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

[YeBeWarned]

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

Pakistan has HQ-16, LY-80 ... there is no mentioned of HQ-9 or made it public by Pakistani Forces

 

[BRAVO_]

these days there is a race of HGVs, after barahmos india is working with russia on barahmos 2 on the other hand china has already developed DF-ZF aka WU-14 so i would rather say to avoid such attack free of cost keep the enemy away beyond the distance of 300 km

 

[CriticalThought]

these days there is a race of HGVs, after barahmos india is working with russia on barahmos 2 on the other hand china has already developed DF-ZF aka WU-14 so i would rather say to avoid such attack free of cost keep the enemy away beyond the distance of 300 km

Easier said than done.

 

[Khafee]

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

You said it right: "aren't VERY maneuverable" and not "UN-maneuverable". They can still maneuver. Secondly, because a long range CM is capable of Supersonic / Hypersonic speed, does not mean they will be flying at full speed all the way. In order to effectively get to its target, it will vary it's speed to effectively maneuver.

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.

The range I had in mind was 5kms~ 10kms. At the range you mentioned, the chances of missing the incoming missile are even higher. It's a missile you are targeting, not a projectile flying straight like an arrow.

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

Obviously, it was given as an example as to why, and how a dumb rocket (as in without a seeker) could fail.

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

2nd Strike, 3rd Strike, MAD etc is a different story. We are discussing defeating an incoming missile at the moment, and how an MLRS system could be used as CIWS for it, as a last resort. So lets stay on topic.

In your opinion, what would be the probability of "100 dumb rockets, like you said" taking out a Brahmos category CM?

Easier said than done.

Well easy or not, it is not an option, and has to be done.


Please study this, and then tell tell me how would you design a CIWS

http://www.chinatopix.com/articles/...-launch-rocket-system-unleash-240-rockets.htm

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-semi-is-bristling-with-240-artillery-rockets

 

[CriticalThought]

You said it right: "aren't VERY maneuverable" and not "UN-maneuverable". They can still maneuver. Secondly, because a long range CM is capable of Supersonic / Hypersonic speed, does not mean they will be flying at full speed all the way. In order to effectively get to its target, it will vary it's speed to effectively maneuver.


The range I had in mind was 5kms~ 10kms. At the range you mentioned, the chances of missing the incoming missile are even higher. It's a missile you are targeting, not a projectile flying straight like an arrow.


Obviously, it was given as an example as to why, and how a dumb rocket (as in without a seeker) could fail.


2nd Strike, 3rd Strike, MAD etc is a different story. We are discussing defeating an incoming missile at the moment, and how an MLRS system could be used as CIWS for it, as a last resort. So lets stay on topic.

In your opinion, what would be the probability of "100 dumb rockets, like you said" taking out a Brahmos category CM?


Well easy or not, it is not an option, and has to be done.

Les keep the discussion to Brahmos which maintains Mach 3 after the booster stage. It's outer geometry doesn't show any maneuverability by design. The fins are more for stability rather than agility. The Indians can try to modify the design, but as it stands, it us not very maneuverable.

Second, even if it IS mabeuverable, we are using dumb AND cheap rockets. We can saturate the possible flight path with 500 rockets if needed. There won't be one MLRS, there will be a battery of them. We can increase the probability through sheer brute force.

Next, these missiles face a dilemma. Maneuverability bleeds energy necessarily due to drag. If it maneuvers at high speed, it looses to much fuel to keep that high speed. If it slows down, it becomes easier to shoot down.

http://www.chinatopix.com/articles/...-launch-rocket-system-unleash-240-rockets.htm

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-semi-is-bristling-with-240-artillery-rockets

The way I initially envisaged, it would be composed of a battery of classical 8 or 16 tube launchers on 360 degree rotatable gimbals to parallelize the launches.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Les keep the discussion to Brahmos which maintains Mach 3 after the booster stage. It's outer geometry doesn't show any maneuverability by design. The fins are more for stability rather than agility. The Indians can try to modify the design, but as it stands, it us not very maneuverable.

Second, even if it IS mabeuverable, we are using dumb AND cheap rockets. We can saturate the possible flight path with 500 rockets if needed. There won't be one MLRS, there will be a battery of them. We can increase the probability through sheer brute force.

Next, these missiles face a dilemma. Maneuverability bleeds energy necessarily due to drag. If it maneuvers at high speed, it looses to much fuel to keep that high speed. If it slows down, it becomes easier to shoot down.



The way I initially envisaged, it would be composed of a battery of classical 8 or 16 tube launchers on 360 degree rotatable gimbals to parallelize the launches.

sir you have a very silly idea, are you saying that we are raining MLRS for one Brahmos or multiple Brahmos, without seeker head MLRS is useless against guided missiles and has 99.9% chance is that ALL UNGUIDED ROCKET WILL MISS AGAINST BRAHMOS, and remember brahmos has a terminal evasive S maneuver to avoid interception

 

[CriticalThought]

sir you have a very silly idea, are you saying that we are raining MLRS for one Brahmos or multiple Brahmos, without seeker head MLRS is useless against guided missiles and has 99.9% chance is that ALL UNGUIDED ROCKET WILL MISS AGAINST BRAHMOS, and remember brahmos has a terminal evasive S maneuver to avoid interception

If you throw them out like marbles from a window then yes very little chance. If done properly it will be intercepted much before the S maneuver.

 

[Ultima Thule]

If you throw them out like marbles from a window then yes very little chance. If done properly it will be intercepted much before the S maneuver.

without seeker head impossible

 

[CriticalThought]

without seeker head impossible

Brahmos is not very manoeuvrable. Read the discussion above.

 

[Fawad alam]

1 question,
Is this possible to reduce warhead and add seeker in Nasr for air defence?
what if we put IR Seeker with laser proximity and launch 2 missiles from different angle to counter air born threats.

 

[CriticalThought]

1 question,
Is this possible to reduce warhead and add seeker in Nasr for air defence?
what if we put IR Seeker with laser proximity and launch 2 missiles from different angle to counter air born threats.

Nasr is only quasi ballistic and optimized for Surface to Surface. You will have to change the guidance system a lot, along with either a seeker and/or two way communication channel for mid course correction. And it will be costly.

 

[Khafee]

If you throw them out like marbles from a window then yes very little chance. If done properly it will be intercepted much before the S maneuver.

You do realize that the rocket will ultimately land some where, with or without neutralizing the threat. Can you calculate the safe area, required to set up MLRS CIWS?

Jobaria, can be rotated 360degrees. Each pod can saturate an area of a square km (or more, war head dependent), Range depends on the rockets being used i.e. TR122 or TR300.

 

[CriticalThought]

You do realize that the rocket will ultimately land some where, with or without neutralizing the threat. Can you calculate the safe area, required to set up MLRS CIWS?

Jobaria, can be rotated 360degrees. Each pod can saturate an area of a square km (or more, war head dependent), Range depends on the rockets being used i.e. TR122 or TR300.

For Jobaria it will have to be 16 to 40 kms. The use cases:

1. Armored columns defending against enemy or thrusting into enemy territory. Targets adjacent to border.

2. High value targets such as nuclear production facilities, POF, HIT, PAC Kamra, ports and harbors.

3. Cases where you are willing to accept collateral damage. A major dam, head quarters etc.

I envisage IAF using Brahmos to soften up our air defence. So this will mainly be a supporting system on the border working in tandem with other SAM and AD systems.

 

[Chhatrapati]

Brahmos is not very manoeuvrable. Read the discussion above.

The hard part is detection of a launch. Not interception. For instance forget Brahmos has radiation absorbant material. You can throw anything to stop a missile if it follows a traceable trajectory.

Secondly your discussion is based on Brahmos-A which is not yet inducted. Basically, you are shooting into a dark room.

 

[CriticalThought]

The hard part is detection of a launch. Not interception. For instance forget Brahmos has radiation absorbant material. You can throw anything to stop a missile if it follows a traceable trajectory.

Secondly your discussion is based on Brahmos-A which is not yet inducted. Basically, you are shooting into a dark room.

Or, we are getting ourselves prepared.

Nothing is invisible in a multi-spectral image. A lob of metal moving at Mach 3 through the atmosphere is impossible to hide.