What's new

India does not have an ICBM programme

That is Sovet, not indian, they dont just have the tech to launch rocket but tech I mentioned in my last post. But, there are not src supporting india has those tech.

well i was just replying to your query where you suggested that ICBM and SLVs are not remotely similar...the only similarity is that both of them fly off to sky...

as much as technical know how of india is concerned ISRO is in better position to answer them but i dont think they have enough time at their disposal to answer such silly questions..(off course with their standards not mine...)..
 
@ kinetic ...no use educating him...you will die trying...

I dont need any education from kinetic, he seems know less than me about rockets bcoz he said that Rocket can change to ICBM just get a bit sofeware modifying.:lol: I am reading wiki, but in wiki artcle, there are so many defference between ICBM and rockets.
 
The space age began on October 4 1957 when the USSR launched the first unmanned satellite, Sputnik 1. This stunning triumph quickly lead to a "space race" between the two nuclear superpowers, the Soviet Union and United States. Both nations initially used converted intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) to launch their early unmanned and -- starting in 1961 -- manned spacecraft. Expendable launch vehicles directly or indirectly derived from ICBMs immediately became the preferred option, although the U.S. Air Force and NASA also investigated suborbital hypersonic jet- or rocket-powered aircraft such as the X-15 & XB-70. Missiles could be developed more quickly and easily than aircraft capable of flying 25 times faster than the speed of sound. The U.S. Air Force did briefly consider a small reconnaisance spaceplane that would have been launched into orbit by a Titan II missile -- the X-20 DynaSoar -- but the project was eventually cancelled since ballistic unmanned or manned space capsules were regarded as more cost-effective.

INTRODUCTION TO FUTURE LAUNCH VEHICLE PLANS
 
I dont need any education from kinetic, he seems know less than me about rockets bcoz he said that Rocket can change to ICBM just get a bit sofeware modifying.:lol: I am reading wiki, but in wiki artcle, there are so many defference between ICBM and rockets.

i thought the question was of similarity between SLV and ICBM....

even though i don know much about rocket science i think SLV should be a little more complicated to build than Rocket...
 
Yes, I dont, but arccording to what you said, it seems you are know less than me about space and rocket. I think you should read the article below. ICBM doesnt go like what you said change the software a bit. After launching a ICBM may release several independent warheads, and penetration aids such as metallic-coated balloons, aluminum chaff, and full-scale warhead decoys. And I aslo suggest you read some article about ICBM. Launching ICBM is a very easy phase, but make the ICBM hit the target authenticitily is far difficult than just launching a rockets.


The following flight phases can be distinguished:

boost phase: 3 to 5 minutes (shorter for a solid rocket than for a liquid-propellant rocket); altitude at the end of this phase is typically 150 to 400 km depending on the trajectory chosen, typical burnout speed is 7 km/s.
midcourse phase: approx. 25 minutes—sub-orbital spaceflight in an elliptic orbit; the orbit is part of an ellipse with a vertical major axis; the apogee (halfway the midcourse phase) is at an altitude of approximately 1,200 km; the semi-major axis is between 3,186 km and 6,372 km; the projection of the orbit on the Earth's surface is close to a great circle, slightly displaced due to earth rotation during the time of flight; the missile may release several independent warheads, and penetration aids such as metallic-coated balloons, aluminum chaff, and full-scale warhead decoys.
reentry phase (starting at an altitude of 100 km): 2 minutes—impact is at a speed of up to 4 km/s (for early ICBMs less than 1 km/s); see also maneuverable reentry vehicle.

What an answer!!!

About what are you talking about? ICBM? Read the copy yourself, where it says that every ICBM have to be MIRV? Who said an ICBM has maneuverable RV, decoy? Do you know what is an ICBM? Its Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. :rofl:

A country that can put a satellite precisely into the orbit and when the satellite has thruster for orbit control can build maneuverable RV as well. if a country can launch ten satellites at a time MIRV is nothing for her. India has every one of them with Prithvi and Agni-II/III/V including MIRV, decoy, EW, maneuverable RV etc etc.
 
That is Sovet, not indian, they dont just have the tech to launch rocket but tech I mentioned in my last post. But, there are not src supporting india has those tech.

Funny reply! Are the laws of physics different in USSR and India? :rofl:

Russian ICBM launches satellites into lower orbits than GTO while Indian satellite can touch the Moon but still can't be an ICBM! You are proving yourself! You really don't have any knowledge about space or rocket science. Waste of time!
 
What is your point of posting these src??? Russia and US can change Rockets to ICBM bcoz they have the tech of ICBM which are said in the second link you provide. But there are no src supporting india has those tech.

what is the tech you are talking about?
elaborate further so that we may have a meaningful discussion
 
Funny reply! Are the laws of physics different in USSR and India? :rofl:

Russian ICBM launches satellites into lower orbits than GTO while Indian satellite can touch the Moon but still can't be an ICBM! You are proving yourself! You really don't have any knowledge about space or rocket science. Waste of time!

About you, just keep stopping talking with me, I dont wanna talk to a guy who believe "A rockets can be changed to ICBM with a bit software midifying.":rofl: You really like bla bla bla without any supporting.:rofl:
 
I have posted that in my previous post, and you can aslo check wiki ICBM, bcoz I get it from Wiki.

I did check your previous posts....
check post number 46...
if there is something not covered under that or if you differ from something...
I am all ears..
 
About you, just keep stopping talking with me, I dont wanna talk to a guy who believe "A rockets can be changed to ICBM with a bit software midifying.":rofl: You really like bla bla bla without any supporting.:rofl:

Let me explain clearly. A rocket can be converted into an ICBM. There is no difficulty in it. In fact all the missiles you see are nothing but a warhead attached to a single or multi staged propulsion system. The only difference lies in their course and re-entry mechanism.

Also re-entry is same for all types of ballistic missiles. So if Agni III was successful, the same re-entry mechanism would work on an ICBM too.

The tech you pasted

"After launching a ICBM may release several independent warheads, and penetration aids such as metallic-coated balloons, aluminum chaff, and full-scale warhead decoys. And I aslo suggest you read some article about ICBM. Launching ICBM is a very easy phase, but make the ICBM hit the target authenticitily is far difficult than just launching a rockets."

independent warheads = MIRV
penetration aids such as metallic-coated balloons, aluminum chaff, and full-scale warhead decoys = used to reduce rcs, provide countermeasure to aerial missiles

None of the ballistic missiles are 100% accurate, they all have 0 propulsion when they enter the atmosphere. Their direction can change while re-entry depending upon various factors. This is because ballistic missiles unlike cruise missiles are catapulted using their boosted stages, once the missile gains momentum, the engines are switched off and used stages are dropped off the missile.

None of the things stated above are different for rockets, except for the fact that their are propelled at a different angle to put them into orbit. The same rocket with its payload replaced by the re-entry warhead becomes a missile when launched at different angle.

So much of wiki searching to prove us wrong, the opposite would have put your doubts to rest.
 
did you even go through this link...

CIA Compares Long March To Chinese ICBM

look at the similarities...

the only major difference is absence of warhead...

I read that. The list is below.

WARHEAD NO YES APPLIES TO ICBM ONLY

RE-ENTRY VEHICLE YES YES SIMILAR TO RETURN
CAPSULE TECHNOLOGY


PAYLOAD SEPERATION YES YES SATELLITE & WARHEAD HAVE
SIMILAR DELIVERY


INTERNAL GUIDANCE YES YES SAME HARDWARE - SOFTWARE
& CONTROL SYSTEMS TAILORED TO APPLICATION


STAGING MECHANISMS YES YES SAME

PROPELLANTS YES YES SAME

STRAP ON BOOSTERS YES YES TECHNOLOGY MAY BE USED TO
CREATE MISSILE STAGES


AIR FRAME, MOTOR, YES YES SAME
CASES, LINERS, &
INSULATION

ENGINE OR MOTORS YES YES SAME FOR FIRST STAGE

THRUST VECTORING YES YES SAME
CONTROL SYSTEMS

ENGINE NOZZLES YES YES USUALLY IDENTICAL

The Bold line is the difference between Rockets and ICBM, and frankly I dont know what the difference means. I think we should wait a man who know well about space tech and missile tech to answer me. Maybe "faithfulguy" can answer it, it seems he knows lots about ICBM.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom