Indian Army & Navy news thread
- Thread starter Indianfighter
- Start date
- Status
Indianfighter
Junior Member
The above statement is alright, but the reality is that those are not upgrades, but rather a quantum jump from the earlier rudimentary guidance of the Yakhont (except for the AI), and also that ALL those changes were developed by India.tphuang said:
Hence, it must be reasoned by members as to why did Russia not sell the Yakhont to India directly, but entered into a 49.5:50.5 risk-sharing partnership in developing the Yakhont to a true cruise missile; development which continues today.
Thus, Yakhont is a subset of Brahmos. In my previous post, I only highlighted the complementary parts.
Artificial Intelligence in Brahmos:
The article is old, and work on image-homing has already begun.
The article mentions that the air-launched variant shall be guided by low-earth Kondur satelites. The land-based and ship-launched versions shall be guided by UAVs, which shall continously update the on-cruise Brahmos missile about the co-ordinates of the target in motion. This requires a continous datalink between the UAV/chopper and the Brahmos.
The range of Yakhont is 300 kms only. No version exists with range > 300kms. Russia deliberately and exclusively made the Yakhont within MTCR limits to export it to foreign countries.
Gary was incorrect about the range of Yakhont.
darth sidious
Banned Idiot
Indianfighter said:
no the yakhont was design to replace the moskit as the missile of choice for destroyers basicaly same perfomance on a smaller missile
the 300km is more by chance then design as demonstrated by the improved moskit the yaknot as be easily upgraded for more range
Indianfighter said:
Rudimentary? I think I've already pointed out to you that INS guidance based on current target position principle requires a contineous data link feed. I would like you to point out just how the BrahMos' guidance system is so much better than Yakhont's, and let's not mention upgrades in the works. Let me tell you just how "rudimentary" SS-X-26's guidance is. Regardless of the launch profile, the missile enteres below the radar horizon, it then pop up above the horizon in terminal stage and sends a compressed pulse to determine the exact position of the enemy. It dives down again, calculate the descrepencies, and enter terminal stage. When sufficiently close, it turns on the seeker and attacks. This is the SAME approach BrahMos uses to acquire targets.
As for AI, it is the single most important aspect of ECM/ECCM because this is what drives the missile's actions. For example, Fourier Transform is done by the AI. Target selection in cluttered environment is also done by the AI. Missile evasion, if not preprogrammed like the Moskit, is also done by the AI.
I think it's time for you to go back to Barat Rakshak and ask them the exact differences between the Yakhont and the BrahMos.
As for why Russia entered into a joint development plan with India, it's called politics. Why did Russia invite India into their PAF-FA program? Do you think Indians can actually make a 5th generation fighter?
Indianfighter
Junior Member
Brahmos and Yakhont share the same AI. The Yakhont is a fire-and-forget missile, and there is no communication whatsover from any entity to the missile after launch, (not even for INS).
INS is an onboard processor that corrects a missile's path depending upon speed, relative target position and position of launch, and wind conditions also. In vaccuum, an INS will guide the missile as a projectile to the target.
What Yakhont, Moskit and Sunburn lack are :
1] Satellite guidance like GPS/GLONASS in conjunction with INS.
2] UAV datalink (used for updating position on a moving target).
Note : The AI developed for Yakhont/Brahmos is useful for slow-moving ships only (it involves guess-work and pattern analysis). It will be useless against a fast-moving frigate, or a fast land vehicle.
3] Image homing analysis (similar to DSMAC used in Tomahawk).
4] Possible fast laser-ignition (development is a closely guarded secret).
5] Capability to engage land-based targets. This requires a highly sophisticated guidance system, since the missile cannot follow the pattern of sea-skimming and terminal pop-up on land contours like hills.
INS is an onboard processor that corrects a missile's path depending upon speed, relative target position and position of launch, and wind conditions also. In vaccuum, an INS will guide the missile as a projectile to the target.
What Yakhont, Moskit and Sunburn lack are :
1] Satellite guidance like GPS/GLONASS in conjunction with INS.
2] UAV datalink (used for updating position on a moving target).
Note : The AI developed for Yakhont/Brahmos is useful for slow-moving ships only (it involves guess-work and pattern analysis). It will be useless against a fast-moving frigate, or a fast land vehicle.
3] Image homing analysis (similar to DSMAC used in Tomahawk).
4] Possible fast laser-ignition (development is a closely guarded secret).
5] Capability to engage land-based targets. This requires a highly sophisticated guidance system, since the missile cannot follow the pattern of sea-skimming and terminal pop-up on land contours like hills.
let me ask you this, how the hell are you supposed to use a 300km missile without datalink when your OTH radar (bandstand) can only see out to roughly 200km? You can't just toss a missile on an approximate vector and hope it locks, because the missile's seeker is not powerful enough. Sure it's an option, but not the best one. Every long range missile has a datalink capability. C-803 has it, Harpoon has it, Exocet's longer ranged versions have it, Sunburn has it, Bazalt/Vulcan have it (before autonomous search).
Just because the missile has a fire and forget capability doesn't mean it doesn't use datalink. On the contrary, fire and forget applies ONLY to the terminal stage. All ARH missiles are considered fire and forget, and guess what? All of them use datalink to get into the killzone.
Also, INS using the present target location must be updated with the target's new position contineously. Do you honestly believe a target would just remain it's speed and heading under combat situations? However, I do have to concede that, because of the speed of the BrahMos, it can cover the maximum 300km rather quickly. But I have to iterate again that fire and forget does not mean an entirely autonomous flight.
I cannot find any reference about Yakhont's datalink, for or against, so I'll just shelf this debate and perhaps you can go ask people at BR and I'll ask someone at CDF. But you cannot discount my arguments.
On a sidenote, the Alfa missile, which is based on the Yakhont, does have datalink capabilities plus GLONASS.
"What Yakhont, Moskit and Sunburn lack are :
1] Satellite guidance like GPS/GLONASS in conjunction with INS.
2] UAV datalink (used for updating position on a moving target).
Note : The AI developed for Yakhont/Brahmos is useful for slow-moving ships only (it involves guess-work and pattern analysis). It will be useless against a fast-moving frigate, or a fast land vehicle.
3] Image homing analysis (similar to DSMAC used in Tomahawk).
4] Possible fast laser-ignition (development is a closely guarded secret).
5] Capability to engage land-based targets. This requires a highly sophisticated guidance system, since the missile cannot follow the pattern of sea-skimming and terminal pop-up on land contours like hills."
IndianFighter, Moskit IS the Sunburn, Sunburn being the NATO designation.
1) First of all, I question GPS/GLONASS in an antiship missile, especially GPS, because the signal is probably not miitary grade. But it is true that BrahMos has it and the other two don't.
2) Let's not mention UAV, that's trivial. The datalink issue with Yakhont can't be decided, but Moskit actually has datalink. Why? Because it is not an autonomous system. Not many people know this, but one of the primary drawbacks of the Moskit is that it does not carry enough processing power onboard for terminal stage target discrimination, so it sends the data BACK to the ship for calculations. The 2 side effects of this is that A) Datalink capability is inherent in Moskit B) there is a primitive image analysis capability, not on the missile, but in the system, although this is actually radar return discrimination instead of true visual data.
3) I thought image analysis is still in the pipelines. But regardless, what BrahMos achieves using image analysis, Yakhont achieves uses the AI while Moskit just sends it back to the ship. (The notion of Yakhont's AI being effective against slow moving targets is really taken out of context, just what major warvessels travel above 60 Knots? ) However, Moskit, in this context, is especially suspectible to enemy ECM. Once an Australian Navy Officer, when asked how they'll deal with the Moskit, said, "Softkill all the way". (I suspect that the image analysis capability is tailored toward the land attack version of the BrahMos)
4) I'm not sure what that means. Laser fuse for detonantion or laser "spark plug" for ignition? Because they're trivial.
5) I question the abilities of a Mach3 missile acting as a LACM. Of the advanced LACMs in service today, their primary mode of guidance is TERCOM with GPS corrections. Do you honestly think a Mach3 missile can use TERCOM?
Just because the missile has a fire and forget capability doesn't mean it doesn't use datalink. On the contrary, fire and forget applies ONLY to the terminal stage. All ARH missiles are considered fire and forget, and guess what? All of them use datalink to get into the killzone.
Also, INS using the present target location must be updated with the target's new position contineously. Do you honestly believe a target would just remain it's speed and heading under combat situations? However, I do have to concede that, because of the speed of the BrahMos, it can cover the maximum 300km rather quickly. But I have to iterate again that fire and forget does not mean an entirely autonomous flight.
I cannot find any reference about Yakhont's datalink, for or against, so I'll just shelf this debate and perhaps you can go ask people at BR and I'll ask someone at CDF. But you cannot discount my arguments.
On a sidenote, the Alfa missile, which is based on the Yakhont, does have datalink capabilities plus GLONASS.
"What Yakhont, Moskit and Sunburn lack are :
1] Satellite guidance like GPS/GLONASS in conjunction with INS.
2] UAV datalink (used for updating position on a moving target).
Note : The AI developed for Yakhont/Brahmos is useful for slow-moving ships only (it involves guess-work and pattern analysis). It will be useless against a fast-moving frigate, or a fast land vehicle.
3] Image homing analysis (similar to DSMAC used in Tomahawk).
4] Possible fast laser-ignition (development is a closely guarded secret).
5] Capability to engage land-based targets. This requires a highly sophisticated guidance system, since the missile cannot follow the pattern of sea-skimming and terminal pop-up on land contours like hills."
IndianFighter, Moskit IS the Sunburn, Sunburn being the NATO designation.
1) First of all, I question GPS/GLONASS in an antiship missile, especially GPS, because the signal is probably not miitary grade. But it is true that BrahMos has it and the other two don't.
2) Let's not mention UAV, that's trivial. The datalink issue with Yakhont can't be decided, but Moskit actually has datalink. Why? Because it is not an autonomous system. Not many people know this, but one of the primary drawbacks of the Moskit is that it does not carry enough processing power onboard for terminal stage target discrimination, so it sends the data BACK to the ship for calculations. The 2 side effects of this is that A) Datalink capability is inherent in Moskit B) there is a primitive image analysis capability, not on the missile, but in the system, although this is actually radar return discrimination instead of true visual data.
3) I thought image analysis is still in the pipelines. But regardless, what BrahMos achieves using image analysis, Yakhont achieves uses the AI while Moskit just sends it back to the ship. (The notion of Yakhont's AI being effective against slow moving targets is really taken out of context, just what major warvessels travel above 60 Knots? ) However, Moskit, in this context, is especially suspectible to enemy ECM. Once an Australian Navy Officer, when asked how they'll deal with the Moskit, said, "Softkill all the way". (I suspect that the image analysis capability is tailored toward the land attack version of the BrahMos)
4) I'm not sure what that means. Laser fuse for detonantion or laser "spark plug" for ignition? Because they're trivial.
5) I question the abilities of a Mach3 missile acting as a LACM. Of the advanced LACMs in service today, their primary mode of guidance is TERCOM with GPS corrections. Do you honestly think a Mach3 missile can use TERCOM?
Indianfighter
Junior Member
Photo of Harrier jet taking off from INS Virat, during the Indo-French naval exercises that are being held now:
AI is useful only when the cluster of ships have not mixed with friendly ships and have not moved zig-zag or too far apart from where they were when the missile was fired. Though technologically very complex, mathematically it is a primitive solution to a problem that is now fully solved with UAV guidance, low-earth observable satellite guidance, etc.....all of them with/coming soon on the Brahmos, and little or none with the other ramjet anti-ship missiles.
Anyway, Brahmos also possesses AI inherited/improved from the Yakhont in case the need arises.
INS does NOT need a datalink. It is a modern-day gyroscope or compass inside chips. If the target has moved since the missile was launched, the missile will miss it, unless some AI or UAV guidance or satellite guidance is used to update the missile.
INS is rarely accurate, since wind conditions can hamper its performance. So, GPS/GLONASS is also used in conjuncton. It helps in correcting accumulated errors from time-to-time.
Even the Babar missile uses GPS in conjunction with INS and not just INS alone.
Brahmos will never use TERCON. TERCON was invented at a time when GPS did not exist. It is nothing but an altimeter that compares contours that it "sees" with another in memory, and takes corrective measures when they dont match.
GPS/GLONASS makes this system obsolete, as pin-point accuracy can be achieved on course. Later versions of Tomahawk such as Tactical Tomahawk or Tomahawk IV do not have TERCON.
A land-based ramjet missile like the Brahmos cannot perform terminal pop-up, sea-skimming etc. as it does over the flat sea.
So, more advanced guidance shall be needed to dodge obstacles, remain low on radar(terrain-hugging as far as possible), and obtain pin-point accuracy (such as targetting the 4th window on the 3rd floor of a building).....something that Yakhont or Moskit cannot achieve at least forseeably.
The Brahmos is set to (or mostly has) achieve all that. Without the restraints of its MTCR range limit, it would undoubtedly be THE deadliest cruise-missile in the world.
Laser detonation is useful for extremely fast "ignition" that reduces reaction time, unlike conventional ignition techniques.
AI is useful only when the cluster of ships have not mixed with friendly ships and have not moved zig-zag or too far apart from where they were when the missile was fired. Though technologically very complex, mathematically it is a primitive solution to a problem that is now fully solved with UAV guidance, low-earth observable satellite guidance, etc.....all of them with/coming soon on the Brahmos, and little or none with the other ramjet anti-ship missiles.
Anyway, Brahmos also possesses AI inherited/improved from the Yakhont in case the need arises.
INS does NOT need a datalink. It is a modern-day gyroscope or compass inside chips. If the target has moved since the missile was launched, the missile will miss it, unless some AI or UAV guidance or satellite guidance is used to update the missile.
INS is rarely accurate, since wind conditions can hamper its performance. So, GPS/GLONASS is also used in conjuncton. It helps in correcting accumulated errors from time-to-time.
Even the Babar missile uses GPS in conjunction with INS and not just INS alone.
Brahmos will never use TERCON. TERCON was invented at a time when GPS did not exist. It is nothing but an altimeter that compares contours that it "sees" with another in memory, and takes corrective measures when they dont match.
GPS/GLONASS makes this system obsolete, as pin-point accuracy can be achieved on course. Later versions of Tomahawk such as Tactical Tomahawk or Tomahawk IV do not have TERCON.
A land-based ramjet missile like the Brahmos cannot perform terminal pop-up, sea-skimming etc. as it does over the flat sea.
So, more advanced guidance shall be needed to dodge obstacles, remain low on radar(terrain-hugging as far as possible), and obtain pin-point accuracy (such as targetting the 4th window on the 3rd floor of a building).....something that Yakhont or Moskit cannot achieve at least forseeably.
The Brahmos is set to (or mostly has) achieve all that. Without the restraints of its MTCR range limit, it would undoubtedly be THE deadliest cruise-missile in the world.
Laser detonation is useful for extremely fast "ignition" that reduces reaction time, unlike conventional ignition techniques.
Last edited:
All Indian related topics closed for uncertain period. New threads are allowed to start only when the annoucment "temporary forbidden topics" is gone...
- Status