What's new

Major Indian cities to get missile defence shield

Babur has sea skimming and terrain hugging capability, its designed to avoid radar detection whereas BMD was tested against high incoming missile.
And then there's Ra'ad, a stealth CM!

I'm curious to learn how Mr Saraswat can counter two very advanced CM's without radar detection.

As claimed that the Babur has a CEP value in centimeters. Does this claim mean that it is exponentially better than a Tomahawk missile? don't take these claims as face value. One more claim you can look at is the serial production of the missile within one month from the first test flight. Is this a load of poorly scripted pakistani poppycock or is Pakistan so advanced that they would complete development so soon? One can't even do the same with a simple piece of commercial software. Or is this a dead giveaway that this missile has simply been bought off the shelf from an external source?

We don't know the actual guidance systems onboard the Babur at this point. It may fly on purely inertial navigation. It may or may not employ TERCOM and DSMAC as Pakistan does not have the technological base to develop them. Pakistani press reports claim that "cameras" adjust the height of Babur without having a clue that TERCOM is actually performed by radar instead. Or have the developers bluffed as expected

PAC-III has a kill rate of 70-75%, I don't expect Indian Defence Shield to even measure that.

"I dont expect " Lol do I need to say anything more?
 
.
This article tell more about the missle defence system

Bharat Karnad, research professor at the Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and author of Nuclear Weapons and Indian Security: The Realist Foundations of Strategy, told Asia Times Online that a foolproof ballistic-missile defense is difficult to realize because "physics is against it ... There are all kinds of technical reasons why it will be impossible for an incoming missile to be intercepted inside the atmosphere," he said.

It is easier to intercept a missile under controlled conditions, when you know the parameters of the flight of the missile. "But this is a far cry from a ballistic-missile defense in battlefield conditions where one doesn't have the parameters of the incoming missile. The adversary is not going to feed you information regarding from which direction the missile is coming, the altitude or the kind of maneuvers it can perform," Karnad pointed out.

Karnad also drew attention to the fact that no missile defense system, including the US Patriot PAC-3 or the Israeli Arrow-2, has reached a technological level where it can stop every missile that comes in. Even these advanced systems have a kill capability of only 60-70%. So, he asks, if 30-40% of missiles will slip through, what's the point in having this kind of defense? And an adversary is not going to fire just one missile but will in all likelihood launch a salvo of them.

There is a danger that possession of a missile defense system will instill a measure of false confidence in the country that it can deal with all incoming missiles when in fact it cannot. There is a danger too that if India were to claim capability to blunt missile attacks it would prompt an adversary to seek to overcome the claimed shield by firing more missiles.

There is also the cost factor. The US has poured billions of dollars into its missile-defense project. Can India afford to invest so much in a system that is not foolproof?

And then there is the question of whether such a system that is based on point defense, ie, defense of specific cities, is compatible with the principles of democracy. A missile defense system will be deployed to protect the national capital, New Delhi. This raises troubling questions. Why should Delhi have a missile defense system when other towns and villages do not? Because its rulers live there? Should hundreds of billions of dollars be invested in a system that will defend at best a city or two?

With its successful interception of a missile last week, India has demonstrated that it has taken a step toward building a missile defense. But it has many miles to travel and several hurdles to cross before it can feel relieved that it has a credible shield against its adversaries' missiles.
 
.
Pardon me for my lack of military knowledge, but I am curious the statement that Indian missile shield's interception range is 25km maximum, isn't that pretty low??
If I remember correctly, S-300 PMU-1 already has 120km interception range, S-300 PMU-3 has range of 400km, while PAC-3's range is 200km. That seems to have a lot of disparity between the Indian ABM.

Don't mind me saying, but even Republic of China (Taiwan) has developed Tien Kung-II (Sky Bow) missile with 200km range with ABM capability, Mainland China has the capability to shoot down object at 865 km (actual interception) range at exoatmospheric environment.

Shouldn't that makes India the 7th country to developed ABM? (As oppose to the stated "5th"... well, some Indian news even stated as 3rd country to have ABM)

This was a technology demonstration and hence the range choosen was 48 Km .
 
.
Interview: Vijay Kumar Saraswat
Chief Controller of Research and Development, India’s DRDO


Known in India as the father of the anti-ballistic air defense missile system, Vijay Kumar Saraswat began his career at the state-owned Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) with the development of India’s first liquid-propulsion engine for the Prithvi missile.

Saraswat, who specializes in rocket propulsion, missile technologies, and project and technology management, today is the DRDO’s chief controller for research and development. His future assignments include development of India’s anti-ballistic missile systems, radars, C4I systems and integration of battle management resources into a national authority. For his outstanding contribution to India, Saraswat was conferred with the Padma Shri Award, the country’s fourth-highest civilian award, in 1998.

Q. Please describe the homegrown ballistic missile defense system. How many missiles will it have for different layers of threats?
A. Our missile configuration is a three-layered missile defense configuration. We are planning to engage ballistic missiles at the exo-atmospheric layer, i.e., the layer where it enters the atmosphere, and the endo-atmospheric layer, where there is a thermally sensitive atmospheric layer. This configuration gives us the best probability of killing a ballistic missile coming to us. To increase hit probability, we can plan to launch two to three missiles each for exo- and endo-atmospheric.

The missile that demonstrates our capability to intercept ballistic missiles at exo-atmospheric altitudes is called PAD. It is a two-stage missile. The first stage is liquid, and the second is a solid rocket motor with many additional features, which are leading to an interception or engaging the ballistic missiles. For example, it has seeker guidance, divert thruster which can generate a lateral acceleration at more than 5 Gs at 50 kilometers altitude.

Q. How many missiles in the system?
A. There are two layers. At each battery there is a multiple launcher with multiple missiles.

Q. What is the configuration of BMD?
A. In a typical battery, you have the long-range radars, missile launchers, mission control center and other ground systems.

The complete network of radars, launch batteries, missile control centers, launch control centers. These are geographically distributed and are connected to a very potent secure communications network.

The radar is looking at a particular elevation and detects incoming ballistic missiles. This information is sent to the mission control center(MCC), which then decides whether it is a missile interceptor or a satellite or any other projectile, and it does target classification within a few seconds. When the target is classified, the MCC also calculates where the impact point of the target is likely to be and where it is going to fall.

After the target is classified, the MCC also finds out the trajectory profile and the speed it is going to travel. Based on that, it assigns a target to a particular battery. This is called target assignment.

Once the target is assigned, the data goes to a particular battery, then control goes to the launch control center (LCC). LCC keeps on getting data from radar directly, and then it decides when to launch the interceptor. This is decided based on the data received from radar, on the speed of target, altitude, flight path. A ground guidance computation is done. It's a very complex computation from ground computation when to launch the interceptor. All this is done in an autonomous fashion.

Q. Can you tell me the timeframe?
A. For the 600-kilometer class of system, if a radar has spotted a target, the interceptor will be launched within about 180 seconds. It will be different for 200-kilometer and 300-kilometer missiles.

Q. What is the speed of the air defense missile?
A. It is between 4.5 and 5 Mach. The same system has the capability to engage 300-kilometer to 2,000-kilometer classes of ballistic missiles.

Q. How efficient is it?
A. Depending upon the area of threat, radars are deployed in that direction. We deploy the radar in such a way that a threat coming from that direction is detected. Once the target missile is detected at a point, a number of batteries are deployed. If a missile is passing through the zone of influence of one battery, that battery will be activated.

Q. Is this Swordfish radar?
A. No, it is Long-Range Tracking Radar. It has the capability to track 200 targets at a range of about 600 kilometers.

It can track the target and the interceptor also. So in this radar, we developed the complete software for doing the tracking and engagement of ballistic missiles.

Complete software for signal processing transmitter receiver modules, central processing units and complete ground segment — like cooling units, power supplies and the communication network — have been indigenously developed and integrated. Today, we have full capability to manufacture this radar in our country.

Q. How many radars have you developed in this class? When did this development begin?
A. We started working on this in late 1999, beginning of 2000, and we completed it in 2004. It has taken almost five years. We had also developed radar for the endo-atmospheric layer. It is called multifunction control radar. This is also a phased array radar. It also has the capability to beat the interceptor guidance, if required.

Q. How does the MCC work?
A. MCC is completely a software-intensive system for BMD, and this works on about 10 computers simultaneously. It receives information about the target from different sources. It could be ground-based radars, satellites or our own technical intelligence system. MCC is connected to all the elements of the weapon system through a wide area communication network. It does target classification, target assignment and kill assessment.

In addition, planning for deployment of radar and other weapon system elements is also done by MCC. It can also simulate all the types of track profiles and also simulates the interception using our interceptors, and then select whether interception will take place or not. It can also indicate how many missiles should be launched to intercept an incoming threat to give an assured kill probability. It acts as a decision support system for the commander.

Q. What is LCC?
A. It is the basic hub for launch of the interceptor. After a target has been assigned to a particular battery, LCC starts computing when to launch the interceptor based upon the information received from the radars, about the target. It carries out the checking of the health of the missile. It prepares the missile for launch in real time, carries out ground guidance computation.

After an interceptor is launched, the interceptor is provided information about the target through an uplink. The target real time data is transmitted through a very robust communication network.

Q. When will the BMD testing be complete?
A. It will take more than three years to complete our developmental activities.

Q. What is Phase II?
A. The same missile interceptors cannot cover all threats. Threat targets of longer ranges — 2,000 kilometers — will make our phase-II development.

During Phase I: Endo-atmospheric interceptor is AAD. This interceptor will engage targets at 25 kilometers. AAD is superior in terms of coverage area compared to PAC-3, which is 15 kilometers. You can see the difference. AAD’s equivalent is the Israeli Arrow, which intercepts at 40 kilometers. PAD is 50 to 80 kilometers. America is building a missile, THAAD — Terminal High Altitude Area Defense — that intercepts out to 120 kilometers, but it is still in development. However, a lot of failures have taken place during THAAD development.

Q. How many missile batteries would you deploy?
A. Nobody will give information on how many and where we will deploy them.

Q. Who will be the production agency for this?
A. We have participation of 30 private and public industries for various subsystems of this missile and weapon system.

Q. Who will build the radar eventually?
A. Radar will be made by a consortium of Bharat Electronics and many other private industries, facilitating private-public partnership, with DRDO as technology giver.

Q. And what about missiles?
A. Missiles and subsystems are also being made by many private industries. It could be government-owned Bharat Dynamics Ltd. — the preferred agency — or any other agency.

Q. What is involved in the development of a missile system?
A. A lot of different technologies are involved. For example, take the PAD missile. We started developing in the year 2000, and in six to seven years we have launched the missiles — whereas the Integrated Guided Missile Development Program started in 1983 and the first launch of Prithvi was in 1988, Agni in 1989, and we have developed other missiles like Akash and Nag also. One needs to work on various technologies for different systems in propulsion, control, guidance, aerodynamics, structures, power systems, launchers and other supporting ground systems.

Q. What does this mean?
A. We have reached the stage of technology development where we have technical maturity and technological qualification leading to subsystem production at identified production agencies. This is a very long, long process.

Q. What is the effect of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR)?
A. When we launched Prithvi and Agni, it had affected the launch of all the missiles and subsystems. The MTCR was a major reason for delay in the 1990s in the development of our missiles.

Q. How did you overcome?
A. We launched a program called “Combating MTCR,” and because of that program, we developed all the unavailable materials, components and subsystems indigenously.

When you do such work, you have to depend on your country’s industries and scientific institutions. When the scientific institutions give support but industries lack the technological base to support this type of program, then we have to develop required integrated circuits, etc. We have to have set up like that and we have to spend money, and it takes time. That way, development of the Integrated Guided Missile Development Program, we were involved in development of integrated circuits, material, irradiating elements. We spent a lot of money and effort doing that.

In 1996, the first Prithvi system was delivered. Despite MTCR, Agni-1 and -2 have been done. Akash flight trials were conducted successfully. The Nag imaging infrared seeker has been built. So it is to the credit of the Indian scientific community.

Now, the Akash air defense system is going to lead to production because this year, we are going for induction of Akash after a few user trials.

Q. What about the Nag anti-tank missile?
A. This year, we are going to conduct the user trials of Nag.

Q. What about the Trishul quick-reaction missile?
A. Development is completed. We are looking for more variants.

Q. What about the Dhanush ship-launched missile and Astra beyond-visual-range missile?
A. Dhanush we have already completed successfully. Astra is an air-to-air beyond-visual-range missile. Ballistic trials of the missile have been completed. Now, we are on to control and guidance flight-trial mode. We expect that by June, control guidance flights will commence. Now it is going per schedule and all the various technological requirements of Astra are being met.

Q. What are the spinoffs?
A. Once Phase-II interceptors are developed, these can be used as long-range interceptors of aircraft at ranges of 120 kilometers.

You see the question which you asked that it has taken 20 years to develop. Now you see it is not taking more than 5 years - 6 years. Even Americans also take time. Their missile program with industrial infrastructure, the cost is very high and they take six to seven years before a missile is launched. This is also time taken for development of PAD and AAD.

By Vivek Raghuvanshi in New Delhi.
 
.
No need to get into lenghty discussions but should say that put the shield in and stay safe, Feel safe and think safe, but when it starts raining Shaheen, Ghauri and Babur then donot come out in open otherwise you will get really Wet.

Peace !
 
.
Pardon me for my lack of military knowledge, but I am curious the statement that Indian missile shield's interception range is 25km maximum, isn't that pretty low??
If I remember correctly, S-300 PMU-1 already has 120km interception range, S-300 PMU-3 has range of 400km, while PAC-3's range is 200km. That seems to have a lot of disparity between the Indian ABM.

Don't mind me saying, but even Republic of China (Taiwan) has developed Tien Kung-II (Sky Bow) missile with 200km range with ABM capability, Mainland China has the capability to shoot down object at 865 km (actual interception) range at exoatmospheric environment.

Shouldn't that makes India the 7th country to developed ABM? (As oppose to the stated "5th"... well, some Indian news even stated as 3rd country to have ABM)

You are comparing horizontal range to vertical range of Indian system. AAD hit the target at 15km vertical height not 15km horizontal distance.
 
.
Babur has sea skimming and terrain hugging capability, its designed to avoid radar detection whereas BMD was tested against high incoming missile.
And then there's Ra'ad, a stealth CM!

I'm curious to learn how Mr Saraswat can counter two very advanced CM's without radar detection. :coffee:

Air borne radars. Cruise missile are difficult to detect using land based radar not airborne radar. AESA radars on F-18,Bars radar are optimized for detecting low flying objects.

US & Russians have been building cruise missile for decades. Solution already exists for shooting cruise missiles. If ships can shoot down water hugging ASHM,why cant there be a system for shooting down cruise missiles?
 
.
Air borne radars. Cruise missile are difficult to detect using land based radar not airborne radar. AESA radars on F-18,Bars radar are optimized for detecting low flying objects.

US & Russians have been building cruise missile for decades. Solution already exists for shooting cruise missiles. If ships can shoot down water hugging ASHM,why cant there be a system for shooting down cruise missiles?

Ok that Ships can shoot down sea skimming missiles but these are getting far more advanced day by day then the Interception techniques, How many AshMs were fired in War against terror against US... None.. When you have to intercept a AshM it is easier said then done my friend. The harpoon and Exocet are the worst nightmare for Ships, Sun Burn and Brahmos are the others which should be feared. Shooting down Cruise Missile is not as similar as Shooting down Ballastic Missiles. Till date no ABM has been tested against Cruise Missiles, all are tested against Ballastic Missiles which now are also evolving and the guidence systems are now being based on Intercept avoidence techniques. At the end of the day the aggressor Missile will win the race rather then the Intercept missile. The credibility of ABM systems is yet to be tested against most advaced missile systems. Only rear test will tell how effective they are.
 
.
Ok that Ships can shoot down sea skimming missiles but these are getting far more advanced day by day then the Interception techniques, How many AshMs were fired in War against terror against US... None.. When you have to intercept a AshM it is easier said then done my friend. The harpoon and Exocet are the worst nightmare for Ships, Sun Burn and Brahmos are the others which should be feared. Shooting down Cruise Missile is not as similar as Shooting down Ballastic Missiles. Till date no ABM has been tested against Cruise Missiles, all are tested against Ballastic Missiles which now are also evolving and the guidence systems are now being based on Intercept avoidence techniques. At the end of the day the aggressor Missile will win the race rather then the Intercept missile. The credibility of ABM systems is yet to be tested against most advaced missile systems. Only rear test will tell how effective they are.

If I can detect an cruise,what is preventing me from shooting a subsonic missile? You say it is easier to shoot a BM coming at Mach4 than a subsonic cruise missile?
 
.
Ok so how about you detect the cruise missile and when you are done that phase let us know, and by that time we will have something else for you to keep you busy :)
 
.
there are still missiles that can hit ships.
On May 17, 1987, the pilot of an Iraqi Mirage F-1 allegedly mistook the U.S. Navy Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate USS Stark for an Iranian tanker and fired two Exocets at the warship. Both hit, but only one exploded.[citation needed] The first penetrated the port-side hull; it failed to detonate, but spewed flaming rocket fuel in its path. The second entered at almost the same point, and left a 3-by-4-metre gash then exploded in crew quarters. Thirty-seven sailors were killed and twenty-one were injured. Stark was heavily damaged, but saved by the crew and sent back for repairs. The errant pilot was reportedly executed for his error, which had the dual effect of rendering him unavailable for an inquiry into the attack.

this was at the time of the cold war if the americans werent able to stop a missile how good will the indians be
 
.
If I can detect an cruise,what is preventing me from shooting a subsonic missile? You say it is easier to shoot a BM coming at Mach4 than a subsonic cruise missile?

What is stopping you from shooting a subsonic cruise missile and subsonic AshM missile is the ability to detect before its to late. In case of Ramjet powered cruise missiles like brahamos or Sun burn, the opposite is true that its easier to detect but lesser time to react, which makes them also lethal.

BM's are very hard to intercept also but some success has been achieved in before re-entering earth atmosphere altitude. Still it is hard to Intercept BM with 100% accuracy in Boast phase and in Terminal phase. Intercept avoidance is not a prime guidance feature of Ballastic Missile, Rather it is the speed that is the difference between ballastic missile that make them more lethal. Solid fuelled missile as used by Pakistan are more speedy then the liquid fueled missiles, Solid fuel based MRBMs or IRBMs are very hard to Intercept also.

As the ABM technology is evolving so is the ballastic missile tech. I didnot meant that you can shoot BM's with 100% surety. Furthermore, MIRVed warheads, re entering the atmosphere desperse at different allocated destination and becomes very hard to track and intercept. MIRVed IRBM's are to be tested in this region thou, but Pakistan has the significant know how to do so.
 
.
Hiccups you say. Is that the way you describe decades old projects which even the IAF and IA have serious doubts and are unwilling to induct them. Indeed i'm very qurious about DRDO's land mark success. By the way which success are we talking about? Pardon my ignorance here.

Believe me i'm not at all forgeting DRDO's wishlist of ambitious projects that also includes now the antiballistic system and yes now i fully can imagine how proud you indians must be of DRDO. :enjoy:


What an unbelievable irony and so desperation in proving DRDO a failed establishment, isn’t it? Couldn’t seen successful ABM system and hence justifying emotional unease by giving examples of all other DRDO’s delayed project.

Pls do tell me what is the way of describing decade old project?

And Offcourse, IAF and IA have serious doubts and unwillingness in not only homegrown project but also in Foreign products that are on their wishlist.

Regarding your imaginative thinking judging our proud factor, you don’t have that wisdom.
 
.
Oh yeh indeed we shoould not suggest dear ;)
---------------------




And that is what you should be! Isn’t it so convenient for you to deliver such editorial criticizing DRDO, which is already 6 months old? This only goes to show that you people are so lighting to jump on such criticism and on other hand you mysteriously get blindfolded when it comes DRDO being appreciated by all other Indian editorial and substantiate your claims by highlighting DRDO delayed projects.
 
.
Yes you're very fortunate to have a range of stop-gap purchases due defence establishments like DRDO. She's structurely providing necessity to 'import' weapons to take care of your countries security needs.
Bravo! :tup:





Import of weapons, offcourse nobody denying that, but Indian are quite intelligent over here as well in setting the obligation of Offset contractual clauses by which transfer of technology can get availed and regarding stop gap measure are for fulfilling temporary needs, nothing more then that by which one could get annoyed.

It seems to me, restless emotions are steaming everwhere with ABM test and association of DRDO with this test. Just this line of thought can’t get below throat of some people who exceedingly trying accuse DRDO of failed establishment and hence usual harping ARJUN-LCA delay, stop gap. And kindly man do tell me if any other creative accusation.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom