a threat hinted at by the “string of pearls” we’ve been reading so much about. India’s only option has always been ‘maneuver warfare’; the very antithesis of silos; which the Americans and Russians have abandoned themselves. (BTW: The term “survivable silo” is an oxymoron; as it would certainly invite a 200 KT ground-burst first strike. It’s not even worth starting the engineering work.)

ALTERNATIVELY: Taking an optimistic tack, maybe the article was written for Chicomm consumption? Some sort of reverse mind game? I dunno.

WORRYINGLY: It may have been written by/for those who would like to see the establishment of a (quote) “Indian” (unquote) *commercialized* military-industrial complex (like in the USA) wherein top secret technologies developed at taxpayer expense in DRDO labs would be handed-over to “private sector” players (i.e. ‘cronies’), for some ideological reason inspired by misdirected capitalism and sold to the public as patriotism (just like in the U.S. of A.). IMVHO, writing as a complete outsider who is also a keen observer: It seems to me that India’s strategic forces are being developed and deployed very intelligently and at tremendous pace; researching, developing and integrating cutting-edge technologies that do confer significant military advantages; in a manner that maintains deterrence without sparking undue alarm across borders.

All the while, official India has largely avoided unnecessary chest-beating or war drum thumping; even shying away from any sort of formal enunciation of aspiration or intention to become “a security provider to a lot of countries in Asia /Africa especially the ASEAN countries”. That’s the kind of thing you ordinarily hear from (expeditionary) Amreekhans, not from Indians. Some friction with Chicomms was inevitable, because the Chicomm style has always been rather ‘prickly’, as they know they can win concessions and appeasements just by seeming/pretending/claiming to feel threatened, slighted, insulted or whatnot.

Dr. Khaniejo’s suggestion that “India should take advantage of the declaration made by China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin stating that India and China were not ‘competitors but partners’” is particularly ridiculous. Is she really suggesting that a security guarantee from a *spokesman* at the Chicomm FM is a better guarantor of Indian sovereignty, self-determination and security than is the (unmentioned) IGMDP? Is she really suggesting that India “take their word for it”? If that’s her attitude, Dr. Roshan Khaniejo should retire, IMO.

SIDE NOTE: OFFERING A HUNCH / NOT A SOLID ACCUSATION / JUST A HUNCH: The awkward use of the word “Eulogies” is most unusual for someone who is presumably steeped in English, as would be “Dr Roshan Khaniejo, Associate Research Fellow at the Centre for Strategic Studies and Simulation, USI”. The word ‘eulogy’ truly has only one commonly used meaning, and this article mistakes that word’s meaning terribly. Moreover, there is no slightly misspelled alternative word that could explain it; nor an autocorrect option in common software. That is no typo. It is the result of high-end English training with a ‘tell’ showing by way of error. (NB: The word “liquidated” is also badly misused.) MY HUNCH (not an accusation): It is possible that portions of the article were actually written by someone who was educated in mainland China.

JMT.

[NOTE: This post has been amended as per ramana's instruction that Dr. Khaniejo is a woman. Appologies for the earlier errors. It is good to see a woman working in the 'strategic space'. It's just too bad this one is so terribly misinformed.]

[ramana]

Well first of all its a she and not a he.
Yes she is a China expert at USI.
I too had a smiley after eulogy!

What to do? India suffers from too many English educated elites who use pedantic words without knowing their meaning.

[SaiK]

she is a fellow and associate faculty there.
http://www.usiofindia.org/CS3/Faculty/

She has done ayotollahic critical analysis for her p.chaddi. Now, one may want to dig further on her NPT studies, besides this alarming "self kabardhaar!" article.

Not sure,.. it could be all from the forces that is actually holding indic nuke buttons by the 10k mile string across the globe -- the khaans themselves. they are wanting to do a controlled aggression on chippanda. If the ayotollahs feel, it is time to attack, it is time, no matter who is the victim as long as it is not the ayothallah family [all nato + p5 - 1].

[member_20036]

Agni-IV, Agni-III launch next week
13 September 2012 ,
By T. S. Subramanian


The missiles can carry nuclear warheads, weighing one tonne each


Close on the heels of the successful launch of Agni-V, Agni-II, Agni-I andPrithvi-II missiles from April this year, the Defence Research and Development Organisation is making preparations on the Wheeler Island, off the Odisha coast, for two more Agni variants’ launches.
While Agni-IV will lift off from a rail-mobile launch pad on September 18, Agni-III missile will blast off on September 21, said V.K.Saraswat, Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister. The maiden launch of Nirbhay, a sub-sonic cruise missile, will take place in October or November.
Both Agni-IV and Agni-III are two-stage missiles that can carry nuclear warheads weighing one tonne each. In the missions on September 18 and 21, Agni-IV and Agni-III will be armed only with conventional explosives. Both missiles are 17 metres long. While Agni-IV can devastate areas situated 4,000 km away, Agni-III’s range is over 3,000 km.
While the DRDO will flight-test Agni-IV, the Strategic Forces Command of the Army, which is entrusted with firing strategic missiles, will fire Agni-III. This is Agni-IV’s third flight. Agni-III will be flying for the fourth time. The maiden flights of both missiles ended in failure.
The Aeronautical Development Establishment, a DRDO facility in Bangalore, has developed Nirbhay, a subsonic cruise missile. Nirbhay means “Fearless” and the missile is a derivative of Lakshya, a pilotless target aircraft. DRDO sources said Nirbhay’s range was “in the region of 1,000 km.” “It is a tree-top missile, that is, it can fly at the height of a palmyra tree.”

http://m.thehindu.com/news/national/art ... ek%26hl%3D

[member_23370]

Is this first confirmation Agni-iv range is 4000 km. Also I thought it was 20 m long.

[nakul]

Any one knows whether Agni IV will progress beyond a tech demonstrator?

[Singha]

is A2-AT==A4 or A2-AT != A4 ?

[member_23370]

It is supposed to be. It should replace the legacy A-II's. I hope in future A-I is replace by Shaurya, A-II by A-4 and A-5 fills in ICBM(MIRV) role. A-3 can be used as tech demo like prithvi is used for all sorts of testing.

[member_23694]

i am confused between agni 3 and agni 4....
agni 4 - L = 20m - Wt = 17 tonne - Range = 3500Km - 800-900 Kg warhead
agni 3 - L = 17m - Wt - 48 tonne - Range 3500 Km - 2-2.5 tonne warhead

what is the extra 31 tonne wt for agni 3 if there is no significant range difference. Is it
only for additional 1-1.5 tonne of warhead....or the fact is that the range is not 3500Km but
something more......

please clarify....if any update...

[nakul]

^^^

Saraswat post Agni 5 test revealed that they were not stressed as much because some of the components in Agni 5 had been tested in Agni 4. Looking at the nos, it seems to have the same crucial figures as Agni 3. Its innards are different. Agni 3 is being inducted. Dunno about Agni 4...

[member_23694]

further to my query above.....if from the figures....agni 4 seems more advanced....then why not induct them in large numbers rather than the heavier agni 3...how does having a 48 tonne missile with only 3500 km range help when we have a 17 tonne missile with similar range...only exception being the payload....
honestly ...i really find difficult to convince myself that the range of agni 3 is only 3500 km....

all the 40-55 tonne missile world over seems to be having range in excess of 7500-8000 Km....

[nakul]

Agni 3 is more mature. Honestly, I thought Agni 4 was a test bed for testing new technologies. They may not induct it. Agni 5 could be the next step up from Agni 3. But only the elves of the missile complex know what they are doing.

[member_23694]

Agni 3 is more mature. Honestly, I thought Agni 4 was a test bed for testing new technologies. They may not induct it. Agni 5 could be the next step up from Agni 3. But only the elves of the missile complex know what they are doing.

fine ...but any idea about the agni 3 actual range......is it possible for a 48 tonne missile to have a range of only 3500 km.....any idea...

[nakul]

No expert but you can calculate that Chinese called 5500 km Agni 5 to be 8000 km.

It is heavy payload missile. SO could allow for bigger yeild bombs or MIRV. Both are desirable IMHO.

As for weight, they did not use as much composites then. The weight is moot as long as it can reach its destination. Its a land launched missile after all.

[Katare]

Agni 4 has all composit motor casing, while A3 is made with maraging steel, hence the weight difference. A4-A5 are new generation missiles A3 is based on poor turd world technology.

Spend some time on BR missile section or read archive for more info.

[member_23694]

Agni 4 has all composit motor casing, while A3 is made with maraging steel, hence the weight difference. A4-A5 are new generation missiles A3 is based on poor turd world technology.

Spend some time on BR missile section or read archive for more info.

my understanding is that the difference in range because of the use of composite and maraging steel
works for Agni 2 and Agni 4 where agni 2 has a range of around 2000 - 2500 Km while agni 4 having range of
around 3500 Km.
Both the missile have similar size and weight so the use of lighter composite motors helps in the range increase
for agni 4 and thus pretty much understandable.
Now while agni 2 had a weight 17 tonne and a range of 2000-2500 Km , for agni 3, assuming similar
steel & propolsion etc, we have a range of 3500 Km but the missile weight goes to 48 tonne.

I know agni 4 is advanced and all the other stuffs, but even if you compare the agni 2 and agni 3
based on the old technology, having a range difference of only 1000Km between the two is not clear to me....

[ramana]

the heavy payload needs the heavier vehicle. Its called range partial. The higher payload weight requires the all up higher weight.
The need to have both vehicles is due to the difference in payload weight.

[member_23694]

OT:
^^dhiraj: Please try to use correct capitalization of words and punctuation (mainly, please avoid the use of these multiple periods - it ruins the reading experience for other members). Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.

Thanks for the suggestion, will definitely try to improve, but i hope there is no issue with the contents of my post since my intention
has always been the best for India

[nakul]

Your post got me thinking. That Agni 3 would be 3500 km for a multi ton payload. Its range would obviously be much higher for lighter payloads. This could allow us to deliver petals to Beijing & Shanghai without necessarily placing them at the border. Moreover, the Agni 4 will not have an equally long range for lighter payloads. Therefore, it becomes imperative for us to induct Agni 3 till Agni 5 comes online. Agni 4 can compenstate for its lighter payload due to greater accuracy (as good as Agni 5 in accuracy). So both missiles have their places in the nuke delivery arsenal.

[member_23694]

Your post got me thinking. That Agni 3 would be 3500 km for a multi ton payload. Its range would obviously be much higher for lighter payloads. This could allow us to deliver petals to Beijing & Shanghai without necessarily placing them at the border. Moreover, the Agni 4 will not have an equally long range for lighter payloads. Therefore, it becomes imperative for us to induct Agni 3 till Agni 5 comes online. Agni 4 can compenstate for its lighter payload due to greater accuracy (as good as Agni 5 in accuracy). So both missiles have their places in the nuke delivery arsenal.

that was the very intention of my post , since my understanding is that agni 3 and agni 5 with a 1 tonne payload should have a much longer range than what is mentioned in press release
Any suggestions for the maximum possible range for these missiles

[nakul]

The Shaurya missile can go 1900 km for 200 kg payload. Its official range is 700 km. I'm no rocket scientist so I will leave Agni range to the experts.

The range (for any missile) is dependent on the weight of payload. Its max range would obviously be with 0 kg payload. But its useless. The max range for a given payload is what matters. The range can only be decided if we know the weight of the bomb. For practical purposes, since our nuke deterrrent theory calls for maximum damage, the missiles should be used with max yield payloads. That is why we have missiles with huge payload carrying capacities. In that case, we can take the officially stated range on face value since there is little incentive to launch an Agni with a puny bomb when we can do more damage with a larger payload.

[jamwal]

It calls for 'minimum unacceptable damage'

[kit]

Just thinking of the Agni's payload capacity., if india puts thermonuclear warheads ., then the destructive capability will be much more !but seems likely that all are fission types

[nakul]

The benefits of multiple small bombs are greater than one single bomb especially when MIRVed. I hope we demonstrate MIRV in 2013 & start production by 2014. The more MIRVed missiles we have (especially on Arihant) the less we have to worry about BMD of the target. It also helps in maintaing fewer missiles

[vivek_ahuja]

I hope we demonstrate MIRV in 2013 & start production by 2014.

I completely agree with you! However, I would just modify the sentence slightly as follows:

"I hope we can demonstrate MIRV 2013 by 2015 & start production by 2014 2020"

[ramana]

kit, its TN that is why its so heavy.
No MIRV till A5 next phase.

[SaiK]

IF we had shakti-1 assumed/proved at near 99% burn, THEN we could potentially cause a mega ton with 4 to 5 MIRVs [times 200KT walas]. correct?