He is not trolling I think. Maybe that is how Pakistan study technology and that is why they have lagged so far behind.:biggrin2:
Brahmos-A is simply the light weight air launched version of current configuration. It has been designed to bring down the weight to 2.5 ton. As far as increasing the range of Brahmos is concerned, it would be done for mainly the surface and ship launched variant. For air force variant, it is an stand off weapon and hence no immediate need is there to increase its current range.
Well, why not? When one can have a stand off weapon for 290 km, why not for 550 km?? Technically the aircraft acts as a range extender - it essentially becomes a very long range cruise missile!!!
I have to go ahead and disagree with you. Brahmos was always designed as a 600 km cruise missile (essentially the Oniks). Just to comply with MTCR, Russia just half-filled the fuel (at least officially that's the statement, they might have filled it up completely and the missile might always have always been secretly a 550 km range one!). There is essentially very little difference between the Brahmos and Onik (or for that matter the Bastions, Yakhonts etc.) when it comes to the overall design/dimensions, engine, fuel, fins etc. The seekers may have been slightly tweaked for each application/country! Net-net, the official project right now is to 'top off' the fuel tank (if it wasn't already topped off secretly initially itself); there are rumors that the newer missiles' fuel tank might have been topped off couple of years before the MTCR membership itself!
Here you are forgetting the basic concept of Stand off weapon. Stand off weapon means any weapon which could be fired from a safe distance out of the range of enemy air defence. So even with its current range of 300 km, the launching platform (Su30) would be effectively out of range of any current SAM except 40N6 of S400. So whether you want to extend its range as an standoff weapon or not, depends on how you want to use it. For this very reason I was saying that India should go for some heavy dedicated bomber instead of modified fighters for CM. But lets not discuss it now.
Now this half filled tanks and all are just plain bullshit. If someone has really written something like that, its nothing more then some ignorant writing. Look at how things work. Engines in a missile or rockets are used to provide thrust or force to the body. Now if we look at the relation of Force, Mass and Distance then a simple layman equation comes up as,
You're being very simplistic and incorrect in your view of the battlefield. Just because the aircraft is out of range of the SAM, it does not mean your missile will hit any arbitrary target with whatever piddly range the stand off weapon has! Imagine S400s deployed as a fence and your target is 300 kms behind the air defence, then your stand off weapon needs to traverse 600 kms. Extended range is always useful (especially if it comes for almost free). Kapsich?
Dude!! Maybe we should talk after you graduate from high school?? In your view of the world, the weight of the missile is constant throughout its flight! Where in fact. the weight of the missile changes constantly during the flight ( I am hoping that the light bulb went off in your head - that's right, the fuel quantity is decreasing). Despite this change the cruise missiles can maintain steady speed. How do they do that? You're right again - the engine can control thrust! Another thought exercise: Tomahawk cruise missile flies at subsonic speed for nearly 2,500 kms, now by your logic, during the last 100 kms of the journey the missile should attain hypersonic speed because the engine thrust remains the same but the weight has reduced drastically. You see what's wrong with that picture???
So you mean that you want Brahmos to take out a perimeter fence of S-400? When you talk about war, then the very first thing you want to do first is break down the defence. Using air borne system to take out any advance SAM site is the last thing you want to do unless and untill you are using stealth weapon. So talking about any strategic weapon like Brahmos in this situation is completely rubbish. It all depends on strategy buildup.
Now this shows that you circuit is completely fried up.
You don't necessarily need to take down the entire air defence system before you launch missile/aircraft to the other side of the defence perimeter!! That is the essence of a missile - all the more so for a supersonic cruise missile (which is hard to detect and chase). Brahmos is not for taking down air defence systems (don't know why you think that I think otherwise) but other strategic targets that could lie BEYOND the air defence 'fences'. I am trying not to use real target city names (as that would be inflammatory). Anyways, if you don't understand the utility of a longer range missile, then I am not going to try anymore to help you understand.
Just as the pilot of a commercial plane does not mount a new engine based on the number of passengers the plane is carrying, a cruise missile doesn't need a new engine for weights varying (within its design parameters). The new initial weight (with increased fuel load) is just a software configuration parameter that will get updated for all the up-ranged missiles. As I said before, this exercise was already done to flight control software to down range the missiles - they just need to reverse it now!
First of all, in the previous post itself you have shown your ignorance in matter of warfare technique by simply quoting a scenario where you are putting something like S-400 at perimeter. So I too believe that discussing on something like general warfare with you would simply mean waste of time. So lets leave this. Whether IAF wants an extended range Brahmos or not, it depends on them and their thinking. No point in discussing it.
Don't even compare Brahmos with any other cruise missile. Conventional Cruise Missiles like Tomahawk or our own Indian Nirbhay uses Turbofan engine, which is essentially an aircraft engine and simple software tweek could only vary its mass lifting capability within its performance threshold. But Brahmos make use of a RAMJET engine, which is a Rocket engine. Software tweeking of rocket engine doesn't change its performance criteria like that of Aircraft engine.
You don't seem to seem to get the fundamental point that Brahmos (from Oniks) was always designed and already built as a 600 km range missile. It was configured to fly only half that distance (at least official statement is thus - it may have been fully capable of full range all along too, but we never know). Now they'll be lifting those configuration restrictions - that's all!!! Think of the current Brahmos (at it's launch time) being in the fuel level state as it would have been at mid-point in its 600 km range flight. Can't a missile that has completed half it's 600 km flight and exhausted nearly half the fuel complete the remaining half of its flight or does it fall prey to some quackery of f=md???
i cant see anything at all. lol sorry.
Instead of Akash, why don't we modify barak-8 and increase its range?
Not sure what the connection with Brahmos missile is. But then Barak-8 is a damn good missile whose range has already been extended. One area where Akash kicks Barak-8's butt is the price!!! Then again Barak-8 is designed as a 'point defence' weapon as such it's own speed and altitude ceiling is not that consequential - it's top speed and altitude ceiling are slightly less than that of Akash's. Akash as such has a 'slight' advantage in the chase mode (with higher speed and higher altitude ceiling). A low priced, extended range Akash with an on-board seeker will probably still be a good option to continue pursuing
We need a layered defense anyways. Short range missiles are just as important. Range of akash and baraks should be increased but the short range versions shall also be kept deployed.
There was talk about deploying Ashwin as a long range SAM; I think with it's 200 km range and 4.5 mach speed it would be an exceptionally good long range SAM - it beats the crap out of Barak-8 (even with all its extensions)!! Also, being completely indigenous it might cost much less too. Barak-8 is way too expensive!! Israelis make a killing from this stuff (nothing against it in principle though)!!
