Have you ?
Which Indian Ballistic Missile's are operational ?
Prithvi -> Operational/ 300km range
Agni 1 -> Operational / 750km range
Agni 2 -> Inoperational
Agni 3 -> Inoperational
Shaurya -> Inoperational*
Let me repeat what I said to 'Koji' on the chatbox a few hours ago: the Agni-II is ALREADY operational with the 555th Missile Group of the Indian Army.
The following will provide you with a source from the literature:
"As of 2002, at least 12 TELs and personnel in Secunderabad were on base in operating capacity with Agni-2s. Reports suggest that there are additional Agni-2s and warheads readily available for the Strategic Rocket Regiment."
MissileThreat :: Agni-2
Duncan Lennox, ed., Jane’s Strategic Weapons Systems 46 (Surrey: Jane’s Information Group, January 2007), 49-52; GlobalSecurity.org, “India Missile Special Weapons Delivery Systems,” available at
Agni - India Missile Special Weapons Delivery Systems, accessed on 19 May 2005.
Supplementary sources:
India conducts night test fire of IRBM Agni-II missile .:. newkerala.com Online News -156450
In addition, I attach the following Word document from the 'Big Book of War', from which the Wikipedia article on the Agni is excerpted {Peruse attachments}
Confirmation can also be obtained from present and former/ex Army servicemen, from whom my independent verification is attained.
sabirji,
An operational missile doesn't fail this often and nor does it require so many "improvements". An operational missile's subsytems, designs are frozen, user trials have been successfully conducted and then it is mass produced and inducted.
How can India claim to have operationalized missile when its guidance system still requires tweaking and it fails this often in user trials ?
Really? Do you understand how many times an operational missile must be validated and tested, particularly after the initiation of limited serial production, to ensure effective quality control? How many failures has the Agni-II had? 2 out of a total of seven launches, including the most recent- the last failure (May 17th) which was rectified immediately after a critical evaluation as expounded upn above.
Operational missiles are
expected to fail approximately half of their tests. To not do so is indicative of either: exceptional genius, pilfered technology, sheer luck, or most likely, stinks of a cover-up. Failure rates of between 40-50% are neither unusual, nor are they portents of ultimate futility. A quick perusal of missile development trajectories and their histories, including in the 1990's of China and other states will serve to illustrate the point.
Privatizing the DRDO involves a host of complications: not least of which pertain to national security and intelligence. Which is why not even the most laissez-faire economy in the world has plunged headlong into privatization, retaining instead crucial defense laboratories such as the [Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency] the DARPA, the [Missile Defence Agency] MDA and the [Defence Technical Intelligence Centre] DTIC among others, in addition to the 26 national defence laboratories. When a company is privatized, its management exercises a degree of
leeway in their decisions, as opposed to the stringent regulation that can be implemented in the top-down public sphere. Ofcourse, the other option is to have a measure of lassitude present, which is equally deleterious, if somewhat less subverting. The solution, I believe, is to strike a compromise: throw out all the complacent management in the organization and replace them with competent technocrats, who at present do only the grunt work in the organization. When that is effectuated, you will see management brought on par with research potential, which should be augmented by a thorough search and scout for talent in the universities.
An operational missiles "subsystems, designs" are rarely, if ever, "frozen". Take any of the missiles on the following
page for example. But to provide an illustration, I quote the following for the RT-21M / SS-20 ("SABER" NATO designate):
"The developer of a complex was the Moscow institute of Thermal Technology which was headed by A.D. Nadiradzye. The flight-design tests were conducted from September 1975 through January 1976 at the Kapustin Yar test site. Deployment of the SS-20 began on March 1976, and the first regiment equipped with the Pioneer missiles was set under airborne alert on August 1976."
[....]
"On 10 August 1979 the tests of the modernized "Pioneer"-UTTKh (15Zh53) began on the Kapustin Yar test site. They continued through 14 August 1980, and on 17 December 1980 the missile designated as SS-20 Mod3 was deployed. This variant had the same propulsion system as earlier versions, but due to upgrading of a command structure and instrumentation-service unit it was possible to improve accuracy (CEP) from 550 to 450 meters, to increase maximum range by 10 %, and to increase the area covered by the warheads. "
RT-21M / SS-20 SABER
And the R-14 / SS-5 ("SKEAN" NATO designate)
The development of the R-14 was authorized in July 1958. The authorization provided for the construction of a missile with an approximate range of 4,000 km, surpassing the R-12 by 2,000 km. The designer was M.K. Yangel of KB Yuzhnoye (OKB-586). The preliminary design was completed in December 1958. Flight tests of the R-14 began in July 1960 [Western sources suggest a first flight in June 1960] and were finished between December 1960 and February 1961. On 24 April 1961 deployment of the R-14 missile began. According to Western intelligence the initial operational capability with the Mod 1 reentry vehicle and soft sites was achieved in late 1961.
[....]
According to Western intelligence an initial operational capability with hard sites was achieved in early 1963, and the initial operational capability with the Mod 2 reentry vehicle was achieved in mid-1963.
R-14 / SS-5 SKEAN
I'd also refer you to the following articles on Chinese and US missiles:
HQ-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
LGM-30 Minuteman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia {Refer particularly to the chronology of development and the vulnerability improvements post Wing V turnover in 1965}
The rumour indeed was that a new navigational system was being tested. I cannot ofcourse confirm that independently. Except to tell you that I have spoken to Col, Raj Khalsa and asked him to find out what the buzz on the grapevine is, and to refer you to previous articles that suggest that "a new inertial guidance system with an improved optical or radar terminal phase correlation system" was being tested on the Agni-III, and therefore we assume, albeit admittedly speculatively, on the Agni-II.
