Indian Ballistic Missile Defense System

[Eastman]

@ladder atleast I explained why a second stage upon the existing missile is possible/not possible based upon the diagram.

 

[ladder]

Only If you learnt to read-



Shaurya (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Where did I Insist ?- Prithvi does have a specific role of Nuclear delivery- under both Army and Air Force- perhaps Navy too- But I am not sure about that-

Conventional Prithvis have been modified with improved trajectory- which is not pure ballistic-

Even an artillery shell has the capability to carry nuclear explosive- however certain yard sticks and benchmarks are applied by various militaries world wide- other than that cruise missile are not easily detectable hence the reaction time is low-

I did learn to read,

Perhaps my comprehension is the problem.

So, please clarify for the helpless soul.

Do, yo as in the wiki article allude that the minimum range of the Shaurya with a 1000 kg load is 700 km .

Or should I say Shaurya with a 1000 kg payload cannot hit any target below 700 km?

=================================

You never insisted, you are not in a position to.

Army and Air force Prithvi's have no nuclear role whatsoever.

Conventional Ballistic missiles with non conventional shaped trajectory or depressed ballistic trajectory aren't cruise missile.

What are the benchmark and yardsticks? Please enlighten the poor guy.


Artillery shell ( DAvy Crocket) only one was used in nuclear role and is not operational.

Theoretically any thing above 2.5 gram, which is critical mass of uranium can be converted into a device for explosion. So?


Yes, because Cruise missile are so stealthy, armed forces do recommend the possible use of AA gun to bring down low flying cruise missile. Isn't it?

But, the same armed forces require a sophisticated BM Shield to bring down incoming ballistic missile.

===========================

Though I understand what you want to say, but better represent it properly.

 

[ladder]

awwww.....PAD got a solid stage in the elongated warhead section for end game maneuver

The same that is used in every maneuverable RV. All modern RV have it.

Here it is for Agni 2

Post Boost Vehicle (PBV) integrated into the missile's Re-entry Vehicle (RV).

Agni-II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If not integrated with RV it is designated as a separate stage as in PAD and Dhanush (New)

Not just for maneuver but simply can be used to increase range.

 

[ladder]

@ladder atleast I explained why a second stage upon the existing missile is possible/not possible based upon the diagram.

And I explained the terminology of stage where you are getting it wrong.

Go and see my previous post.

Re quoting for you

Older Dhanush is two stage ( single?) liquid but a newer version is Solid+ liquid.

Do, you know, why I used the single in bracket and two stage.

 

[Guest]

I did learn to read,

Perhaps my comprehension is the problem.

So, please clarify for the helpless soul.

Do, yo as in the wiki article allude that the minimum range of the Shaurya with a 1000 kg load is 700 km .

Or should I say Shaurya with a 1000 kg payload cannot hit any target below 700 km?

Launch It deeper inside to achieve the shorter range-

=================================


You never insisted, you are not in a position to.

The use of Nuclear/Conventionally armed Prithvi by Army and Air Force-

Army and Air force Prithvi's have no nuclear role whatsoever.

According to whom-- you ?

Conventional Ballistic missiles with non conventional shaped trajectory or depressed ballistic trajectory aren't cruise missile.

They do get low enough to avoid early detection by enemy radars-

What are the benchmark and yardsticks? Please enlighten the poor guy.

That a Cruise missile is generally not used as a nuclear delivery platform- since It is precise and accurate- hence less explosive needed to neutralize target-
Artillery shell ( DAvy Crocket) only one was used in nuclear role and is not operational.

Theoretically any thing above 2.5 gram, which is critical mass of uranium can be converted into a device for explosion. So?

However It is not converted- or used-


Yes, because Cruise missile are so stealthy, armed forces do recommend the possible use of AA gun to bring down low flying cruise missile. Isn't it?

Which proves It being stealthier than BM- Not detected lower time to react-- AA guns are the last line of air defense-

But, the same armed forces require a sophisticated BM Shield to bring down incoming ballistic missile.

Due to Its ballistic trajectory and high speed-

===========================

Though I understand what you want to say, but better represent it properly.

Thanks for understanding-

I would add here that-- CM are slowly replacing ballistic missiles for tactical missions due to various reasons- one of them is that- being precise and accurate thanks to improved guidance system they can do the work- at much cheaper rates than say a ballistic missile using lesser explosives-

 

[ladder]

Thanks for understanding-

I would add here that-- CM are slowly replacing ballistic missiles for tactical missions due to various reasons- one of them is that- being precise and accurate thanks to improved guidance system they can do the work- at much cheaper rates than say a ballistic missile using lesser explosives-

Not, always.

Also.

A tactical ballistic missile is a ballistic missile designed for short-range battlefield use. Typically, range is less than 300 kilometres

A theatre ballistic missile (TBM) is any ballistic missile with a range between 300 kilometres (190 mi) and 3,500 kilometres (2,200 mi), used against targets "in-theatre".

Go, and check what ranges I have quoted for Prithvi 3.

Also, why do you think USA has ATACAM and Russia has Iskandar-M?

=================================

But, you haven't answered, what is the minimum range of Shaurya? Please Answer.

 

[ladder]

Thanks for understanding-

I would add here that-- CM are slowly replacing ballistic missiles for tactical missions due to various reasons- one of them is that- being precise and accurate thanks to improved guidance system they can do the work- at much cheaper rates than say a ballistic missile using lesser explosives-

Oh you answered in line which didn't notice.

Let me re- quote your brilliant answers here

Launch It deeper inside to achieve the shorter range-

Yes, you aren't serious aren't you?

So, when you are being hit by a barrage, travel 500 km back inside you territory, to hit the sweet spot.

Kiddo, BM aren't your high school projectile physics.

Every potential take out point is pre-determined.

According to whom-- you ?

Check the mandate of SFC, Google is your friend. No, need to believe me.

They do get low enough to avoid early detection by enemy radars-

Depressed Ballistic trajectory isn't at tree top heights.

hat a Cruise missile is generally not used as a nuclear delivery platform- since It is precise and accurate- hence less explosive needed to neutralize target-

Ok, is that a norm a benchmark?

Show me.

So, you mean to say it's either 200/300 kg warhead or KT warhead ( though Sub KT warhead are also available) nothing is required in between?

Which proves It being stealthier than BM- Not detected lower time to react-- AA guns are the last line of air defense-

No, because AA guns are pretty effective so, no general will dish out 2 million dollar worth SAM for it, if not necessary.

Due to Its ballistic trajectory and high speed-

You have finally answered. I am happy.


Answer me. How many country have BM shield? Does our western neighbor have it? So can she intercept a BM? No

But, does she have a AA gun? Yes, so, can she intercept a CM? yes.

So, answer is with you.

====================

 

[Vishwarupa]

Interceptor spot on, though without blast: DRDO

Scientists say Prithvi Defence Vehicle mission achieved important objectives

India's ambitious mission on Sunday to intercept an "enemy" ballistic missile at a altitude of 120 km seems to have achieved only partial success. While the missile technologists of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) say the interception did take place and the mission met its "important objectives," they concede that the warhead in the interceptor missile, which took off from the Wheeler Island, did not explode.

Avinash Chander, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, said: "The infrared (IR) seeker in the interceptor could track the target, but we have not exploded the target. The target was not to be exploded."

Asked if the mission was only "partially successful," Mr. Chander, architect of India's Agni series of missiles, said, "The mission's main objective was to track the target missile. We wanted to see the performance of the IR seeker. The warhead in the interceptor missile was not meant to be exploded in this mission. Since we did not fire the warhead, the debris did not fall."

Another DRDO missile technologist said: "We have recorded the interception."

Asked whether "a hit-to-kill" took place in the mission as it did in the previous six other interceptor flights from the Wheeler Island, he said: "We have to work out the missed distance between the target missile and the interceptor. Based on that, the hit-to-kill would take place. We are not able to say right now whether the hit-to-kill took place."

Yet another scientist said, "Whether the target missile was destroyed or not, I cannot say right now."

The DRDO was looking forward to this mission because it was "challenging" and "complex." Of the DRDO's seven interceptor missions, six were successful. The interceptions had taken place either in the endo-atmosphere (below 50 km) or in the exo-atmosphere (between 50 km and 80 km). But this mission was a different ball game because the interception was to be done at 120 km, providing very little time for the interceptor to blast off and waylay the attacker. So the motors in the interceptor called the Prithvi Defence Vehicle (PDV) and the target missile were specially developed. The target missile lifted off a ship in the Bay of Bengal, off Odisha at 9.07 a.m. It was a two-stage missile, "mimicking a hostile ballistic missile approaching from more than 2,000 km away," a DRDO press release said.

In an automated operation, radar-based systems on the Wheeler Island and in Paradip, Puri and Cuttack detected and tracked the "enemy" missile. The computer network, with the help of data from the radars, predicted its trajectory. The single-stage PDV interceptor took off two-and-a-half minutes later.

The PDV, guided by the highly accurate inertial navigation system and supported by a redundant micro-navigation system, moved towards the point of interception. Once the PDV crossed the atmosphere, its heat shield domes covering the IR and radio frequency (RF) seekers fell off. So the two seeker domes opened to look at the incoming missile's location. With the help of inertial guidance and the IR seeker, the PDV moved for the interception. "The mission was completed and the interception parameters were achieved," the press release said.

G. Satheesh Reddy, Director, Research Centre, Imarat , a DRDO missile facility in Hyderabad, said the mission featured several new technologies. Both the missiles had new, powerful motors. The heat shield, covering the IR and RF seekers, ejected for the first time. The seekers worked well. "This is the first time that an imaging seeker has been used for the air defence vehicle. The imaging seeker could see the incoming missile, track it and guide the interceptor towards the target." The RCI team made the seekers and the inertial navigation and guidance system, Mr. Reddy said.

Adalat Ali was the Programme Director and Y. Sreenivasa Rao, Project Director.

Interceptor spot on, though without blast: DRDO - The Hindu

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Guys, It is a real pleasure to read so detail arguments, But please do not get personal as both of your posts are very educative and getting personal make thing look spoiled ..

Thank you & Please carry on ..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

My knowledge is limited regarding this topic, Though what i learn before than Pritiavi series will be replaced by Prahaar in future ..

But again, If Armed forces wish something else then the course would be what you are referring to ..

@Kunal Biswas

Seeing the PDV, can we conclude that the development of Prithvi-3 which is all solid fueled canister-ised missile with 1ton payload and 400-500 km range. Which will be in the league of Iskander-M and ATACMS is also nearly complete?

========================

PJ-10 and Shaurya so does Nirbhay system are expensive and are large systems to carry around ( No of vehicles in a convoy ), But Prahaar is design high mobility with more Missiles specifically design for precision strike for very specific tactical targets ( Enemy mobile / static, Arty / MRLS units, High priority Bunkers, Bridges, Groups of Tank units, ) More or less like Precision Arty strike but at longer ranges, Its more or less a replacement for BM-30 in service ..

Why go for another Short range Ballistic missile- when already have Brahmos, and Shaurya- with Nirbhay and LACM(Supersonic) under development-

 

[ladder]

My knowledge is limited regarding this topic, Though what i learn before than Pritiavi series will be replaced by Prahaar in future ..

But again, If Armed forces wish something else then the course would be what you are referring to ..



========================

PJ-10 and Shaurya so does Nirbhay system are expensive and are large systems to carry around ( No of vehicles in a convoy ), But Prahaar is design high mobility with more Missiles specifically design for precision strike for very specific tactical targets ( Enemy mobile / static, Arty / MRLS units, High priority Bunkers, Bridges, Groups of Tank units, ) More or less like Precision Arty strike but at longer ranges, Its more or less a replacement for BM-30 in service ..

Kunal Sir,

The very article which mentioned that Prahar missile will replace Prithvi missile also had another information which many missed,

The tactical versions of the Prithvi missiles would be withdrawn from service and will be upgraded to be used for longer ranges, he said.

Prithvi missiles to be replaced by more-capable Prahar: DRDO - Hindustan Times

=====================

Each of the prithvi missile variant has same diameter.

So, the length only differs due to composition like size of tanks and stages.

Also, when a solid propellant version of Prithvi has been already developed (PDV), why will DRDO upgrade older ones with liquid fuel and not solid fuel, when liquid fuel are corrosive, hazardous and slow-reacting.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I did missed that, Thanks for sharing ..

================

Btw a close look >>

 

[bhramos]

 

[Guest]

Yes, you aren't serious aren't you?

So, when you are being hit by a barrage, travel 500 km back inside you territory, to hit the sweet spot.

Kiddo, BM aren't your high school projectile physics.

Every potential take out point is pre-determined.

What can you say about mobile TELs- or SSBN for that matter-

What about missiles like Agni-1 which has a range of 700km similar to shaurya) and used to target Lahore/Rawalpindi for example- or even Multan Lets say-

Check the mandate of SFC, Google is your friend. No, need to believe me.

As per- the process of Debate- when you claim something you're the one who should prove it-

Depressed Ballistic trajectory isn't at tree top heights.

Due to the round shape of earth- the line of sight of LRTRs are affected- say for a missile with apogee >60-70m detection is earlier than say with a 40km altitude cruise flight- never said it goes on tree top level- where detection becomes nearly impossible- both due to curvature of surface and ground clutter-

Ok, is that a norm a benchmark?

Show me.

Norm generally yes- Benchmark for US and Russia due to their arms control treaties- which is followed by NATO also-

So, you mean to say it's either 200/300 kg warhead or KT warhead ( though Sub KT warhead are also available) nothing is required in between?

Unless you want to blow a whole village- small town or say a whole military cantonment area- where casualties would account good number of civilians- which a responsible military/Govt- avoids-

No, because AA guns are pretty effective so, no general will dish out 2 million dollar worth SAM for it, if not necessary.

If It were to be as effective a s you claim- Iraqis under Saddam would've down a good number of Tomahawks missiles out of thousand launch on them-

You have finally answered. I am happy.


Answer me. How many country have BM shield? Does our western neighbor have it? So can she intercept a BM? No

But, does she have a AA gun? Yes, so, can she intercept a CM? yes.

So, answer is with you.

====================

Your assumption here is based on a silly argument that CMs can be shot down easily using AA guns- which is flawed-- even with early warning counted in- the reaction time is too limited and chances of downing it is little- unless potent anti-missiles are used- Hence the enemy is equally vulnerable to CMs as It is to BMs- in case of Pakistan- with chances high that a launch of ballistic missile by India- can invoke a nuclear response- and casualties would be high- than say compared to a cruise missile exchange-

 

[Guest]

========================

PJ-10 and Shaurya so does Nirbhay system are expensive and are large systems to carry around ( No of vehicles in a convoy ), But Prahaar is design high mobility with more Missiles specifically design for precision strike for very specific tactical targets ( Enemy mobile / static, Arty / MRLS units, High priority Bunkers, Bridges, Groups of Tank units, ) More or less like Precision Arty strike but at longer ranges, Its more or less a replacement for BM-30 in service ..

One of the important motive behind the development of Nirbhay is a cheap solution to tactical strikes deep within enemy territory- at a Cheaper rate than Brahmos- and easily adaptable platform for all three forces- AFIK-

IMO- Nirbhay is going to be a cheaper missile- deployed in larger numbers and used in in larger numbers in a conflict- compared to Brahmos and Shaurya- which would be used for High value targets in initial phases of war- while Prahar would remain a tactical solution in case of precision strikes at forward enemy formations-

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Indeed true, Though my comparison was with Prahaar regarding tactical targets within 200km from Borders ..

Nirbhay = 1000km
Brahmos = 390kms
Prahaar = 160kms

They will be distributed in required strengths ..

 

[Guest]

Interceptor spot on, though without blast: DRDO

Scientists say Prithvi Defence Vehicle mission achieved important objectives
India's ambitious mission on Sunday to intercept an "enemy" ballistic missile at a altitude of 120 km seems to have achieved only partial success. While the missile technologists of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) say the interception did take place and the mission met its "important objectives," they concede that the warhead in the interceptor missile, which took off from the Wheeler Island, did not explode.

Avinash Chander, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, said: "The infrared (IR) seeker in the interceptor could track the target, but we have not exploded the target. The target was not to be exploded."

Asked if the mission was only "partially successful," Mr. Chander, architect of India's Agni series of missiles, said, "The mission's main objective was to track the target missile. We wanted to see the performance of the IR seeker. The warhead in the interceptor missile was not meant to be exploded in this mission. Since we did not fire the warhead, the debris did not fall."

Another DRDO missile technologist said: "We have recorded the interception."

Asked whether "a hit-to-kill" took place in the mission as it did in the previous six other interceptor flights from the Wheeler Island, he said: "We have to work out the missed distance between the target missile and the interceptor. Based on that, the hit-to-kill would take place. We are not able to say right now whether the hit-to-kill took place."

Yet another scientist said, "Whether the target missile was destroyed or not, I cannot say right now."

The DRDO was looking forward to this mission because it was "challenging" and "complex." Of the DRDO's seven interceptor missions, six were successful. The interceptions had taken place either in the endo-atmosphere (below 50 km) or in the exo-atmosphere (between 50 km and 80 km).But this mission was a different ball game because the interception was to be done at 120 km, providing very little time for the interceptor to blast off and waylay the attacker. So the motors in the interceptor called the Prithvi Defence Vehicle (PDV) and the target missile were specially developed. The target missile lifted off a ship in the Bay of Bengal, off Odisha at 9.07 a.m. It was a two-stage missile, "mimicking a hostile ballistic missile approaching from more than 2,000 km away," a DRDO press release said.

In an automated operation, radar-based systems on the Wheeler Island and in Paradip, Puri and Cuttack detected and tracked the "enemy" missile. The computer network, with the help of data from the radars, predicted its trajectory. The single-stage PDV interceptor took off two-and-a-half minutes later.

The PDV, guided by the highly accurate inertial navigation system and supported by a redundant micro-navigation system, moved towards the point of interception. Once the PDV crossed the atmosphere, its heat shield domes covering the IR and radio frequency (RF) seekers fell off. So the two seeker domes opened to look at the incoming missile's location. With the help of inertial guidance and the IR seeker, the PDV moved for the interception. "The mission was completed and the interception parameters were achieved," the press release said.

G. Satheesh Reddy, Director, Research Centre, Imarat , a DRDO missile facility in Hyderabad, said the mission featured several new technologies. Both the missiles had new, powerful motors. The heat shield, covering the IR and RF seekers, ejected for the first time. The seekers worked well. "This is the first time that an imaging seeker has been used for the air defence vehicle. The imaging seeker could see the incoming missile, track it and guide the interceptor towards the target." The RCI team made the seekers and the inertial navigation and guidance system, Mr. Reddy said.

Adalat Ali was the Programme Director and Y. Sreenivasa Rao, Project Director.

Interceptor spot on, though without blast: DRDO - The Hindu

Interesting points- Including the use of Dual Seekers-

 

[ladder]

What can you say about mobile TELs- or SSBN for that matter-

What about missiles like Agni-1 which has a range of 700km similar to shaurya) and used to target Lahore/Rawalpindi for example- or even Multan Lets say-



As per- the process of Debate- when you claim something you're the one who should prove it-




Due to the round shape of earth- the line of sight of LRTRs are affected- say for a missile with apogee >60-70m detection is earlier than say with a 40km altitude cruise flight- never said it goes on tree top level- where detection becomes nearly impossible- both due to curvature of surface and ground clutter-



Norm generally yes- Benchmark for US and Russia due to their arms control treaties- which is followed by NATO also-



Unless you want to blow a whole village- small town or say a whole military cantonment area- where casualties would account good number of civilians- which a responsible military/Govt- avoids-




If It were to be as effective a s you claim- Iraqis under Saddam would've down a good number of Tomahawks missiles out of thousand launch on them-



Your assumption here is based on a silly argument that CMs can be shot down easily using AA guns- which is flawed-- even with early warning counted in- the reaction time is too limited and chances of downing it is little- unless potent anti-missiles are used- Hence the enemy is equally vulnerable to CMs as It is to BMs- in case of Pakistan- with chances high that a launch of ballistic missile by India- can invoke a nuclear response- and casualties would be high- than say compared to a cruise missile exchange-

What about missiles like Agni-1 which has a range of 700km similar to shaurya) and used to target Lahore/Rawalpindi for example- or even Multan Lets say-

That's not what are we discussing, are we?

You are digressing from topic at hand,

So, putting the original question to you again, what is the minimum range of Shourya?

So, can it hit any target below 700 km with 1000 kg warhead?

We, aren't discussing whether you need to launch shourya 680 km from border to hit Lahore or 650 km inside border to hit Multan.

Btw, that above argument of yours is flawed.


For example, to make things easier for you

The operational envelope of Prahar is 60 to 170 km with stated war-head.

No, matter even if you put a tennis ball as war head, it would go any further or if you put 2000kg as war head it can't be used at ranges smaller than 60.

State that for Shaurya?

We, aren't discussing at what depth from which a missile will be launched.

As per- the process of Debate- when you claim something you're the one who should prove it-

You said you don't believe me, then the responsibility is on you why you don't?

Prove it, by stating any source that the missiles with IA or IAF has nuclear role. Or other wise, any missile outside SFC has nuclear role.

Where did I Insist ?- Prithvi does have a specific role of Nuclear delivery- under both Army and Air Force- perhaps Navy too- But I am not sure about that-

Due to the round shape of earth- the line of sight of LRTRs are affected- say for a missile with apogee >60-70m detection is earlier than say with a 40km altitude cruise flight- never said it goes on tree top level- where detection becomes nearly impossible- both due to curvature of surface and ground clutter-

Again you are digressing from topic.

Conventional Prithvis have been modified with improved trajectory- which is not pure ballistic-

And I replied back Quasi ballistic trajectory aren't on tree top heights.

Now, you might read it any way.

What would you do, by detecting a approaching a BM, can you intercept it, if you haven't BM shield?

Also, I don't want to go into detection techniques and avoidance principle and tactics, which is off topic.

What, we are discussing is that CM can effectively for all purpose replace BM. for tactical role. ( your claim)

Norm generally yes- Benchmark for US and Russia due to their arms control treaties- which is followed by NATO also-

not, a norm but a bilateral treaty only.

USA and Russia has a treaty on not developing IRBM. Do we follow that?

So. now a treaty between USA and Russia becomes global norm? Is that what you want to say?

So, who developed 60km nuclear capable missile?

Also, you haven't provided exactly which treaty states that cruise missile can't have a nuclear war-head.

Unless you want to blow a whole village- small town or say a whole military cantonment area- where casualties would account good number of civilians- which a responsible military/Govt- avoids-

What is weight of warhead of runway denial bomb.
What is the warhead weight of a bunker buster to be used against hardened targets?
What is the weight of cluster bomb.


Nuclear weapons too can cause lot of civilian causality, so, govt. avoids but does it mean it's abandoned?

Also, do you want to allude that in war no civilian causality needs to take place?

If It were to be as effective a s you claim- Iraqis under Saddam would've down a good number of Tomahawks missiles out of thousand launch on them-

Do you want to say AD of Iraq is similar to Sub-continent after two-decades?

Also, Patriot also failed to intercept many Scuds? What does that indicate? What inference do you draw?

Your assumption here is based on a silly argument that CMs can be shot down easily using AA guns- which is flawed-- even with early warning counted in- the reaction time is too limited and chances of downing it is little- unless potent anti-missiles are used- Hence the enemy is equally vulnerable to CMs as It is to BMs- in case of Pakistan- with chances high that a launch of ballistic missile by India- can invoke a nuclear response- and casualties would be high- than say compared to a cruise missile exchange-

Not, my theory, also I gave you a condition of it, which you neglected, not my fault. Go, back and read my original comments.

All other is your theory, not acceptable, or is it?

Your, time to prove that when cruise missile is launched by India/ Pakistan. It will not contain a nuclear warhead?

Show me any treaty on it? If there is none, you line of argument is flawed.

===============================

Though your POV isn't flawed, but, you aren't able to justify it.

 

[Guest]

Indeed true, Though my comparison was with Prahaar regarding tactical targets within 200km from Borders .

All Depends on Army- If they insist Prahar range can be exceeded to 200km- DRDO is already offering 160-170km on export models-

However I thin rather than sitting on the already developed prahar version DRDO should try something extra ordinary onto the missile like this-


It can be used very effectively on enemy armor and Kargil like situations-

 

[ladder]

@Guest,

When you are saying moving back inside 700 odd km into Indian territory to target Lahore using Shaurya, what not launch A-5 from Pacific Island to target Lahore? Do you support that?