Pakistani Ballistic Missiles: Indigenous Content & Development

[Zarvan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1172121526897926145

https://twitter.com/x/status/1172122226642038784

@Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi

 

[SABRE]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1172121526897926145

https://twitter.com/x/status/1172122226642038784

@Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi

Reading such things makes me wonder how desperate are we to saw-off our own feet? Let's assume this is true. Who then are we planning to signal to? I have my doubts that at this stage we can develop an ICBM with a range able to cover entire Europe (where we have no threats) or one that can reach the United States (I don't think we have the gutts to threaten the US in any form). If we have Israel on our mind then technically Shaheen-III is able to cover the country almost entirely but for more effective targeting an intermediate-range ballistic (IRBM) missile with 3000km-3500km would suffice very well (If Shaheen-IV is on the cards this might be its desired range anyway). There is no need to waste precious resources on an ICBM with 5000-5500km range. Not only will it invite undue and unwanted attention it would be virtually useless. Better invest in submarine-launched systems to enhance 2nd strike capability against India, which is much more crucial and urgent.

 

[TeesraIndiotHunter]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1172121526897926145

https://twitter.com/x/status/1172122226642038784

@Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi

There is no ICBM program in Pakistan. Its been decades and we are hearing same idiotic stories lol

Move on.....

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Reading such things makes me wonder how desperate are we to saw-off our own feet? Let's assume this is true. Who then are we planning to signal to? I have my doubts that at this stage we can develop an ICBM with a range able to cover entire Europe (where we have no threats) or one that can reach the United States (I don't think we have the gutts to threaten the US in any form). If we have Israel on our mind then technically Shaheen-III is able to cover the country almost entirely but for more effective targeting an intermediate-range ballistic (IRBM) missile with 3000km-3500km would suffice very well (If Shaheen-IV is on the cards this might be its desired range anyway). There is no need to waste precious resources on an ICBM with 5000-5500km range. Not only will it invite undue and unwanted attention it would be virtually useless. Better invest in submarine-launched systems to enhance 2nd strike capability against India, which is much more crucial and urgent.

Sir
We can't hit Israel with confidence using Shaheen III the bmds of Israel is such (and is improving and strengthening by the day) that a few Shaheen III hits may fail to achieve the objective thats why our warheads needs more speed ,maneuverability
And penetration aids hence we need heavy lifters which can carry heavier loads to higher apogees so it's not just the range that heavy lifters increase it's the apogee the speed the number of penetration aids etc
Which helps in penetrating dense bmd environment like that of Israel. So

https://twitter.com/x/status/1172121526897926145

https://twitter.com/x/status/1172122226642038784

@Path-Finder @Arsalan @Horus @Rafi

sir aap ke muh mein ghee shakkar lekin mujhe in khabroon par zyada aitbar naheen
We absolutely need heavy lifters we can't survive long without them.

 

[SABRE]

Sir
We can't hit Israel with confidence using Shaheen III the bmds of Israel is such (and is improving and strengthening by the day) that a few Shaheen III hits may fail to achieve the objective thats why our warheads needs more speed ,maneuverability
And penetration aids hence we need heavy lifters which can carry heavier loads to higher apogees so it's not just the range that heavy lifters increase it's the apogee the speed the number of penetration aids etc
Which helps in penetrating dense bmd environment like that of Israel. So


sir aap ke muh mein ghee shakkar lekin mujhe in khabroon par zyada aitbar naheen
We absolutely need heavy lifters we can't survive long without them.

Read my comment again. Though Shaheen III covers Israel we would need a 3000-3500km range missile for more effective targeting. Beyond that range, we would have an overkill.

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Read my comment again. Though Shaheen III covers Israel we would need a 3000-3500km range missile for more effective targeting. Beyond that range, we would have an overkill.

3000-3500 is not a heavy lifter and my post was not about range it was about penetration of advance bmd shield there is no overkill in ballistic missile technology.
Please study the subject more deeply.

Shaheen III has already 3000 km range

 

[SABRE]

3000-3500 is not a heavy lifter and my post was not about range it was about penetration of advance bmd shield there is no overkill in ballistic missile technology.
Please study the subject more deeply.

Shaheen III has already 3000 km range

Fine , I'll get back to my Ph.D. thesis on Pakistan's Ballistic Missile Programme.

BTW, when you say heavy-lifter what exactly do you intend to lift with it? Generally, heavy-lift rockets are intended for developing space vehicles. In principle, all rocket science is virtually the same but distinction is maintained when developing an SLV and long-range BM. If you intend for it to launch satellites in future then it would fall into completely different domain. Given the modest size of our space programme, which is likely to remain modest in the foreseeable future, heavy-lift launch vehicles (HLLV) and super heavy-lift launch vehicle (SHLLV) are definitely not required.

If you mean to launch a megaton (MT) warhead, something that we do not have or have not demonstrated, then it does not necessarily require heavy-lift unless you intend to have something like Soviet R-36 capable of launching MIRV with 10 warheads, each with 18-25MT yield, and up to 40 penetration aids. Even if we have acquired an untested MT capability I doubt it would be anywhere close to 18-25MT.

BTW, American Jupiter medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) with 2400km range and Thor intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) with 1800-3700km range were capable of launching W49 warheads with over 1MT yield.

If we want to launch our current 12-20KT warheads or even develop a warhead with 1MT to 1.5MT yield (that's the best we would be aiming for) and design something like R36 (even if to a lesser extent) to launch them then tell it is not an overkill? It will kill us economically/financially long before it kills the enemy. Under idol circumstances, especially the availability of resources, the economical thing would be to have a BM capable of launching MIRV with three 1MT-1.5MT warheads with a range 3500-3700km (this includes the weight of the warheads and fuel mass). It would serve as a good deterrent against all threats, whether regional or extra-regional. But I think we are a long way from that as well.

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Fine , I'll get back to my Ph.D. thesis on Pakistan's Ballistic Missile Programme.

BTW, when you say heavy-lifter what exactly do you intend to lift with it? Generally, heavy-lift rockets are intended for developing space vehicles. In principle, all rocket science is virtually the same but distinction is maintained when developing an SLV and long-range BM. If you intend for it to launch satellites in future then it would fall into completely different domain. Given the modest size of our space programme, which is likely to remain modest in the foreseeable future, heavy-lift launch vehicles (HLLV) and super heavy-lift launch vehicle (SHLLV) are definitely not required.

If you mean to launch a megaton (MT) warhead, something that we do not have or have not demonstrated, then it does not necessarily require heavy-lift unless you intend to have something like Soviet R-36 capable of launching MIRV with 10 warheads, each with 18-25MT yield, and up to 40 penetration aids. Even if we have acquired an untested MT capability I doubt it would be anywhere close to 18-25MT.

BTW, American Jupiter medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) with 2400km range and Thor intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) with 1800-3700km range were capable of launching W49 warheads with over 1MT yield.

If we want to launch our current 12-20KT warheads or even develop a warhead with 1MT to 1.5MT yield (that's the best we would be aiming for) and design something like R36 (even if to a lesser extent) to launch them then tell it is not an overkill? It will kill us economically/financially long before it kills the enemy. Under idol circumstances, especially the availability of resources, the economical thing would be to have a BM capable of launching MIRV with three 1MT-1.5MT warheads with a range 3500-3700km (this includes the weight of the warheads and fuel mass). It would serve as a good deterrent against all threats, whether regional or extra-regional. But I think we are a long way from that as well.

how are you going to defeat modern bmds like thaad sm 3 etc? by heavy lifters i mean 2 meter diameter multistaged solid fuel missiles like agni v which gives you a higher apogee which in turn saves your rv from midcourse phase threats and gives your rv a very high speed mach 20+ and lots of room for penetration aids pen aids like mylar balloons are good for exoatmospheric bluff but
When RVs enter the atmosphere it fails you need
Same size same mass dummies to bluff modern
bmd sensors hence the need for heavy lifters.
and who is talking about r36 type missiles we need solid fuel based survivable road mobile missiles systems not slvs and it won't bankrupt
Us we already have the basic infrastructure and technical know how yes we will need new 2m dia assembly lines jigs test beds etc but if we want to deter Israel nothing less would work so

Sorry for my clumsy posts I am posting via mobile

 

[Ultima Thule]

how are you going to defeat modern bmds like thaad sm 3 etc? by heavy lifters i mean 2 meter diameter multistaged solid fuel missiles like agni v which gives you a higher apogee which in turn saves your rv from midcourse phase threats and gives your rv a very high speed mach 20+ and lots of room for penetration aids pen aids like mylar balloons are good for exoatmospheric bluff but
When RVs enter the atmosphere it fails you need
Same size same mass dummies to bluff modern
bmd sensors hence the need for heavy lifters.
and who is talking about r36 type missiles we need solid fuel based survivable road mobile missiles systems not slvs and it won't bankrupt
Us we already have the basic infrastructure and technical know how yes we will need new 2m dia assembly lines jigs test beds etc but if we want to deter Israel nothing less would work so

Sorry for my clumsy posts I am posting via mobile

Solid fuel doesn't carry much weight (warhead/ ECM/Mylar balloon type countermeasures) as compare to Liquid fuel missile and Liquid fuel have ISp then solid fuel but Liquid fuel BM has own drawbacks like they are able to fire at will, takes hours to fuel and handling liquid fuel are highly dangerous even for highly trained people, and both solid and liquid fuel BMs has same reentry/orbital speed Mach-20+
and what is the Shaheen series of BMs, isn't solid fuel BMs with mobile TELs (TRANSPORT ERECTOR LAUNCHER)

No we don't need heavy lifter BMs, there are other ways to evade ABM system like BOOST GLIDE VEHICLE/Maneuvering warheads/ depressed trajectories etc etc @Fawadqasim1

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Solid fuel doesn't carry much weight (warhead/ ECM/Mylar balloon type countermeasures) as compare to Liquid fuel missile and Liquid fuel have ISp then solid fuel but Liquid fuel BM has own drawbacks like they are able to fire at will, takes hours to fuel and handling liquid fuel are highly dangerous even for highly trained people, and both solid and liquid fuel BMs has same reentry/orbital speed Mach-20+
and what is the Shaheen series of BMs, isn't solid fuel BMs with mobile TELs (TRANSPORT ERECTOR LAUNCHER)

No we don't need heavy lifter BMs, there are other ways to evade ABM system like BOOST GLIDE VEHICLE/Maneuvering warheads/ depressed trajectories etc etc @Fawadqasim1

What are you talking about solid fuel system are quick reaction ready to fire single vehicle shoot and scoot systems look at ababeel it looks like an slv and requires an icbm launcher its a makeshift systems.We need a proper first and second stage for it which can carry mirv bus with lots of pen aids and with manageable dimensions as a real survivable road mobile and off road mobile system you will see india buying systems like thaad and s500 in the near future we need agni 5 class missiles for that to carry a) heavy mirv bus
b) lots of pen aids c) higher apogee = high speed d) manageable dimensions for road
mobile and off road mobile operations
All of the above dramatically increase the
The survivability of the system and warheads on ground, in all of it's ballistic phases and against bmds so

P.s mylar balloons are no defence against systems like thaad and s500

"BOOST GLIDE VEHICLE/depressed trajectories" for both of the above you need more boost phase energy which these
1.4 m dia stages cannot provide I.e manageable and easily mobile dimensions.

 

[Ultima Thule]

What are you talking about solid fuel system are quick reaction ready to fire single vehicle shoot and scoot systems look at ababeel it looks like an slv and requires an icbm launcher its a makeshift systems.We need a proper first and second stage for it which can carry mirv bus with lots of pen aids and with manageable dimensions as a real survivable road mobile and off road mobile system you will see india buying systems like thaad and s500 in the near future we need agni 5 class missiles for that to carry a) heavy mirv bus
b) lots of pen aids c) higher apogee = high speed d) manageable dimensions for road
mobile and off road mobile operations
All of the above dramatically increase the
The survivability of the system and warheads on ground, in all of it's ballistic phases and against bmds so

solid fuel quick reaction BMs whereas liquid fuel are not, India will not buying THAAD or S-500 but S-400 which able to shoot down on Short ranged BMs like Ghaznavi/ Shaheen 1 but for MEDIUM RANGE BMs like Shaheen 2/3 and Ghauri 1/2 its useless against MRBM, our TELs already have off road capability, and you do need lots of research of BMs tech you can't make MRBM will reach a apogee of ICBM
Ababeel has range of 2200 km less than Shaheen-2 range how can it need ICBM launcher,
Ababeel has 2 stages 1st solid fuel (quick reaction time) and 2nd liquid fueled to lift heavier reentry bus and our Military strategic planner know better what are they doing

And MIRV and Mylar balloon decoys are old tech (since 70s) but latest Boost glide vehicle, Maneuvering Warheads/ Depress trajectories system are cheaper to develop as compare to MIRV/decoys as well as harder to intercept as compare to MIRV @Fawadqasim1

P.s mylar balloons are no defence against systems like thaad and s500

India is/will not buying these ABM system any time soon @Fawadqasim1

"BOOST GLIDE VEHICLE/depressed trajectories" for both of the above you need more boost phase energy which these

you don't what are you talking about, Boost glide system when last stages of BMs eject warheads in orbits, warheads just only enter higher atmosphere and suddenly with a slight retro rocket thrust (small) they skip back to orbit again and drop on targets at different trajectories, Hence ABM guideness computer will not predict next projected trajectory preciously/accurately
and depress trajectories means less apogee for example SHAHEEN-1 apogee is lets assume 750 km but depress trajectory Shaheen BMs has 400 km apogee hence less reaction time for the enemy to shoot down the warhead, This tech is used in Russian TOPOL ICBM version with slightly less range as compare to Conventional TOPOL ICBM @Fawadqasim1

 

[Fawadqasim1]

solid fuel quick reaction BMs whereas liquid fuel are not, India will not buying THAAD or S-500 but S-400 which able to shoot down on Short ranged BMs like Ghaznavi/ Shaheen 1 but for MEDIUM RANGE BMs like Shaheen 2/3 and Ghauri 1/2 its useless against MRBM, our TELs already have off road capability, and you do need lots of research of BMs tech you can't make MRBM will reach a apogee of ICBM
Ababeel has range of 2200 km less than Shaheen-2 range how can it need ICBM launcher,
Ababeel has 2 stages 1st solid fuel (quick reaction time) and 2nd liquid fueled to lift heavier reentry bus and our Military strategic planner know better what are they doing

And MIRV and Mylar balloon decoys are old tech (since 70s) but latest Boost glide vehicle, Maneuvering Warheads/ Depress trajectories system are cheaper to develop as compare to MIRV/decoys as well as harder to intercept as compare to MIRV @Fawadqasim1


India is/will not buying these ABM system any time soon @Fawadqasim1

you don't what are you talking about, Boost glide system when last stages of BMs eject warheads in orbits, warheads just only enter higher atmosphere and suddenly with a slight retro rocket thrust (small) they skip back to orbit again and drop on targets at different trajectories, Hence ABM guideness computer will not predict next projected trajectory preciously/accurately
and depress trajectories means less apogee for example SHAHEEN-1 apogee is lets assume 750 km but depress trajectory Shaheen BMs has 400 km apogee hence less reaction time for the enemy to shoot down the warhead,

This tech is used in Russian TOPOL ICBM version with slightly less range as

compare to Conventional TOPOL ICBM @Fawadqasim1

1) we were talking about deterring Israel primarily.
2) how can you know india won't buy thaad and s500
3) why is the range reduced in the case of topol ICBM for a depressed trajectory
because it requires more energy
4) Boost glide vehicle will require more r&d, money and time than 2M dia stages and still it will just be an rv not a versatile missile system which can be used to carry multiple types of rvs e.g mirv bus, marv, decoy bus to saturate enemy defences etc. So

5) just compare ababeel's length with shaheen ii and iii if you can you will understand what i am talking about

Who is talking about an icbm

 

[Ultima Thule]

1) we were talking about deterring Israel primarily.
2) how can you know india won't buy thaad and s500
3) why is the range reduced in the case of topol ICBM for a depressed trajectory
because it requires more energy
4) Boost glide vehicle will require more r&d, money and time than 2M dia stages and still it will just be an rv not a versatile missile system which can be used to carry multiple types of rvs e.g mirv bus marv decoy bus to saturate enemy defences etc. So

5) just compare ababeel's length with shaheen ii and iii if you can you will understand what i am talking about

Who is talking about an icbm

1) Israel has only 2 BMDs ARROW 2/3 and recently THAAD with a combination of MARV (Maneuvering reentry vehicle)/MIRVs warhead will do the job put some solid fuel rocket engine (small) onto the warheads that warhead can able to Change its trajectory then its harder to intercept and WE DON'T HAVE DIRECT THREAT FROM ISRAEL
2) India not hinted that specially for THAAD and S-500 still in its developmental stages
3)To evade US ICBM ABMs ( Mid course ABMs which specially design to intercept Russian/Chinese ICBM) Depress trajectories means enemy has less time to react to shoot down warheads
4) Boost glide vehicle isn't new tech either this tech came from late 90s, if China could help us then it will better option then MIRV/Decoys tech, MIRV tech can relatively easier to intercepts and also modern radar and space based IR sensor can easily be discriminate REAL WARHEAD and Mylar balloons and other decoys
4) and where do get Shaheen- 3/Ababeel length, i didn't find anywhere on the net and Shaheen-2 length is more then 52 feet @Fawadqasim1

 

[Fawadqasim1]

1) Israel has only 2 BMDs ARROW 2/3 and recently THAAD with a combination of MARV (Maneuvering reentry vehicle)/MIRVs warhead will do the job put some solid fuel rocket engine (small) onto the warheads that warhead can able to Change its trajectory then its harder to intercept and WE DON'T HAVE DIRECT THREAT FROM ISRAEL
2) India not hinted that specially for THAAD and S-500 still in its developmental stages
3)To evade US ICBM ABMs ( Mid course ABMs which specially design to intercept Russian/Chinese ICBM) Depress trajectories means enemy has less time to react to shoot down warheads
4) Boost glide vehicle isn't new tech either this tech came from late 90s, if China could help us then it will better option then MIRV/Decoys tech, MIRV tech can relatively easier to intercepts and also modern radar and space based IR sensor can easily be discriminate REAL WARHEAD and Mylar balloons and other decoys
4) and where do get Shaheen- 3/Ababeel length, i didn't find anywhere on the net and Shaheen-2 length is more then 52 feet @Fawadqasim1

Are you sane ababeel's range is 2200 km and cannot hit Israel carrying an mirv bus that's why i am contemplating a road mobile irbm not an mrbm compare the lengths of Shaheen ii and Chinese df31 first then look at ababeel its length and its range you will understand what i am trying to say.
For knuckleheads not for you sir the first two stages of Shaheen ii and ababeel are the same length.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Are you sane ababeel's range is 2200 km and cannot hit Israel carrying an mirv bus that's why i am contemplating a road mobile irbm not an mrbm compare the lengths of Shaheen ii and Chinese df31 first then look at ababeel its length and its range you will understand what i am trying to say.
For knuckleheads not for you sir the first two stages of Shaheen ii and ababeel are the same length.

LISTEN CAREFULLY BRO WE DON"T HAVE A DIRECT THREATS FROM ISRAEL ( ATTACK FROM ISRAEL FROM ANY KIND) ISRAEL HAS LEAST PRIORITY FOR PAKISTANI ARMED FORCES @Fawadqasim1

First give me the length estimate of ABABEEL then i will compare to Shaheen-2 @Fawadqasim1