Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 17 Nov 2011 15:52

composite 1st stage is probably only seen in a couple icbm like TridentD5 and M51?...its a desired end goal for us as will save a couple tons of weight for sure...also imparting a higher start speed for the 2nd stage and benefits flowing all the way to RV higher speed.

the exoskeleton material of insects , called 'Chitin' is probably where the idea of composites came from...its composed of layer upon layer of material with the ply in different directions for each layer.
some of the insect world for their size have incredible load carrying and jumping abilities....a grasshopper for instance can jump 20 times its body length...a human would have to long jump 40 mts to match that.
likewise fish have superb sensors, sensor fusion and efficient streamlining and locomotion...

mody
BRFite
Posts: 704
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby mody » 17 Nov 2011 16:25

The A5 was always advertised as being same as A3, with only an additional 3rd stage, to increase range from 3,500 Kms to 5,000 Kms.

From all the discussion and what DRDO is saying, it seems the A5 is going to be a whole new beast.
My guess is that the NEW A5 with 3 stages, will actually turn out to be lighter then the 48 ton A3.

The details of the new A5 will be very interesting. If it has a 2 meter diameter like the A3, and feature all the goodies that have been developed in the A4, then it will have a fantastic range or if the range is sought only in the 5,000 Kms to 7,000 Kms, range, then it will be a much shorter missile then the A2, A3 and the A4.

Interesting times these.....

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 17 Nov 2011 16:27

It seems like an aerospike might also help, in addition to the all-composite case.
Source: Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile
All three stages of the Trident II are made of lighter, stronger, stiffer graphite epoxy, whose integrated structure mean considerable weight savings. The missile's range is increased by the aerospike, a telescoping outward extension that reduces frontal drag by about 50 percent.Image

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12128
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 17 Nov 2011 16:29

Even better if A-5 can deliver a 4 tonne payload at 5K Km, Imagine a missile hiding wither in C'garh or Kerala Western Ghats capable of taking out much of attacking Bejing, Shanghai or its Eastern seaboard with a large number of Nukes. Chinese will then understand our concerns regarding Pakis threatening our cities with Nukes.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19570
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Karan M » 17 Nov 2011 16:57

Karan M wrote:Good news.

Now, some updates on LRSAM, SRSAM, Akash Mk2 etc would be great.


My wish (partly) granted!!

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 755088.cms

NEW DELHI: India will test-fire early next year the 70-km Long Range Surface to Air Missile (LR-SAM), which will help the Navy protect its warships from incoming enemy cruise missiles and fighter aircraft.

The LR-SAM is an over USD 500 million joint venture with Israel.

"The missile will be test-fired by January or February next year in Israel," a senior DRDO official told reporters here.

The missiles will be inducted by the Indian Navy for protecting its warships from incoming enemy cruise missiles and fighter aircraft.

The DRDO official said the missile will be ready to be offered for induction into the armed forces after the completion of eight scheduled test-firings.

He said after the initial test, two to three launches of the missiles will be done in India also.

The missile to be produced under the project will also be provided to the Indian Army for its Medium Range Surface to Air Missile (MR-SAM) requirements.

The range of the missile to be provided to the Army will also be 70 Km.


Now for more details on Akash MK2 and SRSAM!! Plus PDV!!

Interesting they don't mention the range of the IAF version above. If the IAF chooses a booster as on the Barak-8 ER version it'd be interesting, there were reports that the Barak 8 ERs range would be 120 km .

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/lebourge ... er_jpg.jpg

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby shiv » 17 Nov 2011 18:58

Here look at this all Pakidiots. Woman. Short. Dark. Rice eater. Kafir. Guaranteed to chew off your tight asses you donkeys. Enjoy..

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=16716
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WDofeg0i1LI/T ... TESSY1.jpg

Bangalore: Her big-ticket nuke-toy Agni-IV hit the target bang in 20 minutes after cruising over 3,000 km from the launch pad in Wheeler Island on Tuesday, November 15. Inside the Block Office (a special concrete shelter that can withstand a nuclear explosion or the impact if a missile misfires and falls over it) 48-year-old Tessy Thomas, Project Director, Agni-IV, was closely tracking her surface-to-surface pet, obediently following the trajectory as per the text book plans. Moments later, India’s first woman scientist to head a sensitive missile project broke down with joy. Very few knew that she had finally kept her word given to her mother Kunjamma Thomas, a qualified teacher, who lives alone in Allapuzaha (Kerala)

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby rajanb » 17 Nov 2011 19:30

^^^^ Shiv-loved the pakiidiots. Thanks.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Vipul » 17 Nov 2011 20:29

5,000-km range Agni-5 to be test fired in February 2012.

Buoyed by the successful test- firing of the Agni-4, DRDO will launch the 5,000-km version of the nuclear capable missile after three months as part of strengthening India's deterrence capabilities.

"Agni-V is presently undergoing integration and we may test fire it by the end of February next year. It is right on schedule and the successful test of Agni-4 will prove to be a building block in development of this missile," DRDO Chief V K Saraswat said here today.

Addressing a press conference here, Saraswat talked about India's missiles programme and developing effective deterrence capability against adversaries.

Yesterday, DRDO had successful test fired nuclear capable Agni-4 missile from a test range in Wheeler Island off Odisha coast.

"Agni-4 belongs to DRDO's flagship programme to make the country self-reliant in missile technology. We have now graduated to a higher level of missile technology with more capable versions of the earlier missiles such as Agni-1 and Agni-2," he said.

Talking about Agni-4's capabilities, he said, "Earlier missiles were based on rail mobile launchers which needed an exhaustive infrastructure support. But Agni-4 is based on road mobile launchers. It gives a much higher level of flexibility and is a maintenance free system. It is better in terms of accuracy and performance as well."

This missile is better than previous ones in various parameters such as terminal accuracy, payload delivery capability and also in terms of maintenance and flexible operational deployment, he said.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7487
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Prasad » 17 Nov 2011 20:55

Singha saar,
I just had a look at a map of the IOR and from wheeler island to antartic continental shelf is > 10,000 KMs. Lots and lots of room to test out new ranges. It is our ocean no? :)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54513
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 17 Nov 2011 20:56

Dilbu the headline is not correct. She is Aditi (mother of Agni) not Agni Putri. This version of Agni has realised it full potential for a two stage single warhead missile.

The writer needs to get his Indian theogony right. Indidiot.

The grill or rather truss design is used on Russain missiles/rockets for venting the second stage motor at ignition. The events are in millisecs and not seconds. That would be too late leading to fratricide.

Singha, Step back and look at all the payloads that were tested so far from the Agni TD-I on wards ( a whole range of them: plain ballistic, RV with Fins and HAE, RV without fins but HAE, RV's of different weights 1.5 t, 1t and 800kg so on ) and then correlate that to the BK talk. Each RV is a different weapon and all are being proofed. Further the 3K degree C is also an indicator of thermal and structural margin.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby RamaY » 17 Nov 2011 20:59

arijitkm wrote:Sirji, as per your logic the velocity of Agni IV is
174.928556845359 / kms


Thank you. I stand corrected.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54513
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby ramana » 17 Nov 2011 21:01

Why don't you guys look up a rocket simulator on the web and plug in the info instead of using zero order equations?

8)

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 17 Nov 2011 21:16

what about ins/mings for petals? do they individually be having the flex nozzle [which I guess, must in the sense if the spread of targets are 1000 kms apart].

I am sure these devices are already part of the shroud>petal>config miniaturized, and providing more redundant feeds to various stages [reuse of petal mings to stages].

Am I thinking correct?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 17 Nov 2011 21:33

aerospike topped with aeroplate is a must. the M51 uses it too, all modern SLBM do...I have not seen it used in land based Satan type ICBM yet albeit my data is from youtube onlee and not much good footage exists of these puppies leaving the cansister. in M51 and trident is clearly visible.
maybe compact 1st stage of SLBM have more mandatory need for this. SS-18 satan had plenty of BHP and space to play with :shock:

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 17 Nov 2011 21:50

sometime back I have read some single stage to orbit was being considered or in design by nasa using aerospiked engine/nozzle.

Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Altair » 17 Nov 2011 21:54

Kanson wrote:http://business-standard.com/india/news/drdo-plans-early-entryagni-4-into-arsenal/455781/


Saraswat also explained that the Agni-4 represented the final defeat of the technology denial regime that the West imposed on India from 1974 onwards. India, he said, could no longer be blocked from developing a world-class nuclear deterrent.

No technology control regimes can stop usfrom making missiles in this class. We need to thank the technology sanctions for enforcing upon us a degree of self-reliance where we no longer need imports,” said Saraswat.

The DRDO chief praised a range of Indian entities for defeating western sanctions. Defence PSU, MIDHANI developed “maraging steel” for missile components; Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd (KMML) produces 500 tonnes per year of badly needed titanium; the blockage on Indian imports of composite carbon fibre — essential for the Agni’s heat-resistant nose cone — was defeated. “We have made our own carbon fibre which is better than anything that is available from those foreign countries”, said Saraswat.



The venom cannot be hidden by semantics however refined they are. These people hate US and other western countries more than any hardcore BRFites ever can including CRS! :mrgreen:
Bravo guys You make us proud. Induct Agni 5 by end of next year and deploy them all over India in secret bunkers.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 17 Nov 2011 22:06

we need the same bravo team for kaveri++. i am sure they can do this without any firang help. i am only begging here.

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby sohamn » 17 Nov 2011 22:19

Singha ji, i guess the chrome plating (supposedly patented) technology does the same thing as the aero spike at least that's what DRDO claims.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 17 Nov 2011 22:45

Perhaps, but how does the black carbon-carbon re-entry vehicle have chrome plating on it?

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3840
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby hnair » 17 Nov 2011 23:08

er, guys, aerospike is not a "must" for all ICBM range missiles and infact might not be really optimal. Infact it is just an ingenious workaround for a problem where lengths of missiles matters hugely, while still taking care of lower atmosphere aerodynamics. Thus aerospike is a solution used till now only for SLBMs because they dont have the luxury of having long aerodynamically optimal pinocchio noses inside shorter submarine tubes. Land missiles (though made as short as possible), dont have that insane shortening of length design challenge and can have an aerodynamically longer nose.

eg: MX is a contemporary of Trident and dont have it. You can sort of figure out the design limitations that submarines put on Trident. MX designers did not have that limitations and hence has a pointier nose, instead of the no-nose of Trident. That is where some bright-sparks thought of using the aerospike that deploys *after launch*.

The french SLBM is even more blunter nosed. It is like they slapped the MRVs around a really fat third-stage using a rubber band and but a barrel over it. But thanks to Aerospike that barrel nose works. I guess their third-stage does not have the secret sauce of the Trident.

But nevertheless both these designs solved the problem of collapsing the third-stage and payload area into just one efficient annular design.

Coming back to India, only the Fat Lady of Arihant *might* have it, depending on whom we are sending messages to. I would be happy to see it, though I think we might not. Yet. Agni V would probably be more conventional looking, as till now all indicators are of a land based mijjile and we can send our usual ambiguous messages out (50,000 ton warhead for 50 meters etc) despite a third stage.


shiv wrote:Here look at this all Pakidiots. Woman. Short. Dark. Rice eater. Kafir. Guaranteed to chew off your tight asses you donkeys. Enjoy..


That is right. Ain't no one puts Tessy-chechi in a corner and live to say that story 8) 8) 8)
Last edited by hnair on 17 Nov 2011 23:11, edited 1 time in total.

A Nandy
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 405
Joined: 06 Sep 2009 23:39

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby A Nandy » 17 Nov 2011 23:11

So, after the Agni V test in February, what next ? Are there already any plans for crossing the 5500 km mark ? :)

Or will the focus shift to other aspects of missile development ?

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 17 Nov 2011 23:23

hnair wrote:er, guys, aerospike is not a "must" for all ICBM range missiles and infact might not be really optimal. Infact it is just an ingenious workaround for a problem where lengths of missiles matters hugely, while still taking care of lower atmosphere aerodynamics. Thus aerospike is a solution used till now only for SLBMs because they dont have the luxury of having long aerodynamically optimal pinocchio noses inside shorter submarine tubes. Land missiles (though made as short as possible), dont have that insane shortening of length design challenge and can have an aerodynamically longer nose.
---

And that insane shortening of the nose happens for MIRV fairings as well, be it for SLBMs or ICBMs This isn't restricted to submarines although the problem is exacerbated for the space constraints of a submarine.

Agni-V might not have an aerospike - this is not only true but it is the most probable case. I didn't claim otherwise. The BR roadmap for Indian missiles ends at Agni V only because not much has been discussed beyond it. We know almost nothing about Surya. All I'm saying is that there are many more optimisations to be had like an all-composite case, like MIRVs, like aerospikes for MIRV fairings, etc.
---------------------
Added later:

hnair, I'll concede that an aerospike is not necessary for a ICBM. Here's a picture of the Peacekeeper missile. They just use a large shroud :) The tradeoff in the SLBM is that the third stage motor takes up space which could have been used to accommodate more RVs. An ICBM can always be made longer to avoid that tradeoff.

Image
FAS: LGM-118A Peacekeeper
Last edited by PratikDas on 18 Nov 2011 05:00, edited 4 times in total.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby member_20317 » 17 Nov 2011 23:30

What are the chances that Agni IV is only a prelude to Agni V. Basically a project with low risk of loosing Political capital, a secret test for Agni V ki atma? Logical extension being Agni IV may not even be inducted. I mean what else could explain the preponement of Agni V test.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 17 Nov 2011 23:37

I guess we do need a 2 staged dragon killer. why waste 3 stages for the dragon?

Bharath.Subramanyam
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 28 Jul 2009 00:17

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Bharath.Subramanyam » 18 Nov 2011 06:18

BVR air-to-air missiles are effectively useless. BK has personally advised GoI in the past to strengthen in other ways, not BVR.



Why is BK saying BVR air-to-ari missiles are useless? Aren't we developing 'astra' for this? I have read that these kind of missiles go upto 4 Mach while a fighter like F-22 can go upto 2 Mach. So a BVRAAM should hit even a fast 4th generation fighter, correct?

Once we develop 'astra' we should be able to knock out Paki Solahs once they cross the border, isn't it?

Mods: Do you want me to take this question to some other thread?

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3012
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Kanson » 18 Nov 2011 08:37

Asked by Business Standard whether the Agni-4 was qualitatively in the class of Pakistan’s ballistic missiles (the Shaheen and the Ghauri), Saraswat responded, “Agni-4 compares with what is available [globally] in its class of missiles like the Pershing (US missile)… I am talking in terms of technology, not in terms of range, as Pershing missiles have higher range… it meets global standards.”

Saraswat may have mixed up his facts, since the Pershing II, the US ballistic missile he likened the Agni-4 to, is a decommissioned 1980s missile with a range of just 1,800 kilometres. But his claim, as evident from his other remarks, was that the Agni-4 met global benchmarks.


Too much is made on this where the message is simple. Isn't this the job of journo to make too much over nothing?

It is clear that from the beginning, he is referring to class of missiles like Pershing. Why is he referring to that class? Because Agni-IV falls in that class, as per him. What was that class? It depends upon whom you are asking? Russians and Chinese have their own classification which differs from US. The class he is referring to, in this context, is more in common wrt technology than range. To clarify, he adds, "Pershing [class of] missiles have higher range". Only smart alec types pick those statements to say he don't know facts.

Next one, why is he referring to decommissioned 80's missile? If you like to compare your missile, you compare those to one having high standards. US and Russia are established missile powers. Under treaty obligation there is no new missiles recently developed of that class by these entities, further, China, Pakistan, NK and Iran who also develop missiles can't be taken as epitome in missile development to compare your missile with. So it is obvious that he had to refer to '80's decommissioned missile'.

But his claim, as evident from his other remarks, was that the Agni-4 met global benchmarks.
Finally, some enlightenment.

From comment's section,
Broadsword said...

@ Anonymous 12:32

It must be nice to be as blindly patriotic as you are, but the simple fact is that ever since India and Pakistan began structuring their nuclear deterrents, Pakistan has had better missiles. They had solid fuel missiles long before we did... and the fact that Chinese and North Korean assistance helped them along is irrelevant. When you have a nuclear-tipped Pakistani missile coming down on your head, it does little good to start squealing, "Hey, you can't fire that at me, it's based on a North Korean missile!"

As far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out on whether we have caught up with the Pakistanis in terms of accuracy, reliability, command and control systems, and maintainability. Only time will tell.

17 November 2011 15:16
To an intelligent gent like Broadsword, it is not very hard to understand that, whether we have caught up with Pakistanis in missile development or not, it doesn't stop a Pakistani missile coming down on your head. Our superior or inferior missile doesn't stop Pakistani missile reaching their intended target. Hope it clears your head!(pun intended)

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Nov 2011 09:03

pershing2 was reknowned for its high accuracy and mobility. it had radar map of target for 30m CEP, steerable vector nozzle, and both stages had composite casing. a compact missile on a high mobily tracked launcher
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 966%29.png

Rus may have caught up with the pershing2 level by means of Iskander deployed in the 2000s....Rus still has problems getting a compact SLBM into service and hence the big Sturgeon SLBM on the bulky Delta4 boats remains in service.

lets face it - Khan sets the pace and defines the playing field in terms of compactness, lightness, sophistication....and they use small warheads like scalpels.

bmallick
BRFite
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 20:28

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby bmallick » 18 Nov 2011 09:12

Bharath.Subramanyam wrote: I have read that these kind of missiles go upto 4 Mach while a fighter like F-22 can go upto 2 Mach. So a BVRAAM should hit even a fast 4th generation fighter, correct?


Bharath, its not that simplistic. What you are visualizing is as if the missile is chasing the fighter, while both are flying straight, hence the higher speed missile would catch up. However such straight line chases never happen in real life. Once the missile is launched and the fighter gets aware of it, the fighter would start maneuvering hard, to break the missile lock. All such maneuvering would mean the missile as well as the fighter would be bleeding energy, which would have to be sustained by burning more fuel. Now assuming the missile is still able to maintain lock, it might hit the fighter, if it does not run out of fuel first. So its not a case of simple speed.

Moreover, for quite a few long range AAM's main rocket runs out much before the missile is any way near to the fighter, hence max speed is met much before final engagement. In such cases fast maneuvering would bleed the stored kinetic energy, with the missile unable to make it up, because fuel is kaput. Hence the requirement of missiles like Meteor, whose ramjet motors burn all the while, thus providing energy in the end game.

vasu_ray
BRFite
Posts: 550
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 01:06

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby vasu_ray » 18 Nov 2011 09:19

Q. Any plans on building the Brahmos with composites? even as a Tech Demo

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby shiv » 18 Nov 2011 09:29

bmallick wrote:
Bharath.Subramanyam wrote: I have read that these kind of missiles go upto 4 Mach while a fighter like F-22 can go upto 2 Mach. So a BVRAAM should hit even a fast 4th generation fighter, correct?


Bharath, its not that simplistic. What you are visualizing is as if the missile is chasing the fighter, while both are flying straight, hence the higher speed missile would catch up. However such straight line chases never happen in real life. Once the missile is launched and the fighter gets aware of it, the fighter would start maneuvering hard, to break the missile lock. All such maneuvering would mean the missile as well as the fighter would be bleeding energy, which would have to be sustained by burning more fuel. Now assuming the missile is still able to maintain lock, it might hit the fighter, if it does not run out of fuel first. So its not a case of simple speed.

Moreover, for quite a few long range AAM's main rocket runs out much before the missile is any way near to the fighter, hence max speed is met much before final engagement. In such cases fast maneuvering would bleed the stored kinetic energy, with the missile unable to make it up, because fuel is kaput. Hence the requirement of missiles like Meteor, whose ramjet motors burn all the while, thus providing energy in the end game.


To add to what Mallick says I have an additional 2 paise.

The term BVRAAM is "self explanatory" and was coined to refer to missiles that can be used against aircraft "Beyond visual range"

The concept sounds good, especially if you use them in the way the US and Europeans used them to enforce "no fly zones" over weaker nations. Have a few AWACS monitoring the airspace you want to sterilize. The miunte anything is detected, shoot it down with a few BVRAAMs. Simple, Of course the hit probabilty and range of a BVRAAM will vary with whether the adversary's aircraft is flying towards you or away from you. Flying towards you - you may be able to detect him at 100 km and hit his 60 km. Even then one missile may not be enough. Two is better. If is is flying away from you fast - the BVRAAM may not catch up even if he is 30 km away when you fire off your missile.

Al this is fine to "sterilize" airspace that you can dominate. But imagine a war in which an Indian AWACS is monitoring airspace in which there are 15 Indian aircraft on a known path, and 8 unknown aircraft from the Chinese/Paki side. Are those unknown aircraft Chinese or Paki aircraft or are they Indian aircraft that have been pushed off course by interceptors as they return from an earlier attack. How do you identify them? If they are Indian aircraft trying to escape from a tricky situation and low on fuel they may not want to respond or give off any signals that would locate them. Do you simply shoot them all down with BVRAAM?

So BVRAAMs have some advantages. Personally I think they are needed - especially really long range ones to get enemy AWACS aircraft deep inside their territory. So I disagree that BVR are unnecessary. BK is wrong IMO. Who is BK in this context? Not Bharat Karnad again? :eek:

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby SaiK » 18 Nov 2011 10:14

A mach 4 BVR given the right target range [let us say, the enemy fighter can only detect the missile at 30km, and needs delta time to turn back and burn], will do the kill no matter how much ever dodging an after-burning fighter can do. So, stealthy (passive mid-course guidance) BVR will definitely help. As shiv points, AWACS and refuelers are easy targets. It would further help to fire the target from above 50kft alt.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 704
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby mody » 18 Nov 2011 10:47

BVR missiles and SAM's use very similar technology. So it is quite astonishing when I hear claims that SAM's are very effective, while BVR missiles are not. If a radar guided Akash can have a hit probability of more then 90%, when two missiles are fired simultaneously, I would assume even the radar guided R27 when ripple fired should have a hit probability of atleast 80%+.
Here I am not concerned about the fact that Radar guided R-27 puts the firing aircraft at a disadvantage as it has to have its radar locked on the target for the duration of the missile flight. I am only trying to stress on the similarity of technology in terms of seeker, range, speed etc. of SAM's and BVR missiles.

Similarly fire and forget missiles like the MRSAM that we are developing are sought desperately to provide air defense, then how come missiles like the R-77 are not considered to be equally effective in the air to air domain.

neerajb
BRFite
Posts: 830
Joined: 24 Jun 2008 14:18
Location: Delhi, India.

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby neerajb » 18 Nov 2011 10:51

shiv wrote:Al this is fine to "sterilize" airspace that you can dominate. But imagine a war in which an Indian AWACS is monitoring airspace in which there are 15 Indian aircraft on a known path, and 8 unknown aircraft from the Chinese/Paki side. Are those unknown aircraft Chinese or Paki aircraft or are they Indian aircraft that have been pushed off course by interceptors as they return from an earlier attack. How do you identify them? If they are Indian aircraft trying to escape from a tricky situation and low on fuel they may not want to respond or give off any signals that would locate them. Do you simply shoot them all down with BVRAAM?


IFF is there on almost every AD platform right down to simple missiles like Stinger. IFF has it's own limitations but still, it's not the duty of the target to broadcast that it is friendly but the targetting system to identify the hostile. I know 99.99% people on this board understand what IFF is, nevertheless a good read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identifica ... end_or_foe

Cheers....

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 18 Nov 2011 10:59

time for a new thread.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests