What's new

India to Test “China Killer” Agni-V ICBM

Dude, don't push the envelope. Me being civilized doesn't mean that I'm incapable of a reply, the only problem is, if I do, you'll be the one crying. Moron. :D

Agaya na aukaad par. Wahi bori bistar banakar so ja. :partay:

Don't paint every Pakistani(or any anybody :D) with the same brush. China is a big fat smart kid. An effective deterrence against them is still missing. This is one step in that direction. :tup:
But it's still just a step. Nothing more.

Yeah 10 yrs ago we planned islamabad, today we can hit northernmost part of china. Not enough effective deterence.
 
.
DRDO ( DRTROLL ) pay attention! The following is much more realistic and honest evaluation of Agni 5, from a Chinese in a Chinese military forum:


(Google translated, with some tiny grammar corrections by me)




" The entire series of all 5 series of Agni missile test-fired up to now do not add up to 20 times in the entire history. Any one serie of numerous Dongfeng missile tests is more than what all Agni series are combined. Agni missiles, if they were made of other countries, they can not simply suited for the purpose of production.

In fact, India's missile addressed only the issue of "have” or “have not” , the question of “good or bad”, however, is completely out of the question. The combat readiness of Agni series ( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) is entirely symbolic. And I can responsibly say that the sophitication level of India's missiles not only can not be mentioed with China’s in one breath, they are even inferior to Pakistan , Iran, and North Korea’s.

Agni missile currently has five models, but a total of two series. i.e. Agni 1, 2 and 4 is a series, The planned Agni 6 also belongs to this series. The technical source for them is SLV3 rocket . Agni 3 and 5 is the other series. The technical source for them is PSLV launch vehicle . We can clearly see that India's missiles in general are not like other countries which belong to military-to-civilian conversion. India’s missiles are of civilian-to-military conversion. This is not surprising , since India's rocket technology is the introduction of foreign civilian missile technology, rather than develop their own technology ( either solid fueled or liquid one ) .


Civilian rockets and ballistic missiles for military purpose are different. This difference brings heavy deficiencies to Indian missiles.
Obviously, Agni 1, 2, 4 and 6 are all too long and too thin, while Agni 3 and 5 are too heavy. These are based on civilian rocket prototypes which share some common problems: for the missile , it brings low reliability, poor mobility, and poor delivering ability .




Delivering ability :
Agni missiles delivering abilities are all low, coupled with the problem that its nuclear weight is too large. For the same range missile , Agni emphasis on the heavier weight and weaker power.
For example Agni-3 , and DF 3 , Dongfeng 21A are the same 3000 km or so missiles.
Dongfeng 3 weight 64 tons , capable of delivering 3 million tons level of nuclear warheads .
Dongfeng 21 weight 16 tons , capable of delivering of 700,000 tons -class nuclear warheads.
Agni 3 weight 50 tons , India is currently the largest nuclear warheads tested equivalent 20,000 tons ( 60,000 tons is planned ) .
Keep in mind that the weight of Agni-3 is even heavier than both heavy class DF-31 and Topol M,. Of course, Agni 5 is even heavier than Agni 3 .



Mobility:
If weight is heavy, naturally the maneuvering capability is worse . Agni 3 and 5 are much heavier than the Topol M , so they need a larger TEL ( carriage , verticle , firing three vehicles ) to carry . However, only two countries in the world produce this tonnage TEL - Russia and China ( the United States does not need it) . One can see those TEL on parade in Northe Korean. India can only be jealous, envy and hateful about it. No way China and Russia will sell this kind of TEL to India, So-called" road mobile " uou listen to India media is just a joke . As for Agni 1, 2 and 4 , India’s auto production sophitication level can only make it possible for those to “walk around”for 1 lap or 2 in Indian national parade. Do not expect it though to make it really running on the road. You can compare TELs from Indian missile parades to their Chinese counterparts, you’ll notice that a lot of things are missing. Indian TEL is simply not a complete TEL.
As for so-called “rail-mobile” Agni, it is only theoretically possible. But seeing Agni 5 launch video , we understand that it is simply not a launch vehicle. It can only be called some kind of “orbital vehicles” only. lol, If that was “rail mobile”, then someone would say that China 's Long March 2F can also be called a " rail mobile” launchers. Haha




Range:
Agni range is arguably the its only bright spot. But we need to know that it’s important not only to fire up the missile , but also to fly down . This is the re-entry issue. When warheads from outer space fly back to the earthe surface , their air speed friction can generate a lot of heat. If not handled properly, missiles will burn their warheads at re-entry. Further range missiles have, more serious the re-entry problem. In general, range up to 3,000 km is a tech hurdle , up to 5,000 km another hurdle, a ridge above 8,000 km another hurdle, etc. Only 3 countries: the United States , Russia, and China have truly solved the world's intercontinental missile warhead reentry problem. France and the United Kingdom have not solved the problem on on their own merit. The US give it to them. Is there a way around this hurdle? Yes, that is the high resistance of the big blunt nose , and let the angle warhead more gradual return to some of the atmosphere , so that warheads in flight in the upper atmosphere of the time a bit longer with fuller deceleration . But the consequences are significant decline in accuracy and the difficulity to be intercepted has declined dramatically. Even so the wearheads may still be burned out. Agni- 5 reentry problem is to the same. The result is that warheads of Agni 5 were burned . Of course, this may not be a failure , perhaps the Indians have no plans to completely verify the Agni 5 reentry problem anyway.

According to reports from India , Agni 5 validated 2000 degrees tempreture reentry problem. But this temperature is the level of medium-range missiles , ICBMs can reach 10,000 degrees . Realistically speaking, India’s reentry warhead technology has not exceeded what 3,000 kilometers millsiles require. If their missiles fly 5,000 kilometers , the burned-doen “warhead” that came down to the surface is probably no more than a scrap iron block.

Of course, calling Agni 5 with a range of only 5000 km , an ICBM, is very boring. Since India's geographical location is not good, hitting the United States needs more than 10,000 km range .

Agni missile 's range is not only unrealistic , but also the potential for increased range being very limited. Agni 5 is actually Agni- 3 with a small added 3rd level , with reduced the weight of the warhead. Tthe total weight increased from 1 to 3 tons ( India provided a large deviation ) , weight increase of about 5% . This missile can fly 5,000 kilometers at best, unlike what the media said that “ it has a range of 10,000km but only claim being 5,000km in order not to make the U.S angry”. In the video of the launch of Agni-3, one can see very slow takeoff acceleration , takeoff thrust to weight ratio of about 1.4 to 1.5. Agni 5 series is even less. That is, the weight of over 50 tons of missiles , a takeoff thrust of only 70 tons, no wonder Agni 5 can not add more weight. It it did, it would have difficulity to take off.

Generally solid missile takeoff thrust-weight ratio is around 2.5 , Dongfeng 21A weighs about 16 tons , a takeoff thrust of more than 40 tons , if the weight gain of up to 20 tons, a takeoff thrust-weight ratio is a lot higher than the Agni 5 . And then DF 21A has 25% of the weight gain , easy to hit more than 8,000 km . Interestingly, there are some rumors online saying that Dongfeng 31 weighs 20 tons, with700 kg warhead and a range of 8,000 km. In fact, according to the tonnage of the Dongfeng 21 " extended range " counted out. But in fact if Dongfeng 31 than weighs 4 more tons than DF 21, no need for larger launching veicle. Dongfeng 31 weighs 40 tons, much lighter than Agni 5. It would easily deliver the same Agni 5 warhead to the twice distance.




Accuracy:
Speaking of accuracy, it’s embarrassing for the Indians. In1980’s “580 mission” to the South Pacific, China launched ICBMs with a range of over 9,000 km , draw the restricted area of about more than 50,000 square kilometers . In 2012 when India launched the Indian Ocean Agni 5 , a range of 5,000 km , it draw the restricted area of 600,000 square kilometers . 11 times larger.

The main factors affecting three errors are guidance level , the system horizontal control, and the external environment interference. In all these three areas India are problematic.

Inertial Navigation is the basis of all the navigation system . However, India is not capable of producing INS . Agni 5 laser inertial navigation is imported from Russia. But this INS is used in medium-range missile Agni 2 and Agni 3 . It is not suitable enough for the long-range missile like Agni 5.

As for System Control, let’s say precision is not Indian tradition.

Let’s talk about Interference with the external environment. As already said , the fire re-entry mode selected shape can reduce warheads and warheads heat generated by friction with the atmosphere , but the price paid is the greatly reduced accuracy. The greater the volume of warheads , the slower reentry is , the longer it flies in the atmosphere aerodynamic, the greater effects is generated random deviation. Of course, in the design and processing level the Indians are an embarrassment , which also achieved a notorious nickname of " Brownian Bomb ".(to borrow Brownian Motion term in Physics)



Reliability:
According to documented records , all five Agni series of missiles fired from the 1989 of total 17 times so far. The most test-fired Agni- 1 has 5 times only. Ballistic missiles in other countries are generally required about 20 times the test before stereotypes for production. Therefore , regardless of how much success rate of fire India has , from the angle of the number of optical tests , all five kinds of Agni missile missile can not even be stereotyped for production purpose in any other major powers. Or rather, the entire Agni series of missiles are in fact not be combat capable. India truly combat missile , Scud is similar to the earlier basic properties of India’s Earth 1 and the Earth 2 ( correct Hindi translation?) missiles with range of only 300 km level . This is why the Earth missile series, although extremely backward, are still strongly depended and empahsized by India .



Why India's missile sophistication level is even inferior to that of Pakistan, Iran and North Korea? These 3 countries have mature and reliable level of 2,000 km range ballistic missiles. Amongst these 3 countries: North Korea has the most mature technology - they started the 1st , and scored a number of Russian technology input; Pakistan has the most advanced technology – it introduced the liquid fuel missile technology from Korea, and Chinese solid fuel missile technology. Dongfeng 11 and Dongfeng 15 from China , though not advanced, are in fact points of envy in eyes of today's India. DF11 and DF15 equivalent technologies ensure Pakistan ahead of India for at least one generation in the up-to 1,000 km level of ballistic missiles. And this advantage has begun to extend to 2,000 km level . Iran also has imported missile technologies from Korea , Russia and China. Among the 3 countries, Iran has the highest level of overall industrial and technical mastery. So it is also the first of these three countries to launch satellites."
 
.
The Agni V, particularly when armed with multiple nuclear warheads, has been accused of upsetting the fragile regional balance of power. Will it in fact destabilise the region, or is it merely a cover for some to obfuscate more pressing issues?

India tested its nuclear-capable Agni V yesterday. The missile, with a range of over 5,000 kilometres, may eventually have its range enhanced or be equipped with multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV) technology though there are no signs that either of these was achieved in this morning’s test. The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has been focusing instead on improving India’s second-strike capability by making its missiles faster, more agile, and road mobile (survivable). India’s latest missile, with its significant range increase over its predecessors, is seen as a China-centric missile and likely to be deployed after a few more trials only by 2017.

There are several interesting facets to the development of the Agni V. The first and most obvious is its range. Delhi can deny its rivalry with Beijing until it is blue in the face but there is no reason for India to develop a missile with such reach to target Pakistan. The Agni V underscores the argument that India sees itself in a dyad with China rather than, as US analysts have tried to argue, as an equal hyphenated with Pakistan.

As several observers have noted, despite today’s successful missile test, India remains a fair way away from an assured second strike capability that is essential to its no first use (NFU) posture. Others have commented that India’s focus on China creates instability in its relations with Pakistan, who, unable to keep up with the defence expenditure required to attain party with India, has chosen to resort to asymmetric warfare which could inadvertently bubble over into a full-fledged war. In an effort to become an established nuclear power with a credible triad, India’s nuclear arsenal has abandoned the minimum credible deterrent philosophy.

These fears are either exaggerated or inaccurate. First, the deployment of the INS Arihant will enhance the survivability of India’s nuclear arsenal and ensure a second strike capability, but India’s road- or rail-mobile nuclear arsenal is not an easy target for a hypothetical first strike. India may be significantly behind its rival across the Himalayas in terms of operational readiness, indigenous development of military hardware, and sophistication of its missiles and nuclear warheads, but none of these lacunae take away from India’s crossing a minimum threshold of nuclear readiness.

Second, while it has been fashionable to consider India and Pakistan as one sub-system and China as part of another isolated network, these assumptions bear no resemblance to the reality on the ground. China’s behaviour, vis-a-vis the United States, Russia, or anyone else, will impact Indian nuclear thinking and Delhi’s response will in turn affect Islamabad. It is irrational to expect Delhi to stand idly by while China improves its nuclear arsenal, no doubt in response to US modernisation initiatives, develops an anti-ballistic missile defence shield, and anti-satellite missiles.

Third, minimum credible deterrence is a philosophy that depends greatly on one’s rival; Pakistan has never been more than a distraction in India’s nuclear planning, much to its chagrin. For Delhi, its deterrence has always been against Beijing’s ambitions, and in that capacity, India has always maintained a technologically and numerically modest force. In fact, the DRDO’s moratorium on developing longer ranged missiles shows caution, responsibility, and the power of a limited purse. As Chander has stated, the DRDO’s primary goal now is to refine rather than expand India’s defence capabilities.

The fear that MIRV capability will somehow spiral into Armageddon is based on US and Soviet experiences during the Cold War. This is not applicable to the Indian sub-continent – neither China nor Delhi have suffered from the insane Cold War dash to accumulate gargantuan nuclear arsenals, and there is little evidence to indicate that a MIRVed Agni V will substantially increase the size of India’s arsenal. In fact, barring one or two analysts, the considered opinion of the strategic enclave is that the country would be well served by a nuclear kitty ranging from 150 to a maximum of 250 warheads. Of course, this is liable to change with fluctuating threat perceptions but is still a far cry from the 16,000+ warheads the US and Russia have between them.

There is, however, merit to the claim that India’s military developments will keep Pakistan on edge; it is the same dynamic India experiences with China’s rise and challenge to the United States. However, acknowledgement of this fundamental dynamic is not to equate the two rivalries – India does not support terrorist activity against China as Pakistan does against India. The low intensity conflict Islamabad sponsors does far more to destabilise sub-continental relations than a straight up military and nuclear rivalry.

Another factor contributing to the region’s instability is China’s refusal to acknowledge the threat posed by India’s nuclear arsenal. The
Pokhran II blasts and the success of the Agni V has made Beijing’s tone terse, but until it acknowledges India’s nuclear prowess, there can be little hope for confidence building measures or nuclear discussions between Asia’s two largest states. There are many questions hanging over China’s NFU policy, which Delhi is certain to notice and compensate for in its force structure.

It would be supremely irresponsible for any nation to ignore the increasing military capability of a neighbour it considers its rival. India cannot rationally expect Pakistan to not be worried as India continually increases its military capabilities and reach, just as it is impractical to expect India to ignore China’s advances and activities in the region. Europe has witnessed several of these multi-variable rivalries as powers rise and fall in its history and something similar is being played out in Asia today, albeit with nuclear weapons. As China flexes its muscles in the region, India will be forced to respond, which will in turn put pressure on Pakistan.

Refraining from developing the Agni V, MIRV capability, and various defence technologies will only make India weak without increasing regional stability. Stability and peace have come either by the total destruction of an enemy, the peace of a graveyard, or by negotiations among equals; moderation is a virtue only in those who are thought to have an alternative.

Jaideep spends most of his time avoiding work; when not married to his books, he likes to cook, sail, and scuba. A great admirer of Hatshepsut, Jaideep refuses to live in the 21st century. He grew up in the Middle East and Europe.When forced into wage slavery, he is a doctoral student in History at Vanderbilt University.

http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/1889770/standpoint-agni-v-and-the-south-asian-balance-of-power
 
.
But A5 is not related to South Asia.

Power Balance was always in our favor in SA and will always remain mainly with Akula, Arhiant, K15, K4 etc etc.
 
. . .
It is such an unnecessary analysis. Agni-V is not meant for South Asia at all.
 
.
When India test-fired its Agni V missile for the second time on Sunday, the buzz, predictably, was about how far it can fly and which all cities around the world can now be targeted. For a nation obsessed with numbers, the 5,000 km plus range of the nuclear capable missile has somehow become a convoluted symbol of India's 'global position'.

In reality, the challenge for India's missile programme lies much farther ahead of the range it can achieve, scientists after all have sent a mission to the moon. As India's top missile scientist and head of the DRDO Avinash Chander puts it, give scientists a number and two years of time and anything can be achieved.

The challenge lies in proving technology of such strategic nature at a different level — gaining the trust of the users, the Strategic Forces Command, that a foolproof system will not fail in the time of need. While four more tests will be carried out before formal induction of the serial produced variant in two years, a critical factor will be ensuring the quality of production — a sore issue that has plagued not just missiles but most indigenous military systems.

An even bigger challenge that remains is fine-tuning the technology to meet the requirements of a modern and dynamic battlefield. The Agni V has a designed precision of landing within a 100 metre of the intended target (CEP). This needs to be brought down to 10-15 metre. Though nuclear missiles can afford to be a bit off the target, it must not be forgotten that the Agni series also have a conventional role. A military mind would appreciate how far the capability of precisely hitting a hardened target at long range with a conventional warhead can be exploited.

Last but not the least, is the development of MIRVs (Multiple Independently targetable Re-entry Vehicle) — a single ballistic missile carrying multiple warheads — that are needed to defeat modern missile defence systems. Unfortunately, while DRDO has been working on this technology and has even fabricated certain modules to facilitate future tests, a decision has not yet been taken to initiate a formal MIRV missile programme.
 
.
Everytime india test Agni-IV, AGNI-V the communist party of china sings hindi-chini bhai bhai.... It seems they only hear a aggressive language. The more aggressive india get the more china speak softly. Funny.... They should wait for Agni-6.... i mean thats a killer which can carry several warheads and drop at several different locations. 1 missile and multiple targets. Great.
 
.
Everytime india test Agni-IV, AGNI-V the communist party of china sings hindi-chini bhai bhai.... It seems they only hear a aggressive language. The more aggressive india get the more china speak softly. Funny.... They should wait for Agni-6.... i mean thats a killer which can carry several warheads and drop at several different locations. 1 missile and multiple targets. Great.

What the hell is this ?

We expect better quality response from you.

I am disappointed. you should be ashamed if yourself.
 
. .
Yesterday I show the video so Agni V Second test. It is visibly faster than Agni III. Can anybody tell me what new technology was tested in Agni V. What additional compare to Agni V first test? What was terminal velocity. For Agni V first test, it was Mach 24+.
 
.
A mindless descent into nuclear madness that India can Ill afford. I wonder why we need to play Star Wars -II with China. USSR and The USA were existential threats to each other, and had ideological spheres involving tens of nations to defend. What does India have against China - a couple of thousand square miles of disputed frozen waste, and a border skirmish more than 50 years ago in which China practically achieved its border goals. And here we are talking of MIRVs and ICBMs as if we have a life and death struggle with China.

And we all know what happens to the economically weaker nation in a costly arms race.
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom