First lets take a look at the kind of K-missile ASBM I am proposing (elementary analysis):-
Based on: K-15
CEP = 20 m (Here I am assuming that you are right and DRDO scientists, who said that K-family has a stated goal of achieving high accuracy, are wrong) I believe the CEP to be in single digits.
R95 = 42m
Range = 700km
ToT = 500 seconds
Active guidance at terminal phase (The real cost of development of the missile).
Role : Disturb enemy warship fleet. Work in conjunction with ASCMs to cripple enemy fleet and force its return.
Deployment: Arihant-class SSBN, Ground based (Shaurya) missile TELs on Car Nicobar.
Warhead:-
The stated role is to disturb enemy warships and cause damage to enemy morale and enemy warship's subsystems. The disabling of critical enemy subsystems such as radars, VLS, magazines, Bridge, ATC, Carrier hangars or flight deck is purely based on probability, and hence we use MKKW (Multiple Kinetic Kill Warhead) to maximize chances. Each KKW will have a weight of 10 kg and will be a Kinetic Energy Penetrator with no explosives. Hence, each K-15 will be able to carry ~99 warheads. Each KKW will have a kinetic energy of approximately 30 Mega Joules. Distance between points of impact between any two consecutive KKW is 7 meters.
Look at the image below:-
Blue point represents point of impact of Center of Mass of missile.
The blue circle represents the CEP.
Red area represents the circle in which K-15 has >95% probability of landing (R95 circle).
Black holes represent point of impact of each KKW (Total 99) (Uniform circular distribution around the blue point assumed).
[Graphic is to scale]
Now, we can see that even if the blue point (and the resulting distribution of black holes around it) is moved to the edge of the red area (R95 circle), at least half of the 99 KKW will still land on the carrier.
And this is the KKW distribution of one missile. In wartime, a salvo (of upto 12 missiles) will hit the ship, and the number of KKW hitting the ship could be well over 100. Within those odds, the probability of hitting critical subsystems is high.
The opening strike thus delivered by this weapon would rob the carrier fleet of its air cover, and will allow the IN warships to close-in before engaging the remaining targets with ASCMs fired by stealth corvettes. Capital ships of the IN, meanwhile, will stay well away.
The main challenge in designing the weapon is designing an automated terminal guidance system to locate the target ships which would have moved >3 km away since the mid-course update.
The real challenge in wartime would be to try and knock out a few air defence ships with the K-15ASBM to allow for lesser resistance to Brahmos salvos. The Type-52D destroyer will be a much tougher target.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
As for you claiming our lack of need, and that PLAN are not entering Indian Ocean for the next decade and the US threat to PRC being much more than the PRC threat to India:-
India needs to develop a capability to defeat PLAN in a naval engagement west of Singapore. We would not want to rely too much on the American pressure on PLAN in SCS. Understand that we are not trying to create an Indian DF-21, so do not try and compare this with Chinese situation. Our ASBM would focus on disturbing the target vessel, to create a gap in enemy defences in order to kill without risking our aircraft or capital ships. K-15 might be redundant on Brahmos, but think what a K-4 based ASBM based on same thinking can do. Its range of >3000 km coupled with greater throw weight (2.5 tons) will be the real challenge for PLAN.
No, Chinese did have their own reason but Indian only “need” this because some fanboys say so.
The Challenge Chinese faces is 6-7 US aircraft carriers plus another 200-300 US land based fighters deployed in Japan and South Korea. There is no way that Chinese can have such scale of forces sent to India Ocean in next 20-30 years.
Indian generals will laugh their ass off if Chinese dare to send 4 carriers (the maximum available in next 20 years) to India Ocean.
Turning a ballistic missile into a anti-ship weapon requires lots of re-design, additional equipment, higher standard techs. All these will make this weapon lots more expensive than both Brahmos and normal ballistic missile. But its effectiveness will be no better than Brahmos on anti-ship, neither better than other ballistic missile on land target strike. Then why you want to waste the money on such a weapon.
I disagree with this part.
The problem is not CM tech. According to American, Chinese started to develop the so called “carrier-killer” after 1996. I don’t think Chinese had any trouble to get the supersonic cruise missile from Russia at the time. But they didn’t or they did buy but not on the top of their shopping list. Why? Because the current threat of US forces is lot greater than any threat that Chinese could possibly throw on India: 6~7 carriers with 80~90 planes on each, 20~30 SSBN with 138 cruise missiles on each, plus another 200~300 land based fighters/bombers, not to mention the military planes from her allies. What did China have at the time? 48 Su-27 and hundreds of planes/warships built with 1960s tech. So, the problem for China was that she didn’t have any platform able to get as close as 600km to US fleet with enough CM. That is why they need a 1500-2000km ballistic missile to do the job.
Now come back to India. The threat of Chinese fleet in India Ocean is as much as Indian fleet in SCS: zero. In India Ocean, Indian land based air force can sink the entire Chinese fleet even without shooting a single brahmos.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Exactly my point. Even with all the improvements in tech, the improvement in accuracy would still be far behind then what could be achieved by any CM. For any country without any proven CM tech, ASBM could be a choice of weapon for maritime warfare. But if someone does have a proven CM like Brahmos in arsenal, investing in ASBM is pure misplacement of funds. Improving accuracy is one thing, but diverting energy to configure K15 into ASBM role is simply not economical for India atleast.
The only cost would arise out of designing a guidance system for a missile moving at mach 7 and trying to locate the targets within a 3 kilometer radius. The cost for software upgrade (to allow the terminal guidance to update the terminal maneuver profile) will be much less in comparison.
Given that we are already trying to develop Brahmos-II, we will need better tech for Brahmos-II guidance to work, and hence, any funds sunk in developing a terminal guidance for K-15 ASBM would be useful for the Brahmos-II programme. Later when the Brahmos-II is up and running, we can develop a K-4 based ASBM for greater ranges (~3000km).
