What's new

BrahMos From On High

Sorry...But EVERYTHING you said is nothing more than an assumption.

Our experience with the MIG-25...

Viktor Belenko - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...Revealed that the MIG-25 was overall inferior to US fighters, which was the F-15 and F-16 at the time of Belenko's defection.

After the sudden, ignoble and spectacular collapse of the Soviet Union, the former Soviet satellites, who were hard up for cash to keep their countries running, called US up and asked if we wanted to go shopping. The merchandises ranges from low level infantry rifles to tanks to SAMs to fighters and even whole nuclear missiles. Yes...You read that right.

Russia

What do you think 'delivery systems' really means? Anyway...We consistently found out that Soviet technologies were usually around 10 yrs behind US.

What you do not understand is that in aviation, once a paper design is set for development, said design is pretty much fixed. Any alterations to the basic airframe could make the design unflyable. We have no evidences that today's Russia is anymore technologically advanced than when Russian aviation designers were under the Soviets. If anything, the economic dire straits that Russia had to suffered limited any theoretical innovations from progressing beyond the paper stage. Just from visuals alone, it is highly suspicious that the PAK-FA will be anywhere in the same low RCS class as the F-22.

Hum ho, I understand that the US got their hands on some Soviet technology, yet I don't understand how you were able to conclude that it was inferior, provide links for that please, thanks.
 
.
They are smart enough to know these effects. However, if the desire is to reach the enemy in the shortest possible time, meaning speed is the overriding consideration, the skin temperature effect will be relegated to the background. Hardware to reduce that temperature? More like materials and we have yet to see evidence of anything other than ordinary alloys that does nothing to reduce said effect. Please provide sources that say otherwise.

If they want to improve the speed of the missile, and they think that the heat signature will be much much enhanced that it will infact increase the chances of it being intercepted greatly.....then there will be no purpose of making the missile.....coz ultimately the final producty is worse then the one having low speed...
so no one is going to make such a missile....even a child wont.... so this possibility is not possible....
 
.
What's so funny? :what: You and your brother Mauryan seem to go into a laughing frenzy instead of taking the time to prove or debunk an argument.

Why do you feel that an approaching Brahmos cannot be "neutralized" by a volley of heat seeking missiles?.

Stopping Brahmos with stinger is like stopping semi truck running at 400 miles per hour with a rock. If you have any luck in doing that, kindly revert back. :lol:


I'm done wasting my time with Mauryan who seems to think the Brahmos has a low RCS simply because it is small OR the skin of the Brahmos has magical properties and hence low IR signature..

First you have to prove that how brahmos will be destroyed even if its detected. This missile is like usual hollywood cowboy making guns blazing entry into war zone :lol:


I am yet to see any evidence to support the theory that one or two Brahmos is sufficient to take out a destroyer.

Man, 2 brahmos can take out destroyer even if warhead is removed. Their kinetic kill ability is more than enough.
 
.
What's so funny? :what: You and your brother Mauryan seem to go into a laughing frenzy instead of taking the time to prove or debunk an argument.

Why do you feel that an approaching Brahmos cannot be "neutralized" by a volley of heat seeking missiles?

I'm done wasting my time with Mauryan who seems to think the Brahmos has a low RCS simply because it is small OR the skin of the Brahmos has magical properties and hence low IR signature.

I am yet to see any evidence to support the theory that one or two Brahmos is sufficient to take out a destroyer.

with regard to heat seeking missiles, I presume you are talking about manpads. The big issue with manpads will be adequate reaction time. Brahmos provides the adversary with very little reaction time.

Most manpads have a range within 5-6 km. This would imply a reaction time of 5-6 seconds. Also consider the low penetration altitudes which would render detection at 5km highly unlikely. If the said defences comprise the first line, they will not even have early warning and this should render such defences highly inadequate. The other issues I can think of include time delay associated with system "warm-up" (for the seeker head) as well as maximum speed of the missile. For example, a stinger with a maximum speed less than mach 2.5 will render any intercept effort impractical unless the system is deployed from specific quadrants.

Having said that, there is no reason why a "volley" of missiles fired may not get lucky!

There is no reason to believe that two brahmos missiles will take out a destroyer for certain. However, as discussed, the high KE allows the missile to inflict massive damage. The programmable attack mode allows for the system to target the ships at the waterline thereby maximizing the pk. Thus, I would say that the chances of Brahmos taking out a destroyer is equally good, if not better than other systems deployed.
 
.
Stopping Brahmos with stinger is like stopping semi truck running at 400 miles per hour with a rock. If you have any luck in doing that, kindly revert back. :lol:

First you have to prove that how brahmos will be destroyed even if its detected. This missile is like usual hollywood cowboy making guns blazing entry into war zone :lol:
Bad analogy. The rock does not explode. Further...The Brahmos, like all missiles, is not a solid mass. Flight is biased AGAINST mass and weight. The greater the mass, the greater the propulsive power to get that mass moving. A missile has a lot of empty space by design. A truck is anchored to the ground and is %99.999 independent from aerodynamic forces. A missile is an aircraft and all aircrafts is the opposite -- %99.999 dependent upon aerodynamic forces. This make the missile vulnerable to aerodynamic instability. To make the truck unstable, you have to disrupt that connection to the ground, meaning disable its wheel/tire combination somehow. That mean it is easier for a rock -- or a bullet -- to disable a missile in flight than to remove the truck from the road.

Man, 2 brahmos can take out destroyer even if warhead is removed. Their kinetic kill ability is more than enough.
In a missile versus ship scenario, if the miss is even by one meter, the ship win. So as long as the fleet is covered by AWACS, passive defensive methods such as seduction/distraction chaff/flare can be deployed, blinding the seeker's electronic view, be it radar or infrared or even hybrid. The key is early detection and AWACS have the advantage.
 
.
Bad analogy. The rock does not explode. Further...The Brahmos, like all missiles, is not a solid mass. Flight is biased AGAINST mass and weight. The greater the mass, the greater the propulsive power to get that mass moving. A missile has a lot of empty space by design. A truck is anchored to the ground and is %99.999 independent from aerodynamic forces. A missile is an aircraft and all aircrafts is the opposite -- %99.999 dependent upon aerodynamic forces. This make the missile vulnerable to aerodynamic instability. To make the truck unstable, you have to disrupt that connection to the ground, meaning disable its wheel/tire combination somehow. That mean it is easier for a rock -- or a bullet -- to disable a missile in flight than to remove the truck from the road.


In a missile versus ship scenario, if the miss is even by one meter, the ship win. So as long as the fleet is covered by AWACS, passive defensive methods such as seduction/distraction chaff/flare can be deployed, blinding the seeker's electronic view, be it radar or infrared or even hybrid. The key is early detection and AWACS have the advantage.

Erm, dood, refer to Newtons laws for the first para, kthx.
 
.
Sorry...But EVERYTHING you said is nothing more than an assumption.

Our experience with the MIG-25...

Viktor Belenko - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...Revealed that the MIG-25 was overall inferior to US fighters, which was the F-15 and F-16 at the time of Belenko's defection.

After the sudden, ignoble and spectacular collapse of the Soviet Union, the former Soviet satellites, who were hard up for cash to keep their countries running, called US up and asked if we wanted to go shopping. The merchandises ranges from low level infantry rifles to tanks to SAMs to fighters and even whole nuclear missiles. Yes...You read that right.

Russia

What do you think 'delivery systems' really means? Anyway...We consistently found out that Soviet technologies were usually around 10 yrs behind US.

What you do not understand is that in aviation, once a paper design is set for development, said design is pretty much fixed. Any alterations to the basic airframe could make the design unflyable. We have no evidences that today's Russia is anymore technologically advanced than when Russian aviation designers were under the Soviets. If anything, the economic dire straits that Russia had to suffered limited any theoretical innovations from progressing beyond the paper stage. Just from visuals alone, it is highly suspicious that the PAK-FA will be anywhere in the same low RCS class as the F-22.

Cmon gambit, dont fly in the lala land,get your boots on to the earth.
I have really no idea why hordes of US netizens pop up and start defending that their technology is 10 yrs,100 yrs ahead of soviets,while at many instances US failed to catchup with soviets/Russians.

Dont tell me that GE aero engine tech is not russians.Mig-25 was a compromised theory and there is nothing proud in sabotaging a fighter,which makes no difference between US and china.Even till today US struggles to matchup with Russian SAMs,Satellites,Launch vehicles,AAMs,Submarines,....... what not?

I neither have the time nor the intention to summarize how US got its so called technology from others.Putting Us citizens on moon with a rocket made by a german??? :cheers:

Yes ,again and again this is what I am saying.Only people like you have the capability to conclude that a PAK-FA TD is not stealthier than F-22.Poor scientists and engineers who are working hard day and night bringing modifications to the TD.

Its only that Russians currently dont have money after soviet collpse, Else US would have became another china in copy catting Russian tech.

The bolded part doesnt need attestation from US or its netizens to prove that Russian got superior technologies.Its weapons and systems just proving that all way along.
 
. .
In a missile versus ship scenario, if the miss is even by one meter, the ship win. So as long as the fleet is covered by AWACS, passive defensive methods such as seduction/distraction chaff/flare can be deployed, blinding the seeker's electronic view, be it radar or infrared or even hybrid. The key is early detection and AWACS have the advantage.

I dont buy this theory. Brahmos block-II got new updates that distiguish original targets and dummies. It can go against the initially locked-on target unless untill a mid-course guidance tells it to go after another.Brahmos got ECM and ECCM and it is highly impossible to jam while scoring its hit.

And Brahmos hitting a ship scenario,its onboard sensors make sure the hit takes place just above the water level and at the ships weekest point.Its about the capability and accuracy of the missile,but not hush bush theories that so often retained from fan boys.

It known that Naval Block-II upgrades got the similar autonamous guidance system like Granit. Thats the reason why CEO S.Pillai hell bent on saying that a salvo of 9 can bring down 3 frigates/destroyers under and damn critical environment.
Under a 3 missile salvo,alike Granits one missile flys high while others at sea level initial going after the locked targets. But the one flying at altitude guides the 2 flying at sea level.It updates the courses all the time,though the ship is manueverable.I bet even though E-3D or other over the horison radars get these 3 painted say at 25 nautical miles away,there is no chance of interception.by the time a launch sequence initiates, missiles hits the target.
Our main point here is low RCS which unfotunately we have been discussing for the last 2 days and the US people are hell bent in accepting the capability while they want us to accept that F-22 is stealthy :P
 
Last edited:
.
It does not take a genius to figure that at nearly three times the speed of sound skin IR emissions contribute significantly to the IR signature of the missile in the MWIR(Mid-wavelength infrared) band. In this phase the Brahmos is a magnet for every heat seeking missile in your enemy’s arsenal this includes manpad and stingers.

You mean, a Stinger missile can hit down a Tomahawk because Tomahawk is slower than Brahmos?

LOL.

Anyways, you sound like a typical paranoid American who is scared of even scud missiles that some country, thousand miles away from USA, makes.

It is fun reading your posts. In fact, you make people laugh on USA and how small they think.

Seriously, USA has given a lot of good movies through Hollywood(copying ideas from ancient Asian scripts), so you need to be more open-minded rather than being paranoid/jealous about Asian countries making Brahmos or co-operating with Russia.

Even though American rockets are based on German design, I still think USA is much ahead in rocket technology than Asian countries. Russians will remain masters though.
 
Last edited:
.
I once met a pilot who told me he returned from a mission with a .22 caliber bullet embedded in the under carriage of his Hornet. I found it hard to believe but his wingman corroborated the story and swore they were never below a 1000 ft during the entire mission.

Everyone here has a problem with the suggestion that a MANPAD can be used to neutralize a supersonic cruise missile. On their product brochures both Raytheon and Mistral confirm it is “accurate and lethal” against cruise missiles. Laughable when you consider that the Sea Scorpion 2 ship protection suite is loaded with Stinger missiles. Everyone here thought I was retarded to say that an all aspect heat seeking missile can strike an approaching Brahmos. It may take more than one strike to neutralize the threat but remember at MACH 3 the missile is already straining to retain structural integrity. IMHO, a hit from a MACH 1 to MACH 2.5 heat seeking missile is sufficient to either destroy it completely or damage the control surfaces enough to neutralize the threat.

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilitie...ts/content/rtn_rms_ps_navstinger_datashee.pdf

Sea Scorpion, Phalanx and other CWIC defense systems is the bottom layer. There are other defensive measures like SeaRAM with a 95% success rate against supersonic cruise missiles.

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilitie...ments/content/rtn_rms_ps_searam_datasheet.pdf

Missiles with Active / Passive seekers are vulnerable to jamming; no one here is able to explain why the Brahmos is immune to jamming or seduction. To be honest, I am skeptical that your scientists have discovered a novel method for solving these problems on a missile that is 98% engine, fuel and warhead. Finally, there is no reason to become emotional - I doubt the concept of supersonic cruise missile and not Indian scientific prowess. If it helps assume I am a prospective client for Brahmos convince me that one or two missiles is enough to sink an American aircraft carrier / destroyer or frigate.

Sea Scorpion and SeaRAM was never developed to engage Brahmos type missile. Brahmos is not just another supersonic missile it is almost tri-sonic with speed of Mach 2.8. They cant stop it.
 
.
Well, Brahmos is not made to attack USA. So, why people from USA are scared?

To me, this "I hate Brahmos" from some western sections, is equivalent to "I hate anything from Russia" type of prejudice.

I think, we are in Cold-War II. LOL

I am sure, more such hate-mongering will come after Brahmos-2 is inducted in next 6 years.
 
.
I once met a pilot who told me he returned from a mission with a .22 caliber bullet embedded in the under carriage of his Hornet. I found it hard to believe but his wingman corroborated the story and swore they were never below a 1000 ft during the entire mission.

Everyone here has a problem with the suggestion that a MANPAD can be used to neutralize a supersonic cruise missile. On their product brochures both Raytheon and Mistral confirm it is “accurate and lethal” against cruise missiles. Laughable when you consider that the Sea Scorpion 2 ship protection suite is loaded with Stinger missiles. Everyone here thought I was retarded to say that an all aspect heat seeking missile can strike an approaching Brahmos. It may take more than one strike to neutralize the threat but remember at MACH 3 the missile is already straining to retain structural integrity. IMHO, a hit from a MACH 1 to MACH 2.5 heat seeking missile is sufficient to either destroy it completely or damage the control surfaces enough to neutralize the threat.

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilitie...ts/content/rtn_rms_ps_navstinger_datashee.pdf

Sea Scorpion, Phalanx and other CWIC defense systems is the bottom layer. There are other defensive measures like SeaRAM with a 95% success rate against supersonic cruise missiles.

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilitie...ments/content/rtn_rms_ps_searam_datasheet.pdf

Missiles with Active / Passive seekers are vulnerable to jamming; no one here is able to explain why the Brahmos is immune to jamming or seduction. To be honest, I am skeptical that your scientists have discovered a novel method for solving these problems on a missile that is 98% engine, fuel and warhead. Finally, there is no reason to become emotional - I doubt the concept of supersonic cruise missile and not Indian scientific prowess. If it helps assume I am a prospective client for Brahmos convince me that one or two missiles is enough to sink an American aircraft carrier / destroyer or frigate.

This is gonna be my last hit in educating you.And I will try to clear all those clouds as much as possible.

both Indo-Russian engineers didnt developed this so called supersonic cruise missle to clarify the doubts of some some baseless argumenters.

Brahmos Supersonic cruise missile jointly developed by Russia and India
BrahMos is a supersonic cruise missile that can be launched from submarines, ships, aircraft or land. It is a joint venture between India's Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and Russia's NPO Mashinostroeyenia who have together formed the BrahMos Aerospace Private Limited.

Brahmos Missile

Proven Capabilities
1. Ability to strike targets at extremely short ranges of 25 kms.
2. Supersonic maneuvering.
3. Target discrimination.
3. Automatic target reassignment in carrier attack mode. ( I also cleared it before about its artificial intelligence system)

There is no chest tumping abt the system being a JV, but in reality the JV work share was 80% and 20%.Engine and seeker from Russia in knocked down kits, while control systems and everything else is Indian.

For target acquisition, the Brahmos uses an active/passive seeker which is an improved variant of the one found in the Moskit cruise missile provided by Russia to China.
Why Brahmos is imune to jaming and other electronic interference?
Because its highly sophisticated Radar seeker which is both active and passive by nature.Both these active and passive components works in tandem tracking the target and guiding the missile.

Also Brahmos has the capability to intelligently switch(flight) modes during autonomous flight irrespective of user/ship bourne radar interaction with midcourse guidance.

Why Brahmos is so costly and mean?

Coordinated Carrier Attack Capability

The Brahmos missile is claimed to have an impressive salvo fire with intelligent coordinated attack capability for the Brahamos missile

The capability allows a missile salvo to intelligently takeout multiple ships from within a formation, such as a aircraft carrier group.This includes airdefence ships and other surface combatants.

Missiles fired in a salvo stagger their attack and automatically reassign themselves new targets if the primary target, say an aircraft carrier is destroyed.
In a salvo mode, i.e co-ordinated attacking more ,one takes the command to guide other missiles.Its liquid propulsion ramjet offers the high flexibity and excellent manuevering during attack phase or target take-over phase.
This is what Mr.Pillai CEO of Brahmos Aerospace said:
"The missiles are so clever that they not only detect a target but develop a plan of attack based on the enemy’s air defense. They know exactly which target is the primary one, which of them is an attacker and which is a defender. When the main target is destroyed, they re-prioritize and continue with the attack. Now even more advanced missile is on the way."
Which is an hypersonic variant.

Block II LACM version


Block II LACM versions of missiles being supplied to the Indian Army feature an active seeker with an ability to discern a designated target from amidst multiple.

The Block II missile comes with a "multi-spectral seeker" capable of better target discrimination than the current radar seeker.
( the other day you showed a video of Brahmos LACM hitting a wall. That was the development fllight testing of Block I which uses a radar seeker.)

The Block I missile radar seeker is only effective against isolated targets as the missile was basically designed to attack ships. When confronted with multiple targets in the target zone, the missile homes on to the target reflecting the maximum amount of radar energy.

In the land attack mode the missile can easily stray off its designated target when adjacent objects have relatively higher radar reflection.

Brahmos, incidentally, is the first and only supersonic cruise missile that uses liquid Ramjet technology.
A vertical launcher is designed to be fitted under the warship's deck, thereby protecting it from atmospheric conditions and imparting stealth to the weapon system. It also allows the missile to engage targets 360 degrees around the ship.

The initial cost of the missile after the completion of development was in the range of $2.1-$3 million depending on the variants.But it is known that after receiving of huge orders from all three services the price is supossed to hit ground.

Current Orders include:
Re-weaponising IN combatants along with ships undergoing construction.
IN also placed orders for more than 3 regiments for shore based AShM variants.

IA initially ordered a regiment of Block -I LACM and also placed order ofr 2 regiments of Block-II variant.And is anticipating to order 2 more Block-II variants along side.

OTOH IAF ordered Block-II LACM for 2 regiments while its ALCM version is awaiting for test integration on MKI.

All future IN submarines are supossed to be carrying Bhrahmos-1/II.

A notable feature of the Brahmos-II hypersonic variant undergoing development is that,It can be fit into the same launch canister thereby eliminating the need for scrambling of resources .

Future IN capital surface combatants will carry both Brahmos-I and II along side in the same vertical launcher. A new rotary reloading system under development will gives the commander an option of loading either of the missile into the launch canisters and can exercise different firing modes.

P.S: Indian involvement in the Brahmos-I was everything minus liquid propulsion Ramjet engine minus seeker.But OTOH Brahmos-II will see a great involvement and participation from Indian side given its unparallel research involved in hypersonic engines.
 
.
^^ Good post Mauryan but don't expect anything from him! He already made up his mind, "The great USA can do everything!".

Well, Brahmos is not made to attack USA. So, why people from USA are scared?

To me, this "I hate Brahmos" from some western sections, is equivalent to "I hate anything from Russia" type of prejudice.

I think, we are in Cold-War II. LOL

I am sure, more such hate-mongering will come after Brahmos-2 is inducted in next 6 years.

Forget this guy! He said there are 'heat seeking' missiles that can destroy Brahmos but came up with Stingers and RAM!!! I knew which missiles he can mention!! I thought about RAM but he put Stinger as well! :woot: More we do better more they hate us!!
 
.
Having spent the major part of his working life in Germany, how did he feel in America? I asked this of von Braun who had become a cult figure in the States after creating the Saturn rocket in the Apollo mission which put man on the moon. "America is country of great possibilities, but they look upon everything un-American with suspicion and contempt. They suffer from a deep rooted NIH - Not Invented Here- and look down on alien technologies".

I have deep regard for Germans. Very hard working people. Cheers. :cheers:
 
.
Back
Top Bottom