Pak tests Babar cruise missile

[sigatoka]

Are the BMPs substitutes for a MBTs? arent they suppose to have much lesser fire power and more cabin space for soldiers?

Unless things are perfectly complementary, there exists some degree of substitutability between two products. The only perfectly complementary goods are for example a right hand shoe when u have a left hand shoe. This is a frivolous example but it demonstrates that all goods have some degree of substitutability even when they differ in terms of fire power and cabin space.

 

[sigatoka]

As you are referring to the Iraqi theater. Then you will be aware of what happened to the dug in Iraqi armour in defensive positions. Besides a T-72 AP ammo used by the Iraqis did not have the RHAe penetration required to destroy the M1 Abrams. A BMP-3s Kornet can take out any tank at 4 km. It depends how you use it - as pill boxes or mobile units.

To attack one BMP-2/3 equipped platoon defended locality the opposing force has to use minimum 1 sqdn of armour to break through. The BMPs anti-tank weapons and the integral anti-tank weapons of the dismounted troops will blunt any attacking armour in troop strength. This is the case assuming there is no armour support for the BMP platoon. The same capability is absent in an APC equipped mech platoon.

You are being deceiving because you are comparing a BMP-3 to a T-72, wouldnt it be fairer to compare a T-72 to a BMP-2 or a T-80 to a BMP-3??

Secondly APC equiped mech Platoon can be equiped with wire guided anti-tank missiles as well so your second point doesnt hold either.

 

[sword9]

You are being deceiving because you are comparing a BMP-3 to a T-72, wouldnt it be fairer to compare a T-72 to a BMP-2 or a T-80 to a BMP-3??

I am not comparing the two types of armoured vehicles. All I am saying is that an ICV/IFV can fight back and can suppliment its tanks units, but an APC is just a battle taxi period it cannot fight back.

Secondly APC equiped mech Platoon can be equiped with wire guided anti-tank missiles as well so your second point doesnt hold either.

All mech platoons have their integral shoulder fired RPGs/RR, that is standard issue for all infantry units. These are battalion support weapons and are not issued to all platoons.
Wire guided ATGMs are issued mainly to Pak Army's recce & support and to infantry units (mainly jeep mounted) these may alos be with your mech units.
If you add extra 2 men of the ATGM crew you will screw up the logistics and accomodating capacity of the APC.

 

[green eagle]

well i think appreciate to new version just no need to b shamed try to imporove indians bcoz america trying to save sunken indian missile prog :wall:

 

[Contrarian]

EDITED: Forget it, that post is not worth replying.

 

[green eagle]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur_missile

 

[green eagle]

On August 12th, 2005, Pakistan publicly announced that it had successfully test fired a nuclear-capable Babur cruise missile. The missile was launched from a land based transporter erector launcher (TEL). With this test, Pakistan became one of twelve countries that possess cruise missile technology. Babur is part of Pakistan's Hatf missile series. The unannounced initial launch on 11 August 2005 caught much of the international community by surprise due to the technically advance nature of the missile, as well as the fact that Pakistan did not notify India of its test-firing in accordance with the existing notification agreement, as it is limited to ballistic missile testing only.

Currently, Pakistan is looking into modification that will enable the missile to be launched from its F-16, Mirage and A-5 air platforms and naval platforms such as the Agosta 90B attack submarines and its Tariq class frigates. In a statement issued by ISPR, the spokesman said that Pakistan is modifying the missile for air and sea launch configurations. He added that Pakistan is also working on a more advanced version of Babur (possibly named Babur-2) with a range of 1,000km and increased payload.

After many debates, it has now been confirmed that the second version of the Babur cruise missile has been developed after some modifications. It is capable of being fired from submarines, in this case Pakistan's Agosta-90B, or fighter aircraft, such as Pakistan's JF-17, F-16, or A-5 Fantan. [2]

On March 22nd, 2007, Pakistan test-fired the second version of the nuclear-capable Babur/Hatf VII nuclear-capable cruise missile with the capability to avoid radar detection and an extended range of 700km.[1]

 

[green eagle]

The sudden test of the Babur missile surprised some. The United States gave a muted response. India which, though gave no official response, was criticized by its media for not knowing beforehand. Some criticized the Indian intelligence incorrectly, despite a media report had reported Pakistan's building of a missile based on Tomahawks with Chinese nexus a few months before the test. Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf praised the Pakistani scientists and engineers by saying "it has all been done indigenously without any outside assistance. I am proud of you and the whole nation is proud of you", he told Pakistani scientists. Musharraf said Pakistan was not into an arms race with anyone but would never compromise on its strategy of defensive deterrence. "We are not in an arms race but we have to maintain the strategy of defensive deterrence and cannot compromise on that", he said. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur_missile

 

[green eagle]

Function medium-range, all-weather, subsonic cruise missile
Manufacturer National Defence Complex (NDC)
Unit cost Unknown
Entered service August 11, 2005
General characteristics
Engine turbo-fan and a solid-fuel booster
Launch mass 1440 kg
Length 6.25 m
with booster= 7 m

Diameter 0.52 m
Wingspan 2.67 m
Speed 880 km/h or 550 mph
Range 700 km or 435 mi
Warhead Conventional and Nuclear
Guidance GPS, TERCOM , DSMAC, INS
Fuzes Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS)
Launch platform transporter erector launcher (TEL)