Shourya hypersonic missile launch successful

[Firemaster]

Was thinking same. But I think they have done it already. None of the K-15 tests were made public. If not done, than also it will not be public.

My three wishes,


1) PDV test
2) K-15 from Arihant video
3) Agni-V MIRV test

and

Where

And Because none of k-15 test was made public so some of them may be K-4 test. I Hope So.
Fingers Crossed.

 

[Kinetic]

Where

And Because none of k-15 test was made public so some of them may be K-4 test. I Hope So.
Fingers Crossed.

Bro actually K-4 have been tested atleast once. Here is some update about K-4 from the Hindu.


Next goal K-4 SLBM

The Hindu : Sci-Tech / Science : India successfully test-fires Shourya missile

With Shourya ready for production and its under-water cousin, K-15, already under production, the DRDO's sights are set on K-4 missile, which will be launched from a submarine. After K-4 is launched under water, it will knife up to the surface and can target places 3,000 km away. “Various systems of K-4 are under development,” a DRDO official said.

 

[perplexed]

Where

And Because none of k-15 test was made public so some of them may be K-4 test. I Hope So.
Fingers Crossed.

Bhai mere range toh atleast check karenge na ? If it doesnot fly its complete range then how can that be called a successful test of K4? In that case it will be reduced to a prototype test for onboard computers and guidance systems which in other words will be tantamount to K15 test. I think we haven't achieved true success of that scale(k4) but surely DRDO is going great guns towards achieving that

 

[kingdurgaking]

4) Shaurya is already highly maneuverable, while ships move relatively slow. If we can have a highly agile anti-ballistic missile like AAD which needs to be more correct than milliseconds than it can. We have done it through Brahmos (Mach 3), we are planning to do it with Brahmos-2 (Mach 7) than we can do it with Shaurya too.

You have some misinterpretation .... Attacking lands is not equal to attacking ships.. If land has a CEP of about 30 m that is fine.. the impact will create some destruction .. but in water it is not the case... the CEP has to be on the target or immediately next to the ship so that the ship will be damaged.. CEP > 5 m will not give any major destruction to the ship because the water itself will suppress some impact.. and the ship will survive... there fore Ship attack missile has to on the target.. Shaurya should have a pin point accuracy which it is not designed for...

 

[kingdurgaking]

self delete

 

[shrivatsa]

Bro actually K-4 have been tested atleast once. Here is some update about K-4 from the Hindu.


Next goal K-4 SLBM

The Hindu : Sci-Tech / Science : India successfully test-fires Shourya missile

With Shourya ready for production and its under-water cousin, K-15, already under production, the DRDO's sights are set on K-4 missile, which will be launched from a submarine. After K-4 is launched under water, it will knife up to the surface and can target places 3,000 km away. “Various systems of K-4 are under development,” a DRDO official said.

Is shourya powered throughout its flight regime, if yes do you have link to corroborate that?

 

[acetophenol]

congratugations to all the ones behind this project.

proud to be an indian!

 

[shfgfa]

It should be more than 1200 km with 500 kg payload. Another thing is if launched like a ballistic missile it will go even further but weight may increase slightly.

its range is i think b/w 750- 1900 km.
i checked on wiki and a couple of more sources.

 

[Vasily Zaytsev]

Is shourya powered throughout its flight regime, if yes do you have link to corroborate that?

then how come the missile travels the distance of 700km at an altitude of 40 km horizontally and then on the target it steep dives almost doing a 90 degrees turn. and also the missile is rotated about its axis during its flight to enable uniform heat decipation on its surface because tremendous heat is generated on the surface since it is trveling at hypersonic speed all along through the atmosphere.

 

[gambit]

You have some misinterpretation .... Attacking lands is not equal to attacking ships.. If land has a CEP of about 30 m that is fine.. the impact will create some destruction .. but in water it is not the case... the CEP has to be on the target or immediately next to the ship so that the ship will be damaged.. CEP > 5 m will not give any major destruction to the ship because the water itself will suppress some impact.. and the ship will survive... there fore Ship attack missile has to on the target.. Shaurya should have a pin point accuracy which it is not designed for...

Excellent. Here is something else to consider...

The greater the CEP figure, the more likely that the warhead will an air burst type. The burst altitude differs, of course, but it is not that difficult to reason out why: Explosions, like electricity or anything under pressure, will ALWAYS seek out the path of least resistance. So why do any damage to dirt? Is that your intention? An air burst will 'radiate' the concussive force in all direction and if there are any material propelled by that force, an air burst will make better use of those material than if those fragments were delivered at ground level.

A 500 lbs bomb or 230 kg will produce a fragmentation human lethal radius out to about 30 meters. Against equipment is a different issue but it is reasonable to cut that figure in half where the equipment is rendered either incapable or severe reduction of contributing to the war effort.

The lower CEP figure will reduce the explosive load needed to create the same level of physical damages to both hard and soft targets. That is why the US is moving towards the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) type. This will also lower the air burst altitude to take maximum effects of the concussive force and fragments.

Here is something about naval warfare that most people do not realize: If a land structure like a building is damaged, the human warfighters and their equipment can move to another structure/location and continue to prosecute the war. But over water, if the ship is damaged, the human warfighters are either immobilized or their contributorship to the war effort is severely curtailed. They are trapped. That is why it is better to cripple a ship than to sink it. Crippling it takes far less effort and resources. So if you have a very capable warhead with a CEP figure of less then 5 meters, an air burst of 5 meters will do serious damages to the enemy.

 

[Safriz]

^^^may be thats why most nations stick to smaller less complicated subsonic cruise missiles for naval warfare?
sinking the ship isnt that important.

 

[Vibs]

Excellent. Here is something else to consider...

The greater the CEP figure, the more likely that the warhead will an air burst type. The burst altitude differs, of course, but it is not that difficult to reason out why: Explosions, like electricity or anything under pressure, will ALWAYS seek out the path of least resistance. So why do any damage to dirt? Is that your intention? An air burst will 'radiate' the concussive force in all direction and if there are any material propelled by that force, an air burst will make better use of those material than if those fragments were delivered at ground level.

A 500 lbs bomb or 230 kg will produce a fragmentation human lethal radius out to about 30 meters. Against equipment is a different issue but it is reasonable to cut that figure in half where the equipment is rendered either incapable or severe reduction of contributing to the war effort.

The lower CEP figure will reduce the explosive load needed to create the same level of physical damages to both hard and soft targets. That is why the US is moving towards the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) type. This will also lower the air burst altitude to take maximum effects of the concussive force and fragments.

Here is something about naval warfare that most people do not realize: If a land structure like a building is damaged, the human warfighters and their equipment can move to another structure/location and continue to prosecute the war. But over water, if the ship is damaged, the human warfighters are either immobilized or their contributorship to the war effort is severely curtailed. They are trapped. That is why it is better to cripple a ship than to sink it. Crippling it takes far less effort and resources. So if you have a very capable warhead with a CEP figure of less then 5 meters, an air burst of 5 meters will do serious damages to the enemy.

By crippling do you mean crippling the engines or the deck? Air burst types will do minimal damage to the engine and depends on doing damage to the control room. Sea Skimming missiles like the Bramhos are designed to hit the ship side on and penetrate the hull, truly crippling the ship.

As far as Shourya is concerned, it may be designed to target something of a considerable size in naval warfare. But I suspect that role will go to the hypersonic Bramhos 2.

 

[gambit]

^^^may be thats why most nations stick to smaller less complicated subsonic cruise missiles for naval warfare?
sinking the ship isnt that important.

Actually...Never has. Here is the reason why sinking a ship is falsely perceived as necessary by the public: Weapons inaccuracy.

Because of weapons inaccuracy it once took so much bombs and sorties and human lives to fight that sinking a ship became somewhat expected out of the sheer amount of ordnance delivered.

Look at this example...

In the old days, it would have required dozens of aircrafts over several missions to deny an airfield its capability. But today, at least for US, it took one aircraft, one mission, and 6 bombs to create the same result. So why not do the same for a ship? Look at the Exocet and what it did.

 

[gambit]

By crippling do you mean crippling the engines or the deck? Air burst types will do minimal damage to the engine and depends on doing damage to the control room. Sea Skimming missiles like the Bramhos are designed to hit the ship side on and penetrate the hull, truly crippling the ship.

As far as Shourya is concerned, it may be designed to target something of a considerable size in naval warfare. But I suspect that role will go to the hypersonic Bramhos 2.

An Aegis-type ship will be crippled if its radar arrays are rendered inoperable. So what if the ship can move around? The only reason why we have 'sea skimming' missile is to deny the enemy early warning of an attack, not because we want hit the ship broadside. But then because of the flight characteristic, hitting the ship broadside is inevitable, thereby giving the impression that is the goal.

Horizon calculator - radar and visual

Plug in any figure you like and see for yourself. The higher the radar and/or visual horizon, the more time the enemy has to prepare.

 

[Kinetic]

You have some misinterpretation .... Attacking lands is not equal to attacking ships.. If land has a CEP of about 30 m that is fine.. the impact will create some destruction .. but in water it is not the case... the CEP has to be on the target or immediately next to the ship so that the ship will be damaged.. CEP > 5 m will not give any major destruction to the ship because the water itself will suppress some impact.. and the ship will survive... there fore Ship attack missile has to on the target.. Shaurya should have a pin point accuracy which it is not designed for...

Before calling it misinterpretation read the posts. I did not posted them to repeat the same thing again and again.

Shaurya has a CEP of 30 m without active radar terminal homing. The anti-ship version of Shaurya must have it. Brahmos also have active radar seeker. There is no question of Shaurya as anti-ship missile without active radar homing.