Indian Ballistic Missile Defense System

[anoop_mig25]

another attempt to close our BMD programme.

Potential for cooperation with India to develop BMD: US

Potential for cooperation with India to develop BMD: US | Business Standard

hope they donot fall in this trap

 

[praneetbajpaie]

hope they donot fall in this trap

Given that our leaders are jackasses of the first order, I am not sure about that and its all our fault to keep on voting for them.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

US keen to cooperate with India in Ballistic Missile Defence shield programme - The Economic Times


US keen to cooperate with India in Ballistic Missile Defence shield programme

 

[sayareakd]

'The Indian missile shield: nothing to be baffled about' by Mihir Shah

Last Month, India Today carried a column by Manoj Joshi that was rather critical of the Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO's) ballistic missile defence (BMD) program. Joshi argued that DRDO's claims about the BMD shield being ready after just six tests, in what appear to be controlled conditions, were unrealistic; that a project of such strategic importance lacked proper direction from the outset; and even questioned the need for such a system in the Indian context. Be that as it may I felt that it would be good if a different perspective was brought to the fore that diverged with the opinions expressed in Joshi's piece and furthered the debate on what is by any account a most significant programme for India's strategic security.

In today's guest post we have Mihir Shah responding to Joshi's assertion and rebutting some of the points expressed by him on DRDO's BMD programme.

1: That India's missile shield is not ready for deployment

To be fair, Joshi doesn't state this explicitly, but seems to drive the reader towards this conclusion by questioning the adequacy of the tests the missile shield was subject to. This, in spite of the presence of multiple credible sources in the public domain that attest to the fact that the entire BMD system has been subject to full-up tests, in its "final user configuration". Moreover, although the column's title expresses the belief that the government is 'baffled' over the DRDO chief's claim, Joshi presents scant evidence to show that this is indeed the case. Even the ubiquitous 'unnamed sources' that usually form the basis of such theses are conspicuous by their absence.

2: That a modified Prithvi missile launched from a distance of 70 km can in no way mimic the flight profile of a 2000 km range missile

This is incorrect. As long as the inbound reentry-vehicle comes in at the correct angle and terminal velocity, it matters not for a terminal phase BMD system whether it was launched from 2000 km away or 70 km away. And there is no reason a Prithvi's trajectory cannot be modified to mimic that of an intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM) in the terminal phase. The day the DRDO builds a Sprint/Spartan type system, there shall be no alternative but to test it against "proper" long-range missiles. But to the best of my knowledge, they aren't building a Sprint/Spartan right now, so why use an expensive Agni as a target when a much cheaper (and convenient) Prithvi will suffice?

3: With nuclear weapons around, only a shield that will guarantee blocking every single missile is the only one worth having

This one claim is perhaps the most puzzling of all, and demonstrates a skewed understanding of how ballistic missile defences are supposed to work. Another perspective would point out that If India deploys even a marginally effective BMD system, it will seriously limit an enemy country's nuclear strike options and impose excessive costs on them should they decide to build more warheads and delivery vehicles to neturalise India's advantage.

Let me explain what I mean, by building a hypothetical scenario. Suppose that the hypothetical continent of Westeros is in the midst of a cold war, with the Starks of Winterfell facing off against the powerful Lannisters of Casterly Rock. The Lannisters are known to possess a limited number (say forty) of nuclear warheads mounted on ballistic missiles. At most, that means they can hit 40 targets, Furthermore suppose Lord Tywin of the Lannister's for some reason demands that each Lannister missile be targeted against a different city. To counter it, the Starks decide to put into operation a BMD shield to cover the North, Riverrun, and the Vale of Arryn. Let us assume that this shield has a rather poor anticipated kill probability of 80 per cent. How do the Lannisters respond? The easy way out would be to assign multiple missiles to a smaller number of targets. They select eight of the most important targets and assign five missiles to each in the hope that at least one of those five will make it through. Almost at once, the Starks' BMD system has protected 32 targets, thousands of lives, and tons of precious resources without having fired a single shot. This is called 'virtual attrition'. The Lannisters may well decide to enlarge their arsenal to 200 warheads and missiles and get back their earlier effectiveness numbers, but there is every chance that this will be either impossible or terribly expensive. And the moment the Starks give their system a minor upgrade to increase its effectiveness to 90 per cent, they (the Lannisters) will be back to square one, requiring another 200 missiles to restore the status quo. The economics of the competition are loaded in favour of the Starks -- an ABM system is expensive to set-up, but it can be expanded and upgraded at a fraction of what it would cost the Lannisters to build more missiles and warheads and then set up the infrastructure for their deployment, maintenance, and upkeep.

Applying the lessons of this scenario to India tells me that inflicting a bit of this same virtual attrition on Pakistan's nuclear arsenal wouldn't be such a bad thing at all. Several well-meaning analysts consider a nuclear war 'unthinkable' and see a war as 'lost' as soon as the first nuclear warhead goes off. In the process they end up advocating an all-or-nothing approach to national defence which frankly speaking makes very little strategic sense. One expects pragmatic policy-makers to be made up of sterner stuff. It is their job to make the nation as secure as possible, to rationally think about nuclear war, to devise strategies to win it if it happens, and ensure the continued functioning of the state after the dust has settled. And rational thinking dictates that given a choice between losing, say, Delhi alone versus losing Delhi and Jaipur, the correct decision would be to save Jaipur, no matter how much it offends some. Sitting around twiddling thumbs and calling either "unthinkable" is NOT an option.

4: That none of the DRDO's claims have been verified by third parties, say, any of our armed forces. In contrast, China's January 2010 test was authenticated by the Pentagon

This is a weak line of argument at best, since it juxtaposes the views of the user of an indigenously developed weapon system with a foreign defence department in the context of evaluating the efficacy of a high security programme under development! The two are hardly equivalent! In any case it can always be argued that we do not know whether the Chinese system was verified 'independently' by their military. As for the Pentagon, its statement only states that American satellites detected an interception. There is little to indicate that it verified the operation of every little component of the system: the search, tracking, and fire control radars, the communications system, the command and control system, and so on. In any case the Indian military and potential users have pretty much been present during various BMD tests. Surely, a user team from the Indian Army, present at Wheeler Island at the time of the test, got to examine the operation of the entire system in more detail than a few foreign satellites observing a Chinese test? In fact given that both Air Marshal Barbora and Maj Gen Saxena were present at this particular test on July 26, 2010, it is quite possible that the shield will be operated by a joint Army-Air Force team under the direct command of the SFC.

5: That the system will be ready for only "two places", presumably Mumbai and Delhi. But what about Kolkata, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Lucknow and the rest of the country?"

The deployment in two places is only supposed to be an initial deployment. Every new weapon is deployed in phases, and there is no reason the BMD system should be any different in that regard. In fact, setting it up in several cities at once without it being given a thorough shakedown would be the far riskier option, strategically and economically.

6: That building a missile shield would force Pakistan to build "field greater numbers of missiles with nuclear weapons", compromising India's interests

In support of this suggestion, Joshi quotes Air Vice-Marshal (retd) Kapil Kak: "For an unstable and fragile state like Pakistan, India's BMD could indeed be destabilising, as this would substantially reduce the value of Pakistan's nuclear and missile arsenal, tempting it to increase the same." My response to this is, yes, it may be so but why is this "destabilisation" necessarily a bad thing? Pakistan has more than once pronounced its willingness to use nuclear weapons if war breaks out, and hasn't shied away from protecting terrorist entities it actively supports with these weapons. Short of a direct threat of unprovoked nuclear war, the situation is already about as unstable as it could get for India. Now with the Pakistani economy in doldrums, wouldn't it make sense for India to "destabilise" the strategic equation by forcing Pakistan to pour more money and resources into an arms build-up it cannot afford?

Acknowledgements: Mihir Shah would like to extend his sincere gratitude to Rahul M, Nitin V, and Dr Sanjay Badri-Maharaj for contributing their considerable knowledge and views and their assistance in critiquing this rebuttal.

(Mihir Shah is an engineer who tracks aerospace issues closely and has contributed in the past to Livefist and Pragati magazine. He works at a firm specialising in energy efficiency consulting. He may be contacted at [email protected])

IBNLive : Saurav Jha's Blog : Guest Post 2: 'The Indian missile shield: nothing to be baffled about' by Mihir Shah

 

[Shaitan]

 

[LalTopi]

'The Indian missile shield: nothing to be baffled about' by Mihir Shah


IBNLive : Saurav Jha's Blog : Guest Post 2: 'The Indian missile shield: nothing to be baffled about' by Mihir Shah

Anymore news on the roll-out to Delhi and Mumbai?
I am still not convinced that this news is true - has there been an official announcement from a reputable source?

 

[sayareakd]

Shield in the sky

T.S. SUBRAMANIAN
With the success of the DRDO's interceptor launch on November 23, India now has a defence shield capable of simultaneously destroying multiple long-range attacker missiles.
DRDO

An image on the computer at the Launch Control Centre on Wheeler Island showing (on the left) the electronically simulated attacker missile being killed by a "digital" interceptor at an altitude of 120 km and, in the middle of the picture, a real target missile from Chandipur, Odisha, being neutralised by an actual interceptor missile at a height of 15 km.
INDIA is gearing up to deploy, in 2013 or 2014, a ballistic missile defence (BMD) shield around the capital New Delhi and around strategic assets such as the commercial capital Mumbai and political targets such as residences of top political leaders. In Phase II of the project, long-range radars and more powerful interceptors will be developed to engage enemy missiles launched from more than 2,000 kilometres away. More importantly, India's BMD shield can take care of multiple attacker missiles by launching multiple interceptor missiles simultaneously. A ship-based platform is also being planned to launch the interceptors.

Enviable record

The Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO) top-brass, V.K. Saraswat and Avinash Chander, made these announcements within a couple of hours of the resounding success of the interceptor missile launch on November 23. The DRDO has an enviable record in its interceptor missile tests. Out of eight tests, beginning from November 27, 2006, to the latest one, seven have been unvarnished successes.

Soon after the success of the seventh test on February 10, 2012, Saraswat, Director General, DRDO, who is Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, asserted: "The mission was done in deployment mode, close to the final user [the Army] configuration"¦. Its success confirms that the country is ready to take it to the next phase of production and induction" ( Frontline, March 9, 2012). Avinash Chander, Chief Controller R&D (Missiles and Strategic Systems), DRDO, was equally assertive on February 10: "The entire operation was close to the deployment configuration," he said. D.S. Reddy, then Programme Director, Advanced Air Defence (AAD), said the test proved that India had graduated "from experimental mode to deployment mode".

Crucial test

The November 23 mission featured two attacker (target) missiles, one electronically simulated and launched from 1,500 km away and the other real and launched from 600 to 1,000 km away. The tests tried to reproduce a scenario where multiple enemy missiles could be raining on India, and the aim was to pulverise them in their tracks. Since Indian territory does not have the range and geometry to launch a target missile from a distance of 2,000 km, the DRDO used an electronically simulated target missile. The radars picked up the target missile and tracked it, and an electronic interceptor missile was launched. The attacker was "electronically hit" by the "digital" interceptor at a height of 120 km, in the exo-atmosphere.

The real target missile, a modified Prithvi, took off from the Integrated Test Range at Chandipur on the Odisha coast and mimicked the trajectory of a ballistic missile coming from an enemy country. Within seconds of its blast-off, radars at Paradip, Konark and Cuttack began tracking its path. Five minutes later, the Launch Control Centre on Wheeler Island, off the Odisha coast, gave the command to the interceptor to lift off from the island and destroy the incoming missile. The interceptor, an AAD system, featured a directional warhead, a proximity fuse and a radio frequency seeker.

Of these three, "the most critical technology" was the directional warhead. The seeker acted as the interceptor's "eye" and calculated the velocity, position and direction of the "enemy" missile. The seeker conveyed all this information to on-board computers, which then directed the interceptor to manoeuvre itself close to the target. The AAD missile continuously received updates on the target's position from the radars. As the attacker came down in a free fall, the interceptor's on-board computer guided it towards the target at an altitude of 15 km. The radio proximity fuse ignited the directional warhead and the target missile was reduced to burning wreckage.

What was outstanding about the mission was that both interceptions took place near simultaneously. More importantly, this was the first time that the interceptions took place both in the endo-atmosphere and in the exo-atmosphere. "With this, we have demonstrated our confidence in deploying the system in full configuration where we can tackle multiple missiles coming together," Avinash Chander said.

Saraswat told Frontline: "This kind of mission has been done only by the U.S. and Russia. This is an important development in our BMD shield development. With this launch, Phase I of the BMD shield is ready for deployment in 2013 or 2014." India is the sixth country to have developed the BMD system. The others are the U.S., Russia, France, China and Israel.

P.V. SIVAKUMAR

V.K. SARASWAT (right), Director General of DRDO and Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, with Avinash Chander, Chief Controller R&D (Missiles and Strategic Systems), DRDO.
Avinash Chander, speaking separately, echoed Saraswat's words: "Simultaneously taking care of multiple missiles coming from different directions is part of any BMD system. We are happy that our confidence in our capability to do this has been demonstrated by this trial." G. Satheesh Reddy, Associate Director, Research Centre Imarat (RCI), Hyderabad, called it "a memorable day for the country's defence scientists" and said it was fantastic to see on the monitors four missiles flying simultaneously—two interceptors attacking two targets with different ranges.

Satheesh Reddy's team in the RCI developed the ring-laser gyroscope-based navigation system in the target missile (the modified Prithvi) and the fibre-optic gyroscope-based inertial navigation system in the interceptor (AAD missile), both of which performed well in this mission.

RAMAKRISHNA

G. SATHEESH REDDY, Associate Director of Research Centre Imarat.
The team led by C.G. Balaji, Associate Director, RCI, was responsible for the development and integration of the radio frequency seeker in the AAD missile. Adalat Ali, the Programme Director, was proud that the two attackers were intercepted near simultaneously. "Whatever has been electronically simulated now, that is, the electronic target missile with a range of 1,500 km and an interceptor attacking it at an altitude of 120 km, will be actually test-fired early next year," Ali said.

Ready for deployment

Avinash Chander called the mission "a major event for us because we are gearing up now to deploy the [BMD] system around the capital region" of New Delhi. The DRDO was able to simulate the launch of multiple missiles and intercept them in real time. This was a "real breakthrough" in the run-up to the BMD shield deployment. The mission also demonstrated India's capability to take care of ballistic missiles launched from 2,000 km away. Avinash Chander asserted: "This missile [AAD interceptor] broadly covers all the missiles deployed by Pakistan on the west, and a large number of missiles deployed in the north-east and in the immediate neighbourhood. In Phase II, we will be able to cover up to 5,000 km and it can handle all the missiles that are being deployed around us. We will be able to take care of all of them in numbers too."

Many new technologies, too, were tested in the mission. The most critical one was the directional warhead which destroyed the target missile. The target missile was speeding towards India at a velocity of 3 to 4 km per second. The interceptor was going towards it at 1.5 to 2 km per second. The relative speeds were 4 to 5 km per second, where there was less than one-thousandth of a second for the interceptor's directional warhead to explode.

"The timing and accuracy of the warhead should be within that kind of time frame. The time for the warhead to explode in the kill zone is effectively less than 1/100th of a second. This is one of the key technologies demonstrated and established in this test," Avinash Chander said.


Besides, all the network elements were integrated with both the main and the standby systems, which were operated, tested and established fully in this test. "The repeated interceptor tests [eight] have given a lot of confidence to the designer for freezing the systems' configuration so that we can start planning for the production process," Avinash Chander said.

Surprisingly, if India's Agni-V launch in April 2012 attracted a lot of comments from China, there was no reaction from it about India's decision to go ahead with Phase I of its BMD shield deployment in 2013 or 2014. On November 28, Pakistan successfully test-fired Hatf V, a medium-range ballistic missile capable of reaching targets in India. Hatf V can hit targets up to 1,300 km away.

India felt the requirement for a BMD shield in the late 1990s when Pakistan test-fired Ghauri missiles with ranges that threatened Indian cities. Besides, the Hatf missiles too can reach India. So India conceived a two-layered air defence system, in the exo-atmosphere and the endo-atmosphere, to protect its vital assets.

Possible threats

Rajaram Nagappa, Visiting Professor, National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS), Bangalore, said China was getting into multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicles (MIRVs), which could be integrated with its DF-31 and DF-41 missiles. These missiles are capable of firing multiple warheads. The DF-41 missile, it is claimed, has a range of 12,000 km. Pakistan is also interested in acquiring MIRVs. "With the MIRVs, the efficacy of the missile defence shield becomes more challenging," said Prof. Nagappa.

China has a multilayered BMD shield. It has done interceptor tests in the exo-atmosphere, the endo-atmosphere and the mid-atmosphere. "Knowing the missile exchanges that have taken place between China and Pakistan, there is always a possibility of these missiles being developed in Pakistan with Chinese assistance," Nagappa said. Besides its interceptor missile tests, China had carried out an anti-satellite test on January 11, 2007.

Israel is another country which boasts of interceptor missiles such as Arrow and David's Sling. "A new Israeli air shield against rockets more powerful than those intercepted by Iron Dome in the Gaza conflict passed its first field test last week after being rushed through development," said Reuters, quoting Israeli officials speaking on November 25. The officials, according to Reuters, said that "David's Sling, billed as Israel's answer to the long-range missiles of Lebanese Hizbollah guerrillas and Syria, shot down a target rocket in a secret November 20 desert trial that coincided with fierce shelling exchanges between the Israelis and Palestinians in the Gaza Strip."

Shield in the sky

 

[sayareakd]

Many new technologies, too, were tested in the mission. The most critical one was the directional warhead which destroyed the target missile. The target missile was speeding towards India at a velocity of 3 to 4 km per second. The interceptor was going towards it at 1.5 to 2 km per second. The relative speeds were 4 to 5 km per second, where there was less than one-thousandth of a second for the interceptor's directional warhead to explode.

"The timing and accuracy of the warhead should be within that kind of time frame. The time for the warhead to explode in the kill zone is effectively less than 1/100th of a second. This is one of the key technologies demonstrated and established in this test," Avinash Chander said.

these figures shows how difficult it is to intercept BM. Still we did it.......................just imagine one second and enemy missile travelling at the speed of 3-4 km per second. even before you can count to 3 it will cross 3-4 km, then the easy part is to track it and difficult part is to send interceptor and detonation at the right time so as it wont miss the target RV. 1/100 of second and if you miss this time, either the RV would pass the interceptor or it will not come within kill range. This is what is called surgical interceptor strike.

 

[Bheeshma]

I hope the A-1 will be adequately modified for target vehicle of Phase-II BMD to mimic a 4000-5000 Km range BM. When is the K-15 test?

 

[sayareakd]

India: How Credible is its Ballistic Missile Defence?

Debak Das
Research Intern, NSP, IPCS
e-mail: [email protected]

The strategic implications of an operational Ballistic Missile Defence System are grave and potentially dangerous. The DRDO's successful test of the indigenously built Advanced Air Defence (AAD) interceptor on 23rd November 2012 in a 'near deployable configuration' is an interesting development. Its Director-General, V.K. Saraswat, recently announced that New Delhi and Mumbai could be brought under the missile defence shield system that has been successfully tested over the last few months. CNN-IBN reports that the Director of the Missile Defence Programme has stated that the AAD system is ready to be deployed over the Delhi-National Capital Region by 2014.

How credible is India's missile defence? How is this likely to impact the regional strategic environment in South Asia?

Changing Tracks on Missile Defence: From Nay to Aye
India's initial resistance to missile defence came from its criticism of the United States' Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in the early 80s. Even in July 2000, the then Indian Defence Minister, George Fernandes opined that the US should give up the whole exercise as it would lead to far too many problems in the future. After US President, George W. Bush's announcement of an American National Missile Defence System, it seemed that the Indian position had changed. This change has been attributed to the fact that Indian thinking about 'nuclear weapons has always been a mix of power-oriented realism and idealistic restraint.' (Rajesh Basrur, 2002)

The more natural and logical arguments posited were of course, that the Indian position of vehement opposition to missile defence and space based armament proliferation would not be acceptable to the successful pursuit of the Indo-US nuclear deal, the groundwork for which began in the early 2000s. The increasing pace of the Chinese and Pakistani missile programmes and the rising tensions with the latter in the period of the NDA government, also led to a giving up of the erstwhile policy of opposition to a missile defence shield.

The Missile Defence Shield
Earlier this year, The Hindu reported V.K. Saraswat claiming that incoming ballistic missiles with a range of 2000km could be destroyed with the shield and this capability would be enhanced to meet missiles with a range of 5000km by 2016. This capability was successfully tested at both the endo-atmospheric and exo-atmospheric levels. The DRDO has also compared this indigenously built system to the US' Patriot 3 system. By late July, Saraswat had claimed that the Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) system was ready for induction and that two cities, Mumbai and New Delhi were ready to be put under its defensive shield. At the time, India Today reported that the government was baffled with the activities of the DRDO, which was acting of its own accord in announcing to the world Indian missile defence capabilities.

The 23 November test saw the supersonic interceptor AAD home in on and destroy an incoming modified Prithvi missile at an altitude of 14.7km in the endo-atmospheric stage. The success of this test has been hailed as a major boost to the development of a multi-layered BMD System. With the next test for exo-atmospheric ballistic missile interception scheduled for January, it is important to consider the strategic implications that a BMD shield entails.

Strategic Implications
Any discussion on the ballistic missile defence raises technical questions about the possible success rate of a deployed system. While the odds of an interceptor missile taking out an incoming ballistic missile with multiple warheads are low, the odds of such an interceptor system taking out multiple incoming ballistic missiles (each with multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles) are even lower. The 'successful' tests that were conducted by the DRDO were in fact against the slow moving Prithvi missiles. The DRDO has not even tested them against its own Agni missiles. How such a BMD system would fare against missiles like the Dongfeng-41 with multiple sub-warheads with separate trajectories remains an unanswered question. The Indian BMD system does not even provide an answer to Indian vulnerability to the 'stealth' cruise missiles like the Hatf-VII that are possessed by Pakistan.

The lack of systematic policy considerations guiding the Ballistic Missile programme has seen the DRDO act quite hawkish on the score of achieving the capability. But given that this system threatens Pakistan's first strike capability, it is bound to lead to uncertainty and insecurity on that side of the border. The Indian BMD will thus serve to only accentuate the current missile race in South Asia.

Domestically too, statements assuring BMD capabilities to just two cities will prove to be a major headache to the central government, as selective defence of cities is bound to be contested by other parts of the country, thus possibly arousing domestic turmoil. It seems that missile testing and potentially destabilising hawkish behavior on ballistic missile defence in India has acquired a certain bureaucratic momentum of its own. It is thus important for the government to reign in these programmes. While not compromising on the technological development of Indian defences, the government needs to ensure that these capabilities do not foster insecurity in the region.

India: How Credible is its Ballistic Missile Defence? by Debak Das

for bold and underline part

 

[Bheeshma]

Wow looks like the quality of think tanks is really going down. Slow moving Prithvi at 2Km/sec. They really need to hire technically competent interns who know what they are writing about.

 

[sayareakd]

Wow looks like the quality of think tanks is really going down. Slow moving Prithvi at 2Km/sec. They really need to hire technically competent interns who know what they are writing about.

this was most shocking

He is particularly interested in ballistic missile stability in South Asia as well as the role of science and technology in shaping foreign policy.

Debak Das - (Research Intern) - Institute of Peace & Conflict Studies

 

[Bheeshma]

LOL BA from JNU (jhollawalla national university) that pretty much says it all. The fart has no technical knowledge to understand the complexities of BMD systems else wouldn't have bought up rubbish like Hatf VII and DF-41 in the same sentence. Someone needs to send him a link for the article by mihir shah.

 

[arnabmit]

Let us discuss India's current & future Missile Defense systems & options.

Points to be discussed:
1. Platforms on offer
2. Feasibility (Tech & Cost)
3. Effectiveness
4. Strategic/Political Impact etc...

Few of the options already available:
1. DRDO's AAD+PAD
2. Israel's Iron Dome + David's Sling
3. US' THAAD+AEGIS

 

[Bheeshma]

PAD was simply tech demonstrator. PDV is the real deal and will be tested this year.

 

[arnabmit]

Israel's Rafael reports that IAF has 18 batteries of SPYDER ADS (108 launchers with 750 Python-5 and 750 Derby missiles). Can anyone corroborate this?

 

[arnabmit]

As Fajr V rockets rained down on Israel from battleground Gaza for a week, many Indian defense planners were keeping a close watch on the performance of Israel's Iron Dome, which is probably the only deterrent to these homegrown short-range missiles.

It was not just out of curiosity regarding one of the most effective systems against rockets, but also because of the possibility of India acquiring an indigenous version of Iron Dome.

Several months ago, the military scientists in the Defense Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) had suggested that India look at a joint development program with Israeli firms to develop an Indian version of Iron Dome, which is touted as the most effective system against short-range missiles such as Fajr V rockets. The Indian scientists believe Israel's plight has several parallels to its threat from Pakistan as well as the vulnerability of its cities from terrorists.

The Iron Dome, according to reports, intercepted 87% of the rockets fired at Israel by the Hamas. The system, produced by Israel's Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and at work since 2011, is believed to have the capability to shoot down rockets and artillery shells with ranges of up to 70 km. The system has been shown to be effective against rockets or shells that might target populated areas.

In the Indian military establishment, the temptation for acquiring this new toy is explained by the fact that India is ringed by hostile neighbors. Pakistani terror groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) could well acquire similar capability that would threaten large groups of Indian population. Even otherwise, the strategic planners have for long been worried about the deadly effect of short-range rockets fired at Indian cities or from across the border.

Unlike ballistic missiles, against which DRDO claims to have a fairly good anti-ballistic missile shield, there is almost no protection against short-range rockets or artillery fire. DRDO is currently collaborating with Israeli firms to develop medium range surface to air missiles (MRSAMs) and LRSAMs. However, Iron Dome is in a different class all together, Israeli diplomatic sources here argue.

One of the reasons why some Indian defense planners is pushing for it is the possibility of another conflict with Pakistan, where a system like the Iron Dome might be useful to deter even conventional artillery attacks. In addition, Pakistan has developed a tactical nuclear weapon like the Nasr, which is a solid fueled battlefield range ballistic missile. While Pakistani analysts say this was developed in anticipation of India's supposed Cold Start doctrine, some Indian sources say the Iron Dome might be an effective deterrent against this new weapon.

On the other hand, acquiring such defensive systems in anticipation of similar attacks might prove to be too much a temptation for groups like LeT. While they haven't yet developed rockets like the ones the Hamas has been using, the lure of such home-grown weaponry should not be under-estimated, say diplomatic sources.

According to sources, there have been some discussions between DRDO and their Israeli counterparts for a possible joint development of Iron Dome for India. "The Israeli team comes and works in our laboratories. Our team goes and works in their laboratories and industries. There is a learning that is taking place which was not there when we buy things and integrate with existing products... In directed energy weapons â€" we are focusing on fiber laser, high powered micro-waves, etc. We have also started discussions with Iron Dome for co-development (in India)," Dr W Selvamurthy, Chief Controller looking after international cooperation, told the Economic Times recently.

 

[arnabmit]

The Israel based defense company Rafael has announced participation in the 2013 edition of Aero India, the premier air Show of Asia. Among its out door displays, the company is showcasing the much talked about Iron Dome and David Sling weapons systems. It will be a part of Rafael's complete Air Missile defense System display.

David's Sling or Stunner is an advanced multi-mission, multi-platform terminal interceptor designed for insertion into integrated air and missile defense systems. It is a joint project with US's Raytheon Systems. Iron Dome is a defense solution for countering short range rockets and 155 mm artillery shell threats with ranges of up to 70 km in all weather conditions. India is understood to have an interest in acquiring the Iron Dome system.

In addition at Aero India 2013, the company will display its precision guidance kits Spice 1000 / Spice 2000; Electro Optic and Communication Systems like Litening Pod, Reccelite, Toplite, Imilite & Global Link; and Spike family of multi-purpose tactical guided missile systems. Spike family includes, Long Range Multi-Purpose Tactical Missile – SPIKE LR, Medium Range Multi-Purpose Tactical Missile – SPIKE MR (Gill) and Extended Range Multi-Purpose Missile – SPIKE ER (NTD).

Read more: Israeli defence company Rafael to display Iron Dome and David's Sling at Aero India 2013

 

[arnabmit]

The Israeli Defense Ministry is set to "soon" test the Arrow III high-altitude missile interceptor, a ministry source said Wednesday.

Arrow III is expected to be able to hit non-conventional, nuclear weapon-tipped rockets, the official told the Haaretz daily.

"There are all sorts of tests going on all the time," the source told Xinhua, adding that the missile project, which is meant to hit incoming Iranian rockets while they are in the stratosphere far above Israel, was "a work in progress."

When officials divulge such firing plans, it often means the test will take place within several days.

The Arrow III is the high-altitude end of a triad of Israel's multi-tier active air defenses: Iron Dome against close-in threats up to 70 km, like rockets from Gaza; and David's Sling, which is designed to intercept short and mid-range projectiles up to 250 km away, and which successfully shot down an advanced missile in a live-fire trial two weeks ago.

A leading Israeli missile defense expert recently told Xinhua that the David's Sling constituted a breakthrough in Israel''s race to build a shield against growing threats of rocket and missile attacks.

A "perfect interception" was achieved during the trial in Israel's Negev desert, said a senior official in the ministry's Administration for the Development of Weapons and Technological Infrastructure. Representatives of the American Missile Defense Agency, which is underwriting most of the system''s development, attended the trial.

"It was the first in which all of the system's components worked in tandem to intercept a live missile. It was a significant milestone from which it's possible to begin the countdown to operational deployment," Uzi Rubin, the founder and first director of the Israel Missile Defense Organization (IMDO), told Xinhua.

Rubin estimated that Israeli cities might be hit by more than 13,000 missiles and rockets in a future war waged on multiple fronts.

Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, one of Israel's largest defense contractors, and the U.S. missile giant Raytheon are jointly developing David's Sling, also known as Magic Wand.

"It''s shot to the big skies, where it has to home in and directly strike its target, and you can't miss by a single inch," Rubin said. "It's not finding a needle in a haystack. Here, it's about finding an atom in a haystack."

David's Sling is scheduled to become operational in 2014, and Arrow III in 2015-16.

 

[arnabmit]