Agni V Missile

[EagleOne]

jst one thing offically 'Agni-5', the entirely solid fuel with a range of 5,000 kms according to (pib)

 

[LETHALFORCE]

LF, considering that that chart is authentic, if you see that when the payload is reduced from 1.5 tons to .75 tons, the range increases by 40 - 50% not double.

you are right Yusuf it is not exactly a doubling of range when you reduce 50% but closer to 35-40%. But that 40% increase in range would give a 8000km+ ICBM range. With all the future Ballistic missile shield programs the most effective ballistic missiles will be SLBM MIRV'S.

 

[keshtopatel]

Here is a UNCLASSIFIED australian material on Range vs Payload tradeoff to ward off potential MTCR violaters...........That chart does not serve its purpose, there is scintific study done on this structure....

http://dspace.dsto.defence.gov.au/dspace/bitstream/1947/3328/1/DSTO-RR-0025 PR.pdf

 

[sayareakd]

I Think this chart is made by the Arun Vishwa karma. Simply this chart is a BS

yeah lets say A3 has 200 kg payload then how far it will go...........:emot0:

 

[nrj]

B]
I am not saying whether Agni is or is not ICBM [/B]-

Doesn't matter... A5 is not ICBM Program anyways.

It was yr 6000 Km wrong conclusion which led me to fetch you a encyclopedia definition.

Any balistic missile with 6000 Km range is a ICBM, go figure!

Encyclopedia has no credit against GOI clarification. A5 with declared 5500Km range is not ICBM. GOI is not even considering 8000Km missile by late of 2009.

If you dont know the requirements of IA on CEP, why you are harping on the same here, again n again?

Nobody knows. Once tested & asked for induction, User will prescribe the figures on CEP.

You say its mandatory I say no its not, and the examples of USA-Russia given.

I said Mandatory to the level user demands. I have highlighted in the same language I used more than twice.

Not only that when Pritivi was inducted, it was inducted with 500 CEP for yr info. India with 200 Kt capability (source Anil Kakodkar) can have five such MIRVs in its payload, now thats megaton punch.

Prithvi parameters are no point of discussion here.

Hence we should not make CEP factor mandatory

IA/IN does not include we. Strategic Forces command & Armed user will make the mandatory calls.

because our will be a second strike with massive (unacceptable) danage,

With either CEP value, Second Strike will be ensure nothing but bare wasteland remains on enemy side. So retaliatory job is ensured.

we are not going to surgically strike our enemy with NFU in place.

Stated even earlier that NFU can be withdrawn in heightened tension situation. Strike option is never forgotten by GOI, be it tactical Nuclear or large-scale conventional.

Everyone in the Pentagon n state department have shown concern on India´s PSLV-GSLV (which are just screw drivers away to become ICBMs) to be deadly force against the US interest, should there be crisis. Its put up or shut up time....

Pentagon had various concerns from '70s itself. India holds ICBM capability (10,000Km) but program does not exist.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

The range of Indian Ballistic missiles is intentionally kept in IRBM ranges so India is not perceived as a hostile nation (to the west).

 

[sayareakd]

let us discuss few things first of all Agni 3 is not the regular agni missile it was new missile, unlike Agni 1 and 2.

now this A3 which is new was made one thing in mind that was China still it was quite strange that its range was just shown to be only 3000km.

We have all the tech to make bigger range missile.

 

[nrj]

yeah lets say A3 has 200 kg payload then how far it will go...........:emot0:

Will that make A3 an ICBM? NO. Reducing payload even 10,000Km far target can be touched but that does not make it true ICBM program.

 

[nrj]

you are right Yusuf it is not exactly a doubling of range when you reduce 50% but closer to 35-40%. But that 40% increase in range would give a 8000km+ ICBM range. With all the future Ballistic missile shield programs the most effective ballistic missiles will be SLBM MIRV'S.

Exactly. The way BMD is progressing with much more sophistication than ever. SLBM MIRVed missiles can a sure hope in strike. GOI must stress on SLBM tests. Early 2011 can see K-15 tests from Arihant. It will truely mark Indian Nuclear Triad.

 

[keshtopatel]

Doesn't matter... A5 is not ICBM Program anyways.

It may not be for you or the USA which warry of India gaining ground on this, I think they had persuaded Indian gov to resist from 10K range, thats why u hear that there is no ICBM programm for India.

Encyclopedia has no credit against GOI clarification. A5 with declared 5500Km range is not ICBM. GOI is not even considering 8000Km missile by late of 2009.

Encyclopedia was used against your ignorance of 6000 Km and its (yr quote) not being an ICBM. Period

Nobody knows. Once tested & asked for induction, User will prescribe the figures on CEP.

Oh then pls stop ranting on this CEP issue, because as it is, neither you know nor does IA, once you have correct info, you may come full circle on this, untill then pls keep away with yr futile tirade on this.

I said Mandatory to the level user demands. I have highlighted in the same language I used more than twice.

And you failed to identify those user demands, despite my couple of questions on the same.

Prithvi parameters are no point of discussion here.

Its a CEP matter n the Army involved, so why skip one and welcome the other - is not the crux of matter "accuracy" here which revolves around CEP?

IA/IN does not include we. Strategic Forces command & Armed user will make the mandatory calls.

Well then dont talk abt it right now.

With either CEP value, Second Strike will be ensure nothing but bare wasteland remains on enemy side. So retaliatory job is ensured

.

Oh yes, and the 50% margin of error on CEP transformed to what?
You strike an enemy with five times and you fail all the times on CEP - yet its okey, just because the later five strikes did fit well into CEP cap - what nonesense is this CEP equation then? No wonder Russians are working on 200M.

Stated even earlier that NFU can be withdrawn in heightened tension situation. Strike option is never forgotten by GOI, be it tactical Nuclear or large-scale conventional.

When NFU will be withdrawn we shall talk about it then. Right now its the core doctrine of India with minimum credeble deterence.

Pentagon had various concerns from '70s itself. India holds ICBM capability (10,000Km) but program does not exist.

Even existance of ATV denied, then what happened?

India is swimming in the shark (US) infested water, they have to be careful!

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Will that make A3 an ICBM? NO. Reducing payload even 10,000Km far target can be touched but that does not make it true ICBM program.

Do we really need an ICBM at this time?? The need of the hour is to be be able to cover China and we have more or less reached that point. Even Chinese have nowhere near the ICBM capability and infrastructure that USA or Russia have (or had at height of cold war). A ICBM program would require huge commitment by the government and investment which maybe a drain on other programs. With no threat perception a ICBM program is a waste but that does not mean that testing,planning and investing,research should not be made in this area. At this point Indian Govt is more or less content with a regional power role.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Everyone keep the discussion friendly and avoid personal attacks!!!!!!!!!

 

[keshtopatel]

There is one more problem for a SLBM. Inside a submarine you cannot fire its rocket engine. This means that it has to be cold launched, that is, expelled by the pressure of expanding cold gas in the launch tube. The technology of cold launch in itself is quite complicated. Then the SLBM has to traverse a depth of water before it can break free and fly in the air. While it is moving through the water, it is subjected to a great many disturbances as against a land-fired ICBM which flies into the air on its set trajectory from the word go. This makes the guidance system of the SLBM far more complicated and has to be much more sophisticated.

It should be clear that making a SLBM is far more difficult than making a regular land-fired ICBM. The same argument applies to any missile that is fired from the submarine. Even if you are firing a small missile of say 300 miles range from a SSN, the missile has to be technologically more sophisticated than a corresponding land-fired missile.

A major part of the research in making a SLBM revolves around developing design and technologies that would result in a short stubby missile which would be able to deliver the warheads of nearly the same gross weight to roughly the same range. The LGM-30 Minuteman III ICBM of the USA, a three-stage rocket, is nearly 60 feet tall but only 65 inches thick. It has a range of over 6000 miles. On their biggest nuclear sub, the Ohio class SSBN also the Americans have been able to deploy their Trident-II D-5 SLBM which had to be limited to only 44 feet height. And yet it is 74 inch wide. The Trident is still nearly 58.5 tons in weight whereas the Minutemen is only 32.1 tons. Yet the Trident has a range of only 4600 miles. This shows how difficult it is to design a short ICBM for a submarine even for those nations which have vast experience in this field.

India will take apx 10 years to launch an SLBM from submarine´s belly.........

 

[nrj]

It may not be for you or the USA which warry of India gaining ground on this, I think they had persuaded Indian gov to resist from 10K range, thats why u hear that there is no ICBM programm for India.

Big bolded words. Any proof?

Encyclopedia was used against your ignorance of 6000 Km and its (yr quote) not being an ICBM. Period

Yes tweaked 6000Km A5 is no ICBM. And I repeat my words, I stick to -

I won't exactly consider A5 a 5000-6000 Km range missile a cross-continent hitting world-class absolute ICBM, deterrent arm even if Media & fanboys start jumping calling it All-Killer ICBM. Surya program if in real can be ICBM. Future Agni variants have real ICBM. GOI has not even considered 8000 Km range missile as of late 2009. For symbolism, recent news can be a good start -
::India does not have an ICBM programme::

Encyclopedia doesn't stand against credibility of DRDO official words.

Oh then pls stop ranting on this CEP issue,

Bring my post ranting on CEP.

because as it is, neither you know nor does IA

I have said the same thing and highlighted it twice. When did I say I know A5's correct CEP specs? I put my opinion on it.

, once you have correct info, you may come full circle on this,

Which correct info? I never claimed any CEP specific info on my side to be correct. It was my individual opinion. I have highlighted it. In case you are not familiar with common names, IMO=In My Opinon.

untill then pls keep away with yr futile tirade on this.

Care to explain the BOLD PART. I will continue to put my opinion.

Keep away the SMS lingo. Doesn't go along with Forum standard here.

And you failed to identify those user demands, despite my couple of questions on the same.

I have repeatedly said that User demands will emerge only after 1st test. I even made you available my stand on it from beginning with every post. Shall I list them again?

Its a CEP matter n the Army involved, so why skip one and welcome the other - is not the crux of matter "accuracy" here which revolves around CEP?

Prithvi program & Agni program are different on every parameter. Very least analogy can be established.

Well then dont talk abt it right now.

Do you control me or Forum to decide that? I stick to my stand on that from the very first word & will continue on it.

Oh yes, and the 50% margin of error on CEP transformed to what?
You strike an enemy with five times and you fail all the times on CEP - yet its okey, just because the later five strikes did fit well into CEP cap - what nonesense is this CEP equation then? No wonder Russians are working on 200M.

All the figures were approximate & predicted. On Topic: Indian ICBM Program if there is should not exactly keep the standards defined by West & work on Ideal parameters.

When NFU will be withdrawn we shall talk about it then

Doesn't prove that Strike Option does not exist or is not available.

Right now its the core doctrine of India with minimum credeble deterence.

It has always been. Strategic policy considers every possibility.

Even existance of ATV denied, then what happened?

India is swimming in the shark (US) infested water, they have to be careful!

Concerns US. Not related here.

 

[nrj]

Do we really need an ICBM at this time??

Indeed not. Hence we don't have ICBM program.

The need of the hour is to be be able to cover China and we have more or less reached that point.

I believe somehow the need is addressed & lapses are being fixed.

Even Chinese have nowhere near the ICBM capability and infrastructure that USA or Russia have (or had at height of cold war).

Sophistication which US & Russia have in ICBM capability can not be matched by PRC anytime soon. But they have quiet load numbers to deter US/Russia. Although nobody stand side-by-side with technological hold & field experience US/Russia have.

A ICBM program would require huge commitment by the government and investment which maybe a drain on other programs. With no threat perception a ICBM program is a waste but that does not mean that testing,planning and investing,research should not be made in this area. At this point Indian Govt is more or less content with a regional power role.

Our Threat perception & required measures are sufficient as of now. But India is yet to rank on Global ICBM standards achieved by US/Russia although its not need of time. So A5 even not being ICBM with 6000Km capability, using some juggad can be sufficing for some more extended challenges.

 

[keshtopatel]

Any proof?

In a diplomatic parlance its known as veiled threat-Arm twisting, which US is good at against any nation, here is the Russian example:

The abrupt cancellation in 1993 of the $75 million "cryogenic engine deal" that India had signed with a Russian company was owing to Washington's pressure on Moscow. The U.S., France, Britain, Germany, France, Canada, Italy and Australia submitted diplomatic notes to India in 1993 urging that the Agni project be frozen and the deployment of Prithvi

halted.

Agni, with a range of 1,500 km, has been test-fired three times. The last "technology demonstration" test took place in 1994. There was a great deal of pressure from the West after the last test. This, many people believed, was the reason why the Narasimha Rao Government kept the programme on hold.

."India to ignore US pressure and test Agni missile," UPI , Washington, 16
December 1993. Read it......It is well understood by everyone in the know that US bullies weaker nations - India included! (Brahma chellaney)

More:

Encompassing the emergence of likely missiles race in the region, the United States calls the Agni a "destabilizing weapon" and mounts intense diplomatic pressure on India to suspend further Agni tests. Indian officials dismiss US concerns that India is building ballistic missiles to deliver nuclear warheads.

Then you said:

Yes tweaked 6000Km A5 is no ICBM. And I repeat my words, I stick to -

Now you are changing your own statements to be defensive, so what I can do here?
Here is your ORIGINAL statement without this crucial defensive word "tweaked":

I won't exactly consider A5 a 5000-6000 Km range missile a cross-continent hitting world-class absolute ICBM,

See? How you change tracks according to your convenience?

Bring my post ranting on CEP.

This is the genesis of my dialogue with you - crux of the matter indeed!

A5¨s accuracy is desired but not mandatory.

You:

Yes it is desired & mandatory up to the level user i.e IA/IN demands.

Without even knowing the IA threshold of CEP which is irrelivant anyway (50% margin of error - and US, Russians content with 200M) with megaton punch nuke warhead having lethal punch already with 5 200KT MIRVs!

Encyclopedia doesn't stand against credibility of DRDO official words

And?
Indeed there is no official word anyway! do you have one on CEP IA? So why harp on¿¿¿¿

I have repeatedly said that User demands will emerge only after 1st test

Now you are adding words (1st test) to save your reputation here - for, ever since I interacted with you on this subject, you never ever did use such words - you are drifting with the winds on this......

And for the record: Here is your first post on mine ; Yes it is desired & mandatory up to the level user i.e IA/IN demands.

There is no 1st test wordings here - I know you are trying to save embarasment for you here.........thereby adding words....but keep on keeping as they say!

Prithvi program & Agni program are different on every parameter. Very least analogy can be established.

Its all about IA and CEP issue altogether!

Can you tell me why would IA accept the CEP of 500M (which they did) for smaller nuke warheads, and would fudge the issue just on CEP requirement when it comes to 200Kt yield?

Any common sense here?

Russians exact figures were not declared officially unless creditless Encyclopedia has something to show

And what is that creditless encyclopedia, may you name it?

Doesn't prove that Strike Option does not exist or is not available.

Why did you miss the word "nuclear" purposely as we are talking about it! why obfuscate the issue?

It has always been

Wrong!

Only after Pokharan II - Bajpayee - 1998....

Concerns US. Not related here.

India will always be tied to superpower like US, these are Geopolitical matters in the globalised world which covers bilateral treaties on various issues - defense included.

Just learn the International Power Matrix and you would be all right.......I dont need to gift you the subscription of foreign policy affairs issue.....

 

[nrj]

Your statement: I think they had persuaded Indian gov to resist from 10K range

What You said:

In a diplomatic parlance its known as veiled threat-Arm twisting, which US is good at against any nation, here is the Russian example:

The abrupt cancellation in 1993 of the $75 million "cryogenic engine deal" that India had signed with a Russian company was owing to Washington's pressure on Moscow. The U.S., France, Britain, Germany, France, Canada, Italy and Australia submitted diplomatic notes to India in 1993 urging that the Agni project be frozen and the deployment of Prithvi
halted.

Agni, with a range of 1,500 km, has been test-fired three times. The last "technology demonstration" test took place in 1994. There was a great deal of pressure from the West after the last test. This, many people believed, was the reason why the Narasimha Rao Government kept the programme on hold.
."India to ignore US pressure and test Agni missile," UPI , Washington, 16
December 1993. Read it......It is well understood by everyone in the know that US bullies weaker nations - India included! (Brahma chellaney)

More:
Encompassing the emergence of likely missiles race in the region, the United States calls the Agni a "destabilizing weapon" and mounts intense diplomatic pressure on India to suspend further Agni tests. Indian officials dismiss US concerns that India is building ballistic missiles to deliver nuclear warheads.

Now where does it say 10K range? Arm twisting & diplomatic pressure is always there in globalized world.

_________________________________________________________________________


My opinion you think changing -

Yes tweaked 6000Km A5 is no ICBM. And I repeat my words, I stick to -

I won't exactly consider A5 a 5000-6000 Km range missile a cross-continent hitting world-class absolute ICBM, deterrent arm even if Media & fanboys start jumping calling it All-Killer ICBM.

Now you have problem with my addition of word "tweaked".

A5's declared range 5500Km. Tweaked 6000Km A5 meant original configuration A5 modified to 6000Km range.

Now there is no difference in the above two posts made by me. One is using word "tweaked" while mentioning range 6000Km while other mentions the window of 5000-6000Km without word "tweaked". Feel free to mention if you have any more misunderstanding on it.

None of them makes A5 an ICBM, which was my prime individual opinion.

________________________________________________________________________


On CEP:

Now when you are making argument that I have added word "first" just now.

So your recent remark -

Now you are adding words (1st test) to save your reputation here - for, ever since I interacted with you on this subject, you never ever did use such words - you are drifting with the winds on this......

There is no 1st test wordings here - I know you are trying to save embarasment for you here.........thereby adding words....but keep on keeping as they say!

Now Check my very first post responding member named "manc" - #130

Its early to comment on AGNI V's CEP. We will come to know about actual figure only after first test.

I hope you recognized the word & you can check the post made when you were not even part of discussion. I maintain the same stand. So don't comment on my reputation. I won't tolerate personal remarks hereafter.

_________________________________________________________________________


On Armed User acceptance:

My statement -

Yes it is desired & mandatory up to the level user i.e IA/IN demands.

__________________________________________________________________________

Your comment -

Without even knowing the IA threshold of CEP which is irrelivant anyway (50% margin of error - and US, Russians content with 200M) with megaton punch nuke warhead having lethal punch already with 5 200KT MIRVs!

I really don't care what figures US/Russia walk with. Accuracy parameter based on CEP is not irrelevant for Indian Armed User. And hence without matching the mandatory level IA/IN will not accept deliveries from DRDO. IA/IN will never simply ignore the accuracy aspect & induct the missiles. So there will always be threshold level demanded by user & DRDO will have to match it.

_________________________________________________________________________

And?
Indeed there is no official word anyway! do you have one on CEP IA? So why harp on¿¿¿¿

When did I say that I have official word for CEP from IA?

___________________________________________________________________________

Can you tell me why would IA accept the CEP of 500M (which they did) for smaller nuke warheads, and would fudge the issue just on CEP requirement when it comes to 200Kt yield?

Common sense dictates that, threshold level was approved. If user approves the specification, orders are placed & inducted.

__________________________________________________________________________

And what is that creditless encyclopedia, may you name it?

Unofficial sources which are not approved by authorities.

__________________________________________________________________________

Why did you miss the word "nuclear" purposely as we are talking about it! why obfuscate the issue?

Maybe I did, maybe I did not.

You want discussion specifically on that we can carry out in respective threads. I can carry out same on "Nuclear Strike" & "Strike".

I recently highlighted your hollow "First test" & "tweaked" word-argument. Same line can be walked on your "word-game".

__________________________________________________________________________

India will always be tied to superpower like US, these are Geopolitical matters in the globalised world which covers bilateral treaties on various issues - defense included.

Did I negate on that? Its a Globalized world & India being important part of it. Everyone is aware of it.

__________________________________________________________________________

Just learn the International Power Matrix and you would be all right.......

And who are you highness ?

I dont need to gift you the subscription of foreign policy affairs issue.....

Is it point of discussion you want to make?

__________________________________________________________________________



NOTE TO MOD: Are personal attacks allowed now?

 

[charlie]

What makes you think I have not read them! BTW, for yr info, wings of fire is 11 years old and ever since too much water has flown under the bridge, moreover the book is saying nothing of such things as purported by you so why rely on such book ? Anyways, even so you failed to deliver the qualified answer when you say the following:

well wings of fire is a biography it not an open source that anyone can write any crap about it and read vikaram sarahabahi biography you will know and if you still cant find it then there is something wrong with your reading skills i guess, and by the way ISRO was founded roughly more then 45 years ago so do you think they change their policy ever decade no some principles remain the same no matter what and did you know that vikram sarabhi was even against launching the military satellite with the help of ISRO but the government did not listen to him on that India's cryo-engine failure: Beginning not the end: Rediff.com India News
read it carefully where it says that ISRO is probated for military application i can provide you better source but why don't u find it for yourself

Prohibited by whom?

well it is prohibited by the government itself

 

[Yusuf]

Kesho, Nrj discuss the issue forcefully if you will but refrain from getting personal. Kesho esp you, this is not a forum for one upmanship and scoring points over another member. Your points are well taken but don't make it personal. Thanks.

 

[keshtopatel]

Kesho, Nrj discuss the issue forcefully if you will but refrain from getting personal. Kesho esp you, this is not a forum for one upmanship and scoring points over another member. Your points are well taken but don't make it personal. Thanks.

What was personal here sans 4 letter words or cuss words, nothing of that sorts, off course some degree of sarcasim is allowed in almost any forum. The guy here is trying to be a cry baby for nothing!

I have not called MODS attention on similar lines, have I?

But look on the same lines I am rediculed right here:

And who are you highness ?

What is sauce for the goose, should be the sauce for the gender too!

I guess you people have to be fair enough and give some leeway towards the freedom of speech - for I have not used an abusive language as you know.

Nobody needs the brownie points here because everybody is a keyboard tiger here sans true identity. Yes, if I were actual Rahul gandhi on this platform and dong what I am doing, then it becomes obvious, on the public forums its different where people keep thier real identity in the swiss bank account. In my case I dont know who is keshtopatel because its not my real name anyway. People are not required to post their real names for the sake of thier own security.

I can say that my opponent is employing tactics, and wants his opponent (me) to be banned, what about that angle......

You people want to be fair, impartial, want good people, enough traffic, you have to be flexible.

Well, advise is all I can give.

Love me or leave me that is....