Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs)

Discussion in 'Strategic Forces' started by LETHALFORCE, Jul 17, 2010.

  1. Broccoli

    Broccoli Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2012
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    106
    Location:
    Finland
    No idea where to find film about those French MIRV's, but Russian ones can be briefly seen in "Weapons races" documentaries what can be found from youtube. Here is missiles one.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    sayareakd likes this.
  2. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    India’s Agni-V ICBM to Carry Multiple Nuclear Warheads | The Diplomat

    India’s Agni-V ICBM to Carry Multiple Nuclear Warheads


    Delhi’s use of MIRV technology on its longest-range missile could destabilize the nuclear balance with China


    [​IMG]

    India is reconfiguring its longest-range missile to enable it to carry multiple nuclear warheads, Chennai-based The Hindu reported on Wednesday, citing a senior Indian official.

    V.K. Saraswat, Director-General of the Defence Research and Development Organisation, told the newspaper that a team is modifying the Agni-V to give it the ability to carry Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs).

    “Work on that is going on and it is at design stage,” Saraswat told The Hindu.

    The Agni-V is a nuclear-capable three-stage, solid-fuel missile with an initial range of 5,000 kilometers that will likely be extended to over 5,5000 kms, making it an Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile (ICBM). India first tested the Agni-V last April, and the launch was a success.

    The test was widely celebrated among official India and the Indian press where some referred to as the “China killer” owing to the fact that missile puts in range all of China’s major cities for the first time. Saraswat himself called the missile a “game-changer.”

    MIRVs enable ICBMs to carry multiple nuclear warheads on a single missile, and strike multiple targets or a single target with greater efficiency. After the last stage of the ICBM boosts off, a MIRVed ICBM will dispense the warheads to their separate or singular targets. Both the Soviet Union and the United States MIRVed their ICBM forces during the 1970s, which complicated arms control agreements moving forward.

    It has long been suspected that India would at some point seek to modify the Agni-V and the Agni-III— an intermediate range ballistic missile which has the same build as the Agni-V— with MIRVs. This is primarily because China is believed to be in the process of testing MIRVed versions of its DF-31 ICBM and DF-41 road-mobile ICBM.

    MIRVing ICBMs has the potential to destabilize a mutually assured destruction situation primarily because they could give nations greater confidence in being able to destroy an adversary’s hardened missile silo sites in a first strike by launching multiple, lower yield warheads at the sites. This fear, in turn, increases the strategic logic of offensive action as nations could come to believe that they have to be the first side to launch nuclear strikes or risk having a large portion of their nuclear forces wiped out by an adversary.

    There were strong fears throughout the second half of the Cold War about the destabilizing effects of MIRVed missiles. As one source recounts:

    “MIRVed land-based ICBMs were considered destabilizing because they tended to put a premium on striking first. MIRVs threatened to rapidly increase the U.S.'s deployable nuclear arsenal and thus the possibility that it would have enough bombs to destroy virtually all of the Soviet Union's nuclear weapons and negate any significant retaliation. Later on the U.S. feared the Soviet's MIRVs because Soviet missiles had a greater throw-weight and could thus put more warheads on each missile than the U.S. could.”

    The smaller size of the Chinese and Indian nuclear and missile forces could enhance the destabilizing nature of introducing MIRV technology into the relationship. It should be noted, however, that both China and India have no-first use nuclear doctrines, which should theoretically reduce the danger and anxiety created by MIRVed nuclear forces. Additionally both India and China are in the process of acquiring Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs) that, once reliable forces are operating, virtually ensure that some second strike capability would survive a first strike by the other side.

    Still, at the very least the introduction of MIRVed technology into the Sino-Indo strategic balance could convince both sides that they need to significantly expand the size of their nuclear forces. This would inevitably complicate global efforts to reduce the size of nuclear arsenals. Indeed, Russia recently stated that it is no longer interested in bilateral nuclear arms reductions with the United States, and will only pursue arms control agreements on a multilateral basis.
     
  3. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
  4. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
  5. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    The Indian move towards MIRVs



    India's pursuit of multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV) technology has been variously described as being in the design or technology development phase in recent times. This position was reiterated on the side lines of the second successful test of the Agni V Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) last September by officials from DRDO. Of course there had been some confusion in the past as to whether it is the Agni-V itself which will have a MIRVed variant or whether the first Indian MIRV configuration will be exhibited by a new vehicle sometimes referred to as the Agni-VI in the media. Nevertheless, repeated references to India's program for MIRVs has raised the heckles of the usual quarters in the Western hemisphere who either see it as destabilizing or a departure from India's stated nuclear doctrine of credible minimum deterrence(MCD). But truth be told MIRVs are a strategic priority for India precisely because of its deterrence philosophy and the emergence of anti-ballistic missile (ABM) systems in China and elsewhere.

    The second test of the Agni-V served to underline the repeatability of a number of new components that contribute towards increasing the payload fraction of Indian missiles (significant for MIRVing) as well as their reliability and robustness. The Agni-V boasts contemporary technology such as wholly carbon composite second and third stages on the materials side and system on chip (SOC) and digitally connected multi-channel communications on the avionics side. Composite stages have greater structural integrity than metallic stages and weigh less for similar size. They are also more corrosion resistant. SOC eliminates the need for PCB based hardware for on-board computers that weigh up to 5 kgs in legacy missiles. SOC based computers weigh just 200 grams and boast 6-7 times higher processor capability while requiring very little power and giving far greater leeway in terms of warhead configuration. SOC's therefore also aid the process of designing MIRVed missiles. Digitally connected multi-channel communications for the control system of missile of course get rid of the miles of cabling that would have otherwise gone into these missiles.

    These developments taken together therefore sit very well with the desired aim of deploying the Agni-V in a canisterized configuration. Canisterization requires that a high degree of confidence be held in the dependability of the missile's components so as to make it a 'wooden round' i.e once deployed the missile moves in the canister itself carried by a truck (or even train as in the case of the Russian SS-24 Scalpel) ready to be launched on warning. It also requires shaving of as much missile




    weight as possible for improved or comparable mobility to an equivalent non-canisterized road mobile system since the canister's weight also counts, naturally. Given India's second strike posture which puts a premium on survivability, canisterization has become an imperative for the land based missile leg of India's nuclear deterrent.

    While India's Strategic Forces Command (SFC) already has rail mobile Agni-IIs and IIIs deployed, it has been deemed that a better cost benefit calculus is possible by making India's newer long range ballistic missiles canisterized road mobile systems. Indeed the next test of the Agni-V, likely to be conducted soon, will be from a canister and the Agni-IV is also likely to be canisterized in the future. But the transporter erector launchers (TELs) deploying these missiles differ from the Russian MAZ series vehicles. While road mobile TEL's deployed by Russia are designed for cross country mobility in that country's vast forested hinterlands and for quick exits from their shelters in case of garrison basing, India's road mobile missiles will be randomly based across India's road network consisting of everything from a highway to perhaps even a Class II road.

    The idea is to deploy camouflaged TEL's that would look like every day semi-trailer trucks at least when viewed from above. Thus concealment in addition to road mobility is a cornerstone of India's future land based missile force. As Avinash Chander then Chief Controller Missiles and Strategic Systems, DRDO (and now Director General, DRDO) put it in an interview to Frontline in April 2012.

    You can stop on the roadside on the highway, launch from there and go away. You can stop the traffic for five minutes on either side, launch and go away. Your ability to move, your options to launch and your operational flexibility increase manifold. You have a reduced reaction time. Everything is already prepared. Just make the missile vertical in three minutes, and the launching takes another few minutes. So you stop, launch and go off. That does not give the enemy a chance even if he detects you. He does not know from where you are going to launch. Only when you have made the missile vertical for launch will he realise that you are going to launch it. The boost-phase destruction that people are talking of, that is, the missile getting destroyed before it takes off, will not be possible if you have a short reaction time as in a canisterised launch unless you have a space-based radar weapons system. Today, it is non-existent and is not likely to be developed in the next couple of decades at least.

    Given that this is the intended pattern for deployment, it is understandable that the actual number of such vehicles transiting India's road network will be kept modest, to ensure water tight protection and manageability. Indeed the greater threat to such systems probably comes from clandestine ground level operations rather than from a targeted first strike. Accordingly an enemy would perceive much lesser gains from a first strike against such systems in MIRV configuration then it would if the same missiles carrying MIRVs were deployed in hardened or even super-hardened silos.




    While MIRVed missiles sitting in silos do greatly increase the temptation on the part of the enemy to risk a first strike it is debatable whether the same can be said for randomly based camouflaged mobile missiles carrying MIRVs which even an enemy with very good C4ISR technology will find difficult to locate in time amongst India's clutter. Again, given the need to keep India's land based deployment pattern manageable, the number of missiles themselves will be kept modest and this ties in well with the need to have an affordable nuclear deterrent.

    On the other hand limited numbers actually strengthens the case for MIRVing. Since India has opted for stealth rather than sheer numbers for its land based missile force (i.e in terms of boost vehicles), increasing the targeting capability of these missiles is a need and that is precisely where MIRVs prove useful. India's counter-value doctrine requires that its forces survive an enemy first strike and retaliate massively. It is therefore important that whatever percentage of India's modest sized deployed missile force survives an enemy first strike, is able to inflict unacceptable damage in the enemy's perception.

    It is here that MIRVs emerge as particularly useful since each MIRV could be used to attack a spread of targets within a certain 'footprint' area. From India's perspective China's urban conurbations at the mouth of its historically settled rivers provide an ideal target for MIRVed missiles. Even a few Agni series missiles carrying 3-5 thermonuclear MIRVs each would be sufficient to put paid to the 'Chinese miracle'.

    Now there has been a fair bit of confusion about whether an Agni V variant itself will feature a post boost control vehicle (PBV) on top of its three stages which would allow it to position and deploy MIRVs or a new three-stage ICBM of the Agni series will sport a PBV. This confusion however could also serve to underline that not all of India's modest road mobile force will sport MIRVs and that means that the overall number of warheads deployed by India's land based missile force will also remain modest.

    Similarly, India is likely to maintain one or two SSBNs (with about 12 missile tubes on the Arihant follow ons) on constant deterrent patrol in the future and even if all the missiles they carry are MIRVed the total number of warheads at sea won't be that many (assuming 3-5 warheads per missile at the most). So MIRVing doesn't really challenge the 'minimum' part of India's deterrent strategy at all when seen in the appropriate context and away from deliberate alarmism.

    It does however bolster the 'credible' part of India's doctrine in an environment where China is moving ahead with mid-course ABM technology. One should note China's first mid-course interception test took place in 2010 prior to the Agni-V being tested for the first time in 2012. As Avinash Chander told this writer in an interview earlier this year, "MIRVs give you a higher leakage probability."

    India therefore has the two rationales for deploying MIRVs, increasing targeting ability with a modest number of missiles and easier penetration of ABM systems. Indeed, while treaty limitations initially forced the cold war superpowers to put more warheads on their existing missiles to ensure counterforce potency, India's self-imposed limitations require the same for counter-value targeting against China which is moving ahead on ABMs. In the future, India's MIRVs will also be manoeuvring re-entry vehicles (MARVs) clearly underlining that SFC will ensure that enough deliverable warheads can survive any potential enemy first strike and that these warheads are indeed delivered to their targets.

    Saurav Jha's Blog : The Indian move towards MIRVs
     
  6. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
  7. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
  8. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
  9. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    http://www.asianage.com/india/india-china-n-competition-may-increase-614


    ‘India-China N-competition may increase’
    Jul 29, 2015 - Sridhar Kumaraswami |

    A leading US defence thinktank has referred to India’s latest Agni-VI intercontinental ballistic missile project and warned in a recent report that the competing missile technologies of India and its giant eastern neighbour China may “deepen nuclear competition between the two Asian nuclear powers”.

    The thinktank — Federation of American Scientists — has referred to a US defence intelligence agency report mentioning India’s latest Agni-VI intercontinental ballistic missile project, which is expected to involve the deployment of multiple warheads on a single missile system. This is referred to in scientific terms as “multiple independently-targetable re-entry vehicle” technology that is capable of hitting multiple targets.

    Already, the earlier-tested 5,500 km-range Agni-V ICBM is expected to provide India with a strategic nuclear deterrent against China whenever it is inducted into the armed forces since it will be capable of hitting all parts of that country.

    The Agni-VI missile project is now set to take Indian missile technology to the next level beyond the Agni-V.

    The observations on India in the FAS report came in the context of the US thinktank referring to the latest Pentagon annual report that had claimed that China’s ICBM force now includes the “MIRV-equipped Mod 3 (DF-5)” missile system”.

    The FAS report states, “The deployment of a MIRVed DF-5 also raises serious questions about China’s strategic relationship with India. The Pentagon report states that in addition to US missile defence capabilities, ‘India’s nuclear force is an additional driver behind China’s nuclear force modernisation’.

    There is little doubt that Chinese MIRV has the potential to nudge India into the MIRV club as well.

    Indian weapons designers have already hinted that India may be working on its own MIRV system and the US defence intelligence agency recently stated that ‘India will continue developing an ICBM, the Agni-VI, which will reportedly carry multiple warheads’.”

    “If the Chinese MIRV triggers the Indian MIRV it would deepen nuclear competition between the two Asian nuclear powers and reduce security for both. This ... also requires the other MIRVed nuclear-armed states to limit their MIRV and offensive nuclear warfighting strategies,” the FAS report states.

    With India’s Agni missile technology prowess in the limelight once again due to the pioneering efforts in previous decades of India’s “Missile Man” and former President Dr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam who passed away on Monday.
     
  10. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
  11. aliyah

    aliyah Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2015
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    168
    how much devastation can normal 3 ton bomb make ??
     
  12. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/04...-turned-india-into-a-dangerous-nuclear-power/

    While the United States beats the war drums over North Korea and Iran’s long-ranged nuclear armed missiles –which they don’t even possess – Washington remains curiously silent about the arrival of the world’s newest member of the big nuke club – India.

    In January, Delhi revealed a new, 800km-ranged submarine launched missile (SLBM) designated K-15. Twelve of these strategic, nuclear-armed missiles will be carried by India’s first of a class of domestically built nuclear-powered submarine, “Arihant.” India is also working on another SLBM, K-5, with a range of some 2,800km.

    These new nuclear subs and their SLBM’s will give India the capability to strike many high-value targets around the globe. Equally important, they complete India’s nuclear triad of nuclear weapons delivered by aircraft, missiles, and now sea that will be invulnerable to a decapitating first strike from either Pakistan or China.

    Last February, it was revealed that India is fast developing a new, long-ranged, three-stage ballistic missile, Agni-VI. This powerful missile is said to be able to carry up to ten independently targetable nuclear warheads, known as MIRV’s.


    Agni-VI’s range is believed to be at least 10,000km, putting all of China, Japan, Australia, and Russia in its range. A new 15,000km missile capable of hitting North America is also in the works under cover of India’s civilian space program. India is also developing accurate cruise missiles and miniaturized nuclear warheads to fit into their small diameter.

    These important strategic developments will put India ahead of other nuclear powers France, Britain, North Korea, and Pakistan, about equal in striking power to Israel and China, and not too far behind the United States and Russia.

    Delhi says it needs a nuclear triad because of the growing threat of China, whose conventional and nuclear forces are being rapidly modernized.

    This writer has been reporting on the nuclear arms race between India and China since the late 1990’s. China has replaced Pakistan as India’s primary nuclear threat. Even so, Indian and Pakistani nuclear forces remain on a frightening hair-trigger alert within only a 3-5 minute warning time of enemy attack, making the Kashmir cease-fire line (or Line of Control) the world’s most dangerous border.


    The Bush administration began quietly aiding India’s nuclear program with nuclear fuel when India had a shortage of fissile material. Some advanced technology from the US and India’s second largest arms supplier, Israel, has also aided Delhi’s nuclear and missile delivery programs.

    India, as I wrote years ago after one of its big nuclear tests, is feeling its “nuclear Viagra.” Most Indians take great pride in their strategic nuclear programs as their way into the great power’s exclusive nuclear club.

    But not all Indians are so delighted, particularly those on the left who ask how their nation, with one third of all the world’s poorest people, can afford to spend tens of billions on advanced weapons, including nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, and ICBM’s.

    According to the World Bank, 32.7% of Indians subsist below the international poverty level of $1.25 daily, and 68.7% on less than $2 daily. Aid agencies say 33% of Indian children are malnourished.

    Delhi is making steady progress in reducing poverty and disease, and in trying to break down the pernicious caste system that dooms a quarter of Indians to lives of misery.

    This, critics claim, is no time to be posturing as a world power when Mother India still has feet of clay.

    The Bush administration was totally unaware that India’s advent as a major nuclear power whose weapons might one day challenge the United States. Bush & Co. wanted India to bulk up as a competitor to China, a permanent enemy of the Republican hard right. Today’s Republicans think similarly.

    India is a great democracy where politicians, not generals, make policy. She is a staunch friend of the United States, where over one million Indians now live. True enough, but we have seen there are no permanent friends in world politics, only permanent interests.

    One day mighty India may vie for influence with the US for Mideast and Central Asian oil, and control of the Indian Ocean’s vital sea lanes. But not today, as all eyes are on pipsqueak North Korea and dilapidated Iran.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    Scarface likes this.
  13. Scarface

    Scarface Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    83
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Leftists if in power will run this country into the ground
     
  14. M.J.K

    M.J.K New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    8
    About the writer
    Eric Margolis
    Journalism
    Margolis writes a regular column for the Huffington Post and also writes for Dawn, an English language Pakistani newspaper, the Gulf Times in Qatar, the Khaleej Times in Dubai, New York Timesand The American Conservative . He appears regularly on such television outlets as CNN, Fox, CBC, British Sky Broadcasting News, NPR, and CTV. He is a regular guest on the TV Ontario's The Agenda after previously regularly appearing on its predecessor programme Studio 2.

    He is affiliated with several organizations including International Institute of Strategic Studies in London and the Institute of Regional Studies based in Islamabad, Pakistan.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Margolis

    The above qualifications make him a paki bootlicker and not worth discussing about in my humble opinion.

    Is there any specific reason why you brought out this old news now sir? @LETHALFORCE
     
    LETHALFORCE likes this.
  15. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    19,528
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    Yes I know the author and I was waiting to see who spots this ? (Playing both sides by USA) secondly I am still waiting for other claims to be spotted that cannot be true
    since they would be MCTR,FMCT,NPT violations. Also no replies from anyone about India's whole strategic program controlled by USA (which I don't believe) also many other things. My main reason for posting was to give a link that India had nuclear miniturization capability in another thread


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    M.J.K likes this.
  16. M.J.K

    M.J.K New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    8
    Regarding 1st point I still give a benefit of doubt in favour of Americans.As far as i understand political lobbying by foreign institutions is legal in US, so there might lie their two headedness.
    2nd point If you are referring to "The Bush administration began quietly aiding India’s nuclear program" I don't believe that shit.The only thing Americans are capable of is helping themselves.
    3rd I think India reached (far back) a critical mass on economic and military front to be controlled by anyone(I doubt if they can even influence us like they did in 80's) except by itself.
    4th point taken regarding miniaturization i do believe we had it but not deployed it yet( I may be wrong ,we might have tested it covertly, so only the guys in the business know what it is and they are making noises about it)
     
    Screambowl and LETHALFORCE like this.

Share This Page