PJ10 BrahMos Missile

Pathfinder-X

Tribal Warlord
Verified Defense Pro
The jointly developed Indo-Russian anti-ship cruise missile, which was successfully test-fired from Chandipur interim test range in Orissa, is a crucial step forward in India's defence efforts. This technological achievement places India among a small group of countries to acquire the capacity of producing cruise missiles. What, however, makes the jointly produced cruise missile distinguishable from others is that it travels at a supersonic speed i.e. more than twice the speed of sound. Almost all other contemporary anti-ship missiles fly at subsonic speed. Its other distinguishing feature is that the Indo-Russian cruise missile is a state-of-the-art product.

Its unmatchable speed is its high point, making it invincible. The supersonic speed imparts it a greater strike-power as well. Possessing stealth characteristics, the 6.9-meter cruise missile weighing three tons has a range of 280 km. Its another outstanding feature is that it is highly accurate and can be guided to its target mainly with the help of an onboard computer. This has been established by the test-flight. The computer and the guidance system have been designed by India whereas Russia has provided the propulsion system.

Test flights of the PJ-10 occurred on 12 June 2001, 28 April 2002, with a third test expected in June 2002. The test-firing of the cruise missile which took place in the middle of June 2001 was described as an unqualified success. The Brahmos recorded its performance as having met technical parameters, both in terms of the flight range and hitting accuracy. Defence Minister Jaswant Singh who was present at Chandipur along with Indian and Russian scientists and technologists described the launch as a "landmark in technology partnership".

The Chandipur launch was the first in a series of test-flights of the cruise missile planned to demonstrate the capabilities of the system. A series of other test-flights will take place before the missile is simultaneously inducted into the Indian and Russian arsenals. It will also be sold to third countries in due course of time.

One of its special features is that this essentially anti-ship missile can be launched from ground, ship, submarine or air. Defence analysts underline that the eventual addition of this strategic missile is a logical follow-up of the goal set as per the country 's nuclear philosophy. Stated in plain terms, it is essential for the fulfilment of India's minimum nuclear deterrent profile as outlined in the draft nuclear doctrine prepared by the Vajpayee Government. The acquisition of the cruise missile which can be tipped with a nuclear warhead has obvious implications for our nuclear weapons' delivery system.

In order to avoid controversy, both India and Russia have taken care to ensure that the production of the cruise missile did not violate obligations under the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) or any of the international agreements related to proliferation. That is why the missile range is well within the 300 km limit stipulated under the MTCR.

Both India and Russia welcomed the joint development of the supersonic cruise missile with great exuberance. Elated at the successful test flight from Chandipur, the state-owned Russian collaborating company, Mashinostroyenie, put the cruise missile on display at the Moscow annual air show. Mashinostroyenie designed the missile and its propulsion system, leaving the all-important software and the guidance system to its Indian counterpart— the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) of the Defence Ministry.

New Delhi described the missile as an "outstanding example of Indo-Russian joint endeavour". The President, Mr KR Narayanan and Prime Minister Mr Vajpayee termed it as a symbol of defence cooperation between the two countries.The development of the cruise missile takes their decades-old defence cooperation and the revived post-Cold War strategic partnership to a new high. It may be recalled that during the Russian President, Mr Vladimir Putin's visit to India in October 2000, a Joint Declaration of Strategic Partnership was issued. During the Defence Minister, Mr Jaswant Singh's visit to Moscow a few days before the Chandipur launch, this strategic relationship was further reinforced. On these two occasions, the two countries signed a series of agreements on the acquisition of sophisticated weapon system and for a joint production of some of them including missiles.

The newly developed cruise missile is more than a match to similar anti-ship missiles available with China. The latter has mounted Moskit anti-ship missiles on its recently acquired Soverameny-class warships. Beijing is also planning to mount its aerial version of the Moskit on its SU-27 planes. The Indian cruise missile with its supersonic speed will be able to check movements by the Chinese warships, especially in the Indian Ocean area. Besides, its extraordinary accuracy and speed increases the range of its targets.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

according to some source of kanwa, the missile has already been deployed by indian navy for evaluation. i hate to fight a warship equip wif this missile. it can travel 300km in little more than 5 minutes. it has better range, faster speed, deadlier warhead, better homing than harpoon or moskit missile, giving indian navy an edge against PLAN and pak navy.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Its unmatchable speed is its high point, making it invincible.
That's an incredibly optimistic, if not patriotic comment by the author.

The fact is that the US has trained against supersonics for over 15 years and has processes in place to deal with them.

If the USN has a process to neutralise supersonics against the russians, then I'm sure China will eventually work it out as well.

Russia had far more supersonics deployed on far more vessels than any other navy, so the Indian Navy in real terms represents a fraction of the threat base. Thats not meant to dismiss their capability, but to add some reality to the "promo blurb"

Comments such as the above demonstrate a very poor comprehension of how a fleet is deployed, what defensive options are available and the body of evidence available on the success of anti-shipping missiles (even nuke tipped ones) It also demonstrates a really poor understanding about how ASM's work (especially nuke tipped ones)
 

Pathfinder-X

Tribal Warlord
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
the article i got was from globalsecurity.org, it's not all new as that site haven't been updated in ages.
but even though the article has overestimated the capablity of BrahMos, it is the fastest missile surface to surface cruise missile in existence. it does out range harpoon and moskit.
one more question, u said the U.S navy has been training to counter supersonic anti-ship missiles, how do they do it?? in my knowledge the U.S navy is not equiped wif supersonic missiles.
 

adsH

New Member
Every system can be countered. There are people that desing a system and there are people that solve problems to Beat the System.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Pathfinder-X said:
the article i got was from globalsecurity.org, it's not all new as that site haven't been updated in ages.
but even though the article has overestimated the capablity of BrahMos, it is the fastest missile surface to surface cruise missile in existence. it does out range harpoon and moskit.
one more question, u said the U.S navy has been training to counter supersonic anti-ship missiles, how do they do it?? in my knowledge the U.S navy is not equiped wif supersonic missiles.
They train against Vandals and Sea Snakes, which are supersonic ramjets. They also bought 50 russian KH-31 supersonics approx 6 years ago which were modified by Boeing. The missiles failed to meet performance requirements and were dropped in favour of continued use of the Vandals. Unmodified the Vandal was a Mach 2.4 missile, the modified units top end is classified. The Kh-31 was initially faster, but didn't meet other performance criteria (as terminal speed is not the sole measurement benchmark)

There are a number of vulnerabilities for ASM's like the Brahmos, and India does not have some of the support infrastructure in place that Russia has with Sunburn or even the Yakhont. They are also not going to be able to replicate that capability for the next 15 years at least - unless there is a major shift in defence structure and procurement. On that basis, China can breathe a little easier. BUT, if those missiles are used WVR, or on a short hop (say sub 50nm) then it would be a worry to any PLAN vessel in the region as they don't have a viable countering ability both in weaps response and electronically.

What should be apparent to anyone is that the USN has a supersonic ASM capability, and has had it since 1959 - there is obviously a reason for them as to why they haven't continued down the development path.

At any point, they could refit existing stocks and bring supersonic ASM back into the game. The war stocks are solid propellants, so they can be re-engined, and tuned to go faster etc with various engine and flight control combinations. The decision therefore must be a tactical one where they don't see supersonics providing an extraordinary advantage to an OPFOR.
 

Awang se

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
Russian used supersonic missiles long before BrahMos was developed and of course, it's rival, USA have build an appropriate countermeasures. one should realized that AEGIS is a system specificaly design to counter massive soviet supersonic missiles attack. I only wonder if this missile is a sea skimmers, since it is almost impossible to maintain very low altitude in supersonic speed.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Awang se said:
Russian used supersonic missiles long before BrahMos was developed and of course, it's rival, USA have build an appropriate countermeasures. one should realized that AEGIS is a system specificaly design to counter massive soviet supersonic missiles attack. I only wonder if this missile is a sea skimmers, since it is almost impossible to maintain very low altitude in supersonic speed.
Not in a position to comment on specific sea skimmer supersonics training. The US does train against all 3 types though. A number of current russian systems were bought from ex warsaw pact countries, it has been said that the US has also acquired Sunburns.

The West undertook and extensive "shopping" campaign starting with US requests for hardware via the SAS in Afghanistan in the late 70's. The Mujihadeen were getting paid substantial amounts of money to provide (then) modern Russian systems. The US also gets info on Russian systems through MLU/SLEP's conducted on Russian platforms. The Israeli's, Germany, French and the Brits have extensive data on such systems. Countries like Poland, Moldavia and Romania have also provided substantial data on fire control systems etc.... Apparently there has been a wealth of info provided by the Libyans.

Few people actually understand the capability of the US to "suck" electronic transmissions and data out of an "event" and build an operation procedure from it.

Any nation that wants to compete at a military level, first needs to build a commercial equivalent, and that includes such structures as the educational systems, R&D environment etc...

As an example, over 90% of the worlds military satellites are controlled by the US. That should give you an idea about coverage, depth and scale. Russia, (at 2nd place) has more military satellites in orbit than the balance of countries put together..

When you add in the capability of the US to "snoop" on foreign systems it is a force maximiser of a huge order of magnitude.

Missiles such as Brahmos (to be improved substantially over Yakhont) need changes to range, and terminal guidance. So the US understands within the physical limitations of that missiles size and shape, what can be done without impinging on structural changes. eg They know that Brahmos still does not have the absolute range of some derivatives of the Yakhont.

So, if the US can work it out (and they are not an enemy), then Indias enemies can work it out and adjust their warfighting strategies to a form of effect.
 

srirangan

Banned Member
I am sorry but this is the first ever super sonic cruise missile. No counter as yet developed by even the USA. But navies such as the USA have a broad existence and do not develope counters to a particular weapon, but the work to render the weapon useless by sheer domination.

Neither Pakistan nor China can dominate any navy as yet; so them replicating the US style is just not possible.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
srirangan said:
I am sorry but this is the first ever super sonic cruise missile. No counter as yet developed by even the USA. But navies such as the USA have a broad existence and do not develope counters to a particular weapon, but the work to render the weapon useless by sheer domination.
Absolutely incorrect on all counts. There are specific counters in place for some missile systems. On others (such as Brahmos) it is based on a threat behavioural matrix.

Also, it never has been the "first ever" supersonic cruise missile. It's heritage is from the Yakhont, as such, the Yakhont as the legacy platform is entitled to that "mantle". However, the Yakhont has not been the first supersonic missile of type either.

In actual fact it's a strike missile - NOT a cruise missile in the literal sense.
 

Awang se

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
The most effective way to penetrate an american fleet AD is by using massive supersonic missile attack launch from all point of compass. Usually involving over a hundred missile per attack to overwhelm the fleet AD. The hope is some of the missiles will make it through the defence and destroy or damage several ships.
 

Pathfinder-X

Tribal Warlord
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
Awang se said:
The most effective way to penetrate an american fleet AD is by using massive supersonic missile attack launch from all point of compass. Usually involving over a hundred missile per attack to overwhelm the fleet AD. The hope is some of the missiles will make it through the defence and destroy or damage several ships.
given the capability of U.S carrier battle groups, it would take at least 200 missiles to even come close crippling it. and might require a second wave of missiles to completely destroy it. but the problem is no navy in the world has the capability to launch that kind of attack in the middle of the ocean.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Awang se said:
The most effective way to penetrate an american fleet AD is by using massive supersonic missile attack launch from all point of compass. Usually involving over a hundred missile per attack to overwhelm the fleet AD. The hope is some of the missiles will make it through the defence and destroy or damage several ships.
It would have to be more than massive. A netforced Strike Group is able to deal with 1200 concurrent targets.

Unless there is a separate satellite system in place (which is how Russia was able to start to deal with terminal guidance issues), then that means that all those supersonics will require visual or optical final guidance. Without an accurate update the fleet will have moved 5kms after the time of launch. (at a max distance). Visual guidance is required as all combatants are capable of spooking and ghosting a missiles sensor system.

At the time they launch, they have declared their position. The detection shield using the CVN as the centrepoint is approx 1000k's.

It won't be easy. Indias significant problems with Brahmos is due to the fact that they can't use the Russian terminal guidance system. Hence, the absolute usefulness of the missile is compromised if used against a fleet using C5i. They have to develop their own guidance, and that requires a dedicated satellite system which can only be used in a section of ocean, needs redundancy and needs overlap. Estimates are that to effectively track a vessel in a battle group 24/7/365 would require 128 satellites in place. The Russians couldn't do it at the peak of their power, China is no way near that ability.

It's not easy at all. Russia realised this which is why she stopped mass producing supersonic bombers and walked away from using them as the principle tool to kill a carrier. Some may get through, but no airforce has the airpower to reach out, swarm and strike a modern battle group.

It's not necessarily impossible, but people need to understand the power of that battle group when it is integrated into the US C5i network. - And the US has 12 of them. The 10 Expeditionary groups are less capable but just as lethal at shorter ranges.


100 missiles concurrently inbound would not overwhelm a strike group at all.
To do a 360 degree attack requires some essential placement and still assumes that none of the 50 plus aircraft have been detected taking off.

If Australia can see planes literally taking off from airports anywhere in a 3000k intercept point (literally we could if we were on a war footing intercept detection mode) from our systems, then heavens knows what the US can see.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
Plus you've got to take into account that the Carrier Battle group is not simply going to sit there and try and defend itself against the missiles alone. The strike capability of a single Carrier Battle Group is enormous and it will concurrently launch it's own strikes against the launch platforms for the Brahmos (or whatever type) Missiles. The Tomahawk missiles possessed by the US have proven amazingly effective as a strike weapon (particularly the Block 1V Tactical Tomahawk which can be re-targeted in flight) and will require huge efforts by this US enemy to defend against. I could be wrong, but I don't think a Tomahawk missile has ever been shot down in combat, has it anybody? As to the massive missile strike being the only way to penetrate a US Carrier Group defence system, I don't agree with that. In US/Australian exercises, RAAF F-111's have "notionally" sunk US carriers on a number of occasions, (there are 2 confirmed US Carrier "sinkings" that I know of), much to the annoyance of the US Navy... :smokingc:.

The techinques used are classified but they generally use extremely high speed low level ingress with Harpoon missile strikes on the carriers and escorts. This is then followed up with Laser Guided Bomb attacks on the remaining ships, And to add injury to insult, the US Marine Corps Ground Combat Element based around 2nd Battlion, 3rd Marines was also destroyed by a similar sized Australian Formation during Ex Croc 03 last year, much to the annoyance of the US Marine Corps...
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
IIRC, every-time we have "won" against the US it's because we don't do what is expected.

We tend to do "left of field" responses.
 

adsH

New Member
i know that the UK has or continues to develop the AI Guidance and the overall ability of the tomahawk, it is continuously updated so developing a cure for this Attack wouldn't mean that the tomahawk wouldn't get through. it will its a resilient weapon.
 

Red aRRow

Forum Bouncer
Pathfinder-X said:
Awang se said:
The most effective way to penetrate an american fleet AD is by using massive supersonic missile attack launch from all point of compass. Usually involving over a hundred missile per attack to overwhelm the fleet AD. The hope is some of the missiles will make it through the defence and destroy or damage several ships.
given the capability of U.S carrier battle groups, it would take at least 200 missiles to even come close crippling it. and might require a second wave of missiles to completely destroy it. but the problem is no navy in the world has the capability to launch that kind of attack in the middle of the ocean.
A little off topic but is it possible to knock out a Carrier Battle Group by an atmospheric detonation of a nuclear device and immediately following it with a cruise missile or Ballistic missile (nuclear tipped) attack??
The atmospheric detonation might knock out the electronics of the ships in the effected area with an EMP pulse thus letting the following barrage to get through the defences???
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The reason why a strike group is spread out is to minimise the effect of a fallout strike. In addition all the citadels in modern US warships are NBC shielded.

A war footing means a real estate footprint of 100+ sq miles. The russians built the largest atomic weapons in history, and they determined that it was not air deliverable or achievable.
 

adsH

New Member
i think a carrier is heavily shielded ie the Primary systems (primary systems being the Onboard computer core the electronics for self defenses and basic lanch ability handlers, communication systems Intelligence cntres. all these systems are vital for the operation ans survivability of a carrier. i doubt a carrier would get knocked out that easily by a weapon designed couple of decades ago.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
shamayel said:
Well guess the job is up to the Moskits then. ;)
The US has respect for one missile, and it's not Moskit and it's not Yakhont/Brahmos.
 
Top