Advanced Agni-6 missile with multiple warheads off the shelves.

[Indo-guy]

India's PLSV can be turned into a ICBM with range more than 10,000 KM. The basics behind PLSV and Missiles should be same.

In a way we possess the capability to create missiles with range more than 10,000 KM.

Indeed we do posess capability to make 1missiles with 10,000+ km range ....but it's not as straightforward as we think !

Missiles are necessarily much more advanced than space launch vehicles ! they have to be ready to be fired at will unlike space launch vehicles which take months altogether to get assembled !

So although we do have capability for 10,000 km missile we are atleast decade behind from bridging that gap from launch vehicle to missile !

 

[rohitshubham]

Indeed we do posess capability to make 1missiles with 10,000+ km range ....but it's not as straightforward as we think !

Missiles are necessarily much more advanced than space launch vehicles ! they have to be ready to be fired at will unlike space launch vehicles which take months altogether to get assembled !

So although we do have capability for 10,000 km missile we are atleast decade behind from bridging that gap from launch vehicle to missile !

haha, good joke. The only part they create more difficulty is in their reentry phase but now due to presence of advance guidance systems, the reentry phase can be easily made possible .

 

[Indo-guy]

haha, good joke. The only part they create more difficulty is in their reentry phase but now due to presence of advance guidance systems, the reentry phase can be easily made possible .

@rohitshubham



Missiles for all practical purpose carry restriction of weight and length so that they can be logistical enough ....

space launch vehicles do not have such restrictions !

what is the length and weight of PSLV -XL ? and what is the weight and length of Agni V ?

make good comparison yourself ....you will understand the extent of miniaturization required ....

and miniaturization is not the only obstacle . Launch vehicles are made for immediate launch ....missiles need to be kept to be used god knows when and where ? It involves making missiles housekeeping compatible ....the technology involved in doing so it's not simple !

and besides there is problem of re-entry ....the heat shields must be good enough to make warheads withstand enormous heat generated during re entry . Longer the missile range , higher the speed greater the heat generated during re entry !



So to convert a launch vehicle into a missile one has to make advancement in miniaturization , composite materials is necessary !
In that sense they are advanced than corresponding space launch vehicles ....


I do not understand why my statement regarding missiles being necessarily much more advanced than launch vehicles seems joke to you ....

 

[rohitshubham]

@rohitshubham



Missiles for all practical purpose carry restriction of weight and length so that they can be logistical enough ....

space launch vehicles do not have such restrictions !

what is the length and weight of PSLV -XL ? and what is the weight and length of Agni V ?

make good comparison yourself ....you will understand the extent of miniaturization required ....

and miniaturization is not the only obstacle . Launch vehicles are made for immediate launch ....missiles need to be kept to be used god knows when and where ? It involves making missiles housekeeping compatible ....the technology involved in doing so it's not simple !

and besides there is problem of re-entry ....the heat shields must be good enough to make warheads withstand enormous heat generated during re entry . Longer the missile range , higher the speed greater the heat generated during re entry !



So to convert a launch vehicle into a missile one has to make advancement in miniaturization , composite materials is necessary !
In that sense they are advanced than corresponding space launch vehicles ....


I do not understand why my statement regarding missiles being necessarily much more advanced than launch vehicles seems joke to you ....

let's see i can give two points now
a)it's large due to i) it takes larger payload
ii) energy required to throw an object into space is much more than to send it maybe to 900kms. velocity required to send a 1kg object to space is 11.2kms/sec and to send it to height of 900kms is roughly 4.283772km/sec.
b)the guidance system of missile is way more easier than that of space launched vehicle you can beam a missile to ground through em waves but you can't beam an em wave into nothing(aka space). the breakthrough being observed into spacial guidance is locating the point at which the x% power of the wave remains and stop according it it. and yeah a sway of 200-330 feet means nothing to a missile but a sway of 200-300 feet during the 1st and 2nd booster stage means that you will land nearly 2000kms away from your target on moon or maybe never land on mars if you intended to do so in the first place as AFAIK there are no 3-D boosters till now on any PSLV or even on a space shuttle .

 

[Indo-guy]

let's see i can give two points now
a)it's large due to i) it takes larger payload
ii) energy required to throw an object into space is much more than to send it maybe to 900kms. velocity required to send a 1kg object to space is 11.2kms/sec and to send it to height of 900kms is roughly 4.283772km/sec.
b)the guidance system of missile is way more easier than that of space launched vehicle you can beam a missile to ground through em waves but you can't beam an em wave into nothing(aka space). the breakthrough being observed into spacial guidance is locating the point at which the x% power of the wave remains and stop according it it. and yeah a sway of 200-330 feet means nothing to a missile but a sway of 200-300 feet during the 1st and 2nd booster stage means that you will land nearly 2000kms away from your target on moon or maybe never land on mars if you intended to do so in the first place as AFAIK there are no 3-D boosters till now on any PSLV or even on a space shuttle .

what payload you are talking about ?

Agni V and PSLV payloads are virtually same .....on what basis you are saying Bigger size for bigger payload ?


Do you agree that to change space launch vehicle into missile requires enormous miniaturization of all subsystems ....including electronics and more so have to make it heat compatible less missile itself will be burned during launch itself along with its warhead ?


If it had been so easy to turn launch vehicle into missile ....it would not have had taken us 3 decades to come up with Agni while we have been manufacturing SLV , PSLV since 2-3 decades !

I agree much of the technology is dual use ....

but not as simple as some people put it !

I am lay man ....I do not know specifics of navigational system of missile vis a vis Launch vehicles so I can't comment on that confidently although I tend to understand your point .

But even if I agree that navigational system of missiles may be easy to make does that mean you are claiming that making missile is easy than making launch vehicles ???

 

[GR!FF!N]

no description on range???I think we should be better off giving the officially range of this missile to 5000km again,just like A-5..to troll the world..

our current threat perception is our neighbourhood,not USA or Russia..so,its better if we contain our range to our neighbourhood,atleast officially..

but is that mean no MIRV to A-5?? but i was hoping to see both MIRV/MARV and canisterised version of A-5..

 

[chanikya]

well as so called "rocket scientist" i can assure you they are different although ISRO scientists can help to create a longer range missile due to first two stage of them being nearly same as both seek to create "Compressible laminar flow in a capillary" .(refer to HR Van den Berg, CA Ten Seldam… - Journal of Fluid …, 1993 - Cambridge Univ Press)

But the technology of PSLV which can launch more number of satellites at time can be used in A6 MIRV

 

[Indo-guy]

what payload you are talking about ?

Agni V and PSLV payloads are virtually same .....on what basis you are saying Bigger size for bigger payload ?


Do you agree that to change space launch vehicle into missile requires enormous miniaturization of all subsystems ....including electronics and more so have to make it heat compatible less missile itself will be burned during launch itself along with its warhead ?


If it had been so easy to turn launch vehicle into missile ....it would not have had taken us 3 decades to come up with Agni while we have been manufacturing SLV , PSLV since 2-3 decades !

I agree much of the technology is dual use ....

but not as simple as some people put it !

I am lay man ....I do not know specifics of navigational system of missile vis a vis Launch vehicles so I can't comment on that confidently although I tend to understand your point .

But even if I agree that navigational system of missiles may be easy to make does that mean you are claiming that making missile is easy than making launch vehicles ???

If indeed you are rocket scientist , I have to give you more credence to your assertions !

But you should clarify on the points I raised ....

I personally do not believe turning launch vehicles into missiles is as easy as most people think !

 

[Srinivas]

India already have the MIRV tech. We have launched 10 satellites in different orbits with single launch vehicle. This tech is same as MIRV

 

[kbd-raaf]

If indeed you are rocket scientist , I have to give you more credence to your assertions !

But you should clarify on the points I raised ....

I personally do not believe turning launch vehicles into missiles is as easy as most people think !

The technology is very similar.

However the ISRO have been able to obtain overseas equipment and consulting help solely because of the fact that they do not, EVER, let their work be used for military purposes.

That being said, in a crisis situation, I don't see why ISRO's technology wouldn't be transferred to DRDO/etc.

 

[HongWu]

The India is getting scary. Everything they do is targeting us. For our people safety, we MUST developed counter-measure to the Indian target. Since Indian proximity is close to China, we can used J-20 to bomb the missile launch site when it's being detected by our satellites. Given the short distance, it should be easier to travel with supersonic speed as long as our satellites are giving enough time to detect it. We can also build missile defense system on the far West region to detect ongoing missiles and killed it in mid-air before it reaches Beijing. Though, if it's MIRV then that's problematic. I see only two solution. One is conducting MASSIVE cyberattack on their launch system to disrupt its missile projectory destination and two is like I said, bomb the missile sites before it is launched. Any suggestion how to deal with this threat from India?

India doesn't even have basic urban sanitation. You really think they can make a ballistic missile?

 

[rohitshubham]

But the technology of PSLV which can launch more number of satellites at time can be used in A6 MIRV

yes, it can be theoretically used to deliver multiple warheads but again as far as i know the MIRV's warheads scatter in 4 directions but if you use the PSLV's tech, the warhead's would be semi-parabolic, just like an object dropped from an aircraft in atmost 2 directions.(but i am not sure about how MIRV works , but that's how it's path would be if it used multiple satellite's logic).
but again converting from 2 direction to 4 directions should not be very difficult, it will just need a small push in the perpendicular axis.

but if it works like this pic then it's 95% same :

you see how multiple satellites are launched actually what happens is that satellites are detached from rocket at a specific time so that they maintain a a specific height which determines their time-period. and contrary to popular belief, object need not be given a x-direction push for them to start revolving . it's their height which determines their period which can be easily found out by equating it's initial kinetic energy with final gravitational energy.

what payload you are talking about ?

Agni V and PSLV payloads are virtually same .....on what basis you are saying Bigger size for bigger payload ?


Do you agree that to change space launch vehicle into missile requires enormous miniaturization of all subsystems ....including electronics and more so have to make it heat compatible less missile itself will be burned during launch itself along with its warhead ?


If it had been so easy to turn launch vehicle into missile ....it would not have had taken us 3 decades to come up with Agni while we have been manufacturing SLV , PSLV since 2-3 decades !

I agree much of the technology is dual use ....

but not as simple as some people put it !

I am lay man ....I do not know specifics of navigational system of missile vis a vis Launch vehicles so I can't comment on that confidently although I tend to understand your point .

But even if I agree that navigational system of missiles may be easy to make does that mean you are claiming that making missile is easy than making launch vehicles ???

nope making a missile is definitely tougher than sending an object into space, but just think that is the level of science and technology involved in PSLV which will be sending a expedition to mars(mangalyaan) is inferior to sending a missile to a neighboring country??
and do you know that why ISRO's been more successful than DRDO because " they have always gotten the best brains of the country not to mention excellent transfer of technology coz many things about space expedition is public (like few indepth details of launch vehicle) while the details of missile tech are highly classified."
this is the reason was given to me by Ex-DRDO chief Mr. V.K.AAtre last year when i asked him the same question as why ISRO has been more successful than DRDO.

 

[Indo-guy]

it can be theoretically used to deliver multiple warheads but again as far as i know the MIRV's warheads follow independent path but if you use the PSLV's tech, the warhead's would be semi-parabolic, just like an object dropped from an aircraft.
you see how multiple satellites are launched actually what happens is that sattelites are detached from rocket at a specific time so that they maintain a a specific height which determines their time-period. and contrary to popular belief, object need not be given a x-direction push for them to start revolving . it's their height which determines their period which can be easily found out by equating it's initial kinetic energy with final gravitational energy.


nope making a missile is definitely tougher than sending an object into space, but just think that is the level of science and technology involved in PSLV which will be sending a expedition to mars(mangalyaan) is inferior to sending a missile to a neighboring country??

Space launch vehicles and missiles have some obvious similarities and some drastic differences . I do think that guiding missile to its intended target is as difficult as launching satellite in space . Having said that one can't and shouldn't compare two !!!

My whole thrust was that converting space rocket into missile is not as easy as some people think ....

It involves whole series of advancements ...


You found my statement as missiles are necessarily advanced than space launch vehicles as funny !

but i simply said that in context of converting rocket into practically useful missile !

Besides all this you never clarified about points I raised regarding miniaturization of several subsystems and increasing durability for storage etc. It involves advancement in whole segment of metallurgy , electronics , engines and what not ....

My point is simply when people assert PSLV gives us ability to make 10,000 + km range missile ...Yes possible but not easy !


Most people here think that we have PSLV means we have already have 10,000 km range missile .

We can't just change direction of rocket and convert it into missile and use as such !!!

( I know you don't mean this ....but some people may have such notions when they say that we have PSLV so we can convert it into 10,000 + km missile )

 

[navtrek]

The India is getting scary. Everything they do is targeting us. For our people safety, we MUST developed counter-measure to the Indian target. Since Indian proximity is close to China, we can used J-20 to bomb the missile launch site when it's being detected by our satellites. Given the short distance, it should be easier to travel with supersonic speed as long as our satellites are giving enough time to detect it. We can also build missile defense system on the far West region to detect ongoing missiles and killed it in mid-air before it reaches Beijing. Though, if it's MIRV then that's problematic. I see only two solution. One is conducting MASSIVE cyberattack on their launch system to disrupt its missile projectory destination and two is like I said, bomb the missile sites before it is launched. Any suggestion how to deal with this threat from India?

Come on buddy look at our political system closely we can never wage wars as an aggressor such leadership is absent actually the environment which gives birth to such leaders is absent. Look in to India's history u will find that all the time we will have so many internal problems that we can rarely concentrate on the external world.

All this talk about China killer missile is just media hype the common people don't share such views.

 

[rohitshubham]

Space launch vehicles and missiles have some obvious similarities and some drastic differences . I do think that guiding missile to its intended target is as difficult as launching satellite in space . Having said that one can't and shouldn't compare two !!!

My whole thrust was that converting space rocket into missile is not as easy as some people think ....

It involves whole series of advancements ...


You found my statement as missiles are necessarily advanced than space launch vehicles as funny !

but i simply said that in context of converting rocket into practically useful missile !

Besides all this you never clarified about points I raised regarding miniaturization of several subsystems and increasing durability for storage etc. It involves advancement in whole segment of metallurgy , electronics , engines and what not ....

My point is simply when people assert PSLV gives us ability to make 10,000 + km range missile ...Yes possible but not easy !


Most people here think that we have PSLV means we have already have 10,000 km range missile .

We can't just change direction of rocket and convert it into missile and use as such !!!

( I know you don't mean this ....but some people may have such notions when they say that we have PSLV so we can convert it into 10,000 + km missile )

that's the exact same thing that i assured a guy on my post #15 that they are different.

now talking about size there are few factors which shrinks the size of a missile and increase the size of a spacecraft.
a)it needs nearly twice as much as energy coz it goes up higher which means more fuel hence more space.
b)it's second stage and fourth stage is liquid fuel which have low LCV/grms owing to its low density as compared to solid fuel which means more space to keep fuel.
c)it needs oxidisers in liquid form nearly as much as its fuel by volume to oxidize the fuel completely coz of zero oxidiers(100%) which requires as much space as fuel contrary to missiles which needs to oxidize just to increase efficiency(roughly 40%) which again doubles the space for fuel in rockets.

so solid+liquid fueled spacecraft will need more than 3 times fuel for same payload as compared to a missile which amounts to miniaturization and i can't comment on the material's quality on both of them as i don't know about them.

Again i repeat that building a missile is not easy and so is building a space rocket both have their own difficulties and problems but yeah the guys at ISRO have done a better job than the guys at DRDO and complexity of agni VI may be compared to primitive PSLV's launches but the latest launches especially HEO launches or upcoming GSLV launches nowhere compare to any other technology India can offer .