Agni-VI all set to take shape

[Ayush]

i read one article in missile threat.com title "Agni Missiles: More than what meets the eye?" claims India's Agni series missiles especially Agni iii,iv,v are all actually ICBM missiles with ranges much more than what actually India claims and that too India have ICBM much before unofficially and the basis of such claim is agni missiles characteristics i.e the article compares the Agni missiles with other ICBM of US,China and Russia like minuteman 3,Peacekeeper,Topol M,Dongfeng 31 and 41 and found out that Agni missiles are actually more longer and heavier than other ICBM's with equally powerful propelant engines thus more fuel and more range.

For more read missilethreat.com/agni-missiles-more-than-what-meets-the-eye/

I myself also sometime thinks that DRDO is much more worried about developing and involving latest technology to its missiles like ring laser gyroscope,inertial navigation systems,missile defence evading sensors,etc etc than worriying about range may be because India has that range already but downplays it.

I hope and pray that you are right

 

[IND151]

^^ I too hope so

 

[skysthelimit]

India does not enjoy degree of air superiority that would be required target missile in boost phase by the means that we have and technology has not reached a pointed where it could be done by any system by remaining within Indian border.

I was not talking about an aircraft mounted laser - even the Yankees couldn't make that work. I was thinking more in the lines of using our PADs and AADs to target the BMs during the boost phase - similar to Aegis.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...-effectiveness-reliability.html#ixzz2KB6cjPJh

A few points -

1. Pakistan doesn't use/have ICBMs - they will likely use short range and intermediate range missile with different flight characteristics.
2. In terms of the limited range of boost phase defence, do we know where the likely launch points are?
3. Are the Pakistani missiles solid or liquid fueled?

 

[The Deterrent]

MIRV's have no relation to Missile defense.The only advantage a MIRV'd missile could have over NoN-MIRV'd is that it could carry countermeasures due its high payload characteristics.Number of warheads does not decide the efficiency of missile defense.It is decided by warhead characteristics.

MIRV'd missile is more suitable for surprise strike and second strike.

I suggest that you take a closer look at MIRVs ability to counter ABMs.

Number of warheads can defeat ABMs by simply outnumbering them. If , say, 10 ICBMs are launched at a state in US mainland, would it be easier to intercept 20 warheads or 100 (if each missile in the latter case is MIRVed with 5 warheads per missile)?
The number of deployed ABMs in an area is limited, and can be further decreased by SEAD strikes.

 

[The Deterrent]

A few points -

1. Pakistan doesn't use/have ICBMs - they will likely use short range and intermediate range missile with different flight characteristics.
2. In terms of the limited range of boost phase defence, do we know where the likely launch points are?
3. Are the Pakistani missiles solid or liquid fueled?

1. Yes, Pakistan does not. In case of boost-phase defence, ICBMs offer the best case scenario to the ABMs because they have the longest boost phases. So intercepting IRBMs/MRBMs/SRBMs in the boost phase becomes increasingly difficult than ICBMs, because they give very less reaction (interception) time to ABMs.

2. No, we don't. Pakistan's SRBMs/MRBMs are highly road mobile, carried by MAZ-543/7310 & its derivatives (both Belarussian and Chinese Wanshan series) which are off-road vehicles. It is close to impossible to predict launch points, however the storage locations can be pin pointed.

3. Pakistan has deployed 5 ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons. 4 of them (Abdali SRBM, Ghaznavi SRBM, Shaheen-I SRBM, Shaheen-II MRBM) are solid-fueled. One (Ghauri MRBM) is liquid fueled.
There are 3 more in development (confirmed) which are solid-fueled (Nasr BRBM, Shaheen-IA MRBM, Shaheen-III MRBM).

 

[Penguin]

I am not 100% sure but I have seen most of the Goods Train in India with Max Tare 55T written over it. Thought that the max weight which can be taken by the rails (moving at a decent enough speed) might be somewhere near this value.. Also, the Tank Arjun MK-II being ~58 tonnes is called less rail mobile..so ...

Then again, there is a history of using rail-tel's for Indias Agni's ....

The Agni-1 is a short-range, road/rail-mobile, solid propellant ballistic missile.

Agni-1 | Missile ThreatMissile Threat

The Agni-2 underwent its first flight test in April 1999 from Wheeler’s Island in the Bay of Bengal. The test was conducted from a rail-car TEL. In 2001, the Agni-2 was tested from a road TEL. A third test, from a rail-car TEL, was made in August 2004

Agni-2 | Missile ThreatAgni-II | Missile Threat

Like its predecessors, the Agni-3 can be fired from a rail-based launcher. It is possible that a road-based TEL has been or will be developed as well,

Agni-3 | Missile ThreatMissile Threat

The Agni-4 is believed to be an upgraded version of the Agni-2 missile with an increased range.

Agni-4 | Missile ThreatMissile Threat

Agni-V (quasi-ICBM): Tested in 2012 it is a road and rail mobile missile with a range of 5,500-5,800 km

List of ICBMs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pics: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?89961-Indian-Armed-Forces/page511

Dec 2012

Russia steps up developing new rail-mobile missile systems.

"The new rail-mobile missile systems will not employ heavy missiles," it said.
"They are to be armed with something lighter, which would fit in one railcar, like the Bulava, Topol-M, or best of all Yars, which can carry several warheads (design work done by the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology has confirmed this possibility)," it said.

Jan 2013

China is building strategic long-range missile trains as part of its major nuclear forces buildup, according to new information from China and U.S. strategic specialists.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force recently sought proposals from the U.S. defense industry for a future U.S. rail-mobile ICBM that would be hidden in tunnels.

The program revealed that the Chinese are building between 620 miles and 1,240 miles of special rail tracks capable of handling the heavy ballistic missile trains.

China developing rail basing systems for missile transport | Washington Free Beacon

 

[anonymus]

I suggest that you take a closer look at MIRVs ability to counter ABMs.

Number of warheads can defeat ABMs by simply outnumbering them. If , say, 10 ICBMs are launched at a state in US mainland, would it be easier to intercept 20 warheads or 100 (if each missile in the latter case is MIRVed with 5 warheads per missile)?
The number of deployed ABMs in an area is limited, and can be further decreased by SEAD strikes.

The logic of overwhelming has major flaws.


1.A MIRV does not offer any extra advantage over non-MIRV warheads.A missile defense would have to do equal amount of work for x number of warheads,whether MIRV'd or not.3 warheads delivered by 3 missiles require equal resources to stop as 3 warheads delivered by 1 missile.Instead if coordinated,3 warhead on three missiles could outperform 3 warheads in 1 missile by approaching at different angles at same target.

2.The advantage of MIRV'd missile lies in the fact that it reduces the number of missiles that need to be prepared for targeting. It has advantage in second strike scenarios as even few surviving missiles would be enough and in surprise strike scenarios where the reduction in number of missiles that need to be prepared would make surprise possible.That's why MIRV'd missiles are older than missile defense.

3.The idea of overwhelming ABM's is grounded in argument that only few ABM's would per present per target since ABM vs BM is more of an competition based on economics rather than technology.It extends the same logic that is extended for futility of Iron Dome due to price differential but ignores an important point that the only missile that would have any practical chance of getting through an ABM would either has to be a decent MRBM fired in salvo(not some crappy rockets) or an ICBM class with ability to carry MIRV's (Every MIRV'd capable missile is an ICBM irrespective of what the country of origin is claiming).ABM's battery which itself consist of guided missiles when compare to multiple missiles (one on one comparison) or an advanced ICBM (many on one) would easily justify it's cost.Whether missile defense finally works would depend upon relative economic strength of adversaries.After initial sunk cost in R&D is written off,the ABM does not suffer from drawback on account of production cost vis a vis any other missile.A country able to afford 5 batteries would not have to pay 10 times for acquiring 50.

4.Effect of SEAD strikes is highly doubtful,even bordering to impossible as most countries have their important cities far from border (only exception of south korea comes to my mind).If an adversary as sufficient airpower to penetrate that far,probably his country would not be nukes at all.

 

[trident2010]

India developing Agni-VI ballistic missile


BANGALORE: India is developing a long-range nuclear-capable Agni-VI ballistic missile that would carry multiple warheads allowing one weapon system to take out several targets at a time.

"Agni-V is major strategic defence weapon. Now we want to make Agni-VI which would be a force multiplier," DRDO chief V K Saraswat said here on Friday.

Refusing to divulge the range of the new under-development missile, he said the force multiplier capability of the missile would be because of its multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV) capability.

The Agni-5 ballistic missile, which was test-fired in April last year, has a range of upto 5,500 kms and it is believed that the Agni-6 would have a range longer than its predecessor.

"It will have force multiplier capability by the MIRV approach which would enable us to deliver many payloads at the same time using only one missile.

"Work is on in this area and designs have been completed. We are now in the hardware realisation phase," he said.

DRDO officials said once the Agni-6 is developed, it would propel India into the elite club of nations with such a capability including the US and Russia.

The DRDO chief said his organisation was also working towards developing a cruise missile defence programme which would enable the armed forces to defend against low-flying cruise missiles and enemy aircraft.



India developing Agni-VI ballistic missile - The Times of India

 

[Speeder 2]

^^ as long as it's DRDO, i know it will be a joke, largely en elementary paintjob purchased from Russia.

An easy and partial proof: will someone pulls out DRDO's financial statements, if it has one, to check those tiny footnotes on how much "expenditures", or "goodwill spending" if it's more sophitiscated, paid to Russia before every Agni launch?

MIRV technology-wise, India is about 40 years hehind China. Agni-VI to what China has long posessed is like what Mig-16 to F-35. That's the gap, people. Stop day-dreaming.

MIRV requires miniature tech that India won't have for the nxst 30 years at least if without Russia's help which I doubt. Moskow is not dumb enough to sell reliable high tech delivery systems to india.

Agni's guidance system- a key in missle delivery, will ALWAYS be purchased from Russia - why? because India has neither tech knowhow nor high tech industrial might to produce it.

Many turn-key tech also, such as materials used.


And don't get me started on reliablity issue, which is the soul of any delivery. Launch 1 is easy, how about launch 10 in a roll without hitting Mumbai "accidentally"?

Surely you don't want it to land on Mumbai the second tme you try to launch it right? For Indians (comparablely, just check your miserable satelite launch failure rate - world-leading on myth and randomness , to put it mildly), it might be the case

In a nutshell, its not whether you can deliver ir or not, it's how reliable it is, get it?

it's like most countries can nowadays really make a bullet or a rifle, as long as having some industries. Yet only a handful of countries can make a reliable bullet and rifle that almost never fail - definition: workable, meaning extremely high reliability. India is far from being a member of this "elite club".

Want to know why? You don't have proper industry to design and produce that or anyting related. Whatever DODO's fancy ideas and promises are, they will stay on paper indefinitely, or proceed in typical DRDO-style: (fill in the blank) Mark I, fail, MARK II, no more news after.., so what? then "far more advanced" Mark III, fail, no prob, now let's talk about "futuristic" Mark IV...

Can't you see and do you have a proper brain to comprehend at this level?

...that whatever your DRDO does, like basic idea and design generating, is very very simple stuff - stuff that most graduate students from most decent universities around the world can more or less do. It's nothing! - THE HARD PART, though, is how to realise it, how to make it happen. That seperates a bragging bigot or a troll that your DRDO, or HAL or ISRO, is, to a real industrial power lab. Therefore the more news conferences (aka Bragging Championship) it holds, stupider it looks giving no PhD stud holds a press conf on what his term project idea.

 

[The Deterrent]

The logic of overwhelming has major flaws.


1.A MIRV does not offer any extra advantage over non-MIRV warheads.A missile defense would have to do equal amount of work for x number of warheads,whether MIRV'd or not.3 warheads delivered by 3 missiles require equal resources to stop as 3 warheads delivered by 1 missile.Instead if coordinated,3 warhead on three missiles could outperform 3 warheads in 1 missile by approaching at different angles at same target.

2.The advantage of MIRV'd missile lies in the fact that it reduces the number of missiles that need to be prepared for targeting. It has advantage in second strike scenarios as even few surviving missiles would be enough and in surprise strike scenarios where the reduction in number of missiles that need to be prepared would make surprise possible.That's why MIRV'd missiles are older than missile defense.

3.The idea of overwhelming ABM's is grounded in argument that only few ABM's would per present per target since ABM vs BM is more of an competition based on economics rather than technology.It extends the same logic that is extended for futility of Iron Dome due to price differential but ignores an important point that the only missile that would have any practical chance of getting through an ABM would either has to be a decent MRBM fired in salvo(not some crappy rockets) or an ICBM class with ability to carry MIRV's (Every MIRV'd capable missile is an ICBM irrespective of what the country of origin is claiming).ABM's battery which itself consist of guided missiles when compare to multiple missiles (one on one comparison) or an advanced ICBM (many on one) would easily justify it's cost.Whether missile defense finally works would depend upon relative economic strength of adversaries.After initial sunk cost in R&D is written off,the ABM does not suffer from drawback on account of production cost vis a vis any other missile.A country able to afford 5 batteries would not have to pay 10 times for acquiring 50.

4.Effect of SEAD strikes is highly doubtful,even bordering to impossible as most countries have their important cities far from border (only exception of south korea comes to my mind).If an adversary as sufficient airpower to penetrate that far,probably his country would not be nukes at all.

1. Yes, speaking in terms of individual warhead capability, MIRVs don't. But they can overcome ABMs, if saturated in a particular area (then they would be simply MRVs, i.e. separate warheads but converged on the same target).
No, ABMs can defeat missiles coming from any direction, difference of direction does not makes the interception difficult.

2. Yes, the primary reason for developing MIRVs was to inflict maximum damage in a fist strike utilizing least possible missiles. In the second strike too, they can ensure complete annihilation.

3. Yes, a limited number would be present, because all the targets cannot be defended equally. However I agree with you that MIRVed systems are somewhat equally expensive speaking in terms of individual economics. But don't you think that the countermeasures, which MIRVs deploy, make interception a whole lot difficult?

4. Well PAF does have the capability, although it might not be pretty strong at the moment. We can potentially reduce the number of deployed ABMs by India in case of a war.

@ nuclearpak , kindly move the last couple of posts related to missile defenses to this thread:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-strategic-forces/127894-how-can-pakistan-counter-india-s-abm-system.html

 

[ashok321]

India working on advanced nuclear missile - FT.com

Now we want to make Agni VI which would be a force multiplier,” VK Saraswat, head of India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation, said in Bangalore. “Work is on in this area and designs have been completed. We are now in the hardware realisation phase.”

Just make it lean mean machine, fit it into the Arihant belly and see the baily dance....lol

 

[Speeder 2]

AhaseebA,

mostly true, but based on IF.

IF India has reliable MIRVS. That's a big big IF like IF Indians can reach outer solar system, then everything are off the bets and all bets are off.

Russia, who controls Agni's guidance system,turnkey hardware, materials used, reliablity issue and guideance service ( Russia GLOSASS? ), will not be stupid enough to allow India get MIRV full tech, make no mistake about it. But some Russia defence firms will use the idea to milk more cows from DRDO in the coming years.

Heck even Russia would sell it, the US, China and other members of UNDC wouldn't allow it happen.

 

[ashok321]

Russia, who controls Agni's guidance system,turnkey hardware, materials used, reliablity issue and guideance service ( Russia GLOSASS? )

Show me any proof on above you lndia hater and I would resign from this PDF - or you do the same.

Cretin is one who acts like one!

 

[Speeder 2]

ashok 321,

how about show me the proof that Russan nukes are fake or F-22's key tech producers are xyz factories, etc?

... no proof there since those info are classified. So are any Russia to India key tech sales.

But if you have IQ beyond 82, you can bet that those nukes are not fake since it's common knowledge, likewise which tech india is capable of and which is not according to its current and forseeable scientific AND industrial sophistication.


the following are common knowledge:

india has no domestic industry sophiticated enough to design and produce advanced laser gyros that are capable of guiding agni series;

super hard alloys and (anti)super high temp alloys of agni V (and other series, too) are all Made-in-Russia, since India doesn't have high precision tech to produce them. In fact only a handful of countries (Germany and Japan included)in the world having the related advanced heavy industries can produce these items.


hi tech (anti)super high temp materials of the critical 2nd and 3rd stage shells of Agni V ( the 1st stage was basic carbon fiber - made-in-India) are imported from either Russia or France, Russia most likely. No country other than UNSC 5 has this matericals science tech, Japan and Germany aside.

the engine fuel, the basic 1st gen fuel though, of agni V, is imported from Russia.

last time i checked India has no global/regional positional sats system on top, so it uses and will use either GPS, or Russian GLOSASS, or Beidou , when required.

...need more?

now, i hope it's the last time i see u here? goodbye, and don't make a scene will ya?

 

[faithfulguy]

ashok 321,

how about show me the proof that Russan nukes are fake or F-22's key tech producers are xyz factories, etc?

... no proof there since those info are classified. So are any Russia to India key tech sales.

But if you have IQ beyond 82, you can bet that those nukes are not fake since it's common knowledge, likewise which tech india is capable of and which is not according to its current and forseeable scientific AND industrial sophistication.


the following are common knowledge:

india has no domestic industry sophiticated enough to design and produce advanced laser gyros that are capable of guiding agni series;

super hard alloys and (anti)super high temp alloys of agni V (and other series, too) are all Made-in-Russia, since India doesn't have high precision tech to produce them. In fact only a handful of countries (Germany and Japan included)in the world having the related advanced heavy industries can produce these items.


hi tech (anti)super high temp materials of the critical 2nd and 3rd stage shells of Agni V ( the 1st stage was basic carbon fiber - made-in-India) are imported from either Russia or France, Russia most likely. No country other than UNSC 5 has this matericals science tech, Japan and Germany aside.

the engine fuel, the basic 1st gen fuel though, of agni V, is imported from Russia.

last time i checked India has no global/regional positional sats system on top, so it uses and will use either GPS, or Russian GLOSASS, or Beidou , when required.

...need more?

now, i hope it's the last time i see u here? goodbye, and don't make a scene will ya?

very solid analysis of India's capabilities. I really doubt India has the basic research to produce a modern ICBM. I'm certain that India is not capable of miniaturize warheads without testing for MIRV. So you are correct above.