Indian Space & Missile Discussion II

India Nears Fielding Of New SAM Systems

Oct 15, 2010

By Asia-Pacific Staff
New Delhi

—Snip—

That situation is now being remedied. By next March, the IAF will begin receiving the first of 18 Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI)-Rafael Spyder quick-reaction medium-range missile systems. The offshore deal became necessary in 2006 because of development problems and delays in the indigenous Akash surface-to-air missile (SAM) program.

However, Akash has since turned the corner, and the IAF decided to order six more Akash batteries worth $925 million—each with 125 missiles—in addition to the two systems already on order. The service will receive its first two Akash batteries in February, and is likely to deploy them in India’s Northeast.

The IAF also anticipates joint development work kicking off in earnest on the 15-km.-range (9.3-mi.) Indo-French Maitri short-range SAM (SR-SAM), which is aimed at filling the void created when the Indian government decided to wind up the Trishul point-defense weapon program in 2006 and effectively de-link it from IAF and Indian navy requirements. A workshare agreement between the Indian Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and European missile maker MBDA has been concluded. IAF sources suggest a formal accord sanctioning the program is likely soon, possibly when French President Nicolas Sarkozy visits New Delhi later this year.

An MBDA official says the SR-SAM would finish development work and the first phase of testing within three years of program go-ahead. While no official timelines have been revealed, the IAF expects the system to be available for deployment by late 2013.

Even higher on the IAF’s priority list is the 70-km.-range MR-SAM that the DRDO is developing with IAI. The IAF has revealed plans to raise at least two regiments that will use the MR-SAM, each with 40 launchers and support equipment. In India, the MR-SAM will progressively replace the IAF’s antiquated Soviet-vintage SA-3 Pechora and SA-8 OSA-AK SAM systems. A proposed foreign-assisted upgrade of the Pechora fleet was shelved two years ago, with the IAF deciding it was more economical to pursue a limited ground-equipment modification by Bharat Electronics Ltd. The Pechora, OSA-AK and 9K38 Igla man-portable SAM systems are effectively obsolete, and the IAF admits it has had to cannibalize equipment to keep a minimum number operationally effective.

—Snip—

But these activities to not address all of the air force’s concerns; radar coverage is another worry. The IAF currently has fast-track tenders out for long-range surveillance radars, high-powered radars, three-dimensional C/D band air surveillance radars, low-level transportable radars and radars for mountain surveillance in India’s northern and eastern sectors.

—snip—

Photo: DRDO

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/awst/2010/10/11/AW_10_11_2010_p30-259987.xml&headline=India Nears Fielding Of New SAM Systems&channel=defense

Interesting read, there was a really good artical I think in AFM or another major publication which discussed the major holes in the Indias air defense network many years ago and it looks like this is finally being addressed.

I wonder if it would be worth for India to pay outright for the S-300 sitting in Russia currently not sold to Iran as a stop gap.

Do you see Akash role and range over lapping Barak 1 or Trishul ? Barak 1 is a quick reaction point defence sam , trishul was a PD too but never made out of R&D due to continuous guidance issue.

The IN was not interested in Akash because it has a range too short to be useful as naval medium range SAM and Akash or Shtil are not quick reaction PD SAM.

Maitri could be the next PD sam if that project goes ahead.

^^^ Command Guidance have their own limitations in dealing with Saturations Attacks and their ability to deal with long range targets with LOAL approach is not possible due to LOS issue.

Akash also has range restriction to remain a viable MR range in todays naval threat environment.

So the IN choose Barak-NG to over come these issue and deal with such threats more effectively.

I am talking about Akash vs Trishul or even Akash vs Barak1 or Barak vs shi*l

^^^ Command Guidance have their own limitations in dealing with Saturations Attacks and their ability to deal with long range targets with LOAL approach is not possible due to LOS issue.

Akash also has range restriction to remain a viable MR range in todays naval threat environment.

So the IN choose Barak-NG to over come these issue and deal with such threats more effectively.

I have always wondered why no attempt was made to design a Naval variant for Akash. Ship launched as well as shore launched for anti-sea skimming missiles. If trishul could be given low altitude interception capability then the same should not have been difficult for Akash also

Even for land use there are applications against sea(land)-skimming missiles, in particular ALCMs.

You are not getting the point at all.

Over land, unless its flat terrain all the way etc, you are not going to see aircraft & missiles go below a certain level, and even there the Akash can strike. A few meters below that, and SR-SAMs can hit there as well. Both are part of the Indian acquisition/inventory.

Internalize this, speed & height of flight are in opposite directions as far as control systems are concerned.

Over sea, you can put a radar altimeter & a height lock loop algorithm to take into account the waves & different sea states and hence come up with very low heights. Hence all the talk of sea skimming missiles flying at 100 feet and even below.

Over land, you don’t have that benefit, there are wires, obstructions every place and the variance in terrain is mindboggling.

So cruise missiles use a combination of inertial nav, radalts and the truly sophisticated ones, using passive database derived navigation input, which correlates with mapped terrain. Given the margin for error is so low, they have a minimum height below which they dont go and are hence vulnerable to properly designed IADS, especially the subsonic ones. Tomahawks in ODS for instance are cited at flying a “few hundred feet” off the ground. A 100 feet is 30 meters. (Desert Storm, what the Navy did). As matter of fact, Missile Guidance texts quotes the height for a typical subsonic land attack cruise missile as 200 meters.

The success of these missiles is determined by the fact that radar horizon is low even at that height, and they are literally “on the target” before medium range ADS has the time to react. So its not that they are too low to shoot down, its that they are there before you knew they were, because your average medium ranged radar only picked them up at 40-50 km. The supersonic ones, of course are even more dangerous.

The solution to this of course, is to have layered detection using aerostats, AEW&C who are high, dont have radar horizon issues, and pick them up from afar and start shooting them down, and for the leakers have QRSAMs with fast reaction times & low minimum ranges. Subsonic missiles, the vast majority in the world, and the ones with India’s adversaries are all vulnerable.

Even so, the true low fliers are the helicopter pilots, who literally fly “on the deck”, ie a few meters above ground level (as low as 10 meters and even below!), though the speed is a fraction of that of combat aircraft and even subsonic missiles. But they in turn are very vulnerable to MANPADS and ground fire.

^^^ I dont think we will see Akash go active with ARH or IIR seekers , Akash is suppose to be cost-effective mass produce missile for mass deployment , they will go through range and FC/Rajendra improvement in block variant e.g improvement in ECCM,Track/Range improvements etc

I think such periodic block improvement and the capable system that it already is will make it an effective system for the next 25 years viz-a viz the threats that exist.

I think that Akash production will cease when Baraks enter mass production in and around 2015. Though i would like to see Akash with Active homing seeker

Even for land use there are applications against sea(land)-skimming missiles, in particular ALCMs.

We need to be clear what the Akash is meant for, the Akash is not meant for a naval use, so why would it have to engage sea skimming targets. However, it did engage low flying targets at trials at Chandipore on Sea, showing that the system is capable.

For Naval use, we’ll be relying on the Barak-8/LRSAM & Barak-1. With a radar mounted high up, it should be able to pick up a sea skimmer, fairly far away.

But the Akash is basically meant for land use, where it can engage low flying targets, with both Raj & 3D CAR capable of detecting the same. We really should not be going to get into exact numbers, since this is a system that is going to be deployed operationally.

The bigger thing than the Akash is the creation of a national air grid, which is in the works.

The Akash can hit much lower than that..

Clarification? It’s not much ground for skepticism, but I would like to hear from a source that Akash is designed for sea-skimming targets. Speaking of which, are Rajendra and CAR proficient at detecting the same?

I believe imported target drones have also been used to validate Akash missile system. Having said this IIRC till late nineties the lakshya’s minimum height of flight was around 100m

The Akash can hit much lower than that..

Lakshya is a subsonic targeting drone. Also from that report I’m not convinced that it was flown simulating cruise-missile trajectories and not just low-flying aircraft.

You have stated something that needs to be clarified.

A cruise missile trajectory, is actually easier than that flown by experienced combat pilots some of who’ll get down to 100-200 feet (30-60 meters) without an autopilot, heavy load, tough terrain and that too, at decent speed (0.6 M). These guys will even initiate evasive maneuvers and jamming at the first sign of trouble.

A missile on the other hand, relies on height, usually has a bunch of waypoints programmed in, to avoid prominent obstacles and possible SAM positions & the top of the line auto-nav system variants is still carefully kept by the US (they licensed this for the EF & Rafale). Most other systems worldwide, rely on similar or more primitive systems and cannot, over land, perform similarly. Its one of the biggest advantages of the US Precision Weapons industry.

In other words, a cruise missile is depending on the radar horizon, is dumb, it cannot detect it has been fired at and take evasive action, has to depend on the “intelligence” of its original programming & cannot jam its opponent.

The Lakshya, is perfectly capable of a cruise missile trajectory.

So take what this says seriously, as the IAF trial directive combines all the key requirements needed of the Akash:

User trials to verify the consistency in performance of the total weapon system against A. low flying near range target, B. long range high altitude target, C.crossing and D. approaching target and E.ripple firing of two missiles from the same launcher against a low altitude receding target were conducted at ITR, Chandipur during Dec 2007. Akash missile successfully intercepted nine targets in successive launches. Fifth and last trial successfully took place at 2.15pm on 21st Dec at Chandipur on sea in which the Akash missile destroyed an Unmanned Air Vehicle (Lakshya) which was flying a path simulating an air attack.

http://www.akashsam.com/about.htm

The low altitude receding target is the hardest.

The bigger question is why are Cruise Missiles still a challenge. Its because of their trajectory, and the radar horizon.

At 15,000 feet, detecting a target flying at 100 feet has a radar horizon of 300 km. At 10 meters (typical radar placed on elevated mast), you have a horizon of 40 km. So you see, cruise missile swarms can be a big pain if you dont have an AEW system or aerostats in place.

In other words, once you can detect these in time, you can shoot them down, even with radar guided guns. The best method against these swarms are a layered defence. The moment they are launched, everything from MKIs to border guns should open up on them, with the BADZ being the last.

What ever it is India and IAF need to get the AKASH to increase coverage. Hopefully atleast the electronics will have been updated and made more jam resistent.

Hopefully India will not be witness to something like the alleged Israeli attack on its neighbours nucleare power plunt up north.

I believe imported target drones have also been used to validate Akash missile system. Having said this IIRC till late nineties the lakshya’s minimum height of flight was around 100m

It’s possible. From what I’ve read about it the Lakshya is a fairly basic targeting drone used for general testing. Anyway, the Akash official site advertises it as being effective for targets upto 600m/s, which is a little below Mach 2. At the least it will be a suitable replacement for the old SA-6.

I believe imported target drones have also been used to validate Akash missile system. Having said this IIRC till late nineties the lakshya’s minimum height of flight was around 100m

User trials to verify the consistency in performance of the total weapon system against low flying near range target, long range high altitude target, crossing and approaching target and ripple firing of two missiles from the same launcher against a low altitude receding target were conducted at ITR, Chandipur during Dec 2007. Akash missile successfully intercepted nine targets in successive launches. Fifth and last trial successfully took place at 2.15pm on 21st Dec at Chandipur on sea in which the Akash missile destroyed an Unmanned Air Vehicle (Lakshya) which was flying a path simulating an air attack.

http://www.akashsam.com/about.htm

Lakshya is a subsonic targeting drone. Also from that report I’m not convinced that it was flown simulating cruise-missile trajectories and not just low-flying aircraft.

Thats a false news faithfully reproduced by every one now TOI(let)

It was a problem with solar cell leading to loss of partial power that caused the problem with INSAT-4B.

My OS just crashed must be Stuxnet 😉

News Source:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/China-hitting-India-via-Net-worm/articleshow/6725747.cms

well-known American cyber warfare expert Jeffrey Carr, who specialises in investigations of cyber attacks against government, told TOI that China, more than any other country, was likely to have written the worm which has terrorised the world since June.

Attributing the partial failure of ISRO’s INSAT 4B satellite a few months ago — the exact reason for which is not yet known — to Stuxnet, Carr said it was China which gained from the satellite failure.

it infects only those computers which use certain Siemens software systems. Siemens software systems are used in many Indian government agencies including ISRO.

Is it even possible? Can it be verified?

User trials to verify the consistency in performance of the total weapon system against low flying near range target, long range high altitude target, crossing and approaching target and ripple firing of two missiles from the same launcher against a low altitude receding target were conducted at ITR, Chandipur during Dec 2007. Akash missile successfully intercepted nine targets in successive launches. Fifth and last trial successfully took place at 2.15pm on 21st Dec at Chandipur on sea in which the Akash missile destroyed an Unmanned Air Vehicle (Lakshya) which was flying a path simulating an air attack.

http://www.akashsam.com/about.htm