But where are the DACT nozzles for exo-atmospheric directional control.We don't know anything about the 40N6, while the 48N6 has not been designed with HTK in mind. It has a massive warhead instead.
As for 40N6's exo capability, they have managed to keep it classified, but it's been designed for exo.
It's a big missile.
PAC-1 had a warhead approximately as large as the 48N6 and results in Desert Storm were far from perfect. Warhead remains continuing after hit etc.
The 40N6 claimed exo-atmospheric capabilities but it never had DACT nozzles either.
The 48N6/H6 is using similar technology to PAC-2. PAC-1 was effective but not fully effective, it certainly made many successful intercepts during Desert Storm, but against SRBMs only. The main problem was that intercepts at that altitude leave fragments that are too low to burn up on re-entry. I don't see how the 48N6 addresses any of these issues. Proximity bursts just aren't reliable against BMs.
The US are a million miles ahead of anyone with respect to ballistic missile interception because they started thinking about doing it conventionally 35 years ago. We can argue that the Russian system is maybe better value for money, but it is definitely not better.
Last edited:
If India has DACS on the PDV, then you can be sure the Russians do as well.
The very reason that the S-300PMU-1/2 was better than the Patriot PAC-3 in the BMD role is why the PAC-3 was rejected by the IAF. The 48N6 available at the time was significantly inferior to what's available today, and that missile demonstrated superior qualities to the PAC-3.
Too much dumb anti-Russian propaganda in the west. Makes no sense at all.
Not necessarily. I've never seen evidence of any Russian exo-atmospheric intercept. Yeah, India intercepted and SRBM outside the atmosphere, which is kind of pointless.
India’s Advanced Air Defense Interceptor Destroys Incoming Ballistic Missile in Test
I don't see how it could be better than the PAC-3 MSE. PAC-3 MSE has made intercepts up to 42km altitude and 16 can be carried on a smaller launcher than 4 48N6 missiles. India chose it for cost not performance.
'The west' has actually performed multiple exo-atmospheric intercept tests against MRBMs, IRBMs and ICBMs, including one by the GBI at 5,000km range, whereas all I see from Russia is marketing bollox. So I'm sticking with my opinion until I see some tests that prove otherwise. That's not propaganda it's proper fact.
That's not a benchmark though, you witnessing a Russian test.
Some notes on DRDO's PDV ballistic missile defence interceptor - Saurav Jha’ Blog
PDV is a true blue exo-atmospheric interceptor capable of intercepts at up to 150 km. Indeed, the late April test involved a 'near miss' at an altitude of 120 km. This puts the PDV in a different category in terms of its propulsion system, navigation set-up and homing seeker capability.
I wonder how many SRBMs are intercepted at an altitude of 120Km.
Lol. No. India did not reject the PAC-3 due to cost. The S-300 can perform interceptions up to an altitude of 60Km to a distance of 60Km. PAC-3 is half that and at slower speeds. Also, PAC-3 can only stop missiles that are half as fast as what the S-300 can stop.
It's thoroughly beaten in the BMD role by the S-300.
All propaganda. The ones who need to know about the tests know it.
Nobody has witnessed a Russian test though, even the US DoD, which sees everything with SBIRS.That's not a benchmark though, you witnessing a Russian test.
Some notes on DRDO's PDV ballistic missile defence interceptor - Saurav Jha’ Blog
PDV is a true blue exo-atmospheric interceptor capable of intercepts at up to 150 km. Indeed, the late April test involved a 'near miss' at an altitude of 120 km. This puts the PDV in a different category in terms of its propulsion system, navigation set-up and homing seeker capability.
I wonder how many SRBMs are intercepted at an altitude of 120Km.
Lol. No. India did not reject the PAC-3 due to cost. The S-300 can perform interceptions up to an altitude of 60Km to a distance of 60Km. PAC-3 is half that and at slower speeds. Also, PAC-3 can only stop missiles that are half as fast as what the S-300 can stop.
It's thoroughly beaten in the BMD role by the S-300.
All propaganda. The ones who need to know about the tests know it.
A lot will if you fire them upwards enough. They used a Prithvi, which is an SRBM.
India’s Advanced Air Defense Interceptor Destroys Incoming Ballistic Missile in Test
S-300 has a 30km service ceiling.
PAC-3 was limited to 30km but MSE is 42km and far more missiles can be carried per launcher (16 vs 4).
The S-300 has never done anything in the BMD role unless you can prove otherwise.
There haven't been any tests, the SBIRS satellite network sees everything. Hence why it was known that China shot down a satellite.
So they mentioned the Chinese satellite intercept but not Russian ballistic missile intercepts. You're kidding yourself.
Well they used a Prithvi as link suggests.
India’s Advanced Air Defense Interceptor Destroys Incoming Ballistic Missile in Test
And whilst SRBMs wouldn't go outside the atmpshere in normal use, they can if fired on a high trajectory. The German V-2 with 300km range was the first man made object in space for this very reason.
And the 9M96 has no DACT either. How do you expect these missiles to manoeuvre sufficiently above 20km with no DACT and tiny fins? Magic?
And how large is an S-400 system with respect to transport?
9M96E2
Range - 120km (Claimed).
Altitude - 30km (Claimed)
PAC-3 MSE
Range - 160km
Altitude - 42km (Tested).
Aegis Ashore
Range - 460km (SM-6)
Altitude - 500km (SM-3 IB), 1,500km (SM-3 IIA)
It's a fact. There's no record of any MRBM intercept, unless the US just happened to report on China's tests but not Russia's. Even though defence contractors would love to make the information public to justify more government defence spending.
All Indian purchases are heavily cost-restricted, your government just tells you they picked the best to save themselves embarrassment and criticism, and afterwards you convince yourselves that it's true to protect your pride. Even the Russians know they're not ahead of the US in ABM technology.
Last edited:
The Chinese test was a mid course test, like GBI. The Russians have been intercepting BMs in the terminal phase for so long that nobody in the West cares anymore.
That's why the US actually had an ABM Treaty with the Russians.
It has been modified to imitate reentry speeds of more than 3Km/s. That's not an SRBM.
Lol. Yep, yep, they don't have attitude control systems. They have never launched a satellite after all.
9M96E3
Range - more than 120Km
Altitude - more than 40Km (Tested)
48N6E3
Range - more than 250Km
Altitude - more than 60Km
40N6
Range - more than 400Km
Altitude - more than 180Km
Mid course defence. It's something else entirely.
The Russians believe they are 20 years ahead compared to the West.
Give it up. The ABM Treaty occurred because the Russians couldn't afford to keep up with the West's spending in 1995. Doesn't matter whether it's terminal or mid-course, the target still has to launch with a huge plume and leave the atmosphere. They simply haven't demonstrated anything. A while back you showed a picture of Patriot failing one MRBM intercept, so where is the picture of the S-400 succeeding in one MRBM intercept huh?
Oh sure, modified huh. Sure, you got a 600km range Prithvi III (assuming it was even a Prithvi III) to go an extra 1200-1400km, which is how far it would go if it reached 3km/s. Well even this states your interceptor system only works up to Mach 8.
India’s Advanced Air Defense Interceptor Destroys Incoming Ballistic Missile in Test
You couldn't modify a Prithvi to do over 1000km, even with no warhead. Source for your BS?
So where are they? Satellite control and ballistic missile intercepts are a hole different matter wrt speed and timing.
9M96E3 altitude test, where is it?
Evidence of 40N6 intercept at 180km altitude please?
So you think the US can do the much harder mid-course defence better but can't do the much easier terminal defence better?
20 years ahead compared to where the US were in 1970, hence why they still use nuclear-tipped interceptors, like the US did in the 1970s.
LIM-49 Spartan - Wikipedia Oh look, it's radio command too.
Wake up and smell the coffee son.The 48N6E3 is basically a larger PAC-1/2, except nowhere near as combat-proven.
Last edited:
Secret.
The Dhanush already does 750Km with one liquid fuel stage. Whereas the target missile for BMD has been modified with a solid fuel stage with more range.
That mach 8 statement is outdated.
What you need is altitude.
This is for the AAD.
Ballistic Missile Interceptor AAD Successfully Flight Tested
The endo-atmospheric missile, capable of intercepting incoming targets at an altitude of 15 to 25 kms was launched against multiple simulated targets of 1500 km class ballistic missile.
So where are they? Satellite control and ballistic missile intercepts are a hole different matter wrt speed and timing.
9M96E3 altitude test, where is it?
Evidence of 40N6 intercept at 180km altitude please?
So you think the US can do the much harder mid-course defence better but can't do the much easier terminal defence better?
20 years ahead compared to where the US were in 1970, hence why they still use nuclear-tipped interceptors, like the US did in the 1970s.
LIM-49 Spartan - Wikipedia Oh look, it's radio command too.
The 48N6E3 is basically a larger PAC-1/2, except nowhere near as combat-proven.
Is that why the IAF rejected the PAC-3 then?
Nothing is secret with SBIRS, you can't hide ballistic missile intercept tests anymore than you can hide a pre-emptive nuclear strike.
No evidence of modified found. Low hanging fruit.
India’s Advanced Air Defense Interceptor Destroys Incoming Ballistic Missile in Test
December 2017. New source and test to prove then?
The altitude is possible with an Prithvi SRBM, but 3km/s is not.
Makes no sense, test the endo-atmospheric interceptor against undefined 1500km range targets (circa Mach 8) but test the exo-atmospheric interceptor against a Prithvi?
Cost is why they rejected it, as always. The PAC-3 MSE is a lot better though. The US spent billions researching missile defence during 1980s and 1990s whilst the Russians were fighting over loaves of bread. The progress they've made since has just been to catch up with where the US was 20 years ago. The 48N6XX missile is Russian PAC-1/2 with a large warhead to make up for lack of tracking and guidance accuracy. GBI, THAAD and SM-3 IIA are things that Russia will not achieve until 2040.
Proof at all is not necessary in your case. Your government has told you that these magical logs intercept missiles and your pride is on the line so you back them up.
So where did 3km/s come from?
Cost, cost, cost. 36 Rafales instead of 126, all cost.
Lol. So the 48N6 and 40N6 reach altitudes of 60Km and 180+Km because they are air defence missiles.
Some notes on DRDO's PDV ballistic missile defence interceptor - Saurav Jha’ Blog
With this test DRDO also unveiled a new two stage target equipped with new motors that successfully mimics the 3-5 km/sec re-entry speeds of a 'hostile ballistic missile approaching from more than 2000 km away'.
The Phase 1 has been made to stop missiles like the Shaheen II.
Lol. Bad example. Would have made more sense if you said we couldn't afford 126 Rafale, so we bought 36 F-16s instead.
Requirements are prime. Costs are secondary.
Show me evidence of intercepts at that altitude.Lol. So the 48N6 and 40N6 reach altitudes of 60Km and 180+Km because they are air defence missiles.
Some notes on DRDO's PDV ballistic missile defence interceptor - Saurav Jha’ Blog
With this test DRDO also unveiled a new two stage target equipped with new motors that successfully mimics the 3-5 km/sec re-entry speeds of a 'hostile ballistic missile approaching from more than 2000 km away'.
The Phase 1 has been made to stop missiles like the Shaheen II.
Lol. Bad example. Would have made more sense if you said we couldn't afford 126 Rafale, so we bought 36 F-16s instead.
Requirements are prime. Costs are secondary.
This reminds me of a f'king Sinbad movie, your ABMs are no more real than your aspirations to be a superpower.
Couldn't afford toilet paper, bought the Rafale.
Prithvi missile has altitude of much more than 25-30km. The missile is shot almost straight up and then made an almost U turn to replicate incoming MRBM at 3km/s. So, India can make the missile fly straight to 60km altitude, then make a U-turn with still fuel left and accelerating downwards to reach about 8Mach at 30km altitude. Prithvi 2 is liquid fueled has ballistic range of 350km and is capable of maneuvering which helps in controlling thrust as and when needed to be modified to replicate MRBM reentry pattern.
Indian systems are not useless. PAC-3 has been developed since 1980s but it was only in 1990s that it became more mature. Development algorithm, programing language, computation etc have drastically changed and hence time does not work linearly in BMD or SAM development. It was with the advent of super-computing in 1985-1990 and fast computers that the BMD got a boost. So, India is not too far behind. Indian system is also capable of intercepting missiles as per Indian needs - mainly MRBM.
Indians don't use toilet paper. Indians use water. Toilet papers are disgusting. Cost has nothing to do with purchases. India purchases to get new technology to learn from, not for usage. The technology obtained will be used to make indigenous items. Rafales, S400 etc involve some high technology which are needed for India. These system themselves are not of great use but the technology available in them are.