Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
jpremnath
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby jpremnath » 16 Sep 2018 21:11

The pics strategically shows the launch is smokeless for quite a distance before its ass is set on fire.....NICE!!!.....long enough to prevent giving away the location of the launching team I hope...maybe experts here can correct me if I am wrong...

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15553
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2018 21:35

Singha wrote:its hard to comment on size without any human for reference.


Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15553
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2018 21:43

Specifications

Like a mini-Nag

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 310
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Haridas » 16 Sep 2018 21:46

Trikaal wrote:On a side note, do we really need 75000 MPATGM? I was looking at Paki Armour numbers. Wikipedia puts their tanks around 5000 and armoured troop carriers around 3000. Even with a ratio of 5:1, 75000 seems a bit excessive. Maybe some more knowledgeable members can shed some light on Infantry tactics against armoured columns and what numbers are typically required?

Becoz one can't make MPATGM magically appear (relocate from one border post to another) when a soldier at border see's a puki tank. In fog of war where enemy deployment is not known with cetainity, tanks could in attack any point on the border, thus Bharatiya sainik all along the border need MPATGM to neutralize it. 1:30 ratio gives enough probability to block incursion of not just tanks but other light armour vehicles.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4208
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karthik S » 16 Sep 2018 22:03

May be it's to take out buildings and other structures. BTW 5000 is too high a number for pakis, their naya PM is selling off buffalos and cars because they don't have money.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1569
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby srin » 16 Sep 2018 22:28

Given the tortured history of Nag and its seeker (capable of detecting very small temperature differentials), do we really need to use it for bunker-busting roles when there are wire-guided (and presumably cheaper) Milan missiles and also RCLs like Carl Gustavs for short-range targeting ?

Trikaal
BRFite
Posts: 499
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 08:01

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Trikaal » 16 Sep 2018 23:09

Thanks everyone for clarifying. My thoughts were that with how network centric the warfare has become, with satellite imagery and weapon system radars, it wouldn't be that hard to quickly find out where the armoured thrust would come from. But yes, I realize now that it would be quite foolish to completely depend on satellites/information and not arm all battalions. After all, there are many uncertainties in war and one should be prepared for every eventuality. Also the role against bunkers, etc skipped my mind. So thanks again.

Regarding paki armour nos, yes they must be inflated. I took the nos from Wikipedia after all :P

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6929
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Indranil » 16 Sep 2018 23:27

jpremnath wrote:The pics strategically shows the launch is smokeless for quite a distance before its ass is set on fire.....NICE!!!.....long enough to prevent giving away the location of the launching team I hope...maybe experts here can correct me if I am wrong...


Not an expert. But, the primary advantage of soft launch feature of MP-ATGMS is to save the soldier launching the missile from the exhaust and ejecta. Hiding location is a secondary benefit.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15553
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karan M » 17 Sep 2018 04:33

srin wrote:Given the tortured history of Nag and its seeker (capable of detecting very small temperature differentials), do we really need to use it for bunker-busting roles when there are wire-guided (and presumably cheaper) Milan missiles and also RCLs like Carl Gustavs for short-range targeting ?


Srin the Nag seeker has now been fixed. In combat soldiers use whatever they can get, if cheaper alternatives are not available.
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/15 ... taf-anyway

“Things were bad enough that troops had taken to firing expensive Javelin anti-tank missiles at enemy fighters in order to hit them from a safe distance and get at them behind hard cover, such as rock outcroppings and earthen barriers.”

The use of Javelin in particular had become so pronounced by 2012, that Jerry Schlabach, who performed operations research, modeling, simulation, and analysis for the manufacturer Raytheon, briefed the National Defense Industry Association’s annual Joint Armaments Conference on the topic. The powerpoint slides included quotes from troops who had fought in Afghanistan lauding the missile’s ability to break up ambushes, get at insurgents hiding in caves and behind hard cover, and even perform a limited surveillance function thanks to the launch control unit’s infrared optic.


There is also the range differential. The MPATGM has a range of 2.5km vs the Carl Gustaf's 500 mtr range.

Image

As it is fire and forget, it protects the troops from retaliatory fire unlike Milan and Konkurs where the fire team has to remain in place, manually guiding the round onto target.

Point being MPATGM will replace Milan with a superior weapon, is built on technologies specifically developed for our needs after gruelling tests, and will complement the Carl Gustaf.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35981
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby SaiK » 17 Sep 2018 05:39

So, it is in the Javelin range.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35981
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby SaiK » 17 Sep 2018 05:43

Karan M wrote:Specifications

Like a mini-Nag

total weight + including the launcher = 29kg

TOW is 6.2kg max war head. total is 18 to 22kgs depending on war head [but ranged for 3.7km].

----

we have to work on this [reduce both launcher and mpatgm by at least 35% - go composites].

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63341
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 17 Sep 2018 06:12

The tow missile has a very hefty tripod while russians use small ones from prone or sitting position

We need to use some light alloy or composite to reduce the weight of launcher ftom 14kg to 7kg

And missile hopefully shave 2-4kg

That will make it much more portable

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15553
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karan M » 17 Sep 2018 06:14

I doubt the CLU weighs 12 kg, could be a typo and would likely be in the 6-8 kg range.
Not the first time, typos in the brochure etc.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/ ... 72994.html

Maiden trials of Man Portable Anti-Tank Guided Missile successful

Defence sources said two rounds of the indigenously developed missile were tested in two days from Ahmednagar range in Maharashtra.

Published: 17th September 2018 05:07 AM | Last Updated: 17th September 2018 05:07 AM | A+A A-

By Hemant Kumar Rout
Express News Service

BHUBANESWAR: In a major technological breakthrough, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has successfully conducted maiden trials of third generation Man Portable Anti-Tank Guided Missile (MPATGM).

The missile, best in its class in the world, is expected to replace second generation French origin anti-tank guided missile Milan and Soviet semi-automatic wire-guided missile Konkur, which are in service with the Army.

Defence sources said two rounds of the indigenously developed missile were tested in two days from Ahmednagar range in Maharashtra. The missile in operational configuration was flight tested for its full range on Sunday.

After a smooth release from the launch platform, the missile tracked the target all through its trajectory before destroying it with high precision. “Two tests were intended for two different ranges. The missile performed as expected meeting all mission objectives successfully and validated its maximum range capability. The low-weight weapon works on fire and forget principle and is known for its top attack capabilities,” said a defence official from New Delhi.


While proto-seeker front-end and image tracking tests were carried out at Pokhran range last year, pop-out tests were conducted to prove soft launch propulsion prior to the final flight trials.

“Apart from stand alone and warhead testing, the missile had undergone a series of tests including integrated static trial to characterise trust vector control. Performance of all systems and sub-systems were satisfactory during the final trials,” the official added.

Having a strike range of 2.5 km, the missile capable of being fired from shoulder can be used during day and night. It weighs around 14.5 kg to maintain man portability and has a minimum lateral centre and gravity offset.

Effective against both stationary and moving targets, the missile will be deployed in the infantry and parachute battalions of the Indian Army. Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman has congratulated team DRDO, Indian Army and associated industries for the twin success of MPATGM weapon system.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50579
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby ramana » 17 Sep 2018 07:04

Looks like a winner. DRDO appears to.have done a series of tests to validate the missile.

Hope inflated quantity requirements don't force imports.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35981
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby SaiK » 17 Sep 2018 07:11

Singha wrote:The tow missile has a very hefty tripod while russians use small ones from prone or sitting position
..

we do at least need a monopod (pref: tripod) for stability control, given the weight class.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1413
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby ArjunPandit » 17 Sep 2018 07:52

How that we're the strategic partner of USA and have developed this, will we get javelin?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63341
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 17 Sep 2018 08:19

the kornet is 29kg combined per wiki - missile, tube, optics, tripod - 95% teeth and 5% tail
Image

the metis is smaller, foxier and low slung
Image

the TOW seems very bulky in comparison with a massive tripod and battery type things - belongs to the v8 dodge ram school of atgm design
Image

even a syrian jihadi unit has to cart that heavy battery and tripod through the woods and hills
Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63341
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 17 Sep 2018 08:27

the tow tropid is strangely very hefty vs anything else out there. perhaps they had planned some heavier missile or reused it from a past product.
must be a real pain to carry around.

and is such a huge optronic unit needed for a mere 4km shot?

the khan trooper is using a MKI unit more befitting a tank or helicopter

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2231
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby abhik » 17 Sep 2018 09:00

Karan M wrote:
Singha wrote:its hard to comment on size without any human for reference.


https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c ... 7bd12965f9

The DRDO developed one is different from the VEM developed one right?

Also I hope they have factored in a greater range for the missile, all the latest ones (MMP, Javelin etc) advertise a 4-5 km Max range (even if it is in favourable conditions). Else they might be chasing a new goalpost very soon.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6706
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby brar_w » 17 Sep 2018 09:06

Singha wrote:the tow tropid is strangely very hefty vs anything else out there. perhaps they had planned some heavier missile or reused it from a past product.
must be a real pain to carry around.

and is such a huge optronic unit needed for a mere 4km shot?

the khan trooper is using a MKI unit more befitting a tank or helicopter


Tow has been around for 4 decades if not more. A more portable weapon exists in the Javelin since the mid 1990s or so, therefore, no one has really made an effort to demand a complete overhaul of the Tow. Between the Tow, Javelin and the Hellfire most of the US Army's Manportable and vehicle-mounted missions are satisfied.

Image
Last edited by brar_w on 17 Sep 2018 10:20, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15553
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karan M » 17 Sep 2018 09:08

Spike, from wiki:

Spike-MR/LR from ground:[3]
• Missile round: 14 kg (30 lb 14 oz)
• Command & launch unit (CLU): 5 kg (11 lb 0 oz)
• Tripod: 2.8 kg (6 lb 3 oz)
• Battery: 1 kg (2 lb 3 oz)
• Thermal sight: 4 kg (8 lb 13 oz)


Image

The DRDO design seems far more compact and easier to handle.

I suspect part of the reason for the weight is stuff like a heavy tripod and battery for repeated use of the CLU as a surveillance device, as versus relying only on the internal battery.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15553
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Karan M » 17 Sep 2018 09:09

abhik wrote:

The DRDO developed one is different from the VEM developed one right?


Its the same, a JV.

Also I hope they have factored in a greater range for the missile, all the latest ones (MMP, Javelin etc) advertise a 4-5 km Max range (even if it is in favourable conditions). Else they might be chasing a new goalpost very soon.


Developed per IA SQRs. They specify the range etc.

jpremnath
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby jpremnath » 17 Sep 2018 09:41

Indranil wrote:
jpremnath wrote:The pics strategically shows the launch is smokeless for quite a distance before its ass is set on fire.....NICE!!!.....long enough to prevent giving away the location of the launching team I hope...maybe experts here can correct me if I am wrong...


Not an expert. But, the primary advantage of soft launch feature of MP-ATGMS is to save the soldier launching the missile from the exhaust and ejecta. Hiding location is a secondary benefit.


So MPATGM will join both Spike and Javelin as the only soft launched ATGM out there ?

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 648
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby ks_sachin » 17 Sep 2018 10:31

jpremnath wrote:
Indranil wrote:
Not an expert. But, the primary advantage of soft launch feature of MP-ATGMS is to save the soldier launching the missile from the exhaust and ejecta. Hiding location is a secondary benefit.


So MPATGM will join both Spike and Javelin as the only soft launched ATGM out there ?

No.there are others. Protection of the operator is important.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2231
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby abhik » 17 Sep 2018 11:02

The VEM missile definitely looks different than the DRDO one, with the fins swiveling out of the body (like Spike and javelin) instead of being "folded".

Also did the army give specifically give the requirements for this program or are they using the GSQR for the import contract (which by now would be 5-10 years old).

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 648
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby ks_sachin » 17 Sep 2018 11:34

abhik wrote:The VEM missile definitely looks different than the DRDO one, with the fins swiveling out of the body (like Spike and javelin) instead of being "folded".

Also did the army give specifically give the requirements for this program or are they using the GSQR for the import contract (which by now would be 5-10 years old).

Dont get misled by illustrations mate...same same....

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1720
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Picklu » 17 Sep 2018 12:36

Karan M wrote:Developed per IA SQRs. They specify the range etc.


The only predictable part of an IA SQR is that they keep changing with foreign brochure.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1463
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby nam » 17 Sep 2018 13:16

Picklu wrote:
Karan M wrote:Developed per IA SQRs. They specify the range etc.


The only predictable part of an IA SQR is that they keep changing with foreign brochure.


This would have a problem in the 90- early 2000, when we are were within the learning curve. Brochure requirements got us a puematic shocks on Arjun, composites & FBW on LCA. The crazy requirement also got us a ATGM, which is able to hit targets in peak summer in Thar, something which no other ATGM can do.

Given that we are over the learning hump, there is no point developing equivalent capability in tactical weapons, which are available else where.

So I welcome brochure SQR. DRDO should not expect status quo requirements.

kurup
BRFite
Posts: 105
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 14:22

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby kurup » 17 Sep 2018 19:42

Two missile test warning issued from Sep 20 to 23 ,

https://twitter.com/kurup89/status/1041686627947409408

https://twitter.com/kurup89/status/1041687164440928256

The first one could be Pralay and second one looks like Air Launched (Both my guesses).

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35981
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby SaiK » 17 Sep 2018 20:04

robotic personal assistant is one way forward, considering weights and range/target type/profiles - if the design constraint for DRDO that they can't reduce weight - I think, these are the places where private should pitch in - advanced materials, production jigs, etc. bike mounted guns to 4x4 mounted are all options to be considered. it should be a versatile multipurpose pod. standardization on the pods could lead to standardized weapon t-shirt sizes - small, medium, large.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 779
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby nash » 17 Sep 2018 20:30

kurup wrote:Two missile test warning issued from Sep 20 to 23 ,

https://twitter.com/kurup89/status/1041686627947409408

https://twitter.com/kurup89/status/1041687164440928256

The first one could be Pralay and second one looks like Air Launched (Both my guesses).


Air Launch - 330 KM - Brahmos?

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1057
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby dinesha » 17 Sep 2018 20:35

Pakistan watching our missiles
https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/ma ... 93007.html
It is common practice for states to test-fire their missile systems in order to check for their accuracy and reliability and, should there be any limitations, to correct the same. In addition, the threat from adversaries’ incoming ballistic and cruise missiles calls for a system that is capable of tracking and detecting incoming missile systems. Such a system is crucial to a defence system — be it air defence or missile defence — as unless the missile is tracked and detected, interception would not be possible.

In March 2018, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) claimed that it had provided Pakistan with an advanced missile tracking system. The system has been developed by CAS’ Institute of Optics and Electronics by Chinese technicians and engineers. The name of the system is not yet known, probably due to the fact that Pakistan wants to keep this a secret. The system is a large–scale optical tracking and measurement system. Such a system would enable Pakistan to better track enemy ballistic missiles as well as its own missiles. Such precision-tracking systems prevent the missile from veering off into an unplanned trajectory that could result in it being destroyed.

The system comprises four optical tracking telescopes that can carry out automatic tracking, target monitoring and image recording. Usually, such missile tracking systems comprises two telescopes and hence, this system is claimed to be a more sophisticated one.

Each telescope can detect ballistic missiles over a few hundred kilometres. These telescopes are positioned in different locations and timing is synchronised with atomic clocks that can reveal details of the accuracy of ballistic missiles of Pakistan’s own arsenal
— a crucial information that can be used by Pakistan to improve the accuracy and engine performance of its own missiles. However, it is yet unknown whether the Chinese-made system can also track cruise missiles.

Pakistani personnel have already received guidance and training on the system. It is presently being used by the Pakistani army.

The system may carry cinetheodolites that use high-speed cameras and laser-tracking to help collect trajectory and performance data that would be crucial in missile testing and development programmes. These systems also carry infra-red detectors and a centralised computer system.

It is believed that such a system can help speed up Pakistan’s work on its multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs), which Pakistan is said to be developing to evade missile defence systems and which would be fitted on a 2,200-km Ababeel missile.

Zheng Mengwei, a researcher at CAS, has claimed that Pakistan has deployed the system recently “at a firing range” for testing and development of missiles. The CAS has clarified that its system has “surpassed the user’s expectations.” The system is far more advanced and complex than Pakistan’s indigenous systems.

What it means for India
The deal between Pakistan and China took place two months after India test-fired its Agni-V ballistic missile, which has a range of over 5,000 km and is a deterrent against China. The deal was a signal from China that the two-front war for India would only get more complicated with China providing sophisticated weapon systems to Pakistan.

Technologically advanced ballistic missiles on Pakistan’s side would only make it difficult for India to intercept incoming missiles with ballistic missile defence (BMD) systems. On the other hand, its 4-telescope missile tracking system can track missiles from different angles, so that would reduce the chances of losing a target — that is, an incoming ballistic missile.

Moreover, these systems are advanced and sophisticated technologies that further lead to proliferation concerns. China has been known to have sold missile systems to Pakistan in the past. Though unconfirmed, there are also reports that China has assisted Pakistan in developing MIRVs. The sale of ancillary components that support a missile system, like the tracking system, is also a concern. In addition, in the past, China also facilitated missile technology cooperation between North Korea and Pakistan. China and Pakistan are also not members of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and hence such exchanges of crucial systems between the two countries is a sheer act of proliferation.

Sophisticated MIRVs could negate India’s missile defence systems. Though India is also on the verge of acquiring the sophisticated Russian S-400 air and missile defence system, apart from its own missile defence system being developed by the DRDO as well as Israeli systems, there is no guarantee that MIRVed warheads could not slip through all those layers.

As is known, ballistic missile flight trajectory has four phases — boost, ascent, mid-course and terminal phases. With the Chinese-made missile tracking system, it could study the functioning and features and performance of missile systems in detail in every one of these phases, record the data and fathom the reliability and credibility of Indian ballistic missiles.

However, it is not yet unknown if the missile tracking system can track ballistic missiles with sophisticated counter-measures. India has also developed the supersonic BrahMos cruise missile and is working on a hypersonic version of it. Even if Pakistan’s tracking system can track cruise missiles, it is unclear if it can track anything that flies as fast as a BrahMos missile.

India’s BMD programme has also resulted in the development of the Swordfish long-range tracking radar that can track incoming ballistic missiles from long distances. It is an indigenously developed tracking system derived from the Israeli Green Pine radar. New Delhi is also working on its own MIRV technology on the Agni-V missile.

(The writer is an independent consultant specialising in nuclear, missile, and missile defence issues)

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1463
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby nam » 17 Sep 2018 21:08

We fire our missiles on East coast. How will Pak Optical sensor track them from west coast, thousands of km away?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby pankajs » 17 Sep 2018 21:23

The person is shooting from their backside.

Trikaal
BRFite
Posts: 499
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 08:01

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Trikaal » 17 Sep 2018 21:52

Does the Agni series missile deploy counter-measures like flares, dummy warhead, etc.?

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3147
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby suryag » 17 Sep 2018 22:05

Trikaal ji - with all due respect, do you seriously think chaff and flares will be in a warhead? please think through from an engineering perspective a warhead is a projectile at the end of the day and how much can you pack in terms of electronics or mechanical systems travelling at high velocities

Trikaal
BRFite
Posts: 499
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 08:01

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Trikaal » 17 Sep 2018 22:22

Suryag ji, I think some ICBMs carry such countermeasures also called penetrating aids or penaids. I am not very knowledgeable about this but I am reasonably sure this exists. Not sure if anyone has deployed them yet.

Here's a concept video link: https://youtu.be/ARnyIrDg6xk

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 860
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby prasannasimha » 17 Sep 2018 22:39

There are inflatable decoys and "chaff" (not actually chaff but highly reflective wrt radar signature in ICBM's so that the actual RV is difficult to detect or possibly intercept etc

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 860
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby prasannasimha » 17 Sep 2018 22:41

Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63341
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Missiles News & Discussions - May 2017

Postby Singha » 18 Sep 2018 07:27

are these intended to work in upper part of trajectory outside the atmosphere?

a mach20+ RV inside atmosphere will need ceramic heat shield

in space, even these metal coated balloons will fall at same speed as the warheads.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kartik, Neela and 28 guests