How to defend Brahmos?- American analysis.

[Soumitra]

If brahmos hits an ACC can it make it inoperational?

 

[sicsheep]

No defense is ever impenetrable. You can ask all sorts of 'what if' questions, each one with increasing lethality tailored to eventually defeat your target, and there is nothing I can do about it. But the flaw here is assuming that you can field unlimited munition against a target in these 'what if' scenarios.

The more sophisticated the weapon, especially the one-way discard type like a cruise missile, the less likely you will have large quantity of it, and that mean you have to carefully husband your resources. If you have to expend three Brahmos against a single ship, granted a capital ship, it mean the threat factor of this ship overrides other demands for the limited supply of Brahmos. Even for US with our wealth, in Desert Storm for example, every aircraft that sortied, every cruise missile that was launched, every cannon shot from the USS Missouri, had to be accounted for, not just as mere 'bean counting' after the war, but to calculate the maximum damage possible so that the battleship or the air base can turn its attention to other targets with whatever munitions it have leftover. In war, every combatant commander, from the general/admiral all the way down to the platoon sergeant, believes his immediate situation have the highest priority.

I hate to use the meaningless advice phrase 'Trust me' because no one have any reason to trust anything I say on an anonymous Internet forum. But I will tell you this from my experience: That outside of plain old bullets, no weapon designer ever started a project with the intention of giving his customer the latitude to using the 'spray and pray' combat tactic. The customer can do whatever he want, of course.

US fired 725 Tomahawks in 2003 during Iraqi freedom, mostly by the US Navy, a fully loaded Ohio SSGN carries 154, so yeah i dont think this rule applies to the US as it does with other countries lol.

 

[kṣamā]

I am not aware and neither are you. With your experience I'm sure what you state is true of American and western weapons tests, but that doesn't necessarily make it a 'Global Best Practice'. Whats to stop from the IN to take the missile one boring day, put up a target above a dinghy and perform one of their 'user trials'.

I ,word for word, agree with @gambit . (@gambit: I am borrowing from you)

"I hate to use the meaningless advice phrase 'Trust me' because no one have any reason to trust anything I say on an anonymous Internet forum." but even then, 'Trust me' all sort of system testing is a rigged affair. No matter if the system is a physical, electronic, software or even biological, testing is rigged. Testing is always done to generate quantifiable info about the system. No one in their wildest dream "Just test a system". Even the smallest test has hundreds of parameters to be checked.

I am no petrol head but the testing suite I am working on tests manufacturing of performance engines. It alone tests more than 75 parameters over a very broad spectrum of engine usage. Now this is for just a commercial/race engine. Think of the parameters being tested on a multi-million dollar MISSILE (for god sake it's a frigging missile, not a 3k LOC C++ code !!).

I am more than willing to bet my nxt yr salary that each and every of those 44 test was scripted and was testing incremental integration of multiple complicated systems. Each of the system must be dumping a crap load of data. Why ?? Bcoz if even 1 subsystems malfunction, the system may not fail but testers like me will have to pluck their (ever so reducing) hair, sieving through the data to find the point of failure.

Now if all the systems are to be tested and the test goes south, the amount of data to be analysed is just overwhelming. Think of it as looking at massive heap of dominoes and trying to find what triggered the domino-effect.

 

[definitelynotIndian]

real question is why would US fight India? we are allies OBummer is coming to India in a week

 

[gslv mk3]

So basically game, set and match according to your own analysis and verdict, right?



So we must counter the imaginary, planned or unplanned future upgrades with what is available today. Hmm.....

Stop trolling troll.

hypersonic brahmos is no pipe dream,Its first flight would happen in 2years and induction would happen by end of this decade.

 

[The Great One]

I ,word for word, agree with @gambit . (@gambit: I am borrowing from you)

"I hate to use the meaningless advice phrase 'Trust me' because no one have any reason to trust anything I say on an anonymous Internet forum." but even then, 'Trust me' all sort of system testing is a rigged affair. No matter if the system is a physical, electronic, software or even biological, testing is rigged. Testing is always done to generate quantifiable info about the system. No one in their wildest dream "Just test a system". Even the smallest test has hundreds of parameters to be checked.

I am no petrol head but the testing suite I am working on tests manufacturing of performance engines. It alone tests more than 75 parameters over a very broad spectrum of engine usage. Now this is for just a commercial/race engine. Think of the parameters being tested on a multi-million dollar MISSILE (for god sake it's a frigging missile, not a 3k LOC C++ code !!).

I am more than willing to bet my nxt yr salary that each and every of those 44 test was scripted and was testing incremental integration of multiple complicated systems. Each of the system must be dumping a crap load of data. Why ?? Bcoz if even 1 subsystems malfunction, the system may not fail but testers like me will have to pluck their (ever so reducing) hair, sieving through the data to find the point of failure.

Now if all the systems are to be tested and the test goes south, the amount of data to be analysed is just overwhelming. Think of it as looking at massive heap of dominoes and trying to find what triggered the domino-effect.

This is funny
How about the customer? Would you refer to a test drive as a 'rigged test'? Does the customer (before buying) care about which feature or part can go wrong or does he care about whether the car performs as advertised, if overall system (car) has any fault OR not and just guns it (for sports car only!).
LOL and do you think that cars (or engines) aren't tested for full performance before they are advertised as For SALE? Why do they hire racing drivers as test drivers? Of course you'd want a man with a real sensitive *** and a good hearing, both of which most racing drivers have but all that is also taken care of by the electronics (much more accurately at that).

Indian engineers can. But when -- not if -- something goes wrong, they will inundated with so much data that root cause analysis will be next to futile. That is why tests, whether it is for missiles or for automobile tires, are conducted with incremental releases of influential factors, in other words: rigged tests. If the Brahmos had 44 tests, as claimed, then each of those tests are rigged. You can bet your next yr's salary on that.

I yam afraid you are mixing development trials with user trials. What kind of a field trial would it be where they restrict or remove any factor from a real-world environment. All 44 tests weren't conducted by Brahmos Corp. a lot of them were acceptance trials conducted by the 3 branches.

 

[Mav3rick]

Stop trolling troll.

hypersonic brahmos is no pipe dream,Its first flight would happen in 2years and induction would happen by end of this decade.

First of all, thanks for the lovely words.

Now, back on topic, the supposed achievement and progress is 'planned' right? So why count it as an achievement that others have to counter?

 

[gambit]

This is funny
How about the customer? Would you refer to a test drive as a 'rigged test'? Does the customer (before buying) care about which feature or part can go wrong or does he care about whether the car performs as advertised, if overall system (car) has any fault OR not and just guns it (for sports car only!).

Uhhh...Yeah...

Do you really think the car salesman is going to let you actually wring the car out as if it is your own car ? We are not talking about making sure the air conditioning blows cold air, or the radio pick up stations, or the doors works.

LOL and do you think that cars (or engines) aren't tested for full performance before they are advertised as For SALE? Why do they hire racing drivers as test drivers? Of course you'd want a man with a real sensitive *** and a good hearing, both of which most racing drivers have but all that is also taken care of by the electronics (much more accurately at that).

I yam afraid you are mixing development trials with user trials. What kind of a field trial would it be where they restrict or remove any factor from a real-world environment. All 44 tests weren't conducted by Brahmos Corp. a lot of them were acceptance trials conducted by the 3 branches.

Missile tests are %99.999 destructive tests. So what kind of 'user trials' do you think I am going to let you perform and at my cost when the test vehicle will be destroyed at the end ?

You are correct. This is hilarious.

I ,word for word, agree with @gambit . (@gambit: I am borrowing from you)

"I hate to use the meaningless advice phrase 'Trust me' because no one have any reason to trust anything I say on an anonymous Internet forum." but even then, 'Trust me' all sort of system testing is a rigged affair. No matter if the system is a physical, electronic, software or even biological, testing is rigged. Testing is always done to generate quantifiable info about the system. No one in their wildest dream "Just test a system". Even the smallest test has hundreds of parameters to be checked.

I am no petrol head but the testing suite I am working on tests manufacturing of performance engines. It alone tests more than 75 parameters over a very broad spectrum of engine usage. Now this is for just a commercial/race engine. Think of the parameters being tested on a multi-million dollar MISSILE (for god sake it's a frigging missile, not a 3k LOC C++ code !!).

I am more than willing to bet my nxt yr salary that each and every of those 44 test was scripted and was testing incremental integration of multiple complicated systems. Each of the system must be dumping a crap load of data. Why ?? Bcoz if even 1 subsystems malfunction, the system may not fail but testers like me will have to pluck their (ever so reducing) hair, sieving through the data to find the point of failure.

Now if all the systems are to be tested and the test goes south, the amount of data to be analysed is just overwhelming. Think of it as looking at massive heap of dominoes and trying to find what triggered the domino-effect.

Very good, SIR. You sounds like you know what you are talking about.

 

[OrionHunter]

So basically game, set and match according to your own analysis and verdict, right?

Right!

So we must counter the imaginary, planned or unplanned future upgrades with what is available today. Hmm.....[/QUOTE]
So you want to develop weapons for yesterday's wars?? You need to think of the future and plan accordingly or you're toast. A 20 year perspective planning is the need of the hour and thus you need to plan accordingly.

 

[War Thunder]

Brahmos Block 4 is comming. It will take a totally different route to attack ships. It will not attack from side but parpendicular to normal route which missile takes to attack boat. In this area , there is a minimum of Radar and EW. Hit in this area shall quickly disintegrate the ship. Verticle dive brahmos is not too far.

Arjun and LCA were also coming for many years. "Is coming" is not a reliable thing coming from indians, not until some thing has been proven, tested and manufactured.
Specially when as per the indian media, most of the indian missile arsenal is full of duds...

"An armory of junk and a nation to defend" ............ lol india......

 

[gambit]

If brahmos hits an ACC can it make it inoperational?

Yes, it can render an aircraft carrier either reduced operation or out of combat completely.

It is actually very tough to sink a modern aircraft carrier. In the past, carriers came from converted hulls of cruisers or even oilers. Today's carriers are actually designed as aircraft carriers. There are compartments to isolate hull breaches so that mean it would take multiple hits at different levels of the hull to really sink a carrier.

USS Oriskany (CV-34) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Oriskany had to have deliberately planted explosives at know crucial structures in order to sink her.

Carrier sunk to make artificial reef - US news - Environment | NBC News

...500 pounds of plastic explosives went off. The rusted hulk took about 37 minutes to slip beneath the waves, ...

That is 500 lbs of explosives spread throughout the interior at known strategic locations to sink the ship. So just because a 500 lbs warhead from a missile penetrated the hull, it does not mean the ship will sink because of that damage.

USS Enterprise fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This blast tore a large hole, approximately 18 feet by 22 feet, into the flight deck, and ruptured a 6,000 gallon fuel tank mounted to a tanker aircraft; a massive fireball resulted from the fuel igniting, spreading the fire further. All told, eighteen explosions occurred, blowing eight holes into the flight deck and beyond.

If the Enterprise was in combat, the ship would still be able to conduct air operations, although it would be limited launches and recovery. But since the accident occurred in peace time, the Enterprise returned to port for repairs.

If you are talking about a US class aircraft carrier, it would be very very tough to actually sink such a ship. Reduce its contribution to the battle is another issue.

 

[The Great One]

Uhhh...Yeah...

Do you really think the car salesman is going to let you actually wring the car out as if it is your own car ? We are not talking about making sure the air conditioning blows cold air, or the radio pick up stations, or the doors works.

Different dealers have different test drive rules. I don't think there are very many rules applicable to a buyer gunning a 458 Italia around the narrow lanes of Fiorano.

Missile tests are %99.999 destructive tests. So what kind of 'user trials' do you think I am going to let you perform and at my cost when the test vehicle will be destroyed at the end ?

You are correct. This is hilarious.

You?
Firstly in India we have DPSU's (Public Sector Units) (Brahmos is a JV with Ruskies but 50.5% is held by our DRDO). They don't get to display all their new inventions and products. The armed forces identifies its needs, sets its requirements and DRDO then makes it. (10 years later). No cost to be borne by the manufacturer (which DRDO isn't anyway, its purely a research org) for any failed test.
Secondly, If what you state is true then we can summarily dismiss all claims made about a lot of American missiles since none of them have been tested for real life conditions.
BTW, how come Pinnacle Armor- Dragon-skin maker had to go undergo testing with DoD test protocols at HP White Labs. Isn't body armor test also 99.999% destructive. (You could wear it afterwards but well, really?)

 

[kenyannoobie]

SIGHHHHH! I know this is PDF but its sad there are still so many US fanboys. I know they're victims of American advertising,the movies,books and documentaries but still....
Let me throw in this story of how the USS Donald Cook was softkilled in April last year in the Black Sea part of the Anglo Zionist to bully the Russian bear.
"Which turned to nearly full blown panic when it was learned exactly how the elderly Sue got so close. As it approached the destroyer all electronic systems shut down leaving the ship as defenseless as a little dhow"
Karanja'z Place: THE USS DONALD COOK INCIDENT AND THE REALITY OF RUSSIAN WAR FIGHTING EQUIPMENT AND
Here's what happened:"The radars along with all associated systems shut down as if a switch was turned off. The jet then buzzed the ship,which is a low high speed overflight once and then repeated the manoeuvre eleven times.
The Cook and its shaken crew immediately after set sail for Romania while it was another 2 days before the Pentagon could issue this response:"
If I were you I really wouldn't sing the praises of the Aegis and its supporting systems!

 

[kenyannoobie]

Oh dear, not this again. @gambit - you want to take care of this? I sure as hell don't want to go over this again.

Look @kenyannoobie - this has been discussed and dispelled before:

https://defence.pk/threads/russian-...erican-“uss-donald-cook”.344152/#post-6434088

Russia Claims Its Bomber Jammed U.S. Destroyer — War Is Boring — Medium

I doubt you have any new information or technicals to add, but if you have something substantial, go ahead and add it. That claim, which both @gambit and I have experience with, can be accuralty called BS. The only thing the Donald Cook was a victim of is people gullibility.

Nor to flame but frankly you had nothing but assertions on that thread. I'm convinced the episode happened as the Russians say. Fyi their capabilities are always underrated. You heard how they shot down 2 missiles in the Med 2 years ago? No doubt the Zionists trying to false flag them into WW4.
Russia has claimed that its missile early warning system has detected the launch of two missiles from the central part of the Mediterranean Sea fired towards the Sea's eastern coastline.
Missiles launched in Mediterranean towards Syrian coast, claims Russian defence ministry - Telegraph

 

[Oldman1]

One single sort of advanced weapon does not count very much. Only dozens of F22s are not able to counter the whole AF of the IAF, let alone Brahmos to USN.

Indeed, India would have to send its whole entire air force to take down an entire battle group with its own fighters of almost 100 aircraft alone of different ones designed to defend it from air to sea.