The 2-step testing does make sense, its just that the time of the February test coincides with the EXACT time MicroSat-R was about to pass over Wheeler Island. If it was against an electronically simulated target, which can be generated ANY time, why was it conducted at the above mentioned time?
I think performing a test with an electronically simulated target while the real target was around would give much more data. Kinda like a visible checkpoint in the sky that you can correlate with your simulated target.
ISRO's flights involve expensive payloads with significant stake-holders. In this particular instance, the only stakeholder is DRDO itself.
Apparently, it's all the same. Asked the same question about less sophisticated missiles compared to ISRO's rocket. Was told even an MBRL rocket has to go through the whole shebang after failure. The time it takes depends on the complexity of the missile itself.
About 'ending' the missile's flight, if you're testing to validate ALL parameters except real target, why would you not even deploy the seeker for it, which is the WHOLE point?
No point speculating the more nuanced aspects of the test. Perhaps the second stage was a dummy stage and simply fell back to the earth. Perhaps it was real and it did perform what it was supposed to do before falling back. We can't be sure of any of this.
Are you seriously saying that it took more than TWO years to 'prepare' for this test, ALL components (except target satellite) for which were already available?
They would have taken a minimum of 18 months, ISRO's standard satellite build time, to build the target satellite alone, not counting the design phase. Let's also not forget that the K-4 was also still undergoing tests as far back as 2017.
I don't care about who the credit should go to, I'm just making a point about the intention(s) of the test.
The intentions of the test is obviously more strategic and comes with international ramifications. The same with the nuclear tests under Vajpayee or the first test under Indira Gandhi. It's obvious India's global status becomes more important than the few brownie points Modi would earn at home. So you shouldn't begrudge Modi's ability to kill two birds with one stone.
As an Indian, I am more concerned with having done it than not having done at all. The problem with our establishment is, the UPA is too much of a sissy. Their so-called "mature" attitude is working against them now. What Modi is doing is what any normal country with great power aspirations would do, and should do. And any citizen of such a country would like to see a strong govt in power. So one should be more concerned with UPA's abnormal ineptness than NDA's normalcy. The problem comes when people are dumb enough to believe UPA is normal and NDA is extreme. It was the same systemic lethargy that led to us being singled out of the nuclear-haves in the NPT.
I said K-4's booster is an overkill for the BMD application. Its expensive, considering Indian would need hundreds of interceptors for Pakistan alone. Therefore a smaller motor (similar to that of Arrow-3) is needed. DRDO has yet to miniaturize the PDV seeker for practical and feasible production & subsequent deployment.
For ASAT demonstration purpose, K-4 did its job just fine.
Okay, I get what you mean now.
There is a plan to develop mid-course BMD for multiple altitudes. For example, a spinoff of the AD-2 will be able to perform mid-course interception for MRBM class targets at lower altitudes, as an AEGIS SM-3 equivalent. So you will see different classes of BMD developed for different types of targets.
Also it appears you are overestimating the cost of the missiles way too much. Last year, the govt approved the production of 30 PSLVs for less than $30M per rocket.
http://www.spacetechasia.com/india-approves-us1-574-billion-funding-for-30-pslv-10-gslv-flights/
So the K4-ASAT is going to be a whole lot cheaper than the PSLV. It's not like we will need more than a few dozen to deal with the higher end MRBMs of Pakistan. While the lower end will be dealt with by whatever comes out of Phase 2. Even if we assume $15M a pop, $1.5B is a cheap price to pay for 100 missiles with a much higher shot at stopping nukes than terminal BMD.
Also it's more prudent to stick with what's already been tested rather than go for something new and untested, if only in order to save a million bucks or two a pop for doing the same thing.
So far the BMD program is a research project. That's why despite the claims of deploying Phase-I by 2014, nothing happened on the ground. PAD was a TD, PDV improved upon it. Only AAD can be deployed, but for some reason it hasn't been.
The BMD sites are still being built. It's not merely a mobile SAM unit. These are some massive facilities.
Unless DRDO converts the Phase-I & Phase-II programs to producible and feasibly deployable systems, India will not get anything even close to a BMD. There is a reason why S-400 is being rushed in, because its a deployable system.
The BMD is far too big a program to be compared to the S-400. It in no way conflicts with the BMD program. S-400's primary mandate is air defence. It merely has the added bonus of being able to protect itself from BMs. Also, since the BMD does not have air defence as part of its mandate, a system like the S-400 is necessary to protect it, hence it has a complementary effect.
