Weapon Systems Being Used in Afghanistan

The Cruise Missile

Columnist Col (Retd) EAS BOKHARI gives a detailed analysis of the cruise missile.

The Cruise Missile is one of the battle tested long range missile and can be launched both from surface ships and submarines. The missile has seen extensive service in the Gulf War-1991, and then again the US warships fired about 60 of these missiles against suspected hide outs of Osama bin Laden (OBL) in 1998 from the Arabian Sea. This engagement was not effective and it is reported that one missile fell in the Balochistan territory of Pakistan as its propulsion unit failed to perform satisfactorily.

The US troops used the BGM-109 or more commonly named Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) which has three variants i.e. the TLAM-N which has a 200 Kiloton nuclear warhead, and the TLAM-C and TLAM-D which have a conventional warhead of 1000 pounds of High Explosives and submunitions respectively. All the three variants have a range of approximately 1400 miles.

The Americans are not the exclusive users of Cruise Missile technology and there are many other countries who produce missiles based on cruise missile technology. The main characteristics of this technology as will be explained in the paragraphs that follow are its stealth, comparatively slow speed, and special guidance system.

There is no doubt that the US made an extensive use of these missiles from the Gulf along with the aerial bombing of Iraq and the engagements were so merciless, and saturated the Iraqi targets to an extent that the follow up action by the Allies armour (wider hooks from the left), and infantry close up after this ‘softening up’ met hardly any worthwhile Iraqi resistance.

With D-day on 8 Oct 2001, in Afghanistan these missiles are being used for their versatile characteristics for the engagement of known terrorists hide outs and training camps. A post-engagement of the analysis of their performance is not yet available. It will take some time for this to crystallise.

We may not have noticed their technical nomenclature but we do possess cruise missiles such as RGM-83 Harpoon and Exocet. The Indian ‘Koral’ programme signifies a technological development which is not available to many developing countries.

IDR (International Defence Review) May 1994 Issue Volume No 27 indicates “India has developed the capability to build an indigenous version of ‘Tomahawk’ cruise missile ... Its Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) has successfully designed and built unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) which can be transformed into cruise missiles by upgrading their precision guidance and navigation system, changing structuring design and controls, and fitting an engine with greater fuel efficiency....”

According to a senior DRDO (Defence Research and Development Organisation) officer “... Should the requirement (for such missiles) arise we can put the total system together without significant dependence on imports.” Obviously Indians have already acquired cruise missile design, its aerodynamics, flight controls, inertial guidance and air breathing engines. The Indians have two UAV projects i.e. the Lakshya and the Nishant — the latter is to be developed for battlefield surveillance and reconnaissance for the Indian Army. A scientist at the ADE has said “we are currently working only on non-lethal applications.” But as pointed out above by the IDR — a cruise missile could be the logical application of the UAV technology, which is a dual use technology.

As would be recalled ‘Tomahawk’ cruise missile could be singled out for its accuracy and destructive power, and was launched from sea on Iraqi targets during the 1991 Gulf War with deadly effect. The missile was almost undetectable due to its rather lower height of trajectory and its movement in the lower denser atmosphere, where radar is ineffective.

A cruise missile is a breed in itself, and is, therefore, not easy to define it. A cruise missile can be ground, ship, submarine or air launched. There is a considerable difference of opinion about the range of a cruise missile, but the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) laid down range of upward of 300 Kilometers (Km) is perhaps a most reasonable profile of a cruise missile in the absence of a specific range limitation. In this sense a cruise missile falls in the category of ballistic missiles any way. But then, there are subtle differences and “a cruise missile uses an air breathing engine and flies the whole of its trajectory within the denser part of the atmosphere (below 100,000 feet or 30 Km). In design terms a cruise missile is similar to surface- -to-surface, and air-to-air missile....”

“Certainly more versatile than ballistic missiles (of equal range) cruise missiles can be launched from vehicle, ramps, silos and small ships, submarines and aircraft.” The comparison of ‘Tomahawk’ and CSS-5 (DF-21) with ballistic missile of similar pay load and ranges, shows that the cruise missile has only 10 per cent launch weight of the ballistic missiles.

From the paragraphs above it is evident that the technology to develop a cruise missile should be available even to less advanced countries which possess potential to fabricate a light aircraft.

With the advancement and improvement of locating accuracy by the introduction of GPS, which provides ‘instant’ fixation, and which was freely and profitably used during the Gulf War, 1991 cruise missiles have a great future, and perhaps a proliferation threat too along with this. A GPS receiver weighs not more than 5 Kg and is even commercially available (cost $ 5000), which will surely affect ‘the development and employment of cruise missiles very considerably. A GPS fixation can provide an accuracy of less than 100 m regardless of the range of engagement.

According to Duncan Lennox, an expert on ballistic missiles “... Small turbo-jet technology has been widely exported with small unmanned air vehicles and guided missiles. The net result is that in late 1990s the cruise missile will have a similar warhead size, delivered over a similar range more accurately and at about 10 per cent to 25 per cent of the total cost of an equivalent ballistic missile. The cruise missile will become a serious proliferation issue over the next ten years....”

The development of cruise missiles to their present shape and status has been eclectic, and perhaps the first cruise missile that appeared on the battlefield was the Second World War Germany’s Fi-103/FZG-76 missile better known as the V-I ‘buzz bomb’. The Russians and the Americans tried to have their own missiles of this type but by the end of 1950 the US planners thought that the cruise missiles were more vulnerable to ground defences, and were less accurate and unreliable. US programmes like ‘Hound Dog’ and ‘Snark’ were, therefore, scrapped, in favour of more promising ballistic missiles.

The Soviet cruise missile programme was more pragmatic, and it continued along with the ballistic missile programmes. And later ‘Styx’ (Soviet SS-N-2/SSC-3) formed the basis for a whole family of cruise missiles such as SS-N-3, SS-N-12 and many others. It is to be noted that it was a Soviet supplied ‘Styx’ which made a quick work of Israeli Missile boat ‘Elath’, The missile was operated by Egyptians.

It appears that China has obviously copied the Soviet ‘Styx’ and reduced their well-known CSSC-2 ‘Silkworm’ which has been developed into a ram jet powered CSS S-6 (HY-3), and a turbo powered CSSS7 (HY-4).

USA has returned to cruise missiles in 1982 with AGM-86 and BGM-109 ‘Tomahawk’ in 1983. Many countries have followed suit notably Iraq and Iran. Iraqi programme, however, was the most versatile.

‘Exocet’, the sea skimming missile which our Navy possesses is a good missile and is known to have sunk the British ship HMS ‘Sheffield’ in 1982 (in the hands of Argentinean operators) in the Falkland War.