Brahmos launch videos

[srev2004]

http://rapidshare.de/files/27742453/Brahmos.wmv.html

ENJOY!

 

[srev2004]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0np6B33YM30

 

[LogicChristian]

Now if only the missile could find a way to outrange the AIM-120D and the planes that carry it.

Supersonic cruise missiles are cute, but useless if you can't get them into launch range. The AS-4 and AS-6 were good missiles, but the problem was that the backfires and badgers just didn't have much of a chance of penetrating past fleet defender + phoenix range. Likewise, the range of the superhornet combined with its high sortie rate and long range missiles (AIM-120C-7, AIM-120D in 2007) mean that the big problem is getting the BrahMos in launch range. Even then, RAM is a good close in defense system. Even against China, the missile will be matched against similar missiles in the PLAN and PLAAF. This missile is a possible export, and a decent deterrant to Pakistan, and that's about it.

 

[srev2004]

Now if only the missile could find a way to outrange the AIM-120D and the planes that carry it.

Supersonic cruise missiles are cute, but useless if you can't get them into launch range. The AS-4 and AS-6 were good missiles, but the problem was that the backfires and badgers just didn't have much of a chance of penetrating past fleet defender + phoenix range. Likewise, the range of the superhornet combined with its high sortie rate and long range missiles (AIM-120C-7, AIM-120D in 2007) mean that the big problem is getting the BrahMos in launch range. Even then, RAM is a good close in defense system. Even against China, the missile will be matched against similar missiles in the PLAN and PLAAF. This missile is a possible export, and a decent deterrant to Pakistan, and that's about it.

why so defensive I never mentioned US military. Shows how insecure u are. wah wah wah

 

[LogicChristian]

why so defensive I never mentioned US military. Shows how insecure u are. wah wah wah

I mentioned the US military, the PLA, and Pakistan, the former you've often chosen as an adversary for India, the latter are the more likely ones.

 

[srev2004]

I mentioned the US military, the PLA, and Pakistan, the former you've often chosen as an adversary for India, the latter are the more likely ones.

whatev, the brahmos rocks. once it locks on there is no stopping it. and it is submarine launchable from 80 meters under water.

 

[LogicChristian]

whatev, the brahmos rocks. once it locks on there is no stopping it. and it is submarine launchable from 80 meters under water.

There's plenty of stopping it: CIWS, AMRAAM, directed energy attacks from AESA SuperHornets, RAM.

The biggest difficulty will be getting the launching platform in range of the carrier group. At max range, a carrier group would have up to 5 minutes to react to the attack.

 

[srev2004]

There's plenty of stopping it: CIWS, AMRAAM, directed energy attacks from AESA SuperHornets, RAM.

The biggest difficulty will be getting the launching platform in range of the carrier group. At max range, a carrier group would have up to 5 minutes to react to the attack.

it is detected 2 seconds before it strikes. American tech can't stop hezbullah rockets...

 

[LogicChristian]

it is detected 2 seconds before it strikes. American tech can't stop hezbullah rockets...

No, it's not detected 2 seconds before it strikes. If you can show me the technical reason why that is true, I'd love to hear it. Could you explain how it wouldn't be detected at launch by AWACS? Can you also explain how it is invisible to the seeker head of RAM and AESA radars? Does it have some capability that disables look down radar? Do the math Srev, divide the missile's speed by its launch range. Believe it or not, AWACS can detect cruise missiles flying at high speeds rather easily, and friendly fighters can be sent the firing data via datalink.

Hizbollah's rockets use a different flight profile than Brahmos, and you know that as well as I do. American close in defense and fleet defense fighters have shown many itmes that they are capable of shooting down cruise missiles.

 

[Balko]

Its not detected before it strikes. Lock on fire-and-forget missiles are easier to detect because they give off stronger signals. With a good enough defense system, cruise missiles can be countered.

Plus given the fact that cruise missiles qualities that made them hard to counter were small, low to ground, and had low audio warning, and "cruise" flightpath. A lot of that goes down the crapper when you make it supersonic. On the other hand, you've got reduced reaction time.

 

[LogicChristian]

On the other hand, you've got reduced reaction time.

That was the logic behind missiles like the AS-4 and AS-6, but the US still found ways to counter them. I don't see how BrahMos is a much better missile than these and the Moskit.

 

[srev2004]

No, it's not detected 2 seconds before it strikes. If you can show me the technical reason why that is true, I'd love to hear it. Could you explain how it wouldn't be detected at launch by AWACS? Can you also explain how it is invisible to the seeker head of RAM and AESA radars? Does it have some capability that disables look down radar? Do the math Srev, divide the missile's speed by its launch range. Believe it or not, AWACS can detect cruise missiles flying at high speeds rather easily, and friendly fighters can be sent the firing data via datalink.

Hizbollah's rockets use a different flight profile than Brahmos, and you know that as well as I do. American close in defense and fleet defense fighters have shown many itmes that they are capable of shooting down cruise missiles.

just watch the vid, the scanner comes out for .5 seconds finds it target and goes back in. Just watch the rapidshare video.

 

[Balko]

Answer, passive lock on? or fire-and-forget? by what you said, sounds like passive, but missiles tend to be better accurate when they actually know where they are.

That was the logic behind missiles like the AS-4 and AS-6, but the US still found ways to counter them. I don't see how BrahMos is a much better missile than these and the Moskit.

I question the tradeoff as well. However, it is useful if you want to fire a missile from close-range. But if a subs close enough to fire at a military target, it'll probably be detected by then, and probably dead meat. Good for terrorists though, who can use civilian ships as well as civilian areas as cover.

 

[LogicChristian]

just watch the vid, the scanner comes out for .5 seconds finds it target and goes back in. Just watch the rapidshare video.

I watched the rapidshare video when you first posted it. I tried to watch it again but it didn't work. What exactly in that video means that the missile isn't detected minutes before it hits the target how? Just because the seeker isn't on long doesn't mean the missile isn't detected. The missile doesn't need to emit any kind of radar signal at all to be found easily. Even in the 1970s, if you were waiting until the missile turns on its seeker in the terminal phase to start shooting it down, you're toast. The US Navy's strategy is to hit the missiles before they launch, or failing that, miles away from the battle group. Saying that the "scanner" turns on shortly before the missile strikes makes it absolutely no different and no harder to detect than any anti-ship cruise missile since the Gabriel, Exocet, and Harpoon Block I. Just about every cruise missile in the world guides itself in exactly the way you described. How does any of what you said prevent Brahmos from being detected at any point after it is launched? Saying the "scanner" comes out for only a short amount of time just doesn't make the missile any harder to detect.

You see Srev, since the 1960s, there's been this neat innovation in naval warfare known as AWACS. Today, AWACS is capable of finding even the smallest targets against the ocean in look down mode, and the faster those targets move, the easier they are for AWACS to detect. New missiles like the AIM-120, and especially the long range AIM-120C-7 and AIM-120D as well as the SM-2ER, are designed around using the data derived from AWACS, as well as Aegis and Superhornet's AESA, to shoot down missiles minutes and dozens of miles before they even turn on their "scanner" (I assume you mean the terminal guidance phase in which the radar is turned on.)
.

 

[srev2004]

I watched the rapidshare video when you first posted it. I tried to watch it again but it didn't work. What exactly in that video means that the missile isn't detected minutes before it hits the target how? Just because the seeker isn't on long doesn't mean the missile isn't detected. The missile doesn't need to emit any kind of radar signal at all to be found easily. Even in the 1970s, if you were waiting until the missile turns on its seeker in the terminal phase to start shooting it down, you're toast. The US Navy's strategy is to hit the missiles before they launch, or failing that, miles away from the battle group. Saying that the "scanner" turns on shortly before the missile strikes makes it absolutely no different and no harder to detect than any anti-ship cruise missile since the Gabriel, Exocet, and Harpoon Block I. Just about every cruise missile in the world guides itself in exactly the way you described. How does any of what you said prevent Brahmos from being detected at any point after it is launched? Saying the "scanner" comes out for only a short amount of time just doesn't make the missile any harder to detect.

You see Srev, since the 1960s, there's been this neat innovation in naval warfare known as AWACS. Today, AWACS is capable of finding even the smallest targets against the ocean in look down mode, and the faster those targets move, the easier they are for AWACS to detect. New missiles like the AIM-120, and especially the long range AIM-120C-7 and AIM-120D as well as the SM-2ER, are designed around using the data derived from AWACS, as well as Aegis and Superhornet's AESA, to shoot down missiles minutes and dozens of miles before they even turn on their "scanner" (I assume you mean the terminal guidance phase in which the radar is turned on.)
.

As I said I never mentioned USA.... anyways not everything is America centric, but to humor you I will argue...

USA has nothing in it's inventory to intercept a missile going at mach 2.8, and brahmos has evasive maneuvers. It's trajectory is very hard to predict. For a missile to intercept, you need to know where the missile is going to be, not where it is right now. That my friend is what makes the Brahmos almost impossible to stop. Unless you know the algorithms for the trajectory pattern in the Brahmos, you can't stop it.

Scenario number one, Sukhoi jets attack AWACS, simultanious brahmos launches from Corvettes, Subs, Land, and Air. If the brahmos was launched, the target is as good as dead. No military in the world has a 5 minute reaction time, especially for a barrage of cruise missile. Let me repeat, NO MILITARY... this includes India, Russia, China, and last but not least the United States.

We all know how AWACS & Simulated AESA performed in Cope India 2006

Let's not forget the EW counter measures, low RCS, RAM coating and sea skimming mode of less than 10 meters. Very very hard to stop this missile, it might be easy to detect, but that won't help if you can't stop it.

 

[LogicChristian]

As I said I never mentioned USA.... anyways not everything is America centric, but to humor you I will argue...

You didn't have to say the USA

USA has nothing in it's inventory to intercept a missile going at mach 2.8, and brahmos has evasive maneuvers.

SM-2ER, AMRAAM, and many other systems are capable of this. Heck, AESA radars are capable of frying the missile's electronics without ever having to hit it with a missile or gun. US equipment has hit targets going faster than Mach 2.8 dating back to the late 70s and/or early 80s, including IRBMs, and the MiG-25.

It's trajectory is very hard to predict. For a missile to intercept, you need to know where the missile is going to be, not where it is right now. That my friend is what makes the Brahmos almost impossible to stop. Unless you know the algorithms for the trajectory pattern in the Brahmos, you can't stop it.

Why would you need to know the algorithms, you just have to have a radar good enough to watch it change course and adjust the intercept path accordingly. You're acting as if the Brahmos is both faster and more maneuverable than the AIM-120, SM-2, or RAM, that simply isn't the case.

Scenario number one, Sukhoi jets attack AWACS, simultanious brahmos launches from Corvettes, Subs, Land, and Air. If the brahmos was launched, the target is as good as dead. No military in the world has a 5 minute reaction time, especially for a barrage of cruise missile. Let me repeat, NO MILITARY... this includes India, Russia, China, and last but not least the United States.

How are the Sukhois going to get into launch range? Where's the comms and datalink capability in the Indian Navy to coordinate an atack that well?

No military in the world has a 5 minute reaction time at war? You're saying it would take the US Navy over 5 minutes to launch defenses at wartime during a BrahMos attack. Sorry, but every single cruise missile excercise the US Navy has had demonstrates otherwise. Do you have a single source to show that it takes the Russian, Chinese, or USN over 5 minutes to respond to a cruise missile attack? Locking on a radar and firing a missile take a lot less than 5 minutes, whether it be from a ship or a plane.

We all know how AWACS & Simulated AESA performed in Cope India 2006

Exactly what AESA equipped platform participated in that excercise? The F-16s in USAF service has no AESA, only the UAE ones do.

Let's not forget the EW counter measures,

Which most all cruise missile have. Ever heard of home on jam?

low RCS,

Wait, I thought you yourself said that stealth is meaningless... Even so, making the missile out of RAM (something I've never seen published) is of limited use if the structure isn't made to be stealthy and the missile is so fast. Radars have a much easier time picking up targets moving at high rates of speed against the ocean than slow moving ones.

it might be easy to detect, but that won't help if you can't stop it.

You can stop it though, unless the thing is both faster and more maneuverable than AMRAAM, the beam of an AESA, RAM, or SM-2ER/3, which it isn't.

 

[srev2004]

You didn't have to say the USA


SM-2ER, AMRAAM, and many other systems are capable of this. Heck, AESA radars are capable of frying the missile's electronics without ever having to hit it with a missile or gun. US equipment has hit targets going faster than Mach 2.8 dating back to the late 70s and/or early 80s, including IRBMs, and the MiG-25.


Why would you need to know the algorithms, you just have to have a radar good enough to watch it change course and adjust the intercept path accordingly. You're acting as if the Brahmos is both faster and more maneuverable than the AIM-120, SM-2, or RAM, that simply isn't the case.



How are the Sukhois going to get into launch range? Where's the comms and datalink capability in the Indian Navy to coordinate an atack that well?

No military in the world has a 5 minute reaction time at war? You're saying it would take the US Navy over 5 minutes to launch defenses at wartime during a BrahMos attack. Sorry, but every single cruise missile excercise the US Navy has had demonstrates otherwise. Do you have a single source to show that it takes the Russian, Chinese, or USN over 5 minutes to respond to a cruise missile attack? Locking on a radar and firing a missile take a lot less than 5 minutes, whether it be from a ship or a plane.





Exactly what AESA equipped platform participated in that excercise? The F-16s in USAF service has no AESA, only the UAE ones do.







Which most all cruise missile have. Ever heard of home on jam?


Wait, I thought you yourself said that stealth is meaningless... Even so, making the missile out of RAM (something I've never seen published) is of limited use if the structure isn't made to be stealthy and the missile is so fast. Radars have a much easier time picking up targets moving at high rates of speed against the ocean than slow moving ones.



You can stop it though, unless the thing is both faster and more maneuverable than AMRAAM, the beam of an AESA, RAM, or SM-2ER/3, which it isn't.

Simulated AESA from Awacs. You can't fry something that you can't hack into... anyways stop hijacking my thread, it's about brahmos and it's coolness, not wannabe american tech...

 

[LogicChristian]

Simulated AESA from Awacs.

Source? American AWACS radars get the job done and then some, but they aren't exactly advanced enough to perform a proper simulation of the capabilities of an AESA unit.

You can't fry something that you can't hack into... anyways stop hijacking my thread, it's about brahmos and it's coolness, not wannabe american tech...

How do the effects of weaponized AESA require something be hacked into? The pure energy from the radar is what destroys the missile's electronics, not "hacking."

anyways stop hijacking my thread, it's about brahmos and it's coolness, not wannabe american tech...

I'm not hijacking your thread. You said Brahmos was unstoppable, and the fact is, you're wrong. If you don't want someone posting an opposing point of view, don't post things that just aren't true. The fact is, there's no such thing as an unstoppable missile.

 

[srev2004]

Source? American AWACS radars get the job done and then some, but they aren't exactly advanced enough to perform a proper simulation of the capabilities of an AESA unit.



How do the effects of weaponized AESA require something be hacked into? The pure energy from the radar is what destroys the missile's electronics, not "hacking."


I'm not hijacking your thread. You said Brahmos was unstoppable, and the fact is, you're wrong. If you don't want someone posting an opposing point of view, don't post things that just aren't true. The fact is, there's no such thing as an unstoppable missile.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY INDIA!

 

[srev2004]