Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

India's K-15 Ballasic Missile tasked to take out China's Aircraft Carrier 'Liaoning'

Discussion in 'Indian Navy' started by HariPrasad, Apr 17, 2017.

  1. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    There is nothing called piercing the veil, need to saturate their defenses. Simple as that, how simple it may be depends on the Chinese CBG's capabilities.

    And I dont think Chinese have such lethality as that of other counterparts yet and may be not in future as tech. is developing faster than the defending of a CBG...
     
    Hellfire likes this.
  2. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,709
    Likes Received:
    4,693
    And here's the kind of data you can get now.


    Check 00:50.

    In this image, the satellite is automatically tracking vehicle data.


    So, for this purpose, you have imaging satellites and SAR/ISAR satellites.

    As for the problem of continuous surveillance, we have enough satellites in polar orbit. And by the time the Chinese CBGs become a real threat many years later, we will have launched far more satellites with more advanced capabilities.

    While satellite surveillance is a problem for us, we should be talking about what existing powers have already achieved in terms of continuous surveillance capabilities, you shouldn't use India as a benchmark.

    For example:
    http://www.popsci.com/gaofen-4-worl...s-chinas-great-leap-forward-into-space#page-3
    In the Gaofen 4's case, its range of view is a 7,000km by 7,000km box of 49 million square kilometers of Asian land and water in and around China.

    The Gaofen 4 is the world's most powerful GEO spy satellite. It has a color image resolution of slightly less than 50 meters (which is enough to track aircraft carriers by their wake at sea) and a thermal imaging resolution of 400m (good for spotting forest fires). It may also have a lower resolution video streaming capacity.

    By 2030, the Jilin constellation will have 138 imaging, high-resolution small satellites that provide all weather coverage of any point on Earth, at 10 minute intervals.


    So you can understand the military value right there.

    But in case the Chinese come in through Sunda or elsewhere, we already have the intelligence required to track the ships real time through surface and air based assets.

    And we do have some weather satellites in geostationary orbit.

    The plasma is generated during reentry, and by then mid course corrections are useless.

    Missiles are fast. And warheads are maneuverable. Ships are slow, too slow.

    You don't need 1m CEP either, a 1000Kg warhead can be quite disastrous even if the missile misses by 10m.

    Regardless, we shouldn't be talking about ballistic missiles with conventional warheads. Let me give you an example. This is also a 'ballistic missile'.

    [​IMG]

    So is this.
    [​IMG]

    Although the anti-ship BM is a BM, the payload it carries is not simply falling. It carries a seeker of its own and it is maneuverable.
     
  3. A_poster

    A_poster Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2016
    Messages:
    985
    Likes Received:
    1,431
    Country Flag:
    India

    A geo-stationary earth observation satellite would have atrocious resolution, and IIRC the naval satellite India launched was for communication.


    A network of satellite could provide cover for, or track a CBG, but a single satellite can't. That was the point I made.

    A single satellite ,even when it detect a CBG has to move on in its orbit, and by the time it return, a CBG may have moved out of its sight.
     
    Hellfire and layman like this.
  4. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    12,663
    Likes Received:
    13,273
    Country Flag:
    India
    They have to also take into consideration the counter force strike by USN. Plus the saturation strike proposed by PLAN also has limitations unless they plan to use nukes to take out CBGs. US will be than free to strike China with nukes. Are the Chinese game for it? saturation strike is not an option for the simple reason that the closure rate of the missile and target is so huge that a very minor movement by the Carrier from its targeted position will bring huge error in targeting it. More over ships start zig-zagging once they come under such attack and also increase speed to max possible.
     
  5. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    [​IMG]

    Full Ship shock trails in case of misses.



    Navy’s Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM), a last-line-of-defense weapon to shoot down enemy missiles on the final approach, and conducted a successful test. Minus the crap music which i could not do much about it. lol



    Such test are conducted for the main purpose of near close explosions in case of missing targets of the Missiles.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
    Hellfire and randomradio like this.
  6. Aqwoyk

    Aqwoyk Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    486
    Country Flag:
    India
    But These are the underwater explosion , an air burst will have more spread .
     
  7. Immanuel

    Immanuel 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2012
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    133
    Anti Ship Ballistic missiles are all hype IMO, they can be spotted hundreds of miles away and can be shot down quite easily by systems like Barak-8, SM-6 etc.
     
    Hellfire likes this.
  8. A_poster

    A_poster Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2016
    Messages:
    985
    Likes Received:
    1,431
    Country Flag:
    India
    You are proving my point.

    Take a not of change in field of vision with changing resolution. This is a basic physics law that for same size of detector, increase in resolution would decrease the area that could be covered by that satellites.

    And for most remote sensing satellites, resolution and areal coverage is fixed, and if resolution very high to detect a CBG, areal coverage would be low and more satellites would be needed to cover same area. Only SAR satellite has capability to change resolution in real time, but in it too the limitation remains. If it is operating in high-res mode, it would cover less area.

    That is also what I have said. With enough satellites, you could maintain continuous track; but since a satellite is not stationary, it could maintain track for a very short amount of time.

    That information would be good for racking but useless for targeting using a BM.

    Which has resolution that would miss even most of Islands of A&N.


    That is what I said. There is no guidance possible after re-entry. But even after entering troposphere, a warhead travelling with 10 Mach velocity, has to travel blind for 7.6 seconds during which time a carrier would have moved by around 136 meters. A warhead without terminal guidance (which does not exist) could have a CEP more than length of carrier.



    Not fast enough. A CBG at full speed would have moved by 10s of kilometers during the time a missile is in flight, and even during terminal phase, it could move by more distance than its length.

    No, nothing except a direct hit with conventional munition could bring down a carrier. For proximity destruction, warhead need to be nuclear.

    RLVs are different game.



    A seeker would work and warhead could be maneuverable only in low hypersonic range as actuator surfaces to guide even a Mach 8 object does not exist, and for higher speeds, could not exist. Designing actuators capable of fine enough movement to function at hypersonic speeds is what has been holding Hypersonic cruise missiles back.
     
    Hellfire and layman like this.
  9. A_poster

    A_poster Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2016
    Messages:
    985
    Likes Received:
    1,431
    Country Flag:
    India

    Underwater explosions are more dangerous for ships than air burst.
     
    Hellfire likes this.
  10. Aqwoyk

    Aqwoyk Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    486
    Country Flag:
    India
    Say in case a 610kg df 21 warhead misses a warship by 10m then where would do you want to have that miss 5m above sea surface or underwater ?
     
    Hellfire likes this.
  11. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,709
    Likes Received:
    4,693
    That's irrelevant. What matters is target position. The rest is handled by the seeker of the payload.

    You are forgetting that there are also satellites in GEO and they are positioned permanently over the target.

    And 10 minutes is good enough.

    All you need are GPS coordinates and speed.

    Again, irrelevant. All that means is we don't have the capability, but others like the US, Russia and China do.

    That distance is irrelevant again. The payload has its own seeker and can maneuver.

    I think 50-100Km is good enough. The seeker of the Brahmos can pick up a carrier beyond 50Km easily.

    Take the bridge out, the carrier will go home.

    That wasn't the point. Imagine using the Brahmos-2 as the payload. The missile is merely transporting the Brahmos-2 towards the carrier, nothing else.

    A Brahmos has a rocket motor that takes it to mach 2.5 in a few seconds. Now imagine the Brahmos-2 has been given two stages worth of rocket motor, one to take it into space, the other to bring it into the atmosphere. This is what we are talking about.

    That small distance the carrier has traveled is irrelevant to the Brahmos-2, since, just like the Brahmos, it will find the target on its own and kill it like a regular cruise missile.

    Check the Zircon. It is expected to replace the Granit in Russia. Sea skimming, highly maneuverable.

    http://tass.com/defense/941559
     
    GSLV Mk III and Hellfire like this.
  12. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    And regarding Nukes for destroying the carrier.... Which i wanted to clarify also

    In Operation Crossroads, the (larger) ship hulls themselves held up relatively OK to nearby (within a mile) Hiroshima sized blasts, but anything on the exposed weatherdecks, and fragile stuff (like radar masts) took damage. The underwater blast was far more effective in sinking ships.

    IMO, a Nukes would obtain a "sift kill". That is, the effects on the crew itself (both from actual injuries and, just as importantly, the hit to their morale) would render a ship combat-ineffective if a Nuke exploded within a certain radius (a few miles?), depending on warhead size. Closer to the ship, of course, will still cause significant damage. On a carrier, I would expect a lot of secondary fires... from the planes and aircraft refueling equipment, for example, that would endanger the ship. (Imagine another Forrestal fire.)

    But logic beats the theory in Theater war once Nukes are used then the conflict changes to MAD doctrine. So losing a Carrier group would be insignificant.


    And to Clarify on the Air burst of a BM, If a BM misses by 5 meters or 10 meters after say it has punched though several layers of defense deployed by the CSG, sure it would be a big irritant and let me clarify being irritant as it is not going to render CSG completely useless nor non-operative. CSG's are trained to take strikes.

    Matter to fact that probability of a BM striking a CSG is close to nil...
     
    surya kiran and Hellfire like this.
  13. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    12,663
    Likes Received:
    13,273
    Country Flag:
    India
    The moment any CBG detects a missile launch towards it, they will go into NBCD state-1 condition Zulu. Which a state in which the whole ship is sealed, its internal pressure raised to 1.1 times the atm pressure to ensure no outside air enters the ship and Nuke decontamination systems primed. water jet shower (Water Sprinklers system) of the ship may also be commenced depending on how accurate the warning is. The ship is now operated completely thru automation and from Operations room and all weapon systems are given full launch orders to shoot down the threat. The complete screen of the CBG comes to this state. Major Ships are designed to withstand a nuke blast within 2nm of them.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
  14. Indian Jatt

    Indian Jatt 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    166
    Country Flag:
    India
    Lol man even i have some dreams like that, but if same economy was given to pakistan, they would had turned the Island into fortress..... i feel sad for Indian armed forces they dont have much power....:cry:
     
    Hellfire and layman like this.
  15. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,709
    Likes Received:
    4,693
    This video will shatter that myth.
     
    Bloom 17 and Hellfire like this.

Share This Page