MLRS - Effective counter to SU-30MKI + Brahmos combination

[amardeep mishra]

In terms of technical complexities yes both are non comparable but in terms of destruction power cm400akg is more devastating ... first of all cm400 akg being air launched provides flexiblity of launch timing and profile, it speed is even greater than brahmos and at the teeminal phase it can reach upto 5 mach depending on flight profile and launch altitude
..

Secondly its attack profile is more devastating as it hit from the top of the deck and put a hole in the hull of big ships ...

Last but not the least terminal guidance of cm400akg is tv/ir guidance in addition to passive radar which means it is a smart missile designed to hit the target at the most vulnerable place which gives it a complete edge over brahmos which is radar guided and is not only subject to ECM counter measures but also not smart to hit the ship at the vulnerable places like bottom part of the hull

Hi @The Accountant
First of all I do not think CM400 is either a TV/IR guided system,for if it was, we could see either a camera or Infra red seeker in the nose. The only possibility left is then active radar guidance--which is de facto the most widely used sensor for AshM missiles.

Let me make things a bit easier for you--
1) The massive weight difference between Brahmos and CM400(2.5T(for air launched version) vs 750Kg) and propulsion scheme(liquid ramjet vs solid propulsion) implies that former has not only higher velocity but also greater range(600kms(after MTCR modifications) vs 100-200kms). Also note air launched brahmos is now a reality, you can go through a couple of research seminar videos of Aero India-2017 to validate the information.
2) In order for PN to take a shot, they would have to come at least 150-200km or so close to the carrier, and in order to impart as much velocity as possible to the missile, the launching platform would have to launch it at the highest possible altitude. Now, detecting an aircraft and a missile high up in sky is far more easier than detecting a low flying missile.
3) CM400 will be easily picked off by ELTA-2248 aboard Kolkatas. It will be intercepted much before it could initiate it's terminal sprint. And since it is a steep dive missile, it would have to be pretty close to the carrier in order to initiate it's steep dive(probably within 5-10kms downrange). The trick is to intercept the CM400 when it is flying high at normal velocities and Barak-8(70+kms of interception range) and Barak-8ER(in very near future with a range of 110+kms) will have no problem taking this missile down at range of around 70kms when the Cm400 would be flying like any other solid fueled missile. Just because the task to intercept CM400 will become difficult in the terminal sprint, At least 2 or more Barak-8s would be fired at each CM400 to take it down much much before it could even initiate it's terminal sprint.

Comparing it against Brahmos is like comparing apples to oranges. A missile should be compared with another missile using similar propulsion and guidance schematic.

 

[The Accountant]

Hi @The Accountant
First of all I do not think CM400 is either a TV/IR guided system,for if it was, we could see either a camera or Infra red seeker in the nose. The only possibility left is then active radar guidance--which is de facto the most widely used sensor for AshM missiles.
View attachment 406873
Let me make things a bit easier for you--

It is dual guided i.e. TV/IR + Radar ... You can do some research on it ...

Hi @The Accountant
1) The massive weight difference between Brahmos and CM400(2.5T(for air launched version) vs 750Kg) and propulsion scheme(liquid ramjet vs solid propulsion) implies that former has not only higher velocity but also greater range(600kms(after MTCR modifications) vs 100-200kms). Also note air launched brahmos is now a reality, you can go through a couple of research seminar videos of Aero India-2017 to validate the information.

I think by velocity you meant momentum ... Yes Brahmos is heavy and has more destruction impact ubt do you know the max speed CM400AKG can achieve is Mach 5 depending on the flight profile... So for bigger targets which needs bigger impact less weight will be compensated by speed ...

Hi @The Accountant
2) In order for PN to take a shot, they would have to come at least 150-200km or so close to the carrier, and in order to impart as much velocity as possible to the missile, the launching platform would have to launch it at the highest possible altitude. Now, detecting an aircraft and a missile high up in sky is far more easier than detecting a low flying missile.

For low flight and terror hugging mode we have Raad antiship version ... Same is the problem with Brahmos, in terror hugging mode its max range is aroung 100km hence in terror hugging mode it has to be launched somewhere from 90 to 80 km and again with high infra red signature and active radar it will never remain hidden ...

On the contrary CM400 is designed to be launch from height so that attacking aircrafts can remain outside the danger range of SAM system. A size of airfraft or destroyer is visible from maximum range of missile to the fighter so why would they come to 150Km but even if they come then they will be away from SAM ...

The higher the launch altitutde the more dangerous the missile is as it can attain more speed and at the terminal phase it can achieve max designed speed of Mach 5 with the help of solid fuel motor and ballistic trajectory ... So this missile is sort of ballistic missile with manuvering capabilities

Hi @The Accountant
3) CM400 will be easily picked off by ELTA-2248 aboard Kolkatas. It will be intercepted much before it could initiate it's terminal sprint. And since it is a steep dive missile, it would have to be pretty close to the carrier in order to initiate it's steep dive(probably within 5-10kms downrange). The trick is to intercept the CM400 when it is flying high at normal velocities and Barak-8(70+kms of interception range) and Barak-8ER(in very near future with a range of 110+kms) will have no problem taking this missile down at range of around 70kms when the Cm400 would be flying like any other solid fueled missile. Just because the task to intercept CM400 will become difficult in the terminal sprint, At least 2 or more Barak-8s would be fired at each CM400 to take it down much much before it could even initiate it's terminal sprint.
View attachment 406882

Partially agreed but you are making a false assumption that before final dive missile is at 5 km and it is easy to take on missile at that level ... First of all missile will take the steep dive at a greater range as it will be travelling at a certain height therefore the distance will be much higher than 5km ... Secondly through out the flight CM400AKG will remain supersonic which is prime characteristic of any solid fuel motor ... So it will be somewhere around mach 3 therefore Barak 8 will have very less time to intercept the missile before terminal phase and at terminal phase with manuvering course due to active guidance and varying accelration it will be near to impossible by Barack 8 to intercept the missile ...

Barack 8 is not designed to take on near ballistic missile with terminal velocity of Mach 5 ... Is it ?

Hi @The Accountant
Comparing it against Brahmos is like comparing apples to oranges. A missile should be compared with another missile using similar propulsion and guidance schematic.

Agreed but we are not comparing technical aspect of both missiles and I agree Brahmos is technically more sophisticated but I am just giving the answere of what Pakistan options are for Indian agression and it is not that only you can attack on our ships but your ship has also to fear from us ...

Regarding technical superirotiy of Brahmos engine I would say if we can achieve better results with less cost than who cares ... CM400AKG speed is faster .. Its infrared signatures are lower (as it engines keep on switching on and off) and its guidance and snsor suite are much better so CM400AKG is clear winner here ...

 

[amardeep mishra]

It is dual guided i.e. TV/IR + Radar ... You can do some research on it ...

Hi @The Accountant
Maybe I can not notice a camera/IIR seeker, can you point it out for me? I would be really obliged! I just hope you know that there "exists" a camera/IR seeker in TV/IR guided missiles.

Yes Brahmos is heavy and has more destruction impact ubt do you know the max speed CM400AKG can achieve is Mach 5 depending on the flight profile

As far as I have read the max velocity that can be attained by CM400 is 4mach, however you can correct me from "official" sources.

For low flight and terror hugging mode we have Raad antiship version ... Same is the problem with Brahmos, in terror hugging mode its max range is aroung 100km hence in terror hugging mode it has to be launched somewhere from 90 to 80 km and again with high infra red signature and active radar it will never remain hidden ...

There isnt any "anti-shipping" variant of Ra'ad, again an official source from PN or the design agency would suffice. Also Brahmos generally flies in what is known as "Lo-Hi-Lo" mode, which means, it is first flying low then it goes up to the max possible altitude and then comes down to almost sea hugging mode some 30-40kms before the target. Now most of the radars cant detect any sea-skimming missiles beyond 15-20kms of range(Even the much touted and sophisticated MFSTAR AESA onboard Kolkatas cant detect a sea skimming missile for more than 25-30kms!). Kindly read about "detection of low flying objects". For detecting a low flying objects like cruise missile you'd constantly need a radar high up in sky working in "look down" mode. Thats where IN's Kamov-31 come into picture-- they are the mini-awacs for carrier battle group. They can detect a low flying target 120-150kms away.

Partially agreed but you are making a false assumption that before final dive missile is at 5 km and it is easy to take on missile at that level ... First of all missile will take the steep dive at a greater range as it will be travelling at a certain height therefore the distance will be much higher than 5km ... Secondly through out the flight CM400AKG will remain supersonic which is prime characteristic of any solid fuel motor ... So it will be somewhere around mach 3 therefore Barak 8 will have very less time to intercept the missile before terminal phase and at terminal phase with manuvering course due to active guidance and varying accelration it will be near to impossible by Barack 8 to intercept the missile ...

Barack 8 is not designed to take on near ballistic missile with terminal velocity of Mach 5 ... Is it ?

The farther the missile from the target, less steep will be it's descent and hence slower will be the velocity buildup, hence to maximize the velocity buildup(which is the primary advantage of missiles like Cm400) they would have to be as steep as possible. Also solid fuels can burn either as booster or sustainer. Kindly refer to their thrust graphs. Hence in order to make the decent as steep as possible, the distance at which it initiates a dive should be as close to the target as possible. I am afraid you missed my point, my point was, let me repeat-
Before the CM400 can initiate a dive, it would be traveling at speeds lesser than 3Machs, it is only in steep dive phase that it exceeds 3Machs. And since it is flying way up in air, detection wouldnt be a problem as both the missile and the launching platform will be picked up by the AESA radar onboard kolkatas at more than 350kms. And Barak-8/8ER would be fired at the CM400 at an optimal time to intercept it way way before it can enter the steep dive phase. Kindly note with barak-8ER(propulsion of which was designed by DRDL hyderabad) the interception envelope will touch 110kms. The main objective here is to intercept the missile way before it could enter the steep dive phase and thats where the range of Barak-8/8ER comes into picture.
Yes Barak 8 has limited capability to intercept even mach 5 targets "inside atmosphere". However it will loose itz effectiveness in near space conditions.

Agreed but we are not comparing technical aspect of both missiles and I agree Brahmos is technically more sophisticated but I am just giving the answere of what Pakistan options are for Indian agression and it is not that only you can attack on our ships but your ship has also to fear from us ...

Regarding technical superirotiy of Brahmos engine I would say if we can achieve better results with less cost than who cares ... CM400AKG speed is faster .. Its infrared signatures are lower (as it engines keep on switching on and off) and its guidance and snsor suite are much better so CM400AKG is clear winner here ...

Thats what you think my dear friend, No one in IN takes CM400 seriously, believe me, based on my experience I would fear a low flying missile much more than a steep dive. CM400 speed is "faster" only in terminal sprint.
Now would you kindly explain your reasoning for "better guidance scheme and sensor suite"? At present both Brahmos and CM400 use active radar seeker. Also I do not think you know that the primary seeker of brahmos is going to be based on electronically scanned array in near future, making it much harder to jam. The guidance schematic in both the missiles is most likely going to be either PN or augmented PN algorithms. I have designed such control algorithms for UAVs and missiles and implemented it on autopilots. A true comparison would have been when China had delivered any air launched liquid ramjet based Anti Ship missile to PN.

 

[CriticalThought]

@amardeep mishra @The Accountant the thread is about using MLRS as CIWS to defend HVTs on land.

 

[The Accountant]

@amardeep mishra @The Accountant the thread is about using MLRS as CIWS to defend HVTs on land.

lolzzz sir thora sa humien kush honey do,, It was an informative and interesting debate ...

 

[CriticalThought]

lolzzz sir thora sa humien kush honey do,, It was an informative and interesting debate ...

That's true! Now it would be awesome if u could research and find out which system can counter Brahmos in the naval theatre, is it available to us, if not what is the closest approximation we can get and modify? Can we fool Brahmos' navigation or other electronic systems? Does it use GPS in the terminal phase?

 

[CriticalThought]

In the whole world It's only happens in Pakistan than an MLRS shoots down a supersonic & hypersonic missile..

One more coincidence that Only Chinese ballistic missiles has the capability to hit a 50 kmph moving ship in the ocean. (i would only ask them to improve the accuracy of their land based missiles first).

If you have nothing to contribute, then please refrain from degrading the quality of the thread. Thank you.

 

[Khafee]

India's mainstay offensive weapon against Pakistan's frontline positions and aerial defense infrastructure comprises a combination of SU-30 MKI paired with a hypersonic Brahmos missile.

The age old dilemma of hypersonic missiles is that of speed vs. manoeuvrability. At hypersonic speeds, the missile does not have the luxury of deviating drastically from final trajectory if it is to have a reasonable level of accuracy. Classically, counter-measures have exploited this to propose relatively simple, linear attack patterns.

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.1990-3379


Here, we propose that MLRS type weapons are a very effective platform for the sequential launch of projectiles against incoming hypersonic threats such as Brahmos.

It is then significant, that the recent yearbook by MoDP lists MLRS as one of the systems in which Pakistan seeks to build indigenous capability.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pakistan-to-develop-advanced-mlrs.493376/

Specifically,

b. Production and indigenous development of Rockets MLRS
d. Indigenous development of advanced MLRS

The indigenous production of guided MLRS rockets would be a significant step for Pakistan. Although it is tactically advantageous in its own right, but when seen in the light of defending against Brahmos, such a project takes on a vital importance for national security. Coupled with shoot and scoot type of launch vehicles, these systems would be a potent response to Brahmos, and could spell significant headaches for Indian plans in the future.

We end this article on a forward looking note. Once railgun technology matures to a point that it can be deployed easily on land based systems, it should be expected that Pakistan will invest in procuring this technology for its defence needs. Crucial projects to watch in this regard would be the Turkish and Chinese railgun systems that are currently under development.

How will MLRS, counter an cruise missile?

An air defence system, CIWS system, A2A missile - I can understand, but MLRS?

I have been through this thread, and do not understand, kindly educate me.

Thank You

 

[Safriz]

Pakistan now has HQ-9 which can hit SU-30 flying at maximum altitude.

 

[Khafee]

Pakistan now has HQ-9 which can hit SU-30 flying at maximum altitude.

HQ9 is an air defence system, so it is understandable that it can target high alt jets, as well as low alt CM's. But what baffles me, is how can an MLRS do that.

 

[CriticalThought]

How will MLRS, counter an cruise missile?

An air defence system, CIWS system, A2A missile - I can understand, but MLRS?

I have been through this thread, and do not understand, kindly educate me.

Thank You

The idea is to use MLRS as a CIWS.

Per the research paper cited above, the main weakness of super/hypersonic missiles is the inability for large corrections if they go off course. And what is required to cause deviation is an opposing momentum. The OP uses very rough calculations to show that about 100 rockets are enough to completely counter the momentum. The key strength is using very cheap rockets to counter the very expensive Brahmis. Also, being a CIWS, it should be considered the last line of defence. Finally, fundamental components such as radar to identify incoming missile are left undiscussed.

NOTE: We are using cheap brute force approach as a last line of defence.

 

[Safriz]

The idea is to use MLRS as a CIWS.

Per the research paper cited above, the main weakness of super/hypersonic missiles is the inability for large corrections if they go off course. And what is required to cause deviation is an opposing momentum. The OP uses very rough calculations to show that about 100 rockets are enough to completely counter the momentum. The key strength is using very cheap rockets to counter the very expensive Brahmis. Also, being a CIWS, it should be considered the last line of defence. Finally, fundamental components such as radar to identify incoming missile are left undiscussed.

NOTE: We are using cheap brute force approach as a last line of defence.

A bit far fetched Idea
Instead we should use Abdali with advanced seeker

 

[CriticalThought]

A bit far fetched Idea
Instead we should use Abdali with advanced seeker

Many small and cheap rockets leave room for error. The idea is to have a very rudimentary control system launching dymb rockets. High value assets such as Abdali are best utilized elsewhere.

 

[Khafee]

The idea is to use MLRS as a CIWS.

Per the research paper cited above, the main weakness of super/hypersonic missiles is the inability for large corrections if they go off course. And what is required to cause deviation is an opposing momentum. The OP uses very rough calculations to show that about 100 rockets are enough to completely counter the momentum. The key strength is using very cheap rockets to counter the very expensive Brahmis. Also, being a CIWS, it should be considered the last line of defence. Finally, fundamental components such as radar to identify incoming missile are left undiscussed.

NOTE: We are using cheap brute force approach as a last line of defence.

To defeat an incoming missile, CM or otherwise, you will need a projectile that can home in on it. AND for that either a radar seeker, or an IR seeker would be required. Plus a warhead big enough to damage / destroy the incoming missile.

Land based rockets are dumb projectiles, that follows a trajectory, based upon their angle of elevation, to hit a target. Smarter ones with GPS or Laser guidance, use GPS Coordinates, or a Laser beam to guide them to their target. e.g. Hydra 70 becoming APKWS.

Theoretically MLRS could work, but it would need to be linked to a radar system, and the MLRS system would have limited range against it. Should the missile be carrying a big enough war head , it would still cause a lot of damage., depending on it's distance from the target. Against an NBC warhead, it would be more or less useless.

This is why all major anti missile systems - Thaad, Patriot, Aster 30, HQ9, S300, S400 track the incoming missile well in advance of the max range of their defensive missile. So as to neutralize it, at the max possible range.

A flaw of the Phalanx CIWS was exactly this against missiles. It shot bullets in circular pattern creating a defensive wall of bullets, which could be avoided should the incoming missile decided to change angles, before hitting it's target. Hence we see the newer RIM116 systems, which can take incoming missiles on, even if the missile is flying away from the target (as in switchback).

 

[CriticalThought]

To defeat an incoming missile, CM or otherwise, you will need a projectile that can home in on it. AND for that either a radar seeker, or an IR seeker would be required. Plus a warhead big enough to damage / destroy the incoming missile.

Land based rockets are dumb projectiles, that follows a trajectory, based upon their angle of elevation, to hit a target. Smarter ones with GPS or Laser guidance, use GPS Coordinates, or a Laser beam to guide them to their target. e.g. Hydra 70 becoming APKWS.

Theoretically MLRS could work, but it would need to be linked to a radar system, and the MLRS system would have limited range against it. Should the missile be carrying a big enough war head , it would still cause a lot of damage., depending on it's distance from the target. Against an NBC warhead, it would be more or less useless.

This is why all major anti missile systems - Thaad, Patriot, Aster 30, HQ9, S300, S400 track the incoming missile well in advance of the max range of their defensive missile. So as to neutralize it, at the max possible range.

A flaw of the Phalanx CIWS was exactly this against missiles. It shot bullets in circular pattern creating a defensive wall of bullets, which could be avoided should the incoming missile decided to change angles, before hitting it's target. Hence we see the newer RIM116 systems, which can take incoming missiles on, even if the missile is flying away from the target (as in switchback).

1. Super/hypersonic missiles aren't very maneuverable.

2. MLRS should be able to engage at at a range of 20-40 kms. It's the CIWS of missile defence, not CIWS per se.

3. The power of rockets is much more than bullets.

4. If the Indians are foolish enough to go nuclear, they have bigger things to worry about than MLRS.