Akash Surface-to-air Missile

[Singh]

Don't want to get dragged in the heated debate(as i am already engaged in a few ) but still just a pointer

For AAM's and SAM's (in simpler terms missiles that have to chase fighter aircrafts) Higher speed Doesn't always equate to a better missile system

because the turn rates required for a missile increase as the ratio of the velocities of the missile and the aircraft.

for example . let us say a fighter flying at mach 1 is being chased by a missile flying at mach 3

If the fighter pulls a tight 9g turn then to keep up with the fighter the missile will have to pull 9x(3/1)^2 = 81g turn rate .... not always possible

Not sure about this formula ? where is the radius and the angle ?
Gforce = speed of the object squared divided by radius of curvature whole divided by gravitational constant of acceleration (take out the sine table and pick a radius and speed of the flight and you are good to go)


Though Missiles like Spyder's Python, Derby and even Barak-2 can sustain 60-80G+ turns, whereas Aakash can manage only 15G maneuvres.

 

[Armand2REP]

Don't want to get dragged in the heated debate(as i am already engaged in a few ) but still just a pointer

For AAM's and SAM's (in simpler terms missiles that have to chase fighter aircrafts) Higher speed Doesn't always equate to a better missile system

because the turn rates required for a missile increase as the ratio of the velocities of the missile and the aircraft.

for example . let us say a fighter flying at mach 1 is being chased by a missile flying at mach 3

If the fighter pulls a tight 9g turn then to keep up with the fighter the missile will have to pull 9x(3/1)^2 = 81g turn rate .... not always possible

Your're forgetting missiles have frag warheads. If Akash is exploding a 60kg frag under your ass = ass is grass. The G forces missiles need to undertake are only relavent to the explosive radius of the warhead it carries. Hence, smaller missiles need to be more manueverable to get into a smaller kill radius. FYI, your calculations don't make any sense. The equation is (g+a)/9.8

 

[notinlove]

Not sure about this formula ? where is the radius and the angle ?
Gforce = speed of the object squared divided by radius of curvature whole divided by gravitational constant of acceleration (take out the sine table and pick a radius and speed of the flight and you are good to go)


Though Missiles like Spyder's Python, Derby and even Barak-2 can sustain 60-80G+ turns, whereas Aakash can manage only 15G maneuvres.

the radius and angle are immaterial in this case because they are taken the same as the radius and angle of the aircraft the missile is chasing hence they won't make any difference to the calculation.

 

[notinlove]

Your're forgetting missiles have frag warheads. If Akash is exploding a 60kg frag under your ass = ass is grass. The G forces missiles need to undertake are only relavent to the explosive radius of the warhead it carries. Hence, smaller missiles need to be more manueverable to get into a smaller kill radius.

Agreed.

FYI, your calculations don't make any sense. The equation is (g+a)/9.8

that's because the equations you are using are for straight line accelerations such as cars etc not turn rate gforce calculations , the equation that singh wrote above is correct.
FYI the a+g you wrote is vector sum and not scalar sum that you wrote

 

[gb009]

@ppgj

check my previous the post.

Means DRDO is not confident of making a good seaker so they have to resort the old system of command guidance (for the entire flight).

heard of Lakshya??

Top speed = 0.7 mach, you think the enemy fighter will slow down to allow the Akash to get a better shot at it? service ceiling = 9000m, which jet has such a high service ceiling? Rate of climb = 25m/sec, I am sure most jet fighters can't do that either. So no doubt Lakshya can mimic a jet fighter.

check my previous post.

So? Its their job to come up with a missile that is small so more can be fitted on a launcher and its easier to handle. I am just happy you din't quote the weight as an advantage to Akash.

 

[Armand2REP]

that's because the equations you are using are for straight line accelerations such as cars etc not turn rate gforce calculations , the equation that singh wrote above is correct.
FYI the a+g you wrote is vector sum and not scalar sum that you wrote

How much turn rate do you think an acceleration to Mach 3.5 is going to have with a 15G limit? The vector product is what we want to find the g-force on a missile that is basically a rocket on its final trajectory. Its limit will already be reached by its acceleration on the final approach thanks to its limited range.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

SA-6 was a good system during the Yom kippur war Egypt suprised the Israelis with the system and claim to have shot down 64 Israeli aircraft. The serbs also claimed to have shot down an F-117 using SA-6 during the Serbian war. SA-6 battery operators used the technique of not turning their radars on for more than a few seconds and relying on the IR homing of the missiles themselves, thus not alerting the pilots to the danger. We have AKASH operating with RAJENDRA radar some vast improvements have been made making it almost a completely different system compared to the original SA-6's, but the missile is almost identical to the original. I wonder if anything was gained in making the ramjet for Akash which could be possibly implemented in other missiles in the future??

 

[dineshchaturvedi]

I surely believe that our missiles system are not cutting edge. I however want people to realize that in no way we can blame out scientist for that, the scientist of western nations enjoys way better facilities, finances etc. We also have to take into consideration that we were and are basically a poor nation who started nation building since 1947. We have significant population of uneducated and poor people when we started. There is a life cycle of everything, till late nineties we were hardly having any money to concentrate on R&D and it was never focus of the politicians. I do not want to go in length but people who criticize India should keep all this in mind when putting their opinion.

Now after 2000 we have started to put funds and priorities differently, as and when we become economically stronger we will get better at R&D. The point I am trying to make it wait for another 2 decades or so when we have decent finance to support our R&D developments and then I will take your criticism.

Their is are other factors like proper leadership, US pressure not to test develop etc, do not think I am hiding behind excuse, just wanted to limit my comments to specific areas.

One cannot graduate without completing schooling, so people who expect that from 5th grade a person will graduate in 3 to 4 years are having wrong expectations, however what ever progress we have made in the time frame is good.

Our missile program is getting priority now, I can see that from the number of test we have started to do after 2008, so you will see the results getting better by the day. How many of you have seen articles from DRDO coming so frequently, how many news channel use to focus on defense before. In a way 26/11 is a turning point for India, remember it will be important date in history of India.

 

[ppgj]

You know you are not helping your cause by trying to portray that somehow Patriot is a failure and inferior to Akash.

how come you are helping your cause by portraying Akash is not cutting edge, RE of SA-6 while patriot missile is miles ahead.

i have never said anything of that sort. i pointed a failure of patriot only to show - 'even systems created by the leader of the world are also prone to failures'.

every missile is designed for a purpose and have their place. period.

Okay you believe Akash is the world's best missile, even better than the Patriot

i have never said it is world's best missile. as for patriot, i beleive in our scientists, is what i said.

you are free to interpret in whatever way you want to but i would appreciate if you do not put words into my mouth.

and Army and Airforce are corrupt who don't want this missile.

i have never said they are corrupt. i would request you again, to - not put words into my mouth.

as for their anti drdo bias there is a well documented history to it.

Sorry but I don't subscribe to BS nor do I wish to humour you.

humour me!! are you serious!!

SA-6 had tracked chasis from the beginning. SA-6 had an advantage of sustained thrust 40 years back. Gee I wonder why Russians decide to go in for solid propellent rocket motors ?

i was answering to your 'number of missiles per launcher' observation.

i know SA-6 is also tracked chassis. btw at lesser weight even SA-6 also had 3 missiles to a launcher.

as for russians going to solid propellant motors does not mean RAMJET is a negative.

25km = Shorad.
If its a MR-SAm then why is Indian govt going for Barak-2 Mr-sam ?
Spyder Sr is Sr, Spyder Mr is Mr.

i have given enough links to support what i said. if you do not want to beleive, i can't force you.

Comparing Pak-fa with Akash ?

did i?? how can an aircraft be compared to a missile!!

you went OT by referring Akash as RE of SA-6. i countered by going OT asking you if PAKFA is a RE of F-22/YF-23.

And by the way SA-6 took down over 60 crafts in the Yom Kippur war.

agree. but still SA-6's first rate kil/missilel is 70%. Akash is 88%.

And kudos to DRDO for removing seekers from SA-6 and giving it solely radar guidance. So Next Gen. Not.

disagree.

absolute rubbish. There is nothing spectacular about a ramjet SAM. And Drdo scientist fit a SA-6 like ramjet propulsion in a SA-6 like missile. This was done by Ruskies 50 years back.

technology is never static. they keep getting recycled and reinvented.

 

[ppgj]

@ppgj

Means DRDO is not confident of making a good seaker so they have to resort the old system of command guidance (for the entire flight).

Top speed = 0.7 mach, you think the enemy fighter will slow down to allow the Akash to get a better shot at it? service ceiling = 9000m, which jet has such a high service ceiling? Rate of climb = 25m/sec, I am sure most jet fighters can't do that either. So no doubt Lakshya can mimic a jet fighter.

all your points have been answered in my previous posts. it would be better if you do not ask the same questions which have been answered even if they were not to you.

So? Its their job to come up with a missile that is small so more can be fitted on a launcher and its easier to handle. I am just happy you din't quote the weight as an advantage to Akash.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot

there can be different versions of the same missile system. does not mean anything you are referring to.

point here is IAF and the army are happy. if they want to add, it would be possible though tracked chassis may not allow as much as a wheeled chassis.

 

[hit&run]

Singh ji,
Don't you think purchasing Arms from DDRO will help them to enhance it to a cutting edge bird? I think the whole issue is can we still afford to compromise our security and go ahead with Aakash for couple of more years to come.The answer from our govt. will be yes, trust me. The GoI's forseeability is; the would be/ threat perception and challenges are distant.We can afford to invest in domiciliary technology and wait. You can not expedite R&D but yes you can expedite replication. R&D means R&D you know what i mean, no outsider will drain his brain for you. Either you will buy more over advanced or will accept household. Why Aakash was snubbed many times before show that people purchasing it now were/are honest about what they need per threat perception.
Regards.

 

[notinlove]

How much turn rate do you think an acceleration to Mach 3.5 is going to have with a 15G limit? The vector product is what we want to find the g-force on a missile that is basically a rocket on its final trajectory. Its limit will already be reached by its acceleration on the final approach thanks to its limited range.

couldn't understand, doesn't make sense , where did vector product came in from ?

the g limits for missiles are given for turning maneuvers and not straightline motion , because in a straightline motion missiles can take a lot more forces on them when compared to turning maneuvers because their width is nothing compared to their lengths..

Moreover don't jump into specifics of akash i never said anything about it , i just pointed out a general pointer ........
as far as akash is concerned the jury is still out for me.

 

[vaibhavk]

thanks,
very nice picture
have any more?

 

[Singh]

What people don't realise is that, Akash programme was started when the cold war was still ongoing. Soviet Union was facing reverses, US was our "enemy", our economy was tanking and self-indigenous was the mantra.

India was using Soviet SAMs which were getting old and difficult to maintain and a replacement was required. The fastest way to make an indigenous requirement was by reverse engineering and improving the existing systems. Akash is based on SA-6, which is still widely used by the armed forces.

However, cut to 2000s, the Cold war is finished, Russia, EU, US, Israel all are our close allies and friends, and our economy is booming. Today the armed forces have no monetary or indigenous constraints, therefore they are right in demanding the best systems in the world.

 

[gb009]

all your points have been answered in my previous posts. it would be better if you do not ask the same questions which have been answered even if they were not to you.

I think you forgot to add "unsatisfactorily". between "answered" and "in". Such answers don't count.

point here is IAF and the army are happy. if they want to add, it would be possible though tracked chassis may not allow as much as a wheeled chassis.

I never said anything about IAF being unhappy. My point is that Akash is not cutting edge.

 

[mani1090]

India to deploy Akash missiles in North-East

India plans to progressively base six surface-to-air Akash missile squadrons in the North-East to counter the threat posed by Chinese fighters, helicopters and drones in the region.

Sources say IAF will get eight Akash tactical air defence squadrons by 2015, with the first one becoming operational by 2011 itself, at a cost of over Rs 6,100 crore. Every squadron will have two `flights' of four Akash launchers each. Moreover, the Army is now poised to order two Akash regiments, with six firing batteries each, for around Rs 4,000 crore.

With an effective interception range of 25 km, the DRDO-developed Akash system with supersonic missiles and a network of radars is designed to neutralise multiple aerial targets attacking from several directions simultaneously in all-weather conditions. With an 88% "kill probability'', it can even take on sub-sonic cruise missiles.

The plan to base Akash squadrons in North-East constitutes yet another step to counter China's massive build-up of military infrastructure all along the unresolved 4,057-km Line of Actual Control (LAC).

Though it woke up quite late, India is now fastracking measures like raising of two new specialised infantry mountain divisions and an artillery brigade for Arunachal Pradesh and basing of two Sukhoi-30MKI squadrons (36 fighters) each at Tezpur and Chabua in Assam.

India is also looking to deploy the 3,500-km Agni-III and the under-development over 5,000-km Agni-V ballistic missiles as soon as possible. While Agni-III will be operationally ready by 2011-2012, the two new infantry divisions, with 1,260 officers and 35,011 soldiers, will be in place by 2012.

The government, of course, likes to downplay all this. Defence minister A K Antony on Monday said the two new divisions were part of the overall strategy to strengthen the armed forces.

"It's not directed at China or any country. The aim is to have an effective deterrent against any threat or eventuality,'' said Antony, after inaugurating DefExpo-2010, which has attracted a record 650 companies.

India is not "a war-mongering country'', nor does it covet "even an inch'' of any country's territory. "But we are ready to defend every inch of our territory... Our aim is to give the most modern equipment to our armed forces so that they can meet any challenge from any quarter at any time,'' said Antony.

Yes, there is the long-pending border dispute with China, but both New Delhi and Beijing are trying to "amicably resolve'' it through talks. Relations with China in other sectors like trade have dramatically improved, said Antony.

While this is certainly true, China is upgrading as many as 14 airfields in Tibet, of which at least half are now fully-operational. Its Linzi airbase, for instance, is not even 30 km away from the LAC in Arunachal.

With straight double-digit hikes in its defence budget for over 20 years, the 2.25-million strong People's Liberation Army has swiftly enhanced its transborder and `area-denial' military capabilities as well as bolstered its nuclear missile arsenal.

 

[ahmedsid]

Finally, When I keep hearing these news, I feel happy that our Govt is atleast doing or trying to do something when it comes to china, after years of lax attitude. The Chinese should see this as a clear sign saying "Trespassers will be shot at, not prosecuted". I just hope GOI also speeds up the infrastructure development in the area. God Speed

 

[ajtr]

Hold west and secure east seems to be the strategy of GOI.thats the reason we are seeing talks with west and deployment in east.

 

[ppgj]

I think you forgot to add "unsatisfactorily". between "answered" and "in". Such answers don't count.

i am not answering to satisfy you. the point that it is a debate means people have divergent views. neither of us is the judge here nor is the forum a court. clear??

how does asking the same thing which has been answered (satisfactorily or otherwise) makes sense??

I never said anything about IAF being unhappy. My point is that Akash is not cutting edge.

point is i have not said it is cutting edge. it may be better or worse. go read the posts again.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

What people don't realise is that, Akash programme was started when the cold war was still ongoing. Soviet Union was facing reverses, US was our "enemy", our economy was tanking and self-indigenous was the mantra.

India was using Soviet SAMs which were getting old and difficult to maintain and a replacement was required. The fastest way to make an indigenous requirement was by reverse engineering and improving the existing systems. Akash is based on SA-6, which is still widely used by the armed forces.

However, cut to 2000s, the Cold war is finished, Russia, EU, US, Israel all are our close allies and friends, and our economy is booming. Today the armed forces have no monetary or indigenous constraints, therefore they are right in demanding the best systems in the world.

Singh I agree with you, I also want to add that AKASH we are presently acquiring is only one version, I am sure it will go thru many different versions and upgrades as needed, it is only one part of the BMD and right now it fits the role we are looking for and being a mobile and mass produced cost effective system, it will probably evolve into a much different system a decade from now?