Brahmos Supersonic Cruise Missile : News, Updates and Discussions

[randomradio]

I already have provided the data. Range of ASMP/ASMP-A and range of Brahmos Air Launched version (300-500 KM : Air-Sol Moyenne Portée (ASMP/ ASMP-A) | Missile Threat, BrahMos | Missile Threat) . Weight of both and their variants Air launched and NG (860KG vs 2500KG and 1500KG Air-Sol Moyenne Portée (ASMP/ ASMP-A) | Missile Threat , BrahMos | Missile Threat ). Their propulsion mechanism (RAMJet : Air-Sol Moyenne Portée (ASMP/ ASMP-A) | Missile Threat).

Now I need the data AND source for the cost of ASMP/ASMP-A fuel that you claimed.

Where does it say 300Kg for ASMP? I'd really like to specifically see a source for the ASMP where it says the payload is 300Kg. Since you claim both have the same warhead weight, you're going to have to back that up first.

We will talk about all these new strawmen that you are bringing but first lets see the claims that you made already and their data source.

First compare the two, since we still have to clear out basic common sense issues, like the effect of the seeker on a missile.

 

[Bon Plan]

Where does it say 300Kg for ASMP? I'd really like to specifically see a source for the ASMP where it says the payload is 300Kg. Since you claim both have the same warhead weight, you're going to have to back that up first.

File:US nuclear weapons yield-to-weight comparison-fr.svg — Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

The theorical maximum ratio power/energy is 6MT of TNT by ton of nuke weapon.
as the nuke of ASMP is known to be a 300kt weapon, the load has a theorical weight of at least 50 kilos. the maximum ratio is never reached, and there are some goodies for safety... but I think we are far from 300 kilos. Specially when you see how narrow the nose of the missile is.

 

[randomradio]

File:US nuclear weapons yield-to-weight comparison-fr.svg — Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

The theorical maximum ratio power/energy is 6MT of TNT by ton of nuke weapon.
as the nuke of ASMP is known to be a 300kt weapon, the load has a theorical weight of at least 50 kilos. the maximum ratio is never reached, and there are some goodies for safety... but I think we are far from 300 kilos. Specially when you see how narrow the nose of the missile is.

He's using wrong data to come to his made up conclusions. There's nothing more to it.

He doesn't know the effect of the seeker on range, never mind the fact that he's comparing a ground launched system with an air-launched system. The weight of the warhead is not even the main problem, even though its twice that of the ASMP.

Even the Brahmos-M is a ground-launched system, with only the booster being modified for the air-launched version.

 

[Saaho]

as the nuke of ASMP is known to be a 300kt weapon, the load has a theorical weight of at least 50 kilos. the maximum ratio is never reached, and there are some goodies for safety... but I think we are far from 300 kilos. Specially when you see how narrow the nose of the missile is.

I said between 200-300 KG, which is the truth. Weight of TN-80 bomb alone is 200 KG : France's Nuclear Weapons - Development of the French Arsenal

Where does it say 300Kg for ASMP? I'd really like to specifically see a source for the ASMP where it says the payload is 300Kg. Since you claim both have the same warhead weight, you're going to have to back that up first.

France's Nuclear Weapons - Development of the French Arsenal

nuclearweaponarchive.org

Weight of TN-80 bomb alone is 200 KG. Anything like hardening and bulkheads will endup adding more weight. It will be between 200-300 KG.

Now that we have source of my claim, I will love to see where you got this "fact" that fuel of ASMP is "expensive"?

 

[Saaho]

He's using wrong data to come to his made up conclusions. There's nothing more to it.

Sorry, I am using correct data, you know nothing. You have no source.

He doesn't know the effect of the seeker on range, never mind the fact that he's comparing a ground launched system with an air-launched system. The weight of the warhead is not even the main problem, even though its twice that of the ASMP.

As I said before, repeat after me: BRAHMOS AIR LAUNCHED VERSION. You have even include Brahmos - NG as well which is double the weight of ASMP.

Even the Brahmos-M is a ground-launched system, with only the booster being modified for the air-launched version.

HUH?
This is the latest statement from Brahmos Aerospace :

BrahMos short-range ramjet supersonic cruise missile, to now come in smaller version

The BrahMos Missile, designed, developed and produced jointly by India and Russia has generated a lot of interest globally and is expected to undergo a change in size.

www.financialexpress.com

Mini-BrahMos or BrahMos NG has a shorter dimension and is lighter and mightier to its predecessor variant. It has the capability of going up to Mach 3.5.

It weighs 1.4-1.6 tonne; and has a length of 6metre.

These can be integrated with the Russian Su 30 MKI fighter aircraft, Swedish Gripen and others.

This is under development Brahmos Mini or NG and it is to be integrated with fighters. No dear, it is NO WHERE near the weight of ASMP.

 

[Saaho]

The theorical maximum ratio power/energy is 6MT of TNT by ton of nuke weapon.

That seldom happens in practice. One of the light warhead W-80 has a weight of 130 KG for a yield of 150 KN. TN-80 used on ASMP has a weight of 200 KG with a yield of 300 KT. Throw weight of ASMP will be 200-300.

 

[randomradio]

I said between 200-300 KG, which is the truth. Weight of TN-80 bomb alone is 200 KG : France's Nuclear Weapons - Development of the French Arsenal

France's Nuclear Weapons - Development of the French Arsenal

nuclearweaponarchive.org

Weight of TN-80 bomb alone is 200 KG. Anything like hardening and bulkheads will endup adding more weight. It will be between 200-300 KG.

Now that we have source of my claim, I will love to see where you got this "fact" that fuel of ASMP is "expensive"?

*yawn* this is getting boring. It's better to just spoon feed since you have no interest in actually learning.

ASMP's payload is less than 150Kg, it was improved to "less than" 200Kg for a bigger warhead on the ASMP-A, still less than 200Kg. TN-80 is "about" 200Kg, not 200Kg.

The Brahmos that we use has MTCR restrictions, hence it seals a fuel tank to restrict range and restricts its payload to 200Kg, the non-MTCR version has no restrictions in either. So it's 300Kg payload on that.

Plus you forget that the Brahmos has a seeker. The LRASM is basically the JASSM-ER with a seeker. The JASSM-ER's range is 930Km, which was reduced to less than 600Km after the introduction of the seeker on LRASM. The addition of a seeker has reduced the range of the same missile with the same engine by 40%. This is how much of a difference a seeker creates. So you are quite literally comparing a less than 200Kg payload with a more than 200Kg payload + seeker.

Now, if you actually want to learn, look up the differences between the air-launched LRASM and ship-launched LRASM. You will learn not to compare a missile designed for ground launch with a dedicated air-launched missile after that.

 

[Saaho]

*yawn* this is getting boring. It's better to just spoon feed since you have no interest in actually learning.

ASMP's payload is less than 150Kg, it was improved to "less than" 200Kg for a bigger warhead on the ASMP-A, still less than 200Kg. TN-80 is "about" 200Kg, not 200Kg.

The Brahmos that we use has MTCR restrictions, hence it seals a fuel tank to restrict range and restricts its payload to 200Kg, the non-MTCR version has no restrictions in either. So it's 300Kg payload on that.

Plus you forget that the Brahmos has a seeker. The LRASM is basically the JASSM-ER with a seeker. The JASSM-ER's range is 930Km, which was reduced to less than 600Km after the introduction of the seeker on LRASM. The addition of a seeker has reduced the range of the same missile with the same engine by 40%. This is how much of a difference a seeker creates. So you are quite literally comparing a less than 200Kg payload with a more than 200Kg payload + seeker.

Now, if you actually want to learn, look up the differences between the air-launched LRASM and ship-launched LRASM. You will learn not to compare a missile designed for ground launch with a dedicated air-launched missile after that.

Blah Blah Blah, now out with the source of "Expensive RAM-Jet fuel". If you have source, present it. If not say that you are always lying like you do.

 

[Saaho]

ASMP's payload is less than 150Kg, it was improved to "less than" 200Kg for a bigger warhead on the ASMP-A, still less than 200Kg. TN-80 is "about" 200Kg, not 200Kg.

Source?
TN-80 itself weighs 200 KG, FYI.

Plus you forget that the Brahmos has a seeker.

Do you have a source for weight of the the said seeker?

The LRASM is basically the JASSM-ER with a seeker. The JASSM-ER's range is 930Km, which was reduced to less than 600Km after the introduction of the seeker on LRASM. The addition of a seeker has reduced the range of the same missile with the same engine by 40%. This is how much of a difference a seeker creates. So you are quite literally comparing a less than 200Kg payload with a more than 200Kg payload + seeker.

Unrelated.

Now, if you actually want to learn, look up the differences between the air-launched LRASM and ship-launched LRASM. You will learn not to compare a missile designed for ground launch with a dedicated air-launched missile after that.

Well, I don't want to learn, I want to see sources and evidence of your assertion.

Source of "Expensive RAM-jet fuel".
Source of "150 KG" payload of ASMP.
Source of Brahmos seeker weight.

If you don't have the source then you are just blabbering bullshit.

 

[randomradio]

Source?
TN-80 itself weighs 200 KG, FYI.

Look it up yourself. You still haven't found me a link which says ASMP's payload is 300Kg.

Do you have a source for weight of the the said seeker?

That's how clever you are. It's not about weight, it's about size. Seekers are big, look up Brahmos' seeker, it's availabe on the net. Seekers take up size that's suppose to make the missile thinner and smaller or take up room for fuel. It's also the reason why Brahmos is fatter, 'cause it needs to have a seeker with a large enough antenna in order to find its target before it reaches a point when it can no longer change its direction. Due to the increase in seeker diameter, it's obvious that the airframe needs to be bigger. It's the same reason why an aircraft that has a 900-1000mm radar is a giant whereas 600-700mm radar carrying aircraft are small. And with a larger seeker and bigger warhead, you need a bigger airframe, which in turns increases weight, which in turn needs a more powerful engine, which in turn needs a lot of fuel, hence the higher overall weight.

LRASM uses a longer seeker, which takes up even more room for fuel. Hence the 40% reduction in range.

This is what I meant when you don't even have the basic common sense knowledge about why missiles are designed the way they are. No one with such basic knowledge will actually compare missiles of different classes meant for different roles.

Unrelated.

Of course, you will find it unrelated. Obviously nothing surprising to me.

LRASM needs a 900Kg booster to boost a 1100Kg missile to altitude. Brahmos needs a 1000Kg booster to boost a 2000Kg missile to altitude. So, going by your logic, Russian boosters are nearly 100% more efficient than American boosters. That's how dumb your arguments are. Not only that, LRASM only needs a speed above 800Kmph as its initial speed whereas Brahmos booster has to take the missile to above mach 2 for the ramjet to kick in. So wouldn't you say Russians boosters are practically magic then?

Well, I don't want to learn, I want to see sources and evidence of your assertion.

It's impossible for you anyway.

Source of "Expensive RAM-jet fuel".

The Russians export downgraded fuel compared to what they use for their own stuff. Pretty much on everything that doesn't come out of a civilian refinery.

Source of "150 KG" payload of ASMP.

Look it up.

Source of Brahmos seeker weight.

No common sense.

If you don't have the source then you are just blabbering bullshit.

Whatever makes you happy. Nothing I have said requires anything more than common sense to figure out.

 

[Saaho]

Look it up yourself. You still haven't found me a link which says ASMP's payload is 300Kg.

Here it is : France's Nuclear Weapons - Development of the French Arsenal
Weight of TN-80, the nuclear bomb in ASMP is 200 KG. Payload of ASMP is 200-300 KG to carry a 200 KG bomb.

Of course, you will find it unrelated. Obviously nothing surprising to me.

LRASM needs a 900Kg booster to boost a 1100Kg missile to altitude. Brahmos needs a 1000Kg booster to boost a 2000Kg missile to altitude. So, going by your logic, Russian boosters are nearly 100% more efficient than American boosters. That's how dumb your arguments are. Not only that, LRASM only needs a speed above 800Kmph as its initial speed whereas Brahmos booster has to take the missile to above mach 2 for the ramjet to kick in. So wouldn't you say Russians boosters are practically magic then?

Unrelated.

It's impossible for you anyway.

Sources first rest later.

Look it up.

It does not exist, you are lying.

No common sense.

Less bullshit, more facts and sources.

The Russians export downgraded fuel compared to what they use for their own stuff. Pretty much on everything that doesn't come out of a civilian refinery.

Thats not a source. Give a source for your claim or say you were bull shitting.

Whatever makes you happy. Nothing I have said requires anything more than common sense to figure out.

Common sense without any fact is non sense.

 

[randomradio]

Here it is : France's Nuclear Weapons - Development of the French Arsenal
Weight of TN-80, the nuclear bomb in ASMP is 200 KG. Payload of ASMP is 200-300 KG to carry a 200 KG bomb.


Unrelated.


Sources first rest later.


It does not exist, you are lying.


Less bullshit, more facts and sources.


Thats not a source. Give a source for your claim or say you were bull shitting.


Common sense without any fact is non sense.

Wow, 200 Kg is 300 Kg. Yeah, okay, dude. Cheers.

 

[Ashwin]

Now that you are venturing into Hypersonic world, what are the great challenges that you encounter working on a new engineering paradigm, new aerodynamics, new materials and new configuration? In the niche, elite technological exclusivity of Hypersonics, how do you fare internationally?

The hypersonic BRAHMOS-II (K) is envisioned to become the fastest cruise missile system in the world by flying at a top speed of 7-8 Mach (seven to eight times the speed of sound). The hypersonic missile will definitely provide an advantage to the Indian armed forces in future warfare. The challenges are many in developing such a break-through technology. NPOM has already started ground work for the hypersonic variant and hope to hit the sky by 2028. DRDO, from its end has already test-fired Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle (HSTDV), precursor for the development of a hypersonic cruise missile system.

Aeromag

www.aeromag.in

 

[Saaho]

Wow, 200 Kg is 300 Kg. Yeah, okay, dude. Cheers.

200-300 Kg is payload range genius. The missiles payload capacity is not just bomb's weight but a little bit more to accomodate hardening too. ]

Now enough about my facts and figures, out with your source of "expensive fuel". I guess you are wimp enough not to address that.

 

[randomradio]

200-300 Kg is payload range genius. The missiles payload capacity is not just bomb's weight but a little bit more to accomodate hardening too. ]

 

[Hydra]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1438172543001640967

 

[randomradio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1438172543001640967

The Koreans have been taking a lot of Russian assistance in missile development.

 

[Chain Smoker]

The Koreans have been taking a lot of Russian assistance in missile development.

It's ramjet simulation was done by Indian company zeus numerix.

 

[Gautam]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1438172543001640967

The Koreans have been taking a lot of Russian assistance in missile development.

It's ramjet simulation was done by Indian company zeus numerix.

Here, posted about it on forum long back. Posted on twitter too:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1276749607922552839

This is probably the 290km version. Nonetheless a very potent AShM. Our defence relationship with the Koreans have taken off recently. First the K9/K10, then the DRDO/L&T-Hanwa light tank & now this. There was a logistical agreement signed & an intelligence cooperation agreement coming up too. Hopefully the Army orders the Biho soon.

I hope we sell the B8 &/or VL-SRSAMs to the Koreans too. They will need that to defeat the Chinese supersonic AShMs. In return they can help us design the P-18 class destroyers. The Sejong class destroyers could be a good starting point for the P-18 class.

 

[randomradio]

Here, posted about it on forum long back. Posted on twitter too:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1276749607922552839

This is probably the 290km version. Nonetheless a very potent AShM. Our defence relationship with the Koreans have taken off recently. First the K9/K10, then the DRDO/L&T-Hanwa light tank & now this. There was a logistical agreement signed & an intelligence cooperation agreement coming up too. Hopefully the Army orders the Biho soon.

I hope we sell the B8 &/or VL-SRSAMs to the Koreans too. They will need that to defeat the Chinese supersonic AShMs. In return they can help us design the P-18 class destroyers. The Sejong class destroyers could be a good starting point for the P-18 class.

The Biho is apparently out. It's now an atmanirbhar project.

They have their own SAMs too. The Koreans are in fact offering the K-SAAM for the Kamorta class.