Indian Missile News And Discussion

[Arun_S]

[quote name='Bharat_2009' date='10 October 2010 - 11:43 AM' timestamp='1286690758' post='108772']

Agni II (AT) test again postponed for early 2011. It is an advanced missile. Arun sir-can answer this question. Do you think Agni II(AT) is going to be another boost glide missile in our arsenal?



Are we looking at Boost Glide RV for Agni II (AT)?? [/quote]

Yes, I believe Agni-II (AT) will have it pedigree of Agni-II RV that is BG capable.

if yes, then it can compensate on TN warhead (Lack of confidence)

Can it compensate for lack of TN warhead, in the minds of potential challenger?

No.

Firstly destructive effect on target is a function of total tonnage of warheads and how they are dispersed. So lacking TN one requires many times more RV's to deliver smaller yield warhead. Given that modern missile's accuracy is a fraction of even small warheads yield one needs to only deliver enough numbers of RV with accuracy on target much more Hypersonic glide has its own overhead, and together with decoys that requires many more missile rockets. All teh above impose a cost many time more than what one needs if credible TN warhead is available.

[Bharat_2009]

[quote name='Arun_S' date='11 October 2010 - 05:27 AM' timestamp='1286754571' post='108784']

Yes, I believe Agni-II (AT) will have it pedigree of Agni-II RV that is BG capable.





Can it compensate for lack of TN warhead, in the minds of potential challenger?

No.

Firstly destructive effect on target is a function of total tonnage of warheads and how they are dispersed. So lacking TN one requires many times more RV's to deliver smaller yield warhead. Given that modern missile's accuracy is a fraction of even small warheads yield one needs to only deliver enough numbers of RV with accuracy on target much more Hypersonic glide has its own overhead, and together with decoys that requires many more missile rockets. All teh above impose a cost many time more than what one needs if credible TN warhead is available.

[/quote]



Awesome !! We can also say that neither Shourya nor Agni II (AT) can be intercepted. Agni III with a BGRV will be a killer. India's offensive missiles are getting very advanced and we don't need to worry about anti-Ballistic missiles around the world.



Now we need a strong ABM program for intercepting missiles with MIRVs (which is already going on) and ABGM (Anti-boost glide missile program). BGRV technology can spread eventually to China and Pakistan (of course with Chinese help). Scary, if Pakis get BGRVs, door delivered (free of cost) by China in 5 to 10 yrs time, since Pandas are hell bent on suppressing India's growth economically and militarily.

[Guest]

Would talking to China about missile proliferation to Pakistan be a good idea that the netas and strategic thinkers consider pursuing?



After all the US and USSR/Russia did talk about reducing the threat to each other.

This all depends on how sane and sensible the chinese are, their proliferation to Pakistan reeks of their recklessness, even desperation.

[Guest]

A thought just occured to me.



Is it possible that the Agni II AT will be a longer ranged shourya - a Shourya-II?

It'll be capable of delivering love and affection 4000 kms away.

[Bharat_2009]

[quote name='Gagan' date='17 October 2010 - 05:12 AM' timestamp='1287272058' post='108901']

A thought just occured to me.



Is it possible that the Agni II AT will be a longer ranged shourya - a Shourya-II?

It'll be capable of delivering love and affection 4000 kms away.

[/quote]



If you go back to the 23rd and 24th pages, there is some good information on Agni II (AT).



Arun mentioned in one of his comments





"The 1.3 m diameter Agni-2AT could carry a nose faring to carry the single RV along with penetration aids.

For 1,000 Kg payload range will be > 4,000 Km, and

for 600 Kg payload > 6,000 km"



Agni II (AT) is a long range Hypersonic Boost Glide Missile.



I think we are looking at



1. 550 kg FBF warhead with 150 kilotons yield or 350 kg FBF warhead with 50 kilotons yield for range above 6000 km.



It will be really a big achievement by India.



US is also working on something similar under their "Prompt Global Strike" program



"Prompt Global Strike (PGS): We’ll have the surgical hypersonic missile strike to your door, anywhere in the world, in one hour or less…or your pizza’s free"



http://www.defensereview.com/prompt-glob...zzas-free/

[Arun_S]

[quote name='Bharat_2009' date='17 October 2010 - 02:28 PM' timestamp='1287305429' post='108912']



Agni II (AT) is a long range Hypersonic Boost Glide Missile.

[/quote]



The RV of Agni-II (AT) will be Hypersonic BG vehicle. Just to clarify that is quite different from Shourya missile that is hypersonic glide vehicle.



I am doubtful that A-IIAT will be capable of Shourya like flight (reason: its velocity is too high, and cruising with that velocity will require exotic material body for upper stage).



IMHO Shourya-II is a matter of when rather than if.

[Raj Malhotra]

It seems that Agni-IIAT is evolutionary design + insurance for delay of Agni-3-4-5 series. I think Agni-IIAT will mainly be single warhead based while Agni-3-4-5 will MIRV based. I think it is very good idea to pursue two lines rather than putting all eggs in ONE design basket which is the Indian norm due to minuscule budgets.

[Bharat_2009]

[quote name='Arun_S' date='17 October 2010 - 10:19 PM' timestamp='1287333707' post='108916']

The RV of Agni-II (AT) will be Hypersonic BG vehicle. Just to clarify that is quite different from Shourya missile that is hypersonic glide vehicle.



I am doubtful that A-IIAT will be capable of Shourya like flight (reason: its velocity is too high, and cruising with that velocity will require exotic material body for upper stage).



IMHO Shourya-II is a matter of when rather than if.

[/quote]



Thanks for the clarification.





Shourya and Agni II (AT) flight paths are different, but still we don't have to worry about interception of Agni II (AT) with Hypersonic Boost Glide Re-entry vehicle, right.

[Arun_S]

[quote name='Bharat_2009' date='18 October 2010 - 06:13 AM' timestamp='1287362130' post='108931']

Shourya and Agni II (AT) flight paths are different, but still we don't have to worry about interception of Agni II (AT) with Hypersonic Boost Glide Re-entry vehicle, right.

[/quote]

Sure one has to worry! BGRV does not make it impervious to ABM systems. Just that as of now it is difficult. In fact the only thing that can take it down with high probability is airborne laser based ABM.



As Mumbai attack shows India is not under attack by one country only, but more than one at the same time.







[url="http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_16359619"][url="http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_16359619"]Scout in Mumbai Attacks Was DEA Informant, Authorities Say[/url][/url]

[Bharat_2009]

[quote name='Arun_S' date='18 October 2010 - 07:19 AM' timestamp='1287366073' post='108933']

Sure one has to worry! BGRV does not make it impervious to ABM systems. Just that as of now it is difficult. In fact the only thing that can take it down with high probability is airborne laser based ABM.



As Mumbai attack shows India is not under attack by one country only, but more than one at the same time.







[url="http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_16359619"][url="http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_16359619"]Scout in Mumbai Attacks Was DEA Informant, Authorities Say[/url][/url]

[/quote]





Looks like the US cancelled the second airborne laser prototype aircraft.



Secretary of Defense Robert Gates also said that "the ABL program has significant affordability and technology problems, and the program's proposed operational role is highly questionable"





http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-10227341-76.html



They are working on solid state lasers now.

[Bharat_2009]

Shourya Hypersonic Missile Launch with sound. Killer.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFG-gJcNVGA

[Arun_S]

[quote name='Bharat_2009' date='14 November 2010 - 10:24 AM' timestamp='1289709982' post='109232']

Shourya Hypersonic Missile Launch with sound. Killer.



[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFG-gJcNVGA"]http://www.youtube.c...h?v=UFG-gJcNVGA[/url]

[/quote]



Indeed. (I saw that few days ago.)



Also it is more informative, in that one can clearly measure the time duration of booster burn, stage sepration and the main stage burn time. That will allow much accurate ROCKSIM.



The most interesting observations are:

1. Very small (and snubbed by initial chemical) launch flash intensity.
2. The duration when all stages are expended is exceptionally small. Making this beauty very difficult to track from space.

[Guest]

Arunji,



I have some questions.



1. The wikipedia page on TSP's WMD claims that TSP has in development a Ghauri III of 3500 km range and 1800+kg payload, a Shaheen III of 5000+ range with 2200+kg payload and an ICBM of 7500km+range and 4500+kg payload...It looks exaggerated. How far is this true ? To me, these seem like notional missiles, since on and off, I have heard their names for the past several years.



2. As far as I can see, with Agni III , a real (now ready for induction) BM as opposed to notional one, we overtook TSP as far as ballistic missile technology are concerned. This gap will be reinforced with Agni-V. The only way they can get something similar is if China gives them a DF-31/31A. This is unlikely. What is your assesment? Mine is that at most, they would get new north korean liquid fuelled IRBM of 3000-3500 km range based on Soviet R-27. Its payload is however, way inferior to Agni-III.



3. It is interesting to note Bharat Karnad's book which says that the 6000km+ SLBM we are developing is being done by a group different from the one developing A-V. The SLBM, he points out, will be more sophisticated (plus somewhat better range for the same payload going by the figures he quotes).

He never mentions an intermediate SLBM between K-15 and the long range one exceeding Agni-V parameters (he refers to A-V as Agni-IV).



4. From what I hear, RC's fizzle is not RC's. RC is a "research politician" rather than an engineer or scientist. In this sense, he is very different ffrom AK, whohas played a major role at least in reactor building (dhruva),and therefore has some concrete achievements to his credit unlike RC. RC has done no work in weapon design, but got his name attached to this work in order to claim credit for himself. This is what I hear.



5. In any case, Bharat Karnad is very confident that the question is not if, but when, we test again. Our govt. (in spite of maino, etc) position of "unilateral moratorium" rather than CTBT indicates that this confidence that we will again test in the future is well informed. How close to the establishment is BK ? (P.S: I do not include MMS. He is only maino's puppet).



6. you said we are going for the Su-34 to deliver a big credible payload to deter those who wont be deterred by the 50kt max. credible yield on the missiles. What sort of big payload is this ? A TN payload of a very conservative, but crude (and therefore, too heavy for missile) design ? Is the massive payload of 1.5 ton of A-III also for such a thing (BK mentions a 1 MT single warhead in his book. 1 MT for a 1.5 ton payload is really a very poor yield/weight ratio. This is reinforced when we hear from Chandraguptaji that 1.5ton is payload, while throwweight is 1.5 ton +extra 1 ton or so for penetration aids.

[Arun_S]

I knew of this some time ago. and have scans of the magazine pages but found a reference on the web so just linking them for you.



Article has some very useful insights as well some disinformation.



Overall a very good article.



Some observations:



1. K4 tested last January from submerged puntoon at 50 meter depth. I am lead to believe it was tested with BGRV. (that to me the big news and real good achievement)



2. K4 dia is reported to be 1.3 m, 10 m tall, and 20,000 Kg mass. We will know the real diameter when any further information re-confirms it. Teh 20 tonne mass is very unlikely with 1.3 m dia and 10 m total length.



He himself later compares K4, 20 tonne & 10 m length with 3,500 Km range compared to Agni-II with 17, tall and 2 m diameter. Unni should have by now known that Agni-III range is far in excess of 3,500 km touted for the 48 tonne missile.



A smaller K4 missiles range improvement is however very possible due to its BGRV that flies a non-ballistic, non parabolic trajectory.



3. If 1.3 m dia is in deed true then it pedigree of the Agni-IIAT that Ms Thomas is now heading. The 1.3 m dia is a bummer because the very fact that Arihant carries upto 12 Sagarika of certain diameter, it is clear the pressure tube is 2 to 2.2 m dia. It is terribly mismatched design choice to use a 1.3 dia A4 into an optimized nuclear sub.



4. The 10 m length of K4 is OTOH a good news, because that tells me that my Agni-II SL predictions are close to reality.



5. The A5 range of 3,500 km variant of A4 for larger sub will be 12 tall. That really is good news indicating the size of next variant of Arihant.



6. The air launched 2 tonne strategic missile with 200 km range and hypersonic speed will be an interesting spin-off of the BGRV that goes into K4.





7. With new RLG based INS, accuracy is a non-issue for all new Indian strategic missiles including Agni series.

[Guest]

[quote name='Arun_S' date='20 November 2010 - 11:05 PM' timestamp='1290315438' post='109338']

I have scans of the magazine pages but found a reference on the web so just linking them for you.



Article has some very useful insights as well some disinformation.



Overall a very good article.

[/quote]



1. Clearly, 10m length 1.3 m dia seems to small for 20 ton mass (unless there is a very dense propellant).



2. The Jan. test seems to have been more a popup test launching a dummy of similar size, mass etc rather than a test of the missile itself. Correct ?

Difficult to test a 3000 km range missile in secret unless you do it overland.



3. Given that 8 tests of K-15 were completed in 2004-2008, isnt 2010-2017 too long for 8 tests of K-4 ?



4. Also, BK refers to 6000km+ slbm with A-V class range-payload parameters appearing in 2015. So, K-4 must be ready before that, right ? Or is 2017 for the "5000 km" follow-on to the K-4 ?



5. V. K. Saraswat has mentioned canisterize A-II class missile. Probably the land-launched analog of the K-4 is the one. Couls this be the advanced A-II that is soon expected to appear, with the original A-IIAT in cold storage ?

[Bharat_2009]

1. K 15 with BGRV

2. K4 with BGRV

3. K5 SLBM or BGRV??



so, Arihant Class will be armed with K4s and K15s BGRVs





Next 3 nuke subs will be armed with K5 SLBM or BGRV ?? May be for longer range we need SLBMs??



I thought 2017 was wrongly reported for K5s but it looks like Advanced K4 Hypersonic Boost Glide missile can keep Pandas under control and it might even become a China specific missile.



We don't have to worry for now, about arming the missiles with MIRVs (to avoid interception) , since K4 Hypersonic Boost Glide Missile can do the job with a Heavy payload and 200 kilotons yield.



It all comes down to how many K4 missiles can arm Arihant? If they can fit in 2 x K4s in each launch tube, it would be awesome. 8 x K4s per Arihant nuke sub can do the job. I hope the real diameter of K4 is around 1 or 1.1 m.

[Guest]

Arunji,



The article seems to indicate the K-4 test was mainly to test underwater launch - somehow the wording suggested a dummy projectile (or rocket with dummy upper stage) being tested. Such tests happened for soviet SLBMs. A video of such a thing for RSM-50/54 was available on youtube a while ago.



Do you have any other corroborative info that the Jan 2010 K4 test involved a full fledged K4 incl BGRV? How can a "full fledged" test of this type be secretly done ? Wouldnt a NOTAM be given ? What abt detection by uncle, etc ?

[Arun_S]

A wide area NOTAM while there is a long range missile test announched for ITR range will do it. Vizac's vicinity surely has many test ranges. and NOTAMs dont necessiates need for artillery or air test firing range.



If someone does research Indian NOTAMs for that month I am sure one will find multiple NOTAMS for Bay of Bengal and overlapping timings.



BTW full fledged test does not have to be at full range. Even for BGRV. One needs to verify the envelop corner points though.

[Guest]

Arunji,



Agree with ur clarification on NOTAMs. Still, the wording in India today includes the possibility of just a surface breaking test rather than one where everything incl. BGRV was tested for some flight trajectory, right ? This is still ambiguous unless there is further confirmation. Of course, Uncle could have chosen to stay silent on this test even after (likely) detection. All in all, good news.



Isnt 2017 too long for K-4 given that K-15 went from first test to serial production in 4 years ? Or is 2017 for the 6000 km SLBM ? BK says the 6000 km SLBMwll be available by 2015...whom to believe ?



Looks more and more like "haathi ke daant khaane ke aur dikhaane ke aur" as far as strat. prog. is concerned...

[gangajal1]

What is puzzling about the K-series missiles is their payload. Has India developed warheads

for submarine launch? The 1998 tests only involved land based warheads. So what will India's

submarines launch?