Future upgrade of Delhi Class?

[Ethan]

Whatever happened to the whole Sagarika Project. It was suppose to be a supersonic LACM. I think earlier it was mentioned in defence news publications that it was going to arm the Indian SSNs and possibly the new Bangalore class destroyers.

 

[aaaditya]

india is to test a highly improved variant of the brahmos missile this year.i wouldnt be surprised if it is named as the sagarika.

 

[gf0012-aust]

india is to test a highly improved variant of the brahmos missile this year.i wouldnt be surprised if it is named as the sagarika.

Nope, thats impossible. The Sagarika is based on the Privthi. One is a ballistic rocket, the other is a supersonic cruise missile. You can't turn a Brahmos into a Sagarika - period.

 

[ajay_ijn]

Nope, thats impossible. The Sagarika is based on the Privthi. One is a ballistic rocket, the other is a supersonic cruise missile. You can't turn a Brahmos into a Sagarika - period.

It is still confusing that Is sagarika is SLBM or SLCM?
In some websites it is given as SLBM and in some it is given as SLBM.

An article in Bharat Rakshak claims that Sagarika is a SLCM.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Articles/Article03.html

It says that Even Janes website defines Sagarika as cruise missle.

 

[gf0012-aust]

It is still confusing that Is sagarika is SLBM or SLCM?
In some websites it is given as SLBM and in some it is given as SLBM.

An article in Bharat Rakshak claims that Sagarika is a SLCM.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Articles/Article03.html

It says that Even Janes website defines Sagarika as cruise missle.

If Sagarika is based on the Privthi, then it is a ballistic rocket. If thats the case - then you cannot turn it into a cruise missile. It is not technically possible.

Are there two weapons systems called Sagarika??

www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/missile/sagarika.htm

Sagarika / Dhanush
DRDO may also be developing a 300-km submarine-launched ballistic missile, Sagarika, based on the Prithvi.

 

[ajay_ijn]

Are there two weapons systems called Sagarika??

www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/missile/sagarika.htm

gf i have seen u many times saying that FAS website has many mistakes.
and u are only providing a source from FAS.
U are defence consultant and u will know better than any one of us.

Why won't u ask any indian from defence industry?

If Sagarika is based on the Privthi, then it is a ballistic rocket. If thats the case - then you cannot turn it into a cruise missile. It is not technically possible.

ya but i have a question.
I regularly read that during 1970's DRDO failed to reverse engineer SA-3 into a ballistic missile or something.
I am not sure if its a ballistic missile or not But if it is a ballistic missile then how can u convert a SAM into a ballistic missile.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Are there two weapons systems called Sagarika??

www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/missile/sagarika.htm

gf i have seen u many times saying that FAS website has many mistakes.
and u are only providing a source from FAS.
U are defence consultant and u will know better than any one of us.

Why won't u ask any indian from defence industry?

Because it's pretty apparent that someone either does not know what they are talking about - and that caution should be exercised before making further statements. If you want me to add more links to prove that Sagarika is a ballistic weapon and not a cruise missile - then I can, I was hoping that people would see it as self evident. Hence, from this point on they would try and do some more research themselves rather than expect one of us to do it for them.

any number of Indian sites actually do point out that Sagarika is a SLBM - not a cruise missile. The fact that you raise it as a cruise missile is curious (and incorrect), so I'd like to see your sources. Perhaps we can then send them an email to advise them to correct their information.

If Sagarika is based on the Privthi, then it is a ballistic rocket. If thats the case - then you cannot turn it into a cruise missile. It is not technically possible.

ya but i have a question.
I regularly read that during 1970's DRDO failed to reverse engineer SA-3 into a ballistic missile or something.
I am not sure if its a ballistic missile or not But if it is a ballistic missile then how can u convert a SAM into a ballistic missile.

I was assuming that people were smart enough to comprehend the difference between a missile and a rocket. I also didn't post numerous links as I assumed that it was self evident. There is a vast difference between FAS/GlobalSecurity getting performance specs wrong, and misnaming a capability such as differentiating the difference between a rocket and a missile. It was a polite way of saying that someone didin't know what they were talking about.

You can't convert a SAM into a ballistic rocket - thats why it's called a missile in the first place - and you can't make a rocket into a SAM as it won't have the necessary precision guidance to do the job.

This is pretty basic stuff. Thats why I'm curious why any military related site with any credibility would get such a fundamental set of details wrong.

I've tried to simplify my answer to make it easier to comprehend.
Also Bharat-Rashak make it clear in their own article on Privthi that it is a BM - as is Sagarika. Sagarika is a version of Privthi. So I'm not sure whether you are challenging BR's accuracy as well as FAS on this??

 

[XEROX]

Dhanush is meant to be a submarine launched ballistic missile. With a range variously estimated at between 300 km and 350 km, Its also meant to be deployed on surface warships

Note - the picture shows a Privthi missile on a Dhanush Stabilizer mounted on the Sukanya Class patrol vessel


However the rumours are that India is developing a sub sonic cruise missile with a range of 1500KM which is based on the Lakshya UAV project

 

[ajay_ijn]

Sagarika is a version of Privthi

Are u sure sagarika is a version of privthvi.
Can u provide me a source other than fas website
I have find a source from janes
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/asia_pacific/news/jdw/jdw010704_1_n.shtml

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is releasing work to the private sector to make parts of the submarine, known as the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV), and the test launcher for the Sagarika (Oceanic) nuclear-armed SLCM that forms an integral part of the country's nuclear deterrent.

I found something really funny
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/sub/index.html
Its wrote

The Sagarika (Oceanic) began development in 1994 as a submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) which will have a range of at least 300 kms (a few claim 1000 kms); it is projected for deployment around 2005.

And it the same website we can find Sagarika as SLBM
www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/missile/sagarika.htm

Sagarika / Dhanush
DRDO may also be developing a 300-km submarine-launched ballistic missile, Sagarika, based on the Prithvi.

But FAS did mention that "May also be" so FAS is not Sure about that.

This is pretty basic stuff. Thats why I'm curious why any military related site with any credibility would get such a fundamental set of details wrong.

Many websites are saying that DRDO tried to reverse engineer SA-2 into an SRBM
http://www.missilethreat.com/threat/india.html
I got a good and detailed source
http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/India/Missile/1931_2020.html

Under his leadership, the DRDL launches "Project Devil," a project to reverse-engineer and produce the Soviet SA-2 surface-to-air missile (SAM) indigenously within seven years. Narayanan is also asked to set up the technological infrastructure to build a series of missiles.

It should also be noted that although the SA-2 is nominally a surface-to-air "defensive" missile, it can readily be transformed into a surface-to-surface system for "offensive" purposes.

By this we can know that DRDO really tried to reverse-engineer SA-2.
But its unclear they wanted to convert SA-2 into ballistic missile or any other missile may be cruise missile.

 

[gf0012-aust]

If you've read the FAS site for Privthi, and the BR site for Privthi, you will also see the comments about it being a ballistic missile. and that Sagarika is a derivative of Privthi.

:cop For the last time. You cannot convert a ballistic missile into a cruise missile.

It's a technical impossibility. If you want to believe that it can, then so be it.

 

[ajay_ijn]

For the last time. You cannot convert a ballistic missile into a cruise missile.

It's a technical impossibility. If you want to believe that it can, then so be it.

gf read my post carefully,I was saying about DRDO re-engineer SA-2(Surface to air missile) into some kind of offensive missile(may or may not be a ballistic missile but is a surface to surface missile).

Even in my previous posts i said i am not sure if its a ballistic missile or not.

 

[gf0012-aust]

For the last time. You cannot convert a ballistic missile into a cruise missile.

It's a technical impossibility. If you want to believe that it can, then so be it.

gf read my post carefully,I was saying about DRDO re-engineer SA-2(Surface to air missile) into some kind of offensive missile(may or may not be a ballistic missile but is a surface to surface missile).

Even in my previous posts i said i am not sure if its a ballistic missile or not.

my comments were with respect to the Sagarika. I haven't made any comments on the attempted Guideline conversion.

 

[ajay_ijn]

my comments were with respect to the Sagarika. I haven't made any comments on the attempted Guideline conversion

Oh!I am sorry I apologise for this.

About the sagarika,
FAS has given two different facts about the same missile which i posted previously.

I found something really funny
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/sub/index.html
Its wrote
Quote:
The Sagarika (Oceanic) began development in 1994 as a submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) which will have a range of at least 300 kms (a few claim 1000 kms); it is projected for deployment around 2005.

And it the same website we can find Sagarika as SLBM
www.fas.org/nuke/guide/india/missile/sagarika.htm
Quote:
Sagarika / Dhanush
DRDO may also be developing a 300-km submarine-launched ballistic missile, Sagarika, based on the Prithvi.

And even in BR as u said that it has given sagarika as version of prithvi and is ballistic missile.
In another article BR claims's that Sagarka is a cruise missile.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Articles/Article03.html
It wrote

The US has simply got it wrong. Whereas India is developing a sea-launched missile, Sagarika, it is not a ballistic missile but a naval air-breathing cruise missile. This missile is to be launched at targets on land. It is expected to be mounted on the hull of submarines, thereby providing it maximum invulnerability at sea. This is not a missile whose development was discovered recently. It was identified as a cruise missile over three years ago in a book, Sea Power and Indian Security published in London. This was followed by its description in the 1995-96 edition of Jane's Fighting Ships. In March 1996, Jane's Naval Weapon Systems also defined Sagarika as a cruise missile. In effect, there exists sufficient authoritative literature describing Sagarika as a cruise missile, not a ballistic missile. Yet, all these sources were deliberately and systematically ignored by the Clinton Administration.

Even janes says Sagarika is a cruise missile.
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/asia_pacific/news/jdw/jdw010704_1_n.shtml

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is releasing work to the private sector to make parts of the submarine, known as the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV), and the test launcher for the Sagarika (Oceanic) nuclear-armed SLCM that forms an integral part of the country's nuclear deterrent.

 

[gf0012-aust]

rule of thumb is:

rocket motor
parabolic flight path
high mach speed re-entry = ballistic weapon.

a cruise missile doesn't have a parabolic flight profile.

or to use a proper definition (which some sources seem to have forgotten the basics)

What is a Ballistic Missile?

The modern ballistic missile is based on a design in use since the German V-2 rocket. During World War II, the Germans used the V-2 to terrorize and kill the British. But because the warhead used conventional explosives—roughly a ton of TNT—the damage was limited. Nevertheless, ballistic missiles have become both the essential long range artillery of modern warfare, and the means par excellence of exerting international pressure. Much of their current usefulness depends on the current lack of defenses against them.

A ballistic missile can be launched from land, from a silo, from mobile platforms on trucks or trains, from submarine or ship, or from an airplane. The U.S., Russia, the UK, France, and China each also have missiles (SLBMs), which can be launched from submarines underwater, at sea, or in port. After launch, a ballistic missiles arches up from one point, and lands at another point. All rockets, from fireworks to massive space launchers, carry both fuel and some form of oxygen. Because they do not burn oxygen from the air, they can fly beyond earth’s atmosphere. Long range ballistic missiles spend a majority of their flight time in the vaccum of space. Short-range ballistic missiles may Because they can fly where there is little or no air resistance, they can reach speeds up to 20 or more times the speed of sound—some 15,000 miles per hour (7km/sec)—speeds which allow ballistic missiles to go between continents. A missile is called ballistic because, just as one would throw a ball or spear, the rocket’s engine gives the missile an initial push, after which its flight is affected only by gravity. Ballistic missiles do not fly. They go up, and they come down.

Ballistic missiles are not to be confused with cruise missiles. The former are unmanned projectiles; the latter are pilotless airplanes, either remote controlled or pre-programmed. They fly through the air, and only through the air. The engines of cruise missiles, like those of aircraft, burn oxygen from the air. Like all other kinds of aircraft, cruise missiles are held up by the flow of air over their wings. Their engines work throughout the flight, not just at the beginning. Cruise missiles fly horizontally rather than in arches, reach only about twice the speed of sound, and typically travel from tens to hundreds of miles. But while cruise missiles and defenses against them are important to modern warfare, these technologies are quite different from those of ballistic missiles and ballistic missile defenses.

A ballistic missile is a tube some thirty to over one hundred feet tall, almost completely filled with either liquid or solid fuel. At the bottom of the tube are the engines and direction controls—either fins (as in older models) or small sideways thrusters. Liquid fuel is typically some distillate rich in carbon and hydrogen. In the engines, this combines with liquid oxygen, ignites, and provides thrust. Solid fuel consists of some powdered metals such as zinc or magnesium, combined with a solid source of oxygen, and something that binds the mixture and regulates the burn. The engines simply direct the resulting thrust. But once solid fuel missiles are lit, the fuel will burn until done. At the top of the missile are its brains—the guidance systems. Above these are the payload.

Modern guidance systems begin with instruments that measure how fast, how long, and in what direction the missile has moved. Periodically, the information generated by this system is updated by checking the missile’s position against known stars, (or against signals from the U.S. Global Positioning System satellites). The guidance system then compares this information with the course pre programmed into it, and guides the missile accordingly. Modern U.S. ballistic missiles have a high probability of putting their payload into a fifty-yard circle from intercontinental distances. It is also possible to give ballistic payloads the capacity to receive signals late in flight, and to make small maneuvers. When this happens, they are no longer strictly ballistic. With such extra guidance, the payload can be delivered within ten feet or so of the target.

The payload may be a satellite programmed to be launched into orbit, or it may be a warhead—a conventional high explosive, a chemical weapon, or a nuclear weapon. The warhead may be programmed to hit a variety of targets at various ranges. There may also be a number of warheads aboard a single missile, which may each be programmed to hit a different target: these are called Multiple Indpendently-targetable Reentry Vehicles, or MIRVs. These warehads may of course be nuclear weapons, which can be made to detonate in the ground to destroy a “hard†target on or below the ground, or in the atmosphere to kill human beings.

The destructive capacity of the warhead has aboard, however, has nothing to do with the technology required to destroying its means of delivery. The science of destroying a missile carrying a nuclear weapon is identical to the science of destroying the same missile carrying a mass of concrete as a payload. The increased destructive capacity of warheads delivered by ballistic missiles made even older and more inaccurate missiles more, not less useful tools in warfare. The very usability of ballistic missiles and the possibility of warfare involving the nuclear warheads they carry is what which makes ballistic missile defense such a priority.

Technically yakhont and brahmos are not cruise missiles - which is why the Russians don't call theirs (Yakhont) a cruise missile. It is a misnomer and completely inaccurate as a descriptor.

or the Canadian Forces College Definition:

Ballistic missiles are designed to deliver conventional, nuclear, biological or chemical warheads over distances between 100 and 15,000 kilometres. They are propelled into the upper atmosphere, or outer space, by a rocket engine burn lasting between tens of seconds and a few minutes. The missile then returns to earth following a ballistic (curved) trajectory with little or no course alteration during flight.

Until people started inventing their own titles for missiles, aircraft carriers, rockets etc..... to circumvent some Int'l Treaty definitions it was pretty easy. I take the classic view - which is the correct view.

 

[ajay_ijn]

rule of thumb is:

rocket motor
parabolic flight path
high mach speed re-entry = ballistic weapon.

a cruise missile doesn't have a parabolic flight profile.

or to use a proper definition (which some sources seem to have forgotten the basics)

I know a cruise missile can never have a ballistic path.
But how can assume that Sagarika is version of prithvi.
It is still not sure that "Sagarika is a version of prithvi".How can we trust a website that given 2 different facts about the same missile.
U said both BR and FAS claims that Sagarika is version of privthvi.
But both BR and FAS also says that in some other articles that Sagarika is cruise missile.
But i know it can't be.
So the final answer of Mine would be
It is still not clear that Is Sagarika is a SLBM (version of prithvi) or SLCM till the Indian govt officially say's

Lets stop this discussion,We are way off topic.We went from delhi to sagarika.

 

[gf0012-aust]

It is still not clear that Is Sagarika is a SLBM (version of prithvi) or SLCM till the Indian govt officially say's

Lets stop this discussion,We are way off topic.We went from delhi to sagarika.

Actually the topic is relevant - Privthi has been mounted on a surface vessel, that means that the IN is looking at mounting Sagarika on vessels other than a sub.

It's also designed to work on the Advanced Technology Vessel - that makes it an SLBM

Global Security: ("India Models SLBM After Prithvi Missile," Defence News, 25-31 July 94.)

DRDO may also be developing a 300-km submarine-launched ballistic missile, Sagarika, based on the Prithvi. The program is reported to have started in 1992 and was originally reported to involve adapting a ramjet engine to the missile to reduce the need for heavy oxidizers. India does not have a submarine configured for launching ballistic missiles.

The precise relationship between the Dhanush and the Sagarika programs remains obscure. Given the evident similarities in their overall characteristics, Dhanush may simply be the new name for the original Sagarika system. However, since the Dhanush is reported by some sources to have a 350 km range, compared to the 250-300 km range of the Sagarika, the change in designation may reflect a design change.

Bulletin of Atomic Scientists:

Naval weapons. In addition to air-and land-based nuclear-capable forces, India is working on at least two naval systems, the Sagarika ("oceanic") and the Dhanush ("bow"), which may be equipped to carry nuclear warheads in the future. Work on the Sagarika missile began in 1991 and it is now in advanced development. Previously rumored to be a cruise missile, the Sagarika is now designated as a submarine-launched ballistic missile by U.S. intelligence, which predicts it will not be deployed until 2010 at the earliest.

Greenpeace:

The Indian nuclear submarine programme is run by the Indian Navy and the Atomic Energy Department. It is paralleled by the development of a sea-launched ballistic missile (SLBM). Work started in Bangalore in 1992 on the Sagarika SLBM, a variant of the ground-launched Prithvi missile, which is planned to have a range of 300km and to be smaller than the Prithvi.

http://archive.greenpeace.org/nuclear/testing/indiacap.html

Outside of FAS, BR and GlobalSecurity, there are also reference to it in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, CEIP, RANSAC, The Bulletin, DefenseNews (US International Military Magazine, Aviation Now, Military Technologies, Naval Forces. JED - so there are substantial references. I suggest you go to the library and do some research. The internet is only a limited resource - and nearly all the publications I have detailed are regarded as reference works within the industry. There is also an article detailing it in a reference book I receive from the National Submarine League - that also is not available on the net and is only available to members of the NSL. BR regards Sagarika as a Privthi derivative. If you care to check the weapons charts you'll see it listed as a heritage weapon.

So, as you can see, I have been more than generous in trying to explain this in minute detail, but to be frank, I am rather tired of explaining obvious concepts. I am wondering whether you are serious in your questions, or just being argumentative. Either way, if you don't understand the concept of a ballistic missile such as Privthi by now - then it isn't going to happen in the near future.

But, rather than continue to argue about what it is, I suggest that you look at a picture of Privthi and then you'll understand why it cannot be a SLCM.

Sometimes all this requires is common sense, and anyone with a basic comprehension of ballistics, can see the whys and why nots of what kind of delivery platform it is.

BTW, Mods will determine when topics are getting distracted - this one is still on course. Refer to the Privthi sitting on a deck launcher and you'll see why Sagarika may have relevance to any of Indias surface fleet. I would suggest that surface launchers will be well in place before you see it in a submarine.

CEIP Chart dated 2002:

Normally BR is considered a reference site by all the Indian Members - so I have continued to view it as such. If BR are correct in their tables, and Sagarika is a Privthi heritage system, then it's a parabolic weapon - so that makes it ballistic.

As such, the issue is where would India mount it on the Delhis under normal circumstances. One would assume that a navalised Privthi would need to be mounted in an AUR cannister to protect it from the elements. that will either mean a VLS AUR, or reduction in open deck space to mount a horizontal cannister that can be raised for launch. (not entirely satisfactory)

 

[ajay_ijn]

Outside of FAS, BR and GlobalSecurity, there are also reference to it in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, CEIP, RANSAC, The Bulletin, DefenseNews (US International Military Magazine, Aviation Now, Military Technologies, Naval Forces. JED - so there are substantial references. I suggest you go to the library and do some research. The internet is only a limited resource - and nearly all the publications I have detailed are regarded as reference works within the industry. There is also an article detailing it in a reference book I receive from the National Submarine League - that also is not available on the net and is only available to members of the NSL. BR regards Sagarika as a Privthi derivative. If you care to check the weapons charts you'll see it listed as a heritage weapon.

But BR says in an article that Sagarika is cruise missile and US misunderstood it as a ballistic missile ,That is why u will find US sites saying sagarika is a ballistic missile and a version of prithvi

The US has simply got it wrong. Whereas India is developing a sea-launched missile, Sagarika, it is not a ballistic missile but a naval air-breathing cruise missile. This missile is to be launched at targets on land. It is expected to be mounted on the hull of submarines, thereby providing it maximum invulnerability at sea. This is not a missile whose development was discovered recently. It was identified as a cruise missile over three years ago in a book, Sea Power and Indian Security published in London. This was followed by its description in the 1995-96 edition of Jane's Fighting Ships. In March 1996, Jane's Naval Weapon Systems also defined Sagarika as a cruise missile. In effect, there exists sufficient authoritative literature describing Sagarika as a cruise missile, not a ballistic missile. Yet, all these sources were deliberately and systematically ignored by the Clinton Administration.

Why don't u ask some Indian from Defence industry.
The problem will be solved.

Either way, if you don't understand the concept of a ballistic missile such as Privthi by now - then it isn't going to happen in the near future

I know the concept A Ballistic Missile cannot be a cruise Missile.
If sagarika is a version of prithvi then It is not Crusie missile.
If sagarika is a cruise missile then it cannot be a version of prithvi.

I am wondering whether you are serious in your questions, or just being argumentative.

I am serious but finally U will know much better than me as u are an Expert.
But i will not believe till Indian MOD officially claims that sagarika is an SLBM.

 

[dabrownguy]

did u think rumors? I think the only missile on the homemade nuke sub is gonna be the barhmos.

 

[ajay_ijn]

did u think rumors? I think the only missile on the homemade nuke sub is gonna be the barhmos.

What rumors are u talking about?
I disagree with your statement,India recently tested Prithvi-III and Dhanush.Prithvi-III was tested from a special underwater platform.
US intelligence also report that there is Missile being developed named Sagarika which is submarine launched.
So India might be seriously looking to have an SSBN rathey than a nuclear submarine having Cruise Missiles.

http://www.missilethreat.com/news/200411080819.html
http://www.missilethreat.com/news/200410270729.html

The missile is also said to have the capability to be launched from a submarine. Today’s launch reportedly took place from a specially constructed underwater platform and canister, from the Integrated Test Range at Chandipur, in the eastern coast state of Orissa, some 230km from the city of Bhubaneswar. The missile landed in the Bay of Bengal.