12-09-2009, 11:01 AM
[quote name='Arun_S' date='24 November 2009 - 01:06 AM' timestamp='1259045910' post='102751']
While failure analysis will pinpoint exact cause, looking at preliminary news report it appears that it is again a flight control problem, very similar to the last A2 failure.
[/quote]
Arunji,
Do you have any further feedback on the cause for this failure ?
1. If it is the same problem as in the May test, was the cause not pinpointed then ?
2. why do some reports talk of problems after second stage separation after a smooth first stage separation ? This does not match Hemant rout's report of it crashing after 97 km..
3. Is it a fundamental design flaw or more of a quality control problem ?
4. A Hemant Rout article also makes claims about a foreign INS being replaced by a local one which did not perform on par...How far is this likely to be true ?
5. By the look of it, any credible ballistic missile requires around 10 tests, even if 3 are enough for IOC. Afre initial operationalization, continued credibility would require 2-3 tests/year ideally, 1-2 otherwise. When is A-III going to be tested next ? Will this A II failure have a bearing on A III testing ? (Certainly if there is a fundamental issue with our INS...but I do not know if that is true.
6. What about the possibility of BDL having difficulty absorbing the technology for production ? /possibility of sabotage during production ?
7. Possibility of greater degradation of certain components due to aging/handling than anticipated ?
8. Unkil's testing processes seem extremely rigorous. The trident II had 20 land launched development flights...3 were failures and all these occurred after 7-8 consecutive successful flights. Then came sub launched operational tests which had 2 failures among the first four. Seven more were successfully launched after that i.e, 26/31 when it first became fully operational. It has since had around 200 or more consecutive successful launches without a single failure.
The soviet R36M2 in spite of being a modification of the R-36MUttKh, (uprated engines by 10%) had 25/30 record when it went operational.....
The credibility in these cases is from a consistent testing process. That is the key.
While failure analysis will pinpoint exact cause, looking at preliminary news report it appears that it is again a flight control problem, very similar to the last A2 failure.
[/quote]
Arunji,
Do you have any further feedback on the cause for this failure ?
1. If it is the same problem as in the May test, was the cause not pinpointed then ?
2. why do some reports talk of problems after second stage separation after a smooth first stage separation ? This does not match Hemant rout's report of it crashing after 97 km..
3. Is it a fundamental design flaw or more of a quality control problem ?
4. A Hemant Rout article also makes claims about a foreign INS being replaced by a local one which did not perform on par...How far is this likely to be true ?
5. By the look of it, any credible ballistic missile requires around 10 tests, even if 3 are enough for IOC. Afre initial operationalization, continued credibility would require 2-3 tests/year ideally, 1-2 otherwise. When is A-III going to be tested next ? Will this A II failure have a bearing on A III testing ? (Certainly if there is a fundamental issue with our INS...but I do not know if that is true.
6. What about the possibility of BDL having difficulty absorbing the technology for production ? /possibility of sabotage during production ?
7. Possibility of greater degradation of certain components due to aging/handling than anticipated ?
8. Unkil's testing processes seem extremely rigorous. The trident II had 20 land launched development flights...3 were failures and all these occurred after 7-8 consecutive successful flights. Then came sub launched operational tests which had 2 failures among the first four. Seven more were successfully launched after that i.e, 26/31 when it first became fully operational. It has since had around 200 or more consecutive successful launches without a single failure.
The soviet R36M2 in spite of being a modification of the R-36MUttKh, (uprated engines by 10%) had 25/30 record when it went operational.....
The credibility in these cases is from a consistent testing process. That is the key.