India's Air Defense System and its Capabilities

[sgarg]

@power_monger, you are ahead of the designers of PAD system. It cannot create a safety zone of 120 km radius around the launcher. Akash system is for aircrafts and cruise missiles. PAD is for ballistic missiles. The purpose is different.

There is no 100% effective system against ballistic missiles. The chances of interception are much lower for ballistic missiles. This is the very reason India's nukes are mounted on ballistic missiles. The cruise missiles will be used for conventional strike.

Interception of ballistic missiles is remarkably complex. PAD system is NOT mature by any means. It remains an experimental system.

 

[arnabmit]

A few points:

PAD is yet to be tested in final configuration. The maiden test was done without a KV. It is still 3-4 years away from production.

PAD interception ceiling is 150km, not range. Range is approx 450km.

Cost of PAD would not be prohibitive. Each interceptor would cost approx 10-12cr INR, or 1.5-2 million USD.

BM interception is not very complex in terms of tracking. Challenge is speed of reaction as incoming BMs are hypersonic. On the other hand, subsonic CM interception is very complex in terms of tracking, but gives you larger window of engagement. That is why, compared to a Hypersonic BM to a supersonic CM, the later poses a much greater threat to interception capabilities.

Single interceptor probability is low, that is why we would have a 2 tier BMD. Combined probability is in the high 90th percentile.

Sgarg,yes a typical SAM battery will cost in millions. Agreed. But what you do not realize is Exo-atmosphere Interceptors can cover wider region than Endo-atmospheric interceptors.

For example one Akash SAM defense system can at max cover a region of 25 Kms around the Strategic location. But where as PDV whose altitude range is 150 kms can easily provide protection of upto 120 kms area.
If you only had Akash SAM defense system,thousands of SAM batteries would be required there by increasing the cost hugly. But the Number of batteries required would get reduced drastically if you use PDV for exo-atmospheric interception. Once your SAM missile range increases,it requires less batteries to intercept incomming ballistic missiles there by reducing the cost of the whole ABM program exponentially.

This is our BMD program architecture.It includes
a) over the horizon and X-band fire control radars which detect and track the incoming missile
b) mission control centre (MCC) that fuses input(which may come from satellite based sensors also) processes it and sends orders for engagement to launch control centres
c) (LCCs) situated 1000 km away via mobile communication terminals (MCTs).
d) LCCs which orchestrate the final launch sequence with the mobile interceptor sitting nearby.

While point a) b) & c) have kind of static cost even when they are expensive,it is the point d) whose cost can reduced by having higher range SAM''s. In order to keep cost in control,BMD program will have multiple LCC's to cover most of India via exo atmospheric interceptors LCC's and will keep endo atmospheric interceptors LCC's only for selected few cities and strategic locations only.I Hope you are clear on the cost part of the BMD program.

Generally Exo-atmospheric interception is difficult as missiles can deploy decoys and jamming of signals can be attempted.US had identified 48 potential decoys for Exo-atmospheric intercpetion.But the intercpetion become even more difficult in Endo atmosphere because speed of the ballistic missile will be highest and they can also do maneouver missile incomming interceptiors(although ballist missiles cannot have much maneouvarability more than 5g in most cases) and there is a high risk of debris falling.

But our ABM program is only way where we can induce fear in pakistani minds about their first strike capability. Generall public sees ABM program as a program for complete protection.But Armies look it other way.It is a program which gives them a second striking capability to counter strike.which is why exactly India is develping ABM program

I hope i have cleared your doubts on ABM program.BTW,Strartegic location could be like Reliance jamnagar refinery. Government has already maintained Akash SAM over the refinery. cities could be metros and cities like bangalore with high concentration of defense related companies.

@power_monger, you are ahead of the designers of PAD system. It cannot create a safety zone of 120 km radius around the launcher. Akash system is for aircrafts and cruise missiles. PAD is for ballistic missiles. The purpose is different.

There is no 100% effective system against ballistic missiles. The chances of interception are much lower for ballistic missiles. This is the very reason India's nukes are mounted on ballistic missiles. The cruise missiles will be used for conventional strike.

Interception of ballistic missiles is remarkably complex. PAD system is NOT mature by any means. It remains an experimental system.

 

[power_monger]

@power_monger, you are ahead of the designers of PAD system. It cannot create a safety zone of 120 km radius around the launcher. Akash system is for aircrafts and cruise missiles. PAD is for ballistic missiles. The purpose is different.

There is no 100% effective system against ballistic missiles. The chances of interception are much lower for ballistic missiles. This is the very reason India's nukes are mounted on ballistic missiles. The cruise missiles will be used for conventional strike.

Interception of ballistic missiles is remarkably complex. PAD system is NOT mature by any means. It remains an experimental system.

I mentioned Akash SAM just as an example. It was notional example of a SAM defense system to indicate how range controls the cost.I very well know that Akash SAM cannot intercept targets with higher speed of 600 m/s.

BTW,can you mention with exact reason why you think a mature PDV missile system cannot a create a safety zone for 120Kms? Comming to maturity did I say our ABM program is fully mature?Even the US ABM program is not fully mature. Technology does not mature over night.it takes time.Ballistic missiles are less intelligent species among missiles. They follow similar trajectories for given ranges.Only recently there has been a attempt to put seekers on to Ballistic missiles to make it more intelligent. Even with seekers ballistic missiles are severly restricted in manuevarability.They just cant do 40g 50g manevoures.Ballistic missiles biggest defense in mid-course(atmosphere) is its ability to throw decoys.Currently there has been attempts to build seekers to distiniguish between BM and a decoy like dual color seeker.Even DRDO is developing a dual colour seeker in RCI which is planned for development trial in 2016.Give time and we should be able to defend BM with some level of comfortness.(100% defense is never a possability).

Btw,I would appreciate more technical discussion on Ballistic missile defense from your side than just statements like it can never happen,it is impossible etc etc.It simply does not add value addition to the discussion.And our ABM program is a definatly not a experimental system.It never was.

 

[power_monger]

A few points:

PAD is yet to be tested in final configuration. The maiden test was done without a KV. It is still 3-4 years away from production.

PAD interception ceiling is 150km, not range. Range is approx 450km.

Cost of PAD would not be prohibitive. Each interceptor would cost approx 10-12cr INR, or 1.5-2 million USD.

BM interception is not very complex in terms of tracking. Challenge is speed of reaction as incoming BMs are hypersonic. On the other hand, subsonic CM interception is very complex in terms of tracking, but gives you larger window of engagement. That is why, compared to a Hypersonic BM to a supersonic CM, the later poses a much greater threat to interception capabilities.

Single interceptor probability is low, that is why we would have a 2 tier BMD. Combined probability is in the high 90th percentile.

Arnab,if i remember our interceptors work on proximity fuse arent they? I know our ABM program needs more time to mature. We have only used Prithvi missiles for target.we have not even tested our ABM program for our own agni missiles with decoys. First test of PDV done in march was to validate the capabilities of its on-board imaging infrared (IIR) seeker as well as the capabilities of a new missile.Hit to Kill test should happen before the year end(hopefully).

 

[ladder]

I mentioned Akash SAM just as an example. It was notional example of a SAM defense system to indicate how range controls the cost.I very well know that Akash SAM cannot intercept targets with higher speed of 600 m/s.

BTW,can you mention with exact reason why you think a mature PDV missile system cannot a create a safety zone for 120Kms? Comming to maturity did I say our ABM program is fully mature?Even the US ABM program is not fully mature. Technology does not mature over night.it takes time.Ballistic missiles are less intelligent species among missiles. They follow similar trajectories for given ranges.Only recently there has been a attempt to put seekers on to Ballistic missiles to make it more intelligent. Even with seekers ballistic missiles are severly restricted in manuevarability.They just cant do 40g 50g manevoures.Ballistic missiles biggest defense in mid-course(atmosphere) is its ability to throw decoys.Currently there has been attempts to build seekers to distiniguish between BM and a decoy like dual color seeker.Even DRDO is developing a dual colour seeker in RCI which is planned for development trial in 2016.Give time and we should be able to defend BM with some level of comfortness.(100% defense is never a possability).

Btw,I would appreciate more technical discussion on Ballistic missile defense from your side than just statements like it can never happen,it is impossible etc etc.It simply does not add value addition to the discussion.And our ABM program is a definatly not a experimental system.It never was.

I very well know that Akash SAM cannot intercept targets with higher speed of 600 m/s.

Any links for the claim?

 

[sgarg]

A few points:

PAD is yet to be tested in final configuration. The maiden test was done without a KV. It is still 3-4 years away from production.

Single interceptor probability is low, that is why we would have a 2 tier BMD. Combined probability is in the high 90th percentile.

We are not seeing a strong schedule of PAD tests. That tells me that program is not having as much focus as we hope.
The key is to test against IRBMs. However such tests are quite difficult to set up and accomplish.
Testing against SRBM like Prithvi is not enough.
You may dig more info on PAD and post it here. I somehow do not get much comfort feel on this project.

 

[power_monger]

We are not seeing a strong schedule of PAD tests. That tells me that program is not having as much focus as we hope.
The key is to test against IRBMs. However such tests are quite difficult to set up and accomplish.
Testing against SRBM like Prithvi is not enough.
You may dig more info on PAD and post it here. I somehow do not get much comfort feel on this project.

You need to come out of the feeling that ABM programs are just experiments and BM are invincible.A experimental program cannot spin off new SAM missiles like PDV. Very less info is leaked on press so as to keep ABM program low profile. But that does not mean there is no enough focus.Nearly 40 companies(both public and private) are involved in this project.Just go through the ABM thread in DFI. you will realise how systems were improved and technology is maturing. Btw,on test range to intercept multiple incomming missiles simultaneously,A new range in Machilipatnam is being built at an estimated investment of Rs 1,000 crore which may be operationalized by 2017.

 

[power_monger]

Any links for the claim?

Had read it in DRDO website itself long back.Will dig that link for you.

 

[arnabmit]

Arnab,if i remember our interceptors work on proximity fuse arent they? I know our ABM program needs more time to mature. We have only used Prithvi missiles for target.we have not even tested our ABM program for our own agni missiles with decoys. First test of PDV done in march was to validate the capabilities of its on-board imaging infrared (IIR) seeker as well as the capabilities of a new missile.Hit to Kill test should happen before the year end(hopefully).

We are not seeing a strong schedule of PAD tests. That tells me that program is not having as much focus as we hope.
The key is to test against IRBMs. However such tests are quite difficult to set up and accomplish.
Testing against SRBM like Prithvi is not enough.
You may dig more info on PAD and post it here. I somehow do not get much comfort feel on this project.

It would have a proximity fuse which would explode the gimbaled warhead, releasing a cloud of pre-fragmented shrapnel towards the target.

Tests against Agni-II would take place once the 2nd missile test range near Kalaikunda is constructed within 2yrs.

Read this for more details:

Saurav Jha's Blog : Some notes on DRDO's PDV ballistic missile defence interceptor

 

[sgarg]

It would have a proximity fuse which would explode the gimbaled warhead, releasing a cloud of pre-fragmented shrapnel towards the target.
Tests against Agni-II would take place once the 2nd missile test range near Kalaikunda is constructed within 2yrs.
Read this for more details:

Is there any firm timetable for tests and then further production and induction?

The experience of Akash and LCA Tejas has proved amply that it takes time and resources to "product-ionize" even after proving product is successful.

 

[arnabmit]

Is there any firm timetable for tests and then further production and induction?

The experience of Akash and LCA Tejas has proved amply that it takes time and resources to "product-ionize" even after proving product is successful.

DRDO under Dr. Chander is a different beast. The mismanaged projects of yester-years will have to pay for past bloch-ups with time. But all new projects will be delivered in a time bound manner.

Target date for "Missile Autonomy Mission" is 2022. Includes all strategic & tactical missiles.

 

[power_monger]

DRDO under Dr. Chander is a different beast. The mismanaged projects of yester-years will have to pay for past bloch-ups with time. But all new projects will be delivered in a time bound manner.

Target date for "Missile Autonomy Mission" is 2022. Includes all strategic & tactical missiles.

Vk saraswat and Chander both were missile man.npo doubt missiles get highest attention in DRDO..

 

[sasi]

it is still on the drawing board!

DRDO Chief on Akash MK-II missile | idrw.org

i hope, they do it akash 2 atleast in a decade!

 

[power_monger]

it is still on the drawing board!

DRDO Chief on Akash MK-II missile | idrw.org

i hope, they do it akash 2 atleast in a decade!

It won't for the single fact that algorithms to control flight characteristics which are most time consuming is pretty much done. And new akash is just the same missile with increase in range only. To me it looks like they do not want Akash missile to be changed drastically by adding seeker which would make it entirly different missile and much costlier too.

And Astra missile is undergoing user trials which is planned for induction in 2015. Considering that ground launched Astra has already proven its capabilities,Astra can be used as a missile with seeker capabilities if required.Astra mark - 1 when used as a SAM has similar range that of Akash.So putting seeker on Akash would result in duplication of efforts and resources in creating similar range and type missiles.

 

[Archer]

akash etc can only be taken up in mk2 version if service/s commit to it. only then funds are released and work can be firmed up for production. any significant work beyond initial design and preparatory work leads CAG to call DRDO names and has landed their leaders in hot soup. with such beancounting, why would drdo commit its own funds to an akash mk2, only to learn later IAF says, sorry not interested we want something else. etc.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Make in India: Bharat Forge & Punj Lloyd in race for Rs 16,800 crore contract to make anti-aircraft guns

NEW DELHI: Bharat ForgeBSE 3.41 % and Punj LloydBSE 7.67 % have emerged as the only contenders for a Rs 16,800-crore mega contract to replace the ageing anti-aircraft guns of the Indian Army. With the defence ministry looking to go ahead with trials and field tests to pick the winner, the two private companies are set to compete for one of the largest army projects under the 'Make in India' programme.

The project — involving manufacturing of 1,102 air defence guns over the next 15 years to replace the vintage L70/ZU 23 that have been in service for decades — promises to establish the winner of the contract as a major defence player in the private sector given that no state-run company, including the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), is competing for the contract.

The two domestic companies were shortlisted after responses to a tender were received under the 'Buy and Make (Indian)' category earlier this year, people familiar with the matter said.In the first stage, the manufacturer will have to supply the army with 428 guns over the next five years. The mega contract also involves churning out several lakh rounds of ammunition in India. However, a long process lies ahead, including extensive field tests for accuracy and reliability, quality checks and scrutiny of the finances of the competitors. In the past, it has taken two-three years to select a winning bid in such contracts.

Read more at:
Make in India: Bharat Forge & Punj Lloyd in race for Rs 16,800 crore contract to make anti-aircraft guns - The Economic Times

 

[Hari Sud]

Future fights are missile fights, anti aircraft guns are subsidiary to aircrafts patrolling overhead keeping the enemy away. For the fighter fight of today, anti aircraft guns are subsidiary.

Anti aircraft guns, very modern type, costing a huge sum for fast moving fighter overhead, firing thousands of rounds to catch one fighter is a heavy expense with limited value.

Yes, modernizing anti aircraft guns is essential but not a high priority. It is like taking a knife to a gun fight.

 

[Adioz]

Future fights are missile fights, anti aircraft guns are subsidiary to aircrafts patrolling overhead keeping the enemy away. For the fighter fight of today, anti aircraft guns are subsidiary.

Anti aircraft guns, very modern type, costing a huge sum for fast moving fighter overhead, firing thousands of rounds to catch one fighter is a heavy expense with limited value.

Yes, modernizing anti aircraft guns is essential but not a high priority. It is like taking a knife to a gun fight.

Not necessarily.

1.AAAs and AAs provide volume firepower and this makes it perilous to attempt a low level bombing run.
2.They are cheap, not very complicated and are difficult to saturate when deployed in large numbers. Some places like forward posts on Siachen and various other mountainous terrains rely on these systems for air defence.
4.It can also be used as an anti-infantry weapon when in a pinch. Hence it is a very versatile weapon.
5.They can complement SAMs to make SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defences) operations a tough proposition for any foe.
6. They can be employed in larger numbers than SAMs thus covering 2nd teir air-defence zones along with MANPADs.
7. SAMs alone cannot guarantee air defence in mountains. They need to be deployed with AAAs.

 

[tharun]

We need tier system of air defence..
1)Two tier ballistic missile system for for top cities
2)Single tier for other cities.
Different types of Anti-aircraft SAM's
1)300km+ range(S-300 or 400)
2)80+km of range Barak-8
3)25 km of akash is already available
Short range of mobile Sam's
1)Pantsir-S1 for countering attack helicopters,cruise missiles
2)manpads
Fixed Air Defence like
1)Anti-aircraft guns
2)Close in weapon system like Phalanx 07 Ak-630 to protect from rockets and mortars

 

[Adioz]

We need tier system of air defence..
1)Two tier ballistic missile system for for top cities
2)Single tier for other cities.
Different types of Anti-aircraft SAM's
1)300km+ range(S-300 or 400)
2)80+km of range Barak-8
3)25 km of akash is already available
Short range of mobile Sam's
1)Pantsir-S1 for countering attack helicopters,cruise missiles
2)manpads
Fixed Air Defence like
1)Anti-aircraft guns
2)Close in weapon system like Phalanx 07 Ak-630 to protect from rockets and mortars

Dude, this plan you just laid out is ideal. This simply means that it cannot be achieved. Keep in mind that it is ideal air -defence but not ideal for the country.
A small, rich country with a high threat perception is the only one that can justify the money spent.
A more reallistic proposition would be:-
1. ABM defence for top cities (keep in mind that DRDO is trying to integrate AAD and PAD into a single missile)
2. Multilayered SAMs complemented by AAAs and MANPADs for forward troops and 2-tier SAM cover for supply routes.
3. Multilayered SAMs for airbases.
4. Various other SAM sites to plug the gap.
5. No need to deploy special air defence assets for individual cities. They'll be covered by the grid stated above.
Multilayered SAMs include: Barak 8 LRSAM, Aakash MRSAM, Maitri QRSAM.
2 tier SAMs include: Barak 8 and Aakash SAMs
CIWS should be used sparingly where a major city or installation is under direct threat from an MLRS or enemy artillery. These should be moved according to enemy deployment.