PSLV-C20 launches 7 satellites

[MST]

Does India have a Kinetic Kill Interceptor ?

Sir I don't know the answer to that question since this is not in public domain. Here is the statement from DRDO chief:

Can show anti-satellite capability if govt gives nod: DRDO chief - Indian Express

Quoting from this article. Though I don't always take his words seriously Space/Missile Technology is one area we are doing pretty good. So I will give him the benefit of doubt here.

While the top scientist said India is not interested in weaponising space and is a 'peace loving nation', he asserted that the Agni V launch is the last piece of technology that had to be demonstrated to prove that India has anti-satellite capabilities

 

[kurup]

Does India have a Kinetic Kill Interceptor ?

so far no, i think. But explosive kill can do the job. And kindly explain kinetic kill so imp for ASW.

Sir I don't know the answer to that question since this is not in public domain.

answer is YES .

BMD Test on November 23, 2013 was KKV.

 

[S-DUCT]

answer is YES .

BMD Test on November 23, 2013 was KKV.

Any missile which remains inside the atmosphere can maneuver using fins & thrust direction,so its pointless to use KKV for inside endo-atmospheric interception.

AAD uses P-charge warhead.Warhead is released when AAD missile is very close to Ballastic missile on the other hand KKV is released in the space and it uses it thrusters for navigation and it also does not contains any explosives to destroy hostile ballastic missile.

 

[Liaoning]

This is nothing special. All the satellites were mini satellites. Nothing special in sending multiple mini satellites into space. Indians launch technology and satellite technology still relies on foreign manufacturers.

 

[kurup]

Any missile which remains inside the atmosphere can maneuver using fins & thrust direction,so its pointless to use KKV for inside endo-atmospheric interception.

AAD uses P-charge warhead.Warhead is released when AAD missile is very close to Ballastic missile on the other hand KKV is released in the space and it uses it thrusters for navigation and it also does not contains any explosives to destroy hostile ballastic missile.

AFAIK , incoming ballistic missiles can be destroyed in two ways - proximity detonation and hit-to-kill.

Isn't hit-to-kill and kkv same??

 

[S-DUCT]

AFAIK , incoming ballistic missiles can be destroyed in two ways - proximity detonation and hit-to-kill.

Isn't hit-to-kill and kkv same??

Yep!(except for SAM)
I checked that THAAD,RIM-161 SM3,PAC-3,Arrow-3 uses hit-to-kill apraoch to drown enemy ballastic missile and they all have KKV.

THAAD,PAC-3,ARROW-3 are therminal phase interceptors that kills ballastic missile at altitude of more than 100km and we also know that new DRDO'S interceptors can work upti altitude of 150km so can we expect this missile to have KKV?

 

[ANPP]

Yep!(except for SAM)
I checked that THAAD,RIM-161 SM3,PAC-3,Arrow-3 uses hit-to-kill apraoch to drown enemy ballastic missile and they all have KKV.

THAAD,PAC-3,ARROW-3 are therminal phase interceptors that kills ballastic missile at altitude of more than 100km and we also know that new DRDO'S interceptors can work upti altitude of 150km so can we expect this missile to have KKV?

THAAD surely uses hit-to-kill, but Arrow uses explosive kill. PAC is mainly SAM with limited anti-ballastic capability.
As wiki suggest AAD have kinetic kill so you are wright but explosive kill gives more accuracy especially in missile-kill. Thats why PAD uses proximity detonation.

 

[S-DUCT]

THAAD surely uses hit-to-kill, but Arrow uses explosive kill. PAC is mainly SAM with limited anti-ballastic capability.
As wiki suggest AAD have kinetic kill so you are wright but explosive kill gives more accuracy especially in missile-kill. Thats why PAD uses proximity detonation.

Mate,Latest arrow-3 missile has KKV

PAC-3 anti-missile system is made mainly to perform as A.B.M.It has Ka band active radar seeker . The active radar also gives the warhead a "hit-to-kill" (kinetic kill vehicle) capability that completely eliminates the need for a traditional proximity-fused warhead.

PAD uses gimbaled directional warhead ,from an US patent

n a medium range interceptor missile for deployment against air supported targets, said missile having a directional blast fragmentation warhead fuze seeker system comprising a gimbaled system for supporting and positioning the warhead within the nose section of the missile and a proximity fuze seeker system which senses the intended target, controls the gimbaled system through a servo system whereby the axis of the fragmentation blast pattern of the warhead is aligned with the line-of-sight from the interceptor missile to the target, and fires the warhead when the interceptor missile is a predetermined distance from the target, the improvement comprising:

No doubt directional warheads are powerful,IMO but one will need KKV for midcourse interceptions

 

[SHAMK9]

we cant even launch one congrats to Bharat though

 

[S-DUCT]

we cant even launch one congrats to Bharat though

But you can use taimur ICBM to launch small payloads(around 50kg) to LEO though.

 

[Nan Yang]

Sir I don't know the answer to that question since this is not in public domain. Here is the statement from DRDO chief:

Can show anti-satellite capability if govt gives nod: DRDO chief - Indian Express

Quoting from this article. Though I don't always take his words seriously Space/Missile Technology is one area we are doing pretty good. So I will give him the benefit of doubt here.

From the article, the answer seems to be a YES and then a NO.

"An anti-satellite system requires a good boost capability. Something like 800 km (into space). If you can reach that and have the guiding capabilities it can be done. The Agni V has demonstrated the boost capability," Saraswat said, adding that a kill vehicle could be attached to the missile to target a satellite.

You have the boost but you do not have the kill vehicle.

You need an Exo-atmosphere Kill Vehicle to destroy a satellite in orbit.

Look at statements coming from DRDO after Chinese tests "We have all the elements of ASAT in place".

So the DRDO statement is misleading....right ?

 

[Astra-2013]

kill vehicle is just a term coined by defence companies........full name of it is actually is EXOATMOSPHERIC KILL VEHICLE

EXOATMOSPHERIC=meaning outside atmosphere that is something above 50km. 99.99% part of atmosphere is within 40km.

KILL VEHICLE=(meaning there should be a seperate small part fitted to missile that is seprated from missile at terminal interception and it used to kill the incoming warhead by any possible method like kinetic kill or proximity explosion )

And like a person can be killed by a gun or hitting by a hammer on his head, a warhead can be killed by hit to kill or proximity explosion. both are kill vehicle but method of killing is different.

Now you know why this kill vehicle thing is used because outside atmosphere there is no aerodynamic forces so we have to use
lateral thrusters to control and guide the missile or whatever, it requires a lot of fuel,now if we use a small part(kill vehicle ) fitted in missile instead of whole missile that is guided to the warhead then if can go further with less fuel required by lateral thrusters......since size is limited so fuel is limited......that is the reason behind using a small thing called kill vehicle in exoatmospheric interceptors.

India's AAD don't have kill vehicle why
1.because it is a atmospheric interceptor........ within 30km altitude.
2.because it doesn't have a separate part(which we can call kill vehicle) fitted in missile,which is used in terminal interception and kill.
instead whole missile what is left after stage separation is used till. so by definition whole missile is kill vehicle.

India's pad uses lateral thrusters but if we use exact definition then it don't have kill vehicle because. though it uses lateral thrusters but don't have a separate vehicle instead it uses what is left of a missile after stage separation in last phase in killing.
and drdo does't use separate kill vehicle because PAD doesn't go that high if i remember correctly it can intercept as high as 80km

-->BUT if we look at with technological perspective rather than by exact definition coined by western companies and what most of people understand than we can say India's has kill vehicle technology. because kill vehicle technology require technology for lateral thrusters and terminal seeker coordination and algorithms. and good terminal seeker which India demonstrated what is Left is fitting this in a sperated vehicle which will be demonstrated in comming PDV missile(interception at 200km altitude)

 

[Astra-2013]

After comming PDV test in May if Drdo used hit to kill method than kill vehicle will be called kinetic kill vehicle and if Drdo used proximitiy explosion than it will be called Directional explosion kill vehicle. but both are kill vehicles.

BUT i think DRDO will use kinetic kill because at 200km altitude there will be very little shock effect of explosive,and it will depend on only shrapnel to kill the warhead.

 

[kurup]

Yep!(except for SAM)
I checked that THAAD,RIM-161 SM3,PAC-3,Arrow-3 uses hit-to-kill apraoch to drown enemy ballastic missile and they all have KKV.

THAAD,PAC-3,ARROW-3 are therminal phase interceptors that kills ballastic missile at altitude of more than 100km and we also know that new DRDO'S interceptors can work upti altitude of 150km so can we expect this missile to have KKV?

Now I get it .All kkv's employ hit-to-kill method but all hit-to-kill doesn't need to be a kkv.

The video I posted was a hit-to-kill by AAD but was not a kkv.For a kkv , it requires a warhead section that seperates from the main missile does the interception which the AAD was not.

@Astra-2013 explained it nicely in #403 and #404.

 

[suren]

This is nothing special. All the satellites were mini satellites. Nothing special in sending multiple mini satellites into space. Indians launch technology and satellite technology still relies on foreign manufacturers.

Well said sir,
What about putting some water tanks on orbit just because it must be heavy?