Indian Missile Transporter Erectors and Launchers (TEL)

Gautam

Team StratFront
Feb 16, 2019
12,462
9,201
Tripura, NE, India
I don't see an exhaust though. Or it could be tri-pack, with the 4th one being used as exhaust. There's definitely going to be a lot of exhaust gas.
I was thinking the space between the tubes can be used. Although using one tube for re-routing exhaust can be a good idea.

If you notice the top of the launch tubes, one of them looks different from the other 3.
 

Chain Smoker

Well-Known member
Mar 2, 2020
537
425
india
I was thinking the space between the tubes can be used. Although using one tube for re-routing exhaust can be a good idea.

If you notice the top of the launch tubes, one of them looks different from the other 3.
Some thing like this.
images (49).jpeg


i think vls will come in different length according to package.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gautam

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
1,734
1,314
Republic of Wadiya
It seems a design study was conducted in 2017 for trying to fit a quad pack of smaller hot launched missiles into a naval cold launch set up.
View attachment 20948
The smaller hot launch missiles are the SAMs & the cold launch set up it like the Brahmos VLS or the upcoming UVLMs set up. The quad pack has a hot gas routing system at the bottom attached to it. In the pic above the gas can is shown in white colour. There are white coloured tubes rising up along side the launch cannisters. These tubes will re-route the hot gasses upwards when the missile is fires.

The tubes rising up seem quite thin. This type of quad packing will be restricted to smaller SAMs, so I guess there won't be a lot of gas to route up anyway. Also there are space & weight constraints so that might have played a role. You can also see coiled springs below the gas can. The springs are probably for damping the recoil force. The platform below the springs is a part of the cold launch set up. This is where all the launch tubes rests.

It is just a design study so there is no certainty of this being used. We might still end up with 2 separate launchers: a cold launch set up for AShMs/LACMs/heavy SAMs & a hot launch set up for tactical SAMs like Barak8/VL-SRSAM. I am not even sure if this is their own design or are they studying some foreign design.

But at least they are studying the possibility of quad packing tactical SAMs. So the probability of the DRDO's UVLMs being a truly universal VLS is high.
Why we don’t focus on cold launch system ? Is it that complex system to design a Cold Launch type launcher ?
I’m curious because I can see a lot of advantages in having Cold launch set up in space constrained areas like Naval ships , subs, Road mobile launchers and even in Airforce. I believe its safer and more friendly to the plateform too.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,546
8,783
India
I was thinking the space between the tubes can be used. Although using one tube for re-routing exhaust can be a good idea.

If you notice the top of the launch tubes, one of them looks different from the other 3.

Yeah, that cap like thing is what made me assume that tube is meant for exhaust.

Anyway, the IN has made no mention of continuing the use of Barak 8 for future ships. So I am also assuming NGD and NGF will have new fangled UVLMs for everything. The same S band radar on Dhruv, resized to fit, could be used on new ships along with indigenous missile systems. Hence a possible quad pack option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,546
8,783
India
Why we don’t focus on cold launch system ? Is it that complex system to design a Cold Launch type launcher ?
I’m curious because I can see a lot of advantages in having Cold launch set up in space constrained areas like Naval ships , subs, Road mobile launchers and even in Airforce. I believe its safer and more friendly to the plateform too.

Hot launch VLS are cheaper and simpler. Less possibilities of failure since there's no ejection mechanism. Plus the engagement time is much faster, which is important for SAMs, cold launch systems can lose as much as a second.
 

Gautam

Team StratFront
Feb 16, 2019
12,462
9,201
Tripura, NE, India
i think vls will come in different length according to package.
Yep.
Why we don’t focus on cold launch system ? Is it that complex system to design a Cold Launch type launcher ?
A cold launch set up is generally more complex & elaborate than a hot launch set up. Cold launchers are preferable on heavy multistage missiles especially when the 1st stage is a solid fueled. Hot launchers are preferable when there is a need for high rate of fire.

Tactical SAMs need a high rate of fire for point defence roles.
I’m curious because I can see a lot of advantages in having Cold launch set up in space constrained areas like Naval ships , subs, Road mobile launchers and even in Airforce.
Both set ups have their advantages. For road mobile missiles remember you would also have to carry the additional weight of the gas cannisters for a cold launchers.
I believe its safer and more friendly to the plateform too.
Not always safer. Say a Brahmos missile is ejected from the launch tube & somehow the solid boosters fail to ignite. Then the 3 ton missile will fall right back on the ship that launched it. There will be serious material damage & possibly even fire damage.
Anyway, the IN has made no mention of continuing the use of Barak 8 for future ships.
True. But if Barak-8 is removed we would need the Akash-Ng to replace it. Barak-8 ER can be replaced by XR-SAM. XR-SAM is a derivative of the Akash-NG also the NG has AESA seekers as opposed to the PDR seekers of the Barak-8.
So I am also assuming NGD and NGF will have new fangled UVLMs for everything.
I hope so.
The same S band radar on Dhruv, resized to fit, could be used on new ships along with indigenous missile systems. Hence a possible quad pack option.
Radar of the INS Dhruv or INS Anvesh ? DO we what band the LR_MFR operates in ?

We have managed to indigenize the float part of ship building. The sensor & weapons part will be indigenized soon. The propulsion part will remain out of reach for at least a decade. We have marine diesel engines manufacturers in India (Kirloskar-SEMT, Cummins & MAN). Nuclear engines are also being made by BARC-L&T-BHEL. But gas turbines are either imported from Ukraine, US or UK.

HAL has signed some deals with GE & RR for maintenance spares and supplies. But that's about it. Even if we manage to get the KMGT working at best we will get around 15 MW. That will be good for Navy's smaller ships, the larger ones will continue to rely on imports.

Wonder if we should just ready the CLWR-B1 for surface vessel use. At 83 MWe it is more than twice as powerful as the RR MT30. Of course there are constraints of price & nuclear fuel.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,546
8,783
India
True. But if Barak-8 is removed we would need the Akash-Ng to replace it. Barak-8 ER can be replaced by XR-SAM. XR-SAM is a derivative of the Akash-NG also the NG has AESA seekers as opposed to the PDR seekers of the Barak-8.

Akash NG won't be enough though. Unless there's no time to develop something new. 'Cause we need to be able to stop hypersonic missiles. Hopefully XRSAM will perform that role.

Radar of the INS Dhruv or INS Anvesh ? DO we what band the LR_MFR operates in ?

It's easy to guess even without any offical confirmation. MFR = Multifunction radar. And such radars are primarily in the S band (or even C band). L band sucks at targeting and X sucks at volume scan, hence S band sits in the middle, which has earned it that moniker. Also the reason why ships carry an S band radar for both surveillance and targeting. Anyway, I was referring to Anvesh, not Dhruv, I don't believe the Dhruv carries S band. The NGD/NGF will require an X band radar as well, similar in set up to the new American ABs, with the X band sitting on the crown.

We have managed to indigenize the float part of ship building. The sensor & weapons part will be indigenized soon. The propulsion part will remain out of reach for at least a decade. We have marine diesel engines manufacturers in India (Kirloskar-SEMT, Cummins & MAN). Nuclear engines are also being made by BARC-L&T-BHEL. But gas turbines are either imported from Ukraine, US or UK.

HAL has signed some deals with GE & RR for maintenance spares and supplies. But that's about it. Even if we manage to get the KMGT working at best we will get around 15 MW. That will be good for Navy's smaller ships, the larger ones will continue to rely on imports.

Wonder if we should just ready the CLWR-B1 for surface vessel use. At 83 MWe it is more than twice as powerful as the RR MT30. Of course there are constraints of price & nuclear fuel.

For one, we need to improve the refuelling cycle to 25 years (4th gen reactors) from 10 years (2nd gen). And we also need to introduce electricity in lieu of steam. Anyway, as per BARC, the sub nukes apparently cannot be used on surface ships because they are not marinized to the level required.

As for price, yeah, although there are immense savings in terms of fuel costs, we can't afford to pay higher upfront costs at this stage of our economy.
 

Gautam

Team StratFront
Feb 16, 2019
12,462
9,201
Tripura, NE, India
Akash NG won't be enough though. Unless there's no time to develop something new. 'Cause we need to be able to stop hypersonic missiles. Hopefully XRSAM will perform that role.
The NG's seeker can target TBMs which do go hypersonic in their terminal phase. Whether AD against TBMs translates to AD against hypersonic cruise missiles that remains to be seen. It seems the XRSAM is the Akash NG with a solid booster.
It's easy to guess even without any offical confirmation. MFR = Multifunction radar. And such radars are primarily in the S band (or even C band). L band sucks at targeting and X sucks at volume scan, hence S band sits in the middle, which has earned it that moniker. Also the reason why ships carry an S band radar for both surveillance and targeting.
Fair enough. It would also make sense to replace the S-band MF-STAR with a S-band LR-MFR. I hope the LR-MFR uses TSA type antennas with GaN transistors. That should allow it to out perform the MF-STAR.
Anyway, I was referring to Anvesh, not Dhruv, I don't believe the Dhruv carries S band
The primary radar is X-band. The secondary is S-band. Though I am not sure which one is the primary & secondary.
The NGD/NGF will require an X band radar as well, similar in set up to the new American ABs, with the X band sitting on the crown.
Do we have any X-band radars in development ? I can recall the IAF's Ashwini LLTR operates in the S-band. IA's ADTCR is touted to be a derivative of the Ashwini so that's probably in S-band too. IN's Revathi is also in the S-band. We have a lot of S-band radars.

QR-SAM's BMFR is a X-band AESA radar with 80 km range for a RCS of 2 sq. meters. That can be used I guess. What would be the use of the X-band ? FCR ? 80 km is good enough for most FCR applications. You can always make the AESA panels larger to get more range.

I love the flushed panels on the truck. :love:
1631729646174.png

For one, we need to improve the refuelling cycle to 25 years (4th gen reactors) from 10 years (2nd gen). And we also need to introduce electricity in lieu of steam.
Yep I was hoping they could make a IEP set up using that reactor.
Anyway, as per BARC, the sub nukes apparently cannot be used on surface ships because they are not marinized to the level required.
I have read the same. With surface ship the power demands are stringent as surface ships need to overcome weather elements & its effect on sea state. With subs weather is not a constant drag.
As for price, yeah, although there are immense savings in terms of fuel costs, we can't afford to pay higher upfront costs at this stage of our economy.
Yeah. I had this idea going in my head that we could power a 15,000 ton combat ship with the CLWR-B1. Even if project costs can be reduced by scaling manufacturing the up front cost would be enormous.
 

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,252
1,245
India
Guys, small request, please avoid short forms as much as possible.. ..

It would be awesome to remember things u all discuss.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,546
8,783
India
The NG's seeker can target TBMs which do go hypersonic in their terminal phase. Whether AD against TBMs translates to AD against hypersonic cruise missiles that remains to be seen. It seems the XRSAM is the Akash NG with a solid booster.

Actually, it appears XRSAM is the Astra Mk2 with a booster. The original speculation was the SFDR version will be XRSAM, but obviously the timelines don't match. Perhaps Astra Mk3 will be the extended range version with 400Km range.

The mechanics for hitting a hypersonic sea skimmer is different from a TBM that falls in an inclination or vertical. The interception profile for a skimmer is very hard to achieve. If the XRSAM can do it, then we will need versions without the booster for this role.

Do we have any X-band radars in development ? I can recall the IAF's Ashwini LLTR operates in the S-band. IA's ADTCR is touted to be a derivative of the Ashwini so that's probably in S-band too. IN's Revathi is also in the S-band. We have a lot of S-band radars.

QR-SAM's BMFR is a X-band AESA radar with 80 km range for a RCS of 2 sq. meters. That can be used I guess. What would be the use of the X-band ? FCR ? 80 km is good enough for most FCR applications. You can always make the AESA panels larger to get more range.

I love the flushed panels on the truck. :love:
View attachment 20953

Yeah, I've only seen the small ones. Perhaps the one on Dhruv is our very first one.

Yep I was hoping they could make a IEP set up using that reactor.

I have read the same. With surface ship the power demands are stringent as surface ships need to overcome weather elements & its effect on sea state. With subs weather is not a constant drag.

Yeah. I had this idea going in my head that we could power a 15,000 ton combat ship with the CLWR-B1. Even if project costs can be reduced by scaling manufacturing the up front cost would be enormous.

Too far away in my books. I'll be happy if NGD is a 10k-ton ship with 90+ VLS using IEPS. What we need is numbers. Our current VLS capability for CMs by 2025 or so is 1/10th of PLAN's. Plus our logistics pacts with many countries gives us plenty of supply options all across the world. And we do not have a nuke carrier to actually make use of a nuke destroyer. Otoh, the Russians and Chinese need nuke destroyers, they don't have many friends after all.
 

Gautam

Team StratFront
Feb 16, 2019
12,462
9,201
Tripura, NE, India
Actually, it appears XRSAM is the Astra Mk2 with a booster.
XR-SAM's upper-stage airframe looked identical to the Akash-NG. Although the Astra Mk-2's airframe is also similar.
The original speculation was the SFDR version will be XRSAM, but obviously the timelines don't match. Perhaps Astra Mk3 will be the extended range version with 400Km range.
A SFDR based SAM is being worked. Who knows when that will arrive.
The mechanics for hitting a hypersonic sea skimmer is different from a TBM that falls in an inclination or vertical. The interception profile for a skimmer is very hard to achieve. If the XRSAM can do it, then we will need versions without the booster for this role.
Yep. To intercept a sea-skimming hypersonic AShM the SAM will need to have active thrusters similar to the DACS on the PDV Mk-2. We will also need hot launch set up & jet vane control system. AESA seekers, 2 way data links etc.

Putting them all on one missile will make it pretty heavy though, especially the DACS. We can use the Shaurya to test interception of hypersonic missiles. The Shaurya can't do sea skimming though, but still can be useful for testing. The building blocks are there, a lot of work to do.
Yeah, I've only seen the small ones. Perhaps the one on Dhruv is our very first one.
The one of the Dhruv would be a bit too big to be superstructure mounted. Would need to be scaled down a bit.
No L band at all on either ship?

Then I suppose they will use a land-based one on the mainland or A&N.
The Dhruv probably has a L-ban. The fore deck has 2 radomes, one for the X-band the other for the L-band. Of course the mid deck has the massive S-band.

There is a C-band AESA under development. Probably for the Swathi Mk-2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,546
8,783
India
XR-SAM's upper-stage airframe looked identical to the Akash-NG. Although the Astra Mk-2's airframe is also similar.

A SFDR based SAM is being worked. Who knows when that will arrive.

Astra will have much superior performance though, being lighter and smaller. With an initial high speed release, its 200+Km range at altitude can easily cross 250 or even 300Km.

Yep. To intercept a sea-skimming hypersonic AShM the SAM will need to have active thrusters similar to the DACS on the PDV Mk-2. We will also need hot launch set up & jet vane control system. AESA seekers, 2 way data links etc.

Putting them all on one missile will make it pretty heavy though, especially the DACS. We can use the Shaurya to test interception of hypersonic missiles. The Shaurya can't do sea skimming though, but still can be useful for testing. The building blocks are there, a lot of work to do.

Shaurya is unsuitable for this role. For a 500m interception, it will have to leave behind the booster and 1st stage our own deck. :p

The missile needs to be small and single stage, no different from Barak 8, Akash NG or even Astra.

DACS won't help inside the atmosphere, it's meant for use in space.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

Chain Smoker

Well-Known member
Mar 2, 2020
537
425
india
Astra will have much superior performance though, being lighter and smaller. With an initial high speed release, its 200+Km range at altitude can easily cross 250 or even 300Km.



Shaurya is unsuitable for this role. For a 500m interception, it will have to leave behind the booster and 1st stage our own deck. :p

The missile needs to be small and single stage, no different from Barak 8, Akash NG or even Astra.

DACS won't help inside the atmosphere, it's meant for use in space.
Anti HGV missile with very high lateral acceleration is under development.
 

Gautam

Team StratFront
Feb 16, 2019
12,462
9,201
Tripura, NE, India
Astra will have much superior performance though, being lighter and smaller. With an initial high speed release, its 200+Km range at altitude can easily cross 250 or even 300Km.
Won't the Navy need AWACS for early detection. Ship based sensors can only see so far.
Shaurya is unsuitable for this role. For a 500m interception, it will have to leave behind the booster and 1st stage our own deck. :p

The missile needs to be small and single stage, no different from Barak 8, Akash NG or even Astra.
I meant using the interceptor against the Shaurya. Not using the Shaurya as the interceptor.
DACS won't help inside the atmosphere, it's meant for use in space.
The Brahmos uses thrusters to go from vertical to horizontal. That's what I meant.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,546
8,783
India
Won't the Navy need AWACS for early detection. Ship based sensors can only see so far.

Definitely. Both AWACS and fighter jets. Even drones. We cannot effectively use long range SAMs without CEC.

I meant using the interceptor against the Shaurya. Not using the Shaurya as the interceptor.

My bad, was blind there.

The Brahmos uses thrusters to go from vertical to horizontal. That's what I meant.

Right, just one of the various types of TVC is enough though. We actually need something that's HTK and a small seeker, so there's not a lot of mass for attitude control, the hot launch itself will get the motor roaring from the start.
 

Gautam

Team StratFront
Feb 16, 2019
12,462
9,201
Tripura, NE, India
We actually need something that's HTK and a small seeker, so there's not a lot of mass for attitude control, the hot launch itself will get the motor roaring from the start.
HTK with IIR seeker or RF seeker ? IIR seekers often need cooling for low altitude uses. That effects total weight. That uncooled IIR seeker seems to be coming along well. One of the spin offs from the Nag project.

Also how much weight can be shaved off before the terminal phase ? Unlike the PDV Mk-2, an Astra based HTK won't do any stage separation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker