Early Warning System for BMD

[Arpit]

As we all know, with the inception of nuclear weapons in South Asia, which was tested by India under Operation Shakti. The Indian planners faced with new threat, how we establish deterrence.

India is now enmeshed in the deterrence game—actively with its traditional adversary Pakistan, and potentially with China. At the same time it is finding easier access to fissile materials and strategic technologies. In order to deal with these developments safely and wisely, the nation needs a much more sophisticated and multidisciplinary understanding of the strategic, technological, operational, and cost issues involved in nuclear matters.

Koithara, Verghese. Managing India's Nuclear Forces (Kindle Locations 2-5). Brookings Institution

The purpose of deterrence is intelligent and at same time idiotic. If our purpose of holding these weapon is to deter other, then why we all holding it in first place? And the myth of deterring other create a perpetual motion which lead to more and more and more nuclear weapons.
So why keeping nuclear weapon? That's the question people asking since 1945 and till now no one able to give serious answer toward this question.

But to establish a deterrence, first is required a EW system, that able to strengthen our second strike capability, moreover Indian planners able to know when to push the button. Further, these are basic requirements for BMD in providing warning to BMD Units and tracking radars.

OTH-Radar which facing Taiwan. Sat Image Dated:- 30- Oct-2017

EW Site near OTH radar which facing Taiwan. Sat Image Dated:- 30- Oct-2017

The Chinese OTH radar work under VHF and provide range upto 3000 KM. Given below the link of radio signal recorded by Amateur Radio Operator

Chinese Radar Sound

Here is the basic definition of OTH radars

Normally radar systems have a problem: the bend of the Earth surface. The maximum range of these radars is limited by the radio horizon – slightly far away than the optical horizon. OTH radars use very long wave lengths with special properties of propagation. Given the long wavelengths, an OTH antenna array is a sprawled business, stretched out over kilometers. Some OTH radars use FMCW to maximize signal energy, and such systems require separate transmit and receive antenna arrays.
Several OTH radar systems were deployed starting in the 1950s and 60s as part of early warning radar systems, but these have generally been replaced by airborne early warning systems instead. OTH radars have recently been making something of a comeback, as the need for accurate long-range tracking becomes less important with the ending of the Cold War, and less-expensive ground based radars are once again being looked at for roles such as maritime reconnaissance and drug enforcement.
Radar Basics

Such radar are necessarily required to establish deterrence against China. OTH radars not only provide Early Warning to Ballistic Missile launch, such radar also allow India to monitor enemy exercises and movement.
To monitor and provide Early Warning against China, two such radars are required, one in Ladakh and second in North East. Such radars are mostly setup on rooftops of mountain and to provide efficient surveillance, such radars mostly work under VHF, L,S and C-bands.


Like the Chinese, Iranian also started the work of OTH radar in previous decade named under Sepehr Project. Unlike the Chinese Phased Array radar, Iranian established several antennas fixed at a distance.

Sepehr Radar, Sat Image: 17/10/2017

The Sepehr is 360 degree, 3D radar, with a ceiling upto 300 KM and a range of 1100 KM.

One can hear a high tone and low tone, sweep rates of 870 and 307 sweeps/sec. sent in two separated bursts
Sepehr Radar


Next UP: EW from Satellite

 

[Arpit]

Part 1 of Command & Control

I meant to write on Sat systems, but I thought first people need to understand Command & Control.

Lot of us think BMD systems are meant to intercept Ballistic Missiles, but BMD systems also create imbalance in Deterrence. So question arise, how can we see BMD as separate entity? Without linking to our deterrence and Nuclear Policy which is NFU (officially atleast). If we able to protect even Tier-1 cities from nuclear exchange, then that lead to unstable deterrence which force our enemies to produce more nuclear weapon and MIRVs.

But upside of BMD is of its dual nature, not in sense of Civilian and Military use, but the infrastructure that required to build the BMD also can be used for deciding when to initiate the process of launching missiles, and when to start the Continuity of the Govt. program. Such elements are necessary to protect the political Command from surprise strike.

The BMD network itself should be linked to nuclear command, and should be under SFC, that allow the NCA and his/her command to know the situation from a Hardened Command Center. The IACCS already done basic work in connecting the several MPRs and many other radars. Such network can be used in linking several OTH radars and satellite , which in modern world capable to detect launch within seconds after launch of missiles, if the intelligence about launch pads are good enough. Such information need to be transferred seamlessly into SFC's Command Center and to the NCA.

The new Generation Command Centers also capable to access the past SFC's and Indian Army's exercises as dataset, which they feed into a mathematical model and an algorithm, to produce best case & worst case scenarios, and are even capable to provide best course of action to the NCA and his/her Command. Such systems are useful in making quick decisions which lead to deaths of thousands.

But then question arise Indian Armed Forces's commander and even NCA groomed enough to believe over a machine, instead of there own guts? Afterall, these Commanders when they were Cadets, were groomed like that.

Coming Up: Part 2 of C&C

 

[Arpit]

Part of C&C

The real objectives of BMD are :-

1) Providing a Early Warning to Command Centers
2) Intercepting the Ballistic Missiles

About providing Early Warning, I explained above in great detail, but something also need to be explained. The different wavelengths hold different properties and there usefulness is limited by there wavelengths.

Different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation have different penetrating and reflection properties.

The wavelength produced by S Band radars is 8 to 15 cm (2 to 4 GHz) and the wavelength produced by X Band radars is 2.5 to 4 cm (8 to 12 GHz).

Because of the smaller wavelengths produced by X Band radars they use small antennas. Such antennas can easily fit onto smaller boat, consequently X Band radar is used for marine applications.

The radio waves produced by S Band radars are not easily attenuated, this gives them greater penetrating power and they are used for "near and far weather observations". Their penetration capabilities allow them to see through heavy weather.

The size of S Band antennas can exceed 7.6 m (25 ft) in size.
Difference between X-band and S-Band

By above explanation it is clear that why all surveillance or Early Warning radar are in UHF, VHF, S-band , L-band or C-band. Such radars able to provide a high range, detection of low RCS object even at long range and beyond horizon. But what are there drawbacks?

Such radars are incapable to provide good resolution of objects which is necessary to provide lock on and feed that data into intercepting missiles.

IAI EL/M-2090U for surveillance and long range Early Warning (UHF Band)

India bought EL/M-2080 Greenpine radar in previous decades to support the development of BMD program. Such radars are good and even best for development, but if we are serious about deployment of homemade BMD, we seriously start to think about developing or buying a X-band radar for providing proper tracking.

There is nothing wrong with such radars, but all over the world such radars are only used for providing surveillance, and when something detected, they intimate the X-band radar operators to turn ON there radar by video or voice links for providing a proper tracking.

But one thing I missed to mention, such X-band radar that provide tracking of Ballistic missiles, are very hard to develop and require lot of manpower and resources. Such radar is so hard to crack that only one country able to produce such radar on Planet Earth which is USA.

Raytheon AN/TPY-2

Then question arise, what we do next, if these radars are so hard. Three options exist for us :-

1) Developing our own radar
2) Asking US to sell us AN/TPY-2
3) Using S-band radar for tracking ( How Israelis done)

For obvious reasons if we use S-band radar for tracking, that going to be a sub-optimal solution. But this is more a political decision, and Indian politicians need to understand this, they want a sub optimal solution or they want to buy such radars from US? Obviously if we go toward buying AN/TPY-2, US going to ask something. What that something will be, time will tell us.

AN/TPY-2 Deployment Site, South of Rashid Bin Saeed Al Makhtoum Naval College, UAE. Sat Image Date: 14/10/2017

Coming UP: Part 3 of C&C

 

[Angel Eyes]

Isro Multi Object Tracking Radar. It could compliment Sword fish radar developed by DRDO at much lower price

 

[Arpit]

Isro Multi Object Tracking Radar. It could compliment Sword fish radar developed by DRDO at much lower priceView attachment 89

MOTR is not a Over the Horizon Radar.

 

[Aashish]

Multiple Object Kill Vehicle (MOKV)

By Sandeep Tyagi

Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD)
The concept of having a defensive system against ballistic missiles came into being in the 1950s, wherein both USA and USSR started coming up with elementary BMD systems with mixed results. This process has continued till date with the countermeasures developmental cycle going through numerous crests and troughs. A number of other countries such as France, China, Israel and India have also tried to develop BMD systems albeit with varying success. The idea however is nothing short of trying to hit a ‘bullet with a bullet’.

When, Where and How?
The proponents of BMD have been seized with these questions throughout the history of developing and fielding BMD systems. The ballistic missiles can be countered either in boost, midcourse or terminal phase. This obviously would mean that the encounter happens either in the enemy territory, outer space or over friendly/own air space. The potential kill means include a kinetic kill, use of directed energy weapons, electronic measures and even Special Forces! Each course of action has its own advantages and disadvantages which are not under consideration here.

Major Chink in BMD Shield
In the year 1970, USA fielded the first true Multiple Independently Targeted Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) payload to be delivered by the Minuteman III ICBM which was meant to defeat the ABM defence shield around Moscow[1]. This eventually led to USSR building her own MIRV payloads resulting in a major shift in the strategic thought process and emergence of the concept of mutually assured destruction as ABM systems could not cope up with the offensive ballistic missiles carrying MIRV payloads. The MIRVs negated the effectiveness of a BMD system as the attacking missile could have multiple warheads (3–12), whereas the interceptor missile had only one warhead per missile. Additionally, decoys may also be used alongside actual warheads to maximise the chances of the actual warheads reaching their targets prior to possible interception. Thus, militarily, as well as economically, BMD systems were unviable in the MIRV context. A viable Anti Ballistic Missile (ABM) defence against MIRVs would therefore require multiple defensive missiles for each offensive one. Although a BMD system that could intercept the incoming ballistic missile before deployment of the MIRVs could potentially overcome this lacuna, it would obviously be technologically challenging and economically prohibitive to field.
The arrival of MIRVs on the scene resulted in the ABM treaty of 1972 meant to prevent an arms race between the USA and USSR which remained in force for the next 30 years till USA withdrew from this treaty in the year 2002.

Multiple Object Kill Vehicle (MOKV)
In the first decade of this century, USA commenced R&D on developing a MOKV (referred to as MKV then) which could be the futuristic ballistic missile killer intended to detect, track, and kill several different incoming enemy missile warheads and decoys with only one counter-missile launch. As the nomenclature suggests, it caters for more than one kill vehicle to be launched from a single booster. The system consists of a carrier platform with on board sensors and a number of small, simple kill projectiles that can be independently targeted, with each projectile weighing approximately 10 pounds[2]. A test of the MOKV was conducted on 2nd December, 2008, at the National Hover Test Facility at Edwards Air Force Base, California. In April of 2009, the project was terminated under the Secretary of Defence Robert Gates, but later revitalized in 2015[3].

• Working. Six to eleven MOKV are envisioned to be launched on one booster rocket, which may track the targets using data from the ABM System and its own seeker. The carrier missile dispenses and guides the kill vehicles in the threat envelope using infrared heat-detecting technology to locate threat objects and destroy these kinetically. MOKV is likely to launch on rockets like the U.S. Navy Raytheon SM-3 standard shipboard missile[4].
• Advantages.
  • The MOKV would be a force multiplier for any ABM system. A single interceptor missile equipped with this payload could now tackle the MIRVs, including decoys.
  • The many-on-many strategy obviates the need for credible pre-launch intelligence while leveraging the ABM System’s discrimination capability.
  • Provides a layered ABM defence against ballistic missiles of all ranges in all phases of flight[5].
  • Substantially reduces the interceptor inventory required to defeat an evolving and more capable threat.
• Current Status. The development programme was shelved in the year 2009; however the same has been revived as part of the $9,775,608 contract awarded in August 2015, to M/S Raytheon to define an operational MOKV concept[6]. Further, earlier this year a $59.6 million contract was awarded to the Raytheon Missile Systems to enhance the MOKV's secure communications systems, high sensitivity multi-band sensor, survivable processor, kill vehicle divert and attitude control system, bus sensor and sensor pointing, and the engagement management and a $53.1 million contract to the Lockheed Martin Space Systems, to enhance the MOKV's gimbaled seeker assembly, integrated avionics assembly, component integration and testing, and an advanced seeker[7]. USA intends to operationally deploy this system in the year 2025-2030 time frame.

Conclusion
The R & D in the field of ballistic missile defence technologies has continued across the globe despite technical setbacks, budgetary constraints and administration/regime changes. Disintegration of USSR signalled the end of cold war and consequent lowering of ballistic missile threat, however, new threats have emerged both for the USA and the rest of the world. While China is competing to be the next super power, North Korea and Pakistan continue to maintain their dubious and dangerous fuzzy logic of employing nuclear weapons. In light of these developments, the BMD issue is again live and contextual and MOKV is an important futuristic component of this defence. Presently, only USA seems to be pursuing this system (there may be other national covert programmes) which could prove to be a game changer for ABM systems.

References
[1] Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle - Wikipedia
[2] Multiple Kill Vehicle - Wikipedia
[3] Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance » Multi-Object Kill Vehicle (MOKV)
[4] http://www.militaryaerospace.com/ar...defense-to-kill-several-warheads-at-once.html
[5] http://www.lockheedmartin.com:80/products/MKV/index.html
[6] Raytheon takes next step toward defining Multi-Object Kill Vehicle concept
[7] http://www.militaryaerospace.com/ar...defense-to-kill-several-warheads-at-once.html

http://www.claws.in/1836/multiple-object-kill-vehicle-mokv-sandeep-tyagi.html