BMD tested successfully

[Safriz]

Thanks final question, what diameter is Shaheen III/Ababeel (stage sections). I have gathered a few other numbers I need, I think I just need this one and can proceed with a best case scenario envelope.

It's anywhere between 1 47 and 1.5 m.
We took it as 1.5m

 

[bloo]

you guys have absolutely no idea what you are talking about...

an ABM missile travelling at mac 3 mac 4 may be 5 is trying to hit a re entry vehicle travelling at mac 15 or mac 20... that means you cannot chase it... its three times faster than the interceptor.

what ABM does is to calculate the ballistic trajectory and contemplates where it would be at said time and send its interceptor for head on collision....

if the target missile changes its ballistic trajectory (df series, shaheen series, topol M) , whole calculations are finished. all these missiles change their trajectory several times before re entry..... final trajectory gives a raction time of not more than 30 seconds....

now go figure

Firstly, speed is more or less an unimportant facet, what matters is the maneuvering capacity of the warhead and the ABM.

Secondly, you are wrong, there is no "chase" being initiated.
Its a head on meet and there is no escaping detection.

This longer trajectory of BMs give ample time for space based detection systems and ground based radars to detect the said BM, specially during its boost phase.
Even more so during an India vs Pakistan scenario, both countries are very close to each other, and any Pak BMs wont need a global SBIRS like system, a few satellites will do and neither will it need a shit load of radars nor the powerful ones like US uses.
Hell most BMs originating in Pak will be detected by ground radars alone, giving our SFC the opportunity to intercept it before it even reaches its apogee, i.e eventually when we make boost phase systems.

I do accept that our BMD is in its nascent stages, rather all BMDs of the world have been ignored.
But we and everyone else is catching up really fast.

Back in the 40s and 50s, due to lack of proper tech and certain "geo political concerns", ABM Treaty and such, ABMs were more or less shelved.
And only now are they being given their due, and if you consider that into account MIRVs and MaRVs have been there for a long time while BMDs have just started to catch up, and they are catching up really bloody fast.

And as technologies advance, countries become richer and the cost-exchange ratio becomes better the more the defensive capabilities of nations will improve.

 

[amardeep mishra]

I guess the target vehicle and the PDV bioth are first solid stage and second liquid stage vehicles.
First solid stage is a low thrust stage and mneuvers by moving fins at the back. Secons stage being liquid fueld uses some sort of thrust vectoring.

Hi shaheen missile!
Target Vehicle is technically india's first ship launched ballistic missile(a lot of people think that K-15 is navy's strategic weapon). This TV or Prithivi missile is mounted on a gimbal stabilized platform to provide stability in the face of roll and pitch moments of the platform aka the ship. While TV is indeed liquid fueled,the PDV is entirely solid fueled(1st stage) apart from the KV section that uses liquid engine for attitude control and thrust. It has got a highly sensitive IIR seeker that can discriminate between RV from other decoys.

It's anywhere between 1 47 and 1.5 m.
We took it as 1.5m

Hi!
I really doubt itz anything other than 1.4m

Shaheen-3 was made three stage missile same way as Agni-5 . By cramming a third stage in the top triangle.

View attachment 376351
The third stage is from the arrow mark to where the black cable runner ends.
The warhead sits on top.

Hi shaheen!
There is no "3rd pair" of cable runners in shaheen-3. Either it is a liquid engine just like ababeel or there is no 3rd stage.

 

[IceCold]

View attachment 376323

Look at the Thrust of Israeli Arrow 2 and compare it to Indian PDV weak thrust.
Yet Indians claim better specs

I have a small observation to make. This Indian interceptor missile also consists of fins something Indians mock us for calling it soviet era scuds. The comparison picture you posted also shows Israeli system without fins. Point being Indians claim our design is obsolete yet they incorporate the same for theirs. Ironic isnt it.

 

[Safriz]

I have a small observation to make. This Indian interceptor missile also consists of fins something Indians mock us for calling it soviet era scuds. The comparison picture you posted also shows Israeli system without fins. Point being Indians claim our design is obsolete yet they incorporate the same for theirs. Ironic isnt it.

I don't even reply to those Indian superiority complexes . I just laugh. Suggest you do the same.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Radar only, in propulsion tech Israel is far behind.

That is not entirely correct.Israel has competencies in various solid engine. However they are very good in electronics,radars etc.

 

[Safriz]

@amardeep mishra what you see here?
The old PDV on left and new one on the right.

New PDV

Old PDV

 

[IceCold]

I don't even reply to those Indian superiority complexes . I just laugh. Suggest you do the same.

Well I am no expert but at the very least i can show them the mirror.

 

[amardeep mishra]

I don't even reply to those Indian superiority complexes . I just laugh. Suggest you do the same.

Hi shaheen missile!
Of course a missile system without any external control surfaces is more complex to design than a system with external control/stabilization surfaces. The problem however is,the TVC(servomechanism controlled nozzle) has to account for stability as well. In case of smaller tactical missiles control inputs(given to actuators) are slaved to target location and hence they have to provide a turning rate higher than the target to ensure a successful interception(encapsulated in the navigation constant in PN-guidance equation). Sometimes this control input might throw the missile in unstable regime--hence a stabilization surface is required. So,just to play safe,they went ahead with conventional control and stabilization layout in PDV. This doesnt mean what they have in PDV is very revolutionary control layout.

 

[Hindustani78]

President's Secretariat
12-February, 2017 18:01 IST
President of India Congratulates DRDO on the Successful Test-Firing of the PRITHVI Defence Vehicle Interceptor Missile

The President of India, Shri Pranab Mukherjee congratulated DRDO on the successful test-firing of the Prithvi Defence Vehicle (PDV) Interceptor Missile.


In a message to Dr. S. Christopher, Secretary, Department of Defence Research & Development and Chairman, DRDO, the President has said, "I extend my hearty congratulations to all those associated with the successful test-firing of the Prithvi Defence Vehicle (PDV) Interceptor Missile.


India now joins a select group of nations having such an effective Ballistic Missile Defence System. The nation is proud of this accomplishment made by DRDO. This is a significant milestone in boosting India’s defence capabilities and will provide enhanced security against incoming ballistic missile threats.


Kindly convey my greetings and felicitations to the members of your team of scientists, engineers, technologists and all others associated with this mission. I wish the DRDO continued success in the coming years”.


*****

 

[Safriz]

Hi shaheen missile!
Of course a missile system without any external control surfaces is more complex to design than a system with external control/stabilization surfaces. The problem however is,the TVC(servomechanism controlled nozzle) has to account for stability as well. In case of smaller tactical missiles control inputs(given to actuators) are slaved to target location and hence they have to provide a turning rate higher than the target to ensure a successful interception(encapsulated in the navigation constant in PN-guidance equation). Sometimes this control input might throw the missile in unstable regime--hence a stabilization surface is required. So,just to play safe,they went ahead with conventional control and stabilization layout in PDV. This doesnt mean what they have in PDV is very revolutionary control layout.

While i agree with what you said here,may i also point out that others too may have good reasons to use fins on their ballistic missiles instead of inability to make TVC or technical inferiority.

Also @amardeep mishra India doesnt have real TVC tech on their well trumpeted missiles.
There are no servo motor controlled gimbaled movable exaust nozzle on Agni series. Its Gas injection induced Thrust vectoring in which cold gas is injected on one side so that thrust goes weak on that side and remains normal on the other,thus creating a turning moment. Inefficient and waste of thrust and slow.
You can see it here in Agni-3 second stage. The gas injector nozzle is visible on the main engine exhaust

 

[amardeep mishra]

There are no servo motor controlled gimbaled movable exaust nozzle on Agni series

Hi shaheen!
It is unwise to base your argument on an old pic of a missile that merely served as a technology demonstrator and precursor to larger more powerful 2m rocket i.e A-5. I dont know what you mean by "real TVC" but rest assured DRDL/ASL has designed servo controlled nozzles for A-5. I have seen those!

 

[Safriz]

Hi shaheen!
It is unwise to base your argument on an old pic of a missile that merely served as a technology demonstrator and precursor to larger more powerful 2m rocket i.e A-5. I dont know what you mean by "real TVC" but rest assured DRDL/ASL has designed servo controlled nozzles for A-5. I have seen those!

Reat Thrust vectoring is Movable nozzle.

Anyway even in K-15 India is using Gas injection in the exhaust for creating asymmetric thrust for steering.
You can actually see the gas here.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Anyway even in K-15 India is using Gas injection in the exhaust for creating asymmetric thrust for steering.
You can actually see the gas here.

Hi!
I never claimed that K-15 had any servo controlled nozzle. The only missiles in indian inventory to possess that is Agni-4,5 and K-4.
Btw,have a look at this launcher(TCT-5 canisterized launcher for A-5)-
http://i.imgur.com/jpwkYF6.gif
As far as I remember there was a CAD model of flex nozzle of Agni-5 that I remember seeing in one of the seminars. if you search hard,I am sure you can find the pics.
Hi shaheen!
here is a pic of ISRO's rocket that has flex nozzles implemented via servo control-Kindly note similar system is in place with Agni-4,5 and K-4
http://i.imgur.com/m3DkhHK.png
http://i.imgur.com/HCDn8PS.png

 

[monitor]

India successfully tests Ballistic Missile Defence