Indian Missiles - News, Developments, Tests, and Discussions

[booo]

well not quite because it will make ways for further trials and improvements.

hehe... the glass is half full

 

[gambit]

well the news is said but sure issues will be rectified...however i am not clear what does night trial means and how is it complicated than day trial?? I failed to contemplate the technical challenges about a missile behaving fins during the day but not in night...Can someone please enlighten me??

Military professionals may answer your question Decki..Ask Gambit or some one else..

perhaps the test is not for missile itself but for the soldiers who operate the missile? someone pressed wrong button?
from the report, i think the missile would be failed even during day time.. How many tests had the missile done before?

Correct...Night testing of any weapons system is not about engineering but about operational readiness. Basically, the scientists and engineers proved the concept, now it is up to the end user -- the military -- to prove to the nation that they can effectively wield the weapon system at the environmental conditions specified by the scientists and engineers to defend the country. Obviously...A torpedo cannot be used as an air-air missile.

The engineers have effectively 'dumb down' the usability of the weapons system to the lowest common denominator in the military, in other words, reduce as much as possible the number of steps to launch an aircraft or a missile so that the stress of war will have minimal impact on the ability of the soldier or missileer to use the gun or launch the missile. If radar works during the day, it will work at night. If the fuel ignite in the day but not at night, then either there is something wrong with the fuel preparation or the people that is supposed to launch the missile. Unless we are talking about artic temperature, nighttime drop in temperature got nothing to do with fuel volatility, computer wares or radar transmissions.

The article stated...

But it faltered just before the second stage separation and behaved erratically, deviating from its coordinated path.

Just before? What usually occur at stage separation?

Stage separation from a rocket vehicle using pyrotechnic mechanisms

A theoretical analysis of stage separation from a rocket vehicle using pyrotechnic mechanisms is presented. Analytical relationships between the separation parameters and the parameters governing the expansion of the combustion products of the explosive used in the separation mechanisms are examined. Optimal conditions for the conversion of the internal energy of the combustion products into useful work are obtained.

Pyrotechnics are often used in bomb delivery...Or in stage separation in multi-stage rockets...

Ares I-X 2009 Test Flight Progress: Pyrotechnic Stage Separation | Universe Today

So, last week, ATK successfully tested the explosive charges that will perform the most important task of the test launch of the Ares I-X. The Forward Skirt Extension is located between the first and second stages of the rocket (pictured left). This 1.8 metre (6 ft) long by 3.7 metre (12 ft) diameter aluminium cylinder will allow the first stage booster to separate at the frustum (a cone-shaped connector that attaches the first stage to the larger diameter upper stage). During the launch, separation will occur at an altitude of around 40 km (130,000 ft).

We want each stage to separate from each other as clean and as rapid as possible and explosives to destroy the mechanical clamps holding the stages together are the best method. Other methods are compressed gas or powerful hydraulics.

SOLID ROCKET BOOSTERS

The separation commands issued from the orbiter by the SRB separation sequence initiate the redundant NSD pressure cartridge in each bolt and ignite the BSMs to effect a clean separation.

But explosive cartridges are the best.

Something happened to this test and nighttime environmental conditions got nothing to do with this failure, as far as affecting the hardwares goes. Pyrotechnics are safety pinned so did someone forgot in his sleepiness to pull all the pins? I do not know and unless we know the exact separation mechanisms, we probably will never know. The missile computer may have performed as required and sent the appropriate separation signals but somehow one (or more) bolt failed. Is that what happened? We do not know but nighttime condition got nothing to do with keeping the bolt secured.

The reader can use the keywords I presented to do his own research and speculate all he want...But nighttime conditions got nothing to do with this. Something HUMAN caused is the culprit of this failure.

 

[Saint N sinnerr]

I heard a different story alltogather guys : -

India successfully test fires nuke-capable Agni-II in night trial


------> India test fires nuke-capable Agni-II in night trial <--------


Balasore (Orissa): India has successfully conducted its first night-trial of nuclear-capable Agni-II intermediate range ballistic missile from Wheeler island off Orissa coast.

It had been decided to test the nuclear capable Agni-II Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) for the first time during night, defence officials had said in Balasore on Sunday.

"Range integration work in Integrated Test Range (ITR) for the proposed trial has been completed and if final check-up in the sub-system of the missile is found flawless, the mission will be taken up tomorrow," the officials had said.

A special 'strategic forces team' raised by the Army conducted the trial with necessary logistic support by various ITR laboratories and Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) scientists.

The indigenous weapon is a two-stage solid propelled ballistic missile and has a weight of 17 tonnes and length of 20 metres. It can carry a payload of one tonne over a distance of 2,000 km.

Agni-II was developed by Advanced Systems Laboratory along with other DRDO laboratories and integrated with Bharat Dynamics Ltd, Hyderabad with the private sector participating in a big way in its production.

The missile is part of the Agni series which included Agni-I (700 km range) and Agni-III (3,500 km range). Agni-I was already inducted and Agni-III is in the process of induction, the officials added.

The missile was already inducted into the services and the strategic command network is in charge of the missiles operation.


other source --

First night trial of Agni-II conducted

First night trial of Agni-II conducted- Hindustan Times

India on Monday test-fired its nuclear capable Agni-II Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) during night for the first time from the Wheeler Island off Orissa coast.

The night trial, a major step towards making it fully operational in the Strategic Forces Command (SFC), was conducted from a rail mobile system in the launch complex-4 of Integrated Test Range (ITR) at about 7.50 pm, a defence source said soon after the versatile and indigenously developed surface-to-surface missile blasted off from the launch pad.

"It was a smooth launch. Data relating to various parameters of the missions' objectives are being analysed," said a defence official who witnessed the test launch.

The 2000-km plus Agni-II has already been inducted into service and today's test was carried out by the SFC of the Indian Army while logistic support was provided by various laboratories and personnel of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), sources said.

On the significance of conducting night trial, a DRDO scientist said since it is a training exercise for the end-users, one should be familiar with the operation in extreme conditions.

The entire trajectory of today's trial was tracked by a battery of sophisticated radars, telemetry observation stations, electro-optic instruments and naval ship located near the impact point in the down range of the Bay, the sources said.

Agni-II is a two stages, solid propelled ballistic missile and is 20-meter long. The launch weight of the missile is 17 tonnes.

It is capable of carrying a payload of 1000 kg over a distance of 2000 km.

Agni-II was developed by the Advanced Systems Laboratory along with other DRDO laboratories and integrated by Bharat Dynamics Limited, Hyderabad.

The missile is part of the Agni series, which includes Agni-I of 700 km range and Agni-III (3,500 km).

Agni-I was already inducted into service while Agni-III is in the process of induction.

The first trial of Agni-II was on April 11, 1999 and the last test was conducted on May 19, 2009 from the Wheeler Island, which was not "fully successful".

 

[arihant]

It was test fired. Later noticed that it was having some error in second stage seperation.

 

[booo]

The reader can use the keywords I presented to do his own research and speculate all he want...But nighttime conditions got nothing to do with this. Something HUMAN caused is the culprit of this failure.

But solid fuel rockets dont need any fitting etc... before firing, right? isnt it like erecting the missile and configuring computer for firing and press the button?

 

[gambit]

But solid fuel rockets dont need any fitting etc... before firing, right? isnt it like erecting the missile and configuring computer for firing and press the button?

Solid fuel are preferred for military uses because it is the simplest to maintain. That said...The issue here is the complexity of the rocket itself. The more stages the greater the need for events to occur at their appropriate time -- without flaws.

DRDO admits N-capable Agni-II failed night testing

Agni-II was test-fired from a mobile launcher intended to train the end-user, the Strategic Force Command of the Indian Army, to operate the missile in adverse conditions.

That right there should lead the interested reader to investigate the 'end user', meaning the human operators, not the hardware since we usually test our human created junks in the day time first.

Even though the missile took-off smoothly and reported no glitch in the first stage separation, the missile appeared to have failed to meet the desired results mid-way at the second stage separation, DRDO sources said.

What does that mean? Nothing at this point other than the first stage worked and separated as planned. But what does 'failed to meet desired results' mean? No one is saying anything. I used fuel and assorted hardwares as examples for the readers but really...Until the DRDO is willing to be more open, the only thing we can say is the nighttime condition got nothing to do with this, other than it is the sleeping time for most humans.

In theory and operations...Yes...All the operators have to do is program in the desired coordinates, or if the missile's computer is already programmed, release a few safety lock mechanisms, and 'push the button' or 'turn the keys' and missile is away. And it did worked -- up to the second stage. Something happened at the second stage prior to separation.

There is something in rocketry called 'thrust alignment', that is where the direction of the motors should be as much inline with the rocket body longitudinal axis as possible. The greater the deviation, or off axis thrust, the greater the tendency of the body to vibration, especially at higher velocity. Did something happened at the second stage separation that could create an off axis thrust situation? And at night? How improbable is that when apparently nothing similar was reported during the daytime firings?

Next is something called a 'gravity turn'...

Gravity turn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A gravity turn or zero-lift turn is a maneuver (see trajectory optimization) used in launching a spacecraft into, or descending from, an orbit around a celestial body such as a planet or a moon. This launch trajectory offers two main advantages over a thrust-controlled trajectory where the rocket's own thrust steers the vehicle. First, any thrust used to change the ship's direction does not accelerate the vehicle into orbit. This loss can be reduced by using gravity to steer the vehicle onto its desired trajectory. Second, and more importantly, because gravity does the steering during the initial ascent phase the vehicle can maintain low or even zero angle of attack. This minimizes transverse aerodynamic stress on the launch vehicle, allowing for a lighter launch vehicle.

To induce a gravity turn, or gravity assisted turn, thrust is reduced. But solid fuel motors do not have variable thrust mechanisms...

Throttle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Liquid rockets are throttled by controlling the pumps which send liquid fuel and oxidizer to the combustion chamber. Solid rockets are not controlable once the solid fuel is ignited.

That mean if the second stage was at the point where a gravity turn is executed, something happened that failed the turn. But apparently the gravity turn was fine in daytime testing. So...???

For the successful daytime firings, were they from mobile launchers? Yes. So for this nighttime test launch, was it by the same crew? We do not know. Why not? It would make sense to use the same crew to remove as much human variables as possible until the testing program can deal with the increased human variables. I am just speculating out of my butt here. There are too many unanswered questions but nighttime conditions got nothing to do with this failure.

 

[RPK]

Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) sources told The Hindu that some malfunction occurred after 60 seconds when the missile reached up to an altitude of 20 kms following which it nosedived. The fact that the first stage, a replica of the SLV-3 (first stage), functioned well showed it was robust. &#8220;Something went wrong after the first stage&#8221;, the sources added.
A few seconds of malfunctioning, probably in the control system, had affected the normal thrust and resulted in the missile losing its speed. The snag resulted in the high dynamic vehicle becoming uncontrollable subsequently. The problem might have occurred either during separation or ignition of the second stage.
DRDO constituted a special team to analyse the cause of failure. It might take at least 10 days to pinpoint the actual cause and come to a definite conclusion

The Hindu : News / National : Agni-II night trial ends in failure

 

[RPK]

Agni-II fails to make the mark at trial by night

Bhubhneswar: In a major setback for the Indian missile programme, the first night trial of the nuclear-capable Agni-II on Monday has failed to hit the target. It fell off after embarking on a mid-air journey for nearly 90 km from Wheeler Island in Bhadrak district off the Orissa coast, about 160 km from here. The missile was test fired at 7.50pm.

The army was testing the missile after sunset to demonstrate whether it could be fired whenever required, defense officials said. The surface-to-surface Agni II missile is capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to targets 2,000 km away, officials said.


Everyone associated with the missile were monitoring it from the Defence Research and Development Centre (DRDO) at Chandipur, about 100km from the testing site. They were relieved after Agni had a smooth take-off. The missile had three components. While the first two carried solid fuel, the last one carried the payload, which should have hit the target. After the take-off, there was a smooth first stage separation which gave the missile the necessary momentum to go ahead. But a problem cropped up in the second stage. Though the fuel started burning, the container carrying the fuel did not separate. It failed to give the necessary thrust and fell down on its own weight.
On being the reasons for the failure, a DRDO official said, "The missile might have failed to hit its target due to an operational problem. It has nothing to do with the time of the day." An inquiry has been started to find out why the mission failed.
"There could be a thousand reasons for the debacle," the DRDO official said. "We have to find out whether the material was at fault or whether there was a mistake on somebody's part. We have started investigating the case," he said.


Agni-II fails to make the mark at trial by night - dnaindia.com

 

[gambit]

Agni-II fails to make the mark at trial by night

Bhubhneswar: In a major setback for the Indian missile programme, the first night trial of the nuclear-capable Agni-II on Monday has failed to hit the target. It fell off after embarking on a mid-air journey for nearly 90 km from Wheeler Island in Bhadrak district off the Orissa coast, about 160 km from here. The missile was test fired at 7.50pm.

The army was testing the missile after sunset to demonstrate whether it could be fired whenever required, defense officials said. The surface-to-surface Agni II missile is capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to targets 2,000 km away, officials said.


Everyone associated with the missile were monitoring it from the Defence Research and Development Centre (DRDO) at Chandipur, about 100km from the testing site. They were relieved after Agni had a smooth take-off. The missile had three components. While the first two carried solid fuel, the last one carried the payload, which should have hit the target. After the take-off, there was a smooth first stage separation which gave the missile the necessary momentum to go ahead. But a problem cropped up in the second stage. Though the fuel started burning, the container carrying the fuel did not separate. It failed to give the necessary thrust and fell down on its own weight.
On being the reasons for the failure, a DRDO official said, "The missile might have failed to hit its target due to an operational problem. It has nothing to do with the time of the day." An inquiry has been started to find out why the mission failed.
"There could be a thousand reasons for the debacle," the DRDO official said. "We have to find out whether the material was at fault or whether there was a mistake on somebody's part. We have started investigating the case," he said.


Agni-II fails to make the mark at trial by night - dnaindia.com

Each propulsion stage in a multi-stage rocket become useless when their fuel is expended. So we have a fuel tank and its rocket motors doing nothing else than being dead weight. Discard it. In theory and application, the next stage should carry less weight. Any failure in separation and the entire vehicle will fail. Rockets are not designed to compensate for any flaws in their sub-systems. Either each component work as supposed to be or the entire vehicle fail. Missiles are essentially throw-away weapons. Each launch is a discard of the launch vehicle with no guarantee of success for the payload. Each launch is an 'investment' of sort that there is a hope that the weapon will hit the target, be it a test range or an actual enemy. So in this failure, India have just thrown away several millions. No return-on-investment (ROI) as the businessman would say.

 

[Iggy]

well not quite because it will make ways for further trials and improvements.

I never thought I can give you thanks for one of your posts

 

[ironman]

Solid fuel are preferred for military uses because it is the simplest to maintain. That said...The issue here is the complexity of the rocket itself. The more stages the greater the need for events to occur at their appropriate time -- without flaws.

DRDO admits N-capable Agni-II failed night testing

That right there should lead the interested reader to investigate the 'end user', meaning the human operators, not the hardware since we usually test our human created junks in the day time first.

What does that mean? Nothing at this point other than the first stage worked and separated as planned. But what does 'failed to meet desired results' mean? No one is saying anything. I used fuel and assorted hardwares as examples for the readers but really...Until the DRDO is willing to be more open, the only thing we can say is the nighttime condition got nothing to do with this, other than it is the sleeping time for most humans.

In theory and operations...Yes...All the operators have to do is program in the desired coordinates, or if the missile's computer is already programmed, release a few safety lock mechanisms, and 'push the button' or 'turn the keys' and missile is away. And it did worked -- up to the second stage. Something happened at the second stage prior to separation.

There is something in rocketry called 'thrust alignment', that is where the direction of the motors should be as much inline with the rocket body longitudinal axis as possible. The greater the deviation, or off axis thrust, the greater the tendency of the body to vibration, especially at higher velocity. Did something happened at the second stage separation that could create an off axis thrust situation? And at night? How improbable is that when apparently nothing similar was reported during the daytime firings?

Next is something called a 'gravity turn'...

Gravity turn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To induce a gravity turn, or gravity assisted turn, thrust is reduced. But solid fuel motors do not have variable thrust mechanisms...

Throttle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That mean if the second stage was at the point where a gravity turn is executed, something happened that failed the turn. But apparently the gravity turn was fine in daytime testing. So...???

For the successful daytime firings, were they from mobile launchers? Yes. So for this nighttime test launch, was it by the same crew? We do not know. Why not? It would make sense to use the same crew to remove as much human variables as possible until the testing program can deal with the increased human variables. I am just speculating out of my butt here. There are too many unanswered questions but nighttime conditions got nothing to do with this failure.

Gambit,all Agni series are using solid fuel in all stages.http://www.drdo.org/dpi/2009/oct09.pdf.

Modern solid fuel motors do have variable thrust mechanism.

Rocket engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More advanced solid rocket motors can not only be throttled but can be extinguished and then re-ignited by controlling the nozzle geometry or through the use of vent ports. Also, pulsed rocket motors which burn in segments and which can be ignited upon command are available.

For DRDO developed propellants please go through
New Page 2

 

[k7x]

this failed news is what i expected when Sing is having state dinner with Obama.



Do you expect this flash news in cnn..

Dr. Sing is having state dinner today in the whouse. meanwhile india succesfully tested a nuke missile ...


instead... now if it is a filed test.... it makes them think poor drdo can be removed from the black list for some time as they are not able to do any thing on their own. and some american companies can get $$$

 

[gambit]

Gambit,all Agni series are using solid fuel in all stages.http://www.drdo.org/dpi/2009/oct09.pdf.

Modern solid fuel motors do have variable thrust mechanism.

Rocket engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


For DRDO developed propellants please go through
New Page 2

Check your own wiki source...

Rocket engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Throttling

Rockets can be throttled by controlling the propellant rate \dot{m} (usually measured in kg/s or lb/s). In liquid rockets, the rate of flow of propellant is controlled, in solid rockets it is controlled by changing the area of propellant that is burning and this can be designed into the propellant grain and hence cannot be controlled in real-time.

Spaceflight :Solid Propellants for Missiles and Rockets

Solids do not require complicated engines or plumbing, but rely on sophisticated chemistry and strong casings to withstand the intense pressures that they generate. They can fire much faster, and accelerate more quickly at liftoff, but cannot be throttled in flight.

SPACE.com -- The Rockets' Red Glare

The largest solid-fuel rockets ever built are the two huge external motors (known as Solid Rocket Boosters, or SRBs). The two cylindrical SRBs, mounted on each side of the shuttle's large liquid-fuel tank, provide the bulk of the vehicles lifting power during launch. They provide over a million pounds of thrust each.

Once ignited, they burn with full fury until all the fuel is expended, with no throttle or other control possible.

Ramjet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In a solid fuel integrated rocket ramjet (SFIRR) the solid fuel is cast along the outer wall of the ramcombustor. In this case fuel injection is through ablation of the propellant by the hot compressed air from the intake(s). An aft mixer may be used to improve combustion efficiency. SFIRRs are preferred over LFRJs for some applications because of the simplicity of the fuel supply but only when the throttling requirements are minimal i.e. when variations in altitude or Mach number are limited.

Throttle controlability for solid fuel is limited because of the basic chemistry construction of the fuel itself. Solid fuel ramjet have the same operational constraints as solid fuel rockets. As your wiki source stated that it is possible to have some level of burn rate control for solid fuel grain, here are examples of how...

Rockets and Missiles - Solid Fuel Rockets

The shape into which the grain is formed is especially important in the operation of the solid-fuel rocket. The larger the surface area of grain exposed, the more rapidly the fuel will burn. One could construct a solid-fuel rocket by simply packing the rocket body with the fuel. However, simply boring a hole through the center of the fuel will change the rate at which the fuel will burn. One of the most common patterns now used is a star shape. In this pattern, the solid fuel is actually put together in a machine that has a somewhat complex cookie-cutter shape in its interior. When the fuel has been cured and removed from the machine, it looks like a cylinder of cookie dough with its center cut out in the shape of a seven-pointed star.

SOLID ROCKET BOOSTERS

The propellant mixture in each SRB motor consists of an ammonium perchlorate (oxidizer, 69.6 percent by weight), aluminum (fuel, 16 percent), iron oxide (a catalyst, 0.4 percent), a polymer (a binder that holds the mixture together, 12.04 percent), and an epoxy curing agent (1.96 percent). The propellant is an 11-point star- shaped perforation in the forward motor segment and a double- truncated- cone perforation in each of the aft segments and aft closure. This configuration provides high thrust at ignition and then reduces the thrust by approximately a third 50 seconds after lift-off to prevent overstressing the vehicle during maximum dynamic pressure.

Hybrid rocket motor solid fuel grain - Patent 5339625

While the wagon wheel grain configuration can provide an optimal ratio of exposed surface area to cross sectional area, the disadvantage of the wagon wheel design is that because of the slow burning rate of the fuel, the webs become very thin during the last portion of the burn and again, subject to separation. It has been attempted to reinforce the wagon wheel fuel grain by incorporating solid stiffening sheets in the spoke or web portions of the grain. This too has not proven satisfactory since the fuel grain tends to separate from the solid sheets during burning.

Space and its Exploration: How a Solid Propellant Rocket Works

Surface area is the amount of propellant exposed to interior combustion flames, existing in a direct relationship with thrust. An increase in surface area will increase thrust but will reduce burn-time since the propellant is being consumed at an accelerated rate. The optimal thrust is typically a constant one, which can be achieved by maintaining a constant surface area throughout the burn. Examples of constant surface area grain designs include: end burning, internal-core and outer-core burning, and internal star core burning (figure 3). Various shapes are used for the optimization of grain-thrust relationships since some rockets may require an initially high thrust component for takeoff while a lower thrust will suffice its post-launch regressive thrust requirements. Such a compromise has implications as seen, but it optimizes overall rocket performance. Complicated grain core patterns, in controlling the exposed surface area of the rocket's fuel, often have parts coated with a non-flammable plastic (such as cellulose acetate). This coat prevents internal combustion flames from igniting that portion of fuel, ignited only later when the burn reaches the fuel directly.

As we have seen...The motor's thrust output changes only when a certain amount of fuel grain with a certain shape that determine a specific volatility is exhausted. This is not true throttability.

Once a solid rocket is ignited it will consume the entirety of its fuel, without any option for shutoff or thrust adjustment.

That 'entirety' is either the total fuel load, or a section of the total fuel load with a specific fuel grain shape. The above is applicable UNTIL the combustion process is stopped by a barrier that distinguishes one fuel grain shape from the next, which is this section...

This coat prevents internal combustion flames from igniting that portion of fuel, ignited only later when the burn reaches the fuel directly.

Then when the flame itself reaches the new grain shape it will ignite a new combustion process with the new grain shape and we have a new thrust level -- lower or higher. So the more different fuel grain shapes available the more different the thrust levels but none of these levels are under the direct control of anyone or anything. So far we have seen solid fuel grain shapes such as star, cone and 'wagon wheel'. Have no doubt plenty of other shapes and their burn rates have been studied.

A 'rocket' is only a vehicle of sort. But a missile is a rocket with an intention, which is to deliver an explosive charge to destroy <something>, hopefully belonging to the enemy.

We could have a solid fuel missile with a grain shape optimized for the boost phase. Then the next grain shape with lesser thrust level so we can exploit the gravity turn while still maintaining velocity. Then when the missile is pointing down at the target, we can have a grain shape to deliver the highest possible thrust level to deliver the greatest possible kinetic energy to that target to destroy it. This is hypothetical, of course, but the idea of using multiple grain shapes to give us different thrust levels is applicable as we have seen from those sources above.

So the next question is whether this level of complexity for a missile, essentially throw-away weapon, is worth the investment. If it is worth the investment, then it is important that hardware reliability and operational readiness be thoroughly studied before deployment. For this two-stage solid fuel missile, the first stage contain a fuel grain shape optimized to deliver the highest possible thrust to reach altitude as quick as possible. After first stage separation, the second probably has a fuel grain shape for lower thrust level to maintain velocity during the gravity turn. Then when the warhead is finally on its own and on the descent path, it is gravity acceleration for the warhead to the ground target. Everything worked fine in daytime testings. Solid fuel is proven and is not affected by temperature gradients from day to night. So what happened at this night test?

 

[RPK]

The New Indian Express - Best of South India News, Entertainment, Cricket, Business, Lifestyle


BALASORE: The debacle of the first ever night trial of India&#8217;s nuclear capable Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM), Agni-II, has put the credibility of DRDO scientists at stake. The trial was conducted by the Army from the Wheeler Island off Orissa coast yesterday evening. Defence sources said the trial failed to meet many of the mission parameters.


For the second time within six months this indigenously built 2000-km plus range missile has failed to deliver desired results which raised doubts on the deployment of the missile, considered as one of the trusted missiles of the country.

&#8216;&#8217;Like the unsuccessful previous test on May 19, this time too the missile developed technical glitches at the stage separation phase. Although it crossed the first stage separation phase, because of inherent problem it had cumulative effects on other systems,&#8217;&#8217; an official said today.

The official indicated that the control and command system to the fins which provides aero-dynamic thrust to the vehicle was locked thereby plunging the missile into the sea. &#8220;During the May trial the missile started wandering midway before falling, but this time it directly plunged into the sea. In fact it was one of the worst trials ever,&#8221; he said.

&#8216;&#8217;Besides, the India-made inertial navigation system (INS) that guided the missile on its coordinated path by mid-way corrections also failed to provide the desired levels of performance. Significantly, during the developmental trials (all successful) foreign made INS used to be fitted into the missile,&#8217;&#8217; he pointed out.

During post-mission analysis (PMA) it was found that the missile had covered 97 km in nearly 41 seconds while on earlier occasion it had covered around 203 km in 127 seconds. But peculiarly the scientists reportedly claim to have done a great job by launching the missile during night.

Meanwhile, several defence analysts have criticised the DRDO for the recurring failures. &#8216;&#8217;It is high time the DRDO should come out with facts as to where the faults lie as it relates to the Indian defence and tax payers money.

The political class of the country will have to give a pertinent and plausible reply to the recurring failures of the missile programmes,&#8221; he added.

The establishments like ITR should be brought out of the clutches of the defence research and development laboratory (DRDL) and put under director general quality assurance (DGQA) for impartial evaluation of the technical data and thus minimising the chances of manoeuvring and fabrication of the PMA data.

 

[gambit]

The New Indian Express - Best of South India News, Entertainment, Cricket, Business, Lifestyle


BALASORE: The debacle of the first ever night trial of India’s nuclear capable Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM), Agni-II, has put the credibility of DRDO scientists at stake. The trial was conducted by the Army from the Wheeler Island off Orissa coast yesterday evening. Defence sources said the trial failed to meet many of the mission parameters.


For the second time within six months this indigenously built 2000-km plus range missile has failed to deliver desired results which raised doubts on the deployment of the missile, considered as one of the trusted missiles of the country.

‘’Like the unsuccessful previous test on May 19, this time too the missile developed technical glitches at the stage separation phase. Although it crossed the first stage separation phase, because of inherent problem it had cumulative effects on other systems,’’ an official said today.

The official indicated that the control and command system to the fins which provides aero-dynamic thrust to the vehicle was locked thereby plunging the missile into the sea. “During the May trial the missile started wandering midway before falling, but this time it directly plunged into the sea. In fact it was one of the worst trials ever,” he said.

‘’Besides, the India-made inertial navigation system (INS) that guided the missile on its coordinated path by mid-way corrections also failed to provide the desired levels of performance. Significantly, during the developmental trials (all successful) foreign made INS used to be fitted into the missile,’’ he pointed out.

During post-mission analysis (PMA) it was found that the missile had covered 97 km in nearly 41 seconds while on earlier occasion it had covered around 203 km in 127 seconds. But peculiarly the scientists reportedly claim to have done a great job by launching the missile during night.

Meanwhile, several defence analysts have criticised the DRDO for the recurring failures. ‘’It is high time the DRDO should come out with facts as to where the faults lie as it relates to the Indian defence and tax payers money.

The political class of the country will have to give a pertinent and plausible reply to the recurring failures of the missile programmes,” he added.

The establishments like ITR should be brought out of the clutches of the defence research and development laboratory (DRDL) and put under director general quality assurance (DGQA) for impartial evaluation of the technical data and thus minimising the chances of manoeuvring and fabrication of the PMA data.

Now that is very interesting, the bit about foreign made inertial nav systems versus an indigenously developed one. Who authorized the change? What were the test results for the indigenous system that would convince the authority that the two were parity? If this is true, it further support the suspicion that this failure is human caused, that someone made a decision for a system change with possibly inferior hardware.