2 different generation of scientists worked on those 2 projects in different timeframe. hence can be applied that latter batch reused established proven tech.
Pralay and Shaurya: Conventional Strike Surface-to-Surface Missiles
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
We nees to mass produce these. Need hundreds upon hundreds of them!!!
Pralay is 5 tonne missile so even with best optimisation its A2G variant shall be around 4 tonne. That brings the question of how IAF plans to use it because current inventory & planned platforms dont have the capability to air launch such heavy missile.
I think Rather than looking it as an varient.
It's better to look it as a new ~3 ton missile A2G based on pralay's "tech".
Plus AFAIK those 5 tons is launch weight of fully prepared missile with its payload.
It's payload ranging from 350kg to 1 ton.
IMO, A shorter, and some what narrower missile, at most 500kg max payload can be made based on using pralay's tech
That weights ~3-3.5 tons fully ready.
Though rudram 3 is already in user trails, the only advantage a A2G pralay will give over it will be more speed and larger payload.
I don't really think its that much Worth it to make a A2G pralay.
Not really, you can decrease warhead to 200kg and the missile is released in same speed as the carrier jet ie it would start with certain kinetic thrust at around 10km like altitude. So right there almost 800kg to 1 ton propellant saving achieved. Then you got faster climb up, possibly less dia rocket motor (decrease from 740mm dia to somewhat 600mm brahmos class, or use similar non uniform airframe structure like R3) and also avionics+airframe now much lighter esp if they use those isogrid structure airframe parts. So overall air launched version can be brought down to 2.2 ton range fully integrated.
LRSOW idea is like that. Plenty of things can be done now should they wish to make different kind of systems. Can easily give 6-8 different config myself. However it needs to satisfy the somewhat restrictions we face. Su30 will not pull more than 2.5-2.6 ton article else safety compromised. The double pylon combined launcher of brahmos is rated for max 3 ton prob, and for safety you can load up to 2.5 ton approx. The launcher itself weigh ~ 450 kg. So the article needs to be max 2.1 ton class with few kg both side give or take.
Rudram 2 and 3 already have similar or somewhat heavier warhead than 200kg.
It will take away any seperate capability that pralay can provide.
Especially
Rudram 3 With 500+km range.
The only benifit of a lighter A2G pralay with 200kg warhead i see is it being more difficult to intercept.
Which imo is not alone worth it to develop another missile whose role can be done by rudram 3, which will be tricky and difficult to intercept in its own right.
Atleast 500kg payload in an A2G varient
Or higher range of min. ~700km
Will make enough sense to warrant its development.
Brahmos A's weight is mentioned to be 2550kg.
Is it with launcher?
Or weight of the missile only?
That much changes will make it a completely new missile rather than a A2G version. Both heavy warhead capacity and range advantage will be lost. Rudram 3 is already there to perform the same role of this new missile with faster induction timeline. I dont think this is planned. But i m beginning to doubt if there is a possibility that 4 tonne A2G prahar can be launched by IAF transport aircrafts
A smaller shorter narrower new missile is not going to have definitive advantage over Rudram 3 both in terms of range or speed. Rudram 3 with more control surfaces will have better accuracy and air defense evading capabilities. Even 3-3.5 tonne missile cannot be carried by current inventory. Remember Brahmos A is 2.2 tonne only.
Where exactly it is shown a heavier warhead ? R2 is 1050kg all up, its a miracle they have managed to push 200kg warhead in that. Solid fuel rockets need high % propellant loading to overall weight if these are to fly at high speed in relatively lower altitude.
not much to take away at all, its for a longer reach and via diverse platform. When you are programming the guidance law, the range constraint is done for a specific range engagement ie you have to specify at which range the engagement is to happen. This is done to determine whether the missile/FV is having the required kinematics to sustain its flight with the required thrust and maneuverability. This is important because if the range is too great the trajectory optimisation will not work the way you plan it to be under the ambient condition because there will be a shortfall between data in calculated test level vs data in practical test level.
Given DRDO develop stuff across incremental range scenarion, ie short range 300-330km , then extended range/mid range 450-550 km, then long range 800-900km sort. This we can see from the progressive iteration. So it is likely not to deviate from this model.
In the recent interview Dr Mishra specifically mentioned the alcm weight 2.2 ton, so with launcher weight it will be within tolerance threshold of safe flying condition at 2.6 ton. Even if the dual jugaad pylon was rated for 3 ton , it is not advisable to full load for safe take off , flight to the desired location and then release. Our airframes are hardy but also get old, heavy wear tear. So need to consider that aspect too.
So your saying at ~500 km range, pralay based missile will be more accurate than rudram 3?
If the aim is to convert an existing system that is ground launched primarily; and all our missiles are ground launched primarily this is how these are made and tested ; then the airframe needs optimisation for air release. Safe separation, keeping equilibrium all while in motion with the carrier jet means no room for error and a very very critical subject for design.
Now missiles are inherently simple both theoretically and structurally. General structure is a booster or LV launch vehicle, then a kv or kill vehicle. Then you divide that into sections of airframe for better understanding and formulating as per the need. It can be single or multi staged for each section. There are several critical technology domain that enable making any kind of missile which upon mastering you can then develop any type of missile as you want. Total 13 building block enabling tech bases
This is imp because once the basic idea is well proven, we need not see missiles as different kind of development, rather its a collection of these enabling tech which is then put together to fit purpose. Here for Rudram 4 , our purpose is likely a long range standoff weapon that is air launched. In this case we have Pralay proven airframe, so we can further modify the design a little to suit release in air and have trajectory planned because we know its flight profile, how flow condition work at different speed , how much heat resistant needed , basic airframe sections already well established. So in a way its not that different from creating Brahmos NG from the original Brahmos concept , or creating Rudram 2 from prahaar airframe , then adding booster to R2 & modify to create R3 etc.
No, I am saying if Pralay airframe is modified to create some 800km variant air launched LRSOW R4 then it is a possibility, it is feasible to make such a long range standoff weapon to hit a target from 800km away and launched from a jet which is a huge capability. Do not think about just in land attack mode ie Su30 with such a weapon system over the land area. Rather think about Su30 with such standoff weapon over the vast IOR area and you can understand the strategic force multiplier of such a capability.
This is just for the basic design part. How the missile is made to fly, in which trajectory, how fast , how target acquisition is done, ability to deceive enemy air defence and keeping datalink comm, long range navigation & guidance are where it would differentiate from another (plus the cost , utility etc) missile system. Then it is upto the mission commander to decide which choice is to use depending on battlefield situation. That part is what I can not tell because its a practical war use aspect I do not know much about.