Pakistan cruise missiles pose key challenge to India

[Bratva]

Is there any SAM missile in indian inventory which can shoot an object flying at 40-50 meter height? No!

In 2012 firing of Babur cruise missile,,, it flew at 50 meter height. At that height only ground fire can destroy the missile nothing else!

But indians who arguing don't even know this thing, because they don't know what Babur LACM mission parameters are. Well good luck living in fool paradise

 

[Secur]

And considering the 2nd test comes next month, i.e. less than a year, its still doing way better than Babur.

Where exactly is the doubt on " a transfer of technology on brahmos would help other Indian cruise missile projects " coming from ? Otherwise why insist on technology transfer from Dassault with their Rafale if it isn't going to help the other Indian aircraft projects ? Same thing both are , right ?

As for Nirbhay doing better than Babur , boy , you must me kidding me there . The latter have had a dozen test flights , is in serial production and inducted by SFC . Can I say about the Nirbhay which has yet to have its first successful test flight until now ?

A failure is a failure , no matter what way you put it . As for the partial success , requote me when its translated into "full" before declaring it way better than its counterpart .

Prasun is known to criticize everything Indian as well as Pakistan go check out his recent blogs.

And it was Oscar i think who stated so,Subsonic missile ‘Nirbhay’ test fired | Page 14
enjoy your denial

Yes TRISHUL an Indian blog written by an Indian How very credible ! Can you get me a neutral or Pakistani source for "Babur did only 17 km in its first test flight" ? The missile has been tested so many times until now that even I have lost track of it nevemind the upgrades coming with each .

 

[bloo]

Is Oscar working in Pakistani missile industry, no!

Stop proofing yourself stupid and ignorant who is debating with no hard facts and proofs!

Don't be an idiot there is usually no hard proof of such things unless you are working inside the development organisation.
We can only assume these infos are true when they are coming from professionals from the field.

Parul Aghi (Author is an Aerospace engineer, currently associated with the field of Guided Missiles at Defense Institute of Advanced Technology (DRDO) )Even in the first flight test of Pakistan’s Babur missile, it could fly only for 17 km (August 12, 2005)Nirbhay missile: Success or Failure, Importance of Nirbhay missile for India, Nirbhay Missile

Where exactly is the doubt on " a transfer of technology on brahmos would help other Indian cruise missile projects " coming from ? Otherwise why insist on technology transfer from Dassault with their Rafale if it isn't going to help the other Indian aircraft projects ? Same thing both are , right ?

As for Nirbhay doing better than Babur , boy , you must me kidding me there . The latter have had a dozen test flights , is in serial production and inducted by SFC . Can I say about the Nirbhay which has yet to have its first successful test flight until now ?

As for the partial success , requote me which its translated into "full" before declaring it way better than its counterpart .

You are completely blurring the lines of ur analogies aren't you?
Sure then a ballistic missile is same as a cruise missile.
Do reread my post on the INS of Nirbhay before prematurely evaluating everything.
Therefore no they are not the same.
And if the TOT was used in Nirbhay those components probably did succeed,

“The lift-off from the canister, the booster separation, ignition of cruise vehicle engine at high altitude, wing deployment, control guidance and way-point navigation capabilities have been proven. For missile designers these are crucial milestones achieved,” Avinash Chander, Chief Controller (Missiles and Strategic Systems)“Nirbhay met 90 per cent of its mission parameters. It was the first test and we will quickly find out from the data which part gave up. We will fix it and prove the missile’s full-duration capabilities,”ADE Director P S Krishnan

Do not misquote me on purpose, and yes Nirbhay is doing way better than babur did travelling ~250km in its first test and the 2nd test coming within 1 year of its 1st test unlike Babur.

And again way better than Babur was.

Yes TRISHUL an Indian blog written by an Indian How very credible ! Can you get me a neutral or Pakistani source for "Babur did only 17 km in its first test flight" ? The missile has been tested so many times until now that even I have lost track of it nevemind the upgrades coming with each .

Sure don't believe me.
I can only post it so that u can look at it from an unbiased point of view, Prasun is a known critique and I know very well how Pakistani members quoted him multiple times in an Su-30 thread to "prove" so many things, of course it becomes negligible when I do it.
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
BTW Parul Aghi - Aerospace engineer, currently associated with the field of Guided Missiles at Defense Institute of Advanced Technology (DRDO) says the same thing.

 

[Bratva]

Don't be an idiot there is usually no hard proof of such things unless you are working inside the development organisation.
We can only assume these infos are true when they are coming from professionals from the field.





You are completely blurring the lines of ur analogies aren't you?
Sure then a ballistic missile is same as a cruise missile.
Do reread my post on the INS of Nirbhay before prematurely evaluating everything.
Therefore no they are not the same.
And if the TOT was used in Nirbhay those components probably did succeed,


Do not misquote me on purpose, and yes Nirbhay is doing way better than babur did travelling ~250km in its first test and the 2nd test coming within 1 year of its 1st test unlike Babur.

And again way better than Babur was.



Sure don't believe me.
I can only post it so that u can look at it from an unbiased point of view, Prasun is a known critique and I know very well how Pakistani members quoted him multiple times in an Su-30 thread to "prove" so many things, of course it becomes negligible when I do it.
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
BTW Parul Aghi (Author is an Aerospace engineer, currently associated with the field of Guided Missiles at Defense Institute of Advanced Technology (DRDO) ) says the same thing.

Abay Jahil,,,, Was Prasun at test site of Babur Cruise missile on 12 August 2005? Why not ask what's the source of info of prasun. I can show 100's of his claims which were later turned out to be false. A calim made without proof. Yeah surely I'm arguing with an idiot who will belive whatever prasun says about Babur CM.

Comparing an operational missile with an failed missile... What an amazing person you are

 

[Secur]

@bloo I can assure you , a failure is still a failure whatever way you put it . Who am I to misquote your post when you base your claims on unproven and unreliable blogs - the worst source in a debate ! I didn't say both are the same , read it again more carefully , the technological correlation is there to understand . I will still ask for a Pakistani or neutral source for that claim , do you have it ? Compare the development history and present status of both Babur and Nirbhay and we can talk on that . Otherwise , using fancy terms which you yourself dont seem to understand wont help you in this debate , the missile was destructed in mid air only after covering 30% of its intended range and the second test flight which was planned months after that , hasn't happened until now . Speak of "way better" and compare it with a missile in operational service .

 

[bloo]

Abay Jahil,,,, Was Prasun at test site of Babur Cruise missile on 12 August 2005? Why not ask what's the source of info of prasun. I can show 100's of his claims which were later turned out to be false. A calim made without proof. Yeah surely I'm arguing with an idiot who will belive whatever prasun says about Babur CM.

Sure Mr. gawar
I don't know what his sources were but I know enough that he is probably telling the truth, as I said his critiquing on both sides gives him that much value.
Sure show me your 100 mind-numbingly brilliant claims that you have proven wrong, please do.

@bloo I can assure you , a failure is still a failure whatever way you put it . Who am I to misquote your post when you base your claims on unproven and unreliable blogs - the worst source in a debate ! I didn't say both are the same , read it again more carefully , the technological correlation is there to understand . I will still ask for a Pakistani or neutral source for that claim , do you have it ?

Yes it is a failure I don't deny that.
However 90% of the mission parameters were also met regardless of what you think.There is always a grey spectrum you cannot just judge it in black or white.
Sure the blog is unproven to you when you haven't been following it, no use debating that either.
I know what you were saying, do not be mistaken it was just an analogy, unless of course you secretly work in DRDO. Of course your "technological correlation" becomes automatically true even if you are guessing and deserves no neutral source, what you mention is what I have already explained please reread that.
Well I can't find any, I can only expect you to see the 2 sources I provided from an objective point of view.

 

[Secur]

@bloo I told you in my first post that a blog is a worst source to prove something , even if it is written by someone revered known as "Prasun" or even if you have been following it from years . No one knows the source of his assumption being parroted as a "fact" here . Now , there is a massive difference between the two . As for the technological correlation between two cruise missiles ( Brahmos and Nirbhay ) , believe it or not but the latter would have benefited alot from the technoogy transfer - now that is an assumption and you do not have to be a Professional to understand the general relations between different technologies . The seeker tech from Brahmos provided by the Russians can be modified , upgraded or changed for any cruise missile - that is what I am saying but you do not seem to grasp the concept of " technological correlation "

 

[bloo]

@bloo I told you in my first post that a blog is a worst source to prove something , even if it is written by someone revered known as "Prasun" or even if you have been following it from years . No one knows the source of his assumption being parroted as a "fact" here . Now , there is a massive difference between the two . As for the technological correlation between two cruise missiles ( Brahmos and Nirbhay ) , believe it or not but the latter would have benefited alot from the technoogy transfer - now that is an assumption and you do not have to be a Professional to understand the general relations between different technologies . The seeker tech from Brahmos provided by the Russians can be modified , upgraded or changed for any cruise missile - that is what I am saying but you do not seem to grasp the concept of " technological correlation "

Prasun K. Sengupta is also a correspondent for FORCE Magazine, if that should put any legitamacy to his claims.
Well I did provide a 2nd source didn't I.
Nirbhay missile: Success or Failure, Importance of Nirbhay missile for India, Nirbhay Missile
I see you are not well informed, Nirbhay's terminal RF seeker was developed by Alpha technologies, Hyderabad not BATL. And the problem occurred in the guidance system(INS/GPS).
I do understand the concept of upgrading, and maybe DRDO did research certain systems of Brahmos and developed them for Nirbhay but it seems the only problem was in the INS so I don't really see what your absolute query is.
And again your point of " technological correlation " remains moot, DRDO officials already gave a public statement of what went wrong so what you are feeling is doubt based on bias.

 

[GURU DUTT]

thing is according to the thread do pakistani cruise missiles pose grave threat to indian security answer is yes

the question now should be is india doing enof to safe gaurd its air space being voilated by pakistani cruise missiles answer is still yes

now the next logcal question is what has india to counter them answer is SAT cover backed by ASEA & PESA based 2D,3D & 4D ground radars like indra , anirudhha , green pine , swordfish and some french and russian ones which are backed by systems like AAD, PAD,S-300 PMU, S -400, SA2, Akash, Maitri, Spyder and soon to be added barak LR, MR & SR batteries on the other hand india is increasing its offensive innoventorry with missiles like Bhramos super sonick cruise missile "with an 'official' disclosed range of 290 KMs" that is able to attack all pakistani targets in less than 2 Mins of launch and has right now no known detternt and not to forget missiles like Prithvi, Prahaar & agni series which soon will be complimented by Nirbhay

now the question is how will pakistan stop these missiles ravaging its infra when they dont have the capacity to track / scan and destroy US , Iranian & afghanistani hellicopters and drones that keep on voilating pakistani air space on a regular basis

so the short summary is that yes we feel threatened by pakistani cruise and bilistick missile systems and are taking percautionarry stepd for it and building owr defences question is how will pakistan hold or detter india

 

[Secur]

@bloo Really I am not well informed when you are the one using blogs or a single biased Indian source to prove something that cant really be known unless ofcourse these experts were present at the test site or have access to missile parameters - which isn't a possibility by any means . I saw the website source and the author's biased language more concerned with geniuity of Babur and other Pakistani missile rather than their own "failure" . You do not even know the development history and present status of Babur but are debating uselessly , it has been upgraded a couple of times and tested a dozen times now ! Research a little before comparing it with a missile which is yet to make its first successful test flight . Wherever the seeker was designed , I simply said that the Brahmos technology would have helped . What exactly has the DRDO statement got to do with the technological correlation ? Still cant grasp the general relation between different technologies concept ?

@GURU DUTT What is a Afghanistani helicopter if i may know ? Something you just made up or the usual trolling attempt despite knowing the agreement for drone between the US and Pakistan exists and the attacks are carried out with Islamabad's permission

 

[bloo]

@bloo Really I am not well informed when you are the one using blogs or a single biased Indian source to prove something that cant really be known unless ofcourse these experts were present at the test site or have access to missile parameters - which isn't a possibility by any means . I saw the language more concerned with geniuity of Babur and other Pakistani missile rather than their own "failure" . You do not even know the development history and present status of Babur but are debating uselessly , it has been upgraded a couple of times and tested a dozen times now ! Research a little before comparing it with a missile which is yet to make its first successful test flight . Wherever the seeker was designed , I simply said that the Brahmos technology would have helped . What exactly has the DRDO statement got to do with the technological correlation ?

No you aren't well informed, I can say Trishul blog is legit as the critiques by P K Sengupta have been on both sides and clearly I don't see any reservations in believing an Aerospace engineer, currently associated with the field of Guided Missiles at Defense Institute of Advanced Technology (DRDO).
Either way as I said it is up to you to believe it or no I can only give you reasons.
And I was never saying what Babur is capable of now, all I said was Nirbhay is doing much better than what Babur did in its first test.
And do you honestly expect me to believe that Pakistan exceeded everytime when Tomahawk 1 of the first of its kind failed quite a few times, nope doesn't sit right with me and neither should it with you?
The "technological correlation" you mentioned If I am not wrong was in your belief that most systems failed and not just the INS,

Usually I do not argue like that , but doing only 30 percent of the intended target doesn't really look like a only-guidance problem to me for some reason .

So yes I agree with you, there might have been some benefits of BrahMos ToT and I disagree with your "doesn't really look like a only-guidance problem to me for some reason"

 

[Secur]

@GURU DUTT There isn't any such thing as "Afghanistani" helicopter since ANA doesn't operate any . As for the rest offtopic stuff , I would advise you to stop this technical trolling in different threads under the guise of "innocent questions" before the mods come in .

 

[Secur]

@bloo I would have believed a neutral source , not a biased one or a blog no matter written by whom since the source for this information is well unknown and for all we know false . There are no morals in this business , boy , do not look for them . The Pakistani defense projects operate under extreme secrecy and most of the time , little data is available except for brief press releases . The technological correlation has nothing to do with apparent failure of Inertial Navigation system , just try to understand this concept by the thing that transfer of technology of Brahmos may have helped in Nirbhay or the reason behind Indian insistence for the same with Rafale to help with future aircraft projects . A lot happened after the first test of Babur in 2005 , read about it . The missiles aren't compared based on their first test or some unproven claims of travelling 17 km . If Prasun can prove his presence during the missile test or his access to missile parameters , I can believe that , not otherwise .

 

[bloo]

@bloo I would have believed a neutral source , not a biased one or a blog . There are no morals in this business , boy , do not look for them . The Pakistani defense projects operate under extreme secrecy and most of the time , little data is available except for brief press releases . The technological correlation has nothing to do with apparent failure of Inertial Navigation system , just try to understand this concept by the thing that transfer of technology of Brahmos may have helped in Nirbhay or the reason behind Indian insistence for the same with Rafale to help with future aircraft projects . A lot happened after the first test of Babur in 2005 , read about it . The missiles aren't compared based on their first test or some unproven claims of travelling 17 km .

It depends on what you perceive as bias.
I don't need to look for morals, things are either true or false, it depends on you if you want the hard truth or the easy lie. The critic doesn't have to be present when the sh!t hits the fan.
Secrecy or no secrecy, I hope you can relate everything I said to my Tomahawk analogy.
"transfer of technology of Brahmos may have helped in Nirbhay" - I have already agreed to this, and have already showed what I disagreed to, so please don't repeat the same thing over and over again just to prove a moot point, honestly its annoying.
Then Babur and Nirbhay shouldn't be compared at all as Nirbhay isn't ready, but of course it is okay when you all do it.

 

[Secur]

@bloo I will not ask the Nazis , the image and the character of Fuhrer It is as simple as that , neutral sources are preferred for a reason . Well , the first test flight and the subsequent ones numbering around eight of Babur were successful , that is true , now if you wonder why , you are starting to look for something not present in this business - morals . Nice philosphical lecture , but the critic has to declare the "source" of his information or provide the data , he's basing his opinion on - both are absent in this case . Why expect me to beleive it ? The whole thing has been going around in circles since you couldn't comprehend the technological correlation concept and kept mixing it with the cause of failure and argument followed another - that isn't my fault now . I have been posting in this thread for long and unfortunately I wasn't the one who started to compare a missile under development with an operational one - your countrymen and you yourself were , comparing the first flight and declaring something yet to make its first successful flight as way ahead and better than its counterpart .