Agni V Missile

[Dinesh_Kumar]

BK's article basic point being more tests are required before we can claim "Credible, minimum, No First Use, Nuclear Deterrent". Rite now only the "minimum" part seems to be achieved. To get to "credible", we need Weapons Tests. BK points out (in a different way) that with present simulation tech in India, even Arty guns simulation cant be done realistically. China Tech levels here are not the matter,its only used as an example. Wat was promised to people was "Credible, minimum, No First Use, Nuclear Deterrent" BK Says not been achieved, and I agree.
@kseeker, this is not first time the Test Dilemma is coming up, last time DRDO Scientist said not enough, but was overruled by BARC, who assure that all is well.

 

[drkrn]

I beg to differ on this. Bharat Karnad underestimated our capabilities by comparing with Chinese. I agree that, chinese have better technology than us; that doesn't mean we are miniscule in nature. Nuclear impact, be it a 20 KT or 20MT, they will have devastating effect. Do you think GOI will allow our scientists to reveal actual facts in front of general public ? Both western and chinese think tanks have adopted a philosophy of undermining "Indian" achievements. Scientists don't become experts by conducting 40-50 tests, even fewer tests will reveal the capability of the system.

wrong opinio.
its only with repetition of such tests you learn about the key mistakes and smaller things which we tend to miss in general.theese are never shareed even between most friendly nations,nor available in open.

testing repeatedly till you are confident is the only way of mastering nuclear technology

 

[t_co]

Just for reference, the standard Chinese thermonuclear warhead is pretty much an improved copy of the American W88.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W88

It has approximately the same yield and weight.

a W88 warhead manages to yield up 475 kt with a physics package 68.9 in (1.75 m) long, with a maximum diameter of 21.8 in (0.55 m), and weighing probably less than 800 lb (360 kg)

The payload of the DF-21C, the standard IRBM aimed at India, is 600kg. The diameter of the missile is not large enough to fit 2 W88-style warheads, but there is enough space and spare payload to fit a much higher amount of penetration aids (radar chaff, infrared decoys, even jamming devices) than normal. Also, because the missile will be launched from far within its maximum range, any Chinese nuclear strike on India will come in on depressed trajectories to utilize the radar 'wall' of the Himalayan Mountains for as long as they can. Without launch detection capabilities, India would have less than 3 minutes of warning time for any Chinese attack launched from Tibet - which would likely be composed of 150-200 small-sized (but powerful) warheads with US-style decoys and chaff bluffing any ABM network.

The DF-21C's upgraded version, the DF-25, can carry up to 3 smaller warheads with reduced yields based, again, on the W88 design. China makes about 20 of those missiles each year, but most of them are aimed at Japan (because the greater population density means that even reduced yields can achieve the necessary casualty figures Chinese leaders consider necessary for deterrence.)

 

[ice berg]

Just for reference, the standard Chinese thermonuclear warhead is pretty much an improved copy of the American W88.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W88

It has approximately the same yield and weight.



The payload of the DF-21C, the standard IRBM aimed at India, is 600kg. The diameter of the missile is not large enough to fit 2 W88-style warheads, but there is enough space and spare payload to fit a much higher amount of penetration aids (radar chaff, infrared decoys, even jamming devices) than normal. Also, because the missile will be launched from far within its maximum range, any Chinese nuclear strike on India will come in on depressed trajectories to utilize the radar 'wall' of the Himalayan Mountains for as long as they can. Without launch detection capabilities, India would have less than 3 minutes of warning time for any Chinese attack launched from Tibet - which would likely be composed of 150-200 small-sized (but powerful) warheads with US-style decoys and chaff bluffing any ABM network.

The DF-21C's upgraded version, the DF-25, can carry up to 3 smaller warheads with reduced yields based, again, on the W88 design. China makes about 20 of those missiles each year, but most of them are aimed at Japan (because the greater population density means that even reduced yields can achieve the necessary casualty figures Chinese leaders consider necessary for deterrence.)

It is not chinese nukes India needs to worry about. It is the chinese conventional missiles.

Quote from OOE from WWB;
Then, there is the Chinese non-nuclear SSM batteries. The Chinese are the ONLY force that practises salvo launches. Imagine five 1000lb bombs dropping on your HQ. Not fun and they don't even have to punch through the Indian AD net.

The increase in accuracy of conventional missiles have far more impact on military plannings than numbers of Indian or chinese nukes. Sadly most indian fanboys still got their heads wrapped on "nukes".

 

[t_co]

It is not chinese nukes India needs to worry about. It is the chinese conventional missiles.

Quote from OOE from WWB;
Then, there is the Chinese non-nuclear SSM batteries. The Chinese are the ONLY force that practises salvo launches. Imagine five 1000lb bombs dropping on your HQ. Not fun and they don't even have to punch through the Indian AD net.

The increase in accuracy of conventional missiles have far more impact on military plannings than numbers of Indian or chinese nukes. Sadly most indian fanboys still got their heads wrapped on "nukes".

Yep, and standard Chinese SOP is to give lower-level commanders the authority to engage without warning, using massive PGM and cyber strikes against all adversary C4ISR nodes within the opening hour of a conflict - without requiring any approval from slower-moving command organs like the CMC.

 

[Broccoli]

There is lot misinformation in this thread coming from a Chinese and Indian members. I would suggest all you to read these articles.

The Chinese nuclear tests, 1964–1996
http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_61/iss_9/47_1.shtml?bypassSSO=1

Why China Won't Build U.S. Warheads
Why China Won't Build U.S. Warheads | Arms Control Association

 

[sayareakd]

Spin off from A5 has reached A3. From 48 tons A3 is now 22. My question is does change in TOW will increase range of missile?

 

[Dinesh_Kumar]

Source please....

Spin off from A5 has reached A3. From 48 tons A3 is now 22. My question is does change in TOW will increase range of missile?

 

[sayareakd]

Source please....

Agni-V vital: Tessy Thomas - The Hindu

 

[sayareakd]

Source please....

Agni-V vital: Tessy Thomas - The Hindu

 

[drkrn]

@sayareakd
is it good to miniature the size of missile as well?when they could halve the weight why not they decrease the size a bit?

 

[sayareakd]

@sayareakd
is it good to miniature the size of missile as well?when they could halve the weight why not they decrease the size a bit?

they can do that, but that result in changing lot of things. Economics of scale wont permit it, as it will increase the cost. But i think with change in TOW ratio, it will increase the range of the missile as the missile is weight half with almost same or more thrust. You should look at A3 and A5 video and you will get the idea about the first stage separation etc.

 

[Dinesh_Kumar]

No, I already know abt Nav and Avionics on A3, where does it say 22 tons?

Agni-V vital: Tessy Thomas - The Hindu

 

[sayareakd]

No, I already know abt Nav and Avionics on A3, where does it say 22 tons?

Ms. Thomas said that while the two-stage Agni-III missile capable of hitting targets up to 3,000 km away weighed 50 tonnes, the team was able to bring down the weight of the missile to 22 tonnes.

(5th para from the top)
Agni-V vital: Tessy Thomas - The Hindu

 

[happy]

(5th para from the top)
Agni-V vital: Tessy Thomas - The Hindu

Few months back, there was an article on DFI with the headline "AGNI missiles - more than meets the eye". My question, is this revelation by tessy thomas, is to dispel doubts on the range of agni series missiles??

 

[DivineHeretic]

they can do that, but that result in changing lot of things. Economics of scale wont permit it, as it will increase the cost. But i think with change in TOW ratio, it will increase the range of the missile as the missile is weight half with almost same or more thrust. You should look at A3 and A5 video and you will get the idea about the first stage separation etc.

To be fair, There is never much thought given to economics of scale as far as strategic weapons go (unless of course it is something as outrageously expensive as the B2 bomber).

But yeah, with everything else remaining same, a missile with lower TOW will definitely travel a longer distance, at least in the vertical direction. Now whether they use it to improve its range or intend to use a steeper and faster approach to target remains to be seen.

We should have heard about change in trajectory of the the Agni-III, or atleast the change in max. altitude attained by the missile if indeed the flight characteristics of the missile were altered.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Few months back, there was an article on DFI with the headline "AGNI missiles - more than meets the eye". My question, is this revelation by tessy thomas, is to dispel doubts on the range of agni series missiles??

The problem with strategic weapons is that you need to demonstrate its fearsome capabilities and reliability to your opponents, and at the same time ensure the enemy remains oblivious to its performance.

Nobody worth their salt would reveal every aspect of their weapons, so it is natural that some aspects/features/capabilities of the Agni-III too would be kept outside the public domain.

The question is would the somebody deliberately hide/obfuscate the actual tonnage of the missile, for whatever reasons deemed necessary, and then come out into the open just a few years down the line?

My answer to that would be; Yes.

 

[Bheeshma]

Whats wrong in obfuscating the tonnage? The range is always obfuscated, look at Brahmos, A-1, A-2,Shaurya and now A-5. As a rule of thumb I just assume GoI has the numbers right but the units wrong.

 

[sayareakd]

Since weight of A3 has been reduce, then it can either had same range with reduce size and fuel, or it can have same size with more fuel.

 

[Dinesh_Kumar]

Good stuff Sir.

(5th para from the top)
Agni-V vital: Tessy Thomas - The Hindu