Agni-5 can target our Harbin city: Chinese daily

[Spring Onion]

I would like to give an online source. People who are interested in missile tech can read it.

IDR Article: Strategic Missiles

And Bharat verma is associated with this source


Your posts show that India is bluffing the world so do you think India should be given any leniency over NPT

 

[oct605032048]

......and by the way

What is the use in targeting Harbin??

There are other juicy targets like Beijing and Shanghai !!

Harbin is used as an example by some layman journalist to show his half baked knowledge about strategic missiles.

80% of China's oil goes via Strait of Malacca. It is one of the reasons why Indian Military activities in Andaman and Nicobar Islands are more lately !!

thanks for your half baked knowlege about china's energy consumption. 80% of china's energy comes from coal instead of oil, and 50% of the oil consumed in china is also produced in china.

If you want to block the malacca strait, just goooooo~ahead. Countries such as japan or skorea instead of China will immediately jump out fighting for their oil supply.

Mr. Ma of the Republic of China has been calling the PLA to move away 1500+ missiles which he believes is "pointing at taiwan" from the neighboring provinces. I myself do agree with him and Xizang or Xinjiang would be a good choice to re-arrange these DF15 or 21.

 

[aimarraul]

......and by the way

What is the use in targeting Harbin??

There are other juicy targets like Beijing and Shanghai !!

Harbin is used as an example by some layman journalist to show his half baked knowledge about strategic missiles.

80% of China's oil goes via Strait of Malacca. It is one of the reasons why Indian Military activities in Andaman and Nicobar Islands are more lately !!

we always recognize india's nuclear superiority,even though she have only 80 warheads,cos she have much more value targets in her hand ,i have to say it's pretty hard for china to choice the first indian city to start, so stop feeding your vanity with your 10th nuclear arsenals.you are right ,80% of china importing oil goes malacca,but china don't need to import 80% oil like some country，now china is building pipelines in russia,myanmar,malaysia，later on it's very likely we will also build pipelines in pakistan ,iran,thailand.so ,unless india wanna have a war with all these countries,i see no reason to worry about your A and N islands.....and you have to ask youself another question:is IN strong enough to control malacca

this thread is really a joke,can someone close it

 

[Merilion]

And Bharat verma is associated with this source


Your posts show that India is bluffing the world so do you think India should be given any leniency over NPT

Jana, thanks for the very important info. u saved me 2 seconds opening the link and 5 mins to actually read it--i'm sure i would stop reading it after 5 mins.


Is this graph drawed by some fanboy?
if Agni III has a range 6000km with 1400kg payload according to the above graph, i then failed to understand why india is trying so hard to develop Agni V with 5000km range?

and it doesn't need rocket science to debunk 'half payload double range' BS, just take a car as example, u can drive a car with another person up to say 500km without refuel but that doesn't mean u can drive 1000km without refueling if u drive the car alone.

 

[SU-57E]

comparison between missile and car with two passangers.... what a marvelous idea sir..... kudos..........

 

[kashmiri2009]

come on guys !! The link provided has lot of technical details about missiles. Instead of just blindly rejecting it, how about refuting the claims with some technical details. Provide some credible source to reject Indian technical details.

The article was written by Arun Vishwakarma NOT Bharat Verma.

When I visited an Indian forum Bharatrakshak.com, the same article was posted there with lot of figures and graphs.

I think Pakistan got to do something to stop Indian missiles, like develop anti-ballistic missiles. Chinese too need a dedicated interceptor missile rather than S-300 SAMs. It looks like Indians also have been testing interceptor missiles and saw some success there.

If we let India get away, then it is very hard to control them.

 

[aimarraul]

Chinese too need a dedicated interceptor missile rather than S-300 SAMs.

ballistic missile is too fast，GBI interceptor missile is not the future direction。 we should invest most money in Laser, microwave , ion beam weapons and aim at space defence if we want to find the good answer for ballistic missile

 

[Iron_Eagle_17]

comparison between missile and car with two passangers.... what a marvelous idea sir..... kudos..........

Why can't you just understand
Increase in range by just reducing the weight in understandable but saying that half the wieght would mean double the range is just out of my physics....(unless of course india's physics is superficial)

I have heard the same reduce wieght and increase range thing on an interview of Doctor SAMAR MUBARIKMAND head of NESCOM at that time and he explained it reallly welll.......(I'll try loooking for the video and post it here so patience)

 

[Hulk]

I liked the car passenger example, it was simple to the point. With my limited knowledge here is what I think. Missile carries payload + fuel and hence reducing the payload to half will not mean weight of missile is half. Also there are other things how much heat the surface can take etc. So half weight = double range does not fly.

 

[Iron_Eagle_17]

This is taken From WIKIPEDIA

The Bharat Rakshak Agni page » MISSILE ARMOURY » AGNI - STRATEGIC BALLISTIC MISSILE has extensive data and analysis that uses public domain data and ballistic calculations to show that the range is greatly influenced by use or non-use of thrusters on the RV (required for velocity trimming) for propulsion as a HAM (High Altitude Motor). There seems to be room in the RV for about ~200 kg fuel (solid or liquid) after allowing for a long but lightweight TN weapon. This RV integrated HAM is referred to as the half stage after the two solid fuelled stages. This stage provides a disproportional increase in range for a lighter RV payload. Thus development of lightweight nuclear weapons is paramount to the missile's range.

When the Agni-II was first launched, then Defence Minister George Fernandes indicated that the maximum range of the Agni-II was 3000 km. Since then, ranges from 2000 km to 2500 km have been bandied about while Dr. Kalam, at Aero India '98, stated that Agni-II had a maximum range of 3,700 km! The range of 2000 km can be excluded, as the system has been tested to greater range in both 1999 and 2001. Given the test to 2300 km in 1999 and 2100 km in 2001, with an apparently lighter payload, would indicate that a variation in trajectory was used and it may be possible to extrapolate some more accurate estimates of Agni-II's maximum range.

It would appear that Agni-II has a theoretical ability to hit a target 3000 km away with a 1000 kg overall payload – (a 250 kg RV's deadweight and a 750 kg warhead). It is suggested that a 200 kiloton 'boosted fission' warhead was earlier developed for the Agni system when it was on the drawing board in the late 80s, however after the Pokhran-II series of nuclear test in May 1998, the 200 KT boosted fission design has clearly given way to a 200 - 300 KT two stage thermonuclear design that is expected to be much lighter. From the tables at Effect of payload and stage configuration on Agni-II range, one can see that a number of permutations and combinations are available to DRDO based on the existing Agni-II design and Indian propulsion technology. Range changes can be made by either varying the payload or by altering the engine configuration.

Given the available data, it is therefore clear that Agni-II has a maximum range of somewhere in excess of 3000 km, and possibly as high as 3500 km with a 1000 kg payload. Greater range with a lighter payload however requires the RV to be qualified for higher re-entry velocity and corresponding Max-Q for thermal stress.

There is a BIG difference between theoratical calculations and practical calculations....HOPE u get the point.

Oh and unfortunately couldn't find the video hope one else can find it....TA

 

[Merilion]

I liked the car passenger example, it was simple to the point. With my limited knowledge here is what I think. Missile carries payload + fuel and hence reducing the payload to half will not mean weight of missile is half. Also there are other things how much heat the surface can take etc. So half weight = double range does not fly.

thanks bro. that's the simplest example i can think of. don't know why some ppl still cannot get it.
the missile itself has a much bigger weight compare with it's payload. per wiki Agni (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Agni weight and range:
Agni I 12000 kg 700km
Agni II 16000kg 2500km
Agni III 42000kg 3500km

so reduce couple of 100kgs of payload won't significantly effect it's range.

come on guys !! The link provided has lot of technical details about missiles. Instead of just blindly rejecting it, how about refuting the claims with some technical details. Provide some credible source to reject Indian technical details.

it is not rocket science but common sense. 'half payload double range' is BS.

 

[Novice09]

Funny, why you Indians like to twist BS as facts to support yourself ?

This report has not been confirmed by any other sources until 2009. Officials of the Indian government have repeatedly denied the existence of the project.

Surya missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please tell me your GOI is telling the truth or you are lying ?

They also kept denying for Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) Project but today we have Arihant.

Between for me its as simple as this, China is chasing US(economy and defense), India is chasing China(economy and defense) and Pakistan is chasing India(only in defense sector).

All four (US, China, India and Pakistan) going crazy to win this race

 

[aimarraul]

They also kept denying for Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) Project but today we have Arihant.

Between for me its as simple as this, China is chasing US(economy and defense), India is chasing China(economy and defense) and Pakistan is chasing India(only in defense sector).

All four (US, China, India and Pakistan) going crazy to win this race

you missed the point,china is facing the threat from U.S everyday,but PLA and china's media never provoke india as someone ,even though india is the side actual controlled the disputed area ,india like to take china's goodwill as "soft".with all due repect,india better pray “mcmahon” issue will be solved before china abandon the negotiations .with current “muscle”， china won't endure three years of "forward policy" before she begin to resist

 

[Novice09]

you missed the point,china is facing the threat from U.S everyday,but PLA and china's media never provoke india as someone ,even though india is the one actual controlled the disputed area ,india like to take china's goodwill as "soft".with all due repect,india better pray “mcmahon” issue will be solved before china abandon the negotiations .with current “muscle”， china won't endure three years of "forward policy" before she begin to resist

aimarraul with respect to your thoughts, I just want to clarify one thing that both of us read different history books. For me China attacked India in 1962 and took control over OUR land.

We will be in touch for further exchange of words

 

[aimarraul]

aimarraul with respect to your thoughts, I just want to clarify one thing that both of us read different history books. For me China attacked India in 1962 and took control over OUR land.

We will be in touch for further exchange of words

your land is even behind an illegal border?if wasn't three years of natural disasters ，that war should've started in 1959。