Agni V Missile

[Godless-Kafir]

yes, close enough.. remember a5 reached only 600km in height during test.. it can also reach 900KM in height

Point!! So we do have an ICBM on our hands, if pakistan had this missile they will deem the rage as 25,000kms. We are such cowards and we cant even boast!

 

[utubekhiladi]

Point!! So we do have an ICBM on our hands, if pakistan had this missile they will deem the rage as 25,000kms. We are such cowards and we cant even boast!

there is a good reason why we are not boosting about it. we played diplomacy very well here.

 

[Pokemon]

Guys dont get into physics only.

Chemistry also restricts the range of missile and that is propellent quality.

To travel higher distance your propellent must allow the engine to run for longer duration.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Guys dont get into physics only.

Chemistry also restricts the range of missile and that is propellent quality.

To travel higher distance your propellent must allow the engine to run for longer duration.

Now that is lame pokee...

Solid fueled rockets have no engine.

 

[Pokemon]

Now that is lame pokee...

Solid fueled rockets have no engine.

 

[pmaitra]

Now that is lame pokee...

Solid fueled rockets have no engine.

Are you sure?

A quick Google search before posting always helps buddy!

A schematic diagram of a Solid Rocket Engine from NASA.

Are we cool?

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Are you sure?

A quick Google search before posting always helps buddy!

A schematic diagram of a Solid Rocket Engine from NASA.

Are we cool?

Duhh...That is just an combustion chamber has no moving parts like an engine.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

You wouldn't know shit from shoodles.

 

[trackwhack]

GK is right, Solid rockets dont really have an engine per say. It works on the same principle as a regular diwali rocket does. However impulse solid rocket engines do have mechanisms of shutting down and reigniting through changing the geometry of the nozzles. Those have more 'engine'

But at the end of the day if we go by the definition of engine anything that converts energy into mechanical motion is one. Hence Solid rockets also have engines

 

[Pokemon]

Who wouldn't know shit from shoodles.

So do you want to say a rocket goes upto thousands of kilometers without a motor/engine??

solid fuel propulsion to generate thrust to drive motor combined is termed as solid propellent engine.

Or there must be some strokes to qualify as engine as per your say???

The whole system is termed as engine.

 

[pmaitra]

TrackWhack, I get your point. It's still called an engine. GK, I would go by the NASA terminology.

Pokemon is correct.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

So do you want to say a rocket goes upto thousands of kilometers without a motor/engine??

solid fuel propulsion to generate thrust to drive motor combined is termed as solid propellent engine.

Or there must be some strokes to qualify as engine as per your say???

The whole system is termed as engine.

TrackWhack, I get your point. It's still called an engine. GK, I would go by the NASA terminology.

Pokemon is correct.

Duhhh...It does have an engine as per TERMINOLOGY. I wasnt talking of terminology here but Poke said.

To travel higher distance your propellent must allow the engine to run for longer duration.

Here propellant does not allow the engine to RUN for a longer duration, propellant is the engine. Just as in your Diwali rocket, dont bring in the combustion chamber for engine, i know that before you started itching in your fathers pants.

 

[Pokemon]

I wasnt talking of terminology here but Poke said. Here propellant does not allow the engine to RUN for a longer duration, propellant is the engine. Just as in your Diwali rocket, dont bring in the combustion chamber for engine, i know that before you started itching in your fathers pants.

So propellent only is the engine??

And if I says propellent runs rocket motor/engine is wrong??

And if you were aware than you wouldn't have poked your nose just because you are doubtful of semantics.

 

[pmaitra]

Duhhh...It does have an engine as per TERMINOLOGY. I wasnt talking of terminology here but Poke said. Here propellant does not allow the engine to RUN for a longer duration, propellant is the engine. Just as in your Diwali rocket, dont bring in the combustion chamber for engine, i know that before you started itching in your fathers pants.

I get your point. NASA is wrong. You are right. Happy now?

 

[sayareakd]

from NDTV screen shot we know that A5 motors perform better then what drdo expected, although trejectory was corrected by on board computers still it is good news.

 

[A chauhan]

Some facts i have learned so far from sayare and others:-

1.Agni 3 reached 800km while Agni 5 reached 600kms , it means Agni 5 which is a completely new and technologically better missile can easily reach 800km and even higher.

This "symbolises a major, massive jump in the technologies and the capability" of the DRDO because "once you have a range of 5,000 km, the same missile [Agni-V] can go to a height of 2,500 km with a short range and you can hit any object and satellite at that height. The same modules can put small satellites in orbit and multiple warheads," Chander said.http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/strategic-forces/55-drdo-psu-news-discussion-69.html#post486467, Story of self-reliance

2,500km is 4 times higher than 600km, just guess what will be it's maximum range when tested to its full range ! although Chander was talking about ASAT capabilities of Agni 5 with an angle of 70-90 degree, Chander has willfully added some ambiguity to his statement.

2. .See the post #1016 of sayare, it says Agni 5 was tested with 60 degree to 70 or 75 degree of angle, testing it with an angle of 45 degree can dramatically increase its range.

3. Modern missiles do not follow a pure ballistic trajectory,how can you call a missile having MIRVs pure ballistic when you can re-target its aim.


So sayare is right. Agni 5 can go 8-9,000 km easily and with some advancements it will definitely reach 12-13,000kms.

 

[utubekhiladi]

Some facts i have learned so far from sayare and others:-

1.Agni 3 reached 800km while Agni 5 reached 600kms , it means Agni 5 which is a completely new and technologically better missile can easily reach 800km and even higher.



2,500km is 4 times higher than 600km, just guess what will be it's maximum range when tested to its full range ! although Chander was talking about ASAT capabilities of Agni 5 with an angle of 70-90 degree, Chander has willfully added some ambiguity to his statement.

2. .See the post #1016 of sayare, it says Agni 5 was tested with 60 degree to 70 or 75 degree of angle, testing it with an angle of 45 degree can dramatically increase its range.

3. Modern missiles do not follow a pure ballistic trajectory,how can you call a missile having MIRVs pure ballistic when you can re-target its aim.


So sayare is right. Agni 5 can go 8-9,000 km easily and with some advancements it will definitely reach 12-13,000kms.

even the chinese predicted that A5 can reach 8000KM., but my own analysis says that A5 can reach around 7000-7500 ish.. because A5 is heavier and can carry more load than Agni 3, 4

* are we sure that A3 reached only 800KM? can any confirm this? keep in mind that A4/A2 prime reached 900KM in height.

* saraswat also told in interview that Agni 5 can be used to launch satellites quickly and at low cost.

 

[pmaitra]

Topol-M is about the same diameter as Agni-5, but is 22.7 m long, carries a 1,200 kg warhead and can go up-to 11,000 km.

There is no way Agni-5 can go that far if it carries a 1,200 kg warhead. With 1,500 kg warhead, range will be even lesser.

 

[utubekhiladi]

agni 4/agni 2 prime is the best technology demonstrator and proven platform for making anti-satellite weapons. who agrees with me?

we can also make anti-sate weapons out of agni 3, 5 but i think agni 4/2 prime is a good candidate for such kind of weapons. who agrees?

 

[pmaitra]

agni 4/agni 2 prime is the best technology demonstrator and proven platform for making anti-satellite weapons. who agrees with me?

we can also make anti-sate weapons out of agni 3, 5 but i think agni 4/2 prime is a good candidate for such kind of weapons. who agrees?

SLBM version of Agni-4 is solid-fuelled, so probably Agni-4 is solid-fuelled. Thus, it is less controllable and not best for anti-sat role. I'd go for a liquid fuelled final stage for anti-sat.