Do these type of AUVs have capability to interact with each other like true swarms ?
A fully networked swarms of these AUVs with other naval assets will drastically reduce dependence on costly assets like subs and P8i MPAs. Couple that with our own version of Predator UAVs and we don’t have to buy Billion dollar Subs and MPAs just to cover the Indian Ocean.
Last edited:
Agreed.
So it does - however SMART does appear to have a lot in common with Shaurya/K15. Similar diameter, similar fin placement etc which one can infer may also include a similar solid motor.
The Kalam Series: Exploring India's SLBMs and Derivatives - Overt Defense
In this piece overt defense explores India's growing series of SLBM's and their derivatives including the Kalam series and SMART
www.overtdefense.com
It's possible it says Supersonic because the missile would decelerate to supersonic velocities before releasing its torpedo.
So it does - however SMART does appear to have a lot in common with Shaurya/K15. Similar diameter, similar fin placement etc which one can infer may also include a similar solid motor.
The Kalam Series: Exploring India's SLBMs and Derivatives - Overt Defense
In this piece overt defense explores India's growing series of SLBM's and their derivatives including the Kalam series and SMART
It's possible it says Supersonic because the missile would decelerate to supersonic velocities before releasing its torpedo.
All warheads decelerate with a drop in altitude, even Shaurya will drop down to supersonic at the terminal stage.
There may be a significant differences in trajectory between the two classes, since the torpedo needs to be released with a parachute. Perhaps the transit happens at a much lower altitude than Shaurya, which eats into speed and range.
Interesting Ideas for Brahmos or Nirbhay cruise missile near Indo-Tibetan border ... the USA conducts 1st time live "Rapid Dragon" test
Last edited:
This idea makes it impossible for Ground Based Air Defences to know which plane is carrying cargo or passengers or missiles
We can use it innovatively against Pakistan if Not China
This idea counters to all chinese Bombers... A truck can't move to a specific lunch site near the northeast or Ladakh border due to bad infrastructure. If we have multiple cost-effective solutions it's always better.
A truck needn't go all the way to the borders in any case to fire those missiles. That's not the way the doctrine behind having those missiles in your arsenal was framed.
You Normally fire those missiles from fixed silos , rail or trucks in case of SSMs from either deep within your territory if it's a border state or the hinterland.
In the case of the US , they'd already have land based CMs & BMs in Japan & SK apart from SLBM & SLCM . This facility is meant to further augment those capabilities where these heavy transport aircraft can take off from the west coast of the US or somewhere in the Pacific like Guam or Australia , come near the ECS or SCS & release their payload.
In our case we'd have to do it from the airspace deep within the hinterland as & when we develop the capacity to mass deploy such CMs with ranges in excess of 3000 kms if we're talking about China here .
S2S missiles below 1000 km operational range... will have range issues against Chinese deployment. For precision strike, we will use airstrikes with Brahmos, SCALP EG, HAMMER ... Air dropping these CMs will be an added option and the US also does have multiple options to strike e.g. Bomber, Aircraft carrier, ICBMs ...
All these missiles you've mentioned have > 1000 kms range. For these missiles to be effective against China, they've to have a minimum max range of > 2000 kms.
Yes, for the US. Not so much for us as we'd have to successfully undertake SEAD / DEAD missions before theoretically deploying those missiles thru heavy cargo aircrafts against China.
OTOH, the US will engage China with their heavy cargo aircrafts coming in thru the seas. There's a huge difference between both approaches & repercussions.
It's also probably one of the reasons we didn't opt for bombers as we don't need it against Pakistan & against China we'd rather depend on SSMs & SLBMs.
Grid fins on the nose for acquiring a high AoA & a set of twin guide tubes in the rear for steering in high AoA flight regimes. Combine that with a 125 kg PCB warhead, this would cause some serious hurt.
Redback IFV of Hanwaha has spike ATGMs integrated on it. We should do the same with our IFVs too.