Agni & Prithvi Ballistic Missiles : News & Discussions

lcafanboy said:
MARV was mastered by India in late 1990s early 2000s
Actual Agni 5 missiles are having elliptical dome instead of conical shape. I can't Post real foto as it got deleted by me by mistake. But the real inducted version has elliptical dome. It's for a reason that no new launch videos are available in public domain. All are stock videos...🤗

Now don't tell India is not capable of MIRV technology. ISRO demonstrated it several times with multiple satellite launches with highest being 101 satellites. Technology is exactly the same with a bus holding warheads instead of satellites.

Also you are grossly unaware of India's miniaturisation of nuclear weapons which is almost at par with P5 nations as we got access to French super computers for simulation of modern nuclear weapons design....🤗
Click to expand...
we don't need MARV for Pakistan... Indian MBRL will hit major Pakistan cities
 
AbRaj said:
Seriously dude, you need to work on your scrip writing skills. You are terrible at story telling.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1438837087596392452

Here operational version of Agni 3. Check nose cone clearly it is MARV. Now check when was Agni 3 tested. I stand corrected on the time line of MARV.
I will get Agni-V operational foto too. It is a blunt elliptical cone meant for MIRV.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1437900975939985411

https://twitter.com/x/status/1437808487669673989

Exactly what I had said. No story telling. Again telling operational Agni 5 nose cone is elliptical, more like K4 missile. That's why no latest videos are available, only 2012 stock videos of Agni-V are released...😊

E_PR3e3WQAApIsb.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: hellbent, Chain Smoker, Aditya b7777 and 1 other person
lcafanboy said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1438837087596392452

Here operational version of Agni 3. Check nose cone clearly it is MARV. Now check when was Agni 3 tested. I stand corrected on the time line of MARV.
I will get Agni-V operational foto too. It is a blunt elliptical cone meant for MIRV.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1437900975939985411

https://twitter.com/x/status/1437808487669673989

Exactly what I had said. No story telling. Again telling operational Agni 5 nose cone is elliptical, more like K4 missile. That's why no latest videos are available, only 2012 stock videos of Agni-V are released...😊

View attachment 21764
Click to expand...
Ok, let me help you. The first lesson of the script writing is to have some basic understanding of the subject. For example what is MIRV and what is MARV.
Secondly try to pass your story as genuine content. Posting others posts without any context and with lots and lots of emojis is childish.

Thirdly try to control your urge of copy-pasting something without first reading it yourself.

I think it’s it’s enough for today.
 
Last edited:
AbRaj said:
Ok, let me help you. The first lesson of the script writing is to have some basic understanding of the subject. For example what is MIRV and what is MARV.
Secondly try to pass your story as genuine content. Posting others posts without any context and with lots and lots of emojis is childish.

Thirdly try to control your urge of copy-pasting something without first reading it yourself.

I think it’s it’s enough for today.
Click to expand...
This twitter handle is imagining too much about Agni 3.
Even there is a deflected nose cone on the reentry vehicle it won't be visible at lancing pad. Because all that is hidden under the missile nose cone , which gets ejected in upper atmosphere, revealing the RV.
You cannot launch a missile with deflection in the nose cone as the missile will go out of balance and aerodynamic forces in lower atmosphere will make it go loopy and too much stress will be exerted on missile structure.
 
safriz said:
This twitter handle is imagining too much about Agni 3.
Even there is a deflected nose cone on the reentry vehicle it won't be visible at lancing pad. Because all that is hidden under the missile nose cone , which gets ejected in upper atmosphere, revealing the RV.
You cannot launch a missile with deflection in the nose cone as the missile will go out of balance and aerodynamic forces in lower atmosphere will make it go loopy and too much stress will be exerted on missile structure.
Click to expand...
Like the phanbhai you too are misunderstanding his posts.
@hellbent post are almost always based on verifiable sources and with proper scientific explanation. It’s best what we can get next to official announcement.
And those things that he assumes, he tells it very clearly.

And A3 has single warhead MARV. what’s there to explain that is not explained yet. Even you yourself have pointed out various thrusters at the aft of the warhead. And you can clearly see the tapered end even in the official pictures.
And yes MARV puts a lot of strain on the RV and that’s why we use composites and superalloys. You can get the relevant information in this thread as @hellbent has already posted the data earlier.
Tapered nose cone can be seen in various types of hypersonic missiles too.
That said I believe A3 and A4 both have single MARV warhead
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hellbent and Chain Smoker
AbRaj said:
But the official launch video suggests K-series missiles to be very slender compared to A-series and also having entirely different launch sequence. Are they trying to achieve some level of commonality in newer versions ?
Click to expand...
Yes there is spillover from K series.
Here is the possible land Based version of unkown missile
kkl.jpg

Is there any possibility that ITCM got SATCOM link along with DSMAC I remember its Director talked about it in old tarmak video. @Gautam
 
  • Like
Reactions: RISING SUN
safriz said:
That's just a MARV.
Same as it was on Agni 2.
Click to expand...

Not same.

A2 only had control fins for adjustment inside atmosphere (fins are useless in space) which only allows for small course-corrections AFTER re-entry if and when necessary.

A3, A4 and A5 had DACS-based system which is true MARV, which can reorient to a entirely different target mid-course by firing the thrusters in space. The same thrusters can be used inside atmosphere for small course corrections (effect inside atmosphere is reduced).

ASAT missile also had DACS-based system, but a more sophisticated one both in terms of software & hardware as it had to hit an object travelling at 8-10 km/s and even small mistake can lead to a miss.

A1P combines DACS with control fins. The DACS gives it the ability to reorient mid-course, while the fins + DACS ensure high degree of maneuverability inside atmosphere. The DACS was already proven on several missiles over last 15 years, so why bring this new arrangement? You only need this if you either want to hit moving target or for performing skip-glide or maneuvers like HGV.

Either way, the reason for A1P arrangement is because maneuverability requirements are far greater than any previous BM.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: kurup, TARGET, Aditya b7777 and 5 others
AbRaj said:
Looks like a SLBM, mainly because of low height to breadth proportions which is typical for SLBM.
Click to expand...
Shaurya missile is land based missile of K15 or B05 as is known now.
For long it was believed that it was just test missile but from what I know it's a fully operational missile. So what stops us from land based K4 and K5 missiles...
Could be one of the above 3 missiles...
 
lcafanboy said:
Shaurya missile is land based missile of K15 or B05 as is known now.
For long it was believed that it was just test missile but from what I know it's a fully operational missile. So what stops us from land based K4 and K5 missiles...
Could be one of the above 3 missiles...
Click to expand...
Warheads for any sea based missile are very expensive due to high Plutonium content and complexity of manufacturing.
Likewise periodic maintenance due helium production in Plutonium core and any stages in between.
Any missile using the same warhead as the sea based missile, makes no financial sense, because for land based missile you can build heavier Warheads with more uranium usage and simplified design.
Other scenarios where Plutonium rich warhead is justified is MIRV and cruise , Tactical ballistic missile with nuclear warhead.
 
safriz said:
Warheads for any sea based missile are very expensive due to high Plutonium content and complexity of manufacturing.
Likewise periodic maintenance due helium production in Plutonium core and any stages in between.
Any missile using the same warhead as the sea based missile, makes no financial sense, because for land based missile you can build heavier Warheads with more uranium usage and simplified design.
Other scenarios where Plutonium rich warhead is justified is MIRV and cruise , Tactical ballistic missile with nuclear warhead.
Click to expand...
Whether you you want to believe or like it or not Shaurya missile which is land based B05 is operational. Cost be damned when security of nation is concerned.
 
safriz said:
Sure, and I am batman .
Good luck. 👍
Click to expand...

@lcafanboy

There are supposedly 2 versions of Shaurya. The newer one is believed to be lighter and faster. The older one is in service with the IA and IAF. It has been in serial production for couple of years. This information is widely available online, not a state secret. It is also believed to be a land version of the Sagarika.

The warhead, I do not know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lcafanboy and Chain Smoker
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom