Reduce drag and increase range with blunt shaped nose cones ( which can accommodate larger no of MIRVs )
Sorry for the later reply . If I post consecutive posts the posts get appended together . So I mean to post later and than I forget to post
Reduce drag and increase range with blunt shaped nose cones ( which can accommodate larger no of MIRVs )
Sorry for the later reply . If I post consecutive posts the posts get appended together . So I mean to post later and than I forget to post
DRDO project 20 ship / DRDO technology demonstration vessel details -connecting the dots
LR-MFR ( long range multifunction radar ) and SLS ( ship launch system ) launchers for supporting the launch of AD series interceptors ( and other missiles if required ).
LR-MFR ( long range multifunction radar ) and SLS ( ship launch system ) launchers for supporting the launch of AD series interceptors ( and other missiles if required ).
That can be done by most manuvering missiles. There was a video of ashwin interceptor doing the same.
Check how iskander-M changed its path to almost 90 degree. (Starting 3:00)
Which missiles comes to your mind when you think of the SLS ? The AAD, XR-SAM in the future ?
DRDO has been awfully quiet about the AD-1 & AD-2.
IMO SLS is a experimental launcher for testing missiles onboard drdo project 20 ship.
Future IN warships will not have it , they will have a fixed VLS or rather a universal VLS which will cater to all future and existing local missiles of all types.
SLS is primarily for testing AD 1 and AD 2 interceptors . Possibly it might be reused/modified to test ship and submarine launched cruise missiles , SMART , XRSAM etc later on.
I have already posted the pic of AD 2
HOOOOO BOY!!! Finally some good Pr0n after so much bad news!
In light of new evidence
It is now confirmed that Helina ATGM has a " FIXED NOZZLE " not a " FLEXIBLE NOZZLE ( TVC ) " as previously suspected.
Unfortunately FIXED NOZZLE doesn't provide any thrust control. So Helina cannot change her trajectory just after launch.
On the contrary Dhruvastra with " JET VANE CONTROL ( JVC ) " can change its trajectory just after launch.
Picture of the Helina rear section shows that the nozzle is fixed at the throat and no actuator is visible ( required to implement flexible nozzle )
BrahMos Says Got Permission From Russia, India to Export Missiles to Third Countries
BrahMos Says Got Permission From Russia, India to Export Missiles to Third Countries.
BrahMos Says Got Permission From Russia, India to Export Missiles to Third Countries.
Barak-1 point defense missile firing from a Shivalik-class frigate.
Talking about thrust control @hellbent
View attachment 17417
Barak-1 point defense missile firing from a Shivalik-class frigate.
Talking about thrust control @hellbent
JVC
Post the whole Tweet:
So four ducted intakes, all 90deg apart. This is a good thing as a symmetric design is much easier to cannisterize than a non-symmetric one. There appears to be a single guide rail running right through the lower end of the missile, 20mm in width. That is probably to assist with the smooth and safe ejection from the cannister. This is especially necessary if the cannister is larger than the missile and there is a lot of gap between the missile body and cannister walls.
The missile has an over all length of 5.15m, no big deal other missiles are longer. We don't know if the rear wings are foldable, they probably are. But if not we will have problems with canisterizing. Overall this missile can be fitted with the current VLS the Navy uses. I am comparing from the IN's POV because the really need an universal VLS and already have deployed significant amount of VLS on ships. The other services can just get a new launcher on a truck and problem solved.
What will be the range? Is it going to replace Brahmos(liquid-fuelled ramjet ) since it's 100% made in India product?
This is the original targeted specs of the LFRJ:
Notice the range and speed. 600km at Mach 3.2.
But here Indranil is saying the speed will be Mach 2.4. The decrease in cruising speed would mean reduced rate of fuel consumption. Which in turn means increased range. Given the fact that this is initially aimed to hit aerial targets (as AAM or SAM), the focus will be on preserving speed and ability of accelerating and changing directions fast. For an AShM the focus is maintaining a very high speed for extended periods of time.
For AAM and SAM I would say range would be 600+ km. For AShM, if speed is not increased, range would be around 700 km. Just guesswork on my part.
As far as replacing Brahmos goes, I think the AShM will replace the current version of Brahmos. Brahmos' future versions will be travelling at much higher speeds than the current version, so the future versions of the missile will continue on.
Any LFR missile development other than the target missile is a long shot now. its not a priority. Possibly post 2025 development.
There is no need to cannisterize a target missile. It will use a similar launcher like Akash.
Can't comment on timelines or need. But if engineering designs are out along with dimensions, it means design phase is over and prototype phase has begun. I don't think it will take 5 years before we see this and its variants flying. We are pretty good with missiles. Services can acquire them when the feel like it, all acquisitions run late anyway. The missile development need not be effected by it.
But I think the Nirbhay's future variants would be given priority over this.
All future missiles are being cannisterized, including the future variant of Akash. I agree there is no need for it in target missiles but the LFRJ will go the into multiple missiles which will need cannisterizing. We have to think about it from now and design the missile, especially the propulsion, accordingly. Else the cannisters will be an afterthought and not optimised.