Is the Barak 8 SAM a big mistake?

[Skull and Bones]

I do agree with your PoV in this matter but i feel that we should rather become self reliant in the long run when it comes to the aeronautical industry.We can't forever depend on the western countries or for that matter Russia to fulfill our need,we have to start somewhere making our own aircraft and turbojet engines and this LCA project has given us that opportunity.Just look how P.R.C. revolutionized it's aeronautical industry over the years.It started manufacturing reverse engineered Mig-21 50 years back and now it's Aeronautical bureaus like Chengdu are developing their own indigenous 5th generation aircraft.

I also support inducting 10-15 squadrons of LCA Tejas, but i won't support to leave a loop hole in defense just to make way for an indigenous product. Times are different now.

 

[nik141991]

Barak 8 is mach 4.5 not mach 2 ,idiots should stop quoting Wikipedia as a source,even barak 1 is more than mach 2

 

[C130]

it would of been better to compare Barak 8 to ESSM.

a supplement to Barak 1/8 for air defence might be needed in the future though.

SM-6 is over 300KM in range

 

[desimorty]

it would of been better to compare Barak 8 to ESSM.

a supplement to Barak 1/8 for air defence might be needed in the future though.

SM-6 is over 300KM in range

Agreed some missiles are a completely different weight category. If India ever wanted such a missile like the SM6 the would have to house it in the same VLS modules as Brahmos and Kubs and would require a much larger destroyers.

 

[kaku1]

Barak 8 is a piece of shit, and I find it hilarious that Indians continually try to defend the missile saying things like "barak 8 has high Gs" and "it is ok if barak 8 is only Mach 2, because speed doesn't matter when hitting a target head on".

These arguments are such bullshit.

Firstly, yes, barak 8 does have high G rating, but guess what? So does every other SAM! Aster 15/30 has a G rating grater than 60 at speeds of 4.5 Mach!! That is seriously high maneuverability and very impressive speed!

Barak 8 has a G rating of 80, higher than Aster, but remember, the faster a missile goes the less Gs it can pull. Because high Gs at high speeds increases the risk of rupturing and tearing the missile apart due to extreme levels of stress.

Therefore, the ONLY reason barak 8 has higher Gs than Aster, is because barak 8 goes less than 50% SLOWER than Aster if barak 8 traveled at speeds of Mach 4.5 like Aster, then Barak 8 would probably only have a maximum G rating of 30.

Secondly, SPEED MATTERS! That is why all modern Western, Russian and Chinese SAMs have very high Mach speeds.

Speed especially matters when performing Area Air defence when you have to protect ships spread over several nautical miles (like a carrier battle group). In these scenarios, you may have to perform cross interception and engage an enemy missile heading on a bearing of 45 degrees from your position many kms away. Barak is just too slow to cover the distance quick enough and intercept the target in time.

Barak 8 can only intercept targets heading directly towards it or heading towards ships very close to it.


In the real world, the ships in a Carrier battle group are dispersed several nautical miles from each other.

A carrier battle group only sails close together for photo ops.

What a great philosophy? You are not in navy? Are you? Thats why you talking so much foolish things.

One question, HQ-9 attain mach 4 just after launch or within 10 kms? Or for high altitude or high range target. And if you saying HQ-9 attain mach 4 within 10-20 Km, then no chance it can intercept cruise missile, it cant sustain high g turns, then what the use of speed?


Let me call a professional @gambit @Penguin , he give us a good impression of Speed V/S Maneuverability.

it would of been better to compare Barak 8 to ESSM.

a supplement to Barak 1/8 for air defence might be needed in the future though.

SM-6 is over 300KM in range

A good read, take a look at it. He explained Barak-8 role good.
Explained – Can The US Navy Can Shoot Down The Deadly BrahMos Missile? | Defencyclopedia

 

[The_Sidewinder]

Anything We buy becomes a mistake for Bangladeshi's, I wwonder why?????

Barak 8 is a damn good air defence missile. With sustainable G & terminal menuvering it will give any Fighter run for its life.

 

[TopCat]

India actually does not need anything with capabilities but with high aesthetic value to show off in the PDF forum or in the national parade.
Just read the latest GDP figure of India. LMAOF.

 

[kaku1]

Speed especially matters when performing Area Air defence when you have to protect ships spread over several nautical miles (like a carrier battle group). In these scenarios, you may have to perform cross interception and engage an enemy missile heading on a bearing of 45 degrees from your position many kms away. Barak is just too slow to cover the distance quick enough and intercept the target in time.

.

So, you thinking the ship that is 10-20 Km away from main CBG, air defenses of that ship is already neutralized and you assuming it not armed with its own Barak system?

Anything We buy becomes a mistake for Bangladeshi's, I wwonder why?????

Barak 8 is a damn good air defence missile. With sustainable G & terminal menuvering it will give any Fighter run for its life.

Dual pulse motor, you forget. And combination of 2 seekers.

 

[The_Sidewinder]

So, you thinking the ship that is 10-20 Km away from main CBG, air defenses of that ship is already neutralized and you assuming it not armed with its own Barak system?


Dual pulse motor, you forget. And combination of 2 seekers.

Ohhh thanks man. Thanks for adding that.

 

[Nilesh Singh]

So the Barak 8 is only designed to defend the Kolkata destroyers and maybe the carrier which will be very close by(<5km)?

If that why it was brought then I am fine with that.

Oh thanks man..................you are fine, Now we can all live happily

 

[gambit]

Barak 8 is a piece of shit, and I find it hilarious that Indians continually try to defend the missile saying things like "barak 8 has high Gs" and "it is ok if barak 8 is only Mach 2, because speed doesn't matter when hitting a target head on".

These arguments are such bullshit.

It is not bullshit.

In a head on collision, speed increases the level of damage to both bodies and if we are talking about car crashes, that would be very bad. But in area defense, the only reason why an interceptor SHOULD have high speed is because we want the interception to be as far away from us as possible, not because we want to use the higher energy of speed to create physical damages to the target. So in reality, it does not matter if the target is at Mach 4 and the interceptor is Mach 2. Upon collision, or even a glancing hit, there will be enough physical disruption to the target that aerodynamics alone will send the target off course.

Firstly, yes, barak 8 does have high G rating, but guess what? So does every other SAM! Aster 15/30 has a G rating grater than 60 at speeds of 4.5 Mach!! That is seriously high maneuverability and very impressive speed!

Barak 8 has a G rating of 80, higher than Aster, but remember, the faster a missile goes the less Gs it can pull. Because high Gs at high speeds increases the risk of rupturing and tearing the missile apart due to extreme levels of stress.

Therefore, the ONLY reason barak 8 has higher Gs than Aster, is because barak 8 goes less than 50% SLOWER than Aster if barak 8 traveled at speeds of Mach 4.5 like Aster, then Barak 8 would probably only have a maximum G rating of 30.

Here is where your attempt to downplay the Barak 8 failed...

The above is a simplified example of how a missile -- under the popular proportional navigation (PN) guidance scheme -- intercepts a target.

If the missile is under PN guidance, usually complex PN derivatives, we can safely assume the missile have active radar guidance, either of its own or from an external source, such as ground or airborne parent launcher. Regardless of which, the missile essentially receives active radar information FROM the target. What the missile does is take in the target's current position, and we are talking about micro-seconds increments of target spatial displacement, and target's speed, then calculate a guess of where the target is most likely to be, then the missile reorient itself to that guestimated spatial location.

Are you with me so far ? I hope so.

Assume the target is an attacking aircraft, which also assume the g-limit for this target to be 9 gs. So then why does ANY missile have double digits g-ratings ? The answer lies in the PN guidance algorithms. The missile does not know if the target is a 'dumb' cruise missile with a fixed flight profile or a 'smart' piloted aircraft that can and will unpredictably change the aircraft's spatial locations and how unpredictably fast that change can be. All the missile know (programmed) is that if there is a change in the target's spatial location, it has to recalculate an entire new guesstimate of where the target MIGHT be.

Combined proportional navigation law for interception of high-speed targets

A new proportional navigation (PN) guidance law, called combined proportional navigation (CPN), is proposed. The guidance law is designed to intercept high-speed targets, which is a common case for ballistic targets. The range of target-to-interceptor speed ratio during target interception is derived when guidance laws are applied in high-speed targets interception, and the effectiveness of negative navigation ratio in the PN-based guidance law is proven analytically in some lemmas.

Do note the authors' names which indicate their most likely national/ethnic origins. I do not want to you to accuse me of making up this 'PN' thingy and using only Western sources to back up my arguments.

Anyway...The quicker the missile can reorient itself, the quicker it can recalculate a new interception point. Hence the g-rating. The higher g-rating also hinted at high sophistication of the interceptor's flight control system. Think of how you steer your car, or in your case a bicycle since you are in China. Once you have reoriented, you must stop the steering input in order for you to continue with your new heading. No different for the missile, except for the missile, its flight control system must be robust enough to stop the missile's reorientation speed when its brain calculated a new interception point.

Now, all YOU have to do is imagine the unpredictability of an attacking aircraft in terms of altitude and airspeed changes over time and you will realize that against an incoming attacker, the higher g-rating of a missile is a definite plus over its max speed. It is unlikely that a ship will tail chase an aircraft where speed does matter. If we are talking about a ship, a combat scenario will most likely involve a head on interception or some degree of off-angle intercept like the illustration above. It does not mean speed is unimportant. It is very important because we still want to intercept the target as far away from us as possible. But since the target is approaching our position, and can maneuver unpredictably, maybe missile maneuverability should have a higher priority.

 

[$@rJen]

LOL.

Imagine a Kolkata class destroyer has just picked up a Mach 3 cruise missile heading towards another ship 20km away at 90 degress to it.

How on earth is a Mach 2 missile going to intercept in time as it will run out of time before the Mach 3 cruise missile hits the other ship?

please let me bring a screw driver to tighten the screws in your brain.... What the hell is wrong with you???

Kolkata is going to be near y the carrier , if it detects mach 3 missile , barak 8 wil be fired and take thhe AshM heads on... interceptors doesn't need to chase after the target. the target is coming to the Interceptors way. and Barak 8's raction time is very fast, it'll break any missile coming its way..

The HQ-9 was put in a competitive tender against S-300 in Turkey and beat it.

LoL... Russia an Arch enemy of NATO wanted to sale to Nato, its one of the main system that was designed to protect itself from NATO ???

 

[Capt.Popeye]

@gambit; thanks for explaining. But whether that explanation could knock some sense into some dense 'kopfs' is anybody's guess.....

 

[Capt.Popeye]

@Horus @IceCold @Zarvan @Umair Nawaz can beat it anytime @Donatello your expert comments are needed here.You are the one who can reverse law of physics.

Oh.... so many guys can defy the Laws of Physics here?
We seem to be in some exalted company of Scientists!

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Don't take it lightly.They can prove that earth is flat according to law of physics they have studied.They will prove it with videos and reference will be cleric from KSA.

Oh.... that is nice then. More power to them, great scientific minds that they may be!