Discussion in 'Strategic Forces' started by ladder, Dec 10, 2013.
Mostly pop out test and may be one half range test when Prithvi was tested.
Tested for 1750km or 200km (basically half of K4 range or half of Prithvi range)?
Having Prithvi is paying off in multiple ways :thumb:
first part is state secret.
Second part yeah they have tested Prithvi for some 80-90 times, so they have knowledge of how it behave, plus it is work horse for all the new system tested on Agni and other missiles, including anti BMD systems.
old article on India Today
the land version of k-4 would be an ideal choice for india's very own long range carrier killer.
Land version of the K-4 is called Agni III (range wise). China's carrier killer is a propaganda tool. Currently no country has the technology to develop a BM with 2m CEP.
k-4 and agni 3 though comparable in range are completely different.agni 3 is an older generation missile of about 48 ton weight and is the primary workhorse of sfc and is a product of asl lab.k-4 is about 17 ton weight new generation submarine based missile and is a product of rci lab.as far as chinese carrier killer is concerned it has been tested on ship based old platforms and is regarded by global military community as a big threat to aircraft carriers.even iran is claiming to have a carrier killer missile in its arsenal and many countries will follow soon.i am saying that k-4 can be modified in a long range anti ship role if the need arise.
Hi, ballistic missiles cannot perform anti ship role since this role requires mid course correction (a ship is not a stationary target) and terminal seeker. That is why all anti ship missiles have generally two modes of guidance, an INS or GPS based guidance which may be aided by data guidance allowing for mid course correction, plus a terminal guidance for end game (active radar homing in case of Brahmos). Ballistic missile don't come with terminal seekers since they are meant to target stationary systems.
In addition, ballistic missiles are comparatively easier target for sam systems as their high trajectory puts them on the radars of ships from miles away. Dedicated anti ship missiles, on the other hand, are usually sea skimming to remain out of radar's detection as long as possible.
Hence, to convert a K4 into anti ship missile, substantial changes to the guidance system and trajectory will be required. It will be easier to develop a completely new missile instead.
some told me that K4 and A3 SL are two different projects. Can someone confirm that ?
yes,k4 and A3 are different.
A3 SL (Submarine Launch)
there is no sub launched missle in A-family.
Sir, this is just speculation, not an authentic source.
someday you will know that it is not speculation.
Maybe, but it doesn't make any sense. K-4 is much more technologically advanced than the AIII. When both has the same range, then why go for a relatively backward missile when we already have a relatively much more advanced missile?
Methinks AIIISL, if there was ever anything called such, was kind of like a technology demonstrator, which evolved into the K-4.
Land version of k4 is shaurya?
Imo agni SLBM mirv will come once the MIRV'D land version is tested?
I think, Shaurya is land version of k-15 Sagarika
Land version of K-15 is Shaurya.
Separate names with a comma.