P-800 Yakhont vs P-900 (supersonic) Klub

If this thing was that good and engineering wise proven why was it cancelled ?

Same reason lots of things are: No $$$$$. That and I think they figured better was just around the corner (of course it always is) in Fasthawk/RATTLRS/X-51.

Fasthawk was cancelled ages ago. BTW it was intended to carry a 700lb warhead 700 miles at Mach 4. Just a tad better than Brahmos 😉 All in a package about half the size (~3000 lbs.)

If this thing was that good and engineering wise proven why was it cancelled ?

For me the main sticking point with the Brahmos is its range, to hit targets deep in enemy territory the batteries have to be moved much closer to the border. The payload is another issue, the success of a small warhead against an area target is debatable. Brahmos was designed to use tis Kinetic energy to do most of the damage in anti shipping role.

I really think if we can develop or get access to missiles like the Tomahawk we should get them asap. Use them along with the Brahmos.

Fasthawk was cancelled ages ago. BTW it was intended to carry a 700lb warhead 700 miles at Mach 4. Just a tad better than Brahmos 😉 All in a package about half the size (~3000 lbs.)

Some additional info on Brahmos block 2 test

Missile Man pierces army apathy How a tenacious technocrat put the supersonic BrahMos back on track

New Delhi, April 3: India can stake claim to be among the first in the world to be ready with a supersonic land-attack cruise missile because of the tenacity of an unheralded Missile Man whose pet project was almost written off for aiming too high.

Sivathanu Pillai, a technocrat whose bald pate is not covered by berets, whose chest is bereft of medals and shoulders of epaulettes, dared the Indian Army by claiming he would arm its artillery divisions with a missile the world had not seen.

The army is led by an artillery officer, General Deepak Kapoor, who wanted to see this wonder weapon himself.

So he led a team to the Pokharan desert range on January 20. The general witnessed the dismal failure of the BrahMos Mark II personally.

Yet, in the space of just over two months, Pillai produced a missile — a supersonic cruise missile for the army — through three rapid-fire tests that left the generals gasping for its uniqueness, for its speed and for Pillai’s sheer grit.

Pillai has made the BrahMos Land Attack Cruise Missile Mark II real despite opposition from the Indian Army that kept upping its demands and reducing the size of the targets in the tests.

The first target was the size of a factory, the second, also a factory the size of a large building and the third, a small building in a simulated urban cluster. The missile was tasked to hit the factory in the first two tests. In the third test, it was to discriminate, select and choose its target before destroying it.

Pillai’s BrahMos missed the first. The mission was aborted after the missile went off-target mid-course despite a successful launch on January 20 when the army chief was witness.

After the second test, on March 4, seen by deputy army chief Lt Gen M.S. Dadwal, Pillai said it was a success but the army said it was “evaluating and analysing” the results even three days after the test.

“The missile was in the target area all right,” Gen Kapoor said of the test. “But there has been one failure (on January 20) so we need confirmation and there are some technical issues.”

Then on March 29 — just last week — Pillai requested the army to send a team to witness another test. The director general of military operations, Lt Gen A.S. Sekhon, led a team.

This time, the army put up just a sheet as a target with reflectors on two sides to deflect the missile from its trajectory.

Pillai’s BrahMos hit bull’s eye. Without waiting for official word from the army this time, Pillai went public, proclaiming its success.

“In 15 minutes flat,” he put it simply in his chamber inside the headquarters of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) in an interview to The Telegraph, “your enemy country can be destroyed and you do not even have to go nuclear.”

Pillai is the chief executive officer and the head of the Indo-Russian BrahMos, an acronym from the Brahmaputra and Moskva rivers. He is also the chief controller for armaments, land and naval systems in the DRDO.

“In the Iraq war, the US launched 1,000 Tomahawks in half a day,” he recalled. “You have to think on that scale. And the BrahMos is supersonic. It cannot be intercepted. Even we cannot do anything to it, once we launch it. Fire and forget. You think of the missile in hundreds, thousands, like you think of many, many arrows being fired from a quiver,” he said.

Two other known supersonic land-attack cruise missiles under development are the Fasthawk, made by Boeing in the US, and the French ANS. China also has a supersonic missile programme.

The BrahMos is ready.

Then why did the Indian Army open itself to suggestions that it was not keen on the project? Clear-cut answers won’t be available to such questions. But the army has been seeing demonstrations of missiles by Raytheon Corporation. A section of the army’s artillery officers has been impressed by it.

A piece of history that DRDO’s scientists are familiar with was in danger of being repeated: was another indigenous, rather, a semi-indigenous military programme going to be sacrificed in the interest of imports? And to the benefit of middlemen who would earn fat commissions? All in the name of national security? And national interest?

But this week — soon after Pillai’s third test — the vice-chief of army staff, Lt Gen Noble Thamburaj, announced at a seminar: “The BrahMos Mark II is ready for induction. The missile’s accuracy, lethality and range have made it a deadly combination.”

The army is now ready to raise two regiments of the BrahMos Mark II.

:rolleyes:

If you want to be in fantasy land about basic radar and missile technologies please go right ahead.

Ridiculous. A standard forward facing ARH antiship seeker is incapable of differentiating land structures, much less a concrete shelter. Radar used on cruise missiles are not mounted on the nose but on the belly with beams facing downward uses doppler sharpening with stored databases on land features to enact TERCOM. This is something antiship missiles don’t have.

:rolleyes:

In that case they are going to a lot of trouble to reinvent a wheel. Why try and turn Brahmos into Iskander when the requirement is clearly for Iskander in the first place. Save the money on development and buy the appropriate weapons system.

Its not like the money poured into the development of this ‘multispectral seeker’, that has been in the offing for so many years, is going to lead to export sales either as no-one who wants a 300km short engagement cycle land-attack weapon would come to Brahmos over Iskander either. So, apart from supporting DRDO, its hard to see where the advantages come from this investment?.

Disagree massively. Had Brahmos become something more than what Indian technology did for the old P-20’s then perhaps. It isnt though. Its a bought-in Russian airframe with an indigenous, but otherwise unremarkable, seeker. Nothing new for India in any real sense – IIRC didnt the Russians buy back the Indian Styx seeker – so they already had those bragging rights.

For what you are talking about – the leverage effect of being involved in the JV – I’d say that its been a step backwards or, at very least, a stagnation in the technology area and a very distinct own goal. Yakhont/Brahmos as an antiship missile, against modern naval air defence, is emminently defeatable. As a land-attack weapon its trumped by Iskander and is competing, in naval land-attack, with the Klub LACM variants that the IN can already operate. In short it offers nothing very special for its price tag.

Again though I cant see how that is in any way moving Indian industry forward?. The advance over their earlier work with P-20 is what?.

The key to the destructive potential of the weapon is the impact kinetic energy of the M2+ air vehicle slamming into the target. A prox fuse would immediately throw that KE potential away. I would find it extraordinarily suprising to learn of a prox fuse on Brahmos. Its a good excuse to cover a miss though!. 😎

I think its more of an arguement for arguements sake kind of thing that you are doing. Are you sure you arent taking the p*ss? 🙂

Iskander? Let the Russians first demonstrate a precision strike ability beyond INS control, for export Iskanders. And if they did, its not available to the Indians anyway for mass production. So thats is a red herring.

Same holds for the Klub – another red herring, given its dedicated for the Naval role in the definitive dart variant.

The Indians are definitely developing their own tactical strike BM’s- but why wait when a ready system can be quickly modified to meet urgent precision strike needs. And they have done that, and I have no issues in giving credit where credit is due.

Exports are of some relevance in the issue under discussion but dont really matter- Brahmos Aerospace has a huge orderbook already, and if they meet local needs and keep churning them out in number, export sales are not necessarily required.

Your statement about the P-20 is to be frank, massively incorrect.

What exactly did the Indians contribute to the P-20 bar end use modifications which went back to the Russians?

Did they build the fire control systems, the navigation systems, integrate the entire missile, build C3I units and TEL’s, or even modify the seeker to the level they appear to be doing with the Brahmos? Or did they even have a follow on propulsion enhancement as they seem to be doing with their hypersonics program? Did the P-20 give the Indians experience with structural modifications for carrier platforms ranging from aircraft to submarines?

The answer to all the above is no.

But as far as Brahmos is concerned, the answer to all the above is yes. Somewhere in my notes, I even have the entire split – which the Corp stated was done based on competence, not workshare allocations alone.

All in all I see this program having developed a viable tactical missile ecosystem for the Indians with Russian assistance, which they will undoubtedly leverage for future programs.

Its a win for them – they got some real good insight into a worldclass system from an experienced developer.Anyone familiar with the program in the wider industry, accedes to the fact that the Brahmos seems to be working fine for the Indians, and they have leveraged it to the hilt.

Lastly, given the kind of targets they are aiming to engage, its the warhead which will still do a vast amount of damage, not just a M2 missile slamming through the target – thats the entire point of having a proximity fuse. Dont see your arguement being any more viable there either.

MBDA are now selling the SRSAM to India as Brahmos Aero has established a viable business proposition. All in all, this is a good thing for the Indians even as they compete for more complex aerospace contracts in both the civilian space and military (offset) space.

Your mileage may vary – but frankly, your statements dont match what the industry procurement blokes are saying, and so far their arguements have been more persuasive.

besides the special sensor suite ( new seeker + new Algo + software ) one intersting aspect is the jagged edge just behind the nose cone

Image

This is to reduce the frontal RCS of Brahmos , to quote arun @ BRF ” that is classical and most effective method to reduce RCS for almost any RF band. The jagged edge give tapered prorogation path that impedance matches the RF absorbing material as well as reflect residual RF energy in a direction away from the incident angle “

here is the video link of Brahmos block 2 launch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NOkwGoxMFo

Finally Army gives the thumbs up

Army wanted BrahMos to achieve high standards of accuracy

New Delhi (PTI): The three trials of BrahMos cruise missile were aimed at testing the effectiveness of the new special sensor integrated in the missile to hit the desired target in an urban environment accurately, a top army officer said on Monday.

Vice Chief of Army Staff, Lt Gen Noble Thamburaj, said Army had enhanced its aspirations and wanted the BrahMos to achieve high standards of accuracy.

“Accuracy was the mantra. We had wanted a special sensor to be integrated in the missile so that it can hit the desired target accurately from among similar kind of targets in an urban environment,” he told reporters on the sidelines of a defence seminar here.

He said the last three trials have been to test the effectiveness of the new sensor.

“On behalf of the Army, I would like to congratulate the scientists for conducting an extremely successful third test of BrahMos,” he said.

2. The INS is accelerometer based with updates from GPS/Glonass.. But the recent test failure had nothing to do with GPS signal failure.. such premise is “false and foolish” – the GPS correction required at 55km range is very very insignificant.. INS is very accurate at those ranges..

So much for Americans turning the G.P.S off on us 🙂

Updates on Brahmos from Aero India 2009 posted by Rakall at BRF

Updates on Brahmos:

1. All naval versions of Brahmos – Ship to ship, Ship to land, Coastal land battery to Ship and the Army versions – mk1, mk2 — all of them have the same RF seeker.. There is no difference in the seeker

Whatever differences are there only in the software – algorithm for target detection.

2. The INS is accelerometer based with updates from GPS/Glonass.. But the recent test failure had nothing to do with GPS signal failure.. such premise is “false and foolish” – the GPS correction required at 55km range is very very insignificant.. INS is very accurate at those ranges..

The failure was due to a software error which was immediatly identified.

3. The previous tests of Army had to identify a RCS target in a bunch of non-RCS targets and destroy it.. The recent test was about eliminating a RCS target when it is surrounded by targets of similar RCS — all of them having insignificant RCS or all of them having a similar RCS levels such that difference in RCS signature is not very large..

4. An RLG based INS is almost ready for future versions.. indigenous RLG programme has matured enough to adopt it with confidence now..

5. When either the IRNSS or GAGAN becomes operational – can get signals from that also.

6. Brahmos still waiting for IN to give them a sub to test the Sub-launched version.. The airforce version work will start when Sukhoi DB is ready to start work.. The structural work will involve strngthening the underbelly area with an additional stinger to take the load..

The pylon – which is not actually a pylon, but an ejector with all the electronics & s/w.. design is ready..

7. The max range of Brahmos is limited by the software.. if the missile travels 290km and does not find the target there – the software will liquidate the missile (even if the target is just 10-15km away).. this has been done to ensure adherence to MTCR guidelines..

But – the day GoI decides to give a one-finger salute to MTCR, range can easily be increased to ‘much more’. There is internal volume capability for more fuel, so once MTCR is shown middle-finger – range is not a problem

Obviously there is absolutely no point if you put a 300km range limit on a hypersonic missile – so Brahmos2 will definitely not be 300km range.. Have your own guess to what it will be

8. When ripple fired – the initial startup (after acquiring targets from UAV or Satellite or AWACS or whatever ) will take 3.5mins.. the first missile will go after 3.5mins after targets are acquired and the other two will follow within a space of 2.5secs each — both for salvo mode or ripple fire mode.

9. The Naval ship to land version has been tested to 250km range in Andamans.. (As seen from the video) The target was pretty makeshift – a triangular metal plate hoisted on two oil drums.. the missile got the centroid of the triangle..

10. Rajput has Brahmos in inclned mode.. All other warships (I mean destroyers & frigates) will get VLS… But IN is planning to put Brahmos in inclined mode on a few missile boats which can manuevre faster..

11 SCAN is just an algorithm..

I did not specifically ask if there was a dual seeker bcoz the question was kind of pre-empted.. When I asked “whether there is a new seeker or SAR” – Brahmos guys tried their best to explain that it was not a simple patch work to just change the seeker simply like that because of the realestate problem in the small radome.. So from that, if I have to guess — there is no dual seeker or planned in immediate future.

But, apparently an “improved RF seeker” is under development as part of JV.. so there is slender hope that we might get seeker technology, but depends on how well we manage the pesky ruskies.

GLONASS should be completely operational by the end of this year or early next with worldwide coverage, ie. 24+ operational satellites. Currently there is 20 up, but only 18 in full operation.

Haven’t heard anything about the shorter range – sounds a little dubious…
Unless GPS satellites are in a higher orbit?

GLONASS is actually meant to be slightly more precise than GPS from what I heard.

Klub is an all Russian missile with no Indian input , we just use it …….although it has a history of its own , LACM Klub has gone through its failures during test firing from Kilo and its only recently that they managed to rectify it and make it fully operational.

Here is one interesting report which may indicate that the GPS blink was deliberate , good lesson to learn at early stage , rather than get screwed in war , IIRC the US had degraded GPS during Kargil war as well in that region. I wonder how dumb DRDO can be and depend on GPS for accurate signal.

BrahMos to get GPS data from Russian satellites

During the failed test, the missile’s GPS system could not link its onboard computers with hovering satellites. This eventually crippled its guidance system, and the mission objectives were not achieved. The missile had apparently performed the flight plan but missed the target. It was fitted with an advance seeker which was to home in on the target using GPS data obtained through the US satellites.

BrahMos will now concentrate on the eight Glonass satellites, although they have a shorter range than the US spacecraft. “The necessary software modification has been incorporated to take care of the eventuality of not many satellites (eight is a small compared to the 24 US satellites) available for position updates,” BrahMos Aerospace CEO and MD, A Sivathanu Pillai told Deccan Herald on the sidelines of the ongoing “Aero-India 2009” airshow here.

PS: I believe that GLONASS is currently 18 operational satellites and not 8 , although it is possible that since GLONASS is curently more focussed on russia , it may just have 8 for ROW ?

Do you think Club has something like SCAN technology (developed exclusively by DRDO, like the engine by NPO Mash) of Brahmos???

I think over all Brahmos have many edges over Club with its multi-guidance technologies, intelligence, accuracy, speed and lethality. But again I Brahmos costs mush more than Club.

The engine is nothing special, ramjets have been around for over half a century.

LOL!! After so much of talking and news reports this test is still ‘another’ test of Brahmos Block-I ??!!! Really strange!!! Why cant you just accept that the test on Jan 20th was an upgraded version of current missile i.e. Block-II!! Above all Block-I version is already in service with the IA. Do you think they have accepted Brahmos without verifications??!! Also DRDO promised to solve the problem with in a month or two with further test, so how it is a major glitch???

Rajan you do not know what Block 2 is. The report initially posted suggests that no major change is made from the Blk1 to Blk 2 round. In my experience mounting a different seeker to a missile represents a very significant change.

IF that article is wrong and Blk2 is a new land-attack only variant, with a different seeker with terminal MMW or IIR guidance, for the Army thats fine and is indeed an entirely different issue. My questions all the way through have been regarding this mythical land-attack capable active-radar seeker on the Blk1. Defexpo has covered that ground to my satisfaction though.

If you do not want to accept the word of Brahmos/DRDO/Indian official, so what can I do?? If the tech was from British or Americans, we could easily digest it….

If even the Indian Army do not accept the word of DRDO/Indian officials and feel they need to see proof of the ‘successful’ outcome of their trial firings I think a healthy degree of scepticism is more than warranted. You want to wear the blinkers you go right ahead!.

15 successful test firings yet its test fired for the first time?. Congratulations on maximum contradiction from a very small number of words.

LOL!! After so much of talking and news reports this test is still ‘another’ test of Brahmos Block-I ??!!! Really strange!!! Why cant you just accept that the test on Jan 20th was an upgraded version of current missile i.e. Block-II!! Above all Block-I version is already in service with the IA. Do you think they have accepted Brahmos without verifications??!! Also DRDO promised to solve the problem with in a month or two with further test, so how it is a major glitch???

I have a fundamental need for proof of something that Chinese, Russian, French, British and American seekers cant do through the limits of the technology but, according to some reports, Indian ones can. I don’t think that is an unjustifiable position. If you want to spin that as an attempt at anglo-supremacism on my part feel free to do so – its entirely your issue.

😀

haha!! That is the answer I needed!!! You need more ‘proof’…

If you do not want to accept the word of Brahmos/DRDO/Indian official, so what can I do?? If the tech was from British or Americans, we could easily digest it….

Good excuse for denial!!! After 15 successful tests (even with a video) now you found a tiny glitch with something new onboard failed when test fired for the first time!!!

15 successful test firings yet its test fired for the first time?. Congratulations on maximum contradiction from a very small number of words.

You seems to have a fundamental belief that if US/UK could not have it means, no one can!!!

I have a fundamental need for proof of something that Chinese, Russian, French, British and American seekers cant do through the limits of the technology but, according to some reports, Indian ones can. I don’t think that is an unjustifiable position. If you want to spin that as an attempt at anglo-supremacism on my part feel free to do so – its entirely your issue.

American seekers suffer it, British seekers suffer it, French seekers suffer it, Russian seekers suffer it and now, according to DRDO, we know that Indian ones, despite all denials, do to!.

They may try and paint this as some small algorythm goof that needs correction….then again though they also said a 1000yd miss was a hit!. Sorry pal.

Good excuse for denial!!! After 15 successful tests (even with a video) now you found a tiny glitch with something new onboard failed when test fired for the first time!!!

Look lads I understand the sheer desperation many of you feel to prove that this missile is something it is not. After all it is the clarion call, the very zenith of missile technology, for sure. Yet you cant make the basic technology do something that it plainly cannot do. Accept this.

All, and I do mean ALL, an active radar seeker can do is provide a series of numbers, extracted and digitised from the antenna receive side, that correlate to the return energy coming back from seeker emissions. Thats it. No magic.

To determine where the target is therefore you need an RF contrast i.e an area of low FR return, gradually raising until a peak return and then a dropoff. This establishes the target parameters for the seeker. By parameters I mean where the target starts and where it finishes with the intent, usually, programmed into the seeker to go for peak return between the two points. You can see the evidence of this clearly in any picture of an ARH missile hit on a ship – USS Stark, HMS Sheffield….even check out the stills H K posted from the French SINKEX on the current ‘How many antiship missiles’ thread.

The issue with this miraculous ARH seeker on the missile tested, that in black and white the piece says is unchanged from the Block 1 missile, is that suddenly it doesnt seem to need a radar contrast to hit its target. That would mean that the seeker does not need to know where its targets start and end….it can find point of aim anyway. Tosh.

The size of the target is irrelevent as well, antiship missiles are quite capable against even quite small boats – Harpoon was developed originally to engage Sov cruise missile boats on the surface which have a very small radar cross section but a high radar contrast. So hitting a large building in a cluttered environment is no different, in any real sense, than hitting a small one. What we see with this test is a 1000yd miss on a clutter target. This means that the seeker was not able to determine where its target was inside of the seeker FoV – which is exactly the same problem every other non-MMW ARH missile in the world has!.

Now you can all go back to your theories about multispectral seekers and software upgrades and all the other crumbs of information that you are trying to twist to come up with the answer you want. Its entirely your business. For me this is a mystery solved – how does an ARH antiship missile become a precision guided land-attack missile (without recourse to simple DGPS guidance)? Answer – it doesn’t!.

You seems to have a fundamental belief that if US/UK could not have it means, no one can!!!

Jonesy , I dont think it is a question of credibility of DRDO or IA that we are talking here , both DRDO and IA admitted that the test did not met the laid requirement

but before any thing some more info on the test that happened link1 and link2

Two regiments of the Army already have Block I version of the missile. BrahMos Aerospace had come up with a Block II version without changing the missile’s major systems that were proven in the previous 17 flights. But the Block II version had new software to improve the missile’s operational capability.

So as you can see from the info , the Brahmos being tested here

1 ) Is testing a new SCAN multispectral seeker with new algorithim
2 ) This Block 2 Brahmos can hit to quote Pillai , “a small hidden building out of multiple target , so target discrimination of small target among multiple targets”
3 ) Previous test (Brahmos block 1 ) did hit targets in environment of many targets but it was a bigger target.
4 ) It performed a lot of terminal stage manouveres which were difficult at high supersonic speed .
5 ) DRDO have validated the result and believe that the reason for miss is not serious and are confident that in the next test they will over come the glitches

Good analysis. Thanks Austin.