[sierrabravo98]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Effectiveness of IR is all about how much heat signature there is compared to other light sources, in practice mainly the sun. To the best of my knowledge normal electronic clutter in the atmosphere does not interfere with IR.

The reason those missiles are having trouble engaging on hot dessert grounds is not because of electronic clutter/interference but because of IR sensors having problems detecting different temperature ranges (I.e. object versus surroundings) or influence from direct sun light.

Visual sensors work just like your eye. I don’t see how normal electronic clutter would interfere.

Jeroen

Clearly something is being lost in translation here. IR Clutter IS electronic clutter. Every interference you just referred to is an electronic disturbance for the IIR sensor on the ATGM. Light is an electromagnetic wave. If you are referring to just radio waves interference when talking about electronic interference, then it's a different subject.

And NO, visual sensors don't work like the human eye. I wish that had been the case though as you would just have solved the multi billion dollar effort of Computer Vision industry of trying to achieve even 20% efficiency of what the Human eye-brain combo are able to achieve.

[ads11]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

India successfully tests Ballistic Missile Defence Interceptor capable of neutralising long-range adversary missiles

Came across a tweet that says DRDO & IN have successfully tested a ship borne Ballistic Missile Defence interceptor. I'm guessing this is the follow on from the above project?

(Livefist appear to be confirming this news too)

I imagine the test was off a static pontoon but any idea what the plans are in terms of fitting it to future surface combatants? I'm going to assume the BMD missile itself will be rather a large one, and thus it'll necessitate a big platform to carry it - will there be a bespoke BMD destroyer down the line or is the follow on class to the Kolkata-class destroyers going to be designed with BMD capability in mind? (If someone's answered this already on one of the IN threads, feel free to just link the relevant comment on there, my memory is a little hazy on this one).

Pretty handy capability all told to have in house. Having ship borne BMD batteries gives a level of redundancy to static land based installations.

[shortbread]

Originally Posted by ads11

Came across a tweet that says DRDO & IN have successfully tested a ship borne Ballistic Missile Defence interceptor. I'm guessing this is the follow on from the above project?

(Livefist appear to be confirming this news too)

I imagine the test was off a static pontoon but any idea what the plans are in terms of fitting it to future surface combatants? I'm going to assume the BMD missile itself will be rather a large one, and thus it'll necessitate a big platform to carry it - will there be a bespoke BMD destroyer down the line or is the follow on class to the Kolkata-class destroyers going to be designed with BMD capability in mind? (If someone's answered this already on one of the IN threads, feel free to just link the relevant comment on there, my memory is a little hazy on this one).

Pretty handy capability all told to have in house. Having ship borne BMD batteries gives a level of redundancy to static land based installations.

Don't think it's a static pontoon. I think in the last one or two years the navy has commissioned two tracking/missile ships, INS Dhruv & INS Anvesh. I believe it's one of them, albeit very little has been divulged in the press release. For more definitive details one will have to ask the chinese who had stationed a missile/satellite tracking vessel close outside Indian waters . What perplexes me is that India decided to go ahead with the tests anyway!

[ads11]

Originally Posted by shortbread

Don't think it's a static pontoon. I think in the last one or two years the navy has commissioned two tracking/missile ships, INS Dhruv & INS Anvesh. I believe it's one of them, albeit very little has been divulged in the press release. For more definitive details one will have to ask the chinese who had stationed a missile/satellite tracking vessel close outside Indian waters . What perplexes me is that India decided to go ahead with the tests anyway!

Ah right, I thought they were simply tracking vessels, they didn't have any launch capability. Hence I figured they'd use whatever pontoon or barge they use for preliminary missile launch tests. Looks like it might be this instead?

Interesting, can't fault the PLAN for sending one of their own missile tracking ships down, would be negligent on their part not to. Maybe there was no getting around the PLAN ship being there? I imagine it would've stayed in international waters. Don't think they're prevented from just sitting in international waters and going about their business just as much as the IN wouldn't be in the wrong if it did similar right? Or it could be a timeline thing and DRDO had to meet this launch window from a development timeline standpoint. The press release sure was economical with details. We'll just have to wait for whatever snippets make the public domain in due course in that case.

Btw, got my answer regarding the BMD ships - looks like it'll be the follow on to the Vishakhapatnam class destroyers, Project 18.

[V.Narayan]

Astra Mk 2, Long range BVR AAM to enter production

https://alphadefense.in/bvr-astra/

Excerpts:

India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has recently completed testing of the Astra Mk2 missile and is expected to enter limited series production soon. This development is significant for India’s defence capabilities, as the missile is set to be integrated with Indian Air Force (IAF) fighter jets including the Su30 MKI, LCA Mk1A, Mirage 2000, and Mig29.

Based on a document accessed by our team at www.alphadefense.in, the Astra Mk2 missile is an upgraded version of the Astra Mk1 missile. The missile has a slightly larger diameter of 190mm compared to the Mk1’s 178mm, but with the same overall length. The larger diameter of the missile allows for more fuel to be carried, which means that it will have a longer range. The missile is also fitted with two pulses that will further increase its range.

The Astra Mk2 missile’s two pulses are separated with EDPM rubber with kevlar fillers, with the second pulse having a higher burn rate than the first. This enables the missile to maneuver more aggressively during end game, enhancing its targeting capabilities. The weight of the missile system is kept low, with pulse 1 weighing 40.1kg and pulse 2 weighing 20kg.

The missile also comes equipped with an AESA seeker made in India, an optical proximity fuse, and a two-way data link. This means that the missile can communicate with the launch aircraft, enabling it to receive targeting information and course corrections.

Range: 160 kms
Altitude ceiling: ~66,000 feet
Launch speed: Mach 4.5, sustained by a dual motor configuration.
Warhead: 15 kgs
Fuse: Optical proximity

https://www.google.com/search?q=astr...id:D_kq2PoYS2k
A short video, badly made

[SmartCat]

This article gives an idea about cost of various missiles:
https://idrw.org/brahmos-2-india-pla...duction-costs/

Brahmos: Rs. 24 cr
Brahmos 2 (hypersonic missle): Rs. 48 cr
Agni 3/4 IRBM: Rs. 48 cr

[sagarpadaki]

Originally Posted by SmartCat

This article gives an idea about cost of various missiles:
https://idrw.org/brahmos-2-india-pla...duction-costs/

Brahmos: Rs. 24 cr
Brahmos 2 (hypersonic missle): Rs. 48 cr
Agni 3/4 IRBM: Rs. 48 cr

The 24Cr for Brahmos is excluding the cost of warhead. The one which was misfired and ended up on Pakistan was without warhead and still managed to cause good amount of damage. Imagine what damage is a warhead equipped Brahmos capable of inflicting.

[V.Narayan]

AGNI PRIME Medium Range Ballistic Missile

Agni-P, a medium-range ballistic missile with a strike range of 1,000-2,000 km, has been successfully flight-tested in Odisha.


Agni-Prime was successfully flight-tested by the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) from Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Island off the coast of Odisha on June 7, 2023.This was the "first pre-induction night launch" of the Agni-Prime conducted by the tri-service Strategic Forces Command (SFC) and was the fourth test firing of this missile in 2 years.

Agni-P or Agni-Prime is a new generation nuclear-capable medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) developed by the DRDO that incorporates technological advances from Agni-IV and Agni-V and is considered a successor for the Short Range Ballistic Missiles (SRBM), the Agni-I and Agni-II which are in operational service.

Agni-Prime, with a strike range of 1,000 to 2,000 km, has significant upgrades, which include composite motor casing, two Multiple Independently targetable Re-Entry vehicles (MIRV) or one Manoeuvrable Re-entry Vehicles (MaRV), improved propellants, and navigation and guidance systems. It is a two-stage, surface-to-surface, road mobile and solid fueled missile which is transported by a Transporter-Erector-Launcher vehicle and launched via a canister. It weighs 11 tonnes and can carry a warhead said to be of between 1.5 tonnes.

Although Agni-Prime looks similar to Agni-III, the weight is reduced by half. Agni-Prime will replace older generation missiles such as Prithvi-II (350 km), Agni-II (2,000 km), Agni-III (3,000 km) ballistic missiles. Agni-P is developed to achieve maximum manoeuvrability against missile defence systems and higher accuracy for precision strikes.

Along with Agni-V, Agni-P will provide India with stronger deterrence against countries such as China and Pakistan. While Agni-V brings all of China within its strike range, Agni-P seems to have been developed to counter Pakistan's forces. Agni Prime, with its accuracy and difficult to shoot down MaRV warhead could also be used as a deterrent for China's carrier task forces that may come visiting the Indian Ocean. The missile can be armed with a nuclear or a thermobaric warhead. A thermobaric warhead uses oxygen from the air instead of carrying its own oxygen in the explosive powder. Think of it as a super conventional explosive several times more powerful than a traditional conventional warhead.

The Chinese press has called it the carrier killer! Well at least the recognize a missile when they see one :-) Living as we do in the most dangerous neighbourhood of planet Earth with a belligerent almost super power on one side and a nuclear terrorist state owned by an army on the other it makes ample sense to arm and deter.

Jai Hind.

History of the Agni series of ballistic missiles

As there are now 6 types of ballistic missiles bearing the Agni name I thought it may be nice to list them all for the benefit of our readers.

The Agni series of ballistic missiles are one of the most successful indigenously developed military hardware stories. In the 1980s, India started developing the Agni missile series under the Integrated Guided Missile Development Program (IGMDP) led by former president Dr A P J Abdul Kalam. IGMDP received approval from the government in 1983. IGMDP was aimed at making India self-sufficient in missile technology. The programme has five missiles P-A-T-N-A: Prithvi (SRBM), Agni (MRBM), Trishul (Short Range SAM), Nag (ATGW - Anti-tank Guided Weapon), and Akash (Medium Range SAM).

Agni-I is a two-stage Agni technology demonstrator with a solid-fuel first stage. It was first tested at the Interim Test Range in Chandipur in 1989. It has a strike range of 700-1200 km and can carry a payload of 1,000 kg.

Agni-II is a two-stage ballistic missile with a strike range of 2,000-3000 km. It can carry a payload of 1,000 kg and was first launched on August 9, 2012.

Agni-III is an intermediate-range ballistic missile with a 3,500-5,000 km range. Agni-III was first tested on July 9, 2006, from Wheeler Island off the coast of the eastern state of Odisha. It can carry a payload of 1,500 kg.

Agni-IV is an intermediate-range ballistic missile with a range of around 4,000 km. It was first tested on November 15, 2011, and September 19, 2012, from Wheeler Island off the coast of Orissa. Agni-IV bridges the gap between Agni II and Agni III. Agni-IV can take a warhead of 1,000 kg. With state-of-the-art technologies, Agni-IV is designed to increase kill efficiency and higher range performance. It can be fired from a road-mobile launcher.

Agni-V is a solid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) which has a strike range of over 7,000 km. It was first test-fired on April 19 2012, from Wheeler Island. The second test launch was successfully done on September 15, 2013. The last test launch of Agni-V was conducted on December 15, 2022, from Abdul Kalam Island, Odisha. Agni-V is meant to cover the whole of China from anywhere in India.

Agni Prime the sixth in the series is the subject of this post.

File photo of Agni Prime's first launch Source: Ministry of Defence, Govt of India

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Agni Prime, with its accuracy and difficult to shoot down MaRV warhead could also be used as a deterrent for China's carrier task forces that may come visiting the Indian Ocean.

The Chinese press has called it the carrier killer! Well at least the recognize a missile when they see one :-)

Interesting, I've always been curious as to whether India had the capacity to deter carrier task forces using ballistic missiles. Unlike China or Iran, India never really had a threat from hostile carrier groups since atleast 1971, so I guess we never really had the need for that capability.

I guess that irony isn't lost on the Chinese given that they are the ones who originally hyped the use of ballistic missiles against hostile aircraft carriers.

[ads11]

Originally Posted by dragracer567

I guess that irony isn't lost on the Chinese given that they are the ones who originally hyped the use of ballistic missiles against hostile aircraft carriers.

Was just about to say the say thing. What strikes me is this. Most critics of the DF21/26 "carrier killer" point out that it's vastly easier said than done to strike a moving target in terms of an aircraft carrier (I mean everyone knows a USN supercarrier can really hustle when they want to for such leviathans). Which ultimately means that a lot of the deterrence impact of the DF21/26 lies in the perception of that risk. Again, with that sort of thing it's hard to know how creditable the risk is till smoke is in the air.

So with that being said, I can't help but feel a similar degree of skepticism regarding the carrier killer ability of the Agni-P unless the goal is to also benefit from the same level of perceived risk that the DF21 did when it first came onto the scene.

Before someone calls me out for being a Debbie Downer, I'd point out that it's only fair because the above targeting skepticism is often held up as a counter point to any discussion about the DF21 being fielded against IN CBGs, that the same applies for an Indian Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile.

At the end of the day, all of this is par for the course in terms of an arms race. And at least in the missile domain, it's reassuring to see logical, incremental development.

Interesting, I've always been curious as to whether India had the capacity to deter carrier task forces using ballistic missiles. Unlike China or Iran, India never really had a threat from hostile carrier groups since atleast 1971, so I guess we never really had the need for that capability.

It's a good point. I wonder how long till you see a PLAN CBG start running regular patrols into the IOR. Have they ventured out that far yet? As a whole CBG that is. Because for the time being at least, the whole modus operandi of the PLAN carrier fleet is to punch out from the First Island Chain to the Second Island Chain and beyond, not to mention to add another vector in the inevitable Taiwan conquest that they seem to be angling towards. In that case it would very much seem that the bulk of their surface fleet would remain engaged in that theatre (thankfully for the IN, though that doesn't exclude the PLAN subsurface fleet from tasking out in the IOR as we all know).

Talking hypotheticals, Xi has set up the entire PLA and state machinery over the past few years towards one primary objective in Taiwan. Should some sort of prolonged domestic dip occur where a dictator would resort to that time tested tool of whipping up national fervour through conflict, even limited conflict, I wonder if Xi has cornered himself with his constant proclamations about Taiwan. What I mean is, should he have to rely on a short sharp conflict to rally national mood back in favour of the state (and everyone knows Taiwan won't be that), then he's not left any room for himself to engage in any serious adventure in the IOR (and hopefully the Indian land frontier). That's not to say that this is totally out of the question. It's just that it would require quite some propaganda heavy lifting to suddenly change the target of China's ire to India as a means to drawing an end to the "century of humiliation" when the emblem of the latter has been constantly painted as the 'breakaway province' of Taiwan.

What I'm saying in a roundabout way is this: does that mean realistically India gets afforded some breathing room, at least in the marine domain of the IOR (beyond the constant nuisance level threats of sporadic PLAN forays)?

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by ads11

Was just about to say the say thing. What strikes me is this. Most critics of the DF21/26 "carrier killer" point out that it's vastly easier said than done to strike a moving target in terms of an aircraft carrier

My uneducated assessment on this is as follows:-

A MRBM ballistic missile would typically fly at 2.50 to 3.0 kms/second. Let's say it has to fly 1000 kms across the parabolic curve that is about 6.5 minutes from launch pad to target. The target cruising even at a clipped 30 knots would move 2 nautical miles {3700 metres} in that time. Assuming no mid-course guidance correction capability and even a generous 500 metre CEP the target would still be well within the lethal destructive radius of 10kms of a 1-megatonne warhead. A missile with 4 MIRV warheads of 250 kilo tonnes each would have a destructive radius of 15 to 16 kms. So, I guess the lethality of the warhead covers for the lack of fine tuning of the terminal homing. Of course, the para above might be complete nonsense. I have no technical qualification on this subject.

[shortbread]

Originally Posted by ads11

What I'm saying in a roundabout way is this: does that mean realistically India gets afforded some breathing room, at least in the marine domain of the IOR (beyond the constant nuisance level threats of sporadic PLAN forays)?

India purchased its breathing space post Galwan and the economic actions that followed. With or without Taiwan, China is aiming at its own feet with a confrontation against India and rest assured while there will be a lot of posing but China will not pick a fight.

Right now a slowing Chinese economy is unable to trade freely south of the border with the world's most populous nation. SAIC and BYD cannot invest in their own Indian operations, the Chinese mobile makers have the government's foot at their throat. With or without the Chinese the Indian market will continue to prosper with other investors whether that's the Americans, Koreans, Japanese or domestic players. So if it's anyone's loss it is China's. The Indian government would like nothing more than China to give it a reason to write off an 80-90 billion dollar trade deficit.

China's biggest drawback is that it does not have a credible major ally, but is instead surrounded by global powers that want it to take a misstep in order to corner it even further and backstab at the opportune moment. Russia, Middle East, Iran. None of the pro-Chinese cohorts will pick a side in this conflict.

The last remaining trump card China has in a fight against India is the Pakistanis. Well, if you want to trust the Pakistanis with anything, then be the unenviable guest!

What Xi is desperate for the last few years is to pick a fight that he knows he can win. The problem is that he announced his intentions very early. Taiwan will be run over by the Chinese but he will pay a very very high price. Western sanctions will suffocate a wheezing Chinese economy.

[sagarpadaki]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

My uneducated assessment on this is as follows:-

A MRBM ballistic missile would typically fly at 2.50 to 3.0 kms/second. Let's say it has to fly 1000 kms across the parabolic curve that is about 6.5 minutes from launch pad to target. The target cruising even at a clipped 30 knots would move 2 nautical miles {3700 metres} in that time. Assuming no mid-course guidance correction capability and even a generous 500 metre CEP the target would still be well within the lethal destructive radius of 10kms of a 1-megatonne warhead. A missile with 4 MIRV warheads of 250 kilo tonnes each would have a destructive radius of 15 to 16 kms. So, I guess the lethality of the warhead covers for the lack of fine tuning of the terminal homing. Of course, the para above might be complete nonsense. I have no technical qualification on this subject.

So if I understand, these missiles do not have a terminal homing system?

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by sagarpadaki

So if I understand, these missiles do not have a terminal homing system?

I don't know. Nothing has been announced yet. Probably never will. A radar based homing system usually would not work at close range, say 250 kms, if the relative closing velocity of the two objects is 3000 metres/second or 9 times the speed of sound. Israeli Phantoms jets used to be unable to lock on with their radars onto Russian MiG-25's flying at Mach 2.8 or Mach 3.0. And on the one or two occasions the Israelis managed to launch a Sparrow AAM head-on the Sparrow's radar could not cope with the relative closing velocity of roughly Mach 5.0 +. To best of my limited knowledge the one way to correct course of a ballistic missile within very narrow parameters is by a geo-location update from a third source e.g. a P-8I flying say 200 kms away from that enemy carrier group. That P-8I's survival would be slender to say the least. Or maybe a satellite? We can only guess.

[NewUser123]

A good explainer on the different types of missiles and their characteristics (in the second half of the blog post). Hope this helps further the understanding and discussion.

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/...ot-destruction