INDIA : Capability to neutralise enemy satellites proved

Discussion in 'Strategic Forces' started by ganesh177, Mar 8, 2011.

  1. ganesh177

    ganesh177 Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    295
    Location:
    Pune, Incredible India
    Capability to neutralise enemy satellites proved

    By admin at 7 March, 2011, 5:29 am

    SOURCE : The Hindu
    The fresh success of the interceptor missile mission on Sunday has demonstrated the country’s capability to neutralise adversarial satellites in space, according to V.K. Saraswat, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister.India has “all the technologies and building blocks which can be used for anti-satellite missions” in the low-earth and polar orbits. However, “India’s policy is that it will not weaponise space, and we are committed to the peaceful uses of outer space,” he said.
    Out of the six interceptor missions conducted so far by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), five have been successful.
    “Fantastic success”

    Dr. Saraswat, who is also the DRDO Director-General, called Sunday’s mission “a fantastic success.” The interceptor boasted new technologies such as directional warhead, fibre-optic gyroscopes and a radio-frequency seeker that guided the interceptor to attack the incoming “enemy missile” at an altitude of 16 km above the Bay of Bengal.
    The incoming missile, a modified Prithvi, blasted off at 9.32 a.m. from the launch complex III of the Integrated Test Range at Chandipur, Orissa. It mimicked the trajectory of a ballistic missile with a 600-km range. In no time, radars at different locations swung into action, tracking the “enemy” missile, constructing its trajectory and passing on the information in real time to the Mission Control Centre (MCC) to launch the interceptor, an Advanced Air Defence (AAD) missile. It had a directional warhead to go so close to the adversarial missile before exploding to inflict the maximum damage on it. The interceptor had state-of-the-art guidance systems to achieve a manoeuvrable trajectory.
    The MCC identified the attacker as a ballistic missile and assigned it to the Launch Control Centre (LCC) on Wheeler Island. After making quick calculations, the LCC launched the interceptor “right on the dot at the required instant,” Dr. Saraswat said. The AAD soared into the sky at 9.37 a.m. from Wheeler Island to take care of the “threat.”
    The interceptor manoeuvred in the direction of the target, which was called the “least energy manoeuvre,” he said. The interceptor raced into the sky at 4.5 Mach. In the terminal phase of the attacker’s flight, as it was hurtling towards the earth, the interceptor’s radio frequency seeker “acquired the target, rolled the interceptor in the right direction and, when it was a few metres from the target, gave the command to the directional warhead to explode,” Dr. Saraswat explained.
    The warhead detonated, blasting the attacker to pieces. The ground-based radars and the sensors on board the targeted missile tracked the debris, which rained down over the Bay of Bengal, “confirming a very good kill,” the DRDO Director-General said. “Based on the data from the target, a 100 per cent kill was achieved.” The radars were located at Konark and Kendrapara, near Paradip, in Orissa.
    V.L.N. Rao, Programme Director; Avinash Chander, Director, Advanced Systems Laboratory, DRDO, Hyderabad; K. Sekhar, Chief Controller (Missile Systems and Low Intensity Conflict), DRDO; and S.P. Dash, Director, ITR, were present on Wheeler Island. Defence Minister A.K. Antony congratulated the DRDO missile technologists on the successful demonstration of the ballistic missile defence system.
    Dr. Saraswat said the next test would be done later this year to intercept a 2000-km-range incoming missile at an altitude of 150 km. India’s plans for putting in place the first phase of the two-layered ballistic missile defence shield by 2012 and the second phase by 2016 were on course. This would be done by integrating it with the Air Defence System of the Indian Air Force and the Army.
    Only the U.S., Russia, France, Israel and India have the capability to put in place a ballistic missile defence shield. China is still developing it. It conducted an anti-ballistic missile test on January 11, 2010. The target missile, launched from Xichang, was intercepted and destroyed at an altitude of 700 km by a KT-2 variant missile that took off from near Korla in Xinjiang province.


    http://idrw.org/?p=933
     
    Pintu likes this.
  2.  
  3. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
  4. Minghegy

    Minghegy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    9
    Proved? did you mean the Russian satellites? Oh my god...
     
  5. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    There is nothing in the report that explicitly states Russian satellites. Also, it says that India has the knowhow to create anti-satellite weapons because the technology is supposedly same as those used in India's interceptor missile tests, 5 out 6 of which were successful.

    ??
     
  6. Minghegy

    Minghegy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    9
    Your experts only fool your people, such words just is a joke for foreign military experts.
     
  7. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    And I presume you are a military expert? Fine, please explain, purely from the technical point of view, why you think our experts are fooling us?
     
  8. Tronic

    Tronic Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    True. Its definitely not the People's Daily. ;)
     
  9. Minghegy

    Minghegy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    9
    Such in-atmosphere interception is finished by an upgraded SAM, but beyond the atmosphere there is totally different techs.

    "Neutralise" sounds cool, but not the accurate word due to his analogy was between in-atmosphere interception and attack a satellite, "destroy" or "hit" is much accurate.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  10. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Location:
    Bangalore
    he he he it seems Chinese are trying so hard to prove there propaganda right, but sadly the world doesn't seem to listen to them.

    On a serious note, time is near by to test the PDV.
     
  11. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    If you have the means of computing the trajectory of a moving object in the atmosphere, why would that be any different from computing the trajectory of a moving object at the periphery or outside the atmosphere? Moreover, satellites move in a designated orbit and hence should be typically easy to target.

    Please explain, what you meant by 'totally different techs'?
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  12. A.V.

    A.V. New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    6,503
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    Moscow, russia
    THE RECENT INTERCEPTER TEST TWO DAYS BACK , was a partial success only . the missile did hit the incoming target but it was not on the desired point in time , the inbound missile was on it way down and the locus of interception was alternate than the one programmed. so i am not jumping around much here as i think lot more needs to be done to perfect this technology.
     
  13. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Location:
    Bangalore
    A.V. I am not getting what are you trying to say. Can you please explain a little more
     
  14. Minghegy

    Minghegy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    9
    Can you represent the world? hehe, who the hell you are!

    Below the atmosphere use an upgraded SAM as interceptor.
    Above the atmosphere use such interceptor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTY-pCkL-QE
    They are technically different at all.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  15. A.V.

    A.V. New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    6,503
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    Moscow, russia
    Sir the desired level of accuracy meeting all parameters of success was not achieved in the recent test 2 days back , it was a partial success with some of the objectives not being fulfilled thats the last info i got yesterday from a reliable source
     
  16. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Location:
    Bangalore
    Then who the hell you are? And if you are not so much worried about us then why bother responding?
    Oh ouch the truth hurts that people know how useless your capabilities are and even not bother to mention your name
     
  17. Iamanidiot

    Iamanidiot Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    5,326
    Likes Received:
    1,493
    avis where was this tested P\can you PM me the location where this test occured
     
  18. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Can you represent the world Minghegy? May I ask who you are? I just assumed that you are a military expert, but do let us know.

    Good video and thanks for sharing.

    Still, I am not convinced that this is the only way to intercept a satellitle. Interceptors have to predict the path of a incoming missile or aeroplane. This prediction part is easier when it comes to satellites. Please explain how endo-atmospheric vs exo-atmospheric interception vary in terms of technology.

    Waiting for your response.

    BTW, have you ever heard of sequential Monte-Carlo methods?

    Edit: Minghegy, kindly respond.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  19. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Location:
    Bangalore
    A.V. I would request not to get in to speculation mode, rather then request to wait for more clarity, usually the report by TSS (The Hindu) is right, if his reports mentions it as success then I don't see any reason to doubt it. Mean while the AAD was never designed as hit to kill it is always close proximity explosion to induce maximum damage. Mean while if you can get some more info out that would be great, because the way you are portraying as "partial success" I am getting a feeling that it shows the robustness of the system :)
     
  20. Tronic

    Tronic Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    That is most certainly what the Chinese wish they had. Shooting down a satellite, as the Chinese did, is not some great leap as you may be led to believe. The Chinese already knew the exact trajectory of their satellite; they knew exactly when and where the satellite would be, and they knew where to toss the interceptor missile. Moreover, it was a low orbit satellite which the Chinese destroyed which itself resulted in a whole lot of trash flying around the orbit; which is why, other nations won't be doing something as foolish any time soon. Any nation that can put a rover on the moon, can also laden a missile with explosives and toss it towards a pre-determined location, as the Chinese did.
     
  21. Minghegy

    Minghegy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    9
    Did I try to represent the world? Never.
    Maybe it's a cultural difference that in China you can't represent others without their permissions, no one can get the permission of the world so no one can represent the world. I'm sorry for this cultural difference.

    KKV is the best way and the most difficulty way, other ways are inefficient relatively.

    I don't know sequential Monte_Carlo methods.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011

Share This Page