In general a head-on colision is a less than .5 probability case.And for a IR homing missiles,it simply non-sensical to say a kill is possible.But one has to definitely consider as many things.Like the sensitivity of the seeker.And in which wavelenghts it is good at.Also relevance to the reflection coefficient and emissivity of the approaching target. Since the topic is about brahmos,let me put it this way.The alloy used for the structuring of brahmos has really high specific heat.It at times even negate the applicable shock wave(creating high drag and threby heating of the surface) due to the supersonic flight.But again a shock wave presence is totally relevant to the bodys aerodynamic characteristics,which PJ-10 is highly good at.This means,brahmos at supersonic speeds is comparable to an subsonic missile in terms of drag coefficients.PJ-10 is drag optimised. On a head-on you will be only visualising a tiny 600mm or less bullet cruising towards you and of the said 600mm a significant part >500mm goes for radome in which an active/passive seeker is embeded.And now please tell me applying all your radar engineering techniques in dealing with this sort of thing.
For a kinetic kill to occur the probablity is not even 10% and only leaves a chance for proximity kill.But the onboard radar seeker which will be sea skimming during the last 40km can be able to detect an incoming interceptor with in its scope.If the interceptor tries to hit avoiding the seeker detection,neither a head-on nor a proximity kill are possible.
That is hilarious. The Stinger can reach Mach 2.2 in about two seconds...
Raytheon FIM-92 Stinger
The initial boost phase accelerates the Stinger to Mach 2.2 within only 2 seconds, and top-speed at motor burnout can be as high as Mach 2.6 for certain trajactories.
The target's physical construct is largely irrelevant to an IR equipped interceptor. You can post anything you want regarding the Brahless' materials and construction and probably no one, including me, will dispute you. But this is about sensor technology. Infrared sensor does not care about the target's aerodynamics, it care only about the target's infrared emissivity. So your bringing up the Brahless' dimension is irrelevant. I am willing to bet that the gibberish from you above is a copy/paste job lifted from somewhere.
Speaking of radome, we will examine the Brahless' radome construct, which directly affect radar performance, and see how efficient the Brahless' radar really is...
Aerospaceweb.org | Ask Us - Rocket Nose Cones and Altitude
The faster the vehicle is designed to go, the more pointed the ideal aerodynamic nose shape becomes. Compare the nose of the Mach 2 F-15 with that of the Mach 5 Phoenix air-to-air missile shown below. The limitation on nose shape is temperature. At very high Mach numbers, the nose must become more rounded than the ideal low-drag shape in order to spread the high temperatures over a larger area and prevent the nose from melting.
Per the highlighted, 'very high Mach numbers' usually implies Mach 5+ as indicated below...
Hypersonic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In aerodynamics, hypersonic speeds are those that are highly supersonic. Since the 1970s, the term has generally been assumed to refer to speeds of Mach 5 (5 times the speed of sound) and above. The hypersonic regime is a subset of the supersonic regime.
The Brahless has a claimed top speed of Mach 2.5, give or take a bit depending on altitude. The Stinger's top speed as shown is Mach 2.2 in about two seconds.
Radome shaping for an aircraft is important...
Internal volume space is not enough. Two radomes that has the same internal volume space but different shaping or geometry will directly affect radar performance. The more 'rounded' the shape, the more 'forward' we can position the antenna. Of course, radome shaping will incur the issue of radome aberration, aka 'boresight errors' which can produce radar 'ghosts' or inaccurate target position and direction. Boresight errors are why so many ground radar stations prefers those ball-like radomes over nose cones or similar shapes in aircrafts.
The Stinger missile has quite a rounded shape seeker head and this shape, as indicated by the
aerospaceweb.org source, is hemispherical and has a very low drag coefficient. Same as the parabola. The cone shape, on the other hand, despite its sleek appearance, has a higher drag coefficient. The hemispherical shape on the Stinger mean we can position its IR sensor pretty much at the physical limit of the missile itself, allowing the sensor the maximum field-of-view possible.
But here is the Brahless' radome along with the MIG-21's for comparison...
If the maximum speeds of the Brahless and the Stinger missile are pretty much the same, then why does the Brahless have such a different radome and an aerodynamically inferior one at that? The answer is that the Brahless' radome pulls dual duties:
1- To house the radar antenna.
2- To control airflow for the jet engine.
That is why the MIG-21 is also presented for comparison. Another comparison is the SR-71 with dual sharp nose cones, called spikes, for the engines. This mean the positioning of the Brahless' radar antenna is not as forward as the Stinger's IR sensor. Antenna physical scan limits are determined by the cone's
TAPER angles. Looking at the Brahless, it is highly doubtful that its radar antenna is anywhere forward of the air intake lips, if not even more recessed. This mean the Brahless will have an inferior radar field-of-view compared to the Stinger's IR field-of-view.
As if that is not bad enough...
Saint-Gobain Aerospace
Unfortunately, from a functional stand point it is necessary to manufacture radomes from the dilectric materials, thus making them a prime source of static generation.
As the speed of the aircraft increases, so does the friction of the air passing over the radome surface. This increases the voltage of the charge that builds up. Aircraft cruising at low speeds are less likely to be affected. Radome shape is also a factor. Small pointed radomes will build charge faster than large blunt radomes.
Got the highlighted? Pointed shapes will build up static charges faster than rounded ones, like the shape on Stinger's IR seeker head. This mean the Brahless' radar antenna should be recessed behind the air intake lips to prevent accidental static discharges that could damage the antenna, even though the radome itself may be grounded. I am not saying that this is a must. I am saying that based upon my experience and common sense, either antenna size is reduced, or keep the same size but position it further back. Either option reduces radar capabilities.
The phrase 'head-on' is somewhat general in description. It does not require the interception to be literally point-to-point. A 'head-on' interception can have an off-angle. For the fleet, once the Brahless is blinded by chaff, one or several Stinger-type missiles can effect several head-on interceptions with off-angles that may be outside of the Brahless radar field-of-view. We have seen several factors that necessitate the positioning of the Brahless' radar antenna into an inferior location to say that the possibility of a successful off-angle head-on interception is very real.
Do you really think that DRDO will have any of the Brahmos' weak points as I cited above, just on the radome alone, for public discussion? Not only DRDO but all militaries, including US. Once again, you are not debating the claims of the Brahmos with no ordinary 'fanboy'.
