• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Indian Missile News And Discussion
#1
I think it is important to have a separate thread for Indian missile system, since it is an important leg of Indian triad of nuclear deterrence. Missile are also important tactical weapons.



With the recent failures of an otherwise assumed to be reliable Agni-2 missile system has seriously undermined Agni-2 deterrence value.



[url="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Agni-II-missile-fails-to-clear-night-trial/articleshow/5262395.cms"]Agni-II missile fails to clear night trial[/url]

Quote:TNN 24 November 2009, 12:28am IST



BALASORE: India's nuclear-capable intermediate range Agni-II missile, test-fired for the first time after sunset on Monday, reportedly failed to get the desired results.



The Army test-fired the surface-to-surface Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) from Wheeler�s Island, Bhadrak district, around 7.50pm.��The liftoff and the first stage separation was smooth. But it faltered just before the second stage separation and behaved erratically, deviating from its coordinated path. Further analysis is on to ascertain the cause,�� said a source.



The entire trajectory of Monday�s trial was tracked by a battery of sophisticated radars, telemetry observation stations, electro-optic instruments and a naval ship.



The launch, originally scheduled in the first week of this month, was deferred due to some technical snags in its pneumatic system. Though the snags were rectified, another glitch surfaced during Monday�s test, leading to the fiasco, the source claimed.



The nuclear capable 2,000-km-plus range missile has a length of 20 meters, a diameter of one meter, weighs 17 tonnes and can carry a payload of around 1,000 kg. It was first tested on April 11, 1999.



The test launch was significant from India's strategic point of view because for the first time since the beginning of DRDO�s missile development programme, a missile was put under trial during night. The user trial was conducted by Army officials while scientists from DRDO were present to provide necessary logistical support.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



[url="http://www.timesnow.tv/Agni-II-missile-fails-to-clear-night-trial/articleshow/4332825.cms"]Agni-II missile fails to clear night trial[/url]

Quote:24 Nov 2009, 0859 hrs IST

In a set back for India's missile program, the nuclear-capable Agni-II missile, which was to be test fired for the first time at night on Monday (November 23), failed to get the desired results.



The Army test-fired the surface-to-surface Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) from Wheelers Island, Bhadrak district, around 7.50pm on Monday.



According to sources, the liftoff and the first stage separation was smooth. But a snag developed just before the second stage separation and the missile deviated from its coordinated path.



The test launch was significant from India's strategic point of view as it was for the first time since the beginning of DRDOs missile development programme, a missile was tested in the night.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[url="http://ibnlive.in.com/printpage.php?id=105847&section_id=3' target='_blank'"]DRDO admits N-capable Agni-II failed night testing[/url]

Quote:CNN-IBN

BIG SHOW: Agni II missile is seen in a rehearsal for the Republic Day Parade in New Delhi.



New Delhi: The first-ever night firing of the Agni-II Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) on Monday failed, admitted Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).



DRDO is investigating the cause of the failure.



The nuclear capable missile was test-fired on Monday night from the Wheeler Island off Orissa coast.



Agni-II was test-fired from a mobile launcher intended to train the end-user, the Strategic Force Command of the Indian Army, to operate the missile in adverse conditions.



Even though the missile took-off smoothly and reported no glitch in the first stage separation, the missile appeared to have failed to meet the desired results mid-way at the second stage separation, DRDO sources said.



Strategic Forces Command conducted the test with necessary logistic support by various ITR laboratories and DRDO scientists.



The purpose of the test was to validate procedures for night firing.



The indigenous weapon is a two-stage solid propelled ballistic missile and has a weight of 17 tonnes and length of 20 metres. It can carry a payload of one tonne over a distance of 2,000 km.



Agni-II was developed by Advanced Systems Laboratory along with other DRDO laboratories and integrated with Bharat Dynamics Ltd, Hyderabad with the private sector participating in a big way in its production.



The missile is part of the Agni series which included Agni-I (700 km range) and Agni-III (3,500 km range). Agni-I was already inducted and Agni-III is in the process of induction, the officials added.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
  Reply
#2
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.
  Reply
#3
<b>Agni-II fails to meet mission parameters</b>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Tue, Nov 24 11:52 AM

Balasore (Orissa), Nov 24 (PTI) The first-ever night trial of India''s nuclear capable Agni-II Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) has failed to meet all the mission parameters, defence sources said today. "The test-fire, conducted from the Wheeler Island off Orissa coast last night, could not achieve all the desired results and pre-coordinated parameters," they said after a thorough analyses of the mission data.

The two-stage indigenously developed Agni-II missile, with a range of 2000 km, which was test-fired from a mobile launcher, was intended to train the end-user, the Strategic Force Command of the Indian Army, to operate the sophisticated missile in adverse conditions. However, after a smooth take-off and proper first stage separation, the sleek missile appeared to have failed to meet the desired results mid-way at the second stage separation, the sources said.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
  Reply
#4
<b>Agni-II night trial ends in failure</b>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Sources in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) told The Hindu that some malfunction occurred after 60 seconds when the missile reached an altitude of 20 km, following which it nosedived into the sea.

The fact that the first stage, a replica of the SLV-3 first stage, functioned well showed it was robust. “Something went wrong after the first stage,” the sources said.

<b>The malfunction, probably in the control system for a few seconds, affected the normal thrust and resulted in the missile losing its speed. The vehicle became uncontrollable subsequently. The problem might have occurred either during separation or ignition of the second stage. </b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
  Reply
#5
<b>Agni-II's night trial is a flop show</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The first-ever night trial of India's nuclear capable Agni-II Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile has failed to meet all the mission parameters, defence sources said on Tuesday.
"The test-fire, conducted from the Wheeler Island off Orissa coast on Monday night, could not achieve all the desired results and pre-coordinated parameters," they said after a thorough analyses of the mission data.

The two-stage indigenously developed Agni-II missile, <b>with a range of 2000 km</b>, which was<b> test-fired from a mobile launcher,</b> was intended to train the end-user, the Strategic Force Command of the Indian Army [ Images ], to operate the sophisticated missile in adverse conditions.

However, after a smooth take-off and proper first stage separation, the sleek missile appeared to <b>have failed to meet the desired results mid-way at the second stage separation</b>, the sources said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
  Reply
#6
[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.
  Reply
#7
[url="http://www.indianexpress.com/news/drdo-mission-to-promote-technology-for-lowintensity-conflicts/552392/2"]‘Agni II test will be conducted again’[/url]



Quote: Dec 10, 2009 at 0502 hrs



He said the DRDO would aim for self reliance but only if it was cost-effective. “We would have to invest Rs 300- Rs 400 crore in critical technologies to enhance our self reliance. Sometimes it is not worth it as it is not cost effective. The first priority of the DRDO is to focus on technologies that have been denied to us,” Saraswat said.



‘Agni II test will be conducted again’



Saraswat said that the Agni II ballistic missile test that failed recently would be conducted again. It was a result of poor manufacture of components. “Certain components were of poor quality and we have already alerted the manufacturers about it. The test will be conducted soon,” he said.



Redeeming this double failure will take time for it require multiple successful tests to prove system reliability.
  Reply
#8
Sorry for late reply, I was unable to access the forum because of all kinds of connectivity problem.





[quote name='Kritavarma' date='09 December 2009 - 11:09 AM' timestamp='1260336718' post='102847']

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 ? [/quote]

Trouble shooting flight failure on a missile that is released to user service is more troublesome because it is not as intensely instrumented. Analysis from limited data often lead to many failure modes and in the eventual parato analysis some of have lower probability thus no deeper scrutiny, specially if it is a multi variable problem. So it is possible that it is not caught in first fix.





Quote: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 ?

If it was only INS it will be easy to identify and fix, but it is also very very unlikely that it was only an INS problem, more likely to be a compound problem. Both the failed tests were near Max-Q portion of flight trajectory, and that generally points to control system failure. And Control system spans many subsystems ranging from control laws (software), sensors and actuators.



Quote: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 ?


This should open the eyes of powers to be who have till now believed in regime that involves way fewer tests to proof the design, and even lesser proofing the inventory and manufacturing process. The mentality of international approbation "Log Kya Kahaingay" is suicidal.



IOC after 3 successful flight test of Agni-III is IMVHO OK, what is not OK is if that IOC is not quickly followed up by another 6 tests from initial production stock.







Quote:6. What about the possibility of BDL having difficulty absorbing the technology for production ? /possibility of sabotage during production ?

Thoroughness is not an national trait of Indian psyche and is more pronounced in PSU. Strategic weapons/system can't survive such process, and they must tighten control if they products guarantee national security. There is cost to it and there is no two ways to paying that cost.



Quote:7. Possibility of greater degradation of certain components due to aging/handling than anticipated ?

This I initially thought could be a likely possibility. And one can guard against it by only doing regular test from inventory stock. But given recent statement by Shri Saraswat, this is less probable.



Quote: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.

Your said it.



Familiarity breeds contempt,

Testing breeds confidence !
  Reply
#9
[quote name='Arun_S' date='10 December 2009 - 01:37 PM' timestamp='1260473359' post='102878']

Sorry for late reply, I was unable to access the forum because of all kinds of connectivity problem.







Trouble shooting flight failure on a missile that is released to user service is more troublesome because it is not as intensely instrumented. Analysis from limited data often lead to many failure modes and in the eventual parato analysis some of have lower probability thus no deeper scrutiny, specially if it is a multi variable problem. So it is possible that it is not caught in first fix.







If it was only INS it will be easy to identify and fix, but it is also very very unlikely that it was only an INS problem, more likely to be a compound problem. Both the failed tests were near Max-Q portion of flight trajectory, and that generally points to control system failure. And Control system spans many subsystems ranging from control laws (software), sensors and actuators.



[/quote]



1. But still, that the INS could underperform is worrying. Does that not have implications for A-III, Shourya, unless INS underperformance was due to extreme abnormal conditions caused by other circumstances. Saraswat's remarks seem to hint at quality control with some mechanical interfaces.



2. Regarding Max-Q trajectories, was none of the development flights done on such a regime ? Very unlikely. Surely, one development flight would have been on a max-Q trajectory.



3. Sanjay on BR says that he has sources telling him that A-II was not ruggedized while A-III has been ruggedized during the design process itself. This is very possible since A-III has been designed as a weapon from the beginning while A-II has civilian origins. In this specific instance, it makes more sense to push A-III forward than A-II.



4. Especially given that news reports now say A-III is also being inducted. How true is this ?



5. Sanjay also says that there was a successful A-II test on Jun 19 2009. This was reported by very few sources. Not Hemant Rout. Did such a test really take place ? You too said something to this effect around that time on BR.



6. In the long run, given aging issues and the like, canisterization would be the solution.
  Reply
#10
Who Sanjay?

The same self proclaimed missile expert who does not know what is max-Q trajectory! <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Big Grin' />
  Reply
#11
[quote name='Kritavarma' date='11 December 2009 - 09:27 AM' timestamp='1260503347' post='102890']

1. But still, that the INS could underperform is worrying. Does that not have implications for A-III, Shourya, unless INS underperformance was due to extreme abnormal conditions caused by other circumstances. Saraswat's remarks seem to hint at quality control with some mechanical interfaces.

[/quote]



Who said INS underperformed?



Anything could underperformed, one need to be worried and try to understand implication only when we know what (if any) underperformed. Cross the bridge when it comes.
  Reply
#12
[quote name='Arun_S' date='11 December 2009 - 12:25 AM' timestamp='1260512260' post='102900']

Who said INS underperformed?



Anything could underperformed, one need to be worried and try to understand implication only when we know what (if any) underperformed. Cross the bridge when it comes.

[/quote]



1. It was Hemant Rout who claimed that local INS underperformed (and development flights had videshi INS) in one of his articles. I do not know how accurate he would be in such details. You would probably know better.



2. Saraswat's statement indicates that components (plural) were poorly manufactured. So, unless ground testing facilitites to detect poor components are truly comprehensive, more than one flight being required to detect the poor components is very very plausible. Especially in not fully instrumented samples.



3. at least before these types of tests, can't there be a system of component verification that detects these flaws ? Probably component verification after dismantling one or two specimens from a production lot, if it needs to be done.



4. Whenever this sequence of failures ends, a sequence of 5-6 successful flights after that will do a lot to restore A-II credibility - the main issue is that BDL and not DRDO now produce the missile and there have been difficulties during this transition. Probably also change in scale of production is an issue. the 5-6 successful tests that will be very likely after this sequence of failures ends will be a sign of production capability having stabilized.



5. Even after that, 1-2 tests each year will have to be done on operational missiles throughout the operational life span. While this is not as thorough as Unkil, it is still acceptable. This is how it has been with Prithvis. They have had regular tests after IOC.



6. My personal feeling, however is that for TSP one must rapidly operationalize the Shourya class of missiles. So far , two tests happened, right ? I do not count pop-out tests.



7. As for PRC, it is better to focus on A-III and its successors. Right now, as far as credibility goes, A-II and A-III stand at more or less the same level. It is better to push A-III more aggresively. No A-III test this year (2009) is criminal.



8. Is A-III being inducted as some news reports indicate ?
  Reply
#13
After the current fault is fixed, more tests are required to further increase reliability and shake out other bugs that may be lurking. It is true for all strategic missiles, including A2, A3, Shaurya, AAD and PAD (including it final avatar that is not Prithvi based).



Shying away from rapid testing as these missiles enter IOC is serious disservice to India, IMHO intense flight testing regime is critical for these missile to be of real value to national defense.
  Reply
#14
[url="http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article64463.ece?css=print"]'Dhanush' missile test-fired successfully[/url]



Quote:Y. Mallikarjun

T. S. Subramanian



The Hindu 'Dhanush' Missile (a Naval Version of PRITHVI) has been successfully launched from INS Subhadra off Orissa Coast on Sunday. Photo: Special Arrangement



Dhanush, the ship-based anti-surface missile was successfully launched from a naval vessel, INS Subhadra in the Bay of Bengal, off the Orissa coast on Sunday. The missile was fired by Indian Navy personnel as part of user training exercise.



The nuclear-capable Dhanush is a naval version of Prithvi and was test-fired at 11.35 hrs. [color="#0000FF"]It flew over a range of 350 km[/color] and splashed down at the target point in the Bay of Bengal with “pin-point accuracy”, according to Defence Research & Development Organisation sources. The missile followed the pre-designated trajectory with text-book precision and two naval ships located near the target have tracked the splash.



The sources said that the 350-km range missile met all the velocity, height and guidance parameters. Radar systems of the Integrated Test Range (ITR) located along the coast have monitored the entire trajectory of the vehicle which flew for 520 seconds before zeroing on to the target with a CEP (circular error probability) of under 10 metres.



The single stage missile is powered by liquid propellants. It is 10-metre long and weighs six tonnes. It has one metre diameter and can carry 500 kg warhead.



Scientific adviser to Defence Minister V.K.Saraswat, who is also the Director-General DRDO, Major General (retd) P.C. Karbanda, who is Deputy National Security Adviser and Rear Admiral C.S.Patham, who is Deputy Commander-in-Chief of Strategic Forces Command were aboard INS Subhadra to witness the launch.



DRDO sources said that [color="#0000FF"]there would be two more flight tests of the nuke-capable Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile Agni-II ( 2,000 km plus range) in the coming months to overcome the failure of the missile in its previous two flights in May and November 2009.[/color] The sources added that during its last test in November,[color="#0000FF"] Agni-II had a problem at the time of ignition of the second stage. Its flex nozzle too did not function properly[/color]. Similar problem with flex nozzle occurred during the first Agni-III ( 3,500 km range) flight in July 2006.



The DRDO will test-fire K-15 ( underwater missile) from a submerged pontoon and its land version ‘ Shaurya’ in the coming months.



So Agni-II test failure root cause is narrowed down to Second stage ignition AND its flex nozzle.
  Reply
#15
[url="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-5333773,prtpage-1.cms"]Dhanush blips out Agni failures: ToI[/url]

Quote:TNN 13 December 2009, 10:37pm IST



BALASORE: The navy on Sunday successfully testfired the nuclear-capable Dhanush missile from a warship off the Orissa coast. The success of the surface-to surface missile test has come as a big relief for the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO), which was smarting from the twin failures of tests on Agni-II this year.



The Dhanush trial termed as "trainer exercise" was conducted around 11:31 am. Defence sources said the missile was test-fired from INS Subhadra that was anchored about 35 km offshore from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Chandipur, during its final operational configuration. Another warship, INS Rajput, provided essential support for the test. It was the sixth test of the anti-ship missile.



"All the operations for the launch were carried out by naval personnel. It has met all the mission objectives. All the events occurred as expected and was also monitored by the range sensors. It was a textbook launch and achieved fantastic mission accomplished," ITR director S P Dash said.



Dhanush, the indigenously developed naval version of the Prithvi short-range ballistic missile (SRBM), has a strike range up to 350 km and can carry 500 kg of conventional or nuclear warhead.



Developed by the DRDO under its ambitious Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP), the missile is about 8.53 metres in length and 0.9 metre in diameter besides its launch weight about 4.4 tonnes. This single stage missile uses liquid propellant. It can be used as an anti-ship weapon as well as for destroying land targets depending on the range.



"During the Sunday's test which was aimed to study the control and guidance system of the missile and its other parameters besides providing training to the user, the missile maintained its intended trajectory before dropping into the sea," a source said. "The test launch was tracked from its take-off to impact point through an integrated network of sophisticated radars and electro-optic instruments for data analysis," he added.



The defence ministry had made elaborate preparations for the testfiring of Dhanush. A cautionary notice was issued to aviators and mariners to keep away from the area of splashdown in the Bay of Bengal.



V K Saraswat, scientific advisor to the defence minister, and the DRDO's district general and secretary were on-board the ship during the mission.
  Reply
#16
More Dhanush Missile test news reports:



[url="http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/print.pl?file=2009121455301100.htm&date=2009/12/14/&prd=th&"]Dhanush missile test fired successfully: Hindu[/url]



Quote:Y. Mallikarjun & T.S.Subramanian



350-km-range missile meets velocity, height and guidance parameters



Radar systems along the coast monitor the entire trajectory





HYDERABAD: Dhanush, the ship-based anti-surface missile, was successfully launched from INS Subhadra, in the Bay of Bengal, off Orissa on Sunday.



It was fired by Navy personnel as part of a user-training exercise.



The nuclear-capable Dhanush, a naval version of Prithvi, was test fired at 11.35 hrs. It flew over 350 km and splashed down at the target point in the Bay with “pinpoint accuracy,” according to official sources in the Defence Research & Development Organisation. The missile followed the pre-designated trajectory with text-book precision and two naval ships anchored near the target tracked the splash.



The sources said the 350-km-range missile met all the velocity, height and guidance parameters. The radar systems of the Integrated Test Range (ITR), located along the coast, monitored the entire trajectory of the vehicle, which flew for 520 seconds before zeroing in on the target with a circular error probability (CEP) of below 10 metres.



The single-stage missile is powered by liquid propellants; it is 10 metres long and weighs six tonnes. It has one-metre diameter and can carry a 500-kg warhead.



V.K. Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister who is also the Director-General of the DRDO; Major General (retd.) P.C. Karbanda, who is Deputy National Security Adviser; and Rear Admiral C.S. Patham, who is Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Strategic Forces Command, were aboard INS Subhadra to witness the launch.



The sources said there would be two more flight tests of the nuclear-capable Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile Agni-II (2,000 km-plus range) to overcome its failure in the two previous flights, in May and November 2009. The sources said that during its last test in November, Agni-II had a problem at the time of ignition of the second stage. Its flex nozzle, too, did not function properly.



A similar problem with the flex nozzle occurred during the first Agni-III (3,500-km range) flight in July 2006.





[url="http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_missile-dhanush-has-textbook-launch_1323442"]Missile Dhanush has textbook launch: DNA[/url]



Quote:Subhashish Mohanty / DNA



India successfully test-fired its nuclear-capable ballistic missile Dhanush on Sunday. The surface-to-surface missile with a strike range of 350 km was fired around 11.30 am from INS Shubhadra 35km off the integrated test tange (ITR) at Chandipur in the Bay of Bengal.



The missile developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is considered the naval version of Prithvi. “It was a textbook launch and a fantastic mission accomplished. It met all mission objectives and all events occurred as expected,” ITR director SP Dash said.



DRDO officials and ITR scientists were relieved after Dhanush’s successful launch. They were under tremendous pressure following recent test failures of two Agni-II missiles. Dhanush can carry a single warhead weighing up to 500kg and hit off and on-shore targets. The missile is about 8.53 m long and 0.9 m in diameter. While its launch weight is about 4.4 tonnes, it uses a single-stage liquid propellant engine.



The missile had failed its first development-stage test on April 11, 2000, due to a technical snag. But later, DRDO achieved success. The last trial of Dhanush was successfully conducted from a naval ship off Orissa coast on March 30, 2007.



[url="http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/553587/"]India successfully tests nuclear-capable missile Dhanush: Indian Express[/url]

Quote:Agencies Posted online: Sunday , Dec 13, 2009 at 1814 hrs

Balasore, Orissa : India successfully tested a nuclear-capable ballistic missile 'Dhanush', a naval variant of Prithvi with 350 km range, from a warship in Bay of Bengal off the Orissa coast.



The single-stage ship-based missile was flight-tested at around 11.31 am from INS Subhadra ship 35 km off shore the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Chandipur near here, defence officials said.



Describing the trial as successful, ITR director S P Dash said, "It has met all the mission objectives and all the events occurred as expected and also monitored by the range of sensors. It was a text book launch and fantastic mission accomplished."



'Dhanush' has a payload capacity of 500 kg and is capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads. It can hit both sea and shore-based targets. The missile, which has liquid propellant, is the naval version of India's indigenously developed surface-to-surface 'Prithvi' missile system, the officials said.



The test launch of 'Dhanush', developed by Defence Research and Development Organisation, was carried out by Navy, a DRDO press release said.



"Today's test was tracked from its take-off to impact point through an integrated network of sophisticated radars and electro-optic instruments for post-mission data analyses," the officials said.



The scientific advisor to Defence Minister A K Antony, V K Saraswat was on-board the ship during the mission, the DRDO release said. The missile had failed in its first test at the development stage on April 11, 2000 due to certain technical problems relating to the take-off stage, but subsequent trials were successful.



The last trial of 'Dhanush' was successfully conducted from a naval ship off Orissa coast on March 30, 2007, defence personnel said.
  Reply
#17
Arun , what is the significant of Dhanush as anti-ship missile , compared to antiship missile it is a large single stage missile , since it spends most of the time in Air it is easily trackable by ships long range radar and intercepted at higher altitude at long ranges by ships anti-aircraft missile.



Dhanush will have value as Land Attack Missile , but as anti-ship weapons its utility is at best secondary
  Reply
#18
Austin,

Glad to to have you on this forum. I look forward to rewarding collaboration.



Recent press reports mention Dhanush role also as an Anti-ship missile, in the same breath calling out its range as 350 Km. The challange hitting a moving navel target at 350 Km is first detecting and identifying a perticular ship in a fleet at that range, and projecting/extrapolating its position by the time OODA response time (which is much more than missile flight time).



Given that Dhanush is a hybrid semi-ballistic missile (with aerodynamic lift available most during of the trajectory, it does lend itself to terminal maneuvering). But for successful indiction, the Dhanush either:



1.) Gets final target position for interception via a data-link that is connected in realtime to observing platform. For most carrier bourn armada getting cloer to 300 Km radius from battle group is a difficult challange. However for a non-carrier battle group that is not very difficult.



OR



2.) Carry multi-sensor guidance package (RF and optical) to discriminate a perticular vessal in a battle group. Preferably passive and not active. This is a challenge that DRDO has yet to demonstrate mastery.



For high value navel targets, lack of terminal accuracy can be compensated by a high yield nuclear weapon. Unlike Brahmos that cant carry a big nuclear warhead (perhaps limited to ~20 kT), Dhanush can carry high yield FBF or TN and fly a trajectory using only passive guidance/sensors.



In either case Dhanush class missile with its slow speed is liable to interception by Agies class warships (US has sold many such ship to other countries), its winged maneuverability will however makes it bit more challenging to Aegis ABM interceptors.
  Reply
#19
Arun Thanks , Regarding Dhanush its anti-ship capability is what i believe is secondary and good to have capability .



Finding a moving target like ships is a real challenge and discriminating a Carrier/Destroyer amongst the fleet is another challenge , Dhanush is again a large single stage missile making it a large target and its slow terminal speed and high altitude flight can make it vulnerable to missile like Shtil-1,Aster ,SM-2/3



Finally the sticking point for Dhanush is the limited amount of platform that can carry then , Currently IN AOPV is being used as a platform to test and most likely they will remain the only platform that will carry it ( probably in the single helicopter hanger ) , it being a liquid fuel missile carrying it on other naval capital platform is a risk IN will not likely take.



So we will not see Dhanush deployed in meaningful number and platforms , this seems to be a stop gap measure perhaps will also serve as a sea mobile BM Target for future ABM testing , The Sagarika/K-15 on the other hand is more robust and capable system and its deployment on Sea Based Platform besides ATV is something we must think about.
  Reply
#20
[url="http://www.drdo.com/pub/techfocus/2009/dec09.pdf"]DRDO Tech Focus ISSN : 0971-4413 for Dec 2009[/url] is out.

[url="http://www.drdo.com/pub/techfocus/2009/dec09.pdf"]http://www.drdo.com/pub/techfocus/2009/dec09.pdf[/url]



Has good article on Nishant Wrenkle Engine (55 Hp, 100 kg thrust).

Quote:Salient Features

Displacement : 324 cc

Type : Single rotor Wankel engine

Idle speed : 2700–2900 rpm

Cooling : Water cooled housings and air cooled rotor

Power output : 55 bhp at 8000 rpm

Compression ratio : 9.2:1

Specific fuel consumption : 250 gm/bhp hr

Lubrication system : Total loss type forced lubrication



Also hypersonic engine test bed simulates flight at 32 Km altitude, with:

Inlet at Mach-2, Temp: 2000 K, Pressure: 4 bar pressure,

Combustor Air flow: 3/1 Kg/se, O2 flow: 1.05 Kg/sec H2 flow: 0.08 Kg/sec

Ejector mass flow 22 kg/sec at Mach-4
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)