Reusable Cruise Missile

[ajay_ijn]

I always thought cruise missile is most safest and assured way of destroying major enemy targets. But due to high cost, any country can afford limited numbers like few hundreds instead of many thousands except for US.

We saw US using cruise missiles since gulf war, tomahawks target was planned before and with help of INS, GPS, TERCOM etc it was able to stay its altitude, flight route as planned.


Would it possible for cruise missile be programmed to follow a particular flightpath, deliver the the warhead (warhead can glide towards the target with its terminal sensor) and missile then returns in a different flight path using evasive maneuvers (to avoid Gunfire, SAMs & Fighters) and recover it using parachute, like the Nishant RPV.

if we can recover the missile avionics, airframe, engine and able to use it few times, costs can be drastically reduced. If costs can be reduced to match the operating costs of Stealth Fighter then it can be really successful.



on a different note, how many instances are there when Cruise missiles have been intercepted and destroyed in their flight path? a stealthy low-flying cruise missile will be difficult challenge for any air defence.

 

[sayareakd]

ajay good to see you after long time.

yeah idea is good, We have HSTDV project but it is not cruise missile. What you are saying is basically unmanned cruise plane which can deliver weapons to target. May be they should convert the LCA mark I into this role.

but the problem can be powerful jammers to disrupt GPS or any other satellite data system. It was used in Iraq but when US found out they took it out with laser guided weapon.

 

[Bhadra]

I have been reading the good ideas of DRDO for donkey's years .. they spend money in having good life, good pay and perks and good guest rooms and making fool of the patriotic Indian masses

 

[sayareakd]

I have been reading the good ideas of DRDO for donkey's years .. they spend money in having good life, good pay and perks and good guest rooms and making fool of the patriotic Indian masses

are you sure that we spend enough for R&D i am talking about the salary paid and the actual funds for R&D.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

There are already reusable cruise missiles, it is called a fighter jet.

There is nothing that can really replace the accuracy and durability of a fighter jet.

 

[SPIEZ]

I always thought cruise missile is most safest and assured way of destroying major enemy targets. But due to high cost, any country can afford limited numbers like few hundreds instead of many thousands except for US.

We saw US using cruise missiles since gulf war, tomahawks target was planned before and with help of INS, GPS, TERCOM etc it was able to stay its altitude, flight route as planned.


Would it possible for cruise missile be programmed to follow a particular flightpath, deliver the the warhead (warhead can glide towards the target with its terminal sensor) and missile then returns in a different flight path using evasive maneuvers (to avoid Gunfire, SAMs & Fighters) and recover it using parachute, like the Nishant RPV.


if we can recover the missile avionics, airframe, engine and able to use it few times, costs can be drastically reduced. If costs can be reduced to match the operating costs of Stealth Fighter then it can be really successful.

Yes! It can, USAF will only have un-manned fighter jet after the F22.

on a different note, how many instances are there when Cruise missiles have been intercepted and destroyed in their flight path? a stealthy low-flying cruise missile will be difficult challenge for any air defence.

That's because the cruise missiles were used in places where there wasn't a credible Surface to Air missile system that could handle a cruise missile. US developed the cruise missile so that it would be less expensive than the SAM, and the number of missiles can easily overcome the number of SAMs.

 

[ajay_ijn]

There are already reusable cruise missiles, it is called a fighter jet.

There is nothing that can really replace the accuracy and durability of a fighter jet.

Its not about replacing fighter jets. Fighters themselves use cruise missiles, glide bombs to target from a long distance, to avoid heavy air defences near the target. When human decision making is not required and everything has been preplanned to hit a stationary target then missiles definitely come into play.

 

[sayareakd]

i think there are other advantage to this system specially to be used against enemy BVR fighters, if we can replicate the RCS of our fighter into these reusable or Unmanned combat planes.

 

[SPIEZ]

i think there are other advantage to this system specially to be used against enemy BVR fighters, if we can replicate the RCS of our fighter into these reusable or Unmanned combat planes.

Cruise missiles are hard to detect primarily because they are much smaller than the aircrafts.

 

[sayareakd]

Cruise missiles are hard to detect primarily because they are much smaller than the aircrafts.

i was talking about other usage of the missiles and UAVs.

 

[ajay_ijn]

I was thinking about general cruise missile design but with ability to eject its warhead during terminal phase and then make a U-turn back to the base. any major change in the design will significantly affect its aerodynamics and hence speed, agility etc will be affected. To just deliver its warhead and turn back will require major redesign of the missile.

The missile main body and warhead have to be separated. Missile should and must retain performance even after delivering the warhead, its control surfaces, avionics, fuel capacity should allow it to turn steeply, make evasive maneuvers to avoid air defences which are now alert. Finally missile must be able to slowdown, deploy parachutes and land in a place without getting its airframe, engine or avionics damaged.

All this should be autonomous, should be done by computers/software within the missile.

I think its not experimented because it requires significant redesign, addition of more subsystems, components making missile bigger, heavier, difficult to maneuver and probably less payload or fuel capacity