Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 21 Nov 2010 21:09

If the name stands for a former president. It is right.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 21 Nov 2010 21:24

Aditya G wrote:Hmmm there is the new missile Air Launched Article or K-ALA-M.

Not sure is linking missiles to individuals is the best practice.

Has happened before itself. Nag is named after B.D. Nagchaudhari.

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/India/IndiaSmiling.html

As long as we keep politicians, historical personalities out, we should be fine. That will lead to everyone wanting someone or the other.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Nov 2010 21:38

Pratyush wrote:If the name stands for a former president. It is right.

it's not named after a former president, it's named after a top scientist who happened to become president of the country.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 21 Nov 2010 21:42

Rahul,

Still the decision to do so is correct. It better then naming thim after barbarians like the animal land to the west of us.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Nov 2010 21:47

of course it is correct ! but not because he was the president.
tell me, do you want to see the AMCA named as PDSP-01 ?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 21 Nov 2010 21:56

I want to see AMCA named after an Apsara (Urvashi,Menka,Rambha,Hema). But thats not my say. The point for me is that the presidentship for him was just a milestone in the extraordinary jurney of his life. If a lab of DRDO decided to name a series of weapons after his name. I say let them.

Similarly, if the AMCA is named after the first woman president of the nation. I say more power to the DRDO / ADA /NAL.

srai · Post by **srai** » 22 Nov 2010 07:23

Israel to supply India with Griffin 3 bomb guidance kits

11/07/08 The Indian air force will procure Israel Aerospace Industries' Griffin 3 laser-guided bomb....

...The conversion kit is compatible with the Mk82/83/84 general purpose bomb series, and comprises a front guidance section and a rear section with steering fins....

DRDO: Indian Laser Guided Bomb Kits Successfully Tested By IAF

JUNE 09, 2010 DRDO Statement: The Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) has successfully designed, developed & carried out the user trials of laser guided bomb kits at Pokhran with the participation of the IAF. Flight tests have demonstrated the accuracy, reliability and performance of these precision air launched bombs. The tests have been conducted after extensive, simulation, design validation, ground experiments followed by series of flight evaluation. A number of high tech components have also been developed by Indian industries for this advanced weapon package. Indian Air Force is expected to upgrade a large number of unguided bombs to this standard based on the excellent results seen today.

What They Did At Vayu Shakti 2010

This confirms that IAF has Griffin"-3" LGB in its service as it was used by a Jaguar in the Vayu Shakti 2010. Also, a Mirage-2000 dropped a Paveway"-II" LGB. Both look very similar to each other except that Paveway was bought back in the 1990s and mated with M2K and 1,000lb bombs during Kargil. Griffin was bought only in 2008 as per reports.

IMO, I think what the ADE did was to integrate the "Griffin 3" guidance kits to DRDO's high speed low drag (HSLD) bombs (i.e. 450kg (and various 1,000lb)) since the IAF has vast quantities of these HSLD/1,000lb in-service. As one can interpret from the "What they did at Vayu Shakti 2010", the primary armament of the IAF's Jaguars seems to be 1,000lb bombs. MKI and Bison dropped 250kg Russian bombs whereas Mirage-2000s dropped 1,000lb Paveway LGB and 250kg bombs. It is not clear if the DRDO's HSLD 250kg class (or Russian 250kg) has also gotten the laser guidance kits.

Or it could be that ADE took "inspiration" (or licensed critical parts or reversed-engineered or joint-venture) from the Griffin 3 / Paveway-II LGB designs since DRDO's LGB looks similar to them.

srai · Post by **srai** » 22 Nov 2010 07:31

This article mentions IAF "exhibiting" Griffin LGBs in 2003.

Janes - Griffin laser-guided bomb (LGB) system (Israel), Bombs - Precision and guided munitions

In 1990 MBT Systems, part of Israel Aircraft Industries Ltd, completed development of a laser-guided bomb (LGB) system called Griffin. The Griffin guidance kits were designed for easy attachment to standard low-drag bombs such as the US Mk 82 (500 lb), Mk 83 (1000 lb) and Mk 84 (2,000 lb) bombs already in service with the Israeli Air Force.
...

In February 2003 Griffin LGBs were exhibited by the Indian Air Force (IAF) in what must be a modification unique to that country. India has integrated UK-pattern 1,000 lb GP bombs, from the Indian production line, with the Griffin guidance kit. It is believed that these bombs are used to equip India's Jaguars and are probably available to other IAF aircraft.

...

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 22 Nov 2010 08:05

Err, the latest one seems to be that the Kaveri was successfully tested in Russia.

But significantly not one word on weather it has met its design specifications.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 22 Nov 2010 08:07

AGupta, Don't be so pessimistic. I can tell you that Sudarshan is indigenous built. And most of the time that we hide is our true capability with the usage of such words and we have Agni-III's with 3500 km onlee or even less at 3000 km onlee.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 22 Nov 2010 08:12

Narad wrote:THE BIG STORY: INDIA TESTED TOP SECRET 3500 KM SLBM THE K4[/color]
[/size]

In a dramatic breakthrough in its nuclear offensive capability, India has successfully tested a submarine-launched ballistic missile(SLBM) with an eventual range of 3,500 km. Tested secretly off Visakhapatnam in January this year, the 10-m long and 1.3 m wide missile emerged from a pontoon submerged 50 m underwater......

The pontoon is stationed off Vizag???
If the report said it was stationed off Wheeler island or Chandipur-on-sea, It'd make sense.

But off Vizag? Hmm.

What news reports are there about missile tests in January? I am in a restricted internet environment and can't access news sites freely.

Range wise, the Agni-1 has the same range as the Shourya and the Sagarika, K-15 mentioned. It'll be difficult (except for the massa satellites) to find out if the test originated from land or just off-shore.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Nov 2010 10:38

Are the earlier versions of the Griffin 3 or what?

BTW Griffin 3 has steering in rear vanes. The Sudarshan picture from blog has fixed rear fins. Its the fore fins that rotate to give the control.

srai · Post by **srai** » 22 Nov 2010 15:03

A list of current/planned PGMs in IAF's inventory:

LGB

Paveway II LGB (1,000lb GP bomb) -> Mirage-2000, Jaguar
Griffin 3 LGB (1,000lb GP bomb) -> Jaguar
Sudarshan LGB (450kg HSLD bomb or 1,000lb GP) -> Jaguar (first tested with)
KAB-500Kr (500kg bomb) -> MiG-21 Bison
Matra LGB (1,000kg bomb) -> Mirage-2000

ASM

Kh-29TE -> Su-30 MKI
Kh-31P -> Su-30 MKI
AS-30L -> Mirage-2000
Sea Eagle -> Jaguar IM (to be replaced by Harpoon)
Brahmos -> Su-30 MKI

Note: Quantities not known.

Here's a good picture of various IAF's munitions (2003):

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 22 Nov 2010 15:13

Gagan wrote:The pontoon is stationed off Vizag???
If the report said it was stationed off Wheeler island or Chandipur-on-sea, It'd make sense.

But off Vizag? Hmm.

What news reports are there about missile tests in January? I am in a restricted internet environment and can't access news sites freely.

Range wise, the Agni-1 has the same range as the Shourya and the Sagarika, K-15 mentioned. It'll be difficult (except for the massa satellites) to find out if the test originated from land or just off-shore.

IIRC even the Dhanush was tested off Vizag and not the ITR. So for sea born weapons it seems that Vizag is prefered locations from which tests are conducted.

JMT

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 22 Nov 2010 16:19

So ADE designed/dev/carried out the User Trials. It DOES NOT say at all that ADE designed or developed the guidance kits.

What a dumb a$$ like me could understand is:

ADE designed, & developed the kit and after that, it conducted the user trials of these kits. Having come to a different conclusion altogether, could you please tell me how a USER TRIAL is "designed & developed"?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 23 Nov 2010 00:57

srai wrote:A list of current/planned PGMs in IAF's inventory:

Edited:

LGB

Paveway II LGB (1,000lb GP bomb) -> Mirage-2000, Jaguar
Griffin 3 LGB (1,000lb GP bomb) -> Jaguar, MiG-27UPG, Su-30MKI (likely)
Sudarshan LGB (450kg HSLD bomb or 1,000lb GP) -> Jaguar (first tested with)
KAB-500Kr (500kg bomb) -> MiG-21 Bison, Su-30MKI
Matra BGL (1,000kg bomb) -> Mirage-2000

ASM

Kh-25MP -> MiG-27ML (retired?)
Kh-29TE -> Su-30 MKI
Kh-31P -> Su-30 MKI
Kh-35 -> IL-38SD (speculation)
Kh-59M -> Su-30MKI
AS-30L -> Mirage-2000
Sea Eagle -> Jaguar IM (to be replaced by Harpoon)
Brahmos -> Su-30 MKI
Crystal Maze -> Mirage-2000

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 23 Nov 2010 01:23

First Akash missile system to fill gap in air defence.

With crucial Indian defence and nuclear establishments and vital infrastructure facilities open to an enemy air strike, many in India’s military consider the shortage of anti-aircraft guns, missiles and radars as our single greatest security vulnerability.

For two decades, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has blocked overseas purchases, to allow the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) to indigenously develop anti-aircraft missile systems for replacing the obsolete Russian weaponry currently dotted around key headquarters, air bases, atomic power plants, nuclear installations and facilities like the Bhakra Nangal dam.

It has been a dangerous gamble. If war had broken out, the ineffectiveness of these Russian systems, especially the 50-year-old Pechora missile, would have forced the Indian Air Force (IAF) to use its combat aircraft more for defending Indian ground forces against enemy fighters than for attacking targets in enemy territory.

But that gamble is finally beginning to pay off, with India’s first modern air defence system readying to roll off the assembly line. On an exclusive visit to Bharat Electronics (BEL) in Bangalore, Business Standard was given the first-ever media look at an operational Akash missile system, which will be delivered to the IAF by March 2011. This first Akash squadron will protect the Gwalior Air Base, where the IAF bases its Mirage-2000 fighters.

BEL will follow this up quickly with a second Akash squadron by December 2011, which will safeguard Lohegaon Air Base at Pune, a major base for the front-line Sukhoi-30MKI fighters. Meanwhile, another defence public sector undertaking, Bharat Dynamics, will build six more Akash squadrons, most of these for the IAF’s new fighter bases along the Sino-Indian border, including Tezpur, Bagdogra and Hasimara.

“BEL is building two Akash squadrons for Rs 1,221 crore,” says Ashwini Datta, BEL’s chairman and managing director. “The ground infrastructure would cost another Rs 200 crore, so each squadron effectively costs about Rs 700 crore. That is not just significantly cheaper than foreign procurement, but also permits better maintenance and allows for continuous technological improvements.”

DRDO and MoD sources say the Indian Army is close to ordering a high-mobility version of Akash, mounted on T-72 tanks, that can move alongside tank forces. One of the army’s three strike corps, which attack deep into enemy territory, has no anti-aircraft “area defence system”; the other two strike corps are equipped with the vintage Russian SA-6, designed in the early-1960s. This makes them dangerously vulnerable to enemy fighters if they advance deep into enemy territory.

The Akash – developed by the DRDO, in partnership with BEL, under the Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme – is a sophisticated amalgam of systems working in concert. The heart of the Akash is a mobile Rohini radar, which can detect an aircraft when it is 120 kilometres (km) away; automatically, a coded electronic interrogator ascertains whether this is an IAF aircraft, or a civilian airliner. With the target identified, the Rohini radar alerts the Akash squadron headquarters, which then controls the engagement.

As the enemy fighter races in at about 15 km per minute, the task of shooting it down is allocated through a secure digital link to one of the squadron’s two missile “flights”, which are normally about 25 km away, to cover the maximum area. The designated Flight Control Centre locks its sophisticated 3D phased-array radar onto the enemy fighter and calculates the launch parameters for an Akash missile to shoot down the target at its maximum range of 25 km.

Meanwhile, the flight’s four Akash launchers raise their missiles to the launch positions and swivel automatically towards the incoming aircraft. At the calculated time of launch, the Flight Control Centre electronically passes a launch order to one of its four launchers. An audio signal starts beeping and the missile operator presses the launch button, which is quaintly labelled “MARO”. A “ripple” of two missiles roars off the launcher, seconds apart, to increase the chances of a hit. The 3D radar guides the missiles throughout their flight, homing them onto the enemy aircraft. The DRDO claims that a two-missile “ripple” will destroy an enemy fighter 98 per cent of the time.

The dangerous shortage of India’s air defence resources has been known to Business Standard for some time, but can only now be publicly revealed, with the induction of the Akash remedying the situation. The number of installations that need protection – each is termed a Vulnerable Area (VA) or a Vulnerable Point (VP), depending upon how large it is – has steadily increased. In a letter written on December 4, 2002, to the MoD, the IAF’s Air Marshal Raghu Rajan pointed out that a study by the military’s apex Chiefs of Staff Committee, ordered by the Cabinet Secretariat, had identified 101 Indian VAs/VPs in 1983. That went up to 122 in 1992; to 133 in 1997; and is now understood to be well above 150.

Without the anti-aircraft resources needed to protect these VAs/VPs, the outdated Pechora missiles, which began service in 1974 with a designated life of nine years, have been granted repeated extensions. The Russian manufacturers extended the life to 15 years; when they refused any further extensions, the DRDO extended it unilaterally to 21 years. By 2004, only 30 Pechora units of the 60 originally imported were still in service.

On January 15, 2003, the IAF boss, Air Chief Marshal S Krishnaswamy, wrote to the MoD saying that 60 per cent of India’s VAs/VPs could no longer be provided anti-aircraft protection. The IAF’s top officer wrote: “By 2004… terminal defence of VA/VPs would be only notional… We need to import minimal number of systems to meet our national defence needs.”

Seven years later, the roll-out of the Akash from BEL will begin to fill this gap.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 23 Nov 2010 09:11

The dangerous shortage of India’s air defence resources has been known to Business Standard for some time, but can only now be publicly revealed, with the induction of the Akash remedying the situation.

Didnt know that this was such a secret that only Business Standards fabulous reporters were able to unearth

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Nov 2010 15:14

Yep! Business Std.'s "sniffer doggies" found out what the whole world has known for a decade+! Neverthless,a good piece about the remedial measures and one v.important indigenous success that of Akash.Now all that we need further is a naval variant of Akash developed and why not? It would cost far less than the proposed and under development Barak-8.Perhaps it could also complement it.The important fact is that Akash is an Indian air defence missile whose potential should be exploited to the full.We need dozens more Akash batteries defending the A&N islands and all along our coastline defending our key ports, and naval and air bases.Akash could even be a good export to friendly nations like Vietnam,etc.A concerted effort should now be made by the DRDO/MOD to maxmise thre success of Akash across the board.

Sandeep_ghosh · Post by **Sandeep_ghosh** » 23 Nov 2010 15:32

Marten wrote:Politicians? Let's please stick to naming them after our scientists.
If we run out of worthy scientists, start with the heroes of the forces. I for one would love to see some heavy armaments named after Sam Bahadur.

Well said... I would really like to see anti tank weapon or may be even the new FMBT named after Arun Khetarpal

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Nov 2010 15:46

^^^The number of VP and VA is a classified information and not know to may people....so, in that respect, it is being shared for the first time in public.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 23 Nov 2010 16:40

It would cost far less than the proposed and under development Barak-8

Is this on the lines of C 17 equal to An 124 equal to MTA??

Seriously !!!!

nits · Post by **nits** » 23 Nov 2010 18:17

rohitvats wrote:^^^The number of VP and VA is a classified information and not know to may people....so, in that respect, it is being shared for the first time in public.

As per the article there are 150+ VAs/VPs; and as of now 7 Akaksh squadron are in process of production. As rate of production is not very high and considering high # of VAs/VPs; how much time and squadron we need to cover all VAs/VPs ?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 23 Nov 2010 18:21

The Akash may well turn out to be cheaper then the Barak 8. As IIRC, Akash is not fully fire and forget weapon and the barak 8 should be

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 23 Nov 2010 18:35

Narad wrote:THE BIG STORY: INDIA TESTED TOP SECRET 3500 KM SLBM THE K4[/color]
[/size]

In a dramatic breakthrough in its nuclear offensive capability, India has successfully tested a submarine-launched ballistic missile(SLBM) with an eventual range of 3,500 km. Tested secretly off Visakhapatnam in January this year, the 10-m long and 1.3 m wide missile emerged from a pontoon submerged 50 m underwater and breached the surface.Painted black and white so that i can be distinguished in water, it has passed a critical parameter......

In the works is an as yet unnamed longer-legged variant of the k-4 with a 5,000-km range. The 12 m long missile is meant to arm future nuclear submarines.
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4039/20462914.jpg
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/1839/66602302.jpg
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/939/94214502.jpg

Source : India Today Latest Nov 2010 edition released today. Snapshots attached

Interesting thing about the turf war. Maybe we know the truth in it if the Navy discards Dhanush missile for K15/B05. As recently as few months back Dhanush missile was tested from Navy platform. If production started last year and unspecified numbers of K15/B05 missiles were already handed over, if the Navy wants to move over to K15, it could have done it already. Better to take guard against sensationalism while dealing with strategic matters.

The programme for the sea based missiles started in 90s. Names like Sagarika and designations like PJ-02 were used in 90s. PJ-10 is Brahmos. PJ-08 could be K-15. As the serial number indicates the programme started much before Brahmos JV.

As expected, the next missile planned for the SSBN will be of length 12 m, so the next ATV will be bigger than current INS-Arihant and the power reactor might be of higher capacity.

To justify an aero-spike, the dia of the panned 12m missile will be greater than or around 2m. It is most likely a compacted version of Agni-V, i guess.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 24 Nov 2010 03:13

Kanson: as the article itself states, there is a lot of fudging as to the types of missiles and their capabilities. For instance, the "unnamed longer-legged variant of the k-4 with a 5,000-km range" may or may not be Agni-V. If I were to hazard a guess, I would say it is not Agni-V. The Agni family of missiles are pure ballistic, while the K-family seems to be the BGRV variety. That being said, Agni-II-AT was rumored to have a BGRV profile.

All very confusing only.

But no complaining - glad to see some competitive juice flowing between the 2 parallel efforts. But the turf war is worrying & am glad Sandeep Unnithan brought it out in the open. The lack of follow-on tests of Shourya for 2 years is not good. Since the Shourya is a spin-off from a sea-based missile, maybe the team doesn't have much say in testing/induction of land-based variants.

Its not surprising that the sea-based missiles are technically more advanced. Same story as with sub-nuke-reactors, which fathered nuke reactors for power plants. More constrained parameters - so what was built to work under those conditions would be more advanced than the land based counterparts

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 24 Nov 2010 04:31

I doubt there is a turf war because S Unnithan, seems to have mixed up something across the different systems. Few Indian journalists, with due respect are technology specialists like the guys in Brassey's and even AWST, with very experienced guys like Sweetman who report day in and night out on defence, have privileged access across the board, and hence over time, become experts/very knowledgable about systems.

Reason I am saying this is because the Agni & Shaurya type systems are two approaches to the same problem, and both offer pros and cons. To say one is immensely superior to the other, is a conclusion, the current article cannot justify. Both have the same technology bedrocks from DRDL & RCI. They employ the same basic guidance technology, which Unnithan incidentally misses. The INS system for instance, AWST notes, is now being used for everything from Agni to LCA.

They are different in that one, the Shourya is a quasi-ballistic system itself, and the Agni has a terminal stage that maneuvers. Both can hence pose a challenge to, and penetrate ABM systems.

The Agni is more mature, the former is being developed. To ditch a mature system with proven performance & which is being improved to even more impressive standards (read Business Standard interviews with DRDL officials) would be the heights of folly. This is the point Natrajan & others are making.

The Prithvi, is also not as vulnerable as the reports suggest. It has been improved, to simplify the fueling and other issues. I recall reading two key points, that gelled fuel had been developed for the Prithvi itself, and second, it can be fueled and kept in storage for several years. In other words, it need not be fueled on site. So the Prithvi still packs a punch, especially since it has been produced in numbers and has a variety of roles possible, conventional and strategic. Shaurya can take over once production stabilizes, and testing is complete.

srai · Post by **srai** » 24 Nov 2010 08:19

Vipul wrote:First Akash missile system to fill gap in air defence.

...
“BEL is building two Akash squadrons for Rs 1,221 crore,” says Ashwini Datta, BEL’s chairman and managing director. “The ground infrastructure would cost another Rs 200 crore, so each squadron effectively costs about Rs 700 crore. That is not just significantly cheaper than foreign procurement, but also permits better maintenance and allows for continuous technological improvements.”

...

... The number of installations that need protection – each is termed a Vulnerable Area (VA) or a Vulnerable Point (VP), depending upon how large it is – has steadily increased. In a letter written on December 4, 2002, to the MoD, the IAF’s Air Marshal Raghu Rajan pointed out that a study by the military’s apex Chiefs of Staff Committee, ordered by the Cabinet Secretariat, had identified 101 Indian VAs/VPs in 1983. That went up to 122 in 1992; to 133 in 1997; and is now understood to be well above 150.

...

700,00,00,000.0 INR = 153,626,687.15 USD (24-Nov-2010)
[~$150 million USD per Akash squadron] -> Cost of 8 Akash squadrons comes to $1.2 billion USD.

It would seem VA/VP can be translated as ADGES/BADZ.
* Vulnerable Area (VA) -> ADGES
* Vulnerable Point (VP) -> BADZ

So there are 150+ VA/VP (as of 2002), out of which at least 60+ are IAF airbases. That leaves around 90 "non-airbase" VA/VP.

As per article, Akash is "significantly cheaper than foreign procurement". Using this as the low-end basis, here are some rough cost calculations on how much it would cost the IAF (on the lower-end-scale) to purchase enough SAM squadrons to cover all its 150 VA/VP:

100% coverage -> USD $22.5 billion (150 VA/VP * 150 Akash Squadrons @ $150 million each)
80% coverage -> USD $18 billion (120 VA/VP * 120 Akash Squadrons @ $150 million each)
50% coverage -> USD $11.25 billion (75 VA/VP * 75 Akash Squadrons @ $150 million each)
30% coverage -> USD $6.75 billion (45 VA/VP * 45 Akash Squadrons @ $150 million each)

That's a lot of money IAF needs to invest in its SAM defenses over the next two/three decades.

Note: This is just a very simple straight forward calculations to get some rough estimates. More accurate calculations would require distances between the VA/VP, the threat-level/value-asset associated with each of them, and the geography surrounding them.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Nov 2010 09:10

Srai,

I have a major issue with teh charactarasation of the VA/VP as made by the jurno. He is assuming that the IAF will be sitting on its a$$ tweedling its thumb. In case of a crisis. The Fighters as they exist will be more then cabable of dealing with any PAF air raid. So the vulnerability as mentioned by him is not so acute.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 24 Nov 2010 11:29

Prem Kumar wrote:Kanson: as the article itself states, there is a lot of fudging as to the types of missiles and their capabilities. For instance, the "unnamed longer-legged variant of the k-4 with a 5,000-km range" may or may not be Agni-V. If I were to hazard a guess, I would say it is not Agni-V. The Agni family of missiles are pure ballistic, while the K-family seems to be the BGRV variety. That being said, Agni-II-AT was rumored to have a BGRV profile.

All very confusing only.

What we know about Agni missile capabilities? It is reported Agni-II has nose mounted radar and can do manoeuvres at terminal stage. Is it not then can be called as BGRV? That is about Agni-II. We don't know much about Agni-III or V.

The Hindu

With respect to ballistic missiles, Dr. Saraswat said that the DRDO was in the process of developing missiles with both short and long range radars, which were highly manoeuvrable. The key is to integrate the elements of command, control and communication all together and make it happen in real time,” he said.

Just a clue, compare the planned test date of Agni-II plus missile with K4, and try to compare their capabilities, you may understand my statement wrt to Agni-V. Pls note the statement on canisterised Agni-V, it imparts different meaning in different context. Pls also note ,so far, Agni-3 is not reported for canisterisation.
http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/oct/ ... adlier.htm

The Agni-5 will be the first canisterised, road-mobile missile in India's arsenal,
...
"The Agni-5 is specially tailored for road-mobility," explains Avinash Chander, Director, ASL. "With the canister having been successfully developed, all India's future land-based strategic missiles will be canisterised as well"

i.e. Agni-II plus will be canisterised. If i want, i can right away dismiss the portion of article which talks about turf war and one being superior to other as rubbish. But then we are living in error prone world.

But no complaining - glad to see some competitive juice flowing between the 2 parallel efforts. But the turf war is worrying & am glad Sandeep Unnithan brought it out in the open. The lack of follow-on tests of Shourya for 2 years is not good. Since the Shourya is a spin-off from a sea-based missile, maybe the team doesn't have much say in testing/induction of land-based variants.

Turf war is his imagination. Earlier, few years back, the same question was asked, whether we are going to replace Prithvi with solid fuel missile. Saraswat answered, no. In his reply he said, Prithvi was much matured, after fueling it can be stored for 7 yrs and can be extended, just as 10 yrs quoted for wooden round in his article. Further Prithvi is continuously upgraded to impart more capabilities. Easily detectable moving columns are just for adding salt & masala. Without going into the merits of Arun Prakash's classified report, that is completely outdated and has no relevance now. In the mean time, we have moved a lot.

What i'm trying to say is, what he has written in not a technical report but he sprinkled enough journalistic "flavours". Just to stress, earlier he reported the length of K-15 as 7m in his previous article on ATV, now he mentioned the length as 10m. Is he not subjected to errors?

You ask yourself, if DRDO is interested in testing a land based missile why should not it go ahead in delivering the missile for the land forces(?). If there is any turf war as he reported, it is between DRDO and Army, right? What stopped Navy, being the owner of the project (as per him), to go ahead and replace the Dhanush missile with K-15?
If k-15 is strictly a strategic weapon, the whole argument of Navy having something while not provided for the army kind of discussion is absurd. It all going to come under SFC, as they will be fighting as a single unit. Similarly, Agni-II will be retained even in the presence of Agni-II plus missile, so where is the question of preferential treatment to Prithvi or turf war?

Asked whether the Agni-II would be decommissioned after the introduction of the Agni-II Plus, Saraswat stated that both versions would be used. "We require missiles of various ranges. The older version will not be removed from the services," he said.

Read more: Agni-II Plus to be tested in 2 months - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... z16B00nrDJ

P.S. Thanks Karan M for pitching in.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Nov 2010 11:56

My understanding of canistarised system is that is is a soft launch system. If that is the case, then how can any present version of agni be aanisterised as none of then is a soft launch system.

If contanerisation is to be done then the system will have to developed from the ground up.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 24 Nov 2010 12:01

^ Not present Agni, future version of all strategic missiles, that includes Agni-V and Agni-II plus.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Nov 2010 12:15

I was confused while reading the piece.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 24 Nov 2010 12:30

Kanson wrote:^ Not present Agni, future version of all strategic missiles, that includes Agni-V and Agni-II plus.

Or the Agni-II AT as it was called on BR not to long ago. Really misss our old BR missile man and his many technical write ups and diagrams. All the breaking news in those days about missiles was heard first on BR . Anyone have any idea where he is these days or weather he is on some other site?????????????????

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 24 Nov 2010 14:16

What we know about Agni missile capabilities? It is reported Agni-II has nose mounted radar and can do manoeuvres at terminal stage. Is it not then can be called as BGRV? That is about Agni-II. We don't know much about Agni-III or V.

Nose mounted radar is reported to be a terminal phase scene-matching correlation system. These along with control fins and the HAM are primarily provided to achieve higher degree of accuracy for the delivery of the payloads.

Primary function of these systems are for terminal accuracy and for Error compensation for PBV injection post the second stage burn out to achieve desired trim velocity and orientation required to shape the trajectory in desired re-entry conditions. They do provide limited manoeuvrability but it does not impart the re-entry vehicle with Boost-Glide Characteristics.

Geometry of the RV primarily imparts the Boost Glide Characteristic to the projectile.

When considered nose-tip alone: RV of Agni-II has a blunt spherical hemisphere nose tip with a radius of ~6 inch. This will cause faster loss of kinetic energy and velocity because of higher drag. This kind of RV is designed for lower heating and stress. A boost-glide projectile will have to have a long and slender geometry with sharp nose tip to slice and rip through the air retaining its velocity and kinetic energy.

Agni-III when made operational is expected to be canisterized. Amongst other things it will impart opacity to RV/MIRV characteristics. It is highly unlikely that current RV will be the only operation RV.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 24 Nov 2010 15:30

DRDO plans a slew of high-profile launches by December
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/drdo- ... er/715330/

DRDO sources said that on November 25, the nuclear-capable and surface-to-surface single stage Agni-I missile would be test-fired by personnel of the Strategic Forces Command as part of Indian Army's user-training exercise from Wheeler Island on Bay of Bengal.

On December 2, DRDO would test-fire supersonic cruise missile Brahmos that has a range of 290 kms. It was last tested successfully on September 5.

Similarly, the 2,000 km plus range surface-to-surface nuclear-capable missile Agni-II would be test-fired from Wheeler Island between December 8 and 12.

I doubt that the Sept 24 test was plain venella Prithvi-II.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 24 Nov 2010 18:55

He also said the flight-testing of the long-range surface-to-air missile, being jointly developed by India and Israel, would start next year. Ground-testing has just been completed.

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... /117030/on
Business Standart/ PTI

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 24 Nov 2010 18:59

"DRDO plans a slew of high-profile launches by December
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/drdo- ... er/715330/"

Good news. What about a second launch of Shaurya? It was last launched two years ago. Any news on that?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 24 Nov 2010 19:28

dinesha wrote:When considered nose-tip alone: RV of Agni-II has a blunt spherical hemisphere nose tip with a radius of ~6 inch. This will cause faster loss of kinetic energy and velocity because of higher drag. This kind of RV is designed for lower heating and stress. A boost-glide projectile will have to have a long and slender geometry with sharp nose tip to slice and rip through the air retaining its velocity and kinetic energy.

Agni-III when made operational is expected to be canisterized. Amongst other things it will impart opacity to RV/MIRV characteristics. It is highly unlikely that current RV will be the only operation RV.

Nice to know your view. The RV in discussion provides lift and helps in trajectory shaping and the profile is not pure ballistic. As BGRV also does that, though in the conventional stricter sense RV can't be termed that way but giving a wiggle room...so the expression, "Is it not then can be called as BGRV?". Seen in context, it is meant to convey everything came in iteration, every project enhanced the knowledge and nothing came out of the blue.

Can we see Agni-3 in canisterized form for the coming republic parade?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Nov 2010 19:32

a M51 SLBM test type video of the K4 surging out of its water filled pontoon and deploying aerospike and aeroplate before going away in a line of white smoke will soothe everyone.

one awaits that momentous day.