DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[raju1982]

What is that at 48s? MRSAM? or something else?

 

[AnantS]

What is that at 48s? MRSAM? or something else?

MRSAM

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

Archer would incorporate whatever we learned from Tapas program.

Can you please clear all the Archer ng is heron mk 2 doubts?

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

Sakshin

Falcon is a long range and high endurance UAV designed for mapping and surveillance

t.co

 

[Chinmoy]

Can you please clear all the Archer ng is heron mk 2 doubts?

Archer NG is Rustom fuselage with twin boom and pusher config like Heron.

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

Archer NG is Rustom fuselage with twin boom and pusher config like Heron.

Now people please see this and stfu about it being heron mk2

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Welcome to the debate.
You have done quite a bit of work.
But my simple question has not yet been answered.

My question is are MBRL systems preferable while targeting an very long range high value target. Say the Chinese underground nuclear submarine base on Hainan Island. A fully hypothetical situation.

It would be protected by an ABM shield, no doubt.
Is it not the rule that rockets in an MBRL system fly in close proximity to one another and usually detonate on the target at the same time. A salvo attack.

Now if you were manning an computer console in the ABM control room, would it not be easier for you to launch interceptor missiles at an incoming missile attack where the missiles are flying closer to each other than if the missiles were approaching from dispersed trajectories.

I guess an couple of air burst detonations with prefragmented warheads in front of an 8/12 rocket barrage will be quite effective.
As against launching interceptor missiles at a number of enemy missiles approaching the target from different angles.These enemy missiles were fired individually from different locations and not from an MBRL based in a single location.


To put it simply : The ABM system will find it easier to neutralise an MBRL attack.
The very strength of an MBRL system i.e. an salvo of multiple rockets flying together(not exactly that) and impacting together on the target becomes its weakness because a flock of 12 missiles flying close is easier to intercept than 12 individual missiles coming in from different directions.

The ABM computer will have to generate 12 different targeting solutions and launch a minimum of 12 interceptors aimed in different directions to target each missile. In case an MBRL is not used.

Using an MBRL for very long range attacks may well turn out to be counter productive.
An question up for debate.

You whole hypothesis is entirely wrong.

Firstly, for precision targets, guided rockets are absolutely must. Now, you can simply program the rockets to fire after in intervals of 5sec, in that time each rocket would be KMs apart, rendering any hypothesis of taking out multiple rockets from one interceptor.
Surely you'll be able to detect them but then it's basically generating target solution for each of them, imagine doing it for 72 rockets fired from a battery in case of pinaka.

MBRL rockets don't impact together, in flight they are easily good amount of upto 100metres spread, I am talking about unguided salvo fired ones here, like 12 rockets in 40secs.
Interceptor blast fragment warhead action is few 10s of metres at best.

No single system exist as of now which can tackle a salvo fire of mlrs battery effectively. Iron dome can only dream.

You can easily see from Ukraine conflict that although Russia is able to tackle few gmlrs fired at it but When a salvo of 10-18 rockets is fired, we usually see some getting through. What is the super duper anti- ABM doing here, simply its just not made for that role.

For me most impressive thing is Pantsir, single vehicle system able to tackle those gmlrs in upto 4 rockets.

The biggest mlrs is KN25 as of now. There is so much range you can get out of mlrs given the physical constraints. For longer ranges, BMs are inevitable.View attachment 237115

 

[Tridev123]

You whole hypothesis is entirely wrong.

Firstly, for precision targets, guided rockets are absolutely must. Now, you can simply program the rockets to fire after in intervals of 5sec, in that time each rocket would be KMs apart, rendering any hypothesis of taking out multiple rockets from one interceptor.
Surely you'll be able to detect them but then it's basically generating target solution for each of them, imagine doing it for 72 rockets fired from a battery in case of pinaka.

MBRL rockets don't impact together, in flight they are easily good amount of upto 100metres spread, I am talking about unguided salvo fired ones here, like 12 rockets in 40secs.
Interceptor blast fragment warhead action is few 10s of metres at best.

No single system exist as of now which can tackle a salvo fire of mlrs battery effectively. Iron dome can only dream.

You can easily see from Ukraine conflict that although Russia is able to tackle few gmlrs fired at it but When a salvo of 10-18 rockets is fired, we usually see some getting through. What is the super duper anti- ABM doing here, simply its just not made for that role.

For me most impressive thing is Pantsir, single vehicle system able to tackle those gmlrs in upto 4 rockets.

The biggest mlrs is KN25 as of now. There is so much range you can get out of mlrs given the physical constraints. For longer ranges, BMs are inevitable.View attachment 237115

Bro,
I was alluding to extreme range MBRL system.
Some members had stated that 500,1000 and even 2000 kms MBRL systems can be made feasibly. That it is technically possible.
We are certainly not referring to the Pinaka, leave alone the prospect of firing 72 IRBM range missiles in a few minutes. Even the US doesn't have that kind of money to field something like that.

If you refer to my original post on the matter, I had asked how feasible it was to keep on increasing the range of MBRL systems. If we take the pros and cons we should arrive at some maximum range of future MBRL systems.

The Chinese keep on increasing the range of their MBRL systems. I believe that they have delivered an 400 kms range MBRL system to Pakistan who call it the Fatah 3 system. Please confirm the name given by Pakistan. I am not too sure.

The reference to an Anti Ballistic Missile system is usually in the context of intercepting IRBM's and ICBM's though sometimes even short/medium range ballistic missiles are also intercepted.

My statements were only in the context of an MBRL system firing multiple IRBM's at a very high value target. Which I feel is a deeply flawed strategy.

Please read my first post on this subject.

 

[TopWatcher]

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

What aircraft is hindustan 228

 

[Vikram314]

What aircraft is hindustan 228

Dornier 228

 

[Narasimh]

 

[Aniruddha Mulay]

What is that at 48s? MRSAM? or something else?

Indian Army MRSAM launcher

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Bro,
I was alluding to extreme range MBRL system.
Some members had stated that 500,1000 and even 2000 kms MBRL systems can be made feasibly. That it is technically possible.
We are certainly not referring to the Pinaka, leave alone the prospect of firing 72 IRBM range missiles in a few minutes. Even the US doesn't have that kind of money to field something like that.

If you refer to my original post on the matter, I had asked how feasible it was to keep on increasing the range of MBRL systems. If we take the pros and cons we should arrive at some maximum range of future MBRL systems.

The Chinese keep on increasing the range of their MBRL systems. I believe that they have delivered an 400 kms range MBRL system to Pakistan who call it the Fatah 3 system. Please confirm the name given by Pakistan. I am not too sure.

The reference to an Anti Ballistic Missile system is usually in the context of intercepting IRBM's and ICBM's though sometimes even short/medium range ballistic missiles are also intercepted.

My statements were only in the context of an MBRL system firing multiple IRBM's at a very high value target. Which I feel is a deeply flawed strategy.

Please read my first post on this subject.

Whatever that Fatah system is, it's either a simple ballistic missile like ATACMS and hence the range. Otherwise I highly doubt that any rocket of dia of 300-400mm would be able to reach 400km.
There is a A300 mlrs system rocket, also used by polonez system but should we call it a rocket or missile, imo it's a mix of both, basically a dual rocket motor with gliding surface projectile.
Very ingenious of Chinese for such a config and that's why A300 system is able to achieve near 300km range for such a system.

To say that Pakistani Fateh is better in range than even Chinese 370mm rockets, things are not adding up. More so given that Fatah 1 and 2 are canard guided. Basically guided AR3 mlrs.

About your IRBM range mlrs, I simply am unable to hypothize any possible real scenario. I'll be leaving the discussion on that.

But as of now 400km or 500km range seems to be the upper limit for guided mlrs.

 

[Tridev123]

Whatever that Fatah system is, it's either a simple ballistic missile like ATACMS and hence the range. Otherwise I highly doubt that any rocket of dia of 300-400mm would be able to reach 400km.
There is a A300 mlrs system rocket, also used by polonez system but should we call it a rocket or missile, imo it's a mix of both, basically a dual rocket motor with gliding surface projectile.
Very ingenious of Chinese for such a config and that's why A300 system is able to achieve near 300km range for such a system.View attachment 237178

To say that Pakistani Fateh is better in range than even Chinese 370mm rockets, things are not adding up. More so given that Fatah 1 and 2 are canard guided. Basically guided AR3 mlrs.View attachment 237177

About your IRBM range mlrs, I simply am unable to hypothize any possible real scenario. I'll be leaving the discussion on that.

But as of now 400km or 500km range seems to be the upper limit for guided mlrs.

What is your take on using a single ballistic missile to perform the task of an MBRL rocket/missile barrage.
For ranges beyond 500 kms a single mid course maneuvering ballistic missile with multiple warheads can be fired.These warheads will have fins and even small thrusters to make lateral(horizontal plane )movements to ensure that each warhead lands a few tens or even a hundred meters from each other.
Already runway denial dispersed bomblets type warheads are available. This will be a more advanced version with blast effect of a few Sq.kms.

It cannot equal an 72 round Grad launcher. But can provide competition to an 8 or 12 round long range MBRL.

If up to 8/12 small individual warheads can be fitted into the nose cone of the ballistic missile

Essentially an very very downsized ICBM with multiple manoeuvrable re entry vehicles.

One drawback is that it will be a relatively large diameter missile. Need to make it's trajectory unpredictable for most of its flight regime. Make it harder to track it and shoot it down.

Also another drawback will be that the individual warheads will not have a heavy explosive charge.
The warheads have to be light enough to be easily carried by a medium weight ballistic missile.

One advantage is that it would have a smaller footprint than an MBRL and more mobile. Reloading could be faster. Probably concealment can be easier.Can be stored/protected in hardened silos.More survivability.But fixed silo basing means the enemy can learn beforehand it's location.

It's not a new idea.

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[Arihant Roy]

Love this Himalayan Grey two tone paint scheme.

Swathi mkII.

 

[Narasimh]

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[Tejbrahmastra]