DRDO and PSUs

[randombully]

*****Naya khulasa*****

This is still related to my previous posts regarding HCM-RS and HCM-AB( scramjet).

But I'd like to correct one thing, it's about range efficiency of scramjets, previously it correlated with both size and weight, that's what I wanna correct, it's mostly correlated with "weight" not size.

Now weight matters a lot in case of carrying the missiles in "planes" so HCM-AB( scramjet) is still Ideal for it.

For for "ground" and
now "SHIP" based missiles.
Weight is not that big of a problem.
Even with higher weight of HCM-RS compared to HCM-AB, it's till in single digits in terms on tons, if it's gets pa's 10ton or more then problem would start.
In that case you can't fit more no. Of HCM-AB onto a ship compared to HCM-RS because size of both will be similar.
Now you may wonder why? Let's understand it.

with booster has length of ~9m and width of 0.6-0.7m at thickest ton.
Shaurya missile has length of 10m and width of 0.74m at thickest.
So in terms of dimension/space occupied both missiles are similar with shaurya being slightly bigger.
But here's the catch brahmos has weight of 3 tons while shaurya had weight of 6+tons.
Shaurya is Similar in size but twice the weight of brahmos.
And in depressed glide trajectory(hcm) it gives max range of 600-800km.
While brahmos with max range of 800km was tested recently too.
So air-breathing ramjet of brahmos is definitely more efficient in cruising than rocket motors of shaurya because a 3 ton missile has similar range as 6+ton.

But here's the thing, both missiles have similar size and similar range.
So the penalty in inefficiency of rocket motor compared to air breathing is in "weight" not in size.

Them there's the American x 51 wave rider scramjet prototype, with length of 7.6 Meters and width of 0.6-0.8m, but carried by b52 at an altitude of 15km then released and climbes farther up in altitude, if we wish to launch to it from " ground" then booster needs to be become more bigger and total length will reach 9+meters.
So in same size range as brahmos and shaurya.
And "max range" of x51 waverider scramjet hcm prototype american is targeting is 700-800km.
So similar max range as shaurya and brahmos.

So 3 missiles, similar dimesion, similar max range,
But weights of all three missiles are different.
X51 weighs around 2 ton(~ 2.5 if that extra booster I'm talking about is attached or more bigger payload Is targeted).
While shaurya again weighs 6+tons.

So if we were to put x51/our own indigenous scramjet hcm in ships it would take same amount of space as shaurya missile.
And extra weight unlike planes is not a big problem for ships( still in single digits of tons) and will provide similar range as shaurya missile.


So basically what i'm saying is to develop a ship based HCM-RS based on shaurya missile.
Just like how Russians developed zircon.

The penalty of inefficiency of propulsion can be forwarded to weight and achieving similar range as an scramjet HCM of same size.

Now if you are wondering how can a missile similar in size weight twice as much or thrice as much.
The answer is extra avaliable space, rocket motors are lot more compact than scramjet engines, second scramjet engines need lots of empty space for air to pass, So all the extra space avaliable due to rocket motors can be filled with high energy dense solid fuel.
And while in theory scramjets can use "solid fuel" But right now american x51 uses liquid fuel( lot less energy dense than solid fuel) while high energy dense solid fuel for rocket motors is available for decades.
So most of the extra weight of HCM-RS compared to HCM-AB will be extra fuel carried in similar size to achieve similar range while flying similar trajectories( also HCM-RS due to no need to maintain proper airflow to engine can be designed to be more maneuverable plus more space is also present for electronics + bigger warhead useful against large ships like aircraft carrier)


So scramjet project while good for airforce/carried by plane.
But for ground and "ship" based HCM we should just use shaurya as a base and create a zircon like HCM to be fired from our ships.

 

[fire starter]

View: https://x.com/AdithyaKM_/status/1913840634718302436?t=hf-mg9vW0kB8xnv14gMt8A&s=19

 

[Satish Sharma Ji]

In order to threaten China apart from the Pralay & Shaurya (which unfortunately is with the SFC) , you need conventionally armed IRBMs like a land based version of the recently tested Hypersonic AShM reaching distances of upto 4000 kms to cover every inch of China like they do ours & in great numbers like thousands of them not the piece meal procurements we undertake of a few dozens in 5 year plans .

The reason for this is simple. If we reach a stalemate on the LAC , CCP will start targeting the hinterland like Russia is doing Ukraine aiming at our population centres, industrial hubs , power generation facilities , storages , oil depots , refineries etc .

Then the only option which our Dhotis would have is to threaten usage of N weapons. What if Beijing isn't deterred ? We lob on a few into China ? What then ? Ironically China's faced with the same possibility vis a vis the US when it undertakes the invasion of Taiwan .

The only way we can deter the Chinese is to have Long Ranged Missiles from 300 kms - 4000 kms , whether BMs , CMs or Hypersonic Missiles whether HGV , HCM or what have you in the thousands such that Beijing thinks four or five times before escalating what's essentially a border war .

That's not all . Our wartime mfg capacities needs to churn out equivalent replacements in the shortest time possible for all manner of consumables not just missiles.

In any case our Air Force is handicapped , our ADS & ISR evolving , our drone program though good is nowhere near theirs , our space based assets negligible compared to theirs & we don't have the slightest clue on our cyber capabilities & capacities where they've an extremely advanced program going.

Let's not even bring in the IA who've all the necessary tools at their disposal that too of indigenous origin unlike what it is with the IAF where most of our programs will fructify next decade or rely on imports like the Rafales / MRFA , but are going about things at their own sweet time trialing platforms & ammo to glory.

Hence to sum up my rant - where exactly do our advantages lie ?

Agreed.
It seems we do not posses as much capabilities as chinese posses against us when it comes to targeting hinterland in order to destroy industry & cripple infra.

In order to deter a war we have to develop the capability to destroy there critical infra & industrial base(military industries)
Beijing should be the farthest target we would be looking for which from Delhi is 3800km from Kolkata it would be 3300km. While most of there cities with military industrial output reside closer to us like chegdu, chongching, xian, wuhan(inner land of china) this are all around 2000kms from Kolkata. It could get alot less if we move eastwards but for now let's suppose kolkata being the launch site for ease and so neither I'm considering the distance exact precisely.

While Beijing, Shanghai at around 3200km harbin,shenyang, dalian around 3500-3600kms.
Now inorder to deter them we need to hit this centres of military industrial outputs.

Now those policy makers at higher ups know this already they would have worked onto it i suppose the below mentioned missiles are result of there policies and strategies in order to strengthen deterance.

Agni P, Shaurya, LrAshM, HSTDV, Pralay, and 3-4 types of hypersonic glide vehicles out of which 2 are tested. We are working on 12 hypersonic projects.

-Agni P carrier a conical HGV and should range in excess of or around 3000km. Given its dimensions, along with composite body it wouldn't be just a mere 2000km missile as published by DRDO.
-Shaurya has advertised maximum range of 1900km again published by DRDO. Which is also doubtful for the given dimensions it has. shaurya has been put into production in 2011 inducted in large numbers.
-LrAshM a powered delta winged HGV.
-HSTDV a scramjets project named vishnu should yield us with a range of atleast 1500kms.
- 3to4 HGVs under project dhvani a conical HGV, a winged HGV under development & regarding blended wing HGV there isnt anything public but high possibility we would be working on it & another one is delta winged went on LrAshM.
This HGVs should have ranges at around 3000-4000kms atleast. Especially the winged one.
-Pralay highly doubtful it would be just a 500km mere ranged missile. While having dimensions quite similar to shaurya.
As membran @randombully pointed out iskander with 3.7 ton has 1000km variant. Initially it was capped at 500km due to Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. How come the Pralay would be lacking so behind despite weighing 5 tons. Our solid fuel tech is quite advance. We had developed composite fuel during development of shaurya which went onto all upcoming missiles since then. Surprisingly pralay also has decoy/decoys. Iskander has 4 decoys.
The reason they abandoned prahar because it wasn't effective against chinese airbases and so pralay development was initiated in 2015.

Summary of Approximate Distances from India’s Borders:
Kashgar Airbase (Xinjiang): ~300–400 km (from Ladakh).
Hotan Airbase (Xinjiang): ~500–600 km (from Ladakh).
Lhasa Gonggar Airport (Tibet): ~1,000 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Nyingchi Airbase (Tibet): ~120–150 km (from Arunachal Pradesh).
Shigatse Airbase (Tibet): ~400–450 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Tsetang Airbase (Tibet): ~700–800 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Xining Caojiabao Airport (Qinghai): ~1,000–1,200 km (from Ladakh/Himachal Pradesh).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now if I had to go by the published range numbers of drdo we would be lacking the capability to target deep inside china to destroy industries & infra not that severely thou.

But then again at those higher ups they know they're priorities and what they would want from such strategic systems to deliver in order to strike deep inside china. what I expect is the aforementioned systems should posses significantly more range in order to suffice our requirements. Requirements of upcoming ROCKET FORCE also called as JOINT MISSILE COMMAND.

We will have all elements required to form a formidable rockets force. That's why we have total of 12 hypersonic projects let's deduct AD-AH anti hypersonic interceptor. Total of 11 many are not know yet. Inshort this should suffice deep strikes capabilities as lethal as china in distinct future.

The timeline of formation of rocket force would be parallel with completion of development of aforementioned total of 11 hypersonic systems.

It would be suffice to say once mass production of this project i.e vishnu, dhvani is reached we would be having an deep strikes capability boosting conventional deterance along with projects like BMD(aad phase2), KUSHA(xrsam), AD-AH,
We are going in good direction and good pace.

 

[fire starter]

How is this iddm.

View: https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1913900926454448308?t=mgSRM7d6yHAEZY4SX01mGw&s=19

 

[Satish Sharma Ji]

Agreed.
It seems we do not posses as much capabilities as chinese posses against us when it comes to targeting hinterland in order to destroy industry & cripple infra.

In order to deter a war we have to develop the capability to destroy there critical infra & industrial base(military industries)
Beijing should be the farthest target we would be looking for which from Delhi is 3800km from Kolkata it would be 3300km. While most of there cities with military industrial output reside closer to us like chegdu, chongching, xian, wuhan(inner land of china) this are all around 2000kms from Kolkata. It could get alot less if we move eastwards but for now let's suppose kolkata being the launch site for ease and so neither I'm considering the distance exact precisely.

While Beijing, Shanghai at around 3200km harbin,shenyang, dalian around 3500-3600kms.
Now inorder to deter them we need to hit this centres of military industrial outputs.

Now those policy makers at higher ups know this already they would have worked onto it i suppose the below mentioned missiles are result of there policies and strategies in order to strengthen deterance.

Agni P, Shaurya, LrAshM, HSTDV, Pralay, and 3-4 types of hypersonic glide vehicles out of which 2 are tested. We are working on 12 hypersonic projects.

-Agni P carrier a conical HGV and should range in excess of or around 3000km. Given its dimensions, along with composite body it wouldn't be just a mere 2000km missile as published by DRDO.
-Shaurya has advertised maximum range of 1900km again published by DRDO. Which is also doubtful for the given dimensions it has. shaurya has been put into production in 2011 inducted in large numbers.
-LrAshM a powered delta winged HGV.
-HSTDV a scramjets project named vishnu should yield us with a range of atleast 1500kms.
- 3to4 HGVs under project dhvani a conical HGV, a winged HGV under development & regarding blended wing HGV there isnt anything public but high possibility we would be working on it & another one is delta winged went on LrAshM.
This HGVs should have ranges at around 3000-4000kms atleast. Especially the winged one.
-Pralay highly doubtful it would be just a 500km mere ranged missile. While having dimensions quite similar to shaurya.
As membran @randombully pointed out iskander with 3.7 ton has 1000km variant. Initially it was capped at 500km due to Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. How come the Pralay would be lacking so behind despite weighing 5 tons. Our solid fuel tech is quite advance. We had developed composite fuel during development of shaurya which went onto all upcoming missiles since then. Surprisingly pralay also has decoy/decoys. Iskander has 4 decoys.
The reason they abandoned prahar because it wasn't effective against chinese airbases and so pralay development was initiated in 2015.

Summary of Approximate Distances from India’s Borders:
Kashgar Airbase (Xinjiang): ~300–400 km (from Ladakh).
Hotan Airbase (Xinjiang): ~500–600 km (from Ladakh).
Lhasa Gonggar Airport (Tibet): ~1,000 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Nyingchi Airbase (Tibet): ~120–150 km (from Arunachal Pradesh).
Shigatse Airbase (Tibet): ~400–450 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Tsetang Airbase (Tibet): ~700–800 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Xining Caojiabao Airport (Qinghai): ~1,000–1,200 km (from Ladakh/Himachal Pradesh).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now if I had to go by the published range numbers of drdo we would be lacking the capability to target deep inside china to destroy industries & infra not that severely thou.

But then again at those higher ups they know they're priorities and what they would want from such strategic systems to deliver in order to strike deep inside china. what I expect is the aforementioned systems should posses significantly more range in order to suffice our requirements. Requirements of upcoming ROCKET FORCE also called as JOINT MISSILE COMMAND.

We will have all elements required to form a formidable rockets force. That's why we have total of 12 hypersonic projects let's deduct AD-AH anti hypersonic interceptor. Total of 11 many are not know yet. Inshort this should suffice deep strikes capabilities as lethal as china in distinct future.

The timeline of formation of rocket force would be parallel with completion of development of aforementioned total of 11 hypersonic systems.

It would be suffice to say once mass production of this project i.e vishnu, dhvani is reached we would be having an deep strikes capability boosting conventional deterance along with projects like BMD(aad phase2), KUSHA(xrsam), AD-AH,
We are going in good direction and good pace.

We should have had talked abt this systems
Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon.
The us army published it range 1725miles (2760km) While it was once tested from Hawaii to Marshall Islands which is 2300 miles (3680km)
Its dia is 0.88 compared to .75m of shaurya
Weights 7.4 tons while 6.2 is shauryas weight.

Last time they tested it for 3700km of the coast of Hawaii. It carries a conical common hypersonic glide body vehicle. Some reports claim it to have a reached maximum altitude of 40-50kms.

Just like our conical HGV put on Agni Prime. Which is a ton 11 ton mammoth. How much did drdo advertise ? 2000km.
While we are also getting a newer iteration of our conical HGV BM04 (winged conical). Which would be even more muneuverable.

Another most important aspect we are forgetting while talking about this systems is the altitude.
All this systems will churn out longer ranges if they cruise higher in atmosphere. The aforementioned systems also from previous posts are all going to stay in atmosphere as they are meant to muneuver in order to evade threats. That's the basics of hypersonic vehicles.
The American hypersonic missile flew 3700km at 40-50km altitude cruise so does ours would perform at those altitudes or even longer if flew higher.

Now the degree of muneuverability varies as per the altitude lower the altitude higher the velocity at a cost of reduced range. Then velocity would vary as per altitude higher the altitude lesser the drag higher the velocity at a cost of reduced muneuverability.
Obviously this data would be highly classified. For media just mere number is released this shouldn't be the basis for discussion here.

The balance can be striked in above mentioned parameters depending on the distance of target and how heavily the target is defended. It's a balancing act between maximizing the benefits of higher altitudes and ensuring the vehicle remains agile enough to evade interception or adjust course when needed.

At this point I'm convinced that
Shaurya, LrAshM,Agni Prime, Agni BM04, Pralay and rest of those 2 glide vehicles (winged & body blended) would hit deep inside china. There specs doesn't match up with the dimensions this systems have. As I said earlier the higher ups policy makers know there requirements and if we are working on such systems we wouldn't be making them this short ranged. Using them against pakistan would be over kill the sole purpose of this hypersonic garden is to be used against china.

LrAshM shares the same first stage with Agni P, its the only HGV to posses propulsion which is most likely a sustained boost.
No need to talk abt shaurya & pralay.
Once this systems are manufactured in masses it bring us at par with china. They don't have this kind variety in HGVs neither they have low altitude powered cruisers like shaurya,pralay & especially LrAshM
The only things I have seen from there side is the blended design dfzf and conical HGV in the form of mirv. No scramjets based system yet.

While our status of
Shaurya - in production (2011)
Pralay - in production
Agni Prime - completed development will enter production soon. User trials test have been conducted but not sure wheather user trials are over or not
Agni Prime BM04(winged conical HGV)- under development
LrAshM - under development (tested)
Winged & body blended HGV are under development.
HSTDV (project vishnu) is also under development (tested) scramjet based thou didn't got mentioned here.
@randombully
what is you're take on this

 

[randombully]

View attachment 31038
We should have had talked abt this systems
Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon.
The us army published it range 1725miles (2760km) While it was once tested from Hawaii to Marshall Islands which is 2300 miles (3680km)
Its dia is 0.88 compared to .75m of shaurya
Weights 7.4 tons while 6.2 is shauryas weight.

Last time they tested it for 3700km of the coast of Hawaii. It carries a conical common hypersonic glide body vehicle. Some reports claim it to have a reached maximum altitude of 40-50kms.

Just like our conical HGV put on Agni Prime. Which is a ton 11 ton mammoth. How much did drdo advertise ? 2000km.
While we are also getting a newer iteration of our conical HGV BM04 (winged conical). Which would be even more muneuverable.

Another most important aspect we are forgetting while talking about this systems is the altitude.
All this systems will churn out longer ranges if they cruise higher in atmosphere. The aforementioned systems also from previous posts are all going to stay in atmosphere as they are meant to muneuver in order to evade threats. That's the basics of hypersonic vehicles.
The American hypersonic missile flew 3700km at 40-50km altitude cruise so does ours would perform at those altitudes or even longer if flew higher.

Now the degree of muneuverability varies as per the altitude lower the altitude higher the velocity at a cost of reduced range. Then velocity would vary as per altitude higher the altitude lesser the drag higher the velocity at a cost of reduced muneuverability.
Obviously this data would be highly classified. For media just mere number is released this shouldn't be the basis for discussion here.

The balance can be striked in above mentioned parameters depending on the distance of target and how heavily the target is defended. It's a balancing act between maximizing the benefits of higher altitudes and ensuring the vehicle remains agile enough to evade interception or adjust course when needed.

At this point I'm convinced that
Shaurya, LrAshM,Agni Prime, Agni BM04, Pralay and rest of those 2 glide vehicles (winged & body blended) would hit deep inside china. There specs doesn't match up with the dimensions this systems have. As I said earlier the higher ups policy makers know there requirements and if we are working on such systems we wouldn't be making them this short ranged. Using them against pakistan would be over kill the sole purpose of this hypersonic garden is to be used against china.

LrAshM shares the same first stage with Agni P, its the only HGV to posses propulsion which is most likely a sustained boost.
No need to talk abt shaurya & pralay.
Once this systems are manufactured in masses it bring us at par with china. They don't have this kind variety in HGVs neither they have low altitude powered cruisers like shaurya,pralay & especially LrAshM
The only things I have seen from there side is the blended design dfzf and conical HGV in the form of mirv. No scramjets based system yet.

While our status of
Shaurya - in production (2011)
Pralay - in production
Agni Prime - completed development will enter production soon. User trials test have been conducted but not sure wheather user trials are over or not
Agni Prime BM04(winged conical HGV)- under development
LrAshM - under development (tested)
Winged & body blended HGV are under development.
HSTDV (project vishnu) is also under development (tested) scramjet based thou didn't got mentioned here.
@randombully
what is you're take on this

Shaurya, pralay, LR-ASHM all most likely also fly in 40-50km altitude for their current max ranges.
If we want more range from these systems, need to use "ballistic" and "quasi-ballistic" trajectory for initial and midcourse( can still be used in depressed manurable trajectory in terminal phase).

So IMO, the range of all three of these missiles is "not under representated" in their "current flat 40-50km altitude sustained cruise trajectory".

 

[Hawkeye]

Agreed.
It seems we do not posses as much capabilities as chinese posses against us when it comes to targeting hinterland in order to destroy industry & cripple infra.

In order to deter a war we have to develop the capability to destroy there critical infra & industrial base(military industries)
Beijing should be the farthest target we would be looking for which from Delhi is 3800km from Kolkata it would be 3300km. While most of there cities with military industrial output reside closer to us like chegdu, chongching, xian, wuhan(inner land of china) this are all around 2000kms from Kolkata. It could get alot less if we move eastwards but for now let's suppose kolkata being the launch site for ease and so neither I'm considering the distance exact precisely.

While Beijing, Shanghai at around 3200km harbin,shenyang, dalian around 3500-3600kms.
Now inorder to deter them we need to hit this centres of military industrial outputs.

Now those policy makers at higher ups know this already they would have worked onto it i suppose the below mentioned missiles are result of there policies and strategies in order to strengthen deterance.

Agni P, Shaurya, LrAshM, HSTDV, Pralay, and 3-4 types of hypersonic glide vehicles out of which 2 are tested. We are working on 12 hypersonic projects.

-Agni P carrier a conical HGV and should range in excess of or around 3000km. Given its dimensions, along with composite body it wouldn't be just a mere 2000km missile as published by DRDO.
-Shaurya has advertised maximum range of 1900km again published by DRDO. Which is also doubtful for the given dimensions it has. shaurya has been put into production in 2011 inducted in large numbers.
-LrAshM a powered delta winged HGV.
-HSTDV a scramjets project named vishnu should yield us with a range of atleast 1500kms.
- 3to4 HGVs under project dhvani a conical HGV, a winged HGV under development & regarding blended wing HGV there isnt anything public but high possibility we would be working on it & another one is delta winged went on LrAshM.
This HGVs should have ranges at around 3000-4000kms atleast. Especially the winged one.
-Pralay highly doubtful it would be just a 500km mere ranged missile. While having dimensions quite similar to shaurya.
As membran @randombully pointed out iskander with 3.7 ton has 1000km variant. Initially it was capped at 500km due to Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. How come the Pralay would be lacking so behind despite weighing 5 tons. Our solid fuel tech is quite advance. We had developed composite fuel during development of shaurya which went onto all upcoming missiles since then. Surprisingly pralay also has decoy/decoys. Iskander has 4 decoys.
The reason they abandoned prahar because it wasn't effective against chinese airbases and so pralay development was initiated in 2015.

Summary of Approximate Distances from India’s Borders:
Kashgar Airbase (Xinjiang): ~300–400 km (from Ladakh).
Hotan Airbase (Xinjiang): ~500–600 km (from Ladakh).
Lhasa Gonggar Airport (Tibet): ~1,000 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Nyingchi Airbase (Tibet): ~120–150 km (from Arunachal Pradesh).
Shigatse Airbase (Tibet): ~400–450 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Tsetang Airbase (Tibet): ~700–800 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Xining Caojiabao Airport (Qinghai): ~1,000–1,200 km (from Ladakh/Himachal Pradesh).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now if I had to go by the published range numbers of drdo we would be lacking the capability to target deep inside china to destroy industries & infra not that severely thou.

But then again at those higher ups they know they're priorities and what they would want from such strategic systems to deliver in order to strike deep inside china. what I expect is the aforementioned systems should posses significantly more range in order to suffice our requirements. Requirements of upcoming ROCKET FORCE also called as JOINT MISSILE COMMAND.

We will have all elements required to form a formidable rockets force. That's why we have total of 12 hypersonic projects let's deduct AD-AH anti hypersonic interceptor. Total of 11 many are not know yet. Inshort this should suffice deep strikes capabilities as lethal as china in distinct future.

The timeline of formation of rocket force would be parallel with completion of development of aforementioned total of 11 hypersonic systems.

It would be suffice to say once mass production of this project i.e vishnu, dhvani is reached we would be having an deep strikes capability boosting conventional deterance along with projects like BMD(aad phase2), KUSHA(xrsam), AD-AH,
We are going in good direction and good pace.

While this is all good and the future advancements in missile tech should naturally find their place in Mk X of these missiles and improve range further, only mass produced cheap cruise missiles with low visibility features (which are the subsonic ones in the case) are the only things which come in mind to deter China for extended periods. Presently LRLACM should have range of 1000-1500km and we should definitely explore newer low RCS cruise missiles with even greater range of 2500kms and even upto 4000km.
But there's a dilemma here as well, although relatively cheaper they are very easy to shoot down in case detected earlier and tracked enough to send airforce planes to intercept them. Then does that mean that only a supersonic missile will do but am not sure about the viability of 4000km range supersonic cruise missile. Anyway we should definitely try to learn from and emulate DF 100 missile for sure. Don't know how the fu*k do they claim 3000-4000km for a mach3-4 missile with those dimensions.

Seems so good that they should just replace all of their conventional ballistic missiles with this thing

Unveiling the CJ-100: Redefining Long-Range Precision and Supersonic Missile Capabilities

The 2024 Zhuhai Airshow may have concluded, but new revelations continue to emerge. In a less prominent area of the exhibition, information boards about the CJ-10 and CJ-100 missiles were spotted, shedding light for the first time on the actual capabilities of these previously enigmatic weapons...

www.china-arms.com

 

[randombully]

While this is all good and the future advancements in missile tech should naturally find their place in Mk X of these missiles and improve range further, only mass produced cheap cruise missiles with low visibility features (which are the subsonic ones in the case) are the only things which come in mind to deter China for extended periods. Presently LRLACM should have range of 1000-1500km and we should definitely explore newer low RCS cruise missiles with even greater range of 2500kms and even upto 4000km.
But there's a dilemma here as well, although relatively cheaper they are very easy to shoot down in case detected earlier and tracked enough to send airforce planes to intercept them. Then does that mean that only a supersonic missile will do but am not sure about the viability of 4000km range supersonic cruise missile. Anyway we should definitely try to learn from and emulate DF 100 missile for sure. Don't know how the fu*k do they claim 3000-4000km for a mach3-4 missile with those dimensions.

Seems so good that they should just replace all of their conventional ballistic missiles with this thing

Unveiling the CJ-100: Redefining Long-Range Precision and Supersonic Missile Capabilities

The 2024 Zhuhai Airshow may have concluded, but new revelations continue to emerge. In a less prominent area of the exhibition, information boards about the CJ-10 and CJ-100 missiles were spotted, shedding light for the first time on the actual capabilities of these previously enigmatic weapons...

www.china-arms.com

Take 2000+km as max range for df-100.
That 3000-4000 figure is plain wrong.

And df100, does fly in a similar philosophy and trajectory as our LR-ASHM.

 

[randombully]

Range of zircon more than 1000km in hcm trajectory.
Flight/cruise altitude ~25-30km.



Range of shaurya 800km in hcm trajectory.
Flight/cruise altitude 30-40km.



Both missile can be fired in hcm trajectory or ballistic/quasi ballistic trajectory for more range, and can also be used in hybrid ballistic-cruise trajectory for ranges that full on hcm trajectory can't achieve but doesn't require pure ballistics/ quasi ballistic trajectory.


And that guy with white anime russin girl and guy with "tom" in his profile both are junior aeronautical engineers working in russian mod.
And they also said, zircon is not a scramjet.

 

[Satish Sharma Ji]

The answer is extra avaliable space, rocket motors are lot more compact than scramjet engines, second scramjet engines need lots of empty space for air to pass, So all the extra space avaliable due to rocket motors can be filled with high energy dense solid fuel.
And while in theory scramjets can use "solid fuel" But right now american x51 uses liquid fuel( lot less energy dense than solid fuel) while high energy dense solid fuel for rocket motors is available for decades.

The things scramjets requires alot of cooling unlike scramjets the temperature isn't as high as in scramjet combustors. That's why Ramjet systems like Meteor & Solid fuel ducted ramjet use solid fuel which produces fuel rich gas. Another thing this above mentioned solid fueled ramjets systems don't fly that fast either there sole purpose is efficient cruise (2.5-3.5mach)while saving energy for end phase of air to air interception.

In order to tackle high temperatures our indigeneous scramjet has (active cooling)regenerative transpiration cooling it has internal channel linning combustors through which endothermic fuel is circulated which absorbs the heat and turns into vapour which is more efficient to burn than a liquid fuel.

In scramjets Metalurgy is not the only concern but endothermic fuel for cooling, regenerative transpiration cooling of combuster along with additive manufacturing for creating those channel in which endothermic fuel can be used as coolant, flame holder etc

One of the problem in scramjet is that the fuel has to burn very fast because of the fast stream the fuel best suitable for this application is small carbon chain hydrocarbons like ethane/ethyne.

Delayed ignition would make a very inefficient scramjet. Usual kerosene jp fuel aren't ideal for this application that's why even in Ramjet like brahmos hydrogen induced fuel is used which increases efficiency by 3% but efficiency is not the reason.
Hydrogen burns fastest among all it increases the burn rate of fuel which results in faster and efficient ignition inside Ramjet combustion chamber. it has very high specific impulse as well.

This same problems gets steroids in scramjet. Here hydrogen induced jp fuel can't be used either as most of it wouldn't burn inside chambers due to fast stream so most preferred in this use case is hydrogen it isn't handy another one is ethane & ethene but then this fuel can't be used as endothermic coolant. As we all know endothermic means heat is absorbed from surrounding in order to carry out change (chemical or physical)
One of the biggest challenge in scramjets is to manage those high temperatures.
A endothermic fuel should be such that it absorbs as much temperature as possible ethane isn't the one. But jp fuel does the job here. The straight carbon chain are preferred as they require more heat to break down absorbing more heat compared to branches chains.

Once combustion is initiated the endothermic fuel runs through internal channels absorbing heat and breaking down into the desired products which is then sent into combustors to burn.
Endothermic fuel is just isn't sending jp fuel through cooling channels but rather carrying out reaction such that only desired products are formed which could be ethane ethyne propane which are the most desired for scramjet.
This requires proper catalysts along with it the endothermic capacity of fuel can be increased used by adding water as you can see in the image.
This results in formation of free hydrogen & CO2 as I said earlier hydrogen has fastest burn rate among all which would again increase the burn rate of fuel
And most important more heat can be managed as H2O would require,absorb higher heat in order to breakdown into H2 + CO2. This solution es fundamental issues with scramjets.
Also as I said vapourised fuel burn much efficiently.

Most likely DRDO would prefer jp+H2O fuel as it gives very high specific impulse & high heat absorption.
The recent test was to verify this active cooling system.
Remember the first test only lasted 22-23 seconds it was to verify the combustion chamber,flame holder basic stuff.
It lacked cooling channels.
While the recent tests successfully verified this regenerative transpiration cooling & endothermic fuel. Which lasted 120 seconds. this one should have had those internal cooling channels.

Can't believe we have came so far.

 

[Satish Sharma Ji]

The things scramjets requires alot of cooling unlike scramjets the temperature isn't as high as in scramjet combustors. That's why Ramjet systems like Meteor & Solid fuel ducted ramjet use solid fuel which produces fuel rich gas. Another thing this above mentioned solid fueled ramjets systems don't fly that fast either there sole purpose is efficient cruise (2.5-3.5mach)while saving energy for end phase of air to air interception.

In order to tackle high temperatures our indigeneous scramjet has (active cooling)regenerative transpiration cooling it has internal channel linning combustors through which endothermic fuel is circulated which absorbs the heat and turns into vapour which is more efficient to burn than a liquid fuel.

In scramjets Metalurgy is not the only concern but endothermic fuel for cooling, regenerative transpiration cooling of combuster along with additive manufacturing for creating those channel in which endothermic fuel can be used as coolant, flame holder etc

One of the problem in scramjet is that the fuel has to burn very fast because of the fast stream the fuel best suitable for this application is small carbon chain hydrocarbons like ethane/ethyne.

Delayed ignition would make a very inefficient scramjet. Usual kerosene jp fuel aren't ideal for this application that's why even in Ramjet like brahmos hydrogen induced fuel is used which increases efficiency by 3% but efficiency is not the reason.
Hydrogen burns fastest among all it increases the burn rate of fuel which results in faster and efficient ignition inside Ramjet combustion chamber. it has very high specific impulse as well.

This same problems gets steroids in scramjet. Here hydrogen induced jp fuel can't be used either as most of it wouldn't burn inside chambers due to fast stream so most preferred in this use case is hydrogen it isn't handy another one is ethane & ethene but then this fuel can't be used as endothermic coolant. As we all know endothermic means heat is absorbed from surrounding in order to carry out change (chemical or physical)
One of the biggest challenge in scramjets is to manage those high temperatures.
A endothermic fuel should be such that it absorbs as much temperature as possible ethane isn't the one. But jp fuel does the job here. The straight carbon chain are preferred as they require more heat to break down absorbing more heat compared to branches chains.

Once combustion is initiated the endothermic fuel runs through internal channels absorbing heat and breaking down into the desired products which is then sent into combustors to burn.
Endothermic fuel is just isn't sending jp fuel through cooling channels but rather carrying out reaction such that only desired products are formed which could be ethane ethyne propane which are the most desired for scramjet.
This requires proper catalysts along with it the endothermic capacity of fuel can be increased used by adding water as you can see in the image.
This results in formation of free hydrogen & CO2 as I said earlier hydrogen has fastest burn rate among all which would again increase the burn rate of fuel
And most important more heat can be managed as H2O would require,absorb higher heat in order to breakdown into H2 + CO2. This solution es fundamental issues with scramjets.
Also as I said vapourised fuel burn much efficiently.
View attachment 31068
Most likely DRDO would prefer jp+H2O fuel as it gives very high specific impulse & high heat absorption.
The recent test was to verify this active cooling system.
Remember the first test only lasted 22-23 seconds it was to verify the combustion chamber,flame holder basic stuff.
It lacked cooling channels.
While the recent tests successfully verified this regenerative transpiration cooling & endothermic fuel. Which lasted 120 seconds. this one should have had those internal cooling channels.

Can't believe we have came so far.

DRDO's crown jewels
Absolute bonker

Expect 2 version to be based on HSTDV. One atleast with 2500km range. And one for air launched application probably around 700km range.

 

[Satish Sharma Ji]

View: https://twitter.com/Amitraaz/status/1446804126394773507
Kind of unseen photu.

 

[NerVik]

View: https://twitter.com/Amitraaz/status/1446804126394773507
Kind of unseen photu.

What firing unit is it? Is it a bofors gun?

 

[Satish Sharma Ji]

What firing unit is it? Is it a bofors gun?

L&T sudarshan ciws

 

[Fatalis]

L&T sudarshan ciws

It was Kalyani's offering for IAF's CIWS program. They lost to L&T. Now, L&T and BHEL are competing for IA anti aircraft gun requirement.

 

[jaijaganath]

Folks does anyone maintain the record of dmrl and midhani's development wrt engine metallurgy
If yes can you share it here or any account that maintains it

 

[KarmaWeapon]

CRPF to hold fresh trials for procurement of 200 sniper rifles after intervention by Delhi HC

SSS Defence, one of three bidders, challenged process in HC over competitors’ use of ammo different from tender requirement. Other bidders were Adani’s PLR and MEIL’s ICOMM.

theprint.in

when someone ask me what our country is good at i always say "corruption"

 

[Satish Sharma Ji]

CRPF to hold fresh trials for procurement of 200 sniper rifles after intervention by Delhi HC

SSS Defence, one of three bidders, challenged process in HC over competitors’ use of ammo different from tender requirement. Other bidders were Adani’s PLR and MEIL’s ICOMM.

theprint.in

View attachment 31213

when someone ask me what our country is good at i always say "corruption"

View: https://twitter.com/jaiswal_sh4296/status/1914315702753767442
If NSG can shortlist the sss sniper rifle then there is no doubt that this is a hitjob. Still no one is held accountable misery of this nation..

 

[shade2]

View: https://twitter.com/jaiswal_sh4296/status/1914315702753767442
If NSG can shortlist the sss sniper rifle then there is no doubt that this is a hitjob. Still no one is held accountable misery of this nation..

Cheques & Balances saar



Gormint doesn't ((( step ))) on toes of Baboons and UN Import Genrols.

 

[Azaad]

Agreed.
It seems we do not posses as much capabilities as chinese posses against us when it comes to targeting hinterland in order to destroy industry & cripple infra.

In order to deter a war we have to develop the capability to destroy there critical infra & industrial base(military industries)
Beijing should be the farthest target we would be looking for which from Delhi is 3800km from Kolkata it would be 3300km. While most of there cities with military industrial output reside closer to us like chegdu, chongching, xian, wuhan(inner land of china) this are all around 2000kms from Kolkata. It could get alot less if we move eastwards but for now let's suppose kolkata being the launch site for ease and so neither I'm considering the distance exact precisely.

While Beijing, Shanghai at around 3200km harbin,shenyang, dalian around 3500-3600kms.
Now inorder to deter them we need to hit this centres of military industrial outputs.

Now those policy makers at higher ups know this already they would have worked onto it i suppose the below mentioned missiles are result of there policies and strategies in order to strengthen deterance.

Agni P, Shaurya, LrAshM, HSTDV, Pralay, and 3-4 types of hypersonic glide vehicles out of which 2 are tested. We are working on 12 hypersonic projects.

-Agni P carrier a conical HGV and should range in excess of or around 3000km. Given its dimensions, along with composite body it wouldn't be just a mere 2000km missile as published by DRDO.
-Shaurya has advertised maximum range of 1900km again published by DRDO. Which is also doubtful for the given dimensions it has. shaurya has been put into production in 2011 inducted in large numbers.
-LrAshM a powered delta winged HGV.
-HSTDV a scramjets project named vishnu should yield us with a range of atleast 1500kms.
- 3to4 HGVs under project dhvani a conical HGV, a winged HGV under development & regarding blended wing HGV there isnt anything public but high possibility we would be working on it & another one is delta winged went on LrAshM.
This HGVs should have ranges at around 3000-4000kms atleast. Especially the winged one.
-Pralay highly doubtful it would be just a 500km mere ranged missile. While having dimensions quite similar to shaurya.
As membran @randombully pointed out iskander with 3.7 ton has 1000km variant. Initially it was capped at 500km due to Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. How come the Pralay would be lacking so behind despite weighing 5 tons. Our solid fuel tech is quite advance. We had developed composite fuel during development of shaurya which went onto all upcoming missiles since then. Surprisingly pralay also has decoy/decoys. Iskander has 4 decoys.
The reason they abandoned prahar because it wasn't effective against chinese airbases and so pralay development was initiated in 2015.

First of all , let me commend you for an excellent summation of the problem at hand which I've tried highlighting here & on other forums which hasn't gotten the concern it should have .

There're a few problems with our war fighting philosophy w.r.t China which probably explains a lot of our development , mfg & deployments as well as a few things you've highlighted.

To begin with I'm of the firm conviction , GoI STILL believes our conflict with China will remain confined to the LAC assuming there's a conflict in the first place ( GoI still believes China's more focused on Taiwan & the LAC isn't on the list of their top priorities ) & that in case the war occurs & it doesn't remain confined to the LAC , the N option will come into play.

I'm not convinced the Chinese will be deterred by our threatening to use N weapons against them. It's the same paradigm for Indo Pak N dynamic . Are we deterred by Pak threats ? To an extent , yes . However that would be in the case of a full blown war , not in case of a Kargil or Balakot type scenario .

Now flip this around to China . We think that just coz a Paxtan can't deter us from a border war threatening usage of N weapons coz we won't cross their red lines , China'd behave in the same way as we do i.e they won't cross our red lines & if they do our N threats will dissuade them. There's no back up plan or Plan B in case N deterrence doesn't work .

Which brings me to our development of the various missiles you've catalogued & the pace of the entire program. Do you see any urgency in the development program , testing , mfg , deployment , etc ? I ask for I'm of the firm view whatever we're going to face vis a vis China will unfold between 2030-2032 . This time 2035 it'd be all over.

For perspective on why I think so , consider two things - China's armed forces modernisation program cum theater ization program is due to be over by 2027-28 . While this is a partial modernization program with the next phase due to be accomplished by 2035 & the final phase where they surpass anything the US has by 2040 , it's been understood that whatever modernisation they achieve by 2027-28 will be enough to enable them to take Taiwan which obviously means taking on the US + allies in this theater of operations. In the next phase their aim is to to enable China to take on the US in the wider Indo Pacific theater & finally anywhere in the world.

Hence if that be the case , you can well imagine the implications for India. The second part of this is check out on Xi Jinping's age. He isn't getting younger & he's determined to go down in Chinese history as THE leader who helped not only in the rejuvenation of the great Chinese people but someone who reunified Taiwan & ( this is important ) solved all of China's border problems which also includes the LAC.

Now , after having established the urgency on the part of the Chinese as well as the reasons for their strategy , to come back to our missile development program , except for Shaurya , Pralay & Agni 1P , the rest of the programs are in various stages of development .

To make matters worse except for Pralay , the other two will be under the C&C of the SFC meaning they're designated as strategic weapons. The only other missile which can come into contention is the LR AShM or rather the land attack version of it . However we don't have any idea on when do they plan to develop it if they actually plan to develop it , test mfg & deploy it in numbers. Do you see any urgency in any of the above functions I've de lineated as far as missile development to deployment is concerned ?

There's another problem with the thinking with the great security apparatus of our great country . Apparently for a long time they didn't develop the Pralay missile or even the Prahar / Pragati / Pranash variants in a tactical role as they didn't want to send mixed signals to Paxtan meaning if Paxtan saw a BM coming their way they shouldn't panic thinking it's a N tipped missile & exercise the N option. Of course at that point of time China didn't figure high in our threat matrix & Doklam / Galwan weren't merely in the distant future they weren't even anticipated. Long story short - development of the Pralay & other missile systems I mentioned were put on the back burner or cancelled.

As far as the weight vs range debate you guys are having vis a vis Pralay / Shaurya , please check on the various missiles in our arsenal & compare it to that in the Chinese arsenal following which you can compare it to the Russians & you'd discover that a great deal of our Agni series missiles have a higher weight comparable to what the USSR had in the 1980s / 90s .

Ditto for Chinese missiles up until last decade. This isn't a coincidence. Most of both our nation's missiles owes something or the other to Russian tech & the Russians were known for their bulky missiles for the same range as compared to the missiles in a similar category for the west especially the US.

It's only in the last two decades Russia has managed to slim down those missiles thanks developments in their fuel , rocket motor , composite material etc. with China & now India following in Russia's footsteps . This isn't to imply that Russia's providing either us or them with tech ( could be possible with selective projects like in the case of with us & some other project under the radar with China but I was referring to the general trend here ) but that technology development in both our respective countries have reached a certain amount of maturity.

The other part of it is serious under declaration of our true missile range which once again in the esteemed view of our security management is not to draw much attention to our program. It's counter intuitive to N deterrence & how it works . For perspective consider Paxtan - their hype over their missile systems border on the ridiculous but that's an essential part of their overall philosophy which is to appear bigger than they are.

The Chinese follow the same philosophy since they're benchmarking themselves to the US. Then there's us. I just explained above how we literally shelved development of the Pralay & didn't look at it till post the Doklam crisis with Galwan only accelerating the program. However there's still a lot to be desired in the way & more to the point the speed with which we're undertaking various projects some of which like the Hypersonic program is genuinely a function of getting the tech right & suitably matured but not all of it can be explained to this .

For example - how did Shaurya land up under the C&C of the SFC when the Chinese have a whole battery of tactical BMs & CMs of various ranges under the C&C of their Rocket Force which incidentally is also tasked with C&C of their strategic weapons , while we have none except some SRBMs . Incidentally the Chinese have a NFU policy just like we do though there are doubts on how far will China adhere to it. We're just about waking up to this problem & by the looks of it there's still not much seriousness in our approach.

Summary of Approximate Distances from India’s Borders:
Kashgar Airbase (Xinjiang): ~300–400 km (from Ladakh).
Hotan Airbase (Xinjiang): ~500–600 km (from Ladakh).
Lhasa Gonggar Airport (Tibet): ~1,000 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Nyingchi Airbase (Tibet): ~120–150 km (from Arunachal Pradesh).
Shigatse Airbase (Tibet): ~400–450 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Tsetang Airbase (Tibet): ~700–800 km (from Sikkim/West Bengal).
Xining Caojiabao Airport (Qinghai): ~1,000–1,200 km (from Ladakh/Himachal Pradesh).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now if I had to go by the published range numbers of drdo we would be lacking the capability to target deep inside china to destroy industries & infra not that severely thou.

But then again at those higher ups they know they're priorities and what they would want from such strategic systems to deliver in order to strike deep inside china. what I expect is the aforementioned systems should posses significantly more range in order to suffice our requirements. Requirements of upcoming ROCKET FORCE also called as JOINT MISSILE COMMAND.

We will have all elements required to form a formidable rockets force. That's why we have total of 12 hypersonic projects let's deduct AD-AH anti hypersonic interceptor. Total of 11 many are not know yet. Inshort this should suffice deep strikes capabilities as lethal as china in distinct future.

The timeline of formation of rocket force would be parallel with completion of development of aforementioned total of 11 hypersonic systems.

It would be suffice to say once mass production of this project i.e vishnu, dhvani is reached we would be having an deep strikes capability boosting conventional deterance along with projects like BMD(aad phase2), KUSHA(xrsam), AD-AH,
We are going in good direction and good pace.

We need the land attack version of the LR AShM immediately & that too in ranges between 1500-4000 kms , deployed ASAP with mfg geared up to maximum especially in a war time scenario to cater to replacements. Ditto for the Pralays. We need to either take the Shaurya or the Agni 1P out of the SFC & give it to the upcoming Rocket Force or develop it into a dual use missile with applications in both the tactical & strategic realms.

I don't see the other programs maturing before 2030 so won't comment on them save to say that development & funding of these programs ought to continue ( which it will , goes without saying ) with a mandate to DRDO to speed them up .